04111983 Regular Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

57 Regular Meeting April 11, 1983 Page 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE 1980-37 WHICH DE- TERMINED APPROPRIATIONS FOR REVENUE SHARING ENTITLE- MENT 12; AMENDING ORDINANCE 1982-41 WHICH SET FORTH AN ITEMIZED ESTIMATE OF THE EXPENSE OF CONDUCTING EACH ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF SAID CITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING ON OCTOBER 1, 1982, AND ENDING ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1983, AND APPROPRIATED MONEY FOR THE VARIOUS FUNDS AND PURPOSES OF SUCH ESTIMATE; REAPPROPRIATING FUNDS IN ORDINANCE 1981-70 AND 1982-41; ADOPTING SAID REAPPROPRIATIONS AND DECLARING AN EMER- GENCY. Mr. Farr moved for adoption of the Ordinance on emergency and Mr. Guerra seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mayor Craddock introduced for consideration approval of an Ordinance on first reading, the caption which was read as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS, TEXAS, Þ..MENDING SECTION 3 OF APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF SAID CITY, SAME BEING THE GENERAL ZONING ORDINANCE AND ZONING MAP OF SAID CITY WHICH REGULATE AND RESTRICT THE LOCATION AND USE OF BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND LAND IN SAID CITY, TO CHANGE THE ZONING AND USE DESIGNATION OF FORTY (40) ACRES, MORE OR LESS, OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TOWN OF SAN MARCOS, IN HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM "c" COMMER- CIAL DISTRICT TO "CBA" , CENTRAL BUSINESS AREA DIS- TRICT AND TO INCLUDE SAID LAND WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CENTRAL BUSINESS AREA DISTRICT AND DECLARING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The Ordinance had been tabled from the March 28, 1983 meeting to the April 11, 1983 meeting, so Mr. Brown moved to remove the Ordinance from the table and Mr. Farr seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Mr. Farr moved to approve the Ordinance on first reading and Mr. Brown seconded the motion. City Planner Joe Garza said the Planning Commis- sion had considered the Ordinance. The purpose of the Ordinance was to prohibit new bars from starting in the CBA. The bars could change own- ership or the name of their bar and could close and reopen with no use change in between and still remain a bar, but cannot change locations. If there were major changes made to the structure of the building, such as over 50% of the fair market value of the structure being remodeled, if the building burned and was to be rebuilt and used as a bar, enlarge- ment and if for some reason the City condemned the building and it was to be rebuilt, all would require approval of the Zoning Board of Adjust- ments and Appeals. City Attorney Barbara Edwards stated the nonconform- ing use and conditional use need to be amended to be set out more pre- cisely and Mr. Farr directed this be done and presented to the Council for adoption in the near future. On roll call the following vote was recorded: AYE: Brown, Farr, Guerra, Craddock, Kissler, Kreczmer. NAY: Moore. ABSTAIN: None.