HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_P&Z_10.01.2019Notice of Meeting for the
P lanning and Zoning Commission
of the City of Georgetown
October 1, 2019 at 6:00 P M
at Council and Courts B ldg, 510 W 9th Street Georgetown, T X 78626
T he C ity of G eorgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require as s is tance in partic ipating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reas onable
as s is tance, adaptations , or ac commodations will be provided upon request. P leas e c ontact the C ity S ec retary's
O ffic e, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc heduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or C ity Hall at 808 Martin
Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626 for additional information; T T Y users route through R elay
Texas at 711.
P ublic Wishing to Address the B oard
O n a s ubjec t that is posted on this agenda: P lease fill out a speaker regis tration form whic h can be found at the
Board meeting. C learly print your name, the letter of the item on which you wish to speak, and pres ent it to the
S taff Liais on, preferably prior to the start of the meeting. You will be c alled forward to speak when the Board
cons iders that item.
O n a s ubjec t not posted on the agenda: P ersons may add an item to a future Board agenda by filing a written
request with the S taff Liais on no later than one week prior to the Board meeting. T he reques t must include the
s peaker's name and the spec ific topic to be addres s ed with sufficient information to inform the board and the
public . F or Board Liaison c ontact information, pleas e logon to
http://government.georgetown.org/c ategory/boards -commissions /.
A At the time of posting, no pers ons had s igned up to address the Board.
Consent Agenda
T he S tatutory C ons ent Agenda includes non-c ontroversial and routine items that may be ac ted upon with one
s ingle vote. An item may be pulled from the C ons ent Agenda in order that it be disc ussed and acted upon
individually as part of the R egular Agenda.
B C ons ideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the S eptember 17, 2019 regular meeting of
the P lanning and Zoning C ommission. - Mirna G arc ia, Management Analyst
L egislativ e Regular Agenda
C C ontinued from the S eptember 17, 2019 P lanning & C ommission M eeting:
P ublic Hearing and possible action on a reques t for a S ubdivis ion Varianc e to waive the S idewalk
C ons truction requirement of S ec tion 12.07.010 of the Unified Development C ode, for the property
generally loc ated at 801 E. 2nd S treet, bearing the legal desc ription of Lot 1, Block A, Hauser R idge
S ubdivision (2019-3-WAV) -- Ethan Harwell, P lanner
D P ublic Hearing and possible action on a reques t for a R eplat of Lots 57 and 58, S ection 1 of the Logan
R anch S ubdivision, als o being 9.96 ac res of the William R oberts S urvey, Abstract No. 524, located at
138-150 Logan R anch R oad, to be known as Mountain Laurel S enior Living -- C hels ea Irby, S enior
P lanner.
Page 1 of 147
E P ublic Hearing and possible action on a reques t to rezone an approximately 0.79-acre trac t of land out of
the J.B. P ulsifer S urvey, Abstract No.498, also know as the O rville P erry S urvey, Abs trac t No. 10, from
the Agriculture (AG ) to O ffice (O F ) zoning dis tric t, for the property generally located at 1340 W
University Ave (2019-6-R EZ) -- Mic hael P atroski, P lanner
F Discussion Items:
Updates and Announcements (S ofia Nelson, C NU-A, P lanning Direc tor)
Update from other Board and C ommission meetings .
G TAB - https://government.georgetown.org/georgetown-trans portation-advis ory-board-gtab/
UDC AC - https ://government.georgetown.org/unified-development-c ode-advisory-board-2/
Q uestions or c o mments from Alternate Memb ers about the actio ns and matters c o nsidered on this
agenda
R eminder o f the O c to b er 15, 2019, P lanning and Zo ning C o mmis s io n meeting in C C C hambers
loc ated at 510 W 9th S t, s tarting at 6:00pm
Adjournment
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that this Notic e of
Meeting was posted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily
acc es s ible to the general public as required by law, on the _____ day of _________________, 2019, at
__________, and remained s o posted for at leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said
meeting.
__________________________________
R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary
Page 2 of 147
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
October 1, 2019
S UB J E C T:
C onsideration and pos s ible ac tion to approve the minutes from the S eptember 17, 2019 regular meeting of
the P lanning and Zoning C ommis s ion. - Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Minutes Backup Material
Page 3 of 147
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 1 of 5
September 17, 2019
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, September 17, 2019 at 6:00 p.m.
Courts and Council Building, located at 510 W. 9th Street, Georgetown, TX 78626
Commissioners present: Ercel Brashear, Chair; Gary Newman; Ben Stewart; Tim Bargainer; Marlene
McMichael; Kaylah McCord
Commissioners in training present: Glenn Patterson; Aaron Albright
Commissioners absent: Travis Perthius
Staff Present: Andreina Davila-Quintero, Current Planning Manager; Sofia Nelson, Planning Director;
Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner; Michael Patroski, Planner; Ethan Harwell, Planner; Mirna Garcia,
Management Analyst
Chair Brashear added Commissioner in Training Patterson to the dias and called the meeting to order
at 6:00 p.m and Commissioner Bargainer led the pledge of allegiance.
A. Public Wishing to Address the Board
At the time of posting, no persons had signed up to address the Board.
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 and possible action to approve the minutes from the September 3, 2019 regular
meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. – Mirna Garcia, Management Analyst
Motion by Commissioner Bargainer to approve the Consent Agenda. Second by Commissioner
McMichael. Approved (7-0).
Legislative Regular Agenda
C. Continued from the August 20, 2019 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting: Public Hearing and
possible action on a request for a Subdivision Variance to waive the Sidewalk Construction
requirement of Section 12.07.010 of the Unified Development Code, for the property generally
located at 801 E. 2nd Street, bearing the legal description of Lot 1, Block A, Hauser Ridge Subdivision
(2019-3-WAV) – Ethan Harwell, Planner
Harwell presented the item to the Commission. He indicated that the applicant would like the item
to be discussed at the next meeting.
The applicant, Richard Williamson, addressed the Commission. He would like the item to be
Page 4 of 147
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5
September 17, 2019
discussed at the next meeting because he is not prepared and does not have the pictures he would
like to show the Commission.
Motion to continue the item for further discussion until the October 1 meeting by Commissioner
Newman. Second by Commissioner Stewart. Approved (5-2) with Commissioner Bargainer and
Commissioner McCord opposed.
D. Public Hearing and possible action on a request to rezone approximately 0.165 acres out of Lots 5
and 8, Block 38, City of Georgetown and a portion W 6th St a 60-foot wide roadway from the
Residential Single-Family (RS) district to the Mixed Use Downtown (MU-DT) district, generally
located at 601 S Main Street (2019-13-REZ) -- Chelsea Irby, Senior
Staff report presented by Irby. The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject property to Mixed
Use Downtown (MU-DT) to conform to the zoning of the adjacent properties. The applicant states
that the existing parking lot is not allowed in the Residential Single-Family (RS) district and would
be fully compliant under the requested zoning district. The subject property has an existing Future
Land Use designation of Specialty Mixed Use Area and is currently zoned Residential Single-
Family. The subject property is within the Downtown Overlay District (Area 1). The surrounding
properties are well-established as a part of the northeast quadrant of the downtown area. Since the
subject property is on the edge of the Town Square Historic District, the surrounding area is a
transitional area between a residential area and the Town Square. Surrounding the property are
houses that have been converted into businesses, the historical buildings of the Town Square, and a
residential home.
Commissioner Patterson had a question about the map that was presented and the map that was
posted online. Irby explained that the GIS department map did not show the strip/section of the
map but the map presented is correct.
Commissioner McMichael asked if the property is owned by the City. Irby responded that it is.
Chair Brashear opened the Public Hearing.
Josh Baran addressed the Commission. He commented that the adjacent property maybe zoned
DT-MU, but its current use is residential. His mother lives in the property.
Chair Brashear closed the Public Hearing.
Motion to approve Item D by Commissioner McCord. Second by Commissioner Stewart.
Approved (7-0).
E. Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change
the Future Land Use designation from Employment Center to Moderate Density Residential on an
approximately 119-acre tract of land in the Woodruff Stubblefield Survey, Abstract No. 556,
generally located at 1500 Lawhon Ln (2019-5-CPA). Michael Patroski, Planner
Page 5 of 147
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5
September 17, 2019
This item was deferred until the next meeting on October 1, 2019.
F. Public Hearing and possible action on a request to rezone approximately 2.55 acres out of the
Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract No. 497, from the Residential Single-Family (RS) district to the
Office (OF) district, for the property generally located at 1625 Williams Drive (2019-12-REZ) --
Michael Patroski, Planner
Staff report presented by Patroski. The applicant is requesting to rezone the Residential Single-
Family (RS) zoned property to Office (OF). The subject property currently improved with one (1)
existing barn. The remainder of the property is undeveloped, is predominately flat and contains
moderate tree coverage throughout the site. The subject property has a Mixed-Use Neighborhood
Center Future Land Use designation. It is currently zoned Residential-Single Family (RS). It is also
situated within the 2017 Williams Drive Study Area with the intended designation of Small
Office/Medium Density Housing. The subject property is adjacent to Residential Single-Family to
the east and north, and Office to the west and south.
Chair Brashear noted his concern with the staff report criteria of partially complies. He asked if a
site plan can be administered on the property with no request for a subdivision plat. Davila-
Quintero answered that staff would need to review the configuration of the lot to see if it has legal
lot status. That review has not been completed yet, and it is one of the next steps before making a
determination.
The applicant, Josh Baran addressed the Commission and stated that he is not able to submit site
plan info until zoning is approved. The client is trying to determine the type of use. They will seek
legal lot determination and are proposing to bring access from Williams Drive, and extend Park
Lane to Golden Oaks Road. There will also be a second road through the property. If legal lot
determination is not possible, they plan to plat the back and front empty lots as a single lot.
Chair Brashear commented that if they are granted office zoning, and if the type of client/business
changes, there is no assurance to the neighborhood of what will be there. The uncertainty is a
concern.
Chair Brasher opened the Public Hearing.
Public speaker Randy Howry commented on his concern with Park Lane opening up. He would
like to work with the property owner to come up with a plan of action that is acceptable by
everyone living in that area. They are concerned with the type of fencing used as well.
Public speaker Will Kemper is also concerned with Park Lane being open to thru traffic. He is
concerned that a residential street will be open to commercial use and wants to know what
residents can do to avoid this.
Chair Brashear explained the review process and advised Mr. Kemper to establish communications
Page 6 of 147
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5
September 17, 2019
with staff to answer Mr. Kemper’s questions.
Chair Brashear closed the Public Hearing, and invited the applicant to speak.
The applicant, Josh Baran, commented that site plan will be submitted and will come up to P&Z.
Commissioner McMichael asked what is on the 2 properties to the north of this property, and how
they will be impacted. The applicant indicated that they are empty and the owners were notified of
this project request.
There was discussion by the Commission regarding the request the roadway extension, and fire
code. Several Commission members commented on needing more information before making a
decision.
Chair Brashear had a question about the Commission’s voting options, and how a denial would
affect a subsequent application for a PUD request. Davila-Quintero explained that it is up to City
Council to make the final decision. The applicant would need to demonstrate a substantial
difference between the requests to not be subject to a waiting period.
Motion by Commissioner Bargainer to recommend denial of Item F (2019-12-REZ). Second by
Commissioner in training Patterson. Approved (6-1) with Commissioner Newman opposed.
G. Public Hearing and possible action on a request to rezone approximately 24.74 acres out of the
Antonio Flores Addition Survey, Abstract No. 2356, from the Local Commercial (C-1) district to the
High-Density Multi-Family (MF-2) district, for the property generally located at the northeast
corner of the N Austin Ave and Stadium Drive intersection (2019-9-REZ) -- Michael Patroski,
Planner
This item was pulled.
H. Discussion Items:
- Updates and Announcements (Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director)
- Update from other Board and Commission meetings
o UDC
▪ Nelson updated the Commission regarding the UDC Committee. Presently
they are reviewing the Gateways and providing feedback on Comp Plan
efforts.
- Questions or comments from Alternate Members about the actions and matters considered
on this agenda.
o Commissioner Newman had a question about the legislative changes and the UDC
changes.
o Nelson commented that the UDC will be updated towards the end of year.
- Reminder of the October 1, 2019, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in CC
Chambers located at 510 W 9th St, starting at 6:00pm.
Page 7 of 147
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5
September 17, 2019
Motion to adjourn by Commissioner McMichael. Second by Commissioner McCord.
Adjournment at 6:56 pm.
____________________________________ ____________________________________
Ercel Brashear, Chair Attest, P&Z Ben Stewart, Secretary
Page 8 of 147
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
October 1, 2019
S UB J E C T:
C ontinued from the S eptember 17, 2019 P lanning & C ommission M eeting:
P ublic Hearing and pos s ible ac tion on a request for a S ubdivision Variance to waive the S idewalk
C onstruc tion requirement of S ection 12.07.010 of the Unified Development C ode, for the property
generally located at 801 E. 2nd S treet, bearing the legal des cription of Lot 1, Bloc k A, Haus er R idge
S ubdivis ion (2019-3-WAV) -- Ethan Harwell, P lanner
IT E M S UMMARY:
Overview of Applicant’s Request:
T he applic ant is requesting a waiver from the requirement of S ection 12.07.010 of the Unified Development
C ode, which requires a s idewalk to be cons tructed ac ros s the property at 801. E. 2nd S treet. T he s ubjec t
property is currently vac ant, and the property owner wis hes to develop it with a new s ingle-family home,
thus triggering the sidewalk requirement.
S taff’s Analysis:
S taff has reviewed the request in ac cordance with the Unified Development C ode (UDC ) and other
applicable codes. S taff has determined that the proposed request only partially c omplies with one of the
five criteria establis hed in UDC S ec tion 3.22.060 for a S ubdivis ion Varianc e, as outlined in the attached
S taff R eport.
Public Comments:
As required by the Unified Development C ode (UDC ), all property owners and registered neighborhood
as s ociations within 300 feet of the subject property were notified of the reques t (17 notic es mailed), a legal
notice advertis ing the public hearing was plac ed in the S un News paper (Augus t 4, 2019) and s igns were
pos ted on-site. As of the public ation date of this report, s taff has received 2 written comments in favor and
none in opposition of the request.
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None. T he applicant has paid the required application fees .
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Ethan Harwell, P lanner
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
2019-3-WAV - P&Z Staff Report Cover Memo
Exhibit 1 - Location Map Backup Material
Exhibit 2 - Letter of Intent Backup Material
Exhibit 3 – Concept Plan Backup Material
Page 9 of 147
Exhibit 4 – Map Exis ting Sidewalk Conditions from 2015 Sidewalk
Masterplan
Backup Material
Exhibit 5 – Sidewalk Project Priority Map Backup Material
Exhibit 6 – 2nd Street Project Summary from 2015 Sidewalk
Masterplan Backup Material
Exhibit 7 – Public Comments Backup Material
Pres entation Pres entation
Page 10 of 147
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-3-WAV
801 E. 2nd Street Page 1 of 7
Report Date: August 16, 2019
File No: 2019-3-WAV
Project Planner: Ethan Harwell, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: 801 E. 2nd Street
Project Location: 801 E. 2nd Street, within City Council district No. 6
Total Acreage: 0.33 acres
Legal Description: Lot 1, Block A, Hauser Ridge Subdivision
Applicant: Lisa Forsythe & Rick Williamson
Property Owner: Lisa Forsythe & Rick Williamson
Request: Waiver from the requirement of Section 12.07.010 of the Unified Development
Code, which requires a sidewalk to be constructed across the property at 801.
E. 2nd Street.
Page 11 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-3-WAV
801 E. 2nd Street Page 2 of 7
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant is requesting a waiver from the requirement of Section 12.07.010 of the Unified
Development Code, which requires a sidewalk to be constructed across the property at 801. E. 2nd
Street. The subject property is currently vacant, and the property owner wishes to develop it with a
new single-family home. In their letter of intent (Exhibit 2), the applicant cites the lack of sidewalks on
homes in the same subdivision and in the general vicinity as the reasons for their request.
Site Information
Location:
The subject property is located at 801 E. 2nd Street between N. College Street and Holly Street. The site
is currently zoned Residential Single-Family (RS) and has a Future Land Use designation of Moderate
Density Residential (MDR).
Physical Characteristics:
The subject property is approximately 0.33 acres and slopes towards a low, vegetated area at the rear
of the lot. There are several smaller trees on the buildable area of the property.
Page 12 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-3-WAV
801 E. 2nd Street Page 3 of 7
Background
The subject property was created in 2002 as a part of the six lot Hauser Ridge Subdivision. Five of the
lots in the subdivision have homes constructed between 2003 and 2005. There is no sidewalk existing
around these homes.
The current property owners wish to build a new single-family home on the remaining undeveloped
lot. Currently, the UDC standards related to sidewalks (Section 12.07.010) require that sidewalks be
constructed at the time of the building permit.
In 2015, the City adopted the 2015 Sidewalk Master Plan. This plan is meant to guide sidewalk
development and policy through the year 2025. The goals and policies of the plan support the policies
of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan by encouraging an active, safe pedestrian environment. The plan
evaluated existing pedestrian facilities, identified opportunities for future sidewalks, and created a
prioritized implementation plan for City investment in new sidewalks.
The plan identified E. 2nd Street between Austin Ave. and Holly St. as a Priority 1 Project (Exhibits 5 &
6). This designation was given because of the lack of sidewalks, the medium condition of existing
sidewalks (Exhibit 4), and its close proximity and connection to the Downton Overlay District, multiple
parks, the trails along the San Gabriel River, and Southwestern University. 2nd Street was also
mentioned to have special importance during the public outreach process for the plan. In 2015, the
estimated cost of these improvements for the entire length of 2nd Street was $410,000.
Recently, the City constructed a six foot sidewalk across VFW Park, approximately 700 feet west of the
subject property, and a sidewalk along Holly Street that connects to the Bark Park, approximately 220
feet east of the property.
Utilities
The subject property is located within the City’s service area for water, wastewater, and electricity. It is
anticipated that there is adequate water and wastewater capacity at this time to serve this property by
existing capacity.
Transportation
The subject property has approximately 80 feet of frontage along E. 2nd Street, which is identified as a
Major Collector on the Overall Transportation Plan.
Approval Criteria
According to the UDC, a subdivision variance may be approved, conditionally approved, or
disapproved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Approval requires a super-majority vote by the
Commission. At least four (4) of the following factors are required for approval:
Page 13 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-3-WAV
801 E. 2nd Street Page 4 of 7
SUBDIVISION VARIANCE
CRITERIA
FINDINGS COMMENTS
That the granting of the variance
will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare or injurious
to other property in the area or to
the City in administering this Code.
Partially Complies The installation of a sidewalk on the
subject property will contribute to
the provision of effective mobility
and pedestrian safety along this
roadway, even if in the immediate
future it will not be part of a larger,
useful system. To the east of the site
there is a six-foot wide sidewalk
along Holly Street (approximately
220 feet away), but the lots between
the subject property and Holly St do
not have sidewalk. To the west, there
is a six-foot wide sidewalk along E.
2nd Street at VFW Park
(approximately 700 feet away), but
there is no sidewalk on the
properties to the west of the subject
property to meet it. While the
sidewalk would be isolated once
constructed, the intent of this
regulation is to provide sidewalks as
property (re)develops to eventually
provide a complete network. Because
of this, staff finds that granting of the
variance may be detrimental as these
properties and the roadway
redevelops due to the lack of a safe
pedestrian network.
That the granting of the variance
would not substantially conflict
with the Comprehensive Plan and
the purposes of this Code.
Does Not Comply The 2030 Comprehensive Plan goals
and polices call for a safe pedestrian
network as an alternative to
automobile usage. Specifically, in
policy 1.E.3 of the Land Use Element,
the plan promotes safe and friendly
pedestrian routes as a key to creating
quality neighborhoods.
The City’s 2015 Sidewalk
Masterplan, a component of the
Overall Thoroughfare Plan, follows
this policy and seeks to ensure that
Georgetown is a “safe, walkable city
which accommodates all users.” The
Page 14 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-3-WAV
801 E. 2nd Street Page 5 of 7
SUBDIVISION VARIANCE
CRITERIA
FINDINGS COMMENTS
plan makes recommendations that
promote investment in older
neighborhoods and places where
gaps in the system exist. It also
recommends the enforcement the
UDC requirements related to
sidewalks, so that as many steps are
being taken towards building a
complete sidewalk network. The
Plan identifies the 2nd Street corridor
as a Priority 1 Project. This corridor
holds special importance due to its
proximity to parks, trails, the
Downtown Overlay District, and
other land uses that generate
pedestrian traffic, but at the time of
the writing of the plan there were no
pedestrian facilities along the
corridor.
The UDC requires a 6-foot wide
sidewalk along this the frontage of
this property. However, The UDC
does provide additional guidance on
the matter in Section 12.07.010.A
where it states that infill projects
should provide sidewalks where
practical, but consideration should
be given to the existing conditions of
the built and natural environment.
This allows the property owner, in
collaboration with City staff, to
consider alternative locations and
design for the required sidewalk. In
reviewing the existing conditions of
the site, staff finds that a sidewalk
along this roadway is feasible. In
addition, Section 12.07.010 states that
some justifications for the variance
may include the location of the
proposed facilities in relationship to
the existing and planned pedestrian
network, the need for the facility,
Page 15 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-3-WAV
801 E. 2nd Street Page 6 of 7
SUBDIVISION VARIANCE
CRITERIA
FINDINGS COMMENTS
and topography/natural features.
The Land Use Element of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan promotes
complete, pedestrian oriented, streets
throughout its policies. Thus,
waiving the sidewalk requirement
would be in conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan and purpose of
the UDC.
That the conditions that create the
need for the variance do not
generally apply to other property in
the vicinity.
Does Not Comply There are other undeveloped
residential lots in the area that do not
have any existing sidewalks. As
these properties (re)develop, the
UDC’s sidewalk requirement would
apply.
That application of a provision of
this Code will render subdivision of
the land impossible.
Does Not Comply The subject property is already a
platted lot and does not possess
sufficient street frontage to be
subdivided further. In addition, all
properties are required to provide a
sidewalk at time of development,
and would not render subdivision of
the land impossible.
Where the literal enforcement of
these regulations would result in an
unnecessary hardship.
Does Not Comply The enforcement of these regulations
would not result in a hardship. The
property could still be developed in
accordance with the property
owner’s wishes and as permitted by
the UDC.
Summary:
Overall, Staff finds that the request only partially complies with one of the approval criteria. The
approval of the waiver would not support a safe pedestrian environment and would not be consistent
with the policies and recommendations of the 2030 Compressive Plan or the Sidewalk Master Plan.
Public Notification
As required by the Unified Development Code (UDC), all property owners within 300 feet of the subject
property were notified of the request (17 notices mailed), a legal notice advertising the public hearing
was placed in the Sun Newspaper (August 4, 2019) and signs were posted on-site. As of the publication
date of this report, staff has received two written comments in favor (Exhibit 7) and no written
Page 16 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-3-WAV
801 E. 2nd Street Page 7 of 7
comments in opposition of the request.
Motion
When making a motion to approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the variance request, the
Planning and Zoning Commission must identify and recite each factor that the Commission has found
to have been met, or not met (in the event of a disapproval).
Attachments
WAV-2018-003 – P&Z Staff Report
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Letter of Intent
Exhibit 3 – Concept Plan
Exhibit 4 – Map Existing Sidewalk Conditions from 2015 Sidewalk Masterplan
Exhibit 5 – Sidewalk Project Priority Map
Exhibit 6 – 2nd Street Project Summary from 2015 Sidewalk Masterplan
Exhibit 7 – Public Comments
Presentation
Page 17 of 147
E 7TH S T
EL
M S
T
ROCK ST
H
O
L
L
Y
S
T
E 5TH S T
E 4TH S T
S MAIN S
T
SCENIC DR
WE
S
T S
T
E 2ND ST
E 6TH ST
ASH ST
S IH 35 NB
NCOLLEGE ST
W 8TH ST
S A
U
S
TI
N
AVE
W 10TH S T
S MY
RTLE
S
T
S CHUR
CH ST
W 9TH S T
PINE ST
S CO
LLEG
E ST
S IH 35 SB
W 6 TH S T
MAP
LE
S
T
W 4 TH S T
S IH 35 FWY NBS IH 35 FWY SB
FOREST ST
T H O M A S C T
E 3RD ST
W 7TH ST
N AUSTIN AVE
W 3RD ST
ENTR 261 NB
E 11TH S T
E 10TH S T
WALNUT
ST
EXIT 261 S B
E U N I V E R S I T Y A V E
SOUT H W ESTERNBLVD
EMORROW ST W
L
W
A
L
D
E
N
D
R
N CHURCH
S
T
N
M
Y
R
T
L
E
S
T
E VA L L EY ST
E 8 T H S T
S M I T H C R E E K R D
W M OR ROW ST
W 5TH ST
W
E
S
L
E
Y
A
N
D
R
L O W E R P A R K RD
P I R A T E D R
N MA
IN
ST
C
H
A
M
B
E
R
W
A
Y
SO ULE DR
S E R VI C E R D
W 11TH ST
WILLIAMS DR
B LUE HOLE PARK RD
P
I
R
A
T
E
C
V
WSPR I N G S T
B R E N D O N L E E L N
J
O
H
N
C
A
R
T
E
R
D
R
W 2 N D S T
RIV E R SID E D R
E 9 T H S T
WILLIAMSDR T N NB
RUCKE
R
ST
M C K E N Z I E D R
R E T R E A
T
P
L
O
L
I
V
E
S
T
E 9TH 1/2 ST
SAN G A B R I E L VIL L A G E BLV D
TI
N
B
A
R
N
A
LY
W 9TH ST
E 9 T H S T
H
O
L
L
Y
S
T
E 10TH ST
E 9TH ST
E 8TH S T
E 8 T H S T
W 5 T H S T
E 11TH ST
PINE
S
T
E 3RD S T
FORE
S
T S
T
W 2ND ST
2019-3-WAVExhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
0 500 1,000Fee t
Page 18 of 147
Letter of Intent
Subject – 801 E. 2nd Street, Georgetown, TX 78626 / Owners – Lisa Forsythe & Rick Williamson
Request for a subdivision variance to waive the requirement to construct the sidewalk for new build
residential home in Old Town
1. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare or injurious to other property in the area or to the City in administering this Code.
ANSWER- Granting this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, as the public
already uses the sides of the street for passing along every lot in our plated community. And to
our knowledge, no pedestrian has ever been involved in a traffic accident or been struck by a
passing vehicle in the history of our platted community. What is detrimental to the public
health in our platted community is the city’s lack of completing the construction of East 2nd
street beyond College Street, which was specifically itemized in the special City Bond ballet
several years ago and which specially included ALL of East 2nd Street! However, it has never
been completed beyond College Street! Consequently, the poorly constructed 2nd Street
extension up to S. Holly Street is not even a legal roadway. It is too narrow just beyond our
platted community, and without yellow center lines or white edge-to-edge lines all up and down
this 3-block section.
2. That the granting of the variance would not substantially conflict with the Comprehensive
Plan and the purpose of this Code.
ANSWER- Granting this variance would not conflict with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, as we
already explored any such conflict over two years ago through the Georgetown Planning
Department, when seeking to acquire the City’s abandoned Pine Street extension that ajoins
our property on the west side of our lot. The City Council approved our acquiring that land only
after it first explored any other use the City might have had in mind for it. There was none.
3. Conditions that create the need for the variance do not generally apply to other property in
the vicinity.
ANSWER- Not only do they not apply to the other five lots in our platted community since it was
created in 2002, none of the other home owners, including the home we now live at within this
platted community, have ever been approached by the city to build sidewalks. So why should
we be the lone property in our community required to have a sidewalk.
4. That application of a provision of this Code will render subdivision of the land impossible.
Page 19 of 147
ANSWER- Does not apply as our platted community has been fully sub-divided and platted since
2002.
5. Where the literal enforcement of these regulations would result in an unnecessary hardship.
ANSWER- We are being unfairly singled out as the only property in our platted sub-division
required to have a sidewalk. Consequently, since no other homeowners in our platted
community considered them necessary, we feel obligated to conform to their uniformity of no
sidewalks. To do otherwise would be in conflict with the uniformity this City appears to most
highly value. Furthermore, it only seems reasonable to allow the city to review the need for
sidewalks in our platted community when the extension, widening and proper lane-marking of
E. 2nd Street is done, as called for in the previous Bond Election documentation.
Page 20 of 147
LIVING SQUARE FOOTAGE
TOTAL LIVING 2597
SQ FT
TOTAL SLAB SQUARE FOOTAGE
TOTAL SLAB 3556 SQ FT
SLAB COVERAGE 24.60%
TOTAL IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE SQUARE
FOOTAGE
TOTAL
IMPERVIOUS 4123 SQ FT
TOTAL COVERAGE 28.52%
MASONRY PERCENTAGE
TOTAL MASONRY 96%
C
20
6
6
02
6
1
1 A
NORTH
& $
01
/
2
3
/
1
9
DW
C
1/
8
'
'
=
1
'
-
0
'
'
05
/
1
7
/
1
9
MUST COMPLY WITH THE 2012 IRC, COG UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT CODE, 2014 NEC & CITY OF
GEORGETOWN ELECTRICAL ORDINANCE 2014-67
Must comply with water conservation ordinance
2014-023
Must comply with COG Construction Driveway
Standards
Landscaping must comply with City of
Georgetown Unified Development Code Section
8.03
Required Trees cannot be planted in PUE per
section/ROW section 12.04.020 and 13.03 of COG
UDC
All Heritage Trees require a pruning permit.
Please contact Urban Forester for more info and
to obtain a permit
Five (5) foot sidewalk is required along street per
section 12.04 of COG UDC
Fences must comply with section 8.07.020 and
8.07.040 of the COG UDC
Must comply with all Plat notes
All Backflow reports must be uploaded to
www.vepollc.com
Inspections must be requested by 3PM for next
business day inspection*in most cases
PerPlatNote#7:abackflow
prevention device must be
installed at each water meter due
to the location of the sanitary
easement.
6-foot sidewalk
Page 21 of 147
E 3 R D ST
E 2 N D ST
HOLLY ST
P
I
N
E
ST
N
CO
L
L
EG
E
S
T
WA
L
N
U
T
S
TS
CO
L
LE
GE
S
T
WIN
DRID
GE
VILLA
GE
CV
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Aerial - Sidewalks 2015
2019-3-WAV LegendSiteCity Limits
0 250 500Feet
Page 22 of 147
E 3 R D ST
E 2 N D ST
HOLLY ST
P
I
N
E
ST
N
CO
L
L
EG
E
S
T
WA
L
N
U
T
S
TS
CO
L
LE
GE
S
T
WIN
DRID
GE
VILLA
GE
CV
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Aerial - Sidewalk Master Plan Priority Projects 2015
2019-3-WAV LegendSiteCity Limits
0 250 500Feet
Page 23 of 147
FINAL REPORT
25March 2015
Preliminary Costs
Description Estimated
Quantity
New Sidewalk 3,000 LF
New Curb Ramps 10 EA
Sidewalk Repairs 0 LF
Curb Ramp
Repairs 1 EA
Total $410,000
Notable Elements
●Connection to Downtown
Overlay District
●VFW Park
●Bark Park
●San Gabriel River Trail
●McMaster Athletic Complex
●Public Priorities
●Parks and Recreation
Priorities
2nd Street
Excellent
Good
Passable
Limited Failure
Failing
No Sidewalk
Trail
Downtown District
Project Area
LEGEND
Page 24 of 147
Page 25 of 147
Page 26 of 147
801 E. 2nd Street
2019-3-WAV
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 1, 2019
Page 27 of 147
Item Under Consideration
2019-3-WAV
•A Subdivision Variance to waive the requirement of Section 12.07.010
of the UDC, which requires a sidewalk to be constructed across the
property at 801. E. 2nd Street.
Page 28 of 147
Location Map
VFW Park
Bark Park
Suddenlink Office
McMaster
Athletic Complex
Trail Access
Page 29 of 147
Background
•Site has been undeveloped since it
was created in 2002.
•Sidewalk is required with new
single-family homes. 6-foot wide
sidewalk is required along Major
Collector Roads
•Some existing sidewalks in the
area, none on this block
•Priority 1 Project in the Sidewalk
Masterplan
Page 30 of 147
Facing Holly Street Facing College Street
Context
Page 31 of 147
Plot Plan
6’ Sidewalk in ROW
Page 32 of 147
2015 Existing Conditions
No SidewalkGood
Excellent
Passable
Page 33 of 147
Priority 1 Projects
Priority 1 Project
Page 34 of 147
Priority 1 Project
•Parks and Recreation
•VFW Park
•Bark Park
•San Gabriel River Trails
•McMaster Athletic Complex
•Connection to Downtown
Overlay District,
Southwestern University
6’ Sidewalk along VFW
Park to College St.
Page 35 of 147
Policy Guidance
•2030 Plan Policy 1.B: Promote more walkable neighborhoods within
appropriate infill locations.
•Encourage pedestrian facilities and context sensitive streetscapes.
•2015 Sidewalk Master Plan recommends leveraging UDC sidewalk
construction requirements to help fill in gaps in the sidewalk system.
•UDC Justifications (12.07.010.E)for the variance include, but are not
limited to:
•Location of the facility in relation to the existing or planned pedestrian network
•the need for the facility
•topography/natural features
Page 36 of 147
Approval Criteria –UDC Section 3.22.060
Criteria for Subdivision Variance Complies Partially
Complies
Does Not
Comply
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or welfare or injurious to other property in the area or to
the City in administering this Code.
X
That the granting of the variance would not substantially conflict with the
Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this Code. X
That the conditions that create the need for the variance do not generally
apply to other property in the vicinity. X
That application of a provision of this Code will render subdivision of the
land impossible.X
Where literal enforcement of these regulations would result in an
unnecessary hardship.X
Page 37 of 147
Public Notifications
•17 property owners within the
300’ buffer
•Notice in Sun News on August 4th
•Signs posted on the property
•2 written comments in Favor
Page 38 of 147
Summary
•Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Subdivision
Variance to waive the Sidewalk Construction requirement of Section
12.07.010 of the Unified Development Code, for the property
generally located at 801 E. 2nd Street, bearing the legal description of
Lot 1, Block A, Hauser Ridge Subdivision (2019-3-WAV )
•Per UDC Section 3.22.050, a Subdivision Variance may be approved,
conditionally approved, or disapproved by the Planning & Zoning
Commission with a super majority vote.
•The motion should also include findings of how it either met/did not
meet each of the criteria.
Page 39 of 147
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
October 1, 2019
S UB J E C T:
P ublic Hearing and pos s ible ac tion on a request for a R eplat of Lots 57 and 58, S ec tion 1 of the Logan
R anc h S ubdivis ion, also being 9.96 acres of the William R oberts S urvey, Abs trac t No. 524, loc ated at
138-150 Logan R anc h R oad, to be known as Mountain Laurel S enior Living -- C helsea Irby, S enior
P lanner.
IT E M S UMMARY:
Overview of Applicant's Request:
T he applic ant is propos ing two re-s ubdivide two platted into lots into four lots in the ET J.
S taff Analysis:
S taff has reviewed the reques t in acc o rd anc e with the Unified Develo p ment C ode (UDC ) and other
applicable c odes . S taff has d etermined that the proposed reques t c omplies with the criteria es tablished in
UDC C hapter 3.08.080.D for a R eplat, as outlined in the attac hed s taff report.
Public Comments:
As req uired by the Unified Develo p ment C ode, all property owners within a 200-foot radius of the s ubjec t
property and within the s ub d ivis ion were no tified o f the R ep lat req ues t (23 notices), a legal notice
advertis ing the pub lic hearing was plac ed in the S un Newspaper (S eptemb er 15, 2019) and signs were
pos ted o n-site. To date, s taff has rec eived zero (0) written c omments in favo r, and s even (7) in opposition
to the reques t.
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None. T he applicant has paid all required fees .
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
C helsea Irby, S enior P lanner
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
2019-16-FP - P&Z Staff Report Cover Memo
Exhibit 1 - Location Map Backup Material
Exhibit 2 - Replat Backup Material
Exhibit 3 - Public Comments Backup Material
P&Z Pres entation Pres entation
Page 40 of 147
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-16-FP
Mountain Laurel Senior Living Page 1 of 4
Report Date: September 27, 2019
Case No: 2019-16-FP
Project Planner: Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Mountain Laurel Senior Living
Project Location: 138-150 Logan Ranch Road, within the extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Total Acreage: 9.96
Legal Description: Lot 57 and 58, Section 1 of the Logan Ranch Subdivision, described as 9.69
acres out of the William Roberts Survey, Abstract No. 254
Applicant: Texas Land Surveying c/o James Barker
Property Owner: Aaron Castillo
Request: Approval of a Replat for the Mountain Laurel Senior Living Subdivision
Case History: This is the first public hearing of this request.
Location Map
Page 41 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-16-FP
Mountain Laurel Senior Living Page 2 of 4
Plat Summary
Residential Lots: 4
Total Lots: 4
Site Information
The subject property is located within the Logan Ranch Subdivision, which is northeast of Williams
Drive and Shell Road. The subject property is located in the City’s Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) and
has a Future Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential (LDR) and Moderation Density
Residential (MDR).
Physical and Natural Features:
The subject property is undeveloped, flat, and has heavy tree cover. There are no other notable physical
or natural features.
Utilities
The subject property is located within the City’s service area for water and electric. The subject property
is served by septic since it is not within the City limits. It is anticipated that there is adequate capacity
to serve the subject property at this time.
Transportation
The subject property has approximately 750’ of frontage on Logan Ranch Road, which is a residential
roadway maintained by Williamson County. No new roadways are proposed with the Replat.
Parkland Dedication
Parkland Dedication is not required for four lots or less.
Intergovernmental and Interdepartmental Review
The proposed Replat was reviewed by the applicable City departments and Williamson County.
Subdivision Plats are reviewed to ensure consistency with minimum lot size, impervious cover, streets
and connectivity, and utility improvement requirements, among other. All technical review comments
have been addressed by the Applicant.
Approval Criteria
Staff has reviewed the proposed request and has found that it complies with the criteria established in
UDC Chapter 3.08.080.D for a Replat, as outlined below:
APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENTS
a. The Replat is acceptable for
consideration, meaning the
application is complete and the
information contained within the
application is correct and sufficient
to allow adequate consideration and
Complies
The Plat has been deemed acceptable and
complete for consideration.
Page 42 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-16-FP
Mountain Laurel Senior Living Page 3 of 4
APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENTS
final action.
b. The plat meets or exceeds the
requirements of this Unified
Development Code and any
applicable State or local laws
Complies
The proposed Replat meets all applicable
technical requirements of the UDC
pertaining to streets, sidewalks, utilities,
and parkland.
c. The plat is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan and any other
adopted plans as they relate to:
i. The City's current and future
streets, sidewalks, alleys, parks,
playgrounds, and public utility
facilities; and
ii. The extension, improvement, or
widening of City roads, taking
into account access to and
extension of sewer and water
mains and the instrumentality of
public utilities.
Complies
The proposed Replat is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan as it meets all
applicable technical requirements of the
UDC pertaining to streets, sidewalks,
utilities, and parkland.
d. The plat meets any subdivision
design and improvement standards
adopted by the City pursuant to
Texas Local Government Code §
212.002 or § 212.044, governing plats
and subdivision of land within the
City's jurisdiction to promote the
health, safety, morals, or general
welfare of the City and the safe,
orderly, and healthful development
of the City.
Complies
The proposed Replat meets all applicable
technical requirements of the UDC
adopted pursuant to Sections 212.002
and 212.044 of the Texas Local
Government Code to promote the health,
safety, morals, or general welfare of the
City and the safe, orderly, and healthful
development of the City, including but
not limited to Chapter 6, Residential
Development Standards, Chapter 7, Non-
Residential Development Standards,
Chapter 12, Pedestrian and Vehicle
Circulation, and Chapter 13,
Infrastructure and Public Improvements
of the UDC.
e. The tract of land subject to the
application is adequately served by
public improvements and
infrastructure.
Complies
The subject property will be adequately
served by public improvements and
infrastructure.
f. A Subdivision Variance may be
requested as a companion
application to the consideration of a
Replat, according to the provisions
detailed in Section 3.22 of the UDC.
N/A
No Subdivision Variance is being
requested as part of this Replat.
Page 43 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-16-FP
Mountain Laurel Senior Living Page 4 of 4
APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENTS
The Subdivision Variance and the
Replat shall be required to be
approved by P&Z.
g. A Replat may not amend or remove
any covenants or restrictions and is
controlling over the preceding plat.
Complies
The proposed Replat does not amend or
remove any covenants or restrictions and
is controlling over the preceding plat.
Public Notification
As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners within a 200-foot radius of the
subject property and within the subdivision were notified of the Replat request (23 notices), a legal
notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun Newspaper (September 15, 2019) and signs
were posted on-site. To date, staff has received zero (0) written comments in favor, and six (6) in
opposition to the request (Exhibit 3).
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Mountain Laurel Senior Living Replat
Exhibit 3 – Public Comments
Page 44 of 147
§¨¦35
D el W e b b B l v d
D el WebbBlvd
WilliamsDr
WilliamsDr
Lake w ay Dr
Lakeway D r
DB
W
o
o
d
R
d
Booty'sCrossingRd
Shell
Rd
ShellRd
S h ell R d
N Austin Ave
¬«1 9 5
S eren a da D r
Lake w ay Dr
AirportRd
NLakewoo d s D r
S e d r o T rl
2019-16-FPExhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
0 0.5 1Mi
Page 45 of 147
N
IF THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT CONTAIN THE RED STAMPED SEAL OF THE UNDERSIGNED SURVEYOR, IT IS AN UNAUTHORIZED/ILLEGAL COPY.
TEXAS LAND SURVEYING, INC. ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FROM THE USE OF ANY UNAUTHORIZED/ILLEGAL DOCUMENT.
Texas Land Surveying, Inc.
Page 46 of 147
IF THIS DOCUMENT DOES NOT CONTAIN THE RED STAMPED SEAL OF THE UNDERSIGNED SURVEYOR, IT IS AN UNAUTHORIZED/ILLEGAL COPY.
TEXAS LAND SURVEYING, INC. ASSUMES NO LIABILITY FROM THE USE OF ANY UNAUTHORIZED/ILLEGAL DOCUMENT.
Texas Land Surveying, Inc.
Page 47 of 147
1
Chelsea Irby
From:
Sent:Monday, September 16, 2019 11:53 AM
To:Ethan Harwell; Chelsea Irby; WEB_Planning
Cc:David Morgan
Subject:[EXTERNAL] Assisted living proposal on Logan Ranch Road
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Dear Officials,
I have been a resident of Logan Ranch Road for over 30 years. When we built here you could not see another
house from our home. We invested deeply in this property and subdivision along with supporting the
Georgetown community and school district.
We are entirely perplexed that a proposed development from an outside corporation is considering an assisted
living/memory care facility in the midst of 3+ single family subdivisions. Yes, our restrictions may have
expired however common sense should prevail. We would need road improvements to safely allow EMS, fire
trucks and the sheriff’s department to maneuver our narrow road. There is overwhelming opposition against
this from Logan Ranch, Logan Plateau, Berry Creek and nearby Serenada residents.
I have fully enjoyed raising my family in this “country” atmosphere with friendly neighbors, wildlife, gardens
and horses. It is discouraging that now I may have to have greater concern with my grandchildren playing in the
area their parents and grandparents felt was ideal. Yes, the largest investment people make is their homestead
and my neighbors and I are asking for help to protect our lifestyle and property.
Please show some integrity for the residents that will be affected if this senior center is allowed within
Georgetown’s known subdivisions. Some mistakes by city and school officials can, and have, adversely
affected our community in the past and may for years to come.
Thank you,
Gayle Elsasser
313 Logan Ranch Road
Page 48 of 147
Page 49 of 147
Page 50 of 147
Page 51 of 147
Page 52 of 147
Page 53 of 147
Page 54 of 147
1
Chelsea Irby
From:Brandy Heinrich
Sent:Tuesday, September 17, 2019 11:12 AM
To:Chelsea Irby
Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL] Project 2019-16-FP, 138-150 Logan Ranch Road
Hi Chelsea,
Looks like this one in yours.
Thank you,
Brandy Heinrich
Development Account Specialist
Planning Department
512‐930‐3576
planning@georgetown.org
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 10:06 AM
To: WEB_Planning <planning@georgetown.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Project 2019‐16‐FP, 138‐150 Logan Ranch Road
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Dear City Commissioners:
I would like to strongly object to the above referenced project proposed on Logan Ranch Road. Logan Ranch Road is a
rural thru‐way that supports many single family homes and families, some families have small children that ride their
bikes in the road way. Our road does not even have a painted strip running down the middle to separate the cars.
Logan Ranch Road attracts joggers, bicycle enthusiasts, dog walkers to name a few daily exercisers, that add to the
normal traffic. We have noticed with the additional traffic that we already experience, that the vehicle speed has
increased. Cars used to slow down when they saw anyone walking or jogging in the road way.
We also a a very large population of deer, rabbits, foxes, road runners and many other species of native Texas critters
that would be at risk.
Please take into accounts these concerns.
Regards,
Diane L. Wilkie
Resident of Logan Ranch Road since 1991.
Page 55 of 147
2
302 Logan Ranch Road
Georgetown, TX 78628
Page 56 of 147
Page 57 of 147
Page 58 of 147
Page 59 of 147
Page 60 of 147
Page 61 of 147
Page 62 of 147
Page 63 of 147
Page 64 of 147
Page 65 of 147
Page 66 of 147
Mountain Laurel Senior Living Replat
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 1, 2019
Page 67 of 147
Item Under Consideration
•2019-16-FP -Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a
Replat of Lot 57 and 58, Section 1 of the Logan Ranch Subdivision, 9.96
acres of the William Roberts Survey, Abstract No. 254, located at 138-
150 Logan Ranch Road, to be known as Mountain Laurel Senior Living
Page 68 of 147
Williams Drive & Shell Road
Page 69 of 147
Page 70 of 147
Summary
•Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Replat of Lot 57 and 58,
Section 1 of the Logan Ranch Subdivision, 9.96 acres of the William Roberts
Survey, Abstract No. 254, located at 138-150 Logan Ranch Road, to be known
as Mountain Laurel Senior Living (2019-16-FP) –Chelsea Irby, Senior Planner
Page 71 of 147
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
October 1, 2019
S UB J E C T:
P ublic Hearing and pos s ible ac tion on a request to rezone an approximately 0.79-ac re tract of land out of
the J.B. P uls ifer S urvey, Abs trac t No.498, als o know as the O rville P erry S urvey, Abstract No. 10, from
the Agric ulture (AG ) to O ffic e (O F ) zoning district, for the property generally loc ated at 1340 W
Univers ity Ave (2019-6-R EZ) -- Michael P atros ki, P lanner
IT E M S UMMARY:
Overview of the Applicant's Request:
T he subject property is part of a larger tract of land that has two zoning districts : O ffice (O F ) on the
s outhern portion along W Univers ity Ave, and Agric ulture (AG ) on the norther portion. T he applicant is
requesting to rezone the Agriculture (AG ) zoned property to O ffic e (O F ) to make the whole property
cons is tent with the same zoning dis tric t.
S taff Analysis:
S taff has reviewed the request in ac cordance with the Unified Development C ode (UDC ) and other
applicable codes. S taff has determined that the proposed request meets the criteria establis hed in UDC
S ection 3.06.030 for a Zoning Map Amendment, as outlined in the attac hed S taff R eport.
Public Notification:
As required by the Unified D evelopment Code, all property owners and registered neighborhood associations
within a 300-foot radius of the subject property were notified of the Z oning Map Amendment request (9
notices), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the S un Newspaper on S eptember 15, 2019
and signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received 44 written comments objecting the request.
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
None. T he applicant has paid the required application fees .
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mic hael P atroski
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
2019-6-REZ - P&Z Staff Report Cover Memo
Exhibit 1-Location Map Backup Material
Exhibit 2-Future Land Use Map Backup Material
Exhibit 3- Zoning Map Backup Material
Exhibit 4-Design and development s tandards of the OF Zoning
Backup Material
Page 72 of 147
districts
Exhibit 5- Letter of Intent Backup Material
Exhibit 6 - Public Comments Backup Material
Pres entation Pres entation
Page 73 of 147
Planning and Zoning Commission
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 1 of 9
Report Date: September 27, 2019
Case No: 2019-6-REZ
Project Planner: Michael Patroski, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Highway 29 MOB
Project Location: 1340 W University Ave, within City Council district No. 2.
Total Acreage: 0.79 acres
Legal Description: 0.79 acres out of the Joseph B. Pulsifer Survey, Abstract No. 498
Applicant: Pape-Dawson, c/o Brent Tuley
Property Owner: NSJS Limited Partnership, c/o Ginger Townley.
Request: The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject property from Agricultural
(AG) to Office (OF).
Case History: This case was first scheduled for the August 6, 2019 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting. However, the applicant submitted a request to postpone
the case to meet with the surrounding neighbors. This is the first public hearing
of this request.
Page 74 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 2 of 9
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The subject property is part of a larger tract of land that has two zoning districts: Office (OF) on the
southern portion along W University Ave, and Agriculture (AG) on the northern portion. The applicant
is requesting to rezone the Agricultural (AG) zoned portion of the property to Office (OF) to match the
southern portion of the property that is currently zoned Office (OF).
Site Information
Location:
The subject property is located at 1340 W. University Ave. This property is located approximately 240
feet northwest of the W. University Ave and River Chase Blvd intersection.
Physical and Natural Features:
The subject property is currently vacant with moderate density tree coverage throughout the eastern
and southern portion of the property.
Future Land Use and Zoning Designations:
The subject property borders on the Low Density Residential and Regional Commerical Future Land
Use designation. The northern portion of the property is zoned Agricultureal (AG), while the southern
portion of the property is zoned Office (OF). The subject property is also part of the Scenic-Natural
Gateway Overlay district.
Surrounding Properties:
The subject portion of the property is located west of River Chase Blvd. The remaining 1.22 acres of the
property to the south is zoned Office (OF) with frontage along W. Univeristy Ave. Adjacent uses
include the River Chase residnetial subdivison to the north, commercial uses to the east across River
Chase Blvd (currently under construction), vacant Residential Single-Family (RS) zoned property to the
west, and First Baptist Church to the south across W. Unviersity Ave. Additionally, subject property is
west of the Wolf Ranch Town Center development, a regional commercial project that includes anchor
retail stores, restaurants and small pad sites, and north and west of the Wolf Ranch Hillwood
development that includes commercial, multi-family and single-family residential uses. The
development trend for this area displays a consentration of non-residential development along the
major arterial roadways.
The current zoning, Future Land Use designation, and existing uses of the adjacent properties to the
north, south, east and west are outlined in the table below:
Page 75 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 3 of 9
DIRECTION ZONING DISTRICT FUTURE LAND USE EXISTING USE
North Residential Single-
Family (RS)
Low Density
Residential (LDR) Residential Homes
South
Office (OF)-
remaining portion
of property, and
Residential Single-
Family (RS) across
W. University Ave
Low Density Residential
(LDR)
Regional Commercial (RC),
and Institutional across W.
University Ave
First Baptist Church
East General
Commercial (C-1) Regional Commercial (RC)
Vacant, proposed
development is/Senior
Living/Assisted Living
Facility
West Residential Single-
Family (RS)
Low Density
Residential (LDR) Vacant
Property History:
The subject property was annexed into the city in 2008 with the designated zoning of Agriculture
(AG). The southern portion of the property was annexed into the city in 1986 with the designated
zoning of Residential Signle-Family. The southern portion of the property was later rezoned in 1998
to Office (OF).
Academy
Sports
First Baptist Church
River Chase Subdivision
DB Woods Road
Page 76 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 4 of 9
Comprehensive Plan Guidance
Future Land Use Map: Low-Density Residential
The Low Density Residential Future Land Use category includes the city’s predominantly single-family
neighborhoods that can be accommodated at a density between 1.1 and 3 dwelling units per gross acre.
Conservation subdivisions are also encouraged in this land use district. Modifications to development
standards applicable to this category could address minimum open space requirements, public facility
impacts, and greater roadway connectivity.
This category may also support complementary non-residential uses along arterial roadways such as
neighborhood-serving retail, office, institutional, and civic uses, although such uses may not be
depicted on the Future Land Use Map. Standards should be established to maximize compatibility of
these uses with adjacent land uses, minimize traffic congestion and overloading of public
infrastructure, and also ensure a high standard of site, landscape, and architectural design.
Regional Commercial:
The Regional Commercial Future land use category applies to large concentrations of commercial uses
that serve or draw a regional market, such as major shopping centers, stand-alone big-box retail, tourist
attractions and supporting accommodations, and automobile-oriented commercial uses that rely on
convenient access from major transportation routes and highway interchanges. Such properties are
often configured in a manner or located in areas that may not be suitable for the introduction of mixed -
uses.
Page 77 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 5 of 9
Growth Tier: Tier 1A
Tie 1A 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. Within Tier
1A, the city is called on to conduct assessments of public facility conditions and capacities, and to
prioritize short and long-term capital investments so as to ensure that infrastructure capacity is
sufficient to serve development intensities as indicated on the Future Land Use Map and in the zoning
districts.
Utilities
The subject property is located within the City’s service area for water and wastewater; and the
Georgetown and Oncor dual service area for electric. It is anticipated that there is water and
wastewater capacity to serve the subject property at this time. A Utility Evaluation may be required at
time of Site Development Plan to determine capacity and any necessary utility improvements
Transportation
The portion of the subject property requesting to be rezoned has road frontage along River Chase Blvd,
one block north from the W. University Ave intersection. However as this portion is part of a larger
tract of land, access to the portion subject to this request is available from W Univeristy Ave, which is
classified as an existing Major Arterial in the City’s Overall Thoroughfare Plan. Arterial sreets provide
traffic movement through and between different areas within the city and access to adjacent land uses.
FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Page 78 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 6 of 9
Access is more controllable because driveway spacing requirements are much greater and, if safety
dictates, overall access can be limited to specific turning movements. Major arterials connect major
traffic generators and land use connections, and serve much larger traffic volumes over greater
distances. River Chase Blvd is identified as a Local Street.
Proposed Zoning District
The Office District (OF) is intended to provide a location for offices and related uses. The uses allowed
have relatively low traffic generation. Small areas of the OF District may be appropriate adjacent to
most residential uses and as a transition between residential areas and commercial areas. Because of
this, the Office zoning district is generally considered a transition zoning to facilitate the ordered
development from intense commercial uses to residential.
Some of the permitted uses allowed by right in this district include; Diagnostic Center, Home Health
care Services, Medical Office, Dental Office, General Office, Personal Services, Dry Cleaning Services,
Printing/Mailing Services, Banking/Financial Services, Commercial Document Storage, Emergency
Services Station, Governmental/Post Office, Library/Museum, Social Service Facility, Natural Preserve,
Parking Lot , Park-n-Ride, ad utilities (minor, intermediate, major) . Other uses such as restaurant, data
center, business/trade school, day care, church, heliport, farmers marke t among others are permitted
subject to specific design limitations. Certain land uses, including Hotel, Medical Complex, Surgery
Center, and Integrated Office Center require a Special Use Permit (SUP). Exhibit 4 contains a
comprehensive list of OF district permitted uses and development standards.
Intergovernmental and Interdepartmental Review
The proposed rezoning request was reviewed by all applicable City Departments to determine the
appropriateness of the requested zoning on the subject property. No comments were issued regarding
the zoning request.
Approval Criteria
Staff has reviewed the proposed rezoning request and has found that it complies with the criteria
established in UDC Section 3.06.030 for a Zoning Map Amendment, as outlined below:
APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENTS
1. The application is complete
and the information contained
within the application is
sufficient and correct enough
to allow adequate review and
final action.
Complies An application must provide the
necessary information to review and
make a knowledgeable decision in
order for staff to schedule an
application for consideration by the
Planning and Zoning Commission and
City Council. This application was
reviewed by staff and deemed to be
complete.
2. The zoning change is
consistent with the
Complies The subject property has the
predominant Future Land Use
Page 79 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 7 of 9
APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENTS
Comprehensive Plan.
Designation of Low Density
Residential. This category supports
non-residential uses along arterial
roadways. With this portion being part
of a larger tract that fronts the W
University Ave major arterial, the
requested Office (OF) district meets the
purpose and intent of this land use
category. In addition, the Office (OF)
district on the entire property will
serve as a transition from the major
roadway to the residential
neighborhood to the north consistent
with the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan.
As previously mentioned, the adjacent
property to the east is currently zoned
General Commercial (C-3) and is
developing multiple commercial
projects, including retail and assisted
living facility uses. With larger scale
development directly across the street
of the subject portion, it stands to
reason that the rezoning of the
property would bring conformity to
the site and display consistent
development trends along the major
arterial. Focusing non-residential
development along major roadways
and providing a transition into
Residentially zoned property is
encouraged and achieved through the
Office (OF) zoning district.
3. The zoning change promotes
the health, safety or general
welfare of the City and the
safe orderly, and healthful
development of the City.
Complies The requested Office (OF) zoning
district would not adversely affect the
health, safety, or welfare of the City.
The southern portion of the property is
zoned Office (OF) and the portion
subject to this request is located along
an existing roadway with available
access from two roadways. The request
is to designate the entire property with
the same zoning district so it may be
Page 80 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 8 of 9
APPROVAL CRITERIA FINDINGS STAFF COMMENTS
developed cohesively. In addition, as
previously stated, the Office (OF)
zoning district is often considered a
transition zoning to facilitate the
orderly development from intense
commercial uses to residential.
4. The zoning change is
compatible with the present
zoning and conforming uses of
nearby property and with the
character of the neighborhood.
Complies The proposed Office (OF) district is
compatible with the surrounding
zoning districts and uses as this district
has been considered appropriate next
to residential and a good transition
between different of incompatible
zoning districts. If this portion of the
property were to be rezoned, the
subject property would confirm to the
adjacent portion to the south.
5. The property to be rezoned is
suitable for uses permitted by
the District that would be
applied by the proposed
amendment.
Complies The applicant is proposing to rezone
the subject property to Office (OF),
which is currently vacant. The subject
property is 0.79 acres with
approximately 150 feet of street
frontage along River Chase Blvd, and is
part of a larger 1.9 acre tract that also
has frontage along W. University Ave.
Should the rezoning request be
approved, office uses at this location
would be suitable and obtainable due
to its size and location.
Based on the findings listed above, staff finds that the requested Office (OF) zoning district complies
with the approval criteria for a Zoning Map Amendment. The subject property is located between a
major arterial that has developed with intense commercial uses and a residential neighborhood. This
district, should it be approved, will provide a good transition in uses and zoning from this roadway
and the ore intense commercial uses along this corridor and the residential neighborhood to the north.
In addition, the proposed zoning district would allow the entire property to be developed with the
same zoning designation.
Meetings Schedule
October 1, 2019 – Planning and Zoning Commission
October 22, 2019 – City Council First Reading of the Ordinance
November 12, 2019 – City Council Second Reading of the Ordinance
Page 81 of 147
Planning Department Staff Report
2019-6-REZ
Hwy 29 MOB Page 9 of 9
Public Notification
As required by the Unified Development Code, all property owners and registered neighborhood
associations within a 300-foot radius of the subject property were notified of the Zoning Map
Amendment request (9 notices), a legal notice advertising the public hearing was placed in the Sun
Newspaper on September 15, 2019 and signs were posted on-site. To date, staff has received 44 written
comments objecting the request.
Attachments
2019-6-REZ- P&Z Staff Report
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map
Exhibit 4 – Design and development standards of the OF Zoning District
Exhibit 5 – Letter of Intent
Presentation
Page 82 of 147
D
B
W
O
O
D
R
D
S IH 35
W U N I V E R S I T Y AV E
§¨¦35
2019-6-REZExhibit #1
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Location Map LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
0 0.25 0.5Mi
Page 83 of 147
W U N IV ER S ITY AV E
D
B
W
O
O
D
R
D
M E M O R I A L D R
R
I
V
E
R
C
H
A
S
E
B
L
V
D
B E L F O R D S T
MERCER RD
LA MESA LN
E
L
E
G
E
N
D
O
A
K
S
D
R
W O LF R A N C H P K W Y
WOOD CT
GLORIETA LN
SADDLE
MOUNTAIN
RD
E L L Y S O N L N
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
¯
Future Land Use / Overall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2
2019-6-REZ
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
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
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
0 250 500Feet
Page 84 of 147
W UN IVE R SI T Y AVE
D
B
W
O
O
D
R
D
M E M O R I A L D R
R
I
V
E
R
C
H
A
S
E
B
L
V
D
B E L F O R D S T
MERCER RD
LA MESA LN
E
L
E
G
E
N
D
O
A
K
S
D
R
W O L F R A N C H P K W Y
WOOD CT
GLORIETA LN
SADDLE
MOUNTAINRD
E L L Y S O N L N
Zoning Information2019-6-REZExhibit #3
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
¯
0 250 500FeetPage 85 of 147
Maximum Building Height = 45 feet Front Setback = 25 feet Bufferyard = 15 feet with plantings
(0 feet for build‐to/downtown) adjacent to AG, RE, RL, RS, TF, MH,
Side Setback = 10 feet TH, MF‐1, or MF‐2 districts
Side Setback to Residential = 15 feet
Rear Setback = 10 feet
Rear Setback to Residential = 25 feet
Allowed by Right Subject to Limitations Special Use Permit (SUP) Required
Diagnostic Center Restaurant, General Hotel, Boutique
Home Health Care Services Data Center Medical Complex
Medical Office/Clinic Upper‐story Residential Surgery Center
Dental Office/Clinic Home‐Based Business Integrated Office Center
General Office Business/Trade School
Personal Services Day Care (Group/Commercial)
Dry Cleaning Service, Drop‐off Only Church
Printing/Mailing/Copy Services Church w/ Columbarium
Banking/Financial Services Public Park, Neighborhood
Commercial Document Storage Heliport
Emergency Services Station Wireless Transmission Facility (<41')
Government/Postal Office Seasonal Product Sales
Library/Museum Farmer's Market, Temporary
Social Service Facility Business Offices, Temporary
Nature Preserve/Community Garden Concrete Products, Temporary
Parking Lot, Off‐Site Construction Field Office
Parking Lot, Commercial Construction Staging, Off‐site
Park‐n‐Ride Facility Parking Lot, Temporary
Utilities (Minor, Intermediate, Major)
OFFICE (OF) DISTRICT
District Development Standards
Specific Uses Allowed within the District
Page 86 of 147
Page 87 of 147
Page 88 of 147
Page 89 of 147
Page 90 of 147
Page 91 of 147
Page 92 of 147
Page 93 of 147
Page 94 of 147
Page 95 of 147
Page 96 of 147
Page 97 of 147
Page 98 of 147
Page 99 of 147
Page 100 of 147
Page 101 of 147
Page 102 of 147
Page 103 of 147
Page 104 of 147
Page 105 of 147
Page 106 of 147
Page 107 of 147
Page 108 of 147
Page 109 of 147
Page 110 of 147
Page 111 of 147
Page 112 of 147
Page 113 of 147
Page 114 of 147
Page 115 of 147
Page 116 of 147
Page 117 of 147
Page 118 of 147
Page 119 of 147
Page 120 of 147
Page 121 of 147
Page 122 of 147
Page 123 of 147
Page 124 of 147
Page 125 of 147
Page 126 of 147
Page 127 of 147
Page 128 of 147
Page 129 of 147
Page 130 of 147
Page 131 of 147
Page 132 of 147
Page 133 of 147
Page 134 of 147
Highway 29 MOB2019-6-REZ
Planning & Zoning Commission
October 1, 2019
Page 135 of 147
Item Under Consideration
2019-6-REZ
•Public Hearing and possible action on a request to rezone an
approximately 0.79-acre tract of land out of the J.B. Pulsifer Survey,
Abstract No. 498, also known as the Orville Perry Survey, Abstract No.
10, from the Agricultural (AG) district to the Office (OF) district, for
the property generally located at 1340 W University Ave (2019-6-
REZ).
Page 136 of 147
First Baptist Church
Page 137 of 147
First Baptist
Church
D B Woods Road
River Chase
Subdivision
Academy Sports
Wolf Ranch West
Page 138 of 147
General Commercial AG
Agricultural
Residential Single Family
OF
C-1 RS
RS
Page 139 of 147
Regional Commercial
High Density Residential
Institutional
Low Density Residential
Moderate Density
Residential
Page 140 of 147
Office (OF)
•Offices and related uses
•Relatively low traffic generation
•May be appropriate adjacent to
residential
•Can serve has a transition between
residential and commercial areas
Dimensional Standards
•Max building height = 45’
•Front Setback = 25’
•Side Setback = 10’
•Side Setback to Residential = 15’
•Rear Setback = 10’
•Rear Setback to Residential = 25’
•15’ bufferyard when adjacent to
residential
Page 141 of 147
Zoning District-Office (OF)
•Allowed uses –
Page 142 of 147
Approval Criteria –UDC Section 3.06.030
Criteria for Rezoning Complies Partially Complies Does Not Comply
The application is complete and the information
contained within the application is sufficient and
correct enough to allow adequate review and
final action;
X
The zoning change is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan;X
The zoning change promotes the health, safety
or general welfare of the City and the safe
orderly, and healthful development of the City;
X
Page 143 of 147
Approval Criteria –UDC Section 3.06.030
Criteria for Rezoning Complies Partially Complies Does Not Comply
The zoning change is compatible with the
present zoning and conforming uses of nearby
property and with the character of the
neighborhood; and
X
The property to be rezoned is suitable for uses
permitted by the district that would be applied
by the proposed amendment.
X
Page 144 of 147
Public Notifications
•9 property owners within the
300’ buffer.
•Notice in Sun News on
September 15, 2019
•Signs posted on the property
•To date, staff has received 44
public comments in
objection to the request.
After second neighborhood
meeting, staff has received 0
public comments.
Page 145 of 147
Summary
•Public Hearing and possible action on a request to rezone an
approximately 0.79-acre tract of land out of the J.B. Pulsifer Survey,
Abstract No. 498, also known as the Orville Perry Survey, Abstract No.
10, from the Agricultural (AG) district to the Office (OF) district, for
the property generally located at 1340 W University Ave (2019-6-
REZ).
•Per UDC Section 3.06.020.E, the Planning and Zoning Commission
shall hold a Public Hearing… and make a recommendation to the City
Council
Page 146 of 147
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
October 1, 2019
S UB J E C T:
Discussion Items:
Updates and Announc ements (S ofia Nels on, C NU-A, P lanning Director)
Update from other Board and C ommis s ion meetings.
G TAB - https ://government.georgetown.org/georgetown-transportation-advisory-board-gtab/
UDC AC - https://government.georgetown.org/unified-development-code-advis ory-board-2/
Q ues tions or c o mments fro m Alternate Memb ers ab o ut the ac tions and matters cons id ered o n this
agenda
R eminder o f the O c tober 15, 2019, P lanning and Zo ning C ommission meeting in C C C hambers
located at 510 W 9th S t, starting at 6:00pm
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
.
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mirna G arcia, Management Analys t
Page 147 of 147