02122001 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4. Regular Meeting February 12, 2001 Page 4 PARK BY AMENDING ARTICLE 7 OF CHAPTER 82, TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES, OF THE SAN MARCOS CITY CODE; INCLUDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES. Mr. Moseley moved for approval of the Ordinance on first reading and Mr. Doiron seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mayor Chiu introduced for consideration approval of an Ordinance on first reading, the caption which was read as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, AMENDING SECTONS 42.001, 42.076 AND 42.129, AND ADDING AN ARTICLE 5, TAX INCENTIVES, OF CHAPTER 42, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, OF THE CITY CODE TO PROVIDE'TAX INCENTIVES FOR THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS; AND INCLUDING PROCEDURAL PROVISIONS. Mr. Moseley moved for approval of the Ordinance on first reading and Mr. Doiron seconded the motion. Mr. Moseley stated he was excited about this amendment. It offers great opportunity for homes over fifty years to be restored. He applauded the efforts of the Commission for their work and Jeff Kester for being involved in these types of projects. Mr. Doiron stated this opportunity needs to be publicized. Mr. Kester, Chair of the Commission, introduced other members present: Hill Rylander, Vice Chair, Diana Carbajal, Elvin Holt and Bill Pennington. Other members not present include Rodney VanOudekerke and Sandy Ellison. Mr. Kester thanked Kate Elrod for her work in preparing information for the Commission gathered from other cities. Mr. Kester then reviewed with the Council a fact sheet prepared by the Commission, which is attached to these minutes. Ms. Hughson suggested part of the eligibility process reflect the applicant has no delinquent ad valorem taxes and suggested an application fee be determined, such as $20.00 for minor and $50.00 for a major project. Ms. Hughson stated Section (e) on Page 7 states the period of exemption for successive projects can be ~tacked" at the Commission's discretion to extend the overall period of tax exemption. Mr. Taylor advised ~tacke~' is the more legal terminology. Ms. Hughson asked for clarification regarding Section 42.155 regarding eligibility. If the Commission approves a complete application, the project can move forward; and when an application is not approved by the Commission, the applicant has the right of appeal to the City Council. Ms. Hughson asked who pays the recording fee mentioned in Section 42.156(c), and Mr. Patterson advised the City's standard procedure is to pay the recording fee and collect that fee from the property owner. Ms. Hughson asked when the tax collector is advised of the property improvements, and was advised the information is provided to the Appraisal District. Ms. Hughson asked how often the status of a project is monitored by the Planning Director. She suggested it should be monitored annually, and might be done January 1st of each year or the anniversary date of the application which ever works best for the Planning Department. Mr. Kester stated that wording could be tightened up. The Council voted unanimously for approval of the Ordinance on first reading.