Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_P&Z_01.20.2015Notice of Meeting for the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Georgetown January 20, 2015 at 6:00 PM at City Council Chambers, 101 E. 7th Street, Georgetown The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8th Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Comments from the Chair - Welcome and Meeting Procedures Action from Executive Session Public Wishing to Address the Board On a subject that is posted on this agenda: Please fill out a speaker registration form which can be found at the Board meeting. Clearly print your name, the letter of the item on which you wish to speak, and present it to the Staff Liaison, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item. On a subject not posted on the agenda: Persons may add an item to a future Board agenda by filing a written request with the Staff Liaison no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. The request must include the speaker's name and the specific topic to be addressed with sufficient information to inform the board and the public. For Board Liaison contact information, please logon to http://government.georgetown.org/category/boards-commissions/. A - As of the deadline, no persons were signed up to speak on items other than what was posted on the agenda. Consent Agenda The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine items that may be acted upon with one single vote. An item may be pulled from the Consent Agenda in order that it be discussed and acted upon individually as part of the Regular Agenda. B Consideration of the Minutes from the December 16, 2014, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. C Consideration and possible action on a Preliminary Plat of 116.14 in the Joseph Fish Survey, Abstract 232, to be known as Lakeside Subdivision, located on the south side of Williams Drive west of Wildwood and Woodlake Drives, behind the Olde Oaks Estate and Woodlake subdivisions. (PP-2014-012) Legislative Regular Agenda D Public Hearing and possible action on the rezoning of 13.1501, described as Lots 5-7 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat, located at 70 Del Webb Blvd., from the Local Commercial (C- 1) district to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district. (REZ-2014-034) E Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning of 7.74 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Two-Family (TF) District, located at 422 Northwoods Drive. (REZ-2014-036) F Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning from the Residential Single-family (RS) District to the Mixed Use – Downtown (MU-DT) District for a 0.12-acre tract described as Lost Addition, Block 64 (part), located at 211 West 11th Street. (REZ-2014-035) G Public Hearing and possible action on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code (“UDC”) relating to water quality standards for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City limits and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (“ETJ”). H Presentation and discussion of the Executive Summary of the Georgetown Overall Transportation Plan- Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analyst, PMP®, Edward G. Polasek, A.I.C.P, Director, Transportation Services and Jordan J. Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner I Consideration and possible action to approve the amended board bylaws in accordance with the revised Code of Ordinances – P&Z Staff Liaison J Discussion Items: Update on the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee (UDCAC) meetings. (Chair Horne) Update on the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) meetings. (Commissioner Rankin) Questions or comments from Commissioners-in-Training about the actions and matters considered on this agenda. Reminder of the February 3, 2015, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, Jessica Brettle, City Secretary for the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted at City Hall, 113 E. 8th Street, a place readily accessible to the general public at all times, on the ______ day of __________________, 2015, at __________, and remained so posted for at least 72 continuous hours preceding the scheduled time of said meeting. ____________________________________ Jessica Brettle, City Secretary City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Consideration of the Minutes from the December 16, 2014, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. ITEM SUMMARY: FINANCIAL IMPACT: NA SUBMITTED BY: ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Draft P&Z Minutes_December 16, 2014 Cover Memo Page 1 of 3 City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, December 16, 2014 at 6:00 PM Council Chambers 101 E. Seventh Street, Georgetown, Texas 78626 Commissioners: John Horne, Chair; Bob Brent, Secretary; Andy Webb, & Alex Fuller Kaylah McCord Commissioners in Training: Scott Rankin, Kevin Pitts Commissioner(s) Absent: Commissioner(s) in Training Absent: John Marler, Josh Schroeder and Ben Watkins Staff Present: Jordan Maddox, Principal Planner and Stephanie McNickle, Recording Secretary. Chair Horne called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Chair Horne stated the order of the meeting and that those who speak must turn in a speaker form to the recording secretary before the item that they wish to address begins. Each speaker is permitted to address the Commission once for each item, for a maximum of three (3) minutes, unless otherwise agreed to before the meeting begins. A. As of the deadline for this agenda, no persons were signed up to speak on items other than what was posted on the agenda. Consent Agenda The Consent Agenda includes non-controversial and routine items that the Commission may act on with one single vote. A Commissioner or any member of the public may request that any item from the Consent Agenda be pulled in order that the Commission discuss and act upon it individually as part of the Regular Agenda. The Planning and Zoning Commission's approval of an item on the Consent Agenda will be consistent with the staff recommendation described in the report, unless otherwise noted. B Consideration of the Minutes from the November 18, 2014, Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. C Consideration and possible action on a Preliminary Plat of 116.14 in the Joseph Fish Survey, Abstract 232, to be known as Lakeside Subdivision, located on the south side of Williams Drive west of Wildwood and Woodlake Drives, behind the Olde Oaks Estate and Woodlake subdivisions. Item was pulled at the request of the applicant. D Consideration and possible action on a Revised Preliminary Plat for 43.922 acres in the William Addison Survey to be known as La Conterra, Sections 7 & 8, located on Naturita Drive and Ingnecia Drive. PP-2014-017 Page 2 of 3 E Consideration and possible action on a Preliminary/Final Plat for 3.089 acres to be known as Pedernales Falls Drive and Rocky Hollow Creek Drive, located in northwest Sun City. Jordan J. Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner F Consideration and possible action on a Preliminary Plat for 37.47 acres to be known as Sun City Neighborhood 64, located between CR 245 and Pedernales Falls Drive. PP- 2014-019 Jordan J. Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner G Acceptance of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Annual Report -- Jordan J. Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner The Commission commended Jordan Maddox in regards to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Annual Report. Motion by Commissioner Brent to approve the consent agenda including the minutes from the November 18, 2014 Planning and Zoning meeting. Second by Commissioner Fuller. Approved. (5-0) Legislative Regular Agenda At this time Commissioner Brent recused himself from the dais for agenda item H and I. H Public Hearing and possible action on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, changing approximately 73 acres on the Future Land Use Plan from Employment Center to Moderate Density Residential for Three Forks Ranch, located near Airport Road and Brangus Road. CPA-2014-003 Jordan J. Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner. Staff report given by Jordan Maddox. Jordan Maddox provided an overview of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request, description of project and recommend for approval. Staff stated the applicant is here and will be glad to answer questions. Chair Horne opened the public hearing. No one came forward to address the commission, the Public Hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner McCord to recommend to City Council approval or a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, changing approximately 73 acres on the Future Land Use Plan from Employment Center to Moderate Density Residential for Three Forks Ranch, located near Airport Road and Brangus Road. Second by Commissioner Fuller. Approved (4-0) I Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning from a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District to 250 acres of Single-family Residential (RS) District, 19.85 acres of Low-Density Multifamily (MF-1) District, and 15.89 acres of Agriculture (AG) District in the David Wright Survey for Three Forks Ranch, located near Airport Road and Brangus Road. REZ-2014-029 Jordan J. Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner. Staff report given by Jordan Maddox. Jordan Maddox provided an overview of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request, description of project and recommend for approval. Staff stated the applicant is here and will be glad to answer questions. Page 3 of 3 Chair Horne opened the public hearing. No one came forward to address the commission, the Public Hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner McCord to recommend to City Council approval of a Rezoning from a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District to 250 acres of Single- family Residential (RS) District, 19.85 acres of Low-Density Multifamily (MF-1) District, and 15.89 acres of Agriculture (AG) District in the David Wright Survey for Three Forks Ranch, located near Airport Road and Brangus Road. Second by Commissioner Fuller. Approved (4-0) J Discussion Items Update on the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee (UDCAC) meetings. (Chair Horne) NA Update on the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) meetings. (Commissioner Rankin) NA Questions or comments from Commissioners-in-Training about the actions and matters considered on this agenda. NA Reminder of the January 20, 2015, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Motion to adjourn at 6:29 __________________________________ _______________________________ John Horne, Chair Bob Brent, Secretary City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action on a Preliminary Plat of 116.14 in the Joseph Fish Survey, Abstract 232, to be known as Lakeside Subdivision, located on the south side of Williams Drive west of Wildwood and Woodlake Drives, behind the Olde Oaks Estate and Woodlake subdivisions. (PP-2014-012) ITEM SUMMARY: Background: The applicant proposes to develop 116.14 acres as a single-family residential subdivision with 301 residential lots, 13 open space, drainage, and water detention/quality lots, 2 public parkland lots, and 3 commercial lots that are located at the entry from Williams Drive along the proposed Lakeside Ranch Road. The public parkland for the development proposes to provide 4.77 acres in 2 lots. The technical requirements of the associated Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA- 2014-003) have been completed and are consistent with the proposed plat. Public Comment: Public notice is not required for a preliminary plat application. There have been several inquiries about the plat from nearby neighbors who made public comments during the rezoning process earlier in 2014. Recommended Motion: Approval of a Preliminary Plat of 116.14 in the Joseph Fish Survey, Abstract 232, to be known as Lakeside Subdivision. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The applicant paid the required fees. SUBMITTED BY: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner and Sofia Nelson, Interim Planning Director ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Staff Report Cover Memo Exhibit 1 - Location Map Backup Material Exhibit 2 - Proposed Preliminary Plat_Part 1 Backup Material Exhibit 3 - Proposed Preliminary Plat_Part 2 Backup Material Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Lakeside Subdivision Preliminary Plat Page 1 of 4 Report Date: January 15, 2015 File No: PP-2014-012 Project Planner: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner Item Details Project Name: Preliminary Plat of Lakeside Subdivision Project Address: 4840, 4844, and 4852 Williams Drive Location: Between and behind the Olde Oak Estates and Woodlake subdivisions (see Exhibit 1) Total Acreage: 116.14 acres Legal Description: 116.14 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey, Abstract 232 Applicant: Hank Smith, P.E., Texas Engineering Solutions Property Owner: Georgetown 116 Development, LP Contact: Hank Smith, P.E., Texas Engineering Solutions, LLC Proposed Lots: 301 residential, 3 non-residential, 13 open space, water detention/quality, 2 parkland lots Streets Proposed: 17,063 linear feet Parkland: Parkland requirements are being met by dedication of 4.77 acres, see Plat note 6 Heritage Trees: There are 30 Heritage Trees located on this plat, with 3 proposed for removal Existing Use: Undeveloped land Existing Zoning: Residential Single-family (RS) District (109.54 acres), Local Commercial (C-1) District (5.09 acres), Neighborhood Commercial (CN) District (1.51 acres) Growth Tier: Tier 2 Applicant’s Request The applicant proposes to develop 116.14 acres of undeveloped land into 301 residential lots and 3 non- residential lots, with 4.7 acres of dedicated parkland and associated roads and open space and water drainage lots. Site Information Location: The property is located on the south side of Williams Drive, bounded by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers property (Lake Georgetown) and the Olde Oake and Woodlake subdivisions. Connectivity is provided to the existing Woodlake subdivision through Moreland Drive and Cedar Lakes Boulevard, and a road stub of Salamander Street extending to the property to the west (the Gatlin Creek project per Ordinance 2012-037). Physical Characteristics: The property consists of four (4) tracts of land, all of which are undeveloped. The land is generally gently sloping to the southwest toward Lake Georgetown. A tree survey has indicated 30 Heritage trees. The plat was designed in conjunction with the City Urban Forester to ensure buildable areas within each residential lot that provide protection to the Heritage Trees. Protected Trees were also identified on the three proposed non-residential lots, and will be either preserved or mitigated for during the Site Plan review and approval process. Planning Department Staff Report Lakeside Subdivision Preliminary Plat Page 2 of 4 History The property was annexed in two portions per Annexation Ordinances 95-12 and 2014-34. The property was rezoned by City Council on June 24, 2014, per Ordinance 2014-38, from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Residential Single-family (RS), Neighborhood Commercial (CN), and Local Commercial (C-1) Districts; see excerpt below with Zoning Districts – yellow is RS, light pink is CN, light red is C-1. 2030 Plan Conformance The proposed Preliminary Plat is in general conformance with the 2030 Plan land use designation of Low Density Residential. This land use category supports single family detached neighborhoods at a density ranging between 1 and 3 dwelling units per gross acre; 301 residential lots over 109.54 acres equals a density of 2.75 dwelling units per gross acre. The non-residential portion of the plat (less than 7 acres) complies with the category in providing ‘complementary non-residential uses along arterial roadways’ (Williams Drive, an existing Major Arterial). See excerpt map below, where the light yellow is Low Density Residential, blue is Institutional, green is Open Space (floodplain from Lake Georgetown, or land owned by the Army Corps of Engineers), and orange is the Mixed Use Neighborhood Center category. This project is located within Tier 2 (Intermediate Growth Area) of the current City Growth Tier Map, notwithstanding annexation and zoning. Infrastructure facilities will be the responsibility of the developer to serve the property. Planning Department Staff Report Lakeside Subdivision Preliminary Plat Page 3 of 4 Utilities Utility services will be provided by City of Georgetown for electric, water, and wastewater. Public utility easements are being dedicated with this plat according to the City of Georgetown standards. Transportation This plat will create a new direct and primary access point to Williams Drive near Olde Oak Drive with the proposed Lakeside Ranch Road, a residential collector (65’ of right-of-way, 37’ of paved width) that serves as the primary “spine” road through the majority of the subdivision. Lakeside Ranch intersects with proposed Cedar Lake Boulevard, which serves as a residential collector from that point northward to the point of connection with the Woodlake Subdivision. Cedar Lake Boulevard exists as residential collector (platted in 2003 and 2004 as a 60’ right-of-way with approximately 37’ of pavement) through the Woodlake Subdivision Phases 3 and 4; this road terminates (stubs) to an unplatted 33.6 acre property in the Joseph Fish Survey owned by the Andice Development Company. The phasing plan, via plat note 17, restricts development of Phase 2 until Cedar Lake Boulevard connects to Williams Drive, which would occur through the Andice Development Company property previously noted. The applicant will be responsible for construction of this connection of Cedar Lake Boulevard from the Woodlake subdivision to Williams Drive, and this connection back to Williams Drive would serve as the other primary access point, as all trips from the subdivision must eventually get to Williams Drive, due Planning Department Staff Report Lakeside Subdivision Preliminary Plat Page 4 of 4 to the subdivision being bound by Lake Georgetown. A third point of connection is proposed with Moreland Drive (through the portion of the subdivision zoned Local Commercial, between Block L / Lot 1 and Block C / Lot 58), which would connect to an unplatted 2.884 acre property in the Joseph Fish Survey that is surrounded by several non-residential lots in the Woodlake Phase 6 subdivision plat. Moreland Drive is constructed between Woodlake Phase 5 / Lot 1 and Woodlake Phase 6 / Lots 4 and 5, and connects to Woodlake Drive, which in turn leads to a signalized intersection at Williams Drive. Thus, actual connectivity to this neighboring subdivision, and the ability to access the existing traffic signal at Williams Drive, will hinge on development of this unplatted property and continuation of the middle ‘link’ of Moreland, unless constructed by others. The fourth point of connection is to the northwest from Salamander Street to an approximately 115 acre property approved for a project known as Gatlin Creek, which has not developed yet. How, and when, that connection can be used is unknown, but because of the same physical constraint of Lake Georgetown to the south/west, trips from Salamander Street through this neighboring property will eventually end up on Williams Drive. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA-2014-003) has met the technical requirements and the proposed plat is consistent with the findings of that TIA. Future Application(s) In order to proceed with development on this site, it will be necessary to obtain approval of Final Plats and infrastructure Construction Plans, which are administratively approved applications. Residential lots will develop with Building Permits. Non-residential lots will require on-site Site Plan and Construction Plan approvals, which are administratively approved applications. Staff Analysis Staff Recommendation and Basis: Staff supports the Preliminary Plat as it meets all of the requirements of the City’s Unified Development Code. Interdepartmental, Governmental and Agency Comments None Public Comments Public notice is not required for a preliminary plat application. There have been several inquiries about the plat from nearby residents who made public comments during the rezoning process earlier in 2014. Proposed Meetings Schedule January 20, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission Attachments Exhibit 1 – Location Map Exhibit 2 – Preliminary Plat (part 1) Exhibit 3 – Preliminary Plat (part 2) C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N CITY OFGEORGETOWN C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N G e o r g eto w n E TJ Georgetown ETJ Georgetown ETJ G e o r g e t o w n E T J C E D A R LAKEBLVD T E R I C T W O O D S T O C K D R WILD W OODDR A C K E R R D SU N D AY SC H O OL D R WILLIAMS DR LE A N N E D RWINDHOLLOWDR C LIFFWOODD R O L D E O A K D R W O O D L A K E DR PP-2014-012 Exhibit #1 Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 1,000 2,000Feet ¯ LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Williams Dr S hellRdWilliams Dr D e l Web b Blvd Site City Limits Street Site ³ PP-2014-012 City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible action on the rezoning of 13.1501, described as Lots 5-7 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat, located at 70 Del Webb Blvd., from the Local Commercial (C- 1) district to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district. (REZ-2014-034) ITEM SUMMARY: Background: The applicant has requested rezoning from the Local Commercial (C-1) District to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) District with a base zoning of Local Commercial (C-1) to allow for development of a 13-acre resort style retirement center consisting of six main buildings housing a maximum of 300 independent living units and various amenities to serve the residents of the development. To facilitate this development, the proposed PUD includes exceptions to current standards for building height and signage, but establishes standards above UDC minimums for land uses, setbacks, parking, access, and buffering. Public Comment: Two comment letter have been received by owners of neighboring properties in opposition to the request. (see Exhibit 4) Recommended Motion: Recommend to the City Council approval of the request to rezone Lots 5-7 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat from C-1 to PUD. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The applicant has paid the required fees. SUBMITTED BY: Valerie Kreger, Principal Planner, and Sophia Nelson, Interim Planning Director ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Staff Report Cover Memo Exhibits 1 & 2 - Zoning & Future Land Use Maps Backup Material Exhibit 3 - Aerial Map Backup Material Exhibit 4 - Public Comment Backup Material Exhibit A - PUD Development Plan Exhibit Exhibit B - PUD Conceptual Land Plan Exhibit Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report Lots 5-7 Village Gate at Sun City – Seven Strand Senior Living Rezoning Page 1 of 7 Report Date: January 15, 2015 File No: REZ-2014-034 Project Planner: Valerie Kreger, AICP, Principal Planner Item Description Public Hearing and possible action on the rezoning of 13.1501, described as Lots 5-7 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat, located at 70 Del Webb Blvd., from the Local Commercial (C-1) district to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district. Item Details Project Name: Seven Strand Senior Living Address: 70 Del Webb Blvd. Location: Near main entrance of Sun City development Total Acreage: 13.1501 acres Legal Description: Lots 5-7, Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat Applicant: Brian Blaylock Property Owner: Gregory Hall Existing Use: Undeveloped Existing Zoning: Local Commercial (C-1) Proposed Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Future Land Use: Moderate Density Residential surrounding a Mixed Use Neighborhood Center node Growth Tier: Tier 1A Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant has requested rezoning from the Local Commercial (C-1) District to the Planned Unit Development (PUD) District with a base zoning of Local Commercial (C-1) to allow for development of a 13-acre resort style retirement center consisting of six main buildings housing a maximum of 300 independent living units and various amenities to serve the residents of the development. To facilitate this development, the proposed PUD includes exceptions to current standards for building height and signage, but establishes standards above UDC minimums for land uses, setbacks, parking, access, and buffering. The following provides a summary of the regulations proposed with the PUD (see also Exhibit A – Development Plan and Exhibit B – Conceptual Land Plan): Planning Department Staff Report Lots 5-7 Village Gate at Sun City – Seven Strand Senior Living Rezoning Page 2 of 7 Land Uses: The PUD establishes that the primary use will be multifamily attached residential units for seniors (independent living apartments) that may include an assisted living retirement center and/or nursing or convalescent home. Typically allowing multifamily by-right would be considered an exception to the UDC standards, but in this case the current zoning conditions allow this use by-right. Additional uses related to the primary use that may be allowed within the development include a hospice facility, skilled nursing facility, hospital, day care, overnight accommodations, and health services, all of which are allowed by-right within the C-1 district and could be constructed on the site currently. Accessory uses that may be provided in conjunction with the primary use for the residents of the development include a fitness/wellness center, barber/beauty shop, bank, theater, arts and craft studio, medical services, bar/lounge, restaurants, business center, library, chapel, concierge services, laundry services, housekeeping services, security services, and support offices. The by-right C-1 uses that will be prohibited with the PUD (except as otherwise allowed by the PUD) include residential uses (single-family, townhouse), civic uses, food and beverage establishments, entertainment and recreation, and professional and business offices. Density: The maximum dwelling unit density of 24 units per acre that is proposed with the PUD matches the maximum that could be developed under the current zoning ordinance for the property or could be approved via Special Use Permit within the C-1 district. Setbacks: The minimum setbacks proposed within the PUD exceed the minimum of the base C-1 district. The PUD proposes a minimum building front setback of 25 feet (C-1 is 25 ft.), rear building setback of 15 feet (C-1 is 0 ft.), side building setback of 15 feet (C-1 is 10 ft.), and east side building setback against the residential zoning district (Sun City) of 25 feet (C-1 is 15 ft.). Parking and garage setbacks are proposed to be 15 feet, except where adjacent to a residentially zoned property the setback will be 25 feet. Height: The maximum building height of the C-1 district is 35 feet. The PUD proposes an exception to increase the maximum building height to 60 feet. However, the maximum height steps down so that no portion of a building may exceed 45 feet in height within 150 feet of any property line and no portion may exceed 35 feet within 80 feet of the residential zoning district to the east (Sun City). Garages and accessory buildings may not exceed 25 feet in height. Parking: The standard UDC parking requirement for senior apartments is one space per dwelling unit plus an additional 5% (1 per 20 units) for visitors. The PUD proposes to increase this requirement to one space per unit plus one additional per each 15 dwelling units. Access: The proposed PUD prohibits access from this development to Red Poppy Trail. Landscaping and Buffering: Landscaping will meet the minimum standards of the UDC, except that the buffer required adjacent to the residentially zoned properties to the east Planning Department Staff Report Lots 5-7 Village Gate at Sun City – Seven Strand Senior Living Rezoning Page 3 of 7 (Sun City) will be increased from 15 feet to 25 feet (excepting a proposed drive aisle/fire lane encroachment). Screening materials will consist of a 6-foot masonry wall and evergreen trees. Signage: The UDC does not allow off-site signage. Due to the lack of frontage at the access points, the PUD proposes the allowance of off-site directional signage along Williams Drive and Del Webb Boulevard. Stormwater: The PUD provides for improvements to Lot 9 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat (stormwater pond adjacent to Del Webb Boulevard) including wet ponds, pathways and landscaping. Common Amenity Area: The PUD proposes to provide at least 5 common amenities on- site, which meets the UDC minimum number for properties with over 200 units. These amenities may be met by integrating a combination of uses including a fitness center, pool, game room(s), theater, art/craft studio, business center, walking trail, garden, game court(s) or outdoor dining areas. Site Information Location: This property is located near the northeast corner of Williams Drive and Del Webb Boulevard at the entrance of Sun City. Physical Characteristics: The 13-acre property is flat with no notable tree coverage. Surrounding Properties: The majority of the immediately surrounding property is developed and includes the Sun City neighborhood, rural residences, Walgreens, First State Bank, and medical offices. Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North None (ETJ) Low Density Residential Rural residential South AG Moderate Density Residential/ Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Node Open Space/Detention Ponds East RS Moderate Density Residential Residences (Sun City) West C-1 & C-3 Moderate Density Residential/ Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Node Walgreens, First State Bank, medical offices, and vacant lots Planning Department Staff Report Lots 5-7 Village Gate at Sun City – Seven Strand Senior Living Rezoning Page 4 of 7 Property History The subject property was part of the original Sun City Development Agreement and Concept Plan, approved in 1995. Also in 1995, the property was annexed into the City and was zoned Local Commercial (C-1) and Residential Planned (RP) to reflect the Sun City Concept Plan that identified this as a location for an assisted living facility or something similar. In 1997, the 15-acre tract this property was part of was removed from the Sun City Development Agreement and Concept Plan by the Second Amendment thereto. Also in 1997, the property was platted and rezoned (Ordinance No. 97-37) from C-1 and RP to Office and Service Use (RM-3) to allow for an assisted living center; however the development was not pursued. With the adoption of the Unified Development Code (UDC) in 2003 the RM-3 district was transitioned to the Office (OF) zoning district. In 2007, a retirement community project was proposed on the property that was to include living options at various levels of independence. The OF district did not allow the type of development proposed and the property was again rezoned in November 2007 with the following conditions: 1. A minimum of 8 acres be allocated exclusively to the development of a Continuum Care Retirement Community and accessory uses. These primary and accessory uses may include the following: a. Multi-family Dwellings and Accessory Uses as defined in Section 16.03.030 (A) “Household Living” of the Unified Development Code (UDC). b. Residential Assisted Living Facilities and Accessory Uses as defined in Section 16.03.030 (B) “Group Living” of the UDC. c. Nursing or Convalescent Home and Accessory Uses as defined in Section 16.03.030 (B) “Group Living” of the UDC. 2. Provide a Type “C” buffer (Section 8.08.030.F. of the Unified Development Code) between the site and the lots fronting on Plover Pass. 3. The site plan for the development, as required pursuant to Section 3.09 (“Site Plan Review”) of the Unified Development Code, shall be submitted for the review and approval of City Council. The proposed 2007 project was not pursued and in 2010 a new project, including an assisted living facility, was proposed on this property, resulting in a replat of the property in 2011. To this date, the property remains undeveloped. A plat application is under review at this time that will combine these three lots into one. 2030 Plan Conformance The 2030 Plan provides for a Mixed Use Neighborhood Center node at the intersection of Del Webb Boulevard and Williams Drive, all surrounded by the Moderate Density Residential land use category. Individually, these tracts are primarily shown as Moderate Density Residential; however, the Mixed Use Neighborhood Center node conveys the type Planning Department Staff Report Lots 5-7 Village Gate at Sun City – Seven Strand Senior Living Rezoning Page 5 of 7 of land use visioned to generate from that intersection, not the exact development boundaries or configurations. The Moderate Density Residential land use category single family neighborhoods densities ranging between 3.1 and 6 dwelling units per gross acre, but may also support non- residential uses along arterial roadways, although such uses may not be depicted on the Future Land Use Map. The Mixed Use Neighborhood Center land use designation accommodates, but does not require, mixed-use buildings with retail, service, and other uses on the ground floor, and offices or residential units above, and may also include stand-alone high density residential development. The exact size, location, and design of these areas should be subject to a more specific approval process, to ensure an appropriate fit with the surrounding residential pattern. The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1A (Developed, Redeveloping), which is the portion of the City where infrastructure systems are in place, or can be economically provided, and where the bulk of the City’s growth should be guided over the near term. Proposed Zoning District The PUD, Planned Unit Development District, is intended to allow flexibility in planning and designing for unique or environmentally sensitive properties, which are to be developed in accordance with a common development scheme or planned associations of uses. PUD zoning is designed to accommodate various types of development, including a combination or mix of uses. The PUD zoning district may also provide for variations from the standard UDC requirements allowing for creation of a unique product. The C-1 district provides for areas of commercial and retail activities that primarily serve residential areas. The District is more appropriate along major or minor thoroughfares and corridors including Westinghouse Road. Typical allowed uses in the C-1 district include restaurants, offices, retail sales, and personal services. However, the Seven Strand PUD as proposed limits these uses to accessory/amenity for the residents of the development. The independent living use proposed in the PUD is classified as a multifamily use, which if not included in a PUD would require approval of a Special Use Permit; although, the conditions of the previous zoning ordinance for this property allowed the use by right. Utilities The City of Georgetown will provide electric, water and wastewater services at this location. Utility requirements are being determined through the platting process and as the project design progresses. Planning Department Staff Report Lots 5-7 Village Gate at Sun City – Seven Strand Senior Living Rezoning Page 6 of 7 Transportation This property has full access to Williams Drive, right-in/ right-out access to Del Webb Boulevard, and one-way exit only access to Yellow Rose Trail, all via access easements. While the property has frontage on Red Poppy Trail, no access will be permitted from this property and an existing wall/fence will remain in place. Williams Drive is an existing Major Arterial level roadway and Del Webb is a collector level roadway. Per the approved plat, the requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is determined with the Site Plan application and is not required with this rezoning. Future Application(s) Development of this property will also require approval of a Replat, Site Plan and Building Permit that will all be administratively reviewed and approved. Staff Analysis Staff Recommendation and Basis: Staff is supportive of the proposed request for rezoning from C-1 to PUD based on the following: 1. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map placement of a Mixed Use Neighborhood Center node at Del Webb Boulevard and Williams Drive supports the PUD zoning and the proposed uses listed in the PUD Development Plan. 2. The property is currently zoned C-1 (the proposed PUD base district) and is adjacent to properties zoned Local Commercial (C-1) and General Commercial (C-3), from which primary access to this tract will be taken. Increased setbacks and buffering have been proposed against the Single-Family Residential (RS) zoned properties to the east within Sun City. 3. The adjacent land uses include Walgreens, First State Bank, medical offices and rural residences as well as the Sun City neighborhood. Increased setbacks and buffering have been proposed against the Single-Family Residential (RS) zoned properties to the east within Sun City. 4. The PUD Development Plan outlines many provisions in excess of standard UDC requirements to mitigate for the additional building height, including increased setbacks, parking, and buffering and restricted land uses. Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments None Planning Department Staff Report Lots 5-7 Village Gate at Sun City – Seven Strand Senior Living Rezoning Page 7 of 7 Public Comments Thirty-two notices were sent out to owners of property within the city limits that are also within 200 feet of the proposed rezoning. A public notice was posted in the Sun newspaper on January 4th, 2015. As of the writing of this report, two written public comments have been received in opposition to the request (see Exhibit 4). Special Considerations None Attachments Exhibit 1 – Zoning Map Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map Exhibit 3 – Aerial Map Exhibit 4 – Public Comment Exhibit A – PUD Development Plan Exhibit B – Conceptual Land Plan Meetings Schedule January 20, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission January 27, 2015 – City Council First Reading February 10, 2015 – City Council Second Reading CIT Y O F G E O R G E T O W N C I T Y O F G E O R G E T O W N REZ-2014-034 T R A I L OF THEFLOWERS Y E L L O W R O S E T R L A C A CI A W A Y RE D P O P P Y T R L T H I S T L E T R L P L O V E R P A S S BURR O A K L N G O L F V I E W D R DEWBERRY DR WILLIAMS D R P O W D E R C R E E K C V LAKEVIE W L N SEDROTRL DA N D E L I O N D R VINCA D R S CISSORT AILTRL W H ITEWING WAY S LAKEW O O D S D R BLAZING STAR D R SC I S S O R T A I L T R L B E R R Y W O O D L N WHIPPOORWILLWAY C H E R R Y W O O D L N ALL E N CIR DEL WEBB BLVD D E L W E B B B L V D C A S A L O M A C I R Zoning InformationREZ-2014-034Exhibit #1 ¯ Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 1,000 2,000 Feet LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ ³ Site Del WebbBlvd WilliamsDrive GeorgetownETJ GeorgetownETJ G e o r g e t o w n E T J REZ-2014-034 WILLIAMSDR D E W B E R R Y D R Y E L L O W R O S E T R L ACACI A W A Y R ED POPPYTRL P L O V E R P A S S S LAKEW O O D S D R W H I T E W ING WAY D E L W E B B B L V D CASA LOM A C I R 0 500 1,000Feet Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Exhibit #2REZ-2014-034 Legend Thoroughfare Future Land Use Institutional Regional Commercial Community Commercial Employment Center Low Density Residential Mining Mixed Use Community Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Moderate Density Residential Open Space Specialty Mixed Use Area Ag / Rural Residential Willi a m s D r D e l W ebbBlvd Site³ City Limits Street Site Existing Collector Existing Freeway Existing Major Arterial Existing Minor Arterial Existing Ramp Proposed Collector Proposed Freeway Propsed Frontage Road Proposed Major Arterial Proposed Minor Arterial Proposed Railroad High Density Residential REZ-2014-034 WI L L I A M S D R YELLOW ROSE TRL D E W B E R R Y D R COL U M B I N E C T ACACI A W A Y RED P O P P Y T R L P L O V E R P A S S S LAKEW O O D S D R TRA I L O F T H E F L O W E R S B E R R Y W O O D L N C H E R R Y W O O D L N WHI T E W I N G W A Y C A S A L O M A C I R DEL WEB B B L V D LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ 0 500 1,000Feet Exhibit #3 REZ-2014-034 D e l W ebbBlvd Site City Limits Street Site ³ Willi a m s D r i v e Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT A Seven Strand Senior Living Planned Unit Development Development Plan A. PROPERTY The Seven Strand Senior Living Planned Unit Development District is located along Del Webb Boulevard at the entrance to Sun City and encompasses approximately 13.1501 acres, described as Lots 5, 6, & 7, Block A, of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat recorded in Document 2011087677, Official Public Records of Williamson County, herein defined as the “property”. B. PURPOSE The vision for the Seven Strand Senior Living development focuses on creating a luxury resort style retirement center consisting of multiple retirement housing buildings with integrated amenities to serve the residents of the Seven Strand Luxury Senior Living development. This PUD serves to augment and/or modify the standards for development outlined in the City’s Unified Development Code (UDC) in order to implement the vision for the property and insure a cohesive, quality development not otherwise anticipated by the underlying base zoning district. In accordance with UDC Section 4.06.010.C “Development Plan Required”, this Development Plan titled Exhibit A is a summary of the development and design standards for the property. C. APPLICABILITY AND BASE ZONING In accordance with UDC Section 4.06.010.A “Compatibility with Base Zoning District”, all development of the property shall conform to the base zoning district of Local Commercial (C-1). Except for those requirements specifically deviated by this Development Plan, all development standards established in the most current version of the UDC at time of development shall be applicable. In the case that this Development Plan does not address a specific item, the City of Georgetown UDC and any other applicable Ordinances shall apply. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this PUD and the regulations of the base zoning district, the PUD shall control. D. CONCEPTUAL LAND PLAN A Conceptual Land Plan has been attached to this Development Plan as Exhibit B to illustrate the land use and design intent for the property. The Conceptual Land Plan is intended to serve as a guide to illustrate the general vision and design concepts and is not intended to serve as a final document. As such, the proposed building and parking configurations are subject to refinement at time of Site Plan review. The Conceptual Land Plan depicts a series of buildings, parking, outdoor areas, and landscaping that may be developed in phases, provided the minimum requirements of the PUD district are met. Approval of this PUD, Development Plan, and Conceptual Land Plan does not constitute approval of a Site Plan per Section 3.09 of the UDC. Page 2 of 5 E. LAND USES 1. Primary Use. The primary permitted use is multifamily attached residential for seniors. The development plan for the property (See Exhibit B) is for a resort style retirement center consisting of one or a mixture of the following types of related senior living housing choices: • Independent Living Retirement Center Apartments • Group Living in the form of an Assisted Living Retirement Center or Nursing or Convalescent Home 2. Additional Permitted Uses. • Hospice Facility • Skilled Nursing Facility • Hospital • Day Care • Overnight Accommodations Uses • Health Services Uses 3. Permitted Accessory Uses. The following shall be allowed as accessory uses within the primary buildings in support of the primary retirement center use: • Fitness/Wellness Center • Barber/Beauty Shop • Bank • Theater • Art and Craft Studio • Onsite Medical/Wellness • Espresso Bar • Bar/Lounge • Restaurants and Kitchen • Business Center • Library • Chapel • Concierge Services • Laundry Services • Housekeeping • Security • Offices providing support services within the facilities 3. Prohibited Uses. Unless listed as an allowed use in section E.1, E.2, or E.3 of this PUD (Exhibit A), the following uses are prohibited: Page 3 of 5 Residential Uses: All residential uses listed as “permitted (P), limited (L) or special use (S)” under the C1 zoning column in table 5.02.010 of the UDC. Civic Uses: All civic uses listed as “permitted (P), limited (L) or special use (S)” under the C1 zoning column in table 5.03.010 of the UDC. Commercial Uses: All commercial uses listed under “Food & Beverage Establishments”, “Entertainment & Recreation”, “Professional & Business Offices” listed as “permitted (P), limited (L) or special use (S)” under the C1 zoning column in table 5.04.010 of the UDC. F. DESIGN STANDARDS 1. Density. There shall be a maximum of 24 dwelling units per acre. There shall be no maximum on the number of dwelling units per structure. 2. Setbacks. The setbacks on the Property shall be as follows: Front (Southern) Setback - minimum 25 feet Side (Western) Setback - minimum 15 feet (Eastern) Setback to Residentially Zoned District - minimum 25 feet Rear (Northern) Setback - minimum 15 feet Accessory Building (Garage) Setback – minimum 15 feet Accessory Building (Garage) Setback to Residentially Zoned District - minimum 25 feet Parking Setback – minimum 15 feet Parking Setback to Residentially Zoned District – minimum 25 feet 3. Building Height. The maximum building heights on the Property shall be as follows: Maximum Height for Residential Buildings shall be 60 feet, however: • Any portion of a building within 150 feet of a property line shall not exceed 45 feet; and • Along the eastern property line, any portion of a building within 80 feet of the adjacent Residentially Zoned District shall not exceed 35 feet. Maximum Height for Accessory Buildings (Garage) shall be 25 feet. All other buildings shall not exceed 35 feet in height. 4. Building Size. There shall be no maximum building square footage or floor-to-area ratio for any residential or group living buildings on the property. 5. Exterior Lighting. Exterior Lighting on the Property and its buildings will comply with the requirements set forth in Section 7.05 of the UDC related to outdoor lighting unless otherwise described in this PUD. G. PARKING. Parking on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 9 of the UDC except as otherwise stated in this Development Plan. The specific parking requirement for the Independent Living Retirement Center use shall be: 1 space per dwelling unit + 1 space per Page 4 of 5 each 15 dwelling units or fraction thereof for visitor and employee parking. Garage spaces shall count toward the overall parking requirements. Golf cart parking may count towards a maximum of 2% of the required parking spaces. H. VEHICULAR ACCESS AND CIRCULATION 1. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis, as noted in the recorded subdivision plat covering this property, will be deferred to the Site Plan application. 2. Driveways Access. Driveway access shall be prohibited from Red Poppy Trail. I. TREE PRESERVATION Tree Preservation on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 8 of the Unified Development Code unless otherwise stated in this Development Plan. J. LANDSCAPE AND BUFFER REQUIREMENTS Landscaping on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 8 of the UDC except that a 25-foot wide landscape bufferyard, consisting of a solid six-foot screening wall constructed of two-sided masonry materials and plantings including two evergreen trees per each 50 linear feet, shall be required along the eastern property line adjacent the residential properties in the Sun City neighborhood. A 10 ft. encroachment by a fire lane into the 25 ft landscape bufferyard is allowed but shall require 4 evergreen trees per each 50 linear feet of encroachment. K. SIGNAGE Signage on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 10 of the Unified Development Code unless otherwise stated in this Development Plan. 1. A maximum of two (2) off-site identification signs may be allowed within Lots 1 thru 4 or Lot 8, Block A, of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat recorded in Document 2011087677. 2. A Master Sign Plan may be approved separately from the PUD, without cause for amendment to the PUD, following the approval process outlined in Section 3.12 of the UDC. L. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE Impervious coverage on the Property shall be in conformance with Note #15 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat. M. STORMWATER Improvements will be installed on the adjoining common-owned Lot 9 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat. Such improvements will include wet ponds, pathways, and native drought tolerant landscape plantings to enhance the environment. N. PARKLAND AND COMMON AMENITY AREA 1. Parkland. The parkland dedication requirements of UDC Section 13.05 will be met with fee-in lieu of dedication, as provided for in Section 13.05.010.D, at time of Site Plan approval, in an amount equal to $200 per new dwelling unit. Page 5 of 5 2. Common Amenity Area. The Common Amenity Area requirements of UDC Section 6.06.020 for any Independent Senior Living dwelling units will be met by integrating any combination of 5 of the following amenities on-site: • Fitness/Wellness Center • Pool/Hot Tub • Great Room • Billiards • Card Room • Theater • Art and Craft Studio • Business Center • Walking Trails (these may carry over onto Lot 9 of the Village Gate at Sun City Final Plat) • Community Garden • Yard Games/Courts (Bocce, horseshoes, washers, etc.) • Outdoor Dining Patio O. PUD MODIFICATIONS In conformance with Section 4.06.010.D.3 of the UDC, modifications to this Development Plan shall require City Council approval of an amendment to this PUD processed pursuant to Section 3.06 of the UDC, except, where the Director of Planning determines such modifications to be minor, the Director may authorize such modifications. Minor modifications may include changes to building sizes, uses, or locations providing those modifications conform to the general intent of this PUD, uses authorized by this PUD, or to applicable provisions of the UDC and any other applicable regulations. P. LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A – This PUD Development Plan Exhibit B - Conceptual Land Plan 3 0 ' B U F F E R Y A R D U T I L I T Y E A S E M E N T 1 5 ' P U B L I C U T I L I T Y E A S E M E N T 1 5 ' P U B L I C 3 0 ' B U F F E R Y A R D 4 0 ' A C C E S S E A S E M E N T 1 0 ' S I D E S ET B A C K UTILITY EASEMENT 15' PUBLIC M A I N B U I L D I N G 4 F L O O R S 6 0 ' H E I G H T , M A X . A L L A M E N I T I E S O N F L O O R S 1 & 2 R E S I D E N T I A L B U I L D I N G D 3 F L O O R S 4 5 ' H E I G H T , M A X . R E S I D E N T I A L B U I L D I N G C 3 F L O O R S 4 5 ' H E I G H T , M A X . R E S I D E N T I A L B U I L D I N G B 3 F L O O R S 4 5 ' H E I G H T , M A X . R E S I D E N T I A L B U I L D I N G F 3 F L O O R S 4 5 ' H E I G H T , M A X . R E S I D E N T I A L B U I L D I N G E 3 F L O O R S 4 5 ' H E I G H T , M A X . FIR E LA N E F I R E L A N E FIRE LANE F I R E L A N E F I R E D E P A R T M E N T A C C E S S F I R E D E P A R T M E N T A C C E S S 5 3 ' 5 3 ' 8 4 ' 1 5 1 ' 1 1 7 ' 2 5 ' S E T B A C K T O R E S ID E N T IA L 2 5 ' S E T B A C K T O R E S I D E N T I A L 2 CAR GARAGE/ STORAGE UNIT, TYP. 89.95° 8 4 ' 2 4 4 ' 1 8 0 ' 8 4 ' 49 SPACES 20 SPACES 19 SPACES 29 SPACES 10 SPACES 29 SPACES 16 SPACES 17 SPACES 17 SPACES 19 SPACES 35 SPACES23 S P A C E S 1 0 S P A C E S MONUMENT SIGN 1 2 4 ' 3 6 8 ' 1 7 6 ' 1 8 7 ' WATER/FIRE FEATURE © COPYRIGHT GSC ARCHITECTS 2014. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. SITE PLAN - ENLARGED 11.05.2014 7 STRAND PROJECT NO.: 201306100 TRUE NORTH25'0'50'100'200'10' STANDARD ACCESSIBLE GARAGES TOTAL PARKING 262 12 66 340 PARKING COUNT City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning of 7.74 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Two-Family (TF) District, located at 422 Northwoods Drive. (REZ-2014-036) ITEM SUMMARY: Background: The applicant has requested to rezone one parcel of land from the Agriculture (AG) District [default zoning upon annexation in November, 2013] to the Two-family (TF) District, to develop a residential subdivision of either single-family or two-family dwelling units. All surrounding properties are platted and developed with some form of residential development. Public Comment: One (1) written comment has been received to date, opposing the request. Recommended Motion: Recommend to the City Council approval of the request to rezone 7.74 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Two-Family (TF) District. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The applicant paid the required fees. SUBMITTED BY: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner and Sofia Nelson, Interim Planning Director ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Staff Report Cover Memo Exhibit 1 - Future Land Use / Transportation Map Backup Material Exhibit 2 - Zoning Map Backup Material Exhibit 3 - Public Comment Exhibit Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report 7.74 ac. Porter Survey (422 Northwood) - Rezoning Page 1 of 4 AG to TF Report Date: January 15, 2015 File No: REZ-2014-036 Project Planner: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner Item Details Project Name: 422 Northwood Project Address: 422 Northwood Drive Location: 422 Northwood, Northwest Boulevard at River Bend Drive (See Exhibit 1) Total Acreage: 7.74 acres Legal Description: 7.74 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract #497 Applicant: Mark Baker, SEC Planning Property Owner: Jeff Stokes Contact: Mark Baker, SEC Planning Existing Use: One single-family residence Existing Zoning: Agriculture (AG) per Annexation Ordinance 2013-53, adopted November 26, 2013 Proposed Zoning: Two-Family (TF) District Future Land Use: Moderate Density Residential Growth Tier: Tier 1A Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant has requested to rezone one parcel of land from the Agriculture (AG) District [default zoning upon annexation in November, 2013] to the Two-family (TF) District, to develop a residential subdivision of either single-family or two-family dwelling units. All surrounding properties are platted and developed with some form of residential development. Site Information Location: This property is located on the north side of Northwest Boulevard, at the intersection with River Bend Drive, approximately ¼ mile east of Lakeway Drive. (See Exhibit 1) Physical Characteristics: The property is a flat, sparsely treed and mostly undeveloped tract, with one single-family residence in the center. Surrounding Properties: The surrounding properties include various residential density uses (See aerial image below). Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use North MF-2, High Density Multifamily; ETJ Moderate Density Residential Two-family and ETJ residential South MF-2, High Density Multifamily Moderate Density Residential Apartment Multifamily East RS, Residential Single-family Moderate Density Residential Single-family residential West MF-2, High Density Multifamily Moderate Density Residential Apartment Multifamily Planning Department Staff Report 7.74 ac. Porter Survey (422 Northwood) - Rezoning Page 2 of 4 AG to TF Property History The property was annexed into the City on November 26, 2013 per Ordinance 2013-53. Prior to this, the property operated under a 15-year Annexation Development Agreement (Williamson County Document #2008088986, executed by the previous owner) that maintained the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) status of the property and allowed/limited the continuation of a single-family residence and a commercial truck parking and portable office use (Section 2.1 of Agreement). Per that agreement, voluntary annexation into the City was initiated when the current property owner indicated an imminent desire to develop the property. No other history of the property is known. Subdivisions and residential development have occurred on all sides of the property in the past, completely surrounding this unplatted property. 2030 Plan Conformance Land Use: The proposed rezoning is in conformance with the 2030 Plan land use designation of Moderate Density Residential, providing for a density ranging between 3.1 and 6 dwelling units per gross acre. UDC Section 6.03.060 specifically cites the Two-Family District as a moderate density zoning district. It is estimated that the 7.7 acre parcel, under the development standards of the Two-Family zoning district, could yield in the range of 40 (single-family detached) to 50 (two-family aka duplex) dwelling units, a density of roughly 5.2 to 6.5 dwelling units per acre, depending on site designs for roadways, drainage features, preserved Planning Department Staff Report 7.74 ac. Porter Survey (422 Northwood) - Rezoning Page 3 of 4 AG to TF trees, etc. Growth Tier: The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1A, that portion of the city where infrastructure systems are in place, or can be economically provided and where the bulk of the city’s growth should be guided over the near term. Proposed Zoning District The Two-Family (TF) District is intended for areas of medium density with a minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet, but allows both Single-family detached, Single-family attached, and Two-family uses. The standards of UDC Section 6.03.060 seek to maintain the ‘single-family’ neighborhood characteristics, and the District can effectively act as a transition between solely single-family neighborhoods (zoned RE, RL, or RS) and higher density residential (TH, MF-1, MF-2) and commercial districts/developments. Utilities Electric, water, and wastewater are served by the City of Georgetown. It is anticipated that there is adequate capacity to serve this property either by existing capacity or developer participation in upgrades to infrastructure. Transportation The property currently has access from the terminus of Northwood Drive and a driveway onto Northwest Boulevard on the far northwest end. Northwood Drive is local residential street with a 50’ right-of-way and 28’ of pavement. Northwest Boulevard is a Major Collector (60’ of right-of-way, 44’ of pavement). Access will be determined through the future subdivision platting process, which could include the continuation of Northwood Drive as a public street, and a centralized connection to Northwest Boulevard. Future Application(s) The following applications will be required to be submitted to develop the property under the requested zoning district: • Preliminary Plat to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission; • Final Plat(s) is to be processed administratively; • Construction Plans will be processed administratively; • Building permits for construction of two-family or single-family detached structures. Staff Analysis Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning for the following reasons: 1. The Future Land Use designation of Moderate Density Residential supports the proposed district. 2. The existing zoning of the surrounding area is RS, MF-2, and ETJ residential. 3. The surrounding developed uses include single-family, two-family, and multifamily residential. Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments None Planning Department Staff Report 7.74 ac. Porter Survey (422 Northwood) - Rezoning Page 4 of 4 AG to TF Public Comments A total of 22 notices were sent out to the owners of properties within the City that lie within 200 feet of the proposed rezoning. Public notice was posted in the Sun newspaper on January 4, 2015. As of the writing of this report, one (1) written comment in opposition has been received. Meetings Schedule January 20, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission February 10, 2015 – City Council Public Hearing and First Reading February 24, 2015 – City Council Second Reading Attachments Exhibit 1 – Future Land Use Map Exhibit 2 – Zoning Map GeorgetownETJ Geo r g e t o w n E T J Georgetown E T J REZ-2014-036 RIVER BENDDR W E S T W O O D L N T H O R NT O N L N THORNTON C V SILV E R L E A F D R G O L D E N O A K S D R LAKE W A Y D R WHISPEROAKSLN DA W N D R NORTHWOODDR NORTHWEST B LVD S H A D Y H O L L O W D R 0 500 1,000Feet Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Exhibit #1 REZ-2014-036 Legend Thoroughfare Future Land Use Institutional Regional Commercial Community Commercial Employment Center Low Density Residential Mining Mixed Use Community Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Moderate Density Residential Open Space Specialty Mixed Use Area Ag / Rural Residential Wi l l i a m s D r §¨¦35 W e i r R d Lakew a y D r N A u s t i n A v e N Au s t i n A v e Site ³ City Limits Street Site Existing Collector Existing Freeway Existing Major Arterial Existing Minor Arterial Existing Ramp Proposed Collector Proposed Freeway Propsed Frontage Road Proposed Major Arterial Proposed Minor Arterial Proposed Railroad High Density Residential N o r t h w e s t B l v d CITYOFGEORGETOWN REZ-2014-036 DA W N D R WESTWOOD LN G O L D E N O A K S D R TANGLEWOODDR T E R RYLN THORNTON C V T H O R N T O N L N RIVER BEND DR SILV E R L E A F D R GOL D E N O A K S R D NORTHWESTBLVD WHI S P E R O A K S L N N O R T H W O O D D R S H A D Y H O L L O W D R Zoning InformationREZ-2014-036Exhibit #2 ¯ Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 500 1,000 Feet LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ N A u s t i n A v e Lakeway Dr Lake w ay Dr Willia m s Dr §¨¦35³Site N o r t h w e s t B l v d City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning from the Residential Single-family (RS) District to the Mixed Use – Downtown (MU-DT) District for a 0.12-acre tract described as Lost Addition, Block 64 (part), located at 211 West 11th Street. (REZ-2014-035) ITEM SUMMARY: Background: The applicant has requested to rezone one parcel of land from the Residential Single-family (RS) District to Mixed Use – Downtown (MU-DT) District. The Future Land Use designation for this area is Specialty Mixed Use Area, and the proposed district is generally consistent with that category. The MU-DT district is reserved for properties located within the Downtown Overlay District and allows for a mix of commercial and residential uses, consistent with the historical growth of the downtown area. Public Comment: There has been no public comment received. Recommended Motion: Recommend to the City Council approval of a request to rezone a 0.12- acre tract described as Lost Addition, Block 64 (part), located at 211 West 11th Street from the RS to the MU-DT. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. The applicant has paid the required fees. SUBMITTED BY: Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner, and Sophia Nelson, Interim Planning Director ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Staff Report Cover Memo Exhibits 1 & 2 - Zoning and Future Land Use Maps Backup Material Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report 211 West 11th Street - Rezoning Page 1 of 3 RS to MU-DT Report Date: January 12, 2015 File No: REZ-2014-035 Project Planner: Matt Synatschk, Historic Planner Item Details Project Name: 211 West 11th Street Rezoning Project Address: 211 West 1th Street Location: Northeast corner of intersection of Rock and 11th Streets (See Exhibit 1) Total Acreage: 0.12 acres Legal Description: 0.12 acres of the Lost Addition, Block 64 (PT) Applicant: Mark Keathley Property Owner: Mark Keathley Contact: Mark Keathley Existing Use: Residential Existing Zoning: Residential Single Family (RS) Proposed Zoning: Mixed Use – Downtown (MU-DT) District Future Land Use: Specialty Mixed Use Area Growth Tier: Tier 1A Overview of Applicant’s Request The applicant has requested to rezone one parcel of land from the Residential Single-family (RS) District to Mixed Use – Downtown (MU-DT) District. The Future Land Use designation for this area is Specialty Mixed Use Area, and the proposed district is generally consistent with that category. The MU-DT district is reserved for properties located within the Downtown Overlay District and allows for a mix of commercial and residential uses, consistent with the historical growth of the downtown area. Site Information Location: The property is located at the intersection of Rock and 11th Streets, inside the Downtown Overlay District. See Exhibits 1 and 4. Physical Characteristics: The property is currently developed, with structures including a primary residential unit and an accessory garage building. Surrounding Properties: The surrounding properties include single-family residential structures, small residential structures converted to offices, and local commercial structures along Austin Avenue. See Exhibit 3 Property History The property is currently developed, with a structure and an accessory garage located on the site. The Low priority historic structure was constructed in 1900 and has been modified to include a second story and other exterior alterations. The subject property was initially zoned residential in 1968 and has remained Residential – Single Family (RS) since that date. The property was added to the Downtown Overlay District in 2001, with the adoption of Ord 2001-048. The 2030 Plan and the Downtown Master Plan Planning Department Staff Report 211 West 11th Street - Rezoning Page 2 of 3 RS to MU-DT identify all properties within the Downtown Overlay District as mixed use properties, combining residential and commercial uses. The proposed exterior alterations and infill construction project was reviewed and approved by the Historic and Architectural Review Commission at the December 11, 2014 meeting. 2030 Plan Conformance Land Use: The proposed rezoning is in conformance with the 2030 Plan land use designation of Specialty Mixed Use Area, providing for a variety of uses consistent with the historical development of the downtown core. The land use designation generally supports the proposed Mixed Use – Downtown zoning district. The surrounding development pattern is very similar, if not identical, to that which could be developed in accordance with the proposed district.The proposed zoning district is also consistent with the Downtown Master Plan, adopted by City Council in 2014. Growth Tier: The 2030 Plan Growth Tier Map designation is Tier 1A, which is that portion of the city where infrastructure systems are in place, or can be economically provided and where the bulk of the city’s growth should be guided over the near term. Proposed Zoning Districts As shown in Exhibit 3, the applicant is seeking to rezone the subject property Mixed Use – Downtown (MU-DT) District, which is intended for areas located within the Downtown Overlay District and supports multiple uses, including residential, commercial office and retail. Utilities The existing electric service and water and wastewater service are provided by the City of Georgetown. No utility changes are required for the property. Transportation The subject property will not generate a significant increase in traffic and a traffic impact analysis is not required with this application. Future Application(s) The following applications will be required to be submitted: • The site may require a plat if determined to not be a legal lot • Site Plans for the commercial development will be processed administratively; and • Building permits for interior and exterior changes. Staff Analysis Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning for the following reasons: 1. The Future Land Use designation of Mixed Use – Downtown (MU-DT) supports the proportion and location of the proposed district. 2. The existing zoning and use pattern of the surrounding area matches that of the proposed district. Planning Department Staff Report 211 West 11th Street - Rezoning Page 3 of 3 RS to MU-DT 3. The Downtown Master Plan and the 2030 Comprehensive Plan designate the property for mixed use development, ensuring the continued success of the Downtown Overlay District. Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments None Public Comments A total of 18 notices were sent out to property owners within 200 feet of the proposed rezoning. Public notice was posted in the Sun newspaper on January 4, 2015. As of the writing of this report, no written comments have been received. Meetings Schedule January 20, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission February 10, 2014 – City Council First Reading February 24, 2014 – City Council Second Reading Attachments Exhibit 1 – Zoning Map Exhibit 2 - Future Land Use Map REZ-2014-035 W 11 T H S T R O C K S T S A U S T I N A V E W 10TH ST Zoning InformationREZ-2014-035Exhibit #1 ¯ Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 100 200 Feet LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ W Univ ersi ty Ave S Aus tin Ave S Coll ege S t ³ Site REZ-2 014-035 S A U S T IN AV E W 11 T H S T R O C K S T W 1 0TH S T 0 100 200Feet Co ordinate System : Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only ¯ LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan Exhibit #2REZ-2014-035 Legend Thoroughfare Future Land Use Institutional Regional Com mercial Community Com mercial Employment Center Low Density Residential Mining Mixed Use Com munity Mixed Use Neighborhood Center Moderate Density Residential Open Space Specialty Mixed Use Area Ag / Rural Residential W Univ ers ity Av e S Au s ti n A ve S Coll ege St Site ³ City Lim its Street Site Existing Collector Existing Freeway Existing Major Arterial Existing Minor Arterial Existing Ramp Proposed Collector Proposed Freeway Propsed Frontage Road Proposed Major Arterial Proposed Minor Arterial Proposed Railroad High Density Residential City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Public Hearing and possible action on proposed amendments to the Unified Development Code (“UDC”) relating to water quality standards for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City limits and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (“ETJ”). ITEM SUMMARY: This amendment includes the proposed amendments to Chapters 2 and 11 of the Unified Development Code (“UDC”) that were previously approved in December 2014, and which have not come into effect, as well as the incorporation of an Appendix to the UDC to include the Federal standards relating to the Georgetown Salamander Occupied Sites (Attachment I). On December 9, 2014, the Georgetown City Council approved Ordinance 2014-103 amending the City’s UDC to formally codify certain water quality standards that were originally established by Ordinance 2013-59 for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City’s jurisdiction (Attachment II). Following the adoption of this Ordinance, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) and Williamson County, contacted the City to request additional changes to the UDC to incorporate the specific standards that apply to the Occupied Sites identified by the USFWS. Prior to the adoption of the 2014 Ordinance, it was the intent of the USFWS to incorporate these specific standards into the proposed 4(d) special Rule for the Georgetown Salamander. Presently, the USFWS intends to reference the local requirements in the proposed 4(d) special Rule, so as to ensure that all applicable regulations are integrated in one document. Due to the limitations on government entities imposed by Chapter 83 of the Texas Park and Wildlife Code, the incorporation of the Occupied Site specific standards in the UDC is proposed through the addition of an Appendix for informational purposes only. The Federal standards to be incorporated in UDC Appendix A will not be imposed by the City under any authority granted by the UDC. These standards will only be subject to Federal enforcement and administration. While this amendment will include the amendments previously reviewed and approved by Ordinance 2014-103, no change is being proposed to the regulations approved through this Ordinance. This new amendment will only include the incorporation of Appendix A to the UDC. Upon recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission, these proposed UDC amendments will proceed to the City Council's February 10th regular meeting for public hearing and first reading of the ordinance. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No direct fiscal impact to the City’s general fund by adopting the Ordinance to amend the UDC. There may be staffing and workload impact to the Planning Department and GUS Development Engineer, as more projects west of Interstate 35 continue on land that is currently undeveloped. SUBMITTED BY: Andreina Dávila-Quintero, Project Coordinator ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Attachment I - UDC Amendment, Chapters 2 and 11, and Appendix A Exhibit Attachment II - City Council Dec 9, 2014 Item AK Backup Material Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 1 of 13 Attachment I Chapter 2 Review Authority Section 2.01 General 2.01.020 Summary of Review Authority *** Table 2.01.020: Summary of Review Authority Procedure Pl a n n i n g Di r e c t o r Bu i l d i n g Of f i c i a l De v En g i n e e r Ur b a n Fo r e s t e r HA R C ZB A P& Z Ci t y Co u n c i l *** Planning and Zoning Commission *** Variance [water quality regulations (Section 11.07.003)] R <DM> A R – Review or Recommendation DM – Decision Making Authority A – Appeal Authority < > - Public Hearing *** Section 2.05 Planning & Zoning Commission (Commission or P&Z) 2.05.010 Powers and Duties The Planning and Zoning Commission has the following powers and duties as described in this Code: A. Final Action *** 6. Variance from the floodplain, water quality regulations (Section 11.07.003) and stormwater regulations of this Code if the Variance is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of this ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done. Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 2 of 13 *** C. Additional Duties *** 3. Hear and decide an appeal that alleges error in an order, requirement, decision or determination made by an Administrative Official in the enforcement of Section 11.07 of this Code. *** Chapter 11 Environmental Protection *** Section 11.07 Water Quality Regulations for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone 11.07.001 Applicability A. The regulations of this Section apply to all property within the corporate limits of the City and its extraterritorial jurisdiction (“ETJ”), to the extent allowable by State law, located within the recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer, as that term is defined in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3 and §213.22, except as noted below. Property within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) is determined by the most current official map of the relevant zone located in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality office for Region 11. B. Section 11.07.003, as described herein, does not apply to Occupied Sites as this term is defined in this Section. Property with an Occupied Site should be in accordance with the Federal standards as referenced in this Section. 11.07.002 Definitions The following words and phrases, when used in this Section, shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this subsection, except when the context otherwise requires: Bank (of a stream). The ordinary high water mark of a stream, not the floodplain boundaries, as determined by the appropriate authority. Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 3 of 13 Best Management Practices (BMPs). For this Section only, BMPs has that meaning ascribed to it in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3(5), as may be amended and as further defined herein. Development Engineer. A professional engineer licensed by the State of Texas and designated to serve in the capacity of the Development Engineer for duties specified in the City Code of Ordinances and Unified Development Code. Geologic Assessment. A report prepared by a geologist pursuant to Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.5 and containing the additional information required by this Section . Geologist. A licensed professional geoscientist who has training and experience in ground water hydrology and related fields that enable that individual to make sound professional judgments regarding the identification of sensitive features, such as springs and streams. Licensed Professional Geoscientist. A geoscientist who maintains a current license through the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists in accordance with its requirements for professional practice. Occupied Site. Any spring identified as a critical habitat unit by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service for the Georgetown Salamander (Eurycea naufragia), and include the following: Cobb Well, Cobb Springs, Cowen Creek Spring, Bat Well Cave, Walnut Spring, Twin Spring, Hogg Hollow Spring, Cedar Hollow Spring, Knight (Crockett Garden) Spring, Cedar Breaks Hiking Trail Spring, Water Tank Cave, Avant’s (Capitol Aggregates), Buford Hollow Springs, Swinbank Spring, Shadow Canyon, San Gabriel Spring, and Garey Ranch Springs. The locations of the Occupied Sites are shown on the map incorporated below. Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 4 of 13 Recharge Zone. That portion of the City and its ETJ that overlays the EARZ as defined in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3, as may be amended. Regulated Activity. Shall have that meaning ascribed to it by Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3(28), as may be amended. Spring. Any natural setting or location where ground water flows to the surface of the earth from underground frequently enough to support spring associated vegetation such as ferns, watercress and Texas sedge. Stream. A flow of surface water sufficient to produce a defined natural channel or bed. A defined natural channel or bed is an area that demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water. 11.07.003 Spring Buffer and Stream Buffer Protection A. Spring Buffer 1. A Spring Buffer is established within 164 feet (or 50 meters) of the approximate center of a Spring outlet in the EARZ that is identified in a Geologic Assessment. The Spring Buffer shall not include pre­existing development. 2. No Regulated Activities may be conducted within the Spring Buffer except for the following and subject to the stated restrictions: Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 5 of 13 a. Properly permitted maintenance of existing improvements; b. Scientific monitoring of water quality; c. Fences above the normal high water mark of a Stream if such fences comply with applicable floodplain regulations; d. Subject to Stream Buffer limitations, below, parks and open space development limited to trails, benches, trash cans and pet waste facilities; provided that trails shall not be located within the ordinary high water mark of a stream and shall be limited to trails for walking, jogging and non­motorized biking; and e. Wastewater infrastructure installed roughly parallel to a stream provided that such infrastructure is installed on the side of the stream opposite the Spring and is installed no closer than 25 feet from the Bank of the Stream; provided that wastewater infrastructure shall not cross a Stream associated with a Spring within the Spring Buffer. B. Stream Buffer 1. A Stream Buffer is established for all Streams in the EARZ that is identified in a Geologic Assessment. The boundaries of the Stream Buffer are as follows: a. For Streams draining more than 64 acres and less than 320 acres, the boundaries of the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (a) shall be a minimum of 200 feet wide with at least 75 feet from the centerline of the Stream. If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer shall be 100 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, if available. b. For Streams draining more than 320 acres but less than 640 acres, the boundaries of the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (b) shall be a minimum of 300 feet wide with at least 100 feet from the centerline of the stream. If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer shall be 150 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, if available. Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 6 of 13 c. For Streams draining 640 acres or more, the boundaries of the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (c) shall be a minimum of 500 feet wide with at least 200 feet from the centerline of the stream. If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer shall be 250 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, if available. 2. No Regulated Activity may be conducted within the Stream Buffer other than: a. Properly permitted maintenance of existing improvements; b. Scientific monitoring of water quality; c. Fences above the normal high water mark of a Stream if such fences comply with applicable floodplain regulations; and d. The construction of the following improvements, subject to the stated restrictions: i. Wastewater facilities, provided that wastewater utilities shall not be located below the normal high water elevation within the channel of a stream except at crossings of a stream; ii. Underground utilities other than wastewater facilities provided that such underground utilities may only be installed at Stream crossings, or at intervals no closer than 400 feet apart; iii. Parks and open space development limited to trails, benches, trash cans and pet waste facilities; provided that trails shall not be located within the ordinary high water mark of a Stream and shall be limited to trails for walking, jogging and non­motorized biking. iv. Water quality or flood control systems, provided that measures are taken in the construction of such water quality or flood control systems to minimize the impact to the Stream Buffer; v. Public projects that enhance or recharge the Edwards Aquifer, provide flood prevention, and similar capital improvements; vi. Remediation of altered floodplain to its natural limits; Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 7 of 13 vii. Arterial, collector and local residential streets crossing a Stream provided that: (A) A floodplain with a drainage area greater than 640 acres may only be crossed by arterial streets; (B) A floodplain with a drainage area between 320 acres and 640 acres may only be crossed by arterial and collector streets; (C) A floodplain with a drainage area up to 320 acres may be crossed by arterial, collector, or local residential streets; and (D) A street required for a secondary access, or as required by the currently adopted fire code regulations, is exempt from this subsection. C. All Spring and Stream Buffers, as described herein, shall be shown on all plats, Site Plan and infrastructure construction plans, to include Stormwater Permits and Building Permits when applicable. D. Exemptions. 1. The Spring Buffer and Stream Buffer requirements of Section 11.07.003 do not apply to an Occupied Site as this term is defined in this Section. Regulated Activity on a tract of land with an Occupied Site, or within 984 feet (or 300 meters) of an Occupied Site, should be in accordance with the standards outline in UDC Appendix A. 2. In the event that the owner of property opts to request a variance from the standards outlined in UDC Appendix A to the Adaptive Management Working Group, it shall be the responsibility of the owner of property to submit to the City of Georgetown revised plans in accordance with the results of the variance request; E. Variances 1. An owner of property of a tract of land with a Spring or Stream may request a variance from the spring and/or stream buffer requirements of this subsection to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. The Planning and Zoning Commission may consider and take final action on a variance request in accordance with the powers and duties in Section 2.05.010.A.6 of this Code. F. Appeal Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 8 of 13 Any person aggrieved by an administrative decision pertaining to this subsection may appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission in accordance with Section 3.14 of this Code. 11.07.004 Water Quality Best Management Practices A. For all Regulated Activities within the Recharge Zone, the following regulations apply: 1. Permanent structural water quality controls for a project shall remove eighty­five percent (85%) of total suspended solids for the entire project and shall be certified by a licensed professional engineer. 2. No Regulated Activity shall cause any increase in the developed flow rate for the 2­year, 3­hour storm; 3. All development projects, including, but not limited to, individual home sites, shall implement temporary BMPs to minimize sediment runoff. 4. New roadways or expansions to existing roadways that provide a capacity of 25,000 vehicles per day that are located on the Recharge Zone shall provide for spill containment as described in the Optional Enhanced Measures of the Edwards Aquifer Protection Program. 5. All permanent BMPs with an overt physical presence shall have signage that clearly identifies the purpose of the permanent BMP and the party responsible for maintenance. 6. Maintenance plans for permanent BMPs shall be recorded in the Official Records of Williamson County. 11.07.005 Geologic Assessment A. The owner of property who submits a development application for a Regulated Activity on a tract of land located over the EARZ shall submit a Geologic Assessment with the Plat application. B. In the event that the subject property was platted prior to December 9, 2014, or meets the Plat exceptions of this Code, a Geologic Assessment shall be submitted with the first required development application for the Regulated Activity. Development applications include Construction Plans, Site/Construction Plans, Stormwater Permits, and Building Permits (only single­family and two­family residential on a tract of land that meets the Plat exceptions of this Code). Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 9 of 13 C. No development application for property located over the EARZ may be approved until a Geologic Assessment has been accepted by the Development Engineer or his designee. D. The Geologic Assessment must contain all of that information required by Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.5. Additionally, the Geologic Assessment must: 1. Identify all Springs and/or Streams on the subject property, or certify that no Springs or Streams exist on the subject property; 2. Describe any Spring and/or Stream on the subject property, including determining the location of any Spring outlet or Stream; E. Subsequent applications required to develop the subject property will not require a new Geologic Assessment provided the Regulated Activity, as submitted in the application, is consistent with the accepted Geologic Assessment. Any deviations will result in the need to submit an updated Geologic Assessment prior to final approval of the application. F. Exemptions. 1. A Geologic Assessment shall not be required for Regulated Activity that meets all of the following criteria: a. Proposed development is single­family residential or two­family residential; and b. Subject property is located on an individual lot that is less than 5 acres; and c. Subdivision (to include replat) is 5 lots or less, and no more than 5 gross acres; and d. Subject property is located within a drainage area that is less than 64 acres. 2. Regulated Activity that meet all of the criteria above must submit with the required development application a letter signed by a professional Engineer certifying the drainage area and identifying any Springs on the subject property. In the event that Springs exist, the project Engineer must identify applicable buffers on the plans. 11.07.006. Acknowledgement Form A. The owner of property who submits a development application for a Regulated Activity on a tract of land located over the EARZ shall submit an Acknowledgement Form in accordance with the provisions of this subsection. B. The owner of property shall through a completed Acknowledgement Form, acknowledge and certify the following: Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 10 of 13 1. The Regulated Activity, as proposed, complies with the Water Quality Best Management Practices regulations of this Section; and 2. The subject property has an Occupied Site, is located within 984 feet of an Occupied Site, or has a Springs or Stream located more than 984 feet from an Occupied Site; and 3. The Regulated Activity, as submitted, complies with the rules and regulations of this Section. C. A completed, signed and notarized Acknowledgement Form shall be submitted with the Plat, Construction Plan, Site/Construction Plan, Stormwater Permit, and Building Permit (single­family and two­family residential on a tract of land that is exempt from the Plat requirements of this Code) applications. D. The development application to the City of Georgetown shall be deemed incomplete if the Acknowledgement Form is not completed, signed and notarized. E. After the completeness review (Section 3.02.040) of a development application subject to subparagraph (A) above, the director or his/her designee shall provide a copy of the Acknowledgement Form to the Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive Management Working Group. 11.07.007 Water Quality Management Plan A. The City shall adopt a Water Quality Management Plan for all areas within the Recharge Zone. Such management practices will include, but not be limited to, public education and outreach, hazardous waste education, integrated pest management, illicit discharge detection and elimination, construction­site storm­water runoff control, post­construction storm­water management, and pollution prevention for municipal operations including City and County maintenance activities in the ETJ. B. The City’s adopted Storm Water Management Plan, as amended, shall serve as the Water Quality Management Plan for purposes of this Section, unless stated otherwise. 11.07.008 Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive Management Working Group An Adaptive Management Working Group has been established by the Williamson County Conservation Foundation to review data on a regular basis and make recommendations for specific changes in management directions related to the Federal standards for Occupied Sites. The Adaptive Management Working Group duties include, but are not limited to, development of an annual report regarding the preservation of the Georgetown Salamander, continuous Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 11 of 13 monitoring of the Georgetown Salamander, assessment of research priorities, adaptive management of preservation of the Georgetown Salamander and the effectiveness of achieving the above objectives. The City Manager will appoint two City employees with appropriate technical expertise in the fields of planning and development and system engineering as members to the Adaptive Management Working Group. The efforts of the Adaptive Management Working Group will be led by the Williamson County Conservation Foundation staff. *** Appendix A Federal Standards for Occupied Sites 1. The standards outlined herein are provided for informational purposes only, and shall not be imposed under any authority granted by this Code. These standards are subject to Federal enforcement and administration. Chapter 15 of the UDC does not apply. 2. The following federal standards apply to Occupied Sites: a. No­Disturbance Zone (Red Zone) i. A no­disturbance zone is established, hereinafter referred to as the “Red Zone” in the Stream or waterway that the Spring drains directly into and shall extend 80 meters upstream and downstream from the approximate center of the Spring outlet of an Occupied Site. The Red Zone shall be bounded by the top of the Bank and shall not extend beyond any existing physical obstructions that prevent the surface movement of Georgetown salamanders, such as roadways, buildings, retaining walls, dams, and culverts. ii. No Regulated Activities may be conducted within the Red Zone other than: 1. Properly permitted maintenance of existing improvements; 2. Scientific monitoring of water quality, population counts and related activities; and 3. Fences above the normal high water mark of a Stream if such fences comply with applicable floodplain regulations. 2. Minimal­ Disturbance Zone (Orange Zone) a. A minimal­disturbance zone, hereinafter referred to as the “Orange Zone,” is established for the subsurface area that drains to the Spring or Springs at an Occupied Site. Except as provided below, the Orange Zone shall consist of that area within 300 meters of the approximate center of the Spring outlet of an Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 12 of 13 Occupied Site, except those areas within the Red Zone. The Orange Zone shall not include pre­existing development or areas without the potential for containing Georgetown salamander habitat as determined by the Geologic Assessment based on site specific, hydro­geologic conditions, for instance, where the Edwards Aquifer is absent. b. No Regulated Activities may be conducted within the Orange Zone other than: 1. Activities permitted in the Red Zone; 2. Wastewater infrastructure installed roughly parallel to a Stream provided that such infrastructure is installed on the side of the Stream opposite the Occupied Site and is installed no closer than 25 feet from the Bank of the Stream; 3. Subject to Stream Buffer limitations, below, parks and open space development limited to trails, benches, trash cans and pet waste facilities; provided that trails shall not be located within the ordinary high water mark of a Stream and shall be limited to trails for walking, jogging and non­ motorized biking; and 4. In addition to (i), (ii), and (iii) above, within the City limits, only Single­ family, Detached (Residential Estate and Residential Low Density District) residential use, as defined in the City of Georgetown’s Unified Development Code, will be allowed. No construction of said dwelling units shall be conducted within 80 meters of an Occupied Site. Within the ETJ, Title 30, Texas Administrative Code § 285 (c) (1) requires a minimum lot size of one acre per single family dwelling for properties within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone if served by on­site sewage facilities. Developers are encouraged to avoid development within the Orange Zone whenever possible. 3. Variances a. The Williamson County Conservation Foundation’s Adaptive Management Working Group (AMWG) is authorized to hear and make recommendations regarding requests for variances from the Federal standards pertaining to Occupied Sites. 1. The AMWG shall recommend variances to the USFW from the terms of these standards pertaining to Occupied Sites, if the variance is not contrary to the objectives of these standards. Any proposed variance to the USFWS should achieve the same level or greater level of water quality benefits and Added language is underline Attachment I Deleted language is strikethrough Page 13 of 13 conservation objectives to the Georgetown salamander. Project proponents may always work directly with USFWS to seek a permit under Section 7 or Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act for these areas. 4. The Geologic Assessment must identify all Occupied Sites, Red Zones and Orange Zones. Should the Geologic Assessment identify an Occupied Site, the Occupied Site and Red Zones and Orange Zones should be graphically delineated on all plats, Site Plan and infrastructure construction plans. City of Georgetown, Texas December 9, 2014 SUBJECT: Second Reading of an Ordinance amending portions of the Unified Development Code (“UDC”) relating to water quality standards for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City limits and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (“ETJ”) -- Andreina Dávila-Quintero, Project Coordinator and Andrew Spurgin, AICP, Planning Director (action required) ITEM SUMMARY: On October 28, 2014, the Georgetown City Council approved Resolution 102814-D (Exhibit A) to initiate an executive amendment to the Unified Development Code (“UDC”) to formally codify certain water quality regulations, initially adopted via Ordinance 2013-59 on December 20, 2013. The purpose of these regulations is to safeguard the stream and spring formations of the EARZ, and protect water quality. These regulations are applicable to property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City Limits and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (“ETJ”). The December 2013 Ordinance established no-disturbance and minimal disturbance zones around identified Georgetown Salamander habitat sites, as well as buffer zones around all springs and streams. In addition, it contributed to improving water quality by increasing the percentage of total suspended solids removal from 80% to 85%. This Ordinance was premised on an understanding that the species would not be listed as endangered or threatened if these measures were taken at the local level. On February 24, 2014, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) listed the Georgetown Salamander as a threatened species. This listing precludes municipal enforcement of the section of the December 2013 Ordinance pertaining to Occupied Sites due to the limitations on government entities imposed by Chapter 83 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code. Since the species was not listed at the time the municipal ordinance was adopted, this was previously not a legal issue. In order to continue the City’s goal of protecting water quality, the City wishes to amend Chapters 2 and 11 of the UDC to formally codify the water quality standards established by Ordinance 2013-59 that do not affect an identified Occupied Site so as not to conflict with State Law. The proposed amendments also establish an intake and review process to document compliance with the City’s water quality regulations (Exhibit C), a variance process for the required stream and spring buffers as a result of undue hardship, and exemption criteria for minor projects (mom and pop type of developments) that would not be required to complete a Geologic Assessment (“GA”). The proposed amendment is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Development of property with an Occupied Site (Exhibit D) or within 984 feet of an Occupied Site would be subject to the standards of a 4(d) special Rule proposed by the USFWS. It is the intent of USFWS to incorporate the standards from the December 2013 Ordinance pertaining to the identified Occupied Sites into the proposed 4(d) special Rule. This will provide stakeholders the benefit of consistent and objective criteria for developing land in the EARZ without the need for site-specific determinations by the USFWS. Stakeholder Meeting: On November 13, 2014, the City in partnership with the Williamson County Conservation Foundation and USFWS hosted a meeting with the development community to discuss the City’s water quality regulations, status of the proposed 4(d) special Rule, and changes to the development process. More than 33 developers, builders, and property and business owners attended the meeting. Stakeholders presented several questions on the applicability of the regulations, particularly for projects that are underway or that have obtained preliminary approval(s) in the development process. Overall, there was mutual consensus and understanding on the positive impact these regulations has to development, as without these regulations stakeholders would be required to coordinate directly with the USFWS when developing property over the EARZ. Planning and Zoning Commission Recommendation: The Planning & Zoning Commission at their regularly scheduled meeting on November 18, 2014, held a public hearing on this item and no speakers were present. The Commission recommended approval (7-0) of the proposed amendments to the UDC. City Council First Reading: The City Council at their regularly scheduled meeting on November 25, 2014, held a public hearing on this item and no speakers were present. The City Council approved (7-0) First Reading of the Ordinance. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No direct fiscal impact to the City’s general fund by adopting the Ordinance to amend the UDC. There may be staffing and workload impact to the Planning Department and GUS Development Engineer, as more projects west of Interstate 35 continue on land that is currently undeveloped. SUBMITTED BY: Andreina Dávila-Quintero, Project Coordinator ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Resolution 102814-D Exhibit B - Proposed UDC Amendment Exhibit C - Acknowledgement Forms Draft Exhibit D - Location Map of Occupied Sites Exhibit E -Ordinance Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 1 of 10 Proposed UDC Amendment Chapters 2 and 11 Chapter 2 Review Authority Section 2.01 General 2.01.020 Summary of Review Authority *** Table 2.01.020: Summary of Review Authority Procedure Pl a n n i n g Di r e c t o r Bu i l d i n g Of f i c i a l De v En g i n e e r Ur b a n Fo r e s t e r HAR C ZB A P& Z Ci t y Co u n c i l *** Planning and Zoning Commission *** Variance [water quality regulations (Section 11.07.003)] R <DM> A R – Review or Recommendation DM – Decision Making Authority A – Appeal Authority < > - Public Hearing *** Section 2.05 Planning & Zoning Commission (Commission or P&Z) 2.05.010 Powers and Duties The Planning and Zoning Commission has the following powers and duties as described in this Code: A. Final Action *** 6. Variance from the floodplain, water quality regulations (Section 11.07.003) and stormwater regulations of this Code if the Variance is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of this ordinance would result in Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 2 of 10 unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done. *** C. Additional Duties *** 3. Hear and decide an appeal that alleges error in an order, requirement, decision or determination made by an Administrative Official in the enforcement of Section 11.07 of this Code. *** Chapter 11 Environmental Protection *** Section 11.07 Water Quality Regulations for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone 11.07.001 Applicability The regulations of this Section apply to all property within the corporate limits of the City and its extraterritorial jurisdiction (“ETJ”), to the extent allowable by State law, located within the recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer, as that term is defined in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3 and §213.22. Property within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) is determined by the most current official map of the relevant zone located in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality office for Region 11. 11.07.002 Definitions The following words and phrases, when used in this Section, shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this subsection, except when the context otherwise requires: Bank (of a stream). The ordinary high water mark of a stream, not the floodplain boundaries, as determined by the appropriate authority. Best Management Practices (BMPs). For this Section only, BMPs has that meaning ascribed to it in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3(5), as may be amended and as further defined herein. Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 3 of 10 Development Engineer. A professional engineer licensed by the State of Texas and designated to serve in the capacity of the Development Engineer for duties specified in the City Code of Ordinances and Unified Development Code. Geologic Assessment. A report prepared by a geologist pursuant to Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.5 and containing the additional information required by this Section . Geologist. A licensed professional geoscientist who has training and experience in ground water hydrology and related fields that enable that individual to make sound professional judgments regarding the identification of sensitive features, such as springs and streams. Licensed Professional Geoscientist. A geoscientist who maintains a current license through the Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists in accordance with its requirements for professional practice. Occupied Site. Any spring identified as a critical habitat unit by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service for the Georgetown Salamander (Eurycea naufragia), and include the following: Cobb Well, Cobb Springs, Cowen Creek Spring, Bat Well Cave, Walnut Spring, Twin Spring, Hogg Hollow Spring, Cedar Hollow Spring, Knight (Crockett Garden) Spring, Cedar Breaks Hiking Trail Spring, Water Tank Cave, Avant’s (Capitol Aggregates), Buford Hollow Springs, Swinbank Spring, Shadow Canyon, San Gabriel Spring, and Garey Ranch Springs. The locations of the Occupied Sites are shown on the map incorporated below. [insert map] Recharge Zone. That portion of the City and its ETJ that overlays the EARZ as defined in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3, as may be amended. Regulated Activity. Shall have that meaning ascribed to it by Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3(28), as may be amended. Spring. Any natural setting or location where ground water flows to the surface of the earth from underground frequently enough to support spring associated vegetation such as ferns, watercress and Texas sedge. Stream. A flow of surface water sufficient to produce a defined natural channel or bed. A defined natural channel or bed is an area that demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of water. 11.07.003 Spring Buffer and Stream Buffer Protection A. Spring Buffer Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 4 of 10 1. A Spring Buffer is established within 164 feet (or 50 meters) of the approximate center of a Spring outlet in the EARZ that is identified in a Geologic Assessment. The Spring Buffer shall not include pre­existing development. 2. No Regulated Activities may be conducted within the Spring Buffer except for the following and subject to the stated restrictions: a. Properly permitted maintenance of existing improvements; b. Scientific monitoring of water quality; c. Fences above the normal high water mark of a Stream if such fences comply with applicable floodplain regulations; d. Subject to Stream Buffer limitations, below, parks and open space development limited to trails, benches, trash cans and pet waste facilities; provided that trails shall not be located within the ordinary high water mark of a stream and shall be limited to trails for walking, jogging and non­motorized biking; and e. Wastewater infrastructure installed roughly parallel to a stream provided that such infrastructure is installed on the side of the stream opposite the Spring and is installed no closer than 25 feet from the Bank of the Stream; provided that wastewater infrastructure shall not cross a Stream associated with a Spring within the Spring Buffer. B. Stream Buffer 1. A Stream Buffer is established for all Streams in the EARZ that is identified in a Geologic Assessment. The boundaries of the Stream Buffer are as follows: a. For Streams draining more than 64 acres and less than 320 acres, the boundaries of the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (a) shall be a minimum of 200 feet wide with at least 75 feet from the centerline of the Stream. If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer shall be 100 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, if available. b. For Streams draining more than 320 acres but less than 640 acres, the boundaries of the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 5 of 10 and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (b) shall be a minimum of 300 feet wide with at least 100 feet from the centerline of the stream. If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer shall be 150 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, if available. c. For Streams draining 640 acres or more, the boundaries of the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (c) shall be a minimum of 500 feet wide with at least 200 feet from the centerline of the stream. If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer shall be 250 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain, if available. 2. No Regulated Activity may be conducted within the Stream Buffer other than: a. Properly permitted maintenance of existing improvements; b. Scientific monitoring of water quality; c. Fences above the normal high water mark of a Stream if such fences comply with applicable floodplain regulations; and d. The construction of the following improvements, subject to the stated restrictions: i. Wastewater facilities, provided that wastewater utilities shall not be located below the normal high water elevation within the channel of a stream except at crossings of a stream; ii. Underground utilities other than wastewater facilities provided that such underground utilities may only be installed at Stream crossings, or at intervals no closer than 400 feet apart; iii. Parks and open space development limited to trails, benches, trash cans and pet waste facilities; provided that trails shall not be located within the ordinary high water mark of a Stream and shall be limited to trails for walking, jogging and non­motorized biking. Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 6 of 10 iv. Water quality or flood control systems, provided that measures are taken in the construction of such water quality or flood control systems to minimize the impact to the Stream Buffer; v. Public projects that enhance or recharge the Edwards Aquifer, provide flood prevention, and similar capital improvements; vi. Remediation of altered floodplain to its natural limits; vii. Arterial, collector and local residential streets crossing a Stream provided that: (A) A floodplain with a drainage area greater than 640 acres may only be crossed by arterial streets; (B) A floodplain with a drainage area between 320 acres and 640 acres may only be crossed by arterial and collector streets; (C) A floodplain with a drainage area up to 320 acres may be crossed by arterial, collector, or local residential streets; and (D) A street required for a secondary access, or as required by the currently adopted fire code regulations, is exempt from this subsection. C. All Spring and Stream Buffers, as described herein, shall be shown on all plats, Site Plan and infrastructure construction plans, to include Stormwater Permits and Building Permits when applicable. D. Exemptions. 1. The Spring Buffer and Stream Buffer requirements of Section 11.07.003 do not apply to an Occupied Site as this term is defined in this Section. Regulated Activity on a tract of land with an Occupied Site, or within 984 feet (or 300 meters) of an Occupied Site, shall follow the rules and regulations of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 2. In the event that the owner of property opts to request a variance from the conservation measures of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations to the Adaptive Management Working Group, it shall be the responsibility of the owner of property to submit to the City of Georgetown revised plans in accordance with the results of the variance request; E. Variances Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 7 of 10 1. An owner of property of a tract of land with a Spring or Stream may request a variance from the spring and/or stream buffer requirements of this subsection to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2. The Planning and Zoning Commission may consider and take final action on a variance request in accordance with the powers and duties in Section 2.05.010.A.6 of this Code. F. Appeal Any person aggrieved by an administrative decision pertaining to this subsection may appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission in accordance with Section 3.14 of this Code. 11.07.004 Water Quality Best Management Practices A. For all Regulated Activities within the Recharge Zone, the following regulations apply: 1. Permanent structural water quality controls for a project shall remove eighty­five percent (85%) of total suspended solids for the entire project and shall be certified by a licensed professional engineer. 2. No Regulated Activity shall cause any increase in the developed flow rate for the 2­year, 3­hour storm; 3. All development projects, including, but not limited to, individual home sites, shall implement temporary BMPs to minimize sediment runoff. 4. New roadways or expansions to existing roadways that provide a capacity of 25,000 vehicles per day that are located on the Recharge Zone shall provide for spill containment as described in the Optional Enhanced Measures of the Edwards Aquifer Protection Program. 5. All permanent BMPs with an overt physical presence shall have signage that clearly identifies the purpose of the permanent BMP and the party responsible for maintenance. 6. Maintenance plans for permanent BMPs shall be recorded in the Official Records of Williamson County. 11.07.005 Geologic Assessment A. The owner of property who submits a development application for a Regulated Activity on a tract of land located over the EARZ shall submit a Geologic Assessment with the Plat application. Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 8 of 10 B. In the event that the subject property was platted prior to [adoption date] or meets the Plat exceptions of this Code, a Geologic Assessment shall be submitted with the first required development application for the Regulated Activity. Development applications include Construction Plans, Site/Construction Plans, Stormwater Permits, and Building Permits (only single­family and two­family residential on a tract of land that meets the Plat exceptions of this Code). C. No development application for property located over the EARZ may be approved until a Geologic Assessment has been accepted by the Development Engineer or his designee. D. The Geologic Assessment must contain all of that information required by Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.5. Additionally, the Geologic Assessment must: 1. Identify all Springs and/or Streams on the subject property, or certify that no Springs or Streams exist on the subject property; 2. Describe any Spring and/or Stream on the subject property, including determining the location of any Spring outlet or Stream; E. Subsequent applications required to develop the subject property will not require a new Geologic Assessment provided the Regulated Activity, as submitted in the application, is consistent with the accepted Geologic Assessment. Any deviations will result in the need to submit an updated Geologic Assessment prior to final approval of the application. F. Exemptions. 1. A Geologic Assessment shall not be required for Regulated Activity that meets all of the following criteria: a. Proposed development is single­family residential or two­family residential; and b. Subject property is located on an individual lot that is less than 5 acres; and c. Subdivision (to include replat) is 5 lots or less, and no more than 5 gross acres; and d. Subject property is located within a drainage area that is less than 64 acres. 2. Regulated Activity that meet all of the criteria above must submit with the required development application a letter signed by a professional Engineer certifying the drainage area and identifying any Springs on the subject property. In the event that Springs exist, the project Engineer must identify applicable buffers on the plans. Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 9 of 10 11.07.006. Acknowledgement Form A. The owner of property who submits a development application for a Regulated Activity on a tract of land located over the EARZ shall submit an Acknowledgement Form in accordance with the provisions of this subsection. B. The owner of property shall through a completed Acknowledgement Form, acknowledge and certify the following: 1. The Regulated Activity, as proposed, complies with the Water Quality Best Management Practices regulations of this Section; and 2. The subject property has an Occupied Site, is located within 984 feet of an Occupied Site, or has a Springs or Stream located more than 984 feet from an Occupied Site; and 3. The Regulated Activity, as submitted, complies with the rules and regulations of the Code of Federal Regulations or this Section, as applicable. C. A completed, signed and notarized Acknowledgement Form shall be submitted with the Plat, Construction Plan, Site/Construction Plan, Stormwater Permit, and Building Permit (single­family and two­family residential on a tract of land that is exempt from the Plat requirements of this Code) applications. D. The development application to the City of Georgetown shall be deemed incomplete if the Acknowledgement Form is not completed, signed and notarized. E. After the completeness review (Section 3.02.040) of a development application subject to subparagraph (A) above, the director or his/her designee shall provide a copy of the Acknowledgement Form to the Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive Management Working Group. 11.07.007 Water Quality Management Plan A. The City shall adopt a Water Quality Management Plan for all areas within the Recharge Zone. Such management practices will include, but not be limited to, public education and outreach, hazardous waste education, integrated pest management, illicit discharge detection and elimination, construction­site storm­water runoff control, post­construction storm­water management, and pollution prevention for municipal operations including City and County maintenance activities in the ETJ. B. The City’s adopted Storm Water Management Plan, as amended, shall serve as the Water Quality Management Plan for purposes of this Section, unless stated otherwise. Proposed UDC Amendment – Ch. 2 and 11 Added language is underline Deleted language is strikethrough Page 10 of 10 11.07.008 Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive Management Working Group An Adaptive Management Working Group has been established by the Williamson County Conservation Foundation to review data on a regular basis and make recommendations for specific changes in management directions related to the standards established in Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The City Manager will appoint two City employees with appropriate technical expertise in the fields of planning and development and system engineering as members to the Adaptive Management Working Group. The efforts of the Adaptive Management Working Group will be led by the Williamson County Conservation Foundation staff. Water Quality Acknowledgement Form Page 1 of 2 Revised: November 13, 2014 CITY OF GEORGETOWN PLANNING DEPARTMENT EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE WATER QUALITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM THE CITY’S WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR PROPERTY OVER THE EARZ A signed and notarized copy of this form is required to be submitted with the a required development application [Plat (Preliminary, Final, Minor, Amending and Replat); (Subdivision) Construction Plans, Site/Construction Plan; or Stormwater Permit] for all Regulated Activity for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City Limits and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (“ETJ”). No application will be accepted without completing this form. In addition, a Geologic Assessment shall be provided to the City with the application subject to this form. PROPERTY INFORMATION Property Address: Legal Description: City/ETJ: Acres: PROJECT INFORMATION Name of Project: Application Type: Proposed Use: No. of Lots: PROPERTY OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE INFORMATION Business Name: Point of Contact: Address: Contact Information: Phone: Email: PROPERTY OWNER’S CONSENT I, , swear and affirm that I am the owner of property at , as shown in the records of Williamson County, Texas, which is the subject of this form. I, , the owner of the property subject to this form, authorize to submit this acknowledgement form and serve as my representative for this reque st. Property Owner’s Signature: Date: Water Quality Acknowledgement Form Page 2 of 2 Revised: November 13, 2014 AFFIDAVIT My name is , and I am the owner or authorized representative of the property that is subject of this request to the City of Georgetown, Texas. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury the following: 1. The Regulated Activity, as proposed, is in compliance with the City’s Water Quality Best Management Practices; and 2. The subject property has an Occupied Site, or is located within 984 feet of an Occupied Site; and The Regulated Activity, as submitted, complies with the rules and regulations of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations; or The Regulated Activity, as submitted, does not comply with the rules and regulations of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations. A variance request has been submitted to the Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive Management Working Group; or The owner of property will coordinate directly with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; or 3. The subject property has a Spring and/or Stream located more than 984 feet from an Occupied Site, and the Regulated Activity, as submitted, complies with Section 11.07 of the Unified Development Code. In addition, A Geologic Assessment for the subject property was completed in accordance with this Section and is made part of the development application; or The project, as proposed: Does not meet the definition of a Regulated Activity; or Meets all of the following criteria:  Proposed development is Single-Family Residential or Two-Family Residential; and  Subject property is located on an individual lot that is less than 5 acres; and  Subdivision (to include replat) is 5 lots or less, and no more than 5 gross acres; and  Subject property is located within a drainage area that is less than 64 acres. NOTE: A letter signed by an Engineer certifying the drainage area and identifying any springs on the subject property must be submitted with the required application. Thus, no Geologic Assessment is required with this application. Signed this day of , 20 Signature: STATE OF TEXAS { KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON { Sworn and subscribed before me by on this day of in the year , to certify which witness my hand and seal of office. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission expires on: Water Quality Acknowledgement Form Page 1 of 2 Issued: November 13, 2014 CITY OF GEORGETOWN INSPECTION SERVICES DEPARTMENT EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE WATER QUALITY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FORM THE CITY’S WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR PROPERTY OVER THE EARZ This form does not apply to new Single-Family Residential (“SFR”) and Two-Family Residential (“TFR”) within a platted subdivision and where all public improvements were completed and accepted by the City of Georgetown, provided the proposed development, as submitted, is in accordance with the approved Water Pollution Abatement Plan of the Subdivision. A signed and notarized copy of this form is required to be submitted with an application for Building Permit for all new SFR and TFR on property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City Limits and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (“ETJ”), when applicable, except as noted above. In addition, Geologic Assessment, when required, shall be provided to the City with the application subject to this form. PROPERTY INFORMATION Property Address: Legal Description: City/ETJ: Acres: PROJECT INFORMATION Name of Project: Proposed Use: PROPERTY OWNER/REPRESENTATIVE INFORMATION Business Name: Point of Contact: Address: Contact Information: Phone: Email: PROPERTY OWNER’S CONSENT I, , swear and affirm that I am the owner of property at , as shown in the records of Williamson County, Texas, which is the subject of this form. I, , the owner of the property subject to this form, authorize to submit this acknowledgement form and serve as my representative for this request. Property Owner’s Signature: Date: Water Quality Acknowledgement Form Page 2 of 2 Issued: November 13, 2014 AFFIDAVIT My name is , and I am the owner or authorized representative of the property that is subject of this request to the City of Georgetown, Texas. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury the following: 1. The Regulated Activity, as proposed, is in compliance with the City’s Water Quality Best Management Practices; and 2. The subject property has an Occupied Site, or is located within 984 feet of an Occupied Site; and The Regulated Activity, as submitted, complies with the rules and regulations of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations; or The Regulated Activity, as submitted, does not comply with the rules and regulations of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations. A variance request has been submitted to the Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive Management Working Group; or The owner of property will coordinate directly with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; or 3. The subject property has a Spring and/or Stream located more than 984 feet from an Occupied Site, and the Regulated Activity, as submitted, complies with Section 11.07 of the Unified Development Code. In addition, A Geologic Assessment for the subject property was completed in accordance with this Section and is made part of the development application; or The project, as proposed: Does not meet the definition of a Regulated Activity; or Meets all of the following criteria:  Proposed development is Single-Family Residential or Two-Family Residential; and  Subject property is located on an individual lot that is less than 5 acres; and  Subdivision (to include replat) is 5 lots or less, and no more than 5 gross acres; and  Subject property is located within a drainage area that is less than 64 acres. NOTE: A letter signed by an Engineer certifying the drainage area and identifying any springs on the subject property must be submitted with the required application. Thus, no Geologic Assessment is required with this application. Signed this day of , 20 Signature: STATE OF TEXAS { KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON { Sworn and subscribed before me by on this day of in the year , to certify which witness my hand and seal of office. Notary Public in and for the State of Texas My Commission expires on: Georgetown Salamander μ 01230.5 Miles Legend Surface Critical Habitat Unit Subsurface Critical Habitat Unit Georgetown City Limits Georgetown ETJ Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zones Contributing Zone Recharge Zone Transition Zone November 13, 2014 Map maintained by: City of Georgetown, Texas Management Services 300 Industrial Ave P.O. Box 1458 Georgetown, Texas 78627 ORDINANCE NO. PAGE 1 OF 3 DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ DATE APPROVED: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTERS 2 AND 11 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE (UDC) RELATING TO WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED OVER THE EDWARDS AQUIFER RECHARGE ZONE (EARZ) WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS AND ITS EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION (ETJ); REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, on December 20, 2013, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, adopted Ordinance 2013-59, establishing additional requirements for property located over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) within the City limits and its Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (“ETJ”) to safeguard the stream and spring formations of the EARZ, and protect water quality (“Water Quality Regulations”); and WHEREAS, Ordinance 2013-59 established no-disturbance and minimal disturbance zones around Georgetown Salamander habitat sites identified by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (“USFWS”) and buffer zones around all springs and streams, as well as improved water quality by increasing the percentage of total suspended solids removal from 80% to 85%; and WHEREAS, on February 24, 2014, the USFWS listed the Georgetown Salamander as a threatened species; and WHEREAS, USFWS is currently in the process of developing a 4(d) special Rule that will be attached to the threatened listing and is expected to be finalized by the end of calendar year 2014; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the USFWS to incorporate the City’s Water Quality Regulations pertaining to the identified habitat sites into the proposed 4(d) special Rule; and WHEREAS, Chapter 83 of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code limits government entities from imposing rules and regulations that are related to endangered species, thus limiting the City’s ability to enforce the sections of the Ordinance pertaining to the identified habitat sites; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to continue to protect water quality and safeguard the stream and spring formations of the EARZ within its jurisdiction in accordance with State Law; and ORDINANCE NO. PAGE 2 OF 3 DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ DATE APPROVED: WHEREAS, on March 11, 2003, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, adopted a set of comprehensive development regulations known as the Unified Development Code (“UDC”) via Ordinance No. 2003-16 which codified various zoning and subdivision standards; and WHEREAS, the City Council established a UDC Advisory Committee on November 12, 2013, to review proposed or requested amendments to the UDC other than executive amendments which are those amendments that are nondiscretionary, mandatory, or legislative revisions to address state statutes or case laws, ratify published directors determinations, incorporate recently approved Council ordinances, process City Council designated emergency items, or address revisions otherwise determined necessary by legal counsel; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 102814-D on October 28, 2014, designating the amendment to the UDC relating to water quality regulations as a legislative revision to address state statutes; and WHEREAS, by City Council declaring this amendment relating to water quality regulations as a legislative revision to address state statutes, it will be processed as an executive amendment that is not reviewed by the UDC Advisory Committee; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on the draft amendment at their November 18, 2014 regular scheduled meeting, and recommended approval of the amendment to the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1: The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this Ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this Ordinance implements the vision, goals, and policies of the Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan and further finds that the enactment of this Ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other policies or provisions of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 2: Ordinance 2013-59, save and except those rules and regulations pertaining to the habitat sites identified by the USFWS, is hereby codified and made a part of the adopted UDC. SECTION 3: Portions of the UDC are hereby amended as described in EXHIBIT A. ORDINANCE NO. PAGE 3 OF 3 DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ DATE APPROVED: SECTION 4: All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. SECTION 5: If any provision of this Ordinance, or application thereof to any person or circumstance shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 6: The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this Ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This Ordinance shall become effective in accordance with the provisions of State Law and the City Charter of the City of Georgetown. APPROVED on First Reading this day of , 2014. APPROVED AND ADOPTED on Second Reading this day of , 2014. Dale Ross, Mayor ATTEST: Jessica Brettle, City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Bridget Chapman, City Attorney   Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 1 of 10  Exhibit A    Chapter 2  Review Authority  Section 2.01 General    2.01.020 Summary of Review Authority    ***    Table 2.01.020: Summary of Review Authority    Procedure Pl a n n i n g Di r e c t o r Bu i l d i n g Of f i c i a l De v En g i n e e r Ur b a n Fo r e s t e r HA R C ZB A P& Z Ci t y Co u n c i l *** Planning and Zoning Commission *** Variance [water quality regulations (Section 11.07.003)] R <DM>A R – Review or Recommendation DM – Decision Making Authority A – Appeal Authority < > - Public Hearing   ***    Section 2.05 Planning & Zoning Commission (Commission or P&Z)    2.05.010 Powers and Duties    The Planning and Zoning Commission has the following powers and duties as described in this  Code:    A. Final Action    ***    6. Variance from the floodplain, water quality regulations (Section 11.07.003) and  stormwater regulations of this Code if the Variance is not contrary to the public interest  and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of this ordinance would result in    Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 2 of 10  unnecessary hardship, and so that the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial  justice is done.    ***    C. Additional Duties    ***    3. Hear and decide an appeal that alleges error in an order, requirement, decision or  determination made by an Administrative Official in the enforcement of Section 11.07 of  this Code.    ***    Chapter 11  Environmental Protection    ***    Section 11.07  Water Quality Regulations for property located over the Edwards Aquifer  Recharge Zone    11.07.001 Applicability    The regulations of this Section apply to all property within the corporate limits of the City and  its extraterritorial jurisdiction (“ETJ”), to the extent allowable by State law, located within the  recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer, as that term is defined in Title 30, Texas Administrative  Code §213.3 and §213.22. Property within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone (“EARZ”) is  determined by the most current official map of the relevant zone located in the Texas  Commission on Environmental Quality office for Region 11.    11.07.002 Definitions    The following words and phrases, when used in this Section, shall have the meanings  respectively ascribed to them in this subsection, except when the context otherwise requires:    Bank (of a stream). The ordinary high water mark of a stream, not the floodplain boundaries, as  determined by the appropriate authority.    Best Management Practices (BMPs). For this Section only, BMPs has that meaning ascribed to it  in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3(5), as may be amended and as further defined  herein.    Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 3 of 10    Development Engineer. A professional engineer licensed by the State of Texas and designated  to serve in the capacity of the Development Engineer for duties specified in the City Code of  Ordinances and Unified Development Code.    Geologic Assessment. A report prepared by a geologist pursuant to Title 30, Texas  Administrative Code §213.5 and containing the additional information required by this Section.    Geologist. A licensed professional geoscientist who has training and experience in ground  water hydrology and related fields that enable that individual to make sound professional  judgments regarding the identification of sensitive features, such as springs and streams.    Licensed Professional Geoscientist. A geoscientist who maintains a current license through the  Texas Board of Professional Geoscientists in accordance with its requirements for professional  practice.    Occupied Site. Any spring identified as a critical habitat unit by the United States Fish and  Wildlife Service for the Georgetown Salamander (Eurycea naufragia), and include the following:  Cobb Well, Cobb Springs, Cowen Creek Spring, Bat Well Cave, Walnut Spring, Twin Spring,  Hogg Hollow Spring, Cedar Hollow Spring, Knight (Crockett Garden) Spring, Cedar Breaks  Hiking Trail Spring, Water Tank Cave, Avant’s (Capitol Aggregates), Buford Hollow Springs,  Swinbank Spring, Shadow Canyon, San Gabriel Spring, and Garey Ranch Springs. The locations  of the Occupied Sites are shown on the map incorporated below.        Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 4 of 10  Recharge Zone. That portion of the City and its ETJ that overlays the EARZ as defined in Title  30, Texas Administrative Code §213.3, as may be amended.    Regulated Activity. Shall have that meaning ascribed to it by Title 30, Texas Administrative  Code §213.3(28), as may be amended.    Spring. Any natural setting or location where ground water flows to the surface of the earth  from underground frequently enough to support spring associated vegetation such as ferns,  watercress and Texas sedge.    Stream. A flow of surface water sufficient to produce a defined natural channel or bed. A  defined natural channel or bed is an area that demonstrates clear evidence of the passage of  water.    11.07.003 Spring Buffer and Stream Buffer Protection    A.  Spring Buffer    1. A Spring Buffer is established within 164 feet (or 50 meters) of the approximate center of  a Spring outlet in the EARZ that is identified in a Geologic Assessment. The Spring  Buffer shall not include pre‐existing development.    2. No Regulated Activities may be conducted within the Spring Buffer except for the  following and subject to the stated restrictions:    a.  Properly permitted maintenance of existing improvements;    b.  Scientific monitoring of water quality;    c.  Fences above the normal high water mark of a Stream if such fences comply with  applicable floodplain regulations;    d. Subject to Stream Buffer limitations, below, parks and open space development  limited to trails, benches, trash cans and pet waste facilities; provided that trails shall  not be located within the ordinary high water mark of a stream and shall be limited  to trails for walking, jogging and non‐motorized biking; and    e. Wastewater infrastructure installed roughly parallel to a stream provided that such  infrastructure is installed on the side of the stream opposite the Spring and is  installed no closer than 25 feet from the Bank of the Stream; provided that  wastewater infrastructure shall not cross a Stream associated with a Spring within  the Spring Buffer.    Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 5 of 10    B. Stream Buffer    1.  A Stream Buffer is established for all Streams in the EARZ that is identified in a Geologic  Assessment. The boundaries of the Stream Buffer are as follows:    a. For Streams draining more than 64 acres and less than 320 acres, the boundaries of  the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a  calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain  and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (a) shall be a  minimum of 200 feet wide with at least 75 feet from the centerline of the Stream.    If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer  shall be 100 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or  a calculated 1% floodplain, if available.    b. For Streams draining more than 320 acres but less than 640 acres, the boundaries of  the Stream Buffer coincide with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a  calculated 1% floodplain, whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain  and a calculated floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (b) shall be a  minimum of 300 feet wide with at least 100 feet from the centerline of the stream.    If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer  shall be 150 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or  a calculated 1% floodplain, if available.    c. For Streams draining 640 acres or more, the boundaries of the Stream Buffer coincide  with the boundaries of the FEMA 1% floodplain or a calculated 1% floodplain,  whichever is smaller. In the absence of a FEMA floodplain and a calculated  floodplain, the Stream Buffer under this subsection (c) shall be a minimum of 500  feet wide with at least 200 feet from the centerline of the stream.    If a property owner only controls one side of a Stream, then the minimum buffer  shall be 250 feet from the centerline of a Stream, or along the FEMA 1% floodplain or  a calculated 1% floodplain, if available.    2.  No Regulated Activity may be conducted within the Stream Buffer other than:     a.  Properly permitted maintenance of existing improvements;    b.  Scientific monitoring of water quality;      Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 6 of 10  c.  Fences above the normal high water mark of a Stream if such fences comply with  applicable floodplain regulations; and    d.  The construction of the following improvements, subject to the stated restrictions:    i. Wastewater facilities, provided that wastewater utilities shall not be located  below the normal high water elevation within the channel of a stream except at  crossings of a stream;    ii. Underground utilities other than wastewater facilities provided that such  underground utilities may only be installed at Stream crossings, or at intervals  no closer than 400 feet apart;    iii. Parks and open space development limited to trails, benches, trash cans and pet  waste facilities; provided that trails shall not be located within the ordinary high  water mark of a Stream and shall be limited to trails for walking, jogging and  non‐motorized biking.    iv. Water quality or flood control systems, provided that measures are taken in the  construction of such water quality or flood control systems to minimize the  impact to the Stream Buffer;    v. Public projects that enhance or recharge the Edwards Aquifer, provide flood  prevention, and similar capital improvements;    vi.  Remediation of altered floodplain to its natural limits;    vii. Arterial, collector and local residential streets crossing a Stream provided that:    (A) A floodplain with a drainage area greater than 640 acres may only be crossed  by arterial streets;    (B) A floodplain with a drainage area between 320 acres and 640 acres may only  be crossed by arterial and collector streets;    (C) A floodplain with a drainage area up to 320 acres may be crossed by arterial,  collector, or local residential streets; and    (D) A street required for a secondary access, or as required by the currently  adopted fire code regulations, is exempt from this subsection.      Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 7 of 10  C. All Spring and Stream Buffers, as described herein, shall be shown on all plats, Site Plan and  infrastructure construction plans, to include Stormwater Permits and Building Permits  when applicable.    D. Exemptions.     1. The Spring Buffer and Stream Buffer requirements of Section 11.07.003 do not apply to  an Occupied Site as this term is defined in this Section. Regulated Activity on a tract of  land with an Occupied Site, or within 984 feet (or 300 meters) of an Occupied Site, shall  follow the rules and regulations of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations.    2. In the event that the owner of property opts to request a variance from the conservation  measures of Section 17.43 of the Code of Federal Regulations to the Adaptive  Management Working Group, it shall be the responsibility of the owner of property to  submit to the City of Georgetown revised plans in accordance with the results of the  variance request;    E. Variances    1. An owner of property of a tract of land with a Spring or Stream may request a variance  from the spring and/or stream buffer requirements of this subsection to the Planning  and Zoning Commission.     2. The Planning and Zoning Commission may consider and take final action on a variance  request in accordance with the powers and duties in Section 2.05.010.A.6 of this Code.    F. Appeal    Any person aggrieved by an administrative decision pertaining to this subsection may  appeal to the Planning and Zoning Commission in accordance with Section 3.14 of this  Code.     11.07.004 Water Quality Best Management Practices    A. For all Regulated Activities within the Recharge Zone, the following regulations apply:    1. Permanent structural water quality controls for a project shall remove eighty‐five  percent (85%) of total suspended solids for the entire project and shall be certified by a  licensed professional engineer.    2. No Regulated Activity shall cause any increase in the developed flow rate for the 2‐year,  3‐hour storm;    Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 8 of 10    3. All development projects, including, but not limited to, individual home sites, shall  implement temporary BMPs to minimize sediment runoff.    4.  New roadways or expansions to existing roadways that provide a capacity of 25,000  vehicles per day that are located on the Recharge Zone shall provide for spill  containment as described in the Optional Enhanced Measures of the Edwards Aquifer  Protection Program.    5. All permanent BMPs with an overt physical presence shall have signage that clearly  identifies the purpose of the permanent BMP and the party responsible for maintenance.    6. Maintenance plans for permanent BMPs shall be recorded in the Official Records of  Williamson County.    11.07.005 Geologic Assessment     A. The owner of property who submits a development application for a Regulated Activity on  a tract of land located over the EARZ shall submit a Geologic Assessment with the Plat  application.     B. In the event that the subject property was platted prior to December 9, 2014, or meets the  Plat exceptions of this Code, a Geologic Assessment shall be submitted with the first  required development application for the Regulated Activity. Development applications  include Construction Plans, Site/Construction Plans, Stormwater Permits, and Building  Permits (only single‐family and two‐family residential on a tract of land that meets the Plat  exceptions of this Code).    C. No development application for property located over the EARZ may be approved until a  Geologic Assessment has been accepted by the Development Engineer or his designee.    D. The Geologic Assessment must contain all of that information required by Title 30, Texas  Administrative Code §213.5. Additionally, the Geologic Assessment must:    1. Identify all Springs and/or Streams on the subject property, or certify that no Springs or  Streams exist on the subject property;    2.  Describe any Spring and/or Stream on the subject property, including determining the  location of any Spring outlet or Stream;    E. Subsequent applications required to develop the subject property will not require a new  Geologic Assessment provided the Regulated Activity, as submitted in the application, is    Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 9 of 10  consistent with the accepted Geologic Assessment. Any deviations will result in the need to  submit an updated Geologic Assessment prior to final approval of the application.    F. Exemptions.     1.  A Geologic Assessment shall not be required for Regulated Activity that meets all of the  following criteria:    a. Proposed development is single‐family residential or two‐family residential; and    b. Subject property is located on an individual lot that is less than 5 acres; and    c. Subdivision (to include replat) is 5 lots or less, and no more than 5 gross acres; and    d. Subject property is located within a drainage area that is less than 64 acres.    2.  Regulated Activity that meet all of the criteria above must submit with the required  development application a letter signed by a professional Engineer certifying the  drainage area and identifying any Springs on the subject property. In the event that  Springs exist, the project Engineer must identify applicable buffers on the plans.    11.07.006. Acknowledgement Form     A. The owner of property who submits a development application for a Regulated Activity on  a tract of land located over the EARZ shall submit an Acknowledgement Form in  accordance with the provisions of this subsection.     B. The owner of property shall through a completed Acknowledgement Form, acknowledge  and certify the following:    1. The Regulated Activity, as proposed, complies with the Water Quality Best Management  Practices regulations of this Section; and    2. The subject property has an Occupied Site, is located within 984 feet of an Occupied Site,  or has a Springs or Stream located more than 984 feet from an Occupied Site; and     3. The Regulated Activity, as submitted, complies with the rules and regulations of the  Code of Federal Regulations or this Section, as applicable.     C. A completed, signed and notarized Acknowledgement Form shall be submitted with the  Plat, Construction Plan, Site/Construction Plan, Stormwater Permit, and Building Permit    Added language is underline  Deleted language is strikethrough  ORDINANCE NO.       DESCRIPTION: WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS FOR THE EARZ  Exhibit A  DATE APPROVED:    Page 10 of 10  (single‐family and two‐family residential on a tract of land that is exempt from the Plat  requirements of this Code) applications.     D. The development application to the City of Georgetown shall be deemed incomplete if the  Acknowledgement Form is not completed, signed and notarized.    E. After the completeness review (Section 3.02.040) of a development application subject to  subparagraph (A) above, the director or his/her designee shall provide a copy of the  Acknowledgement Form to the Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive  Management Working Group.    11.07.007 Water Quality Management Plan    A. The City shall adopt a Water Quality Management Plan for all areas within the Recharge  Zone. Such management practices will include, but not be limited to, public education and  outreach, hazardous waste education, integrated pest management, illicit discharge  detection and elimination, construction‐site storm‐water runoff control, post‐construction  storm‐water management, and pollution prevention for municipal operations including  City and County maintenance activities in the ETJ.    B. The City’s adopted Storm Water Management Plan, as amended, shall serve as the Water  Quality Management Plan for purposes of this Section, unless stated otherwise.     11.07.008 Williamson County Conservation Foundation Adaptive Management Working  Group    An Adaptive Management Working Group has been established by the Williamson County  Conservation Foundation to review data on a regular basis and make recommendations for  specific changes in management directions related to the standards established in Section 17.43  of the Code of Federal Regulations. The City Manager will appoint two City employees with  appropriate technical expertise in the fields of planning and development and system  engineering as members to the Adaptive Management Working Group. The efforts of the  Adaptive Management Working Group will be led by the Williamson County Conservation  Foundation staff.  City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Presentation and discussion of the Executive Summary of the Georgetown Overall Transportation Plan- Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analyst, PMP®, Edward G. Polasek, A.I.C.P, Director, Transportation Services and Jordan J. Maddox, AICP, Principal Planner ITEM SUMMARY: This Plan is a continuation of the effort that the City completed in 2004 with the adoption of the initial Overall Transportation Plan (OTP), which provided an analysis of existing conditions and travel characteristics, a travel demand model, review of the City’s roadway functional classification system, and a revised Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The OTP is one of the elements of the Georgetown 2030 Comprehensive Plan and is a crucial component of the City's long-term land use planning function. This update serves many purposes. It builds upon the previous plan, accommodates city wide changes, recommends new roadway locations and functional classifications, revises the implementation program and improves design recommendations through the implementation of Context Sensitive Solutions. The update also provides a review of the existing sidewalk and pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure and outlines the requirements for future analysis and planning studies. Improvements offered for consideration include roadway widening and/or extensions, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and transit programming. The study involves an evaluation of various transportation improvements and considers the impacts related to traffic/mobility, anticipated construction, and right-of-way costs as well as environmental/land use criteria. As part of the study, the travel demand model has been updated and integrated with the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) 2035 plan/model providing a more detailed transportation zone structure and socioeconomic data enabling a better forecast of future travel demands in and around the Georgetown area. The development of the OTP was a cooperative effort between the City of Georgetown Staff and other City-supported agencies. While a Technical Advisory Committee was not specifically set up for this effort, the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) was updated on a regular basis. During each of the presentations, comments and suggestions were solicited and considered during completion of the OTP. The Planning and Zoning Commission is not required to take action on the plan but is encouraged to provide feedback so that staff can finalize the plans ahead of Council consideration. GTAB will hold a public hearing and consider a final recommendation of the plan to Council on February 13th. Council will then take action on the completed document on February 24th and March 10th. Following the anticipated adoption of the OTP document by Council, staff will begin the process of reviewing and amending part of the UDC in order to implement the goals of the transportation plan and the Commission will consider future action on those amendments. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None at this time. SUBMITTED BY: Nat Waggoner ATTACHMENTS: Description Type OTP Study Area Backup Material OTP Existing Functional Classification Backup Material OTP Design Recommendations Backup Material OTP Thoroughfare Plan Backup Material §¨¦35 §¨¦35 Georgetown Round Roc k Cedar Par k ¬«29 Weir ¬«195 ¬«29 Lake Georgetown Study Area ²0 1 2 3 40.5 Miles Figure ES-1 FM 971 U n i v e r s it y A v e . I n n e r L o o p C R 1 1 0 C R 1 5 0 W e s ti n g h o u s e R d . D B W o o d R d . W illia m s Dr. Airport Rd.S h ell R d .D el W e b b Blv d. S un City Blvd. Roads Rivers & Streams Lakes Round Rock Georgetown Georgetown ETJ Weir Cedar Park FM 1460 RM 2243 Path: G:\0573.003.001 Finalize OTP Updates\07.00 CADD\Revised Exhibits_2014_12_11\ES-1 Study Area.mxd §¨¦35 §¨¦35 Georgetown Round Roc k Cedar Par k ¬«29 Weir ¬«195 ¬«29 Lake Georgetown Existing Functional Classification ²0 1 2 3 40.5 Miles Figure ES-2 FM 971 U n i v e r s it y A v e . I n n e r L o o p C R 1 1 0 C R 1 5 0 W e s ti n g h o u s e R d . D B W o o d R d . W illia m s Dr. Airport Rd.S h ell R d .D el W e b b Blv d. S un City Blvd. Freeways/Frontage Roads Major Arterial Minor Arterial Collector Local Roads Rivers & Streams Georgetown Georgetown ETJ Round Rock Weir Cedar Park Lakes Path: G:\0573.003.001 Finalize OTP Updates\07.00 CADD\Revised Exhibits_2014_12_11\ES-2 Existing Functional Classification.mxd RM 2243 FM 1460 12'12'12'25'MEDIAN12'12'12' 110' VAR IES ROW = 135' MINIMUM 22' MEDIAN 12'12'12'12' 80' ROW = 110' MINIMU M 14.5'14.5'8' 45' 14'14' ROW = 73' MINIMUM 10.5'10.5'8'14'14' 37' ROW = 65' MINIMUM 8.0'6'8'6'11' BORDERAREA 11' 8'8' 28' ROW = 50' MINIMUM BORDERAREA PARK PARK BORDERAREA BORDERAREA BORDERAREA BORDERAREA BORDERAREABORDERAREA BORDERAREA BORDERAREA PARK PARK VARIES VARIESVARIES 1 1 1 1 1 3 NOTES: FAC E OF CUR B TO FACE OF CURB. Major ArterialADT > 24,000 Minor ArterialADT > 12,500 ADT > 2,500Major Collector Residential CollectorADT > 800 5' BIKE BIKE 5' 5' BIKE 5' BIKE 2 REQUIR ED, PENDING ADOPTION OF FU TU RE FIREC OD E WHICH CALLSFOR MINIMUM 32' ROADWAY. OPTIONS FOR 3 AND 4 LANE CON FIGURATIONS. 2 SEE CHAPTER 2 FOR COLLECTOR 1 PAVEMENT MEASUREMENTS ARE 3 UPDATES TO WIDTH MAY BE Functional Classification SystemCross-Sections Figure ES-3 Path: G :\0573.003.001 Finalize O TP Updates\07.00 CADD\Revised Exhibits_2014_12_11\ES-3 Cross-Sections.mxd NOTES: PAVEMEN T MEASUREMENTS ARE FACE OF C UR B TO FACE OF CURB. SEE CH APTER 2 FOR COLLECTOR OPT ION S FOR 3 AND 4 LANE C ONF IG UR AT IO NS. U PDATES TO WIDTH MAY BE REQU IRED , PENDING ADOPTION OF F UTU RE FIR ECODE WHICH CALLS F OR MIN IMU M 32' ROADWAY. 1 2 3 28' \\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ §¨¦35 §¨¦35 Georget ow n Round Rock Cedar Pa rk ¬«29 We ir ¬«195 ¬«29 Lake Ge orgetow n Proposed 2035 Thoroughfare Plan Figure ES-4 F M 9 7 1 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E I N N E R L O O P W E S T I N G H O U S E R D D B W O O D R D WILLIA M S D R AIRPORT RDSHELL R D D E L W E B B B L V D S U N CIT Y B L V D Existing Freeway Existing Major Arterial Existing Minor Arterial Existing Collector Proposed Freeway Proposed Major Arterial Proposed Minor Arterial Proposed Collector \\\Proposed Rail Local Roads Cedar Park Round Rock Weir Georgetown Georgetown ETJ F M 1 4 6 0 R M 2 2 4 3 ²0 1 2Miles Path: G:\0573.003.001 Finalize OTP Updates\07.00 CADD\Revised Exhibits_2014_12_11\ES-4 2035Throughfare Plan.mxd City of Georgetown, Texas Planning and Zoning January 20, 2015 SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to approve the amended board bylaws in accordance with the revised Code of Ordinances – P&Z Staff Liaison ITEM SUMMARY: The City Council revised the Code of Ordinances Chapter 2.48 regarding the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 11, 2014. The Board Bylaws are being amended to conform with the revisions made to Chapter 2.48 and are submitted to the Board for review at this time. The Bylaws will be submitted to the City Council for review and approval in February 2015. FINANCIAL IMPACT: na SUBMITTED BY: ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Ordinance 2014-92 Cover Memo 2015.1.5_P&Z Bylaws Cover Memo Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Revised May 2011February 2015 Page 1 of 7 CITY OF GEORGETOWN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION BYLAWS ARTICLE I. NAME AND PURPOSE Section 1.1. Name. Planning and Zoning Commission (“Commission”). Section 1.2. Purpose. a. The Commission is established to exercise the powers and duties of a zoning commission as permitted by law, including Local Government Code Chapter 211, the City Charter, the City Unified Development Code, and the City Code of Ordinances, as each may be amended. See Ordinance Chapter 2.48. b. The Commission has the power, and its duties includeit shall be its duty: 1. To makeing appropriate surveys, investigations, reports and recommendations relating to community planning and development to the City Council; 2. To makeing plans and maps of the whole or any part or portion of the City and of land outside the City located within five miles of the City limits and any other land outside the City, which, in the opinion of the Commission, bears a relation to the planning of the City and to makeing changes in, additions to and extensions of such plans or maps when it deems the same advisable; 3. To acting with and assisting all other municipal and governmental agencies, and particularly the City Council, in formulating and executing proper plans for municipal development and growth; 4. To recommending to the City Council the passage of such ordinances as it may deem necessary to carry out its program; 5. To recommending to the City Council the adoption of a comprehensive community plan for the guidance and control of the future development of the community; Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Revised May 2011February 2015 Page 2 of 7 6. To makeing studies and recommending to the City Council plans for clearing the City of slums and blighted areas; and 7. To aiding and assisting the City Council in the annual preparation of a long range capital improvement budget and determiningation of sources of funds therefor; and. 8. To perform such other duties as may be prescribed by ordinance or State law; and 6.9. To function as the City zoning commission and exercise all of those powers and duties permitted by Chapter 211 of the Local Government Code, the City Chapter and City ordinances, as each may be amended from time to time. ARTICLE II. MEMBERSHIP Section 2.1. Number of Members. The Commission will be comprised composed of seven (7) Members. Section 2.2. Eligibility. All of the seven Each Members shall be a registered voters eligible to vote in the City elections, reside in the City of Georgetown corporate limits, and must have resided in the City of Georgetown for one year preceding their appointment. The Commission shall be broadly representative as a whole, and whenever possible, . Members shall be drawn, for example, from different residential areas, different racial and ethnic groups, different occupations and professions, and different interest groups. The Members may also be members of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Section 2.3. Appointment of Commission Members and Commissioners-in- Training. a. Members of the Commission shall be appointed pursuant to and in accordance with the City Charter. b. The City Council shall also appoint three persons, who would be qualified to serve on the Commission, as Commissioners-in-Training. Commissioners-in-Training shall not serve as alternates or as proxies for any Commission Member but shall be Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Revised May 2011February 2015 Page 3 of 7 eligible to be appointed to the position of Commission Member upon the expiration of the term of a regular Commission Member or upon a vacancy on the Commission. Section 2.4. Terms of Office. Generally, terms of office for each Member shall be two (2) years. Generally, a Member may serve two (2) consecutive terms. Refer to Ordinance Section 2.36.030A for additional provisions regarding terms of office. Section 2.5. Vacancies. Vacancies that occur during a term shall be filled as soon as reasonably possible and in the same manner as an appointment in accordance with the City Charter. If possible, the Member shall continue to serve until the vacancy is filled. An appointment to fill a vacated term is not included as a term for purposes of counting consecutive terms. Section 2.6. Compensation and Expenditure of Funds. Members serve without compensation. The Commission and its Members have no authority to expend funds or to incur or make an obligation on behalf of the City unless authorized and approved by the City Council. Members may be reimbursed for expenses authorized and approved by the City Council and the Commission. Section 2.7. Compliance with City Policy. Members will comply with City Ordinances, Rules and Policies applicable to the Commission and the Members, including but not limited to Ethics Ordinance Chapter 2.20 and City Commissions, Committees and Boards Ordinance Chapter 2.36. Section 2.8. Removal. Any Member may be removed from their position on the Commission for any reason, or for no reason, by a majority vote of the City Council. ARTICLE III. COMMISSION OFFICERS Section 3.1. Officers. The Commission Officers are Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Secretary. The Chairman is appointed by the City Council during the annual appointment process. The other Commission Officers are elected by a majority vote of the Members at the first meeting after the annual appointment process. Section 3.2. Terms of Office for Commission Officers. Commission Officers serve for a term of one year. In the event of vacancy in the office of Chairman, the Vice- Chairman shall serve as Chairman until the City Council appoints a replacement Chairman. A vacancy in the other offices shall be elected by majority vote of the Members at the next regularly scheduled meeting, or as soon as reasonably practical for Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Revised May 2011February 2015 Page 4 of 7 the unexpired term. If possible, a Commission Officer shall continue to serve until the vacancy is filled. Section 3.3. Duties. a. The Chairman presides at Commission meetings. The Chairman shall generally manage the business of the Commission. The Chairman shall perform the duties delegated to the Chairman by the Commission. b. The Vice-Chairman shall perform the duties delegated to the Vice-Chairman by the Commission. The Vice-Chairman presides at Commission meetings in the Chairman’s absence. The Vice-Chairman shall perform the duties of the Chairman in the Chairman’s absence or disability. c. The Secretary shall perform the duties delegated to the Secretary by the Commission. ARTICLE IV. MEETINGS Section 4.1. Time and Date of Regular Meeting. The Commission shall meet once a month on the same week of the month, the same day of the week, at the same time, and at the same place. The regular date, time and place of the Commission meeting will be decided by the Members at the first meeting of the Commission after the annual appointment process. Section 4.2. Agenda. Items may be placed on the agenda by the Chairman, the City Manager or designee, or at the request of a Member. The party (or individual) requesting the agenda item will be responsible for preparing an agenda item cover sheet and for the initial presentation at the meeting. Items included on the agenda must be submitted to the Staff Liaison no later than one week before the Commission meeting at which the agenda item will be considered. Agenda packets for regular meetings will be provided to the Members in advance of the scheduled Commission meeting. Agenda packets will contain the posted agenda, agenda item cover sheets, and written minutes of the last meeting. Section 4.3. Special Meetings. Special meetings may be called by the Chairman or by request of three (3) Members. Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Revised May 2011February 2015 Page 5 of 7 Section 4.4. Quorum. A quorum shall consist of a majority of the Members. A quorum is required for the Commission to convene a meeting and to conduct business at a meeting. Section 4.5. Call to Order. Commission meetings will be called to order by the Chairman or, if absent, by the Vice-Chairman. In the absence of both the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, the meeting shall be called to order by the Secretary, and a temporary Chairman shall be elected to preside over the meeting. Section 4.6. Conduct of Meeting. Commission meetings will be conducted in accordance with these Bylaws and City Council Meeting Rules and Procedures, as applicable to the Commission. See Ordinance Chapter 2.24. Section 4.7. Voting. Each Member shall vote on all agenda items, except on matters involving a conflict of interest, substantial financial interest or substantial economic interest under state law, the City’s Ethics Ordinance, or other applicable Laws, Rules and Policies. In such instances the Member shall make the required disclosures and shall refrain from participating in both the discussion and vote on the matter. The Member may remain at the dais or leave the dais, at the Member’s option, while the matter is being considered and voted on by the other Commission Members. Unless otherwise provided by law, if a quorum is present, an agenda item must be approved by a majority of the Commission Members present at the meeting. Section 4.8. Minutes. A recording or written minutes shall be made of all open sessions of Commission meetings. The Staff Liaison is the custodian of all Commission records and documents. Section 4.9. Attendance. Members are required to attend Commission meetings prepared to discuss the issues on the agenda. A Member shall notify the Chairman and the Staff Liaison if the Member is unable to attend a meeting. Excessive absenteeism will be subject to action under Council policy and may result in the Member being replaced on the Commission. See Ordinance Section 2.36.010D. Excessive absenteeism means failure to attend at least 75% of regularly scheduled meetings, including Commission meetings and Subcommittee meetings. If a Member is removed from the Commission that position shall be considered vacant and a new Member shall be appointed to the Commission in accordance with Section 2.5 above. Section 4.10. Public Participation. In accordance with City policy, the public is welcome and invited to attend Commission meetings and to speak on any item on the Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Revised May 2011February 2015 Page 6 of 7 agenda. A person wishing to address the Commission must sign up to speak in accordance with the policy of the Council concerning participation and general public comment at public meetings. Sign-up sheets will be available and should be submitted to the Chairman prior to the start of the meeting. If any written materials are to be provided to the Commission, a copy shall also be provided to the Staff Liaison for inclusion in the minutes of the meeting. Speakers shall be allowed a maximum of three minutes to speak, but may take up to six minutes if another individual who signs up to speak yields the time to the speaker. If a person wishes to speak on an issue that is not posted on the agenda, they must file a written request with the Staff Liaison no later than one week before the scheduled meeting. The written request must state the specific topic to be addressed and include sufficient information to inform the Commission and the public. A person who disrupts the meeting may be asked to leave and be removed. Section 4.11. Open Meetings. Public notice of Commission meetings shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act. All Commission meetings and deliberations shall be open to the public, except for properly noticed closed session matters, and shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Section 4.12. Closed Sessions. The Commission may conduct closed sessions as allowed by law, on properly noticed closed session matters, such as consultation with attorney on legal matters, deliberation regarding the value of real property, competitive utility matters, and economic development negotiations. A recording or certified agenda shall be made of all closed sessions of Commission meetings. ARTICLE V. REPORTS TO CITY COUNCIL The Commission shall meet with City Council, as requested, to determine how the Commission may best serve and assist City Council. City Council shall hear reports from the Commission at regularly scheduled Council meetings. ARTICLE VI. SUBCOMMITTEES Section 6.1. Formation. When deemed necessary by a majority of the Commission, Subcommittees may be formed for specific projects related to Commission matters. Subcommittees comprised of non-Members may only be formed with the prior consent and confirmation of the City Council. Planning and Zoning Commission Bylaws Revised May 2011February 2015 Page 7 of 7 Section 6.2. Expenditure of Funds. No Subcommittee, or member of a Subcommittee, has the authority to expend funds or incur an obligation on behalf of the City or the Commission. Subcommittee expenses may be reimbursed if authorized and approved by the Commission or by City Council. Section 6.3. Open Meetings. Subcommittee meetings and deliberations shall be open to the public, except for properly noticed closed session matters, and shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Texas Open Meetings Act. ARTICLE VII. BYLAW AMENDMENTS These Bylaws may be amended by majority vote of the Commission Members at any regular meeting of the Commission. The Commission’s proposed amendments to the Bylaws must be approved by City Council at the next Council meeting after the Commission’s approval. Bylaw amendments are not effective until approved by City Council. Approved and adopted at a meeting of the City Council on the _____ day of ____________________, 2015. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN _____ _____ City Secretary Mayor Approved and adopted at a meeting of the Commission on the ______ day of _________________, 2015. ATTEST: COMMISSION _____ _____ Commission Secretary Commission Chairman