Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Meeting Minutes December 15, 2020 <br />Mayor Pro Tem Derrick closed the Public Hearing at 8:36 p.m. <br />A motion was made by Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Scott, seconded by Council <br />Member Gleason, to approve Ordinance 2020-77, on the first of two readings. <br />Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Scott stated there is a concern for traffic and <br />compromise needs to be made due to sensitivity of this area. <br />Council Member Baker asked Mr. Siefert for clarification regarding the size of <br />the lots being 10,000 sq ft. but citizens are looking for 17,000 sq ft. or three <br />houses per acre. Mr. Siefert stated the residents' general request was for the <br />proposed plan to match the neighborhood lot size of 17,000 sq ft. The original <br />request was for 6,000 sq ft but they compromised on a lot size of 10,000 sq ft <br />with minimal residential lots that meets three houses per acre. <br />Council Member Gleason stated he voted no while he was on P&Z and he will <br />be voting no today. Mr. Gleason stated he has concerns with density, the road <br />is so dangerous, and he not sure how there can be 40 homes in the area. Mr. <br />Gleason would like to defer this item back to Planning and Zoning <br />Commission. <br />Terry Irion, Mr. Siefert's attorney stated this is less dense family zoning. With <br />the typography and the requirement on the water quality and detention pond <br />there may be some smaller lots than the 10,000 sq ft. They would like to see the <br />property zoned now. There has been an opportunity for 5 years to rezone and <br />the property owner has been negotiating for 2 years. The applicant wants to <br />move to the next steps of the process of rezoning and then subdivision filing. <br />Council Member Gonzales asked the City Attorney if the rezoning is denied <br />this evening could the applicant come back with significant changes in the <br />rezoning within the year. Mr. Cosentino stated the ordinance states that if <br />denied, there is a requirement of a one year waiting period, but it doesn't apply <br />if there is finding <br />of the Commission and Council with a two thirds vote that there is substantial <br />changes to the conditions surrounding the subject tract to come back sooner. <br />Council Member Baker inquired about the additional two acres owned by the <br />applicant that are not up for rezoning. Ms. Mattingly stated the applicant <br />owns two vacant lots that are zoned SF 6 and not part of the <br />proposed project. <br />City of San Marcos Page 10 <br />