My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05212001 Regular Meeting
San-Marcos
>
City Clerk
>
01 City Council Minutes
>
2000 s
>
2001
>
05212001 Regular Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/4/2009 4:26:39 PM
Creation date
12/3/2003 10:16:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
City Clerk - Document
Minutes
City Clerk - Type
Regular Meeting
Date
5/21/2001
Volume Book
143
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />233. <br /> <br />Regular Meeting <br /> <br />May 21, 2001 <br /> <br />Page 6 <br /> <br />DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, OF THE CITY CODE TO UPDATE AND SIMPLIFY CITY <br />REGULATIONS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS; INCLUDING PROCEDURAL <br />PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES. <br /> <br />Mr. Moseley moved for approval of the Ordinance on second reading and to <br />amend the Ordinance in Section 94.233(c) to accept the changes suggested <br />by the City Attorney by memorandum dated May 18, 2001 and Mr. Mayhew <br />seconded the motion. Ms. Hughson asked who determines when a PDD is used, <br />and Mr. Patterson stated it is entirely optional for the landowner. Ms. <br />Hughson stated she would like language added on Page 3, Section 94.226 (3) <br />to include neighborhood representatives. Ms. Hughson also wants the <br />language amended on Page 4, Section 94.226 (b) in the last sentence, "The <br />planning director. . . applicant in writing with an explanation. . <br />Ms. Hughson requested the City Attorney provide new language on Page 5, <br />Section 94.226 (c) (2) (H) in the last sentence, such as, "If possible, the <br />land use plan should be laid out over an aerial photograph of the <br />property." Ms. Hughson requested the City Attorney provide new language <br />on Page 9 in Section 94.233 (d) that if there is a request for major <br />changes, it must be taken back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ms. <br />Hughson inquired about fees being included in this Ordinance on Page 10, <br />and stated generally fees are placed on the fee schedule and not in the <br />Ordinance. Mr. Patterson advised they will also be included on the fee <br />schedule. The suggested changes will be prepared for the Council's <br />consideration at third and final reading. The Council then voted <br />unanimously for approval of the Ordinance on second reading. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Mayor Chiu introduced for consideration Item 19 removed from the consent <br />agenda, adoption of an Ordinance on third and final reading, the caption <br />which was read as follows: <br /> <br />AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, <br />APPROVING THE RELEASE OF CITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON REAL PROPERTY <br />OWNED BY W. C. CARSON IN THE 100 BLOCK OF EAST CONCHO STREET; <br />AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A RELEASE AND QUITCLAIM DEED; <br />AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. <br /> <br />Mr. Moseley moved for adoption of the Ordinance on third and final reading <br />and Ms. Hughson seconded the motion. Mr. Mihalkanin stated the Zoning <br />Board of Adjustments and Appeals approved parking and setback variances <br />for this project by a close vote. He stated this development was not <br />presented to the Downtown Parking Committee, and the Council should now <br />give the public an opportunity to speak. Kyle Maysel, Chair of the <br />Downtown Parking Advisory Committee, addressed the Council, but not in the <br />capacity as Chair of the Committee. Mr. Maysel stated this Ordinance <br />deals with a project that was before the Planning and Zoning Commission <br />and ZBOA two months ago. He stated the developer asked for a variance to <br />allow a zero lot line development of a five to eight story multi-use <br />development. ZBOA considered variances to allow a zero lot line <br />development and a reduction of parking spaces. There was no provision <br />made regarding service vehicles, traffic, additional vehicles owned by <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.