08032010 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

not purchase their homesl8 yrs ago and pay taxes all this time knowing it was going to be changed. He asked the Council to build the loop far out where it does not affect homes. Jeffrey Jewett, 2709 Oak Haven, stated that the amendment to remove Loop 110 has taken what he prepared off the table. It is a bad idea to proceed until we have a viable plan to replace it. Moving forward without a plan is a bad idea. The adoption of the Engineers Context Sensitive Solutions Manual is designed for highly developed urban areas. We have no business implementing this in the Leah or 110 Loop area. He noted the tax reinvestment zone allows Carma to receive money for the infrastructure and should be the developer's responsibility. Why would we do something counterproductive to sensible development? James Baker, 727 Belvin, urged the Council to change the wording of the resolution to remove from Part 2 "... except as expressly authorized by the City Council." He and his neighbors are opposed to the inappropriate application of form -based coding in the neighborhood, whether this is proposed by planning staff or the Council. He directed Council to review section 1.4, the process of the code, specifically the function of the DRC and Warrants. He noted there is no government body currently existing with the dangerously broad powers of the DRC proposed in the Code draft. The DRC will override and render powerless current groups such as the Historic Preservation Commission. The device of Warrants is an attempt to side step the process of variance, which is governed by state law. Instead the warrants are governed only by the DRC and allows the DRC to bypass the rules of this code in closed meetings without public notice or public scrutiny. The device of Warrants by Intent is an open invitation to favoritism and corruption. He urged the Council to eliminate warrants from the code and to slow the process down. Polly Wright, 1134 W. Hopkins, spoke on the SmartCode, stating she has seen no evidence and does not trust that changes have been made. She noted it is not fair to Planning and Zoning to vote on an incomplete document. This should be postponed until next January and let the new Council get the thing straight. She asked the Council not to rush it through. Ron Jager, 626 W. San Antonio, stated that despite assurance the SmartCode will not have negative impact on downtown historic district, he remains unconvinced. We are considering an overlay of an established town square and the contiguous areas with an as yet to be determined yuppie -cool and faux antiquity that will obliterate what remains of San Marcos' historic antiquity. He sees little value and nothing of virtue about the SmartCode. He asked Council to not do this to our historic town. Let the historic districts be historic. Wayne Kraemer, 733 Belvin, stated his opposition to the SmartCode because there are no architectural standards or vision. Staff says this is customized to fit San Marcos, but the downtown character was established long ago through the natural evolution of the needs of the city. This should be the purview of the historical commission. A planning code is a living document, but if we lock in the mind set of a SmartCode, we will strangle life out of that. Currently, the Historic Preservation Commission evaluates each project. The SmartCode evaluates by a checklist. Cities that use a SmartCode had nothing to begin with. He RM080310 Minutes Page 3