![]() |
| | | | | | | | |
Committee votes to keep tree ordinance loopholes
|
| More information |
|---|
| Minutes of the TAC committee meeting |
| Memo explaining amendments |
| Text of amendments |
| Express-News: Mayor's no-fault statement on trees went too far |
| Express-News: A big hole in tree ordinance |
| Express-News: Mayor seeks to close tree loophole |
| Cibrian request for Council consideration |
A City of San Antonio committee voted today to keep loopholes in the tree ordinance that have been exploited to clear trees from land before it is sold for development. According to Rod Sanchez, efforts to close the loopholes are dead for now. Sanchez is director of the San Antonio Planning and Development Services department.
Members of the developer-dominated Technical Advisory Committee claimed that the proposed development code changes were unnecessary, ineffective, and would conflict with state law. During the meeting, City Arborist Debbie Reid showed a committee member's plan that took advantage of one of the loopholes, the so-called "existing house" exemption.
Under the current ordinance, landowners who claim an "agricultural operation" are exempt from the tree ordinance. This loophole was exploited in the widely-publicized case of the Village at West Pointe, which prompted action by Mayor Phil Hardberger and Councilwoman Diane Cibrian. In October, Cibrian spearheaded a request for Council consideration co-signed by Hardberger, Philip A. Cortez, Lourdes Galvan, and Mary Alice P. Cisneros.
In addition, the ordinance exempts lots where construction of a single-family house has been completed. This loophole has been exploited by owners of ranches and farms with an existing farmhouse.
Citizens clamored for closure of such loopholes when the City began revising its ordinance in 2000. When the 2003 revisions failed to stop preemptive clear-cutting, Council voted in 2006 to close the loophole, but that amendment was later rescinded. Subsequently, Council voted against closing the loophole, explaining the issue "needed more study".
| Home | | | About Us | | | Contact Us | | | Privacy Policy |