Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Meeting Minutes October 20, 2020 <br />applications that included the creek and watershed areas through which the <br />discharge to the San Marcos River would occur. These plants are not staffed <br />regularly. He noted multiple proposed developments covering hundreds of <br />acres who have made applications to TCEQ. We are opposing these permits. <br />Mr. Taggart provided the City's opposition to TPDES applications as follows: <br />• City Ordinances 70.052(a)(10): "the city discourages... package treatment <br />plants" <br />• Protection of our environment and rivers <br />• Support of State legislative direction for regionalization of treatment services <br />• Impacts on quality of life (odors, discharge flows) <br />• Loss of City utility and general fund revenues <br />• Loss of centralized reuse of the wastewater processed at the package plants. <br />• Potential plant failures at unstaffed package plants could create health <br />threats <br />• Limited expansion of utility systems into our preferred growth areas East of <br />I-35 <br />• Stranding invested City money in system capacities already installed <br />• Establishing a precedent for all ETJ developers <br />Mr. Taggert reminded the council that there was a previous application near <br />the intersection of Hwy 21 and Yarrington Rd and we lost that one. One of <br />these applications on the list that is in our CCN would be over 10 % of our <br />system. For all of these, the additional annual revenue could be over $5 <br />million annually. <br />Ms. Hernandez stated Chapter 86 of the City's Code of Ordinances allows <br />extensions and connections of City utilities to property located within the ETJ. <br />Ms. Hernandez stated in exchange for the benefit of connecting to City <br />utilities, the City's ordinances require that developers making a request must <br />consent to annexation of the property being served. Ms. Hernandez mentioned <br />developers have expressed opposition to being annexed due to the increased <br />costs associated with development standards in the San Marcos Development <br />Code, including standards for blocks, lots, and access; alley requirements, <br />garage placement, parking location; and porches. <br />Table 4.1 Comprehensive Plan/District Translation <br />See Exhibit B -Attached <br />Ms. Hernandez stated the San Marcos Development Code Table 4.1 <br />Comprehensive Plan / District Translation has many of the standards opposed <br />City of San Marcos page 7 <br />