HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda UDCAC 04.10.2019Notice of Meeting for the
Unified Dev elopment Code Adv isory Committee
of the City of Georgetown
April 10, 2019 at 3:30 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.
P ublic Wishing to Address the B oard
O n a s ubjec t that is posted on this agenda: P lease fill out a speaker regis tration form whic h can be found at the
Board meeting. C learly print your name, the letter of the item on which you wish to speak, and pres ent it to the
S taff Liais on, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be c alled forward to speak when the Board
cons iders that item.
O n a s ubjec t not posted on the agenda: P ersons may add an item to a future Board agenda by filing a written
request with the S taff Liais on no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. T he reques t must include the
s peaker's name and the spec ific topic to be addres s ed with sufficient information to inform the board and the
public . F or Board Liaison c ontact information, pleas e logon to
http://government.georgetown.org/c ategory/boards -commissions /.
A - Julie Damian regarding potential changes to the fenc e standards
L egislativ e Regular Agenda
B C ontinued from the M arch 13, 2019 meeting:
Disc ussion and possible action es tablishing the regular meeting date, time and place of the Unified
Development C ode (UDC ) Advisory C ommittee for 2019/20. Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent
P lanning Manager.
C C ons ideration and possible action to approve the minutes of the F ebruary 13, 2019 and March 13, 2019
meetings of the Unified Development C ode Advis ory C ommittee. Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P,
C urrent P lanning Manager.
D P ublic Hearing and possible action on propos ed amendments to C hapter 6, R esidential Development
S tandards, C hapter 8, Tree P res ervation, Lands caping and F enc ing, and C hapter 13, Infrastruc ture and
P ublic Improvements , of the Unified Development C ode relative to the parkland dedication requirements
(Amendment No. 3). Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager, and Kimberly G arrett,
P arks and R ec reation Direc tor.
E P ublic Hearing and possible action on propos ed amendments to C hapter 6, R esidential Development
S tandards, of the Unified Development C ode relative to building standards in the multi-family residential
zoning districts (Amendment No. 14). Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
F P ublic Hearing and possible action on propos ed amendments to C hapter 3, Applications and P ermits, of
the Unified Development C ode relative to public notific ation requirements for land use changes
(Amendment No. 17). Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
Page 1 of 50
G Update on the 2018/19 UDC Annual R eview P lan, S chedule and Next S teps . Andreina Dávila-Q uintero,
AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
Adjournment
C E RT IF IC AT E O F P O S T IN G
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 pos ted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626, a place readily
ac cessible to the general public at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2019, at
__________, and remained so pos ted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the sc heduled time of s aid
meeting.
____________________________________
R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary
Page 2 of 50
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
April 10, 2019
S UB J E C T:
- Julie Damian regarding potential c hanges to the fence s tandards
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
na
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Page 3 of 50
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
April 10, 2019
S UB J E C T:
C onsideration and pos s ible ac tion to approve the minutes of the F ebruary 13, 2019 and Marc h 13, 2019
meetings of the Unified Development C ode Advisory C ommittee. Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P,
C urrent P lanning Manager.
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Minutes from the Feb 13, 2019 Meeting Exhibit
Minutes from the Mar 13, 2019 Meeting Exhibit
Page 4 of 50
UDC Advisory Committee 1
February 13, 2019
City of Georgetown, Texas
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee Meeting
Wednesday, February13, 2019 at 3:30 PM
Historic Light and Water Works Building,
406 W 8th St, Georgetown, Texas 78626
Committee Member(s) in Attendance: Tim Haynie; Chair; Brett Danaher; John Philpott; PJ Stevens; and
Jason Wirth, Secretary.
Committee Member(s) Absent: Tracy Dubcak, Vice-chair; Tim Bargainer.
Staff Present: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; Andreina Dávila-Quintero, Current Planning Manager;
Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner; Ethan Harwell, Planner; Michael Patroski, Planner; Madison Thomas,
Historic and Downtown Planner; Nat Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager.
Legislative Regular Agenda
A. Consideration and possible approval of minutes of the November 14, 2018 regular meeting. Andreina
Dávila-Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager
Motion by Stevens to approve the minutes as presented. Second by Wirth. Approved 5-0-2.
B. Discussion on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code regarding the number of
units and building separation requirements of the multi-family residential zoning districts
(Amendment No. 14). Andreina Dávila-Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager
Dávila-Quintero gave a presentation on the purpose of this amendment; the City’s multi-family
zoning districts and current Unified Development Code (UDC) site and dimensional standards for
these districts particularly as it relates to building separation and maximum number of units
permitted per building; challenges developers have experienced due to these standards; and
alternative designs and deviations that the City has approved to accommodate certain developments.
Dávila-Quintero requested feedback from the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
(UDCAC) on current and potential standards.
The UDCAC discussed the item and provided the following feedback:
• Building separation requirements should follow Fire Code requirements. In addition,
reducing the separation to 10 feet is more appropriate and comparable to Fire Code
requirements.
In addition, the following information was requested to be presented at a future meeting:
• Standards from other cities to see what standards they have regarding building separation
and number of units per building.
No action was taken.
Page 5 of 50
UDC Advisory Committee 2
February 13, 2019
C. Discussion on proposed revisions to the Unified Development Code related to building material
standards in residential zoning districts (Amendment No. 15). Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner
Irby gave a presentation on the purpose of this amendment; the City’s single-family and two-family
residential zoning districts; current UDC building material and design standards (multi-family and
non-residential zoning districts); building material requirements that have been approved through
Planned Unit Developments (PUDs) and Municipal Utility Districts (MUDs); existing development
conditions relating building materials; and building materials standards required by other
municipalities in the region and state. Irby requested feedback from the UDC Advisory Committee
on current and potential standards.
The UDCAC discussed the item and provided the following feedback:
• Building material (masonry) standards should not apply to property in the Downtown and Old
Town Overlay.
• Hardie plank should be considered as a masonry material.
• Purpose of the proposed amendments – is it for aesthetics only?
• Affordability needs to be considered. This is a component of affordable housing and thus must
be looked at.
• Process for deviation of standards should it be included. Additionally, look at allowing flexibility
in the standards
• Building material standards should only applicable to the Residential Single-Family (RS) and
Two-Family (TF) zoning districts
• Public outreach should include an open workshop to which interested stakeholders are invited
to attend.
• Nelson responded that staff will bring back a communication plan to next meeting.
In addition, the following information was requested to be presented at a future meeting:
• How hardie plank relates to fire code requirements/safety.
• Building standards from other Cities and Georgetown
• Example standards of what has been approved in the past
No action was taken.
D. Discussion on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code regarding additional
notification requirements for rezoning applications (Amendment No. 17). Andreina Dávila-Quintero,
AICP, Current Planning Manager
Dávila-Quintero gave a presentation on the purpose of this amendment; the state’s and City’s public
notification requirements; notification requirements of other cities within the region and state;
feedback from the February 12, 2019 City Council Workshop; and possible amendments to the UDC.
Dávila-Quintero requested feedback from the UDC Advisory Committee on current and potential
standards.
The UDCAC discussed the item and provided the following feedback:
• Notifying property owners in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) is a good practice and may
avoid surprises.
Page 6 of 50
UDC Advisory Committee 3
February 13, 2019
• Property owners should receive notifications if something happens within an area.
• Increasing the notification buffer to 300 feet, as well as notifying registered neighborhoods, is
good. Association should be responsible for contacting the residents outside the buffer.
• Property owners located in the ETJ may be notified through the posted sign.
• Community meetings should be suggested but not mandatory.
• Posted sign should include a barcode.
In addition, the following information was requested to be presented at a future meeting:
• Proposed standards to include options for the posted sign.
• Exercise on what the buffer looks at – does it cross the street?
The Chair opened a Public Hearing. The following individuals signed up to speak on this item:
Michael Spano, and John Foliot. The Chair closed the Public Hearing.
No action was taken.
E. Discussion regarding proposed changes to Chapter 2, Review Authority, Chapter 3, Applications and
Permits, and Chapter 16, Definitions, of the Unified Development Code (UDC) regarding the rules,
standards and regulations of the Historic Districts (Amendment No. 2). Sofia Nelson, CNU-A,
Planning Director
Nelson provided a brief recap and update on the drafted amendments to the UDC relating to the
Certificate of Appropriateness process based on City Council’s direction from the City Council.
The UDCAC discussed the item and provided the following feedback:
• The Historic Resource Survey should be updated every 3-5 years as it will identify a pattern
• (Historic) materials should be allowed to be replaced as in some cases those materials may
have been the only materials available at the time. Had hardie plank been available, it may
have been the material used.
• There should be a process to review low priorities structures.
• Low priority structures are only being thought of in Old Town. There are low priority
structures outside the overlay district. There should be different processes to address the
disparity between Old Town and outside Old Town.
• Some structures in Old Town are patch together, which should be considered low, low
priority. Need to know the history of the structures.
• Sidewalks should be considered in the Old Town Districts.
• Additional public comments are needed.
The Chair opened a Public Hearing. The following individuals signed up to speak on this item: John
Foliot, Phil Brown, Russ Hunter, Ann Seaman, Arvella Oliver, and William Harris. The Chair closed
the Public Hearing.
No action was taken.
F. Discussion regarding proposed changes to Section 6.06, Common Amenity Area, Section 8.02, Tree
Preservation and Protection, and Section 13.08, Parkland, of the Unified Development Code (UDC)
Page 7 of 50
UDC Advisory Committee 4
February 13, 2019
regarding Parkland Dedication requirements (Amendment No. 3). Kimberly Garret, Parks and
Recreation Director, and Andreina Dávila-Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager.
Dávila-Quintero gave a presentation on the purpose of this amendment; background on the City’s
parkland dedication ordinance; current standards; standards from other cities in the region;
proposed amendments to the UDC, particularly changes made from the November 2018 UDCAC
meeting; and next steps. Dávila-Quintero requested feedback from the UDC Advisory Committee on
the proposed amendments.
The UDCAC discussed the item and provided the following feedback:
• Fee for fee-in-lieu of dedication should be reviewed on a regular basis but take into account
how this impacts development, particularly when proformas are being drafted in the early
stages.
• The key for accepting parkland in the floodplain is access.
• Flexibility and options should be given to the design standards (i.e. frontage on a street that
can accommodate parking on both sides of the street).
• Street widths should be taken into consideration if parking will be required on both sides of
the street.
No action was taken.
G. Update on the 2018/19 UDC Annual Review Plan, Schedule and Next Steps. Andreina Dávila-
Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager
Dávila-Quintero presented an update on the items listed in the 2018/19 UDC Annual Review cycle,
including upcoming amendments and next steps.
No action was taken.
Adjournment
Motion by Stevens to adjourn the meeting. Second by Wirth. Meeting adjourned at 6:00 pm.
_____________________________________ __________________________________
PJ Stevens, Attest Attest, Jason Wirth
Page 8 of 50
UDC Advisory Committee 1
February 13, 2019
City of Georgetown, Texas
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee Meeting
Wednesday, March 13, 2019 at 3:30 PM
City Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
Committee Member(s) in Attendance: Tracy Dubcak; Jason Wirth; Brian Robinson; John Philpott
Committee Member(s) Absent: PJ Stevens; Stuart Garner; Phillip Wanke
Staff Present: Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; Andreina Dávila-Quintero, Current Planning Manager;
Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner; Ethan Harwell, Planner; Michael Patroski, Planner; Madison Thomas,
Historic and Downtown Planner;
Legislative Regular Agenda
A. As of the deadline, no persons were signed up to speak on items other than those posted on the agenda.
B. Nomination and selection of Vice-chair and Secretary for the 2019/20 UDC Advisory
Committee. Andreina Dávila-Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager.
Motion by Philpot to nominate Tracey Duback as vice chair and Jason Wirth as secretary. Second
by Robinson. Approved 4-0
C. Discussion and possible action establishing the regular meeting date, time and place of the
Unified Development Code (UDC) Advisory Committee for 2019/20. Andreina Dávila-Quintero,
AICP, Current Planning Manager.
Motion by Robinson to continue the item till Next meeting 4/12. Second by Duback. Motion
passed unanimously.
D. Public hearing and possible action on proposed amendments to Chapter 2, Review Authority,
Chapter 3, Applications and Permits, and Chapter 16, Definitions, of the Unified Development
Code (UDC) regarding the rules, standards and regulations of the Historic Districts (Amendment
No. 2). Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
Sofia Nelson, Planning Director, gave a presentation on the agenda item.
Public Hearing opened.
The following speakers spoke during the public hearing:
• Richard Cutts
• Linda McCalla
• Ross Hunter
• Michael Walton
• Mary Volkman
• Peter Dana
• Anne Seaman
Page 9 of 50
UDC Advisory Committee 2
February 13, 2019
• Nancy Knight
• Melissa Boyd
Public Hearing Closed.
Motion by Duback to continue the item till Next meeting 3/18 @ 3:30pm. Second by Philpot.
Motion passed unanimously.
E. Discussion on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code regarding the
building standards of the multi-family residential zoning districts (Amendment No. 14).
Andreina Dávila-Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager
Dávila-Quintero presented an update on the amendment. No action was taken.
F. Discussion on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code regarding additional
notification requirements for land use applications (Amendment No. 17). Andreina Dávila-
Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager
Dávila-Quintero presented an update on the amendment. No action was taken.
G. Update on the 2018/19 UDC Annual Review Plan, Schedule and Next Steps. Andreina Dávila-
Quintero, AICP, Current Planning Manager
Dávila-Quintero presented an update on the items listed in the 2018/19 UDC Annual Review cycle,
including upcoming amendments and next steps. No action was taken.
Adjournment
Motion by Stevens to adjourn the meeting. Second by Wirth. Meeting adjourned at 6:11 pm.
_____________________________________ __________________________________
PJ Stevens, Attest Attest, Jason Wirth
Page 10 of 50
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
April 10, 2019
S UB J E C T:
P ublic Hearing and pos s ible ac tion on proposed amendments to C hapter 6, R es idential Development
S tandards , C hapter 8, Tree P reservation, Landsc aping and F encing, and C hapter 13, Infras tructure and
P ublic Improvements, of the Unified Development C ode relative to the parkland dedic ation requirements
(Amendment No. 3). Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager, and Kimberly G arrett,
P arks and R ecreation Director.
IT E M S UMMARY:
P arkland dedic ation is one of the many standards a munic ipality may impose for all res idential subdivisions
and development of land within its jurisdic tion to promote the health, safety, morals , or general welfare, as
well as the s afe, orderly, and healthful development of the munic ipality. T his is ac complished by ens uring
that new residential development is adequately served by essential public fac ilities and s ervic es , inc luding
park and recreational facilities . Development s eeking or requiring public facilities mus t be in ac cordance
with the C omprehensive P lan, to inc lude the P arks Mas ter P lan and R egional Trail Master P lan, and meet
the minimum s tandards of the Unified Development C ode (UDC ).
To continue with thes e goals and polic ies , the C ity C ouncil directed staff to review and update the UDC ’s
s tandards and c urrent parkland dedic ation requirements as part of the 2016 and 2018 UDC Annual R eview
processes. T he purpose of this amendment is to incorporate needed c hanges and recommendations from
the P arks and R ec reation Advisory Board to ens ure cons is tency with the P arks Master P lan.
Proposed Amendments:
P ropos ed c hanges to the UDC inc lude an inc reas e in the fee in lieu of parkland dedic ation fee to reflect real
land values ; inc lusion of a park improvement fee s o that the cost of building the park is on the residential
developer rather than the C ity; and allowing partial credit for private neighborhood parks meeting certain
criteria (Exhibit A). A summary of the propos ed amendments have been inc luded as Exhibit B.
O n March 6, 2019, the P lanning Department hosted an O pen House on various UDC Amendments , to
inc lude the potential c hanges to the parkland dedication requirements to addres s ques tions and obtain
public input. C omments rec eived are included as Exhibit C .
S taff's Analysis:
S taff has reviewed the request in ac cordance with the Unified Development C ode (UDC ). S taff has
determined that the propos ed amendments meet the criteria establis hed in UDC S ec tion 3.05.050 for a Text
Amendment. P articularly, s taff finds:
1. T he proposed amendments promote the health, s afety or general welfare o f the C ity and the s afe,
orderly, and healthful development of the C ity by continuing to ensure new res idential development is
adequately s erved by es s ential public facilities and services, including park and rec reational fac ilities.
2. T he proposed amendments are cons is tent with the C o mp rehens ive P lan as the revised standards
further implement the policies and recommendations of the P arks Mas ter P lan by ensuring new parks
and recreational facilities meet the level of service and minimum standards of neighborhood parks;
3. T he p ro p o s ed amendments are necessary to address c o nditio ns that have changed in the C ity as a
res ult of growth, c urrent park inventory, and level of service needed to serve future residents as
recommended from the P arks Mas ter P lan (5 acres fo r every 1,000 res id ents for a neighborhood
Page 11 of 50
park);
4. T he proposed amendments would pos itively imp act the community by ens uring ad eq uate parks and
recreational facilities serve future residents of the C ity and its extraterritorial jurisdic tion; and
5. T he proposed amendments are in c onformance with other applic able S ec tions of the C ity C ode.
Public Comments:
As required by the Unified Development C ode (UDC ), a legal notice advertis ing the public hearing was
placed in the S un Newspaper (Marc h 24, 2019). As of the public ation date of this report, s taff has not
received additional comments from the Marc h 6, 2019 O pen Hous e (Exhibit C ).
Next S teps:
T he proposed amendments will be c onsidered on the following dates :
April 10, 2019 - C ons ideration and rec ommendation by the UDC Advis ory C ommittee
April 16, 2019 - C ons ideration and rec ommendation by the P lanning and Zoning C ommis s ion
April 23, 2019 - C ons ideration by the C ity C ounc il
May 14, 2019 - C ons ideration and F inal Action by the C ity C ouncil
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
P ropos ed amendments to the parkland dedic ation requirements include revis ions to the rate to c alculate
fee-in-lieu of dedication to matc h current median land value within the C ity’s juris diction, as well as
inc lusion of a new P ark Improvement F ee to develop dedicated public parkland.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Exhibit A - Parkland Dedication Requirements Proposed
Amendments
Exhibit
Exhibit B - Parkland Dedication Requirements s ummary of proposed
changes Backup Material
Exhibit C - Public Comments Backup Material
Page 12 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 1 of 1 Chapter 6
Deleted language is strikethrough
Chapter 6 ‐ RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
***
SECTION 6.06. ‐ COMMON AMENITY AREA
Sec. 6.06.010. ‐ Applicability.
The provisions of this Section apply to:
A. Townhouses;
B. Attached or detached multifamily development;
CB. Manufactured housing parks; and
DC. Any development type where three or more than two dwelling units are located on the
same a single lot or parcel, with each dwelling unit located in a structure with three or more
dwelling units.
***
***
Exhibit A
Page 13 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 1 of 1 Chapter 8
Deleted language is strikethrough
Chapter 8 ‐ TREE PRESERVATION, LANDSCAPING AND FENCING
***
SECTION 8.02. ‐ TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION
***
Sec. 8.02.050. ‐ Tree Preservation Incentives and Priorities.
A. Tree Preservation Incentives.
***
2. Parkland Dedication Credit.
The pParkland dedication requirement, detailed in Section 13.05 of this Code, may be
reduced if a Heritage Tree is saved within the dedicated Pparkland arealot in accordance
with Section 13.08 of this Code, subject to approval by the Parks and Recreation Director.
The parkland dedication credit will be a 15‐dwelling unit reduction in the number of units
used to calculate the parkland dedication requirement for each Heritage Tree saved
within the parkland. Trees counted towards this credit shall have their entire CRZ located
within the parkland area. Heritage Trees within the 100‐year floodplain do not count
toward this credit.
***
***
Exhibit A
Page 14 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 1 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
Chapter 13 ‐ INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
***
SECTION 13.08. – PARKLAND
Note: Section 13.08, Parkland, is being revised in its entirety and replaced with a new Section 13.08,
Parkland.
Sec. 13.08.010. ‐ Purpose
The purpose of this Section is to provide parks, open spaces, and trails that implement the
Georgetown Parks, Recreation and Trails Master Plan. The Georgetown City Council has
determined that parks, open spaces and trails are necessary and in the public welfare, and that
the adequate procedure to provide for same is by integrating standards into the procedures for
planning and developing property.
Sec. 13.08.020. ‐ Applicability
The provisions of this section shall apply to the development of a tract of land for any residential
use of five (5) or more lots or dwelling units within the city limits and the extraterritorial
jurisdiction (ETJ). For the purposes of this Section, lots and dwelling units are interchangeable for
determining the Parkland dedication requirements.
Sec. 13.08.030. ‐ Requirements for Parkland Dedication
A. Dedication of Public Parkland Required.
1. A developer of a tract of land for residential use of five (5) or more lots shall set aside and
dedicate to the public sufficient and suitable land for the purpose of public Parkland.
2. The minimum acreage of Public Parkland required shall be as follows:
a. For development with one (1) or two (2) dwelling units on a lot: one (1) acre for
each eighty (80) dwelling units, or fraction thereof.
b. For development with three (3) or more dwelling units on a lot: one (1) acre for
each one hundred ten (110) dwelling units, or fraction thereof.
3. The land to be dedicated shall form a single lot with a minimum area of three (3) acres.
4. Exemptions.
a. When two (2) or more, but less than three (3), acres of land would be required to
satisfy the Public Parkland dedication requirements, the Parks and Recreation
Exhibit A
Page 15 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 2 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
Director may approve parkland less than three (3) acres if it is determined that it
would be in the public interest, and/or accept a financial contribution in lieu of
dedication of public Parkland to meet the dedication requirements of this Section.
b.A developer shall make a financial contribution in lieu of dedication of public
Parkland when:
i.No portion of the development is located within the city limits; or
ii.Less than two (2) acres of land would be required to satisfy the Parkland
dedication requirements.
c.The rate required for the financial contribution shall be in accordance with the
adopted fee schedule. The fee shall be reviewed on annual basis to ensure accuracy
and value.
B. Park Development Fee
1.In addition to the dedication of Public Parkland or fee‐in‐lieu, a developer shall pay a Park
Development Fee to ensure that the public Parkland will be sufficiently developed for
park use.
2.The amount for the Park Development Fee shall be in accordance with the adopted fee
schedule and based on the level of service for the public Parkland.
3.Alternative Standards.
a.When two (2) or more acres of land are proposed to satisfy the Parkland dedication
requirements, the Parks and Recreation Director may consider a proposal from an
applicant to construct park improvements on Public Parkland in lieu of paying, in
whole or in part, the Park Development Fee.
b.Park improvements shall include the minimum number of facilities listed in Table
13.08.030.C.3.b:
Table 13.08.030.C.3.b
Parkland Acreage Minimum number of facilities
3 or less 4
4‐6 5
7‐9 6
10 or more 7
Exhibit A
Page 16 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 3 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
c. Park improvement facilities shall be selected from those listed below:
i. Age appropriate playground equipment with adequate safety surfacing
around the playground.
ii. Unlighted practice fields for baseball, softball, soccer, and football.
iii. Unlighted tennis courts.
iv. Lighted or unlighted multi‐purpose courts for basketball and volleyball.
v. Improved multiuse green space.
vi. Picnic areas with benches, picnic tables and cooking grills.
vii. Shaded pavilions and gazebos.
viii. Jogging and exercise trails.
ix. Other facilities as approved by the Parks and Recreation Director.
d. When construction of park improvements is proposed, all park improvements
shall comply with the Parks Master Plan, Section 13.08.040 of this Code, and
applicable City regulations.
C. Credit for Private Parks
1. Where privately‐owned and maintained parks or other recreational facilities with non‐
exclusive private amenities are proposed for a single‐family, two‐family, townhome, or
detached multi‐family residential development, the Parks and Recreation Director, after
recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Board, may grant a credit of up to fifty
percent (50%) of the required Public Parkland dedication and Park Development Fee.
2. Privately‐owned and maintained parks or other recreational facilities shall meet the
following minimum standards:
a. The park or recreational facility shall have a minimum lot area of two (2) acres; and
b. The park or recreational facility shall include the minimum number and type of
facilities outlined in subsection 13.08.030.B.3; and
c. The park or recreational facility shall comply with the Parks Master Plan, subsection
13.08.040, and other applicable City regulations.
Exhibit A
Page 17 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 4 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
3. Privately‐owned and maintained parks or other recreational facilities for a single‐family,
two‐family, townhome, or detached multi‐family subdivision shall be identified on the
Subdivision Plat as a private open space lot.
4. Privately‐owned and maintained parks or other recreational facilities shall be owned and
managed by a mandatory Homeowners Association (HOA), or similar permanent agency,
and subject to restrictive covenants that state the following:
a. The land shall be utilized for Parkland or open space in perpetuity.
b. Each property owner within the subdivision encumbered by the restrictive covenants
shall be required to pay dues and/or special assessments for the maintenance of the
private park or recreational facility.
c. If the responsible agency dissolves, cannot fulfill its obligations or elects to sell,
transfer or otherwise divest itself of the land, the City shall have the right of first
refusal on acquiring the property. If the City elects to acquire the land, said land shall
be transferred at no cost to the City and in accordance with Section 13.08.050, Method
of Dedicating Parkland.
d. The cessation of the privately‐owned and maintained park or other recreational
facility shall be prohibited until such time as the declarant cedes control of the
responsible agency to purchasers of properties within the subdivision, and then only
upon amendment to the restrictive covenants approved by ¾ of the members of the
responsible agency.
D. Credit for Heritage Tree Preservation
1. The parkland dedication requirement may be reduced if a Heritage Tree is saved within
the dedicated Parkland lot; however, the required Parkland lot shall not be less than three
(3) acres, unless the Parks and Recreation Director determines it to be in the public interest.
2. The Parkland dedication credit shall be a 15‐dwelling unit reduction in the number of
units used to calculate the Parkland dedication requirement for each Heritage Tree
preserved within the Parkland lot.
3. Heritage trees counted towards this credit shall have their entire critical root zone (CRZ)
located within the Parkland lot.
4. Heritage trees within the 100‐year FEMA or calculated floodplain shall not count towards
this credit.
Exhibit A
Page 18 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 5 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
Sec. 13.08.040. – Location, Site and Development Standards for Public Parkland.
A. Any land to be dedicated to meet the requirements of this Section shall be suitable for public
parks and recreational activities as determined by the Parks and Recreation Director, and
comply the following standards and requirements:
1. The Parkland lot shall be centrally located within the development, when practicable.
Where existing or accepted public Parkland is located adjacent to the development, the
Parkland lot may abut the existing or accepted public Parkland provided it results in the
creation of a larger park as approved by the Parks and Recreation Director.
2. In unique circumstances, as approved by the Parks and Recreation Director, a developer
may propose dedication of land located outside the development boundary to meet the
provisions of this Section. In this event, the land proposed to be dedicated shall be located
within the same Benefit Zone as the development, and the value of the land shall be equal
to the land or fee‐in‐lieu of land that would be dedicated within the development.
3. Where a residential subdivision is proposed to be developed in phases, the Parkland lot
shall be located within the first phase of the development. If the required public Parkland
is proposed to be outside of the first phase, the first phase may be approved provided that
fee‐in‐lieu of dedication is paid for the number of lots within that phase. In this event, the
fee paid may be credited towards the required Park Development Fee for the subsequent
phase(s) of the development.
4. The Parkland lot shall have a minimum lot width and street frontage of two hundred (200)
feet. When practicable, the Parkland lot shall be a corner or multi‐frontage lot with a
minimum street frontage of two hundred (200) feet on two (2) streets.
5. The Parkland lot shall only be located along street(s) where on‐street parking may be
accommodated on both sides of the street.
6. A minimum of fifty percent (50%) of the Parkland lot shall not exceed a twenty percent
(20%) grade. A slope analysis exhibit shall be provided to the Parks and Recreation
Director.
7. Areas within the FEMA or calculated 100‐year floodplain may be dedicated in partial
fulfillment of the dedication requirement not to exceed fifty percent (50%). When area
within the floodplain is proposed to be dedicated, a minimum of two (2) acres of land,
with a minimum width of one hundred (100) feet, shall be located outside the floodplain
to satisfy the Parkland dedication requirements.
8. Parkland lots with the following conditions shall not be accepted unless approved by the
Parks and Recreation Board:
Exhibit A
Page 19 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 6 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
a. The lot is primarily accessed by a cul‐de‐sac.
b. The lot is hindered by utility easements or similar encumbrances that make
development of the land unfeasible. This does not include required public utility
easements pursuant to Section 13.03 of this Code.
c. The lot is encumbered by sensitive environmental species or habitat areas.
d. The lot contains stormwater facilities. Where stormwater facilities are proposed,
stormwater facilities must be designed as a park amenity.
9. A minimum of two‐inch water service line and six‐inch gravity wastewater service line
shall be provided at one of the property lines in a location approved by the Parks and
Recreation Director.
10. Sidewalks in accordance with Section 12.07 of this Code shall be provided along all street
frontages.
B. Alternative Site and Development Standards
1. Alternative design standards for public Parkland may be proposed and submitted to the
Parks and Recreation Director, provided the intent of the requirements of this Section are
met.
2. Prior to submitting an application for development, the Applicant shall complete the
following:
a. Provide a letter to the Parks and Recreation Director that details the alternative design
for Parkland dedication and why it is equal to or better than the minimum standards;
and
b. Conduct a site visit with the Parks and Recreation Director to review the proposal.
3. The Parks and Recreation Director shall review the alternative design based on Section
13.08.030, Requirements for Parkland Dedication, and Section 13.08.040, Design Standards
for Parkland, of this Code and present the proposed alternative design to the Parks and
Recreation Board for a recommendation to the Parks and Recreation Director.
4. The Parks and Recreation Director shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove
the request.
Exhibit A
Page 20 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 7 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
13.08.050. Method of Dedicating Parkland
A. Land to be dedicated for public Parkland shall be identified on the Preliminary Plat, Final
Plat, and Subdivision Construction Plans. When construction of park improvements and/or
private parks is proposed, all amenities shall be identified on the Subdivision Construction
Plan or Site Development Plan, as applicable. Fiscal surety in the amount equal to the Park
Improvement Fee shall be provided prior to approval of Subdivision Construction Plan or
Site Development Plan, as applicable, for the park improvements on public Parkland.
B. Prior to acceptance of the public Parkland, the following conditions shall be met:
1. Land shall be in good condition, including the removal of all debris and dead plant
materials, and utility services, sidewalks and other public improvements installed. Any
land disturbed by activities not related to park development shall be restored and the soil
stabilized in a method approved by the Parks and Recreation Director in accordance with
the requirements of this Code.
2. Parkland Development Fee shall be paid. When construction of improvements on the
public parkland is approved, park improvements shall be constructed and accepted by
the City at the time of acceptance of all other public improvements, when required, or
final site inspection.
C. Prior to recordation of the Final Plat, the following conditions shall be met:
1. Land accepted for dedication under the requirements of this Section shall be conveyed by
warranty deed, transferring the property in fee simple to the City of Georgetown, Texas,
and shall be free and clear of any mortgages or liens at the time of such conveyance.
2. A copy of the warranty deed and other Parkland dedication documents as outlined in the
Development Manual shall be provided to the Parks and Recreation Director.
D. When financial contribution in lieu of dedication of public Parkland is approved as meeting
the requirements of this Section, no Final Plat may be recorded or Site Development Plan
approved, as applicable, until payment has been accepted by the City.
13.08.060. Park Fund Established
A. A separate fund entitled ʺPark Fundʺ has been created to hold in trust money paid to be used
solely and exclusively for the purpose of purchasing and/or improving public parks and
recreational lands, and shall not be used for maintaining or operating park facilities or for any
other purpose.
Exhibit A
Page 21 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 8 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
B. Where financial contribution is received in lieu of land dedication, the financial contribution
and Park Development Fee shall be expended on a neighborhood park located in the Benefit
Zone where the development is located. In the event there is not a suitable neighborhood park
within the benefit zone, the amount collected shall be expended on the closest community
park or regional park in the Benefit Zone where the development is located.
C. The City Council, based upon the recommendations of the Parks and Recreation Board, shall
determine whether there are sufficient funds to acquire public Parkland and/or construct
improvements. In making a determination for the acquisition of land, the conditions of
Section 13.08.040 shall be taken into consideration.
D. Benefit Zones. Funds shall be expended within the eligible Benefit Zones as shown in Figure
13.08.060.D.
E. Any financial contribution paid in‐lieu of the Parkland dedication requirements must be
expended by the City within ten (10) years from the date received. If the City does not expend
Exhibit A
Page 22 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 9 of 9 Chapter 13
Deleted language is strikethrough
the financial contribution by the required deadline, the owners of the property may request a
refund in the following manner:
1. The owners of such property must request in writing to the City such refund within one
(1) year of the entitlement or such right shall be waived. Refunds shall be paid by the City
within ninety (90) days of the filing of the request.
2. A refund may only be provided for the unbuilt lots for which a fee‐in‐lieu of dedication
was paid.
***
***
Exhibit A
Page 23 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Mar. 19, 19
Page 1 of 2
Summary of proposed changes to Parkland Dedication Requirements (UDC Section 13.08)
As of March 19, 2019
Requirements Current UDC Requirement Proposed UDC Change
Land dedication 1 acre/50 units
1 acre/110 units for MF
1 acre/80 units for SF
Based on LOS in Parks Master Plan (5
acres for 1,000 residents)
Dedication of parkland City required to accept
parkland if over 3 acres
City – 3 acres or more, must dedicate
land
2-3 acres, option to accept as approved
by the Parks and Recreation Director
Less than 2 acres, fee in lieu.
ETJ – fee in lieu
Parkland Fee in lieu of
land dedication
$200/unit for MF
$250/unit for SF
Fee per unit to be determined based on
median land value of $52,000/acre for a
3-acre neighborhood park (minimum
required)
Parkland Improvement
Fee
Not Applicable Fee per unit to be determined based on
estimated cost of construction to
develop a 3-acre neighborhood park
consistent with the Parks Master Plan
(minimum required).
Option to develop the park based on
minimum criteria as approved by the
Parks and Recreation Director
Private Park Credit Not Applicable Up to 50% credit provided certain
criteria are met.
Design Standards Parkland may not be accepted when:
• Accessed primarily by cul de sac
• Encumbered by utility easements
• Encumbered by sensitive
environmental features
• The lot contains stormwater
facilities.
Unless approved by the Parks and
Recreation Director followed by a
recommendation from the Parks
Advisory Board.
Floodplain Along SG River – partial
fulfilment – could be 99%
All others – up to 50%
Up to 50%, with at least 2 acres out of
floodplain – must have 200 feet of
street frontage
Page 24 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 3 Printed on Mar. 19, 19
Page 2 of 2
Requirements Current UDC Requirement Proposed UDC Change
Parkland Approval Parks Board recommends to
P&Z and City Council
Meets requirements, the Director can
approve. Alternative Design may be
approved by the Director following
recommendation by the Parks and
Recreation Board. Additional language
consistent with current practice.
Park Benefit Zones 19 zones 4 benefit zones – direct benefit to
service area or used in a community or
regional park
Parkland Fund Expend funds in 5 years Expend funds in 10 years
Page 25 of 50
Parkland Dedication Requirements
Exhibit C - Public Comments
Page 26 of 50
UDC Public Comments
Name:*
Address *
Email:
Phone Number:
Comment Categories Comments:
Larkin Tom
City
Georgetown
State / Province / Region
Texas
Postal / Zip Code
78626
Country
US
Street Address
509 South Walnut
Address Line 2
larktom@gmail.com
5125951822
Parkland Dedication 1. Although it may not be possible to build out all parks at
present, the city should maintain the current parkland
requirements at the higher level. This requires developers to
"give back" to the community and creates "green resources" for
the future. It also impacts density.
2. HARC should maintain its current level of authority - the
process can be tough sometimes but that's democracy.
Exhibit C - Public Comments
Page 27 of 50
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
April 10, 2019
S UB J E C T:
P ublic Hearing and pos s ible ac tion on proposed amendments to C hapter 6, R es idential Development
S tandards , of the Unified Development C ode relative to building s tandards in the multi-family res idential
zoning dis tric ts (Amendment No. 14). Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
IT E M S UMMARY:
O n April 24, 2018, the C ity C ounc il direc ted s taff to update the UDC ’s standards and current site design
requirements of the multi-family zoning dis tric ts as a part of the 2018/19 UDC Annual R eview proc es s
(Amendment No. 14). T he purpos e of this amendment is to review the maximum number of units allowed
per building, and minimum separation between buildings requirements of the Low Density Multi-F amily
(MF -1) and High Density Multi-F amily (MF -2) zoning dis tric ts.
In 2015, the UDC was amended to add a maximum number of units per building in order to pres erve
building s izes that were in c ontext with G eorgetown's development pattern and avoid buildings that were
large in mas s and sc ale. C urrently, the maximum number of units permitted per building is 12 in the MF -1
dis tric t and 24 in the MF -2 district. S inc e the adoption of this provis ion, C ity s taff and developers have
s een challenges in meeting these requirements due to the variation of unit s izes in one building, as well as
other market and s ite cons traints.
T he minimum dis tance s eparation between buildings requirements has also pos ed additional challenges due
to the sizes of the lots and other required site improvements , s uc h as setbacks , landsc aping, parking and
impervious c over. Dis tance s eparation between buildings are impos ed in order to allow for air, s pace and
light to travel between buildings . C urrently, the minimum building separation requirement is 15 feet for both
dis tric ts.
T hrough P lanned Unit Developments (P UDs ) or zoning variances developers have sought relief from thes e
s tandards to allow alternative des igns and standards. T hese have included:
Incorporating U, T, or L-shaped buildings that c an acc ommodate greater number of units while
meeting the intent of the UDC .
Es tablishing a minimum building faç ade width.
Allowing for wider fac ades where a building fac es a common amenity area.
P roviding for minimum dis tance s eparation c onsistent with the Building C ode, whic h varies
depending on number of openings and cons truction materials
O n F ebruary 13, 2019, the UDC AC reviewed the potential revisions that may be inc orporated into the
UDC and reques ted s taff to s earch standards from surrounding c ities. S taff found that no other c ity within
the region do not have a maximum number of units per building requirement. In addition, the minimum
building s eparation requirement ranged between 15 and 50 feet.
O n F ebruary 26, 2019, the C ity C ouncil directed staff to also review the minimum setback requirements
when multi-family is adjac ent to residential development in the extraterritorial jurisdic tion (ET J).
Proposed Amendments:
T he proposed amendments to the UDC inc lude (Exhibits A and B):
Decrease the minimum building s eparation requirements from 15 feet to 12 feet for the Low Density
Page 28 of 50
Multi-F amily (MF -1) to be c onsistent with other lower density res idential districts .
Increase the maximum number of units per building in the Low Density Multi-F amily District (MF -1)
from 12 to 14 units .
Allow the maximum number of units per building to be inc reas ed provided that additional des ign
s tandards are met for the Low Density Multi-F amily (MF -1) and High Dens ity Multi-F amily (MF -2)
dis tric ts.
Increase the minimum s ide and rear s etbac ks when adjacent to res idential development to 20 and 30
feet for the for the Low Density Multi-F amily (MF -1) and High Dens ity Multi-F amily (MF -2)
dis tric ts, respec tively.
O n March 6, 2019, the P lanning Department hosted an O pen House on various UDC Amendments , to
inc lude the potential c hanges to building s tandards of the multi-family zoning districts , to obtain public
input. C omments received are included as E xhibit C.
S taff's Analysis:
S taff has reviewed the propos ed amendments in ac cordance with the Unified Development C ode (UDC ).
S taff has determined that the propos ed amendments meet the criteria establis hed in UDC S ec tion 3.05.050
for a Text Amendment. P artic ularly, staff finds :
1. T he proposed amendments promote the health, s afety or general welfare o f the C ity and the s afe,
orderly, and healthful development of the C ity by continuing to ensure adequate s eparation between
buildings within the d evelopment and adjac ent residential develo p ment in the c ity limits and
extraterritorial juris d ictio n (E T J), and inc orporating s tandards to address mas s ing and s c ale of a
building(s);
2. T he p ro p o s ed amend ments are cons is tent with the C omprehens ive P lan as the revis ed standards
further imp lement the p o licies and rec o mmendatio ns related to p ro vision o f regulatio ns that allow
variety in hous ing, density and des ign;
3. T he p ro p o s ed amendments are necessary to address c o nditio ns that have changed in the C ity due to
an inc reas e in reques t for deviations to these s tandards to allow alternative des ign and standards;
4. T he proposed amendments wo uld p o s itively impac t the community and environment by providing
adequate s pac ing and des ign s tandards to mitigate the impac t of multi-family uses to adjacent
res idential us es and surrounding area; and
5. T he proposed amendments are in c onformance with other applic able S ec tions of the C ity C ode.
Public Comments:
As required by the Unified Development C ode (UDC ), a legal notice advertis ing the public hearing was
placed in the S un Newspaper (Marc h 24, 2019). As of the public ation date of this report, s taff has not
received additional comments from the Marc h 6, 2019 O pen Hous e (Exhibit C ).
Next S teps:
T he proposed amendments will be c onsidered on the following dates :
April 10, 2019 - C ons ideration and rec ommendation by the UDC Advis ory C ommittee
April 16, 2019 - C ons ideration and rec ommendation by the P lanning and Zoning C ommis s ion
April 23, 2019 - C ons ideration by the C ity C ounc il
May 14, 2019 - C ons ideration and F inal Action by the C ity C ouncil
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None s tudied at this time.
Page 29 of 50
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Exhibit A - Multi-Family Building Standards proposed amendments Exhibit
Exhibit B - Summary of propos ed changes 03.07.2019 Backup Material
Exhibit C - Public Comments Backup Material
Page 30 of 50
Multi‐Family Building Standards *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 14 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 1 of 4 Chapter 6
Deleted language is strikethrough
Chapter 6 ‐ RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
***
SECTION 6.02. ‐ DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
***
Sec. 6.02.080. ‐ MF‐1—Low Density Multifamily District.
The Low Density Multifamily District (MF‐1) is intended for attached and detached multifamily
residential development, such as apartments, condominiums, triplexes, and fourplexes, at a
density not to exceed 14 dwelling units per acre. The MF‐1 District is appropriate in areas
designated on the Future Land Use Plan as high density residential or one of the mixed‐use
categories, and may be appropriate in the moderate density residential area based on location,
surrounding uses, and infrastructure impacts. Properties zoned MF‐1 should have convenient
access to major thoroughfares and arterial streets and should not route traffic through lower
density residential areas. The MF‐1 District is appropriate adjacent to both residential and non‐
residential districts and may serve as a transition between single‐family districts and more intense
multifamily or commercial districts.
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards.
MF‐1 ‐ Low Density Multifamily
***
Dwelling Units per structure, maximum 12
***
Side Setback to residential district or an existing single‐family
home in the ETJ that is platted and planned for residential use
on the Future Land Use Map, minimum feet
20
***
Rear Setback to Rresidential Ddistrict or an existing single‐
family home in the ETJ that is platted and planned for
residential use on the Future Land Use Map, minimum feet
20
***
***
C. Residential Design Standards.
Exhibit A
Page 31 of 50
Multi‐Family Building Standards *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 14 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 2 of 4 Chapter 6
Deleted language is strikethrough
The design standards below apply to all residential development in the MF‐1 District in
addition to the provisions of Sections 6.05 and 6.06 of this Chapter.
1. All development within the MF‐1 District shall also comply with the building design
standards of Section 7.047.03 and the lighting design standards of Section 7.057.04 of
this Code.
2. A minimum building separation of 15 12 feet is required between all buildings on the
site.
***
5. The maximum number of dwelling units per structure shall be 14 units. Buildings with
more than 14 units may be allowed provided the following additional standards are
met:
a. The building does not face a public street right‐of‐way, residential zoning district,
or public park; or
b. The building is a non‐rectangular building that has a shape similar to a “C”, “U”,
“T”, “L” or other shape as approved by the Planning Director. In this event, the
length of any building façade/wall shall extend a minimum of one‐third (1/3) of
the primary building façade/wall.
D. Non‐Residential and Accessory Design Standards.
1. Non‐residential structures shall meet all of the lot and dimensional standards of the
MF‐1 District, in addition to the requirements of Sections 7.047.03 and 7.057.04 of this
Code.
2. Residential accessory structures shall meet the requirements of Section
6.06.0106.05.010.
***
Sec. 6.02.090. ‐ MF‐2—High Density Multifamily District.
The High Density Multifamily District (MF‐2) is intended for attached multifamily residential
development, such as apartments and condominiums, at a density not to exceed 24 dwelling units
per acre. The MF‐2 District is appropriate in areas designated on the Future Land Use Plan as
high density residential or mixed‐use. Properties zoned MF‐2 should have direct access to major
thoroughfares and arterial streets and should not route traffic through lower density residential
Exhibit A
Page 32 of 50
Multi‐Family Building Standards *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 14 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 3 of 4 Chapter 6
Deleted language is strikethrough
areas. The MF District is appropriate adjacent to both residential and non‐residential districts and
may serve as a transition between single‐family districts and more intense commercial districts.
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards.
MF‐2 ‐ High Density Multifamily
***
Dwelling Units per structure, maximum 24
***
Side Setback to Residential District or an existing single‐family
home in the ETJ that is platted and planned for residential use
on the Future Land Use Map, minimum feet
30
***
Rear Setback to Residential District or an existing single‐family
home in the ETJ that is platted and planned for residential use
on the Future Land Use Map, minimum feet
30
***
C. Residential Design Standards.
The design standards below apply to all residential development in the MF‐2 District in
addition to the provisions of Sections 6.05 and 6.06 of this Chapter.
1. All development within the MF‐2 District shall also comply with the building design
standards of Section 7.047.03 and the lighting design standards of Section 7.057.04 of
this Code.
2. A minimum building separation of 15 feet is required between all buildings on the site.
***
5. The maximum number of dwelling units per structure shall be 24 units. Buildings with
more than 24 units may be allowed provided the following additional standards are
met:
a. No building façade/wall shall exceed 240 feet in length.
b. Building facade/wall exceeding 240 feet in length may be permitted when:
Exhibit A
Page 33 of 50
Multi‐Family Building Standards *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 14 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 4 of 4 Chapter 6
Deleted language is strikethrough
i. The building façade/wall does not face a public street right‐of‐way,
residential zoning district, or public park; or
ii. The building is part of a non‐rectangular building that has a shape similar
to a “C”, “U”, “T”, “L” or other shape as approved by the Planning Director. In
this event, the length of any building façade/wall shall extend a minimum of one‐
third (1/3) of the primary building façade/wall.
D. Non‐Residential and Accessory Design Standards.
1. Non‐residential structures shall meet all of the lot and dimensional standards of the
MF‐2 District, in addition to the requirements of Sections 7.047.03 and 7.057.04.
2. Residential accessory structures shall meet the requirements of Section
6.06.0106.05.010.
***
***
Exhibit A
Page 34 of 50
Multi-Family Building Standards
UDC Amendment No. 14
*** DRAFT ***
Printed on Mar. 7, 19
Page 1 of 2
Summary of proposed changes to the Low Density Multi-Family (MF-1) and High Density
Multi-Family (MF-2) Building standards (UDC Section 6.02)
As of March 7, 2018
Requirements Current UDC Requirement Proposed UDC Revision
Maximum Number of Multi-
Family Units Per Building
MF-1
12 units/building
14 units/building
Buildings with more than 14 units may
be allowed provided:
The building does not face a
public street right-of-way,
residential zoning district, or
public park; or
The building is a non-rectangular
building that has a shape similar
to a “C”, “U”, “T”, “L”. The length of
any building façade/wall shall
extend a minimum of one-third
(1/3) of the primary building
façade/wall.
MF-2
24 units/building
Buildings with more than 24 units
may be allowed provided:
No building façade/wall shall
exceed 240 feet in length.
Building facade/wall exceeding
240 feet in length may be
permitted when:
The building does not face a
public street right-of-way,
residential zoning district, or
public park; or
The building is a non-
rectangular building that has
a shape similar to a “C”, “U”,
“T”, “L”. The length of any
building façade/wall shall
extend a minimum of one-
third (1/3) of the primary
building façade/wall.
Page 35 of 50
Multi-Family Building Standards
UDC Amendment No. 14
*** DRAFT ***
Printed on Mar. 7, 19
Page 2 of 2
Requirements Current UDC Requirement Proposed UDC Revision
Building Separation MF-1
15’ minimum
MF-1
12’ minimum
Minimum side and rear
setback to an existing single-
family home in the ETJ that
is platted and planned for
residential use on the Future
Land Use Map
MF-1 and MF-2
Not Applicable
MF-1
20 feet
MF-2
30 feet
Page 36 of 50
Multi-Family Building Standards
Exhibit C - Public Comments
Page 37 of 50
Exhibit C - Public Comments
Page 38 of 50
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
April 10, 2019
S UB J E C T:
P ublic Hearing and pos s ible ac tion on proposed amendments to C hapter 3, Applic ations and P ermits , of
the Unified Development C ode relative to public notification requirements for land us e c hanges
(Amendment No. 17). Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
IT E M S UMMARY:
In ac cordance with the Texas Local G overnment C ode and the C ity’s Unified Development C ode (UDC ),
public hearing and notific ation is required for all zoning applications. T his inc ludes applications for a
Zoning Map Amendment (rezoning), P lanned Unit Development P lans (P UD), S pecial Us e P ermit (S UP )
and other land us e c hanges. C urrently, minimum public notification requirements inc lude the following:
Pursuant to Texas Local Government Code P ursuant to UD C
Mail notic es to all property owners within the city
limits and 200 feet from the property s ubjec t to
the zoning request
Mail notices to all property owners within the c ity
limits and 200 feet from the property subject to
the zoning reques t
P ublis hed notice in a loc al newspaper of general
c irculation
P ublished notic e in a local news paper of general
circ ulation
P os ted notice on the property s ubjec t to the
zoning request
O n April 24, 2018, the C ity C ounc il direc ted s taff to review the public review and notification requirements
for c ertain zoning reques ts, to include the pos s ibility of requiring neighborhood meetings . T he purpos e of
this revis ion is to identify proc es s es and standards that would promote a more robus t public review and
provide the opportunity of property owners to learn, disc uss and provide feedback on proposed zoning
requests in advanc e of the required public hearing.
In addition, on F ebruary 26, 2019, the C ity C ouncil directed staff to look into inc reas ing the notification
radius to 300 feet, as well as providing notific ation to property owners in the extraterritorial juris diction
(ET J).
O ther cities within the region, state and across the c ountry require varying public notific ations and review
requirements, including but not limited to:
Notific ation to property owners beyond the 200-foot radius (i.e. 300, 400 or 500 feet);
Notific ation to a Home O wner, P roperty O wner and/or Neighborhood As s ociation located within
the notific ation area;
Notific ation to other agencies and entities within the notification area or that may be affec ted by the
propos ed zoning reques t; and
Inclus ion of additional information regarding the zoning reques t, to include inclus ion of the
applicant’s contac t information, on the web and/or mail notice.
O n July 11, 2018, and F ebruary 13, 2019, the UDC AC reviewed the notification requirements of other
municipalities , as well as potential revisions that may be inc orporated into the UDC .
P ro po sed A mendments:
T he proposed amendments to the UDC inc lude (Exhibits A and B):
Increase the notific ation buffer requirement from 200 to 300 feet.
Include property owners loc ated in the ET J within the 300-foot notification buffer
Page 39 of 50
Include home owner and other similar as s ociations registered with the C ity of G eorgetown and
located within the 300-foot notification buffer.
O n March 6, 2019, the P lanning Department hosted an O pen House on various UDC Amendments , to
inc lude the potential c hanges to the notific ation requirements , to obtain public input. C omments received are
included as Exhibit C .
Staff's A nalysis:
S taff has reviewed the propos ed amendments in ac cordance with the Unified Development C ode (UDC ).
S taff has determined that the propos ed amendments meet the criteria establis hed in UDC S ec tion 3.05.050
for a Text Amendment. P artic ularly, staff finds :
1. T he proposed amendments promote the health, s afety or general welfare o f the C ity and the s afe,
orderly, and healthful development of the C ity by promoting a mo re robus t pub lic review from
property owners loc ated within the C ity's jurisdic tion that may be affec ted b y land us e changes in
their vicinity;
2. T he proposed amendments are cons is tent with the C omprehens ive P lan as the revis ed standards
further implement the policies and recommendations related to public engagement;
3. T he proposed amendments are necessary to address conditions that have changed in the C ity;
4. T he proposed amend ments wo uld positively impac t the c ommunity by reac hing additio nal property
owners and assoc iations that may also be impac ted by land use changes ; and
5. T he proposed amendments are in c onformance with other applic able S ec tions of the C ity C ode.
Public Comments:
As required by the Unified Development C ode (UDC ), a legal notice advertis ing the public hearing was
placed in the S un Newspaper (Marc h 24, 2019). As of the public ation date of this report, s taff has not
received additional comments from the Marc h 6, 2019 O pen Hous e (Exhibit C ).
Next S teps:
T he proposed amendments will be c onsidered on the following dates :
April 10, 2019 - C ons ideration and rec ommendation by the UDC Advis ory C ommittee
April 16, 2019 - C ons ideration and rec ommendation by the P lanning and Zoning C ommis s ion
April 23, 2019 - C ons ideration by the C ity C ounc il
May 14, 2019 - C ons ideration and F inal Action by the C ity C ouncil
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
P ropos ed amendments to the public notific ation requirements to increase the notific ation buffer, as well as
provide notice to property owners within the ET J will require additional mail pos tage and letters to be
created, which will impac t the applic ation fee of these cases to cover the cost.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Exhibit A - Public Notification requirements proposed amendment Exhibit
Page 40 of 50
Exhibit B - Summary of propos ed changes 03.06.2019 Backup Material
Exhibit C - Public Comments Exhibit
Page 41 of 50
Rezoning Notification Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 17 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 1 of 2 Chapter 3
Deleted language is strikethrough
Chapter 3 - APPLICATIONS AND PERMITS
***
SECTION 3.03. - PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE
Sec. 3.03.010. - Provision of Public Notice.
***
C. Mailed Notice.
1. Generally.
a. A notice of Public Hearing shall be sent by U.S. mail to owners of record of real
property within 200 300 feet of the boundary of the property under consideration,
as determined by the most recent municipal tax roll, and central appraisal district
tax roll information.
b. A notice of Public Hearing shall be sent to home owner and other similar
associations registered with the City and located within 300 feet of the boundary of
property under consideration.
c. Notice of Public Hearing shall be sent by United States mail. The notice may be
served by its deposit in the municipality, properly addressed with postage paid, in
United States mail at least 15 days prior to the date set for the Public Hearing or as
otherwise required by the Texas Local Government Code, as amended.
2. Special Mailed Notice Required for Certain Replats.
Replats containing any area or lot that, during the preceding five years, was limited by
an interim or permanent zoning classification to residential use for not more than two
residential units per lot or in the preceding plat was limited by deed restrictions to
residential use for not more than two residential units per lot, require mailed notice to
all owners of lots that are part of the original subdivision and located within 200 feet of
the boundary of the property to be replatted, in the same manner as prescribed in
Subsection 3.03.010.C.1.c above and in accordance with Texas Local Government Code
§ 212.015, as amended.
***
D. Posted Notice.
***
Exhibit A
Page 42 of 50
Rezoning Notification Requirements *** DRAFT ***
UDC Amendment No. 17 Printed on Apr. 2, 19
Added language is underlined Page 2 of 2 Chapter 3
Deleted language is strikethrough
5. The notice may be served by the receipt of the posted notice(s) in a format approved by
the Director.
***
***
Exhibit A
Page 43 of 50
Rezoning Notification Requirements
UDC Amendment No. 17
*** DRAFT ***
Printed on Mar. 6, 19
Page 1 of 1
Summary of proposed changes to the Public Hearing Notice requirements (UDC Section
3.03)
As of March 6, 2018
Requirements* Current UDC Requirement Proposed UDC Revision
Distance of Notification Area 200’ notification area 300’ notification area
Notification of ETJ owner of
real property
Not Applicable Notify property owners within the
300’ buffer
Notification of HOAs and
Neighborhood Associations
Not Applicable Notify registered contact of HOAs
and Neighborhood Associations
within the 300’ buffer
*Other current requirements include notification in the newspaper and sign posted on-site. No changes
are proposed to these requirements.
Page 44 of 50
Public Notification Requirements
Exhibit C - Public Comments
Page 45 of 50
Exhibit C - Public Comments
Page 46 of 50
UDC Public Comments
Name:*
Address *
Email:
Phone Number:
Comment Categories Comments:
N/A
City
Georgetown
State / Province / Region
Texas
Postal / Zip Code
78626
Country
US
Street Address
N/A
Address Line 2
Public Notification Process If part of a street is in the buffer, notify all property owners on the
street. Please include Shady Oaks Estates HOA in the notification
database.
Exhibit C - Public Comments
Page 47 of 50
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
April 10, 2019
S UB J E C T:
Update on the 2018/19 UDC Annual R eview P lan, S c hedule and Next S teps. Andreina Dávila-Q uintero,
AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
IT E M S UMMARY:
T he purpos e of this item is to provide an update on the UDC Annual R eview P lan, tentative s chedule and
next s teps. In addition, C ity S taff and members of the UDC AC will disc uss the tas ks identified at the
previous meeting, as well as new tas ks to be c ompleted for the next meeting. F eedbac k and information
received on eac h task will be inc orporated when related UDC topics are sc heduled and presented for
dis cus s ion.
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Andreina Dávila-Q uintero, AI C P, C urrent P lanning Manager
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
2018/19 General Amendments Lis t Update Backup Material
Page 48 of 50
Printed on 2/8/2019
UDC Annual Review 2018/19 Schedule ***DRAFT***
General Topic Group Status Am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
Requested Amendment
UDC Chapter/
Section*Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Dr
a
f
t
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
A
C
R
e
v
i
e
w
CC
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Op
e
n
H
o
u
s
e
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
Dr
a
f
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
B
o
a
r
d
s
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Fi
n
a
l
i
z
e
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
Po
s
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
o
n
W
e
b
s
i
t
e
f
o
r
P
u
b
l
i
c
Re
v
i
e
w
UD
C
A
C
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
P&
Z
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
CC
1
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
CC
2
F
i
n
a
l
A
c
t
i
o
n
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
D
a
t
e
Application Processes and
Requirements Complete 8
Expand development agreement language establishing clear
requirements and processes.
Ch. 3, Sec 3.20 & Ch.
13, Sec 13.10 13-Jun 12-Jun July
UDC Aug
Discussion July Aug-Sep 14-Nov-18 4-Dec-18 11-Dec-18 8-Jan-19 Q1 2019
Nonresidential Standards Complete 4
Consider revising the minimum district size for the BP zoning district
(Executive Amendment). Ch. 7, Sec 7.02 N/A N/A N/A N/A 3-Apr-18 10-Apr-18 24-Apr-18 Q2 2018
Land Uses Complete 1
Acknowledge mobile food trailers as a use within the UDC and outline
appropriate regulations governing mobile food vendors. Ch. 3 & Ch. 5 10-Jan-18 8-May-18
UDC July
Discussion Jul-Aug 8-Aug-18 4-Sep-18 25-Sep-18 9-Oct-18 Q4 2018
Historic Districts In Review 2
Review the standards pertaining to historic districts and structures
based on the revised Historic Resource Survey
Ch. 3, Sec 3.13 & Ch.
16, Sec 16.02 Nov-19 13-Feb-19
Nov 18
Dec 18
Jan 19 Jan-19 Feb-19 Feb-19 13-Mar-19 19-Mar-19 26-Mar-19 9-Apr-19 Q1 2019
Parkland In Review 3
Update provisions governing parkland dedication based on
forthcoming recommendations by the Parks & Recreation Board
subcommittee review. Ch. 13, Sec 13.08 Jan-19 13-Feb-19 Feb-19 Jan-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 10-Apr-19 16-Apr-19 23-Apr-19 14-May-19 Q2 2019
Residential Standards In Review 14
Review the maximum number of units required per building, and
building separation requirements for MF districts Ch. 6, Sec 6.02 Jan-19 Feb-19 13-Feb-19 Feb-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 10-Apr-19 16-Apr-19 23-Apr-19 14-May-19 Q2 2019
Application Processes and
Requirements In Review 17
Review the rezoning public review requirements to require
neighborhood meetings for certain rezoning cases. Ch. 3, Sec 3.06 Jan-19 Feb-19 13-Feb-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 10-Apr-19 16-Apr-19 23-Apr-19 14-May-19 Q2 2019
Residential Standards In Review 15 Consider masonry requirements for residential development Ch. 6
Jan/Feb
19 Q2 2019 13-Feb-19 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019
Land Uses In Review
11, 12,
13
Review and update Permitted Use tables:
- Consider changes to the zoning districts various Specific Uses may
be permitted in (in general)
- Consider updating the list of Specific Uses in Chapter 5 to include
various uses that are not currently listed (i.e. self service machines (ice)
and storage yards; commercial vehicle sales, micro-distillery).
- Consider changes to the zoning districts various Specific Uses may
be permitted in ("Contractor Services Limited", "Contractor Services
General", and "Office Warehouse" Specific Uses in the C-3 zoning
district); Food Establishment Services in IN with SUP Ch. 5
Jan/Feb
19 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019
L:\Division\cd\UDC\UDC Amendments\2018‐19\General Amendments\2018 UDC_General_Amendment_List ‐ APPROVED Page 1 of 2Page 49 of 50
Printed on 2/8/2019
UDC Annual Review 2018/19 Schedule ***DRAFT***
General Topic Group Status Am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
Requested Amendment
UDC Chapter/
Section*Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Dr
a
f
t
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
A
C
R
e
v
i
e
w
CC
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Op
e
n
H
o
u
s
e
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
Dr
a
f
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
B
o
a
r
d
s
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Fi
n
a
l
i
z
e
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
Po
s
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
o
n
W
e
b
s
i
t
e
f
o
r
P
u
b
l
i
c
Re
v
i
e
w
UD
C
A
C
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
P&
Z
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
CC
1
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
CC
2
F
i
n
a
l
A
c
t
i
o
n
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
D
a
t
e
Administrative Clean-Up: Federal and
State law compliance In Review
7, 9,
10
Revisions to standards and requirements to ensure compliance with
Federal and State Law: Review Authority; Subdivision Regulations:
When a plat is required; Subdivision Regulations: Replat approval
w/out vacating preceding plat; Subdivision Regulations: Plat
Exemptions; Wastewater connection requirements in ETJ; TUPs
(portable classrooms); Definitions: Household; Definitions: Portable
Signs; Impervious Cover credit for Places of Worship.
Clean-Ups: Permits and Processes; ZBA 45-day review timeline; Model
Homes; Accessory Structures (size limitations); Definitions; Conflicting
and outdated cross-references and sub/section numbers
Ch. 2, Ch. 3, Ch. 5, Ch.
11, Ch. 13 & Ch. 16 Jan-19 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019
Signage Not Started 18
Review of Ch. 10 including signage for bus stops, transit vehicles and
others (portable signs); sign variance process
Ch. 10 and Ch. 16, Sec
16.02 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019
Application Processes and
Requirements Not Started
5, 6,
18
New/revise processes:
- Create a process to address requests for vesting determinations.
- Create a process to address requests for appeals.
- Sign variances
Ch. 3, Sec 3.14 and
3.15 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019
Application Processes and
Requirements On Hold 16
Clarify what triggers the requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
and when an appeal may be made and review the improvements that
are considered or required. Ch. 12, Sec 12.09 TBD
* The UDC Chapter or Section referenced in this column provides the regulation subject to this amendment. However, please note that other sections may need to be amended to address any conflicts and ensure consistency throughout the document.
L:\Division\cd\UDC\UDC Amendments\2018‐19\General Amendments\2018 UDC_General_Amendment_List ‐ APPROVED Page 2 of 2Page 50 of 50