HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_2030SC_07.22.2019Notice of Meeting for the
2030 Comprehensiv e P lan Update Committee
of the City of Georgetown
July 22, 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 meeting on June 17, 2019.
- Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
B P resentation and feedback on the Update to the Land Use Element - S ofia Nelson, P lanning Direc tor and
Nat Waggoner, Long R ange P lanning Manager
C P ublic C omment
D Next Meeting Date/Time/Agenda. - S ofia Nels on, P lanning Director
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 27
City of Georgetown, Texas
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Committee
July 22, 2019
S UB J E C T:
C onsideration and pos s ible approval of the minutes of the S teering C ommittee meeting on June 17, 2019. -
Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
IT E M S UMMARY:
N/A
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
N/A
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Attachment 1 - Meeting minutes Backup Material
Page 2 of 27
Page 1 of 2
Minutes of Meeting of the
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Steering Committee
City Hall, Community Room
808 Martin Luther King, Jr., St. Georgetown, Texas 78626
Monday, June 17, 2019 6:00 pm
In attendance: Tommy Gonzales; Ercel Brashear; Josh Schroeder; Lou Snead; Linda McCalla; Danielle
Houck; Wendy Cash; Suzy Pukys; Paul Secord; Anna Eby; Doug Noble
Staff present: Sofia Nelson; Nat Waggoner; Susan Watkins; Wayne Reed; Mirna Garcia
Regular Session – To begin no earlier than 6:00 pm
Anna Eby called the meeting to order at 6:03 pm.
A. Consideration and possible approval of the minutes of the Steering Committee meetings of April
4, 2019 and May 16, 2019. – Mirna Garcia, Management Analyst
Motion by Brashear to approve the minutes, second by Gonzales. Approved (10-0).
B. Consideration and possible action on the Housing Element policies. – Sofia Nelson, Planning
Director and Susan Watkins, Housing Coordinator
Item Summary: In January, the Steering Committee was provided an overview of the 2008 Land
Use Goals and made recommendations for the revision and creation of new land use goals.
Those recommendations were later evaluated by a joint session of the City Council and Planning
& Zoning Commission on January 10, 2019 and new Land Use Goals were confirmed by City
Council on February 26, 2019. At their March and April meetings, the Steering Committee
evaluated draft housing policies on the council directed themes of preservation, diversity and
affordability. The recommendations of the Steering Committee were forwarded to a Joint Session
of the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council on April 10, 2019. The
recommendations of the Joint Session were then presented to City Council at the April 23, 2019
workshop. City Council directed staff to give the Steering Committee an opportunity to vote on
the proposed housing policies. The Steering Committee was provided additional information on
the draft policies at their May 16, 2019 meeting and an opportunity to request any additional
information.
Summary of Discussion: Steering Committee members voted on individual policies as presented.
The outcome is to provide the City Council a recommendation for each of the draft housing
policies for their review at their 6/25/2019 workshop.
The discussion on this topic generally included comments and questions relating to further
clarification of the policies, purpose of the policies, and questions about decision making and
presenting the final product to City Council. Nelson provided clarification for Committee
members on the process and implementation. A vote was taken on each policy with the Steering
Committee members raising a green, yellow or red card to indicate their support of a policy.
Green indicated the steering committee member wanted to keep the policy as is, yellow meant
that the member supported the policy idea, but would like to modify it, and red was a vote to
Page 3 of 27
Page 2 of 2
eliminate the policy. The results of the voting exercise are attached below. Nelson also sought
feedback from Committee members regarding their voting decisions and asked members to
provide comments for recommended modifications to the policies.
C. Presentation and discussion of Land Use and Gateway policies. - Nat Waggoner, Long Range
Planning Manager
Item Summary: Waggoner provided a brief overview of the analysis completed to date, and
asked the Committee members the following; 1) What development trends should be addressed
in the Land Use Element update? 2) Are there current policies that do not support or conflict
with the land use goals? 3) Is there additional data/information you seek? Waggoner reviewed
the stakeholder outreach plan and sought feedback from the Committee members to determine
goals and priorities for outreach in advance of providing recommendations on policies.
Summary of Discussion: Staff provided background information on the process to update the
2030 Land Use Element, including Gateway policies and strategies. There was also discussion of
the Future Land Use map, and guidance sought from Committee members regarding future uses
and recognizing limitations. Staff also provided further clarification for Committee members
related to zoning, and development patterns.
Committee members expressed interest in additional information regarding policies 4C, 4D, 2B.
Waggoner explained the additional material that was discussed during the meeting will be
provided to Committee members for their review at the end of the meeting.
D. Public Comment - Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager
No public speakers signed up for public comment.
E. Next Meeting Date/Time/Agenda – Sofia Nelson, Planning Director
Next meeting July 10, 2019
Adjournment – Motion for adjournment (Anna Eby)
Meeting was adjourned at 8:15 pm.
_____________________________________ ____________________________________
Approved, Mayor Dale Ross Attest,
Page 4 of 27
Steering Committee Vote on Draft Housing Policies
Po
l
i
c
y
Nu
m
b
e
r
Policy An
n
a
Eb
y
To
m
m
y
Go
n
z
a
l
e
s
Er
c
e
l
Br
a
s
h
e
a
r
Do
u
g
No
b
l
e
Su
z
y
Pu
k
y
s
We
n
d
y
Ca
s
h
Lo
u
Sn
e
a
d
Da
n
e
l
l
e
Ho
u
c
k
Li
n
d
a
Mc
C
a
l
l
a
Pa
u
l
Se
c
o
r
d
Jo
s
h
Sc
h
r
o
e
d
e
r
PJ
St
e
v
e
n
s
Da
l
e
Ro
s
s
Hu
g
h
Br
o
w
n
Rh
o
n
d
a
Mu
n
d
h
e
n
k
Sc
o
t
t
St
r
i
b
l
i
n
g
Count % Green %Red % Yellow
P1 Preserve existing housing stock that contributes to diversity and affordability.12231311113 6 green, 3 red, 2 yellow 55% 27% 18%
P2 Preserve existing neighborhoods in targeted areas.11221211112 7 green, 4 yellow 64% 0% 36%
P3 Support owner ability to stay in their home in neighborhoods with rapid value
increases.12231211222 4 green, 6 yellow, 1 red 36% 9% 55%
P4 Maintain and promote neighborhood character and quality.11211131111 9 green, 1 yellow, 1 red 82% 9% 9%
Count % Green %Red % Yellow
A1 Support and increase rental choices for low‐income and workforce households
unless they are substandard.1222121111 6 green, 4 yellow 60% 0% 40%
A2 Support rental choices for senior households.1123122111 6 green, 3 yellow, 1 red 60% 10% 30%
A3 Increase homeownership choices for workforce households.1113131111 8 green, 2 red 80% 20% 0%
A4 Support community housing choices for vulnerable residents including families
and individuals experiencing homelessness.1333131112 5 green, 1 yellow, 4 red 50% 40% 10%
Green = Keep policy as is
Yellow = Support policy idea, but would like to
modify
Red = Eliminate policy
Affordability
Preservation
06.17.19Page 5 of 27
Steering Committee Vote on Draft Housing Policies
Po
l
i
c
y
Nu
m
b
e
r
Policy An
n
a
Eb
y
To
m
m
y
Go
n
z
a
l
e
s
Er
c
e
l
Br
a
s
h
e
a
r
Do
u
g
No
b
l
e
Su
z
y
Pu
k
y
s
We
n
d
y
Ca
s
h
Lo
u
Sn
e
a
d
Da
n
e
l
l
e
Ho
u
c
k
Li
n
d
a
Mc
C
a
l
l
a
Pa
u
l
Se
c
o
r
d
Jo
s
h
Sc
h
r
o
e
d
e
r
PJ
St
e
v
e
n
s
Da
l
e
Ro
s
s
Hu
g
h
Br
o
w
n
Rh
o
n
d
a
Mu
n
d
h
e
n
k
Sc
o
t
t
St
r
i
b
l
i
n
g
Green = Keep policy as is
Yellow = Support policy idea, but would like to
modify
Red = Eliminate policy
Count % Green %Red % Yellow
D1 Encourage and incentivize new housing and reinventions or additions to
existing housing to provide a mixture of housing types, sizes and price points.12221221111 6 green, 5 yellow 55% 0% 45%
D2 Ensure land use designations and other policies allow for and encourage a
mixture housing types and densities across the community. 11121211111 9 green, 2 yellow 82% 0% 18%
D3 Promote development of complete neighborhoods across Georgetown.12332111223 4 green, 4 yellow, 3 red 36% 27% 36%
D4 Encourage housing options and services to allow people to thrive in
Georgetown as they grow older.12223311222 3 green, 6, yellow, 2 red 27% 18% 55%
Count % Green %Red % Yellow
C1 Actively seek and build public and private partnerships to leverage resources
and promote innovation.1111111111 10 green 100% 0% 0%
C2 Align housing goals with other city policies and strategic plans.1131111111 9 green, 1 red 90% 10% 0%
C3 Provide opportunity for stakeholder community engagement through
outreach and communication.1222112111 6 green, 4 yellow 60% 0% 40%
Coordinated Housing Programming (global policies)
Diversity
06.17.19Page 6 of 27
City of Georgetown, Texas
2030 Comprehensive Plan Update Committee
July 22, 2019
S UB J E C T:
P res entation and feedbac k on the Update to the Land Us e Element - S ofia Nels on, P lanning Director and
Nat Waggoner, Long R ange P lanning Manager
IT E M S UMMARY:
S taff will provide the S teering C ommittee a summary of the 7/5 s urvey res ults , s hare recent feedback from
the P lanning and Zoning C ommis s ion and lead a general disc ussion of land use is s ues and development
trends since 2008. As part of this item, staff will seek feedbac k from the C ommittee on land us e issues
related to the 2030 G oals:
Are there additional land us e issues you think need to be addres s ed in the update whic h have not
been previous ly identified? If so, with what goal does this issue belong?
W hat actions s hould/c ould the C ity take to address thes e land us e issues ? W hat does s uc cess look
like?
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
N/A
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Nathaniel Waggoner, AI C P, P MP
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Exhibit 1 - 2030 Goals Exhibit
Exhibit 2- 2008 Land Use Policy Guide Exhibit
Exhibit 3- Current Comprehensive Plan Growth Management
Framework
Exhibit
Exhibit 4- Current Land Use Goals and Policies Exhibit
Page 7 of 27
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 8 of 27
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 9 of 27
Policy #Existing 2008 Policies with Proposed Mark-Up What is the City's tool?What are we currently doing?Public Input Intent/Outcome
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.
Future Land Use Plan
Zoning
Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) - criteria of approval
requirement includes : " A variety of housing types, employment
opportunities, or commercial services to achieve a balanced
community"
Development Agreements - balance of uses
Overlays, transition zones (Downtown Master Plan)
Corridor Plans (Williams Drive)
MUD and PUD negotiation to include a mixture of housing types
and reservation of land for supporting retail and commercial
services.
OTT - "Set zoning guidelines to prevent urban sprawl"
Survey #1 - "Would love to see continued growth and density of downtown. More
restaurants and shops. More downtown living or hotel options."
Survey #1 - "there's still a country/wildlife feel, yet modern where it matters (i.e.
infrastructure)"
Survey #1 - "There should be growth limits"
Survey #1 - "A balance of living space, plentiful green spaces"
Survey #1 - "Well thought development with a diverse population of different ages,
income levels, and backgrounds. As the city grows I would like the government to plan
ahead of development instead of being reactive."
Survey #1 - "Do not turn it into a sprawling town like Round Rock or Austin."
Survey #1 - "less sprawl more density, bigger downtown"
Minimize land use and impacts of growth,
provide variety of uses
1.B.
Promote more compact, higher density, well-connected
development (e.g., traditional neighborhoods, Transit-
Oriented Development, mixed-use, and walkable
neighborhoods) within appropriate infill locations.
Land Use Categories; Zoning Districts- Mixed Use Downtown and
Mixed Use District;
Workforce Housing Standards and Housing Diversity Program
Action from 2008 Comp Plan: 1.B.1.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.
OTT - "We do not like how clustered apartment developments are. Spread them out
throughout the City."
OTT - "We suggest that housing types be interspersed around town to combat
segregation within the community."
Survey #1 - "attract younger talent to the area, unique Domain like work/living/shopping
area. Make Georgetown a destination, put us on the map and make it count for years to
come."
Survey #1 - "Old Town Georgetown is somewhat a model of what the city should look like
on a larger scale--mixed housing stock, recreation, schools, churches, retail and grocery
stores, businesses, healthcare, etc"
Survey #1 - "More connected neighborhoods with sidewalks on major roads, additional
library location west of I35, mixed use developments like Mueller."
Create connected developments
Reduce vehicle-miles traveled
Allow for greater use of existing land
1.C.
Establish standards appropriate for new residential
development pertaining to lot sizes, open space, buffers, road
connectivity, etc.
UDC Development Standards
UDC Standards for the following: Minimum lot size based on lot size
; parkland requirements; buffer requirements between residential
and non-residential uses; road connection requirements based on
number of units; intersection spacing and maximum block length
and cul-de-sac length standards.
Survey #1 - "Open green spaces, single family homes, add "Dark Skies"
(http://darksky.org/) to new houses and building being built."
Survey #1 - "Lots of green space, open areas for families and wildlife"
Survey #1 - "No east/west divide. Mixed used housing and neighborhoods throughout the
community. Better traffic management and public transportation options, including rail
service south and north."
Use remaining vacant land for quality
development
1.D.Establish improved standards for commercial development.UDC Development Standards
UDC Standards for the following: Floor to area ratio requirement in
C-1 zoning district; Inter-parcel connectivity (Cross access for
neighboring commercial properties); non-residential building
standards; landscaping standards; downtown overlay district design
guidelines;
OTT - Urban Design #1 highest rated positive
Improve the appearance of commercial areas
Use high residential growth rates to attract
high quality commercial development
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.
PUD, Special Area Plan Overlay District, Workforce Housing
Standards, Housing policies and toolkit
Action statement - move to implementation
Development agreements
Developers/Builders - "Due to the dominance of Sun City, Georgetown has a perception
of being an old community. Need a cool factor going."
OTT - Housing/Affordability #3 highest rated negative
Survey #1 - "I hope it will be a compassionate community where people of all racial,
ethnic, socio-economic and religious backgrounds can live and work and thrive."
Encourage good residential design that
increase choice
*Action statement, move to Implementation.
DRAFT 06.17.19
Page 10 of 27
Policy #Existing 2008 Policies with Proposed Mark-Up What is the City's tool?What are we currently doing?Public Input Intent/Outcome
2.A.*
Target capital investments to leverage private investment in
designated areas. Lead investments in transportation and
infrastructure to leverage partnerships with the business
community and interested neighborhood
organizations.A10:I10
Zoning standards- Impervious cover, parking, height
Fee exemptions
Action statement - move to implementation
Financial Institutions - "Construction/infill in Downtown Overlay is difficult. Georgetown
has Austin construction costs but Austin yields $93/ sq. ft."
Developers/Builders - "Infill land in Georgetown is scarce, utilities downtown are a train
wreck"
Developers/Builders - "Entitlements process is widely erratic, Planning and fire codes an
issue"
Realtors - "Old Town and Downtown Overlay development restrictions – make rehabs
complicated"
Survey #1 - "Historic downtown should be expanded to include other historic structures
with high redevelopment standards"
Make sure our regulatory process is not
standing in the way of redevelopment as long
as we can achieve the vision for these target
areas
2.B.
Target capital investments to leverage private investment in
designated areas. Lead investments in transportation and
infrastructure to leverage partnerships with the business
community and interested neighborhood organizations.
Economic development partnerships and incentives
Action from 2030 Plan (2008) 2.B.1. 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).
OTT - Traffic Circulation & Public Transit #2 highest rated negative
OTT - Infrastructure #6 highest rated negative
Survey #1 - "With the expected growth in Georgetown there needs to be related
expansion of the transportation infrastructure"
Leverage public infrastructure to encourage
private investments
2.C.Identify potential opportunities and selectively target, plan, and
promote development/reuse initiatives.
Small area plans- two examples include Downtown Master Plan and
Williams Drive Study
Action from 2008 Comp Plan: 2.C.2. Based on the city-wide
inventory, as well as on neighborhood, corridor, and downtown
planning initiatives, identify site-specific development target areas
and sites.
2.C.6. 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.)
Survey #1 - "More vibrant downtown area with more unique shops,
restaurants, and brew pubs/bars. More diversity in housing
downtown. More employment centers or "tech" centers to relieve
pressure to work/commute to Austin and bring/keep young
professionals here."
Encourage redevelopment/infill
2.D.Continue to promote diversification and strengthening of
downtown Georgetown and its in-town historic neighborhoods. Master plans Downtown Master Plan
Design Guidelines - Certificate of Appropriateness Process OTT - Historic Preservation #4 highest rated positive Protect existing charm/identity and vibrancy
of downtown
3.A.Initiate a fringe area growth management framework
comprising the following elements.A growth framework needs to be updated.
OTT - "Set zoning guidelines to prevent urban sprawl"
Survey #1 - "Would love to see continued growth and density of downtown. More
restaurants and shops. More downtown living or hotel options."
Survey #1 - "there's still a country/wildlife feel, yet modern where it matters (i.e.
infrastructure)"
Survey #1 - "There should be growth limits"
Survey #1 - "A balance of living space, plentiful green spaces"
Survey #1 - "Well thought development with a diverse population of different ages,
income levels, and backgrounds. As the city grows I would like the government to plan
ahead of development instead of being reactive."
Survey #1 - "Do not turn it into a sprawling town like Round Rock or Austin."
Survey #1 - "less sprawl more density, bigger downtown"
Promote compact development and reduce
sprawl
3.B.Establish criteria, targets and timetables for the annexation of
unincorporated “pockets” into the city. Involuntary annexation has been preempted by state legislation.N/A Intentional and planned city expansion
4.A.
Minimize impacts and encroachments of incompatible land
uses (e.g., commercial intrusions into healthy residential
neighborhoods).
UDC Standards-
Small area plans buffer requirements between residential and non-residential uses
Survey #1 - "The historic properties should be maintained. Infill and
expansion construction should be compatible with neighboring
properties."
Minimize land use conflicts and protect
property values
4.B.Revise the UDC to ensure development that is compatible in
character with the surrounding context.Zoning district standards CN and C-1 districts have limitations on building size Survey #1 - "Try to preserve the downtown look and feel and logically
address the need to “modernize” and adapt to the future"
Minimize land use conflicts and protect
property values
4.C.
Develop and apply neighborhood conservation strategies,
such as code enforcement, housing rehabilitation, and
support for urban homesteading for first time buyers.
Housing policies
4.D
Revise the UDC to ensure proper transitions and buffering
between established neighborhoods and adjacent commercial
and manufacturing areas.
UDC Development Standards; Rezoning Criteria- " The zoning
change is compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses
of nearby property and with the character of the neighborhood"
Housing Policies
UDC Standards for the following: buffering requirements for non-
residential development when adjacent to residential development.Survey #1 - "keep the feeling of small community with local flavor"
Minimize land use conflicts
Protect property values
*Action statement, move to Implementation.
DRAFT 06.17.19
Page 11 of 27
GROWTH MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK: TOOLS TO ACHIEVE THE VISION
Background
With the 1988 adoption of the Century Plan came the introduction of a new approach to
managing growth and allocating land uses and their associated intensities. Unlike conventional
comprehensive plan land use elements, which proactively establish policies for community
structure, form, development scale, and intensity, the Century Plan’s Intensity Plan left such
determinations subject to the measurement of impacts of a development on infrastructure and road
capacities. Although the Intensity Plan was considered highly innovative for its time, the 2030
Comprehensive Plan requires a new approach to the management of growth.
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan takes a proactive stance regarding where certain land uses
and intensities are needed in order to realize the vision of balanced, compact development at levels
of quality, which will meet citizens’ expectations for quality of life and community character.
This approach is in contrast to the intensity model structure, which makes development intensity
determinations subject to, or reactive to, the infrastructure capacities that happen to be available
at certain locations. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan creates a new approach, one that depicts
appropriate future land uses on a Future Land Use Map, which will be used as a guide to future
rezonings and development applications. Consistent with the vision of sustainable growth, the
2030 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element calls for higher density infill development in and
around downtown and other urban centers and also calls for proactively reserving land for higher
intensity employment uses to avoid its development as less economically useful subdivisions. In the
2030 Comprehensive Plan, land use policies drive priorities for infrastructure capacity adjustments
rather than the method of the former structure.
For these reasons, the effective implementation of the Land Use Goals and Policies of the
2030 Comprehensive Plan require the creation of a new, more purposeful, predictable and efficient
framework of tools for the management of growth, land use, and development intensity determina-
tions. This growth management framework consists of the following elements.
The Future Land Use Map
The Future Land Use Map depicts an array of land use types allocated geographically
throughout the city and its ETJ, based on the goals and policies of the Land Use Element of the
2030 Comprehensive Plan. These land use categories do not necessarily reflect the present use
of land or existing zoning district designations. Rather, the Future Land Use Map depicts the
array and distribution of land uses as they are expected to exist in 2030. Therefore, the Future
Land Use Map has two essential functions in the Growth Management Framework. First, the
Future Land Use Map graphically portrays public policy for the locations of future land uses and
development types. In the case of residential uses, density ranges are assigned to each of several
residential types. Non-residential development types will have weighted utility capacities in the
Capital Improvement Plan. Second, the Future Land Use Map will be used by staff, the Planning
and Zoning Commission, and City Council as a guide for the consideration of rezoning requests.
Except in very limited and unique circumstances, rezoning requests that are contrary to, or
inconsistent with, the Future Land Use Map should not be approved until and unless amendments
to the Future Land Use Map and/or associated Land Use Goals and Policies are adopted by the
Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.47Page 12 of 27
New Zoning Districts / Predetermined Densities and Intensities
In contrast to the former policy of applying the Intensity Model regardless of zoning designa-
tion, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan calls for the development and application of zoning districts
that specify the density as part of the development standards in the UDC. Two basic types of
zoning and development standards should be considered. Conventional or Euclidian zoning will
regulate development based on quantitative measures, typically numbers of dwellings permitted
per acre for residential use and Floor Area Ratios (ratio of building square feet to site footprint) for
non-residential use. Additionally, “form-based” standards may be developed in areas such as down-
town, historic districts and special areas like the TOD, where the factors of over-riding importance
are scale, architectural and urban design, and consistency with the surrounding character.
GROWTH TIERS
In order to stage contiguous, compact, and incremental growth of the city over the next two
decades, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan establishes a tiered growth framework (Policy 3A.1 and
Map 3-12). The Growth Tier Map is intended to guide long-term City policy regarding the deliv-
ery of municipal services and will evolve only with a continuted long-term outlook. The growth
tier classifications will be changed only with a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the map will
be amended only during the Annual Update cycle. Properties that are voluntarily or involuntarily
annexed into the city limits will not be automatically classified as Tier 1A or Tier 1B properties.
Only properties located within Tier 1A and Tier 1B will be eligible for inclusion in the Capital
Improvement Plans. Zoning and development review requirements will vary by tier, as follows:
Tier 1 (Short Term Growth Area – 10 Years)
Tier 1A is that portion of the city where infrastructure systems are in place, or can be
economically provided and where the bulk of the city’s growth should be guided over the near
term. Within Tier 1A, the city is called on to conduct assessments of public facility conditions and
capacities (Policy 2B.1) and to prioritize short and long term capital investments (Policy 2B.2) so
as to ensure that infrastructure capacity is sufficient to serve development intensities as indicated
on the Future Land Use Map and in the zoning districts.
Impact studies may be required for development approvals in two circumstances. Applica-
tions for rezoning to higher density of use than is depicted on the Future Land Use Map will place
the burden on the applicant to demonstrate sufficient infrastructure and road capacity and/or to
mitigate any public facility impacts. However, approvals of any development that are inconsistent
with the Future Land Use Map are entirely discretionary and can only be approved through an
amendment to the comprehensive plan. While anticipated densities are portrayed generally on the
Future Land Use Map, the full extent of such densities may be limited to coincide with the timing
of public improvements necessary to serve the planned development. As noted above, Policies
2B.1 and 2B.2 call for the City to plan for the development of the full array of public facilities
with capacities adequate to serve the development intensities as indicated on the Future Land
Use Map and in zoning districts. The Capital Improvement Program will carry out these facility
improvements and likely be staged over time. Therefore, in some cases the City may need to delay
development approvals until the necessary infrastructure capacity is in place.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.48 Page 13 of 27
S SA
N
G
A
B
RIEL R
MID
D
LE SAN GA B R I E L R
N SAN GA B RI EL R
LA
K
E GEO
R
G
ET
O
W
N
S
A
N G A B RIE L R
BERRY CREEK
SM
I
T
H
B
R
UN
IV
E
RS
ITY
A
V
E
WO
L
F
RA
NCH
N
A
U
STIN AVE
MAIN ST
L
E
A
N
DE
R
R
D
S AUSTIN AVE
FM 146 0
17
T
H
S
T
M A PL E ST
HU TTO R D
SO U T H W E S T ERN BLVD
S
E
I
N
N
E
R
L
O
O
P
W S
H 2
9
E
S
H 2
9
SH 130
N E I N NER LOOP
FM 971
IH 35
IH 3
5
IH 35
SW 3
C
R
Y
S
T
A
L
F
A
L
L
S P
K
W
Y
AI R P O R T R D
C
R
1
5
1
S
M
I
T
H
C
R
E
E
K
R
D
F
U
T
U
R
E
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
CR 1 03
CR 1 4 0
C
R
1
5
0
FUTURE C
OL L ECTOR
C
R
1
9
4
WC ARTE RIAL 2
F
M
9
7
2
CR 14 1
F U T URE
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
SH 19
5
S H 19 5
S
U
N
C
ITY BLVD
D
E
L WE
B
B
B
LVD WHI
S
P
ERI
N
G WIND DR
S
HEL
L
RD
S
H
E
LL RD
SE
RE
NAD
A DR
SAN
ALOMA DR
SHELL
S
PU
R
LAKEW
AY
BLV
D
NOR T HWES T B LVD
WILLI
A
MS DR
S U N C I T Y B L V D
RIVE
R
Y
S
E
1
S
E
1
SE 1
F
U
T
U
R
E
CO LLECTOR
C
R
1
4
3
C
R
1
4
7
R
ONALD W REAGAN BLVD
NW 1
R
O
N
A
L
D
W
R
E
A
G
AN BLVD
F M 340 5
R R 2 33 8
R R 2 3 38
CR 2 45
CR 24 8
I
N
D
I
A
N
S
P
R
I
N
G
S
R
D
JIM HOG
G
R
D
C R 2 6 2
CR 2 61
SW 1
D B W OOD RD
S O U T H W E S T B Y P A S S
D B WOOD RD
SW
1
R
O
NALD W REA
G
AN BLVD
R O N A L D W R E A G A N B L V D
CR 174
S
W 2
S W 2
S W 3
SW 4
R
R
A
R
T
E
R
I
A
L
H
S A M BASS RD
I N N E R L O OP S P U R
CR 116
W
E
S
T
I
N
G
H
O
U
S
E
R
D
HI D D EN
VALLEY
DT
ER
A
V
I
S
T
A
P
K
W
Y
OA
K
M
O
NT DR
R R A R T E R I A L A
R
R
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
TY
A
VE FM 1460
W C CR 119 I M P
CR 1 0 4
W
C
A
R
T
E
R
I
A
L
1
WC ARTERI
A
L
2
F U TURE CO L L E C T O R
SH 130
C
R
1
5
2
GR
O
W
T
H
TI
E
R
M
A
P
Ca
r
t
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
D
a
t
a
F
o
r
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
O
n
l
y
¯01.5 Mil
e
s
1
i
n
c
h
=
1
.
5
m
i
l
e
s
MA
Y
1
2
,
2
0
0
9
Ch
r
i
s
B
r
y
c
e
Th
e
G
r
o
w
t
h
T
i
e
r
M
a
p
is
a
s
y
s
t
e
m
o
f
t
i
e
r
s
i
n
t
h
e
Ci
t
y
a
n
d
E
T
J
t
h
a
t
p
l
a
n
fo
r
a
f
u
l
l
-
r
a
n
g
e
o
f
C
i
t
y
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
an
d
i
n
v
e
s
t
e
m
e
n
t
i
n
s
t
a
g
e
d
ti
m
e
f
r
a
m
e
s
.
T
h
e
t
i
e
r
s
y
s
t
e
m
is
s
e
t
u
p
a
t
1
0
-
y
e
a
r
i
n
t
e
r
v
a
l
s
th
a
t
c
o
m
m
i
t
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
to
T
i
e
r
1
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m
,
Ti
e
r
2
f
o
r
t
h
e
i
n
t
e
r
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
t
e
r
m
,
an
d
T
i
e
r
3
f
o
r
t
h
e
l
o
n
g
t
e
r
m
.
In
T
i
e
r
3
,
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
h
a
s
d
i
s
c
r
e
t
i
o
n
to
d
e
n
y
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
u
n
l
e
s
s
a
ma
j
o
r
i
n
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
a
n
d
se
r
v
i
c
e
c
o
m
m
i
t
t
m
e
n
t
i
s
m
a
d
e
by
a
p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
'
s
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
r
.
Le
g
e
n
d
Ri
v
e
r
/
S
t
r
e
a
m
Bo
d
y
o
f
W
a
t
e
r
Ci
t
y
L
i
m
i
t
s
Ex
t
r
a
t
e
r
r
i
t
o
r
i
a
l
Ju
r
i
s
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
(
E
.
T
.
J
.
)
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
A
r
t
e
r
i
a
l
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
F
r
e
e
w
a
y
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
o
r
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
A
r
t
e
r
i
a
l
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
F
r
e
e
w
a
y
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Pa
s
s
e
n
g
e
r
R
a
i
l
Ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
R
a
i
l
Ma
p
3
-
1
2
Ul
t
i
m
a
t
e
B
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
Ti
e
r
2
-
I
n
t
e
r
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
Gr
o
w
t
h
A
r
e
a
Pr
o
t
e
c
t
e
d
L
a
n
d
Ti
e
r
3
-
L
o
n
g
-
T
e
r
m
Gr
o
w
t
h
A
r
e
a
Ti
e
r
1
B
(D
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g
)
Ti
e
r
1
A
(D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
/
Re
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
i
n
g
)
Ti
e
r
1
-
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
G
r
o
w
t
h
A
r
e
a
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.49Page 14 of 27
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.50 Page 15 of 27
Through the possible application of an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (Policy 3A.4),
the City may require an impact analysis of a development project of a certain threshold size. If the
impacts are found to exceed level of service standards for public services, institutional, safety road
or infrastructure capacities, the City may delay project approval until planned capacity expansions
are in place. Alternatively, the developer may choose to make a contribution to accelerate the
planned capacity expansion, or otherwise mitigate the development impacts.
Tier 1B
Tier 1B is the area within the present city limits, or subject to a development agreement,
surrounding Tier 1A that is generally under-served by infrastructure and where such service and
facilities will likely be needed to meet the growth needs of the city once Tier 1A approaches build-
out over the next ten years. This includes areas subject to development agreements or annexation
service plans which mandate the provision of public facilities at varying levels of service. Other
than these existing commitments, the City’s priorities for capital improvement should focus on the
development of a full array of services and facilities with adequate capacities in Tier 1A, prior to
initiating additional major investments in Tier 1B.
While the City is obligated to provide infrastructure to serve future development in some
of these areas, it may be fiscally and practically infeasible to do so simply on demand. For this
reason, the 2030 Comprehensive Plan calls for a proactive strategy to provide infrastructure in a
staged manner (Policy 3A.3), along with criteria for making decisions concerning utility extensions
(Policy 3A.2). Therefore, within Tier 1B, requests for rezonings, additional infrastructure exten-
sions, and development approvals should be accompanied by comprehensive assessments of impacts
to include both capital and operating costs associated with water, wastewater, road capacity, police,
fire, EMS, and schools. Developments that cannot adequately mitigate these impacts through
a capital recovery fee (Policy 3A.2) which may be determined at the potential adoption of an
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, or other means should not be approved.
Tier 2 (Intermediate Growth Area – 10-20 Years)
Tier 2 lies outside the city limits, but within the City’s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ).
This area likely will be needed to serve the city’s growth needs over the next 10-20 years. Until
annexation occurs, City land use and development controls are limited to subdivision review and
signage, and in some cases building permits where City utilities are connected to new construc-
tion. However, the City may consider requests for annexation, extension of City services, and
rezonings in this area. The City should first examine such requests based on objective criteria,
such as contiguity (Policy 3A.2) and then require applicants to conduct a comprehensive impact
assessment demonstrating that impacts can be adequately mitigated.
Tier 3 (Long-Term Growth Area – Beyond 20 Years)
Tier 3 consists of the most remote portions of the city’s ETJ, an area of land that will likely
not be needed to meet the city’s growth needs for the next twenty years, during which Tiers 1
and 2 will approach build-out. The broad policy of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan for this area
is to reserve it to meet the city’s long range expansion needs. However, requests for annexation
and development can likely be anticipated in the foreseeable future. The process to be followed
in considering such development requests will follow that described for Tier 2. However, because
premature development in Tier 3 would likely not meet basic review criteria such as contiguity
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.51Page 16 of 27
(Policy 3A.2), development requests in Tier 3 should receive even greater scrutiny than those in
Tier 2. However, the City should remain receptive to major developments in Tier 3 that can be
clearly demonstrated to be in the public interest, such as the potential relocation to Georgetown of
a major corporate headquarters or other major employer or contributor to the local economy.
Protected Lands
This category includes land that is not subject to development due to public ownership,
environmental restrictions or public park designations, including but not limited to the land
immediately surrounding Lake Georgetown. As the Park, Recreation, and Open Space Element
and Environmental Resources Element of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan are completed, the area
designated as Protected Lands on the map will likely be expanded.
Ultimate City Boundary Line
The Ultimate City Boundary Line represents the possible expansion of the future city limits.
By virtue of agreements with, and actions taken by, adjacent communities, utility providers,
or special districts regarding their intentions to expand to accommodate growth this line may
change over time. It is the intent of the City of Georgetown to plan for ultimate City services and
programs to serve that area. This will aide the City in long-term capital planning for community
resource needs.
Focused Application of Impact Analyses/Adequate Public Facilities
Requirements
The former Intensity Plan approach used assessments of impacts on public facility capacities
as a basis for determining development intensities. Where undesired impacts were expected, the
response was to reduce development intensity. As noted above, impact assessments will continue
to be required where the impacts of a proposed development may trip level of service standards.
Where such impacts are determined, the response will generally shift from reducing development
intensity to delaying the timing of development to coincide with planned capacity expansions.
This can best be done with the creation and application of an Adequate Public Facilities Ordi-
nance (Policy 3A.4).
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.52 Page 17 of 27
GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS
Policies and Actions
1.A. Encourage a balanced mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses at varying den-
sities and intensities, to reflect a gradual transition from urban to suburban to rural devel-
opment.
Adjust zoning provisions to provide greater flexibility for mixed-uses, multiple housing 1.
types, compact development, and redevelopment.
Reserve and rezone land ideally suited for long-term commercial and employment uses 2.
and prevent its use for residential subdivisions.
1.B. Promote more compact, higher density development (e.g., traditional neighborhoods,
Transit-Oriented Development, mixed-use, and walkable neighborhoods) within appropri-
ate infill locations.
Establish guidelines and incentives for infill locations, including:1.
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.
Provide density and intensity bonuses for the provision of housing and commercial 2.
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).
Coordinate infrastructure investment policies to ensure that they are consistent with 3.
land uses that encourage compact development.
1.C. Establish standards appropriate for new residential development pertaining to lot sizes,
open space, buffers, road connectivity, etc.
Adjust development standards to address minimum requirements for open space and 1.
protection of natural features; park, school, and transit hub site reservations; landscap-
ing and street design; and subdivision connectivity and accommodation of pedestrian
and bicycle circulation, while providing greater flexibility for the provision and
integration of multiple housing types and densities.
Continue to promote and apply conservation development principles to the design of 2.
residential subdivisions in specifically designated areas.
Goal 1
Promote sound, sustainable, and compact development patterns with
balanced land uses, a variety of housing choices and well-integrated trans-
portation, public facilities, and open space amenities.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.57Page 18 of 27
1.D. Establish improved standards for commercial development.
Prepare land use and zoning provisions to 1. discourage standard commercial “strip”
development and encourage compact commercial and mixed-use centers at appro-
priate locations.
Prepare guidelines and design standards to improve the character of commercial 2.
development.
Identify highway corridors for the preparation and application of corridor design and 3.
access management standards.
Develop and apply standards for the location and design of “mid-box” and “big box” 4.
retail centers to improve their aesthetics, maintain appropriate commercial scale and
provide for their future adaptive re-use.
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.
Establish standards for and actively promote new forms of compact development to 1.
include Transit-Oriented Development, as well as traditional neighborhood develop-
ment (TND), mixed-use, and pedestrian-scale development.
Provide2. 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.
Promote mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly 3. land use patterns, including community
activity centers, neighborhood activity centers, conservation subdivisions, and walk-
able neighborhoods:
Promote development of community activity centers with complementary
mixed uses (e.g., neighborhood-oriented retail, higher density residential,
schools, and other community facilities).
Encourage neighborhood centers and walkable neighborhoods with devel-
opment patterns that replicate the scale and character of Georgetown’s
traditional neighborhoods (compact development, interconnected streets,
sidewalks, etc.).
Encourage forms of development that promote an interconnected street
network, safe pedestrian routes, and healthy, active living.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.58 Page 19 of 27
Narrative: While the city’s predominant single-family neighborhoods
are a valuable resource that should be protected, the City should take every
opportunity to encourage the introduction of new, more compact forms of
development. Such opportunities include the introduction of higher density
housing at appropriate locations, and smaller-unit housing types to meet the
needs of a diversifying population, as well as for housing affordability.
National demographic trends indicate that, at present, only 33% of
all households include two parents and one or more children, a fi gure that
will decline further to 27% by 2030. Conversely, the number of single adult
households will increase from 26% at present to 29% by 2030.
At the same time, U.S. Census data indicates that between 1990 and
2000, certain sectors of the City of Georgetown—in particular those south and
east of I-35—experienced signifi cant growth in the number of younger families
with children, with corresponding implications for housing types, sizes, and
densities.
The identifi ed policies and actions will create new incentives for a more
diverse array of housing choices, and will expand opportunities for infi ll
development beyond what is possible under conventional zoning, which tends
to separate uses and limit fl exibility in development siting. In addition, the
“bonus” provisions proposed by Policy 1B.2 provide a tangible economic
motivation to introduce mixed-use, affordable housing, and other needed
development types.
While these guidelines and provisions for fl exibility are necessary, they
are not suffi cient to fulfi ll the promise of greater infi ll investment and the
introduction of higher densities. Many existing neighborhoods will tend to fear
or resist the introduction of such new uses and may perceive them as threats
to neighborhood stability. While some of these concerns may be misplaced,
they must be addressed by carefully examining how and where such uses can
be introduced in a compatible manner within neighborhoods and transitional
areas, areas of blight, and along roadway corridors.
Because compatibility must be evaluated based on site specifi c
investigation, more detailed neighborhood, corridor and sector plans will be
needed to identify specifi c infi ll opportunities and create design criteria such as
buffers that will ensure compatibility in particular circumstances.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.59Page 20 of 27
Policies/Actions
2.A. Remove present inadvertent impediments to infill and re-investment in older, developed
areas.
Establish criteria that define the characteristics of desirable infill development (e.g., 1.
compatibility with adjoining uses).
Revise zoning/development codes, the permitting process, and other applicable City 2.
policies by identifying and removing impediments to infill, adaptive re-use, historic
preservation and redevelopment, including:
Application of creative code provisions to remove impediments in building/
zoning codes to reuse older buildings while retaining their historic character.
Overlay districts (where specific requirements could be modified to allow
established character to be maintained; e.g., buildings pulled up to the
street, credit for on-street/shared parking, etc.).
Coordinated City departmental policies regarding infill (e.g., adjusting
requirements for stormwater, water/wastewater, and other policies/regula-
tions when they affect the ability to develop infill sites).
Adjust the City’s schedule of development fees (e.g., development review fees and costs 3.
to upgrade infrastructure) to lessen financial burdens on investments in designated
areas and more accurately reflect the different costs of providing services in developed
areas (where infrastructure is available), suburban areas, and fringe areas (where costly
infrastructure extensions are necessary).
Narrative: The City’s code requirements were established and applied
well after much of the older portions of Georgetown were originally developed.
Due to constrained site and building conditions, some potential infi ll sites may
not meet current regulatory requirements (e.g., parking, setbacks, impervious
coverage, and stormwater standards), which are suited to more fl exible
suburban conditions.
Policies 2A.1 to 2A.3 seek to minimize or eliminate present unintended
disincentives for re-investment in infi ll and redevelopment throughout
Georgetown’s urban areas. This necessitates fi rst identifying specifi c types of
infi ll development that are compatible and desired. Once this is accomplished,
the UDC must then be revised to remove unnecessary or inadvertent
impediments, or to waive such requirements in designated urban areas.
Goal 2
Promote sound investment in Georgetown’s older developed areas, includ-
ing downtown, aging commercial and industrial areas, in-town neighbor-
hoods, and other areas expected to experience land use change or obsolescence.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.60 Page 21 of 27
2.B. Target capital investments to leverage private investment in designated areas.
Conduct 1. 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.
Through the City’s Capital Improvement Program,2. 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 improve-
ments, etc.
Identify 3. revitalization corridors for capital improvements (e.g., streetscape/landscap-
ing, utility upgrades, etc.).
2.C. Identify potential opportunities and selectively target, plan, and promote development/re-
use initiatives.
Conduct a city-wide inventory of potential infill/reuse sites, including historic sites/1.
buildings suitable for adaptive reuse.
Based upon the city-wide inventory, as well as on neighborhood, corridor, and down-2.
town planning initiatives, identify site-specific development target areas and sites.
Take direct action to initiate and support 3. private investment , including land
assembly (via voluntary sale and purchase) and clearance, developer solicitation and
selection, and construction of capital improvements.
Encourage use of financial incentives for reinvestment in 4. historic and/or abandoned
properties.
Provide incentives for the reintroduction of 5. neighborhood businesses and services
into older neighborhoods (e.g., assistance with market studies, site assembly, environ-
mental clearances, business capital investment, employee training, etc.).
In coordination with other local governments, pursue 6. state legislative initiatives to
make additional financial tools available for redevelopment (e.g., tax increment financ-
ing, tax abatements, differential development fee schedules, etc.).
Narrative: Although the removal of regulatory and other constraints are
necessary to promote infi ll and redevelopment, it may be insuffi cient to achieve
the desired levels of re-investment. Policies 2B.1 to 2B.3 move the City’s
posture beyond a “regulatory” mode and into a proactive position by targeting
direct investments in capital improvements as catalysts for private investment.
These policies call for a comprehensive assessment of the City’s facilities and
infrastructure and a targeted assignment of priorities for capital improvements
based, in part, on opportunities to leverage private investment.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.61Page 22 of 27
2.D. Continue to promote diversification and strengthening of downtown Georgetown and its
in-town historic neighborhoods.
Maintain a proactive program of City initiatives to promote downtown development 1.
through:
Capital investments to streets, streetscapes, infrastructure, and parking.
Establishment of site-specific downtown redevelopment and reinvestment
areas.
Use of existing City powers (eminent domain, land assembly, bonding, etc.)
to execute designated redevelopment projects.
Additional cultural, civic, and entertainment initiatives.
Actively support private initiatives consistent with the City’s policies to promote 2.
downtown investment by:
Creating density bonuses and other incentives for mixed-use, downtown
housing, and the creation of new centers of activity in downtown (employ-
ment, specialty retail, entertainment, dining, etc.).
Adjusting capital improvement programs to target streets, infrastructure,
and parking as necessary to promote and support desired private investment.
Ensure that public and private initiatives preserve and enhance historic downtown 3.
resources.
Narrative: While preceding policies address removing impediments and
creating incentives for private infi ll initiatives, Policies 2C. 1 to 2C.6 place the
City in a proactive position in actually targeting and carrying out redevelopment
and infi ll projects through partnerships with the private sector.
Opportunities for such direct City action in targeted redevelopment areas
fall into three broad categories. One category includes sizeable areas of the
city where obsolescence—coupled with fragmented property ownership and
potential brownfi eld contamination—may present too many obstacles for the
private sector to address without City assistance. Such areas will include older
industrial areas, as well as obsolete commercial “strips.” A second type may
include a major civic facility (for example, a ballpark, arena, or performing arts
center) for which no suitable site exists. This would necessitate action by the
City in assembling and preparing such a site in partnership with a private or
non-profi t development entity. A third category pertains to the emergence of
new patterns of obsolescence, which may surface in suburban locations.
Of particular concern is the long term viability of “big box” commercial
centers that could succumb to ever-changing consumer patterns and
preferences. In these circumstances, the City should be prepared to intervene
by preparing small area or “focal” plans and various implementing actions
to rebuild and reuse these sites for higher value uses. Similarly, the City
should apply development standards to properly locate such developments
and to infl uence their design to improve their aesthetics and provide for their
adaptation to other uses.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.62 Page 23 of 27
Policies/Actions
3.A. Initiate a fringe area growth management framework comprising the following elements.
Establish a tiered growth framework, as follows:1.
TIER 1 (Short Term Growth Area – 10 Years):
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 consolida-
tion of the city’s development pattern is encouraged over the next 10 years.
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):
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 inef-
ficient development is discouraged by the City.
TIER 3 (Long-Term Growth Area – Beyond 20 Years):
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 inef-
ficient development is discouraged by the City.
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 environment, and provides for effi-
cient provision of public services and facilities as the city expands.
Narrative: Comparable to Policies 2C.1 to 2C.6, these policies situate the
City in a more proactive stance to promote its vision of downtown—one in
which new development and re-investment are actively pursued to strengthen
and diversify the land use and activity mix of downtown.
The City will continue to be supportive of, and responsive to private
initiatives through incentives, public parking, and capital improvements. In
addition, these policies call for the City to develop its own “action agenda” for
downtown, including the identifi cation of redevelopment areas and plans for
area-wide improvements to streets, parking, and urban design amenities.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.63Page 24 of 27
Define specific criteria for water and wastewater extensions and annexations, to 2.
include:
Contiguity with development patterns and present city limits.
Location within appropriate growth area.
Availability of infrastructure capacity.
Consistency with City development standards.
Fiscal impact assessment and mechanisms for the allocation of public facility
costs through a capital recovery fee.
Future annexations shall avoid the creation of additional unincorporated
pockets.
Narrative: Georgetown is expected to grow by an estimated 100,000 people
during the next 20 years. Under current policies, a signifi cant share of this
growth would likely occur in areas—both within and outside the present city
boundary—that are not currently (or only partially) served by infrastructure and
community facilities.
Growth tiers are the areas where development, annexation, and
extension of public facilities will be staged over the 20+ year horizon of
the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the tiered growth concept area is
threefold:
* To promote contiguous, compact and incremental expansion of the city’s
edge.
* To avoid excessive public expenditure on new facilities and services
associated with fragmented, leapfrog development patterns.
* To protect land that the city will need to sustain its long-term growth
from premature development.
Although growth areas located outside the present city limits remain largely
outside of City regulatory authority until annexation occurs, their designation as
a growth area for the city helps communicate Georgetown’s intent and policies
governing the locations, patterns, and types of uses for which requests for
water and wastewater extensions and annexations are likely to be approved.
The tiered growth system does not stop growth or prohibit development
in the outer tiers during the initial 10-year timeframe. Instead, the strategy
endeavors to infl uence the timing, location, and pattern of growth, slowing it
when necessary to prevent overload of public facilities and services, or shifting
it to locations where the City is best able to serve it in a manner that is fi scally
sustainable. It also transfers some of the cost burden to serve new growth from
existing taxpayers, making new development “pay for itself” to a greater extent
than it does at present.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.64 Page 25 of 27
Establish a proactive plan to provide infrastructure (water, wastewater, roads, etc.) in 3.
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).
Consider development of an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to provide for the 4.
timing of development concurrent with the availability of adequate road and public
facility capacity.
3.B. Establish criteria, targets and timetables for the annexation of unincorporated “pockets”
into the city. Criteria may include:
Location within appropriate growth area.
Availability of infrastructure capacity.
Annexation timing so that infrastructure availability is concurrent with need.
Positive or neutral fiscal impact or other overriding public benefit.
Compliance with all applicable Comprehensive Plan policies.
Facilities brought up to City standard prior to or concurrent with annexation.
Mechanism in place to relieve fiscal burdens on the City and its taxpayers through (self-
pay) tools such as special taxing districts.
Narrative: Although the Tiered Growth concept provides a rational
framework for staging fringe area development and annexations, the City is
under no obligation to accept any or all development in Tiers 2 and 3. This
policy encourages the City to carefully examine each development application,
based on consistency with land use policies and careful assessment of
impacts, public costs to be incurred, and the revenues that will accrue to
offset those costs. As noted previously, public costs incurred to support fringe
area “green-fi eld” development are often of an order of magnitude greater
than that for comparable infi ll development, where all or most public facilities
and services are already in place. Policy options to address this issue include
the creation of a “capital recovery fee” to more equitably assign costs, as
well as an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, which would only permit
development that can be accommodated at a given time, without imposing
unacceptable impacts on road or public facility capacity. These policies are not
intended to suggest that fi scal assessment and a capital recovery fee should
be applied so as to allow only those developments that fully “pay their own
way.” However, such tools will allow both citizens and elected offi cials to make
decisions based on a thorough knowledge of their fi scal consequences.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.65Page 26 of 27
Policies / Actions
4.A. Minimize impacts and encroachments of incompatible land uses (e.g., commercial intru-
sions into healthy residential neighborhoods).
4.B. Revise the UDC to ensure development that is compatible in character with the surround-
ing context.
4.C. Develop and apply neighborhood conservation strategies, such as code enforcement, hous-
ing rehabilitation, and support for urban homesteading for first time buyers.
4.D. Revise the UDC to ensure proper transitions and buffering between established neighbor-
hoods and adjacent commercial and manufacturing areas.
Goal 4
Maintain and strengthen viable land uses and land use patterns (e.g.,
stable neighborhoods, economically sound commercial and employment areas,
etc.).
Narrative: Within the present city limits are signifi cant “pockets” of
unincorporated land, some in the heart of the city. Rationalizing the city map
is not however, the reason for annexing these “islands.” Land development
and building standards in effect in these areas are different than those applied
within the city limits.
Unincorporated areas also pose special service delivery and governance
problems. In most cases, the County is not able to keep up with the service
demands of these areas, whose residents often have urban expectations. As
unincorporated communities continue to develop, the standard of living may
decline, leading to deteriorating housing, limited public services, and crime.
On the other hand, with annexation the City becomes responsible for
providing public services to these residents. While it is likely that many City
services already are being used by nonresidents who live in unincorporated
pockets of land within the city boundaries, the fi scal implications of assuming
this responsibility must be fully understood.
Narrative: While much of the city is developed with stable
neighborhoods and commercial areas, the emergence of obsolescence
in some older industrial uses and shopping centers will lead to market-
driven redevelopment. This set of policies/actions will ensure that as such
redevelopment occurs in a manner that minimizes any adverse impacts on
nearby stable neighborhoods and commercial uses.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.66 Page 27 of 27