San Antonio Affordable Housing Options Being Severely Constrained by Proposed Industrial Compatibility Overlay Districts (“ICOD”) Zoning Overlay

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:?At the next Zoning Commission on May 21, 2024 The City of San Antonio is attempting to?quietly push through an Ordinance to solve its legal problems regarding zoning and land use approvals on thousands of acres surrounding the Toyota Project.? This is a problem that has been festering for more than 20 years when the city signed the Project Starbright Agreement agreeing "to restrict the portion of the Overall Tract that is not the Project Site to insure that such?land be used exclusively for (i) uses (other than residential?and heavy industrial uses)...

The?Proposed fast tracked?Industrial Compatibility Overlay District(s)-("ICOD") will?effectively ban all forms of residential development including needed Affordable Housing?within three (3) miles of the perimeter?of the Project Site.

?Talking out of both sides of their mouth the City claims to want and greatly need more Affordable Housing?yet on the southside in the area of Toyota and Texas A&M, where there is a great need and demand, they have continually resisted attempts to issue approvals for residential developments.

Now the city wants to use the power of Zoning via this proposed ICOD overlay?as?a back door effort to comply with .(Exhibit C,?Page C-13, Paragraph 29?of the Starbright Agreement??that states?“Land Use Restriction.?The City hereby agrees to restrict the portion of the Overall Tract that is not the Project Site to insure that such land be used exclusively for (i) uses (other than residential?and?heavy industrial uses)...”??the?promises made to Toyota in the Starbright Agreement,?promises which I have come to learn were likely unconstitutional/ illegal and can't be enforced.??

The city should not be allowed to circumvent the rule of law regarding the citizens’ property rights harming the thousands of property owners and forever restrict the opportunities to develop badly needed affordable housing in this part of the city by trying to institute the proposed “ICOD” Zoning Overlay.

??

John E. Whitsett,?District 10 Zoning Commissioner

__________________________________________________________________________________

May 15, 2024

Mayor Ron Nirenberg,

CC: All City Council Members

Re: San Antonio Affordable Housing Options Being Severely Constrained by Proposed Industrial Compatibility Overlay Districts (“ICOD”) Zoning Overlay

Mayor Nirenberg and City Council Members,

As one of?the city’s eleven Zoning Commissioner’s (D-10) I am very concerned about a Proposed area wide Zoning Overlay presented to the Zoning Commission??at a work session on May 7, 2024.(see attached PDF’s re: Full Notice, ICOD Map and a “DRAFT” of the proposed Industrial Compatibility Overlay District-“ICOD DOCS”?).?Upon receipt and a quick review of the “ICOD DOCS” , Commissioner’s had numerous concerns and questions for??the staff.

Based on answers to our questions, it is my opinion that the approval of this “ICOD” Zoning Overlay(which effectively bans future residential -both single family and multifamily uses within three (3) miles from all boundaries of the Toyota Project)??is in Direct Opposition of and Will be Harmful to your(city’s) goals for Affordable Housing in San Antonio and specifically the southside. The negative impact of this proposed “ICOD” Overlay on Affordable Housing ( growth & supply) was??made even clearer while reading your 12-19-2023?Message to the Community regarding Affordable Housing in San Antonio(in the San Antonio Observer).?In your letter?you stated taxpayers agreed to fund a $150 million affordable housing bond program that included two of the following goals:

“Build affordable rental homes & Build homes to own.

Furthermore you wrote that to achieve the goals some of the following items (BOLD/CAPS) are required:

1.???????“ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF HOUSING FOR ALL INCOME LEVELS?“????????????????????????????????????????My Comment:?Proposed “ICOD” Overlay will?remove(permanently)??from development consideration a large( thousands of acres) supply of affordable land for residential development on the south side of town.

?2.??????“THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR NEED TO WORK TOGETHER”??? ? ? ? ? ??

??My Comment:?With the Proposed “ICOD” Overlay?the public sector(city) is appearing to only be working with the Private Interests of Toyota with little to no consideration given to the thousands of other property owners'/taxpayers/voters who will have this overlay imposed on their property restricting their rights.

3.???????“AND OTHER TIMES IT MEANS REDUCING UNNECESSARY RED TAPE THAT CAN ADD COSTS TO A HOMEOWNER’S BOTTOM LINE?“.?????????????

?My Comment:?The Proposed??Zoning Overlay District will add even?more red tape and regulatory control?to an increasingly expensive and difficult process to develop any form of housing much less Affordable Housing.

Finally, you summarized the five (5) goals identified by the Housing Policy Task Force:

1.???????Develop a coordinated housing system; 2.????Increase City investment in housing with a 10-year funding plan;??3.???????Increasing affordable housing production, preservation, and rehabilitation;??4.???????Protect and promote neighborhoods;??5.???????Ensure accountability to the public

Yet, for the same reasons just summarized meeting these 5 goals will be hindered by this Proposed Overlay District as?IT WILL NOT:

?(3) help?increase affordable housing production,?IT DOES NOT;

(4)?protect and promote neighborhoods?since the “ICOD” Overlay basically bans residential development and essentially likely condemns thousands of acres of private land without compensation??therefore?IT CLEARLY DOES NOT PROTECT AND PROMOTE NEIGHBORHOODS?but the protection is all about Toyota based on??the “Land Use Restriction” from the more than 20 year old “Project Starbright Agreement”. This restriction can be found as follows: (See PDF?No 4 -Exhibit C City Agreement??(starbright))??Exhibit C,-Page C-13, Paragraph 29?“Land Use Restriction.?The City hereby agrees to restrict the portion of the Overall Tract that is not the Project Site to insure that such?land be used exclusively for (i) uses (other than residential?and heavy industrial uses)... “?Additionally on Exhibit C, Page C-12, Paragraph 24 (a) the City agreed to “initiate appropriate zoning cases and revision to the UDC to zone the larger geographical area surrounding the Project Site……and?within three (3) miles of the perimeter?of the Project Site (“Enhanced Zoning Area”-“EZA”) “with the objective of imposing on the “EZA” ‘appropriate land use guidelines?that satisfy Toyota regarding use, density, set-back and other restrictions?consistent with Project Starbright”?AND IT DOES NOT;

(5)?ensure accountability?(or transparency) to the Public-Process has not been transparent?as in this case of the Proposed “ICOD” overlay??boundaries and use limitations ( essentially identical to the boundaries and restrictions found in the Project Starbright Agreement with Toyota)??Despite being a major Zoning Case it appears??that proper procedures have been ignored and extremely limited information??provided resulting in what appears to be an obvious attempt to rush a vote at the May 21, 2024 Zoning Commission and then City Council in June 2024.??No evidence was provided of:

·????????appointment of a Task Force to study impacts both negative and positive; and make recommendations, if any for allowable uses

·????????sufficient efforts to truly engage and inform the thousands of stakeholders who would be impacted by the “ICOD” overlay;

·????????any review by the Technical Advisory Committee;

·????????being presented to Planning Commission

These items which are necessary and important steps to be taken before any presentation to the Zoning Commission or City Council for consideration. If this ICOD Overlay is so important to the city development process then it should probably be addressed through UDC amendments. Support for the proposed “ICOD” overlay comes across as acting only in the interests of??the Starbright Agreement with Toyota and not the thousands of property owners.

It was only last week that notices ( see ICOD DOCS very generic and unclear as to the true impacts to their property rights and future use options)??were mailed to 13,346 people (voters) telling them about the Zoning Commission hearing on May 21, 2024.

As a Zoning Commissioner for the City of San Antonio I cannot support this “ICOD” Zoning Overlay for the following reasons:

?

·?????????FIRST is for the?Failure To Adequately Follow Proper Procedures?and provide adequate details and support for such a large and impactful Zoning Case;

·?????????SECONDLY and more importantly is the fact that it will further?Harm Affordable Housing Options In The City??especially on the southside where more housing is needed.

·????????THIRD the really concerning issue is?the fact that the proposed zoning overlay comes across as?a back door effort to comply with .(Exhibit C,?Page C-13, Paragraph 29?of the Starbright Agreement??that states?“Land Use Restriction.?The City hereby agrees to restrict the portion of the Overall Tract that is not the Project Site to insure that such land be used exclusively for (i) uses (other than residential?and?heavy industrial uses)...”??the?promises made to Toyota in the Starbright Agreement,?promises which I have come to learn were and are illegal and can't be enforced. As a result someone at the city appears to have determined that if they could get the Zoning Commission to quickly approve the ICOD overlay without giving it any scrutiny and then getting City Council to rubber stamp it then the problem with the Contract Zoning and unconstitutional taking of property issues created by the Starbright Agreement would be solved forever and then they could blame it all on the Zoning Commission!

·?????????Even Current District 8??City Council member Manny Pelaez wrote an email (See attached PDF No. 5 Pelaez Toyota Buffer Line) regarding the Toyota Buffer Line confirming that Toyota was given veto power over uses inside the 3 mile buffer line, both Toyota and the city new someday they would likely get sued for these takings of property without compensation and they used political scare tactics to keep the “No residential development” buffers in place all to “keep ….others from maximizing the best use of their property” indicating it city can implement this “ICOD”

Councilman Pelaez’s email letter confirms that these buffer zones were contrived, they are very likely “unconstitutional takings of property” and they have kept and continue to keep property owners in the buffer zones ( aka Proposed “ICOD” Zoning ) from maximizing the best use of their properties. The Zoning Commission should not be used by the city to solve their contract problems.

As a result and for the above reasons I am respectfully requesting that you further investigate this issue and?request that this Proposed ICOD Zoning Overlay be removed from Consideration by the Zoning Commission on or before the May 21,2024 Zoning Meeting and not reconsidered at any future date by either the Zoning Commission or the City Council.

The city should not continue to cause harm to the thousands of property owners and forever restrict the opportunities to develop badly needed affordable housing in this part of the city by??trying to institute??the proposed “ICOD” is Zoning Overlay. Please tell me where has the diversity, equity and inclusiveness in this process been and please don’t continue to circumvent the rule of law regarding the citizens’ property rights .

?

Respectfully,

?

John E. Whitsett

District 10 Zoning Commissioner