HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_UDCAC_10.14.2020City of Georgetown, Texas
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee Meeting
Wednesday, October 14, 2020 at 3:30 P.M.
Teleconference meeting: https:Hbit.ly/2GUMrRx
The regular meeting convened at 3:30PM on October 14, 2020 via teleconference at
https://bit.ly/2GUMrRx. Webinar ID: 999-8563-5251. To participate by phone: call in number 833-548-
0282 or (301)715-8592. Password: 211390. 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; Tracy Dubcak; Stuart Garner; Brian Robinson;
Philip Wanke; Jen Henderson
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 3:31 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 http://government.gc )Tgetown.oi-g/category/boards-
commissions/.
Legislative Regular Agenda
C. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the August 12, 2020 and
September 9, 2020 regular meetings of the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee. -
Mirna Garcia, Management Analyst
Motion to approve both minutes by Henderson. Second by Robinson. Approved (6-0).
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
preservation, removal and mitigation and streetyard, gateway and parking landscape standards
UDC Advisory Committee
October 14, 2020
(UDC General Amendment No. 20-03) -- Steve McKeown, Landscape Planner, Ethan Harwell,
Senior Planner, and Andreina Davila -Quintero.
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 are 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
To facilitate the review process for this amendment, issues that have been identified by the public, the
UDC Advisory Committee and City staff were grouped into three (3) focus areas:
1. Tree Preservation, Removal and Mitigation;
2. Streetyards, Gateways and Parking landscape standards; and
3. Screening, Buffering and Water Conservation
For each of these focus areas, staff and the Committee reviewed the following:
• Discuss each issue in detail:
o What are we trying to resolve?
o Background on how we got here
o What can we do to resolve each issue?
• Validate the recommended solutions; and
• Seek direction to draft the Ordinance
The specific list of issues to be reviewed and amended for each of these three (3) focus areas was finalized
by the UDC Advisory Committee at their September 9, 2020 meeting. The specific UDC sections
associated with each item have been provided for reference. The discussion for this item was completed in
four (4) parts:
• Part 1: September 9, 2020 UDCAC Meeting Recap
• Part 2: Continue discussion on issues related to tree preservation, removal and mitigation,
specifically:
o Discussion of follow-up issues as they relate to:
■ Definition of ornamental trees (TP.05);
■ Removal of trees in the right-of-way or public utility easement (TP.06);
■ Project boundary for tree preservation (TP.09);
■ Tree Inventory Option (TP.10); and
■ Additional Tree Mitigation options (TP.11)
UDC Advisory Committee
October 14, 2020
o Discussion of possible solutions and recommended terms for all issues
• Part 3: Discussion on the issues related to streetyards, gateways and parking landscape
standards
• Part 4: Next steps
The remaining items pertaining to screening, bufferyard and water conservation will be addressed at
Hie next meeting.
Davila -Quintero began the discussion by reviewing the purpose of the meeting; to review and
discuss issues and possible solutions to address conflicts, ambiguity, and alternative standards
relating to 1) tree preservation, removal and mitigation (continued from the September 9
UDCAC meeting), and 2) streetyards, gateways and parking.
Staff sought feedback from the Committee on definitions and terms related to measuring multi -
trunk trees, hardwood versus softwood trees, tree inventory, and tree protection. While
discussing tree mitigation, the Committee recommended staff to work with the legal team to
determine what the City can require through deed restrictions, follow up on options for tier
process through an administrative process, and options on different fees for mitigation
depending on size.
Streetyards, gateways, and parking were discussed, specifically the use of artificial turf. There
was discussion about major concerns allowing artificial turf in the front yard, it should not be
visible from the street, no objection to allowance in the rear yard, and that artificial turf will not
be maintained by property owners. The Committee also discussed that artificial turf needs to be
outside the easement. It was not recommended by the Committee, and if allowed, it should be
limited to the rear yard only.
In addition, there was discussion about the applicability of gateway landscape requirements. It
was proposed that the Gateway code standards need to be clarify so it supersedes all other
landscape requirements and overlay districts when it's the more intense requirement, and also
clarify the boundary of the overlaying districts. The goal is to make sure the gateway area is
heavily landscaped, and the Committee recommended staff to proceed as proposed.
The Committee discussed landscape requirements for inventory lots, where the proposed
solutions were to create a definition for "auto or vehicle inventory lot," and clarify that
inventory lots are exempt from shade tree parking lot requirements. The Committee discussed
requiring an SUP for use, possibly requiring shade structures, and also asked if exempting
inventory lots meets the goal of the City.
Lastly, there was discussion regarding conflicts between signage, utilities and easements, and
Landscape requirements. The proposed solutions included offering enhanced landscape
options (ornamental trees, additional shrubs, and groundcover) around monument signs in -lieu
of meeting a percentage of Gateway shade tree requirement. In addition, shade trees shall be
offset internally to the site at a distance not to exceed 75% of mature size to avoid conflicts and
utilities, and a minimum of 10 foot depth of Gateway buffer shall extend beyond any conflicting
easement.
UDC Advisory Committee
October 14, 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
Adj oumment
Motion to adjourn by Stevens. Second by Wanke. Meeting adjourned at 6:39 p.m.
n'�rYVL e� �v t iZ-Fti�
PJ Stevens, Attest Attest, B44 r nr+4 cA ,,.,,+.,,.,s
ScG�•-G'1�Yy
UDC Advisory Committee 4
October 14, 2020