The San Antonio City Council on Thursday is scheduled to consider zoning changes for dozens of properties surrounding the four Spanish colonial missions on the South Side that were designated as World Heritage sites in 2015.
Changing the land-use rules for much of the so-called World Heritage Buffer Zone, established to protect the area from inappropriate development, has support from most area neighborhood associations and agencies, but the potential changes also face some opposition from two neighborhood groups and some area business and property owners.
“It’s not just about the missions but our opportunities in the South Side,” Councilwoman Rebecca Viagran (D3), whose district includes the four missions, told the Rivard Report on Monday.
She said the re-zoning efforts, which she and City staff call “right-zoning,” also aim to diversify and strengthen the blighted area’s inventory of businesses.
In late 2016, City Council approved 11 land-use amendments and updates to four area community plans as the result of symposia and public meetings about how to best support the missions and surrounding communities. That initiated plans to align the zoning designation of properties with those approved land uses and community plans.
How a property is zoned determines what kind and intensity of activity – residential, commercial, industrial – can occur on the site. Many of the changes proposed involve “downzoning,” meaning that less intense uses or smaller structures uses will be allowed.
For example, several properties zoned MF-33, which allows up to 33 housing units per acre, near the missions would be zoned R-6, for single-family homes, if approved by Council. Single-family homes exist on most of those properties today, so the zoning change would prevent higher-density housing from being built in the future. Not all the proposed zoning changes for the area are downzoning; some areas would become infill development zones, considered more flexible for mixed-use projects.
Land adjacent to the historic Hot Wells resort ruins, slated to become a Bexar County park, would be changed from commercial to infill development to allow for a large mixed-use project.
The buffer zone re-zoning has been supported by the San Antonio Conservation Society, National Park Service, San Antonio River Authority, Lone Star Neighborhood Association, Mission San José Neighborhood Association, San Antonio Area Tourism Council, Blessed Sacrament Academy, and others.
The Hot Wells Mission Reach Neighborhood Association, Villa Coronado Neighborhood Association, and Alliance for San Antonio Missions have all submitted letters in opposition.
The Planning Commission approved the changes. While the Zoning Commission voted 5-3 in favor of the changes, such changes require six votes in favor, so the recommendation moves to City Council as a denial. City Council gets the final say in all zoning cases.
Some say that the new zoning could push out small businesses.
“There is nothing that is threatening the World Heritage Buffer Zone with the zoning,” said Carrol Brown, spokesperson for the Alliance for the San Antonio Missions. “It’s a solution looking for a problem.”
He said that the re-zoning is targeting vehicle-related businesses such as auto repair and tire shops and motels that some consider undesirable for the area while promoting large, developer-friendly projects such as the one at Hot Wells. Others are concerned that downzoning will reduce property values for owners looking to sell.
If a business closes for a year, it cannot reopen again as a so-called “non-conforming” use, according to zoning regulations. The tire shops and mechanics in the area are slated for downzoning, so if they close for a year, they cannot re-open and if they want to expand, they are limited by the lower zoning designation by size of structure, said Brady Alexander, president of the Hot Wells Mission Reach Neighborhood Association and member of the Alliance.
“[Downzoning] doesn’t increase diversity,” Alexander said.
Compounding these concerns, both Alexander and Brown said, is that the properties included in this re-zoning have changed as the process moves forward. Properties in the Brooks City Base area have been removed, as have some properties along Roosevelt Avenue south of South East Military Drive with owners that have strongly opposed the zoning changes.
Many area businesses and residences are “non-conforming,” or incompatible with the land use that is called for in the community plan, said Colleen Swain, director of the City’s World Heritage Office. All of the 14 hotels within the World Heritage Buffer Zone, Swain said, already are non-conforming.
“The zoning change doesn’t change anything for them,” she said. Those property owners can continue to operate, sell or pass their businesses on to family members, and improve their properties.
“We don’t want the current businesses to close down,” said Terry Ybanez, president of the San José Neighborhood Association. She added that she believes the increased interest and investment in the area stemming from the World Heritage designation will increase property values and erase any potential disadvantages from more restrictive zoning.
Previous and unsuccessful efforts to build a multistory apartment complex across from Mission San José illustrate why the neighborhood needs protection, she said.
For lots that are zoned MF-33 but are surrounded by single-family homes, Swain said, “we can’t stop big projects from popping up” because current zoning permits such development.
The City’s Planning Department is working on several community plans throughout the city as part of the SA Tomorrow comprehensive plan. Similar community plan-zoning alignment efforts will soon take place across the city, but they could take years to implement, Swain said.
“There’s a sense of urgency here [in the buffer zone] because of the designation and anticipated change,” she said.
That change includes millions of dollars in 2017 bond projects, including $13 million for Roosevelt Avenue, $5 million for South Presa Street, and another $5 million for Southcross Boulevard.
The new zoning is aimed at guiding growth patterns in the area toward more neighborhood- and visitor-friendly activities, Swain said, adding that those patterns were developed by the community during nearly 40 public meetings with City Council, neighborhood associations, and stakeholders – not including one-on-one meetings City staff and Viagran’s office had with concerned property owners.
“This has been a long time in the making, and it really has been because of community input and concern,” said Viagran.
Alexander sent a letter to Viagran and other City officials requesting a delay of Thursday’s vote on behalf of the Alliance and other neighborhood groups.
“We request for us do it right, not quickly,” he said. “Basically, they’ve ignored us.”
World Heritage designation is just an excuse to infringe on established business property.rights…developers..already get deffered taxes and fees waived, now they want to add downzoning…contd..
Olga
Developing Roosevelt could be a good thing without having to downzone existing.business. .This is moving to fast for such a large area…and now land use changes are being implemented…which adds to the confusion… The decision of the city council appointed zoning commission should be respected as their vote was “no”…
.
The idea that we are downzoning properties in a relatively urban neighborhood and in the middle of a housing crisis is something I can’t reconcile in my mind. It’s clear that this is not actually about what’s good for the community, but rather more about appeasing property owners in their misguided, fearful attitudes toward apartments and tire shops. I wonder if any of the staff or neighborhood folks over there can actually define what “compatible” even means.
Please note that one of the opposing neighborhood association is Mission Reach Hot Wells Neighborhood Association. The distinction of the name is important to Hot Wells residents. The agenda of the Mission Reach Hot Wells Neighborhood Association is not in concert with all members of the original Hot Wells Neighborhood Association.
I agree with Maria. The views of the Hot Wells residents are not being considered by the newly combined Hot Wells Neighborhood Association and the Symphony Lane Pyron Rd Neighborhood Association. The proliferation of run down, ill kept businesses forces the residents to go elsewhere in town than patronize neighborhood businesses. And if those places expect visitors to do business with them then they need to make their buildings and parking lots appealing and marketable.
City Council was misled into believing that the stake holders and property owners were a part of the planning and had a say so in the Land Use Amendments when it was presented to them back in December of 2016. It was not until January of this year that property owners were notified that their property was up for rezoning. The property owners along Roosevelt did not know that City staff was making plans for property that did not belong to them.
Down zoning is a hit financially for the owners of properties along South Presa and Roosevelt. When Jerry gave up the Reigns over 2 the mission reach and East pyron neighborhood associations there was no membership attending the hot Wells neighborhood association. I’m thankful to Brady Alexander for doing what he does in order to keep their Association running under a different umbrella. The current membes have decided that downzoning is not good 4 the development of Roosevelt and South Presa. I don’t remember anyone not wanting to listen to varying opinions. My opinion is that the new zoning is being done in a discriminatory way no one has said that but it’s obvious.
Mr. Brady’s argues that downzoning businesses won’t solve code and crime problems around the San Jose Missions yet he wants the alley near the Rainbow Motel on Presa closed in order to solve the crime problems surrounding that area.
Ms. Ybanez wants the area surrounding the San Jose Mission downzone for the safety and betterment of the community. Mr. Brady wants the City to give him the alleyway in order to make his property larger for free.
Mr. Brady is looking out for one person, himself. Mr. Brady questions why individuals visiting Mission San Jose leave the area before sundown, perhaps because there are no quality amenities nearby. He is roadblocking any type of improvement and preservation of the San Jose Mission and the surrounding area. We live in this area 24 hours, we do not have a Fredericksburg home we can go to.
Mr. Brady does not care about the World Heritage or the Hot Wells Neighborhood. Mr. Brady does not speak for me. I stand with Theresa Ybanez, Councilwoman Viagran and whoever else supports the rezoning.
Commenters on this article may disagree with the position on a specific portion of the World Heritage rezoning proposal that was taken by the Hot Wells Mission Reach Neighborhood Association, but that uncontested position was developed after open, extensive, and thoughtful discussion. Any statement or suggestion to the contrary is misinformed, at best. As a member of the association, I am proud of the way my neighbors reached out to other neighborhood associations and community groups, and worked collaboratively with the Villa Coronado Neighborhood Association and the Alliance for San Antonio Missions to help stand up for neighbors and local businesses who opposed certain aspects of the downzoning. Both the Rivard Report and Richard Webner of the San Antonio Express-News have provided reporting that helps tell more of the story of this controversy.
As for the personal and unfounded attacks on neighborhood association president Brady Alexander, while free speech is perhaps our most important civil right, as a community, we also need to be factually informed and civil if we hope to make a positive difference.
Please note that ‘anonymous’ can make untrue and totally inappropriate comments about Brady Alexander–yet doesn’t have the fortitude to leave her name.
Brady has done nothing but help his neighbors, he’s informative and well spoken, too bad you see him as a threat and not asset, we could have worked together to discuss pros and cons, but we were met with negativity…we tried…No one should ever try to defame character..because of personal difference..thx Brady