HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda UDCAC 05.05.2015Notice of Meeting for the
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
of the City of Georgetown
May 5, 2015 at 3:00 PM
at the Williamson room, Georgetown Municipal Complex, 300-1 Industrial Ave.,
Georgetown
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the
ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please
contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City
Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Regular Session
(This Regular Session may, at any time, be recessed to convene an Executive Session for any purpose
authorized by the Open Meetings Act, Texas Government Code 551.)
A Call to Order
Legislative Regular Agenda
B Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to the inclusion of voluntary
annexation as a formalized process in Chapter 3 of the UDC (2014 UDC General Amendment List
Item 7). (Jordan Maddox)
C Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to allowing patios in the front
setback in limited circumstances per UDC Section 6.05.020 (2014 UDC General Amendment List
Item 26). (Jordan Maddox)
D Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to clarification of allowances
and requirements for residential fences per UDC Section 8.07 (2014 UDC General Amendment
List Items 38 & 39). (Jordan Maddox)
E Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to additional standards and
incentives to encourage the development of Workforce Housing (2014 UDC General Amendment
List Item 27). (Jennifer C. Bills, AICP, LEED AP, Housing Coordinator)
F Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to the building size limitations
of the C-1 zoning district (UDC General Amendment List Item 20). (Andreina Davila-Quintero)
G Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language relating to the determination of
abandonment of a nonconforming situation (UDC General Amendment List Item 61). (Andreina
Dávila-Quintero)
H Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language relating to parking space design
standards to allow for alternative designs (UDC General Amendment List Item 40). (Andreina
Dávila-Quintero)
I Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language relating to the setback requirements for
lots with multiple frontages in non-residential zoning districts (UDC General Amendment List
Page 1 of 48
Item 30). (Andreina Dávila-Quintero)
J Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to residential accessory
dwelling units (2014 UDC General Amendment List Item 22). (Valerie Kreger)
K Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to residential accessory
structures (UDC General Amendment List Item 25). (Valerie Kreger)
Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice
of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public
at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2015, at __________, and remained so
posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting.
____________________________________
Jessica Brettle, City Secretary
Page 2 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to the inclusion of voluntary
annexation as a formalized process in Chapter 3 of the UDC (2014 UDC General Amendment List
Item 7). (Jordan Maddox)
ITEM SUMMARY:
The City has processed voluntary (applicant-driven) annexations for years, but there has never
been a formal annexation process written into the UDC. This amendment adds annexation
procedures into the UDC.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
SUBMITTED BY:
Jordan Maddox
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
UDC Annexation Section Backup Material
Page 3 of 48
3.01.020 Applicability of Procedures
The following Table shows which review procedures, applications and permits apply in the City and
its extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Table 3.01.020 Applicability of Procedures
City Limits Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
Prior to Subdivision, Platting and any Development
Annexation (Voluntary) X
Comprehensive Plan Amendment X X
UDC Text Amendment X X
Rezoning (Zoning Map Amendment) X
Historic District Designation X
Special Use Permit X
Development Agreement X X
Access Point Connection Exemption X X
Subdivision & Platting of Land
Recording Plats X X
Preliminary Plat X X
Construction Plans X X
Plat Vacation X X
Plat Waiver X X
Development Application Process
Site Plan X
Construction Plans X
Zoning Verification Letter X
Legal Lot Verification Letter X X
Temporary Use Permit X
Master Sign Plan X X
Certificate of Design Compliance X
Appeal of an Administrative Decision X X
License to Encroach X X
Variance X
Administrative Exception X
Special Exception X
Stormwater Permit X X
Driveway Permit X X
Sign Permit X X
Courthouse View Height Determination X
3.01.030 Simultaneous Submission of Related Applications
A. Submission of different applications related to the same development may be made
simultaneously, although consideration of applications must remain in the following sequence:
1. Annexation (Voluntary)
2. Comprehensive Plan;
3. Zoning;
Page 4 of 48
4. Subdivision and Plat;
5. Certificate of Design Compliance; then
6. Site Plan.
3.03.010 Provision of Public Notice
A. Summary of Notice Required
Notice shall be required for application review as shown in the following Table.
Table 3.03.010: Summary of Notice Requirements
Procedure Published Mailed Posted
Annexation (Voluntary) X
Access Point Connection Exemption X X X
Certificate of Design Compliance X
Development Agreement * * *
Historic District Designation X X X
Replat without Vacating (§212.0145) X X
Rezoning (Zoning Map Amendment) X X X
Special Exception X X X
Special Use Permit X X X
UDC Text Amendment X
Variance X X X
X = Notice Required
* = Notice to be determined by Development Agreement Committee per Section 3.20
Table 3.03.020: Summary of Required Public Hearing
Type of Application HARC Zoning Board
of Adjustment
Planning &
Zoning
City
Council
Annexation (Voluntary) X (2)
Access Point Connection Exemption X
Appeal of Admin. Decision X
Certificate of Design Compliance X
Comprehensive Plan Amendment X X
Development Agreement * X
Historic District Designation X X X
Replat (Resubdivision) X X
Rezoning (Zoning Map Amendment) X X
Special Exception X
Special Use Permit X X
UDC Text Amendment X X
Variance X
X = Public Hearing Required
Page 5 of 48
* = Public Hearing to be determined by Development Agreement Committee per Section 3.20
Section 3.25 Annexation (Voluntary)
3.25.010 Applicability
A. For the purpose of establishing and maintaining sound, stable, and desirable development
consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the City may consider
annexations of territory to the corporate limits or extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The
provisions of the Section are adopted pursuant to Texas Local Government Code Chapter 43
and the City Charter.
B. Annexation and disannexation of territory may be requested by landowners or their
representatives through this process for real property within the City’s corporate limits and the
ETJ.
C. Annexation of territory initiated by the City Council as an involuntary procedure, through
Local Government Code Chapter 43 Subchapters C and C-1, does not follow the Voluntary
Annexation process.
3.25.20 Review Process
A. Initiation
Initiation of an annexation or disannexation of territory may be made upon application of a
property owner or their authorized agent. Another governmental authority may also request
modification of ETJ or corporate limit boundaries through this process, or through the
cooperative effort of the Georgetown City Council to initiate such proceedings.
B. Application and Completeness Determination
The Director is responsible for checking that a complete application has been submitted with all
material necessary for the City Council to render an informed decision.
C. Staff Review
1. The Director shall review the application, considering any applicable criteria for approval
and prepare a report to the City Council.
2. The Director may establish procedures for administrative review necessary to ensure
compliance with this Code and state statutes.
3. The Director may assign staff to review the application and make a report to the Director.
4. The Director’s report may include a recommendation for final action.
Page 6 of 48
D. City Council Public Hearings
Applications may be made at any time of year; however, Texas Local Government Section
43.0561 dictates the timing of the public hearing schedule. The City publishes an annual
calendar in the UDC Development Manual with set dates for City Council hearings and actions.
1. For annexation of territory into the city limits, the City Council shall hold two (2) Public
Hearings in accordance with its rules and state law, following newspaper publication notice
in accordance with Section 3.03,
2. For disannexation of territory from the city limits, or release of territory from the ETJ, no
public hearings shall be required.
E. City Council Final Action
1. The City Council shall take final action on the proposed annexation or disannexation
2. The annexation or disannexation shall become effective when approved by the City
Council and in accordance with the City Charter.
3.25.30 Approval Criteria (Annexation)
A. The City Council shall consider the following approval criteria in an analysis of immediate
needs and consideration of the long-terms effects.
1. The application is complete and the information contained within the application is
sufficient and correct enough to allow adequate review and final action; and
2. The annexation promotes the health, safety or general welfare of the City and the safe,
orderly, and healthful development of the City.
3. Consistency with the City’s adopted long range plans and annexation policies.
Page 7 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to allowing patios in the front
setback in limited circumstances per UDC Section 6.05.020 (2014 UDC General Amendment List
Item 26). (Jordan Maddox)
ITEM SUMMARY:
There has been a recent trend, particularly in neighborhoods like Sun City and Heritage Oaks, to
convert a portion of the front sidewalk into a small sitting area. Most new homes do not include
front porches and a small patio outside the front door is an increasingly popular alternative. The
UDC currently does not allow for patios in the front setback, although staff has been approving
some under the Administrative Exception process, with specific criteria created about two years
ago. This UDC amendment would codify the existing approval and clear up confusion on the
allowance of these patios.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
SUBMITTED BY:
Jordan Maddox
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Language Backup Material
Page 8 of 48
6.05.020 Setbacks
C. Features Allowed Within Required Setbacks
The following features are allowed to be located within a required setback:
4. Uncovered patios and pools, but only ifwhich must be located in the side or rear
yards at least 3 feet from the property line.
5. Uncovered patios in the front yard, provided that:
a. The surface area of the patio shall not exceed 10% of the total area within the
front setback and shall be located no closer than 15 feet from the street property
line or in a P.U.E.
b. The patio should generally look and feel more like a landscape feature with
materials consistent with the architecture/materials of the home, screening
achieved by a short seating bench or knee-wall natural berm, solid shrub wall or
combination.
c. No other built-in structures are allowed within the setback area, i.e. grills, fire
pits, etc.
56. Minor utilities.
67. Mechanical equipment such as air conditioning units, pool pumps, and similar
equipment, but such equipment is not allowed in the front setback and is allowed in
the side and rear setbacks only if such equipment cannot be reasonably located
behind the structure.
78. Sills, belt courses, cornices, buttresses, chimneys, flues, eaves and other
architectural features provided that such features do not extend further than 18
inches into any required setback.
89. Parking areas that cover up to 50% of the required front setback, provided that:
a. Landscape buffers eight feet wide are provided between the property line and
the nearest side of the parking pad, and also between the structure and the
nearest side of the parking pad. These buffers must be landscaped and each
shall contain a 3 foot high screen consisting of a continuous berm, hedge or wall;
b. The parking is on a paved surface, as that term is defined in this Code; and
c. The impervious coverage requirements in Section 11.02 are met.
910. None of the features above (except plant material and public sidewalks) shall
extend into a public easement without approval of a License to Encroach.
Formatted: Font: Palatino Linotype, 11 pt
Formatted: Font: Palatino Linotype
Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering
Style: a, b, c, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned
at: 0.75" + Indent at: 1"
Formatted: Font: Palatino Linotype
Formatted: Font: Palatino Linotype
Formatted: Font: Palatino Linotype
Page 9 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to clarification of allowances
and requirements for residential fences per UDC Section 8.07 (2014 UDC General Amendment
List Items 38 & 39). (Jordan Maddox)
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item includes some minor edits to the fence requirements, including materials, height and
location of residential fences. These changes clarify and expand the circumstances when a fence
can be 8 feet tall, who has authority to consider alternative fences, and provides some
grandfathering to existing fence locations.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
SUBMITTED BY:
Jordan Maddox
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Fence language Backup Material
Page 10 of 48
Page 1 of 3
Chapter 8 Tree Preservation, Landscaping and Fencing
Section 8.07 Fence Standards
8.07.030 General Requirements
The following apply to all fences within the City Limits, regardless of use or zoning district.
A. Structural Integrity
All fences shall be constructed to perpetually maintain structural integrity against natural forces
such as wind, rain and temperature variations. Fences constructed of chainlink, welded wire,
picket, or similar materials shall require a minimum of two (2) support rails spaced at least ½ of
the total height of the fence apart.
B. Maintenance
Fences shall be kept in good repair and in a safe and attractive condition, consistent with the
design established with the Fence Permit.
C. Fence Materials
1. Allowed
Wood, stone, rock, concrete block, masonry brick, brick, fencecrete, decorative wrought iron,
chain link, welded wire or other similar materials of comparable aesthetic and durability. The
Director or Building Official may consider other materials during permit review such as vinyl,
PVC, or other rot resistant alternatives. Allowed materials may be restricted in certain
circumstances, per the provisions of this Section, and are allowed by right in all other
instances. Materials such as barbed wire, razor wire and electric fencing are only allowed
with the limitations specified in this Section.
2. Prohibited
Products manufactured for other uses and not originally intended to be permanent fencing
are prohibited. Some examples of prohibited material include but are not limited to:
Plywood, paper, plastic, fiberglass panels, chicken wire, fabric or sheet, roll or corrugated
metals.
3. Director Approval
Fence Material that is prohibited or not explicitly allowed in this Section may be considered by the
Director, following the process detailed in Section 8.07.080.
8.07.040 Residential Fences
Fences for single-family, two-family and townhome uses are allowed in accordance with the following
provisions.
A. Fences located in a front yard or a side setback abutting a local or collector-level street are
allowed with the following limitations:
1. Fences shall be limited to 4 feet in height, except in the Old Town Overlay District where
height is limited to 3 feet..
2. Fences shall be at least 50% transparent. For example, a wrought iron fence or picket fence
that has openings the width of the picket.
3. Chainlink fences are prohibited in these locations.
B. Fences in all other locations are allowed with the following limitations:
1. Fences located in a rear setback abutting a local or collector-level street are allowed with the
limitations in this Section, but shall be set back a minimum of 10 feet. If seeking to replace an
Page 11 of 48
Page 2 of 3
existing fence that would not comply this setback, the new fence may be constructed in the
existing location, unless located in a right of way or in conflict with utilities, sight triangle, etc.
2. Fences shall be limited to 6 feet in height, but .
3. Fences abutting public alleys shall be limited to 5 feet in height.
4. Fences may be increased to a maximum of 8 feet in height in the following circumstances:
a. If the adjacent use is non-residential, in which case only a fence on the property line
abutting the non-residential use may be allowed the increase in height.
b. If the fence is located in the rear yard not adjacent to a street right of way and has the
consent of both property owners.
b. If the adjacent use is residential with a home height of two stories or greater.
c. If the fence is more than 50% transparent overall or 100% transparent above 6 feet..
d. If the fence is placed is in a location where the topography of the land dictates the need
for additional height for privacy, at the discretion of the Building Official.
e. If the fence is set back a minimum of 3 feet, with evergreen shrubs placed between the
fence and the right-of-way.
f. If the fence is adjacent to a roadway where the right-of-way width is greater than 120
feet.
g. For fences that would not meet the above circumstances, the Director may consider a
request for an Administrative Exception, as described in Section 8.07.080.3. Fences directly
abutting public alleys shall be limited to 5 feet in height.
C. Barbed wire fences are not allowed on lots of less than 2 acres.
D. Sports fencing is allowed only in rear yards and set back from all property lines at a distance that
is 1.5 x the height of the sports fence. The sports fence shall be a maximum height of 15 feet.
E. For fences that would not meet the above circumstances, the Director or Building Official may
consider a request for an Administrative Exception, as described in Section 8.07.080.
8.07.060 Residential Boundary Walls
In order to provide a cohesive aesthetic appearance in a manner planned and constructed by the
developer, all single-family, two-family, townhome and apartment multi-family development that is
bounded on any side by a major collector, arterial or freeway, as classified in Section 12.03, shall
provide a boundary wall or similar perimeter buffer along that roadway using the following criteria.
Assumption of responsibility for the maintenance and integrity of the boundary wall or portions thereof
shall fall to the Home Owner’s Association or, in the case there is not an HOA, the property owner on
whose lot line the wall is situated.
8.07.080 Alternative Fences
Through the Administrative Exception process detailed in Section 3.16 of this Code, the Director or
Building Official may consider alternatives to the provisions of this Section. Justifiable reasons to
consider an alternative include, but are not limited to, the protection of trees, the location of existing
structures on a site, location and materials of existing fences, unique topographical or other physical
constraints. In addition, the Director or Building Official is authorized to determine whether direct
application of this Section would create an unsightly effect and could be better achieved with an
alternative design. The Administrative Exception may be granted if the Director or Building Official
determines that the proposed alternative clearly meets or exceeds the quality of design that this
Section seeks to promote and that the following assurances listed below are met.
Formatted: Font: Bold
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25"
Page 12 of 48
Page 3 of 3
The following may be proposed to the Director or Building Official for an alternative:
A. Fence material, as long as the alternative material(s) meet or exceed the minimum aesthetic and
durability standards of this Section.
B. Fence location, as long as the alternative location does not affect health and safety standards
and can be proven to be seamlessly integrated with the surrounding neighbors and design of the
neighborhood.
C. Fence height, as long as evident safety concern arises from the height standards provided for in
this Section, notwithstanding the allowances in 8.07.030.B.4.
D. An Administrative Exception is not required for any health and safety determination, hazardous
material security or any other exceptions explicitly stated in this Section.
Page 13 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to additional standards and
incentives to encourage the development of Workforce Housing (2014 UDC General Amendment
List Item 27). (Jennifer C. Bills, AICP, LEED AP, Housing Coordinator)
ITEM SUMMARY:
The Housing Advisory Board is tasked by City Council to “ensure that the City has affordable
housing for residents of all income levels.” To that end, the HAB forwarded the 2030
Comprehensive Plan: Housing Element to City Council, which was adopted in August 2012. As
the implementation step for Priority #1, the Housing Advisory Board has identified two areas in
which the city can offer incentives to encourage the development of Workforce Housing units.
Existing UDC provisions
In Section 6.070.020 Housing Diversity Development standards exist within the UDC, allowing
alternative lot widths, lot sizes and, setbacks for single-family, two-family and townhouse
development. An additional requirement of this section is that the entire development must consist
of a mix of housing types, which has not been a direction developers have been willing to consider
to date. Once the housing type mix requirement was met, additional incentives and waivers could
be gained by setting aside a number of the units as “Attainable Housing,” would be available to
those making 80% of Area Median Family Income (AMFI). The intent of the recommended text
amendments will be offer incentives for affordability OR housing mix.
Addition of Multifamily Standards
Section 6.070.020 does not have any incentives for creation of Workforce Housing in the
multifamily districts. The board has recommended three alternatives that would allow for
increased density (Exhibit 1).
1. Increase the number of units per building.
2. Reduce the front setback.
3. Increase in Impervious Cover.
Fee Waivers
Section 6.07.020 F allows for fee waivers for housing developments that provide Attainable
Housing units. Fees waived in this section include parkland dedication fees, impact fees and
connection fees. The Housing Advisory Board reviewed the fee structure and city policy for
collection of fees and has recommended not waiving parkland, impact, and connection fees. For
fee waivers, the Board reviewed fees charged to recent developments. They proposed that for
eligible projects, the City waive a portion of the staff review and inspection fees.
• For each Workforce Housing Unit included in the project, the developer will receive a $2,500
waiver of City review and inspection fees, up to a total of $100,000. The value of the waivers
cannot exceed the total fees assessed.
• Total incentivized units cannot be more than 50% of total project.
Examples:
200 unit apartment complex
– Up to 40 units (20%) can receive fee waivers
– 40 x $2,500 = $100,000
20 unit townhome/apt project
– Up to 10 units (50%) can receive fee waivers
– 10 x $2,500 = $25,000
Page 14 of 48
Street Standards
With a Housing Diversity Development, applicants were able to reduce the paved width on
Residential Local streets and Residential Collectors if parking is allowed on only one side. Staff is
recommending removing this option and requiring the standard paved width for all developments.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
-
SUBMITTED BY:
Jennifer C. Bills, AICP, LEED AP, Housing Coordinator
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Workforce Housting Amendment Language Exhibit
Multifamily Development Standards Table Backup Material
Page 15 of 48
6.07.020 Housing Diversity Development
A. Purpose
To encourage housing diversity, this Code allows flexibility to the development
standards and allowable housing types for projects that foster housing diversity.
B. Housing Types
The following Table shows the types of housing permitted in a Housing Diversity
Development. At least three of the following housing types in any of the following
Districts shall be included to qualify for the alternative dimensional standards in Table
6.07.021 6.070.20.A.
Table 6.07.020.B A Permitted Housing Types by Residential District
Housing Type Minimum Lot Size RL RS TF TH MF-1 MF-2
Single Family, Detached 7,500 SF lot X X X X X X
Single Family, Detached 4,500 SF lot X X X X X X
Single Family, Attached 3,500 SF lot X X X X X X
Two-Family 6,000 SF lot X X X X X X
Townhouse 7, 000 SF lot X X X X X X
Apartment 12,000 SF lot -- -- -- -- X --
Apartment 2 acre lot -- -- -- -- -- X
C. Dimensional Standards
The following Table provides the dimensional standards for each residential building
type that can be used in lieu of the dimensional standards otherwise applicable. For any
explanation of any reference in this Table to “Attainable Housing,” see subsection (F)
Table 6.07.020 C B: Housing Diversity Type Dimensional Standards 1
Standard Single Family,
Detached
Single
Family,
Attached
Two-
family Townhouse
Lot Size, minimum 7,500 4,500 7,000 6,000 7,000 1,750
Dwelling Size, minimum - - 3,500 3,000 1,750 --
Dwellings per structure max. - - 3 2 7
Lot Width, minimum feet 60 35 2 35 2 60 20
Front Setback, minimum feet 15 15 15 15 5 3
Front Setback, minimum feet
(Attainable Housing) -- 10 10 10 5
Side Setback, minimum feet 10 6 6 6 10
Page 16 of 48
Side Setback, minimum feet
(Attainable Housing) 6 4.5 4 -- 4.5 4 7.5
Rear Setback, minimum feet 10 10 10 10 15
Rear Setback, minimum feet
(Attainable Housing) 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 --
Building Height, max feet 35 40 40 40 40
Acc. Building Height, max. ft. 20 20 20 20 20
Impervious Coverage, max % See Section 11.02 "impervious Cover"
Perimeter buffer, min. feet
See Chapter 8 "Tree Preservation, Landscaping and
Fencing"
1. All Standards in Table 6.070 C B shall meet any specific requirements of the allowed
housing type, as detailed elsewhere in this Chapter. When a conflict occurs between such
requirements and the standards of this Table, the Table shall apply.
2. Lots less than 40 feet in width must be alley-loaded lots, with the exception of townhouse
lots.
3. See Section 6.03.070 C.1.a for clarification.
4. All applicable requirements of the Fire Code must be met.
D. Interpretations and Exceptions
All dimensional standards in Paragraph (C), above, are subject to the interpretations and
exceptions in Section 6.05.
E. Perimeter Buffer
The perimeter buffer applies to the subdivision edge or contiguous area of a Housing
Diversity Development, and not to specific Zoning Districts within the Development.
The perimeter buffer may be counted towards required landscaping if it is within the lot.
F. Alternative Sidewalk Design
Refer to Section 12.02040 Alternative Design and Financing for sidewalk options in
Housing Diversity Developments.
F. Attainable Housing
1. Housing Diversity Developments that include 10% of the housing units available
for those whose incomes are less than or equal to 80% of the area median income
(attainable housing), and for which the deed for each attainable housing unit lot
approved by the City Attorney and including language that provides that for seven
years from the date of the original home sale to the qualifying buyer any resale shall
be to a party whose income is less than or equal to 80% of the area median income
or, absent that, shall require a payment to the City of their proportionate share of
fees that were waived for their lot.
Page 17 of 48
2. Housing Diversity Developments that meet the eligibility criteria set forth in
subsection (1) may use the setback adjustments as noted in Table 6.07.020.C.
3. Housing Diversity Developments that meet the eligibility criteria set forth in
subsection (1) are exempt from the requirement to pay parkland dedication fees,
impact fees, and connection fees for those units that meet the definition of attainable
housing (i.e., for up to 10% of the lots.) These waived fees shall either be used to
reduce the price of the home or for buyer incentives, such as funds to help with
closing costs.
6.07.030 Workforce Housing Development
A. Purpose
To encourage affordable housing for the workforce, this Code allows flexibility to the
development standards and allowable housing types for projects that foster housing
affordability.
B. Dimensional Standards
The following Table provides the dimensional standards for each residential district that
can be used in lieu of the dimensional standards otherwise applicable.
Table 6.07.030 Workforce Housing Dimensional Standards
Standard RS TF TH MF-1 MF-2
Lot Size, Minimum 4,500 6,000 1,750 12,000 2 acres
Dwelling Units per acre, max -- -- -- 14 24
Dwelling Size, Minimum -- 3,000 1750 --
Dwellings per structure, Max -- 2 8 20 50
Lot Width, minimum feet 35 2 60 20 50 50
Front Setback, minimum feet 10 10 10 15 15
Side Setback, minimum feet 5.5 5.5 7.5 10 10
Side Setback to Residential District,
minimum feet -- -- -- 20 30
Rear Setback, minimum feet 7.5 7.5 10 10 15
Rear Setback to Residential District,
minimum feet -- -- -- 20 30
Building Height, max feet 40 40 45 35 45
Impervious Coverage, max %
See Section 11.02 "impervious Cover"
1. All Standards in Table 6.070 C B shall meet any specific requirements of the allowed housing
type, as detailed elsewhere in the is Chapter. When a conflict occurs between such requirements and
the standards of this Table, the Table shall apply.
Page 18 of 48
2. Lots less than 40 feet in width must be alley loaded lots, with the exception of townhouse lots.
C. Interpretations and Exceptions
All dimensional standards in Paragraph (C), above, are subject to the interpretations and
exceptions in Section 6.05.
D. Alternative Sidewalk Design
Refer to Section 12.02040 Alternative Design and Financing for sidewalk options in
Workforce Housing Developments.
E. Workforce Housing
1. Workforce Housing Developments in Single-Family Residential, Two-Family and
Townhouse Districts that include 20% of the housing units available for those
whose incomes are less than or equal to 80% of the area median family income (as
set by the Department of Housing and Urban Development) are eligible to use the
standards in Table 6.070.030 for all lots within the subdivision. TheDeed
resistrictions, approved by the City Attorney must include language that requires
all workforce housing lots be restricted for ten years from the date of the original
home sale to the qualifying buyer any resale shall be to a party whose income is less
than or equal to 80% of the area median family income or, absent that, shall require
a payment to the City of their proportionate and prorated share of fees that were
waived for their lot.
2. Workforce Housing Developments in Low-Density Multifamily and High-Density
Multifamily Districts are eligible to use the dimensional standards in Table 6.07.030
with the provision of the following workforce housing units.
a. Dwelling Units per structure maximum can be reached by providing 5%
of the total development as workforce units.
b. Front Setback can be reduced by 5 feet for every 10% of total
development set as workforce units, to the minimum.
c. Impervious cover can be increase by 10 % for every 10 % of the total
development set as workforce units, to the maximum of 70%, with
required water quality improvements as required in Section 11.02.
E. Fee Waivers
Workforce Housing Developments are eligible for administrative fee waivers. For
each workforce housing unit provided, the developer will receive a waiver of $2,500
of review fees, up to a total of $100,000. Fee waivers cannot be earned for more than
50% the total development.
Page 19 of 48
B. Residential Development
Residential Development in the City limits shall follow the provisions below. All
development in the ETJ shall follow the provisions in Section C below.
1. Except as provided in Subsection b and c, below, Impervious Cover for
development located in Residential Zoning Districts shall be calculated on a per
subdivision basis and shall not exceed the limits set forth in Table 11.02.010.B. All
maximum percentages are established by district, regardless of use. The limits in
Table 11.02.010.B apply to all development located in Residential Zoning Districts
over any part of the Edwards Aquifer in the table below.
Table 11.02.010.B: Impervious Cover (max. %) for Residential Zoning
Districts
Residential Zoning Districts
AG RE RL RS TF TH MF-1 MF-2 MH
All properties 20 40 45 45 45 50 50 50 50
2. Exceptions for Residential Zoning Districts
a. Impervious cover credits are established for all properties, regardless of size and
location, in Section D below.
b. For Conservation Subdivisions in Residential Zoning Districts, a bonus of 10%
per subdivision is granted for all properties.
c. For Workforce Housing Development in MF-1 or MF-2 Districts, a bonus of up
to 20% per site is granted with the provision of 20% of the units restricted as
Workforce Housing.
12.02.040 Alternative Design and Financing
A. Alternative Sidewalk Plan
3. With a Housing Diversity or Workforce Housing Development (Section 6.07) , any
combination of sidewalks, walkways, bikeways, trails, etc., intended for use as a
travelway for pedestrians and/or bicyclists may be approved by the Director to
serve in lieu of the required sidewalk. The Alternative Sidewalk Plan shall be a
minimum of four feet on at least one side of each street. A request for an Alternative
Sidewalk Plan shall be submitted for consideration at site plan or plat review.
Page 20 of 48
12.03.020 Design Standards
The following standards are used for the determination of proper classification of streets.
Table 12.03.020 Street Classification Standards
Standard Alley Residential
Lane
Residential
Local Street
Residential
Collector
Major
Collector
Minor
Arterial
Major
Arterial
Expected ADT --- < 800 < 800 > 800 >2500 >12,500 >24,000
Right-of-way
(min. feet) 20 50 50 65 73 110 135
Paved Width (feet) 15 21 28** 37** 45 82 106
Traffic Lanes:
Number of Lanes
Lane Width (feet)
1
15
2
9.5
2
8
2
10.5
2 - 4
11-14.5
4
12
6
12
Median Width (feet) --- --- --- --- --- 24 24
Design Speed
(mph) --- 20-30 20-30 30-35 30-35 35-45 35-45
Driveways
Permitted Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Parking None None Both Sides Both Sides** Both Sides*** None None
Landscape
Easement
(min. 5’ width)
None Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides
Sidewalks
(min. 5’ wide) None Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides Both Sides
Commercial Driveway Spacing for City /County Controlled Roadways* and State System Highways**
Posted Speed (MPH) Driveway Spacing (Feet)
< 30 200
35 250
40 305
45 360
50 425
Page 21 of 48
Minimum Connection Spacing Criteria for Freeway Frontage Roads**
Minimum Connection Spacing (feet)
Posted Speed (MPH) One-Way Frontage Roads Two-Way Frontage Roads
<30 200 200
35 250 300
40 305 360
45 360 435
>50 425 510
Desirable Spacing between Freeway Exit Ramps and Driveways**
Total Volume
(Frontage Road + Ramp)
(vph)
Driveway or Side Street Volume
(vph)
Spacing
(feet)
Number of Weaving Lanes
2 3 4
< 2500 < 250 460 460 560
> 250 520 460 560
> 750 790 460 560
> 1000 1000 460 560
>2500 < 250 920 460 560
> 250 950 460 560
> 750 1000 600 690
> 1000 1000 1000 1000
* Adopted July 2001 City of Georgetown Driveway Spacing Study based on AASHTO (American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) sight distance standards.
** City of Georgetown, Access Management Policy prepared by HDR, December 2003
Housing Diversity Developments may reduce the paved width on Residential Local Streets to 26
feet and to 30 feet on Residential Collector Streets if only one parking lane is allowed.
*** For 2 Lane Roadways Only
Section 16.02 Definitions
Attainable Workforce Housing. As used in this Code, the residential dwelling units in
Workforce Housing Diversity Developments at are available for those whose incomes are less
than or equal to 80% of the area median family income, as defined by the Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA).
Page 22 of 48
Page 23 of 48
Lot Size, minimum 12,000 SF 2 acre
Units per acre maximum 14 24
Apartments per Structure, max 12 24 Increase to 20 (MF‐1), or 50 (MF‐2)for 5% WF units
Lot width, minimum feet 50 50
Front Setback, minimum feet
20 25
Reduction of 5 feet per 10% workforce units to 15
feet, min.
Side Setback, minimum feet 10 15
Side Setback to Residential, minimum feet 20 30
Rear Setback, minimum feet 10 15
Rear Setback to Residential, minimum feet 20 30
Building Height, maximum feet 35 45
Accessory building height, max. feet 15 15
Impervious Cover, max
50% 50%
Increase of 10% for 10% WF units, to 70% Imp (will
still require UDC water quality improvements).
Workforce Incentives
*up to 70% with water quality improvements
Proposed Workforce Housing Development Standards for Multifamily
MF‐2MF‐1
Page 24 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to the building size limitations
of the C-1 zoning district (UDC General Amendment List Item 20). (Andreina Davila-Quintero)
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item is a continuation of the February 3, 2015 and March 3, 2015 Unified Development Code
Advisory Committee (UDAC) meetings relating to the maximum building size limitations of
25,000 square feet placed on medical and retail uses in the Community Commercial (C-1) zoning
district.
At its March 3, 2015 meeting, UDAC directed staff to look at floor-to-area (FAR) ratio as a means
to limit building size in the C-1 zoning district. Following the March 3, 2015 discussion, City staff
looked into several key factors to review and analyze the building size limitations of the C-1
zoning district. For consistency purposes, staff also looked at the Neighborhood Commercial (CN)
zoning district as the CN and C-1 zoning districts are the only that restrict the maximum size in
square feet (area) of a building. Key factors analyzed included the following:
Purpose and Intent of the Zoning District
The purpose of the CN district is to provide for small-scale office and commercial activities such
as the sale of convenience goods and personal service businesses that primarily service adjacent
residential areas. The purpose of the C-1 district is to provide for commercial and retail activities
that primarily serve residential areas, and that are of greater intensity than neighborhood
commercial uses.
District, Lot and Building Standards
Both the CN and C-1 zoning districts do not have maximum district size, minimum or maximum
lot size (area), or a maximum building coverage requirement. However, these districts limit
building size by providing a maximum building height (30 feet and 35 feet, respectively) and
building area (5,000 square feet and 25,000 square feet, respectively). The purpose of the building
size limitations is to minimize the impact uses in these zoning districts may have on the adjacent
residential areas.
Additionally, lot coverage (Impervious Cover) in both the CN and C-1 zoning districts is limited
to 70% for subdivisions up to 5 acres, additional acreage over the 5 acres is limited to 55% for
property over the EARZ (impervious cover percentage per lot may vary provided the subdivision
does not exceed 70%); and 70% for property outside the EARZ.
Existing Conditions
Staff looked at existing properties that have a CN and C-1 zoning district to determine number of
parcels, average lot area, developable area (based on impervious cover requirements), current
building size requirements, and what the FAR would be based on the existing building size
limitations. In addition, staff looked at a handful of approved Site Plans to determine the FAR
ratio that these properties were developed at. Please refer to EXHIBIT A for a breakdown of these
numbers.
FAR requirements of similar zoning districts from other municipalities
Staff looked at the zoning regulations from other municipalities in the region to determine the
FAR requirements of zoning districts similar to the City’s CN and C-1 zoning districts. The
attached EXHIBIT B provides for a comparison between the City’s requirements and those from
the cities of Austin, Plano, Dallas and Kyle.
Based on these factors, City staff recommends that the building size limitations for the CN and C-
Page 25 of 48
1 zoning district be revised as follows (EXHIBIT C):
In the CN District, the maximum FAR ratio shall not exceed 0.3; however, no building shall
exceed 7,500 square feet in area.
Staff recognizes that the maximum 5,000 square foot building size requirement may be too limited
for larger commercial neighborhood properties, thus a FAR limitation should also be applied to
this zoning district. Inclusion of an FAR requirement will keep a balance between building size
and lot area so as to not overly burden the district’s character while still serving as a transition
between the higher intense zoning districts and residential areas. However, due to the character of
this zoning district, staff recommends that a building not exceed 7,500 square feet to encourage
groups of smaller buildings that are more in character with adjacent residential areas.
In the C-1 District, the maximum floor-to-area ratio shall not exceed 0.5.
Staff recognizes that the maximum 25,000 square foot building size requirement may be too
limited for large commercial properties, particularly those properties that are larger than 2 acres.
By allowing an FAR of 0.5 it will provide opportunities for larger buildings to be developed in C-
1 zoning district, while promoting development in keeping with the character of the district.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
-
SUBMITTED BY:
Andreina Davila-Quintero
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Exhibit A – Analysis of Existing Conditions Backup Material
Exhibit B – Comparison Chart of requirements from other
municipalities Backup Material
Exhibit C – Proposed UDC Amendment language Backup Material
Page 26 of 48
EXHIBIT A - Existing Conditions
Square Feet Acres Dev. Area
Max Bldg.
Height
Max Bldg.
Area
Potential
FAR
Smallest Lot Size*2,569.41 0.06 1,798.59 30 5,000.00 1.95
Largest Lot Size 207,678.71 4.77 145,375.10 30 5,000.00 0.02
Average 85,060.83 1.95 59,542.58 30 5,000.00 0.06
Smallest Lot Size*1,759.18 0.04 1,231.42 35 25,000 14.21
Largest Lot Size 1,087,208.00 24.96 630,634.40 35 25,000 0.02
Average 91,763.76 2.11 64,234.63 35 25,000 0.27
EXISTING DEVELOPMENT SAMPLES (based on approved Site Plans)
Sq. Ft.Acres %
Lot Area 192,048.00 4.41
IC 82,182.00 1.89 42.79
Bldg. Area 28,328.00 0.65
FAR 0.15 0.15
Lot Area 49,528.00 1.14
IC 34,492.00 0.79 69.64
Bldg. Area 4,957.00 0.11
FAR 0.10 0.10
Lot Area 52,314.99 1.20
IC 26,136.00 0.60 49.96
Bldg. Area 3,000.00 0.07
FAR 0.06 0.06
Lot Area 780,159.60 17.91
IC 453,445.20 10.41 58.12
Bldg. Area 112,643.00 2.59
FAR 0.14 0.14
Lot Area 345,736.00 7.94
IC 199,140.00 4.57 57.60
Bldg. Area 49,408.00 1.13
FAR 0.14 0.14
*Lot size does not allow for max bldg. size permitted by UDC due to bldg. height, parking, and other site improvement
requirements
CN
(±
9
p
a
r
c
e
l
s
)
C-
1
(±
1
9
6
p
a
r
c
e
l
s
)
Page 27 of 48
EXHIBIT B - Comparison Chart - FAR Requirements for Non-Residential Development
Zoning District
Minimum Lot
Size (sq. ft.)
Maximum
Building
Height
Maximum Lot
Coverage Maximum Building Size
CN
Neighborhood Commercial N/A 30 ft.70%5K sq. ft.
C-1
Local Commercial N/A 35 ft.70%25K sq. ft.
LR
Neighborhood Commercial 5,750 40 ft.50% (bldg.)0.5 FAR
GR
Community Commercial 5,750 60 ft.75% (bldg.)1 FAR
R
Retail 0 35 ft.30%0.6 FAR
LC
Light Commercial 0 35 ft.40%0.8 FAR
NS(A)
Neighborhood Service 0 30-35 ft.40%0.5 FAR
CR
Community Retail 0 54 ft.60%
0.75 FAR
office - 0.5 FAR
RS
Retail and Service District 6,000 45 ft.65%1.8 FAR
NC
Neighborhood Commercial 1 ac (max)2 stories 1st floor - 10k sq. ft.
CC
Community Commercial 3 stories 1st floor - 15k sq. ft.
Ci
t
y
o
f
Ge
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
Ci
t
y
o
f
A
u
s
t
i
n
Ci
t
y
o
f
P
l
a
n
o
Ci
t
y
o
f
D
a
l
l
a
s
Ci
t
y
o
f
Ky
l
e
Page 28 of 48
EXHIBIT C – Proposed UDC Amendment
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 1 of 2
Added language is underline
Chapter 5 Zoning Use Regulations
***
5.04.010 Commercial Uses Allowed by District
***
Table 5.04.010 Commercial Uses
Specific Use
**
*
CN
C1
**
*
No
t
e
s
***
Food and Beverage Establishments
Restaurant, General L L E,A
Restaurant, Drive-through S L E,A
Bar, Tavern or Pub S L F,A
Micro Brewery or Micro Winery L L G,A
Food Catering Services L L A
Entertainment and Recreation
***
Dance Hall or Nightclub -- L F,A
***
Membership Club or Lodge -- L A
***
Commercial Recreation -- L J,A
***
Health Services
Blood or Plasma Center -- L K,A
Diagnostic Center -- L K,A
Home Health Care Services L L K,A
Medical or Dental Office L L K,A
Medical or Dental Clinic -- L K,A
Medical Complex -- L K,A
Post-Surgical Recovery Center -- L K,A
Surgery Center -- L K,A
Urgent Care Facility -- L K,A
Professional and Business Offices
General Office L L K,A
Integrated Office Center -- L K,A
***
Consumer Retail Sales and Services
General Retail L L M,A
Agricultural Sales -- L A
Landscape Supply Sales/ Garden Center -- L A
Page 29 of 48
EXHIBIT C – Proposed UDC Amendment
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 2 of 2
Added language is underline
Specific Use
**
*
CN
C1
**
*
No
t
e
s
Farmer’s Market L L A
***
Artisan Studio and Gallery -- L A
Personal Services L L N,A
***
Dry Cleaning Service, Drop- off Only L L N,A
Laundromat L L N,A
Printing, Mailing and Reproduction Services L L N,A
Fitness Center L L O,A
Banking and Financial Services -- L A
Consumer Repair L L A
***
Funeral Home -- L A
***
Veterinary Clinic, Indoor Pens Only -- L A
***
Commercial Sales and Services
***
Pest Control or Janitorial Services -- L R,A
***
Automotive Sales and Services
***
Automotive Parts and Accessories Sales, Indoor -- L A
***
5.04.020 Commercial Use Limitations
***
A. Building Size Limitation
Commercial, retail, service, and office buildings are limited to the following maximum
building size:
1. In the CN District, the floor-to-area ratio shall not exceed 0.3. The maximum
building size of each building on an individual lot or parcel shall be 5,0007,500
square feet.
2. In the C-1 District, the maximum building size shall be 25,000 square feetfloor-to-
area ratio shall not exceed 0.75.
Page 30 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language relating to the determination of
abandonment of a nonconforming situation (UDC General Amendment List Item 61). (Andreina
Dávila-Quintero)
ITEM SUMMARY:
Planning Department staff and Department customers have expressed confusion on the process to
determine abandonment of a nonconforming situation. The current UDC lists a several
occurrences that, individually or combined, are considered to be a lack of use or occupancy to
determine abandonment. Staff recognizes that some of these occurrences may be very subjective
and may vary greatly on case by case basis.
City staff is proposing this amendment to clarify the process for determining abandonment of a
nonconforming situation by providing the Planning Director the flexibility to use several and
varying factors applicable to the building, use, site or structure (EXHIBIT A).
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
-
SUBMITTED BY:
Andreina Dávila-Quintero
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Exhibit A - Proposed UDC Amendment Sec 14.01.060.B Exhibit
Page 31 of 48
EXHIBIT A – Proposed UDC Amendment
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 1 of 2
Added language is underline
Chapter 14 Nonconformities
Section 14.01 General
***
14.01.060 Abandonment of a Nonconforming Situation
A. Effect of Abandonment
Abandonment of a legal nonconforming situation shall result in the loss of the existing legal
nonconforming status previously granted. All use of the premises shall cease and any future use
of the premises may only occur as provided for in this Chapter.
B. Determination of Abandonment
1. A legal nonconforming use shall be considered abandoned after the nonconforming use has
not occupied the building or site for a period of twelve (12) months.
2. A legal nonconforming structure shall be considered abandoned after the structure has been
vacant for a period of eighteen (18) months.
3. A legal nonconforming site shall be considered abandoned after the site has been vacant for
a period of eighteen (18) months.
4. A legal nonconforming sign shall be considered abandoned after the site on which it is
located has been vacant for a period of 90 days.
5. Occurrence of a combination of The Planning Director may consider one or more of the
following situations shall be a sign of vacancy or lack of occupancy for the purposes of
determining different conditions of the structure or site to determine abandonment of a
nonconforming situation, including but not limited to disuse of the building, structure or
site; closed or discontinued utility account(s); removal of utility meters; unpaid taxes; or
nonconforming use that has been replaced by a conforming use.:
a. The building, structure, activity or land has been unoccupied or out of use;
b. The intention of the owner to discontinue the use is apparent;
c. One or more utility accounts have been discontinued;
d. Utility meters are removed;
e. The occupant or owner has allowed any taxes to not be paid thereon;
f. The site or structure has not been maintained;
g. The unit has not been made available for occupancy;
h. The characteristic equipment and furnishings of a nonconforming use have been
removed from the premises; or
i. A nonconforming use has been replaced by a conforming use.
6. The time period for determining abandonment of a legal nonconforming site or structure
may be extended to a maximum of three (3) years if the property has been consistently
maintained and the owner of the land or structure can prove to the satisfaction of the
Page 32 of 48
EXHIBIT A – Proposed UDC Amendment
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 2 of 2
Added language is underline
Director that they have been actively and continuously marketing the land or structure for
sale or lease or have otherwise engaged in activities that would affirmatively prove there
was no intent to abandon. This provision excludes the exemption of any nonconforming
signage on the site.
7. An owner of a legal nonconforming use located in a structure specifically constructed or
modified to suit only such use may request a Special Exception from the Zoning Board of
Adjustment, pursuant to Section 3.15 of this Code, to extend the time period for determining
abandonment to a maximum of four (4) years, provided the property has been consistently
maintained, the structure has not been intentionally altered to serve other uses, used to
house a permitted use or used to house another nonconforming use and the owner can
prove to the satisfaction of the Board that they have been actively and continuously
marketing the structure for sale or lease to such a use. This provision excludes the
exemption of any nonconforming signage on the site.
8. All of the buildings, activities and operations maintained on a lot are generally to be
considered as a whole for the purposes of determining abandonment. A multi-tenant site,
building or shopping center shall be considered occupied for the purposes of this Chapter,
provided it remains at least thirty percent (30%) occupied. The failure to rent one space in a
nonconforming building or on a nonconforming site shall not result in a loss of the right to
rent space thereafter so long as the building or site as a whole is continuously maintained
and at least thirty percent (30%) of the units remain rented.
9. The time period for determining abandonment shall exclude any period of discontinuance of
use caused by government actions impeding access to the premises without any contributing
cause by the owner of the legal nonconforming use, site or structure.
Page 33 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language relating to parking space design
standards to allow for alternative designs (UDC General Amendment List Item 40). (Andreina
Dávila-Quintero)
ITEM SUMMARY:
One of the challenges design professionals have faced when designing a site is relating to the
parking space and aisle dimension requirements of the UDC. Depending on the size and shape of
the lot, and other site improvement requirements (i.e. location of access point, setback
requirements, fire lane, etc.), design professionals have had difficulty designing a site with 18-foot
deep parking spaces. Because of this, Staff has explored alternative parking space designs that
allow some flexibility in the dimensions while still meeting the spirit and intent of the UDC.
Looking at parking space requirements from other municipalities, adopted regulations allow for
the use of the landscape buffer or sidewalk (provided minimum ADA requirements are met) as
part of the vehicle’s overhang, which reduced the length of the parking space by a couple of feet.
In doing so, it provides additional room on site to meet other development requirements such as
minimum fire lane or parking aisle dimensions, without the need of requesting a variance or
exception.
City staff is proposing to codify the option of using part of the landscape buffer or strip as the
vehicle’s overhang as an alternative parking space design provided there are no vertical obstacles
in the first two (2) feet of buffer or strip (EXHIBIT A). The minimum parking space requirement
would still remain 9 feet in width by 18 feet in length.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
-
SUBMITTED BY:
Andreina Dávila-Quintero
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Exhibit A - Proposed UDC Amendment Sec 9.03.020.A Exhibit
Page 34 of 48
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 1 of 2
Added language is underline
Chapter 9 Off-Street Parking and Loading
Section 9.03 Parking Space and Parking Lot Design
9.03.020 Parking Space and Parking Lot Design
A. Parking Space Dimensions
1. Required off-street parking spaces shall have minimum dimensions of 9 feet in width by 18
feet in length, unless otherwise indicated within this Section. Parking space length may be
reduced to 16 feet provided there is a 2-foot overhang from the curb or back of the wheel
stop in accordance with Figure 9.03.020.A below:
Figure 9.03.020.A
2. Subject to approval by the Director, parking areas with 20 or more parking spaces, may
allocate up to 10 % of the minimum number of required parking spaces to reduced size
vehicles, including compact cars and motorcycles, if designed to the following standards:
a. A compact car space shall not be less than 8 feet in width and 16 feet in length;
b. A motorcycle space shall not be less than 4.5 feet in width and 8 feet in length;
c. Reduced size spaces shall be laid out in a group and appropriately identified as intended
for exclusive use by the specified vehicle;
d. Other parking space designs may be considered and shall be submitted to the Director
for review.
Page 35 of 48
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 2 of 2
Added language is underline
3. Parallel parking spaces shall not be less than 8.5 feet in width and 22 feet in length.
4. Parking spaces designated as Handicapped shall comply with the design and location
requirements of the American National Standards Institute (A117.1) and the Texas
Department of Licensing and Regulation.
B. Aisle Widths
The minimum two-way drive aisle width shall be 24 feet. One-way and two-way drive aisle
widths adjoining off-street parking spaces must comply with the following standards:
Table 9.03.020B Minimum Aisle Width for Specified Parking
Parking Angle Stall Width (ft)
Aisle Width
One Way Two Way
30° or 45° 9 13 26
30° or 45° 10 12 24
60° 9 16 --
60° 10 15 --
75° 9 23 --
75° 10 22 --
90° 9 -- 26
90° 10 -- 24
C. Markings
1. Each required off-street parking space and off-street parking area shall be identified by
surface markings at least 4 inches in width. Markings shall be visible at all times. Such
markings shall be arranged to provide for orderly and safe loading, unloading, parking, and
storage of vehicles.
2. One-way and two-way accesses into required parking facilities shall be identified by
directional arrows.
D. Surfacing and Maintenance
All required parking, driveways, drive aisles, and entrances shall have a Paved Surface, as
approved by the Development Engineer. All designated fire lanes shall be paved according to the
typical street cross sections for local street design in the City of Georgetown Construction
Specifications and Details, and kept in a dust-free condition at all times.
A. Access
Required parking spaces shall not have direct access to a street or highway. Access to required
parking spaces shall be provided by on-site driveways. Off-street parking spaces shall be
accessible without backing into or otherwise reentering a public right-of-way.
B. Parking
All required parking shall be constructed of a Paved Surface. No parking shall be allowed on any
surface other than a paved surface.
Page 36 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language relating to the setback requirements for
lots with multiple frontages in non-residential zoning districts (UDC General Amendment List
Item 30). (Andreina Dávila-Quintero)
ITEM SUMMARY:
Section 7.03.030(B) outlines the general standards and interpretations that apply to setback
requirements for properties located in non-residential zoning districts. Two standards from this
section have (in some cases) presented a conflict when determining the applicable setback
requirements for lots with two (2) or more street frontages:
Section 7.03.030(B)(2) defines what is to be considered the front lot line specific to corner lots.
This standard allows corner lots to have a front and side setbacks along its street frontages; the
front setback being the setback along the lot line with the shortest length abutting a street. Due to
the exclusivity to corner lots, this standard is not applicable to other lots with multiple frontages
(i.e. double frontage lots) other than corner lots as defined in the UDC.
Section 7.03.030(B)(4) requires the applicability of the front setback on any lot line that fronts a
street regardless of the size or shape of the lot, the number of street frontages or whether the lot is
on intersecting street. Due to its catch-all phrase and potential conflict with Subsection (B)(2),
previous practices have included the applicability of this standard to corner lots, which have
resulted in corner lots having a front/street setback along its “corner side.” In addition, the
applicability of the front setback on all street frontages significantly reduces the buildable area of a
lot, particularly small lots, thus creating an unnecessary hardship.
Staff recognizes that there are situations where, due to the configuration and size of the lot,
existing development pattern and character of the district, applicability of the front setback on all
street frontages may not be conducive for promoting (re)developing. City staff is proposing this
amendment to include the following (EXHIBIT A):
1. Criteria for determining the front lot line (and thus front setback) for lots with multiple
frontages, other than corner lots; and
Provide the Planning Director the ability to reduce the required street setback to be consistent with
the side setback of the district based on lot configuration, building orientation, access, proximity of
buildings to the street on lots on the same block and on either side of the street, and existing
character of the district.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
-
SUBMITTED BY:
Andreina Dávila-Quintero
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
EXHIBIT A - Proposed UDC Amendment Sec. 7.03.030.B Exhibit
Page 37 of 48
EXHIBIT A – Proposed UDC Amendment
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 1 of 3
Added language is underline
Chapter 7 Non-Residential Zoning Districts: Lot,
Dimensional, and Design Standards
Section 7.03 Development Standards
***
Table 7.03.020: Non-Residential Lot and Dimensional Standards
Non-Residential Zoning Districts
Dimension CN C-1 C-3 OF BP IN PF MU-DT MU
District Size, min. acreage -- -- 5 -- 20 5 -- -- 5
Lot Width, minimum feet 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 25
Fo
r
M
U
L
o
t
a
n
d
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
a
l
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
,
S
e
e
S
e
c
t
i
o
n
4
.1
1
Front/Street Setback, min.
feet 20 25 25 25 25 35 25 0
Front Setback, Build-to
Option
0 0 -- 0 -- -- 0 --
Refer to Section 7.03.030.B for the Build-to Option
Front Setback, Downtown
Gateway Overlay
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 --
Refer to Section 4.13.040 for Downtown Gateway Setbacks
Side Setback, min. feet 5 10 10 10 10 20 5 0
Side Setback to Residential
District, min. feet 10 15 15 15 20 25 15 0
Rear Setback, min. feet 0 0 10 10 10 20 0 0
Rear Setback to Residential
District, min. feet 20 25 25 25 25 35 25 0
Building Height, max. feet 30 35 45 45 60 60 45 40
Bufferyards Refer to Section 8.04 for Bufferyard Requirements
Landscaping Refer to Chapter 8 for Minimum Landscape Requirements
Impervious Coverage Refer to Section 11.02 for Impervious Coverage
Requirements
***
7.03.030 Dimensional Interpretations and Exceptions
***
B. Setbacks General
1. No building, structure, or other development feature shall be located within a
required setback or yard unless otherwise specified in this Section.
Page 38 of 48
EXHIBIT A – Proposed UDC Amendment
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 2 of 3
Added language is underline
2. When determining the setbacks for corner lots, the front lot line shall be adjacent to
the shortest street dimension of the lot. In instances where the lot is relatively square
or otherwise unusually shaped, a request may be made to the Director for a
determination of the front lot line.
3. When determining the setback for lots with more than one street frontage, other than
corner lots, the Planning Director shall determine the front lot line on the basis of
street classification, lot dimensions, building orientation, access, traffic flow,
proximity of building to the street, and other best planning practices.
34. No part of a setback or other open space required in connection with any building,
lot or use for the purpose of complying with this Code shall be included for any
other building, lot, or use as part of a setback or open space.
45. Any setback to a public street shall be considered a street setback and meet the
required front setback for lot lines adjacent to the street. The Planning Director may
reduce the street setback to be consistent with the side setback of the district on a
case by case basis based on lot configuration, building orientation, access, proximity
of buildings to the street on lots on the same block and on either side of the street,
and existing character of the district.
C. Setback Exceptions
1. Front Setback, Build-to Option
a. For properties in the CN, C-1, OF and PF Districts, the front setback may be
reduced to zero feet from the right-of-way line or any applicable public
easement, if at least 25% of the street-facing building wall of the principal
structure is built within 5 feet of the right-of-way line or applicable public or
landscape easement on the primary street.
b. Notwithstanding the foregoing provision in subsection (a), parking shall be set
back 10 feet from the right-of-way line and shall not be located in a public or
landscape easement.
2. Front Setback, Downtown Gateway Overlay District
All non-residential uses located in the Downtown Gateway Overlay District,
regardless of the underlying Zoning District, have special setback requirements. For
these properties, the front setback of the underlying Zoning District is reduced to
zero feet from the right-of-way line or any applicable public or landscape easement.
Additional requirements for properties in the Downtown Gateway Overlay District
can be found in Section 4.13.040.
3. Side Setback, MU-DT District
Development in the MU-DT District may have no side setback if access to the rear of
the building is provided on the site or by a dedicated public alley.
Page 39 of 48
EXHIBIT A – Proposed UDC Amendment
Deleted language is strikethrough Page 3 of 3
Added language is underline
4. Features Allowed Within Required Setbacks
a. The following features may be located within a required setback:
i. Landscape features (as defined in Chapter 16).
ii. Fences and walls.
iii. Driveways.
iv. Sidewalks.
v. Minor utilities.
vi. Mechanical equipment such as air conditioning units, pool pumps and
similar equipment, but such equipment is not allowed in the front setback
and is allowed in the side and rear setbacks only if such equipment cannot
be reasonably located behind the structure.
vii. Sills, belt courses, cornices, buttresses, chimneys, flues, eaves and other
architectural features that extend less than 18 inches into the setback.
viii. On-site parking, in Districts other than Industrial, may be located within a
side or rear setback if:
• Such parking is directly adjacent to parking on a neighboring property in
a Non-Residential District; and
• Such parking is located no closer than five feet from the lot line; and
• The lot complies with the applicable bufferyard requirements in Section
8.04 of this Code.
b. None of the features above (except plant material and public sidewalks) shall
extend into a public easement without approval of a License to Encroach.
Page 40 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to residential accessory
dwelling units (2014 UDC General Amendment List Item 22). (Valerie Kreger)
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item brings forth amendment language related to the discussion the committee had at the
February 3rd and March 3rd meetings regarding residential accessory dwelling units, including
garage apartments. The committee was supportive of removing the rental restrictions provided
parking was addressed and limitations were added to restrict electric and water meters. Staff
prepared language requiring an additional parking space for an accessory dwelling unit and
restricted the sites to one electric meter and one water meter.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
-
SUBMITTED BY:
Valerie Kreger
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Accessory Dwelling Unit Amendment Language Exhibit
Page 41 of 48
Page 1 of 1
Chapter 5 Zoning Use Regulations
Section 5.02 Residential Uses
5.02.020 Residential Use Limitations
B. Accessory Dwelling Unit
An accessory dwelling unit is permitted in accordance with Table 5.02.010 and subject to the
following standards and limitations:
1. An accessory dwelling unit is permitted as a subordinate use, provided that it is limited to
twenty-five percent (25%) of the primary dwelling unit.
2. An accessory dwelling unit is permitted in the AG, Agriculture, RE, Residential Estate, RL,
Residential Low Density, RS, Residential Single-family, and MU-DT, Mixed-Use Downtown
Districts with the approval of a Special Use Permit pursuant to Section 3.07. The Special Use
Permit shall include a condition that the unit may not be used for rental purposes.
3. A minimum of three parking spaces shall be available on-site providing the minimum two
spaces required for the primary residence with one additional parking space provided for
the accessory dwelling unit.
4. The accessory dwelling unit must remain on the same electric and water meters as the
primary residence.
5. An accessory dwelling unit may be permitted by right as part of a Housing Diversity
Development, as detailed in Section 6.08.020. Unlike the dwelling units in paragraph (B.1)
above, accessory dwelling units within a Housing Diversity Development may be used for
rental purposes, with approval of a Special Use Permit.
4. 6. Accessory structures that do not contain a kitchen, such as guest houses or pool houses,
are permitted without a Special Use Permit.
Page 42 of 48
City of Georgetown, Texas
Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
May 5, 2015
SUBJECT:
Discussion regarding proposed UDC amendment language related to residential accessory
structures (UDC General Amendment List Item 25). (Valerie Kreger)
ITEM SUMMARY:
This item brings forth amendment language related to the discussion the committee had at the
February 3rd and March 3rd meetings regarding size and height regulations for residential
accessory structures. The committee discussed removing the regulation limiting accessory
structures to only 30% of the rear yard and was supportive of providing for a standard that would
allow a two car garage on any size lot. Additionally, the committee was in agreement that the
accessory building height should be limited to the height of the principal structure. Staff has
prepared language to reflect these changes.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
-
SUBMITTED BY:
Valerie Kreger
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Accessory Structure Amendment Language Exhibit
Page 43 of 48
Page 1 of 5
Chapter 6 Residential & Agriculture Zoning Districts: Lot,
Dimensional & Design Standards
Section 6.03 Development Standards
6.03.020 AG – Agriculture District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
AG - Agriculture
Lot Size, minimum square feet 2 acres
Lot Width, minimum feet 100
Front Setback, minimum feet 25
Side Setback, minimum feet 10
Rear Setback, minimum feet 20
Building Height, maximum feet 35
Accessory Building Height, max. feet 35 (C.4)
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
B. Allowed Uses
1. Single-family detached (minimum lot size: 2 acres).
2. Those Residential Uses identified in the Use Tables in Chapter 5 of this Code as allowed in
the AG District.
3. Those Non-Residential Uses identified in the Use Tables in Chapter 5 of this Code as allowed
in the AG District.
4. Those Accessory Uses identified in Section 5.01.020.E of this Code that may be compatible
with the primary uses allowed in the AG District.
C. Non-Residential and Accessory Design Standards
1. Non-Residential and Accessory Uses shall meet the lot and dimensional standards of the AG
District, in addition to the provisions of Sections 6.05 and 6.06, except as provided below.
2. Non-Residential Uses shall meet the requirements of Section 7.04 and 7.05.
3. Residential Accessory Uses shall meet the requirements of Section 6.06.010.
4. Accessory structures associated with a Non- Residential Use allowed in Table 5.07.010
(Agricultural Uses) may exceed the accessory building height defined in this Section.
D. Other Requirements of This Chapter
1. Dimensional Interpretations and Exceptions, Section 6.05.
2. Site Design Standards, Section 6.06.
Page 44 of 48
Page 2 of 5
6.03.030 RE - Residential Estate District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
RE - Residential Estate
Lot Size, minimum square feet 1 acre
Lot Width, minimum feet 100
Front Setback, minimum feet 25
Side Setback, minimum feet 10
Rear Setback, minimum feet 20
Building Height, maximum feet 35
Accessory Building Height, max. feet 25
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
6.03.040 RL - Residential Low Density District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
RL - Residential Low Density
Lot Size, minimum square feet 10,000
Lot Width, minimum feet 70
Front Setback, minimum feet 20
Side Setback, minimum feet 10
Rear Setback, minimum feet 10
Building Height, maximum feet 35
Accessory Building Height, max. feet 15
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
6.03.050 RS - Residential Single-family District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
RS - Residential Single-family
Lot Size, minimum square feet 5,500
Lot Width, minimum feet 45
Front Setback, minimum feet 20
Side Setback, minimum feet 6
Rear Setback, minimum feet 10
Building Height, maximum feet 35
Accessory Building Height, max. feet 15
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
Page 45 of 48
Page 3 of 5
6.03.060 TF - Two-family District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
TF - Two Family
Lot Size, minimum square feet 7,000
Dwelling Size, minimum square feet 3,500
Dwellings per Structure, maximum 2
Lot Width, minimum feet 70 (C.1)
Front Setback, minimum feet 20
Side Setback, minimum feet 6
Rear Setback, minimum feet 10
Building Height, maximum feet 35
Accessory Building Height, max. feet 15
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
6.03.070 TH – Townhouse District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
TH - Townhouse
Townhouse Lot Size, minimum square feet 2,000
Dwelling Units per Row, maximum 6
Townhouse Lot Width, minimum feet 22
Front Setback, minimum feet 15
Non-shared Wall Side Setback, minimum feet 10
Shared Wall Side Setback, minimum feet 0
Rear Setback, minimum feet 15
Building Height, maximum feet 35
Accessory Building Height, maximum feet 15
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
Page 46 of 48
Page 4 of 5
6.03.080 MF-1 - Low Density Multi-family District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
MF-1 - Low Density Multi-family
Lot Size, minimum square feet 12,000
Dwelling Units per acre, maximum 14
Apartment Units per structure, maximum 12
Lot Width, minimum feet 50
Front Setback, minimum feet 20
Side Setback, minimum feet 10
Side Setback to Residential District, minimum feet 20
Rear Setback, minimum feet 10
Rear Setback to Residential District, minimum feet 20
Building Height, maximum feet 35
Accessory Building Height, max. feet 15
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
6.03.090 MF-2 - High Density Multi-family District
A. Lot and Dimensional Standards
MF-2 - High Density Multi-family
Lot Size, minimum square feet 2 acres
Dwelling Units per acre, maximum 24
Apartment Units per structure, maximum 24
Lot Width, minimum feet 50
Front Setback, minimum feet 25
Side Setback, minimum feet 15
Side Setback to Residential District, minimum feet 30
Rear Setback, minimum feet 15
Rear Setback to Residential District, minimum feet 30
Building Height, maximum feet 45
Accessory Building Height, max. feet 15
Impervious Cover, maximum % See Section 11.02
Page 47 of 48
Page 5 of 5
Section 6.06 Accessory Structures and Amenity Areas
6.06.010 Accessory Structures, Garages and Carports
The requirements of this Section apply to the AG, Agriculture District and all Residential Districts,
except as specified.
A. Accessory structures and buildings shall meet the dimensional standards of the base zoning
district, except as specified in this Section.
B. The accessory structure shall only be located on a lot with a principal structure, unless two
adjacent lots have common ownership, in which case the structures may be located on different
lots. In such instance, the accessory structure shall be located in the rear yard as determined by
the lot with the principal structure on it.
C. The square footage of an accessory structure shall not exceed 25% of the square footage of the
principal structure. However, the maximum accessory structure square footage may exceed 25%
of the principal structure to allow for the construction of a detached two-car garage, not to exceed
600 square feet. For the purposes of this calculation, the square footage of an attached garage
shall not be considered part of the principal structure.
D. Accessory Structures shall not exceed the height of the principal structure, however, accessory
structures associated with a Non- Residential Use allowed in Table 5.07.010 (Agricultural Uses)
may exceed the height of the principal structure provided the maximum building heights of the
district are not exceeded.
E. Accessory structures measuring 8 feet or less in height are allowed in the setbacks in the rear
yard up to 3 feet from the property line, but may not extend into any P.U.E. Properties in the Old
Town Overlay District must follow the procedures outlined in Section 4.09.040, Special Exception
for Setback Modification and the approval process pursuant to Section 3.15.
EF. Garages and carports, whether attached or detached from the principal structure, shall be set
back a minimum of 20 feet from the public street from which the associated driveway takes
access or a minimum of 10 feet when taking access from a public alley.
F. No more than 30% of the rear yard may be covered with accessory buildings or structures. All
impervious cover requirements in Section 11.02 shall be met.
G. Accessory dwelling units located in accessory structures in the AG, RE, RL, and RS Districts are
allowed subject to the limitations provided for in Section 5.02.020.B or within a Housing
Diversity Development without limitations (as detailed in Section 6.07.020).
Page 48 of 48
