HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_ZBA_06.21.2016Notice of Meeting for the
Zoning Board of Adjustment
of the City of Georgetown
June 21, 2016 at 5:00 PM
at Council Chambers, 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable
assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's
Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th
Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Public Wishing to Address the Board
On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form which can be found at the
Board meeting. Clearly print your name, the letter of the item on which you wish to speak, and present it to the
Staff Liaison, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board
considers that item.
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 logon to
http://government.georgetown.org/category/boards-commissions/.
A As of the deadline, no persons were signed up to speak on items other than what was posted on the
agenda.
Legislative Regular Agenda
B
Call to Order
Pledge of Allegiance
Comments from the Chair
- Welcome and Meeting Procedures
Action from Executive Session
C Consideration and possible action of the Minutes from the May 17, 2016, Zoning Board of Adjustment
meeting.
D Public Hearing and possible action on a Variance to Unified Development Code (UDC) Section
6.03.090, High Density Multifamily District (MF-2) Lot and Dimensional Standards, to exceed the
maximum of twenty-four (24) dwellings units per building, for 13.24 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey
located at 4700 Williams Drive. (VAR-2016-002, Merritt Heritage) Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
Page 1 of 16
Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Shelley Nowling, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of
Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times,
on the ______ day of __________________, 2016, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72
continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
____________________________________
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary
Page 2 of 16
City of Georgetown, Texas
Zoning Board of Adjustment
June 21, 2016
SUBJECT:
Consideration and possible action of the Minutes from the May 17, 2016, Zoning Board of Adjustment
meeting.
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
Tammy Glanville, Recording Secretary
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Draft ZBA Minutes_May 17, 2016 Cover Memo
Page 3 of 16
Page 1 of 2
City of Georgetown, Texas
Zoning Board of Adjustment Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 5:00 PM
Council Chambers
101 E. 7thStreet, Georgetown, Texas 78626
Board members: Josh Schroeder, Chair; Kevin Pitts, Kaylah McCord, Alex Fuller, Aaron
Albright
This is a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Georgetown. The
Board, appointed by the Mayor and the City Council, acts on requests for variances,
interpretations and special exceptions under the Georgetown Zoning Ordinance.
Board Member(s) Absent:
Staff Present: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner and Tammy
Glanville, Recording Secretary.
Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Regular Session - To begin no earlier than 5:00 p.m.
B. Call to order: 5:00 p.m.
(The Board may, at any time, recess the Regular Session to convene an Executive Session at
the request of the Chair, a Board Member, the Director or legal counsel for any purpose
authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 551.)
Action from Executive Session. There was not an Executive Session.
C Consideration and possible action of the Minutes from the April 5, 2016, Zoning Board of
Adjustment meeting.
Motion by Board member Pitts to approve the Minutes from the April 5, 2016 Zoning
Board of Adjustment meeting. Second by Board member Fuller. Approved. (4-0)
(At this time Board member Aaron Albright arrived)
D Public Hearing and possible action on a Variance to the Limited Outdoor Display
requirements of Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 5.09.030.B.2 in order to allow
outdoor display in the rear yard and further than 5 feet from the wall of the principal
building at 1302 Williams Drive, being Lot 5, Block 4, Country Club Estates. (VAR-2016-
003). Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
Page 4 of 16
Page 2 of 2
Mike Elabarger provided an overview of the Variance request, description of project
and recommended denial.
Chair Schroeder invited the applicant to speak. Applicant Obdulio (OJ) Ferrer briefly
described his project and feels his business could help impact neighboring businesses.
Mr. Ferrer mentioned his business could cause a public safety concern due to distracted
motorist seeing numerous people standing outside viewing the outdoor displays.
Chair Schroeder opened the Public Hearing. No one came forward the Public Hearing
was closed.
Discussion among board members and staff regarding side street, rear yard, parking
lot, tents, tables and square footage for display area.
Motion by Board member McCord to deny the requested variance, because it does not
meet the six review criteria listed in Section 3.15.030 of the Unified Development Code
although arguable it certainly may meet one which would be the criteria about
substantial detriment giving the applicants public safety concerns. Second by Board
member Fuller. Motion failed. (2-3) Josh Schroeder, Kevin Pitts, Aaron Albright –
voted against the motion.
Motion by Board member Pitts recommended approval of the applicant’s variance, for
limited outdoor display requirements of Unified Development Code Section
5.09.030.B.2 based on the required findings in Section 3.15.030.A Second by Board
member Fuller. Approved. (4-1) Kaylah McCord voted against the motion.
Adjourned at 6:02 p.m.
_____________________________________ __________________________________
Chair Secretary
Page 5 of 16
City of Georgetown, Texas
Zoning Board of Adjustment
June 21, 2016
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing and possible action on a Variance to Unified Development Code (UDC) Section
6.03.090, High Density Multifamily District (MF-2) Lot and Dimensional Standards, to exceed the
maximum of twenty-four (24) dwellings units per building, for 13.24 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey
located at 4700 Williams Drive. (VAR-2016-002, Merritt Heritage) Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
ITEM SUMMARY:
Background:
The Unified Development Code (UDC) establishes that buildings within the High-Density Multifamily
District (MF-2) may contain a maximum of twenty-four (24) dwelling units. The applicant is requesting a
Variance to exceed the maximum units by 196 units to house a total of 220 units in a single building. The
applicant is in the process of requesting rezoning of the property to a mix of the Low and High Density
Multifamily Districts (MF-1 & MF-2) to facilitate the development, whereby the 220 unit building would be
within the MF-2 District boundary.
Public Comment:
To date, no written public comments have been received.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the request for a Variance to UDC Section 6.03.090, to exceed the maximum
of twenty-four (24) dwellings units per building, as it does not meet all of the criteria for approval of a
Variance as identified in Staff’s analysis.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None studied at this time.
SUBMITTED BY:
Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Staff Report Cover Memo
Attachment 1 - Location Map Backup Material
Attachment 2 - Proposed Concept Plan Backup Material
Attachment 3 - Applicant Letter of Intent Backup Material
Page 6 of 16
Georgetown Planning Department
Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report
Merritt Heritage, 4700 Williams Drive – Variance Page 1 of 6
Meeting Date: June 21, 2016
File No: VAR‐2016‐002
Project Planner: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
Report Date: June 15, 2016
Relevant UDC Section: 6.03.090.A – Lot & Dimensional Standards for High Density
Multifamily District, Apartment Units per structure, maximum: 24
Staff Recommendation: Denial
Item Details
Project Name: Merritt Heritage Senior Village
Project Address: 4700 Williams Drive (between Cedar Lake Boulevard & Woodlake Drive)
Legal Description: 13.24 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey
Future Land Use: Mixed Use Neighborhood Center (MUNC)
Current Zoning: Office (OF) and Local Commercial (C‐1) Districts
Proposed Zoning: Low Density Multifamily (MF‐1) and High Density Multifamily (MF‐2)
Districts processing under REZ‐2016‐010.
Applicant: Blake Rue, Rue Investments
Property Owner: Andice Development Company
Contact: Blake Rue, Rue Investments
Page 7 of 16
Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report
Merritt Heritage, 4700 Williams Drive – Variance Page 2 of 6
Applicant Request
The Unified Development Code (UDC) establishes that buildings within the High‐Density
Multifamily District (MF‐2) may contain a maximum of twenty‐four (24) dwelling units. The
applicant is requesting a Variance to exceed the maximum units by 196 units to house a total
of 220 units in a single building. The applicant is in the process of requesting rezoning of the
property to a mix of the Low and High Density Multifamily Districts (MF‐1 & MF‐2) to facilitate
the development, whereby the 220 unit building would be within the MF‐2 District boundary.
(See Attachment 2)
The applicant’s justification for the request is based on the age‐restricted nature of the
proposed development. The applicant states that, due to health issues and other risks, the
residents do not have the ability to go outside between buildings. (See Attachment 3)
Site Information
The south side of the property is bounded by a residential neighborhood, Terraces of
Woodlake, that contains about 160 homes. The property has approximately 450 feet of frontage
on Williams Drive, and is an “L”‐shaped tract. There is a stand of trees on the southern end
that runs the width of the property, and several dumping mounds of rock and other refuse;
nearest Williams Drive, the land is cleared.
Surrounding Properties:
Location Zoning Districts Future Land Use Existing Use
North Local Commercial (C‐1) and
Agriculture (AG)
Mixed Use Neighborhood
Center
Undeveloped, Office,
Commercial
South Residential Single‐Family (RS) Low Density Residential Single‐family residential
East Local Commercial (C‐1) and
Office (OF)
Mixed Use Neighborhood
Center Undeveloped land
West Local Commercial (C‐1) Mixed Use Neighborhood
Center
Undeveloped land, day‐
care center
Property History
This property was part of a 34‐acre contiguous tract bounded by the Woodlake residences and
Wildwood, Woodlake, and Williams Drives. Cedar Lake Boulevard was extended in 2015 to
Williams Drive, bisecting the tract into two halves, with this property being the western half.
A one‐thousand foot wide swath centered on Williams Drive (then FM 2338) was annexed by
the City in 1995, laying the foundation for the growth of the City westward. That annexation
covered most, but not all, of this subject property. The remainder, and all the property that
became the Woodlake subdivision, was subsequently annexed in 2001.
Page 8 of 16
Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report
Merritt Heritage, 4700 Williams Drive – Variance Page 3 of 6
The property is currently going through the rezoning process, requesting the Low‐Density
(MF‐1) and High‐Density (MF‐2) Multifamily Districts to accommodate multifamily residential
development; either detached (one or two units per structure) or attached (multiple units per
structure).
Staff Analysis & Variance Review Criteria
The Unified Development Code (UDC) identifies the MF‐2 District as being intended for
attached multifamily residential development that have access to major thoroughfares and
arterial streets. In order to allow for development that is appropriate adjacent to both
residential and non‐residential zoning districts, the UDC has provided for specific
development standards. These development standards include but are not limited to building
setbacks, building design standards, and the maximum number of dwelling units per
structure.
The maximum units per building standard was adopted to limit the massing of any one
singular building. The intent of the requirement is to reduce large buildings that are not in
scale with surrounding buildings, and create buildings with visual interest and compatibility
to the surrounding context.
Staff has reviewed the Variance request and the applicant’s stated findings, and has evaluated
the request based on the UDC required findings for a Variance. In reviewing the request, it
appears the applicant has based their request for a Variance on the desired use and specific
desired development plan, as opposed to the site and features of the subject property. Based
on the applicant’s findings, a Variance request would be required regardless of the location
within the City.
UDC Section 3.15.030.A ‐ Required Findings
The Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) may grant a Variance if it is not contrary to the public
interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the requirements would result
in unnecessary hardship, so the spirit of the Code is preserved, and substantial justice is done.
No Variance shall be granted unless the ZBA finds all of the following is true:
Page 9 of 16
Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report
Merritt Heritage, 4700 Williams Drive – Variance Page 4 of 6
Meets
Criteria
Does Not
Meet
Criteria
UDC Section 3.15.030.A ‐ Required Findings
1. Extraordinary Conditions – that there are special conditions affecting
the land involved such that strict application of the provisions of the
UDC will deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the land.
Staff Analysis: There do not appear to be extraordinary or special
conditions that affect the property that would necessitate a variance from the
regulations of Section 6.03.090 in order to develop the permitted uses allowed
within the MF‐2 District. The subject property is generally flat without
natural features that limit the development potential of the land.
2. No Substantial Detriment – that the granting of the variance will not
be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to
other property in the area or to the City in administering the UDC.
Staff Analysis: Should the variance be approved, no detrimental effects to
public health, safety, or welfare would be expected. The variance could affect
the appearance of the adjacent streetscapes.
3. Other Property – that the conditions that create the need for the
Variance do not generally apply to other property in the vicinity.
Staff Analysis: The cited reasons for this variance request are not unique to
this property. The same variance would need to be requested if the same
proposed project were to develop on any other site under the MF‐2 zoning
district.
4. Applicant’s Actions – that the conditions that create the need for the
variance are not the result of the applicant’s own actions.
Staff Analysis: The need for the variance is generated by the applicant’s
own intentions, specifically the applicant’s desired population for the
described multifamily development, as detailed in the Letter of Intent
(Attachment 3).
5. Comprehensive Plan – that the granting of the variance would not
substantially conflict with the Comprehensive Plan and the purposes
of the UDC.
Page 10 of 16
Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report
Merritt Heritage, 4700 Williams Drive – Variance Page 5 of 6
Neutral
Staff Analysis: The property is located within the Mixed Use Neighborhood
Center (MUNC) future land use category. Since the requested rezoning is
still under review by the City Council, staff will reserve the land use and
housing need consistency of the request with the Comprehensive Plan for that
application. As a result, the evaluation of the variance request with the
Comprehensive Plan will analyze building scale consistency and if the
request for an increase number of dwelling units in one building is consistent
with the Comprehensive Plan. In regards to building scale, the MUNC
category identifies in new neighborhoods “the exact size, location, and design
of these areas should ensure an appropriate fit with the residential pattern.”
Given the lack of goals and guidance regarding gateway corridors or building
scale in this area, it does not appear the request supports or deters from the
overall vision for the future of the area.
6. Utilization – that because of the conditions that create the need for the
variance, the application of this Code to the particular piece of
property would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the
utilization of the property.
Staff Analysis: There are no conditions inherent to the property that would
preclude development of multifamily attached dwelling units under the MF‐
2 standards. The applicant’s desired form of development does not fit within
those standards, triggering the variance request.
The UDC identifies the following types of possible findings do not constitute sufficient
grounds for granting a Variance:
a. The property cannot be used for its highest and best use.
Staff Analysis: The property is currently zoned Office and Local Commercial Districts,
permitting many different forms of development/use. Under the proposed MF‐2 District, the
property could be used for attached dwelling units.
b. That there is a financial or economic hardship.
Staff Analysis: There is no known financial or economic hardship from developing under the
MF‐2 standard.
c. That there is a self‐created hardship by the property owner or their agent.
Staff Analysis: The justification for the request is the desired tenant population (age 55+),
which is self‐created by the applicant.
Page 11 of 16
Zoning Board of Adjustment Staff Report
Merritt Heritage, 4700 Williams Drive – Variance Page 6 of 6
d. That the development objectives of the property owner are or will be frustrated.
Staff Analysis: The applicant’s desired development objectives cannot be realized under the
particular MF‐2 District standard.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends Denial of the request, as it does not meet all of the criteria for approval of a
Variance as identified in Staff’s analysis.
Public Comments
Per the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200 foot radius of the
property were notified of the application (35 letters), a legal notice advertising the public
hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper on June 5th, and three signs were posted on‐site. As
of the date of this report, staff has not received any written comments on this application.
Attachments
Attachment 1 – Location Map
Attachment 2 – Conceptual Plan
Attachment 3 – Applicant’s Letter of Intent
Page 12 of 16
D el W e bb Blv d
WilliamsDr
WilliamsDr
Lakeway Dr
DB
W
o
o
d
R
d
Booty'sCrossingRd
Shell
Rd
ShellRd
Jim Hog g Rd
Seren a da Dr
Lakeway Dr
N L a k e w o o d s D r
S e d r o T rl
")2338
VAR-2016-002 Attachment #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Location Map
0 0.5 1Mi
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Page 13 of 16
Page 14 of 16
Page 15 of 16
Page 16 of 16