City council postpones zoning appeal request

The San Marcos City Council unanimously voted in favor of postponing the item related to  appealing the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny a request for Alternative Compliance after a motion was made to postpone the item by Councilmember Mark Gleason to the second meeting in May.  

A public hearing and discussion was held related to an appeal by Troy Turner of the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission to deny a request for Alternative Compliance to the protective yard installation requirements of the Development Code for a proposed development located at 312 Camacho Street.

At the reading of the item, councilmember Saul Gonzales recused his participation and vote regarding the item, due to him having property in the area. 

A presentation was given by Director of Planning and Development Services, Shannon Mattingly, where she presented that the Planning and Zoning Commission previously denied the request 9-0 during its March 8 meeting. 

“The way our ordinance reads is it says that a public hearing must be set and an appeal must be heard within 25 days of the appeal application coming in, so we’re at 21 days right now,” Mattingly said. 

Mattingly went on to say that the applicant asked to postpone the  item and that if council were to postpone the item staff recommends still holding the public hearing. 

Some of those who spoke during the citizen comment period alluded to a meeting held the previous evening that involved the property owner and the neighbors of Victory Gardens. Those in attendance hoped to speak with the owner and further discuss the property, however, the owner was not present and instead attempted to communicate via phone call. 

“The purpose of the meeting was to try to communicate with him and get questions and concerns addressed that the residents had, unfortunately it went south,” said Roland Saucedo, Victory Garden resident. 

During the public hearing a representative of the applicant, David Sergi, spoke of how the applicant is looking to improve the property and become a community partner. 

“At the end of the day we’re asking for the alternative compliance so that we can be a good neighbor, we could easily do other things and not be a good neighbor so we’re engaging this council, the community and trying to solve the problem rather than make it worse,” Sergi said. 

Troy Turner, the applicant, also spoke of how he wants to improve and secure the building by giving it a “facelift, make it look good again and operational.” 

Following comments, Councilmember Alyssa Garza asked for clarification on Sergi’s comments on not being good neighbors and what he was alluding to. Sergi clarified that with the heavy industrial zoning ordinance, the property could be used for other purposes that could make them bad neighbors. 

Councilmember Maxfield Baker voiced his support for the postponement, saying it would not only give council time to negotiate but also with alternative compliance, allowing to leverage the community’s and developer’s concerns. Councilmember Jude Prather also urged the applicant to work with the neighbors. 

Councilmember Shane Scott also asked for clarification related to conditions in an alternative compliance and if council can specify what can and cannot be added related to the property. Both City Attorney Michael Consentino  and Mattingly confirmed that conditions could be placed and how it differs from planned development districts. 

Mayor Jane Hughson also voiced support for the postponement saying, “It’s a little hard to have faith right now that y’all are going to go work with the neighborhood because the track record isn’t good yet, but I hold out hope,” Hughson said. 

In other business, the council also received a staff presentation and discussed details regarding the community survey during Tuesday's meeting. 

Communications/IGR Director Lauren Surley presented the council with the various topics they previously submitted for the survey. The National Community Survey (NCS) is administered by Polco. 

The NCS aims to capture residents’ opinions regarding 10 different community facets including utilities, park and recreation, economy and inclusivity and engagement. 

“This survey will allow us to see how our residents rank the importance of each of these community facets and with those answers the goal is that these survey results will provide some insight for you as council and us as city staff to make some community decisions,” Surley said. 

The presentation included the topics submitted by the council and how they compared to an additional example given to councilmembers in their meeting packet. 

Surley mentioned that if council agrees upon starting the survey process this week, the survey could be administered as early as June or July and results would be collected in September or October. 

Garza brought up concerns regarding the timeline. Garza highlighted that the survey going out in the summer could prevent the college student demographic from participating and assistance from the school district in getting parents to participate would be harder with students out for the summer. 

Surley addressed the concern, saying that when previously discussing that topic with Polco, some saw fit to administer the survey in the summer to target more permanent residents, while others wanted to push out surveys in the fall to add the college student perspective. The majority of the council voiced they were in favor of conducting the survey in the fall. 

While going through the topics, Hughson also wanted to add a topic related to how many people shop outside of town and what types of business is San Marcos missing. 

“That’s one of the things I hear when I go to the economic development workshop is, ‘what are you missing?’ You know, ‘is there a certain type of business that you need to get into your town so that you can receive the sales tax and provide those services to your residents locally?’ So, I’m seeing heads nodding, so however we need to ask that, I'm fine with,” Hughson said. 

Baker also brought up his concerns in regards to the economic development and employment opportunities topics. No action was taken by the council following their discussion. 

For the complete meeting and agenda, visit http://san-marcos-tx.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=9.