San Marcos City Council Approves SMART Terminal Project
By, Terra Rivers, Managing Editor
The San Marcos City Council decided the fate of the San Marcos Air, Rail and Truck Terminal on Tuesday, March 19.
After months of controversy, discussion and investigation, the San Marcos City Council approved a 380 Economic Incentive Agreement, ETJ Development Agreement, Annexation and Rezoning of 734.34 acres of land to Heavy Industrial.
Council heard from several members of the community speaking for and against the SMART Terminal during Tuesday’s meeting.
Will Holder, local Business Owner Bucky Couch, former Mayor John Thomaides, San Marcos Consolidated Independent School District Superintendent Michael Cardona, Brian McCoy, CEO of McCoy’s Building Supply, Caldwell County Judge Hoppy Haden and San Marcos Planning and Zoning Commission member, Mark Gleason spoke in favor of the SMART Terminal.
Former San Marcos Mayor John Thomaides read a letter signed by the past six mayors of San Marcos in support of the project.
Dianne Wassenich, Executive Director of the San Marcos River Foundation, spoke before city council on behalf of SMRF.
According to Wassenich, SMRF has reviewed the Economic Development agreement with the SMART Terminal project and has decided not to oppose the project.
“I must admit, and I probably shouldn’t tell you this, but you did stricter regulations than we ever thought the council would pass on our development code,” Wassenich said. “So, we are grateful to you for being so diligent and going beyond those code regulations and doing so much more with your development agreement.”
Wassenich said she felt people in the community did not realize how much things had changed since the Woods apartments were built; she told Council the foundation was willing to help them hold public meetings and explain what the regulations were going to do.
Assistant City Manager and Chief Financial Officer Steve Parker gave council a presentation regarding the SMART Terminal Project.
Parker said while the property was originally 934.34 acres, Curby D. Ohnheiser portion of the property had been carved out to reduce the total project to 888.772 acres; of that 888.772, the ordinance was only for the annexation of 734.6 acres.
“There has been discussion, news articles, papers, people mentioning today about the San Marcos ETJ,” Parker said, “And does the city have the right to annex this set of property here? One thing we mentioned to council, we first brought together a proposal to annex the whole property. From that, Ms. Harper brought to our knowledge that there may be some ETJ agreements with the city of Martindale that extended their ETJ before ours.”
Parker continued to say that the city has been working with the City of Martindale regarding about 154 acres that the city thinks is in a disputed area in need of being resolved.
Regarding the 734.6 acres, Parker said, “Our property rights to that area was brought into play when we annexed the San Marcos Municipal Airport in 1980.”
Parker said the annexation of the airport extended the city’s ETJ one mile, which limited the extension of Martindale’s ETJ that took place in 1982.
In 1983, Curby Ohnheiser submitted a request to the City of Martindale to have his property annexed into the city’s ETJ.
However, Parker said despite the request, because of the extension of San Marcos’s ETJ in 1980, Martindale was not able to annex it.
“There was something that was found on the Caldwell County Appraisal district’s website to show that all of the SMART Terminal project is in the Martindale ETJ,” Parker said. “We’ve contacted the Appraisal District just to get their comments of where that map came from and let them know that we don’t think it to be a valid map at all. I’ve talked to the county commissioner who is looking into it for us, and he agrees with our proposal of what he’s seen related to that.”
According to the 380 agreement, the developer agreed to reduce current run-off from the property by 10 percent. Currently, the property is undeveloped and used for agriculture; during rain events, it has been known to flood.
The proposed rail park will include six tracks with enough space to park four 110-car trains off the main track.
Parker said the 380 agreement will run with the land, which means even Schroeder sells the property in two years, the next developer will be required to adhere to it.
In addition, the 380 agreement has designated a maximum impervious cover limitation of 70 percent instead of the 80 percent allowed by the heavy industrial zoning; the agreement also requires a 70 percent total suspended solids removal, reduction in maximum permissible sound levels, minimal smoke and noxious odors or emissions and compatibility with airport operations.
According to Parker, Katerra’s facility, as it has been proposed and designed, will have approximately 54 percent impervious cover.
“Thanks to all of you who have spoken to your concerns I believe this project has gotten much better,” Prewitt said. “I’m sorry that some of you are going to walk away this evening broken-hearted because I am going to support this development. I don’t think it’s going to hurt anybody; I think it’s going to be better for the environment at the end of the day than what is there right now, and I don’t say that lightly.”
According to Parker, once completed, the SMART Terminal will have a property value of approximately $3 billion and generate $18.4 million a year in property taxes for the City of San Marcos; it will also generate an estimated $42 million in property taxes for the San Marcos Consolidated Independent School District.
The 380 agreement, ETJ Development agreement, annexation and zoning request passed with a 6-1 vote with council member Jocabed Marquez voting no.
Katerra, Inc., is projecting a completion date of February 2020. The railroad portion of the project is slated to be completed in October 2020.
Katerra/ S.M.A.R.T. Terminal Annexation/Discussion Timeline
- October 6: Katerra 380 Agreement Approved by City Council
- November 9: Application Notification Posted to City’s Website
- November 20: Council approved annexation schedule
- November 21: Personal and posted notification
- November 25: Published Notification
- December 11: P&Z Public Hearing
- December 12: Council Public Hearing #1
- December 19: Council Public Hearing #2
- December 21: Personal and Posted Notification (Updated)
- December 23: Published Notification
- January 8: Planning & Zoning Public Hearing
- January 15: City Council Work Session
- January 29: City Council Work Session
- March 19: City Council Meeting, Reconsideration of Zoning and Annexation and Consideration of the 380 Agreement
