HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_P&Z_01.10.2019Notice of Meeting for the
Planning and Zoning Commission Special
of the City of Georgetown
January 10, 2019 at 6:00 PM
at Council and Courts Building 101 E. 7th 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.
This is a joint meeting between the Planning and Zoning Commission and the
City Council to publicly discuss the goals of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and
Future Land Uses.
Regular Session
(This Regular S es s io n may, at any time, b e rec es s ed to convene an Exec utive S es s io n fo r any p urpose
authorized b y the Op en Meetings Act, Texas Go vernment Co d e 551.)
A Pres entatio n and d is cus s io n o f 2030 Comp rehens ive Plan land us e go als . S o fia Nels o n, P lanning Direc tor
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 __________________, 2019, at __________, and remained so p o s ted fo r at leas t 72
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 1 of 32
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
January 10, 2019
SUBJECT:
Presentatio n and dis c us sion of 2030 Co mprehens ive P lan land use goals. Sofia Nels on, Planning Direc tor
ITEM SUMMARY:
At the Dec ember 11, 2018 works hop, the City C o uncil was p res ented with an o verview o f land us e and
d evelopment patterns whic h have oc curred s inc e the 2008 go al setting p roc es s of the 2030 Comprehensive
Plan. Ad d itionally, S taff reviewed the current 2008 Land Use Go als , the 2017 Vis ion S tatement and the
p ublic inp ut c ollec ted fo r the 2030 Up d ate. T he City Counc il provid ed the following feedbac k regarding
the go als :
- P o s s ib ly b reak out the go als (10, mayb e les s )
- Goals d o not nec es s arily c o rrelate to themes
- More s p ecific atio n, c larity is needed
- Add thes e three (3) go als :
Pub lic s afety
Fis c al res pons ib ility
Intergovernmental p artners hips
On January 3, 2019, the Steering Co mmittee o f the 2030 Co mp rehens ive Plan Update met to ans wer the
key ques tion, “Do these goals reflect recent community dialogue and the stakeholders you
represent and are they effective?”
The Steering Committee has mad e rec o mmend ations to this Joint Session o f C ity C o uncil and Planning &
Zoning Co mmis s ion, which are attached as Exhibit 1. T he p ro ject team will p res ent revis ed go als based
o n d irectio n from the December 11th Co uncil wo rks ho p and rec o mmendations from the S teering
Committee as a s tarting p lace fo r disc ussion o f the Joint Session.
The p urpose of the Jo int S es s io n is twofold: (1) to as s ess the revis ed go als and (2) make recommend ed
changes . In order to fulfill p urposes, the key q ues tio ns fo r the Joint Session to c ons id er for each go al:
(S) Specific. Does the go al c learly s tate its intent?
(M) Measurable. Will we b e able to determine when the go al has b een acc o mp lis hed?
(A) Achievable . Is the go al realistic to ac hieve by 2030?
(R) Relevant. Do es the goal reflect the vis io n s tatement and pub lic inp ut themes?
(T) Time-bound. Will we b e able to s et a timeframe fo r ac complishing the go al?
Mo d ificatio ns rec o mmended b y this Jo int Ses s ion will be inc o rp o rated into the draft go als and presented
to Counc il on 2/12/2019.
Work Session:
The work ses s io n will cons is t o f three p arts:
Part 1 – Review rec ent us e of Comprehensive Plan for d ecision making by b o th legis lative bodies. The
group will ans wer:
1. Ho w d o you c urrently us e the comp plan in yo ur d ecision making?
Purp o s e: Gain ins ight into s tructure o f the 2030 Plan.
2. What has been most beneficial ab o ut the c o mp plan when making dec is ions ?
Purp o s e: Und ers tand what wo rks well in the 2030 P lan.
3. What are the c hallenging land use d ecis io ns o f the las t 3 to 5 years? Ho w d id the 2030 P lan help o r
challenge yo ur dec is io n making p ro cess?
Purp o s e: Und ers tand what doesn’t work well.
Page 2 of 32
Part 2 – Review draft revis io ns to 2030 Plan land us e go als adopted in 2008.
Part 3 – Make rec o mmendatio ns fo r c hanges /additio ns to 2030 P lan land us e go als adopted in 2008.
Disc ussion and group c o nsens us o n any c hanges /additio ns to 2008 go als .
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
SUBMITTED BY:
Nat Waggoner, AICP, PMP, Long Range Planning Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Exhibit 1 - (1/3/19) Steering Committee Recommendation Backup Material
Exhibit 2- 2008 Land Us e Goals .Policies .Actions Backup Material
Exhibit 3- Goals and Policy Progres s Report Backup Material
Exhibit 4- Public Input Report Backup Material
Page 3 of 32
Page 1 of 2
Re: Steering Committee Meeting #6 – Summary of Findings
At the 1/3/2019 meeting of the 2030 Steering Committee, the Committee
Reviewed the 2008 land use goals, how they are applied and progress made to
date
Established an understanding of how the 2017 vision statement, 2008 land use
goals and recent public input serve as the foundation for goals
Prepared a recommendation to the joint session of the City Council and Planning
and Zoning Commission
Following the staff presentation on land use goal framework, the Steering Committee
completed an evaluation of how well existing land use goals address public input themes and
made recommendations for changes to the land use goals; answering the key question,
throughout their review, “Do these goals reflect recent community dialogue and the
stakeholders you represent and are they effective?”
Below is a summary table of findings. The Steering Committee directed staff to clarify
language (highlighted in yellow), add language (in green italics), remove/refine (red strike
through) for each goal. The Steering Committee also directed staff to create new goals for those
themes generally absent, specifically themes C, D, H, J.
Goal Input Theme
Present
Input Theme
Absent
Relevant
(Y/N)
Specific
(Y/N)
1. Promote sound, sustainable, and compact
development patterns with balanced land
uses, a variety of housing choices and well-
integrated transportation, public facilities,
and open space amenities.
A,B,F,G C,D,E,H,I, J Y Y
2. Promote sound investment in Georgetown’s
older developed areas, including
downtown, aging commercial and industrial
areas, in-town neighborhoods, and other
areas expected to experience land use
change or obsolescence.
None All Y N
Page 4 of 32
Page 2 of 2
Goal Input Theme
Present
Input Theme
Absent
Relevant
(Y/N)
Specific
(Y/N)
3. Provide a development framework for the
fringe that guides sound, sustainable
patterns of land use, limits sprawl, protects
community character, demonstrates sound
stewardship of the environment, and
provides for efficient provision of public
services and facilities as the city expands.
Add concept that describes how we manage
growth and development
A, I B,C,D,E, H, J N N
4. Maintain and strengthen viable land uses
and land use patterns (e.g., stable
neighborhoods, economically sound
commercial and employment areas, etc.).
B, E A,C,D,F,G,
H,I, J Y N
A. Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel
B. Continue to encourage high quality development
C. Enhance citizen participation and engagement (develop new goal)
D. Focus on housing and affordability (develop new goal)
E. Enhance economic development opportunities
F. Maintain and expand existing parks and recreation amenities
G. Improve and diversify the transportation network
H. Public safety (develop new goal)
I. Fiscal responsibility
J. Intergovernmental partnerships (develop new goal)
These recommendations will be considered at the joint session of the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council which will be held on 1/10/19.
Page 5 of 32
LAND USE GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS OVERVIEW
For decades, Georgetown’s pattern of land use has evolved based on a myriad of zoning,
development, and annexation actions. These actions have often been triggered by individual
private development initiatives, which, in turn, are often triggered by new roads, schools, high-
ways, and other factors that influence development marketability and property values. Historically
in Georgetown, actions on annexations and extensions of water and wastewater service have
typically been taken to gain control over land use and development through zoning—an influence
that the City cannot otherwise exercise within its ETJ. This response has led the City in recent
years to annex a sizeable land area, which is likely to be considerably greater than is needed to
meet the city’s growth needs through the 20-year horizon of the comprehensive plan. Another
result of past incremental annexation decisions are the many existing pockets of low density,
underserved areas of the unincorporated county, which remain as isolated “islands” surrounded
by the city. Thus, a major initiative in this Land Use Element is for the City of Georgetown to
become more proactive in purposefully guiding and consolidating growth patterns, through regu-
latory powers, decisions on infrastructure investments, and annexations, so as to ensure sustain-
able, long-term growth opportunities. Projected to accommodate several decades of “growing
room,” this area represents an essential resource to sustain the city’s long-term growth. Vulnerable
as it is to the many adverse impacts of sprawl and fragmentation, development in this area should
be carefully planned, managed, and staged over time.
Most developed areas of Georgetown can be expected to remain stable over time, with little
change in land use. These areas will simply require protection from any impacts that could act as
de-stabilizing influences, such as commercial intrusions or impacts of major highway construction.
However, in other areas of the city—particularly in downtown, older neighborhoods, and along
major highway corridors such as Williams Drive—land use change can be expected to occur
through economic obsolescence and through infill, redevelopment, and revitalization. These repre-
sent opportunities to incorporate a more diverse array of development types such as mixed-use, as
well as housing types that appeal to a greater variety of households.
The following excerpts from the Vision Statement form the basis and the starting point for
the development of the land use goals and policies proposed in the next section of this document.
Quality of Life
Community Character
We have retained our unique identity and heritage by protecting the historic character of
downtown and our older neighborhoods.
We have raised the bar for development quality by encouraging innovation among forms
of development that maintain and enhance community character and that conserve land
and natural resources, consistent with market demand.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.53Page 6 of 32
Quality Growth/Sustainable Development
Th roughout Georgetown we have...
Attracted desired forms of balanced development, creating quality urban, suburban, and
rural places that offer a choice of setting and lifestyle;
Encouraged residential developments that are well-connected to the larger community,
planned and designed to compliment the heritage and natural character of Georgetown
and offer a variety of housing types and price ranges;
Encouraged sound, compact, quality growth, including pedestrian-friendly development
patterns that incorporate mixed-uses, a variety of densities, and resource conservation
while accommodating public transportation, alternative fuel vehicles, biking, and
walking as convenient substitutes for automobile use;
Reserved well-planned and well-located sites for future employment centers, sufficient
to meet our long range need for economic diversification and suitable to attract desired
“clean” businesses; and
Maintained the quality and diversity of our housing stock in all our neighborhoods,
which are framed by safe, attractive streets.
In downtown Georgetown and our older neighborhoods we have…
Supported home-grown businesses and planned for an optimal mix of businesses,
services, retail, and entertainment suited to the scale and historic charm of downtown;
and
Promoted downtown and in-town housing including infill, mixed-use and the creation
of apartments and lofts over retail and offices.
Along our major highway corridors we have…
Promoted development compatible with safe, efficient traffic circulation through sound
standards for access management, limited installation of curb cuts, and parking facility
connectivity;
Selectively determined appropriate locations and applied design standards for large
commercial developments and other high traffic generating uses;
Set high design standards for all commercial development and signage; and
Encouraged mixed-use, clustered and “village center” development types as alternatives
to conventional strip center and stand-alone “pad” sites.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.54 Page 7 of 32
In our suburban fringe we have…
Exercised influence to prevent premature and incompatible development;
Encouraged the staged, orderly expansion of contiguous development to coincide with
the expansion of roads and infrastructure;
Encouraged conservation development and other approaches that retain rural character
and promote retention of open space;
Provided for the city’s long-range growth with strategically timed annexations; and
Consolidated development patterns within the city limits, where feasible, through judi-
cious annexation and capital investments.
Balanced Transportation/Effi cient Mobility
Georgetown has reduced its reliance on conventional fuels and automotive traffic by
promoting alternative fuel vehicles; retrofitting streets with bike lanes and sidewalks
in underserved areas to enhance bicycle and pedestrian mobility; incorporating these
facilities in new developments; and encouraging compact mixed-use and other types of
“walk-able” development; and
Georgetown has carefully located employment and commercial centers, schools, and
other high-traffic generators.
Effective Governance
We have created and enforced innovative, effective and fair regulatory codes and
development standards to guide growth and improve development quality. We have
streamlined the regulatory process, particularly for desired development types and loca-
tions; and
The City has coordinated with the Georgetown Independent School District for the
appropriate siting and timing of new school construction, consistent with the City’s
growth management strategy.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.55Page 8 of 32
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.56 Page 9 of 32
GOALS, POLICIES, AND ACTIONS
Policies and Actions
1.A. Encourage a balanced mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses at varying den-
sities and intensities, to reflect a gradual transition from urban to suburban to rural devel-
opment.
Adjust zoning provisions to provide greater flexibility for mixed-uses, multiple housing 1.
types, compact development, and redevelopment.
Reserve and rezone land ideally suited for long-term commercial and employment uses 2.
and prevent its use for residential subdivisions.
1.B. Promote more compact, higher density development (e.g., traditional neighborhoods,
Transit-Oriented Development, mixed-use, and walkable neighborhoods) within appropri-
ate infill locations.
Establish guidelines and incentives for infill locations, including:1.
Mixed residential uses and mixed-use where appropriate.
Connected, pedestrian-oriented streets.
Conditions for edge treatment (buffers, connectivity, compatibility).
Flexible requirements such as dimensional criteria, impervious coverage, and
parking to address local contexts.
Provide density and intensity bonuses for the provision of housing and commercial 2.
components of mixed-use developments with specific reference to dwelling types
(student housing, elderly, etc.), and additional bonus provisions for affordable housing
(as defined by the City of Georgetown).
Coordinate infrastructure investment policies to ensure that they are consistent with 3.
land uses that encourage compact development.
1.C. Establish standards appropriate for new residential development pertaining to lot sizes,
open space, buffers, road connectivity, etc.
Adjust development standards to address minimum requirements for open space and 1.
protection of natural features; park, school, and transit hub site reservations; landscap-
ing and street design; and subdivision connectivity and accommodation of pedestrian
and bicycle circulation, while providing greater flexibility for the provision and
integration of multiple housing types and densities.
Continue to promote and apply conservation development principles to the design of 2.
residential subdivisions in specifically designated areas.
Goal 1
Promote sound, sustainable, and compact development patterns with
balanced land uses, a variety of housing choices and well-integrated trans-
portation, public facilities, and open space amenities.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.57Page 10 of 32
1.D. Establish improved standards for commercial development.
Prepare land use and zoning provisions to 1. discourage standard commercial “strip”
development and encourage compact commercial and mixed-use centers at appro-
priate locations.
Prepare guidelines and design standards to improve the character of commercial 2.
development.
Identify highway corridors for the preparation and application of corridor design and 3.
access management standards.
Develop and apply standards for the location and design of “mid-box” and “big box” 4.
retail centers to improve their aesthetics, maintain appropriate commercial scale and
provide for their future adaptive re-use.
1.E. Expand regulatory provisions and incentives to encourage innovative forms of compact,
pedestrian friendly development (mixed-use, traditional neighborhood design), and a wider
array of affordable housing choices.
Establish standards for and actively promote new forms of compact development to 1.
include Transit-Oriented Development, as well as traditional neighborhood develop-
ment (TND), mixed-use, and pedestrian-scale development.
Provide2. density and intensity bonuses for the provision of housing and commercial
components of mixed-use developments with specific reference to dwelling types
(student housing, elderly, etc.), and additional bonus provisions for affordable housing,
as defined by the City of Georgetown.
Promote mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly 3. land use patterns, including community
activity centers, neighborhood activity centers, conservation subdivisions, and walk-
able neighborhoods:
Promote development of community activity centers with complementary
mixed uses (e.g., neighborhood-oriented retail, higher density residential,
schools, and other community facilities).
Encourage neighborhood centers and walkable neighborhoods with devel-
opment patterns that replicate the scale and character of Georgetown’s
traditional neighborhoods (compact development, interconnected streets,
sidewalks, etc.).
Encourage forms of development that promote an interconnected street
network, safe pedestrian routes, and healthy, active living.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.58 Page 11 of 32
Narrative: While the city’s predominant single-family neighborhoods
are a valuable resource that should be protected, the City should take every
opportunity to encourage the introduction of new, more compact forms of
development. Such opportunities include the introduction of higher density
housing at appropriate locations, and smaller-unit housing types to meet the
needs of a diversifying population, as well as for housing affordability.
National demographic trends indicate that, at present, only 33% of
all households include two parents and one or more children, a fi gure that
will decline further to 27% by 2030. Conversely, the number of single adult
households will increase from 26% at present to 29% by 2030.
At the same time, U.S. Census data indicates that between 1990 and
2000, certain sectors of the City of Georgetown—in particular those south and
east of I-35—experienced signifi cant growth in the number of younger families
with children, with corresponding implications for housing types, sizes, and
densities.
The identifi ed policies and actions will create new incentives for a more
diverse array of housing choices, and will expand opportunities for infi ll
development beyond what is possible under conventional zoning, which tends
to separate uses and limit fl exibility in development siting. In addition, the
“bonus” provisions proposed by Policy 1B.2 provide a tangible economic
motivation to introduce mixed-use, affordable housing, and other needed
development types.
While these guidelines and provisions for fl exibility are necessary, they
are not suffi cient to fulfi ll the promise of greater infi ll investment and the
introduction of higher densities. Many existing neighborhoods will tend to fear
or resist the introduction of such new uses and may perceive them as threats
to neighborhood stability. While some of these concerns may be misplaced,
they must be addressed by carefully examining how and where such uses can
be introduced in a compatible manner within neighborhoods and transitional
areas, areas of blight, and along roadway corridors.
Because compatibility must be evaluated based on site specifi c
investigation, more detailed neighborhood, corridor and sector plans will be
needed to identify specifi c infi ll opportunities and create design criteria such as
buffers that will ensure compatibility in particular circumstances.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.59Page 12 of 32
Policies/Actions
2.A. Remove present inadvertent impediments to infill and re-investment in older, developed
areas.
Establish criteria that define the characteristics of desirable infill development (e.g., 1.
compatibility with adjoining uses).
Revise zoning/development codes, the permitting process, and other applicable City 2.
policies by identifying and removing impediments to infill, adaptive re-use, historic
preservation and redevelopment, including:
Application of creative code provisions to remove impediments in building/
zoning codes to reuse older buildings while retaining their historic character.
Overlay districts (where specific requirements could be modified to allow
established character to be maintained; e.g., buildings pulled up to the
street, credit for on-street/shared parking, etc.).
Coordinated City departmental policies regarding infill (e.g., adjusting
requirements for stormwater, water/wastewater, and other policies/regula-
tions when they affect the ability to develop infill sites).
Adjust the City’s schedule of development fees (e.g., development review fees and costs 3.
to upgrade infrastructure) to lessen financial burdens on investments in designated
areas and more accurately reflect the different costs of providing services in developed
areas (where infrastructure is available), suburban areas, and fringe areas (where costly
infrastructure extensions are necessary).
Narrative: The City’s code requirements were established and applied
well after much of the older portions of Georgetown were originally developed.
Due to constrained site and building conditions, some potential infi ll sites may
not meet current regulatory requirements (e.g., parking, setbacks, impervious
coverage, and stormwater standards), which are suited to more fl exible
suburban conditions.
Policies 2A.1 to 2A.3 seek to minimize or eliminate present unintended
disincentives for re-investment in infi ll and redevelopment throughout
Georgetown’s urban areas. This necessitates fi rst identifying specifi c types of
infi ll development that are compatible and desired. Once this is accomplished,
the UDC must then be revised to remove unnecessary or inadvertent
impediments, or to waive such requirements in designated urban areas.
Goal 2
Promote sound investment in Georgetown’s older developed areas, includ-
ing downtown, aging commercial and industrial areas, in-town neighbor-
hoods, and other areas expected to experience land use change or obsolescence.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.60 Page 13 of 32
2.B. Target capital investments to leverage private investment in designated areas.
Conduct 1. community-wide public facility assessments to identify and prioritize
corrections to deficiencies in infrastructure, including local streets and sidewalks, and
other public facilities, including parks and recreation facilities.
Through the City’s Capital Improvement Program,2. prioritize short and long-range
capital investments in designated urban areas, including, but not limited to utility
replacements, capacity improvements, area-wide stormwater systems, street improve-
ments, etc.
Identify 3. revitalization corridors for capital improvements (e.g., streetscape/landscap-
ing, utility upgrades, etc.).
2.C. Identify potential opportunities and selectively target, plan, and promote development/re-
use initiatives.
Conduct a city-wide inventory of potential infill/reuse sites, including historic sites/1.
buildings suitable for adaptive reuse.
Based upon the city-wide inventory, as well as on neighborhood, corridor, and down-2.
town planning initiatives, identify site-specific development target areas and sites.
Take direct action to initiate and support 3. private investment , including land
assembly (via voluntary sale and purchase) and clearance, developer solicitation and
selection, and construction of capital improvements.
Encourage use of financial incentives for reinvestment in 4. historic and/or abandoned
properties.
Provide incentives for the reintroduction of 5. neighborhood businesses and services
into older neighborhoods (e.g., assistance with market studies, site assembly, environ-
mental clearances, business capital investment, employee training, etc.).
In coordination with other local governments, pursue 6. state legislative initiatives to
make additional financial tools available for redevelopment (e.g., tax increment financ-
ing, tax abatements, differential development fee schedules, etc.).
Narrative: Although the removal of regulatory and other constraints are
necessary to promote infi ll and redevelopment, it may be insuffi cient to achieve
the desired levels of re-investment. Policies 2B.1 to 2B.3 move the City’s
posture beyond a “regulatory” mode and into a proactive position by targeting
direct investments in capital improvements as catalysts for private investment.
These policies call for a comprehensive assessment of the City’s facilities and
infrastructure and a targeted assignment of priorities for capital improvements
based, in part, on opportunities to leverage private investment.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.61Page 14 of 32
2.D. Continue to promote diversification and strengthening of downtown Georgetown and its
in-town historic neighborhoods.
Maintain a proactive program of City initiatives to promote downtown development 1.
through:
Capital investments to streets, streetscapes, infrastructure, and parking.
Establishment of site-specific downtown redevelopment and reinvestment
areas.
Use of existing City powers (eminent domain, land assembly, bonding, etc.)
to execute designated redevelopment projects.
Additional cultural, civic, and entertainment initiatives.
Actively support private initiatives consistent with the City’s policies to promote 2.
downtown investment by:
Creating density bonuses and other incentives for mixed-use, downtown
housing, and the creation of new centers of activity in downtown (employ-
ment, specialty retail, entertainment, dining, etc.).
Adjusting capital improvement programs to target streets, infrastructure,
and parking as necessary to promote and support desired private investment.
Ensure that public and private initiatives preserve and enhance historic downtown 3.
resources.
Narrative: While preceding policies address removing impediments and
creating incentives for private infi ll initiatives, Policies 2C. 1 to 2C.6 place the
City in a proactive position in actually targeting and carrying out redevelopment
and infi ll projects through partnerships with the private sector.
Opportunities for such direct City action in targeted redevelopment areas
fall into three broad categories. One category includes sizeable areas of the
city where obsolescence—coupled with fragmented property ownership and
potential brownfi eld contamination—may present too many obstacles for the
private sector to address without City assistance. Such areas will include older
industrial areas, as well as obsolete commercial “strips.” A second type may
include a major civic facility (for example, a ballpark, arena, or performing arts
center) for which no suitable site exists. This would necessitate action by the
City in assembling and preparing such a site in partnership with a private or
non-profi t development entity. A third category pertains to the emergence of
new patterns of obsolescence, which may surface in suburban locations.
Of particular concern is the long term viability of “big box” commercial
centers that could succumb to ever-changing consumer patterns and
preferences. In these circumstances, the City should be prepared to intervene
by preparing small area or “focal” plans and various implementing actions
to rebuild and reuse these sites for higher value uses. Similarly, the City
should apply development standards to properly locate such developments
and to infl uence their design to improve their aesthetics and provide for their
adaptation to other uses.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.62 Page 15 of 32
Policies/Actions
3.A. Initiate a fringe area growth management framework comprising the following elements.
Establish a tiered growth framework, as follows:1.
TIER 1 (Short Term Growth Area – 10 Years):
Tier 1A : Area within the current city limits where infrastructure systems are in place,
can be economically provided and/or will be proactively extended, and where consolida-
tion of the city’s development pattern is encouraged over the next 10 years.
Tier 1B: Area within the present city limits that were recently annexed or subject to
development agreements, which are presently underserved by infrastructure. Tier 1B
will require the provision of public facilities to meet the city’s growth needs as Tier 1A
approaches build-out, over the next 10 years.
TIER 2 (Intermediate Growth Area - 10-20 Years):
Tier 2: Area within the ETJ where growth and the provision of public facilities are
anticipated beyond the next 10 years and where premature, fragmented, leapfrog, or inef-
ficient development is discouraged by the City.
TIER 3 (Long-Term Growth Area – Beyond 20 Years):
Tier 3: Area within the ETJ where growth, annexation, and the extension of public
facilities are anticipated beyond 20 years, and premature, fragmented, leapfrog, or inef-
ficient development is discouraged by the City.
Goal 3
Provide a development framework for the fringe that guides sound,
sustainable patterns of land use, limits sprawl, protects community character,
demonstrates sound stewardship of the environment, and provides for effi-
cient provision of public services and facilities as the city expands.
Narrative: Comparable to Policies 2C.1 to 2C.6, these policies situate the
City in a more proactive stance to promote its vision of downtown—one in
which new development and re-investment are actively pursued to strengthen
and diversify the land use and activity mix of downtown.
The City will continue to be supportive of, and responsive to private
initiatives through incentives, public parking, and capital improvements. In
addition, these policies call for the City to develop its own “action agenda” for
downtown, including the identifi cation of redevelopment areas and plans for
area-wide improvements to streets, parking, and urban design amenities.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.63Page 16 of 32
Define specific criteria for water and wastewater extensions and annexations, to 2.
include:
Contiguity with development patterns and present city limits.
Location within appropriate growth area.
Availability of infrastructure capacity.
Consistency with City development standards.
Fiscal impact assessment and mechanisms for the allocation of public facility
costs through a capital recovery fee.
Future annexations shall avoid the creation of additional unincorporated
pockets.
Narrative: Georgetown is expected to grow by an estimated 100,000 people
during the next 20 years. Under current policies, a signifi cant share of this
growth would likely occur in areas—both within and outside the present city
boundary—that are not currently (or only partially) served by infrastructure and
community facilities.
Growth tiers are the areas where development, annexation, and
extension of public facilities will be staged over the 20+ year horizon of
the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the tiered growth concept area is
threefold:
* To promote contiguous, compact and incremental expansion of the city’s
edge.
* To avoid excessive public expenditure on new facilities and services
associated with fragmented, leapfrog development patterns.
* To protect land that the city will need to sustain its long-term growth
from premature development.
Although growth areas located outside the present city limits remain largely
outside of City regulatory authority until annexation occurs, their designation as
a growth area for the city helps communicate Georgetown’s intent and policies
governing the locations, patterns, and types of uses for which requests for
water and wastewater extensions and annexations are likely to be approved.
The tiered growth system does not stop growth or prohibit development
in the outer tiers during the initial 10-year timeframe. Instead, the strategy
endeavors to infl uence the timing, location, and pattern of growth, slowing it
when necessary to prevent overload of public facilities and services, or shifting
it to locations where the City is best able to serve it in a manner that is fi scally
sustainable. It also transfers some of the cost burden to serve new growth from
existing taxpayers, making new development “pay for itself” to a greater extent
than it does at present.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.64 Page 17 of 32
Establish a proactive plan to provide infrastructure (water, wastewater, roads, etc.) in 3.
advance of development (to provide City infrastructure where development is desired,
with the developer bearing the responsibility of providing adequate infrastructure
outside of transitional growth areas).
Consider development of an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to provide for the 4.
timing of development concurrent with the availability of adequate road and public
facility capacity.
3.B. Establish criteria, targets and timetables for the annexation of unincorporated “pockets”
into the city. Criteria may include:
Location within appropriate growth area.
Availability of infrastructure capacity.
Annexation timing so that infrastructure availability is concurrent with need.
Positive or neutral fiscal impact or other overriding public benefit.
Compliance with all applicable Comprehensive Plan policies.
Facilities brought up to City standard prior to or concurrent with annexation.
Mechanism in place to relieve fiscal burdens on the City and its taxpayers through (self-
pay) tools such as special taxing districts.
Narrative: Although the Tiered Growth concept provides a rational
framework for staging fringe area development and annexations, the City is
under no obligation to accept any or all development in Tiers 2 and 3. This
policy encourages the City to carefully examine each development application,
based on consistency with land use policies and careful assessment of
impacts, public costs to be incurred, and the revenues that will accrue to
offset those costs. As noted previously, public costs incurred to support fringe
area “green-fi eld” development are often of an order of magnitude greater
than that for comparable infi ll development, where all or most public facilities
and services are already in place. Policy options to address this issue include
the creation of a “capital recovery fee” to more equitably assign costs, as
well as an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, which would only permit
development that can be accommodated at a given time, without imposing
unacceptable impacts on road or public facility capacity. These policies are not
intended to suggest that fi scal assessment and a capital recovery fee should
be applied so as to allow only those developments that fully “pay their own
way.” However, such tools will allow both citizens and elected offi cials to make
decisions based on a thorough knowledge of their fi scal consequences.
Chapter 3. - Land Use Element
3.65Page 18 of 32
Policies / Actions
4.A. Minimize impacts and encroachments of incompatible land uses (e.g., commercial intru-
sions into healthy residential neighborhoods).
4.B. Revise the UDC to ensure development that is compatible in character with the surround-
ing context.
4.C. Develop and apply neighborhood conservation strategies, such as code enforcement, hous-
ing rehabilitation, and support for urban homesteading for first time buyers.
4.D. Revise the UDC to ensure proper transitions and buffering between established neighbor-
hoods and adjacent commercial and manufacturing areas.
Goal 4
Maintain and strengthen viable land uses and land use patterns (e.g.,
stable neighborhoods, economically sound commercial and employment areas,
etc.).
Narrative: Within the present city limits are signifi cant “pockets” of
unincorporated land, some in the heart of the city. Rationalizing the city map
is not however, the reason for annexing these “islands.” Land development
and building standards in effect in these areas are different than those applied
within the city limits.
Unincorporated areas also pose special service delivery and governance
problems. In most cases, the County is not able to keep up with the service
demands of these areas, whose residents often have urban expectations. As
unincorporated communities continue to develop, the standard of living may
decline, leading to deteriorating housing, limited public services, and crime.
On the other hand, with annexation the City becomes responsible for
providing public services to these residents. While it is likely that many City
services already are being used by nonresidents who live in unincorporated
pockets of land within the city boundaries, the fi scal implications of assuming
this responsibility must be fully understood.
Narrative: While much of the city is developed with stable
neighborhoods and commercial areas, the emergence of obsolescence
in some older industrial uses and shopping centers will lead to market-
driven redevelopment. This set of policies/actions will ensure that as such
redevelopment occurs in a manner that minimizes any adverse impacts on
nearby stable neighborhoods and commercial uses.
City of Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan
3.66 Page 19 of 32
Policies &
Actions
Percent
Complete POLICY Progress
GOAL 1
Promote sound, sustainable, and compact development patterns with balanced land uses, a
variety of housing choices and well‐integrated transportation, public facilities, and open space
amenities.
1.A.
Encourage a balanced mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses at varying densities and intensities,
to reflect a gradual transition from urban to suburban to rural development.
1.A.1 100%Adjust zoning provisions to provide greater flexibility for mixed‐use, multiple housing types, and compact suburban development.Yes
1.A.2 75%Reserve and rezone land ideally suited for long‐term commercial and employment uses and prevent its use for residential subdivisions.Yes
1.B.
Promote more compact, higher density development (e.g., traditional neighborhoods, Transit‐Oriented
Development, mixed‐use, and walkable neighborhoods) within appropriate infill locations.
1.B.1
100%
Establish guidelines and incentives for infill locations, including: Mixed residential uses and mixed‐use where appropriate. Connected,
pedestrian‐oriented streets. Conditions for edge treatment (buffers, connectivity, compatibility). Flexible requirements such as dimensional
criteria, impervious coverage, and parking to address local contexts.
Yes
1.B.2 10%
Provide density and intensity bonuses for the provision of housing and commercial components of mixed‐use developments with specific
reference to special dwelling types (student housing, elderly housing, etc.), and additional bonus provisions for affordable housing. (Coordinate
this action with the preparation of Housing Element).Yes
1.B.3 0%
Coordinate infrastructure investment policies to ensure that they are consistent with compact development designations. (Coordinate this action
with preparation of Infrastructure Element and/or update of infrastructure master plans).No
1.C.
Establish standards appropriate for new residential development pertaining to lot sizes, open space, buffers,
road connectivity, etc.
1.C.1 50%Establish standards appropriate for new residential development pertaining to lot sizes, open space, buffers, road connectivity, etc.Yes
1.C.2 50%Continue to promote and apply conservation development principles to the design of residential subdivisions in specifically designated areas.Yes
1.D.Establish improved standards for commercial development.
1.D.1 50%
Prepare land use and zoning provisions to discourage standard commercial “strip” development and encourage compact commercial and mixed‐
use centers at appropriate locations.Yes
1.D.2 50%Prepare guidelines and design standards to improve the character of commercial development.Yes
1.D.3 25%Identify highway corridors for the preparation and application of corridor design and access management standards.Yes
1.D.4 0%
Develop and apply standards for the location and design of “mid‐box” and “big box” retail centers to improve their aesthetics, maintain
appropriate commercial scale and provide for their future adaptive re‐use.No
1.E.
Expand regulatory provisions and incentives to encourage innovative forms of compact, pedestrian friendly
development (mixed‐use, traditional neighborhood design), and a wider array of affordable housing choices.
1.E.1 50%
Establish standards for and actively promote new forms of compact development to include Transit‐Oriented Development, as well as traditional
neighborhood development (TND), mixed‐use, and pedestrian‐scale development.Yes
1.E.2
Provide density and intensity bonuses for the provision of housing and commercial components of mixed‐use developments with specific
reference to dwelling types (student housing, elderly, etc.), and additional bonus provisions for affordable housing, as defined by the City of
Georgetown.No
1.E.3 50%Promote mixed‐use, pedestrian‐friendly land use patterns, including community activity centers Yes
GOAL 2
Promote sound investment in Georgetown’s older developed areas, including downtown, aging
commercial and industrial areas, in‐town neighborhoods, and other areas expected to experience
land use change or obsolescence.
2.A. Remove present inadvertent impediments to infill and re‐investment in older, developed areas.
2.A.1 25%Establish criteria that define the characteristics of desirable infill development (e.g., compatibility with adjoining uses)Yes
2.A.2 50%
Revise zoning/development codes, the permitting process and other applicable City policies to identify and remove impediments to infill,
adaptive re‐ use, historic preservation, and redevelopment, including:
o Application of creative code provisions to remove impediments to re‐use older buildings while retaining their historic character
o Creation of overlay districts
o Coordinated City departmental policies regarding infill Yes
2.A.3 0%
Adjust the City’s schedule of development fees to lessen financial burdens on investment in designated areas and to more accurately reflect the
different costs of providing services in developed areas, suburban areas, and fringe areas. (Coordinate this action with preparation of
Infrastructure Element and/or update of infrastructure master plans).No
2.B.Target capital investments to leverage private investment in designated areas.
2.B.1 50%
Conduct community wide‐ public facility assessments to identify and prioritize corrections to deficiencies in infrastructure, including local streets
and sidewalks, and other public facilities, including parks and recreation facilities. (Coordinate this action with preparation of other Plan
elements, including Infrastructure, Transportation, and Open Space and Recreation).Yes
2.B.2
Through the City’s Capital Improvement Program, prioritize short‐ and long‐range capital investments in designated urban areas, including but
not limited to utility replacements, capacity improvements, area‐wide stormwater systems, street improvements, etc. (Coordinate this action
with preparation of Infrastructure Element and/or update of infrastructure master plans).No
2.B.3 100%Identify revitalization corridors for capital improvements (e.g., streetscape/landscaping, utility upgrades, etc.)Yes
2.C. Identify potential opportunities and selectively target, plan, and promote develpoment/re‐use initiatives.
2.C.1 0%Conduct a city‐wide inventory of potential infill/re‐use sites, including history sites and buildings suitable for adaptive re‐use.No
2.C.2 100%
Based on the city‐wide inventory, as well as on neighborhood, corridor, and downtown planning initiatives, identify site‐specific development
target areas and sites.Yes
2.C.3 50%
Take direct action to initiate and support private investment, including land assembly (via voluntary sale and purchase) and clearance, developer
solicitation and selection, and construction of capital improvements.Yes
2.C.4 0%Encourage use of financial incentives for reinvestment in historic and/or abandoned properties.No
Page 20 of 32
2.C.5 0%
Provide incentives for the reintroduction of neighborhood businesses and services into older neighborhoods (e.g., assistance with market studies,
site assembly, environmental clearances, business capital investment, employee training, etc.).No
2.C.6 100%
In coordination with other local governments, pursue state legislation to make additional financial tools available for redevelopment (e.g., tax
increment financing, tax abatements, etc.)Yes
2.D.
Continue to promote diversification and strengthening of downtown Georgetown and its in‐town historic
neighborhoods.
2.D.1 100%
Maintain a proactive program of City initiatives to promote downtown development through:
o Capital investment to streets, streetscapes, infrastructure, and parking.
o Establishment of site‐specific downtown redevelopment and reinvestment areas.
o Use of existing City powers to execute designated redevelopment projects.
o Introduction of additional cultural, civic, and entertainment activities.Yes
2.D.2 100%
Actively support private initiatives consistent with City policies to promote downtown investment by:
o Creating density bonuses and other incentives for mixed‐use, downtown housing, and the creation of new centers of activity in downtown.
o Adjusting capital improvement programs to target streets, infrastructure, and parking as necessary to promote and support desired private
investment.Yes
2.D.3 0%Ensure that public and private initiatives preserve and enhance historic downtown resources.No
GOAL 3
Provide a development framework for the fringe that guides sound, sustainable patterns of land
use, limits sprawl, protects community character, demonstrates sound stewardship of the
3.A. Initiate a fringe area growth management framework comprising the following elements.
3.A.1 100%
Draft and adopt ordinance establishing the following growth tiers, consistent with the framework described in the Comprehensive Plan:
TIER 1 (Short Term Growth Area – 10 Years):
o Tier 1A Area within the current city limits where infrastructure systems are in place, can be economically provided and/or will be proactively
extended, and where consolidation of the city’s development pattern is encouraged over the next 10 years.
o Tier 1B: Area within the present city limits that were recently annexed or subject to development agreements which are presently underserved
by infrastructure. Tier 1B will require the provision of public facilities to meet the city’s growth needs as Tier 1A approaches build‐out, over the
next 10 years.
TIER 2 (Intermediate Growth Area ‐ 10‐20 Years):
o Tier 2: Area within the ETJ where growth and the provision of public facilities are anticipated beyond the next 10 years, and where premature,
fragmented, leapfrog, or inefficient development is discouraged by the City.
TIER 3 (Long‐Term Growth Area – Beyond 20 Years):
o Tier 3: Area within the ETJ where growth, annexation, and the extension of public facilities are anticipated beyond 20 years, and premature,
fragmented, leapfrog, or inefficient development is discouraged by the City.Yes
3.A.2 100%
Define specific criteria for water and wastewater extensions and annexations, to include:
o Contiguity with development patterns and city limits.
o Location within appropriate growth area.
o Availability of infrastructure capacity.
o Consistency with City development standards.
o Fiscal impact assessment and mechanisms for allocation of public facility costs through a capital recovery fee.Yes
3.A.3 50%
Establish a proactive plan to provide infrastructure (water, waste water, roads, etc.) in advance of development. (to provide City infrastructure
where development is desired, with the developer bearing the responsibility of providing adequate infrastructure outside of transitional growth
areas).Yes
3.A.4 0%
Consider development of an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance to provide for the timing of development concurrent with the availability of
adequate road and public facility capacity.No
3.B. 0%Establish criteria, targets, and timetables for the annexation of unincorporated “pockets” of land into the city.No
GOAL 4
Maintain and strengthen viable land uses and land use patterns (e.g., stable neighborhoods,
economically sound commercial and employment areas, etc.).
4.A.
Minimize impacts and encroachments of incompatible land uses (e.g., commercial intrusions into healthy
residential neighborhoods).
4.B.
Revise UDC/enact standards to ensure development that is compatible in character with the surrounding
context.
4.C.
Develop and apply neighborhood conservation strategies such as code enforcement, house rehabilitation
programs, and support for urban homesteading for first‐time buyers.
4.D
Revise UDC to ensure proper transitions and buffering between established neighborhoods and adjacent
nonresidential (commercial and manufacturing) areas.
Page 21 of 32
12/5/2018 draft INPUT REPORT
1
INPUT REPORT
This Input Report highlights the most common recurring comments and concerns expressed by the community during the
goal setting phase of the 2030 Update through two community wide events. Additional input related to housing, gateways
and growth scenarios will be considered later in the comprehensive planning process. The first event, “On the Table”, was
held October 2, 2018 and the 2nd event was an online survey open from July to October 2018. Seven distinct themes have
emerged from the input, which will be used to guide the development of the 2030 Plan Update . Those themes that address
issues not being updated in this effort will be considered during future element updates.
Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel
Continue to encourage high-quality development
Enhance citizen participation and engagement
Focus on housing and affordability
Enhance economic development opportunities
Maintain and add to the existing quality parks and recreation
Improve and diversify the transportation network
OUTREACH EFFORTS
At the beginning of the Update, a Public Engagement Plan was adopted which outlines goals, strategies and opportunities
for the community to be involved with the Update. The On the Table Georgetown and an online survey were developed to
meet the following goals of the Public Engagement Plan:
Provide participation opportunities where people are already gathered
Maximize existing networks
Facilitate as much meaningful input as possible
Gain representative participation
Remove/lower barriers to participation
The flexible format of On the Table Georgetown allowed existing networks to facilitate their own discussions about the
future of Georgetown. The online survey allowed the city to gain representative participation from each zip code in the
planning area. Both opportunities lowered barriers to participation by allowing residents to take the survey at their
convenience or host a discussion at their own homes or place of business. The next section of the report provides details of
each input opportunity, the input received and the methods used to analyze the input and develop themes.
INPUT
REPORT
Page 22 of 32
INPUT REPORT 12/5/2018 draft
2
“ON THE TABLE” EVENT AND INPUT OVERVIEW
The City of Georgetown reviewed best practices for public engagement and implemented the “On the Table” community
engagement strategy created by The Chicago Community Trust1, a nonprofit organization that has worked to increase
meaningful civic engagement. Instead of one traditional public meeting hosted by the City, the On the Table model allows
participants to host discussions at their own home or office with friends, family, coworkers, neighborhoods, church
members, or other groups of approximately 8 to 12 people, and report the information back to the City via photo, email or
drop-off.
The small group discussions were intended to occur all on the same day, throughout the city for a citywide public
engagement day. The City hosted the citywide Engagement Day on Tuesday, October 2, 2018, which coincided with
National Night Out. While community members were encouraged to participate in the exercise during that day, the toolkits
were also available for input through October.
To maximize existing networks, the City partnered with six key community groups:
Georgetown Independent School District
Chamber of Commerce
Southeast Georgetown Community Council
Southwestern University
Georgetown Ministerial Alliance
Georgetown Health Foundation.
A representative from each organization met in the months before the event to plan
and reached out to their members to promote event participation. Each organization
acted as a “Super Host” by offering meeting space to the public for discussions at
certain times throughout the day at various locations.
Residents were able to register to participate on the 2030 Plan
Update website, which listed the times and locations of discussions
open to the public. A promotional video was made and posted to
the City’s social media sites. Neighborhood representatives who
signed up for National Night Out were contacted and offered
information about the event. Planning staff spoke at several civic
group meetings and provided details about the input opportunity. A training was held a week before the event on
September 26, 2018 for any resident to get more information and for registered groups to pick up discussion materials.
1 More information about the development of the initiative at: http://onthetable.com/, Reports available from research
partner University of Illinois at Chicago’s Institute for Policy and Civic Engagement at: http://2017.onthetablereport.com/
Page 23 of 32
12/5/2018 draft INPUT REPORT
3
“Toolkits”, or handouts, to facilitate group discussions were developed and made available at the Planning Dep artment
office, via email, and download via the City’s website. “Host” and “Youth” toolkits were customized for the intended
participants. Each toolkit included an introduction to the comprehensive planning process, tips for facilitating a
constructive meeting, a step-by-step checklist, a sign-in sheet, a list of conversation starters, and a notes page to record
input.
Participants were prompted to discuss a series of conversation starters, which included questions such as:
What are the biggest issues our community faces?
What would you say if you were bragging on Georgetown?
What are your favorite cities and why?
What aspect of Georgetown is most important to preserve as we grow?
Following a group discussion, a notetaker documented the most important takeaways and ideas from the discussion on the
Notes page that was then sent back to the city via email or drop off. The notetaker was also able to enter the information
digitally through an online survey tool.
Page 24 of 32
INPUT REPORT 12/5/2018 draft
4
On the Table Community Response
In all, over 1,400 people participated in On the Table discussions
throughout the city, collaborating in 71 groups and providing
841 unique comments. Almost half of the over 700 total city
employees participated in sharing ideas for 2030. Volunteers
from many departments led discussion groups throughout the
day. The school district was able to facilitate discussions across
grade levels, including second grade, middle school and high
school classes, and also facilitated discussions with faculty and
staff. Southwestern University had over 60 students participate
in discussions in an effort led by the University
Communications department and Student Government
Association. Several large neighborhood groups in Sun City
were able to host discussions during their National Night Out
activities. The collective input results are shown in the following
charts and graphics.
Page 25 of 32
12/5/2018 draft INPUT REPORT
5
What do you BRAG about
Georgetown?
7%
7%
7%
5%
4%
3%
2%
Urban Design
Family-Oriented/Small-Town
Feel
Recreation and Open Space
Historic Preservation
Events/Festivals
Public Safety
Public Buildings and Facilities
Urban Design
Family-Oriented/Small-Town Feel
Recreation and Open Space
Historic Preservation
Events/Festivals
Public Safety
Public Buildings and Facilities
Top TEN most frequently-mentioned categories
14%
11%
8%
7%
7%
7%
6%
5%
5%
4%
Economic Development
Traffic Circulation and Public Transit
Housing and Affordability
Family-Oriented and Small-Town Feel
Urban Design
Recreation and Open Space
Citizen Participation
Historic Preservation
Health and Human Services
Infrastructure
Economic Development
Traffic Circulation and Public Transit
Housing/Affordability
Urban Design
Family-Oriented/Small-Town Feel
Recreation and Open Space
Citizen Participation
Historic Preservation
Health and Human Services
Infrastructure
What are your CONCERNS
for Georgetown?
Traffic Circulation/
Public Transit
Health &
Human Services
Housing/
Affordability
Economic
Development Citizen
Participation
Page 26 of 32
INPUT REPORT 12/5/2018 draft
6
What’s MISSING in Georgetown?
Page 27 of 32
12/5/2018 draft INPUT REPORT
7
On the Table Input Analysis
To quantitatively analyze the results, the responses returned to the City were collected and entered into a spreadsheet,
which coded each individual comment with a corresponding category derived from the fourteen elements of the
comprehensive plan prescribed in the City’s charter (e.g., economic development or housing). Five additional categories
were added based on the volume of comments related to that idea. These categories were: education, general growth,
family-oriented/small-town feel, diversity and events/festivals.
Each comment also received a score for a general positive (+1), neutral (0), or negative (-1) connotation. The responses were
tallied through an overall count of references (top ten), the most positive comments (brags), and the most negative
comments (concerns). A fourth type of comment received was the identification of desirable activities or developments
(what’s missing), which are organized generally by the font size representing the frequency of comment. The full listing of
comments can be found as an appendix to this report.
ONLINE SURVEY AND RESPONSES OVERVIEW
The City conducted an online survey, which was open from July 20, 2018 to October 31, 2018. The survey was provided as a
link on the City website’s front page and advertised on social media, in weekly city news emails, and the Georgetown
Reporter that went out in utility bills. The survey was also available to be taken on iPad kiosks that were placed in the
Georgetown Recreation Center, Georgetown Public Library, and
Georgetown Municipal Center. Survey participation was available
through both kiosks and paper surveys taken to outreach events
including the Music on the Square event in Downtown Georgetown,
the Words on Wheels mobile library and at multiple speaking
engagements.
The online survey questions included:
Why did you choose to live in Georgetown?
What do you like most about living in Georgetown?
Which places do you visit most in Georgetown?
What is your connection to Georgetown?
If you live here, for how long?
The online survey asked participants what Georgetown should look
like in the year 2030. This question allowed an open field for the
respondent to enter their own comments.
Online Survey Community Response
The online survey received a total of 1,455 responses, which
included 1,322 online responses and 133 responses from survey
kiosks and printed paper surveys. The results of the input are shown in the charts below.
Page 28 of 32
INPUT REPORT 12/5/2018 draft
8
Connection to Georgetown
1%
3%
10%
13%
28%
88%
Hope to live
Used to live
Other
Out of City, but in WilCo
Work
Live
Why did you choose to live here?
What do you like most about
living in Georgetown?
Which places do you
visit most?
2%
3%
5%
6%
7%
8%
12%
18%
24%
Schools
Family
Sun City
Friendly
Safety
Parks
Community
Downtown/Sq.
Small Town
3%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
10%
13%
16%
23%
24%
29%
Palace Theater
Sun City
Home Depot
Trails
Lake
Rec Center
Gabriel Park
Square
Library
Grocery Stores
Restaurants
Wolf Ranch
1. Small Town
2. Sun City
3. Family
4. Schools
5. Proximity to Austin
6. Quality of Life
7. Employment
8. Affordable
9. Round Rock
10. Low crime
Page 29 of 32
12/5/2018 draft INPUT REPORT
9
Online Survey Input Analysis
The online survey was created using the Survey Monkey online survey tool. Features of the tool include analyzing the most
frequently used phrases to open ended questions. Bar charts and numbered lists were created to represent answers to the
questions based on the Survey Monkey analysis. Survey Monkey provided a quantitative analysis of the questions except for
the question, “In 2030, what should Georgetown look like?” The City ran the responses to this question through the software
application WordStat that produced the most frequently occurring phrases. To provide consistency and basis for
comparison, the comments were also coded in the same manner as the On the Table comments: the recorded responses were
collected and entered into a spreadsheet, which coded each individual comment with a corresponding category to the
fourteen elements of the comprehensive plan prescribed in the City’s charter (e.g., economic development or recreation and
open space). Each comment also received a score for a general positive (+1), neutral (0), or negative (-1) connotation. Five
additional categories were added based on the volume of comments related to that idea. These categories were: edu cation,
general growth, family-oriented/small-town feel, diversity and events/festivals.
In 2030, what should Georgetown look like?
1. Keep Small Town
2. Not Round Rock
3. Effective Public Transportation
4. Improve Williams Drive
5. Improve traffic flow
6. More service to Sun City
7. Increased green space
8. Not Cedar Park
9. More affordable housing
10. Control growth
15%
15%
15%
9%
9%
7%
5%
4%
4%
4%
Traffic circulation and public transit
General growth
Family-oriented/Small-town feel
Economic development
Historic preservation
Future land use
Conservation & env. resources
Infrastructure
Recreation and open space
Urban design
*Top ten most frequently mentioned categories
Page 30 of 32
INPUT REPORT 12/5/2018 draft
10
INPUT THEMES
The following themes emerged from the public input gathered from the two input opportunities. These themes, in
conjunction with additional public input received throughout the comprehensive planning process, will guide the
development of this 2030 Plan Update.
Maintain the family-oriented, small-town feel
1. Given the inevitable growth of the community, it is crucial for the City to preserve this small -town feel to maintain
a strong sense of community.
2. It should be a goal of the City to promote the incorporation of family-friendly development.
3. Host and promote family-oriented events.
Continue to encourage high-quality development
1. Residents are proud of Downtown Georgetown and its appearance. Residents love how vibrant and walkable the
downtown area is and mentioned how they like the historical buildings and local shops.
2. Many residents felt that Georgetown should not reduce development standards to attract development. Instead,
they felt Georgetown should maintain high development standards while still promoting more affordable
development.
3. Many felt that there should be more sidewalks implemented around the City. In addition, many felt that current
sidewalks should be improved.
Enhance citizen participation and engagement
1. Residents noted that it would be beneficial to the community to be notified as to when public events take place,
allowing for greater community participation. Combining social media with more traditional forms of advertising
would allow for more people to know about opportunities to provide their input.
2. Citizens explained that they would like to be better notified of the results of events involving public input.
Although this information might be available to the public, residents explained that it is important to advertise it in
such a way that most residents in the community are made awa re.
3. Pursue more opportunities to engage the community, including utilizing school events and festivals.
4. Communicate better on future and current development happening in the community , including utilizing social
media.
Page 31 of 32
12/5/2018 draft INPUT REPORT
11
Focus on housing and affordability
1. Rising housing prices have aided in creating a high cost of living, increasing to the point where many residents feel
as though they might not be able to live in Georgetown in the near future.
2. There is not enough variety of housing types within the City. For example, developments could be permitted in
more areas of the City.
3. Many residents suggested the use of incentives to help create a more affordable community.
4. Some participants expressed concern regarding the provision of low -income housing and preferred to focus on
middle-income housing.
Enhance economic development opportunities
1. Residents like the large variety of local businesses and restaurants throughout the community. Many noted that
part of Downtown Georgetown’s distinct charm involves the larg e amount of local businesses in the area.
2. Improve Georgetown’s efforts to attract and accommodate younger generations. More nightlife and entertainment
in Georgetown will attract college students and other younger professionals.
3. Recruit higher-paying employers/tech companies to combat the rising cost of living.
4. Develop the eastern areas of Georgetown to match the level of amenities available in other portions of the City .
Maintain and add to the existing quality parks and recreation
1. Expand the existing trail network to connect to areas throughout Georgetown.
2. Improve access to parks and open space by allowing free entry. Many explained that Garey Park is not affordable
and that all parks should be free to residents.
3. Many residents suggested an increase in the amount of open space throughout the community. More specifically,
many liked the idea of adding parks to existing and future neighborhoods.
Improve and diversify the transportation network
1. Many residents expressed the need for better public transit within the City. Some residents are unaware of GoGeo
transit and feel that the service should be better advertised. Conversely, others explained that they would prefer the
addition of a light rail system, such as a trolley.
2. Residents desire some sort of commuter rail that runs to Austin and surrounding areas.
3. Traffic light synchronization should improve to help alleviate traffic congestion.
4. Although traffic congestion has become an issue throughout the City, many residents have explained that Williams
Drive needs significant improvements.
Page 32 of 32