HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_HAB_12.18.2017Notice of Meeting for the
Housing Adv isory Board
of the City of Georgetown
December 18, 2017 at 2:00 PM
at Historic Light and Waterworks Bldg, 406 W. 8th Street Georgetown, TX 78626
The City o f G eo rgeto wn is committed to comp lianc e with the Americans with Dis abilities Ac t (ADA). If yo u
req uire as s is tanc e in participating at a p ublic meeting d ue to a disability, as d efined und er the ADA, reas onab le
as s is tance, ad ap tatio ns , or acc o mmo d ations will b e provid ed up o n req uest. P leas e c o ntact the City Sec retary's
Office, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc hed uled meeting d ate, at (512) 930-3652 o r City Hall at 113 Eas t 8th
Street fo r add itional info rmation; TTY us ers ro ute through Relay Texas at 711.
Public Wishing to Address the Board
On a sub ject that is pos ted on this agend a: Pleas e fill out a speaker regis tration form which c an b e found at the
Bo ard meeting. C learly p rint yo ur name, the letter o f the item o n which yo u wis h to s p eak, and present it to the
Staff Liais o n, p referab ly p rio r to the s tart of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board
cons id ers that item.
On a sub ject not pos ted on the agend a: Pers ons may add an item to a future Bo ard agenda b y filing a written
req uest with the S taff Liaison no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. T he req uest mus t inc lude the
s p eaker's name and the s p ecific to p ic to b e ad d res s ed with sufficient information to info rm the b o ard and the
p ublic . For Board Liais on c o ntact info rmatio n, pleas e lo gon to
http://go vernment.georgetown.o rg/category/b o ard s -commissions /.
A As of th e d ea d lin e, n o p ersons were sign ed up to sp ea k on items other than those p osted on the a g enda.
Legislativ e Regular Agenda
B Pres entatio n and d is cus s io n o f munic ip al linkage fees . Sus an Watkins, Hous ing Co o rd inato r
C Co nsideration and possible actio n to approve the minutes fro m the October 16, 2017 meeting. Karen
Fro s t, Rec o rd ing S ecretary
D Pres entatio n and d is cus s io n o f the updated d emo graphics fro m pages 7-9 of the 2012 Hous ing Element.
Susan Watkins , Ho using Coordinator
E Pres entatio n and d is cus s io n o f the 2012 Hous ing Element rec o mmendations . S us an Watkins , Hous ing
Co o rd inator
F Pres entatio n and d is cus s io n o f vario us Ho us ing chap ters/elements from other cities . S usan Watkins ,
Ho using C o o rd inato r
Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Shelley No wling, C ity S ecretary fo r the C ity of Geo rgeto wn, Texas , d o hereby c ertify that this Notice of
Meeting was p o s ted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a p lace read ily acc es s ible to the general p ublic at all times ,
on the ______ d ay o f __________________, 2017, at __________, and remained so p o s ted fo r at leas t 72
Page 1 of 25
c o ntinuo us ho urs p receding the sc heduled time o f s aid meeting.
____________________________________
S helley No wling, City Sec retary
Page 2 of 25
City of Georgetown, Texas
Housing Advisory Board
December 18, 2017
SUBJECT:
Presentatio n and dis c us sion of municipal linkage fees . S usan Watkins , Hous ing Coordinator
ITEM SUMMARY:
“Linkage fees ” are a tool used b y cities to set as id e funding fo r affordable ho us ing d evelopment. A c ity
with a linkage fee requirement imposes a c ertain fee on new cons tructio n bas ed o n s q uare fo o tage and
d es ignates the fund s ac cumulated from the fee for future d evelopment o f affo rd ab le ho using. During the
2017 Texas Legis lative Session, Hous e Bill 1449 was p as s ed whic h p ro hibits c ities in Texas fro m c harging
fees “o n new c ons tructio n fo r the p urposes of o ffs etting the cost or rent of any unit o f residential
hous ing.” Staff fro m the City Atto rney’s offic e will p res ent info rmation regarding the implic ations of the
legislatio n o n pos s ible d ed icated revenue streams fo r affordable hous ing.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None studied at this time.
SUBMITTED BY:
Charles Mc Nab b , City Atto rney
Page 3 of 25
City of Georgetown, Texas
Housing Advisory Board
December 18, 2017
SUBJECT:
Cons id eration and p o s s ib le ac tion to approve the minutes from the Oc tober 16, 2017 meeting. Karen
Frost, Rec o rding Sec retary
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
SUBMITTED BY:
Karen Fro s t, Rec o rd ing S ecretary
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Minutes _HOUAB_10.16.2017 Backup Material
Page 4 of 25
Housing Advisory Board Page 1
Minutes October 16, 2017
City of Georgetown, Texas
Housing Advisory Board
Minutes
October 16, 2107, at 3:30 p.m.
Historic Light and Waterworks Building, 406 W. 8th Street
Georgetown, Texas 78626
Members present: Brenda Baxter, Vice Chair; Randy Hachtel; Brian Ortego; Nikki Brennan; Harry
Nelson; and Lou Sneed
Members absent: Joseph Gonzales, Chair;
Staff present: Wayne Reed, Assistant City Manager; Sofia Nelson, Planning Director; Nat
Waggoner, Long Range Planning Manager; Susan Watkins, Housing Coordinator; Karen Frost,
Recording Secretary
Call to Order by the Brenda Baxter at 3:35 pm.
Public Wishing to Address the Board
A. As of the deadline, no persons were signed up to speak on items other than those posted on
the agenda.
Legislative Regular Agenda
B. Presentation and discussion of the Housing Element timeline. Susan Watkins, AICP,
Housing Coordinator –
Susan Watkins presented the proposed timeline for the Housing Element and Feasibility
Study completion. Wayne Reed addressed the board, expressing the city’s desire to
maintain affordable housing as a priority and the need to plan for future growth. He also
spoke about the prioritization of staff time and the trust relationship that needs to be built
between the board and the staff. He explained the two groups need to work together to be
most effective. The board expressed concern about the timing of the adoption of the plan
and action items and how they felt the process was too long. They were concerned about
their terms ending before the plan was adopted.
C. Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the September 18, 2017
meeting. Karen Frost, Recording Secretary –
Motion by Brennan, second by Ortego to approve the minutes with a spelling correction
on the second page. Approved 6 – 0 (Gonzales absent).
D. Consideration and possible action to recommend approval of 1) a Resolution of no objection
and 2) a Resolution acknowledging that Georgetown has more than two times the average
per capita amount of Housing Tax Credit units for Pedcor Investments to apply for Housing
Tax Credits for the construction of 192 units to be known as Residences at Stillwater, located
at FM971 & Inner Loop. Susan Watkins, AICP, Housing Coordinator –
Page 5 of 25
Housing Advisory Board Page 2
Minutes October 16, 2017
Staff presented general information regarding LIHTC projects and the developer presented
the specifics of the proposed project including the times and dates of neighborhood
meetings.
The Board asked questions about the proposed development. Overall the project is valued
at $39 million, approximately $200,000 per unit. There will be 192 units. 72 units will be 1
bedroom, 96 units will be 2 bedroom and 24 units will be 3 bedroom. They are expecting
35% of the complex will be units with children. The developer is holding neighborhood
meetings with Katy Crossing residents on 10/26 and 11/2. Over 200 notices have been
mailed and a notice was placed in the Williamson County Sun.
Motion by Ortego, second by Hachtel to recommend to city council approval of a
resolution of no objection for Pedcor Investments for the construction of 192 units to be
known as the Residences at Stillwater, located at FM 971 and Inner Loop. Approved 6 – 0
(Gonzalez absent).
Motion by Ortego, second by Snead to recommend to city council approval of a
resolution acknowledging that Georgetown has more than two times the average per
capita amount of Housing Tax Credit units for Pedcor Investments to apply for Housing
Tax Credits for the construction of 192 units to be known as Residences at Stillwater,
located at FM971 & Inner Loop. Approved 6 – 0 (Gonzalez absent).
E. Presentation and discussion of charts from the Economic Development Workforce Analysis.
Susan Watkins, AICP, Housing Coordinator –
Watkins presented information from the analysis. The board did not request action. The
board expressed frustration regarding the staff recommendation to complete the update of
demographic information. Watkins explained the need to include the workforce analysis
information and to synchronize it with the housing goals of the city to make sure the
industries are served that we are recruiting.
F. Presentation and discussion of the Williamson County rental housing wage. Susan Watkins,
AICP, Housing Coordinator
Watkins presented updated information from select pages from the 2012 Housing Element
as requested by the Board. The median income for the county is $81,400 but the median
income for Georgetown is $63,000. Rent plus utilities should be no more than 30% of the
gross income. In 2015, in Williamson County, that equaled $1195 for a 2 bedroom
apartment. That equates to a full time employee making $22.98 hourly. The board did not
request action.
G. Presentation and discussion of the updated Housing Advisory Board FY18 Work Plan.
Susan Watkins, AICP, Housing Coordinator –
The Board requested compressing work plan schedule by adding December items to the
November agenda. The Board also asked for a special called meeting to discuss items in an
expedited manner, specifically the presentation of linkage fees legislation by the city legal
staff. Nelson stated she will look into the possibility.
H. Upcoming items:
The next regular meeting of the Housing Advisory Board is scheduled for October 16, 2017.
Page 6 of 25
Housing Advisory Board Page 3
Minutes October 16, 2017
Motion by Ortego, second by Snead to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 5:22 pm.
__________________________________ _______________________________________
Approved, Brenda Baxter, Vice-Chair Attest, Randy Hachtel
Page 7 of 25
City of Georgetown, Texas
Housing Advisory Board
December 18, 2017
SUBJECT:
Presentatio n and dis c us sion of the up d ated demograp hic s from p ages 7-9 o f the 2012 Ho using Element.
Sus an Watkins , Hous ing Co o rd inato r
ITEM SUMMARY:
At the Octo ber 16, 2017 Ho using Ad visory Bo ard meeting, the Board b egan reviewing the updated
d emo graphics and ec o nomic s from p ages 7-9 o f the Hous ing Element. Staff p ro vided the Board a
p res entation o n the methodology fo r up d ating the 2017 rental hous ing wage and als o the median ho usehold
inc o me numb er from the rec ently completed Wo rkforc e Analysis.
At the November meeting, the Bo ard will review the updated info rmation fo r:
-New ho using units s ince 2010
-Perc ent of ho us eho ld s with incomes les s than $50,000
-Cost burd ened ho us eho ld s
-Perc ent of jobs b y indus try
-Med ian s ales p ric e
Inc luded in the Hous ing Element demographic s and econo mics d ata are informatio n fo r Georgetown’s
affo rd ab le hous ing s to ck (no t updated ) and affo rd ab ility of s ales ho using (no t updated ). T hese figures
req uire will be updated through technic al stud ies as s oc iated with the overall Comprehensive P lan in the
Spring o f 2018.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None studied at this time.
SUBMITTED BY:
Sus an Watkins , AICP, Hous ing Co o rd inator
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Attachment 1 - 2012 Hous ing Element pages 7-9 Backup Material
Attachment 2 - Updated Demographics Backup Material
Page 8 of 25
Housing Element
7
The market responds by adding more than 9,000 new homes
Favorable economic, demographic and
market trends caused the City’s housing
supply to expand dramatically. New
construction added more than 9,000 units in
Georgetown. Sun City accounted for nearly
3,000 of these homes. Overall, Williamson
County witnessed the creation of over 72,000
new housing units between 2000 and 2010.
Not all Georgetown residents
are wealthy
Even in the midst of a relatively steady
economy and housing market there remain a significant segment of Georgetown residents that
struggle to make ends meet. Forty percent of all City households had incomes of less than
$50,000 in 2010. Moreover, 27% of all households in 2010 were cost burdened and paying more
than 30% of their gross income on housing costs. Many of these individuals are employed in
service industries, which provide 73% of the jobs, located in Williamson County. These jobs are
typically among the lowest-skill, lowest wage jobs of the employment spectrum, providing
employment opportunities in retail, arts and entertainment, and food and accommodations. In the
past five years, forty percent of all new jobs added in the county were in the service sector.
Williamson County’s rental housing wage was $18.35 in 2010
In Williamson County, the Fair Market Rent (FMR) for a two-bedroom apartment is $954. In
order to afford this level of rent and utilities, without paying more than 30% of income on
housing, a household must earn a monthly income of $3,180. Assuming a 40-hour work week, 52
weeks per year, this level of income translates into a Housing Wage of $18.35 per hour. In order
to afford the FMR for a two-bedroom apartment, a minimum wage earner (making $7.25/hour in
2008) must work 101 hours per week, 52 weeks per year. Or, a household must include 2.53
minimum wage earner(s) working 40 hours per week year-round in order to make the two-
bedroom FMR affordable.
Many occupations such as waiters, retail clerks and construction laborers are necessary for the
economic vitality and success of a community. These “vital community occupations” are generally
found at the lower and mid-range of the income scale, and, therefore, these workers can find it
difficult to rent a decent dwelling unit. Based on the housing wage of $18.35, waiters, cashiers,
retail salespersons, and construction laborers could not afford to rent a one-bedroom unit costing
$783 per month as single-wage earning households. Entry level firefighters could afford the one-
bedroom FMR but not the two-bedroom FMR. Elementary school teachers, accountants and
registered nurses could afford a one-bedroom unit or a two-bedroom unit, even as single-wage
earning households.
Page 9 of 25
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
8
Georgetown’s Housing Market
Real median household income has decreased 16% since 2000, meaning overall 50% of
Georgetown households are making less money than they did 10 years ago. In the Georgetown
East market (i.e., east of I-35), the median housing sales price declined 3.9% from 2000 to 2010,
after adjusting for inflation. In the Georgetown West market (i.e., west of I-35), the median sales
price decreased 5.9%, after adjusting for inflation. While the market has registered a decrease in
home prices, the decrease in household income has made the housing market less affordable to
existing households.
Georgetown’s Affordable Housing Stock
The median household income in the City was $60,917 in 2010. With this income, a household
could purchase a home selling for $167,520. In 2010, there were a total of 417 units that sold for
$167,000 or less. This was equivalent to 41.5% of the 1,004 total MLS sales transactions. A
relatively affordable housing market is one in which households at the median household income
could purchase at least 40% of the homes. The Georgetown market currently meets this
threshold.
Between 2010 and 2012, a total of 495 sales transactions involved housing units that sold for
$134,000 or less. This price was affordable to a household earning up to 80% of the City’s median
household income. These 495 units represented 24% of the total 2,083 sales transactions between
2010 and 2012.
Sales Housing in Georgetown is Becoming Unaffordable
Some households in Georgetown with incomes between 60% and 80% of the median area income
can find affordable homes in the marketplace. With respect to sales housing, the total affordable
housing supply (726) is less than the total affordable housing demand (2,295) for the period 2010-
2017. The local housing market is not addressing the need for affordable sales housing as
evidenced by the number of new and existing sales units that sold for $134,000 or less (495 units).
Page 10 of 25
Housing Element
9
Georgetown’s Affordable Housing Deficit Consists of Rental Units
Georgetown made good progress in increasing the supply of affordable rental housing in the
2000s. However, Georgetown still has a higher demand for affordable rental units than supply.
This is due to the growth of lower-wage jobs and, subsequently, lower income households. An
additional 3,082 units will be needed in Georgetown to sufficiently address the rental housing need
for households with incomes at or below 80% of the area’s median income. However, the 180
affordable rental units estimated to be available between 2012 and 2017 will address only a fraction
of the affordable housing deficit. An additional 2,902 affordable rental housing units will be
needed to meet the unmet demand through 2017.
Why address the need
The availability of housing for people at all income levels should be treated as an important issue
in Georgetown. For a city to be viable and sustainable in the long term, housing choices should
be available to those that want to live and work within the same city.
Viability and Support of the Citizens
The provision of work force housing is important for the continued viability of Georgetown. A
readily available pool of service employees is essential for the day-to-day operations required by
the residents of the city. Having teachers, firefighters, police and utility workers able to live
within the community they serve allows the workforce to be more efficient and connected with
the community they serve. In addition, in the event of an emergency or natural disaster,
firefighters, police and utility workers will be onsite to provide immediate assistance. With less
time spent on commuting to and from work, employees will have more free time, be less tired
from travel and be more productive at work.
Page 11 of 25
Housing Element Demographic
Update
November 20, 2017
Page 12 of 25
New Housing Units since 2010
• 4,886 Single family building permits 2010-2017
• 2,236 Multifamily units added since 2010
• 3,894 homes under construction*
• 9,085 homes planned*
• 310 LIHTC units approved in 2016, built by 2018
*Development pipeline as of 03/2017
Source: City of Georgetown
Page 13 of 25
Percent of Households with
incomes less than $50K
• 39.5% of Georgetown households made
less than $50,000
Source: 2015 ACS 5 year estimate – Table B19001
Page 14 of 25
Cost Burdened Households - Renters
Income by Cost Burden (Renters only)
Cost
burden >
30%
Cost
burden >
50% Total
Household Income <= 30% HAMFI 28% 60% 17%
Household Income >30% to <=50% 39% 26% 21%
Household Income >50% to <=80% 21% 8% 22%
Household Income >80% to <=100% 7% 3% 14%
Household Income >100% HAMFI 5% 3% 26%
Total Number of Households 2825 1165 5940
Page 15 of 25
Cost Burdened Households - Owners
Income by Cost Burden (Owners only)
Cost
burden >
30%
Cost
burden >
50% Total
Household Income <= 30% HAMFI 23% 42% 6%
Household Income >30% to <=50% 23% 28% 7%
Household Income >50% to <=80% 29% 23% 14%
Household Income >80% to <=100% 11% 3% 10%
Household Income >100% HAMFI 14% 4% 62%
Total 3245 1540 14825
Page 16 of 25
Percent of Jobs by Industry 2016
Industry
Annual
Salary
Hourly
Wage
Percent of
Jobs
Growth in
past 5 years
Leisure & Hospitality $21,285 $10.23 11% 20%
Other $39,066 $18.78 3% 200%
Education & Health
Services $46,225 $22.22 16% 46%
Government $59,320 $28.52 11% 2%
Professional & Business
Svcs $64,742 $31.13 9% 61%
Trade & Transportation $64,940 $31.22 26% -5%
Construction $65,254 $31.37 8% 37%
Information $69,422 $33.38 1% 39%
Financial Activities $71,720 $34.48 4% 44%
Natural Resources $76,777 $36.91 2% 22%
Manufacturing $103,587 $49.80 11% 64%
Source: City of Georgetown Workforce Analysis, 2016
Page 17 of 25
Median Sales Price
• $268,000 Median Sales Price
• $310,972 Average Sales Price
Source: Texas A&M Real Estate Center Housing Activity for Local
Service Area Georgetown (Austin BoR) September 2017
Page 18 of 25
City of Georgetown, Texas
Housing Advisory Board
December 18, 2017
SUBJECT:
Presentatio n and dis c us sion of the 2012 Hous ing Element recommend ations . Sus an Watkins, Ho using
Coordinator
ITEM SUMMARY:
The Hous ing Element ad o p ted in 2012 identified s even recommend ations , eac h with a c o rres p o nding
p rio rity level. F o r eac h recommend ation, the Bo ard will disc uss and make rec o mmendatio ns to s taff:
1) What progres s has b een mad e since 2012
2) If the recommendatio n s hould be inc luded in the updated Ho using element
3) If the recommendatio n s hould be mo d ified o r improved
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None at this time.
SUBMITTED BY:
Sus an Watkins , AICP, Hous ing Co o rd inator
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
2012 Hous ing Element Recommendations (pages 37-41)Backup Material
Page 19 of 25
Housing Element
37
Recommendations
These recommendations offer a series of procedures that, when undertake n in whole or in part,
offer the potential to reduce the affordable housing deficit in the City of Georgetown. These
recommendations are ranked in order of their priority with a time frame for considering
implementation.
High Priority (One to five years)
1. Develop a program through which workforce housing developers can receive
incentives to provide new units. Waiving development fees and subsidizing impact fees
is the primary method the City has at its disposal to subsidize affordable housing. These
costs represent a significant portion of the development budget for an affordable housing
initiative and through this program; the City can offer a sliding sc ale of incentives to
encourage affordable development . This development will be dependent upon meeting
quantifiable scoring criteria, which can be established within the program.
Primary criteria to be considered and scored:
Amount of affordable housing included in the project : City will establish a percentage
requirement for the amount of workforce housing to be included in a particular project in
order to be considered for any city subsidy in the form of development and impact fee
credits.
Proximity to employment centers : The goal of workforce housing is to allow low to
middle -income employees the opportunity to live within the community in which they
work, while expanding the available workforce for current and future employers.
Infrastructure availability: Developers applying for the program will demonstrate that they
are efficiently locating the dev elopment to utilize the existing infrastructure such as roads,
electric, water and waste water lines .
Access to the road and pedestrian transportation network : While land located further
from the city center is often cheaper for developers, this will usu ally put a transportation
burden upon the future residents, effectively shifting any savings on housing to increased
transportation costs. Sites to be considered through the program must show the distances
and road network available to public services, re tail centers and employment centers.
Relationship to the surrounding property /Appearance : Projects, whether single or
mu ltifamily, should complement and be complemented by the types of development
adjacent to the site. Single-family residential units should not be out of scale and style with
existing single-family developments. Multifamily projects should not pose an actual
detriment to surrounding business or residences. Individual workforce housing units
included as a component of single or multi-family projects should be architecturally
indistinguishable from the market rate units within the same project. For any
development, it is also important to consider t he demographic of future residents, the
proximity of schools, jobs, retail and civic services .
A basic return on investment analysis : The developer will be required to provide the
Board with a future impact analysis of the project showing what financial returns the City
can expect to see through increased tax and utility revenues. Combined with the overall
Page 20 of 25
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehe nsive Plan
38
positive impact an increased population will have on the surrounding business community ,
this will help offset any upfront subsidies the city may provide.
Incentives:
Waiver of development fees : Depending on the score of the project, the deve loper could
receive a waiver of up to 100 percent of Planning and Inspection Fees.
Subsidized impact fees: Impact fees include water, wastewater and electric fees that are
collected to offset the cost incurred by the public infrastructure system. The amount of
subsidy a developer can receive would be set on a graduated scale with the maximum
amount of 75 percent of total fees.
Increased land development densities: The City’s Unified Development Code has several
lot development requirements that limit the amount of units a developer can put per acre.
Impervious cover limits, setback requirements, lot width minimums and height limits can
all be varied in such a way that developers can better utilize the land and develop more
units.
Program Management:
Developers wishing to receive incentives shall present a complete plan to the Housing
Advisory Board, which will be evaluated based on the criteria of the program. The Board
will then make a recommendation to City Council for consideration. Council may seek
evaluation and impact of project by city staff prior to making any final decision. Each case
will be reviewed individually and funding for the program will be dependant upon
budgetary restraints for that year.
Developers considering applying to the program will be able to get a packet of program
requirements with attached sample documents to allow for uniformity of applications and
ensure the ease of applying. The Housing Coordinator will be available to meet with any
developer wishing to take advantage of the program and will present completed
applications to the Housing Advisory Board and City Council with a report showing how
the project meets program requirements. As the project goes through the rest of the City
development processes, t he Housing Coordinator will serve as the case manager.
2. Determine suitable multifamily zoning locations with sufficient services and land
use compatibility for an appropriate mix of housing types within the city. The City
of Georgetown is estimated to run a defici t of 2,902 affordable rental units by the year
2017. As the housing market demand is constantly shifting, it is important for the city to
be in a position to help create a new supply of housing to meet the needs of its residents.
In the current economic climate, the need for rental housing has increased, while the
supply and demand for single -family homeownership has leveled off or decreased. With
this shift, the housing market has an increasing demand for multifamily development. A
quick glance at the City ’s Zoning Map indicates a number of sites that have been zoned for
multifamily, however many of these are speculative in nature and will not have the
necessary infrastructure for 5 years or more. If the City is proactively planning for zoning
and determi ning a reas for multifamily development, new development s will be able to find
appropriate multifamily sites. It can also avoid situations where a developer encounters
local resistance that may drive them from the city.
Page 21 of 25
Housing Element
39
There are provisions for medium and high-density residential units as components of
mixed-use developments that are adequately accounted for in the future land use map. It
should be recognized however that it is difficult for a developer of workforce housing to
incorporate commercial space s in their developments due to the structure of financing
methods used to facilitate affordable residential development. It is impractical to think
that providing for medium and high-density residential development in mixed used zoning
classifications alone will adequately address the shortage of workforce housing.
The current multifamily deficit of 2,902 units as identified in this pla n would require
approximately 120 to 160 acres of land. To address this deficit , the first step is to have the
planning staff review the 2030 Land Use Plan for any possible changes to the high -density
land use category. The Board will review these possible alternatives and then forward any
change to City Council during the annual review of the Comprehens ive Plan in the Spring.
This will actively plan for future high-density development sites.
Second, staff will review possible tract s within the city limits conducive for rezoning as
Multifamily to present to the Housing Advisory Board for consideration. In the analysis,
the following criteria should be examined:
Consider sites close to major employment centers .
Consider sites close to planned public transportation hubs .
Consider sites near areas that may be less suitable for higher income housing.
Consider sites close to existing high-density developments .
Consider existing sites that are not conducive to higher income housing and as a
result are undeveloped.
Once a plan for potential rezoning has been made, the item will be forwarded to City
Council for review and direction. Any potential City or developer initiated rezoning of
tracts would still have to go through the public hearing process as mandated by state law.
Medium High Priority (Five to seven years)
3. Continue the Housing Diversity density incentives for new residential co nstruction.
The City currently provides a density bonus to development projects that include an
affordable housing component. To date, no developers have taken advantage of this
incentive. Over time, as developers become more familiar with this provisio n in the City’s
zoning code and as development sites become scarce, it is likely that developers will
become motivated to take advantage of this incentive. The City may wish to reevaluate the
incentive or provide public infrastructure support for projects that involve creating
affordable housing. The City may also wish to conduct a developer workshop to expand
awareness and to obtain feedback on how the housing diversity component of the City’s
zoning code can be modified to expand the supply of affordabl e housing.
4. Prioritize the use of HUD CDBG funds for affordable housing. As of the 2010
Census, the City’s population was 47,4 00. At the population mark of 50,000 , the City of
Georgetown will become eligible for an annual Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) entitlement grant directly from HUD. By City estimates, this will not happen
until 2014. While we still have time to plan for this , it is important to establish priorities for
Page 22 of 25
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehe nsive Plan
40
the use of CDBG funds as a matter of public policy before entitlement s tatus is conferred
on the City. Early prioritization will minimize the confusion and competition to secure
CDBG funds for “pet” projects that inevitably occurs whenever grant money becomes
available in a community.
Rather than using this newfound source of revenue for activities that ease pressure on the
City’s general fund, the community should prioritize the use of CDBG funds for
affordable housing. CDBG funds can be used to acquire property, rehabilitate affordable
housing, provide infrastructure improvements in support of affordable housing and
provide human services to the residents or prospective residents of affordable housing. In
certain circumstances, CDBG funds can be used to finance the construction of new
affordable housing, but only when the funds are funneled through a community based
nonprofit development corporation. Once the City’s CDBG program is operating
smoothly, the City may want to work towards the designation of a neighborhood
revitalization strategy area (NRSA) which is a provis ion in the CDBG regulations that
makes it easier to utilize CDBG funds for mixed income housing initiatives.
5. Strengthen home buyer counseling and support services. Homebuyer counseling is
aimed at credit repair and building basic home maintenance and budg eting skills. As such,
it is an essential element of the affordable homeownership equation. While there are
certain counseling services already available in Georgetown, these types of services need to
be expanded and promoted. The City should encourage regional providers of counseling
services to create or expand their presence in Georgetown. Commercial lending
institutions and institutions of higher learning also have a vested interest in supporting or
providing homebuyer counseling services. When ext ending public funds for affordable
homeownership activities, the City should require each prospective homebuyer to
successfully complete a certified homeownership counseling program as a condition of
receiving financial assistance.
Medium Priority (Seven to ten years)
6. Seek out County CDBG funds and State HOME funds in support of affordable
housing initiatives; subcontract with local nonprofits to implement projects. One
of the important roles of the City in terms of expanding the supply of affordable housi ng
is to use its legal powers to apply for state and federal funds. Once funding approval has
been obtained, the City would act as a pass -through of funds to one or more local
development organizations. These organizations would then assume responsibilit y for
implementation of the project.
Williamson County is a CDBG entitlement urban county entity and the City of
Georgetown may submit project requests to the county’s community development
department. Requests for federal HOME funds must be submitted to the state. The City
and its affordable housing partners should identify and prioritize a series of projects and
activities that would qualify for CDBG and/or HOME funding. Every year, the City
should submit at least one funding request under each program for priority projects.
The City currently administers a homeowner housing rehabilitation program funded by
general fund revenues. The City’s guidelines for this program closely follow federal
requirements, including an income targeting provision that lim its access to financial
assistance for households with incomes below 80% of the area median household income.
Page 23 of 25
Housing Element
41
This housing rehabilitation program can be administered more efficiently by a local
nonprofit organization or the Georgetown Housing Authority. The City may wish to
enter into a cooperation agreement with a local housing organization to administer this
program.
7. Identify revitalization areas for concentrated investment. Given the limited supply of
resources for affordable housing, the City should select certain areas of the community for
intensive and comprehensive revitalization rather than pursuing a “shotgun” approach to
the development of affordable housing. Thus, it is important to a sk city planners to select
several target areas for intens ive revitalization. Each target area might consist of three or
four blocks. Typically, these areas will require the removal or substantial rehabilitation of
blighted properties, new lighting, sidewalks, streets, utility infrastructure, landscaping and
infill housing. At least some of the infill housing should be affordable to low and
moderate income households. This revitalization will benefit Georgetown as it improves
the tax base and adds to the labor force.
Page 24 of 25
City of Georgetown, Texas
Housing Advisory Board
December 18, 2017
SUBJECT:
Presentatio n and dis c us sion of various Ho us ing c hapters /elements fro m other c ities . Sus an Watkins,
Hous ing Co ordinator
ITEM SUMMARY:
The Bo ard will d is c us s Ho using Element examp les from o ther c ities to d etermine if any components
s hould be cons idered fo r Georgetown’s Hous ing Element update. The Board will recommend examp les o f
fo rmat and co ntent from the elements inc luding s tatis tics, go als and /or p o lic ies that s ho uld b e c o nsidered
in the up d ate.
City o f Lo ngmont, C o lo rad o Ho using Chapter of EnvisionLongmont
City o f Boulder, Colorado Hous ing Chapter
City o f San Marc o s Neighb o rhoods and Hous ing Chap ter
City o f San Antonio , Texas Ho using Element of SA Tomorrow Co mp rehens ive P lan
City o f Dallas , Texas Neighborho o d Plus Plan
City o f Plano Ho us ing & Neighborho o d s Element
King County, Was hington Ho using Develo pment Cons o rtium Co mp rehens ive P lan Hous ing Element
Checklis t
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None at this time.
SUBMITTED BY:
Sus an Watkins , AICP, Hous ing Co o rd inator
Page 25 of 25