HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 12.23.1985THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
REGULAR COUNCIL AGENDA
DECEMBER 23, 1985
7:00 PM
1. Bills over $2000.00
2. Approve City Vehicles Bids - Allyn Moore
3. Approve City Telephone Bids - Allyn Moore
4. Teen Center - Frank Reed
5. Award Sidewalk Project Contract - Allyn Moore
6. Sesquicentennial Grant Agreement - Frank Reed
7. Baird Center - Swim P001 Lease - Bob Gaylor
8. Airport Land Leases - Georgetown Jet - Gantt Aviation - Bob Gaylor
9. Planning Items
A. Consent Agenda
1. Variance - Reinstatement of Final Plat - West
University Professional Center
2. Variance - Reinstatement of Final Plat - Crystal
Knoll Terrace P.U.D. Unit One
3. Variance - Reinstatement of Final Plat - Williamsburg
Village
B. Annexation Ordinances - 2nd Reading
1. Voluntary Annexations: River Ridge Sections Two &
Three, Parklview Estates Sections One through Nine, A
portion of University Park Section One, City of
Georgetown Acre Tract, Reata Trails Unit One
2. Involuntary Annexations: Bobby Pope 2.0 Acre Tract,
Sierra Vista Detention Basin 3.35 Acre Tract, Mahan 1.8
Acre Tract
3. IH 35 Area Annexation
10. Crystal Knoll/Bovay Electric Contract
11. City Secretary - Utilities Billing and Collection Dept. Head
12. Electric Department Changes
13. B.R.A. - R.T.T.S.
14. Misc.
1 -
City of Georgetown
Planning Report for the
City Council Meeting
December 23, 1985 7:00 'p.m.
Agenda
Planning Items:
A.) Consent Items
1.) Variance Reinstatement of Final Plat West University
Professional Center
2.) Variance Reinstatement of Final Plat Crystal Knoll
Terrace P.U.D. Unit One
3.) Variance Reinstatement of Final Plat Williamsburg
Village
B.) Annexation Ordinances- 2nd Reading
1.) Voluntary Annexations: River Ridge Sections Two & Three
Parkview Estates Sections One
through Nine
Westwood Plaza
A portion of University Park
Section One
Thousand Oaks Section Four
City of Georgetown One Acre Tract
Reata Trails Unit One
2.) Involuntary Annexations: Bobby Pope 2.0 Acre Tract
Sierra Vista Detention Basin
3. 35 Acre Tract
Mahan 1.8 Acre Tract
3.) IH -35 North Area Annexation
A.) PLANNING CONSENT ITEMS
VARIANCE - REINSTATEMENT OF FINAL PLAT- WEST UNIVERSITY
PROFESSIONAL CENTER
Location Map 1"=2000'
Applicant: Jessie B Johnson, III
1101-1 Williams Dr
Georgetown, Tx 78628
86 3-45 32
Agent: Steger & Bizzell, Inc.
PO Box 858
Georgetown, Tx 78626
86 3-4521
Request:
As required by Section 4.03 Part 8 of the City Subdivision
Ordinance, applicant has requested a reinstatement of the
approval given this plat on May 14, 1985 in order to have
more time in which to complete the construction plans.
Facts
Location: South of University Ave. (Hwy 20) between the
South San Gabriel River and IH -35. Surrounding use
is commercial, trailer park and single family
residential.
Variance- W. Univ. Professional Center - page 2.
Master Plan District 8a Acreage: 3.99
Proposed Use: Medical Offices
History:
The preliminary/final plat of West University Professional
Center was conditionally approved by Council on May 14, 1985.
This approval expired on November 14, 1985.
Analysis:
Council may grant an extension not to exceed one year.
Several previous requests of this type have been granted.
The extensions allowed for previous requests have ranged
from three to six months.
Requirements necessary for the recordation of this plat
are substantially complete and all fees due have been
paid.
Staff Recommendation:
Granting of reinstatement with a three month extension of
approval.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 5-0
Granted, with a three month extension of approval
VARIANCE - REINSTATEMENT OF FINAL PLAT AND SITE PLAN FOR
CRYSTAL KNOLL TERRACE P.U.D. UNIT ONE
AWKI D o
Location Map
Applicant: Jefferson Group
PO BOX 388 3
Beaumont, Tx 77704
4 09) 842-2 358
Agent: Victor Turley
301 N. 3rd Street
Temple, Tx 76501
869-7961
Request:
1"=2000'
As required by Section 4.03 Part 8 of the City Subdivision
Ordinance, applicant has requested an extension of the
approval given this plat on July 9, 1985 in order to have
more time in which to complete the construction plans.
Facts:
Location: Northwest of the intersection of County Roads
151 and 152; and east of IH -35.
Surrounding Uses: large lot single family residences and
proposed single family and multi -family
in the remaining sections of Crystal Knoll
Terrace
Variance - Crystal Knoll Terrace PUD - page 2
Proposed Uses: 10 duplex lots, 80 single family lots and
a 3.09 acre local commercial lot
Development Pla: District 5c Acreage: 25.14
History:
The final plat was conditionally approved by Council on
July 9, 1985. This approval is due to expire on January
9, 1986.
Analysis:
Council may grant an extension not to exceed one year.
Several previous requests of this type have been
granted. The extensions allowed for previous requests
have ranged from three to six months.
The constructions plans for on-site improvements for
this subdivision have been approved by City. Substantial
completion has been achieved on the off-site utility
systems and the agreement between developer and City regarding
water supply system improvements. Developer has indicated
that he may choose to defer recordation of plat until all
required improvements have been constructed in order to
avoid the County requirement that a surety agreement be
executed.
Staff Recommendation:
Due to the complexity of the work to be done and the
indications from developer of up front construction,
it is recommended that a six month extension be granted
conditional upon all fees being paid prior to recordation.
City Council Action: 5-0
Granting of approval , with three month extension
VARIANCE - REINSTATEMENT OF FINAL PLAT - WILLIAMSBURG
VILLAGE
Location Map
Applicant: Zared Corporation
Rt. 4 Box 4284
Belton, Tx 76513
Agent: Victor Turley
301 N. 3rd St.
Temple, Tx 76501
869-7961
Request:
1"=2000'
As required by Section 4.03 Part 8 of the City Subdivision
Ordinance, applicant has requested an extension of the
approval given this plat on July 9, 1985 in order to have
more time in which to complete the construction plans.
Facts:
Location: At the southwest corner of Booty's Crossing Rd.
and Williams Drive.
Surrounding Area: Is commercial and undeveloped. Existing
zoning is C -2B (Commercial Second Height
District).
Variance - Williamsburg Village - page 2
Proposed Use: Two retail commercial lots
Development Plan: District 4a Acreage: 10.28
History:
Plat was conditionally approved by Council on July 9, 1985
and is due to expire January 9, 1986.
Analysis:
Council may grant an extension not to exceed one year.
several previous requests of this type have been granted.
The extensions allowed for previous requests have ranged
from three to six months.
Site development and construction plans are currently
under review by City staff. It is anticipated that
all necessary requirements for recordation can be completed
in 30 to 90 days. Engineering Review fees have not been
paid.
Staff Recommendation:
Granting of a three month extension of approval conditional
upon all outstanding fees due on this project being paid
prior to recordation.
City Council Action: 5-0
granting of a three month extension of approval conditional
upon all outstanding fees due on this project being
paid prior to recordation.
B.) ANNEXATION ORDINANCES - 2nd Reading
Note: These three ordinances were previously
distributed prior to first reading on
December 10, 1985.
LETTERS OF REQUEST
S,
Steger Bi33eLL, enc.
I.. .1111.Y INUINCCN5 - .YYNYC IYN$
P. O. BOX 855 . GEORGETOWN. TEXAS 78627
December 11, 1985
Mr. Ed Barry
Director of Planning
City of Georgetown
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Reinstatement of West University Professional Center
Final Plat
Dear Mr. Barry:
512) 8534521 IG.olp.lo.n ononal
512) 255-25ffi t wen anonal
As agent for the owner of the above-mentioned property, I would like to
request a reinstatement of the final plat on this property. I am also
requesting that an extension of the recordation be granted to March 31,
1986. I understand that an emergency council meeting will be held on
Saturday morning, December 14, 1985. In order to expedite matters and save
my client from additional delays, I am respectfully requesting that this
be placed on the Saturday agenda as an additional emergency item.
Yours very trul ,
Perry teger
PCS/ec %G 12/ ter f2 a/' iy/
On
119/LTR.PCSf,
MEMBER NSPE TSPE ASCE PMI TSA
December 13, 1985
Mr. Ed Barry, Director
City of Georgetown - Planning
P. 0. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78726
TURLEY ASSOCIATES, INC.
301 NORTH THIRD STREET • TEMPLE. TEXAS 76501 •'61 7) 7732000
Re: Final Plat Recordation for Williamsburg Village Subdivision
Dear Mr. Barry:
This letter will serve as the formal application to the City Council
for an extension of six months for the Final Plat Recordation of the
Williamsburg Village Subdivision. This request will place the
recordation deadline date at July 1, 1986.
Since the City Council's approval of this plat in July, this tract
has changed owners and engineers. Delays caused by this transition
have lengthened the site plan and platting review time beyond the
six (6) months allowed. The final plat and site plans are currently
under review by the planning and building departments. Construction
is anticipated to begin immediately following site plan approval in
January 1986.
Please consider this extension in consideration of the above comments.
Sincerely,
TURLEY ASSOCIATES, INC.
4
Victor D. Turley
Professional Engineer
VDT:sb
ENGINEERING PLANNING 0 SURVEYING • CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Council ROVE ISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR.HANDS this 10 day of December
19
85
J
Mayor, City Coun,il
City of Georgeto n
PROJECT Scenic Oaks - Concept Plan
APPLICANT Metrol2lex Properties
LOCATION North and w s of Snonic Dr. near its intersection with 17th
Street across from Westside Elem. School and north of Georgetown
REQUEST Consideration of Concept Plan
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL*
Approval conditional upon the comments below being satisfied.
Acceptance of the concept plan with the following
conditions to be addressed with subsequent submittal:
1. All ordinance requirements being met
2. Drainage requirements being met
3. Utilities being adequate:
a. Water Availability Note shall applyb. Water Service plan shall address pressure problem
C. Sewer service plan shall address lift station
design and required downstream improvments
4. Rezoning from RS to RP shall be requested in
conjunction with the submittal of a preliminary plat
and site plan
5. Any variances from ordinance requirements shall
be specifically requested and justified per
Ordinance Section 5.10
6. Parking,driveways and building spacing shall be
designed according to fire codes to insure accessibilitybyfirevehicles
7. Agreement on the part of the developer to accept
the cost of relocating the City of Georgetown
power line.
8. Density shall be reduced to 10 living units per
gross acre as required by Ordinance.
9. Request for Variance from the height limits established
by PUD Ordinance shall be justified by a study of the
visual impact of the proposal.
Acceptance of the concept plan with the following
conditions to be addressed with subsequent submittal:
1. All ordinance requirements being met2. Drainage requirements being met
3. Utilities being adequate:
a. Water Availability Note shall applyb. Water Service plan shall address pressure problem
C. Sewer service plan shall address lift station
design and required downstream improvments
4. Rezoning from RS to RP shall be requested in
conjunction with the submittal of a preliminary platandsiteplan
5. Any variances from ordinance requirements shall
be specifically requested and justified per
Ordinance Section 5.10
6. Parking,driveways and building spacing shall be
designed according to fire codes to insure accessibilitybyfirevehicles
7. Agreement on the part of the developer to accept
the cost of relocating the City of Georgetown
power line.
8. Density shall be reduced to 10 living units per
gross acre as required by Ordinance.
9. Request for Variance from the height limits established
by PUD Ordinance shall be justified by a.study of the
visual impact of the proposal.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City CounciAPPROV /DISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 10 day of December 19 85
n
Mayor, City Cou cil
City of Georgetown
PROJECT_ DENNIS P MCCOY SUBDIVISION - REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT
APPLICANT McCoy Realt Cor .
LOCATION Adjacenttothe east side of IH- frontage rd, southo its
intersectioonSwitupplyCegn
rRd.
16 an includes the existing McCoy u
Ing
REQUEST Preliminary Plat approval
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Approved by consent with conditions as listed below.
I. All ordinance requirements shall be met2. All drainage requiremets shall be met3. Utilities being adequate:
a. Water Availability Note shall applyb. A plan for fire protection should be provided4. A drainage facilities maintenance convenant shall be
required prior to recordation
5. Restrictive convenants should contain architectural
controls and landscaping criteria.
6. Subdivision Ordinance Section 4.04 Part 13 b & c shallbesatisfied.
P&Z Recommendation: (5-0)
Approval conditional upon the above comments being met, with the addition of the following comment:
7. Variance on Fox Drive to have a centerline radiusof500'.
ild-
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Council PPROVES/ ISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 10 day of December 19 85
Mayor, City Councift
City of Georgetown
PROJECT 100% Oaks Section Four -Resubdivision of Lot 2, Block A
APPLICANT Tamaron Propee ies
LOCATION South of Thousand Oaks BLVD. on the west side of IH -35.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Approved by consent with the conditions listed below:
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of the Resubdivison Plat of Lot 2 Block A
Thousand Oaks Section IV conditioned upon:
1. Plat meeting all ordinance requirements
2. Drainage requirements being met
3. Utilities being adequate (Water Availability Note
shall apply to Lot 2B)
4. An approved Water Pollution Abatement Plan is requiredbyT.W.C.
5. Cl Local Commercial District zoning subsequent to annexation. 6. A site development plan shall be submitted for staff
approval prior to issuance of building permits,
indicating:
a. Compliance with the drainange ordinance
b. Compliance with the landscape ordinance
C. The front yard of each lot shall be along
Thousand Oaks Blvd.
d. Access shall be restricted to one 24 ft.
approach for each lot and the approach for Lot 2B
shall. be 175 ft. minimum from the IH -35 ROW, except
as approved by City.
e. Drive approach access to IH -35 shall be
prohibited and the 25' building setback area
reserved for drainage, utilities, and
landscaping.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Counci APPROVE DISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 10 day of December 19
Mayor, City Cou qcil
City of George wn
PROJECT VARIANCE - REINSTATEMENT OF FINAL PLAT - RIVERVIEW MALL
APPLICANT -Riverview Mall Assoc.
M
LOCATION Between IH -35 and Riverside Dr., south of Williams Dr.
REQUEST An. extension of the approval in order to have more time in
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
VARIANCE - RIVERVIEW MALL - PAGE 2
Planning Staff Recommendation:
Granting of request with a three month extension of aHowever,
applicant shall be put on notice that due to thewateravailabilityapproval.
recommended b Policy no further extensions will befor
considerationa
r and that a final plat must be submitted25, 1986. Prior to new expiration date of March
City Council Action: 5-0)
Approved by consent with conditions per staff recommendationabove.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Council PROVES/ SAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 10 day of December 19 85
Mayor, City Coun 1
City of Georet n
PROJECT VARIANCE - BUILDING LINE ENCROACHMENT - 803 STAGECOACH
APPLICANT Thomas G Foust, Jr
LOCATION South side of lot 13, Block "C Reata Trails, Unit II
REQUEST Variance to allow an existing residence to remain encroached
some 18" into the recorded building line.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
46
12
approved by consent
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Counci APPROVES/PISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 23 day of December 19 85 .
Mayor, City Co Cil
City of Georgetown
PROJECT Williamsburg Village - reinstatement of final plat
APPLICANTlared Corporation
LOCATION At the southwest corner of Booty's Crossinq Rd and
Williams Drive
REQUEST an extension of the approval given on July 9, 1985,
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Granting of three month extension of approval
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City CouncilPPROVES/ ISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 2'1 day of December 19 85
Mayor, City Counclil
City of Geor etown
PROJECT Cry9tal Knoll Terrace PUD Unit One ReinstatemeRfftitoeflanal plat &
APPLICANTJefferson Group
LOCATION Northwest of the instersection of County Roads 151 and 152 and
east of IH - 35.
REQUEST An extension of the approval given this plat on July 9 1985.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Granting of three month extension of approval
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Counci APPROVES%D SAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 23 day of December 1985
Mayor, City Counctil
City of Georgetown
PROJECT WEST UNIVERSITY PROFESSIONAL CENTER
APPLICANT Jessie B Johnson, III
LOCATION South of Univ. Ave (Hwy 20) between the South San Gabriel
Iver an IH -3b.
REQUEST Reinstatement of the approval given May 14' 1985 in order
to ave more time iwhich o c ete the construction plans.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Granting of Three month extension of approval.
is
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Coun 1 APPROVES ISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OAR HANDS this 8th day of October , 1985
Mayor, City Cou/icil
City of Georgetown
PROJECT VARIANCE - REINSTATEMENT OF PRELIMINARY PLAT-&gb jNg gfiADOWS
APPLICANT William Harshaw
LOCATION Approximately 3/4 mile southeast of Georgetown, along the
west side of Hutto Rd.
REQUEST An extension of the approval
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: (5-0)
Granting of request with a three month extension of approval.
However, applicant shall be put on notice that due to
the water availability policy no further extensions will
be recommended by staff and that a final plat must be
submitted for consideration prior to new expiration date
of January 8, 1986.
The impact of proposed Mokan Transit Corridor should be
ascertained prior to submittal of final plat or the
preliminary plats of other sections.
11. Off-site improvements shall meet City Engineer's specifications
for conditions reflecting development of the three City
wells in this area.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Counci APPROVES ISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 8th day of October 19 85
Mayor, City Counkil
City of Georgetown
PROJECTSHELL ADDITION- RESUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 6
APPLICANT Douglas L. Anderson
LOCATION On the Northwest corner of 4th Street and Pine Street
REQUEST Approval for Resubdivision
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: (4-0) 1 abstention
Approval of the plat subject to the following conditions:
1. All ordinance requirements shall be met
2. Drainage requirements shall be met
3. Utilities being adequate, water availability note shall apply
4. Utility Plan shall be revi-se-d per City Engineers Comments
prior to recordation.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City CouncilPP ROVES ISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 8th day of October 19 85
SJdt s.1_.
Mayor, City Cou cil
City of Georgetown
PROJECT UNIVERSITY PARK SECTION TWO PUD - PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SITE PLAN
APPLICANT TSJ T_4_, VPntt.rc
LOCATION Swab of Buy 29 anti nnrthoact of Hutto Road
REQUEST Approval of preliminary.plat and site plan
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: (4-1)
Approval of preliminary plat and site plan with the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements being met
2. All drainage requirements being met
3. Utilities being adequate. Water Availability Note shall apply4. Water Pollution Abatement Plan being approved
5. Additional water storage facilities are required
6. Preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted for staff approval prior
to submittal of final plat
7. Final site plans shall be at a scale of 1"=50' for each product type
and shall reflect the "ideal" product mix within each type8. Construction phasing plan and schematic grading plan shall be submitted
with final plat
9. Stormwater facility maintenance covenant- shall be requested10. Site plan for Product Type III "Townhouses" shall be subject to
standard review process
11. The following variances shall be granted under the PUD Ordinance and
as outlined in the analysis section of this report:
a. lot area less than 6000 sq. ft.
b. lot frontage less than 60 ft.
c. lot depth less than 100 ft.
d. lots with frontage on two non -intersecting street
e. lots at right angles
f. reduction of front setback to 15 ft.
g. reduction of side setback to 5 ft. except for 15 ft. on corner lotsh. elimination of side and rear public utility easementsi. corner lot width less than 5 ft. wider than average interior lotj. street centerline radius less than 800 ft. - Morrow Drivek. street centerline radius less than 800 ft. - Morrow Drive
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Council APPROVES'/DISAPPROVES/TABLES/
THDRAWS a request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 8th day of October
Mayor, City Coulycil
City of Georgetown
PROJECT EAGLE'S NEST APARTMENTS - VARIANCE REQUEST
APPLICANT Clay St. Joint Venture
LOCATION West of IH -35, east of Park Lane, on the south side of
Clay Street
REQUEST Site plan approval with following variances: 1 .)Zoning Ordinance
2.0403 Area Regulations -reduction in required fronL yard frum 25 feet to
ins rh
for construc-
C TolfON5 r0nispaces in the requeste t. ront yar
3.) Density Standards -increase in the maximum
allowable density standard from 20 Living Units
to 26 Living Units per acre.
19 85 .
Withdrawn at request of applicant.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Council APPROVES/DISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITTNNESS OUR HANDS this 22 day of October 19 85
Mayor, City Coun it
City of Georgetown
PROJECT RIVER RIDGE SECTION THREE B - Final Plat
APPLICANT River Ridge Development Joint Venture
LOCATION West of River Ridge Two, between Leander Road and the South
fork San Gabriel River.
Final plat approval with o owing va 5.6t-12
REQUEST
reverse curves -Kid ge un r. i ge u ou enon
Pd angles
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Lots 32-34.
o s
33-35 Block
1. All ordinance requirements shall be met,
2. Drainage Requirements shall be met,
3. Utilities being adequate,
4. A Water Pollution Abatement Plan being approved
by T.D.W.R.,
5. Street, lot and utility layouts shall tie in to
proposed Riverview Estates Subdivision,
6. Acknowledgment that Leander Road elevated tank is
required to serve this development,
7. Downstream improvments to Smith Branch Sewer Interceptor
may be required,
8. Flood Plain area shall be reinstated with Section III C
as Flood Plain, Drainage and Access Easement and given
a Lot designation
10. Variances granted at preliminary shall apply,
11. Variance for reverse curves shall be granted with the
condition that some tangent (as determined in construction
plan review) be provided, for Rimrock Dr.
12. Variance for right angle lots shall not be granted
except for Lots 32-34 Block "W" conditional upon
the elimination of one of these lots.
City Council Action: (5-0)
Approval with conditions as shown above and the addition
of condition that electrical service shall be provided
by City of Georgetown.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Council APPROVES/DISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 2_ day of October lg 85,
11L
Mayor, City Coqficil
City of Georgetown
PROJECT RIVER RIDGE SECTION THREE C -FINAL PLAT
APPLICANT River Ridge Development Jointypnrure
LOCATION West of River Ridge Two between Leander Road and the South
fork San Gabriel River
REQUEST Final Plat approval with following variances: 1)section 5.01-12
reverse curves -Ridge run Dr. Ridge Run Court Rimro k Dr 2) ion
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 02-8.c.Front Facing:Allow adjacent lots to be
placed at right angles -Block "Y" lots 14-17 and
33-35 Block "W" lots 32-34.
Approval of the plat of River Ridge Section Three C
with the following conditions:
1. All ordinance requirements shall be met,
2. Drainage requirments shall be met,
3. Utilities being adequate,
4. A Water Pollution Abatement Plan being approved byT.D.W.R.,
5. Street, lot and utility layouts shall tie in to
proposed Riverview Estates Subdivision,
6. Acknowledgment that Leander Road elevated tank is
required to serve this development,
7. Downstream improvments to Smith Branch Sewer Interceptor
may be required,
8. Flood Plain area shall be reinstated with Section
III C as Flood Plain, Drainage and Access Easement and
given a Lot desination,
9. A s, stub and water line should be constructed
to access the main body of lot in 8 above,
10. Variances granted at preliminary shall apply, 11. Variance for reverse curves shall be granted with
the condition that some tangent (as determined in
construction plan review) be provided,
City Council Action: (5-0)
Approval conditional upon the above comments being
satisfied and the addition of the condition that electrical
service shall be provided by City of Georgetown.
CITY COUNCIL
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Council APPROVES/DISAPPROVES/TABLES/
WITHDRAWS the request listed below.
WITNESS OUR HANDS this 22 _ day of October 1 19 85
Mayor, City Councp
City of Georgetown
PROJECT PECAN BRANCH - CONCEPT PLAN
APPLICANT Walter Carrington Company
LOCATION Bordering on west side of IH -35 between the N. San Gabriel
River and Hwy 29.
REQUEST Approval of Concept Plan
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
The concept plan should be redesigned to address the
following comments and resubmitted with the preliminary plat.
1. All ordinance requirements shall be met,
2. Drainage requirements shall be met,
3. Utilities being adequate,
4. A Water Pollution Abatement Plan being approved by
T.D.W.R.,
5. Gross overall density should be reduced to 4 dwelling
units/acre,
6. Additional park land should be developed central to
the residential areas,
7. A 20 ft. road widening easement shall be required
along FM 971,
8. A 15 ft. road widening easement and roadway improvements
to County Road 152 shall be required,
9. Commercial acreage should be reduced to approximately
10% of the site and a day care facility provided, unless
more area can be justified by applicant,
10. The concept of lots less than 6000 sq, ft, shall
not be approved unless justified with appropriate
information and established design controls,
11. One east/west and one north/south secondary collector
street shall be provided with the north/south street
crossing Pecan Branch,providing access to future
development to the north.
12. Impact o f proposed Mokan Transit Corridor should
be ascertained prior to submittal of preliminary
plat.
City Council Action: (5-0)
Approval as recommended above with the exception that
comment #5 shall be amended to read "Gross overall
density should conform to P.U.D. Ordinance
requirements and the project shall be designated as aP.U.D."
City of Georgetown
Planning Report for the
City Council Meeting
November 12, 1985 7:00 PM
Planning Agenda Items:
1. Planning Consent Agenda
A) Variance - Building Line - 205 Innwood Dr
B) Variance - Building Line - 712 Cielo Dr
C) Zoning Change - 414 Rock Street from RS District
to RM -3 District
D) Lyons Addition - Preliminary/ Final Plat
E) Oak Crest Ranchettes Unit Three - Resubdivision
of Tract 12, Block 2
F) Edenparc - Concept Plan
G) Westbranch - Revised Preliminary Plat
2. Variance - Allow construction in P.U.E. - 307
Shady Oak Dr
3. Variance - Water Availability Policy - Shell
Addition Block 6, Lot 1
4. River Hills - Concept Plan
5. Riverview Estates - Final Plat
6. Planning Report
VARIANCE REQUEST - 205 INNWOOD DRIVE
Location Map 1"=2000'
Applicant: Donald G Paull
205 Innwood
Georgetown, Tx 78628
Request: Variance to allow a 1 foot encroachment
across the building line at 205 Innwood
Drive. (see drawing on next page)
Location: Lot 7 Block F San Gabriel Heights
Section Five, between the South San
Gabriel River and Leander Road, west
of IH -35.
Fees: $250.00 fee has not been charged as the encroach-
ment is seven to eight years old.
Analysis:
The encorachment leaves 18 feet between buildings
and has existed for 7 years. Problems likely to
arise due to the present configuration do not seem
to justify changes to the structure of the building.
Planning Staff Recommendation: Approval of a vairance
allowing a 1' building encroachment into the side yard
of Lot 7 Block F San Gabriel Heights, also known as
205 Innwood Dr.
City Council Recommendation: (5-0)
Approved by Consent
VARIANCE - 205 INNWOOD DRIVE
SURVEY PERFORMED FOR Q,'1-/Al,0 cy'PA ULL
IPROVEMENT SURVEY OF La> 7 B oce' F SAv 149 P/EL i/E/CA
OF RECORD IN oda/ --/— 4, $tsgES 385-389 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF
W/LL/d MSO.V COUNTY, TEXAS.
PERIMETER DESCRIPTION: —ATTACHED SCALE:/=20'
v NOT REQUIRED LEGEND: IRON PIN FOUND •
IRON PIN SET O
J013 No. N-3958-1
T/O,y Fi E
79v OG':w /Oo. 00'
iv vK/00 0 v e/VAF
9 E
i l
1 W.
V 1 Il:
ti r 205 11J0 .Woot) OR1Ve 0
JNE _ TUPY F/YA ME 1E MdS.•Nc'>'
r , m.•. r ;, h
LOT
III! R
79v OG':w /Oo. 00'
REGISTERED
P68LIC SURVEYOR, DO HEREBY CERTIFYCORRECTLYREPRESENTS THETHATTHEABOVEPLAT
PROPERTY AS DETERMINED BY AN ON -THE -GROUND
SURVEY PERFORMED UNDER
THE/I" DAY
MY SUPERVISION AND
OF MZ&ad"Q_ , 19a; DIRECTION ON
THE PROPERTY PLATTED HEREON IS CORRECT AND
THERE ARE NO APPARENT DISCRSHORTIES ONFLICTS,
AREA, BOUNDARY LINE
OF I
CONFLICTS, ENCROACH-
tr,.
I MENTS ,OVERLAPPING
l0•' S OF IMPROVEMENTS,
yP• VISIBLE UTILITY LINES
OR ROADS IN PLACE ,
BjlI1E11 EXCEPT AS SHOWN
HEREON SAIDAND
PROPERTY HAS ACCESS
FROM AA -.too $It* t TODED CARTED ROADWAY,
S.jFt`I EXCEPT AS SHOWN
HEREON.
FLOOD STATEMENT: i HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE
PROPERTY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES SHOWN HEREON
3 pi WITHIN A SPECIAL
FLOOD HAZARD AREA AS IDENTIFIED BY THE
FEDERALINSURANCEOF
HOUSINGRATION
OF HE
AND URBAN
U.S. DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNITY PANEL NA&M 0010A
EFFECTIVE DATE 977 OR OTHER
FLOOD HAZARD DETERMINATION AS SHOWN HEREON.
3S3-70 37
Steger BI Bizzell , inc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS-SURVEY01
P.G_ BOX OSB• GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78627
205 Innwood
Georgetown, Texas 78628
October 18, 1985
Georgetown City Council
Georgetown, Texas
Dear City Council Member:
I have recently purchased a home in Georgetown at 205 Innwood.
At the time the survey was done, it was brought to my attention
that the front corner of the garage extended over the 7 foot
building setback line by approximately 1 foot on the northeast
corner. I have measured the distance from my house to the house
next door and they are 18 feet apart at the closest point: Since
this house is 7 years old and there evidently has been no problem,
I would request that you allow a variance in order that I might
clear this problem with the title to my house.
Thank you very for your consideration of this matter. Please
let me know if you need any additional information
Sincerely,
j'Iade"
Donald G. Paull
fork phone 251-3511
Home phone 869-0012
OCT 18 1985
VARIANCE - BUILDING LINE - 712 Cielo Dr. Lot 7, Blk 3,
Serenada East II
Location Map 1"=1000'
Applicant: Thomas Construction
1103D Williams Dr
Georgetown, Tx 78628
863 9378
Request•
A variance to allow an existing residence to remain
encroached some 7' into the recorded 25' front building
setback of Lot 7, Block 3, Serenada East II (712 Cielo).
Location: South side of Cielo Dr. between Bosque Trail & Cava Rd.
Surrounding Uses: Large lot single-family residences.
Existing Use: Large Lot single-family residence.
Development Plan: Large lot single family residence.
District 4d
Fees: $250.00 variance fee has been paid
Analysis:
The applicant maintains that the lot was surveyed on July
10, 1984 and that he set the front corner points of the house,
leaving the garage (6") off the setback line. He further
asserts that this was the situation
Variance - 712 Cielo Dr. page 2
at the time of the pre -pour inspection by the City
of Georgetown. He was unable to contact the concrete
contractor who poured the slab, and is otherwise at
a loss to explain this 7' discrepancy.
Planning Staff Recommendation:
No objection to granting of variance.
P & Z Recommendation: (5-0)
approval of variance.
City Council Action: (5-0)
Approved by consent
4?M
51MVERNIMAM lei
1103-D Williams Dr.
Georgetown, Texas 78628
512) 863-9378
The City of Georgetown September 27, 1985
103 West 7th
Georgetown, Texas 78628
Dear Sirs:
It has come to my attention that a survey dated September 18, 1985 has shown
that the garage at 712 Cielo Dr. is encroaching on the 25' building setback. I
can only speculate on how this may have occured, none of which is conclusive. I
can tell you that the lot was surveyed on July 10, 1984. I set the front corner
points of the house with the help of an employee, leaving the garage 25'6" off
the setback line. The garage was 25'6" off the setback line radius pin at the
time of the pre -pour inspection by the City of Georgetown. I have not been able
to locate the concrete contractor who poured this slab, (he no longer does my
work) to ask his explanation.
I feel that it is the builder's responsibility to see that restrictions,
ordiances and laws are followed and obeyed. I would like to ask that you view
this case as a gross mistake on my part and grant a variance to allow this home
to be utilized as it was intended.
Thank you,
Charles S. Thomas
LOT 6
BLOCK ()
Lof 7 L-oTB
5&S* 'W 165-0' 8b•0'
s
o \\ I I \ r
I I
r
CIEII o 1II V A24/0'E
Zoning Change - 414 Rock Street
Location Map
Applicant: David Vidavel
414 Rock Street
Georgetown, Tx
863-8877
Agent: Clare Mashburn
607 N. Austin Ave
Georgetown, Tx
863-9541
Request:
1"=2000'
Approval for zoning change for 414 Rock Street, Part
of Lots 1,2,3; all of Lots 4,5,6,7, & 8, Block 22,
City Addition from Residential Single -Family (RS District)
to Residential Multi -family (RM -3 District)
Farts:
Location: The subject property comprises the west
half and the southeast quarter of the block
northwest of the intersection of Rock and
5th Streets.
414 Rock Street - Page 2
Surrounding Uses: Block 16 to the Northwest is the site
for a proposed County Courthouse Annex,
parking facilities for the County build-
ing are planned on Block 21 to the west.
To the southwest on Block 30 is an old
grocery/upholstery store. The west
half of Block 29 to the south of the
subject tract is an undeveloped drain-
way, on the northeast corner of Block
29 is a newly erected metal building
that will be used as an auto body shop.
To the southeast is the Draeger Automotive
Sales and service center. A single family
residence is on the northwest corner. The
western half of the block to the east is
vacant. On the eastern portion of the
subject block (22) are a house in apparent
dis-repair and what appears to be a junk
yard. North of the property is a
Montessouri School and more open space.
Surrounding Zoning: An RS District extends from the south-
west to the northeast side of the
property. Commercially zoned property
is on the south and east of the subject
tract.
Existing Conditions: The property is zoned RS.
Proposed Use: Office use with structures under 5,000 sq.ft.
Development Plan: Normal Residential is recommended.and
District 1 thus the rezoning does not strictly comform
to the plan.
History: Proposed rezoning to RM -3 was conditionally
approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission
August 6, 1985, with the recommendation that
variances be required for building setbacks
4' on side and back to be permitted) and
variances allowing the crossing of lot lines
to reflect positioning of buildings on site
plan. City Council conditionally approved the zoning
change at the first reading August 13, 1985. A
separate motion was also passed that no more
zoning changes be made until such time as a
comprehensive land use and development plan
can be established for the area bounded by
Austin Street, 8th Street, Martin Luther King,
and the South San Gabriel River. Prior to
the second reading at the September 24th Council
meeting, it was discovered that the legal
description (as used on the application and
notification) was in error, thus invalidating
the entire processing and public hearings. For
this reason the applicant was required to resubmit
and repeat all of the steps involved.
414 Rock Street - page 3
Analysis•
This proposal is inconsistant with the development
plan and would cross the undeveloped and heavily
vegetated drainway that serves as a buffer between
downtown commercial uses and the single family residential
use of the Urban Renewal Area. The recent proposal
for the County Annex will, if built, significantly
alter the character of this neighborhood by creating
economic incentives for more intensive commercial
land use throughout the area. Concerns that need
to be addressed include the provision of pedestrian
access between the new County facility and the square;
protection of the Edwards Aquifer; providing adequate
drainage and flood control; creating adequate off-
street parking;improvement of substandard streets; and
establishing compatible land use and uniform architectural
controls. The largely undeveloped drainway that stretches
from the river up to 7th Street could, if properly
planned, provide an excellent pedestrian oriented
corridor connecting Blue Role Park with the Sesquisentennial
Square Project. Development of this area should take
advantage of the existing conditions and accommodate
both more intensive land use, and a heightened sense of
place".
The concerns pertaining to the Edwards Aquifer Recharge
Zone are briefly stated in the front part of this planning
report. Another factor pertinant to this proposal is
that the majority of recharge takes place in streambeds.
The filling of this streambed as implied by the schematic
site plan and diversion of the water via underground
pipe will significantly reduce the recharge potential
of this property.
In addition to reducing the recharge, underground pipes
would move more water at higher velocities through the
property. This could exacerbate downstream drainage
problems.
The downtown area already has a significant parking
shortage. In the absence of hard statistical data,
a windshield survey of on -street parking 'in the downtown
area reveals that the streets are usually at capacity
for at least a one block redius from the square. New
developments should not be allowed which would increase
the demand for on -street parking. Several streets in
this section of the City are currently substandard. Many •
of the streets lack curbs and gutters, and a few lack
pavement. Street improvements should be planned and
improved to accommodate increased usage resulting from
more intensive land use.
0
414 Rock Street - page 4
Zoning districts should have gradual transition from
one use to the next with appropriate physical buffers
between each use. The subject property serves as
a physical buffer between commercial property along
Austin Street and the residential area of "The Ridge".
RM -3 zoning would provide such a transition by allowing
office use at a scale more compatible with residential use
and pedestrian circulation while restricting more
objectionable commercial uses allowed under a C-1 District.
Staff Recommendation:
No action should be taken until such time as a comprehensive
land use and development plan can be established for
the area bounded by Austin Street, 8th Street, Martin
Luther King, and the South San Gabriel River. This
study should have as its focus the impact of the proposed
Judicial Annex and the feasibility of creating a
pedestrian oriented corridor from the River to the
Courthouse Square.
However, in view of the previous decisions made relative
to this case, staff has no objections to the proposed
rezoning with the conditions as agreed to by applicant
being:
1. That a public pedestrian accessway shall be provided
through the property
2. That a site plan be submitted for approval by City
Council.
3. That construction over existing internal lot lines
shall be allowed.
P&Z Recommendation: (3-2)
Approval conditional upon comments listed above being met.
City Council Action: (5-0)
Approved conditional upon above comments being met
Lyons Addition - Preliminary/Final Plat
Q1
1
111 1
1 1!d 111.1
Location Map
Applicant: James E Lyons,
301 E. 15th St.
Georgetown, Tx
512 863-4437
Agent: Michael Meador
PO Box 96
Georgetown, Tx
512 863-5852
Request:
Jr
78626
I
1"=2000'
Approval of preliminary/final plat of Lyons Addition,
1.04 acres out of the William Addison Survey, A-21
recorded in Vo. 1192, Page 693 of the Deed Records.
Variance from the maximum lot depth to width
ratio and stormwater detention requirements. The
encroachment of the existing residence into the front
building line has been previously granted.
Facts:
Location: East of the intersection of 7th and Olive
Streets on the north side of 7th Street.
The subject tract is inside the City
Limits and within the Edwards Aquifer
Recharge Zone.
Lyons Addition- Page 2
Surrounding Uses: Single family residences surround
the property on three sides and
undeveloped City land separates
this tract from Railroad tracks
to the north.
Existing Use: A single family residence exists on
Lot 1 of this tract.
Existing Zoning: R -S Residential, single family district
Proposed Use: A residential development of 2, half
acre single family residential lots
at a density of 1.923 dwelling units/acre.
Development Plan: The development plan does not
District 6b specify a land use for this property
but the proposed use does not
conflict with either the zoning
or surrounding uses.
Analysis:
Both the type & intensity of use proposed for this
tract are consistent with surrounding uses. Due to
the size and shape of the property, a variance has
been requested to increase the depth to width ratio
from the maximum 2.5:1 to 3.86:1. Due primarily to
the large size of the lots proposed, staff has
no objection to the variance.
Additionally, the extra depth of the proposed
lots will help buffer noise from the railroad tracks.
The existing house on Lot 1 was granted a variance
for front building line encroachment in August, 1985.
The two inch water line that serves this tract cannot
provide adequate fire flows. Additional fire hydrants
will be needed to serve this area of town but because
distribution mains are inadequate to serve new
hydrants, the City engineer has recommended that any
installation of fire hydrants accompany water
distribution system improvements for the general
area.
General improvements of the water distribution
system are needed in the area notth of University Ave.
and East of the MK & T Railroad in order to upgrade
fire protection and avoid reduction of water service
to existing customers due to additional demands of
new development. These improvements should be
funded as a capital improvement project in the near
future.
Lyons Addition - Page 3
Planning Staff Recommendation:
Approval of plat and granting of variances for excessive
depth to width ration, stormwater detention requirement,
and encroachment of existing structure on Lot 1 conditional
upon:
1. Ordinance requirements being met
2. Drainage requirements being met
3. Utilities being adequate a)water availability note
shall apply to Lot 2 b)improvements to provide
adequate fire protection shall be required.
P 6 Z Recommendation: (5-0)
Approved conditional upon above comments being met
City Council Action: (5-0)
Approved by consent with conditions above being met
OAK CREST RANCHETTES UNIT THREE - RESUBDIVISION OF
TRACT 12, BLOCK 2 - PRELIMINARY / FINAL PLAT
RP QeewowR/ i
f
Tgsp
1"=1DDW
Applicant: Foust Builders, Inc.
110 Briarwood
Georgetown, Tx 78628
869-4145
Agent: Steger & Bizzell, Inc.
1978 South Austin Ave
Georgetown, Tx 78626
863-4521
Request: Approval for Resubdivision of Tract 12,
Block 2, Oak Crest Ranchettes, Unit III, a
79 acre tract of land out of the Joseph
P. Pulsifer Survey, Abstract No. 498,
Williamson County. A variance has been
requested for waiver of stormwater detention
due to increase in run-off less than 5.0 C.F.S.
Facts:
Location: On the southeast corner of the intersection
of Southcross Rd. and Spring Valley Rd. in
the Oakcrest III subdivision, east of the
North Fork San Gabriel River and east of
IH -35. This property is in the Edwards
Aquifer Recharge Zone and the E.T.J.
Oak Crest Ranchettes Unit III - page 2
Surrounding Uses: Large lot, single-family residences
Proposed Use: Two single family residential lots of
approximately three -fourth acre each.
Development Plan: This area is designated for large
District 3b lot residential. This plat complies
with the plan.
History: This plat was brought before the Planning and
Zoning Commission on April 2, 1985 but was
voluntarily withdrawn by applicant in order
to comply with drainage and notification
requirements. It was next heard at the May
7th Planning and Zoning meeting, being
approved with the following conditions:
1. Plat shall meet all ordinance requirements.
2. Drainage requirements shall be met
3. Utilities being adequate.
4. Minimum finished floor elevations should
be shown.
5. A Water Pollution Abatement Plan is
required by T.D.W.R.
6. Variance to waive stormwater detention
requirements defered to staff
7. No building permit will be issued on
Lot 12-A until the water treatment plant
is operational
8. Drainage submittal be approved by City
Engineer prior to being placed on the
Council agenda.
Analysis:
Conditions 4,5, and 8 have been satisfied.
This plat was originally submitted to P & Z approximately
one month after both P & Z and Council had "accepted"
a resolution from the Oak Crest Homeowners Association
requesting the disapproval of future resubdivisions
in this area due to traffic, utility service, and quality
of life concerns. However, for the P&Z hearing only
one of eight adjacent property owners returned written
objection and during the hearing those present appeared
to be amenable to this resubdivision after applicant
agreed not to apply for building permit until the
City's water treatment plant is operational. It should
also be noted that this lot has already been deed
divided and thus the platting is essentially a validification
of prior action.
Oak Crest Ranchettes Unit III page 3
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of the resubdivision plat with the following
conditions:
1. All ordinance requirements shall be met
2. All drainage requirements shall be met
3. Utilities being adequate
4. Water Availability Note shall be applied to Lot 12A
5. Variance from stormwater detention requirements
shall be granted
P & Z Recommendation: (5-0)
Approval with the conditions per "History" section
of report
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: (5-0)
Approved by consent with conditions above being met
EDENPARC- CONCEPT PLAN
PARK
Location Map
7
Applicant: Jonathan H. Bassan
760 Ayala Lane
Santa Barbara, CA 93108
805 969 2239
Agent: G. Brian Christie
P.O. Box 863
Georgetown, Tx 78627
WN
STGNEHEDGE
1"=2000'
Request: Consideration of Conceptual Plan for Edenparc,
a 332.59 acre tract in the William Addison
Survey, Abstract No. 21.
Facts:
Location: On the northeast corner of the intersection of
County Rd.188 and Hwy 29 and from Hwy 29 to the
San Gabriel River.
Surrounding Uses: Southwestern Univ; occupies the undeveloped
adjoining property to the west. Across
Hwy 29 to the south lies the proposed
commercial segment of Stonehedge Sub-
division, Indian Creek Subdivision
and St. Helen's Catholic Church. The
San Gabriel River forms the northern
Edenparc - page 2
boundary and undeveloped farmland
lies to the east. This tract encircles
an area which is mixed single-family
and commercial use.
Proposed Use: A multi -use development with 48.65
acres of Commercial, 10 acres of Riverwalk
retail, 46.80 acres of Research 6
Development, 14.40 acres of Office, 48.25
acres of multi -family (1029 units or
@ 21 dwelling units/acre), 74.75 acres
of single-family (605 units or @ 8
dwelling units/acre), 21.95 acres of
Conference Center/Inn, 1.50 acres of
Recreation Center, 31.89 acres of
Greenbelt areas and Water feature, and
34.40 acres of MOKAN R.O.W.)
Development Plan: This area designated for public/semi-
District 6b public use and normal residential.
This proposal does not conform to the
plan.
Notification: It appears that proper notification has
been completed. No opposition has been
filed.
Analysis:
Edenparc represents the largest development under single
ownership reviewed by the Planning Office to date. In
terms of both total area and total demand on the
City's infrastructure it is approximately equal to
the four developments comprising the IH -35 Joint Venture
Planning Area. Each of these two development proposals
represents a population equivalent of approximately
6,000 people. Thus, when fully completed the present utility
demand of Georgetown will be almost doubled by these
two proposals alone.
Additionally, as evaluated in terms of land use type,
mix, density, and proposed ammenity features this proposal
is highly urban in character and yet the site is very
rural. This situation creates both opportunities,
and problems, but generally indicates a longer development
time than most subdivision proposals.
The success of the plan as proposed will depend upon
the implementation of the MOKAN Expressway Plan over the
long run and the construction of the Georgetown Inner
Loop Road in the interim.
As indicated in the supplement to the comprehensive
plan, "the area to the east of Southwestern University
along Hwy 29 has the potential for commercial and/or
industrial development." Coupled with the prediction
that "construction of the South Loop [Georgetown Inner
Loop/MOKAN] could open the area to high density
Edenparc - page 3
development", these forecasts appear to be approaching
reality with the advent of Edenparc. The City's
acceptance of such a development in this area will help
to control growth through the issuance of utility
and building permits. However, evaluating the demands
on its water and wastewater systems - which far outstrip
even the most recent forecasts - creates problems for
utility planning which only a much more specific
description of actual demands and the time of construction
can alleviate.
The proposed residential densities average 21 dwelling
units/acre for multi -family and 8 dwelling units/acre
for single family, the latter being twice the Development
Plan standard for normal residential. The location of
such intensive land use bordering the Smith Branch
flood plain in an area immediately upsteam of its
confluence with the San Gabriel River, is further
complicated by the steep slopes which constitute
a significant percentage of the 31.50 acre "Village
Cluster" area. The positioning of the 14.25 acre
Multi -family tract, with its associated parking lots
and other impervious coverage, immediately above this
steep area, would seem to create potential hazards
in runoff especially when added to the highly dense
single-family (Village cluster) area below. A reduction
in the number of dwelling units seems to be reasonable
due to topographic constraints and extremely close
scrutiny given to drainage and erosion control,
expecially from the multi -family units. Satisfactory
determination of these conditions will require
detailed site plan review.
The City engineers have found the street network to
be insufficient to handle the amount of traffic generated,
particularly until such time as the completion of
MOKAN and the extensions of Riverparc Drive to the east
and west provides additional access. They recommend
the following changes and/or additions regarding
roadways:
1) A minimum two-lane extension from Hwy 29 be constructed
until the MOKAN roadway is built.
2) Jeremy Ave. be expanded to 80 feet of R.O.W. and
shifted to the east.
3) Extending Edenparc Drive with a 50' R.O.W. from
Parc Drive to Riverparc Drive
4) A 60 ft. R.O.W. east -west roadway be provided
between the 7.35 acre multi -family tract through the
17.45 acre Commercial tract from Reinhardt Blvd. to
MOKAN R.O.W.
5) Pascale Dr -be upgraded to 60' R.O.W.
6) The 19.2 acre "Village Cluster" tract be provided
with a second access.
EDENPARC - page 4
The broad spectrum of land uses in this proposed plan
create potential incompatibility with that of surrounding
properties, the majority of which are residential and
rural in character. Efforts must be made to provide
adequate buffering in appropriate places, (such as
surrounding the "peninsula" within the project which
is surrounded by higher uses on all sides) by such
methods as landscaping, fencing, setbacks and height
restrictions. Such methods should help to "preserve
the rural/residential atmosphere and environment
of the existing land uses".
Staff Recommendation:
Acceptance of the conceptual development plan with the
following conditions:
1) All ordinance requirements being satisfied
2) Drainage requirements shall be met and a flood
plain study being approved by City Engineer prior
to submittal of preliminary plat
3) Utilities being adequate;
a) Water Availability Note shall apply
b) Sewer Availability shall require an expansion
of the City's wastewater treatment plant in
addition to the improvements proposed with this
plan
c) Electric service demands shall be considered in
formulation of new "Service Plan"
d) Water and Wastewater Master Plan Reports must
be revised to reflect impact of this project.
4) Project shall conform to the procedural requirements
of the P.U.D. Ordinance (i.e. Section 2.0802-
2.0810) with any deviations from said ordinance.
specifically noted as a variance meeting the criteria
established in P.U.D. Ordinance Section 2.0807
Parts 1 and 2
5) The types of land use shown shall be more specifically
designated on a revised Conceptual Development Plan
and the densities indicated shall be considered
as "maximum allowable" subject to review of more
detailed plats and site plans.
4) Research b Development uses shall conform to City
of Austin Ordinance No. 84 except as otherwise approved.
7) A construction phasing schedule shall be submitted
with the revised Conceptual Development Plan which shall
coordinate with and be subject to the completion
of proposed improvements to the City's water, waste-
water and electrical systems as well as the Georgetown
Inner Loop Road/MOKAN.
Edenparc page 5
8) The submittal of Preliminary Development Plans
per P.U.D. Ordinance Section 2.0809 part 2 shall
correspond to the phasing schedule approved under
condition #7 above, shall conform to an approved
Development Concept Plan, and shall be able to
exist independent of subsequent development phases.
9) Roadway layout shall be revised as recommended by
City Engineer and listed in "analysis" section of
this report except as otherwise shown below.
10) The R.O.W. dedication for MOKAN shall be approved
by the MOKAN Corporation and any interim roadway
needed in this dedication shall conform to the
design of the "Georgetown Loop Road"
11) Potential improvements to County Road 188 shall be
co-ordinated with the County Commissioners
12) The status of the accessway to the unplatted lots
surrounded by this development shall be determined
and improved to City standards if in project area.
13) T.D.H.P.T. shall approve the Road Widening Dedication
proposed along Hwy 29
14) Development of the western half of this tract shall
not obscure the scenic vistas of surrounded property
owners along the ridge.
P & Z Recommendation: (4-0) 1 abstention
Approved conditional upon above comments being met.
City Council Action: (5-0)
Approved by consent with conditions listed above being met
C) 1 L/L i
OF AUSTIN.
A '
ORDIM= NO. 84
AN ORDINANCZ AMENDING CRAFTER 13-2A (RWISED ZCNING RBMMATICNS) OF Tim'
AUSTIN CITY CAE OF 1981, AS A?,=ED ; ADDING 7r=;3 E=O NEW SECTIONS 1721,
1722 AMID 1723 TO DEFINE "RESEARCH TESTING SERVICES", -RESEARCH WAFEHCUSING
SERVICES", AND 'RESEARCH ASSF7 MY SERVICES"; ADDING 7rE. M NEW SECTICNS
2675 - 2679 TO PROVIDE A USE DISTRICT "R&D" RE:SZA,20i A -NM DEJEMOP^ ;
ADDING THERM A NEW SUBSECTICtN 13 -2A -2832(a)(4) TO ALLOW R i D DISTRICTS
IN CC tk7UNCT1CN WITH A PLANNED DE =PMLNT AREA CDYBINING DISTRICT; ADDING
A NEW SWrIO7 2836 TO ESTABLISH PDA PEFTOFMANCE STANDARDS; AMENDnNG TABLE
2900 THERECF TO REFLECT THE CHANGES MADE BY THIS ORDINANCE; SUSPENDING THE
RULE R1=IRING THE READING OF ORDINANCES CN THREE SEPARATE DAYS; PROVIDL%G
FOR SfiUERABU=; AND PR(NIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY CCUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUSTIN:
PART 1. That Chapter 13-2A of the Austin City Code of 1981, as amended,
eland is hereby amended by adding thereto new Sections 13-2A-1721,
13-2A-1722 and 13-2A-1723, to read as follows:
1721. Research testina services are research activities that may be
permitted only with e approval of the City Council of such
activities within a Planned Development Area (PDA) Combining
District Ordinance.
1722. Research warehousing services is the enclosed or screened
storage o materials or equipment related to research services.
Research associated storage excludes the bulk warehousing or
permanent storage of hazardous or toxic substances, except as
provided in a Planned Develogrw_zt Area (PDA) Combining District
Ordinance. Underground or bulk storage of chemicals outdoors
shall be prohibited in all instances.
1723. Research Assembly Services is the assembly of products which are
re a to research services, arra which are used by the owners
of the research establishment or by affiliated entities in the
delivery of services performed by the owner or affiliated
entities. Research assembly services would not include the mass
production of products for general sale to custcrers.
PART 2. That Chapter 13-2A of the Austin City Code of 1981, as amended,
e ann is hereby wended by adding thereto new sections 13-2A-2675,
13-2A-2676, 13-2A-2677, 13-2A-2679 and 13-2A-2680, to read as follows:
2675 R i D R rAFXii DEUEZaP11= DISTRICT
2676 Purposes
The R & D District is intended to provide a special district for
research services. An industrial designation would be
CITY OF AUSTIN. TLX
inappropriate because the principal focus of research and
development activity should not include fabrication, processing,
manufacturing, refining or resource extracti on. Site
development regulations require a site plan which demonstrates a
campus -like envirerment. Research testing w- vices, research
warehousing services and research assembly services are allowed, in accordance with a Planned Development Area (PDA) Ordinance.
2677 Permitted Uses
All uses in an R G D Research and Development District are
subject to the Planned Development Area (PDA) Ordinance for the
tract. Generally, research services uses are permitted.
Research testing services, research warehousing services and
research assembly services shall be permitted only as provided
by the PDA Ordinances, as approved by the City Council and after
the reccmmendations of the Chief Environmental Officer, Fire
Chief and Health Officer have been considered.
The follazng use types are also permitted, subject to the PDA
ordinance.
a. Commercial Uses
Administrative and Business Offices
Art and Craft Studio (Limited)
Business Support Services
Business or Trade School
Corramications Services
Financial Services
Medical Offices
Personal Services
Professional Offices
Restaurant (Convenience)
b. Civic Uses
College and University Facilities
Convalescent Services
Cultural Services
Day Care services (General)
Day Care Services (Limited)
Emergency Residential Care Services (Limited)
Emergency Residential Care Services (General)
Guidance Services
Hospital Services (Limited)
Local Utility Services
private primary Educational FacilitieT
Private sect dart' Educational Facilities
Public primary Educational Facilities
Public secondary educational Facilities
Religious Assembly
90ZTt'8 *OK 9OLMUTP-10
UT pauT;ap sv 'earl lsarv{lzox acyl (;)
X-BOEObB *ON a0ueucpz0 's? POL73ap
s? 'pagSX.T4eM STAei,L axeZ W4 (a)
apoo sTtT4
0 109 -E -ET uoilOaS uF PauT;aP
se 'pagsraleM uTZsrnt axe'I W4 (P)
apoo sn{4
0 8L4 -E -ET t10T70a$ uT PauT;aP
se 'spagszageM paleTas ra;Tnby atR (0)
apoo sial ;o E04 -E -ET tm?l---S
ut pauT;ap se 'pa{sraleM xaa-lo
uosuwTTTTM paleTaT sa;?nby aq4 (g)
apao STtil
0 BLZ-E-ET twT4O4@S uT PauT;aP
se 'pat{srdleM xaaao uol.-eq atC (e)
seaze 6u'rmcllo; atTz
uT T:SZ• paaOxa lOu TTeys oT4es ea.zv
soo ianaMo TAcad
03 TSE• oT4ea ease/moT; Ur=TXeW oTlez eas4 =ooT3
3aa3 OOT 'ti4PTm l0T un=u.[W LPPTM 4011
sa v S ;o azTs l0T uaunTuTuc e tr,TM
ease SZ ;o eaae enonbTlua3 uawTtrrW azTs l0rI
uoTle amlra3
suoTleTnbaa luaudcTanap ar4TS buir+OTTO; ayl of
aCgns aq TTmm OTx4sTQ Q 1 8 aril uT al?s t{oeg 'WaldoTaAap
a iET-0 v alezlsuousp ls= sueTd aur3oTaAaP al?S
suoTleTnbad luau><9OTanaQ a4TS
saTlTTT0P3 burxied
Te=aua) saoTAraS TelTdsog
TeTOraiw o) swiAin aseo 7pa
abpo7 io gnTo
sasp OTATj 'g
palTurr1) luemelsa2i
sasp TeTO.au1 vvo e
axmcrrpzp ttQd atpl of lOa, qns pue' OOZ9 ueT74. S Aq PaP?Aoad
se TeAO.zdde og lOaCgns ' pamo-ITL aq C uc sad r4 asn bu-ueOTTo; atZL
SaOTAxas f4a;eS
INI.Lsnv .10
6L9Z
8L9Z
00L6 uorloas LRT + bu-ruutbaq SPzepuelS
f4TTTgT1educr) al =a;az 'anT_JTS.Sa=
a=au =o S_aS pasn m pauoz A:}iadnzd ;o
Zae; 06S uTLDT^ m ,5u-rITOCpv zo 'unz;
zaa=s app ssnry palvool 14xadoid m3
anT:pTz=saz ssaT m GID 'Z sv pasn m
paT;TsseTo Azzadozd ;o -4aa; OOT uTLrpTM
49a; OT (74 POOnPQa 40 m '2n 'OJ '07
ON sv pasn m jgT;TsseTo Lwadozd ;o
baa; OOT UTg4Tn 4ea; ST a4 pa's 4m
m 9-.ili Is -.mo ' 6-lK ' E-zi 'z -.moi ' T -mi
se paen m paT;TsseTo ,C4Tadozd ;o -4aa;
OOT U7Lr4TA qaa; SZ C4 paonPas -'9-35
m 's -as '6 -as 'E -3S 'Z -d3 'T -ds '2m
j Se pass m PaT;TSSKD Ii4SadO=d ;o
aa; OOT uTg4TA a4TS e ;o UOTg.zod Cue
tai qaa; OOT ')oeq-4as paxmba= uanuTuTW P1E4 apTs 10Tza;ui
OOL6
uorpoaS y4Tw butuurbaq spzvpuegS 14TTT4
TgedumO (74 za;az 'anT-4oTXZSa= axout zo
S_ jS pasn zo pauoz C4. -ad=d ;o -4aa; 069
uTg4-FA m ,Bu=ocpe m 'unz; aaasps
aq4 ssozoe pageool A4zadozd z03 FBj
zo 9-.Dj 'G -Ai 't -.W 'E -IW 'Z -Zi 'T --Bi
Sv pasn m poT;TsseT i4 a 0zd ;0 laa;
OOT uTt474TA baa; SZ 0; Paonpaz "9-3S
o 'S -ds '6-3S 'E -as 'Z -as 'T -as '2Ri
7I se Pass m PaT;TsseTO A4xado=d ;o
4aa; OOT uTLRT'`+ a;TS v ;o WT4zod &m
uo qaa; OOT 1.pvg4as pazTTtbaz wrxruTW PSA apTs 4aaz'zs
OOL6 L07; -)9S u4TM buTuuTbaq spzapu'nS
4TTTgr4uduco Oq za;az 'anT-4o?s4saz
azotu m 5-.iS pom m pat= kwadozd ;o
qaa; 065 UT q;TM m abt.=OCpe =o 'Una;
4aarps aqZ sso=ov pageooT f.4Tad=d
z01 '4a0; SL 'was PanTiba= ucn=urW pze.0 woz3
OOL6 uoT aS tpTA buT=Tbaq spzepuv;s
f;TTTgT;xuaDJ m za;ax 'anT3oTrp5az
a=out m S -3S pasn zo pau= kjaado=d ;o
4aa; 06S uTt TA m bt=oCpe m 'unz3
gaazls arp Ssozoe Pa4eOoT Aredo=d
zo3 ' (.06) 4aa; "4auTu ;o '4q5T@14 TFlal
e paaoxa a3 4ou znq 'xoec 3iaszeas ('OS)
gym; 4-4;T; atR Puv )ppq408 apTs zo
WOO; zoo; (OOT) Pa=Punq-a'm PazTrbaz
aqp VmAaq pvq sT buTPTTTiq a -4et{4
Zaa; ong fLTana zo; '400; atn Paseal.)uT
aq tau -4q5Taq f)=plTnq wqz 'zaN-^N
PaPT^ozd •49a; s6 ':I#TN utsarxeW .4#TaH
NlLsnv AO ).1I
Building coverage
TY Of AUSTIN.
Minim= required setback, 50 feet on
any portion of a site within 100 feet
of property classified or used as LA,
RR, SF -1, SF -2, SF -3, SF -4, SF -5 or
SF -6; reduced to 25 feet within 100
feet of property classified or used as
Mr -1, F -F-2, M -F-3, hT-4, ! -5, MF -6 or
Mt; reduced to 15 feet within 100 feet
of property classified or used as No,
LD, GO, LR, or GR; reduced to 10 feet
within 100 feet of property classified
or used as L, CBD or less restrictive.
For property located across the street
from, or adjoining; or within 540 feet
of property zoned or used SF -5 or more
restrictive, refer to Compatibility
Standards beginning with Section 4700.
Maxim= coverage, 40 percent of the lot
area.
Impervious coverage Maxi= coverage, 50 percent on slopes
of 0-158 slope gradient; no impervious
coverage on slopes of greater than 158
grade.
PAR? 3. That a new subsection 13 -2A -2832(a)(4) be and is hereby adder, to
ti- tin City Code, as amended, to read as follows:
4. R & D Research and DevelopmP-zt District.
PART 4. That a new Section 13-2A-2836 of the Austin City Code of 1981, as
amended, be arra is hereby added, to read as follows:
FITC . :Iam =w^.. W -V--"y n 9
The PDA Ordinance must comply with the performance standards
enumerated in this section. These standards may not be modified by
the PDA Ordinance.
1. General: No land or structure shall be used or occupied in
any manner so as to create any dangerous, injurious,
noxious, or otherwise objectionable noise, smoke, dust,
odor or other foam of air pollution, heat, humidity, liquid
or solid refuse or wastes, light or glare or other
substance, condition, radiation or element in such a manner
or in such amount as to adversely affect any use or
premises within the vicinity; the foregoing are hereinafter
referred to as "dangerous or objectionable elements." This
statement, however, should not be interpreted so as to
exclude resource recovery systems utilizing solid waste.
5
Iitt .
CITY OF AUSTIN. 7L%A
Dete=unaticns are2. Locations where
to be made for,
Enforcerent Standaxds:
a. Noise, odor, vibration, radiation, light and glare: I
At the location of the use creating the same at apointonthesourcepropertyLinewhichhasthe
highest readings, and at any other points where the
existence of such elenen:s may be m --re
b. Smoke, Toxic and Noxious Matter: At the place of
emission into the atmosphere.
3. Noise: At the points of ineasurET,t, the maxinn sound
level radiated by any use or facility, other than
transportation facilities or telporary anstn=tico work,
shall not exceed 55 Idn during daylight hours and 45 Ldn
during night time hours. Refer to Information on levels of
i7ivir m+ental Noise isite to Protect public Health and
We faze with an eouate Margin o Sa et E7rvlro:amenta
wotection A4ency, 1974, or oaiinitio. the Idn noise
parameter.
4. Vibration: At the points of measurements,
earthborne
not exceed the
vibrations frau any operation or
Column I below,
plan shall
for the area in whichlimitssetforthinlocated, unless the point of measurement is located on a
property line which is also the boundary line of aeightyfeetofaresidentialresidentialareaorwithin
line which is located within a streetareaboundaryright-of-way, in which case the limits set forth in Colum:
II below shall apply.
Frequency Cycles colucn If
lacetent (inches)
f
cement (inches)
Dol
la IperdDi
0 to 10 .
0010
0004
10 to 20 .0008
0002
0001
20 to 30 .
0005
0001
30 to 40 .0004
0001
40 and over ,
0003
Steady State — vibrations, for the purpose of this instnmlent,
frequent than sixty pulses Per minute. which are continuous or morewhich Pulses per minute, shall
impact vibration, those less frequennttthan sixty
not cause more than twice the displacement stipulated.
5. Light or Glare: Any operation or activity producing
intense light or glare shall be performed in such a mannerasnottocreateanuisanceorhazardacrosslotlines. Direct illumination fran any source of light or direct
welding flash shall be screened fran adjoining properties
R
OF AUSTIN.
and reflected light from these sources shall not exceed 0.4
foot candles across the source property line.
6. Smoke and Particulate Matter: Smoke emitted from any vent,
stack, chimney, skylight, window, building opening, or
corbustion process shall not exceed any opacity of
Ringelmann No. 0, 0 percent opacity, as observed on the
Ringlenann G`ia--t.
The emission of particulate matter from all sources shall
not exceed one pound per acre of property within the
boundary of any plan site under consideration during any
one hour. Dust coarser than forty-four microns shall be
limited to 0.05
hour.
pounds per acre of property during any one
Open industrial operations involving dust -producing or
dust -causing equipment of operations such as sandblasting,
paint spraying, gravel and concrete batching and similar
operations, shall be so conducted that such dusts do not
cross lot lines in concPntratiais exceeding me million
particles per cubic foot when measured at ground level or
habitable elevation, at or beyond, the lot line, whichever
is more restrictive.
Toxic and Noxious Matter: At a minimum, all applicable
i7ivisormental Protection Agency and Texas Air Control Board
standards and permit requirements shall be fully met. All
toxic and hazardous material utilized on the tract shall be
registered with the City of Austin Fire Department cc
comply with the Hazardous Materials Storage and
Pegistration Ordinance requirements.
7. Fire and Explosive Hazards: Activities involving the
storage and utilization of materials or Products which
de=r>pose by detonation are permitted only when
specifically approved by the City of Austin Fire
Depar=mt. such materials shall include but are not
limited to all primacy explosives such as lead azide, lead
styphnate, fulminates and tetracene; all high explosives
such as TNr, HM , PEZN, and picrid acid; propellants and
caq=-,Mts thereof such as nitrocellulose, black powder,
boron hydrides, hydrazine and its derivatives; pyrotechnics
and fireworks such as magnesium powder, potassium chlorate,
and potassium nitrate; blasting explosives such as dynamite
and nitroglycerin; unstable organic compxnnts such as
perchloric acid, perchlorates, chlorates, and hydrogen
perozide in concentrations greater than thirty-five
percent; and nuclear fuels, fissionable materials and
products, and reactor elanents such as Uraniun 235 and
Plutonium 239.
Explosives shall be stored, utilized, and manufactured in
accordance with applicable local, state, and federal codes.
7
CITY OF AUsT,N. TixA
All applications for uses involving fire and explosive
hazards may be referred to the Office of the City of Austin II
Fire Department for approval. Such approval shall indicate
compliance With all applicable fire codes and ordinances of
the City of Austin and shall be indicated on theapplicationwithintendaysfrauthedateguc3:_application j
was made in the office of the Building
Inspector. II
8. Liquid or Solid wastes: No discharge shall be made into a IIpublicstormorsanitarysewer, waterway, or stream unless
in accordance with the City's Industrial Waste
ordinance I
for storm and sanitary sewers. II
PART 5. That Table 2900 of Chapter 13-2A of the Austin City Code of 1961,
as amended, be and is hereby amended to reflect the changes made by this II
Ordinance. IPART6. If any provision, section, subsection,
sentence, cla
oor
saoet
o 7i's ordinance, or the application of same to any P
void, or II
circumstances is for any reason held to be uncon.5titutional, remaining portions of this ordinance shallinvalid, the invalidity of the being the intent of the City Council innotbeaffectedthereby, it
no portion thereof or provisions,
or
adopting this ordinance thatregulationscontainedherein, shall beccne inoperative or fail by reason
of any unconstitutionality of any
other portion hereof and. all provisions I,
Of this ordinance are declared to be severable for that purpose.
PART 7. The rule requiring that
separate days is hereby suspended
effective ten (10) days following the
PASS!) AND APPR VM S
S
S
1985 S
APPPDVM:
Pa C. I
Citv Attorney
FMC/saf
research Ord w= - ord7)
ordinances shall be read on three
and this ordinance shall beccre I
date of its passage. i
I
IIli
Pcm len II
Mayor
ATTEST:
James E. Aldr ge
City Clerk
WESTBRANCH - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Location Map
Applicant: Raymond E Mitchell
8610 R.R. 620 North
Austin, Tx 78726
266-1343
Agent: Larry Roberts
8610 R.R. 620 North
Austin, Tx 78726
266-1343
1"=1000'
Request: Preliminary plat approval of Westbranch,
a 106 acre subdivision.
Facts•
Location: West of Andice Road (RM 2338) approximately
2.84 miles northwest of its intersection
with IH -35
Surrounding Uses: Large lot residential use to the
northeast in Serenada West IV, and in
Country West Subdivision to the
southeast, and in Turtle Bend to
the south; Corps of Engineers land
to the southwest; and undeveloped land
to the north.
Proposed Use: 351 single family lots at an approximate
residential density of 3.75 units per acre
and two commercial lots comprising
12.44 acres.
Westbranch - page 2
Development Plan: Large lot residential at a density
District 3B of two units per acre is recommended;
the proposed use is not in strict
conformance with the plan but meets
the standard for sewered areas.
Analysis:
The proposed extension of wastewater collection lines
will eliminate the potential risk to drinking water
supplies caused by septic systems. While this gain
is partially offset by the degradation in the quality
of stormwater runoff, the quality of runoff is relatively
easy to monitor and improve.
Commercial use has been proposed along Andice Road. Strip
commercialization of major roadways often results in
hazardous and/or inefficient traffic flow such as
that which has occured along North Lamar Blvd. or Burnet
Road in Austin. To prevent potential traffic problems,
direct access from Andice Road to the commercial tracts
should be limited. Non -retail uses, which generate
less traffic than retail uses are preferable. A day
care center would benefit the future residents of
the subdivision without exacerbating traffic problems
if properly designed. Single family lots adjacent to
the commercial tracts should be buffered from noise and
negative visual impacts.
General Design. The applicant has failed to meet some
basic informational requirements on the plat. These
need to be corrected on a revised preliminary plat
for staff review. Although the present street layout
has been improved substantially, the lot layout requires
the following changes to meet ordinance requirements:
Sec. 5.02.5 "corner lots with a width of less than 75
ft. are to be at least 5 ft. wider than the average
interior lot in the block "
Block F Lot 5 Block 0 Lot 8
Block H Lots 14 & 27 Block Q Lot 30
Block V Lot 20
5.02.6 The ratio of depth to widthi should not
ordinarily exceed 211:1 (Block 0, Lots 7 & 8, and
Block P, Lot 2)
5.02.3 Radial lots shall have . . . a minimum of
60 ft. width, 30 ft. behind the building line. (Block
M, Lot 1)
All the above blocks can be redesigned to meet ordinance
requirements. With the exception of the elimination of
Lot 1, Block M, these changes would not require the
loss of any lots.
Westbranch - page 3
Variances will be required for Blocks E,Q, 6 V which
exceed maximum 1200 ft. block length. Redesign of these
blocks would necessitate a complete revision of the
entire layout. Due to restraints presented by the
existing properties behind Blocks E and Q,
no apparent benefit would result from this revision.
Existing conditions behind Block V do not prohibit
redesign and the extension of Trailside Place would
be a feasible alternative. However, it appears that
a future extension of Windsong Dr. would be preferable
both for the internal circulation of the subdivision
and the spacing of intersections along R.M. 2338. The
downside of this situation is that this second access
to Andice Road will not occur until the Kraus Tract is
redeveloped.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of Preliminary plat of Westbranch subject of
the following conditions:
1. A revised preliminary plat meeting ordinance
informational requirements shall be submitted for
staff approval prior to City Council review,
2. Ordinance requirements shall be met
3. Drainage requirements shall be met
4. Utilities shall be adequate (Water availability
note shall apply)
5. An approved Water Pollution Abatement Plan is
required prior to recordation
6. Commercial lots shall be buffered from single family
lots
7. Variances should be requested for excessive length
of Blocks E", "Q", and "V".
8. Lots should be redesigned as discussed in the analysis
section of this report
9. The basic design and layout of off-site water
and sewer improvements shall be approved by staff
and presented prior to or in conjunction with
the final plat and shall be conditional upon
completion of proposed improvements to the sewer
treatment plant.
P S Z Recommendation: 5-0)
Approval conditional upon the above comments being met
City Council Action:
Withdrawn from agenda of Nov. 12, 1985 at the request of
applicant in order to prepare off-site utility proposal
tth K"l 04 N". kapok
Developers • Builders • Real Estate Sales and Leasing
Raymond Mitchell the builder, Inc.
Raymond Mitchell Rentals
Raylin Development Co.
Lintay Development Co.
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Georgetown
P. 0. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
RE: WESTBRANCH Subdivision
Dear Commissioners:
November 5, 1985
We hereby request a variance for Blocks E, Q, and V of the
above-referrenced subdivision for block lengths exceeding
1200 feet in length. We feel we have coordinated the best
plan with surrounding property for future penetrating streets,
and request this variance with support of your staff.
Additionally, we would like to leave Lots 7 and 8 of Block 0
at the depths shown for now. We feafl this situation will auto-
matically correct itself on the final plat. If not, we will
make necessary corrections.
If additional information is needed for preliminary plat ap-
proval, please feel free to contact me.
LCR:ldm
very truly,
DEVELOPMENT CO.
Raymond E. Mitchell
PRESIDENT
8610 Ranch Road 620 North • Austin, Texas 78726. 512/2661343
VARIANCE - CONSTRUCTION IN P.U.E. - 307 SHADY OAK DR.
r $
5; eZ4Dr.
Oak
r it
1 nerrerrr nrrei.-
Applicant: Stan and Donna Przygoda
307 Shady Oak Or
Georgetown, Tx
Request: Applicant has requested that a variance be
granted allowing the construction of a below
ground swimming pool some 3 feet into the
rear 10 ft. Public Utility Easement of Lot
4 and Part of Lot 3, Block H San Gabriel Heights
Section Two.
Analysis:
Public Works Department has indicated that there are no
utilities in this easement and they have no objection
to proposed construction. Records indicate that all
public utilities for this block are in the street
right-of-way. Building Official has also indicated no
objection to the request.
From a planning perspective, the request realistically
constitutes an abandonment of at least a portion of the
platted easement, due to the permanent nature of
the construction. Perhaps the "cleanest" way of handling
this type of request is through a vacating and resubdivision
procedure whereby the easement is either eliminated or
reduced in width. This would however, represent
considerable expense to the applicant.
Variance - 307 Shady Oak Dr. - page 2
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of variance conditional upon applicants filing
of a covenant in which it is agreed that in the event
that the City of Georgetown requires future use of
this easement then the structure may be caused to be
removed.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: (5-0)
Approved the granting of variance
VARIANCE — WATER AVAILABILITY POLICY — LOT 1, BLOCK 6, SHELL
ADDITION
J
sr a a
5ife
I
i
Location Map 1"= 2000'
Applicant: Douglas L. Anderson
PO Box 752
Georgetown, Tx 78627-752
86 3-565 3
Agent: Steger & Bizzell, Inc.
PO Box 858
Georgetown, Tx 78627-858
863-4521
Request: Variance for Lot 1 Block 6 Shell Addition
from the Water Availability Policy restricting
building permits on new lots which was
established by Council on April 23, 1985.
Letter of request and plat copy attached.)
Facts:
Location: On the northwest corner of 4th Street and
Pine Street, within the City limits and
Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
Surrounding Uses: Single family residences occupy
the adjoining properties to the north
and east, and directly across 4th
Street to the south. The property
across Pine Street to the west (as
well as the southwest corner of Pine
and 4th) is vacant.
VARIANCE - Water Availability - Shell Addition - page 2
History: The plat of the one lot subdivision of Shell
Addition was approved by Council on October
8, 1985 with the condition that the "Water
Availability Note shall apply".
Analysis•
According to the applicants engineer, the lot represented
by this plat was "deed divided" prior to 1968. Thus,
it is likely that this could be considered under the
long standing "grandfather" policy as a legally
established lot. This policy developed due to the
fact that while the City has had a Subdivision Ordinance
since Feberuary 14, 1955 this ordinance was not rigorously
enforced until after passage of the current ordinance
in 1977. However, the Planning Department strongly
encourages the proper platting of all property within
the City's jurisdiction to ensure uniform development
and accurate records for the future.
The basic decision in this case involves maintaining
the integrity and fairness of the policy concurrent
with the implimentation of the Subdivision Ordinance.
By being in the City Limits and considered by past
policy to be a "grandfathered" lot, it appears that
even if the platting had not been accomplished a
building permit could be issued for this lot.
Staff Recommendation:
No objection to granting of variance
City Council Action: (4-0) 1 abstain
Approved granting of variance
B Steger 6 Bi33ell, enc.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS — SURVEYORS (512) 853-6521 Pnone
P. 0. BOX 858 • GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78627 (512) 255-2582 Jeu"m Phone)
October 10, 1985
Mr. Ed Barry, Director
Community Development and Planning
City of Georgetown
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627-409
Re: Job No. E 10571-1
Resubdivision of part of
Block 6, Shell Addition
Dear Mr. Barry:
As the agent for Mr. Douglas L. Anderson, I am hereby requesting a variance
to allow this resubdivision to receive a building permit from the City of
Georgetown prior to the time the city water treatment facilities are
operational. This variance is being requested due to the negligible impact
of this development on the current city water distribution system in
conjunction with the fact that this single family lot was subdivided by
deed prior to the adoption of the current subdivision ordinance in May,
1977, as recorded in Volume 506, Page 272 of the Deed Records of Williamson
County, 'texas, a copy of which is attached. Therefore, the primary purpose
of the resubdivision plat for this lot is to bring it into strict
c6mpliance with this ordinance and not to create a "new" lot demand on the
City's utility system.
If I can be of any assistance please call.
PCS:lh
203/E10571.1
Very ruly yours
C
Perry teger
MEMBER NSPE TSPE ASCE PMI TSA
ng service locations at td
nts necessary.
thin.the Edwards Aquifer
the Texas Plane Coordinate
OWNER
Douglas L. Anderson
Boz 752
Georgetown, TX 78626
512) 863-5653
W
vs6Ji8E
W
I F.
r I
I
qV SMiM
J -4-,66B
4th
117/329 . ?
LEGEND
R.O.W.
B. L.
P.U.E.
p
U. G.
i St. 57
I aoe1
W
9` I AR DS _ _S L'N _ Uj
00. j1
X4131
416"
1
022 Ac.
mil
e7 ^se'w i
STREET_ o
15b-117
Right of Way
Building Line
Public Utility Easement
Iron Pin Found
Iron Pin Set
Underground Utility Easement
WJQU
Preliminary/ Final Plat
Resubdivision - Part of BLOCK 6
SHELL AD0I1rION
A 0.22 Acre Resubdivision Situated in the
WILLIAM ADDISON SURVEY A-21
CITY of GEORGETOWN, WILLIAMSON CO., TEA 1Z
RIVER HILLS - CONCEPT PLAN
Locat.
Applicant: Walter Carrington Company5609Adams
Austin, Tx
512 454-6601
Agent: David Holt - Holford Group
9501 Capital of Tx Hwy North
Austin, Tx 7t7S°r
512 346-8181
Request:
Concept Plan approval for River Hills of Georgetown, a57.7 acre multiuse development, out of the C. StubblefieldSurveyandtheJ.B. Pulsifer Survey No. 36.
Facts:
Location: Bordering on the west side of IH -M- between theN. San Gabriel River and Hwy 29. Outside of, butcontiguous
Zone. to City limits and within Edwards Recharge
Surrounding Uses: Undeveloped land and large lot single-family
and duplex residential
Proposed Use: 15.2 acres of multi -family, 4.7 acreas ofProfessionaloffice, 7.6 acres of local retailcommercial, 2.5 acres of commercial, and
27.7 acres of large lot single family residential.
River Hills Page 2
Development Plan: District 3A- Large residential is recommended.
Proposal does not conform to plan but Council
approval of IH -35 utility agreement implies
flexibility in this area.
History: Site is part of the IH 35 Joigt Venture Utility
Agreement and requires City agproval of concept
plan to fulfill requirements of contract. At the
P & Z meeting of June 4, 1985, the Concept Plan
evoked considerable objections from the adjacent
home owners (large lot single family area). They
protested that developer had sold them lots with
assurances that surrounding uses would be similar
to theirs. It was their contention that the change
of land use to multifamily, office and commercial
was detrimental to their property values as well as
the quality of life they had been led to expect
when they purchased their property. Resubmittal
was recommended in order that objections regarding
land use incompatibility be addressed. The portions
of the plan labeled Section One, Section Two, and
Section Three are existing recorded plats. Section
Four was a portion of the overall concept plan
but has not been filed for record.
Analysis:
This plan was presented and discussed at both the
August and September Planning and Zoning Commission
hearings. No action was taken at either of those
meetings pending a written opinion from City
Attorney relatve to a petition filed in District
Court concerning the project. Attorney has advised
staff to proceed as normal with this proposal.
Concept Plan has not been changed since first put
on hold.
The proposal submitted covers the non-residential
frontage strip of Section One (i.e. Parcel One, Two,
and Four), Section Two (i.e. Parcel Three), and
Section Four (i.e. Parcel Five and Six). Parcel
Three is shown to remain in its current platted
configuration with no change in land use. Parcels
Ong Two, and Four are to remain in the same con-
figuration the only difference being a greater
level of specificity of the proposed commercial
use and an associated utility allocation.
Staff has no problem with Parcel Three as is. The
primary concerns relative to Parcels One and Two are
that an attractive "Front" is secured along IH -35',
that traffic conflicts be reduced, that buffering
of adjacent residential lots be accomplished and
that site development be sensitive to the environment.
The same general concerns hold for Parcels Four, Five,
and Six but are deemed to be m re critical becauseofexistinghomesonadjacentlots. Therefore, consideration
should be given to specific controls for this area in
the form of use restrictions, height and setbabk limits,
and a 50 foot wide natural greenbelt.
River Hills Page 3
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of Concept Plan for land use type with the
following conditions:
I. All ordinance requirements being met
2. All provisions of the Agreement Regarding Water
and Wastewater Facilities and Services shall be met
3. The document entitled "Environmental Standards Criteria"
shall be used to evaluate future plats and plans
4. Access along IH -35 shall be restricted and coordinated
with T.D.H.P.T. Plans
5. A uniform architectural and landscaping theme shall
be maintained on lots fronting on IH -35 and implimented
through site plan review
6. The following conditions should apply to parcels 4,5,& 6:
A. The 50 ft. greenbelt shall remain in its existing
natural condition, and be extended through parcel
four
B. The 100 ft strip adjacent and parallel to this
greenbelt shall be used for landscaping, parking
and driveways only. Construction in the west
half of this area shall avoid the destruction of
existing trees
C. RM -3 District zoning should be requested upon
annexation and used to evaluate site plans
7. Actual density of development shown shall not be
approved except in conjunction with site plan review
8. A landscaped buffer shall be established between
Parcels One and Two and adjacent residential lots
9. Specific land use shall be indicated on preliminary
plat/plans, R & D designations shall be dropped from
consideration
P&Z Recommendation: (2-1)
Approved conditional upon comments above being satisfied.
City Council Action:
October 8, 1985: Withdrawn at council per applicant request.
October 22, 1985: Not placed on agenda
November 12, 1985: Motion to table pending direction from
City Attorney as to the legality of
conditions
RIVERVIEW ESTATES - FINAL PLAT
Location Map
Owner: Philip J. Tremont
PO Box 4104
Bryan, Tx 77805
409 77 3-5444
Agent: Perry Steger
Steger & Bizzell, Inc.
PO Box 858
Georgetown, Tx
512 863-4521
Request:
1"=2000'
Final Plat approval for Riverview Estates, a 50.24 acre
subdivision situated in the J. Thompson Survey, Abstract
No. 608. The following variances have been requested:
1. Lots at right angles- Lots 2-6, 9-13, 16-20,
23-27 Block "F" and lots 16-18 Block "G".
2. Excessive Block length - Block G Exceeds
1200 ft. maximum length
3. Drainage - Waiver from stormwater detention
requirements
4. Lots exceeding maximum .width to depth ratio -
lots 1 & 2 Block "A", Lots 1-6 Block "E",
and Lots 14 & 15, Block "G".
Riverview Estates page 2
Facts:
Location: Between Leander Road (FM. 2243) and the South
San Gabriel River, west of River Ridge Subdivision.
The property is in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
Surrounding Uses: Currently undeveloped land surrounds
the property. River Ridge III, to the
east, is a minimum lot residential
subdivision.
Proposed Use: 91 single family residences with average lot
size 80' x 120' and density of 2.86 units
per acre excluding flood plain.
Development Plan: No use is specified in the plan, however
District 9b normal residential use is recommended
for the tract to the east.
History: the preliminary plat of Riverview Estates was
approved by the City Council on 6/25/85. Variances
allowing lots 1-6 Block "E" and lot 15 Block "G"
to exceed the maximum width to depth ratio
were approved at preliminary stage.
On September 3, the Planning and Zoning Commission
disapproved this plat due to a failure to meet
the preliminary plat condition that the distance
be increased between homes and the gas easement.
However, the applicant has submitted a proposal
to cap the pipeline with concrete which was
accepted" by the Commission on October 1, 1985.
Analysis:
A drawing of the proposed concrete cap for the high
pressure gas line is attached to this report. The
colored concrete cap should be sufficient to alert
equipment operators of their proximity to the gas line.
Notices on the plat and in the deed restrictions in
conjunction with monuments at each property line should
further alert future property owners of the potential
danger. Additionally, in order to further protect the
integrity of the gas line, a variance should be
considered to eliminate all public utility easements
which either cross, or run adjacent to the gas line
except as specifically required by Public Works Department.
Appropriate buffering from the negative impacts of
traffic along Leander Road should be required. While
fences offer a quick solution to buffering, it should
be noted that they require more maintenance than native
evergreen trees and are less effective in reducing
noise.
r
This subdivision and the River Ridge development to the
east contains substantial land in the flood plain. This
relatively undevelopable land could serve as natural
Riverview Estates page 3
parkland connecting future hiking trails along the South
San Gabriel River. At the minimum, the applicant should
allow access to this area for use as open space and
designate it as a single. lot to facilitate its future
use by the public.
The City engineer has not recommended approval of this
plat for drainage or streets. However, the required
changes are relatively minor in nature, and can be
adjusted during construction plan review.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of the Final plat subject to the following conditions:
1. All ordinance requirements being met
2. Drainage requirements being met and drainage plan
being approved by City Engineer
3. Utilities being adequate as noted in City Engineers
review comments
4. A Water Pollution Abatement plan being approved by
T.W.C.
5. Streets and lots shall tie to adjacent River Ridge III
Subdivision and be shown on plat.
6. A notice concerning potential hazard of the existing
gas line shall be added to plat and monuments identifying
its location including a detail of the concrete cap to
be built, shall be included in construction plans.
7. A landscape buffer shall be included in the construction
plans for the setback area along Leander Rd and the
east line of Block "A"
8. The flood plain/drainage easement of Block "E" shall
also be identified as an access easement and given a
single lot designation
9. Variance shall be granted for elimination of all side
and rear P.U.E.'s which either cross or run adjacent
and parallel to the 35' Gas Easement shown
10. Requested variance regarding lots and blocks shall be
granted.
11. The detention variance should not be granted at this
time. Staff shall consider this request during the
construction plan review process with the intent of
reducing, in so far as is possible, negative environmental
impacts of direct discharge, including the need for
filtration of stormwater run-off.
P & Z Recommendation: (5-0)
Approval conditional upon above comments being met, and with
comment #8 changed to read "The flood plain/drinage easement
of Block "E" shall also be identified as a public access
and maintenance easement for the City."
City Council Action: (4-1)
Approved with conditions as originally written and staff
to negotiate establishment of the flood plain area as a
future City Park
NOTE: DEPTH OF COVER
MEASURED TO BE 4'ON
LOT 1 BLOCK G.
2' WIDE TRENCH
RAL BACKFILL TO MATCH EXISTING
ND
CpIo'e
P.S.I. CONCRETE 28 -DAY
NGTH
FILL MATERIAL
THICK HIGH STRENGTH
5 STEEL PIPE
CROSS-SECTION OF (
COSEP
ECEIVED
SEMINOLE PIPELINE TRENCH
27 1985
THROUGH RIVERVIEW ESTATES
INCLUDING PROPOSED 4° -THICK
CONCRETE CAP s V
to
IauuaC 28, 19-6
1. Minutes Motion by King and second by Girvin to approve
the January 14, 1986 Minutes as submitted by
City Secretary Pat Caballero. Motion carried by
unanimous vote.
2. Bills over $2,000.00
Motion by Shell and second by King to approve
the following bills:
ni17a.
Freese & Nichols 10/25/85 & 10/19/85 Statement $ 3755.78
Commercial Body Corp. 12/31/85 Statement 3053.26
Earth Arrangers 1/6/86 Statement 3615.00
Texas water Commission Inspection Fee due 2/1/86 3000.00
Municipal Electric Job Training and Safety
Program 9/1/85 to 8/31/86 Statement 2936.00
Bids:
Miracle Recreation Equipment 12/27/85 Statement 7362.00
Priester-hell & Nicholson Inc. 1/10/85 Statement 6147.85
RTE Dist. Transformer, Inc. 57259.00
Motion to approve the above bills carried by
unanimous vote.
3. Award Bid for Sale of (2) IBM System 32 Computers
Motion by Connor and second by Shell to
authorize the sale of two IBM System 32
Computers to Harry Gold, the only bidder, for a
total price of $500.00. Motion carried by
unanimous vote.
1 -
r
ter.
I. a -r:_
r1:6brit C. i C'/tri,
4.rrrrr !(1_1_1Y Jh"1_I ri.l rl LI, f1, .11:r.
r
r"C.- fir 1r' hUL.Y.:.
t• , ' Yr' ri r4 m''-1 r i r OEaV : r/!/IGh flt afl/] t lannllrU
Director Ed 8arry and Transition Consultant
P.enee Hanson.
1. Minutes Motion by King and second by Girvin to approve
the January 14, 1986 Minutes as submitted by
City Secretary Pat Caballero. Motion carried by
unanimous vote.
2. Bills over $2,000.00
Motion by Shell and second by King to approve
the following bills:
ni17a.
Freese & Nichols 10/25/85 & 10/19/85 Statement $ 3755.78
Commercial Body Corp. 12/31/85 Statement 3053.26
Earth Arrangers 1/6/86 Statement 3615.00
Texas water Commission Inspection Fee due 2/1/86 3000.00
Municipal Electric Job Training and Safety
Program 9/1/85 to 8/31/86 Statement 2936.00
Bids:
Miracle Recreation Equipment 12/27/85 Statement 7362.00
Priester-hell & Nicholson Inc. 1/10/85 Statement 6147.85
RTE Dist. Transformer, Inc. 57259.00
Motion to approve the above bills carried by
unanimous vote.
3. Award Bid for Sale of (2) IBM System 32 Computers
Motion by Connor and second by Shell to
authorize the sale of two IBM System 32
Computers to Harry Gold, the only bidder, for a
total price of $500.00. Motion carried by
unanimous vote.
1 -
r
4. Sidewalk Assessments
The council heard comments from the audience
ar,out Cfle
d r(, :-C r..
5. Award Sidewalk Bids
received:
Dnar-,d! rrn..-,fir..,, ,.4E p-7
In0'ustriai COntractOrs '. 7040'f O:
P.A. Stark Construction 75590`i.00
Austin Enyineering 970140.GG
Mayor Doering announced that due to a conflict
of interest he would not participate in this
matter. For this item Mayor Pro -tem Girvin
presided while Mayor Carl Doering excused
himself from the proceedings. Mayor Pro -tem
Girvin announced that in this capacity he would
only vote to break a tie. Motion by Shell and
second by King to acknowledge the first reading
of an ordinance accepting the bid of Peabody
Construction for $453,473.00 for the
construction of certain improvements surrounding
the public square in. the City of Georgetown.
Motion carried by unanimous vote.
6. Serenada Annexation
The council heard a report from Jack Maidlow
President of the Serenada Home Owners
Association concerning the attitudes of the
residents in the Serenada Subdivision about
being annexed by the City of Georgetown. Mr.
Maidlow indicated that at this time it is not
the desire of the majority of the Serenada
Residents, that conveyed their wishes to Jack
Maidlow, to be annexed into the City of
Georgetown. Motion by King that the city council
through the city staff convey to the Serenada
Home Owners an interest in bringing them into
full citizenship in Georgetown and that the city
staff bring to the council, as soon as possible,
one or more alternate proposals which have been
negotiated between the city staff and the
Serenada Home Owners Association which might
successfully accomplish annexation of the
Serenada Area. Motion died due to a lack of a
second.
2 -
WA
7. Charter amendments
Motion by Colbert and second ty Conner teat a
p r otos ir:(Jn r) t' o.dcF:a Jr. '. L•.!:
ria 'L l,or Jri lC:. NUU LU .1L v`, JU^ L :.L •'u(
council terms. voting went as toliows: yes:
con -or sna
c - .on
Motion t,y :olberr and secr.nd :,y i:e r.ncr _nat r.o:
sentence, contair,ad in sect Lon i.(iLi as pr,jo,sed
revision ba Lot, stating _r:ar. me idfl Cil C•1 !J1
Zoning Commission shail no* have mores Car.
one-fourth of its memoers directi y or 11IO1LeCti'y'
connected with real estate or land development"
be eliminated from such proposition. Voting
went as follows: yes: Connor and Colbert; no:
Girvin, King and Shell. Motion failed.
Motion by King that the sentence, contained in
section 1.09 as proposed as a proposition to be
placed on the charter revision ballot, stating
that the Planning and Zoning Commission shall
not have more than one-fourth of its members
directly or indirectly connected with real
estate or land development" be amended to read
that the Planning and Zoning Commission shall
not have more than one-fourth of its members
directly connected with real estate or land
development". Motion died due to a lack of a
second.
Motion by Shell and second by Girvin to accept
the revisions to the Georgetown City Charter as
proposed by the Charter Review Committee and to
place these changes on a ballot to be voted on
by the citizens of Georgetown. Voting went as
follows: yes Girvin, King, Connor and Shell;
abstain: Colbert. Motion carried.
B. Presentation of the 1984-85 Audit
Motion by Girvin and second by King to accept
both the Fiscal Year 1984 - 1985 City of
Georgetown Audit and The Special Planning
Department Audit as submitted by the Firm of
Virgil Carlson CPA. Motion carried by unanimous
vote.
9. Agreement for Architectural Services
Motion by Connor and second by Shell to
authorize Director of Public Works Allyn Moore
3 -
to retain the :services )f welter Asrnc:3r&s
rnc. for the ;;chematLc desiun phase `he=ur._:C
40 r Ks 6ui :Uir'. :•C`.,
i:,ki J(J. i'IU t. i:.n .a(( o-'(1 :,'i
10. Utilities Report - Wood Ranch Development
The ':_t}, LIL(IShe .rinCccr ;, •..,,_. _
wasr_ewater t ran-port ation 'And ,...--
to the Wood Ranch Deveiopmen'_, >r. rac- ,
the City aeterlBines Cr.aC u.. rr/ aL:.•'
serve the area with watr_r, :iEher and
services that the Wood R411CI. Group *QrR Vn
obtaining those services from the City. 3) That
the City recommends that the Tri -Tract Group and
the Wood Ranch Group work together on a proposal
for implementing this process and return to the
City for further action. 4) That the city statf
be included in such negotiations. Motion
carried by unanimous vote.
11. Planing Agenda Items
A. Variance - Building Setback - 1105 Ranch Road
Motion by Connor and second by Shell to grant a
variance from Section 2.0203 (1) (b) of the City
Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of a
detached accessory building some two feet inside
the required seven foot side yard. Voting went
as follows: ;yes: Girvin, King, Connor and Shell;
no: Colbert. Motion carried.
B. variance - Subdivision Ordinance Section 3.05 - University
Park Section One
Motion by Girvin and second by Connor to grant a
variance to Section 3.05 of the City Subdivision
Ordinance to allow the issuance of utility
an or building permits prior to completion of
required subdivision improvements subject to the
following: 1) A performance bond issued to the
City of Georgetown will guarantee the completion
of all unfinished improvements necessary for
City acceptance of subdivision. 2. The public
streets fronting the lots on which the model
homes are to be built will be paved such that
the lots will have access to existing public
streets. 3) The City will not issue
Certificates of Occupancy until all subdivision
improvements have been completed and accepted by
the City of Georgetown Public works Department.
4 -
4) All othar •7rltaria `he City of /;Pornetown f!as
D. Ordinances - Rezoning Annexed Areas - 2nd Reading
1. Parkview Estates:
a) Section 1 Lots 1-7, Block B and lots 1-10 Block F from RS to
RN -1
Motion by Connor and second by Colbert to adopt
on second and final reading an ordinance
rezoning Parkview Estates Section 1 Lots 1-7,
Block H and Lots 1-10 Block F from RS to RM -1.
Motion carried by unanimous vote.
M
for issuance or nuiidinq persalts wi.i nP ,Wt.
hdC :;,k aF[1LiCuht agreb:. -u
yLLJ)j.!Iij ..(Jr i,L ticquiJ It i,Jn 'Ji
land necessary to connect E. 11th ano iStn
it rQPY :nC3t`td _,. .,he nn Addi'i•=n t i r1:i,:
7UGd17i:11)^. 6) ."tat `:LJC _ ':i :i :'r.r:,
Connection 'fit utilities at ': e, ;-onnFecrion br ....
17th dri(I E. :5th otreet--. 7otiny ,+er,t as
follows: yes: (33irvin, King, Connor and She 1i;
J. (:GiLer. *lo*'•r: tarried.
C. Tri -Corners Preliminary/Final Plat
Councii Memoer Connor rioted that he wouid
abstain from participation on this matter due to
a conflict of interest. Motion by Colbert and
second by Shell to approve the Tri -Corners
Preliminary/Final Plat with subject the
following: 1) Plat shall meet all ordinance
requirements. 2) Drainage requirements shall be
met. 3) Utilities being adequate. Water
availability note shall apply and water
certification letter from Jonah Water Supply
Corporation is required. 4) The following notes
shall be added to the plat: a) An approved site
layout and drainage plan shall be required for
the lots shown on this plat. b) Driveway access
to the lots shall be restricted to one 24"
approach for each lot except as otherwise
approved by City. c) This subdivision lies
within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. An
approved Water Pollution Abatement Plan is
required. 5) A loft. dedication for road
widening shall be required along County Road 151
and a 45 ft. radius shown at its intersection
with Hwy 81. 6 ) Granting of a -V e to 7 --
6ing BentG,(minimum fire protection standards 4o t
as follows: yes: Girvin, King, Colbert and
Shell; abstain:' Connor Motion carried.
D. Ordinances - Rezoning Annexed Areas - 2nd Reading
1. Parkview Estates:
a) Section 1 Lots 1-7, Block B and lots 1-10 Block F from RS to
RN -1
Motion by Connor and second by Colbert to adopt
on second and final reading an ordinance
rezoning Parkview Estates Section 1 Lots 1-7,
Block H and Lots 1-10 Block F from RS to RM -1.
Motion carried by unanimous vote.
M
4(•
1,) Section 2 from C- L and RS to R-1!
lr.. _...H. ._...._.
L (-ton inV I I a L Y. V I St a S ..?CCiOn L Lror.. an(I
ot_ .,n^;,;r -err :..n _:.-gin _:•'V ll !rtr t..
c) Section 3-9 from C -i and V.1; to C -I
or;aecor.r: and `...a:-ac_r14 -1r r1..•1:._e
Ur, 11 :CD .J .-. :'.!,( i J ri ': aL _--v v•r _..._.. ....l, Jr
2. River Ridge II -A Lots 1-3 Block R from RS to RM -2
Motion by Connor and second by Colbert to adopt
on second and final reading an ordinance
rezoning River Ridge II -A Lots 1-3 Block R from
RS to P.M -2. Motion carried by unanimous vote.
3. Westwood Plaza Block A, Lot 1 from RS to RP
Motion by Colbert and second by Connor to adopt
on second and final reading an ordinance
rezoning Westwood Plaza Block A, Lot 1 from RS
to RP. Motion carried by unanimous vote.
4. Thousand Oaks Section IV, Block A, Lots 1, 2A and 2B from RS
to C-1
Motion by Colbert and second by Connor to adopt
on second and final reading an ordinance
rezoning Thousand Oaks Section Iv, Block A, Lots
1, 2A and 2B from RS to C-1. Motion carried by
unanimous vote.
12. Consideration of Collecting of Engineering Review Fees
Motion by King and second by Colbert that the
council reaffirm the position taken by the
director of Community Development and Planning
that the subdivision review fees charged to
developers were and are appropriate and that the
council request that the director schedule
meetings with the developers to attempt to
resolve and diffuse this situation. Motion
carried by unanimous vote.
13. Rabbit Bill Water Corp
Motion by Girvin and second by King to authorize
Planning and Community Development Director to
secure expert testimony on behalf of the City of
Georgetown at a hearing before the Texas Water
Commission scheduled for Thursday February 27,
6 -
k 4
r
f,F f.. 7l '.y..r '_f.r .i Dl;r n•/. -f 1 r -If a filscha rf7P
er^.>_ f cif use
r _ .. _ ... J ,
4. Amf•nd!nPnt to !ii::t.or i'. I,r1•t;Nr/ati1)n f)r(Iinancu - Nirst Read inq
15. Demo I I L 10n fi t Ci t y uwfr(--d huu:.e
1,,f, ,ri:} 5b l.,)f.d :.'( ::7 rif)r 0 JPon
i . l . r I t '.l .. . . !. /' r. •' 1 ) Y IJ fl l 11. I I I) f r.:J
ir:
San (;aur.e1 f'CIL A uUt Lu .t:; uf,Sa Lc: U1 -,U
deteriorated condition. Motion carried by
unanimous vote.
16. Janitorial Services
Motion by Connor and second by Shell to
authorize the city staff to contract Janitorial
Services for the City Buildings. Motion carried
by unanimous, vote.
17. Texas Aeronautics Commission Grant Application
Motion by Connor and second by Colbert to
authorize City Manager Frank Reed to prepare the
necessary documents for a Texas Aeronautics
Commission Grant Application to repair the
Georgetown Airport's East/West Runway and to
proceed in securing the necessary signatures for
the successful completion of such grant
application. (Note: According to a memorandum
dated January 24, 1986 from City Manager Frank
Reed "The estimated cost would be $140,000, with
the City's part running some $35,000.") Motion
carried by unanimous vote.
18. Executive Session Under Art. 6252-17 Sec. 2. (f) Land
No action taken on this matter.
19. Land acquisition
No action taken on this matter.
20. Misc. The council indicated that City Manager Frank
Reed follow up on the following: 1) Location of
large trash containers located on City Streets.
2) Quarterly reports. 3) Personnel Policies
Manual. 4) Division Head job reviews.
Adjourn Motion by Connor and second by Shell to
adjourn. Motion carried by unanimous vote.
MM
ZONING CHANGES FOR RECENTLY ANNEXED AREAS
1 0 I I
Applicant: City of Georgetown
Request: Approval of zoning changes for the following
recently annexed areas so that the zoning
conforms to the uses approved on the plats.
ZONING CHANGES - page 2
1. Parkview Estates (see figure 1)
a) Section 1 Lots 1-7, Block H and Lots 1-10,
Block F from RS (Residential Single Family)
to RM -1 (Residential Multiple Family) for
duplex use
b) Section 2 from C-1 (Local Commercial) and RS
to R -P (Residential, Planned Unit Development)
c) Sections 3,4, and 5 from C-1 and RS to C-1
d) Section 6, 7, 8, and 9 from RS to C-1
24 River Ridge II -A (see figure 2)
a) Lots 1,2, and 3 Block R from RS to RM -2
Residential Multi -Family) for four-plex
use
b) Lots 18 and 19 Block R from RS to RM -3 (Residential
Multi -family) for office and service use
3. River Ridge III -A (see figure' 3)
a) Lots 2 and 3 Block T and Lots 7 and 8 Block
S from RS to RM -2 for four-plex use
b) Lots I,and 4 through 18 Block T and Lots
1-6, 9 and 10 Block S from RS to RM -1 for
duplex use
4. Westwood Plaza (see figure 4)
Block A, Lot 1 from RS to RP for Multi -Family use
5. Thousand Oaks Section IV
Block A, Lots 1, 2A, 2B from RS to C-1 for Neighborhood
Commercial use
Analysis:
All of the proposed zoning changes are consistent with
the approved final plats. With the exception of River
Ridge Section III -A all of the plats have been recorded.
The second reading of the Ordinance rezoning River Ridge
III A should be delayed until after recordation of the Plat.
Because all land is zoned RS upon annexation., the rezonings
are necessary to ensure consistency between the platted
and zoned uses.
Staff Recommendation:
Approval of each of the proposed zoning changes
P & Z Recommendation:
ZONING CHANGES - page 3
P & Z Recommendation: 5-0
Approval of Pa*iew Estates parts a, b, c, and d
as shown on the planning report.
Approval of River Ridge II -A rezoning for Lots 1,2
and 3 Block R from RS to RM -2.
River Ridge II -A Lots 18 and 19 Block R was tabled
until next meeting for re -notification for commercial
C-1) use.
River Ridge III -A rezoning approved as shown on
the planning report for parts a and b.
Westwood Plaza rezoning approved for RP District.
Thousand Oaks Section IV rezoning approved for
C-1 District.
NOTE: Plannind Department recommends that the above
zoning changes be approved conditional upon the
second reading of the ordinances being withheld
until all engineering review fees due, associated
with these projects have been paid.
City Council Action:
I. A motion to table all zoning changes until engineering
review fees have been paid was defeated by a 3-2 vote.
II. All the listed zoning changes were passed with
individual votes of 3-2.
ProPOSCA
R -P
r.
2
1
ey
RS
RM -1 ervease 1
C- I,s, ,D
Q R -P
o o5ed Rm-i
v., f;. b ,•Y
vii' ._ _. :Tj3' y`...• y d \.... ?: .
i j'
o Rm- a
D 0-3
Ivry MWh
SCALE'I =2000
I
Y
35 2 „`
O
v /4
I
3G /7
57
38
39 7' /p i
1
40
G ... /3 -,
y
41 `¢
42.
loll
b s- 7
F A 1
5 3 g
1S5 •4.P &X 4.p1 E /G Z 9 ;
gam
QMM. COMMERI/AL 17
M
RIVER RID6Fr*
SECTION RL -AA
RIVER RIDGE
SECTION TWO
1
km -
I= Rm-
LOCATION MAP
SC/ALE: I =2000
M I 2 .
12 1 5`'
4,• \c JJ /
2 i .2Q
N6!'MJ tree '
z°"r °'
r/
y13 .. bn°0'
I' $
Q 1•G.,%I\\
A 14 1 .9 0• m cid\; 1
I 18 $ 17 16 Yi
16 ' •,. . •
c•°da ti ' K'
2 re. • A- }
pd, A'
6za
5. t
z 1 p - oo,
a• -1'L
w' ee. A.CJ • rl q3 0
e
F)
bgZ.pl j .
to
Dl •,'Dbt i .. •'r+' ''` (
D1
i , '` .\ 5
4321
j .
I{
5
Vol
e
s4c
lGa:.. •'
to
GcnvGETOWN 3
F) a.(p) 6
10 AC.
7
SY..
1 y 1
Illo/725-728
1
km -
I= Rm-
LOCATION MAP
SC/ALE: I =2000
M I 2 .
12 1 5`'
4,• \c JJ /
2 i .2Q
N6!'MJ tree '
z°"r °'
r/
y13 .. bn°0'
I' $
Q 1•G.,%I\\
A 14 1 .9 0• m cid\; 1
I 18 $ 17 16 Yi
16 ' •,. . •
c•°da ti ' K'
2 re. • A- }
pd, A'
6za
5. t
z 1 p - oo,
a• -1'L
w' ee. A.CJ • rl q3 0
e
F)
bgZ.pl j .
to
Dl •,'Dbt i .. •'r+' ''` (
D1
i , '` .\ 5
4321
j .
I{
5
Vol
e
eaee'
moo, '
ago
0 a Jolk (o) o , I• Iv
o) 3a g'
L
46. Z5,22 ..H, Gp9. 64 o 559.32
00, 'e.
CITY OF
to
GcnvGETOWN 3
F) a.(p) 6
10 AC.
7 v 8
Illo/725-728
557'
222ow 20283
4 p' AODM% SNAG 2243
R M
eaee'
moo, '
ago
0 a Jolk (o) o , I• Iv
o) 3a g'
L
46. Z5,22 ..H, Gp9. 64 o 559.32
00, 'e.
1 NOT rNOT IN CITY
IN
A CITY
Area Proposed For Annexation
Thousand Oaks, Section 4
1" - 1000'
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
Planning Report for the
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JANUARY 14, 1986 7:00 pm
Planning Agenda:
1. Ordinances • ----
Zoning Change of Recently Annexed Areas - lst Reading
A) Parkview Estates:
1) Section i Lots 1-7, Block H and Lots 1-10,
Block F from RS (Residential Single Family)
to RM -1 (Residential Multiple Family) for
duplex use
2) Section 2 from C-1 (Local Commercial) and
RS to R -P (Residential, Planned Unit
Development)
3) Section 3,4, and 5 from C-1 and RS to C-1
4) Section 6,7,8 and 9 from RS to C-1
B) River Ridge II -A
1) Lots 1,2 and 3 Block R from RS to RM -2
Residential Multi -family) for four-plex
use
2) Lots 18 and 19 Block R from RS to RM -3
Residential Multi -family) for office
and service use
C) River Ridge III A
1) Lots 2 and 3 Block T and Lots 7 and 8
Block S from RS to RM -2 for four-plex use
2) Lots 1 and 4 through 18 Block T and Lots
1-6, 9 and 10 Block S from RS to RM -1
for duplex use
D) Westwood Plaza -Block A, Lot 1 from RS to RP
for Multi -family use
E) Thousand Oaks Section IV -Block A, Lots 1,
2A and 2B from RS to C-1 for Local Commercial
use.
2. Variance- Rolling Meadow Seciton One - Reinstatement of
Preliminary Plat
3.. Park Central One - Preliminary Plat
4. James Street Townhomes - Vacation of Lots 2-15, Block A University
Park Section One, Resubdivision Plat and Site plan
5, Ordinance - Zoning Change - James Street Townhomes being all of
Block "L" University Park Section One Subdivision from
RS District to RP District, 1st Reading
6s Planning Report Misc.
ROLLING MEADOW SECTION ONE - FINAL PLAT
To
GECRGETO
GEORGET WId 1 .
ETJ 4 ;
Location Map
ROLLIP
MEADC
wale, Tank \
L
1"=2000'
Applicant: Jim Spence
9300 Jollyville Road Suite 200
Austin, Tx 78759
Agent: Same
Request: As required by Section 9.03 Part 8 of the City
Subdivision Ordinance, applicant has requested a 2nd
extension of the approval given this plat on April
23, 1985 in order to have more time in which to determine
the impact of the proposed MOKAN Roadway.
Location: Southeast of the Georgetown City limits,
within the E.T.J. along the west side of Hutto
Road. The property is not within the Edwards
Aquifer Recharge Zone.
Surronding Area: Agricultural land surronds the property.
Proposed Use: 97 single-family residential lots at a
density of 2.8 dwelling units per acre.
Development Plan: District 7b. No use is specified in
the plan.
Electric Service: This tract lies outside the Georgetown
electrical service area and within the
TP & L service area.
Rolling Meadow - page 2
History:
Preliminary Plat approval was granted by City Council on
April 23, 1985. Due to extensive off-site utility
improvements required for this subdivision and questions
involving the proposed MOKAN roadway, a three month
extension of approval was granted on October 8, 1985;
this extension required the submittal of the final plat
prior to January 8, 1986.
MOKAN: On July 9, 1985 the City Council adopted a resolution
which; 1) agreed to support the development of a facility
known as the Mokan Transportation Corridor, 2) agreed
to furnish all required right-of-way and adjust all
utilities not furnished or adjusted by the Mokan
Transportation Corporation. The Williamson County
Commissioners have adopted a similar resolution.
As currently conceived, this roadway will run roughly
parallel and to the east of IH -35 from Martin Luther King
Blvd. in Austin to connect with IH -35 north of Georgetown
at the present Hwy 195 Crossover. (see attached Exhibit 1).
The roadway design currently proposed for the Georgetown
area by the MOKAN Corporation consists of a two lane
transitway flanked by three lane roadways on each side
for the main travelway plus three lane frontage roads
on each side. This configuration plus the required
drainage and separation area result in a R.O.W. requirement
of 400 ft. Additionally, scenic easements,of as yet
undetermined width,are to be established along each side
to control signs, landscaping, buildings, etc. (see
attached Exhibit 2 "Freeway Section").
However, another design has been proposed for the portion
of MOKAN from its south; end in Austin to the future
extension of Loop 620 (Austin Outer Parkway). The
primary difference in the two designs is that the
Parkway Section", also shown on attached Exhibit 2,
eliminates continuous frontage roads and thus reduces
the R.O.W. width to 300 ft. plus scenic easements.
Protest: The preliminary plat of this project
generated considerable protest from adjacent property
onwers and a negotiated set of restrictive convenants
was established as a condition of approval. These
convenants were to be revised and resubmitted with final
plat. A copy of the draft convenants is available
in the Planning Office.
Analysis:
Although the submittal of the final plat does meet one 1
condition established by the City for the extension of
preliminary approval, several issues remain unresolved.
Rolling Meadow- page 3
The most significant of these issues is the impact of
MOKAN on the project. As currently proposed, MOKAN will
be centered on the existing 50' R.O.W. of County Road
110 (Hutto Rd.) which runs along the eastern boundary
of the tract. Thus, in order to accommodate a full
half of the required 400 ft. R.O.W. a reserve of 175
feet plus scenic easements is needed. The plat indicates
only 100 ft. and no scenic easements. Therefore,
seven to ten lots (possibly with residences built on
them) will need to be condemned and purchased to build MOKAN.
if the property is developed as shown on this plat.
In light of the potential expense of the freeway design
to the City and adjacent property owners, the City should
explore the possibility of obtaining parkway status
for this road. MOKAN's parkways are still limited
access to roadways, but because they eliminate
continuous frontage roads, only 300 feet of R.O.W is
required. The elimination of frontage roads reduces
the costs of the road in terms of both pavement and
R.O.W. acquisistion. For more information regarding
1) the proposed route of MOKAN; 2) the comparision
between parkway and freeway sections; and 3) the spacing
and design of interchanges, consult attached exhibits
1,2, and 3 respectively.
However, the successful implimentation of a parkway
configuration will require the establishment of
parallel collector" roads 600 to 1200 ft. from each side
of MOKAN (see Exhibit 3 attached). According to the
MOKAN Corporation developers of property each side
of the main roadway will be required to fund the
construction of all frontage roads. Thus, considerable
reductions in cost to developers will result by using
the Parkway option as opposed to the Freeway section.
This results from two factors; 1) frontage roads
within the MOKAN R.O.W. must be built to Federal Highway
Standards, while parallel collectors can conform to
City and County construction. 2) Land on only one side
of a frontage road can be developed, while both sides
of a parallel collector can be developed thereby
distributing the costs per mile over a greater land area.
Lot and Street Arrangement - The revised lot and street
configuration requires two new variances. Lot 2 Block
C" exceeds the 2.5:1 depth to width ratio. Deer Haven
Drive, a partial loop street has a centerline radius of
150 feet as opposed to the 300' minimum standard.
The proposed street layout is not compatable with the
Freeway design. Deer Haven Drive intersects Rolling
Meadow Drive approximately 117' from the proposed
MOKAN access road. A minimum separation of 150' is
needed. If the MOKAN Corporation develops a parkway
through the Georgetown area, a North-South collector
will be required to parallel the parkway and/or Rolling
Rolling Meadow - page 4
Meadow Drive or some other roadway in the general area
will require expansion to major arterial status with an
interchange.
Gas Line- A high pressure natural gas line (500 psi)
and easement extend through the property. The applicant
has not specified his treatment of the easement. Prior
to approval explicit plans for the maintenance, marking,
and continued protection of the easement should be
submitted.
Open Space - The Detention Area should provide usableA& open space. To ensure -.-.usability, pedestrian
access easements should be established from Doe Run Drive
and Deer Haven Drive and the facility should be designers so as to
accommodate both drainage and recreational functions.
Additionally, provisions for a two acre, non -detention
recreation area have not been shown on Concept Plan
as required by conditions of approval.
Misc. - Other conditions of preliminary plat approvalhavenotbeenmet:
1.) No provisions for off-site road improvements
have been indicated,
2.). Revised restrictive convenants have
failed to address the following concerns:
a) provisions for contiguous and orderly
construction,
b) provisions for rental and maximum
occupancy controls,
cf, specific provisions for identification
and protection of the gas line, and
d) description of amenity features.
Staff Recommendation: for original request to approve
final plat:
Approval of plat as a revised preliminary plat only,
conditional upon the following requirements:
1.) Drainage plan shall be approved by City_Engineer, 2.) The restrictive convenants shall be revised to address
the concerns outlined in the analysis and resubmitted
for the approval of the City Attorney,
3.) Pedestrian access to the stormwater detention and
recreation facility shall be provided from Doe
Run Drive and Deer Haven Drive,
4.) Conditions of preliminary plat approval shall be met,
5.) Dedication for MOKAN shall be increased to 125
feet plus required scenic easements to accommodate
Parkway" design.
6.) Rolling Meadow Drive should be designed as a minor
arterial with 80' R.O.W.
0
P & Z RECOMMENDATION: 5-0 At the request of the applicant
the Planning Commission took no action on the orignal request
for final plat approval but recommended that the approval for
4...-4 N 1 1N
Rolling Meadow - page 5
the preliminary plat be extended an additional six months
in order to work-out the impact the proposed MOKAN Roadway
will have on the plat. Applicant shall retain water
availability as previously approved.
Note: Planning Staff concurs with this recommendation.
City Council Action: 5-0
Grant the variance and extend the approval of the
original preliminary plat for six months with water
availability retained as recommended by Planning
and Zoning Commission.
1
0
peod a6eluwj
wmnj alqlsscd
09—.Oc--,2L
q sw peati a6m j
wninj alqlswd
500 minimum RDW aVbnea
a5
X10
36' 10' 32' 34' 32' 10' 36' 10' as'
Scarce Trvnutrray I ( _ Eo"rnwt I Scenic
r I r Easement
MOKAN
I
PROPOSED —JPROP05ECPOW — I I _ I ROW1
i r
li I
I •
US183 TO OUTER LOOP
PARKWAY SECTION
Varies 400' minimum R.O.W
Vanes
I 32' 36' 57' 10' 36' 10' 38' 10' 36' 10' S7' :c' 1 1
IPROP
i
i !
Scenic
Eat ment
NOTES:
b I
7ranlsrtrayl
L.--4EMOKAN
r
1 V tTt
F"PA27 e
Rpuc OUTER LOOP TO IH35
FREEWAY SECTION
I. Ultimate Lone requirements will be
determined by project traffic analysis.
2 Width of scenic easement to be
determined by SDHPT.
QFe
Rood
MOKAN
PROP
R.O.W.
1
7scenic
Easement
EXHIBIT 2
TYPICAL SECTIONS
HNTB
HOWARD NEEDLES TAuuEN 9 OFF
M
i
MOKAN - Parkway Section
1500' 1200'
desira Minor Arterial/
desirableCollector
r
M0
Major 1
Arterial Major
Arterial
MOKAN - Freeway Section
with Frontage Roads
Not to scale
MOKAN
HNTB
EXHIBIT 3
Interchange Spacing/
Ramp Locations
TAYYEN S eERGEN00FF
PARK CENTRAL ONE - PRELIMINARY PLAT
or
I
t17
7tt;
r`> PROJECT TRACT -
41 PAS
li++7 ,l l _ - - _ m
Cµ0 r 10
P q ,1,- ,
MCMC . . --_ =, '' - A;
Location
Location Map 1"=2000' Applicant:
Darrell David, Riata Interests 323
Congress Ave, STE. 204 Austin,
Tx 462-
2112 Agent:
Same as Above Request:
Preliminary Plat approval for Park Central One,
a 50.0 acre tract Facts:
Location:
The northeast corner of Westinghouse Road and
County Road 116. Inside E.T.J. and just
outside Edwards Aquifer Recharge Area. Surrounding
Uses: Mostly undeveloped agricultural land
surrounds this tract Proposed
Use: 50 acres of light industrial/commercial service
on 15 lots of one acre or more. Development
Plan: No use is specified in the Plan District
8c
Park Central One - Page 2
Analysis:
This is the first plat submitted to the City in the
Westinghouse Road Planning Area" which does not have
frontage on IH -35. The Planning Department has received
numerous informal proposals for various types of
development in this area and so, a broader conceptual
analysis is appropriate.
Land Use- Although no formal applications have been
presented to the City, two single family subdivisions
have been proposed adjacent to this tract [One medium
lot (8-10,000 sq. ft.) single-family residential to
the east and one minimum lot (6,000 sq. ft.) single
family residential on the south side of Westinghouse
Road]. Therefore, some buffering from
adjacent properties is needed. The buffer
should be designed so as to reduce dust, noise and visual
contact. A well designed landscape area would achieve
all three of these objectives. Some maturation time
for a landscape buffer is available because the property
is currently surrounded by undeveloped land. The
center line for the proposed drainage easement along
the eastern boundary of this property should remain
outside the buffer zone. Deed Restrictions can be
used to insure that this landscaping is perpetuated
along with street and drainage maintenance.
Traffic -Neither County Road 116 nor Westinghouse Road
are adequate to handle truck traffic generated by the
uses proposed. The City's Thoroughfare Plan calls for
a minimum 80' R.O.W. along Westinghouse Road and 60'
along County Road 116. Due to the anticipated truck
traffic and non -curb and gutter design likely for
future improvements, County Road 116 should be upgraded
to an 80 ft. R.O.W. The developer should be required to
dedicated the necessary R.O.W. for road widening and
upgrade County Road 116 along the western edge of his
property to adequately handle traffic generated by
this subdivision.
For similar reasons Westinghouse Road should be widened
to 120 ft. R.O.W. with actual roadway improvements
co-ordinanted by the County in conjunction with other
development proposals in the area.
The proposed internal street plan appears to adequately
serve the needs of the subdivision. Variances should
be requested for the excessive length of Blocks 1 & 2
along Park Central Blvd.'
Utilities- No City services are requested by the applicant,
however some consideration should be given to the provision
of adequate water storage and distribution facilities
for some minimal level of fire protection.
Park Central One -Page 3
Drainage- This development drains into the Edwards
Aquifer Recharge Zone and therefore, should require an
approved Water Pollution Abatement Plan through the
Texas Water commission.
Because City utilities are not being requested for
this development, the City will have adequate means of
enforcing drainage ordinance requirements once the
plat has been recorded. In order to insure that the
drainage is adequately designed, site plans for
each lot should be submitted. In lieu of submitting
individual site plans in advance of recordation, the
plat should contain impervious coverage restrictions that
will be used to calculate the detention requirements.
Further insurance that street and drainage facilities
are properly built, will require that these improvements
be designed and constructed prior to the recordation
of the final plat. Also, a stormwater facility
maintenance covenant should be filed with the plat.
Planning Staff Recommendation:
Approval of the preliminary plat of Park Central One
subject to the following conditions:
1. Ordinance requirements being met
2. Utilities being adequate: A) Water Availability Note
shall apply B)A plan for fire protection should be provided.
3. Drainage Requirements being met
4. Maximum impervious coverage limits shall be
specified on plat
5. Street and Drainage improvements sha1L be constructed
prior to recordation of final plat
6. Construction plans for street and drainage improvements
shall be submitted with final plat
7. Road widening dedications shall be required:
15' along County Road 116, 35' along Westinghouse Road
8. Improvements to County Road 116 shall be required
9. A drainage facilities maintenance covenant; shall
be required prior to recordation
10. Perimeter landscaping shall be required.
11. Subdivision Ordinance Section 4.04 13 1 & 2 shall
be satisfied.
P & Z Recommendation: (5-0)
Approval conditional upon the above comments being met,
with an additional condition being:
12. Applicant and adjacent property owners shall meet and
work out differences prior to submittal to City Council.
Note: Applicant has informed staff that the required work
session with adjacent owners has been accomplished.
City Council Action: 4-1
Approval with conditions as listed under Staff Recommendation.
UNIVERSITY PARK SECTION ONE -VACATING AND RESUBDIVISION
OF LOTS 2-15, BLOCK A JAMES ST. TOWNHOUSES AND ZONING
CHANGE FROM RS RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO RP
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DISTRICT
Location Map 1"=2000'
Applicant: JSJ Joint Venture
3415 Greystone #304
Austin, Tx 78731
512 345-5486
Agent: Downing & Leach
1881 9th Street 11201
Boulder, Colorado 80302
303 443-7533
Request:
Approval for vacating and resubdivision plat and site plan
of University Park Section One, Block A, Lots 2-15,a
4.04 acre tract situated in the William Addison Survey,
Abstract No.21, and zoning change from RS Residential
Single-family to RP Planned Development. Variances are
requested for the following per Sections 2.0805 part
4 and 2.0807 of the Zoninq Crdinance:
1. Private street R.O.W. be reduced from 50 ft. to
48 ft. and 22 ft.
2. Private street roadway width be reduced from 30 ft.
to 26 ft and 20 ft.
3. Design speed of the internal roadways be reduced from
25 m.p.h. to 15 m.p.h.
University Park - page 2
4. Allow the use of "roll- over" and "pan" type curbs
in lieu of the standard "barrier" type curb.
5. Allow parking of one vehicle behind another
6. Allow reduction of the length of parking spaces
from 20 ft. to 18 ft.
7. Allow the use of the driveway and head in parking
spaces within the Private Street R.O.W. to fulfill
Ordinance parking requirements
8. Allow an increase in impervious coverage from 40%
to 49.7% of total site area.
9. Allow construction of 6 ft, privacy fence in the
required front yard area, and the spa structure
within the street R.O.W.
10. Minimum size of PUD reduced from 5 acres to 4
acres.
Facts:
Location: South side of Hwy 29 and adjacent to Southwestern
University. Is also contiguous to and west of
proposed Southwestern Blvd.
Surrounding Uses: Undeveloped property borders this site
to the west, University Park One
surrounds the rest, with a future Planned
Unit Development to the north; Southwestern
Blvd. and Smith Branch Parkway to the east
and proposed single family residential to the
south.
Proposed Use: 47 Townhomes at a density of 11.6 units/
acre
Current Zoning: Residential Single-family
Development Plan: District 7a. This area has been
desinaated as multi -family; therefore
the proposed use for this tract is
in basic conformance with the plan.
History: Final plat was recorded August 5, 1985.
Analysis:
Since the property surrounding this development is either
under development by this applicant or undeveloped
the property adjacent to the west), the primary issues
presented by this proposal are the change in land use
from 14 duplexes (28 living units) on standard lots to
47 townhomes on individual lots with common areas and
private streets or "Safety Lanes". The resulting
increase in gross residential density is from 7 living
units/acre to 11.6 living units/acre. Generally, duplexes
are considered by be rental units whereas townhomes
are owner occupied.
Staff concerns regarding this proposal center around the
University Park - page 3
variances being requested particularly the street
design and parking configuaration.
The variances will be discussed in the order listed in
the "Request" section of this report.
Streets - Virtually all areas of street design have been
requested to be varied. Since these roadways
are to be owned and maintained by the homeowners
association, the City's main concern is
access for utility maintenance, garbage
collection and emergency service vehicles.
The reduction in roadway widths and corresponding
rights-of-way can only be considered if no
parking is allowed within the driving lanes.
Three mechanisms are suggested to insure this
condition:
1. The roadways shall be designated as "Public
Utility Easement and Safety Lane" on the
plat specifying that they will be maintained
by the homeowners assocation, provide
access to City personnel, and prohibit
any and all parking within the roadway
surface;
2. The restrictive convenants shall be amended
to prohibit on -street parking;
3. The construction plans shall indicate that all
curbs shall be clearly and permanently
desingated as "Safety Lane".
Reducing the design speed from 25 mph to 15
mph allows the "safe" utilization of reduced
curve radii and shorter tangents between
reverse curves as shown on the plan.. This speed
seems appropriate given the short length
of the streets and the overall compactness
of the site layout.
The use of the "pan" and "roll-over" curb
design as opposed to the standard City curb
has two impacts. The first is relative to
drainage. A standard 6 inch verticle curb
is sufficient to cover both the 25 year
frequency and 100 year frequency storms
within the roadway section. Due to its
reduced height, the "roll-over" and especially
pan" curb design allow the run-off from these
storms to spread beyond the actual paved
area of the road into the adjacent parkway
and, as is the case of the smaller safety lanes,
onto the properties themselves. Drainage
easements shown on the plat outside the R.O.W.
indicate the extent to this spread. Construction
University Park - page 4
within this area and especially the adjacent
floor slabs must be controlled very carefully
to aviod potential problems.
A second impact relates to vehicle control.
The "pan" curb offers no resistance to cross
over by vehicles and thence no protection to
occupants of the "front yard" including structures.
The short length and narrow width should help
reduce driving speed and lower the liklihood
of conflicts, however, enforcement will be
difficult at best. The "roll-over" design is
much better in this regard but still provides
less protection than the standard City curb.
These curb designs combined with the provision
of a single driveway for a one vehicle garage
may result in cars being parked adjacent to
the drive approach shown on the plan for each
lot.
Parking- More than the requited number of off-street parking
spaces have been indicated, with each unit having
its own attached garage and most having a concrete
drive apron sufficient to store a mid-sized
vehicle. However, the arrangement of one car
in the garage and one car in the drive, which
is all that is allowed by its 10' width, would
create "shuffling" inconveniences for two
vehicle families and may encourage on -street
parking. The guest parking is undersized,
measuring 9' x 18' as opposed to the required 9'x20'
and does not relate well to the individual units
in many cases.
On -street parking will contribute to congestion
on these undersized streets, significantly
restrict emergency and service access and detract
from the "quality of life" in terms of stress
and strain for its inhabitants and by creating a
cluttered appearance to this project.
Coverage- An additional variance has been requested to allow
an increase to 49.7% in impervious coverage above
the 407 maximum allowed by the PUD Ordinance. The
applicant feels this increase is off -set by the
below maximum density (11-7 compared to the 15
dwelling units/acre allowed for townhomes) and
single-family character of the homes. While
the actual number of units is less than the
maximum allowed for townhomes, the compact layout
and resulting high impervious coverage created by
exceeding requirements of the PUD Ordinance tends
to create a feel more closely resembling a
standard multi -family "complex".
University Park - page 5
Fence - The site development plan indicates the construction
of a 6 ft. privacy fence on Lots 1 and 47 which
encroaches some seven feet into the required
15 ft, front yard area along Southwestern Boulevard.
This condition occurs as a consequence of the
number of units in the first tier of lots in
conjunction with the constraints of space needed
for the building setback and private yard area.
As long as site distance at the intersection of
the main drive with Southwestern Boulevard is
not imparied and landscaping provides an attractive
front" this variance seems acceptable. However,
it appears that the variance could be avoided
without losing any significahx design feature
by simply removing one of the interior units,on each side.
Area- Although this development does not meet the 5 acre
minimum area requirement of the PUD Ordinance,
rezoning from RS to RP is required. Due to the
fact that the four acre lot adjacent and north
of the project is also to be rezoned RP District
and that the remainder of the adjacent land is
largely undeveloped, this variance does not
appear to present a problem.
Water- The increase in living unit equivalents from 28 to 47
will increase the demand on the City's current water
resources above what was agreed upon in the original
plat. Application of the water availability note would
prohibit such an increase until the water treatment
plants are completed and additional water supplies
become available.
General- Amenities such as landscaping, yard and fencing
design, architectural detail and arrangement of
buildings, mail and garbage provision, and communal
recreational features and private options such as
spas are offered on a small, compact basis. The greenbelt
areas narrow to as little as 4' and their usefulness
is questionable as they do not provide an inter -connecting
network, nor are walkways provided to facilitate
pedestrian access.
As pleasant and enhancing as these amenities are
intended to be, the basic fact remains that for families
with children, yard space and play areas are minimal.
Granted, park area will be available directly across
Southwestern Blvd, to the east when the Smith Branch
Floodway work is completed, but that would necessitate
crossing four lanes of a major thoroughfare. Unless
a pedestrian cross-over is constructed, this would
create a safety hazard for those seeking relief from
the confines of this development.
University Park page 6
P & Z Recommendation:
I) Vote of 5-0 to approve the resubdivision plat and
site development plan of James St. Townhomes with the
following conditions:
1) All ordinance requirements shall be met,
2) All drainage requirements shall be met
3) Utilities being adequate and the Water Availability
Note being applied to any units in excess of 28
which shall be identified as Phase II on the
Development Site Plan.
4) Site Development and Landscape Plan shall contain
all informational requirements
5) The approved constrcution plans for University
Park Section One shall be revised to reflect
changes associated with this project prior to its
being recorded
6) Special attention shall be given to improving
the safety and security of the common area.
7) Variances for street design shall be worked out
with staff prior to Council submittal
8) Variance allowing parking of one vehicle behind
another shall be granted
9) Variances regarding the size of parking spaces
and design of curbs shall be worked out with
staff prior to Council submittal
10) Variance from impervious coverage limits shall be
granted to allow up to a 107 increase in impervious
coverage
11) Variance from the 5 acre minimum size provision of
the PUD Ordinance shall be granted
II) Vote of 5-0 to approve the zoning change from RS to RP.
The following are staff recommendations relative
to P 6 Z conditions 7 and 9 above which were
to be negotiated prior to Council submittal:
1) Variances for street design as indicated by items
1,2, and 3 of the "Request" section of this report
shall be granted with the following conditions:
a) All roadways shall be designated as "Public
Utility Easement and Safety Lane" on the plat
and a note added to specify that they will
be maintained by the Homeowners Association,
provide access to City personnel, and prohibit
any and all parking.
b) The restrictive convenants shall be amended
to prohibit on -street parking.
c) The construction plans shall indicate that all
curbs shall be clearly and permanently designated
as "Safety Lane".
2) Variances regarding the size of parking spaces shall
University Park - page 7
be granted conditional upon all spaces used to
satisfy Ordinance requirements shall conform to
the dimensions shown on sheet 8 of 8 of the
submittal plans.
3) Variance allowing the proposed curb designs shall
be granted conditional upon resolution to satisfaction
of City Engineer during construction plan reveiw
that drainage impacts have been mitigated.
City Council Action: 5-0 (both items)
I.) Approval of plat and site plan with the conditions
listed above and the addition of condition 12.) All
engineering review fees associated with the original
plat of University Park Section One shall be paid
prior to the recordation of this resubdivision plat.
II.) Approval of zoning change from RS to RP.