Category: Alamobsession

Balance the Budget by Enforcing the Code

postcardsfromsanantonio2 Comments

In June, San Antonio City Council will vote on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code (UDC).  This seems frightening, as this code governs the appearance of our cityscape.  Commercial interests have attorneys and lobbyists pouring over the language in documents such as this, objecting to things here and there and suggesting insertions beneficial to their clients.  They do not care about the little things I do (Please change Riverwalk to River Walk throughout the document.); size matters most.  Big asphalt lots without trees taking up valuable  parking spots and big, huge, giant, preferably electronic winking and blinking signs.   

I made the mistake of opening the portion of the document affecting historic districts.  Fifty square feet of signage per building in a primarily pedestrian zone, such as Alamo Plaza seems huge to me.  (I know you probably have tired of my tirades about the appearance of the plaza, but The Alamo is the most visited attraction in Texas.  If we are not taking care of this cash cow, then the rest of the city must really be going to hell.) 

What struck me most about the document is not only what is changing, but what already is on the books and clearly not enforced by the city.  It is as though San Antonio Council passes ordinances and then naively places businesses on the honor system in terms of compliance.

So I took another stroll through Alamo Plaza with the existing UDC Code in mind.  Signage regulations apply to any sign on a facade, even those on windows and doors: 

A facade shall be considered the entire area of a building elevation extending from the roof or parapet to the ground and from one corner of the building to another including the entire building walls, recessed, wall faces, parapets, fascia, windows, doors, canopy, and all other components that make one complete architectural elevation…..

Installation. Commercial signs, posters, decals or advertisements may not be tacked, nailed, pasted, painted or taped to any portion of a building, object, site or structure visible from the public right-of-way….

Signs, visual displays or graphics shall either relate to the historic district or advertise a bonafide business conducted in or on the premises….

The number of signs on each building shall be kept to a minimum to prevent unsightly clutter and confusion…..

Many of the businesses on Alamo Plaza have a multitude of infractions, but, in addition to the problems mentioned above, I am including a portion of the applicable language from the UDC under some photographs.

Prohibited: “Billboards, junior billboards, portable signs, advertising benches and sandwich boards shall not be permitted within historic districts or on historic landmarks.”
Unsure what part of the code regulates this, but, if there is nothing in there, please add it quickly.
Prohibited: “Any sign placed upon a building, object, site, or structure in any manner so as to disfigure, damage, or conceal any window opening, door, or significant architectural feature or detail of any building.”
Prohibited: “Any sign which advertises commercial off-premises businesses, products, activities, services, or events.” This is on the west side of Alamo Plaza. IMAX is not located here.
We are two blocks from the Buckhorn.
Although, the Buckhorn is two blocks away, a promotional video advertising it runs continuously in a window on Alamo Plaza.
Made the mistake of rounding the corner to Houston Street, but decided not to go further.

All of the signage regulations mentioned above remain in the proposed revisions to the UDC, but what good is it?  No one is minding the most critical storefront this city has.

Hey, Sheryl Sculley, no need to look any further than Alamo Plaza to balance the city budget.  Just send inspectors and start collecting fines on the west side of Alamo Plaza, and San Antonio should be in the black.

Note Added on June 1:   The Infrastructure and Growth City Council Committee will meet to discuss changes to the Unified Development Code (UDC) at 2 p.m. on Tuesday, June 8, in the Plaza B Room, Municipal Plaza on Main Plaza.

Note Added on June 6:  Can’t believe I missed this earlier, but the illegal portable sign on the left of the top left photo above actually is an advertisement for Fiesta Texas.

Note Added on June 30:  Sam’s the man!  Sam Perez is the city’s code enforcement officer downtown who is in charge of trying to keep the sidewalks free of sandwich boards and other clutter.  He has his hands full, but he has made several sweeps through Alamo Plaza recently.  Unfortunately, he can do nothing about the illegal signage in the windows – not his department.

Thanks for Correcting Those False Allegations Put Forth by the Liberal Media

postcardsfromsanantonioLeave a comment

Once again, “The liberal media has put the Texas educational system under a great deal of scrutiny lately….”  This opinion is offered by Texas GOP Vote Blog.   

That blog is not anywhere I normally hang out.  In FACT, I truly try to keep politics out of my blog, but…

I was trying to find the text somewhere, anywhere online with the exact wording of the new social studies guidelines approved by the Texas State Education Agency.  If we are once again the laughing-stock (although it really is not funny) of the nation, I wanted the FACTS.  I could not find the approved guidelines in writing so tried listening to some of the actual debates online.  Took about two minutes, perhaps less, to decide I’d wait for the transcripts.

But then I found this GOP blogger ready to straighten out the biased news reports:

To help sort out fact from fiction, Jonathan Saenz from Texas Legislative Update has sent in a fact versus fiction summary….

One of Jonathan’s FACTS follows:

FALSE ALLEGATION: The State Board of Education has eliminated Tejanos who fought at the Alamo.

FACT: The Social Studies TEKS include Tejano leaders who fought at the Alamo.

In Grade 4 Texas history, Tejanos Juan Seguin, Placido Benavides and Francisco Ruiz are required to be studied as important participants in the Texas Revolution.

Benavides and Ruiz were not participants in the Battle of the Alamo (so are unrelated to the discussion of the allegation), but we’ll let this part slide because the sentence above only identifies the three as participants in the Texas Revolution.  Maybe Jonathan should have stopped (or never started) his argument there.

Lorenzo de Zavala and Jose Antonio Navarro, Tejano leaders who died at the Alamo, also are required figures in Grade 4.

Hold everything.  The GOP factoid provider needs a FACT checker before he kills off de Zavala and Navarro at the Alamo. 

I always place great trust in the Handbook of Texas Online, an incredible resource offered by the Texas State Historical Association.  Here is the Handbook’s view of history:

FACT:   Manuel Lorenzo Justiniano de Zavala y Sáenz, first vice president of the Republic of Texas:

Zavala returned to his home in poor health and relinquished his part in the affairs of state.  He resigned the vice presidency on October 17, 1836.  Less than a month later, soaked and half-frozen by a norther after his rowboat overturned in Buffalo Bayou, he developed pneumonia, to which he succumbed on November 15, 1836.

FACT:  José Antonio Navarro was one of three Tejanos signing the Texas Declaration of Independence, along with his uncle, José Francisco Ruiz and Lorenzo de Zavala.  “He died on January 13, 1871.”

I was taught seventh-grade Virginia history from a book emphasizing most masters were kind to their slaves, treating them like family members.  I do not think anyone in my class fell for it.   (FACT:  Relationships were so close that many slaves bore the children of their masters.)

Fortunately, children do not always believe what is taught them.  They are not stupid.  But what’s these two GOP bloggers’ excuse for their ignorance of Texas history?  Happy Jonathan did not tackle too many FACTS past what is taught at Grade 4.

Oh well.  Thanks, guys, for keeping us posted with well-informed FACTS.  Did not even need to reference any of the liberal media stories online to debunk your version of history.

Guess I’ll keep looking for FACTS elsewhere.

Texas, Our Texas! so wonderful so great!
Boldest and grandest, withstanding ev’ry test….

Except maybe fourth-grade history.

Note Added on May 25:  My apologies to Jonathan.  He merely attributed incorrect roles to real people.  In this morning’s San Antonio Express-News, columnist Cary Clack pointed out the hero praised most by one member of the State Board of Education is fictitious: 

Then there’s Don McLeroy of Bryan, the board’s wizard who — among many dubious proposals — wanted to evaluate the impact of reform leaders such as Upton Sinclair, Susan B. Anthony, Ida B. Wells and W.E.B. DuBois.  Instead of citing these men and women as people who loved their country so much they devoted their lives to changing it for the better, McLeroy was concerned that their tone wasn’t as optimistic as the Belgian immigrant Jean Pierre Godet who said, “I love America for giving so many of us the right to dream a new dream.”

….  Godet is a fictional character in the 1998 book, “The Spirit of America” by the painter Thomas Kinkade.

McLeroy is so afraid of the nation’s past he’d prefer to elevate a fictional character at the expense of genuine American reformers.  Maybe he’s right and we can eliminate from our textbooks more of those insufficiently patriotic do-gooders and replace them with true American heroes like the Legion of Superheroes, led by Superman, who made no mistakes and made everyone happy except for the bad guys.

Students can learn about justice and interracial cooperation through The Lone Ranger and Tonto and be taught examples of loyalty, friendship, hard work and ingenuity through the stories of Lassie…. 

That’s what we need, the “painter of light” to illuminate Texas history.  Maybe we can incorporate his work in the math curriculum as well.  Students can be challenged to figure out how many times Tinker Bell appears in Kinkade’s eight Disney images.

Note No. 2 Added on May 25:  From David McLemore’s blog: 

After wrestling Santa Ana to the ground, Davy Crockett parted the San Antonio River and said, “Let my people go!”

Note Added on May 30:  Jonathan, read about three Tejanos who actually were at The Alamo.

Note Added on September 19:  Great John Branch cartoon in today’s San Antonio Express-News:

February 20, 2011, Update: The conservative Fordham Institute condemns revisionist history in Texas, and someone recently sent me a link to a great 2010 cartoon from The Washington Post.

Note added on March 3, 2011: Veronica Flores-Paniagua weighs in on the current state of the State Education Board.

Note added on May 27, 2011: Senate Democrats refused to rubber-stamp the governor’s nomination to lead the SBOE….

Let the Alamo Guardians Retaliate

postcardsfromsanantonio2 Comments

No official comments from the Daughters of the Republic of Texas have been submitted to any of the posts about The Alamo on this blog; so it seems only fair to share their official stance on diverse topics with readers.  Sort of an equal-time kind of thing. 

This way to give the custodians of The Alamo their opportunity to vent about attacks against them in the media is courtesy of The Alamo Wake-Up Call Channel on YouTube.

May 13 Update:  “Another Battle Brews at The Alamo”

June 18 Update:  “DRT Now Under State Investigation”; Attorney General Gregg Abbott’s Request to Examine DRT; related editorial; and Alamo without Director

June 23 Update:  Reports on the saga continue:  “Hopefully, we will be successful in narrowing the scope and extending the time window, as DRT is in the middle of gathering information for our upcoming audit,” Atkins wrote.

July 1 Update:  Editorial pointing out the Alamo’s cracked roof as symbolic of the DRT’s problems.

Update on October 19:  John Branch editorial cartoon: