HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 10.14.1986i THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
OCTOBER 14, 1986
7:00 PM
Consent Agenda
1. Minutes
2. Bills over $5000.00
3. Ordinance - Adding RO Zoning District, 2nd Reading - Ed Barry
4. Award Water Pipe and Fittings Annual Bid - Terry Jones
Regular Agenda
5. Committee vacancy Announcements, Council Salary Committee,
Historic Preservation Committee (1), Library Board (2) -
Mayor Colbert
6. Nominations for Williamson County Appraisal District - Mayor Colbert
7. Proposed IH 35 Southeast Annexation Area - Michael Lauer
8. 1986 Annexations Public Hearing - Michael Lauer
9. Ordinance - Rezoning 605 Leander Rd. from RS to C -2A - Ed Barry
10. Serenada Elevated Tank Site Survey Agreement - Allyn Moore
11. Sesquicentennial Sidewalk Project Final Acceptance - Ray Green
Misc.
1 -
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER
82-30 PASSED AND APPROVED ON THE 9TH DAY
OF NOVEMBER, 1982 WHICH ESTABLISHES
RATES FOR THE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING
REVIEW OF PLATS, PLANS, ZONING, SPECIAL
PERMITS, ANNEXATIONS, MAPPING AND
DISTRIBUTION OF AERIAL MAPS BY AMENDING
ARTICLE I, SECTION 2 "REZONING AND
RELATED LAND USES" TO ADD THE R-0
RESIDENTIAL OFFICE DISTRICT,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN,
TEXAS, THAT ARTICLE I, SECTION 2, "REZONING AND RELATED LAND
USES" of City Ordinance Number 82-30 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
2. For changes to District RM -2, RM -3, R-0 or R -P the sum
of $50.00 up to one acre and the additional sum of $50.00
for each extra acre of area or fraction thereof not to
exceed $2,000.00
READ, PASSED, AND APPROVED on first reading this 23rd day of
September, 1986.
READ, PASSED, AND APPROVED on second and final reading this
14 day of October 1 1986
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
BY:
Jim Colbert, Mayor
ATTEST:
ti ZA
Pat Cabel ero, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stump & Stump, Vity Attorney
605 LEANDER ROAD (LACKEY & CLARK OIL) - A REZONING OF 1.21 ACRES
FROM RS DISTRICT TO C -2A DISTRICT. Project #00545
VERCA
P.U.D.
r1GTWqTH
APT
L
O.X W
0' NT
Location Map
Applicant: Mr. Gary Clark
605 Leander Road
Georgetown, Texas 78626
863-5843
1"=1000'
Request: Approval for rezoning from RS Residential
Single-family zoning district classification
to C -2A Commercial First Height zoning
district classification for Lot M, Block B,
Division A of the C. Stubblefield Survey, a
1.21 acre tract recorded in Volume 519, page
332 of the Official Records of Williamson
County, Texas.
Facts:
Location: On Leander Road at the northeast corner of
its intersection with the Georgetown Railroad
spur. 22nd Street forms the northern boundary
of the property. Is located within the
corporate limits of Georgetown and is within
the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone.
605 Leander Road 2
Surrounding Area: To the south of the subject property lies a
On March 7,1985, Freese and Nichols completed
a planning study regarding the suitability of
land uses for vacant tracts located to the
southwest of central Georgetown. Included
commercial/retail center situated within an
Industrial zoning district. To the west is a
mobile home park, and to the north a truck
storage area, both within the C -2A zoning
district. To the east is located a dirt and
gravel hauling facility, existing as a
legally non -conforming use within an RS
zoning district (see EXHIBIT A).
Existing Site: The site formerly housed Lackey and Clark Oil
Company facilities, which were recently
destroyed by a fire. The site remains
vacant, used only for the outdoor storage of
equipment and trucks.
Proposed Use: The applicant desires to construct a facility
similar, that being a fuel sales and
distribution facility, with more emphasis on
retail and office operations.
Development Plan: Development plan district 8a. The plan
recommends industrial uses for the subject
property. The proposed use substantially
conforms to the plan.
History: The subject property was used for retail/
wholesale fuel distribution operations prior
to the annexation of this property into the
City. Upon annexation, the property was
automatically placed into the RS zoning
district, as is required by Section 1.205 of
the Zoning Ordinance. The property was never
rezoned to a zoning district that
corresponded to the land use for this
property. Such a rezoning is not required,
as Section 4.101 of the Zoning Ordinance
allows legally non -conforming uses to
continue operations as "grandfathered" uses.
If such legally non -conforming grandfathered
uses, however, are destroyed, then the
reconstructed land use for the property must
conform to the zoning district regulations.
The proposed use is not a permitted land use
within the RS zoning district. The
applicants therefore request a rezoning of
the RS district to a C -2A zoning district
where the original land use would be legally
permitted.
On March 7,1985, Freese and Nichols completed
a planning study regarding the suitability of
land uses for vacant tracts located to the
southwest of central Georgetown. Included
605 Leander Road 3
within the bounds of this study was the
subject property and all of the immediate
surrounding uses. The plan recommends that
vacant tracts along Leander Road be developed
as office and/or retail land use; uses
typically associated with the C -2A zoning
classification.
Notification: Proper notification was provided. No comment
forms have been received in opposition to the
rezoning request. One response form has been
received in favor of the request.
Analysis: The subject property is located along the
portion of Leander Road between Austin Avenue
and the Georgetown Railroad. The Development
Plan recommends commercial and industrial
development along both the north and south
sides of Leander road at this location. The
original use of the subject property
conformed to the Development Plan, as would
the continuation of the original use. The
applicant has also indicated that the new
facility, if allowed to be rebuilt, would be
more office and retail oriented, relative to
the prior existing land use for this site.
Such a change in land use would appear to
also substantially conform to the 1985
Planning Study for district 8a.
According to the deeds submitted by the
applicant, it appears that the subject
property may not be a legal lot under the
Subdivision Ordinance. Staff has requested
that the applicant submit verification. If
the subject property does require
subdivision, the City should require the
dedication of 10—feet of street R.O.W. for
the future upgrading of 22nd Street.
The subject property is surrounded by
commercial and industrial land uses and
zoning classifications. Commercial and
office activities are conducted to the south
of the subject property across Leander Road,
within the Industrial zoning district. To
the north is a C -2A zoning district used for
commercial purposes. To the east is an RS
zoning district used for the storage of dirt,
gravel, and sand. This use was "grand—
fathered" in the same manner the subject
property was prior to the fire that destroyed
the structure. A mobile home park lies to
r: Li
605 Leander Road 4
the west in a C -2A zoning district, separated
form the subject property by the Georgetown
Railroad.
The subject property is located in the
immediate vicinity of a sinkhole that
directly feeds into the Edwards Aquifer
Recharge Zone. The drainage basin for this
sinkhole includes the subject property in its
entirety. The sinkhole is located 400 -feet
east of the 22nd Street and Georgetown
Railroad spur intersection, therefore less
than 160 -feet northeast of the subject
property (see EXHIBIT B). The runoff of
pollutants into the sinkhole and consequently
into the groundwater network is a potential
consequence of a lack of protection for the
sinkhole. In order to reduce the risk of
pollutants entering the aquifer from this
site from petroleum storage operations, berms
may be placed around storage tanks with a
volume equal to the capacity of the largest
tank in case of tank leakage.
In order to prevent the collapse or flooding
of the sinkhole, the applicant should conduct
a study to determine what area can be safely
developed. Ideally, such a study should be
conducted with input from hydrologic and
geologic experts who could deal with the
sinkhole safety issue. Filtration should be
employed to capture the first 0.5 -inch of
runoff. The runoff would then be rerouted
into a detention basin before it enters into
the sinkhole, to ensure the removal of
pollutants.
Staff Recommendation: (October 1, 1986)
The staff recommends approval for the rezoning request from RS to
C -2A subject to the following conditions:
1. A Detailed Development Plan shall be submitted for staff
approval,
2. All bulk storage of hazardous materials shall be underground
and shall conform to Aquifer Protection Rules,
3. Site development shall include provisions for the detention
and filtration of stormwater runoff to prevent pollutants
from reaching the sink hole area.
P&Z Recommendation: (October 7, 1986) (4_1)
Recommend approval with the conditions 1 through 3 above being
met.
605 Leander Road
City Council Action: (October 14, 1986) (5-0)
Approved the rezoning request and adopted the Zoning Map
Amendment Ordinance as an emergency on the first and final
reading.
PROPERTY 04NERS CONVENT
Project name
c
Name of respondent
L am in favor
I object
Comments I.C1e C.
If you wish to submit written comment it will he read before-
Y
o b
the Planning and Zoning Cbmmission _qPlanning
A?,,, -1__ --—- ---------- --
Project name
Name of respo
I am in favor
I object
Comments
PROPERTY 014NC•RS COMMENT
PROPERTY OWNERS COMMENT
Project name
Name of respondent
l o>. Zir, urcIaminfavores
I object
jComments
L ,_ / ,
y / "L `i Lik'.`. ? •_
u 1 .. . _ •r 1 Ji
If you wish to submit writteii comment it will be read before
the Planning and Zoning Commission at the above stated time
and place. J
PLEASE REPLY TO: City of JGeorgetown
c/o Planning Department
L
P.O. B 409
Georgetown, Texas 7867.7-0409
i'
I I RM1
1 L If,.
I C2B
i
t RP RP rtlf'
a_ \
1T '
C2A
t C2A C2A
1C t
SinkHole \ 4J m ,
Location
Y 22nd -Street
RS L
C2A 4K
C2A r •_
IZE tel'-Leande Road _ 41 C
RS
000,
M22"
SC1} J ,' , , 1 I ,
2y 2Y1 2X
4C
40
EXHIBIT A
757.1
EXHIBIT B
IWrkinq
C)
M
7_52,3
Porklnq1
Scale 1:100
x
x
Location of Sinkhole
e
J I
x ___
I
Ordinance # $2o -L{ -J
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE "ZONING ORDINANCE" PASSED AND
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN,
TEXAS, ON THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1968, AMENDING A
PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORIGINAL
ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY OF JAMES W. LACKEY IN
THE C. STUBBLEFIELD SURVEY ABSTRACT N0. 558 IN THE
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FROM R -S SINGLE FAMILY
DISTRICT TO C -2A. COMMERCIAL - FIRST HEIGHT DISTRICT
ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH:
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN,
TEXAS:
WHEREAS, an application has been made to the City Council
for the purpose of changing the zoning district classification of
the following described real estate:
1.21 acres out of a 2.4 acre tract which is out of the Clement
Stubblefield Survey, Abs. 558, and recorded in Volume 519, Parte
332 of the Williamson County, Texas Deed Records being more
particularly described in attached plat and field notes - Exhibit
A", which is incorporated by reference herein;
WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change
in the Zoning Ordinance to the City Planning and Zoning
Commission for its recommendation and report; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, before adopting this amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance, gave notice of such hearing by publishing
same in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of
Georgetown, Texas, which notice stated the time and place of
hearing and which time was not earlier than fifteen days from the
first day of such publication; and
WHEREAS, written notice was given not less than fifteen (15)
days before the date set for the meeting before the Planning and
Zoning Commission, to all the owners of the lots within 200 feet
of the above described property, as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the applicant for such zoning change placed on the
property for which such change is applied such sign(s) as
required by law for advertising the Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing, not less than fifteen (15) days before the
ditto set for said hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a
meeting held on October 1 1986 recommended the changing of
said Zoning District Classification as provided in the Zoning
Page 1 of 2
revised 7/86
Ordinance on the above described
Single Family District to C -2A,
District Zoning Classification.
property from an R -S Residential
Commercial First Height
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the
City of Georgetown, Texas:
ARTICLE I
That the Zoning Ordinance, and the Zoning Map of the City of
Georgetown, as well as the Zoning District for the property
described above as 1.21 Acres out of a 2.4 acre tract which is
out of the Clement Stubblefield Survey, Abstract 558, and
recorded in Volume 519, Page 332 of the County Deed Records of
Williamson County, Texas - 605 Leander Road in the City of
Georgetown, Texas shall be and the same is hereby changed from
the R -S Residential Single Family District to C -2A, Commercial
First Height District Zoning Classification.
ARTICLE II
That the rule requiring the reading of an ordinance on two
2) separate days be, and is hereby, suspended and this ordinance
shall become effective ten (10) days after its passage.
READ, passed, and adopted this 14th day of October, 1986 on
the first and final reading.
ATTEST:
G'
Pat Cabellero
City Secretary
AL''
ed as to form:
S an Stu
City Attorney
Jim Colbert, Mayor
City of Georgetown
Page -, of 2
Z /f3/T ".q i'z
N E Y PER R I ?W,,,;g Tw. S D
P.10. BOX 96
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS 78626 /
11 Tel. 512 863-5852
FIELD NOTES for Edwin Vi.nthor of a tract of land out of the C. Stubblefield Survey in Williamson County, Texas and also beini, a partOfacertaintractof112acresdescribedinadeedfromW. T3. NunntoFredVintherthatisBatedDec. 20, 1917 and is recorded in volume182, pa Lo 565, deed
recol%
Ids
of Williamson County, Texas.
Beginning; at the ptiint of intersection of the north richt of waylineofF—M Road 2243 and the east right of way line of the Ceorj;atownRailroadCo, an iron stake at the base of a corner fence post for theS. W. corner hereof.
Thence along the norith riT;ht.Of way of said F—LT road, N. 71 dog. 15, E. 206.2 feet and N.',,78 deg. 35, E. 515.5 feet to an iron stakefortheS. E. corner hereof.
li
Thence N. 2 deL. 200!IW. 84.5 feet to an iron stake for the IT. E. corner hereof in the -sou h right of way line of thebordersthistractonthe
I'
north. public road that
Thence along said roK IT. 89 de-. 50t W. 639.1 feet to an irestupeatthebaseofacedarfenceoornerpostintheoastrightof waylineoftheaforementionedrailroad.
Thence along said railroad right of way, S. 12 deg. 501 W. 261.5feettothe. place of beginning and.00ntaining 2.40 acres of land.
i
STATE OF TEXAS j
WILLIAMSON COUNTY j HNGW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That I, SidneyPerrin, Registered Public Surveyor Ro. 1165 of
the State of Texas do hereby certify thnt duringtliandmarkedthecorners
ofethenth
above
deOf
scribed0tract19691rofyed
landnandethisund
description of some is true and correct to the best of my knowledge andbelief.
To certify which, witness my hand and seal of office at CeorT;otown, Williamson County, Texas this the 11th day of June, A. D., 1969.
Ji
eg s oro c urvoyor o.
State of Texas
i
L ri
oj
a
O L 49 1 !+ U N . i f !
BC N
S'f
to i'. fs 0
cc
1 ' 3 d + '
M'
SOUTH
FORK
APTS.
rFc T W
APT
I
VEROA
U •
z It
1 1
1 ;
N \
T
V RLOOK
NOT J
IN r,
CITY•']
S/- 0 u -'
j i
GEORGETOW
INDUSTRIAL '
P A R K
5
TA
i IQ
YC,EIA
nu-_ NOT IN CITY, '
FNDT IN CITY /p' _'
HORIZON j
COMM E R C I A
PARK
y
PLEASANT
VALLEY \
1r•
S. GTWN.
ADD. / \
A881T HOL\W \r
l-
Ordinance #
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE "ZONING ORDINANCE" PASSED AND
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, -
TEXAS, ON THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1968, AMENDING A':.
PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORIGINAL
ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY OF JAMES W. LACKEY IN
THE C. STUBBLEFIELD SURVEY ABSTRACT N0. 558 IN THE
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FROM R—S SINGLE FAMILY_:
DISTRICT TO C -2A, COMMERCIAL — FIRST HEIGHT DISTRICT
ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH:
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, tom'
TEXAS:
WHEREAS, an application has been made to the City Council
for the purpose of changing the zoning district classification of
the following described real estate:
1.21 acres out of a 2.4 acre tract which is out of the Clement
Stubblefield Survey, Abs. 558, and recorded in Volume 519, Page
332 of the Williamson County, Texas Deed Records being more
particularly described in attached plat and field notes — Exhibit
A", which is incorporated by reference herein;
WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change
in the Zoning Ordinance to the City Planning and Zoning
Commission for its recommendation and report; and
L_J
WHEREAS, the City Council, before adopting this amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance, gave notice of such hearing by publishing
same in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of
Georgetown, Texas, which notice stated the time and place'of
hearing and which time was not earlier than fifteen days from the
first day of such publication; and
WHEREAS, written notice was given not less than fifteen (15)
days before the date set for the meeting before the Planning and
Zoning Commission, to all the owners of the lots within 200 feet
of the above described property, as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the applicant for such zoning change placed on the
property for which such change is applied such sign(s) as
required by law for advertising the Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing, not less than fifteen (15) days before the
data eat for said hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a
meeting held on October 7, 1986 recommended the changing of
said Zoning District Classification as provided in the Zoning
Page 1 of 2
7
revised 7/86
Ordinance on the above described property from an R—S Residential
Single Family District to C -2A, Commercial First Height
District Zoning Classification.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the
City of Georgetown, Texas:
ARTICLE I
That the Zoning Ordinance, and the Zoning Map of the City of
Georgetown, as well as the Zoning District for the property
described above as 1.21 Acres out of a 2.4 acre tract which is
out of the' Clement Stubblefield Survey, Abstract 558, and
recorded in Volume 519, Page 332 of the County Deed Records of
Williamson County, Texas — 605 Leander Road in the City of
Georgetown, Texas shall be and the same is hereby changed from
the R—S Residential Single Family District to C -2A, Commercial
First Height District Zoning Classification.
ARTICLE II
That the rule requiring the reading of an ordinance on two
2) separate days be, and is hereby, suspended and this ordinance
shall become effective ten (10) days after its passage.
READ, passed, and adopted this 14th day of October, 1986 on
the first and final reading.
ATTEST:
Pat Cabellero
City Secretary
Approved as to form:
Stump and Stump
City Attorney
Jim Colbert, Mayor
City of Georgetown
Page 2 of 2
RIVEROAKS RESUBDIVISION (GEORGETOWN SHOPPING CENTER)- PRELIMINARY
PLAT AND DETAILED DEVELOPMENT PLAN LOTS 1-8 AND FINAL PLAT LOT 1.
Project #00541
Location Map 1"=1000'
Applicant: Lucien Hughes
505 Barton Springs Road #1305
Austin, Texas 78704
478-8981
Owner: Williams - NPC
Georgetown Joint Venture
2470 Gray Falls Drive #200
Houston, Tx 77077
713) 531-8000
Request: Approval for Preliminary Plat and Detailed
Development Plan for Lots 1-8, Block One for
Riveroaks Resubdivision, a 27.665 acre
replatting of the Riveroaks subdivision,
recorded in Cabinet D, Slides 319-320, of the
Official Records of Williamson County, Texas;
and approval for Final Plat and Detailed
Development Plan for Lot One Block One,
Riveroaks Resubdivision, a 6.08 acre lot in
the Riveroaks Resubdivision.
Riveroaks Resubdivision 2
Facts:
Location: On the northeast corner of State Highway 29
University Avenue) and IH -35. Is located
within the ETJ and the Edwards Aquifer
Recharge Zone and adjacent to the South San
Gabriel River. Is contiguous to City limits
on west and northeast boundary.
Surrounding Area: To the north is the proposed Riveroaks Office
Park. The South Fork San Gabriel river lies
to the east and north of the subject
property, with IH -35 and State Highway 29 to
the west and south respectively. A single
residence is located adjacent to the
southeast property line. Located south of
State Highway 29 along the highway ROW is a
service station, a professional office under
construction, an electric substation, and a
single large lot residence. The surrounding
area within the City Limits of Georgetown, is
zoned residential single family.
Existing Site: An unzoned vacant tract.
Proposed Use: An H.E.B. supermarket on Lot 1, general
retail, a Walmart discount store, a drug
store, four unspecified commercial reserve
lots.
Development Plan: Development Plan District 2. The plan
recommends public and semi—public uses for
the subject property. The proposed use does
not conform to the plan, but has been
previously approved.
Utilities: Applicant is requesting City provision of
water and wastewater services, and may select
either the City of Georgetown or Texas Power
and Light for electrical service.
Annexation: This property is currently scheduled for
annexation in December 1986. Applicant has
indicated that he will request voluntary
annexation.
History: On June 4, 1985 the Commission recommended
for approval the Concept Plan for what was
then named San Gabriel Plaza for land use
type and conceptual layout with some thirteen
comments to be satisfied. The most notable
of these comments were:
Riveroaks Resubdivision 3
1. Actual layout and density shall be
considered with site plan review,
2. Traffic Impact Analysis should be
submitted and access coordinated with
State Highway Department Plans,
3. Land use for all parcels should be
described,
4. Existing City electric lines to be
relocated at applicants expense,
5. Site plan should demonstrate uniform
architectural theme,
6. The regulations proposed by a Planning
Department document entitled
Environmental Standards Criteria"
regarding: impervious cover limits,
preservation of vegetation, land vistas,
construction on steep slopes and
floodways, stormwater management, size
and scale of proposed buildings, and
methods of construction should be met,
7. Parking areas should be partially
obscured from perimeter highways,
8. Parking variance to allow 1 space per 200
square feet of retail and 1 space per 300
square feet of office use should be
considered with site plan review and
granted only if it can be shown that
reduction is substantiated by items in #6
above.
Subsequently on June 11, 1985 the City
Council approved this plan with no conditions
attached. A Preliminary Plat for Riveroaks,
San Gabriel Plaza was submitted on January
22, 1986, for Planning and Zoning Commission
approval, but withdrawn before the Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting to address
staff concerns.
Notification: The applicant provided required notice.
Analysis•
Overview: With respect to the City as a whole, the use
proposed for this site is excellent due to
its central location along major
thoroughfares. However, at a local level the
site has significant problems in accommodat—
ing this use. Generally speaking, these
problems are utility service, traffic
circulation, and environmental impact. After
much negotiation, the solution to water and
sewer service problems appears to be resolved
with the applicants participation in the
Riveroaks Resubdivision 4
IH -35 Joint Venture Utility Agreement. Minor
revisions to the on-site utility plans
submitted can be handled through staff review
of construction plans. It is highly
desirable that the applicant use City
electric to supply power.
Solutions to traffic problems have not yet
been entirely resolved. The main elements to
this concern are: construction of a greatly
needed one-way frontage road along IH -35,
reconstruction and signalization of the
IH-35/Hwy 29 intersection, improvements to
Hwy 29 from its intersection with IH -35 east
to the bridge crossing the S. San Gabriel
River, what to do with the unnamed 60 foot
ROW running along the west boundary of the
project, and parking requirements.
The problems relative to environmental
concerns stem from the location of this site
adjacent to the river and its high
visibility. These factors translate into the
two major performance objectives for the
project which are maintaining high quality
surface water run-off and a high degree of
aesthetic quality. Due to previous City
approvals associated with the project and the
fact that no substantive "environmental"
regulations have been adopted by the City, a
somewhat different perspective with regard to
this project is required. Ideally,
developments should use the concept of
conservation (i.e. maintain existing
vegetation, minimize cut and fill, reduce
impervious coverage, etc.) to reduce both
negative environmental impacts, and site
preparation costs. However, this particular
site is so incompatible with the specific use
proposed that the conservation approach is
not feasible. According to the Detailed
Development Plan this site, with the
exception of Lot 8, will be completely
devegetated and reshaped to accommodate the
project. Cut and fill in excess of 5 feet is
the norm rather than the exception.
Therefore, the environmental assessment must
come from a perspective of restoration as
opposed to conservation.
Relative to the evaluation of this project
against the minimum requirements of the
Subdivision Ordinance, it should be
considered as a Planned Unit Development even
Riveroaks Resubdivision 5
though the R—P Zoning district does not
strictly apply. This may be done because the
development is to be accomplished in a
unified manner and under the authority of an
approved Detailed Development Plan. This is
particularly true when considering variances
for easements, building setbacks, and access
to individual lots within the development.
Land Use: The designated land use and configuration of
the various land uses relative to one another
on these lots generally corresponds to the
San Gabriel Plaza Concept Plan as approved in
June 1985. The Detailed Development Plan
submitted with this request also generally
corresponds to the approved Concept Plan.
However, there are some notable exceptions.
The first is the lack of any designated
office space. Some 55,000 square feet of
office was approved on the concept plan.
Also, the retail space has been increased
5%. Thus, we may anticipate some 45,000
square feet of office space to be built on
the four reserve lots shown. However, this
should be clarified by indicating the land
use on the plat. A second exception is the
omission of the "Hike & Bike Trail" along the
South San Gabriel Flood Plain (Lot 8). This
was generally interpreted to be some sort of
public/ semi—public space on the concept plan
but no indication of same appears on the
current plans. The City has been encouraging
the development of a linear park "theme"
along similar areas of other developments.
To this end, the portion of Lot 8 which is
not suitable for building should be
designated both as Drainage Easement, and
some form of public use area with adequate
access provided.
Landscaping: The landscape plan/tree survey accompanying
the request is required to account for the
impact of roads, buildings, parking lots,
drainage facilities, and easements on the
existing site tree population. The concept of
the schematic landscape plan submitted is
good, but much more detail is required for
final approval. The landscape plan for this
project has only identified the name, number,
and size of existing trees, but has failed to
indicate which of these trees are to be saved
or removed. The plan requires that the
impact of development on the existing tree
Riveroaks Resubdivision 6
population be completely documented, which
has not been accomplished in the current
landscape plan submittal.
By overlaying the existing tree population
and location schematic over the proposed site
plan, nearly all of the existing trees at the
front of the site are to be lost to parking
lots and buildings, particularly along IH -35
and Hwy -29, including numerous oak trees with
a diameter between 12 to 38 inches. The
location of many of these oaks and other
trees allows for the development of sidewalk
cutouts, medians, peninsulas and islands, and
slight development realignments to protect
numerous trees, while improving the aesthetic
quality of the site.
A total of 46.2% of the existing trees on
this site may be preserved with careful
planning. The plan shows 495 trees to exist
on the site, with perhaps only 20 trees to
remain at the front of buildings and parking
areas. Careful development realignment with
regard to trees can preserve 20 to 25
additional trees, while eliminating huge
expanses of asphalted parking areas.
However, due to the extensive regrading of
the site special techniques must be used to
achieve this goal.
Numerous trees are likely to remain over the
6.12 acre Lot 8, as most of this lot is
unbuildable and to be reserved as a drainage
easement. The landscape plan does not
indicate how proposed drainage facilities and
easements on this lot will impact the
numerous trees existing on this lot. Careful
planning for the placement of such facilities
and easements could preserve significant
vegetation which will aid in sedimentation
and erosion control.
The subject property is located at a high
visibility intersection near the center of
Georgetown and along IH -35. Ideally, this
property should be developed to reflect a
positive image of the City for local
residents and for the motorists that travel
into Georgetown. Parking lots should be
designed as smaller landscaped units, rather
than huge asphalt areas that are unattractive
and do not provide any aesthetic benefit such
as: noise and odor reduction, screening the
Riveroaks Resubdivision 7
site from adjacent highways and properties,
and visual attractiveness. The perimeter of
the site should also be landscaped to add to
aesthetic quality of the community and to
reduce heat, glare and noise in and around
the site.
The eastern boundary line of Lot 1, Block 1
abuts a single-family residential lot. The
Detailed Development Plan submitted
indicates that a truck access is to be
located the length of Lot 1, adjacent to the
residential property. Additionally, the rear
of the supermarket will face the residential
property, with truck loading/unloading,
garbage disposal, and noise. Buffering the
common residential and commercial lot line
with a wall and landscaping treatments may
remedy the situation.
Streets: The subject property is located at the
intersection of Interstate Highway 35 and
State Highway 29, each a major arterial
roadway. At this location, IH -35 does not
have a frontage road; therefore all site
access will be from State Highway 29 until a
frontage road can be constructed. If the
frontage road is built it will serve as an
arterial street, providing access to this
site, and other proposed developments to the
north; linking HWY-29 and FM 2338 along IH -35
North. Until a frontage road is completed,
the primary means of site access will be a
30 -foot wide°temporary local street"that
intersects State Highway 29 approximately 120
feet from the IH -35 on-ramp and perhaps
240 -feet from the future signalized
intersection of State Highway 29 and the on
and off -ramps of IH -35 North. As a result of
the traffic generated by the proposed
shopping center, its location relative to
arterial roadways, and the status of the
frontage road and temporary local street,
several questions relative to the on and
off-site street network need to be
addressed. These questions include:
1. What total amount of traffic will this
site generate?
2. What will be the design and impact of
each driveway and entrance along State
Highway 29 on traffic movement/safety
along this road?
Riveroaks Resubdivision 8
3. What will be the impact of the temporary
local street on the IH -35 and State
Highway 29 intersection? and how will the
signalizing of this intersection impact
the area?
4. Will the temporary local street be closed
after the completion of a frontage road
or become another site access driveway?
5. What are the implications of 90 degree
parking along the 30 foot wide temporary
local street?
6. What will be the impact of a frontage
road along IH -35 North and how will it
serve the site?
7. How will the necessary improvements be
funded?
These questions should be addressed in a
Traffic Impact Analysis study. The TIA
should also provide a phasing schedule for
this site, due to the possibility for
increased traffic from this development. Due
to safety concerns, the City may wish to
limit the amount of leasable space to be
constructed until such a time as the IH -35
frontage road is completed.
Parking: The parking requirement for this site is 1394
parking spaces with the amount of gross
leasing area indicated. Including the
temporary street parking spaces, the site
plan indicates 1132 spaces, 262 spaces short
of ordinance regulations. The total number
of spaces is only 976 if the temporary road
spaces are discounted. The applicant did not
formally request a variance for the parking
requirement, but one appears to be necessary.
The parking requirement for Lot 1 Block 1 for
the proposed HEB grocery store is 456 spaces,
with 421 spaces shown. Using shared parking
concepts, the site may have sufficient
parking, but only by using the 61 on—street
parking spaces. The future addition to this
facility can not be recommended until
additional parking is provided.
Emergency vehicle access should be provided
as approved by the City of Georgetown Fire
Marshall, to allow circulation for WB -50 fire
equipment. Also the central drive approach
from Hwy 29 should be realigned to ninety
degrees with centerline.
Riveroaks Resubdivision 9
Drainage: The drainage concept is acceptable to City
staff and the consulting engineers. The
applicants, however, need to indicate the
storm sewer system and filtration basin with
a drainage easement. Access to this area
should be provided by the 30' PUE just north
of Lots 6 & 7. Additionally, the consulting
engineers require that the information and
data used to determine the 100 -year flood
plain location on the preliminary plat be
submitted for verification.
All drainage facilities used to convey
run-off from one property to another must be
placed in easements for this purpose. The
drainage -erosion -sedimentation plan submitted
with the construction plans must be
sufficient for both the construction phase
and beyond to protect the river from negative
impacts of extensive regrading.
The site plan that was submitted includes a
6.12 acre area (lot 8) to be used for
drainage and open space. The eastern most
portion of this area has been reserved as a
drainage easement, to contain a sedimentation
pond and a filtration pond, to return
stormwater from the shopping center site to
the river. Such a system should prevent
sedimentation and pollution into the South
Fork San Gabriel River and concentrate site
stormwater runoff to one point; thereby
reducing drainage pressure and the likelihood
of serious erosion of the numerous slopes in
excess of 15 degrees that are included in Lot
8 which is reserved from development. Such a
plan should be environmentally advantageous
for this site and the river. Except for the
sedimentation and filtration ponds, however,
the applicant has not indicated how Lot 8 is
to be developed. Due to the environmentally
sensitive nature, Lot 8 should be clearly
notated as to its intended or proposed
development.
Utilities: Off-site water and sewer improvements
required to serve this project are included
in the contracts, construction plans, etc.
for the "Tri -Tract" properties. These
improvements must be completed before service
will be adequate. Construction plans for
required on-site facilities have been
reviewed by the City and applicant has been
notified of the required revisions. The
Riveroaks Resubdivision 10
Detailed Development Plan must be revised to
indicate the utility allocation for each
individual lot in order for the City to
account for all 175 LUE's set aside for this
project. Additionally, the flow data
submitted for each land use must correspond
with the allocations.
Electrical and other utility services have
not been indicated on the plans. This will
be needed to determine the proper size and
location of necessary easements. It appears
that the existing City electric line along
IH -35 must be relocated. This should be at
the applicants expense.
Staff Recommendation: (September 19, 1986)
I. Approval of the Preliminary Plat and Detailed Development
Plan for the Riveroaks Resubdivision subject to the following
conditions:
1. The existing plat of Riveroaks shall be vacated,
2. The 60 ft. road shall be given a street name and
terminated with a temporary turn -around at its
northernmost end per ordinance and eliminating the
existing "bubble",
3. A variance from street design standards to allow parking
within the 60 foot street shall be granted conditional
upon the execution of a development agreement prior to
the recordation of the final plat which provides for the
vacating of this street upon completion of a frontage
road along IH -35 and the reconstruction to City Standards
of a 40 ft. street within this ROW in the event that a
frontage road is not funded within five years as well as
interim measures that indemnify the City against
maintenance and liability during this period,
4. A variance from off-street parking requirements shall be
granted provided; that an acceptable landscape plan is
approved, that at no time shall there be less than 1100
total parking spaces on the site exclusive of the reserve
lots; except that in the event that the on -street parking
is eliminated then the reserved lots shall be utilized to
make up for those lost,
5. A variance from PUE requirements shall be granted
conditional upon the submittal of a complete utility
layout and the dedication of all easements necessary to
accommodate the final utility design as approved by the
City,
6. A variance from building setback lines for internal areas
shall be granted conditional upon the provision for a
minimum 25 ft. building line around the perimeter of the
site,
Riveroaks Resubdivision 11
7. A Traffic Impact Analysis shall be provided which
indicates the necessary off-site improvements required to
accommodate the project,
8. A sedimentation and erosion control plan sufficient for
both the construction phase and post construction
condition being approved with the construction plans,
9. A instrument ready to file shall be presented with the
final plat which dedicates for public use of and provides
pedestrian and maintenance access to the area along the
San Gabriel River flood plain,
10. Adequate buffering for the abatement of noise and visual
impacts on adjacent residential property, Hwy 29 and
IH -35 shall be provided and indicated on a Landscape
Construction Plan.
II. Approval of the Final Plat and Detailed Development Plan for
Lot 1, Block 1 Riveroaks Resubdivision and the granting of a
variance from off-street parking requirements, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Final approval of construction plans for the overall
Riveroaks Resubdivision including streets, drainage,
erosion and sedimentation control, utilities,
2. Submittal of a landscape plan in conformance with the
informational requirements of City Landscape Ordinance
and the concepts presented in the schematic landscape
plan submitted,
3. The future expansion shall not be approved unless
additional parking can be provided,
4. The centermost drive approach shall be constructed
perpendicular to the front property line,
5. The 60 ft. pylon sign shall be removed from the PUE and
height limited to the height of the structure,
6. Buffering to abate noise and visual impacts on adjacent
residential property shall be provided,
7. Approval by the City Attorney of a development agreement
regarding the parking in the 60 foot street and future
frontage road.
P&Z Recommendation: (September 24, 1986)
5-0)
Approval of the Preliminary Plat and Detailed Development Plan
Lots 1-8 for the Riveroaks Resubdivision subject to the
conditions of Item I of the staff recommendation above being met,
with the following amendments:
4. A variance from off-street parking requirements shall be
granted provided; that an acceptable landscape plan is
approved, and that at no time shall there be less than 1100
total parking spaces on the site exclusive of the reserve
lots.
Riveroaks Resubdivision 12
7. A Traffic Impact Analysis shall be provided which indicates
the necessary off-site improvements required to accommodate
the project and level of developer participation shall be set
at final plat approval.
9. A instrument ready to file shall be presented with the final
plat which provides for public use of and provides pedestrian
and maintenance access to the area along the San Gabriel
River flood plain.
5-0)
Approval of the Final Plat and Detailed Development Plan for Lot
1, Block 1 Riveroaks Resubdivision and the granting of a variance
from off-street parking requirements, subject to the conditions
of Item 2 of the staff recommendation above being met, with the
following amendments:
3. The future expansion shall not be approved unless adequate
parking can be provided.
8. Any determination of developer participation (reference #I.7.
above in Preliminary Plat approval) will be determined prior
to final plat approval of Lots 2 through 8.
City Council Action: (September 29, 1986) (5-0)
Approved the Preliminary Plat and Detailed Development Plan Lots
1-8, and Final Plat Lot 1, with the conditions as listed in the
P&Z Recommendation above, with the following additions:
I.11.) City shall receive a letter stating Developer's intent of
using City electric service.
I.12.) City shall receive a letter of voluntary annexation from
the Developer.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF GEORGETOWN
The City of Georgetown City Counc' APPROVE
the request listed
below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 14 day of October, 1986.
I I _ 0 SIL
Mayor, City of Georgetown
Project name & #: 605 Leander Road (LACKEY & CLARK OIL) - A
REZONING OF 1.21 ACRES FROM RS DISTRICT TO C -2A
DISTRICT. Project #00545
Applicant: Mr. Gary Clark
Owner: same
Request: Approval for rezoning from RS Residential
Single-family zoning district classification to C -2A
Commercial First Height zoning district
classification
Approval of the rezoning request and adopted the Zoning Map
Amendment Ordinance as an emergency on the first and final
reading.
1