HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 02.26.2019 WorkshopN otice of M eeting of the
Governing B ody of the
C ity of Georgetown, Texas
F ebruary 2 6, 2 01 9
The Georgetown City Council will meet on February 26, 2019 at 3:00 P M at 101 East 7th Street - City
Council Chambers
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (AD A).
If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the
AD A, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. P lease
contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512)
930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King J r. Street, Georgetown, TX 78626 for additional
information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Policy De ve lopme nt/Re vie w Workshop -
A P resentation and discussion of the proposed Budget Calendar for the FY2020 Annual Budget and
Five year CIP -- P aul Diaz, Budget Manager
B P resentation and discussion of the findings of the technical studies of the 2030 Housing Element
-- Sofia Nelson, P lanning Director and Susan Watkins, AIC P, Housing Coordinator
C P resentation, update and discussion on the 2018/19 Unified Development Code (U D C)
Amendment Review P rocess -- Sofia Nelson, CN U-A, P lanning Director
D P resentation, discussion and direction to staff regarding waiving fees for temporary signage for
501c(3) non-profit organizations and the City of Georgetown’s current P olicy for Waiving Fees
for Major and Minor City-Sponsored Special Events -- David Morgan, City Manager
E P resentation and discussion regarding the Convention and Visitors Bureau’s (C VB) upcoming
Tourism Strategic P lan -- Cari Miller, Tourism Manager
Exe cutive Se ssion
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes,
Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the
regular session.
F Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney
Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the
attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items
- Settlement Agreement related to the Berry Creek Highlands M U D
Sec. 551.086: Certai n P ubl i c P ow er Uti l i ti es: Competi ti ve M atters
- P urchase P ower Update -- J im Briggs, General Manager of Utilities
Sec. 551.087: Del i berati on Regardi ng Economi c Devel opment Negoti ati ons
- P roject Deliver
Sec. 551:074: P ersonnel Matters
City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal J udge: Consideration of the
appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
- City Attorney
Page 1 of 134
Adjournme nt
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that
this Notice of Meeting was pos ted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet,
G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily ac cessible to the general public at all times, on the
_____ day of _________________, 2019, at __________, and remained s o posted for at
leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said meeting.
__________________________________
R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary
Page 2 of 134
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
February 26, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion of the proposed Budget Calendar for the FY2020 Annual Budget and Five year CIP -- P aul
Diaz, Budget Manager
I T EM S UMMARY:
Discussion and direction relating to the FY2020 Calendar.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
none
S UBMI T T ED BY:
P aul Diaz, Budget Manager
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
Budget C alendar
Page 3 of 134
FY2020 Annual Budget
FY2020 Proposed Budget
Calendar
Page 4 of 134
FY2020 Annual Budget
FY2020 Proposed Budget Calendar
•Feb 15th –CIP Kick Off
•March 27th –Base Budget/Request Kick Off
•April 3rd –CIP Coordination Meeting
•April 19th –Base Budgets are due
•May 1st –Departmental meetings with City
Manager
•May –Departmental CIP review with Boards
Page 5 of 134
FY2020 Annual Budget
FY2020 Proposed Budget Calendar
•Resource Allocations:
–Growth
–Major projects
•Public Safety/Body Cams/ Fire Station 6 & 7
•Electric Updates
•Solid Waste/Transfer Station
•Facilities/Space needs assessment
•CIP
•Legislative Changes (SB2 & HB2)
Page 6 of 134
FY2020 Annual Budget
FY2020 Proposed Budget Calendar
•Fee Review Across Various Service Areas
•Cost of Living Comparisons in the Region
Page 7 of 134
FY2020 Annual Budget
FY2020 Proposed Budget Calendar
•July 16th and July 17th Budget Workshops
*SPECIAL MEETINGS*
•Aug 6th *SPECIAL MEETING*: City Manager’s
Proposed Budget
•Aug 13th: Normal Meeting (No budget item
scheduled)
Page 8 of 134
FY2020 Annual Budget
FY2020 Proposed Budget Calendar
•Sep 3rd: *SPECIAL MEETING*1st public
hearing on tax rate
•Sep 10th: Normal Meeting: 2nd public hearing
on tax rate , 1st reading of the budget, 1st
reading of the tax rate
•Sep. 24th: Normal Meeting: 2nd reading of the
budget, 2nd reading of the tax rate
Page 9 of 134
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
February 26, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion of the findings of the technical studies of the 2030 Housing Element -- Sofia Nelson,
P lanning Director and Susan Watkins, AICP, Housing Coordinator
I T EM S UMMARY:
B ackground
On M ay 24 , 2016 City Council directed c ompletio n of an update to the Housing Element and also a Ho using Feasibility
Study. Council asked to e valuate the City’s housing needs of three populatio ns: low income, workfo rc e and senior. City
Council appropriated funds in the Fiscal Year 2 01 7 budget and approve d a contract fo r services which included an update
to the Housing Eleme nt and Housing Feasibility Study, hereinafter re fe rre d to as the “Housing Toolkit” o r ‘Toolkit”. The
update to the Housing Element and the development of a Toolkit within the overall 2030 Compre he nsive P lan Update will
align the City’s development, fiscal and land use strategies. During the December 11, 2018 City Council workshop, the
project team presented Council a review o f the existing land use goals and a summary o f the public input to date. Council
recommended that a housing specific goal be considered. At the J anuary 3 , 20 19 Steering Committee meeting, after
reviewing the e xisting land use go als, the committee found that recent public input themes related to housing were not
included and therefore not reflective of recent community input.
At the J anuary 10 , 2019 J oint Sessio n of City Council and P lanning & Zoning Commission, the group arrive d at
consensus on a Housing specific goal:“Ensure access to diverse housing options and amenities and preserve existing
neighborhoods for residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.”
Included in the newly formed housing goal are three specific themes: affordability, diversity and preservation. Together,
the three themes provide a fuller community ho using strategy that preserves existing housing sto ck and accommodates
future needs by creating greater c onsumer choice by 2030. The 2 03 0 Housing Element uses the data from the technical
study and concerns from the public input to inform the policies for each of the areas.
Community Development Strategies (C DS) was hired as a sub-consultant to Freese & Nicho ls, the prime consultant for
the 2030 P lan Update, to complete a technical study of housing. The components of the technical study consisted of a a)
Housing Inventory, b) Subarea P rofiles and an c) Affordability Analysis. Additional details are outlined in the attached
memorandum and exhibits.
Requested Di recti on
Staff is se e king direction o n the drafted 2030 P lan Update goals and dire c tion to the Steering Committee and Housing
Advisory Board on policy statements for the Housing Element of the 2030 P lan.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
None at this time.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Susan Watkins, AIC P, Housing Coordinator
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
S tate of Hous ing Memo (R ead Ahead)
Exhibit 1- S ubarea P rofiles
Exhibit 2 - Housing Input R eport
P resentation
Page 10 of 134
1
2/26/19
Re: State of Housing Background Materials
Background
On May 24, 2016 Council directed completion of an update to the Housing Element and also a
Housing Feasibility Study. Council asked to evaluate the City’s housing needs of three
populations: low income, workforce and senior. City Council appropriated funds in the Fiscal
Year 2017 budget and approved a contract for services which included an update to the
Housing Element and Housing Feasibility Study, hereinafter referred to as the “Housing
Toolkit” or ‘Toolkit”. The update to the Housing Element and the development of a Toolkit
within the overall 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update will align the City’s development, fiscal
and land use strategies.
Figure 1 - Housing's Role in Future Land Use
2030 Plan Update goal development
During the December 11, 2018 City Council workshop, the project team presented Council a
review of the existing land use goals and a summary of the public input to date. Council
recommended that a housing specific goal be considered. At the January 3, 2019 Steering
Committee meeting, after reviewing the existing land use goals, the committee found that
recent public input themes related to housing were not included and therefore not reflective of
recent community input.
At the January 10, 2019 Joint Session of City Council and Planning & Zoning Commission, the
group arrived at consensus on a Housing specific goal:
“Ensure access to diverse housing options and amenities and preserve existing neighborhoods for
residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.”
Page 11 of 134
2
2030 Housing Element Update
Included in the newly formed housing goal are three specific themes: affordability, diversity
and preservation. Together, the three themes provide a fuller community housing strategy that
preserves existing housing stock and accommodates future needs by creating greater consumer
choice by 2030. The 2030 Housing Element uses the data from the technical study and concerns
from the public input to inform the policies for each of the areas.
Figure 2- Comprehensive Housing Plan
Key Terms Used in this Report
• Affordable housing - regardless of income level,
affordable housing is housing for which all
combined expenses—mortgage or rent, utilities,
insurance and taxes—cost no more than 30% of
gross household income.
• Area Median Income (AMI) – used by HUD to
determine eligibility for housing programs. This
calculation is used in this report to reflect regional
conditions and the household incomes eligible for
federally subsidized units. The AMI for Williamson
County is used to calculate eligibility in Georgetown.
• Median Household Income – half of households earn below and half earn above
• $81,818 WilCo (2016 US Census ACS 1 year estimate)
• $67,379 Georgetown (2016 US Census ACS 1 year estimate)
• Cost Burden – paying more than 30% of gross income toward housing
Affordability
DiversityPreservation
Support existing
Neighborhoods
Increase
consumer choice
Figure 3- Household expenses
Page 12 of 134
3
• Low-income (Industry standard)- Often households that make 50% or 30% or less than
AMI
• Workforce (City of Georgetown UDC) - Workforce Housing Developments are available
for those whose incomes are less than or equal to 80% AMI
• Senior (Industry standards) - Can be age restricted at 55 or 62, Census data addresses
65+
• Planning Area - Geographical study area that includes the City limits of Georgetown
and the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ)
Technical Studies
Community Development Strategies (CDS) was hired as a sub-consultant to Freese & Nichols,
the prime consultant for the 2030 Plan Update, to complete a technical study of housing. The
components of the technical study consisted of a a) Housing Inventory, b) Subarea Profiles and
an c) Affordability Analysis as detailed below.
Housing Inventory
Purpose
The Housing Inventory serves as a full accounting of housing units and households in the City’s
planning area. The inventory provides the type, age, lot size, tenure, and household
composition of the city’s housing stock. This report tallies and catalogues the various types of
housing existing in Georgetown. The Inventory has two primary data sources: (1) the
Williamson Central Appraisal District (WCAD) and (2) Nielson / Claritas, a private sector
provider of demographic data estimates based on recent data available from the Federal Bureau
of the Census and other sources. The geographic Planning Area covered includes the entirety of
the City’s incorporated jurisdiction plus its extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). While the Nielsen /
Claritas data is ascribed generally to the year 2018, the WCAD data is specifically ascribed to a
download period of June-July 2018. The inventory includes maps for comparison of the
characteristics across the city. CDS delivered a Housing Inventory in July 2018. The information
was presented to the Housing Advisory Board on July 23, 2018. Additional information was
presented to the Comp Plan Steering Committee on November 1, 2018.
Key Findings
The report concludes that housing product options not evenly distributed across the planning
area and there are decreasing options among lower price points.
The Planning area has the following characteristics:
Page 13 of 134
4
Housing Unit Characteristics
• 16.6% MF/83.4% SF
• Median home size 1,994 sq ft., Average home size 2,159 sw. ft.
• Median lot size .23 acre, Average lot size 1.17
• 33,842 total units
• Median Homes Value (excluding multi-family) $269,593
• Average Value (excluding multi-family) $309,797
• $146 per sq./ft. (median 2018)
• Median Year built (all units) 2004
Household Characteristics
• 22.4% Renters/77.6% Owners
• Average size 2.47 persons
• Homeowner average of 9 years, Renter occupied 3 years
• Median Household income is $81,219 (94% AMI), Average is $103,384
Subarea Profiles
Purpose
The subarea profiles provide a basis for making policy recommendations through an
understanding of housing as it exists across the city. The granularity of the subarea profiles
allows the City to make recommendations for specific geographies or recommendations that
may apply to the entire study area:
•Housing diversity (type, lot size)
•Housing choice (square footage, price point)
•Historic cost trends (MLS sales and rental data 2008-2018)
•Existing affordable housing stock (market rate and subsidized)
The Subarea map consists of 14 areas. The map was developed using housing characteristics of
housing age, type, density and value. Other considerations included well known boundaries
such as neighborhoods Sun City (age-restricted), zoning overlays such as the Old Town /
Downtown, Census Block Group boundaries and elementary school zones although the zones
had limited impact on the subarea boundaries. The subareas are not intended to define
“neighborhoods”. The review of housing characteristics for the subareas included Multiple
Listing Service (MLS) sales information from the Austin Board of Realtors, US Census data and
field research.
The Subarea information was presented at:
• August 20, 2018 Housing Advisory Board meeting
• September 6, 2018 Steering Committee meeting #4
• September 18, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Page 14 of 134
5
Findings
• Some subareas have no or little housing product diversity or rental options. Other
subareas such as those in the center city have a wide variety of housing types and ages.
• Older duplexes, four-plexes and multi-family properties play an important role in
affordable housing stock.
• Neighborhood change is a concern for some existing residents.
• Household characteristics are depicted geographically and varies widely across
subareas. A summary for each of the subareas is attached to this memo (Attachment 1 –
Subarea Profiles).
Affordability Analysis
Purpose
The Affordability Analysis provides a general picture of the need for affordable rental and for-
sale housing in the Georgetown Planning Area defined as the City of Georgetown City Limits
and its extra-territorial jurisdiction. The report is broken into three parts: Affordable Housing
Demand (including regional employment data), Affordable Housing Supply, Analysis and
Recommendations.
Housing Demand and Supply information was presented at the following meetings:
• September 24, 2018 Housing Advisory Board meeting
• October 15, 2018 Housing Advisory Board meeting
• November 1, 2018 Steering Committee #5
• November 6, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Findings
The bullets below represent the generalized findings of the 11/1 Steering Committee:
• Rental Demand
Housing is an economic development issue
Surprised by high renter cost burden
Surprised Georgetown AMI is lower than WilCo
Surprised that there are a significant amount of more renters are cost burdened than
owners
The data suggests there is a segment of the population for whom Georgetown is
unaffordable
• For Sale Demand
Do Sun City numbers skew planning area numbers?
Lower income is more cost burdened
Surprised that anyone under $20K could own a home
Not enough houses for $50K incomes
When looking at regular employment you can’t afford the job
Income does not equal ownership
Page 15 of 134
6
• Rental Supply
Send to Council: Georgetown needs more 2 plex, 4 plex
Used to be no more than 20% class A, we have 40% because of cost to build
Lower rents for single family than expected
Duplexes = affordability
Surprising that more subsidized units than Class B
• For Sale Supply
Surprised nothing under $399K west of I-35
Townhouses/condos play a role in the market
Density is the answer
# of units under $275K in next 12-18 months, making some progress
Surprised to know wages not growing as fast as housing costs
2008-2018 Wages not growing as fast as housing costs increase UDC, increase cost
Demand
Housing demand is influenced by regional employment trends, household income, age, ability
and desire to rent or own, among other factors. CDS analyzed employment data for the region
using the Williamson County geography.
Regional Employment trends
Nearly half of all jobs (81k/165k) in Williamson County are in industry sectors with lower
average wages, these sectors are exhibiting growth in overall jobs (Texas Workforce Commission
Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) – August 2018)
• Retail Trade
• Educational Services
• Accommodation and Food Services
• Health Care and Social Assistance
Strong growth in high-wage sectors in Williamson County (Texas Workforce Commission
Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW) – August 2018)
• Manufacturing
• Professional and Technical Services
Life Sciences, including Health Care, has been identified as a target industry for Georgetown to
pursue. While success in this pursuit would bring a number of higher-wage jobs, it will also
grow the number of lower-wage jobs associated with Health Care, which has a wide range of
wages for that sector. (City of Georgetown, Target Industry And Workforce Analysis, 2017)
Page 16 of 134
7
Rental Supply
The last four years since 2014 have included generally rising rents in the greater Austin region,
though the increases appear to be plateauing since 2017. This may be because overall supply has
been increasing with new property deliveries, nearly all of which have been considered Class A,
since land and construction costs generally limit the financial feasibility of new unsubsidized
development to only upscale projects. The market rate (non-subsidized or income-restricted)
multifamily properties in Georgetown that supply more affordable rental units either fall into
the Class “B” designation by the real estate investment community or are unrated. They tend to
be older properties (the newest dates to 2001). Lease rates for one-bedroom units tends to range
from $750 to $900 per month. Two-bedroom units range from approximately $900 to $1,100,
with such units at a few properties slightly higher priced. The total number of units in the listed
properties is 1,293.
Georgetown also has a significant supply of multifamily properties that have been publicly
subsidized in some fashion (federal tax credits, public housing, etc.) and have income
restrictions on tenants to remain affordable to lower income residents. Three such projects are
under construction, two of which will offer market rate units. Some properties are age-restricted
to seniors. The total number of units in these properties is 1,916, including the under
construction properties, and of which 1,697 units are income-restricted. Multifamily apartments
are not the only source of rental units in the Georgetown Planning Area. Housing consumers
also look for individual or small-scale rentals. Unfortunately, comprehensive data is not
available to summarize and analyze these transactions. A particular type of rental unit in
Georgetown for which no large transaction or listing sample was available is the small-scale
multi-unit property (mostly quadplexes) and duplexes. These are mostly concentrated in
neighborhoods on just south of the historic core, just west of I-35 off Leander Road, and in
Figure 4 – Regional industry trends, wages and percentage of employment
Page 17 of 134
8
relatively older residential areas off Williams Drives also just west of I-35. A small sample of
listings from field research indicates that typical rents in these properties may be comparable to
Class B market rate multifamily units for the same number of bedrooms.
Type Percentage of Units
Class A 37%
Class B 20%
Rent Restricted 27%
Duplex 10%
Fourplex 6%
For Sale Supply
Market data for the Georgetown Planning Area from the MLS transactions in recent years show
that there is very little excess inventory of existing homes available; this is evident from the
relatively small difference between listing price and sales price, and also the short average days
on market (less than 40, down from a typical 70 to 90 a few years earlier). The sales volumes in
the bottom two price ranges, below $275,000 (1,230 total sales), are a dramatic drop from
previous years. In the 2014-2016 period, sales in these two categories totaled 3,087. These lower
price categories represent “entry level” prices for first-time buyers at or below area median
income (approximately $67,000 and $82,000 for Georgetown and Williamson County
respectively as of the 2016 American Community Survey – see the analysis in the next section).
However, the area housing market is rapidly shrinking the available inventory of such homes.
Figure 5 – Multi-family rental percentages by product type
Figure 6 – Multi-family rental percentages by product type
Page 18 of 134
9
Sun City Factor
One of the frequently asked questions when housing data was presented in 2018 was how much
Sun City skewed any city wide statistics. CDS ran a report that was able to separate the
geography that approximately encompasses Sun City (eight Census block groups) from the rest
of Georgetown. The findings are below:
• The age restriction for living in Sun City is that one person in the household must be at least
55 years of age. Of the 7,787 households represented in the eight Census block groups, 6,419
(or 82%) of the households are headed by persons 65 years or older as of 2016.
• Included in the overall Georgetown tally, 65 and older households account for
approximately 44% of total households. Removing Sun City, this share drops to
approximately 25%.
• Because Sun City is dominated by owner households, its impact on renter data for the city
overall is small. A similar share of total renter households in the Sun City Block Groups are
cost-burdened as compared to the city excluding Sun City.
• A lower share of Sun City owner households have a mortgage than in Georgetown overall.
This is likely because many Sun City residents purchased their homes with cash, having
equity from previous homes they owned. Interestingly, a higher share of Sun City owner
households with mortgages were estimated to be cost-burdened than in the rest of the city.
• Sun City accounted for a very high share, 69%, of all over-65 owner households in
Georgetown. Of these households, a higher share were cost-burdened than in the
remainder of the city – approximately 25% to 18%.
Page 19 of 134
10
Analysis & Recommendations
The current housing needs for the three groups requested by Council are presented below.
The chart above illustrates the number of Georgetown households at each of the HUD defined
income levels using the Williamson County Area Median Income of $77,800 for 2016. The
American Community Survey (ACS) conducted by the Census provides the number of
households by income level for the City of Georgetown. That figure can then be apportioned to
the AMI levels to provide an estimate of number of households by AMI level. The ACS 2016 1
Year estimate for the City of Georgetown was a total of 25,235 households, with 10,271 of those
households headed by a householder over the age of 65.
Low Income households
The findings for the approximately 3,000 low income households with incomes less than 30% of
the Area Median Income were that:
• 69% of renters (1,100/1,600 HHs) are cost burdened
• 68% of owners (950/1,400 HHs) are cost burdened
Possible policies to address this high cost burden include policies to increase rental inventory
and preserve homeownership for low income households.
Workforce households
The findings for the approximately 8,000 workforce households with incomes between 30% and
80% of the Area Median Income were that:
• 80% renters (2,000/2,500 HHs) are cost burdened
• 42% owners (2,300/5,500 HHs) are cost burdened
• Limited supply for sale under $250K
Page 20 of 134
11
Possible policies to address this high cost burden and limited supply of affordable for sale
housing include policies to increase rental inventory, preserve homeownership, and increase
homeownership opportunities for workforce households.
Senior households
The findings for the approximately 10,000 senior households with incomes between 30% and
80% of the Area Median Income were that:
• 67% renters (1,000/1,500 HHs) are cost burdened
• 24% owners (2,000/8,500 HHs) are cost burdened
Possible policies to address this high cost burden include policies to increase rental inventory
and preserve homeownership for senior households.
Future Housing Need
The future needs for housing are projected using the anticipated growth rate for Williamson
County from the Texas State Data Center for the year 2030.
Page 21 of 134
12
The above chart provides a simple analysis of possible housing units needed in 2030 to
accommodate the City’s 2016 household population by income based a 55% growth rate, as
described in the preceding figure.
Public Input
One of the seven themes that emerged from the extensive public input conducted during 2018
was to focus on housing & affordability. A summary of the public input from the various
outreach opportunities can be found in the attached Housing Public Input Report (Attachment
2).
Page 22 of 134
SUBAREA PROFILES
Page 23 of 134
PURPOSE OF SUBAREA PROFILES
•Basis for making policy recommendations by understanding:
•Housing diversity (type, lot size)
•Housing choice (square footage, price point)
•Historic trends (2008-2018)
•Existing affordable housing stock (market rate and subsidized)
Page 24 of 134
PLANNING AREA
Page 25 of 134
SUBAREA MAP DEVELOPMENT
•Housing considerations
1.Housing age
2.Housing type / density
3.Housing value
•Other considerations
•Sun City (age-restricted)
•Old Town / Downtown overlays
•Census Block Group boundaries
•Elementary school zones (limited impact)
•Not meant to define “neighborhoods”
Page 26 of 134
PLANNING AREA HOUSING DATA
Page 27 of 134
PLANNING AREA SALES PRICES 2008-2018
Page 28 of 134
PLANNING AREA HOUSING PRICES 2008-2018
Page 29 of 134
PLANNING AREA FINDINGS
•16.6% MF Smaller lot sizes and square footage
•$146 per sq/ft (median 2018)
•22.4% Renters
•Median Household income is $81,219 (94% AMI)
•Homeowners average of 9 years
•Average household size 2.47 persons
•Median home size 1,994 sq ft.
•Median lot size .23 acre
Page 30 of 134
Characteristic Subarea 1 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)33 17
Renters (%)51 22
Median Household Income $50,440 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)59 94
Tenure –Owner 11 9
Tenure -Renter 3 3
Household size 2.40 2.47
Median Lot size .19 .23
Price per sq. ft.$192 $146
SUBAREA 1 FINDINGS
Page 31 of 134
Characteristic Subarea 2 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)83 17
Renters (%)79 22
Median Household Income $44,523 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)52 94
Tenure –Owner 24 9
Tenure -Renter 3 3
Household size 1.81 2.47
Median Lot size .21 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$183 $146
SUBAREA 2 FINDINGS
Page 32 of 134
SUBAREA 3 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 3 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)25 17
Renters (%)29 22
Median Household Income $80,982 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)94 94
Tenure –Owner 10 9
Tenure -Renter 3 3
Household size 2.89 2.47
Median Lot size .21 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$127 $146
Page 33 of 134
SUBAREA 4 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 4 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)24 17
Renters (%)42 22
Median Household Income $74,805 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)87 94
Tenure –Owner 5 9
Tenure -Renter 2 3
Household size 2.99 2.47
Median Lot size .16 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$132 $146
Page 34 of 134
SUBAREA 5 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 5 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)29 17
Renters (%)42 22
Median Household Income $70,147 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)82 94
Tenure –Owner 11 9
Tenure -Renter 3 3
Household size 2.58 2.47
Median Lot size .17 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$132 $146
Page 35 of 134
SUBAREA 6 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 6 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)32 17
Renters (%)37 22
Median Household Income $66,108 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)77 94
Tenure –Owner 9 9
Tenure -Renter 4 3
Household size 2.34 2.47
Median Lot size .34 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$146 $146
Page 36 of 134
SUBAREA 7 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 7 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)46 17
Renters (%)6 22
Median Household Income $128,576 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)150 94
Tenure –Owner 7 9
Tenure -Renter 2 3
Household size 2.68 2.47
Median Lot size 1.00 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$156 $146
Page 37 of 134
SUBAREA 8 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 8 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)8 17
Renters (%)7 22
Median Household Income $117,407 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)137 94
Tenure –Owner 9 9
Tenure -Renter 4 3
Household size 2.80 2.47
Median Lot size .23 .23
Price per sq. ft.$127 $146
Page 38 of 134
SUBAREA 9 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 9 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)0 17
Renters (%)5 22
Median Household Income $79,188 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)92 94
Tenure –Owner 10 9
Tenure -Renter 4 3
Household size 1.86 2.47
Median Lot size .19 .23
Price per sq. ft.$163 $146
Page 39 of 134
SUBAREA 10 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 10 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)0 17
Renters (%)16 22
Median Household Income $69,809 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)81 94
Tenure –Owner 10 9
Tenure -Renter 4 3
Household size 2.16 2.47
Median Lot size 1.22 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$170 $146
Page 40 of 134
SUBAREA 11 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 11 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)0 17
Renters (%)5 22
Median Household Income $106,641 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)124 94
Tenure –Owner 7 9
Tenure -Renter 7 3
Household size 2.75 2.47
Median Lot size 1.17 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$170 $146
Page 41 of 134
SUBAREA 12 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 12 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)0 17
Renters (%)6 22
Median Household Income $124,799 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)145 94
Tenure –Owner 3 9
Tenure -Renter 2 3
Household size 2.46 2.47
Median Lot size 1.07 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$149 $146
Page 42 of 134
SUBAREA 13 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 13 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)0 17
Renters (%)46 22
Median Household Income $77,446 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)90 94
Tenure –Owner 11 9
Tenure -Renter 3 3
Household size 2.56 2.47
Median Lot size 3.01 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$261 $146
Page 43 of 134
SUBAREA 14 FINDINGS
Characteristic Subarea 14 Planning
Area
Multi-family (%)2 17
Renters (%)18 22
Median Household Income $72,385 $81,219
Area Median Income (%)84 94
Tenure –Owner 10 9
Tenure -Renter 2 3
Household size 2.85 2.47
Median Lot size 1.00 .23
Price per (sq. ft.)$143 $146
Page 44 of 134
1
Public Input Report – Housing
Community input related to housing has been gathered through a city wide survey and
engagement day, two real estate professional specific events and from the Steering Committee
of the 2030 Plan Update. The input is summarized by event below. Future opportunities for
additional input on housing will be available.
On the Table Georgetown
The City hosted a citywide Engagement Day on Tuesday, October 2, 2018, which coincided with
National Night Out to provide residents an opportunity to give their ideas about the future of
Georgetown’s growth and development. Facilitated discussion groups were planned
throughout the day across the city so that individuals could participate at their convenience.
Materials were also made available online so that people could host discussions at their home or
business. Each discussion table was asked to consolidate their ideas into a one page summary
sheet. Of the 858 total comments collected, 71 addressed housing and affordability. A sample of
the housing related comments are below categorized by the three Housing Element themes.
Affordability
• A need for affordable housing in Georgetown.
• Rising housing prices have aided in creating a high cost of living, increasing to the point
where many residents feel they might not be able to live in Georgetown in the near
future.
• Use of incentives to help create a more affordable community.
• Providing incentives to developers to provide more affordable housing.
• Providing incentives to City employees to encourage and allow them to live in the City.
• Affordable housing with rental and home buying is not only affecting low income but
also medium income individuals and families
• Hard to live in Georgetown on a single income.
Preservation
• Gentrification is creating affordability issues
• Gentrification has impacted current residents in a negative manner
• Cost of living is increasing in town and it is difficult for people who have been here to
stay.
• Concerned too expensive to live here for much longer
Diversity
• Not enough variety of housing types within the City.
• Townhomes and apartments are housing developments that could be implemented in
the City.
• More diverse housing types are needed.
• There is slow growth of multi-resident/high density residential buildings. Need more of
these.
Page 45 of 134
2
Survey #1 – Question #5
The City conducted an online survey as initial outreach of the 2030 Plan Update asking
participants what Georgetown should look like in the year 2030. This question allowed an open
field for the respondent to enter their own comments. A sample of the housing related
comments are below categorized by the three themes addressed by the Housing Element. Of the
1,323 open ended comments, 18 addressed housing and affordability directly.
Affordability
• Affordable housing needed to make sure everyone feels welcome, not the case currently
• Affordability has changed in 10-15 years
Preservation
• Maintain existing core neighborhoods and downtown areas. Infill and expansion
construction should be compatible with neighboring properties.
Diversity
• Afford to purchase a home and stay their whole life
• Mixed use development like Mueller
• Embrace everyone
• Expand with mixed-use and a variety of housing types/sizes.
• More dense but still a welcoming community. Pride for historic assets, and a place for
people of all ages.
Page 46 of 134
3
Real Estate Roundtable
On June 26, 2018, the City of Georgetown met with members of the local real estate,
development and finance community to discuss housing trends in the City and region. The
following five topic areas emerged from their discussions:
Affordability
•Rising costs of development
•Issue for first-time home buyers
•Demand for <$50k income
•Austin MSA sprawl
Amenities
•Downtown appealing
•Sense of place
•Neighborhood retail/services
•Aesthetics, amenities, and character
•Trails, parks, and natural areas are desirable
Infrastructure
•Continue to address traffic congestion
•Walkability, bikeability, and connectivity are considerations
•Regulations make (re)development difficult
Housing Types
•Higher density is a potential solution to affordability
•Not currently priced for the target renter/buyer
•Demand for duplex, townhomes, condos, patio homes
Healthcare/Seniors
•Large supply for seniors currently
•Rising healthcare costs make affordability more important
•Medical access is important
Page 47 of 134
4
WilCo Realtors Association
On September 18, 2018, the City of Georgetown met with 67 members of the Williamson County
Association of Realtors to discuss relevant elements of the 2030 Plan, present key trends from
the State of the City, and solicit input on existing conditions within the real estate market.
About half (49%) of the participants have been in the real estate industry for at least 10 years,
and over a third (35%) have worked in the Georgetown market for at least 10 years.
Participants were asked to identify the top three characteristics that their clients request from a
list of eight options. The most requested characteristics include:
1. Affordability (47%)
2. Schools (37%)
3. Regional access (jobs and medical) (26%)
4. Neighborhood aesthetics and “character”
5. Neighborhood retail and services
Affordability
The price points with the highest demand in Georgetown are $200,000 to 250,000 (41%) and
$250,000-300,000 (32%). When desirable housing options cannot be found within Georgetown,
clients most frequently turn to Hutto and Jarrell.
Diversity
The most difficult housing product to find in Georgetown is condominiums (63%), while 18% of
realtors said townhomes are the most difficult to find.
• 84% said there is not enough housing to meet demand
• 79% said Georgetown’s housing quality meets client expectations
Page 48 of 134
5
Preservation
The realtors were not asked questions related to preservation of existing neighborhoods.
Steering Committee #5
Following a presentation of the supply and demand of for-sale and rental housing, the Steering
Committee was asked to note their findings and key takeaways. Many of the findings from the
rental demand data related to affordability.
Affordability
• Surprised by high renter cost burden
• Surprised Georgetown AMI is lower than WilCo
• Surprised that there are a significant amount of more renters are cost burdened than
owners.
• Regional demand cannot be completely addressed by local supply
• The data suggests there is a segment of the population for whom Georgetown is
unaffordable
• Lower income is more cost burdened.
• Surprised that anyone under $20K could own a home
• Not enough houses for $50K incomes
• Income does not equal ownership
• Lower rents for single family than expected
• 2008-2018 Wages not growing as fast as housing costs
• Surprised to know wages not growing as fast as housing costs
Preservation
• Duplexes = affordability
Diversity
• Send to Council: Georgetown needs more duplex, fourplex
• Surprising that more subsidized units than Class B
• Townhouses/condos play a role in the market
• Density is the answer
• Housing is an economic development issue
• Surprised nothing under $399K west of I-35
• # of units under $275K in next 12-18 months, making some progress
• increase UDC, increase cost
Page 49 of 134
6
Page 50 of 134
2030 PLAN UPDATE
City Council Workshop | 2030 Plan Update | February 26, 2019 Page 51 of 134
PURPOSE
Challenge:
1.Confirm ten 2030 Plan Update goals.
2.Distinguish between 2030 Housing Element Update and
Housing Toolkit.
3.Inform Council on state of housing and housing related
public input.
Outcome:
Direction on the key elements of our 2030 housing goal
(diversity, preservation and affordability) to enable policy drafting.
Page 52 of 134
FEEDBACK WE ARE SEEKING
•Direction on the drafted 2030 Plan Update goals.
•Confirm goals
•Provide direction on needed changes
•Direction to Steering Committee and Housing Advisory Board on policy statements for the
Housing Element of the 2030 Plan.
•Does the City Council seek policy statements encouraging a diversity in housing product
options?
•Does the City Council seek policy statements with the identified elements of preservation
(aging in place, naturally occurring affordable housing, home rehabilitation)?
•Direction on the focus of the affordability component of the Housing Element.
•Which of the following do you seek further focused policies to address a particular
population?
•Low income
•Workforce
•Senior
Page 53 of 134
AGENDA
•Part 1 –Confirming Goals Prepared in Joint Session
•Part 2 –2030 Plan Update
•Part 3 –State of Housing
•Part 4 -Feedback
•Part 5 -Next Steps
Page 54 of 134
PART 1
Confirming Goals Prepared in Joint Session
Page 55 of 134
1.10.2019 JOINT SESSION RECAP
•Joint meeting of City Council
and Planning & Zoning
•Consensus on ten draft goals
Page 56 of 134
GOALS PREPARED IN JOINT SESSION
Promote development patterns with balanced land uses that provide a variety
of well-integrated housing and retail choices, transportation, public facilities,
and recreational options in all parts of Georgetown.
Reinvest in Georgetown’s existing neighborhoods and commercial areas to
build on previous City efforts.
Provide a development framework that guides fiscally responsible growth,
protects historic community character, demonstrates stewardship of the
environment, and provides for effective provision of public services and
facilities.
Guide, promote, and assist the preservation and rehabilitation of the City’s
historic resources.
Page 57 of 134
Ensure effective communication, outreach, and opportunities for public
participation and community partnerships to foster a strong sense of
community.
Ensure access to diverse housing options and preserve existing
neighborhoods, for residents of all ages, backgrounds and income levels.
Maintain high quality infrastructure, public safety services, and community
facilities.
Actively partner with GISD, Williamson County, other governmental
agencies, and local organizations to leverage resources and promote
innovation.
Maintain and add to the existing quality parks and recreation.
Improve and diversify the transportation network.
GOALS PREPARED IN JOINT SESSION
Page 58 of 134
ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK
•Do you have any additional feedback on the draft goals?
Page 59 of 134
PART 2
•General 2030 Plan Update
•Housing Element Update
•City Council Direction, Community Input, Housing Element ComponentsPage 60 of 134
2030 COMP PLAN UPDATE
Q1
Technical Studies
Housing Element
2018
Goals
Q1 –Q4
Alignment
Public Outreach
2019
Growth Scenarios
Future Land Use
Williams Drive
Gateways
Q2 Q3 -Q4
Implementation Plan
Public Outreach
Public Outreach
Existing Conditions & Technical Studies Policies, Scenario Development, Implementation
Page 61 of 134
HOUSING’S ROLE IN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
Existing
Conditions
2030 Land
Use Goals
Growth
Scenarios
Future Land
Use Element
Recommendations for
housing
% of residential needed
to realize growth
scenarios
Metrics to guide &
evaluate residential
development decisions
Page 62 of 134
CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION 05/24/16
Council directed the completion of:
1.2030 Housing Element Update (Element)
2.Housing Feasibility Study (Toolkit)
Desire to evaluate housing needs in 3 parts:
Senior (range of housing)
Workforce
Low Income
Page 63 of 134
ACTIONS SINCE 05/24/16
Contract approval, kick off (4/2018)
Technical study on housing (Summer 2018)
Public input (Summer 2018)
Joint session for 2030 Plan Update goals
•Housing specific goal
Policies
Implementation (Toolkit)
Vision Statement 2030 Land Use Goals Policies Actions
Page 64 of 134
COMMUNITY INPUT
•On the Table Georgetown
•Affordability is a community issue
•Concern over neighborhood change
•2030 Plan Update Survey #1
•Desire to see more affordable options by 2030
•Preserve existing neighborhoods
•Real Estate Roundtable/Wilco Realtors Association
•Inventory not meeting demand
Page 65 of 134
BOARD & COMMISSION INPUT
•Housing Advisory Board
•Reviewed Housing Element recommendations adopted in
2012
•Steering Committee
•11/1 reviewed housing supply and demand
•Joint Session = Housing specific goal:
•Ensure access to diverse housing options and preserve
existing neighborhoods, for residents of all ages,
backgrounds and income levels.
Page 66 of 134
2030 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
I.Introduction
•Vision/Themes
•2030 Plan Update goals
II.State of Housing
•Inventory -Diversity
•Subareas -Existing neighborhoods
•Housing Analysis
•Needs/gaps for affordability, diversity, and preservation
III.Public input
IV.Policies
•Affordability
•Diversity
•Preservation
Page 67 of 134
COMPREHENSIVE HOUSING STRATEGY
Affordability
DiversityPreservation
Increase consumer choiceSupport existing
Neighborhoods
Page 68 of 134
PART 3
State of Housing-Diversity, Preservation, and Affordability
Page 69 of 134
TECHNICAL STUDY
Housing Inventory Subarea
Profiles
Affordability
Analysis
•Diversity
•Preservation
(Neighborhood)
•Diversity
•Affordability
Page 70 of 134
DIVERSITY
•Planning area (City + ETJ) wide
•Data points for each area:
•Housing products
•Unit counts
•Lot size
•Household composition
•Household income
•Tenure
•Value
•Sales trend
Page 71 of 134
UNIT BREAKDOWN
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
Source: 2018 WCAD
Page 72 of 134
LOT SIZES
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
Source: 2016 5-Year ACS
Page 73 of 134
TRENDS
•Smaller lot sizes for detached single family –35’, 40’, 45’
•7-14 units/acre for attached (The Grove, Rivery) for attached
single family.
•Density caps set at total number of units, moving away from
unit/acre maximums in recent agreement with Wolf Lakes.
•Most class A apartments are seeking 24 units/acre for high
density multi-family (Whitney Crossing).
•Detached multi-family condominium regime developments
(Gardens at Verde Vista)
Page 74 of 134
DIVERSITY
The Grove @ Georgetown = 7 units/acre
Townhomes 25’-45’ wide lots
The Summit @ Rivery = 18 units/acre
Townhomes 24’-30’ wide lots
Page 75 of 134
COMMUNITY INPUT
•More diverse housing types are needed.
•Demand for duplex, townhomes, condos, patio homes.
•Higher density is a potential solution to affordability.
•Not enough availability of housing to meet demand.
Page 76 of 134
KEY FINDINGS
•Housing product options not evenly distributed across
subareas.
•Decreasing options among lower price points.
Page 77 of 134
FEEDBACK
•Do you support policy statements encouraging a diversity in
housing product options?
•Do you support policy statements encouraging a range of
density for residential products at key locations?
•What other elements of diversity do you seek additional
information or policy to be included?
Page 78 of 134
PRESERVATION
•Subarea Profiles
•Year built
•Household characteristics
•Tenure –how long
owner/renters have lived in
home
•Neighborhood change
•Sales trends
Page 79 of 134
PRESERVATION
•Protect existing
neighborhoods and long
time residents ability to
age in place.
•Preserve naturally
occurring affordable
housing (NOAH)
•Home rehabilitation
Page 80 of 134
COMMUNITY INPUT
•Cost of living is increasing in town and it is difficult for people
who have been here to stay.
•Maintain existing core neighborhoods and downtown areas.
Infill and expansion construction should be compatible with
neighboring properties.
Page 81 of 134
KEY FINDINGS
•Older duplexes, four-plexes and multi-family properties play
an important role in affordable housing stock.
•Neighborhood change is a concern for some existing residents.
Page 82 of 134
FEEDBACK
•Do you agree with the identified elements of preservation
(aging in place, naturally occurring affordable housing, home
rehabilitation)?
•What other elements of preservation do you seek additional
information or policy statements to be included?
Page 83 of 134
AFFORDABILITY
•Defining Key Terms
•Housing Analysis
•Factors of Demand
•Household profiles –home owners and renters
•Supply -for sale and rental
•Housing Need by group
•Low Income
•Workforce
•Senior
Page 84 of 134
KEY TERMS
•Area Median Household Income –half of households earn
below and half earn above
•Cost Burden –paying more than 30% of gross income toward
housing
•Senior –Census uses 65 and better for data provision
Page 85 of 134
Affordability
Affordable housing,
regardless of income
level, is housing for
which all combined
expenses—mortgage or
rent, utilities, insurance
and taxes—cost no
more than 30% of gross
household income.
30%
70%
Page 86 of 134
MARKET ANALYSIS
•Community Housing Demographic
Profile
•Renters
•Home owners
•Cost Burden
•Economic Conditions
•Housing Market
•Multi-family
•Home sales
•Requested Areas of Study
•Low Income
•Workforce
•Senior
Housing
Demand
Rent
or Own
Employ-
ment
growth
Wage
growth
Age
Income
Cost
burden
(30%)
Page 87 of 134
HOUSEHOLD PROFILES
51%
Renters (27%)Owners (73%)
28%Make less than $50,000/year
51%Pay more than 30% income for housing
21%Pay more than 50% income for housing
23%
7%
Page 88 of 134
RENTAL SUPPLY PRICE
TREND
•Existing multi-family rents are increasing
•New market rate multi-family construction is high-end
Page 89 of 134
FOR SALE SUPPLY
PRICE TREND
City + ETJ Sales by Price 2008 -2018
Source: ABOR/MLS July 2018
56%
21%
10%
6%
3%3%
2008-2010
$0 to $199,999 $200,000 to $274,999 $275,000 to $349,999 $350,000 to $424,999 $425,000 to $499,999 $500,000
8%
35%
24%
13%
10%
11%
2017-2018
Page 90 of 134
COUNCIL AREAS OF STUDY
•Low-income (Industry standard)
•Often households that make 50% or 30% or less than AMI
•Workforce (City of Georgetown UDC)
•Workforce Housing Developments are available for those whose
incomes are less than or equal to 80% AMI
•Senior (Industry standards)
•Can be age restricted at 55 or 62, Census data addresses 65+
Page 91 of 134
HOUSING POLICY
42
% AMI
Area Median Income
EXTREMELY LOW VERY LOW LOW MODERATE ABOVE MODERATE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 % AMI
Federal programs Municipal programs
$78K
Source: HUD Income Limits 2016: Williamson CountyPage 92 of 134
ALL HOUSEHOLDS
43
$24K $39K $62K $78K
Source: 2016 HUD Income Limits: Williamson County, ACS 2016 1 Year Estimate
% AMI
Area Median Income
$93K $109K
EXTREMELY LOW VERY LOW LOW MODERATE ABOVE MODERATE
3,000
households
3,000
households
5,000
households
5,000
households
9,000
households
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
TOTAL
4 person
household
25K
% AMI
Page 93 of 134
Low Income
LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
44Source: 2016 HUD Income Limits, ACS 2016 1 Year Estimate, *ACS Table 25063
% AMI
EXTREMELY LOW
3,000
0 10 20 30
TOTAL
•69% of renters are cost burdened policies to increase rental inventory
•68% of owners are cost burdened policies to preserve homeownership
$24K
Page 94 of 134
$24K $39K $62K
Workforce
VERY LOW LOW
3,000 5,000
30 40 50 60 70 80
WORKFORCE HOUSEHOLDS
45Source: 2016 HUD Income Limits, ACS 2016 1 Year Estimate
% AMI
TOTAL
Teacher
Firefighter
Police officer
•80% renters are cost burdened policies to increase rental inventory
•42% owners are cost burdened policies to preserve homeownership
•Limited supply for sale under $250K policies to increase
homeownership opportunities
Page 95 of 134
% AMI
Area Median Income
EXTREMELY LOW VERY LOW LOW MODERATE ABOVE MODERATE
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
1,000 1,000 2,000 2,000 4,000SENIOR
$19K $31K $50K $62K $75K $87K2persons
% AMI
SENIOR HOUSEHOLDS
46Source: 2016 HUD Income Limits, ACS 2016 1 Year Estimate
10K
•67% renters are cost burdened policies to increase rental inventory
Page 96 of 134
COMMUNITY INPUT
•Affordability has changed in 10-15 years.
•Affordable housing with rental and home buying is not only
affecting low income but also medium income individuals and
families.
•Hard to live in Georgetown on a single income.
•Rising costs of development.
•Issue for first-time home buyers.
•Realtors said affordability was top requested characteristic.
Page 97 of 134
KEY FINDINGS
•Limited supply of rental options for low income renters
•Limited supply of rental options for workforce households
•Limited supply of for sale options for workforce households
•Limited supply of options for Senior renters
Page 98 of 134
GROWTH BY COUNTY
20,000
220,000
420,000
620,000
820,000
1,020,000
1,220,000
1,420,000
1,620,000
1,820,000
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Bastrop Caldwell Hays Travis Williamson
Population Growth Forecast
2010-2050
Source: Texas State Data CenterPage 99 of 134
FUTURE HOUSING UNITS
ANTICIPATED
173,125 x 55%≈96,000
Source: Texas State Data Center, ACS 2016 1 Year Estimate
* 2016 ACS used in lieu of City of Georgetown Planning and Development counts to provide regional comparison
34,182* x 55%≈19,000
25,235*x 55%≈14,000
New housing units
by 2030
2030 WilCo Population for estimated
2016 # Households % change (est.) population growth
Williamson
County
City + ETJ
Area
Georgetown
Page 100 of 134
11%
19%
17%
15%
39%
2,000
3,500
3,000
3,000
7,500
Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 Over $100,000
CURRENT HOUSEHOLDS,
FUTURE HOUSING UNITS
Source: ACS 2016 Household Income, City of Georgetown calculations using TSDC projection figure
% of City + ETJ Households by Income -2016 City + ETJ, 19,000 units –2030
Page 101 of 134
HOUSING’S ROLE IN
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
Existing
Conditions
2030 Land
Use Goals
Growth
Scenarios
Future Land
Use Element
Recommendations for
housing
% of residential needed
to realize growth
scenarios
Metrics to guide &
evaluate residential
development decisions
Page 102 of 134
FEEDBACK
•Direction on the focus of the affordability component of the
Housing Element.
•Which of the following do you seek further focused policies to
address a particular population?
•Low income,
•Workforce,
•Senior
•What other elements of affordability do you seek additional
information or policy to be included?
Page 103 of 134
PART 4
Next steps
Page 104 of 134
POLICY EVALUATION
Collect Review Revise Publish
4/23 City Council
3/7 Steering Committee Draft
4/10 Joint Session
Recommended
revisions
Public/Council
1/29 HAB
Page 105 of 134
NEXT STEPS
•Survey on housing diversity and preservation
•3/7 Steering Committee to review 2012 Housing Element
recommendations evaluation from HAB and draft policies
•4/10 Joint Session with City Council and Planning & Zoning
Commission to discuss housing policies
•Public input (speaking to community groups)
Page 106 of 134
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
February 26, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation, update and discussion on the 2018/19 Unified Development Code (U D C) Amendment Review P rocess --
Sofia Nelson, CN U-A, P lanning Director
I T EM S UMMARY:
B ackground:
In accordance with Section 3.05.020 of the Unified Development Code (UD C), the U DC shall be re vie wed o n an annual
basis. The purpose of the review and amendments pro cess is to e stablish and maintain sound, stable, and desirable
development within the City’s jurisdiction, co rrect erro rs in the text, or due to changing co nditio ns in the U DC. The list
of amendments to be re vie wed on an annual basis shall be reviewed and approved by the City Co unc il (“General
Amendments List”), after review and consideration by the Unified Development Code Advisory Co mmittee (U D CAC)
and P lanning and Zoning Commission.
The following direction was provided at 2/12/2019 city council workshop:
Review of setbacks for M ulti-family and no n-residential development when adjacent to ETJ single family
residential property.
Update U D C to increase notice requirements to 300' rather than the state mandated 200' for rezoning requests.
Update U D C to identify notice shall be provided to ETJ residents if located within the prescribed notice area.
Review automotive uses to require a special use permit in a local commercial (C-1) zoning district.
Allow council members the opportunity to review the U D C amendment list and return to a workshop session to
discuss U D C amendments that may be processed outside the annual review process.
P urpose
The purpose of this item is to obtain feedback and dire c tion from the City Council on UD C General Amendments List
that City staff will work on fo r the year 2019. Every year City Staff and the U D CAC revise a list o f items in the U D C
that need to be replaced or updated due to diffic ulties with the language or outdated provisio ns. Items identified as
P riority 1 in the attached General Amendme nts List are those items that the U DCAC, P lanning and Zo ning Commission,
and staff have identified should be reviewed in this next round of amendments. Some of these may be determined by City
Council to be o n a different time frame, such as items to be c onsidered outside the Annual Review process and that would
not be reviewed by the U D C AC.
Di recti on Requested
P lease provide direction o n which of the listed UD C amendments yo u would like staff to review through the annual
review process, the executive amendment process, or the emergency amendment process.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
Review setbacks applicable to multi family and nonresidential develo pments when adjacent to ETJ single family
developments
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Sofia Nelson, P lanning Director
AT TAC HMENT S :
Description
UDC amendment lis t
Types of UDC Amendments
Page 107 of 134
Printed on 2/8/2019
UDC Annual Review 2018/19 Schedule ***DRAFT***
General Topic Group Status Am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
Requested Amendment
UDC Chapter/
Section*Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Dr
a
f
t
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
A
C
R
e
v
i
e
w
CC
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Op
e
n
H
o
u
s
e
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
Dr
a
f
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
B
o
a
r
d
s
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Fi
n
a
l
i
z
e
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
Po
s
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
o
n
W
e
b
s
i
t
e
f
o
r
P
u
b
l
i
c
Re
v
i
e
w
UD
C
A
C
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
P&
Z
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
CC
1
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
CC
2
F
i
n
a
l
A
c
t
i
o
n
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
D
a
t
e
Application Processes and
Requirements Complete 8
Expand development agreement language establishing clear
requirements and processes.
Ch. 3, Sec 3.20 & Ch.
13, Sec 13.10 13-Jun 12-Jun July
UDC Aug
Discussion July Aug-Sep 14-Nov-18 4-Dec-18 11-Dec-18 8-Jan-19 Q1 2019
Nonresidential Standards Complete 4
Consider revising the minimum district size for the BP zoning district
(Executive Amendment). Ch. 7, Sec 7.02 N/A N/A N/A N/A 3-Apr-18 10-Apr-18 24-Apr-18 Q2 2018
Land Uses Complete 1
Acknowledge mobile food trailers as a use within the UDC and outline
appropriate regulations governing mobile food vendors. Ch. 3 & Ch. 5 10-Jan-18 8-May-18
UDC July
Discussion Jul-Aug 8-Aug-18 4-Sep-18 25-Sep-18 9-Oct-18 Q4 2018
Historic Districts In Review 2
Review the standards pertaining to historic districts and structures
based on the revised Historic Resource Survey
Ch. 3, Sec 3.13 & Ch.
16, Sec 16.02 Nov-19 13-Feb-19
Nov 18
Dec 18
Jan 19 Jan-19 Feb-19 Feb-19 13-Mar-19 19-Mar-19 26-Mar-19 9-Apr-19 Q1 2019
Parkland In Review 3
Update provisions governing parkland dedication based on
forthcoming recommendations by the Parks & Recreation Board
subcommittee review. Ch. 13, Sec 13.08 Jan-19 13-Feb-19 Feb-19 Jan-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 10-Apr-19 16-Apr-19 23-Apr-19 14-May-19 Q2 2019
Residential Standards In Review 14
Review the maximum number of units required per building, and
building separation requirements for MF districts Ch. 6, Sec 6.02 Jan-19 Feb-19 13-Feb-19 Feb-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 10-Apr-19 16-Apr-19 23-Apr-19 14-May-19 Q2 2019
Application Processes and
Requirements In Review 17
Review the rezoning public review requirements to require
neighborhood meetings for certain rezoning cases. Ch. 3, Sec 3.06 Jan-19 Feb-19 13-Feb-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 Mar-19 10-Apr-19 16-Apr-19 23-Apr-19 14-May-19 Q2 2019
Residential Standards In Review 15 Consider masonry requirements for residential development Ch. 6
Jan/Feb
19 Q2 2019 13-Feb-19 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019
Land Uses In Review
11, 12,
13
Review and update Permitted Use tables:
- Consider changes to the zoning districts various Specific Uses may
be permitted in (in general)
- Consider updating the list of Specific Uses in Chapter 5 to include
various uses that are not currently listed (i.e. self service machines (ice)
and storage yards; commercial vehicle sales, micro-distillery).
- Consider changes to the zoning districts various Specific Uses may
be permitted in ("Contractor Services Limited", "Contractor Services
General", and "Office Warehouse" Specific Uses in the C-3 zoning
district); Food Establishment Services in IN with SUP Ch. 5
Jan/Feb
19 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019
L:\Division\cd\UDC\UDC Amendments\2018‐19\General Amendments\2018 UDC_General_Amendment_List ‐ APPROVED Page 1 of 2Page 22 of 24Page 108 of 134
Printed on 2/8/2019
UDC Annual Review 2018/19 Schedule ***DRAFT***
General Topic Group Status Am
e
n
d
m
e
n
t
N
o
.
Requested Amendment
UDC Chapter/
Section*Re
s
e
a
r
c
h
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Dr
a
f
t
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
A
C
R
e
v
i
e
w
CC
W
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
Op
e
n
H
o
u
s
e
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
Dr
a
f
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
UD
C
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
B
o
a
r
d
s
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
i
o
n
Fi
n
a
l
i
z
e
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e
Po
s
t
O
r
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
o
n
W
e
b
s
i
t
e
f
o
r
P
u
b
l
i
c
Re
v
i
e
w
UD
C
A
C
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
P&
Z
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
CC
1
P
u
b
l
i
c
H
e
a
r
i
n
g
&
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
CC
2
F
i
n
a
l
A
c
t
i
o
n
Ef
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
D
a
t
e
Administrative Clean-Up: Federal and
State law compliance In Review
7, 9,
10
Revisions to standards and requirements to ensure compliance with
Federal and State Law: Review Authority; Subdivision Regulations:
When a plat is required; Subdivision Regulations: Replat approval
w/out vacating preceding plat; Subdivision Regulations: Plat
Exemptions; Wastewater connection requirements in ETJ; TUPs
(portable classrooms); Definitions: Household; Definitions: Portable
Signs; Impervious Cover credit for Places of Worship.
Clean-Ups: Permits and Processes; ZBA 45-day review timeline; Model
Homes; Accessory Structures (size limitations); Definitions; Conflicting
and outdated cross-references and sub/section numbers
Ch. 2, Ch. 3, Ch. 5, Ch.
11, Ch. 13 & Ch. 16 Jan-19 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019
Signage Not Started 18
Review of Ch. 10 including signage for bus stops, transit vehicles and
others (portable signs); sign variance process
Ch. 10 and Ch. 16, Sec
16.02 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019
Application Processes and
Requirements Not Started
5, 6,
18
New/revise processes:
- Create a process to address requests for vesting determinations.
- Create a process to address requests for appeals.
- Sign variances
Ch. 3, Sec 3.14 and
3.15 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019 Q4 2019
Application Processes and
Requirements On Hold 16
Clarify what triggers the requirement for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)
and when an appeal may be made and review the improvements that
are considered or required. Ch. 12, Sec 12.09 TBD
* The UDC Chapter or Section referenced in this column provides the regulation subject to this amendment. However, please note that other sections may need to be amended to address any conflicts and ensure consistency throughout the document.
L:\Division\cd\UDC\UDC Amendments\2018‐19\General Amendments\2018 UDC_General_Amendment_List ‐ APPROVED Page 2 of 2Page 23 of 24Page 109 of 134
Types of UDC Amendments
SECTION 3.05. -UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENT
Page 110 of 134
Executive
•Separate from the annual review process if the
amendment is nondiscretionary, mandatory, or
legislative in nature and:
•1. Is necessary in order to address state statutes
or case laws;
•2. Is necessary in order to ratify a published
Director interpretation;
•3. Is necessary in order to incorporate recently
approved Council ordinances; or
•4. Addresses revisions otherwise determined
necessary by legal counsel.
Emergency Amendment
•City Council may, by super-majority vote, determine
that a potential revision to the UDC is an emergency
and instruct the Director to process the revision to
be processed as an executive amendment separate
from the annual review process:
•The potential amendment is immediately necessary
to protect the health, safety or general welfare of the
City and the safe, orderly, and healthful development
of the City;
•2. The City Council determines that waiting for the
annual UDC review process is not in the best interest
of the City; and
•3. The UDC does not provide other avenues to
address the proposed revision.
Types of UDC Amendments-
UDC Sec. 3.05.030.
Page 111 of 134
Annual UDC Review and Amendment.
UDC Sec. 3.05.020.
A. The UDC shall be reviewed on an annual basis as provided for within this Section. A citizen or
property owner may request at any time that a proposed text amendment be considered within the
review process, in a manner provided by the Director. The City Council shall have final approval of
an amendment list identifying those items warranting review.
B. The Director, or designee, shall prepare and the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee
shall review language addressing those items identified on the amendment list. The Unified
Development Code Advisory Committee shall hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments
and forward a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council.
C. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the proposed amendments
and forward a recommendation to the City Council.
D. The City Council shall then hold a public hearing and take final action on the proposed
amendments to the UDC.
E. All public hearings shall be scheduled in following public notice in accordance with Section 3.03 of
this Code.
F. The amendment shall become effective in the manner provided by the City Charter or State Law. Page 112 of 134
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
February 26, 2019
S UBJ EC T:
P rese ntation, discussion and direction to staff regarding waiving fee s for temporary signage for 501c(3) non-profit
organizations and the City of Geo rgetown’s current P olicy for Waiving Fees for M ajor and M inor City-Sponsored Special
Events -- David Morgan, City Manager
I T EM S UMMARY:
Councilmember Fought spo nso red an item on the February 12, 20 19 City Council Meeting Agenda regarding fee waiver
requests for signage for non-profit o rganizations. The Co uncil requested that this item be brought back for a more
comprehensive workshop discussion.
P rior to 2018, the City had a practic e of waiving signage fees for non-profit organizations. It was a practice, not a Council
approved policy. The City discontinued that practice in 2018 . Since that time, the City continues to receive requests for signage
fee waivers such as the recent request for the Georgetown National Day of P rayer event.
Councilmember Fought inquired in his agenda item whether or no t some so rt o f fee adjustment, or perhaps a total waiver of
signage fees, would reaso nable as long as: (1) the non-profit organization is aware of, and follows, the City’s signage
regulations; (2) the City’s costs are co vere d; (3) the event for which the signage is requested benefits a substantial part of the
City’s populatio n and is open to all residents; and (4) the non-profit does no t make excessive use of the waivers.
City staff is requesting City Council direction on whether the City Council would like to have guidelines to exempt 501c(3)
non-profit organizations from temporary signage fees for temporary eve nts, and if so, direct staff to develop an o rdinanc e in
coordination with the City Attorney’s Office for City Council consideration.
On a broader sco pe, on February 13, 2007, the City Council appro ved Resolutio n No . 02130 7-EE to appro ve the City of
Georgetown’s current P olicy for Waiving Fees for Special Events Sponsored by the City of Geo rgetown. The purpo se and
intent of the policy was to establish a systematic, fair, and consistent policy and process for waiving fees for special eve nts
sponso red by the City of Georgetown. The policy o utlines criteria for determining major and minor events in the community as
defined belo w:
In order for an e vent to be considered for eligibility in the Major City Sponsored Event cate gory by the
City Council, the event should meet at least two (2) or mo re of the fo llowing criteria:
Attracts tourists and visito rs from outside the city.
Utilizes City property, facilities, streets, parks, equipment, and personnel.
Directly brings sales tax to the community.
Contribute s motel/hotel tax to the community by overnight stays.
Encourages the promotion of the City’s historical, natural, arts, or cultural assets.
All Major City Sponsore d Events shall be approved by the City Council to be designated as such.
Major City Sponsored Events will have all fees, charges, and costs o f the City waived. The sponsors of the
event are require d to complete and process a Special Event P ermit in order to coordinate the usage of facilities
and/or other resources such as perso nnel, barricade s, refuse co ntainers, amplified noise, utilities, or other
special requirements.
Minor City Sponsored Events may also have their fees reduced by application and approval of the City Manager.
The sponso rs of the event are required to complete and proc e ss a Special Event P ermit with the City.
The City Attorney’s Office has indicated that this policy needs to be approved through an ordinance and not just by resolution.
City staff is requesting that the City Council provide direction whether to continue this policy for city-sponsored major and minor
special events, whether there should be more parameters around minor city sponsored events, and if so to direct staff develop an
ordinance in coordination with the City Attorney’s Office fo r City Council c onside ratio n.
F INANC I AL I MPAC T:
This is a workshop discussion.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Shirley J . Rinn on behalf o f David Morgan, City Manager
AT TAC HMENT S :
Descri ption
P o werP oint P res entation
R es olution No . 021307-E E
Page 113 of 134
Page 114 of 134
Temporary Event Signage & Policy for
City Sponsored Events
City Council Workshop
February 26, 2019
Page 115 of 134
Purpose
Provide background previously requested by Council on
temporary event signage for non-profit entities
Page 116 of 134
Agenda
• UDC background
• Historical information
• Direction and next steps
Page 117 of 134
Unified Development Code
• 10.07.040 – Temporary Signs for Temporary Events
– Outlines location, size and height restrictions, duration allowed,
spacing, etc
Page 118 of 134
Current Practice
• Signage for temporary event
– Defined as a public gathering held on private or public property
– Do not include promotional sales events for existing
commercial uses
• Fees
– $31 for the first five signs, $5 each for additional signs
Page 119 of 134
Historical Information on Temporary Event
Signs
• 1/1/2017 – 12/31/2017
– 12 permits
– 4 estimated non-profits ($124 in fees)
• Master Gardeners – event in San Gabriel Park
• CTFF- National Day of Prayer Rock Bible Church
• First United Methodist Church – Pumpkin Patch
• Kiwanis Club – Holiday Home Tour
Page 120 of 134
lnformation on Temporary Event Signs
• 1/1/2018 – 12/31/2018
– 15 permits
– 10 estimated non-profit permits ($258 in fees)
• Williamson County Gem and Mineral Society - Gemboree
• Georgetown Family YMCA – Open House Youth Enrichment
• Master Gardeners – Garden Fair and Plant Sale
• CTFF National Day of Prayer; River Rock Bible Church (3 permits)
• The Georgetown Project - Sun City Home Tour
• Faith in Action
• Preservation Georgetown
• Sun City Horticulture Club
Page 121 of 134
Direction and Next Steps
• Council Direction on exempting non-profits from
temporary sign fees for temporary events
– Fee exempted for 501c3 status organizations
– All other guidelines would apply
– Legal – what would be needed to accomplish this – fees are not
set by ordinance
Page 122 of 134
CITY SPONSORED EVENTS
(MAJOR & MINOR)
Page 123 of 134
Background
• In February 2007 the City Council adopted by resolution a
policy to waive fees and costs for certain major and minor
city sponsored events.
Page 124 of 134
Major City Sponsored Event
In order for an event to be considered a Major City
Sponsored Event, the event should meet at least two (2) or
more of the following criteria:
– Attracts tourists and visitors from outside the city.
– Utilizes City property, facilities, streets, parks, equipment, and
personnel.
– Directly brings sales tax to the community.
– Contributes motel/hotel tax to the community by overnight
stays.
– Encourages the promotion of the City’s historical, natural, arts,
or cultural assets.
Page 125 of 134
Major City Sponsored Event
• Current Major City Sponsored Events Include
– Red Poppy Festival
– The Sertoma 4
th of July Celebration
– The Christmas Stroll
– The Georgetown Swirl
• These events have all fees, charges, and costs of the City
waived. This includes traffic management, public safety
staffing, permit fees, and other expenses.
• Adding additional Major City Sponsored Events shall be
approved by the City Council.
Page 126 of 134
Minor City Sponsored Events
• Minor City Sponsored Events may also have their fees
reduced by application and approval of the City Manager.
• Current Minor City Sponsored Events include:
– The Garden Club Arbor Day Celebration and Garden Show
• Waive rental fee for the Community Center ($500)
– The Scouts – Summer Camp In San Gabriel Park
• Waive rental fee for San Gabriel Park amenities ($750)
– Project Graduation
• Waive rental fees for Rec Center and Community Center ($750)
Page 127 of 134
Direction & Next Steps
• The City Attorney’s Office indicates this policy needs to be
approved through ordinance and not just by resolution.
• Council Direction:
– Does the City Council want to direct staff to develop an
ordinance to continue the policy on Major City Sponsored
Events as well as Minor City Sponsored Events?
– Should there be more parameters around Minor City
Sponsored Events
• Eligibility Criteria, Type of Fee Waivers, Limits on the amount of fee
waivers
Page 128 of 134
Page 129 of 134
Page 130 of 134
Page 131 of 134
Page 132 of 134
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
February 26, 2019
S UBJEC T:
P resentation and discussion regarding the Convention and Visitors Bureau’s (C VB) upcoming Tourism Strategic P lan --
Cari Miller, Tourism Manager
I T EM S UMMARY:
Since 20 14 , Georgetown’s ho tel occupancy tax has increased by 111%. Due to the rapid gro wth of Geo rge to wn, and the
continued increase in ho tel occupancy tax, there is a desire to develop a Tourism Strategic P lan that identifies goals and
action steps to achieve these go als. The Tourism Strategic P lan will ensure that the CVB staff and advisory board focus
their energy, reso urces, and time in advancing the City Council’s current goal to Become a Destination fo r Unique
Experiences and aligns with the City Council’s vision, goals, and strategies for Georgetown.
The Tourism Strategic P lan will include a visito r ’s experience assessment, consumer awareness and perceptio n study, key
stakeholder workshops, analysis of current tourism program, and strategy develo pment sessions with CVB staff and
advisory board.
Work on the Tourism Strategic P lan will begin in early March and conclude in August.
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
The Tourism Strategic P lan will cost $50,000.
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Cari Miller
Page 133 of 134
City of Georgetown, Texas
City Council Workshop
February 26, 2019
S UBJEC T:
Sec. 551.071: Consul tati on w i th Attorney
Advice fro m attorney about pending or co ntemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to
advise the City Council, including agenda items
- Settlement Agreement related to the Berry Creek Highlands M U D
Sec. 551.086: Certai n P ubl i c P ow er Uti l i ti es: Competi ti ve M atters
- P urchase P ower Update -- J im Briggs, General Manager of Utilities
Sec. 551.087: Del i berati on Regardi ng Economi c Devel opment Negoti ati ons
- P roject Deliver
Sec. 551:074: P ersonnel Matters
City Manager, City Atto rne y, City Secretary and M unicipal J udge: Consideration of the appointment, employment,
evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal
- City Attorney
I T EM S UMMARY:
F I NANC I AL I MPAC T:
N A
S UBMI T T ED BY:
Shelley Nowling, City Secretary
Page 134 of 134