My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02242003 Regular Meeting
San-Marcos
>
City Clerk
>
01 City Council Minutes
>
2000 s
>
2003
>
02242003 Regular Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/4/2009 4:10:55 PM
Creation date
9/11/2003 3:11:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
City Clerk - Document
Minutes
City Clerk - Type
Regular
Date
2/24/2003
Volume Book
151
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
81. <br />Regular Meeting February 24, 2003 Page 8 <br /> <br />Mr. Mayhew moved for adoption of the Resolution, and Ms. Tatum seconded <br />the motion. Mr. Mihalkanin stated the agreement assigns the right to <br />transfer to the District and the right would revert to the City if the <br />District did not use it. He inquired whether the City could get the water <br />rights back if the City needed the water. Mr. O'Leary stated South Hays <br />is building a new facility on Lime Kiln Road, and they are unable to build <br />a water well in this area. South Hays is uncomfortable with making this <br />investment without their water rights being stable. Mr. Mihalkanin asked <br />if granting South Hays water rights would have a negative effect on the <br />City's ability to get more water in the future. Mr. Mark Taylor stated he <br />does not see granting this small water rights having a negative effect in <br />the City's ability to request more water. Tom Taggart, Director of Water/ <br />Wastewater Department, stated this amount of water would only serve two <br />families for a year. The Council then voted unanimously for adoption of <br />the Resolution. <br /> <br />Mayor Habingreither introduced for consideration Item 27 removed from the <br />consent agenda, approval for the use of General Fund Contingency Funds in <br />the amount of $2,000.00 for the Greater San Marcos Youth Summit. Ms. <br />Narvaiz moved for approval for the use of General Fund Contingency Funds <br />in the amount of $2,000.00 for the Greater San Marcos Youth Summit, and <br />Mr. Taylor seconded the motion. Mr. Taylor stated this Item was discussed <br />at the last Regular Meeting held on February 10, 2003 while he was out and <br />would like an update. Mr. Mayhew stated the Youth Commission requested <br />funding for the Summit to be held on April 26, 2003. At the November 25, <br />2003 Regular Meeting the Council sent the Youth Commission out into the <br />Community to raise more funds and then come back to the Council for the <br />balance. The Council then voted unanimously for approval for the use of <br />General Fund Contingency Funds in the amount of $2,000.00 for the Greater <br />San Marcos Youth Summit. <br /> <br />Mayor Habingreither introduced a discussion regarding Sign Ordinance <br />revisions. Mayor Habingreither stated Staff has provided Council with a <br />Summary of the Sign Ordinance Workshop held on February 10, 2003. Mr. <br />O'Leary stated Staff needs to know if Council wants to follow the <br />recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission or come up with <br />some other recommendations. Mr. Taylor stated he had asked Staff to <br />address the legal locations left for off-premise signs. Jon James, Senior <br />Planner with the Planning Department, stated in the Interstate Corridor <br />there are 15 potential locations and 245 potential locations off the <br />Corridor. He also stated some locations would require rezoning. Mayor <br />Habingreither stated he does not see anything wrong with the current Sign <br />Ordinance. Ms. Tatum asked if the current Ordinance was not amended, would <br />any additional billboards be able to go up. Mr. James stated yes, the way <br />the Ordinance is currently written, there is a potential for up to 245 <br />locations, but more likely less, due to actual spacing and available <br />locations. Mr. Taylor stated he is concerned the City would be inundated <br />with new sign applications. Mr. Montoya asked out of the 245 potential <br />locations how many are in the ETJ. Mr. James stated the majority of the <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.