Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_UDCAC_09.09.2020City of Georgetown, Texas Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee Meeting Wednesday, September 9, 2020 at 3:30 P.M. Teleconference meeting: https:Hbit.ly/3171UYX The rpomlar meeting rnnvenPJ at .3;30PM on C%enfPmhPr A 7070 xr;n taiarnnfar inre at https://bit.l_y/3171UYX . Webinar ID: 995-3378-5336. To participate by phone: call in number 833-548-0276. Password: 675042. Public comment was allowed via the conference call number or the "ask a question" function on the video conference option; no in -person input was allowed. Committee Member(s) in Attendance: PJ Stevens, Chair; Stuart Garner; Brian Robinson; Philip Wanke; Brian Ortego; Jen Henderson; Tracy Dubcak Committee Member(s) Absent: Brian Ortego Staff Present: Andreina Davila -Quintero, Current Planning Manager; Mirna Garcia, Management Analyst; Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; Steve McKeown, Landscape Planner; Ethan Harwell, Senior Planner Meeting called to order at 3:32 P.M. Regular Session A. Discussion on how the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee virtual conference will be conducted, to include options for public comments and how the public may address the Commission — Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director B. On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future Board agenda by filing a written request with the Staff Liaison no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. The request must include the speaker's name and the specific topic to be addressed with sufficient information to inform the board and the public. For Board Liaison contact information, please log on to h�l/government.g(,orgetown.org/categoiy/boards- commissions/. Legislative Regular Agenda C. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the August 12, 2020 regular meeting of the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee. — Mirna Garcia, Management Analyst Motion to reconsider minutes at the next scheduled meeting by Henderson. Second by D. Discussion and possible direction on proposed amendments to the Tree Preservation and Landscaping standards of the Unified Development Code (UDC) particularly as it relates to tree UDC Advisory Committee September 9, 2020 preservation, removal and mitigation (UDC General Amendment No. 20-03) -- Steve McKeown, Landscape Planner This item is a continuation from the last meeting regarding tree preservation. Staff report presented by McKeown. On July 14, 2020, the City Council directed staff to review the City's tree preservation and landscaping standards as a part of the 2020 UDC Annual Review Cycle. The purpose of these revisions is to address ambiguity, conflicts with other code sections, and challenges found in its implementation on several development projects. Tree Preservation standards are part of the City's development standards for subdivisions and development of property. Landscaping standards as part of the City's zoning standards for development of property. Relevant sections of the UDC include, but are not limited to: • Section 4.11, Gateway Overlay Districts • Section 8.02, Tree Preservation & Protection • Section 8.03, Residential Landscaping • Section 8.04, Non -Residential Landscape Requirements • Section 8.05, Review & Approval Process • Section 8.06, Plant Selection, Installation, & Maintenance • Section 11.04, Stormwater Management System Requirements • Section 16.02, Definitions In addition, staff reviewed possible solutions to address each issue, sought direction on possible code language based on the solutions identified, and what public outreach or additional information is needed to make a recommendation on proposed amendments. The remaining items pertaining to Streetyard, Gateway and Parking, and Screening, Bufferyard and Water Conservation will be addressed at the next two meetings. There was discussion between staff and the Committee regarding the intent of measuring every tree. The Committee stated it takes time to identify and locate every single tree. Staff stated all trees are typically required to be identified on the survey to not overlook any trees that may be protected. Staff will review wording. There was also discussion regarding definitions for the following terms: trunk, branch, stem. The Committee asked staff to bring back these definitions at the next meeting. The Committee commented that the terms hardwood and softwood are too vague and recommend they not be used. The Committee also stated there are a lot of varieties of cedar and it would be better to define the types of tree we may want to keep. The discussion also continued to consider excluding ornamental trees from the definition of protected trees. The Committee stated the ornamental trees need to be included so they may be included in mitigation and credit trees, and to identify a way to measure for certain multi -trunk trees. Staff will bring back two options for consideration at the next meeting. UDC Advisory Committee 2 September 9, 2020 The Committee and staff continued to discuss the applicability of City approval for the removal of protected trees within a right-of-way or public utility easement and assessment of mitigation fees. The Committee suggested creating a new tree removal permit so that a site development plan would not be required. Staff stated they can bring back language that mimics heritage trees in the right-of-way at the next meeting for the Committee's review. There was also discussion to consider requiring a tree inventory for new projects and phased projects whose survey need to be updated after 5 and 10 years. Staff stated they will include it as an option for new development and at the 5/10 year mark. The Committee asked staff to explore options to potentially provide incentives to provide a tree inventory and bring back for their review at the next meeting. There was discussion to establish boundaries in which we are considering the project as it relates to the tree preservation plan mitigation. Staff explained the boundaries may be determined by the project or property line and not the limits of construction. Staff stated the City of Leander prohibits the counting of trees within the floodplain. Staff reviewed the possible solutions and the Committee requested staff bring back some examples and more information to clarify during the next meeting. Discussion continued to consider additional options for tree mitigation. Chair Stevens opened the Public Hearing. Amy Payne commented on the Parkside on the River master planned community, and their challenge to allow credit for trees planted in their project. Chair Stevens closed the Public Hearing. Discussion continued between the Committee and staff regarding how other jurisdictions allow credit for trees planted on street yards of single-family residential lots. Staff stated the City does not enforce deeds, nor the Homeowners Association regulations, but they will review with the Legal team to determine what the City can encourage. There was also discussion to consider altering the situations in which required landscaping trees can be removed, specifically related to signage. Staff stated current code allows for trees to be removed in four situations including when blocking existing signage. The Committee asked if the applicant can do a "fee -in -lieu" option in the event a tree may not be planted elsewwwhere on the site. UDC Advisory Committee September 9, 2020 E. Update on the Unified Development Code (UDC) amendment process, and the 2020 UDC Annual Review Plan, Schedule, and Next Steps — Andreina Davila -Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager Adjournment Motion to adjourn by Stevens. Second by Garner. Meeting adjourned at 6:32 p.m. —These minutes were approved at the October 14, 2 20 virtual meeti4 Stevens, - Attest, Brian Ortego, Secretary UDC Advisory Committee 4 September 9, 2020