HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda_P&Z_11.03.2015Notice of Meeting for the
Planning and Zoning Commission
of the City of Georgetown
November 3, 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 October 20, 2015.
Page 1 of 98
Legislative Regular Agenda
C Possible action on a request for Rezoning of 4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract
497, located at 1402 and 1502 Williams Drive, from the Local Commercial District (C-1) and
Residential Single-family District (RS) to a Planned Unit Development District (PUD) with a base
district of the Local Commercial District (C-1), to be known as Gabriel Bluffs. (REZ-2015-008)
Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner, and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
D Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Low
Density Multifamily (MF-1) District for 25.03 acres in the Perry Survey located at 650 FM 971.
(REZ-2015-012) Carolyn Horner, AICP
E Public Hearing and possible action on Rezoning from the General Commercial (C-3) District
with conditions to the General Commercial (C-3) District for 2.72 acres, being Lot 1 of
Fountainwood Plaza, located at 5610 Williams Dr. (REZ-2015-016) Carolyn Horner, AICP
F Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning from the Residential Single-family District
(RS) to the Low Density Multifamily District (MF-1) for Lot 2 of the Osgood Subdivision, located
at 401 West 17th Street. (REZ-2015-013) Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
G Public Hearing and possible action on a request to Rezone 1.18 acres in the Dimmit Addition
located at 605 East University Ave., to be known as College View Apartments, from the Local
Commercial (C-1) District to 0.1607 acre of the Residential Single-family (RS) District and 1.018
acres for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District with a High Density Multifamily (MF-2)
base zoning district.
H Discussion Items:
Update on the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee (UDCAC) meetings.
(Commissioner in Training Bargainer)
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 to review the Calendar for 2016 which will be voted on during the November 17,
2015 P&Z meeting.
Reminder of the November 17, 2015, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting in the
Council Chambers located at 101 East 7th Street, starting at 6:00 pm.
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, Shelley Nowling, 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.
____________________________________
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary
Page 2 of 98
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
November 3, 2015
SUBJECT:
Consideration of the minutes from October 20, 2015.
ITEM SUMMARY:
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
NA
SUBMITTED BY:
Page 3 of 98
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
November 3, 2015
SUBJECT:
Possible action on a request for Rezoning of 4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract
497, located at 1402 and 1502 Williams Drive, from the Local Commercial District (C-1) and
Residential Single-family District (RS) to a Planned Unit Development District (PUD) with a base
district of the Local Commercial District (C-1), to be known as Gabriel Bluffs. (REZ-2015-008)
Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner, and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
ITEM SUMMARY:
Background:
The applicant has requested to rezone 4.89 acres of land to a Planned Unit Development with a
base zoning district of C-1, Local Commercial District. The purpose of the PUD is primarily to
remove several of the use restrictions for the “Fuel Sales” specific use (UDC Section 5.04.020(T.))
and allow additional building height. The project identified in the Development Plan and
Conceptual Site Layout comprises a retail store, with a restaurant and fuel sales, and a multi-
tenant, multi-story building. The applicant proposes some additional Gateway Overlay District
landscaping and pedestrian amenities along Williams Drive and an increased volume in the
required water quality feature.
Planning Commission meeting of October 20, 2015:
At this meeting, staff made a presentation of the application, followed by the applicant presenting
information, which included three renderings of the proposed retail/restaurant building and the fuel
sales canopy. Commission members asked many questions of staff and the applicant, and the
conversation touched on many facets of the proposal, including:
the type of use and activities associated with the convenience store/restaurant/prepared
foods take-out business as described by the Applicant;
clarification as to why a PUD rezoning was being requested;
the relationship of parking required and provided relative to size of the proposed restaurant
and the outdoor deck seating areas described by the Applicant;
development options/opportunities/limitations based on the staff report analysis.
The required public hearing was held for this rezoning, with one speaker who asked about building
heights.
Public Comment:
As of the date of this report, no written public comments have been received.
Recommended Motion:
Staff is recommending denial of the application, see the staff report for the findings and basis of
that recommendation.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None. The applicant has paid the required fees.
SUBMITTED BY:
Page 4 of 98
Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, 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 - PUD Development Plan Backup Material
Exhibit 4 - PUD Conceptual Site Layout Backup Material
Exhibit 5 - PUD Elevations Backup Material
exhibits provided Thursday1029 (after staff reoort was written) Backup Material
Page 5 of 98
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 1 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
Report Date: October 30, 2015
File No: REZ-2015-008
Project Planner: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Gabriel Bluffs
Location: 1402 & 1502 Williams Drive
Total Acreage: 4.89 acres
Legal Description: 4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Survey (comprising six properties)
Applicant: Wade Todd, National Site Solutions
Property Owner: 1502 Williams – Georgetown Alamo Investors, LLC
1402 Williams – Shell Family Trust
Contact: Wade Todd, National Site Solutions
Existing Use: Undeveloped land, single-family residence
Existing Zoning: Local Commercial (C-1) District on 2.63 acres (1502 Williams);
Residential Single-family (RS) District on 2.26 acres (1402 Williams).
Proposed Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) with a Local Commercial (C-1) base
district
Future Land Use: Specialty Mixed Use Area (SMUA)
Growth Tier: Tier 1A
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone 4.89 acres of land to a Planned Unit Development with
a base zoning district of C-1, Local Commercial District. The purpose of the PUD is primarily
to remove several of the use restrictions for the “Fuel Sales” specific use (UDC Section
5.04.020(T.)) and allow additional building height. The project identified in the Development
Plan comprises a retail store, with a restaurant and fuel sales, and a multi-tenant, multi-story
building. The applicant proposes some additional Gateway Overlay District landscaping and
pedestrian amenities along Williams Drive and an increased volume in the required water
quality feature.
PUD Summary:
The PUD document consists of a required Development Plan (Exhibit 3 to this staff report)
that describes and summarizes the attributes of the PUD District, and the required Conceptual
Site Layout (Exhibit 4 to this staff report) that graphically depicts the proposed development.
Additionally, a set of building elevation drawings were provided to exemplify the proposed
convenience store and fuel sales canopy; see Exhibit 5 to this staff report.
Page 6 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 2 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
In the Development Plan, the applicant is requesting the following deviations from the base
zoning regulations for the C-1 district:
1. For the “Fuel Sales” use, removal of the following restrictions of UDC Section
5.04.020(T.); the section is below, and a footnote 1 regarding this use:
• Allow ten (10) fueling positions via five (5) Multiple Product Dispensers [MPD]
rather than the 8 fueling positions permitted.
• An in-line configuration of the 5 MPD’s rather than the ‘four-square’ stacked
positions.
2. Maximum building height increase of 5’, from 35’ to 40’, for any proposed building.
The Development Plan further commits to the following:
• Six (6) permitted uses – General Retail; General Office; Restaurant, General; Medical or
Dental Office; Fuel Sales; Live Music & Entertainment.
1 - The 4th Round of the 2008-2009 Unified Development Code Amendment process added the permitted use of “Fuel
Sales” to the C-1 zoning district, subject to Limitation “S”, which is currently referenced as Limitation “T” in the most
recent version of the UDC. The language in the limitation is currently the same as it was when adopted May 11, 2010
by City Council (Ordinance 2010-016). The “Fuel sales” use was previously not permitted in the C-1 District at all.
Page 7 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 3 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
• Prohibition of three (3) otherwise permitted uses in C-1 – Restaurant, Drive-through;
Automotive Parts and Accessories Sales, Indoor; Car Wash.
• Increased Gateway Landscape plant materials (an additional 1 shade tree and 10
shrubs per 1,000 SF of required landscape area over the base requirements)
• Increased Parking Lot shade trees (1 per 8 stalls rather than 1 per 12) and additional
shrub plantings and non-plant ground cover in parking lot islands.
• An increase of 10% of the minimal required volume size of the water quality feature to
be constructed (note: the site does not require water quantity storage on-site, as it presently
drains directly to the San Gabriel River).
The Conceptual Site Layout (Exhibit 4 to this staff report) graphically depicts the proposed
development to some exacting details. The size of the property, and the specificity of the
project/development, lent itself to such a detailed graphic. The exhibit is meant to
demonstrate the site development aspects expressed in the Development Plan, and is a critical
part of what makes a PUD application different than by-right zoning requests.
All other aspects of development – streetyard landscaping, bufferyards, tree preservation,
parking, lighting, building architecture, building setbacks, driveways, impervious coverage,
signage, traffic impacts – will comply with minimum requirements listed in the UDC,
enforced at the time of the administratively reviewed Site Development Plan or subsequent
building permits. The other restrictions of Section 5.04.020(T), as they may apply to this site,
will be enforced at the time of site development.
Site Information
Location:
The site is located along the south side of Williams Drive, between Morris Lane and Rivery
Boulevard. 1502 Williams is a single 2.63 acre tract; 1402 Williams comprises five (5) separate
properties totaling 2.26 acres and the address points of 1400, 1402, 1410, 1416, and 1422
Williams Drive. Combined, the property has approximately 410 linear feet of frontage on
Williams Drive. Further in this report it is noted that the applicant has included the property
at 1308 Williams (a 1.74 acre tract) for consideration in their Utility Evaluation, but that
property is not part of this rezoning request, and was not considered as part of this project.
Physical Characteristics:
The site has extensive tree coverage (mostly cedars) and has no known Karst features. The
properties drop in elevation away from Williams Drive, and the rear of the properties form a
cliff that falls to the San Gabriel River, where the properties end.
Surrounding Properties:
The immediately surrounding properties are a mix of commercial and residential uses, but
nearly all properties fronting Williams Drive are now commercially used. This vicinity has a
mix of residential properties that have been repurposed for small office or retail uses, and
Page 8 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 4 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
purpose-built commercial/retail properties. The former McCoy Elementary dominates the
block on the north side of Williams, where the extension of Rivery Boulevard will cross it and
establish new land uses and development patterns in the near-term future. This block of
Williams is all contiguous to the San Gabriel River, where a large view-shed opens up to the
Summit at Rivery project to the southwest.
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North RS, Residential Single-family
and C-1, Local Commercial
Specialty Mixed
Use Area
Commercial, office, GISD
property.
South C-3, General Commercial
[across San Gabriel River]
Moderate Density
Residential, Open
Space
San Gabriel River [the Summit
at Rivery project – townhomes,
hotel, retail, apartments – is
500’ across the river.]
East RS, Residential Single-family Specialty Mixed
Use Area
Undeveloped property.
West C-1, Local Commercial Specialty Mixed
Use Area
Commercial (Extraco Bank)
Page 9 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 5 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
Property History
The property was annexed into the City’s full jurisdiction in 1954. 1502 Williams is currently
vacant, with an unknown development history. The grouping of properties comprising 1402
Williams contains one residence which is several decades old. The properties are all
unplatted, with legal lot status according to the UDC unknown at this time. 1502 Williams
currently has a subdivision plat (PFP-2015-002) under review to plat that property as one lot.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
The properties are contained within the 2030 Plan land use designation of Specialty Mixed
Use Area (SMUA); see Exhibit 1. This category encourages mixed use developments and
planned ‘centers’ that can integrate complementary uses. Emphasized activities would
include retail, offices, and entertainment, with options for civic and parks/green spaces as well
as higher density, multi-family style housing.
The SMUA category exists in strategic locations (see below) where the nucleus of ingredients
exist to create patterns of development focused on pedestrian-oriented, storefront-style
shopping streets.
• From Rivery Boulevard to IH-35 on both sides of Williams Drive [including this site].
• West side of IH-35 north of Williams to Old Airport Road.
• Central portion of Wolf Ranch Parkway between the Rivery Project and the area north
of West University Avenue and a portion east toward IH-35.
• The core of Downtown centered on Austin Avenue/Main Street between 2nd Street and
West University Avenue.
• A large swath south of Leander Road between IH-35 and (future) Southwest Inner
Loop.
• A node at Southeast Inner Loop and Sam Houston Boulevard and Maple Street
[Transit Oriented Develoment (TOD) area].
The SMUA designation at this location represents the City’s interest in revitalizing and
reimagining the “gateway” to the western half of Georgetown. In April 2006, the City
approved the Williams Drive Gateway Redevelopment Master Plan wich envisions a mixed-
use pedestrian oriented activity center where land uses are vertically integrated, buildings are
pulled up to the sidewalk, parking is de-emphasized and placed to the rear of buildings, and
building entries, façade treatments, streetscape, landscape, and signage design create an
inviting and comfortable pedestrian environment. Some of the ultimate goals included
improving traffic flow and access to the area, maximizing revenue generation of the area,
attracting and recruiting a mix of uses consistent with the vision of the area and the
construction of aesthetically pleasing buildings. Following all the planning efforts, a Tax
Increment Reinvestment Zone (TIRZ) was created for the area covered by the Master Plan in
October of 2006. While the properties subject to this rezoning request are not within the
Page 10 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 6 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
boundaries of the Master Plan or TIRZ, the ultimate development of these properties will
affect the success of the future Williams Drive redevelopment plans, especially with the
pending extension of Rivery Boulevard which was not part of the original planning efforts.
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 Planned Unit Development District (PUD) is intended to allow flexibility in planning and
designing for unique or environmentally sensitive properties that are to be developed in
accordance with a common development scheme. PUD zoning is designed to accommodate
various types of development, including multiple housing types, neighborhood and
community retail, professional and administrative areas, industrial and business parks, and
other uses or a combination thereof. A PUD may be used to permit new or innovative
concepts in land use and standards not permitted by zoning or the standards of the UDC.
Although greater flexibility is given to allow development in a PUD that would not otherwise
be allowed, procedures and standards are established in the UDC that are intended to ensure
against misuse.
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 Williams Drive. Typical allowed uses in the C-1 District include
restaurants, offices, retail sales, and personal services.
Of the uses proposed in this request, only the Fuel Sales use contains any development
limitations (ie, is not permitted by-right), and the first two of the items of Section 5.04.020(T.)
(see previously in this report) are the primary impetus for the applicant requesting a PUD
form of zoning. The Development Plan makes no modification requests for items 3.) through
7.) of this Section. The C-1 District has a maximum building height limit of 35’. The
Development Plan requests a maximum building height of 40’ for any building subject to the
PUD.
Utilities
Electric, water, and wastewater are served by City of Georgetown. A Utility Evaluation (UTE-
2015-018) was submitted as a required companion application to this rezoning, to determine
the impact of the proposed development on the City’s infrastructure system. It’s noted that
this evaluation was for an additional 1.74 acres of land referenced as 1308 Williams Drive. The
project identified by the applicant in the Evaluation was 16,200 square feet of office space,
5,000 square feet of a convenience store with restaurant, and 13,600 square feet of retail. The
City’s evaluation letter indicated that the anticipated impacts of the project could be handled
Page 11 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 7 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
by the existing 12-inch waterline and 10-inch wastewater line that serve the properties. Water
and sewer impact fees will be assessed upon development.
Transportation
The access to this property is proposed to be via Williams Drive primarily, but a private access
drive from Rivery Boulevard (through the Extraco Bank to the west) provides another means
of ingress/egress and thus options for visitors. The access drive does not line up with the
traffic light at Country Club Road, therefore the Rivery Boulevard access will be right-in right-
out only. The Conceptual Site Layout identifies driveways to Williams Drive which have been
approved by Transportation and Engineering staff in principle. Exact locations, widths, etc.
will be determined during Site Development Plan review, based on driveway separation
distances, roadways speeds, site triangles, utility locations, etc. Additional required right-of-
way for Williams Drive is identified on Exhibit B, and will officially be dedicated when the
subdivision plat is recorded. Interparcel connections between future lots, or segments of
development, identified in this PUD will be vetted during each Site Development Plan review
to facilitate cross-access between lots/uses so that local trips do not require vehicular entry
onto Williams Drive to essentially go next door.
Future Application(s)
To develop the property, the following applications will be required to be submitted:
• Preliminary Plat to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission;
• Construction Plans (public infrastructure) to be processed administratively;
• Final Plat to be processed administratively;
• Site Development Plans to be processed administratively;
• Building permits for construction to be processed administratively;
• Certificates of Occupancy for tenancy/opening to the public.
Staff Analysis
Staff has reviewed several iterations of the proposed Development Plan and related
Conceptual Site Layout. The expectations for a Planned Unit Development at this particular
location, in accordance with the SMUA land use category, were discussed. Based on those
discussions, the applicant has changed some aspects of the plan from the original submittal.
Improvements were made regarding pedestrian access, Gateway landscaping, and overall
clarity in what would be the governing Development Plan and Conceptual Site Layout
documents.
However, despite the improvements to the original submittal, the primary project and
purpose of the PUD is a gas station – convenience store – restaurant development in a prime
area for future development envisioned for pedestrian-oriented mixed uses. Although the
PUD states “This [office] building is scheduled for construction in 2017”, there are no triggers,
requirements, connections, or restrictions to ensure that the office building is developed in a
Page 12 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 8 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
timely manner, if ever.
Staff offers the following general findings on the application:
• The applicant has verbally described an enhanced development which is superior to
the average gas station development and office building, and though greater specificity
has been incorporated into the PUD documents, the proposed development does not
provide evidence of a commitment to a common development scheme throughout the
development as called for in UDC Section 4.04.030.
• While generally Retail and Office development are consistent with the type of uses
envisioned by the 2030 Plan for the SMUA category, the proposed plan for
development does not appear to establish a framework to promote or achieve Specialty
Mixed Use type development at this location. The proposed development plan could
be altered in a variety of ways to accomplish this, including:
• Bringing the building(s) forward toward Williams Drive (i.e. Extraco bank and
two buildings across Williams Drive near this development);
• Hard and binding commitments to the timing of development of specific uses to
ensure a “mixed use development” actually occurs;
• Reduce the emphasis/prominence on the fuel sales aspect of the development
and create more of an emphasis on the restaurant, office, and retail attributes of
the site.
• The proposed site is located within a key corridor of the City. As one of the primary
routes to and from the hotel/conference center, development along this corridor must
truly reflect the goals and vision of the comprehensive master plan in order for the
vision of this sector of the community to come to fruition.
• The City has created the Williams Drive Tax Increment Refinance Zone (TIRZ), which
does not include this property but is very near to it, as a means of spurring and
incentivizing high-quality development as this sub-area (Williams Drive between
Rivery Boulevard, Northwest Boulevard, and Interstate 35) contemplates future
redevelopment. Development patterns within close proximity of the TIRZ district will
have a profound impact on development within the TIRZ and the financial success of
achieving the goals anticipated with this reinvestment zone.
• The PUD is being brought forth by the applicant for the development of a gas station
with an associated retail (‘convenience’) store that would have a sit-down restaurant
attached to it, with a significant amount of outdoor seating that takes advantage of the
river valley views from the back of the property. That development, in and of itself,
does not fulfill the vision of the SMUA future land use category in this very important
location of the City.
Page 13 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 9 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
Section 3.06.030 Consistency with the Approval Criteria (Rezoning)
Rezoning Criteria Consistent with
the Criteria
Not consistent with the
criteria
Neutral
The application is
complete and the
information contained
within the application is
sufficient and correct
enough to allow adequate
review and final action.
Since the last
Commission
meeting the
applicant has
worked to provide a
higher level of
information than
previously provided.
The zoning change is
consistent with the
Comprehensive Master
Plan.
While generally Retail and
Office development are
consistent with the type of uses
envisioned by the 2030 Plan for
the SMUA category, the
proposed plan for development
does not appear to establish a
framework to promote or achieve
Specialty Mixed Use type
development at this location.
The change promotes the
health, safety, or general
welfare of the City and
the safe orderly and
healthful development of
the City.
It does not appear
that the request
takes steps to
support or deter
from creating a safe,
healthy, and orderly
development.
The zoning change is
compatible with the
present zoning and
conforming uses of
nearby property and with
the character of the
neighborhood.
The base zoning
designation of C-1 is
consistent with the
zoning of nearby
property.
The proposed development
standards associated with the
PUD (increased height and
number of pumps do not appear
to be consistent with the
character of this segment of the
Williams Drive Corridor.
The property to be
rezoned is suitable for
uses permitted by the
District.
The uses permitted
by C1 are suitable
for the subject
property.
The development standards
permitted by the PUD are not
appropriate for subject property.
Page 14 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 10 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
Section 3.06.040 UDC Approval Criteria for PUDs –Specific Objectives
Specific Objectives Consistent Not Consistent Neutral
A variety of housing types
employment
opportunities, or
commercial services to
achieve a balanced
community.
While the applicant is
providing commercial
services the balance of
uses has not been
demonstrated. This is
critical at this location
given the goals of the
comprehensive master
plan.
An orderly and creative
arrangement of all land
uses with respect to each
other and the community.
The request utilizes a
conventional approach
to the arrangement of
the proposed
development.
A planned and integrated
comprehensive
transportation system,
providing for a separation
of pedestrian and
vehicular traffic, to
include facilities such as
roadways, bicycle ways,
and pedestrian walkways
The applicant has
provided walkways
however a planned and
consistent approach is
needed along this
segment of the roadway.
The provisions of cultural
and recreational facilities
for all segments of the
community.
The applicant has not
provided cultural or
recreation facilities. This
is difficult to provide on
an individual lot basis
on a commercial lot.
The location of general
building envelopes to take
maximum advantage of
natural manmade
environment
It does appear the
convenience store is
oriented in a manner
that promotes river
valley views,
The development plan
does not commit to
views for the associated
office building.
The staging of
development in a manner
which can be
accommodated by the
timely provision of public
utilities, facilities, and
services.
The development is
neutral on this
objective.
Page 15 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 11 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
Staff is recommending Denial of the application based on the above, with the following
additional reasons:
1. There are still several points within the Development Plan that staff believes require
additional clarification or revision is necessary in order to make the document
enforceable. These include:
o E.1.a. Restaurant/Retail Building - the statement that the building is scheduled
for construction in 2016 is unenforceable by Staff as written. Staff agrees to the
premise of commitments to the timing and order of development of the
property, but the language must be crafted in a manner that is enforceable and
meets the City’s objectives to be supported.
o E.1.c. Office Building – the statement that the building is scheduled for
construction in 2017 is unenforceable by Staff as written. Staff agrees to the
premise of commitments to the timing and order of development of the
property, but the language must be crafted in a manner that is enforceable and
meets the City’s objectives to be supported. As the last phase or piece of the
development, the possibility exists that it would never be developed, with no
implications on the developer, thus rendering this PUD solely for the fuels sales
and retail/restaurant store.
2. The proposed development does not appear to be consistent with the development
goals of the future land use designation and the Comprehensive Plan for this particular
area of the community.
3. The purpose of a PUD district, as outlined in Section 4.04.020 of the UDC, states that a
PUD “may be used to permit new or innovative concepts in land use and standards not
permitted by zoning or standards of the UDC”. In staff’s review of the request it
appears the development concept is not new or innovative. Rather, it is a use that
could be developed on a property already zoned C-3 or in an area of the community in
which the Comprehensive Plan supports the C-3 District.
Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments
None
Public Comments
A total of 12 notices were sent out to property owners within 200 feet of the proposed
rezoning. The required public notice for the public hearings was posted in the Sun newspaper
on October 4th. As of the writing of this report, no written comments have been received.
Page 16 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
4.89 acres in the Nicholas Porter Surveys - Rezoning Page 12 of 12
From C-1 and RS to PUD (C-1)
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 2 – Zoning Map
Exhibit 3 – PUD Development Plan
Exhibit 4 – PUD Conceptual Site Layout
Exhibit 5 – PUD Elevations and Floor Plans
Meetings Schedule
October 20, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing
November 3, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission (action on the request)
November 10, 2015 – City Council Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance
November 24, 2015 – City Council Second Reading of an Ordinance
Page 17 of 98
(River/Str
e
a
m
)
PARK
W
A
Y
ADAMS
IH 3
5HINTZ
WO
O
D
L
A
W
N
WILLIAMS
M
E
S
Q
U
I
T
E
RANC
H
C O UNTRYCLUB
MCC
O
Y
W O L F R A N C H
C E N T R AL
S H A N N O N
RIV E R SIDE
H I G H KNOLL
PARK
JAN
I
S
MORRI
S
WILL
I
A
M
S
D
R
CEDA
R
RIV E R Y
O
A
K
0 500 1,000
Feet
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-2015-008
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
§¨¦35
W
illia
msDr
Lake w ay DrBooty'sCrossingRd
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
NAustinAve
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
NColleg e StRiveryBlvd
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
W olfRanchPkw y EMorro w St
N
orth
w
estBlvd
Lake w ay Dr
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
REZ-2015-008
Page 18 of 98
(River/Stream)
HINTZRD
ADAMS ST
WILL
I AMSDR
SHAN
N
O
N
L
N
PARK
W
A
Y
S
T
E JA
N
I
S
D
R
RIV E R SID E DR
HIGHKN O L L LN
WILLIAMSDRTNNB
PARK LN
WJANISDR
C O U N T R Y CLUBRD
PARK
L
N
MORRI
S
D
R
CEDA
R
D
R
M
E
S
Q
U
I
T
E
L
N
W C E N T R A L D R
RIV E R Y B L V D
O
A
K
L
N
Existing Zoning MapREZ-2015-008Exhibit #2
¯
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 500 1,000Feet
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
§¨¦35
Willia
m
sDr
Booty'sCrossingRd
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
NAustinAve
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
NColleg e StRiveryBlvd
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
WolfRanchPkw y EMorro w St
N
orth
w
estBlvd
³
Site
City Limits
Street
Site
REZ-2015-008
Page 19 of 98
GABRIEL BLUFFS
Planned Unit Development/Local Commercial (C-1) Base District
Development Plan
A. PROPERTY
The Gabriel Bluffs Planned Unit Development District (PUD) is located at 1402 and 1502
Williams Drive and encompasses approximately 4.89 acres out of the Nicholas Porter Survey
as detailed in the Master Applications, herein defined as the “Property”.
B. PURPOSE
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. Rather than apply a C-3 base zoning district and restrict uses and standards
that might be considered objectionable, the PUD applies a C-1 base zoning district and
specifically sets forth the deviations from uses and standards permitted under the C-1 District.
In accordance with UDC Section 4.06.010.C “Development Plan Required”, this Development
Plan 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
District (C-1), except for those requirements specifically deviated by this Development Plan.
All other development standards established in the most current version of the UDC at time of
development shall be applicable, including amendments or ordinances adopted after the date
of this PUD. 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 A 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 buildings, parking
and landscaping that will be developed in phases as shown on Exhibit A, 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.
E. LAND USES
1. Primary Uses. The primary uses of the Property shall be for Restaurant, General; General
Retail; General Office; Fuel Sales; and Medical or Dental Office, as defined in Chapter 16
and permitted in the C-1 District per Chapter 5, including any limitations per Section
5.04.020 unless otherwise described in this PUD.
Page 20 of 98
a. Restaurant/Retail Building. The Restaurant/Retail building shown on Exhibit A shall
be not less than 4500 or more than 5500 square feet in area, and shall include patios and/or
decks of not less than 2500 or more than 3500 square feet in area. This building is
scheduled for construction in 2016.
b. Fuel Sales Use. Fuel Sales, permitted only in association with the Restaurant/Retail
building described above, will not abide by Section 5.04.020 (T), but rather have a
maximum of five (5) Multi-Product Dispensers (“MPD’s”) with ten (10) fueling positions
in an in-line configuration as shown on the attached Exhibit A.
c. Office Building. The office building shown on Exhibit A shall be not less than 14,000
square feet or more than 18,000 square feet in area. This building is scheduled for
construction in 2017.
2. Prohibited Uses. Prohibited uses of the Property shall include Restaurant, Drive-
Through; Automotive Parts and Accessories Sales, Indoor; and Car Wash.
3. Permitted Accessory Uses. Live Music and Entertainment shall be a permitted accessory
use in conjunction with the restaurant/convenience store, with such accessory use subject
to limitations per Section 5.04.020 (H).
F. DESIGN STANDARDS
1. Architectural Standards. Both buildings shown on Exhibit A shall meet the design
standards set forth in Section 7.04 of the UDC, and shall comply with the Design
Guidelines set forth in the attached Exhibit B. The Restaurant/Retail building shall be
constructed substantially as depicted in the preliminary building elevations depicted in the
attached Exhibit C.
2. Building Setbacks. The setbacks on the Property shall be in compliance with the
provisions of the UDC.
3. Building Height. The maximum building heights on the Property shall be 40’, exceeding
the C-1 District maximum of 35’.
4. 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.
G. PARKING
Parking on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 9 of the UDC.
H. VEHICULAR ACCESS AND CIRCULATION
1. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). Any required TIA will be provided with the site
development application.
2. Driveways/Access. The Property is presently served by an existing shared access
driveway and a cross access easement to Rivery Boulevard. Other existing driveways to
Williams Drive will be replaced by the driveway to be constructed as shown on Exhibit A.
I. TREE PRESERVATION
Tree Preservation on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 8 of the UDC.
Page 21 of 98
J. LANDSCAPE AND BUFFER REQUIREMENTS
Landscaping on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapters 4.13 and 8 of the UDC,
and shall meet the following additional standards:
1. Scenic/Natural Gateway Landscape Buffer. Three shade trees and fifteen 5-gallon
shrubs shall be provided for every 1000 square feet of land rather than two shade trees and
five 5-gallon shrubs for every 1000 square feet of land as required by Section
8.04.050.B.2.
2. Parking Lot Landscaping. A minimum of one shade tree shall be provided per every 8
parking stalls provided rather than one shade tree per every 12 parking stalls provided as
required by Section 8.04.040.B.1. Forty percent of the total landscape island area of the
site shall be planted with 5-gallon shrubs and the remainder of the area shall be covered
with decomposed granite or a decorative aggregate. Organic mulch may be placed in the
root zones of the retained existing trees that are in a parking lot landscape island.
K. SIGNAGE
Signage on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 10 of the UDC.
L. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE
Impervious coverage on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 11 of the UDC.
M. STORMWATER
Impervious coverage on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 11 of the UDC. In
mitigation for the one MPD in excess of the number normally permitted in the C-1 District,
the PUD will provide an additional 10% capacity in the water quality facility as a method of
exceeding the City’s 85% removal standard.
N. PARKLAND AND COMMON AMENITY AREA N/A
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- Conceptual Land Plan
Exhibit B- Design Guidelines
Exhibit C- Restaurant/Retail Building Elevations
Page 22 of 98
Page 23 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Restaurant / Convenience Concept Elevations
Front Elevation
October 20, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Page 24 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Restaurant / Convenience Concept Elevations
Rear Elevation
October 20, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Page 25 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Restaurant / Convenience Concept Elevations
Fuel Canopy
October 20, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Page 26 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Restaurant / Convenience Concept Elevations
Front Elevation
October 29, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Page 27 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Restaurant / Convenience Concept Elevations
Rear Elevation
October 29, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Page 28 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Restaurant / Convenience Concept Elevations
Fuel Canopy
October 29, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION Page 29 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Site Overview Image
October 29, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
View of Site from Hotel
Page 30 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Architectural Design Standards
October 29, 2015 NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Gabriels Bluff PUD Architectural Design Standards
Last Modified 29 October 2015
Design Intent
The Gabriels Bluff PUD is to be developed in a Contemporary architectural style that is focused on the benefits of the natural
landscape and views of the San Gabriel River. Creative, contemporary outdoor focused design to take advantage of the scenic
surroundings is encouraged. The architectural features as prescribed in Chapter 7 have been adjusted to encourage design in
a Contemporary architectural style. The attached Finish Board further illustrates this Design Intent.
Modifications to City of Georgetown UDC Chapter 7
All provisions Chapter 7 of the City of Georgetown UDC not modified by this document apply to the Gabriels Bluff PUD.
Building Height: The maximum building heights on the Property shall be 40’, exceeding the C-1 District maximum of 35’.
Building Materials:
The following materials are ADDED to those allowed in the UDC:
1. Metal (factory finished / galvanized / painted, stainless, perforated, insulated composites) of sufficient thickness to
prevent oil-canning.
2. Composite wood panel systems
3. Acrylic Panels (UV Stabilized and intended for outdoor use), colors subject to approval
4. Fiber Reinforced Plastic Panels, such as Kalwall (UV Stabilized and intended for outdoor use), colors subject to approval
The following materials are REMOVED from those allowed in the UDC:
1. Split-face CMU, marble, and glass block.
Roof Styles: Canopies with slopes less than 2-to-12 are ALLOWED if they incorporate materials and systems to direct proper
water drainage.
Roof Treatments: Parapets shall NOT be required to include decorative cornice detailing
Architectural Features: “Decorative cornice detailing” is REMOVED from the list of required Architectural Features
Outdoor Lighting: high pressure sodium and metal halide lamps are REMOVED from the list of allowed light sources.
Page 31 of 98
Gabriels Bluff PUD – Finish Board
October 29, 2015
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Finish Materials Key
1 Corrugated Steel
2 Perforated Stainless
3 Standing Seam Roof
4 Corrugated Sun Shade
5 Steel Trellis
6 Tube Trellis
7 Limestone Dry Stack Block
8 Coursed Ashlar Stone
9 Rough Landscape Stone
10 Wood T&G Soffits
Page 32 of 98
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
November 3, 2015
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning from the Agriculture (AG) District to the Low
Density Multifamily (MF-1) District for 25.03 acres in the Perry Survey located at 650 FM 971.
(REZ-2015-012) Carolyn Horner, AICP
ITEM SUMMARY:
Background:
The applicant has requested to rezone 25.034 acres of land from Agriculture District (AG) to Low
Density Multi-family (MF-1) zoning for future residential development of the property.
Public Comment:
As of the date of this report, no written public comments have been received.
Recommended Motion:
Recommend to the City Council Approval of the request to rezone the 25.03 acre tract to the MF-1
District.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The applicant has paid the required fees.
SUBMITTED BY:
Carolyn Horner, AICP and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Staff Report Cover Memo
Exhibit 1 - Location Map Backup Material
Exhibit 2 Backup Material
Exhibit 3 Backup Material
Page 33 of 98
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
The Park on San Gabriel, E. Morrow and FM 971 - Rezoning Page 1 of 5
From AG to MF-1
Report Date: October 28, 2015
File No: REZ-2015-012
Project Planner: Carolyn Horner, AICP, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: The Park on San Gabriel
Location: Southeast of the intersection of FM 971 and East Morrow Street
Total Acreage: 25.034 acres
Legal Description: 25.034 acres in the Orville Perry Survey, Abstract 10
Applicant: Steven Crauford, P.E., Pape-Dawson Engineers, Inc.
Property Owner: Thomas William Murray and Ronald Dee Fox
Contact: Steven Crauford, P.E.
Existing Use: Undeveloped, floodplain
Existing Zoning: Agriculture (AG)
Proposed Zoning: Low Density Multi-family (MF-1)
Future Land Use: Moderate Density Residential, Parks, Recreation and Protected Open-
Space
Growth Tier: Tier 1A
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone 25.034 acres of land from Agriculture District (AG) to
Low Density Multi-family (MF-1) zoning for future residential development of the property.
Site Information
Location:
This property is located southeast of the intersection of FM 971 and East Morrow Street.
Physical Characteristics:
The property is undeveloped, and is heavily treed in the southwestern floodplain portion. The
property is subject to the current Heritage Tree regulations, which require a tree survey at
time of platting.
Page 34 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
The Park on San Gabriel, E. Morrow and FM 971 - Rezoning Page 2 of 5
From AG to MF-1
Surrounding Properties:
The surrounding properties include Agriculture (AG), Residential Single-family (RS), and City
Park.
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North
Agriculture (AG),
Residential Single-
family (RS)
Moderate Density
Residential
Single family
residential,
cemetery
South Agriculture (AG) Parks, Recreation and
Protected Open-Space Former city landfill
East Residential Single-
family (RS)
Moderate Density
Residential
Single family
residential
West Residential Single-
family (RS)
Moderate Density
Residential City Park
Page 35 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
The Park on San Gabriel, E. Morrow and FM 971 - Rezoning Page 3 of 5
From AG to MF-1
Property History
In 1998, the City of Georgetown City Council adopted Ordinance 98-76, annexing this
property, along with the adjacent property to the east, into the City of Georgetown. Since
annexation, the property has held Agriculture District (AG) zoning.
The property is across Morrow Street from San Gabriel Park, and adjacent to the Katy
Crossing Trail Park on the east. The Guadalupe Cemetery is across Morrow as well.
The City of Georgetown has several Scenic/Natural Gateways, as specified within the
Unified Development Code. FM 971 is a designated gateway. At time of development, the
applicant will incorporate the requirements of the Gateway into the design of the overall
development.
2030 Plan
The City of Georgetown 2030 Plan designates the majority of this property as Moderate
Density Residential, and the remaining portion as Parks, Recreation and Protected Open-
Space. The Moderate Density Residential category comprises single family neighborhoods
that can be accommodated at a density ranging between 3.1 and 6 dwelling units per gross
acre, with housing types including small-lot detached and attached single family dwellings.
The Parks, Recreation and Protected Open-Space category applies to existing public parks,
golf courses and protected open spaces of city-wide significance, which are expected to remain
as open space in perpetuity.
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 applicant has requested Low Density Multi-family (MF-1) zoning on this property. The
MF-1 district is intended for attached and detached multi-family residential development,
such as apartments, condominiums, triplexes, and fourplexes, at a density not to exceed 14
dwelling units per acre. The MF-1 district may be appropriate in the Moderate Density
Residential area based on location, surrounding uses, and infrastructure impacts, and is
appropriate adjacent to both residential and non-residential districts, serving as a transition
between single-family districts and more intense, commercial uses.
Utilities
Electric, water, and wastewater are served by Georgetown Utility Services. It is anticipated
that there is adequate capacity to serve this property either by existing capacity or developer
participation in upgrades to infrastructure.
Page 36 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
The Park on San Gabriel, E. Morrow and FM 971 - Rezoning Page 4 of 5
From AG to MF-1
Transportation
The access to this project is provided via FM 971, East Morrow Street, and Bastian Lane.
Future Application(s)
The following applications will be required to be submitted:
• Preliminary Plat to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission;
• Final Plat is to be processed administratively;
• Construction Plans will be processed administratively;
• Site Plans for multi-family uses will be processed administratively; and
• Building permits for construction.
Staff Analysis
Staff is supportive of the requested rezoning for the following reasons:
1. The Future Land Use designation of Moderate Density Residential, and Parks,
Recreation and Protected Open-Space, supports the residential zoning on this
property. The subject property includes a portion of floodplain, which will remain
undeveloped and can be integrated into the overall design of the remaining
property.
2. The existing zoning situation of the surrounding area is primarily Agriculture (AG)
and Residential Single-family (RS), with an adjacent park and a cemetery across
Morrow Street. The limited density allowed in the MF-1 zoning is appropriate
adjacent to both residential and non-residential districts, serving as a transition
between single-family districts and more intense, commercial uses. The applicant is
proposing additional parkland dedication, which would increase the buffer
between the adjacent developments.
3. The surrounding developed uses include residential to the north and east and
existing parkland on two sides. Access to the site will be from the major roadways,
with only emergency access into the existing residential neighborhoods. Based on
location, surrounding uses, and infrastructure impacts, the MF-1 district would be a
transition between the adjacent developed uses. Development adjacent to the
parkland will include limited access to the existing parkland trails and amenities.
Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments
None
Page 37 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
The Park on San Gabriel, E. Morrow and FM 971 - Rezoning Page 5 of 5
From AG to MF-1
Public Comments
A total of 11 notices were sent out to property owners within 200 feet of the proposed
rezoning. Public notice was posted in the Sun newspaper on Sunday, October 18th. As of the
writing of this report, zero written comments have been received.
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map
Meetings Schedule
November 3, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission
November 24, 2015 – City Council First Reading
December 8, 2015 – City Council Second Reading
Page 38 of 98
CITY OF G E O R G ET O W N
(R i v e r /S t rea m )
Georgetow n ETJ
G e o r g e t o w n E T J
R EZ -2 01 5-0 12
H
A
V
E
R
L
A
N
D
D
R
P
E
C
ANVIS T A L N
F M 9 7 1
P A R Q U E V I S T A DR
PA R Q U E C T
D E E P C R E E K D RPARQUE C V
PARKVIEW
D
R
STEPHENLNPARQUE C I R
P
E
C
A
N
V
I
S
T
A
C
V
RIV E R P A R K C V
R I O V I S T A D R
TANNERCIR
R AN D Y S T
GANN ST
E M O R R O W S T
B A S T I A N L N
R I V E R P A R K LN
W
L
W
A
L
D
E
N
D
R
B E N C H M A R K S T
RIVERB LUFFCIR
RIVER HAVEN DR
N C O L L E G E S T
E M O RROWST
FRE D D I E D R
REZ-20 15-012
Exhibit #1
Co ord inate Sys tem: Texas S tat e P lane/C entral Zone/NAD 83 /US FeetCartographic Data For Genera l Planning Purposes Onl y 0 1,000 2,000Fee t ¯
Le ge nd
SiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
§¨¦
Site
City Lim its
Str eet
Si te ³
35 97 1
NAustinAve
Page 39 of 98
(R i v e r /S t r e a m )
Georgetow n ETJG
e
o
r
g
e
t
o
w
n
E
T
J
R EZ -2 01 5-0 12
KATY CR O S S I N G B L V D
F M 9 7 1
H
A
V
E
R
L
A
N
D
D
R
M A Y C V
PE C A N V I S T A L N
P A R Q U E VISTADR
PA R Q U E C T
D E E P C R E E K D RPARQUECVPARKVIEW DR
N AUSTIN AVE
STEPHENLNPARQUE C I R
E M O R R O W S T
RIVER P A R K C V
R I O V I S T A D R
RAN DY S T
L O W E R PAR
K
R
D
G
A
N
N
S
T
B A S TI A N L N
RIV E R P A R K LN
N C O L L E G E ST
B E N C H M A R K S T
RIVERBLUFFCIR
M E D A S T
RIVER HAVEN DR
TANNERC I R
W
L
W
A
L
D
E
N
D
R
FRE D D I E D R
0 1,000 2,000
Feet
Co ord inate Sys tem: Texas S tat e P lane/Central Zone/NAD 83 /US FeetCartographic Data For Genera l Planning Purposes Onl y
¯
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Fut ure La nd Use / Ove rall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2REZ-20 15-012
Legen d
Th oro ug hfa re
Fu ture L an d Use
Institut ional
Regional Commercial
Comm unity Com mercial
Employm ent Cent er
Low Density Residential
Mining
Mix ed Us e Com munit y
Mix ed Us e Neighborhood Center
Moderate Density Residential
Open Space
Specialty Mix ed Us e Area
Ag / Rural Resident ial
NEInnerLoop
")971
Site
³
City Lim its
Str eet
Si te
Existing Collector
Existing Freeway
Existing Major Art erial
Existing Minor Art erial
Existing Ram p
Proposed Collect or
Proposed F reeway
Propsed F rontage Road
Proposed Major Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Proposed Railroad
High Densit y Residential
§¨¦35
NAustinAve
Page 40 of 98
CITY OF G E O R G ET O W N
R EZ -2 01 5-0 12
(River/S tr e a m )
H
A
V
E
R
L
A
N
D
D
R
M A Y C V
P
E
CANVIS T A L N
E M O R R O W S T
P A R Q U E V I STA DR
PA R Q U E C T
D E E P C R E E K D RPARQUE C V
PARKVIE
W
D
R
STEPHENLNPARQUE C I R
P
E
C
A
N
V
I
S
T
A
C
V
RIV E R P A R K C V
F M 9 7 1
F M 9 7 1
R I O V I S T A D R
RAN D Y S T
G
A
N
N
S
T
B A S T I A N LN
M E D A S T
TANNERC I RRIVERPARKLN
N C O L L E G E S T
B E N C H M A R K S T
RIVERB LUFFCIR
RIVER HAVEN DR
W
L
W
A
L
D
E
N
D
R
E M ORROWST
N AUSTIN AVE
FRE D D I E D R
Zon in g I nfo rmati onREZ-20 15-012Exhibit #3
¯
Co ord inate Sys tem: Texas S tat e P lane/Central Zone/NAD 83 /US FeetCartographic Data For Genera l Planning Purposes Onl y 0 1,000 2,000Feet
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
§¨¦35
³Site
City L imits
Stre et
Site
971
NAustinAve
Page 41 of 98
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
November 3, 2015
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing and possible action on Rezoning from the General Commercial (C-3) District
with conditions to the General Commercial (C-3) District for 2.72 acres, being Lot 1 of
Fountainwood Plaza, located at 5610 Williams Dr. (REZ-2015-016) Carolyn Horner, AICP
ITEM SUMMARY:
Background:
The applicant has requested to rezone 2.722 acres of land on Williams Drive in order to facilitate
their desired use of fuel sales and car wash. The piece of property in question is currently zoned
General Commercial (C-3) with conditions which restrict development on the land to only uses
allowed within the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district, per a 2005 ordinance. Both the desired
fuel sales and car wash are allowed with limitations under the current zoning; however, there are
limitations on fuel sales that provide challenges for the applicant. Removing the conditions in this
ordinance will allow all uses permitted within the C-3 district and will not be specific to the
desired fuel sales development.
Public Comment:
As of the date of this report, no written public comments have been received.
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends holding the public hearing and postponing action to the next regularly-
scheduled P&Z meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The applicant has paid the required fees.
SUBMITTED BY:
Carolyn Horner, AICP and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Staff Report Cover Memo
Exhibit 1 - Location Map Backup Material
Exhibit 2 Backup Material
Exhibit 3 Backup Material
Page 42 of 98
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
Fountainwood Plaza Lot 1 - Rezoning Page 1 of 7
Report Date: October 29, 2015
File No: REZ-2015-016
Project Planner: Carolyn Horner, AICP, Planner
Item Details
Project Name: Fountainwood Plaza
Location: 5610 Williams Drive
Total Acreage: 2.722 acres
Legal Description: Lot 1, Fountainwood Plaza, Cabinet CC, Slide 39 of the Plat
Records of Williamson County
Applicant: Brian Parker, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Property Owner: Fountainwood Plaza Shopping Center, LLC
Contact: Brian Parker
Existing Use: Undeveloped
Existing Zoning: General Commercial (C-3) with conditions limiting the use of the
property to those uses allowed in the C-1, Local Commercial zoning
district (see below zoning section)
Proposed Zoning: General Commercial (C-3) with no conditions
Future Land Use: Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
Growth Tier: Tier 1A
Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone 2.722 acres of land on Williams Drive in order to
facilitate their desired use of fuel sales and car wash. The piece of property in question is
currently zoned General Commercial (C-3) with conditions which restrict development on
the land to only uses allowed within the Local Commercial (C-1) zoning district, per a 2005
ordinance. Both the desired fuel sales and car wash are allowed with limitations under the
current zoning; however, there are limitations on fuel sales that provide challenges for the
applicant. Removing the conditions in this ordinance will allow all uses permitted within
the C-3 district and will not be specific to the desired fuel sales development.
Existing Zoning
The existing zoning is fairly unique; while the City of Georgetown used to approve
conditional zoning ordinance, it is no longer an accepted practice except through Planned
Page 43 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
Fountainwood Plaza Lot 1 - Rezoning Page 2 of 7
Unit Developments (PUDs). On December 13, 2005, the City of Georgetown City Council
rezoned all of the property in Fountainwood Plaza from C-1 to C-3 with conditions. The
conditions of the C-3 zoning are 1) “the permitted uses on the property shall be limited to
those uses as identified for the C-1, Local Commercial zoning district in Table 5.01.020 of
the Unified Development Code”, and 2) excluding the following uses: (a) Self-Storage, (b)
Vehicle Sales and Service, (c) Wholesale Trade, and (d) Kennels.
When the property was zoned in 2005, fuel sales was not an allowed use in the C-1
District, as well as other uses that have been modified in recent years. Zoning for C-1 uses
only on the property limited development to lower intensity uses, which at that time did
not include fuel sales, which were added with limitations in 2009. That amendment
restricted fuel sales to limited fuel pump numbers and configuration, which is the concern
of the applicant requesting the rezoning.
Property History
The property was annexed into the City of Georgetown on October 10, 2000, with a default
zoning of Agriculture District (AG) zoning. On November 14, 2000, the property was
rezoned from AG to C-1.
In November 2005, the developer of the subdivision requested rezoning the entire
property to a General Commercial, C-3, district. The applicant wanted to eliminate the
“build-to line” requirement for the front setback along Williams Drive. Section
6.03.040(b)(1) of the 2005 UDC required that, within C-1 districts, 15% of the primary
building be built within five (5) feet of the edge of the public right-of-way along the
primary street adjacent to the lot.
The developer of Fountainwood Plaza wanted to orient the parking and lighting to the
front of the lots, away from the developed residential to the rear of the subdivision, which
would not be allowed under the 2005 zoning regulations. The speed limit along Williams
Drive and the curvature of the road in front of the property supported the decision to
move structures away from the right-of-way of Williams Drive.
In response to concerns expressed by the residents of Fountainwood Estates in 2005, the
developer made concessions regarding the future siting of commercial businesses in this
subdivision. The commercial lots would develop in a manner that kept parking lots, and
associated lighting, oriented towards the street with the physical structures setback
towards the residents. In 2005, the developer and City Staff came to an agreement
regarding reasonable limitations upon allowed uses within the C-3 district, and Staff
recommended the condition to exclude the following uses: (a) Self-Storage, (b) Vehicle
Sales and Service, (c) Wholesale Trade, and (d) Kennels.
At the November 1, 2005 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the Commission
unanimously recommended rezoning the property from C-1, to C-3 with the conditions of
Page 44 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
Fountainwood Plaza Lot 1 - Rezoning Page 3 of 7
limiting uses to those allowed in the C-1 District, and the exclusion of the specified uses.
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 Williams Drive. Typical allowed uses in the C-1 district include
restaurants, offices, retail sales, and personal services.
On December 13, 2005, the City of Georgetown City Council rezoned all of the property in
Fountainwood Plaza from C-1 to C-3 with conditions. The conditions of the C-3 zoning are
1) “the permitted uses on the property shall be limited to those uses as identified for the C-
1, Local Commercial zoning district in Table 5.01.020 of the Unified Development Code”,
and 2) excluding the following uses: (a) Self-Storage, (b) Vehicle Sales and Service, (c)
Wholesale Trade, and (d) Kennels.
In 2009, the Georgetown Unified Development Code was amended to allow for limited
fuel sales in the C-1 District, in response to concerns that neighborhood convenience stores
and gas stations were effectively prohibited by the zoning code. Instead of being allowed
in only the C-3 District, more appropriate along highways and at major intersections, the
City expanded opportunities for fuel sales within the C-1 District, albeit with specific
limitations. These limitations included a maximum number of gas pumps (8),
configuration of the multiple product dispensers (MPDs) in a square or limited linear
fashion, canopy height (17 feet), and limited car wash inclusion. In addition, specific
protections for neighboring residential properties were included, including an 8-foot
masonry wall requirement, limitations on arrangement of vacuum, air, and gas dispensers
on the site, and reduction in light impacts.
Together, these restrictions were intended to mitigate the impact of this type of intense use
from residential development. The 4-square configuration was intentionally selected to
lessen the visual impact and scale of the facility from the streetscape. It was a familiar,
compact form of gas dispensers that was an appropriate compromise in the C-1 District. It
was understood that the conditions allowing the use in C-1 would be restrictive on the fuel
aspect in favor of the convenience stores purpose of providing quick, basic needs for the
neighbors. Large-scale gas stations and convenience stores with restaurants would be
reserved for specific areas such as highway frontage roads and major intersections.
Site Information
Location:
This property is located at 5610 Williams Drive, at the southern side of the intersection of
Williams Drive and Jim Hogg Road.
Physical Characteristics:
The property is undeveloped, with no heritage trees on site. The developer constructed a
stone wall along the rear of the property as part of the development of the adjacent
Page 45 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
Fountainwood Plaza Lot 1 - Rezoning Page 4 of 7
commercial uses.
Surrounding Properties:
The surrounding properties include Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ), vacant land, and a
funeral home with columbarium.
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North Extra-Territorial
Jurisdiction
Mixed Use Neighborhood
Center Vacant
South Extra-Territorial
Jurisdiction Low Density Residential Single-family
residential
East General Commerial
(C-3) with conditions Low Density Residential Funeral Home and
columbarium
West Extra-Territorial
Jurisdiction
Mixed Use Neighborhood
Center Vacant
2030 Plan
The City of Georgetown 2030 Plan designates the majority of this property as Mixed Use
Neighborhood Center, and the remaining portion as Low Density Residential. The Mixed
Use Neighborhood Center designation applies to smaller areas of mixed commercial use
within existing and new neighborhoods. Neighborhood-serving mixed use areas abut
Page 46 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
Fountainwood Plaza Lot 1 - Rezoning Page 5 of 7
roadway corridors or are located at key intersections. Uses in these areas might include a
corner store, small grocery, coffee shops, and other personal services, as well as small
professional offices. They may include non-commercial uses such as churches, schools or
parks. 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 intention of the Mixed-Use Neighborhood Center land use category was to identify
certain areas of town that would support localized personal services and retail locations
for neighborhood goods and services, rather than large commercial development and
high-traffic generating uses. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan carefully considered major
commercial activity centers and residentially-compatible commercial and mixed-use areas
near residential entry points. The area in question was selected due to the collector-level
Jim Hogg roadway connection to Williams Drive.
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 applicant has requested C-3 zoning without conditions on this property. The C-3
district is intended to provide a location for general commercial and retail activities that
serve the entire community and its visitors. Uses may be large in scale and generate
substantial traffic, making C-3 District only appropriate along freeways and major
arterials, when supported by the Comprehensive Plan.
The applicant is requesting to remove the conditions in order to develop a fuel sales and
car wash on the vacant lot in the subdivision. Under the conditions of the current zoning
on the property, the applicant could develop a fuel sales site, but is limited to the four
pumps in a square configuration. The applicant would prefer to add additional pumps
and has expressed that the configuration required under the C-1 condition is difficult due
to site constraints. Using the square configuration would encroach into the required front
landscape easement and also into the waterline easement.
The proposed development would be designed in a manner that keeps parking, and
associated lighting, oriented towards the street with the physical building towards the
residents. This design would match the orientation of the existing commercial
development adjacent to this lot.
Page 47 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
Fountainwood Plaza Lot 1 - Rezoning Page 6 of 7
Utilities
Electric is served by Pedernales Electric Cooperative, and water and wastewater are
served by Georgetown Utility Services. 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 main access to this project is provided via Williams Drive. There will be no access
from Fountainwood Drive nor Allen Circle. A Traffic Impact Analysis will be triggered if
the site has more than 2000 trips, and would be reviewed at the Site Plan stage of
development.
Future Application(s)
The following applications will be required to be submitted:
• Site Plan will be processed administratively;
• Construction Plans will be processed administratively; and
• Building permits for construction.
Staff Analysis
Staff is concerned that the Future Land Use designation of Mixed Use Neighborhood
Center does not support removing the conditions of the existing ordinance and allowing
unrestricted C-3 development on the site. The primary issue is the intensity of uses
allowed within the C-3 District that are not compatible with adjacent residential. The
proposed use of a convenience store falls within the guidelines for Mixed Use
Neighborhood Center uses, as does limited fuel sales, but the requested zoning change
will allow unlimited fuel dispensers without site protections, as well as other auto-related
and high-impact commercial development. In a situation with a zoning proposal that does
not include existing conditions, the Future Land Use plan for this intersection would not
support C-3 zoning.
Staff and the applicant continue to discuss the best approach for developing this site. One
option would be to amend the conditions on the subject property instead of remove the
restrictions outright. This would have the effect of possibly easing the site constraints on
the configuration of the fuel sales and accessory stations while retaining and even
strengthening certain standards to protect the residential character of the adjacent
subdivision. It would also lend itself to restricting or prohibiting other C-3 uses on the site,
as the original zoning ordinance intended.
Staff and the applicant agree that the desired outcomes for the commission meeting is as
follows:
Page 48 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
Fountainwood Plaza Lot 1 - Rezoning Page 7 of 7
• Hold the public hearing and solicit feedback from the public.
• Receive feedback from the commissioners and provide the applicant
direction on both positive aspects of the development and aspects of the
zoning request the Commission feels may need further review.
• Return at the next meeting or future meeting with negotiated conditions or
alternative methods for achieving a development that balances the desired
use with careful consideration of the design and impact on surrounding
development.
Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments
None
Public Comments
A total of two (2) notices were sent out to property owners within 200 feet of the proposed
rezoning. Public notice was posted in the Sun newspaper on Sunday, October 18th. As of
the writing of this report, zero written comments have been received.
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Location Map
Exhibit 2 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 3 – Zoning Map
Meetings Schedule
November 3, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission
To be determined beyond November 3rd
Page 49 of 98
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Georgetown ETJ
GeorgetownETJ
R EZ -2 01 5-0 16
JI M H O G G R D
L A K E V I E W L N
B O S B N D
S
T
A
R
LIG
H
T T
R
L
F O U N T AIN W O O D D R
N LAKEWOODS DR
FOUNTAINWOOD
D
R
N
I
C
O
L
E
W
A
Y
ALLENCIR
JIMHOGGDR
WILLIAMSDR
ALLEN CIR
REZ-20 15-016
Exhibit #1
Co ord inate Sys tem: Texas S tat e P lane/C entral Zone/NAD 83 /US FeetCartographic Data For Genera l Planning Purposes Onl y 0 500 1,000Fee t ¯
Le ge nd
SiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
D el W e b b B l v d
WilliamsDr
Jim H o g g Rd
N L a k e w o o d s D r
")2338
Site
City Lim its
Str eet
Si te ³
Page 50 of 98
Georgetown ETJ
Georgetown ETJ
R EZ -2 01 5-0 16
WILLIAMS
B O S
F O U N T AINWOOD
N
I
C
O
L
E
ALLEN
L A K E V IE W
L A K E W O O D S
JI M H O G G
0 500 1,000
Feet
Co ord inate Sys tem: Texas S tat e P lane/Central Zone/NAD 83 /US FeetCartographic Data For Genera l Planning Purposes Onl y
¯
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
Fut ure La nd Use / Ove rall Transportation Plan
Exhibit #2
REZ-20 15-016
Legen d
Th oro ug hfa re
Fu ture L an d Use
Institut ional
Regional Commercial
Comm unity Com mercial
Employm ent Cent er
Low Density Residential
Mining
Mix ed Us e Com munit y
Mix ed Us e Neighborhood Center
Moderate Density Residential
Open Space
Specialty Mix ed Us e Area
Ag / Rural Resident ial
D el W e b b B l v d
WilliamsDr
Jim H o g g Rd
N L a k e w o o d s D r
")2338
Site
³
City Lim its
Str eet
Si te
Existing Collector
Existing Freeway
Existing Major Art erial
Existing Minor Art erial
Existing Ram p
Proposed Collect or
Proposed F reeway
Propsed F rontage Road
Proposed Major Arterial
Proposed Minor Arterial
Proposed Railroad
High Densit y Residential
Page 51 of 98
CITYOFGEORGETOWN
R EZ -2 01 5-0 16
JI M H O G G R D
F O U N T A IN W O O D D R
N
I
C
O
L
E
W
A
Y
FOUNTAINW
O
O
D
D
RALLENCIR
L A K E V I E W LN
N L A K E W O O D S D R
ALLEN CIR
JIMHOGGDR
WILLIAMS DR
Zon in g I nfo rmati onREZ-20 15-016Exhibit #3
¯
Co ord inate Sys tem: Texas S tat e P lane/Central Zone/NAD 83 /US FeetCartographic Data For Genera l Planning Purposes Onl y 0 500 1,000Feet
Le ge ndSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
D el W e b b B l v d
WilliamsDr
Jim H o g g Rd
N L a k e w o o d s D r
")2338
³
Site
City L imits
Stre et
Site
Page 52 of 98
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
November 3, 2015
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing and possible action on a Rezoning from the Residential Single-family District (RS) to
the Low Density Multifamily District (MF-1) for Lot 2 of the Osgood Subdivision, located at 401 West
17th Street. (REZ-2015-013) Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
ITEM SUMMARY:
Background:
The applicant has requested to rezone the platted lot from the Residential Single-Family (RS) District,
the Low Density Multifamily District (MF-1) to allow for future multifamily development of the
property. The Future Land Use designation for the property, and the entire vicinity around the
property, is Moderate Density Residential, which promotes residential densities of between 3 and 6
dwelling units per acre. The proposed District allows up to 14 dwelling units per acre. The property is
located between and contiguous to properties zoned RS and developed with single-family homes and is
developed with a single-family home that would become nonconforming if the rezoning were
approved.
A Utility Evaluation was a necessary companion application to the rezoning request in order to
potential infrastructure impacts of the increased development density. The applicant has chosen not to
submit the Evaluation application. Staff is not in support of the rezoning request as the Future Land
Use Plan does not support the MF-1 District at this location, the MF-1 District is not intended to be
located within an area zoned RS (should be located adjacent to as a buffer), and the infrastructure
impacts of the potential increased development density have not been analyzed.
Public Comment:
As of the date of this report, no written public comments have been received.
Recommended Motion:
Recommend to the City Council Denial of the request to rezone Lot 2 of the Osgood Subdivision to
the MF-1 District.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None. The applicant has paid the required fees.
SUBMITTED BY:
Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Staff Report Cover Memo
Exhibit 1 - Future Land Use / Transportation Map Backup Material
Exhibit 2 - Zoning Map Backup Material
Page 53 of 98
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
401 West 17th Street - Rezoning Page 1 of 5
RS to MF-1
Report Date: October 230, 2015
File No: REZ-2015-013
Project Planner: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
Item Details
Project Name: 401 West 17th Street
Project Address: 401 West 17th Street
Location: 17th Street at Forest Street (See Exhibits 1 and 2)
Total Acreage: 0.99 acre
Legal Description: Osgood Subdivision, Lot 2
Applicant: Tom Watts
Property Owner: William Gottsman
Contact: Tom Watts
Existing Use: Single-family residence
Existing Zoning: Residential Single-family (RS)
Proposed Zoning: Low Density Multifamily (MF-1)
Future Land Use: Moderate Density Residential
Growth Tier: Tier 1A
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone a platted lot from the Residential Single-family District (RS) to the
Low Density Multifamily District (MF-1). The Future Land Use designation for the property, and the
entire vicinity around the property, is Moderate Density Residential, which promotes residential densities
of between 3 and 6 dwelling units per acre. The proposed District allows up to 14 dwelling units per acre,
and such multifamily development under this District processes via a Site Development Plan.
Site Information
Location:
This property is on the north side of West 17th Street at the corner with Forest Street.
Physical Characteristics:
The property is developed with a single-family residence and has a large garden on the west side of the
property. There are several large trees on the property (exact sizes and species are unknown) and the site is
flat. The property is somewhat shaped like an “L”, with the existing house and yard comprising the
eastern two-thirds of the property, and a garden comprising the western third.
Surrounding Properties:
The surrounding properties include single-family residential and a public housing complex operated by the
City of Georgetown Housing Authority. A single lot, being Lot 2 of the Osgood Subdivision, sits west of
the subject lot, and is owned by the Georgetown Housing Authority and appears to be used as a parking and
storage area associated with a community garden, which is on the lot subject to this rezoning request. (See
Exhibits 1 & 2)
Page 54 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
401 West 17th Street - Rezoning Page 2 of 5
RS to MF-1
Property History
The property was annexed into the City in 1915, and there is a single-family residence on the property
(construction date unknown). The property pre-dates the adoption of any zoning regulations but has likely
always been a residentially zoned property. The adoption of the Unified Development Code (UDC) in
2003 redefined the zoning of the property to the Residential Single-Family (RS) District. The property was
platted as Osgood Subdivision, Lot 2, in 1995 as Williamson County Document # 199502722.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Land Use:
The property lies within the 2030 Plan future land use designation of Moderate Density Residential, which
calls for densities of between 3.1 and 6 dwelling units per acre, and supports attached single-family
dwellings such as townhouses. It also describes the appropriateness of in-fill development at greater
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North RS, Residential Single-family Moderate Density Residential Single family residences
South OF, Office * Moderate Density Residential Georgetown Housing Authority
East RS, Residential Single-family Moderate Density Residential Single family residences
West RS, Residential Single-family Moderate Density Residential Parking lot; Single family
residences
*The OF District is the translation of the RM-3 (Office and Service Uses) District that pre-dated the adoption of
the Unified Development Code (UDC) in 2003. Zoning districts at that time were “cumulative” in nature and
allowed residential uses as well as more intense office and service type uses.
Page 55 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
401 West 17th Street - Rezoning Page 3 of 5
RS to MF-1
densities where the property and associated aspects allow it. The proposed Low Density Multifamily
district allows the Specific Use of ‘Multifamily Detached and Attached Units’, whereby individual
structures can house anywhere from one to twelve units.
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 Low Density Multifamily (MF-1) District is intended for attached and detached multi-family
residential development, such as apartments, condominiums, triplexes, and fourplexes, at a density not to
exceed 14 dwelling units per acre. The District does not allow single-family homes, therefore making the
existing home nonconforming if it were to remain. The MF-1 District can be appropriate in the Moderate
Density Residential future land use category based on the particular location, surrounding uses, and
infrastructure impacts. Convenient access to major roadways should be present, and the District can be
proximate to both residential and non-residential districts, with the ability to serve as a transition between
those two.
Utilities
Electric, water, and wastewater utilities for the property are served by the City of Georgetown. Currently, a
six-inch public water line runs within West 17th and Forest Streets to serve the property; an eight-inch
wastewater line runs within Forest Street. A Utility Evaluation was determined by staff to be a necessary
companion application to the rezoning request in order to study the water and sewer lines serving the
property. This study is crucial in order to determine the impact of the greater density allowed by the
proposed District and thus determine the District’s appropriateness at this location. The applicant has
chosen not to submit the Evaluation application, and thus has not provided the Utility Department the
essential information needed to fully analyze the impacts of this rezoning request and provide a proper
recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council.
Transportation
The property is a corner lot, with approximately 260 linear feet of frontage along West 17th Street and 140
linear feet along Forest Street. The current residence has a driveway from West 17th Street. Any new
driveways for development subject to the proposed MF-1 zoning district would be determined at the time
of Site Development Plan review, based on driveway separation, roadway design speed, and site triangle
considerations.
Future Application(s)
The following applications will be required to be submitted (the property is a legal, platted lot, and it is not
anticipated that development under the MF-1 District would include subdivision of the lot):
• Site Development Plan for multifamily development would be processed administratively; and
• Building permits for construction.
Page 56 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
401 West 17th Street - Rezoning Page 4 of 5
RS to MF-1
Staff Analysis
Staff is not supportive of the requested rezoning for the following reasons:
1. The Future Land Use designation of Moderate Density Residential, in this particular location, does
not support the higher densities allowed by the MF-1 District. A property’s location, the surrounding
uses, and the potential development’s impact on the infrastructure in the area define the
appropriateness of the MF-1 District at a particular location. MF-1 zoning at this location would not
serve as a transition or buffer for the adjacent single-family development/zoning from a more intense
development/zoning or from a major roadway. Additionally, the potential impact of the additional
development density has not been studied, due to lack of information from the applicant.
2. The existing zoning of the surrounding properties within this block is RS which is the same as the
current zoning of this property. The MF-1 district is not appropriate placed between residentially
zoned properties; it should serve as more of a transition zone between residentially zoned properties
and more intense multifamily or commercial zoned properties.
3. Although development across 17th Street includes lower density multifamily units (nonconforming),
the surrounding properties within the same block and on the same side of West 17th Street are
developed with single-family detached residences on individual lots. Properties west of Hart Street
and north of 17th Street, including this tract, have developed with single-family homes and this
existing development pattern does not support multifamily development of up to 14 dwelling units
per acre.
4. The potential infrastructure impacts have not been studied, due to the applicant not submitting a
Utility Evaluation. Staff therefore has not been supplied the information necessary to determine the
potential multifamily development is appropriate at this location and will not negatively affect the
existing infrastructure. Because of the lack of information, staff cannot recommend support of this
application.
5. A non-conforming situation would be created if the proposed district were approved, whereby the
existing single-family residence and use is not permitted in the MF-1 District, and there is no future
plans submitted by the applicant (in this case, a Site Development Plan for a multifamily
development under the MF-1 District) to show the intent to remove what would become a non-
conforming structure and use.
Staff notes that the property, at 0.99 acre, is an atypically large lot for the RS zoning district. Per the UDC,
the minimum lot size of 5,500 square feet could yield a theoretical lot count of seven (7) lots, and thus,
seven dwelling units, if the applicant sought to subdivide the property. Through the subdivision process,
aspects such as utility provision, drainage impacts, and driveway locations would be vetted. Thus, under
the current zoning, the opportunity exists to increase the density of dwelling units on the property from one
(1) to a potential maximum of seven (7).
The Georgetown Housing Authority operates housing near the subject property that consists of multiple
units on single, large lots (zoned Office). This housing development dates to the late 1960’s/early 1970’s
era, and there are many existing non-conforming situations. The structures consist of either two or four
dwelling units each, and are all single-story, with common parking and open spaces spread throughout.
Staff calculates the gross density of the Housing Authority at approximately 8.3 dwelling units per acre.
Page 57 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
401 West 17th Street - Rezoning Page 5 of 5
RS to MF-1
There are additional multifamily developments along Austin Avenue and Railroad Avenue, both zoned
Office (nonconforming), that have higher densities; however, to date Hart Street to the west of this property
and 17th Street to the south of this property have acted as dividing lines between the denser residential
development and the single-family homes leading into the Old Town Overlay District.
Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments
None
Public Comments
A total of 21 notices were sent out to property owners within 200 feet of the proposed rezoning. Public
notice was posted in the Sun newspaper on October 18, 2015. As of the writing of this report, no written
comments have been received.
Meetings Schedule
November 3, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing
November 24, 2015 – City Council First Reading and Public Hearing
December 8, 2015 – City Council Second Reading
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 2 – Zoning Map
Page 58 of 98
REZ-2015-013
W UNIVERSITY AVE
L
E
A
N
D
E
R
S
T
H
A
R
T
S
T
SAUSTINAVE
R
O
C
K
S
T
W 1 8TH ST
W 1 5 T H S T
W 17TH ST
E 19TH ST
E 18TH ST
S
C
E
N
I
C
D
R
E 17TH ST
CYRUS AV
E
E 16TH ST
E UNIVERSITY AVE
W 16TH ST
W 13TH ST
B
R
U
S
H
Y
S
T
W
E
S
T
S
T
W 14TH ST
RAILROADAVE
F
O
R
E
S
T
S
T
W 19TH ST
S
M
A
I
N
S
T
T
I
M
B
E
R
S
T
C
A
N
D
E
E
S
T
A
L
L
Y
STONE CIR
0 500 1,000
Feet
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 #2
REZ-2015-013
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
§¨¦35
W University Ave E University Ave
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
Southw este
r
n
B
l
v
d
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
WolfRanchPkw y
S
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
")1460
SAustinAve
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
Page 59 of 98
REZ-2015-013
SAUSTINAVE
L
E
A
N
D
E
R
S
T
H
A
R
T
S
T
W 1 5 T H S T
E 19TH ST
CYRUS AV
E
E 17TH ST
W 18T H ST
E 16TH ST
B
R
U
S
H
Y
S
T
W UNIVERSITY AVE
W 16TH ST
W 13TH ST
W
E
S
T
S
T
W 19TH ST
W 14TH ST
RA
I
L
R
O
A
D
A
V
E
W 18TH STW 19TH ST
F
O
R
E
S
T
S
T
S
M
A
I
N
S
T
T
I
M
B
E
R
S
T
C
A
N
D
E
E
S
T
H A R T S T
A
L
L
Y
STONE CIR
W 17TH ST
Zoning InformationREZ-2015-013Exhibit #2
¯
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 500 1,000Feet
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
§¨¦35
W University Ave E University Ave
Southw este
r
n
B
l
v
d
S
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
")1460 ³Site
City Limits
Street
Site
Page 60 of 98
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning
November 3, 2015
SUBJECT:
Public Hearing and possible action on a request to Rezone 1.18 acres in the Dimmit Addition
located at 605 East University Ave., to be known as College View Apartments, from the Local
Commercial (C-1) District to 0.1607 acre of the Residential Single-family (RS) District and 1.018
acres for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District with a High Density Multifamily (MF-2)
base zoning district.
ITEM SUMMARY:
Background:
The applicant has requested to rezone 1.18 acres in the Dimmit Addition, located at 605 East
University Ave., from the Local Commercial (C-1) District to 0.1607 acre of the Residential
Single-family (RS) District and 1.018 acres for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District with a
High Density Multifamily (MF-2) base zoning district. The applicant seeks to develop a
multifamily development of 32 units to be known as College View Apartments on the majority of
the property, while creating a separate lot for the existing single-family structure that will comply
with the Residential Single-family district standards. The applicant seeks to incorporate portions of
the existing buildings into the structures of both of the new apartment buildings.
Public Comment:
As of the date of this report, two written public comments have been received, and are attached to
this staff report as Exhibit 7.
Recommended Motion:
Staff is recommending the following:
Hold the public hearing.
Discuss the request and provide the applicant direction on both positive aspects of the
development and aspects of the development request the Commission feels may need further
review.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None. The applicant has paid the required fees.
SUBMITTED BY:
Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Description Type
Staff Report Cover Memo
Page 61 of 98
Exhibit 1 - Future Land Use / Transportation Map Backup Material
Exhibit 2 - Zoning Map Backup Material
Exhibit 3 - PUD Development Plan Backup Material
Exhibit 4 - PUD Conceptual Site Layout Backup Material
Exhibit 5 - PUD Elevations and Floor Plans Backup Material
Exhibit 6 - PUD Elevations and Floor Plans-Staff Preferred Backup Material
Exhibit 7 - Public Comments Backup Material
Page 62 of 98
Georgetown Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Page 1 of 12
Rezoning from C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
Report Date: October 30, 2015
File No: REZ-2015-009
Project Planner: Mike Elabarger, Senior Planner
Item Details
Project Name: College View Apartments
Location: 605 East University Avenue
Total Acreage: 1.18 acres
Legal Description: 1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition (comprising four properties)
Applicant: Lee McIntosh, McIntosh Holdings
Property Owner: Georgetown Hospital Authority (2 tracts)
Georgetown Healthcare Systems (1 tract)
Steenken Family Partnership (1 tract)
Contact: Lee McIntosh, McIntosh Holdings
Existing Use: A single-family residence being used for a non-profit purpose; a vacant
hospital comprised of both wood and brick/masonry structures
Existing Zoning: Local Commercial (C-1) District
Proposed Zoning: Residential Single-family (RS) District for 0.1607 acre;
Planned Unit Development (PUD), with High Density Multifamily (MF-
2) base district for 1.018 acres.
Future Land Use: Moderate Density Residential (MDR)
Growth Tier: Tier 1A
Overview of Applicant’s Request
The applicant has requested to rezone 1.18 acres in the Dimmit Addition, located at 605 East
University Ave., from the Local Commercial (C-1) District to 0.1607 acre of the Residential
Single-family (RS) District and 1.018 acres for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) District
with a High Density Multifamily (MF-2) base zoning district. The applicant seeks to develop a
multifamily development of 32 units to be known as College View Apartments on the
majority of the property, while creating a separate lot for the existing single-family structure
that will comply with the Residential Single-family district standards. The applicant seeks to
incorporate portions of the existing buildings into the structures of both of the new apartment
buildings.
PUD Summary:
The PUD document consists of a required Development Plan (Exhibit 3 to this staff report)
that describes and summarizes the attributes and UDC modifications of the proposed PUD
Page 63 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 2 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
District, and the required Conceptual Site Layout (Exhibit 4 to this staff report) that
graphically depicts the proposed development. Additionally, the applicant has provided
Architectural Elevations and floor plans of the proposed buildings (Exhibit 5 to this staff
report).
In the Development Plan, the applicant is requesting the following deviations from the base
zoning regulations of the MF-2 district. Below, the UDC standard is referenced, followed by
the proposed deviation or alternative.
1. Impervious Cover – For a property of this size, the MF-2 District would have a
maximum impervious cover allowance of 50%. The applicant employed the services of
a professional surveyor who determined impervious surfaces currently cover
approximately 92% of the site; however, the exact percentage of impervious coverage
existing on the property will need to be verified by an engineer at time of Site
Development Plan review.
The proposed Development Plan and Conceptual Site Layout plans a maximum of 87%
impervious coverage on the site. While this represents a 37% increase over the 50%
maximum allowed in the MF-2 district, it represents a potential 5% decrease from what
could be utilized if the existing conditions are verified and calculated as an existing
condition.
2. Density - The maximum allowed density for the MF-2 Zoning District is 24 units per
acre and 24 units per structure. The project proposes a developed density of 32 units
per acre – 8 more than permitted - with no individual building structure exceeding 24
units.
3. Building Setbacks – See table:
UDC Standard Proposed Setbacks
North (Adjacent to Residential
Single-Family RS District) -
Rear
30 feet
5 feet
[To permit parking spaces to within
5’ of property line.]
South (University Ave) - Front 25 feet 10 feet
[Equal to the 10’ Gateway Overlay
District landscaping buffer]
West (College Street) - Side 15 feet
0 feet
[Represents a setback reduction of
the entire 15 feet.]
East (Walnut Street) - Side 15 feet
15 feet
[Parking is permitted within this
setback, to the property line.]
Page 64 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 3 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
4. Building Height - The MF-2 District maximum building height standard is 45 feet; the
Old Town Overlay District has a maximum building height standard of 30 feet. It’s
noted that the existing structures have mean heights of 23.6 feet (1920 wooden
hospital) and 21.0 feet (1962 additions). The proposed maximum building height is
thirty-six feet (36’) as measured per UDC Section 7.03.030(D.).
5. Landscaping & Bufferyards – The property is subject to the Downtown Gateway
Landscape Overlay District, and a Type “c” Medium Level Bufferyard is required when
an MF-2 District is adjacent to an RS District. Street Yard and Parking lot landscaping
are also required.
UDC Requirement Proposed
South Side
(University Ave.)
Downtown Gateway Overlay, a 10-
foot planting area with vegetation
comprised of two shade trees and
two 5-gallon shrubs per 1,000
square feet of landscape area.
Raised planters, fencing,
ornamental trees and
shrubs
West Side
(College St.)
Parking lot screening Parking lot screening with
shrubs
East Side
(Walnut St.)
Streetyard landscaping, parking lot
screening
Three shade trees.
North Side
(residential
properties)
Medium Level Bufferyard,
comprised of a 15 foot wide
planting area with one shade tree,
two ornamental evergreens, and
eight evergreen shrubs each 50
linear feet.
5’ wide bufferyard, a
minimum six-foot tall
privacy screen at the
property line comprised of
a 2’6” tall masonry base,
with intermittent columns
of masonry topped with a
3’6” tall wooden privacy
fence.
Parking Lot One shade tree per 12 stalls; no stall
more than 50’ from a shade tree;
minimum size of tree well areas.
Preserve existing trees #
07, 10, 13, 15, 16, 17 –
clean-up, provide
irrigation, and provide
either tree wells or
pervious pavers. Shrubs
adjacent College Street.
6. Building Separation – A building separation standard of 15’ between all buildings
exists for the MF-2 District. The minimum required separation is proposed to be
removed altogether, however, any minimum Fire Code separation requirements will
be met. Structurally and functionally the project will be separated into three separate
Page 65 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 4 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
buildings of 15, 14 and 3 units, but they will all be connected by covered walkways
and/or roofs.
7. Parking - Sixty-one (61) parking spaces are proposed as required per the UDC for the
proposed apartment units; see the Concept Site Layout. Of the 61 spaces provided, 49
are traditional 18’x9’ spaces; 12 Compact spaces (16’x8’) are proposed, which exceeds
the maximum allowed of 10%, by representing 20% of the total parking spaces.
The Development Plan further commits to the following:
• The sole permitted use of Multifamily Attached Dwelling Units.
• Building Height maximum of 36’, nine feet less than allowed in the MF-2 District.
• Tree preservation measures as identified on the Conceptual Site Layout.
• A privacy wall along entire boundary with RS District in lieu of UDC bufferyard
requirements, and shade tree plantings in yard area between building and Walnut
Street not otherwise required.
• Specific Building Architecture and Site Layout/design.
The Conceptual Site Layout (Exhibit 4 to this staff report) graphically depicts the proposed
development with specific details. The size of the property, and the specificity of the
project/development, lent itself to such a detailed graphic. The exhibit is meant to
demonstrate the primary site development aspects expressed in the Development Plan, and is
a critical part of what makes this PUD application different than a by-right zoning request.
The Elevation and Floor Plans (Exhibit 5 to this staff report) exemplify the proposed design of
the building, with details as to the layout of the units to exemplify how the unit orientation
interacts with the shape and design of the buildings.
All other aspects of development not requested for modification will comply with minimum
requirements listed in the UDC, enforced at the time of the administratively reviewed Site
Development Plan or subsequent building permits.
Site Information
Location:
The site is located on the north side of University Avenue (State Highway 29) between College
Street and Walnut Street.
Physical Characteristics:
The site is partially developed with two connected buildings, and a single-family residence.
There are approximately 15 mature trees on the property. The property is extremely flat, and
as noted elsewhere in this report, has a very high state of existing impervious cover (estimated
at 92%) from many decades of use as a community hospital.
Page 66 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 5 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
Surrounding Properties:
The immediately surrounding and adjacent properties are single-family residences. To the
west across College Street is a public school, to the east across Walnut Street a
commercial/office use, and across University Avenue a row of commercial/retail uses.
Location Zoning Future Land Use Existing Use
North RS, Residential Single-family Moderate Density
Residential
Single family residences
South C-1, Local Commercial [across
University Avenue/Highway 29]
Moderate Density
Residential
Commercial [across
University Avenue/
Highway 29]
East RS, Residential Single-family;
C-1, Local Commercial
Moderate Density
Residential
Single family residences;
offices (Georgetown
Community Clinic)
West RS, Residential Single-family Moderate Density
Residential
Williams Elementary
School (GISD)
Property History
The current structure was built in 1922 as the first hospital in Georgetown and significantly
altered in 1962. The alterations included the demolition of approximately 33% of the building,
including the primary façade, and the construction of a two story brick addition, creating a
new primary façade. Structural evidence on the second floor of the structure indicates that the
building originally had a gallery porch on the east side, which was enclosed to create
additional hospital space at an undocumented date. The structure continued to serve as the
primary hospital in Georgetown until the 1970s and was converted to offices and other
medical uses following the opening of a new hospital. The property is currently vacant.
The 1984 Historic Resource Survey form describes the structure’s condition as “fair, severely
altered” and states that “original façade completely obscured.” The survey form also states
that the structure is significant for its historic use, not the structure itself. The 1960s alterations
resulted in the removal of the primary façade, and most of the character defining features of
the architectural style.
The interior of the 1962 addition was subsequently remodeled following the closure of the
hospital and contains no historically significant features. The remaining portion of the original
structure is significantly deteriorated.
The single family residential structure addressed as 1019 South College Street was constructed
in 1880 and is identified as a High Priority structure on the 1984 and 2007 Historic Resource
Surveys. High priority structures are those which may be individually eligible for listing in the
National Register of Historic Places, due to their high level of architectural integrity. The
structure is currently utilized by Georgetown Health Systems to host substance abuse
organizations.
Page 67 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 6 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
2030 Comprehensive Plan
The property is contained within the 2030 Plan future land use designation of Moderate
Density Residential (MDR); see Exhibit 1. This category calls for residential densities of
between 3.1 and 6 dwelling units per acre, but also supports complementary non-residential
uses along arterial roadways such as neighborhood-serving retail, office, institutional, and
civic uses. In such cases, standards maximizing compatibility with adjacent land uses are
important to minimize traffic congestion and infrastructure impact while also ensuring a high
standard of site, landscape, and architectural design.
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 Districts
The rezoning proposes two zoning districts:
1. The Residential Single-family (RS) District for a future 7,000 square foot lot
encompassing the existing single-family residence that resides in the northwest corner
of the property (1019 South College Street).
2. A Planned Unit Development District (PUD), with a base District of the High Density
Multifamily District (MF-2), is proposed for the balance of the property for the specific
project of a 32-unit apartment complex. The development would be comprised of three
connected buildings, two of which are intended to incorporate portions of the existing
buildings into the super-structure of the new apartment buildings. Sixty-one (61)
parking spaces are proposed, with many modifications to the MF-2 District standards,
along with several provisions that exceed the UDC requirements.
The Residential Single-Family (RS) District is intended for areas of medium density with a
minimum lot size of 5,500 square feet and contains standards that maintain the single-family
neighborhood characteristics. The District may be located within proximity of neighborhood-
friendly commercial and public services and protected from incompatible uses.
Per the UDC, the Planned Unit Development District (PUD) is intended to allow flexibility in
planning and designing for unique or environmentally sensitive properties that are to be
developed in accordance with a common development scheme. PUD zoning is designed to
accommodate various types of development, including multiple housing types, neighborhood
and community retail, professional and administrative areas, industrial and business parks,
and other uses or a combination thereof. A PUD may be used to permit new or innovative
concepts in land use and standards not permitted by zoning or the standards of the UDC.
Although greater flexibility is given to allow development in a PUD that would not otherwise
be allowed, procedures and standards are established in the UDC that are intended to ensure
against misuse.
Page 68 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 7 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
The High Density Multifamily (MF-2) District is intended for attached multifamily residential
development, such as apartments and condominiums, at a density not to exceed 24 dwelling
units per acre. The District is appropriate in areas planned as High Density Residential or one
of the Mixed Use categories. Access to major thoroughfares and arterial roads should be
provided, with traffic not being directed through lower density residential areas. The District
is appropriate adjacent both Residential and Non-Residential Districts and may serve as a
transition between single-family districts and more intense commercial districts.
Old Town Overlay District
The Old Town Overlay District was created in 2004 to preserve and protect the historic
structures located within Georgetown’s earliest residential districts. Although primarily
residential in nature, the Old Town Overlay District includes some commercial structures,
typically located along South Austin and University Avenues. The UDC outlines additional
design review requirements for properties located within the Old Town Overlay District
boundaries, requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness for certain types of applications. These
projects include additions to the street facing façade of a residential structure, alterations to
commercial structures, and non-residential infill construction. The criteria for the Old Town
Overlay District are outlined in Section 4.08 of the City of Georgetown UDC, while the criteria
for approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness are listed in Section 3.13.
Historic and Architectural Review Commission (HARC)
The HARC is a seven member commission tasked with making decisions on Certificates of
Appropriateness, as well as providing guidance to applicants and assisting City Council in
carrying out duties related to historic preservation. HARC decisions are based upon the
design guidelines and pertain only to the design of a structure. Use determinations are set by
the underlying zoning district.
Projects within the Old Town Overlay District are subject to additional review by the Historic
and Architectural Review Commission prior to the issuance of building permits or any other
required development permits. The HARC reviews projects for compliance with the
Downtown and Old Town Design Guidelines. The Downtown and Old Town Design
Guidelines were originally adopted in 2002 and updated in 2012 to reflect the Old Town
Overlay District.
Summary of HARC action for the proposed project
The applicant for this rezoning submitted two applications to appear before the HARC
regarding the project. The HARC considered the Certificate of Appropriateness for the
proposed infill project at the June 25, 2015 meeting. The application failed to receive four
affirmative votes, resulting in denial of the application. The applicant filed an appeal of the
decision, which will be heard by City Council at the November 24, 2015 meeting.
Page 69 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 8 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
Design Review
Infill projects in the Old Town Overlay District shall comply with the adopted design
guidelines for the district. The original project proposed the construction of 33 apartment
units, housed in 4 buildings; it has since been reduced to 32 units in three buildings. The
buildings would be connected by enclosed corridors and share a common roof. Through
discussions with the surrounding neighbors and staff, the applicant has reduced the total
number of units to 32, reduced the height of one building to allow for protection of a Heritage
tree, and reducing the height of one corner to provide a sense of scale.
The original design incorporated architectural features along the University Avenue façade
(south façade) to articulate the building, minimizing the overall scale of the project as outlined
in the design guidelines. The proposed reduction of height change to the south façade
increases the articulation while protecting the heritage tree. The design guidelines state “The
overall mass and scale of a new building or addition should convey a sense of human scale.”
The proposed project incorporates varying roof heights, different materials and breaks the
development into multiple buildings to comply with the stated policy.
The design alterations presented with this PUD, from the initial submission, include a
reduction of one unit, being the third floor unit on the southeast corner of the property. The
change is intended to provide building articulation on the Walnut Street side of the project.
Staff has determined that the resulting design creates a roof line that is incompatible with the
structure and fails to maintain the human scale of the project. Staff’s recommendation is for
the 1st alternate design provided by the applicant (Exhibit 6 to this staff report) to be included
in the PUD in lieu of the most recent design submittals. The previous design best complies
with the design guidelines and incorporates the changes requested by staff for tree protection.
Utilities
Electric, water, and wastewater are served by City of Georgetown. A Utility Evaluation (UTE-
2015-020) was submitted as a companion application to this rezoning to determine the impact
of the proposed development on the City’s water supply system. The project identified by
the applicant in the Evaluation was for 33 multifamily dwelling units on 1.02 acres. The City’s
evaluation of the request indicated that the anticipated impacts of the project could be
handled if the development connected to an existing 6-inch main line or larger. Water and
sewer impact fees will be assessed upon development based on the submission date of a
subdivision plat.
Wastewater service analysis was not completed with this rezoning request, but capacity was
determined to be present by the Georgetown Utility System (GUS).
Transportation
The access to this property is proposed to be via College Street and Walnut Street, with no
vehicular access from University Avenue (State Highway 29). The proposed driveway
Page 70 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 9 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
locations are meeting UDC spacing requirements, with exact locations and details such as turn
radiuses determined at Site Development Plan review. It is not anticipated that a Traffic
Impact Analysis (TIA) will be required based on the 32 proposed units.
Future Application(s)
To develop the property, the following applications will be required to be submitted:
• Preliminary Plat to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission;
• Construction Plans (public infrastructure) to be processed administratively;
• Final Plat to be processed administratively;
• Site Development Plans to be processed administratively;
• Building permits for construction to be processed administratively;
• Certificates of Occupancy for tenancy/opening to the public.
Staff Analysis
Staff has reviewed the request and is supportive of both zoning districts. There are still some
specifics relating to site develoment details captured in the Development Plan that staff and
the applicant seek to refine and clarify. The Commission is asked to not render their
recommendation at this time, and postpone the application to the next available meeting.
Staff is recommending the following:
• Hold the public hearing.
• Discuss the request and provide the applicant direction on both positive aspects of the
development and aspects of the development request the Commission feels may need
further review.
Below are findings of support for the request to rezone from the Local Commercial District (C-
1) to the Residential Single-family District (RS) for a 7,000 square foot area to be platted as a
residential lot:
1. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designation of the Moderate Density
Residential supports the RS District for the 7,000 square foot area, as the location is
mid-block, fronting an existing Collector road built to local road standards, and not
abutting an arterial or higher classification of roadway.
2. The surrounding zoning of the 7,000 square foot area is Residential Single-family (RS)
District, and the proposed District would add to the existing RS zoning fronting
College Street to the north.
3. The immediate surrounding uses are single-family residences and the vacant former
hospital, and the proposed District would result in a lot commensurate with many of
the typical ‘old town’ residential lots in this part of the City.
Page 71 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 10 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
Below are findings of support for the request to rezone from the Local Commercial District (C-
1) to the Planned Unit Development – High Density Multifamily District (MF-2 PUD):
1. The Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designation of the Moderate Density
Residential supports complementary non-residential uses along arterial roadways, but
does not specifically note multifamily. Staff finds that a reuse and redevelopment of
portions of the existing structures to fill a segment of the housing spectrum that is
underserved in the ‘old town’ area meets many goals and objectives found in the
Comprehensive Plan. Staff further finds that the combination of the current zoning (C-
1) and extremely high amount of existing impervious cover (noted at 92%) could result
in many more intense and intrusive uses/developments for the neighboring properties.
Fuel sales, convenience store, or drive-through restaurant uses could all be developed
on the property with just subdivision platting and Site Plan approvals. A new and
modern multifamily development, architecturally designed in a classic style, as
proposed and committed to in the PUD, can “cap” the block at University Avenue and
replace deteriorating and vacanct buildings.
2. The surrounding zoning of the contiguous properties is the Residential Single-family
(RS) District, and the Local Commercial District (C-1) across University Avenue and
Walnut Street. Across College Street is Williams Elementary School, which is zoned RS
District. Staff finds that the proposed PUD District would be a transitional buffer for a
property at the end of two streets that intersect with a major arterial State Highway.
Additionally, the fact that the buildings would be fronting University Avenue, and that
nearly half of the northern boundary with the contiguous RS zoned properties will be
further buffered by the proposed 7,000 SF RS district further works to mitigate impacts
of the proposed PUD.
3. The surrounding uses of the contiguous properties are the side yards of two single-
family residences. Across Walnut Street is a single-family residence and an office
building housing a non-profit health care provider. Across University Avenue is a row
of older buildings housing a variety of commercial businesses, and a convenience store
with fuel sales. Across College Street is the Williams Elementary School, which is
slated to be converted to GISD administrative offices in the near future. The wide
variety of non-residential uses immediately adjacent this property exemplifies the mix
of uses that have proliferated along University Avenue and would be bolstered by a
multifamily component where none exist nearby.
The UDC Section 3.06.040 Approval Criteria for consideration of PUD Districts are below,
with staff comment in italics:
1. The district creates a variety of housing types, employment opportunities, or
commercial services to achieve a balanced community;
Page 72 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 11 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
The project proposes new market-rate apartments within walking distance of
Southwestern University, in an area devoid of rental opportunities.
2. The district creates an orderly and creative arrangement of all land uses with respect
to each other and to the entire community;
The property fronts a major arterial roadway and proposes the buildings as close to
the roadway, and thus as far from the adjacent properties, as possible, fostering a
pedestrian environment along University Avenue by placing the parking behind the
buildings and not adding a curb cut onto the higher order roadway.
3. The district offers a planned and integrated comprehensive transportation system,
providing for a separation of pedestrian and vehicular traffic, to include facilities such
as roadways, bicycle ways, and pedestrian walkways;
The project will replace and enlarge the public sidewalk along University Avenue,
replace, enlarge, and complete the sidewalk along College Street, and will add a
sidewalk along Walnut Street.
4. The district offers provisions for cultural or recreational facilities for all segments of
the community; Not Applicable.
5. The district demonstrates the location of general building envelopes to take
maximum advantage of the natural and manmade environment;
The proposed buildings, as captured in the Conceptual Site Layout, do not result in
any tree removals, and have been modified from the original plans to better facilitate
Tree 005. The required parking does result in several trees being removed, but within
the manner permitted by the UDC.
6. The district provides the staging of development in a manner which can be
accommodated by the timely provision of public utilities, facilities, and services;
There is no phasing proposed, the entire project would be built at one time.
Inter Departmental, Governmental and Agency Comments
None
Public Comments
A total of 23 notices were sent out to property owners within 200 feet of the proposed
rezoning. Public notice was posted in the Sun newspaper on October 18th. As of the writing of
this report, two (2) written comments have been received; these are added as Exhibit 7 to this
staff report.
Page 73 of 98
Planning Department Staff Report
1.18 acres in the Dimmitt Addition - Rezoning Page 12 of 12
From C-1 to RS and PUD (MF-2)
Attachments
Exhibit 1 – Future Land Use Map
Exhibit 2 – Zoning Map
Exhibit 3 – PUD Development Plan “Exhibit A”
Exhibit 4 – PUD Conceptual Site Layout “Exhibit B”
Exhibit 5 – PUD Elevations and Floor Plans “Exhibit C”
Exhibit 6 – PUD Elevations and Floor Plans “Exhibit C” – STAFF PREFERRED
Exhibit 7 – Public Comment
Meetings Schedule
November 3, 2015 – Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing
November 24, 2015 – City Council Public Hearing and First Reading of an Ordinance
December 8, 2015 – City Council Second Reading of an Ordinance
Page 74 of 98
REZ-2015-009
E 11TH ST
WA
L
N
U
T
S
T
S
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
S
T
E 13TH ST
E 10TH ST
P
I
N
E
S
T
E UNIVERSITY AVE
0 200 400
Feet
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-2015-009
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
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
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
E University AveW University Ave
§¨¦
N
C
olle
ge
St35
Page 75 of 98
REZ-2015-009
W
A
L
N
U
T
S
T
E 11TH ST
S
C
O
L
L
E
G
E
S
T
E 13TH ST
E 10TH ST
P
I
N
E
S
T
E UNIVERSITY AVE
Zoning InformationREZ-2015-009Exhibit #2
¯
Coordinate System: Texas State Plane/Central Zone/NAD 83/US FeetCartographic Data For General Planning Purposes Only 0 200 400Feet
LegendSiteParcelsCity LimitsGeorgetown ETJ
³SiteCity Limits
Street
Site
§¨¦35
W University Ave E University Ave
N
A
u
s
t
i
n
A
v
e
N
CollegeSt
Page 76 of 98
Exhibit “A”
College View Apartments
High Density Multi-family (MF-2) District
Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Development Plan
A. PROPERTY
The College View Apartments Planned Unit Development District is located at 605
East University, Georgetown Texas 78626 and encompasses approximately 1.018
acres, described as “1.018 acres in the Dimmit Addition”. The property is not
considered a Legal lot by the definition in the City’s Unified Development Code
(UDC) and will undergo subdivision platting after the rezoning process and before
Site Plan approval can be issued.
B. PURPOSE
The purpose of this PUD District is the redevelopment of the portion of the property
comprising the old Georgetown Hospital into 32 apartment Units and 61 parking
spaces.
This PUD zoning serves to augment and/or modify the standards for development
outlined in the City’s 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
High Density Multi-Family (MF-2). Except for those requirements specifically
deviated by this Development Plan, all development standards established in the
most current version of the UDC at the time of development shall be applicable,
including amendments or ordinances adopted after the date of this PUD zoning
being approved by City Council. 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 zoning and the regulations of the base zoning district (MF-2), the PUD shall
control.
D. CONCEPTUAL SITE LAYOUT
A Conceptual Site Layout has been attached to this Development Plan as Exhibit
“B” to illustrate the land use and design intent for the property. The Conceptual
Site Layout 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 for development.
Page 77 of 98
As such, the proposed building and parking configurations are subject to
refinement at time of Site Plan review. The Conceptual Site Layout depicts two
buildings, parking, outdoor areas, and tree preservation. Approval of this PUD,
Development Plan, and Conceptual Site Layout does not constitute approval of a
Site Development Plan per Section 3.09 of the UDC.
E. LAND USES
1. Primary Use. The primary use shall be Multi-Family Attached Dwelling Units
and required parking.
2. Other Permitted Uses. None
3. Prohibited Uses. None
4. Permitted Accessory Uses. None
F. DESIGN STANDARDS
1. Density.
The project proposes a development density of 32 units per acre, with no
individual building structure exceeding 24 units.
2. Setbacks.
The proposed building setbacks for this project are:
• North (adjacent to Residential Single Family RS District) - Rear
5 feet
* [To permit parking spaces to within 5’ of property line.]
• South (University Ave) - Front
10 feet
* [Equal to the 10’ Gateway Overlay District landscaping buffer]
• West (College Street) - Side
0 feet
* [Represents a setback reduction of the entire 15 feet.]
• East (Walnut Street) - Side
15 feet
* [Parking is permitted within this setback, to the property line.]
The setback between the proposed RS District and the MF-2 PUD District shall
be zero and therefore allow parking up to that future property line.
3. Building Height.
The proposed maximum building height is thirty-six feet (36’) as measured per
UDC Section 7.03.030(D.).
4. Exterior Lighting. Exterior Lighting will comply with the requirements set forth
in Section 7.05 of the UDC.
Page 78 of 98
5. Building Separation. The building separation standards of Chapter 6 for the
MF-2 district will not be met on this project, however, minimum Fire Code
regulations will be met. All three buildings will be connected by covered
walkways and will function as a single structure for fire control purposes. A
zero separation is therefore proposed. Structurally and functionally the project
will be separated into three separate buildings of 15, 14 and 3 units
respectively.
G. PARKING.
Sixty-one (61) parking spaces are proposed, with 49 traditional 18’x9’ spaces and
12 Compact spaces (16’x8’); see the Concept Site Layout.
H. VEHICULAR ACCESS AND CIRCULATION
1. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). No TIA is being provided, as the
threshold for requiring one is not met by this project.
2. Driveway Access. Driveways are as shown on the Conceptual Site Layout,
and will meet UDC requirements as determined at the time of Site Development
Plan review.
I. TREE PRESERVATION
Tree preservation shall be in accordance with the UDC. As shown on the
Conceptual Site Layout, the following specifics are committed to being performed:
• Parking lot islands as protective measures for Trees #07 & #15.
• Pervious pavers as protective measures for Trees #10, #13, #15, and #17.
• Trees #04 and #05 in the Gateway Landscape area are retained.
J. LANDSCAPE AND BUFFER REQUIREMENTS
Landscaping on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 8 of the UDC
unless otherwise stated in this Development Plan.
South Side – Adjacent University Avenue/S.H. 29 – Downtown Gateway Landscape
Overlay District - The following landscaping is proposed as an alternative, as utility
conflicts allow and as determined at the time of Site Development Plan review:
1. Raised Planter features near, or integrated into, the buildings along the length of
University Avenue, including wrought iron (like) fencing.
2. Ornamental trees and/or large shrubs per the Preferred Plant List administered
via an Administrative Exception for an Alternative Landscape Plan at the time of
Site Plan review.
West Side adjacent College Street – No landscaping adjacent to the building will be
provided, and no bufferyard is required. Parking lot landscaping consisting of 5-gallon
shrubs, the number and spacing per the UDC, will be provided between the property
line and the two rows of parking spaces.
Page 79 of 98
East Side adjacent Walnut Street – As mitigation for the lack of new shade trees within
the Gateway landscape area, three (3) shade trees of a species determined at the time
of Site Development Plan review will be provided within the green space adjacent
proposed Building B. Site triangle considerations will be determined at the time of Site
Development Plan review which may dictate location and/or number of trees.
North Side adjacent RS District Properties: The following bufferyard is proposed:
• A 5’ wide bufferyard (green space) adjacent the off-site RS District zoned
properties.
• A varying width bufferyard (green space), as space allows as determined during
the Site Plan review process, around the 7,000 SF lot which is part of this
proposal.
• Along the entire boundary of the proposed MF-2 PUD District where adjacent an
existing or proposed RS District, a minimum six-foot tall privacy screen
comprised of a 2’6” tall masonry base, with intermittent columns of masonry
topped with a 3’6” tall wooden privacy fence. This can be increased in height to
eight-feet (an additional 2-feet of wooden privacy fencing) as desired by the
affected neighboring property owners and/or City Council.
Parking Lot Landscaping:
No new shade trees will be provided, utilizing the preserved trees #07, 10, 13, 15, 16,
17. Shrubbery will be installed at the parking lot entrances from College Street; where
possible, the same will be done adjacent Walnut Street, as determined at the time of
Site Development Plan review.
K. SIGNAGE
Signage on the Property shall be in conformance with Chapter 10 of the Unified
Development Code.
L. IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE
The property has been qualified by a Professional Surveyor to be 92 % Impervious
Cover. The project proposed to reduce this to 87% maximum as exemplified on
the Concept Site Layout.
M. STORMWATER DRAINAGE
As the property has been qualified by a Professional Surveyor to be 92 %
Impervious Cover, and the proposed project will reduce that to a maximum of
87%, no storm water management devices (quantity or quality) shall be developed
on the Property. If during the Site Development Plan process, the applicant
engineer cannot certify that 87% impervious cover does exist in the pre-
development condition, water detention may be required for the amount of
impervious cover between existing conditions and 87%.
Page 80 of 98
Drainage will be diverted from the site to the curbs of the three surrounding public
streets, (College, Walnut, University Avenue.) or utilize the existing drainage
system as dictated by the approved Site Development Plan.
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 Development Plan approval.
2. Common Amenity Area. The Common Amenity Area requirements of UDC
Section 6.06.020 will be met by integrating the following amenities on-site:
Four (4) metal benches that currently meet the City standard for right of way
use will be installed on the site as determined by staff and applicant at the time
of Site Development Plan review.
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. PATIOS ON UNIVERSITY
Five ground floor units are proposed adjacent to University Avenue. These units
will have patios surfaced in pavers and separated from the sidewalk with a small
brick retaining wall and an appropriately sized wrought iron ornamental fence.
Q. LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit A – PUD Development Plan (this document)
Exhibit B – PUD Conceptual Site Layout
Exhibit C – PUD Elevations and Floor Plans
Page 81 of 98
Page 82 of 98
Page 83 of 98
Page 84 of 98
Page 85 of 98
Page 86 of 98
Page 87 of 98
Page 88 of 98
Page 89 of 98
From:Pamela Mitchell
To:Mike Elabarger; Matt Synatschk ; Sofia Nelson
Subject:605 E. University Proposal - Case # REZ-2015-009
Date:Tuesday, October 27, 2015 1:00:21 PM
Attachments:GT.605University.Talking Points3.docx
Dear Mike, Sophia, and Matt,
As you know from our meeting 2 months ago, I am opposed to the 605 E. Universityproposal submitted by Mr. McIntosh. I am looking forward to the materials Fridaybut am concerned I will not have enough time to understand the proposal given myschedule - I am facilitating a 3 day strategic planning retreat for BSWH DallasDivision 11/1- 11/3 (at 2 p.m.). It has been scheduled for months. It is my issuenot yours but it does make it hard for me to do the level of prep required for P&Z
given the enormous impact this proposal has on my property. So, a couple of asks.
. . :
From the web site, I understand that P&Z guides projects based on: 1) quality ofthe proposal in terms of supporting GT's future, 2) preservation of the community'shistorical and environmental features, and 3) alignment with the city'scomprehensive plan (plan 2030). And that, you use the UDC as the guide foradherence. Is that correct?
Also, I am looking for information on the following::
1. Can you provide me the materials you have to date? Do you expect more
information or a revised rendering?
2. Can you list the areas where the proposal is out of compliance with the UDCand/or asking for exception?3. Can you share with me the parking space count? - I read 61 spaces but count53.4. Can you provide me the scope of the evaluation regarding traffic and parkingimpact?
Lastly, what is the best way to share:
1. The concerns I have for the proposal - I am not in favor of the infill proposal -
it is too big (3 stories) and too out of character with the old town overlay
district, etc. (See attached - it is based on the last rendering I have but theessential concerns remain.) And, I am concerned about the re-zoning to highdensity/multi-family. It is not aligned with the intent of the space and moreimportantly, does not reflect the Plan 2030 intent of multi-family housinglocations.2. My preferences - I prefer to have the space used for community/healthservices (like the AA house) that is in keeping with the historical intent of the
land/building and something that adheres to normal business hours (8 a.m.-5
p.m. M-F). . . even extended business hours like the AA house (6 a.m. - 10
p.m. 7 days/week).
3. The feedback from the community - I have had a booth at Market Days thelast 2 months and have shared the proposal and location. I have secured over200 signatures opposing the building and am collecting more.
I will be at P&Z and take my 3+ minutes. I will also send in the comment card sent
Page 90 of 98
by you regarding the proposal (given my proximity to the space). What else should
I be doing to have my concerns heard. . . ?
If you would like to talk real time or meet face to face, I will make myself availableup until Sunday when I need to leave for Dallas. 831-901-4011.Thanks,
Pam
Pamela Mitchell
1017 S. College Street
Click here to report this email as spam.
Page 91 of 98
Know Georgetown
Grow Georgetown
Georgetown Community Preservation Initiative
1
Initiative: 605 E. University Talking Points
Overview: Developer, Mr. Lee McIntosh is proposing a development on 605 E. University. The proposal is for
a 33-unit, 3-story apartment building. Currently, the site contains the old Georgetown hospital and
Community Center.
Issues and Concerns:
1. Summary – The key issues are:
a. Mis-alignment with the character of the Old Town Overlay District
b. Size of the building – 3 stories in a neighborhood of mostly 1-story, single family homes
c. Traffic and safety – a) congestion on 29 and no turn lane, b) traffic on College St. and Walnut St.
given proximity to the elementary school, c) College St. though fare for city trucks and concerns
over street parking
2. Consistency with the Old Town Overlay District/Neighborhood
a. The current design outlines:
i. A new 3 story building - in a neighborhood of mostly 1-story historic or older homes
ii. No set-back off of University, College St. or Walnut St. - Educational and religious
buildings along University are mostly 2 stories and have compliant set-back’s from the
street
b. The apartment building has 33 units, 56 bedrooms
i. Given the proximity to Southwestern University, the building is expected to have a
higher number of occupants than bedrooms and mostly of college age
ii. Activity, noise, and lights are expected to be more intense and invasive than the
remainder of the single family residence/neighborhood
1. Note: as a C1 zoning plat, business is expected to be conducted on the site with
standard business hours.
iii. By nature of the building being for apartments, the tenets are transitory and not
expected to be invested in the community of GT
3. Unified Design Standards Compliance
a. The current design is inconsistent with UDC design standards
i. Height – over 35 feet
ii. Set-back – not complying with city regulations regarding street set-backs
iii. Buffer – no buffer between building/parking lot and nearest single-family residences
iv. Parking – insufficient parking given nature of renters
Page 92 of 98
Know Georgetown
Grow Georgetown
Georgetown Community Preservation Initiative
2
b. Note: There is no current information on parking lot lighting, building lighting, landscaping/tree
retention, etc.
4. Traffic and Safety
a. Given the shortage of parking spaces and the expectation that there will be more residence
than bedrooms, tenets and tenet guests are expected to use College St. and Walnut St. as
overflow.
i. Rt 29/University traffic will create more congestion on Rt 29 as well as pushing more
traffic onto side streets and through neighborhoods
ii. There is no turn lane off of Rt 29/University or light at College St. or Walnut St.
1. Congestion on Rt 29/University is expected (at best)
2. Occurrence of accidents are likely (at worst)
iii. A total of 3 additional parking spaces are available for guests which means tenets will be
parking on College St. or Walnut St.
1. College St. and Walnut St are both school zoned
2. College is a major though fare for city waste trucks, Suddenlink maintenance
trucks, and business traffic (GT Parks and Rec, Suddenlink, Recycle Station)
iv. There is no side walk on Walnut St.
5. Historical Relevance
a. The site is the location of the old Georgetown Hospital (circa 1923) and the Community Center
(circa pre-1965).
b. Note: The old Georgetown Hospital is in a nearly unrecoverable state of disrepair and would
require significant investment to refurbish to standard.
6. Consistency with the Master Plan 2030
a. The GT Master Plan 2030 calls for multi-family housing but not for the 605 E. University site
7. Design
a. The design of the building is not reflective of the historic nature of the neighborhood
8. Precedence
a. On the east side of 35/in old town GT, there are no other multi-family dwellings over 2 stories
b. The proposal is one of several 3-4 story buildings being proposed in or immediately around the
Old Town/Historic Overlay District.
Page 93 of 98
Know Georgetown
Grow Georgetown
Georgetown Community Preservation Initiative
3
Status and Next Steps:
Step/Activity Status Notes/Action Items
GT-CPI
Awareness
• Petition drive – asking for signatures from
Georgetown residents and patrons for submission
of Planning and Zoning, HARC, and City Council
• Notification to GT community regarding project
and upcoming activities
• Saturday, 9/12 – join us at
booth 811 for Market Days.
We will be talking to the
community and securing
signatures for the petition
Demolition • Application for demolition has been received by
the city and approved by HARC
• Demolition can occur as early as 9/23/2015
• Concerns can be submitted
until 9/15
Rezoning • The site will need to be combined (there are
currently 3-4 plats and rezoned from C-1 to multi-
family
• The application is not yet complete and has not
been scheduled for planning and zoning
• Planning and Zoning Hearing:
Tuesday, November 3, 2015 at
6 p.m
In-fill • Certificate of Design was submitted and reviewed
by HARC 6/25/15. It was denied.
• Mr. McIntosh submitted an appeal to the City
Council.
• City Council Hearing: Tuesday,
November 24, 2015 at 6 p.m.
Location
Page 94 of 98
Know Georgetown
Grow Georgetown
Georgetown Community Preservation Initiative
4
Rendering of proposed building
Neighborhood. . .
Page 95 of 98
Page 96 of 98
From:RUSSELL
To:Mike Elabarger
Subject:Fw: Rezoning of 605 East University from Commercial to Residential
Date:Sunday, October 25, 2015 9:32:56 PM
From: RUSSELL <texanaprop@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 2:25 AM
To: planning@georgetown.org
Subject: Rezoning of 605 East University from Commercial to Residential
To: Mike Elabarger
From: Ralph Russell
Date: October 25, 2015
Regarding: rezoning 605 East University Ave from Commercial ro Residential.
I am very much opposed to this rezoning. I am in favor of leaving the property commercial.
It is more beneficial to me at 604 E. University, across the street, to leave it commercial.
Commercial properties benefit other commercial properties. An apartment complex on
University Ave in that location would not fit with the character of the unique commercial
neighborhood there. Nor would it balance with the appearance of the area including the
classical older homes to the East and West on University Ave.
We have a very unique little island of commercial properties. If developed in the right way,
this property could be made into a beautiful area of small shops, restaurants and businesses
or offices very beneficial to me and much needed for that part of town.
An apartment complex does not belong there. Let's say no to this one.
Ralph Russell
Owner, 604 E. University Ave. Georgetown TX.
Resident, 1104 River Bend Georgetown, TX
512-869-5880
texanaprop@hotmail.com
Click here to report this email as spam.
Page 97 of 98
From:RUSSELL
To:Mike Elabarger
Subject:Fw: Addendum to Rezoning of 605 East University from Commercial to Residential
Date:Sunday, October 25, 2015 9:50:50 PM
Mike, I wanted to add one additional point. Apartments do not bring in sales tax revenue. It
is not cost effective for the city to allow this change. This is a lucrative location. It would
certainly be an income loss for the city to change the zoning from commercial.
From: RUSSELL <texanaprop@hotmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 2:25 AM
To: planning@georgetown.org
Subject: Rezoning of 605 East University from Commercial to Residential
To: Mike Elabarger
From: Ralph Russell
Date: October 25, 2015
Regarding: rezoning 605 East University Ave from Commercial ro Residential.
I am very much opposed to this rezoning. I am in favor of leaving the property commercial.
It is more beneficial to me at 604 E. University, across the street, to leave it commercial.
Commercial properties benefit other commercial properties. An apartment complex on
University Ave in that location would not fit with the character of the unique commercial
neighborhood there. Nor would it balance with the appearance of the area including the
classical older homes to the East and West on University Ave.
We have a very unique little island of commercial properties. If developed in the right way,
this property could be made into a beautiful area of small shops, restaurants and businesses
or offices very beneficial to me and much needed for that part of town.
An apartment complex does not belong there. Let's say no to this one.
Ralph Russell
Owner, 604 E. University Ave. Georgetown TX.
Resident, 1104 River Bend Georgetown, TX
512-869-5880
texanaprop@hotmail.com
Click here to report this email as spam.
Page 98 of 98