HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_2030SC_06.06.2019Notice of Meeting for the
2030 Comprehensiv e P lan Update Committee
of the City of Georgetown
June 6, 2019 at 6:00 P M
at City Hall, 808 Martin Luther K ing Jr Street, Georgetown, T X 78626
T he C ity of G eorgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require as s is tance in partic ipating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reas onable
as s is tance, adaptations , or ac commodations will be provided upon request. P leas e c ontact the C ity S ec retary's
O ffic e, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc heduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or C ity Hall at 808 Martin
Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626 for additional information; T T Y users route through R elay
Texas at 711.
L egislativ e Regular Agenda
A C ons ideration and possible approval of the minutes of the S teering C ommittee meetings of April 4, 2019
and May 16, 2019. - Mirna G arc ia, Management Analyst
B C ons ideration and possible action on the Hous ing Element policies. - S ofia Nelson, P lanning Direc tor and
S us an Watkins , Housing C oordinator
C P resentation and dis cus s ion of Land Use and G ateway polic ies . - Nat Waggoner, Long R ange P lanning
Manager
D P ublic C omment
E Next Meeting Date/Time/Agenda - S ofia Nelson, P lanning Direc tor
Adjournment
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that this Notic e of
Meeting was posted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily
acc es s ible to the general public as required by law, on the _____ day of _________________, 2019, at
__________, and remained s o posted for at leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said
meeting.
__________________________________
R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary
Page 1 of 49
City of Georgetown, Texas
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Committee
June 6, 2019
S UB J E C T:
C onsideration and pos s ible approval of the minutes of the S teering C ommittee meetings of April 4, 2019
and May 16, 2019. - Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Minutes 4.4.2019 Backup Material
Minutes 5.16.2019 Backup Material
Page 2 of 49
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of Meeting of the
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee
City Hall, Community Room
808 Martin Luther King, Jr., St. Georgetown, Texas 78626
Thursday, April 4, 2019 6:00 pm
In attendance: Tommy Gonzales; Ercel Brashear; Josh Schroeder; Lou Snead; Linda McCalla; Danelle
Houck; Wendy Cash; Suzy Pukys; Paul Secord; Hugh Brown
Staff present: Sofia Nelson; Nat Waggoner; Susan W. Watkins; Steve McKeown; Michael Patroski;
Wayne Reed; David Morgan
Regular Session – To begin no earlier than 6:00 pm
Tommy G. Gonzalez called the meeting to order at 6:02 pm.
A. Consideration and possible approval of the minutes of the Steering Committee meeting of March
7, 2019. - Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager
Motion to approve by Ercel Brashear, 2nd by Josh Schroeder. 10-0 in favor.
B. Staff presentation and discussion on the 2030 Plan Housing Element Update. - Nat Waggoner,
Long Range Planning Manager
Item Summary: Staff provided the Steering Committee a recap of the Council direction on the
updated 2030 goals related to housing as well as a summary of the recommendations from the
March 7, 2019 Steering Committee meeting on the draft Housing Element policies related to
housing diversity and coordinated housing program management. The presentation included a
summary of the technical studies completed for the Housing Element, a summary of findings of
the review of draft policies by the Housing Advisory Board (HAB) and the Commission on
Aging. Lastly, the presentation concluded with an overview and discussion of the draft housing
policies for preservation and affordability.
Summary of Discussion: The discussion on this topic generally included the evaluation of the
housing policies and discussion on support, sustain/maintain, or increase efforts by the city.
Discussion regarding housing changes and economic values change due to time/modern
upgrades and their impact on preserving neighborhood character.
C. The Steering Committee conducted a series of interactive exercises to prepare housing policy
statements for consideration by the Joint Session. - Nat W. Waggoner, Long Range Planning
Manager
Item Summary: The Steering Committee conducted a series of interactive exercises to evaluate
the recently drafted policies using the S.M.A.R.T acronym as a guideline. For the development of
policy statements for the 2030 Housing Element Update, the Steering Committee evaluated the
policies using the terms Specific and Achievable.
a. Specific. Is the policy focused?
b. Measurable. Will we be able to determine when the policy has been accomplished?
Page 3 of 49
Page 2 of 3
c. Achievable. Is the policy realistic to achieve by 2030?
d. Relevant. Does the policy reflect the vision statement and public input themes?
e. Time-bound. Will we be able to set a timeframe for accomplishing the policy?
f. The group will also evaluate, in terms of level of involvement, does this Steering
Committee seek to:
i. Support
ii. Sustain/maintain
iii. Increase
the themes included in these draft policies?
Steering Committee discussion points included the following: cities change and evolve
and are not static; the purpose of a preservation goal; general positivity was expressed
regarding recent survey results residents indicating they liked their current
neighborhood. Discussion points also included defining what is not achievable and the
level of support currently being provided by community. The steering committee
expressed concern that additional information regarding current efforts is needed prior to
being able to evaluate and provide a recommendation on sustain/ increase/ support.
Discussion also included the ability to measure why people are leaving Georgetown.
Discussion included that there is overlap between some policy points. A question
presented to staff included are we able to isolate homes that made less than 25k.
Additionally, the committee requested getting good number of homes off inner loop
under 250K for starter home. The committee expressed a desire to have focused polices
that support and build on current city and general community efforts. The committee
shared concern regarding the cost of implementing policies. Staff remind the committee
that the current step is establishing policies and the implementation/tool kit is a later
stage in the comprehensive planning process. The committee sought specific action items
that would lead to affordability, preservation and diversity.
The following are the finding of the steering committee on each policy.
Policy
Number Policy Specific Achievable
Preservation
P1
Preserve existing housing stock that contributes to
diversity and affordability. X X
P2 Preserve existing neighborhoods. X Not
P3
Support owner ability to stay in their home in
neighborhoods with rapid value increases.
X Not
P4
Maintain and promote neighborhood character and
quality.
X X
Page 4 of 49
Page 3 of 3
Affordability
A1
Support existing rental choices for low-income
households. X X
A2 Increase rental choices for workforce households. X X
A3 Increase rental choices for senior households. X X
A4
Increase homeownership choices for workforce
households. X X
A5 Support community housing choices for all residents. Not X
Coordinated Housing Programming (global policies)
C1 Actively seek and build partnerships to leverage
resources and promote innovation. X X
C2 Align housing goals with other city policies and strategic
plans. X X
C3 Ensure opportunity for stakeholder community
engagement through outreach and communication. X X
D. Public Comment - Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager
Affordability topic and slides:
Tyler Mattos: Public speaker – commended the group on their progress. He shared he is
considered low income. He stated there are a lot of aspects that contribute to the cost of
living in Georgetown that need be examined. He expressed that quality of a
neighborhood is not just measured in the quality of housing but also access to resources.
He shared that having a one website to share his and anyone else’s knowledge on
community resources would be a great help.
Next Meeting Date/Time/Agenda - Sofia Nelson, Planning Director – Next meeting in May
Adjournment – Motion for adjournment (Josh S.), second (Lou S.)
Meeting was adjourned at 8:28 pm.
_____________________________________ ____________________________________
Approved, Tommy Gonzalez Attest,
Page 5 of 49
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of Meeting of the
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee
City Hall, Community Room
808 Martin Luther King, Jr., St. Georgetown, Texas 78626
Thursday, May 16, 2019 6:00 pm
In attendance: Mayor Dale Ross; Tommy Gonzales; Ercel Brashear; Josh Schroeder; Lou Snead; Linda
McCalla; Danielle Houck; Wendy Cash; Suzy Pukys; Paul Secord; Anna Eby; Rhonda Mundhenk; Scott
Stribling
Staff present: Sofia Nelson; Nat Waggoner; Susan Watkins; Andreina Dávila-Quintero; Ethan Harwell;
Wayne Reed; David Morgan; Mirna Garcia
Regular Session – To begin no earlier than 6:00 pm
Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 6:02 pm.
A. Consideration and possible approval of the minutes of the Steering Committee meeting of April
4, 2019. – Mirna Garcia, Management Analyst
Minutes were not attached. They will be presented at the next Steering Committee meeting for
consideration and approval.
B. Presentation and discussion of the purpose of the Steering Committee, the completed schedule,
and the remaining tasks of the Steering Committee. – Sofia Nelson, Planning Director
Item Summary: Staff provided the Steering Committee a current status of the 2030 Plan Update.
Staff discussed how we have reached each step and how/why each step is needed to build on the
next step. Additionally, staff discussed the role of the steering committee, how staff can best
support the committee’s work, and discussed the results of the steering committee survey. The
presentation included an overview and discussion of the draft housing policies.
Summary of Discussion: The discussion on this topic generally included comments relating to
identifying goals for the Committee to work towards, and questions about decision making and
presenting the final product to City Council. Nelson provided clarification for Committee
members on the process, remaining tasks to be completed and implementation.
C. Presentation and discussion of the inputs which led to the formation of the draft Housing
Element policies. - Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager and Susan Watkins, Housing
Coordinator
Item Summary: Since the last steering committee meeting on April 4, 2019, staff conducted a
joint session of the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council to discuss the steering
committee’s assessment of the draft housing policies. The housing policies have been updated to
reflect the assessment by the steering committee and the joint session. Additionally, on April 23,
staff reviewed the work of the steering committee and the joint session with the City council. The
City Council directed staff to take the housing policies back to the steering committee for a vote
on each policy prepared via the steering committee work and the joint session of the Planning
Page 6 of 49
Page 2 of 3
and Zoning Commission and City Council. The item is intended to review the steps that lead to
the draft policies, answer questions, and take an inventory of information that the committee
may need in advance of a vote on the housing policies. The feedback and needs for information
will direct the schedule for a vote on the housing policies.
Summary of Discussion: Staff provided background information and clarification of intent for
the policies that Committee members indicated needed more information/education. Waggoner
provided an overview of the C2, D1, and D2 policies. General discussion related to these policies
included: aligning housing goals with City goals, existing policies, and comments that the
Committee should define certain terminology to ensure all members have the same
understanding (C2). Members commented that for the policy about encouraging and
incentivizing new housing and additions to existing housing, there should be a clear definition
for the terms diversity and affordability, a target number to help achieve the Committee’s goal
should possibly be identified, and had a discussion of demographics and trends that may affect
housing inventory in the future (D1). Members discussed future land use and identifying
barriers to allowing a housing mix for policy D2.
Watkins provided an overview of the P1, P2, P3, and A3 policies. Discussion related to these
policies included preserving existing housing inventory by enabling incentives/programs for
property owners to participate in and be required to maintain a specified percentage of
affordable rents (P1). The committee discussed preserving existing neighborhoods and
understanding resident concerns. There were questions from Committee members about who
will subsidize homeowners for additional regulations, discussion about City Council decisions,
and price points relating to affordability (P2). The policy about the ability to stay in their home
when there are value increases is at the individual home owner/unit scale. Possible tools to assist
homeowners include City programs and partnerships with other nonprofits/organizations (P3).
Public input regarding the affordability policy to increase home ownership choices for workforce
households included comments that said affordability doesn’t just affect low income but also
medium income and workforce households. The policy is intended to enhance incentives
provided to increase home ownership (A3).
After the staff presentation, Committee members’ written questions were addressed. Questions
addressed were related to identifying affordability of the current housing inventory; which
neighborhoods in the City are to be targeted in policy P1; what are identified barriers to people
staying in neighborhoods; what are the price points assumed in D1 policy; what can/should the
city do to mitigate against existing housing market forces? Staff will provide written responses to
the questions posed and any others submitted by May 23, 2019.
D. Public Comment - Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager
Joe: Public speaker – Vice President of a HOA management community for Austin, Cedar
Park, Round Rock, Georgetown and Pflugerville. He commented on his experience
working with cities, previous experience working on comprehensive master plans and
glad that Georgetown is doing this.
Page 7 of 49
Page 3 of 3
Next Meeting Date/Time/Agenda - Sofia Nelson, Planning Director – Next meeting June 6, 2019
Adjournment – Motion for adjournment (Mayor Ross)
Meeting was adjourned at 8:23 pm.
_____________________________________ ____________________________________
Approved, Mayor Dale Ross Attest,
Page 8 of 49
City of Georgetown, Texas
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Committee
June 6, 2019
S UB J E C T:
C onsideration and pos s ible ac tion on the Housing Element polic ies . - S ofia Nels on, P lanning Director and
S usan Watkins, Hous ing C oordinator
IT E M S UMMARY:
Background
In January, the S teering C ommittee was provided a brief overview of the 2008 Land Us e G oals and made
recommendations for the revis ion and creation of new land use goals. T hose recommendations were later
evaluated by a joint s es s ion of the C ity C ounc il and P lanning & Zoning C ommis s ion on January 10, 2019
and new Land Use G oals were confirmed by C ity C ouncil on F ebruary 26, 2019 (Exhibit 1 – 2030 P lan
Update G oals).
At their March and April meetings , the S teering C ommittee evaluated draft hous ing polic ies on the counc il
directed themes of preservation, diversity and affordability. T he recommendations of the S teering
C ommittee were forwarded to a Joint S ession of the P lanning & Zoning C ommis s ion and C ity C ounc il on
April 10, 2019, attac hed as (Exhibit 2 – S teering C ommittee R ec ommendations). T he recommendations of
the Joint S es s ion were then pres ented to C ity C ouncil at the April 23, 2019 works hop attached as (Exhibit
3 – Joint S es s ion R ecommendations ). C ity C ounc il direc ted s taff to give the S teering C ommittee an
opportunity to vote on the propos ed housing policies. T he S teering C ommittee was provided additional
information on the draft polic ies at their May 16, 2019 meeting and an opportunity to request any additional
information.
Housing P olicy Vote
O utc ome: P rovide the C ity C ounc il a recommendation for each of the draft housing policies for their
review at their 6/25/2019 works hop.
Activity: Each member of the S teering C ommittee will be as ked to rais e a green, yellow or red c ard for as
individual policies are presented:
• G reen = keep polic y as is
• Yellow = s upport polic y idea, but modific ations are needed
• R ed = eliminate policy
T he S teering C ommittee members will be as ked to record their vote on a sc oring matrix (Exhibit 4 –
Housing P olicy Vote Matrix). S teering C ommittee members are enc ouraged to provide rec ommendations
for modific ations of policies for whic h they vote “yellow” and c omments for policies for whic h they vote
“red”. Als o, S teering C ommittee members are invited to submit comments they would like staff to take to
C ity C ounc il regarding a reas on to s upport or approve a polic y and prioritization of the policies.
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
S usan Watkins, AI C P, Hous ing C oordinator
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Page 9 of 49
Description Type
Exhibit 1 - 2030 Plan Update Goals Backup Material
Exhibit 2 - Steering Committee Recommendations Backup Material
Exhibit 3 - Joint Ses s ion Recommendations Backup Material
Exhibit 4- Hous ing Policy Vote Matrix Backup Material
Page 10 of 49
2030 PLAN GOALS
Promote development patterns with balanced land uses that provide a variety
of well-integrated housing and retail choices, transportation, public facilities,
and recreational options in all parts of Georgetown.
Reinvest in Georgetown’s existing neighborhoods and commercial areas to
build on previous City efforts.
Provide a development framework that guides fiscally responsible growth,
protects historic community character, demonstrates stewardship of the
environment, and provides for effective provision of public services and
facilities.
Guide, promote, and assist the preservation and rehabilitation of the City’s
historic resources.
Page 11 of 49
Ensure effective communication, outreach, and opportunities for public
participation and community partnerships to foster a strong sense of
community.
Ensure access to diverse housing options and preserve existing
neighborhoods, for residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.
Maintain high quality infrastructure, public safety services, and community
facilities.
Actively partner with GISD, Williamson County, other governmental
agencies, and local organizations to leverage resources and promote
innovation.
Maintain and add to the existing quality parks and recreation.
Improve and diversify the transportation network.
2030 PLAN GOALS
Page 12 of 49
Housing Policy recommendation of the 2030 Update Steering Committee
1
Policy
Number Policy Specific Achievable
Preservation
P1
Preserve existing housing stock that contributes to
diversity and affordability. X X
P2 Preserve existing neighborhoods. X Not
P3
Support owner ability to stay in their home in
neighborhoods with rapid value increases.
X Not
P4
Maintain and promote neighborhood character and
quality. X X
Affordability
A1
Support existing rental choices for low-income
households. X X
A2 Increase rental choices for workforce households. X X
A3 Increase rental choices for senior households. X X
A4
Increase homeownership choices for workforce
households. X X
A5 Support community housing choices for all residents. Not X
Coordinated Housing Programming (global policies)
C1 Actively seek and build partnerships to leverage
resources and promote innovation. X X
C2 Align housing goals with other city policies and strategic
plans. X X
C3 Ensure opportunity for stakeholder community
engagement through outreach and communication. X X
Page 13 of 49
Housing Policy recommendation of the 2030 Update Steering Committee
2
Policy
Number Policy Specific Achievable
Diversity
D1 Encourage and incentivize new housing to provide a
mixture of housing types, sizes and price points. X X
D2
Ensure land use designations and other policies allow for
and encourage a mixture of housing types, densities, and
price points.
X X
D3
Provide opportunity to create complete neighborhoods
across Georgetown that have a mix of housing types and
land uses, affordable housing and transportation
options, and access to healthy food, schools, retail,
employment, community services, and parks and
recreation options.
X Not
D4
Support choice Provide enough housing options and
services to allow people to stay in Georgetown as they
grow older age in the community.
Not Not
Page 14 of 49
PRESERVATION
P1. Preserve existing housing stock that contributes to diversity and affordability.
P2. Preserve existing neighborhoods in targeted areas.
P3. Support owner ability to stay in their home in neighborhoods with rapid value increases.
P4. Maintain and promote neighborhood character and quality.
AFFORDABILITY
A1. Support existing rental choices for low-income households. Support and increase rental choices
for low-income and workforce households unless they are substandard.
A2. Increase rental choices for workforce households. (merged with A1)
A3. Support rental choices for senior households.
A4. Increase Support homeownership choices for workforce households.
A5. Support community housing choices for vulnerable residents including families and individuals
experiencing homelessness.
COORDINATED HOUSING PROGRAMMING
C1. Actively seek and build public and private partnerships to leverage resources and promote
innovation.
C2. Align housing policies with other city policies and strategic plans.
C3. Provide Ensure opportunity for community engagement through outreach and communication.
DIVERSITY
D1. Encourage and incentivize new housing and reinventions or additions to existing housing to
provide a mixture of housing types, sizes and price points.
D2. Ensure land use designations and other policies allow for and encourage a mixture of housing
types and densities across the community.
D3. Provide opportunity to create Promote development of complete neighborhoods across
Georgetown.
D4. Provide Encourage housing options and services to allow people to thrive in Georgetown as they
grow older.
Page 15 of 49
DRAFT 05.30.19
Policy
Number Policy Green Yellow Red
If Yellow, provide specific
recommended modifications Comments
P1
Preserve existing housing stock that
contributes to diversity and
affordability.
P2 Preserve existing neighborhoods in
targeted areas.
P3
Support owner ability to stay in their
home in neighborhoods with rapid
value increases.
P4 Maintain and promote neighborhood
character and quality.
Instructions: After each policy is read and you raised your card, please record your vote of Green, Yellow or Red for each policy.
Green = Keep policy as is
Yellow = Support policy idea, but would like to modify
Red = Eliminate policy
Preservation
Page 16 of 49
DRAFT 05.30.19
Policy
Number Policy Green Yellow Red
If Yellow, provide specific
recommended modifications Comments
A1
Support and increase rental choices for
low-income and workforce households
unless they are substandard.
A2 Support rental choices for senior
households.
A3 Increase homeownership choices for
workforce households.
A4
Support community housing choices for
vulnerable residents including families
and individuals experiencing
homelessness.
Affordability
Page 17 of 49
DRAFT 05.30.19
Policy
Number Policy Green Yellow Red
If Yellow, provide specific
recommended modifications Comments
D1
Encourage and incentivize new housing
and reinventions or additions to existing
housing to provide a mixture of housing
types, sizes and price points.
D2
Ensure land use designations and other
policies allow for and encourage a
mixture housing types and densities
across the community.
D3 Promote development of complete
neighborhoods across Georgetown.
D4
Encourage housing options and services
to allow people to thrive in Georgetown
as they grow older.
Diversity
Page 18 of 49
DRAFT 05.30.19
Policy
Number Policy Green Yellow Red
If Yellow, provide specific
recommended modifications Comments
C1
Actively seek and build public and
private partnerships to leverage
resources and promote innovation.
C2 Align housing goals with other city
policies and strategic plans.
C3
Provide opportunity for stakeholder
community engagement through
outreach and communication.
Coordinated Housing Programming (global policies)
Page 19 of 49
City of Georgetown, Texas
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Committee
June 6, 2019
S UB J E C T:
P res entation and disc ussion of Land Us e and G ateway policies. - Nat Waggoner, Long R ange P lanning
Manager
IT E M S UMMARY:
Background
In January, the S teering C ommittee was provided a brief overview of the 2008 Land Us e G oals and made
recommendations for the revis ion and creation of new land use goals. A s ummary of the rec ommendations
are attac hed as (Exhibit 1 – S ummary of January 3, 2019 S teering C ommittee meeting). T hos e
recommendations were later evaluated by a joint session of the C ity C ouncil and P lanning & Zoning
C ommis s ion on January 10, 2019 and new Land Us e G oals were c onfirmed by C ity C ounc il on F ebruary
26, 2019 (Exhibit 2 – 2030 P lan Update G oals ).
Land Use & Gateway Education
O utc ome:
S hare background information on the proc es s to update the 2030 Land Us e Element, including G ateway
policies and s trategies, and determine a plan for educ ation and outreac h needed prior to a recommendation
by the S teering C ommittee on land use policies.
T he following have been attached to this document to support your education and preparation on making a
recommendation on land us e polic ies :
2030 Land Use Goals (Exhibit 2 – 2030 P lan Update G oals )
2008 land use policies including the progress made to date on implementation of the policies
(Exhibit 3 – P olic y and Ac tion 2008-2018 Analysis)
2030 Chapter 3 Land Use Categories (Exhibit 4 - Land Use C ategories )
Future Land Use Map (Exhibit 5 – F uture Land Us e Map).
Current Gateway Overlays (Exhibit 6 – G ateway O verlay District Map)
Description of each gateway, a summary of the feedback collected through S urvey #3
(Gateways) and a glossary of terms (Exhibit 7 – G ateway Handout).
Activity:
S taff will provide a brief overview of the analys is c ompleted to date, and ask the committee the following:
1. W hat development trends s hould be addres s ed in the Land Us e Element update?
2. Are there c urrent policies that do not s upport or conflict with the land use goals?
3. Is there additional data/information you s eek?
Land Use and Gateway Outreach P lan
O utc ome:
R eview stakeholder outreac h plan and determine goals and priorities for outreach in advanc e of providing
recommendations on polic ies .
Activity:
S taff will provide the C ommittee the plan to engage gather feedbac k from stakeholders including a review
of a webpage dedic ated to gateways on the 2030 webs ite.
T he C ommittee will be asked the following:
W ho are other stakeholders to engage?
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
Page 20 of 49
None.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
S usan Watkins, AI C P, Hous ing C oordinator
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Exhibit 1 - 1/3/19 SC Meeting Summary Memorandum Backup Material
Exhibit 2 - 2030 Plan Update Goals Backup Material
Exhibit 3 - 2008-2018 Policy Evaluation Backup Material
Exhibit 4 - 2030 Land Us e Categories Backup Material
Exhibit 5 - Future Land Use Map Backup Material
Exhibit 6 - Gateway Overlay Dis trict Map Backup Material
Exhibit 7 - Gateway Handout Backup Material
Page 21 of 49
Page 1 of 2
Re: Steering Committee Meeting #6 – Summary of Findings
At the 1/3/2019 meeting of the 2030 Steering Committee, the Committee
Reviewed the 2008 land use goals, how they are applied and progress made to
date
Established an understanding of how the 2017 vision statement, 2008 land use
goals and recent public input serve as the foundation for goals
Prepared a recommendation to the joint session of the City Council and Planning
and Zoning Commission
Following the staff presentation on land use goal framework, the Steering Committee
completed an evaluation of how well existing land use goals address public input themes and
made recommendations for changes to the land use goals; answering the key question,
throughout their review, “Do these goals reflect recent community dialogue and the
stakeholders you represent and are they effective?”
Below is a summary table of findings. The Steering Committee directed staff to clarify
language (highlighted in yellow), add language (in green italics), remove/refine (red strike
through) for each goal. The Steering Committee also directed staff to create new goals for those
themes generally absent, specifically themes C, D, H, J.
Goal Input Theme
Present
Input Theme
Absent
Relevant
(Y/N)
Specific
(Y/N)
1. Promote sound, sustainable, and compact
development patterns with balanced land
uses, a variety of housing choices and well-
integrated transportation, public facilities,
and open space amenities.
A,B,F,G C,D,E,H,I, J Y Y
2. Promote sound investment in Georgetown’s
older developed areas, including
downtown, aging commercial and industrial
areas, in-town neighborhoods, and other
areas expected to experience land use
change or obsolescence.
None All Y N
Page 22 of 49
Page 2 of 2
Goal Input Theme
Present
Input Theme
Absent
Relevant
(Y/N)
Specific
(Y/N)
3. Provide a development framework for the
fringe that guides sound, sustainable
patterns of land use, limits sprawl, protects
community character, demonstrates sound
stewardship of the environment, and
provides for efficient provision of public
services and facilities as the city expands.
Add concept that describes how we manage
growth and development
A, I B,C,D,E, H, J N N
4. Maintain and strengthen viable land uses
and land use patterns (e.g., stable
neighborhoods, economically sound
commercial and employment areas, etc.).
B, E A,C,D,F,G,
H,I, J Y N
A. Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel
B. Continue to encourage high quality development
C. Enhance citizen participation and engagement (develop new goal)
D. Focus on housing and affordability (develop new goal)
E. Enhance economic development opportunities
F. Maintain and expand existing parks and recreation amenities
G. Improve and diversify the transportation network
H. Public safety (develop new goal)
I. Fiscal responsibility
J. Intergovernmental partnerships (develop new goal)
These recommendations will be considered at the joint session of the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council which will be held on 1/10/19.
Page 23 of 49
Slide 1
Date
Session 3
Type slide
Title Input Themes & 2008 Land Use Goals
Respondents 0
No votes for this session
Slide 2
Date
Session 3
Type slide
Title Survey Instructions
Respondents 0
No votes for this session
Slide 3
Date
Session 3
Type slide
Title Scoring
Respondents 0
No votes for this session
Question 4
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Test question - does this image include?
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
mascot of best football team in TX 1.5 8 2 2
mascot of best football team in US 1.416666667 9 1 2
collie with a cape 2.692307692 2 0 11
Question 5
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Test question - does this image include?
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
lettuce 2.153846154 5 1 7
tomato 2.153846154 5 1 7
Page 24 of 49
bread 2.384615385 4 0 9
cucumber 1.923076923 7 0 6
pickle 2.230769231 5 0 8
Slide 6
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type slide
Title Results from Test Question #1
Respondents 2
No votes for this session
Question 7
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Goal 1- Integrated development
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel 2.769230769 0 3 10
Continue to encourage high-quality developmen 2.615384615 1 3 9
Enhance citizen participation and engagement 1.461538462 9 2 2
Focus on housing and affordability 2.230769231 4 2 7
Enhance economic development opportunities 2 5 3 5
Maintain & expand existing parks & recreation a 2.538461538 2 2 9
Improve & diversify the transportation network 2.615384615 0 5 8
Question 8
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Goal 1 - Integrated development
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Public safety 1.923076923 5 4 4
Fiscal responsibility 2.076923077 4 4 5
Intergovernmental partnership 2.076923077 4 4 5
Question 9
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Goal 2 - Redevelopment
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel 2.076923077 3 6 4
Page 25 of 49
Continue to encourage high-quality development 2.307692308 4 1 8
Enhance citizen participation and engagement 1.769230769 7 2 4
Focus on housing and affordability 1.846153846 5 5 3
Enhance economic development opportunities 2.076923077 5 2 6
Maintain & expand existing parks & recreation ame 1.461538462 8 4 1
Improve & diversify the transportation network 1.384615385 9 3 1
Question 10
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Goal 2 - Redevelopment
Respondents 12
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Public safety 1.416666667 9 1 2
Fiscal responsibility 1.916666667 6 1 5
Intergovernmental partnership 1.416666667 9 1 2
Question 11
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Goal 3 - Growth management
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel 2.769230769 0 3 10
Continue to encourage high-quality development 2.384615385 2 4 7
Enhance citizen participation and engagement 1.538461538 8 3 2
Focus on housing and affordability 1.769230769 7 2 4
Enhance economic development opportunities 2.153846154 4 3 6
Maintain & expand existing parks & recreation ame 2.153846154 4 3 6
Improve & diversify the transportation network 2.153846154 4 3 6
Question 12
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Goal 3 - Growth management
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Public safety 1.846153846 4 7 2
Fiscal responsibility 2.461538462 1 5 7
Intergovernmental partnership 1.615384615 8 2 3
Question 13
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Page 26 of 49
Type scales
Question Goal 4 - Preservation
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel 1.846153846 6 3 4
Continue to encourage high-quality developmen 2.615384615 1 3 9
Enhance citizen participation and engagement 1.538461538 9 1 3
Focus on housing and affordability 1.923076923 4 6 3
Enhance economic development opportunities 2.615384615 2 1 10
Maintain & expand existing parks & recreation ame 1.769230769 6 4 3
Improve & diversify the transportation network 1.692307692 6 5 2
Question 14
Date 2019-01-04
Session 3
Type scales
Question Goal 4 - Preservation
Respondents 13
Choices Weighted average 1 2 3
Public safety 1.615384615 8 2 3
Fiscal responsibility 2.307692308 3 3 7
Intergovernmental partnership 1.538461538 9 1 3
Page 27 of 49
2030 PLAN GOALS
Promote development patterns with balanced land uses that provide a variety
of well-integrated housing and retail choices, transportation, public facilities,
and recreational options in all parts of Georgetown.
Reinvest in Georgetown’s existing neighborhoods and commercial areas to
build on previous City efforts.
Provide a development framework that guides fiscally responsible growth,
protects historic community character, demonstrates stewardship of the
environment, and provides for effective provision of public services and
facilities.
Guide, promote, and assist the preservation and rehabilitation of the City’s
historic resources.
Page 28 of 49
Ensure effective communication, outreach, and opportunities for public
participation and community partnerships to foster a strong sense of
community.
Ensure access to diverse housing options and preserve existing
neighborhoods, for residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.
Maintain high quality infrastructure, public safety services, and community
facilities.
Actively partner with GISD, Williamson County, other governmental
agencies, and local organizations to leverage resources and promote
innovation.
Maintain and add to the existing quality parks and recreation.
Improve and diversify the transportation network.
2030 PLAN GOALS
Page 29 of 49
Policies &
Actions
Percent
Complete POLICY Progress
GOAL 1
Promote sound, sustainable, and compact development patterns with balanced land uses, a
variety of housing choices and well‐integrated transportation, public facilities, and open space
amenities.
1.A.
Encourage a balanced mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses at varying densities and intensities,
to reflect a gradual transition from urban to suburban to rural development.
1.A.1 100%Adjust zoning provisions to provide greater flexibility for mixed‐use, multiple housing types, and compact suburban development.Yes
1.A.2 75%Reserve and rezone land ideally suited for long‐term commercial and employment uses and prevent its use for residential subdivisions.Yes
1.B.
Promote more compact, higher density development (e.g., traditional neighborhoods, Transit‐Oriented
Development, mixed‐use, and walkable neighborhoods) within appropriate infill locations.
1.B.1
100%
Establish guidelines and incentives for infill locations, including: Mixed residential uses and mixed‐use where appropriate. Connected,
pedestrian‐oriented streets. Conditions for edge treatment (buffers, connectivity, compatibility). Flexible requirements such as dimensional
criteria, impervious coverage, and parking to address local contexts.
Yes
1.B.2 10%
Provide density and intensity bonuses for the provision of housing and commercial components of mixed‐use developments with specific
reference to special dwelling types (student housing, elderly housing, etc.), and additional bonus provisions for affordable housing. (Coordinate
this action with the preparation of Housing Element).Yes
1.B.3 0%
Coordinate infrastructure investment policies to ensure that they are consistent with compact development designations. (Coordinate this action
with preparation of Infrastructure Element and/or update of infrastructure master plans).No
1.C.
Establish standards appropriate for new residential development pertaining to lot sizes, open space, buffers,
road connectivity, etc.
1.C.1 50%Establish standards appropriate for new residential development pertaining to lot sizes, open space, buffers, road connectivity, etc.Yes
1.C.2 50%Continue to promote and apply conservation development principles to the design of residential subdivisions in specifically designated areas.Yes
1.D.Establish improved standards for commercial development.
1.D.1 50%
Prepare land use and zoning provisions to discourage standard commercial “strip” development and encourage compact commercial and mixed‐
use centers at appropriate locations.Yes
1.D.2 50%Prepare guidelines and design standards to improve the character of commercial development.Yes
1.D.3 25%Identify highway corridors for the preparation and application of corridor design and access management standards.Yes
1.D.4 0%
Develop and apply standards for the location and design of “mid‐box” and “big box” retail centers to improve their aesthetics, maintain
appropriate commercial scale and provide for their future adaptive re‐use.No
1.E.
Expand regulatory provisions and incentives to encourage innovative forms of compact, pedestrian friendly
development (mixed‐use, traditional neighborhood design), and a wider array of affordable housing choices.
1.E.1 50%
Establish standards for and actively promote new forms of compact development to include Transit‐Oriented Development, as well as traditional
neighborhood development (TND), mixed‐use, and pedestrian‐scale development.Yes
1.E.2
Provide density and intensity bonuses for the provision of housing and commercial components of mixed‐use developments with specific
reference to dwelling types (student housing, elderly, etc.), and additional bonus provisions for affordable housing, as defined by the City of
Georgetown.No
1.E.3 50%Promote mixed‐use, pedestrian‐friendly land use patterns, including community activity centers Yes
GOAL 2
Promote sound investment in Georgetown’s older developed areas, including downtown, aging
commercial and industrial areas, in‐town neighborhoods, and other areas expected to experience
land use change or obsolescence.
2.A. Remove present inadvertent impediments to infill and re‐investment in older, developed areas.
2.A.1 25%Establish criteria that define the characteristics of desirable infill development (e.g., compatibility with adjoining uses)Yes
2.A.2 50%
Revise zoning/development codes, the permitting process and other applicable City policies to identify and remove impediments to infill,
adaptive re‐ use, historic preservation, and redevelopment, including:
o Application of creative code provisions to remove impediments to re‐use older buildings while retaining their historic character
o Creation of overlay districts
o Coordinated City departmental policies regarding infill Yes
2.A.3 0%
Adjust the City’s schedule of development fees to lessen financial burdens on investment in designated areas and to more accurately reflect the
different costs of providing services in developed areas, suburban areas, and fringe areas. (Coordinate this action with preparation of
Infrastructure Element and/or update of infrastructure master plans).No
2.B.Target capital investments to leverage private investment in designated areas.
2.B.1 50%
Conduct community wide‐ public facility assessments to identify and prioritize corrections to deficiencies in infrastructure, including local streets
and sidewalks, and other public facilities, including parks and recreation facilities. (Coordinate this action with preparation of other Plan
elements, including Infrastructure, Transportation, and Open Space and Recreation).Yes
2.B.2
Through the City’s Capital Improvement Program, prioritize short‐ and long‐range capital investments in designated urban areas, including but
not limited to utility replacements, capacity improvements, area‐wide stormwater systems, street improvements, etc. (Coordinate this action
with preparation of Infrastructure Element and/or update of infrastructure master plans).No
2.B.3 100%Identify revitalization corridors for capital improvements (e.g., streetscape/landscaping, utility upgrades, etc.)Yes
2.C. Identify potential opportunities and selectively target, plan, and promote develpoment/re‐use initiatives.
2.C.1 0%Conduct a city‐wide inventory of potential infill/re‐use sites, including history sites and buildings suitable for adaptive re‐use.No
2.C.2 100%
Based on the city‐wide inventory, as well as on neighborhood, corridor, and downtown planning initiatives, identify site‐specific development
target areas and sites.Yes
2.C.3 50%
Take direct action to initiate and support private investment, including land assembly (via voluntary sale and purchase) and clearance, developer
solicitation and selection, and construction of capital improvements.Yes
2.C.4 0%Encourage use of financial incentives for reinvestment in historic and/or abandoned properties.No
Page 30 of 49
2.C.5 0%
Provide incentives for the reintroduction of neighborhood businesses and services into older neighborhoods (e.g., assistance with market studies,
site assembly, environmental clearances, business capital investment, employee training, etc.).No
2.C.6 100%
In coordination with other local governments, pursue state legislation to make additional financial tools available for redevelopment (e.g., tax
increment financing, tax abatements, etc.)Yes
2.D.
Continue to promote diversification and strengthening of downtown Georgetown and its in‐town historic
neighborhoods.
2.D.1 100%
Maintain a proactive program of City initiatives to promote downtown development through:
o Capital investment to streets, streetscapes, infrastructure, and parking.
o Establishment of site‐specific downtown redevelopment and reinvestment areas.
o Use of existing City powers to execute designated redevelopment projects.
o Introduction of additional cultural, civic, and entertainment activities.Yes
2.D.2 100%
Actively support private initiatives consistent with City policies to promote downtown investment by:
o Creating density bonuses and other incentives for mixed‐use, downtown housing, and the creation of new centers of activity in downtown.
o Adjusting capital improvement programs to target streets, infrastructure, and parking as necessary to promote and support desired private
investment.Yes
2.D.3 0%Ensure that public and private initiatives preserve and enhance historic downtown resources.No
GOAL 3
Provide a development framework for the fringe that guides sound, sustainable patterns of land
use, limits sprawl, protects community character, demonstrates sound stewardship of the
3.A. Initiate a fringe area growth management framework comprising the following elements.
3.A.1 100%
Draft and adopt ordinance establishing the following growth tiers, consistent with the framework described in the Comprehensive Plan:
TIER 1 (Short Term Growth Area – 10 Years):
o Tier 1A Area within the current city limits where infrastructure systems are in place, can be economically provided and/or will be proactively
extended, and where consolidation of the city’s development pattern is encouraged over the next 10 years.
o Tier 1B: Area within the present city limits that were recently annexed or subject to development agreements which are presently underserved
by infrastructure. Tier 1B will require the provision of public facilities to meet the city’s growth needs as Tier 1A approaches build‐out, over the
next 10 years.
TIER 2 (Intermediate Growth Area ‐ 10‐20 Years):
o Tier 2: Area within the ETJ where growth and the provision of public facilities are anticipated beyond the next 10 years, and where premature,
fragmented, leapfrog, or inefficient development is discouraged by the City.
TIER 3 (Long‐Term Growth Area – Beyond 20 Years):
o Tier 3: Area within the ETJ where growth, annexation, and the extension of public facilities are anticipated beyond 20 years, and premature,
fragmented, leapfrog, or inefficient development is discouraged by the City.Yes
3.A.2 100%
Define specific criteria for water and wastewater extensions and annexations, to include:
o Contiguity with development patterns and city limits.
o Location within appropriate growth area.
o Availability of infrastructure capacity.
o Consistency with City development standards.
o Fiscal impact assessment and mechanisms for allocation of public facility costs through a capital recovery fee.Yes
3.A.3 50%
Establish a proactive plan to provide infrastructure (water, waste water, roads, etc.) in advance of development. (to provide City infrastructure
where development is desired, with the developer bearing the responsibility of providing adequate infrastructure outside of transitional growth
areas).Yes
3.A.4 0%
Consider development of an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to provide for the timing of development concurrent with the availability of
adequate road and public facility capacity.No
3.B. 0%Establish criteria, targets, and timetables for the annexation of unincorporated “pockets” of land into the city.No
GOAL 4
Maintain and strengthen viable land uses and land use patterns (e.g., stable neighborhoods,
economically sound commercial and employment areas, etc.).
4.A.
Minimize impacts and encroachments of incompatible land uses (e.g., commercial intrusions into healthy
residential neighborhoods).
4.B.
Revise UDC/enact standards to ensure development that is compatible in character with the surrounding
context.
4.C.
Develop and apply neighborhood conservation strategies such as code enforcement, house rehabilitation
programs, and support for urban homesteading for first‐time buyers.
4.D
Revise UDC to ensure proper transitions and buffering between established neighborhoods and adjacent
nonresidential (commercial and manufacturing) areas.
Page 31 of 49
LAND USE CATEGORIES
Residential Use
The residential land use categories on the Future Land Use Map designate areas that are
intended to be used in the future for residential development. While, in some cases, residential
uses may already exist—and will remain in the future—in other cases the land is presently
undeveloped and subject to future rezonings for residential development. The residential categories
defined below are intended to accommodate a variety of housing types, the variety of household
types and sizes, housing preferences, and income levels among the population. These housing
types include single-family detached and attached dwellings (such as duplexes and townhomes),
and various forms of multi-family housing, both rental units and condominiums. Rural residential
developments are also included under this heading, since the land is primarily committed to
residential use.
The density ranges in these land use categories are provided in terms of dwelling units per
gross acre. It is recommended that the City similarly adopt a density-based zoning system to regu-
late residential concentrations in the zoning districts corresponding to these land use categories,
instead of imposing lot size requirements as the zoning structure does today.
These categories typically include supportive uses such as schools, churches, parks and may
include neighborhood-serving commercial uses that are not depicted on the Future Land Use Map.
An important consideration for these uses is to ensure that they are as compatible as possible with
the adjacent residential use.
Agricultural / Rural Residential
This broad land use designation is intended to accom-
modate very low levels of population, retain rural character
and require a very limited array of public services.
This category applies in areas that are located outside
the present city limits and are part of the proposed Tier
Growth 3 (Long-Term Growth Area). Generally, such
designations represent a “holding zone” for land areas
prior to their future development for more intense urban
development following annexation. Rural subdivisions,
particularly conservation developments that protect open
space in perpetuity, may be considered permanent uses in
some circumstances.
This land use designation is regulated, to some extent,
by the UDC, as granted by the State of Texas. The more limited “agricultural” designation is
intended to retain the viability of agricultural areas and uses involving grazing of livestock or crop
production, while accommodating minimal levels of population growth consistent with agricul-
tural operations. The “rural residential” designation, on the other hand, is intended to permit low
density residential uses, consistent with rural character, but not necessarily retaining agriculture.
Conservation subdivision
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.71Page 32 of 49
In such areas, conservation developments which preserve substantial
open space by clustering development in smaller lots are strongly encour-
aged here over conventional “large lot” development. In addition, for
new subdivisions created adjacent to agricultural operations that use
generally acceptable management practices, a “right-to-farm” easement
should be considered to require acknowledgement by new residents that
nearby agricultural operations will generate noise, odors, light, dust, and
other impacts.
Some commercial uses are anticipated to occur in this district. Such
uses, however, should be limited to retail and service functions that meet the needs of a rural
population and the operational needs of agriculture.
Low-Density Residential
This category includes the city’s predominantly single-family
neighborhoods that can be accommodated at a density between 1.1
and 3 dwelling units per gross acre. Conservation subdivisions are also
encouraged in this land use district. Modifications to development
standards applicable to this category could address minimum open space
requirements, public facility impacts, and greater roadway connectivity.
This category may also support complementary non-residential
uses along arterial roadways such as neighborhood-serving retail, office,
institutional, and civic uses, although such uses may not be depicted on
the Future Land Use Map. Standards should be established to maximize
compatibility of these uses with adjacent land uses, minimize traffic
congestion and overloading of public infrastructure, and also ensure a
high standard of site, landscape, and architectural design.
Moderate-Density Residential
This land use category comprises single family neighborhoods that
can be accommodated at a density ranging between 3.1 and 6 dwelling
units per gross acre, with housing types including small-lot detached and
attached single-family dwellings (such as townhomes).
As in the preceding category, the Moderate-Density Residential
category may also support complementary non-residential uses along
arterial roadways such as neighborhood-serving retail, office, institu-
tional, and civic uses, although such uses may not be depicted on the
Future Land Use Map. Standards should be established to maximize Townhomes
Rural commercial use
Single family home
Small lot residential
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.72 Page 33 of 49
compatibility of these uses with adjacent land uses, minimize
traffic congestion and overloading of public infrastructure, and
also ensure a high standard of site, landscape, and architectural
design.
This category includes most of the land area known as “Old
Town.” This area is planned to remain predominantly residential
and, although this Plan calls for greater density and infill in Old
Town over time, the utility plans for the area are currently antici-
pated for mostly moderate-density development. The reason Old
Town is in the Moderate Density Residential category is because it fits the historic pattern of the
area. The Plan does not seek widespread increases in density or changes in land use that differ
from present-day Old Town. Yet Old Town, like the Downtown area, is expected to face some
increase in density, provide a greater mix of uses in the future and redevelop completely in certain
areas. The historic nature of the buildings, street patterns, natural resources, etc. will continue to
be an important part of Georgetown and a concerted effort to increase the utility capacity in this
area would have to take place for any significant changes to occur.
High-Density Residential
This category provides for residential uses developed at a minimum density of 6.1 dwelling
units per gross acre. These higher density areas provide opportunities to diversify the housing
stock by accommodating dwelling types that still maintain a compatible neighborhood scale and
character, such as patio homes and townhomes, yet respond to
the demographic shift toward smaller households looking for
alternatives to the large-lot single family home and younger
families looking for affordability.
This category accommodates duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes,
apartments, condominiums, life care and other forms of multi-
family housing types. As with the preceding land use category,
creating opportunities for diverse types of housing will become
increasingly important to respond to demographic shifts and the
continued need for affordable housing within Georgetown. This land use classification is ideally
suited near major activity and employment centers and in areas suitable for future transit service.
The High-Density Residential category may also support complementary non-residential uses
along arterial roadways such as neighborhood-serving retail, office, institutional, and civic uses,
although such uses may not be depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Standards should be estab-
lished to maximize compatibility of these uses with adjacent land uses, minimize traffic conges-
tion and overloading of public infrastructure, and also ensure a high standard of site, landscape,
and architectural design.
Apartments / condominiums
Duplexes
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.73Page 34 of 49
Commercial Use
Commercial areas are those where the predominant activities involve the production, distribu-
tion, and/or sale of goods and services. The land use categories described below accommodate
a range of such existing and future commercial activities, consistent with the Future Land Use
Map. These areas strengthen the city’s commercial base and create employment opportunities for
the community. As with the commercial services allowed in the preceding Residential categories,
standards in the Commercial designations should be established to maximize compatibility of
these uses with adjacent land uses, minimize traffic congestion and overloading of public infra-
structure systems, and ensure a high standard of site, landscape, and architectural design.
Community Commercial
This category applies to areas that accommodate retail, professional
office, and service-oriented business activities that serve more than
one residential neighborhood. These areas are typically configured as
“nodes” of varying scales at the intersection of arterial roads, or at the
intersection of arterials and collectors. Community commercial areas
typically will include some neighborhood-serving commercial uses as
well as larger retail uses including restaurants, specialty retail, mid-box
stores, and smaller shopping centers. They may also include churches,
governmental branch offices, schools, parks, and other civic facilities.
Regional Commercial Destination
This category applies to large concentrations of commercial
uses that serve or draw a regional market, such as major shopping
centers, stand-alone big-box retail, tourist attractions and supporting
accommodations, and automobile-oriented commercial uses that rely
on convenient access from major transportation routes and highway
interchanges. Such properties are often configured in a manner or
located in areas that may not be suitable for the introduction of
mixed-uses.
Regional commercial destination
(Wolf Ranch)
Community commercial
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.74 Page 35 of 49
Mixed-Use
The various mixed-use categories refer to areas that combine retail, service, and other
commercial uses with office and/or residential use in the same building or on the same site.
Mixed-use areas can create vibrant pedestrian-oriented urban environments by bringing comple-
mentary activities and public amenities together in one location at various scales. As a historic
city, Georgetown retains mixed-use characteristics in some areas, such as the downtown. New
mixed-use areas are intended to create similar higher density, pedestrian-friendly environments
where the variety of uses enables people to live, work, play, and shop in one place. The proximity
of diverse uses and pedestrian orientation of these areas make it possible to reduce vehicular trips
and to encourage the use of transit. Some of the larger-scale or more intensely developed areas can
become destinations for the city or even the region.
Mixed-uses can be integrated vertically in a single structure, with the upper floors used for
office or residential use and the ground floor for retail or service uses. They can also be integrated
horizontally; for example, when a single structure provides retail or service uses in the portion
fronting the public street and office uses or residential behind. Mixed-use development can also
be horizontally integrated if two or more structures are developed on one site to provide retail,
service, office, and even light industrial uses in part of the structure, usually fronting the public or
private street, and lower intensity uses such as residential in separate structures.
To support new land use policies aimed at promoting more compact, sustainable development
patterns—reducing auto trips, increasing connectivity, encouraging walking and the use of transit,
and expanding the supply of higher density, affordable housing near employment and activity
centers—the Future Land Use Map contains significant amounts of land for a variety of mixed-use
forms throughout the city. These land use categories differ primarily in the scale and intensity of
development encouraged in them, and all of them should be implemented through the application
of zoning and development standards that encourage appropriate form and character.
Mixed-Use Community
This category is intended for large tracts of undevel-
oped land, which are appropriate for larger scale, creatively
planned communities, where a mix of residential types
and densities are complemented by supporting retail, small
to medium-scale office development, and integrated open
spaces, where appropriate. Compatibility among these
various uses will be maintained through design standards
that address the locations, character and relationships
between uses, while affording greater development flexibility
than provided by standard zoning district classifications.
Instead of specifying a range of allowable residential densities, the residential mixed-use
designation encourages a balanced mixture of residential types as the predominant use in this
category, at densities consistent with those provided for each housing type in the base residential
categories described previously. Development in this category is best served in planned unit devel-
opment form or specific mixed-use zoning standards.
Planned development communities
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.75Page 36 of 49
Mixed-Use Neighborhood Center
This designation applies to smaller areas of mixed commercial
use within existing and new neighborhoods. These areas are
primarily proposed adjacent to, or as part of, larger residential
neighborhoods. Neighborhood-serving mixed-use areas abut roadway
corridors or are located at key intersections. They often function as
gateways into the neighborhoods they serve.
These compact and often “walk-to” centers provide limited retail
goods and services to a local customer base, while having minimal
impact on the surrounding residential uses. They accommodate
(but do not require) mixed-use buildings with neighborhood-serving
retail, service, and other uses on the ground floor, and offices or residential units above. They may
also include stand-alone high density residential development.
Uses in these areas might include a corner store,
small grocery, coffee shops, hair salons, dry cleaners and
other personal services, as well as small professional offices
and upper story apartments. They may also include non-
commercial uses such as churches, schools, or small parks.
In new neighborhoods, in particular, the exact size, location,
and design of these areas should be subject to a more specific
approval process, to ensure an appropriate fit with the
surrounding residential pattern
Neighborhood commercial mixed-use area
Neighborhood-serving commercial uses
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.76 Page 37 of 49
Specialty Mixed-Use Area
This designation accommodates large-scale mixed-use devel-
opments that are mostly commercial and usually near intense
regional commercial uses and the I-35 corridor. This category
encourages the creation of well planned “centers” designed to
integrate a variety of complementary uses, with an emphasis
on retail, offices, and entertainment activities. These centers
may also include civic facilities and parks or other green spaces.
Housing, in the form of apartments, townhomes, condominiums,
and live-work spaces, is also encouraged in these mixed-use areas,
generally in higher densities. These areas should be designed in a
pattern of pedestrian-oriented, storefront-style shopping streets,
with shared parking and strong pedestrian linkages to the
surrounding areas.
This category also applies to downtown Georgetown,
reflecting its role as a regional destination for services, cultural,
and civic functions. This emphasizes the urban character and
the mix and intensity of uses uniquely suited to this center of
activity. The designation is intended to permit a true mix of
uses (except industrial and mining), with unique development
standards tailored to the character of the area, such as the down-
town area or TOD site(s). As promoted by the Downtown Master
Plan, the intent is to move the downtown area towards becoming a center of activity not only in
the day, but also at night and on weekends, by promoting a mix of commercial, entertainment,
residential, and civic uses. Creative forms of housing are encouraged, such as attached homes,
“lofts,” and live-work units. To protect the historic character of downtown, the Land Use Element
recommends maintaining the maximum building height in this district, while allowing maximum
residential densities to be controlled by the building height, setback, landscape, impervious cover-
age, and other regulatory limitations.
This land use category will accommodate development that supports light rail and other
forms of transit and is best accommodated by a planned unit development or specific mixed-use
zoning standards.
Employment Center
This designation is intended for tracts of undeveloped
land located at strategic locations, which are designated for
well planned, larger scale employment and business activi-
ties, as well as supporting uses such as retail, services, hotels,
and high density residential development (stand-alone or in
mixed-use buildings) as a conditional use.
Many Employment Center designations will include
undeveloped properties identified by the City as opportunity
sites for centers of commerce or employment. These sites may
be acquired and developed through public-private partnerships. Primary uses include offices, flex
Downtown activity center
Business park
Regional mixed-use development
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.77Page 38 of 49
offices, and technology research and development, as well as environ-
mentally friendly manufacturing. These uses should be encouraged
to develop in a campus-like setting with generous, linked open space
to maximize value, promote visual quality, and encourage pedestrian
activity between employment areas and areas of supporting uses such as
retail, restaurants, and residential.
These areas often act as a transition between more intensely devel-
oped commercial uses and residential neighborhoods. For this reason,
standards should be developed to ensure that development of these activi-
ties is compatible with the character of the surrounding area.
Industrial uses that already exist or are anticipated to continue for
the foreseeable future are a part of this designation. Such uses include
light industrial uses like manufacturing, assembly, wholesale, and
distribution activities. Care should be taken to protect adjacent uses
from adverse impacts potentially associated with these uses (truck traffic,
outside storage, etc.), using buffering and/or performance-based develop-
ment standards.
Mining
This category accommodates existing activities that involve land
excavation for the extraction of minerals and similar substances. They
are primarily located in the northern and southern fringes of the city
along SH 195 and Leander Road. In most cases, these activities are
anticipated to continue for the foreseeable future. Care should be taken
to protect adjacent uses from adverse impacts associated with these
activities. There are some current mining uses not shown on the map, as
they will cease operations in the short-term.
Institutional Use
The institutional category refers to individual or concentrations of
government operations and uses, including government administrative
offices, libraries, police, fire and EMS services, airports, correctional
facilities, and infrastructure. Schools, university and college campuses,
and similar educational uses and centers are also a part of this designa-
tion, as are community institutions that are privately or semi-privately
owned, such as churches and major medical and health care facilities.
Quarrying / mining activities
Educational uses
(Southwestern University)
Light industrial
Offi ce
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.78 Page 39 of 49
Parks, Recreation and Protected Open Space
This designation applies to existing public parks, golf
courses, and protected open spaces of city-wide significance,
which are expected to remain as open space in perpetuity.
Potential future large-scale park acquisitions, as well as smaller
neighborhoods parks and recreational uses are shown in the Parks
and Open Space Master Plan.
Ultimate City Boundary Line
The Ultimate City Boundary Line represents the planned expansion boundary of the city
limits, by virtue of agreements with, and actions taken by, adjacent communities regarding their
intentions to expand to accommodate growth. The Ultimate City Boundary Line is not set in
stone but a guide to plan for future infrastructure and growth.
Public parks (San Gabriel Park)
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.79Page 40 of 49
Map maintained by:City of Georgetown, TexasTechnical Services Department300 Industrial AvenueGeorgetown, Texas 78627
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/Feet
***
Cartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
***
The accuracy and precision of this cartographic data is limited andshould be used for informational/planning purposes only. This datadoes not replace surveys conducted by registered Texas land surveyors nor does it constitute an "official" verification of zoning,land use classification, or other classification set forth in local, state,or federal regulatory processes. The City of Georgetown, nor any of its employees, do not make any warranty, express or implied,including any warranty of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefullness of any such information, nordoes it represent that its use would not infringe upon privately owned rights.
Future LandUse Plan
April, 2019
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\
\
\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\\\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
S W 2
S W 3
R
O
N
A
L
D
W
R
E
A
G
A
N
B
L
V
D
§¨¦35
N
W
1
!(195
N W 2
C R 1 5 0
C R 1 5 2
W STATE HIGHWAY 29
W
C
C
R
1
1
0
I
M
P
W C A R T E R I A L 1
C
R
1
4
0
C R 1 4 3
R
O
C
K
R
I
D
E
L
N
S H E L L R D
C R 1 0 5
C R 1 9 4
L E A N D E R R D
E S T A T E H I G H W A Y 2 9
C
R
1
0
3
M
A
P
L
E
S
T
E
R
A
B
B
I
T
H
I
L
L
R
D
C
R
1
4
1
DBWOODRD
RIVERY
BLVD
C R 1 4 7
S
H
E
L
L
S
P
U
R
S
W
4
E U N I V E R S I T Y A V E
S T A D I U M D R
F
U
T
U
R
E
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
W U N I V E R S I T Y AV E
ALT.CR188
L
U
N
A
T
R
L
!(130
")971
")2243
!(29
!(29
")972
")972
C R 1 5 0
S
O
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
B
Y
P
A
S
S
I
N
N
E
R
LO
OP
SPU
R
R
O
N
A
L
D
W
R
E
A
G
A
N
B
L
V
D
B
E
L
L
G
I
N
R
D
C
R
1
0
3
E
X
T.
E 2 N D S T
E 7 T H S T
SAN ALO M A D R
B O O T Y 'S C R O SSING RD
W E S T I N G H O U S E R D
COUNTRY RD
E 2 1S T ST
W
C
A
R
T
E
R
I
A
L
2
C
R
110
F U T U R E C O L L E C T O R
W
C
A
R
T
E
R
I
A
L
2
AIRPORT RD
INNER LOOP SE
F M 9 7 2
")971
")2338
W 17 T H S T
SCENIC
DR
WHIS P E R I N G WI N D DR
W IL D W O O D
D R
S E I N N E R L O O P
")1460
D
B
W
O
O
D
R
D
N
W
1
N INTERSTATE 35
FUT U R E C OLL
E
C
TO
R
W
IL
LIA
M
S D
R
S AUSTIN AVE
S
C
H
U
R
C
H
S
T
C
R
2
4
5
R
R
2
3
3
8
C
R
2
4
8
C H A N D L E R R D
I N D I A N S P R I N G S R D
S U N C I T Y B L V D
D ELWEBB B L V D
SE R E N A D ADR
C
E
D
A
R
B
R
EAKSRD
R O N A L D W R E A G A N B L V D
R R A R T E R I A L H
S
W
3
§¨¦35
S P R I N G SBLUE
P K W Y
C
R
2
8
9
LAKE W AYDR
NOR
T
H
W
E
S
T
B
L
V
D
NAUSTINAVE
N E INN
E
R
L
O
O
P
S M IT H C R E E K R D
M
A
I
N
S
T
H
U
T
T
O
R
D
S
O
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
ER
N
B
LV
D
COOPERATIVEWAY
B E R RYCREEK D R")3405
RR
CHIS
H
O
L
M
TRL
C R 1 5 2
FUTURE
OAKMONTD R
J
I
M
HOGG
R
D
C O L L E C T O R
C
R
2
6
2
C
R
2
6
1
C
R
2
4
5
S A M H O U S T O N AVE
CR
174
C R 1 7 6
CR176
C
R 175
S
A
M
B
A
S
S
P
K
W
Y
H
I
D
D
E
N
V
A
L
L
E
Y
D
R
T E RAVISTA
P
K
W
Y
R
R
A
R
T
E
R
I
A
L
A
P
R
O
P
O
S
E
D
A
S
A
C
O
M
M
U
T
E
R
R
A
I
L
F U T U R E C O L L ECTOR
F U T U R E
C O L L E C T O R
R I D G E L I N E
B L V D
WOLF
RA N C H P K WY
F
M
1
4
6
0
S
O
U
T
H
W
E
S
T
E
R
N B
L
V
D
CRYST A LFALL S PKWY
R O N A L D W R E A G A N B L V D
RONALDWREAGANBLVD
R
O
N
A
L
D
W
R
E
A
G
A
N
B
L
V
D
!(130
P
A
T
R
I
O
T
W
A
Y
M.K.T. RR
M.K .T. R R
M
.
K
.
T
.
R
R
M.K.T. RR
M.K.T. R R
Legend
Agricultural /Rural Residential
Low Density Residential
Moderate DensityResidential
High Density Residential
Community Commercial
Regional Commercial
Mixed Use Community
Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
Specialty AreaMixed Use
Employment Center
Institutional
Parks, Recreation,Protected Open Space
Mining
ResidentialLand Use Categories:
CommercialLand Use Categories:
Mixed UseLand Use Categories:
OtherLand Use Categories:
River/Stream
Body of Water
Existing Collector Street
Proposed Collector
Existing Minor Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Existing Major Arterial
Proposed Major Arterial
Existing Freeway
Proposed Freeway
Proposed CommuterRail\\\\
Existing Railroad
City Limits Boundary
E.T.J. Boundary
ProposedUltimate Boundary
!!I
0 1 20.5
Miles
The Future Land Use Plan represents aconceptual vision of the community'sdesired land use patterns over thenext 20 to 30 years. It serves as aguide for decisions regarding zoning,roadways, utilities, and other issuesrelated to the physical developmentof the City.
Per Texas State law, "A comprehensiveplan shall not constitutue zoning regulationsor establish zoning district boundaries."
Page 41 of 49
Symbols showing Gateway Overlay Districts are conceptual and have beenenlarged to highlight those roadways affected by gateway overlay district requirements. Only those land parcels that actually have frontage on a highlighted roadway are subject to Gateway requirements. Land parcelsthat have frontage on two roadways are subject to the Gateway requirementsof both roadways.
Gate way Overlay District
This map is a representation of the information currently held by the City of Georgetown Utility Systems. While every effort has been made to ensu re the accuracy of the product, G.U.S. makes no warranties regarding the veracity or p recision o f the information depicted or the data from which it was produced an d assumes no liability for damages due to errors or o missio ns. This map is not suitable for survey purposes. For questions reguard ing this map please email: maps@georgetown.o rg
Railro ad
City L imits
Strea ms
City L imits
Down to wnOverlay
Downtown Overlay
Highway Overlay
Scenic-Natural O verlay 0 2 41Miles
±
Page 42 of 49
2030 Gateway Handout
HIGHWAY GATEWAY
(IH-35, SH 195, N Austin Ave, SH 130 Toll)
• A 25-foot landscape buffer is
required.
• Breaks up large masses of
parking and pavement with
the incorporation of open
space components.
• Strategically frame desired
views while screening
parking areas.
• Sidewalks are required,
where applicable.
• No parking is allowed
within the landscape buffer.
• No drainage features are
allowed within the
landscape buffer.
Page 43 of 49
2030 Gateway Handout
Survey Feedback
Corridor Favorite Least Favorite
I-35 11 mentions:
Good visibility of entryway sign
Businesses
Open space
Beautiful
Good view of the city
Plantings
19 mentions:
No distinction from Round Rock
Williams Drive exit is too far away
Too busy
Not much character
Dangerous trucks at quarry
Page 44 of 49
2030 Gateway Handout
SCENIC/NATURAL GATEWAY
(FM 2243/Leander Rd, SH 29, S Austin Ave, Williams Dr, FM 971, FM 1460)
• A 25-foot landscape
buffer is required.
• Integrates the natural
characteristics of the land
into the landscape design
(i.e. native stone
boulders, native grasses,
and native wildflowers).
• Sidewalks are required,
where applicable.
• No parking is allowed
within the landscape
buffer.
Page 45 of 49
2030 Gateway Handout
Survey Feedback
Corridor Favorite Least Favorite
SH 29 18 mentions:
Scenic west side and east side
East side still feels rural
Nice mix of landscape and buildings
Beautiful through Downtown
Southwestern
Central represents the Downtown feel
Clean and well-kept
Little bit of everything
22 mentions:
Just storage and gas stations
Traffic
Bridge blocks river view
Few plantings
Williams Drive 20 mentions:
Most convenient
Access to Downtown
Access to businesses
59 mentions:
Looks old and run down
Ugly
Horrible design
Looks dirty
Need to clean up
No landscaping
No restrictions
Buildings
Random buildings with no flow or plan
Buildings too close to road
All commercial
Heavy traffic
Congested
Slow
Too many stop lights
Badly developed
Too many driveways
Dangerous
Page 46 of 49
2030 Gateway Handout
DOWNTOWN GATEWAYS
(Austin Ave, University Ave)
• A 10-foot buffer is
required.
• The appearance reflect a
relatively formal, urban
extension of the
downtown
• Trees should be evenly
spaced and located equal
distance behind the
property line
• For all non-residential
properties in the
Downtown Gateway the
front setback is zero.
• A six-foot sidewalk is
required.
• Parking is prohibited
between the front
building line and edge of
gateway landscape buffer
• The front building line
shall comprise of a
minimum of 40% of the
primary facade of the
primary building.
Page 47 of 49
2030 Gateway Handout
Survey Feedback
Corridor Favorite Least Favorite
Downtown/
Austin Ave
40 mentions:
Historic appearance
Square
San Gabriel River view
Beautiful
Courthouse
Thoughtful and planned
Scenic, low-level buildings
Represents Georgetown
Trees
Urban context
Charming
Unique
Shops and restaurants
Good traffic flow
Adorable homes
Activity
Main entrance into city
Preserves the city’s character
Clean and lively
Good mix
10 mentions:
Ugly oil change
Bad sidewalks
Could look much better
Page 48 of 49
2030 Gateway Handout
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Corridor – A usually densely populated region characterized by one or
more well-traveled routes used by railroad, airline, or other carriers.
Gateway (GTWY) – A collector level street that serves as the entrance or
main point of access to a neighborhood, subdivision, or commercial
development.
Monument sign - means a low-profile freestanding sign supported by a
structural base or other solid structural features other than support poles
and may contain signage on more than one side.
Landscape Buffer – An area planted and maintained to promote visual
aesthetics and/or reduce and ease potential incompatibility between and
among different uses of land in proximity to each other.
Setback – A measurable distance, dictated by zoning district, from any
property line to an invisible parallel plane, within which certain buildings
and structures are prohibited. A setback is separate and distinct from, but
is usually included within, a yard, as that term is defined under Street
Setback.
Street Setback – Any setback located along, and generally parallel to, a
street right-of way and street lot line.
Page 49 of 49
