09042007 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regular Meeting September 4, 2007 Page 11 in writing as well as the time of the hearing for the variance and SUP 45 days before their schedule date, and Ms. Couch seconded the motion. On roll call for the amendment the following vote was recorded: AYE: Couch and Jones. NAY: Thomaides, Bose, Narvaiz, Guerrero and Robertson. ABSTAIN: None. Motion to amend failed. On roll call for the main motion, the following vote was recorded: AYE: Thomaides, Bose, Narvaiz, Guerrero, Robertson and Jones. NAY: Couch. ABSTAIN: None. Mayor Narvaiz introduced for consideration Item 15, removed from the consent agenda, adoption of an Ordinance on third and final reading, the caption which was read as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS AMENDING SECTION 4.3.1.2 OF THE CITY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING LAND USE MATRIX; INCLUDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES. Mr. Guerrero moved for adoption of the Ordinance on third and final reading, and Ms. Couch seconded the motion. Ms. Robertson inquired to what will prevent a business from selling more alcohol than food. Ms. Barrett, Director of Planning and Development, stated the City relies on intent of the business. The Council then voted unanimously for adoption of the Ordinance on third and final reading. Mayor Narvaiz introduced for consideration Item 16, removed from the consent agenda, adoption of Resolution, the caption which was read as follows: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS. APPROVING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED WATER UTILITY AGREEMENT WITH CARMA BLANCO VISTA, LTD; AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT; AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. Mr. Jones moved for adoption of the Resolution, and Mr. Guerrero seconded the motion. Ms. Robertson inquired to whether Blanco Vista would be charging a higher impact fee than the City. Ms. Anderson, Assistant City Manager, stated Carma impact fee rate was grandfathered and they would be charged to their customers who buy in their development, which they can not charged more than the regular impact fee. On roll call for adoption of the Resolution the following vote was recorded: