Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 12.17.1986City of Georgetown City Council Meeting December 17, 1986 4:00 pm Preliminary Agenda: Consent Agenda: 1. Windsong Section One - Preliminary/Final Plat 2. Park Central One - Final Plat 3. Oak Crest Estates Riverside Unit - Resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 8 4. Turtle Bend Section One - Resubdivision of Lots 1-4, Block A 5. Williams Addition - Resubdivision of Lot 12, Block A of Unit 6, and Lot 13, Block A of Unit 7 6. Rivercrest PUD -.-Revised Preliminary Plat and Site Plan 7. Serenada Oaks Utility Agreement 8. Windridge - Variance - Extension of Final Plat approval 9. Briarwood Section IV - Variance - Extension of Final Plat approval 10. Reata Trails III Block D Lot 1 - Variance - Off-street Parking Requirements Regular Agenda: 1. College Place - Revised Final Plat and Site Plan, and Ordinance Rezoning from RM -3 to R -P - 1st Reading 2. Rivery Section One - Final Plat, Ordinance Rezoning from RS to RM, C1,& C2 -A Districts, and Variance - Building Heights THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA DECEMEEP. 17, 1986 4:00 PM CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes. 2. Eills over $5,000. 3. Refund of Capital Recovery Fees.for Gemcraft Homes - E. Barry 4. Park Central One Final Plat - R. Gauther 5. Windridge, Final Plat - R. Gauther 6. Rivercrest P.U.D. Revised Preliminary Plat and Amended Site Plan R. Gauther 7. Williams Addition, Final Plat Extension - R. Gauther 8. Williams Addition - Resubdivision of Lot 12 Block A unit 6 & Lot 12 Block A unit 7 - R. Gauther 9. Turtle Bend Section One - Resubdivision of Lots - R. Gauther 10. Oak Crest Estates Riverside, Resubdivision of Lot 1, Elock 8 R. Gauther 11. Windsong Section One, Preliminary/Final Plat - R. Gauther 12. Briarwood Section IV, Variance, Extension of Final Plat - R. Gauther 13. Serenada Oaks Utility Agreement - R. Gauther Regular Agenda 14. Historic Preservation Committee Appointment - Mayor Colbert 15. Award bids on Street Sweeper - Terry Jones 16. Ordinance Creating Southwest Georgetown Industrial District - E. Barry 17. Rivery Final Plat Section One, Ordinance Rezoning From R -S to RM, Cl and C2A - First Reading, Variance Building Height - R. Gauther 18. Collegeplace Revised Final Plat, Ordinance Rezoning from RM -1 to RP - 1st Reading - R. Gauther 19. Variance, Parking Requirements, Reata Trails III, Block D, Lot 1 - R. Gauther 20. L.C.R.A. Work Authorization, San Gabriel Substation - A. Moore 21. Resolution, Easements, Corps of Engineers - A. Moore 22. Engineering Services Contract, Country Club Wastewater - A. Moore 23. Engineering Services Contract, 18th and 15th Wastewater Improvements - A. Moore 24. Engineering Services Contract, San Jose Drainage - A. Moore Misc. 1 - kv December 17, 1986 V . The City Council of the City of Georgetown met in Regular Session on the above date at 4:00 PM with Mayor Jim Colbert presiding. The following council members and officials were present: Council Member Eb C. Girvin, Council Member Joan King, Council Member Marvin E. Lackey, Council member Lill Connor, Council Member William C. Shell, City Secretary Pat Caballero, City Manager R. Bob Gaylor, Director of Finance and Administration Gwen Sherman, Director of Community Services Hartley Sappington, Director of Public Works Allyn Moore, and Development and Planning Director Ed Barry. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion by Lackey and second by Shell to approve consent items 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10 as stated below and to vote on items 3, 4, 9, 11 and 12 separately. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 1. MINUTES To approve the December 9, 1986 minutes as submitted by the Cite Secretary. 2. BILLS OVER $5,000. To approve the following bills over $5,000. Stump & Stump Law Offices Hidell Architects 6,462.86 7,188.16 3. REFUND OF CAPITAL RECOVERY FEES FOR GEMCRAFT HOMES Motion by King and second by Lackey to refund 5002.65 to Gemcraft Homes for capital recovery fees and building permit fees paid for two proposed, but never constructed, dwellings in the Stonehedge Addition. Voting went as follows: yes: Girvin, King, Lackey and Shell; abstain: Connor. Motion carried. 4. PARK CENTRAL ONE FINAL PLAT Motion by Connor and second by Lackey to approve Park Central One Final Plat subject to the following. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met. 2. City Policy for Fire Protection Improvements shall be met. 3. A Drainage Facility Maintenance Cobenant.- shall be filed with the plat. 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 1 of 11 4. Restrictive Covenants shall be filed with the plat which indicates interior, individual lot landscaping requirements and provides for maintenance of all landscape areas. 5. A plan for perimeter landscaping shall: a. Se included in construction plans and completed with subdivision improvements. b. Provide for ground cover within the landscaped area. C. Function in harmony with drainage and utility plans. d. Use hardy, low maintenance type materials. e. Provide Type E bufferyard along the perimeter of the plat. as 6. The plat shall not be recorded until streets, drainage, perimeter landscaping and fire protection improvements have been accepted by City or surety sufficient to cover the costs of installation has been provided. 5. WINDRIDGE, FINAL PLAT EXTENSION Approve an extension of Windridge Final Plat until June 23, 1987, subject to the conditions of Final Plat as approved by the City Council on Jurie 24, 1986. 6. RIVERCREST P.U.D. REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT AND AMENDED SITE PLAN To approve Rivercrest P.U.D. Revised Preliminary Plat and Amended Site Plan subject to the following. 1. All ordinance requirements being met. 2. Utilities being adequate; a. The Utility Plan shall be revised to reflect the resolution of comments by Public Works and City Engineer and resubmitted in conjunction with the final plat. Specifically, all off-site improvements shall be shown and a proposed electrical, gas, telephone and cable layout submitted. b. Placement of sufficient fire hydrants and fire hydrant linework to bring the site up to City standards, to be approved by the City Fire Marshall. 3. Erosion and sedimentation controls and stormwater filtration shall be provided to improve the quality of stormwater discharged into the river and shall be shown conceptually on the site grading and drainage plan. 4. Detailed. Development Plans shall be required for each lot, to be approved by staff before the 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 2 of 11 issuance of building permits. 5. A Final Plat and Site Development Plan shall not be submitted for P&z or Council approval until the applicant has furnished the City a letter of agreement signed by the property owners of Past and Presents, The Overlook, Circle -K and the adjacent apartments that attests that each agrees to off-site street improvements. 6. Lots Adjacent to the Interstate shall be screened and/or landscaped alone the rear property lines. 7. Applicant in conjunction with other project participants should. fund any signalization a required to handle the increased traffic flow at the new road entrance to Leander Rd. and a signal be requested from SDEPT at this location before the final plat be approved. 7. WILLIAMS ADDITION - RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 12 BLOCK A UNIT 6 & LOT 12 BLOCK A UNIT 7 To approve the partial vacation and resubdivision of Lot 12 Block A Unit 6 and Lot 12 Block A Unit 7 of the Williams Addition subject to the following. 1. Written approval from the Department of Public Works concerning the status of the two PUE's adjacent to the common lot line of Lots 12 and 13. 2. A variance in stormwater detention requirements is hereby granted due to the fact that the increase in stormwater will be less than 5.0 c.f.s. 8. TURTLE BEND SECTION ONE - RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1-4, BLOCK A Approve the resubdivision of Lots 1-4, Block A, Turtle Eend Section One subject to the following. 1. Written approval from the TWC allowing for lots less than 1 acre in size over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge zone. 2. All ordinance requirements being met. 3. A 15 foot dedication for street widening along Booty's Crossing Road shall be required. 4. Access shall be restricted by plat note to one approach to Lot 1 and no approaches to Lot 2 from Booty's Crossing Road and the structure built on Lot 2 shall face Tortoise Lane. 4. OAR CREST ESTATES RIVERSIDE, RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 8 Motion by Lackey and second by Connor to approve 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 3 of 11 J& E, 0 the resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 8, of the Oak Crest Estates, Riverside Unit Subdivision subject to the following. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 1. All ordinance requirements shall be net. 2. All drainage requirements shall be met; a. Minimum finished floor elevations and the 100 -year flood plain elevation, for each lot, shall be - indicated, as determined by a Professional Engineer. b. Variance from stormwater detention requirements are hereby granted. 3. Utilities being adequate; a. Applicant shall construct a 6 -inch water line to City standards along Northcross Road to River Road to the common property line of -Lot lE 2 of Oak Crest Riverside, or from Ridgecrest to the common line of IA & lb. b. The following note shall be added to the plat: "NOTICE: No building permits or utility connections shall be allowed for Lot lE of this plat until such time as the City Director of Public Works has determined that utility service levels are adequate and has approved the new connections in writing." 4. A survey plat shall be submitted to verify that the existing structure on Lot lA meets ordinance requirements. 10. WINDSONG SECTION ONE, PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT To approve Windsong Section One Prelin;inary/Final Plat subject to the followirig. 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met. 2. Applicant shall furnish information indicating the present impervious cover on the lot and indicate by plat note that impervious cover on this lot will not be increased except in conformance to the City Drainage Ordinance. 3. A variance should be granted to waive the requirement for frontage on a public street due to the following findings of fact: a. The primary intent of the subdivision is the sale of property as opposed to the development of land. b. The primary use being served as well as the legal access easement providing the service are existing conditions. C. The health, safety and general welfare z of. the community will not be negatively impacted by this decision. 12/17/86 regular council meeting, page 4 of 11 i J1* 11 4. A temporary deferral from the City ;policy for Fire Protection Improvement should be ;ranted due the the finding that no additional risk to the community will be incurred as a result of this action with the condition that adequate fire protection shall be provide for this lot with development of the remainder of the property indicated on the Concept Plan. 11. SRIARWOOD SECTION IV, VARIANCE, E%TENSION OF FINAL PLAT Motion by Connor and second by Shell to approve the extension of Final approval of Eriarwood Section IV for six months, to June 23, 1987, with the condition of Final Plat as approved by City Council on June 24, 1986, and payment of all development review fees prior to recardation of plat. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 12. SERENADA OAKS UTILITY AGREEMENT Motion by Lackey and second by Shell to approve the principle terms for a Utility Service Agreement for Serenada Oaks, subject to approval of the final document by the City Attorney and Public Works Division. Motion carried by unanimous vote. REGULAR AGENDA: 13. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT Mayor Colbert recommended that Harry Gold be appoint to the Historic Preservation Committee to serve a three year term that will expire December 17, 1989. Motion' by King and second by Lackey to approve and confirm the appointment. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 14. AWARD FIDS ON STREET SWEEPER The following Industrial Type Vacuum Street Sweeper Bids were received. Cooper Equipment Co. - $66,500.00 Naylor Supply Co. - $68,500.00 Industrial Disposal - 69,976.00 Motion by Connor and second by King to award the Industrial Type Vacuum Street Sweeper bid to Cooper Equipment for a total cost of $66,500.00. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 15. ORDINANCE CREATING SOUTHWEST GEORGETOWN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT Notion by Lackey and second by King to adopt on 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 5 of 11 t 0 E emergency reading the following captioned ordinance. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Ordinance # 86-67 AN ORDINANCE CREATING THE SOUTHWEST GEORGETOWN INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT; STATING THE PURPOSE THEREOF; DEFINING THE TERRITORY THEREOF; SETTING FORTH THE LENGTH OF TIME THE DISTRICT IS TO BE IN EFFECT; REQUIRING THE PREPARATION AND EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT RELATING THERETO; ESTAELISHING A DEADLINE FOR EXECUTING THE AGREEMENT; PROVIDING A SEVERABILITY PROVISION; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. 16. RIVERY FINAL PLAT SECTION ONE, ORDINANCE REZONING FROM.R-S TO RM, Cl AND C2A - FIRST READING, VARIANCE BUILDING HEIGHT Motion by King and second by Connor to approve the Rivery Final Plat Section One subject to the following. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 1. Approval of construction plans & staff confirmation that technical requirements of the ordinance are satisfied and the staff approval of the Restrictive Covenants. 2. The following variances are hereby granted: a. Waiver of stormwater detention b. Permit block length in excess of 1200 ft. C. Allow reduction of specified centerline curve radii from 800 ft. to 500 ft. d. Allow a maximum height of 3 stories or 45 feet for Lots 4, 5A, 5E and 7A Rivery Section One. e. Allow a maximum height of 5 stories or 70 feet for Lots 8, 9 and 10 Rivery Section One. f. Allow a maximum height height of 7 stories or 84 feet for Lots 11 and 7E Rivery Section One. Motion by Lackey and second by Connor to affirm the first reading of the following captioned ordinance. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Ordinance Number AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE "ZONING ORDINANCE" PASSED AND ADOPTED EY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, ON THE 12TH bAY OF FEBRUARY, 1968, AMENDING A PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORGINIAL ORDINANCE', TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY OF GEORGETOWN PARTNERS NO. 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 6 of 11 1, LTD. LOTS 2C, 3A, AND 6A RIVERY SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 497, AND THE JOSEPH P PULSIFER SURVEY NO. 498 IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS FROM R -S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO RM -2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY DISTRICT ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH Motion by Connor and second by King to affirm the first reading of the following captioned ordinance. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Ordinance Number 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 ORGINIAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY OE' GEORGETOWN PARTNERS NO. I, LTD. LOT JB RIVERY SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 497, AND THE JOSEPH P PULSIFER SURVEY NO. 498 IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS FROM R -S SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO C-1 LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTH Motion by Lackey and second by Shell to affirm the first reading of the following captioned ordinance. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Ordinance Number 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 TEE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORGINIAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY OF GEORGETOWN PARTNERS NO. 1, LTD. LOTS 4. 5A. 5E, 7A. 8. 9. 10 AND 11 as—•raa.-----va. va.0 vv va.avava. a.. 11.Y L\i V..V LLIV PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 497, AND THE JOSEPH P PULSIFER SURVEY NO. 498 .IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, ..TEXAS FROM R -S SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO C -2A COMMERCIAL SECOND HEIGHT DISTRICT ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS HEREINAFTER 'r SET FORTH 17. COLLEGE PLACE REVISED FINAL PLAT, ORDINANCE REZONING FROM, RM -3 TO RP.- IST READING , Council Member Connor announced that due, to a.. 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 7 of 11 conflict of interest that he would abstain from discussion and voting on this matter. Motion by Lackey and second by King to approve the Revised Final Plat and Site Development Plan for College Place subject to the following. voting went as follows: yes: Girvin, King, Lackey and Shell; abstain: Connor. Motion carried. 1. Common Areas shall be indicated by lot numbers. 2. The lots shall not overlap the drainage and utility easements. 3. Bufferyards on the west and south perimeters shall be indicated on the site plan. 4. Restrictive covenants •shall be submitted and ak approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation. 5. The following variances are hereby granted: a. Reduction of minimum area requirement for P.U.D. b. Reduction of minimum lot size requirement for single family lots. C. Elimination of side and rear yard PUE and building lines. d. Waiver of stormwater detention requirements. e. Waiver of the required PUE and Building lines. Utility and Drainage easements shall be indicated as required by Division of Public Works in conjunction with construction plan review and building lines required only around perimeter of project. f. Allow reduction of off-street parking requirements from 2 to 1.5 spaces per unit. g. T equested waiver of site plan review fee 1s--tercommended, as this fee was paid at the prevings_X-eview. Motion by Lackey and second by Shell to affirm the first reading of the following captioned ordinance. voting went as follows: yes: Girvin, King, Lackey and Shell; abstain: Connor. Motion carried. Ordinance Number 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 OP,GINIAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE THE PROPERTY OF COLLEGE PLACE JOINT 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 8 of 11 VENTURE BEING 1.165 ACRES IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 497, AND THE WILLIAM ADDISON SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 21 IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FROM RM -3 RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY DISTRICT TO R -P RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS HEREINAFTER SET FORTY. 18. VARIANCE, PARKING REQUIREMENTS, REATA TRAILS III, BLOCK D, LOT 1 Motion by Connor and second by King to approve a variance from the off-street parking requirements of Section 7.111 of the Subdivision Ordinance to allow for •a reduction of three a spaces for Lot 1 Block D, Reata Trails Unit III due to the following finding of fact. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 1. The design of the parking area is creative and environmentally superior to the average parking layout. 2. The variance does not diminish the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. 3. The landscaping provided far exceeds the minimum required by ordinance and includes the preservation of nine significant existing trees which would be lost if the ordinance were strictly enforced. 19. L.C.R.A. WORK AUTHORIZATION, SAN GABRIEL SUBSTATION Motion by Connor and second by Shell to authorize the acceptance of LCRA work authorization no. lwam60632 to cover the Gabriel Substation engineering and construction cost necessary to install two 12.5 KV feeder exits for the City of Georgetown out of the distribution structure at Gabriel Substation. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 20. RESOLUTION, EASEMENTS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS Motion by Connor and second by Connor to adopt the following resolution. Motion carried by unanimous vote. WHEREAS, the.. City of Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas has received a request from the Corps of Engineers for the execution of the documents for easements and temporary license to use Government land for a temporary construction area in connection with Lake Georgetown Water: Treatment Plant right -or -way for electric lines, and an access road a shown in the attached field 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 9 of 11 notes (filed in the office of the City Secretary) contained in Corps of Engineers" Contract NO. DACW63-2-86-0743 and Contract No. DACW63-3-86-0744, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is in the best interest of the City to execute such documents for easements and temporary license. EE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ;THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS THAT the City Council of the City of Georgetown does hereby resolve that Robert Gaylor, City Manager, is authorized and directed to sign and deliver all necessary requests and other documents in connection A* therewith for and on behalf of the City of Georgetown. 21. ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT, COUNTRY CLUB WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS Motion by Connor and second by Shell to authorize the Mayor to execute the Country Club Road Wastewater Improvements Engineering Service Contract Project No. 00273 with Camp, Dresser, and McKee, Inc., in the amount of 17,000.00, plus survey and soils engineering cost. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 22. ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT, 18TH AND 19TH WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS Motion by Lackey and second by King to authorize the Mayor to execute the 18th and 19th Street Wastewater Improvements Engineering Services Contract Project No. 00265 with Gilbreath, MCDill, and Associates in the amount of 7,350.00, plus reimbursable expenses. Motion carried by unanimous vote. 23. ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT, SAN JOSE DRAINAGE Motion by King and second by Connor to authorize the Mayor to execute the San Jose Drainage Engineering Services Contract Project No. 00285 with Gilbreath, MCDill, and Associates in the amount of $2,750.00, plus reimbursable expenses. Motion carried by unanimous vote. ADJOURN Motion by Lackey and second by Connor to adjourn. Motion carried by unanimous vote, TIME: 5:05 PM 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 10 of 11 0* 0 Mayor Jim Colbert Fat Caballero, City Secretary THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF WILL MON II CITY OF GEORGETOWN I , being the current City Secretary of the City of Georgetown do hereby certify that the above meeting of the City Council of the City of Georgetown convened in a meeting open to the public and notice of said meeting, giving the date, place, and subject thereof, having been posted as prescribed by Article 6252-17, Section 3A, VATCS, and that the above minutes are the true and correct minutes of said meeting. Dated this day of City Seal) Secretary 19 12/17/86 regular council meeting page 11 of 11 WINDSONG SECTION ONE - PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT. Project #00553. UNIVER STY PARK SECTION I , MICKLER PARK NOT IN CITY/ A SMITH BRANCH Location Map Applicant/Owner: k i - J j J i THE MEADOWS SECTION II. . SITE Vergil and Jesse Poarch Route 7'Box 109-H Georgetown, Tx 78626 Agent: G.W. Schmidt and Co. 600 Forest Street Georgetown, Tx 78626 864-4594 1"= 2000' Request: Approval of a Preliminary/Final Plat for Windsong Section 1, a 2.47 acre tract of land situated in the William Addison Survey, Abstract No. 21 and out of that certain 169.03 acre tract of land described in Volume 836, Page 596, of the Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Also requested is a variance from Section 5.01 Part 19 and from 5.02-8a, to allow access to the proposed lot via a private access easement and from the Storm Water Drainage Ordinance to waive required stormwater detention and .Laociated calculations. Facts• Location: Within the E.T.J. of the City of Georgetown, southeast of the City along Hutto Road County Road 110). Property is not locatedw within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Area: Rural agricultural Existing Site: A single family residence and accessory building exist on the site. Proposed Use: One single family residential lot. Development Plan: Development Plan district 7b. The plan recommends normal residential type development. The proposed use substantially conforms to the development plan. Utilities: The applicant is requesting electrical service from Texas Power and Light. Sewage disposal will be provided by a private on—site disposal system. Water will be provided by the existing water well located near the center of the proposed lot. Analysis• Land Use: The proposed lot requested for subdivision is 2.47 acres in size, comprising only a small percentage of the total 107.37 acres owned by the applicant. The remaining 104.9 acres are being reserved by the applicant until a future date, to be developed at some currently undetermined mixed use type development. A single home is situated upon this lot at a density of 0.4 lot/acre. Streets: The site is located approximately 1000 feet to the east of Hutto Road, with access to the site provided by an existing private access easement. Section 5.02-8A of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that all lots be provided access to an existing or proposed public street by frontage on that street. The ordinance specifically allows private streets meeting City street construction standards only in Planned Unit Developments. However, in the fall of 1985 City Council did grant approval for the final plat of Riveroaks of Georgetown Office Park which is a single 25 acre lot for commercial use connected to the public street system only Windsong 2 via a private access easement similar to that of Windsong One. A review of the facts associated with each case indicates a far greater need for strict application of the w ordinance requirement in the Riveroaks case due primarily to its highly intense land use, relationship to adjacent property and streets, and more urban setting. However, variances of this nature should not be granted without reasonable justification and adequate safeguards. Applicant should be put on notice that no additional lots adjacent to the access easement or using it for access will be approved until dedicated public access to City standards is provided for both this and any newly created lots. Also applicant is encouraged to proceed with the creation of a conceptual roadway plan for the entire parent tract which is based upon the City Development Plan and surrounding projects which have been approved especially the proposed Georgetown Inner Loop Road which crosses part of the property. Within the context of these safeguards, objections to the granting of the variance are diminished by the following: 1. Extension of the public street system is not significantly impaired, 2. The intensity of proposed land use is commensurate with the facility being provided, 3. Both the structure being served and the easement providing the service are existing conditions, 4. Service to adjacent properties is not significantly impaired, 5. No identifiable negative impact upon the public health, safety and general welfare has been determined. It should also be noted that the configuration of the 50 foot access easement does not conform to City standards and thus cannot be directly converted to a dedicated street. Therefore, applicant should anticipate the eventual abandonment of this easement in conjunction with further development of the parent tract. Drainage: A variance is also requested to eliminate the submittal of required stormwater detention and associated calculations. This variance Windsong 3 is requested due to the gentle slope of the terrain and because the proposed development will not increase impervious cover. The plat, however, should contain a general note stating that the impervious cover for this lot will not be increased above existing conditions until compliance with the City Drainage Ordinance has been demonstrated. As no increase in run—off is proposed at this time, no variance is needed. Utilities: The proposed lot will not be served by City of Georgetown utilities, as electricity will be provided by TP&L and water by the existing on—site well. On—site septic systems will accommodate wastewater disposal. However, the site has no accommodations for fire control. Water supplies for fire fighting have not been indicated on the plat. Staff Recommendation: (November 26, 1986) Approval of the final plat for Windsong Section One with the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met, 2. Applicant shall furnish information indicating the present impervious cover on the lot and indicate by plat note that impervious cover on this lot will not be increased except in conformance to the City Drainage Ordinance. 3. A variance should be granted to waive the requirement for frontage on a public street due to the following findings of fact: a. The primary intent of the subdivision is the sale of property as opposed to the development of land, b. The primary use being served as well as the legal access easement providing the service are existing conditions, C. The health, safety and general welfare of the community will not be negatively impacted by this decision, 4. A temporary deferral from the City policy for Fire Protection Improvements should be granted due to the finding that no additional risk to the community will be incurred as a result of this action with the condition that adequate fire protection shall be provided for this lot with the development of the remainder of the property indicated on the Concept Plan. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) (4-0) Recommend approval per staff recommendations above. City Council Action: (December 17, 1986) (5-0) Approval as recommended above by P&Z. Windsong 4 PARK CENTRAL ONE - FINAL PLAT - AMENDED REPORT. Project #00128 PKUJEGT TKAUI C Location Map 11b1"=2000' Applicant: Park Central. Joint Venture & John Felter 323 Congress Ave, Suite 204 Austin, Tx 78701 474-4114 Agent: Darrel S. David 323 Congress Ave Suite 204 Austin, Tx 78701 474-4114 Request: Approval of final plat for Park Central One a 50.0 acre subdivision situated in the Francis A Hudson Survey, Abstract No. 295 and the J.S. Patterson Survey, Abstract No. 502 City of Georgetown, Williamson County, Texas. A variance is requested to exceed maximum block length. (Subdivision Ordinance Sec. 5.03 la.) Location: The northwest corner of Westinghouse Rd and County Rd. 116. It is inside the ETJ and just outside the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Uses: Mostly undeveloped land surrounds the tract Proposed Use: 50 acres of light industrial/commercial services on 14 lots of one acre or more Development Plan: District 8C. No recommended land tse is shown on Plan however, proposed use conforms to that which has been previously approved. Utilities: Proposed electric service is from Texas Power Light. Developer plans to have on-site water supply and sewage disposal system, but has requested that the City make a determination as to if and when water and sewer might be available. History: Conditional approval of the preliminary plat was given by City Council on January 14, 1986. Council requested staff to prepare a report on the future availability of utility services on April 22, 1986 subject to applicants submittal of a formal request. The final plat was tabled with the consent of applicant at Commission hearing of April 1, 1986 to resolve issues brought forth in planning report. The plat was withdrawn by applicant prior to the Commission hearing of August 5, 1986. Development Fees: As of December 2, 1986 the developer owes the City $1,676.11 in development review fees. Analysis• Land Use: Opposition of adjacent property owners relating to the juxtapostion of this industrial project adjacent to their proposed single family subdivisions was expressed at prior hearing. A perimeter landscaping area has been designated to provide a buffer. A plan regarding the details of this proposal has been submitted. A critique of this plan by an adjacent property owner is also attached. Many of the concerns of staff are mirrored in this critique. The proposed landscape plan should be designed to provide an attractive and effective screen along the perimeter and a softening of the buildings and parking areas on the interior. It should also be easy to establish and maintain. Landscaping on the interior could be handled by Park Central One 2 establishment of criteria within the framework of Restrictive Covenants attached to the property. This could then be reviewed by staff during site plan review for drainage. The perimeter treatment, however, should be part of the subdivision improvements and included in the construction plans. This design should be a combination of trees and shrubs that would provide a solid visual screen at least 15 feet high within a five year period and be virtually self sustaining beyond that point. The current proposal lacks the height or compactness desired. Streets: The previous requirement regarding the widening of Westinghouse Rd. and County Rd. 116 to meet minimum recommendation of the Thoroughfare Plan have been met. (Future widening of.Westinghouse Rd to 120 ft ROW should be coordinated by the County in conjunction with other development proposals in the area.) A variance is requested for the block length in excess of 1200 feet along Park Central Blvd. which exceeds the maximum by 220 feet. This does not appear to cause a problem due to the commercial land use. This is particularly true if access points to the lots are controlled (designed to reduce turning movement conflicts. City engineer has recommended that all lots adjacent to Commerce Blvd. have drive approach access restricted to that street. Access to park Central Boulevard should be restricted to three approaches each from Lot 4, Block 2 and Lot 10 Block 1. Direct access from these lots to County Road 116 and Westinghouse rd. should be prohibited in order to maximize the capacity of these future major thoroughfares. Drainage: Because adequate means of enforcing the drainage ordinance do not exist for sites such as this, the preliminary plat was approved conditioned upon: 1. Street and drainage construction plans being submitted with the final plat 2. Street and drainage improvements being completed prior to recordation 3. A "Drainage Facilities Maintenance Covenant" being filed with the'lViat The required construction plans have been submitted and some construction on the site has begun. Additionally, per policy of the Park Central One 3 Public Works Department, City has requested that all Drainage Easements and Public utility Easements be indicated separately on the plat. Also the PUE along the eastern edge of the site is shown to be used for the required landscape buffer. These functions must be redesigned in a coordinated manner to avoid conflicts. The County has a regulation that all drainage easements must either be 75' from adjacent property or approved by the adjacent owner. The revised plat has addressed this problem. Utilities: Since the City is not providing utility service to this project at this time, approval by other agencies is required prior to filing of plat per Section 4.04 (13) of Subdivision Ordinance. A plan for fire protection was required as a condition of preliminary plat approval. A plan has been provided and the City Fire Marshall has recommended disapproval of the plat. Applicant is attempting to work out an acceptable plan with the City or Jonah Water Company. Staff Recommendation: (April 1, 1986) Due to the request of applicant for an indication of utility availability, action on the plat should be tabled unti;,,.this request has been processed (with consent of applicant). However, if approved then it should be conditional upon the following being met: 1. Ordinance requirements shall be met 2. The plan for fire protection being further developed 3. Street and drainage construction plans being approved by Public Works Division 4. Interior landscaping requirements shall be approved by City staff and added to restrictive covenants filed with plat 5. The plan for perimeter landscaping shall: a. Be included in construction plans and completed with subdivision improvements b. Provide a solid visual screen with minimum canopy height of 15 feet after five years of normal growth C. Provide a solid under canopy screen of 4 feet minimum height after five years normal growth using evergreen shrubs d. Provide for ground cover within the landscape area e. Function in harmony with drainage and utility plans f. Use hardy low maintenance type materials g. Be maintained by restrictive covenants 6. A Stormwater Detention facility maintenance covenant shall be filed with the plat Park Central One 4 7. Plat shall not be recorded until streets, drainage, and landscaping have been accepted by City. P&Z Recommendation: April 1, 1986 (4-0) Tabled till next meeting pending resolution of water problems; May 6, 1986 (4-0) Tabled at request of applicant; June 3, 1986 (5-0) Withdrawn at request of applicant. Staff Recommendation: (August 5, 1986) .. Based upon discussions with City staff of both Georgetown and Round Rock, as well as with the applicant, the plan which resulted from applicants request for indication of utility availability is currently at a stand still. Generally, this plan involved securing water and sanitary sewer service from the City of Round Rock by agreement. Applicant is requesting that the City reconsider the approval of final plat as submitted for the April 1, 1986 hearing so that the plat can be recorded and the lots legally sold. The staff recommendation is that the plat not be approved until adequate utility improvements as required by Section 5.07 and 6.05 F of the Subdivision Ordinance have been provided. P&Z Recommendation: (August 5, 1986) Plat withdrawn prior to hearing at the request of applicant. REPORT UPDATE- On November 7, applicant submitted a plan for fire protection for staff review. Both the City Fire Marshall and the Director of Public Works indicated that this plan was not in conformance with City Standards and would not recommend it for approval. As a result applicant was granted a hearing before the City Council on November 10. At that hearing the consensus of the Council was that fire protection improvements to City Standards is not a reasonable requirement for projects not served by municipal level water systems but that the developer's provision of the basic infrastructure for an adequate system in the event of future extension of adequate water supply was reasonable. Therefore, a City policy for the provision of fire protection improvements is currently being drafted to formally establish this direction of the Council. As a result applicant will be required to provide water lines, fire hydrants and appurtenances on—site as a "dry system" ready to connect to an adequate source of water when same becomes available or surety sufficient to cover the installation costs of such a system. Staff Recommendation: (November 26, 1986) Approval of the final plat of Park Central One Subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met, 2. City Policy for Fire Protection Improvements shall be met, Park Central One 5 3. A Drainage Facility Maintenance Covenant shall be filed with the plat, 4. Restrictive_ Covenants shall be filed with the plat which indicates interior, individual lot landscaping requirements and provides for maintenance of all landscape areas, 5. A plan for perimeter landscaping shall: a. Be included in construction plans and completed with subdivision improvements, b. Provide a solid visual screen with minimum canopy height of 15 feet after five years of normal growth, C. Provide a solid under canopy screen of 4 feet minimum height after 5 years normal growth using evergreen shrubs, d. Provide for ground cover within the landscaped area, e. Function in harmony with drainage and utility plans, f. Use hardy, low maintenance type materials, 6. The plat shall not be recorded until streets, drainage, perimeter landscaping and fire protection improvements have been accepted by City or surety sufficient to cover the costs of installation has been provided. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) (4-0) Recommend approval per staff recommendation above, with the following amendments: Item #5b and 5c to be deleted, and a new recommendation to read " Provide a Type E bufferyard (as shown on attached copy) along the perimeter of the plat." NOTE: A copy of letter from adjacent owner which was distributed to Commission at the hearing of 12/2/86 has been attached beyond. City Council Action: (December 17, 1986) (5-o) Approval as recommended by P&Z above. Park Central One 6 M©THERAL INDUSTRIES INCO' 828 sidney baker • kermille, texas 78028 December 2, 1986 2 p 9 AOR D 512/257-6360 City of Georgetown Re: Final Plat Approval of Planning Department park Central One Subdivision P. 0. Box 405 Williamson County, Texas Georgetown, Texas 78627 Attn: Randle Gaither Dear Randle: We are again writing concerning Park Central One. As outlined in our previous letter dated April 91 1986, we are placing all parties concerned on notice that no screening has been placed around this subdivision to block out unsightly commercial uses, and the ditch improperly cut along the east property line of this proposed subdivision has not been filled, in spite of the fact that the developer has been told by the County sanitarian that any drainage ditch along their east line must be at least 75 feet away from our common property line, nor have the necessary drainage improvements necessary to protect downstream land owners been installed. Additionally, no State approval has been ecured for the water system which has been installed illegally. Therefore, we respectfully suggest that the above subdivision not be approved until the above required improvements are completed and approved by the proper City, County and State staff or agency. Failure of the City of Georgetown and/or the Commission to assure compliance with all subdivision requirements prior to approval will be considered acquiescence to, and conducent of substandard development. We will then be forced to take other steps to protect our adjacent property and that of our neighbors. We therefore ask all parties, the developer, the City, the State, the individual staff and commission members to consider this matter carefully, and to resolve all of the above problems prior to final approval. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Yours ver t R. B. Motheral RBM/jsm ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION & MANAGEMENT REQUIRED PUNTugniiPgri PLANT UNITS PER 100 UNITS PER 100' A v Deciduous Tress J: Deciduous Trees Deciduous Shrubs Deciduous Shrubs n tt Evorproone Everpreane N y" NTFJ Berm B B Fence REQUIRED PLANT UNITS PER 100' 0 o0 REQUIRED PLANT Ile UNITS PER 100' Deciduous Troos Deciduous Shrubs h — Deciduous Trees to EvorOreons r' Deciduous Shrubs{ r Evergreens "L REQUIRED PLANT Berm B UNITS PER 100' N B oo r Fence 1— NDeciduousTress Deciduous Shrubs RjiD NEvorproone FIGURE 37030 BUFhERYARD REQUIRE' N ej OAR CREST ESTATES RIVERSIDE UNIT, LOT 1 BLOCK 8— RESUBDIVISION PLAT. PROJECT #00520 Location Map 1"= 1000' Applicant/Owner: Robert and Barbara Choate 100 Northcross Road Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-0866 Agent: Steger and Bizzell P.O.Box 858 Georgetown, Texas 78627 863-0866 Request: Approval for a resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 8, of the Oak Crest Estates, Riverside Unit subdivision, as recorded in Cabinet B, Slide 154 of the Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. t-- Facts: Location: On the northwest corner of the intersection w of Northcross and River Roads, within the City of Georgetown corporate limits. This property is situated 160-200 feet south of the North Fork San Gabriel River, within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Area: Single-family residences with an average lot size of 0.33 acre (14,500 square feet). Existing Site: A single-family residence is built upon proposed Lot IA. Property is zoned R -S, Residential Single-family. Proposed Use: An additional single-family residence, to be located upon proposed Lot 1B, approximately 0.40 acres (17,400 square feet) in size. Development Plan: Development Plan district 9b, which recommends large lot residential use for this area. Existing and proposed uses substantially conform to the plan.*.•. Utilities: Applicant is requesting City provision of water, wastewater, and electrical services for Lot 1B. Lot IA has existing City utility service. History: On March 1, 1985, the Oak Crest Home Owners Association filed a resolution with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council voicing the Association's concern about the resubdivision of lots in the following subdivisions: Oak Crest Riverside Unit, Oak Crest Spring Valley Unit, Oak Crest Ranchettes Units I -III, and Oak Crest Highcrest Unit I. On August 5, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission denied this resubdivision request. Concerns expressed by the Commission included a fear of establishing precedent for resubdivision in the Oak Crest neighborhood and whether infrastructure serving the Oak Crest neighborhood could accommodate resubdivision. The staff recommended disapproval of the resubdivision until the following issues could be resolved: Oak Crest Riverside a.) How many existing lots are capable of being resubdivided under existing development regulations in the Oak Crest Riverside Unit? b.) What street, water, sewer, and electrical improvements are required to adequately serve these new lots? c.) How are these improvements to be funded and built? These issues identified by staff formed the basis for a study of the Oak Crest neighborhood, conducted by the applicant, to gather data to determine the potential for resubdivision in the Oak Crest neighborhood,. and more specifically in Oak Crest Riverside. Based on the results from this research, the applicant has resubmitted a request to resubdivide his lot into two lots. Notification: Proper notification was furnished by the applicant. Two responses have been returned in favor of the request, with none returned in opposition. Analysis• Overview: In response to the aforementioned three issues identified by staff, the applicant submitted a report of data collected in the Oak Crest neighborhoods to determine lots where potential resubdivisions could occur. The information collected by the applicant was field verified by staff and found to be accurate. Based on all the assembled data and field inspection, six other lots, in addition to the applicant lot, could be potentially resubdivided in the Oak Crest Riverside subdivision (see attached Exhibit A). The results of the study were evaluated by Public Works to determine the impact upon infrastructural networks serving the area. The following analysis is partly based upon that data submitted by the applicant and staff analysis of that data. Land Use: The resubdivision of Lot 1 into Lots 1A and 1B would result in two lots at a ratio of 2.43 dwelling units/acre, which is consistent with the surrounding land use and the Development Plan recommendation for this site. Oak Crest Riverside 3 EXHIBIT A RIVERSIDE UNIT Afo6CtOgO t tl _ s ZO t 3 1 p a t9 t y on SUBJECT PROPERTY 14 to 0 1 1• q Z a I!O 10 ! 9 m 1 9 t • d s as y. N 1. It POTENTIAL LOTS z CLlLl11a.x FOR RESUBDIVISION t1 M as. moi.: Jar .r 'lil :••. <. .' s.F' ct • y - r 1t t , t 1 ., o tl ` u•- K P as y to x 4 40 J z is 2` o 31 23 n 30 w- 22 1p-• 29 Zl IK•' cam 20 • 28 2T In Oak Crest Riverside, which encompasses 156 lots, only seven lots (inclusive of the applicant) could potentially be resubdivided to meet ordinance lot size requirements. Four of these six potential resubdivisions would involve two lot owners collaborating to create a third lot. The other two lots are vacant and of substantial size. The percentage of developed lots in Oak Crest Riverside is 94%. As a result, if all six potential resubdivisions occurred, the impact on the neighborhood would likely be minimal, with no likelihood of a resubdivision epidemic initiated by approval of a resubdivision in the Oak Crest Riverside Unit. Streets: With only a total potential of seven additional lots, the cumulative impact of these resubdivisions on streets is very minimal. Despite the substandard design and condition of many streets in the Oak Crest area, the impact of resubdivision on streets is not sufficient to warrant off—site street improvements. Drainage: Due to the proximity of the North Fork San Gabriel River (some 160-200 feet to the north) to the subject property, additional drainage information is necessary. Prior to the placement of this item on the City Council agenda, the applicant must indicate the 100—year flood plain elevation adjacent to the property to determine if a Development Permit is also required, as per Section 6-97 of the City Code. Minimum finished floor elevations must be determined for each lot and shown on the plat, as determined by a Professional Engineer. W Utilities: The Department of Public Works has indicated that the infrastructure currently supplying water to Oak Crest Riverside is substandard and unable to maintain adequate pressures during peak fire flow conditions and peak hours. Despite the fact that ten of the original 156 lots that comprise the Oak Crest Riverside Unit remain undeveloped, the Department of Public Works has indicated that any resubdivision in Riverside would have a detrimental impact upon the existing water service. Also, downstream wastewater lines are currently overloaded. Any additional Oak Crest Riverside 4 demands on these facilities will likely cause a further reduction of currently inadequate service levels. The Department of Public Works has also required that specific improvements necessary to accommodate this resubdivision include the construction of a six inch water line along Northcross Road from River Road to*Ridgecrest Road connecting the two existing lines in order to improve the distribution pressure in the area. Staff Recommendation: (November 18, 1986) Because the applicant has successfully demonstrated to staff the potential for further resubdivision within the Oak Crest Riverside area and, because the land use and lot size of the proposed resubdivision substantially conforms to the surrounding area and, because the applicant has agreed to defer additional demands upon the utility service until such time as these services are improved to meet ordinance demands, The staff recommends approval of the resubdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met, 2. All drainage requirements shall be met; a. Minimum finished floor elevations and the 100 -year flood plain elevation, for each lot, shall be indicated, as determined by a Professional Engineer, b. Variance from stormwater detention requirements should be granted, 3. Utilities being adequate; a. Applicant shall construct a 6 -inch water line to City standards along Northcross Road from River Road to Ridgecrest Road, b. The following note shall be added to the plat: "NOTICE: No building permits or utility connections shall be allowed for Lot 1B of this plat until such time as the City Director of Public Works has determined that utility service levels are adequate and has approved the new connections in writing, 4. A survey plat shall be submitted to verify that the existing structure on Lot 1A meets ordinance requirements. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) (4-0) Recommend approval per staff recommendations above, with the following amendment: Item #3a) shall read "Applicant shall construct a 6 -inch water line to City standards along Northcross Road from River Road to the common property line of Lot 1B & 2 of Oak Crest Riverside, or from Ridgecrest to the common line of lA 1B." (See Exhibit "B" attached) City Council Action: (December 17, 1986) (5-0) Approval as recommended by P&Z aboae Oak Crest Riverside 5 i 740 woo 00, 6\. 1 option 0 E.XHiBIT"'.,B TURTLE BEND SECTION ONE LOTS 1-4 BLOCK A — RESUBDIVISION PLAT. Project #00554. Location Map 1"=2000' Applicant/Owner: Carl Luzius 304 Oakcrest Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-8855 Agent: G.W. Schmidt and Co. 600 Forest Street Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-4594 Request: Approval for a resubdivision of Lots 1-4, Block A, Turtle Bend Section One, as recorded in Cabinet E, Slide 150-151 of the Official Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. Also requested is a variance from Chapter 331, Subchapter B, Section 331.106(d)(3) of the Texas Administrative Code to allow lot sizes under one acre. Facts• Location: Is within the ETJ, at the northwest corner of Booty's Crossing Road and Tortoise.Lane, within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Area Existing Site: Proposed Use: Development Plan: Single family residential A single family residence on Lot 1. Lots 2-4 are vacant single family residential lots Three single family residential lots with a density of 1.55 dwelling units per acre Development Plan district 4a. The proposed use and density of this use substantially conform with the Development Plan. Utilities: The applicant is requesting City provision of water. Sewage disposal will be provided by private on-site disposal systems. Electric service, provided by Pedernales Electrical Co-op, is currently in place. History: On November 9, 1982 the City Council approved the Final Plat for Turtle Bend Section One. The final plat was filed on December 2, 1982 with the County Clerk. Notification: Notification mailed to property owners listed an incorrect date for the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing. Subsequent letters were mailed to each property owner initially notified, with the correct date and time for the public hearing. Renotification occurred 26 days prior to the public hearing. Two responses have been returned in favor and zero in opposition to the request. Analysis• Land Use: At the present time, Lots 2-4 are vacant, while Lot 1 contains a single family residence. The applicant has indicated that the primary purpose and intent for the proposed resubdivision is to allow the sale of a portion of Lot 3 to the owner of Lot 1, thereby extending the northern property line of Lot 1 by 40 feet to the north. Lot 2 will be enlarged in a similar manner, with the remainder of Lot 3 added to Lot 4 (see Exhibit A). The net result of the resubdivision will be to create three larger lots from the original four lots. No other changes from the original subdivision are proposed. Turtle Bend 2 Streets: No new streets are being proposed.* The City Development Plan calls for the widening of Booty's Crossing Road to four lanes therefore a 15 foot dedication for street widening should be required. Access be restricted to one approach for Lot 1 and no access from Lot 17 onto Booty's Crossing Road shall be allowed. The residence built upon Lot 2 should face Tortoise Lane. Theme items should be noted on the plat. Drainage: The reduction in the number of lots from four to three will reduce the amount of total impervious cover that would have existed if a home and driveway had been constructed on all four lots. As a result, stormwater run—off will decrease. The drainage concept approved in 1982 has not been altered, as stormwater collected in Tortoise Lane and the west side of Lots 1 & 3 is transported via a drainage easement swale located at the front of Lots 1 and 2 toward the North Fork San Gabriel River. Utilities: Telephone and electric facilities already exist on each of the three proposed lots. The reduction in lots from four to three creates a similar reduction in septic systems operating within the recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer. Variance: Turtle Bend Section One was approved and filed in December 1982, meeting all State and local regulations that existed at that time. In May 1985, the State of Texas adopted by statute, regulations for development on the Recharge Zone of the Edwards Underground Aquifer, with Chapter 331, Subchapter B containing regulations specific to Williamson County. Section 331.106(d)(3) of these regulations requires that all new lots located on the Recharge Zone of the Edwards Aquifer be one acre in size. Section 331.109 contains provisions to apply for exceptions to other regulations for the recharge zone. The applicant has therefore requested a variance (exception) from Chapter 331, Subchapter B Section 331.106(d)(3) of the Texas Administrative Code to allow lot sizes less than one acre. The requested variance can only be approved by the Texas Water Commission and is provided in this report for information only. Turtle Bend 3 As a result, City approval of the resubdivision request will be contingent upon approval by the Texas Water Commission to allow lots less than one acre. Miscellaneous: w As of the date of this report no response from the Public Works Division has been received. Staff Recommendation: (November 26, 1986) Approval of the requested resubdivision, subject to the following conditions: 1. Written approval from the TWC allowing for lots less than 1 acre in size over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, 2. All ordinance requirements being met, 3. A 15 foot dedication for street widening along Booty's Crossing Road shall be required, 4. Access shall be restricted by plat note to one approach to Lot 1 and no approaches to Lot 2 from Booty's Crossing Road and the structure built on Lot 2 shall face Tortoise Lane. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) (4-0) Recommend approval per staff recommendation above. City Council Action: (December 17, 1986) (5-0) Approval as recommended by P&Z above Turtle Bend 4 TURTLE EXHIBIT A PROPOSED RESUBDIVISION f• sry 4 BOOTY'S CROSSING ROAD ROW W/OTH VARIESJ_____, i LOT 12, BLOCK A WILLIAMS ADDITION UNIT 6 AND LOT 13•, PLOCFC ' WILLIAMS ADDITION UNIT 7 - PARTIAL VACATING AND AMENDING FLAT,. Project #00556. E w REATA EAST'x GOLDEN OAKS M apRdPfRTY GxAT/ N . TWO M) D o / V A 7 LLIAIA6 D 10 / r GATEWAY Location Map HHH i ^lint <• Applicant/Owner": Hazel D. Talbot Hood 707 Garden Meadow Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-9160 Agent: Gilbreath, McDill and Associates PO Pox 1245 Georgetown, Tx 78627 863-9862 Feguest: Approval for a partial vacating and amendi c;• plat for Lot 12, Block A Williams Addition, Unit 6 and Lot 13, Block A Williams Additi:r, Unit 7, as recorded in Cabinet D, Slides 282-8' and Cabinet E, Slides 91--92, respectively, of the Official Flat F:_xcords of Williamson County, Texas. Also requrxsted i_: a variance from Section II of the Stormwaier Drainage Ordinance for stormwater detention. Location: In the City limits of Georgetown, at 707 Garden Meadow. To the immediate south o4 Pecan Creek and the Golden Oaks Suly~?visir/.. Is in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Tone. Surrounding Area: The immediately adjacent area is zoned R-E with single family residential land uses. Properties to the immediate north of the subject property are included within the Golden Oaks Subdivision and are located outside the City limits" As a result, thi= large lot residential area is not zoned. Existing Site: A single family residence is located at 8loc Av Lot 12, 707 Garden Meadow" Block Al Lci 13 is vacant" Both lots are zoned R-S. Proposed Use: Extension of the existing home on Lot 12 ort, the existing Lot 13" Development Plan: Development Plan district 4b" The plan recommends normal residential land use at this location. The proposed use substantially conforms to the plan. Utilities- The existing home on Lot 12 is served with City of Georgetown water, wastewater/ and electrical services" Because the existing home would be extended onto existing Lot 13, new City utility connections will nut be required. History: The final plat for Williams Addition Unit 6 was filed with the County Clerk on April !, 1980" The final plat for Williams Addition Unit 7 was filed on April 1, 1982. Notification: Proper notification was provided" The subject property is transversed by a 20' wide Pedernales Electric Co-op easement, containing overhead electrical lines. The lines are located approximately half-way across Lot 12, on which the applicant's home is located" Building within the 20 foot P.E.C. easement is prohibited. As a result, the 34' x 56^ home cannot be extended into the large remaining portion of Lot 12, and the lot has effectively been reduced from 149.36' x 70.0' to approximately RE' x 70.0' See attached Exhibit A). EX RIM.A.. HI 604 A. 6628 7, K 71W no CAS 5, 1.- 97Es394 - JAMS L. SiFATCh' I N62 -17'55"E 404 ESPE.RADA AR. aO5' SCALGE &WIVWN E.-I'x/00' 7-D L INCGEORGETOWN rY LIMITS 74006' 1.6"E6L 20'ELECr S67 °56'/3"W sC, 69.4J O SUBDIVI, UNE 6FORGE 4f,",JK,4L 90-- MLA V4. GECRSEFOWN, r -T. 76626 12 ! ];; /3 5bL N64005'41" E 4 3 59-93' GARDEN MEADOW DRIVE VACATING PLAT o OAKS 4CA!3 51 . 39" N6201753E 2 amvsON ' a 0, SCALC:11A20 GEORGETOWN 64006'16 r LINE N64V5i E c/ry 4,/M/rs 72.58, mON4ACCESSr PUE A zo EL — — — — L 44b- V-, -WaLnL4 T lt e, M4J. a -J S6'90"1 5"WGAROEN MEADOW OR/VE4995' SUBWDIVISOf, p LINE C:l AMENDING PLAT The applicant desires to purchase the vacant and adjoining Lot 13 so as to extend the home located on Lot 12. In so doing, Lot 12, Block A, Williams Addition Unit 6 and Lot 13, block A Williams Addition Unit 7, must be vacated and the plat amended to reflect the new lot configuration. Amended features of the new lot include the following: 1. The new lot, Lot 36, has the new width of 138 feet and a depth of 144.60 feet on the west and 159.67 on the east, and a new lot acreage total of 0.50 acres. The primary change is the eliminatean of the common lot line between Lot 12 and 13 and the associated P.U.E. on each side of the common property line. No other easements have been altered or eliminated. 2. Because Lot 12 was platted with Williams Addition Unit 6 and Lot 13 with Williams Addition Unit 7, the front yard setbacks are not consistent between the two lots. However, because a home was built on Lot 12 with a 25 foot setback, and because Lot 13 is vacant, the 15 foot setback that exists on Lot 13 should be increased to 25 feet for consistency. The side yard setbacks that exist along the common lot line between Lots 12 and 13 have been eliminated, as the two lots become one. No other setbacks have been altered or eliminated. The Department of Public Works has not commented as to the status of the two PUE's adjacent to the common lot line of Lots 12 and 13. Variance: The increase in stormwater will be less than 5.0 c.f.s. As a result, the applicants request for a waiver of stormwater detention requirements is approved by staff. Staff Recommendation: (November 19, 1986) Approval of the requested vacating and amended plat and variance, contingent upon written approval from the Department of Public Works. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) (4-0) Recommend approval per staff recommendation above. City Council Action:(December 17, 1986) (5-0) Approval per P&Z Recommendation above. Williams Addition Units 6 & 7 3 RIVERCREST P.U.D.— AMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY RESUBDIVISION OF SOUTH FORK APARTMENTS PUD. Project #00528 RLOOK Location Map 4 N 0 T ;I T`Ni p IN j CITY 1"= 1000' Owner/Applicant: Venture Investment Properties 4107 Spicewood Springs Suite #107 Austin, Texas 78759 346-1841 Agent: Gilbreath, McDill and Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 1245 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Request: Approval for amended site development plan and preliminary resubdivision of the South Fork Apartments PUD, a 22.30 acre tract as recorded in Volume 534, Page 661, of the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas. The following variances ar•!-'- requested: 1. A 10—foot building line for Lot 1 and Lot 16 of Block C, 2. The preliminary plat is printed at a 1"=50' scale for legibility, 3. A majority of lots are designed approximately 20 degrees from perpendicular to the proposed streets, 4. The subdivision street centerline radii are less than the 300—foot requirement, 5. A waiver of the City Stormwater Drainage Ordinance for stormwater detention, 6. Elimination of interior yard building setbacks and PUE's. 7. Lots with excessive width to length ratios 8. Allowance for the length of Block C to be 315', while the desirable minimum set by the Subdivision Ordinance is 500'. Facts: Location: Approximately one-third mile north of the intersection of the IH -35 off -ramp and Leander Road (FM 2243) intersection. Is within the corporate limits of the City of Georgetown and the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Uses: Predominantly residential, as reflected in the surrounding R -S Single-family residential and R -P Residential Planned Development districts. Single-family residences in the San Gabriel Heights subdivision lie to the west of the subject property, multi -family apartments to the southwest and low impact retail to the south. The South Fork San Gabriel River is located to the north, with IH -35 and its associated R.O.W. to the east of the site. Existing Site: Water, wastewater, and electrical lines run through the site, as well as an access easement. The access easement appears to still be in effect, and its status is being researched by the applicant. The site is presently zoned R -P Residential Planned. Proposed Use: Ninety-six single family attached residential lots, with a density of 4.48 living units per acre. Development Plan: District 9b. The revised site development plan and preliminary resubdivision substantially conform to the plan. Utilities: The applicant is requesting City provision of water, wastewater, and electrical cervices. Due to the previous approval of the South Fork Apartments PUD in 1984, the existing plat is not subject to the Water Availability Note. However, the City may now, at its discretion, require the Water Availability Rivercrest - amended 2 Note, as this is a new plat request and substantial time has elapsed since the original approval. History: In 1981, a Preliminary Site Study for The Barbarosa was submitted for staff review. The Barbarosa, a proposed duplex and quadraplex Planned Unit Development, apparently never progressed beyond the preliminary stages of review. On August 14, 1984, the City Council approved a Final Plat and Site Plan for the South Fork Apartments Planned Unit Development for Venture Investment Properties. This plat has been recorded. The subject property has remained relatively idle the past two years after Council approval. Venture Investment Properties now propose a single-family attached residential approach for site development. On September 2, 1986, the Planning and Zoning Commission tabled an Amended Site Development Plan and Preliminary Plat for up to one year to enable the applicant to work with the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation in the IH -35 off -ramp redesign and work with Planning Department staff to make modifications to address environmental concerns. Analysis Land Use: The subject property is divided into two distinct sections by the steep slopes and flood plain of the South Fork San Gabriel River. The portion of site to the north of the steep slopes is suited primarily for very limited development. The site to the south of these steep slopes is generally suitable for residential development. As a result, land uses for this site are divided in a similar manner, with land to the north of the steep slopes reserved for recreational and open space land uses and property to the south of these slopes to be developed for townhomes. The subject property, being located within a R -P zoning district, must congorm to land use regulations prescribed in the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed impervious cover for this site is 33%,within the maximum allowable impervious cover total of 40%, as prescribed Rivercrest - amended 3 t. - by ordinance. The proposed density for the Rivercrest townhomes is 4.30 units per acre, which is well within the ordinance requirements. The proposed land uses for this site also conform to R -P district regulations. The western boundary of Rivercrest will adjoin the San Gabriel Heights subdivision. The Rivercrest site plan indicates that a row of houses in Rivercrest will back up to the row of homes in San Gabriel Heights that are located on the west side of San Gabriel Boulevard. As a result, each of the adjacent lots in San Gabriel Heights will be bordered along the rear property line by three lots in Rivercrest. To offset the negative impacts from such an arrangement, the applicant has indicated that the homes in Rivercrest will be only one story in height and will have a six foot high opaque fence with landscaping along the rear property line. The Rivercrest site is heavily wooded and contains numerous significant trees. The preservation of as many of these significant trees as possible is a goal of both the staff and the applicant. The originally submitted site plan and landscape plan appeared to indicate that several additional trees may be preserved with only minor reconfigurations of home design and/or placement upon lots. The applicant has indicated that he will submit more detailed site plans for each lot to be developed in Rivercrest, depicting the type and location of all trees and work with staff to conserve as many trees as possible. Thus, the staff will have the opportunity to review each lot in greater detail to ensure compliance with ordinance regulations and conditions of plat approval for the maximum preservation of significant trees and minimization of potentially adverse site and river disturbance The staff will not issue building permits until these site plans are approved. The Rivercrest site is adjacent to and highly, visible from IH -35. As a result, landscaping and/or screening is recommended to buffer the site from noises from the highway and to screen the rear lots in Rivercrest from the Rivercrest - amended 4 Streets: highway, adding to the privacy of these lots and creating an attractive corridor along the Interstate. The subject property is located at the end of a private access road that originates near the intersection of Leander Road and the IH -35 South off -ramp. The location of the private access road relative to the Leander Road and IH -35 intersection is poor and likely to worsen with the signalization of this intersection, due to the close proximity of the private access road to the intersection. Due to the poor location of the private access easement relative to the Ili -35 South off -ramp, if the private street was dedicated to the City and constructed as a City street, the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation would not construct a frontage road. The construction of a frontage road would be very advantageous for access to properties west of the interstate. As a result, the City will not accept dedication of the private access easement as a City street. On August 5, 1986, a zone change request for The Overlook, a property that also utilizes the private access road just south of Rivercrest, was tabled until the applicant could verify that the State would redesign the IH -35 off -ramp in a manner that would eliminate the private access easement intersection with Leandef Road and provide access to the site by a public street, as per Subdivision Ordinance regulations. The Rivercrest PUD property is directly impacted by those same problems that confronted The Overlook. Both of these requests were tabled by P&Z for up to one year until access problems can be resolved (see Exhibit A). Due to the problems of access, representatives from The Overlook, Rivercrest and the State Department of Highways and Public Transportation began negotiations for the redesign and financing of the IH -35 South off -ramp. However, negotiations were discontinued recently as SDHPT conditions for approval of a redesign of the off -ramp were too costly for the applicants. Rivercrest - amended 5 The remaining options available to access the subject project from a public street are few. One option, to extend a public street out from Rivercrest Drive to San Gabriel Boulevard, would likely result in the disruption of a very stable and quiet neighborhood. A second, more viable option is proposed as a result of a cooperative arrangement between property owners from Rivercrest, The Overlook, Circle -R, the adjacent apartments, and the Past and Presents Store to dedicate r.o.w.!'or a public street that would access all of these properties from Leander Road. All of the aforementioned property owners have verbally agreed to such an arrangement for a new public street, built to City standards west of the current private access easement. Also proposed is the elimination of two-way traffic on the private access easement. The access easement is proposed to be a one lane one-way entry to Rivercrest, The Overlook, and Past and Presents to relieve traffic pressure from the intersection of the proposed public street and Leander Road. The new design of the private access easement should also serve as a fire lane to the rear of The Overlook property. The private access easement will be reduced to one lane one-way status due to the dedication of r.o.w. for a public road along the common property line of The Overlook and apartment properties. The proposed public street would originate at the existing driveway accessing the apartments from Leander Road, approximately 475 feet west of the Leander Road and IH -35 intersection. The public street would progress from this point to the north and east in a "J" shape fashion, intersecting the existing private access easement. That portion of the private access easement to the north of The Overlook property and east of the Rivercrest property would be rededicated for public R.O.W. As a result of the above described design of the proposed public street, all streets within the Rivercrest PUD would be public streets. A new public street in the proposed location would serve as the only means of access to the following properties accessed by the private access easement: 1. Rivercrest PUD Rivercrest - amended 6 2. The Overlook 3. The Georgetown Apartments 4. The Past and Presents store The end result of such a design will be direct public access to the Rivercrest PUD and all other properties currently utilizing the private access easement for site access. Additional benefits could also accrue to the citizens of Georgetown if such a design as is proposed is implemented. Due to the increasing traffic in this portion of the City and the traffic expected to develop from Rivercrest and The Overlook properties, relative to the IH -35 and Leander Road intersection, the dangerous design of this intersection needs to be improved. The dangerous alignment that currently exists due to the close proximity of the Leander Road and IH -35 intersection relative to the private access easement will be improved due to the elimination of left turn movements onto the private road and out from the private road. The private road will accommodate only the right turning movement for traffic entering the site. Left turn movements entering the site will be prevented by a median and restricted to only the signalized intersection of the proposed public street and Leander Road. Implementation of the proposed design will also likely result in the synchronization of traffic signals from the proposed intersection of the public road and Leander Road and the proposed traffic signal to be installed by the SDHPT at the Leander Road and IH -35 intersection. The design of the proposed public street will eliminate the unsignalized conflicting turns that currently slow traffic on Leander Road and create dangers for motorists, particularly unsignalized left turn movements. The intersection of IH -35 and Leander Road, as a result, should operate more smoothly and safely with the elimination of the conflicting left turns. While a frontage road would ultimately be the best solution to resolve access to Rivercrest, current costs for such a road are too great for both the State and the applicant. The proposed solution to resolve Rivercrest — amended 7 access problems to this area of the City appears to be workable and acceptable to all of the adjacent property owners. Utilities: The size and nature of the proposed development of the Rivercrest PUD is such to require on-site utility network improvements by the applicant and off-site improvements to utility networks by both the City and the applicant. Following are the required improvements: OFF-SITE: The Rivercrest PUD site is currently transversed by water, wastewater, and electrical lines. A prior agreement between the land owner and the City of Georgetown (Volume 489, Page 203, of the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas) indicates City responsibility for the relocation of one of the existing power lines across the property platted as South Fork Apartments PUD. The new location of these lines needs to be determined by the City so that they may be protected with easements prior to final plat approval. In order to provide the Southside area with water treated at the proposed grouy.3.water treatment plant, distribution system improvements may be necessary for conveying water from the Central Plane to Southern Plane. These improvements shall be included in the City's overall Capital Improvements Program and no special participation by this project should be required. The Southwestern Lift Station, already overloaded, will be further taxed by this proposed development. The original plat for this property, the South Fork Apartments PUD, was approved in 1984, based on conditions existing at that time and was therefore not required to participate in the upgrading of the Southwestern Lift Station. In the two years following approval of South Fork, the overloading of the Southwestern Lift Station became a serious concern of the City, while the development of the South Fork PUD never commenced. The overloaded condition of this lift station is now a major problem that needs correction. Recently, other plat requests that would add to the overloaded condition of the lift station have been required to participate in the upgrading of Rivercrest - amended 8 the lift station. Despite the close similarity of the Rivercrest PUD to the South Fork PUD that was approved without stipulations for applicant participation in upgrading the lift station, the Department of Public Works has indicated that this project should be evaluated upon the current situation. As a result, the applicant should be required to share in the cost of upgrading the Southwestern Lift Station and the overloaded line segments leading m ---the station. ON—SITE: The utility plan submitted for on—site water and waste water is acceptable to the Department of Public Works and the City Engineer, except for fire hydrant spacing and minor adjustments that can be corrected prior to Final Plat approval. Additional fire hydrants and linework necessary to meet Georgetown Fire Department guidelines will be required. The high density residential development proposed requires that fire hydrants be spaced such that all of each lot is within a 300 ft. radius. The additional line work to support the fire hydrants will likely be available if improvements as proposed are completed. Two overhead electrical lines transverse the site. While the City will relocate its' lines, the ownership of the other lines is not shown. However, the relocation of these lines will be required. It must be determined where these lines will be relocat— ed to and what easements will be required to protect them prior to approval of the final plat. The utility lines located within the private access easement located between Leander Road and the southeast corner of Rivercrest must be provided with a utility easement. Drainage: Drainage from the entire proposed Rivercrest PUD is into the South Fork San Gabriel River. The request for waiver of detention requirements appears to be acceptable. However, erosion and sedimentation controls and stormwater filtration should be required to improve the quality of stormwater run—off. This function should occur in the area between the 25—year and 100—year flood Rivercrest — amended 9 plains. Provisions for the perpetual maintenance of the open space area by a home owners association should be required. Variances: The applicant is requesting the following variances: 1. A 10 -foot building line for Lot 1 and Lot 16 of Block C, 2. The preliminary plat is printed at a 1"=50' scale for legibility, 3. A majority of lots are designed approximately 20 degrees from perpendicular to the proposed streets, 4. The subdivision street centerline radii are less than the 300 -foot requirement, 5. A waiver of the City Stormwater Drainage Ordinance for stormwater detention, 6. Elimination of interior yard building setbacks and PUE's. 7. Lots with excessive width to length ratios, 8. Allowance for the length of Block C to be 315', while the desirable minimum set by the Subdivision Ordinance is 500', The applicant is requesting several variations from the norm, including building upon environmentally sensitive slopes. Some slopes in Block F are 25%. It is a Planning Department policy/recommendation to allow only roads on such environmentally sensitive areas and prohibit other impervious cover. The other requested and subsequently discovered variances are not nearly as vitally important as the impervious coverage of environmentally sensitive areas. Granting these variances will establish a precedent and require similar treatment for similar future requests. Miscellaneous: The Williamson County Official Records indicate that an access easement (Volume 822, Page 73) exists and is still in affect along the southwest property line. The applicant is aware of this fact and is conducting research to ascertain if the easement was abandoned. Additionally, a vacating of the existing South Fork Apartments PUD plat is required in conjunction with the recording of the resubdivided plat. *' Summary: The amended plan for the Rivercrest PUD basically represents a de -clustering of the 96 dwelling units approved as the South Fork Rivercrest - amended 10 Apartments PUD by changing the housing type from the standard apartment form to that of two-plex and four-plex townhomes. The intent is to move from a single to individual property ownership concept. This will necessitate the establishment of a home owners association for the maintenance of streets and common open space. The site is plagued by the same access problems as other properties fronting on the private access easement along IH -35, in addition to having only one point of access. A second access is needed. The applicant no longer requests variances to allow front yard parking, lots without street frontage, and flag lots. A required site plan for each lot would inevitably reduce site disruption due to road, utility, and drainage construction. This includes trenching, regrading, the removal of vegetation and environmentally sensitive slopes. The more concentrated clustering of the apartment form is more appropriate for the site in this regard. The applicant appears to have addressed concerns raised by the Commission and staff at the Se,,*ember 2, 1986 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Staff Recommendation: (November 26, 1986) For reasons outlined in the above summary and detailed in the staff report, the staff recommends that this project be approved, with the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements being met, 2. Utilities being adequate; a. The Utility Plan shall be revised to reflect the resolution of comments by Public Works and the City Engineer and resubmitted in conjunction with the final plat. Specifically, all off-site improvements shall be shown and a proposed electrical, gas, telephone, and cable layout submitted, b. Placement of sufficient fire hydrants and fire hydrant linework to bring the site up to City standards, to be approved by the City Fire Marshall, 3. Erosion and sedimentation controls and stormwater filtration shall be provided to improve the quality of stormwater discharged into the river and shall be shown conceptually on the site grading and drainage plan, 4. Detailed Development Plans shall be required for each lot, to be approved by staff before the issuance of building permits, 5. A Final Plat and Site Development Plan shall not be submitted for P&Z or Council approval until the applicant has furnished the City a letter of agreement signed by the property owners Rivercrest - amended 11 of Past and Presents, The Overlook, Circle -K, and the adjacent apartments that attests that each agrees to off-site street improvements. 6. Lots adjacent to the Interstate shall be screened and/or landscaped along the rear property lines. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) (3-0, 1 abstain) Recommend approval per staff recommendations above, with the following addition: 7. Applicant in conjunction with other project participants should fund any signalization required to handle the increased traffic flow at the new road entrance to Leander Rd. and a signal be requested from SDHPT at this location before the final plat be approved. City Council Action: (December 17, 1986) Approval per P&Z recommendation above. Rivercrest - amended 12 TNOT IN Cl' 5 U TtH tGETOW 1STRIAL ARK SERENADA OAKS - UTILITY SERVICE AGREEMENT. Project #00089 SERENADA U Y v cn cw <\ SITE LI/\ii1JOi 1 CAK CRESrSTATES dg GOLD Location Map 1"=2000' Applicant/Owner: Gil Johnson, Brandi Lane Investments 9005-A Cullen Lane Austin, -Tx 78748 282-0715 Agent: Richard Kern 1214 East highway 79 Round Rock, Tx 244-9111 Request: Approval for a Utility Service Agreement for Serenada Oaks, as a pre -condition for Final Plat approval. Facts: Location: North of Andice Road (FM 2338) between Serenada Country Estates, Serenada West Section 3, and Briarwood. The tract is outside the corporate City limits, but within the ETJ and the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Area: Large lot single family residences surround the property to the north, east, and south. Adjacent tracts along Andice Road remain undeveloped. Faith Lutheran Church is located on the opposite side of Andice Road. Existing Site: Undeveloped Proposed use: A 151 lot single family residential development, at a density of 1.89 lots per acre, with two lots totaling 7.4 acres adjacent to Andice Road reserved for commercial development. Development Plan: District 4d. Large lot single family residences are recommended at this location. The proposed use substantially conforms to the plan. Utilities: The applicant is requesting City provision of water, wastewater, and underground electric service. History: On February 4, 1986, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Plat for Planning and Zoning Commission approval. The Preliminary plat was withdrawn by the applicant prior to public hearing. A revised Preliminary Plat was submitted for P&Z approval on April 1, 1986. The plat was approved conditionally and forwarded to City Council. Council approved the Preliminary Plat with those conditions recommended by P&Z. Following is the list of those conditions of approval: 1. The Development Plan shall be amended to reflect non—single family residential use for the 7.4 acre parcel provided that applicant agrees to: a. Limit access to Andice Road to one common approach with the property adjacent to the southeast, b. Establish a 25` landscape easement and building line along Andice Road, C. Conform to the requirements of the PUD ordinance, d. Recommend the use of the site be non—retail activities such as residential, institutional, and recreational type activities, 2. A variance for Lots 22-24 Block A Section Three with depth to width ratios is excess of 2.5 to 1 shall be granted, Serenada Oaks—Utility 2 3. A variance waiving curb and gutter requirements shall be deferred pending further engineering review and to be determined in conjunction with approval of the "Utility Service Agreement", 4. A variance for street intersections less than 5 degrees from perpendicular shall be granted as recommended by City Engineer upon more detailed evaluation, 5. Water, sewer, and electrical service shall be extended to the site subject to the conditions contained in a "Utility Service Agreement" approved by Division of Public Works. The principle terms of the agreement shall be approved by Planning and Zoning and Council prior to submittal of final plat. The final agreement, approved by Public Works and the City Attorney, shall be submitted with final plat, 6. The plan shall be revised to meet all ordinance requirements and aforementioned conditions of approval for staff review and approval prior to submittal of final plat. 7. Change the name of Blanco to Sevilla. Development Fees: The applicant owes the City $1,178.00 in development review fees as of December 2, 1986. Analysis: At the time of Preliminary Platting for Serenada Oaks, it was anticipated that the City would soon implement a legal mechanism called a Utility Service Agreement that would clearly define those responsibilities, relative to utilities, held by both the City and the applicant. As per the conditions of approval for the Preliminary Plat of Serenada Oaks, the applicant was requested to submit a Utility Service Agreement approved by the Department of Public Works, the Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council, and the City Attorney detailing applicant and City utility responsibilities. Such an agreement was requested to be approved prior to the submittal of the Final Plat. The City has not yet developed a standard format for the Utility Service Agreement mechanism. However, the Department of Public Works and the applicant have finalized responsibilities for the City and the applicant, subject to P&Z, Council, and City Attorney approval. Attached with this copy of the staff report as Exhibit Serenada Oaks -Utility 3 A is the proposed responsibilities applicant. list of utility for both the City and Staff Recommendation: (November 26, 1986) Approval of the principle terms for the Utility Service Agreement, subject to approval of the final document by the City Attorney and Public Works Division. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) (4-0) Approval of the principal terms of this document as satisfying condition #5 of the preliminary plat approval of Serenada Oaks. City Council Action: (December 17, 1986) (5-0) Approval per staff & P&Z recommendations above. Serenada Oaks -Utility 4 KERN ENGINEERING e Mesa Ridge Plaza a 1214 E. Highway 79 a Round Rock, Texas 78664 a (512) 244-9111 December 5, 1986 Mr. Allyn Moore P.E. Director of Public Works City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Tx. 78627 RE: Serenada Oaks Sec. 1, 2, 3 Dear Mr. Moore: The purpose of this letter is to present to you an engineering report for the above refererenced final plats. 1. WATER This subdivision is requesting water service from the City of Gerogetown. It is our understanding that water will be available for this tract when the new water treatemnt plant on Lake Georgetown goes on line. The City of Gerogetown is planning on running a 12 inch line in Andice Rd. The existing 16 inch line in Andice Rd. adjacent to Serenada Oaks will be connected either directly or indirectly to this new 12 inch line. This subdivision will require 151 residential l.u.e.'s and enough l.u.e.'s to service 6.9 acres of commerical. This commerical will probably develop at 6 l.u.e.'s per acre. The total number of l.u.e.' needed for Serenada Oaks will be 151 + 42 = 193 l.u.e.'s. According to the City of Georgetown Water System Analysis this would equate to 190 gpd per capita ( 3.5 people per l.u.e. ) 193 l.u.e. _ 12B,345 gpd.* The peak day demand would be 2.3 times average day = 295,193 gpd. The maximum hour would be 1.8 times the peak day = 531,348 gpd or 369 gpm. The expected fire demand in the residential area is 1500 gpm. The expected fire demand in the commerical area is 2500 gpm. The minimum line size shall be 8 inches. 2. WASTEWATER This project proposes obtaining wastewater service from the City of Georgetown. The expected wastewater discharge is ass follows. RESIDENTIAL 1. Average annual dry flows 87 gpcd (151 homes )3.5 people = 45,979 gpd page 2.15 F+N report 2. I + I 550 gpd/inch mile page 2.2 F+N Report onsite 9600 if e" 8,000 gpd offsite 2800 if 8" 2,333 gpd COMMERICAL I. Use 2000 gpad page 2.26.F+N report 6.9 acres (2000 gpad) 13,800 gpd 70,112 gpd The minimum line size shall be 8 inches. The line layout is shown on the attached utility plan. This project proposes to gravity flow to the southeastern corner of this subdivision through the existing public utility easements in Serenada Country Estates and finally connect to the proposed Northwest Blvd. 10 inch line. This proposed 10 inch line in Northwest Blvd. will connect to the Reata Lift Station. The layout of this plan is shown on the attached offsite wastewater utility plan. The Reata Lift Station and several sections of the gravity line downstream of this lift station are at capacity. A study is currently being conducted by Freese and Nichols Inc. to determine which lines are at capacity and what should be done to remedy the situation. Meetings have been held with the developers to see which ones are ready to participate in this project. As of the the last meeting it was beginning to be apparent that this project would need to be divided into two phases. Phase one would be developed to remedy the immediate problems necessary mainly to service the Reata subdivision and anybody else which needed service immediately. The second phase would be done to service a larger area and those developments which would not need wastewater service until a later time probably 2-5 years. Mr. Gil Johnson has determined that he would like Serenada Oaks to be in the second phase. He does not see his project coming on line for at least a couple of years. However he wants the final plat approved at this time. If a letter of credit is required by the City to provide for the fiscal arrangements for the offsite wastewater work needed for the approval of Serenada Oaks final plats then Mr. Johnson'is willing to put one up at this time. The per l.u.e. cost to the proposed improvements has not been determined at this time. However Mr. Johnson has a letter of credit available for approximately $60,000 to $70,000. We would like to discuss this in further detail soon. This letter of credit may only be available for a limited time only. 3. ELECTRIC SERVICE This project is proposing to receive electric service from the City of Georgetown. It is my understanding that a new circuit is being installed in this area which would provide adequate service for this entire subdivision. It has not been determined at this time if service will be overhead or underground. In either case the lines will be in the street public R.O.N. 4. UTILITY SERVICE CONTRACT A utility service contract will be enterred into as part of the requirements of the approval of the plats for Serenada Oaks. The main points of this contract will be as follows. DEVELOPER RESPONSIBILITIES 1. Construction of all onsite roads and drainage improvements. 2. Construction of all onsite water and wastewater improvements. 3. Construction of the onsite street light system 4. Construction of the onsite street signage 5. Construction of the underground electric distribution system, if used, accordance with the City policy 6. Construction of the onsite natural gas supply system if used. 7. Construction of the offsite natural gas supply system if used. 8. Construction of the offsite water tap into the existing 16 inch waterline on Andice Rd. 9. Construction of the 8 inch offsite wastewater line from Serenada Oaks to the proposed 10 inch line in Northwest Blvd. 10. Acqusition of any offsite easements needed to bring utility or drainage service to this subdivision 11. Posting of a letter of credit for an equitable share of the cost of the improvements of the Reata Lift Station and the associated downstream line improvemnt costs. 12. Maintenance of the detention ponds and common areas and open drainage channels in drainage easements. 13. Maintenance and operation of the street light system until annexed by Georgetown. 14. Coordination of utility construction among, electric, cable, telephone, drainage, water, wastewater and roads. 15. Garbage pickup until annexed by the City. 16. Maintenance of the streets until the County takes over maintenance or the City annexes the land and accepts maintenance of the streets. 17. Provide construction inspection and certification to the City of Georgetown. CITY RESPONSIBILITY 1. Construction of overhead electric lines or their share of the underground service in accordance with the City's electric service policy. 2. Constructionaof offsite water supply lines and water treatment plant. 3. Provide wastewater service from a point beginning at the proposed 10 inch line in Northwest Blvd. 4. Provide wastowator treatment 5. Construction of offsite electric service lines 6. After this subdivision is annexed the city will provide the following services if the construction has been accepted bytheCity a. street maintenance b. street light maintenance if construction c. storm sewer maintenance 7. After this land is annexed this city will provide services. meets city standards the following a. garbage pick up b. police protection C. fire protection d. any other city services typically given to land within the city limits. B. Before and after this subdivision is annexed the city will maintain the following provided these utilities have been accepted by the city as being adequately constructed. a. waterlines b. wastewater lines C. electric lines 9. Provide water meters at the standard price, on the individual lots unless a state of moratorium has been declared by the City Council. 10. The city shall have the right to inspect water, wastewater roads, drainage, and electrical to determine if they have been adequately installed in order to accept maintenacne. 5. ROADS All streets shall have curb and gutter and be built to city standards. The neighborhood collector Sevilla shall have a pavement width of 42 feet. All other residential steets shall have a pavement width of 30 feet. All R.O.W. shall be 60'0" execpt Sevilla adjacent to the 6.9 acre commerical tract. In this location Sevilla shall have an 80 R. O.W. WINDRIDGE VILLAGE - VARIANCE - EXTENSION OF FINAL PLAT. Project #00097 Location Map 1"=2000' Owner/Applicant: Tim L Wright, President West of the Tracks Development Co., Inc. 213 West 8th Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-4525 Agent: G.W. Schmidt & Co. 600 A Forest Street Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-4594 Request: Extension of Final plat approval for Windridge Village, a 10.97 acre subdivision situated in the William Addison Survey, Abstract No. 21. Location: Between the eastern extremes of 2nd and 3rd Streets (Just east of Holly Street) and MK&T Railroad. The tract is within the City limits and the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Existing Zoning: RS Residential Single Family Windridge Village 1 Surrounding Uses: This tract is surrounded by undeveloped and agricultural land, as well as single family residences and a fuel storage facility which is a non—conforming use. Proposed Use: 40 single family residences on 6000 sq. ft. lots at a density of 3.65 dwelling units/acre. Development Plan: District 6a. This tract lies in an undesignated area of the development plan but is consistent with existing zoning. Utilities: City service is requested for water, sewer and electric. History: The City Council, on June 24, 1986, granted approval for a Revised Final Plat for Windridge Village, conditional upon the approval of the required Construction Plans and the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements being met, 2. Utilities being adequate, the water treatment plant and overloaded downstream sanitary sewer lines being improved prior to the issuance of building permits, and electrical service plans being included in construction plans, 3. Drainage issues as presented in the planning report of 6/24/86 being resolved on the construction plans, and a Stormwater Facility Maintenance Covenant being filed with the plat, 4. Off—site street improvements as shown on plat shall be included in construction plans, 5. Note regarding access restrictions being added to plat as follows: a. Lot 1 Block A, and Lot 1 Block B shall access Second Street only b. Lots 7 and 12 Block A shall access Gann Circle only C. Lot 1 Block D, and Lot 14 Block C shall access Windridge Lane only, 6. Buffer yards shall be required adjacent to the MR&T Railroad R.O.W. and along the west side of Lot 19 Block C, which shall conform to the standard as presented in the planning report of 6/24/86, 7. Granting of variances as requested and indicated in the planning report of 6/24/86. Windridge Village 2 Analysis: Final Plat approval for this subdivision will expire on December 24, 1986. However, the design of subdivision improvements and construction plans will require additional time for review, correction, and approval. As a result, the applicant requests that Final Plat approval be extended. An extension of six months, to June 23, 1987, should be sufficient. Staff Recommendation: (December 8, 1986) Approval of request for extension of Final Plat approval until June 23, 1987, with conditions of Final Plat as approved by City Council on June 24, 1986. City Council Action: (Decemberl1 , 1986) Approval per P&Z recommendation above. Windridge Village 3 BRIARWOOD SECTION IV - VARIANCE - EXTENSION OF FINAL PLAT Location Map 1"=2000' Owner/Applicant: Timber Trek Development Co., Inc. 3609 Williams Dr. Georgetown, Tx 78626 869-4145 Agent: Steger and Bizzell PO Box 686 Georgetown, Tx 78627 863-4521 Request: Extension of Final Plat approval for Briarwood, Section IV a 22.04 acre subdivision situated in the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13. Facts• Location: Northeast of Williams Drive and Briarwood Section Three, between Serenada Country Estates and Reata Trails Section IV. Not within City limits, but inside the E.T.J. and the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Briarwood IV - extension 1 Surrounding Uses: Large lot single family residential to the northwest in Serenada Country Estates; normal single family residential to the northeast in Reata Trails IV; duplex lots in Briarwood Section 3 to the southwest; and vacant land to the southeast. Proposed Use: 80 single family residences at a density of 3.63 lots per acre. Average lot size is 7,500 square feet. Development Plan: District 4b. Normal residential use is recommended, the proposed use is substantially in conformance with the plan. History: The City Council, on June 24, 1986, conditionally approved the Final Plat for Briarwood IV. Following are the conditions for approval: 1. Subdivision Ordinance Requirements being met, 2. Drainage requirements being met, 3. Utilities being adequate: Participation in required improvements to Sanitary Sewer Interceptor #7 and the Reata Lift Station shall be determined prior to recordation of plat, 4. The landscaped berm and drainage swale referred to by plat note #9 shall be designated as a "Landscape, Drainage and Public Utility Easement" on plat and its design included in the construction plans for the subdivision, 5. A "Stormwater Facility Maintenance Covenant" shall be required, 6. Applicant shall pay the amount that would be required to serve the project as if it were served independent of any other proposed project. Development Fees: The developer owes the City $2,253.02 for development review, as of December 8, 1986. Applicant has indicated that these fees will be paid prior to Council meeting of 12/17/86. Analysis: The deadline for Final Plat approval for Briarwood IV is December 24, 1986. Because of the length of time it has taken for review and subsequent resubmittal of the Construction Plans for Briarwood IV, the applicant will be unable to meet the December 24 deadline. An extension of six months, to June 23, 1987, for Final Plat approval should be sufficient. Briarwood IV - extension 2 Staff Recommendation: (December 8 1986) Approval for requested extension of Final Plat approval for six months, to June 23, 1987, with conditions of Final Plat as approved by City Council on June 24, 1986, and payment of all development review fees prior to recordation of plat. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: (December 17, 1986) (5-0) Approval per P&Z recommendation above. Briarwood IV - extension 3 REATA TRAILS UNIT III LOT 1 BLOCK D—VARIANCE—OFF—STREET PARKING. PROJECT #00551 Location Map mwAuovper m r. 1"= 2000' Owner/Applicant: Lakeway Office Park General Partnership 600 Forest Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 863-4594 Agent: G.W. Schmidt & Co. 600 Forest Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 863-4594 Request: Approval for a variance from the off—street parking requirements of Section 7.111 of the Subdivision Ordinance to allow for a reduction of three spaces for Lot 1 Block D, Reata Trails Unit III. Facts• Location: At the northeast corner of Lakeway Drive and Northwest Boulevard. Is with the City's ETJ and the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Uses: Proposed single family residences to be located to the northwest, with the Georgetown Municipal Airport approximately 0.15 miles to the northwest. Across Northwest Boulevard to the immediate southwest of the subject property is an approved office building, beyond which is Frost Elementary School. The remaining area is undeveloped. Proposed Use: Office/Commercial Development Plan: District 4b. Normal residential use is recommended. The proposed use does not strictly conform, but is consistent with the recorded plat. Utilities: City of Georgetown History: Resta Trails Unit III was recorded July 30, 1984. Lot 1 Block D was approved for commercial use at the time of platting. On May 27, 1986, the City Council approved a variance to reduce the off-street parking requirement for Lot 1 Block A of Reata Trails Unit III, across the street from the subject property so that existing trees could be preserved. Notification: Proper notification was posted by the applicant. Analysis: The applicant, in an attempt to preserve existing oak trees on the subject property, designed the on-site parking area in a creative manner, utilizing peninsulas, medians, and curves. The net result of this design is the preservation of nine oak trees which would have to be removed if three more parking spaces were added as a required by Ordinance standards (see Exhibit A). The trees that would be preserved through the proposed parking design would screen the proposed building from Lakeway Drive and partially from Northwest Boulevard and be in excess of the minimum requirements of the Landscape Ordinance. The reduction of three parking spaces is within the 10% that staff has considered acceptable when there are compensating factors to consider with site development. It is very likely that the applicant could meet ordinance requirements for off-street parking through standard REATA TRAIL -VARIANCE 2 e^ cRµ1513 PPGE NRVov 00 -•— ' 1 --`.'.. ' ,%" F , N s i 1Pi " ITALOtiL fiPF 1 S 1lI ag l Q 4FEroEBromOFFICEI ._. - .l_ . 1 i'r e—W965/. 00r.! J'iF tr.740 aV - A .. 1,,,.. W-4 ea.: ic" a '. , w •• a• . , 8lJl ore .. .... _.... - ...._ .. ... _ Nr w t' CY{ OD.Z Giy I I I \^\.f1 1W W 1 aFPnx AWA R 'awrrtiir a ST BOULEVARD; ! I (-3.),, I. EXHI"* T A parking lot design at the expense of aesthetic considerations and the loss of existing trees. Staff Recommendation: (November 20, 1986) Approval of the requested variance to allow a reduction in the off-street parking requirement by three spaces due to a finding of fact that: 1) The design of the parking area is creative and environmentally superior to the average parking layout, 2) The variance does not diminish the health, safety and general welfare of the community, and 3) The landscaping provided far exceeds the minimum required by Ordinance and includes the preservation of nine significant existing trees which would be lost if the Ordinance were strictly enforced. This variance should be conditional upon the construction of the staff approved site plan. City Council Action: (December 1; 1986) Approval per P&Z recommendation above. REATA TRAIL -VARIANCE 3 COLLEGE PLACE - REVISED FINAL PLAT AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND REZONING FROM RM -3 TO R -P. Project #00505 X Ll Di D:100IF ILIFLri Location Map 1"=1000' Applicant/Owner: Charles D Crossfield for College Place Joint Venture 1107 Main Street Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-4576 Agent: Gilbreath, McDill, and Associates PO Box 1245 Georgetown, Tx 78626 863-9862 V Request: Approval of a rezoning from RM -3 Residential Multi -family to R -P Residential Planned Development and a Revised Final Plat and Site Development Plan for College Place, a 1.165 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract #497 and in the William Addison Survey Abstract #21, recorded in Vol. 1190, page 568 Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Variances are requested fO'F- 1. Waiver of the site plan review fee, 2. The minimum 5 acre requirement for a PUD, 3. Reduction of minimum lot size requirement, 4. Stormwater detention, 5. Elimination of side and rear yard PUE dedication requirements, 6. Elimination of interior side and rear yard setback requirements, 7. Parking and street requirements. Facts: Location: The southwest corner of 2nd and College Streets. It is within the City of Georgetown and within the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Uses: To the west and south are single family residences. The VFW Park lies to the north across Second Street, and a single family residence is to the east across College St. Proposed Use: Twenty townhome type units are proposed for this 1.165 acre lot, yielding a density of 17.2 units/acre. xisting Zoning: RM -3 Multi—family residential V - Development Development Plan: District 6a. Normal residential use. Proposed use not in strict conformance with Development Plan but similar to that previously approved. Utilities: Existing source of electric, water and sanitary sewer service is City of Georgetown. History: By action of City Council on February 11, 1986, this tract was declared to be a legal lot; and thus platting was not required. However, the applicant, at the request of the Planning Staff, elected to plat the property. The Preliminary/Final Plat was approved by the City Council on May 27, 1986 with the following conditions: 1. Ordinance requirements shall be met, 2. Utilities being adequate, 3. Drainage requirements shall be met; A variance from the Drainage Ordinance Section 5.10) Stormwater Detention requirements to be granted, 4. A fence and/or landscape screen shall be required along the tracts west and south sides, 5. Restrictive covenants shall be submitted and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation, 6. A variance to allow the waiving of platting fees shall be granted, College Place 2 7. Variance from Subdivision Ordinance Section 5.06 shall be granted.,. -Utility and Drainage easements shall be indicated as required by Division of Public Works in conjunction with construction plan review. The Final Plat was never filed with the County Clerk. Analysis• Overview: The original College Place Final Plat and Site Plan approved by Council May, 1986 proposed 20 rowhouse type condominium units on a single lot, conforming to the RM -3 Zoning Ordinance regulations. Subsequently, after the approval of this Final Plat, the applicant's lending institution required that units at College Place be sold as individual townhome lots. This request was made of the applicant after several units neared the end of construction. As a result, the applicant is desiring to maintain the original site plan arrangement of dwelling units, with each unit placed within an individual lot; for a total of 20 lots. The Zoning Ordinance does not provide standards for townhomes within any of the zoning district classifications. As a result, requests for townhome type development are typically accommodated by the requirements of the R—P zoning district. The applicant is seeking similar consideration requesting rezoning of the single RM -3 lot to R—P and a Revised Final Plat to subdivide the single lot into 20 individual lots and common area. Land Use: Due to the fact that the subject property is bounded by adjacent single family residential land uses to the south and west, a condition of approval for the previous Final Plat was that a fence or landscape screen would be placed along the south and west property lines. The proposed plat indicates that those properties to the south will be screened from the subject property by 6 foot high wooden fence. Screening to the west has not been indicated. A Type D bufferyard would be sufficient (see attached Exhibit A). College Place 3 The parking requirement for R -P districts is 2 spaces per unit. This site would thereby be required to provide 40 off-site parking spaces, while only 30 spaces are shown. However, Section 7.102 of the Zoning Ordinance states that only 1.5 off-street parking spaces per dwelling unit (30 spaces) are required for townhome development. Thus, a variance is necessary but does not appear to violate the basic intent of the ordinance. The original Deed Restrictions filed with the County Clerk must be amended to reflect the changed conditions represented by this plat. The proposed plat indicates two "common areas". To properly describe these areas as part of the College Place plat, these common areas should be given lot numbers. The proposed Deed Restrictions need to reflect the new lots (Lots 21 and 22) and provide for the maintenance of these lots. Streets: The proposed Final Plat and Site Plan for this development indicates that access will be provided by a private street. However, the PUD regulations allow for private street access as long as such streets substantially conform to City construction standards. Thus, approval for this design should be contingent upon written approval from the Department of Public Works and the City Fire Marshall. Drainage: The plat indicates that Lots 12-16*are encroaching upon a 25 foot drainage easement, in addition to a 25 foot PUE and Building Line. These lots should be shifted such that they do not overlap these easements in order to provide for more uniform maintenance. Construction Plans for drainage have already been approved. Utilities: Construction plans for utilities have been approved by Public Works and actual construction is substantially complete. Variances: Due to the fact that standards for townhomes do not occur in the Zoning Ordinance, variances are often required for townhome development. As a result, the applicant has requested that the subject property be rezoned to the R -P zoning district, in order to accommodate the following variances: College Place 4 Waiver of the site plan review fee. Due to the fact that essentially the same site plan was submitted and reviewed earlier this year, a waiver for the site plan review fee appears to be appropriate. Waive the minimum 5 acre requirement for a PUD. College Place represents an infill type of project, where slightly more than a single acre of land within the central City remains undeveloped. It is usually impossible to develop a tract five acres in size within the central portion of the City to satisfy PUD size requirement, as most infill areas are small and scattered. However, thew -areas usually require special treatments that can only be addressed with PUD regulations. Therefore, a variance from the minimum five acre requirement for a PUD seems appropriate. Waive stormwater detention. Previously approved. Elimination of side and rear yard PUE dedication requirements. Previously approved. Allow lots below minimum lot size requirement, and elimination of interior side and rear yard setback requirements. The requested variances for lot size requirements and interior side and rear setback requirements appear to be appropriate for townhome development. Staff Recommendation: (November 26, 1986) I. Approval of the revised final plat and site development plan subject to the following conditions: 1. Common Areas shall be indicated by lot numbers 2. The lots shall not overlap the drainage and utility easements, 3. Bufferyards on the west and south perimeters shall be indicated on the site plan, 4. Restrictive covenants shall be submitted and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation, 5. The following variances should be granted: a. Reduction of minimum area requirement for a P.U.D., b. Reduction of minimum lot size requirement for single family lots C. Elimination of side and rear yard PUE and building lines d. Waiver of stormwater detention requirements College Place 5 e. Waiver of required PUB and Building lines. Utility and Drainage easements shall be indicated as required by Division of Public Works in conjunction with construction plan review and building lines required only around perimeter of project, f. Allow reduction of off-street parking requirements from 2 to 1.5 spaces per unit, g. The requested waiver of site plan review fee is recommended, as this fee was paid at the previous review. II. Approval of the zoning change from RM -3 to R -P P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) I. (4-0) Recommend approval of the final plat and site development plan per staff recommendations above. II. (4-0) Recommend approval of the rezoning, per staff recommendations above. City Council Action: (December L7 , 1986) Approval per P&Z recommendation above a College Place 6 RE ilARED PLANT HEQV!HL9 PLANT. UNITS PER 100' UNITS PER 100' A D t RlowDeciduousTrese1 y.`) Deciduous Trees Deciduous Strube,7 . Y " Deciduous Shrubs f • y. Evergreens Everpreene ZakN Berm B Fence ^. REQUIRED PLANT UNITS PER 100' e ioo REQUIRED PLANT a UNITS PER 100' Fri Deciduous Trees ,,,—A Dr /00,w Deciduous Shrubs f • Y ///,(((r~.h q Deciduous Tress Evergreens " fx .. 11-- i1Y Deciduous Shrubs ]f. Evergreens AMA I REQUIRED PLANT Berm B UNITS PER 1DO',, B C1 Fence Deciduous Tress` Deciduous Shrubs Evergreens N FIGURE 37030 BUFF ERYARD REQUIREMENTS PROPERTY OWNERS COMMENT Project name _ C Name of respondent I am in favor 0} ieavi ev 7 -on In s !+s I5 , I object 7"b i4,vy GI4.4N6F WTµwou/D 6 n, a LO gy Zon/H6 Can D;jb Comments -XT rS /Myhnr Sfa.rnillo %fiat' 'hr OroOcrfv in r'eAuP1T of f/4P R14 to ChaN`e, iS allraov 2onPD fo hakalr fpa„ Ap^-S. 7 -,AP Pft-D 1v Yltr 10eg0 I) fesfr_ •c Y ey'ftmere;al "Ve So X h -e/ 7%vt -fxfs ;s oy/y 1a creale If you wish to submit written comment it will be read before / the Planning and Zoning Commission at the above stated time and place. PLEASE REPLY TO: City of Georgetown c/o Planning Department P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 Pc -o gLen,,J S-6 r- fk? PeSi DewT cd- thi/K Op e p7rr Y -u AE0 G;h m••7` hav;Hy a// 7e(eP Pla,r of Co iee LFtP" Be r STrM; /', od,-e T To- THf- GH4N4F R5 S SEC- 2'7-, -77- 4 .4 I!T.n614 PISBni/.Br'P Tdni e,T_ Y revised 7/86 Ordinance Number 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 COLLEGE PLACE JOINT VENTURE BEING 1.165 ACRES IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO.497, AND THE WILLIAM ADDISON SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 21 IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FROM RM -3 RESIDENTIAL MULTI—FAMILY DISTRICT TO R—P RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 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: COLLEGE PLACE, A 1.165 ACRE TRACT DESCRIBED IN VOLUME 1190, PAGE 568 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY TEXAS (Exhibit A) 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 he Zoning Ordinance, gave notice of such hearing by puolishing 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 date set for said hearing; and Page I of 3 revised 7/86 WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on DECEMBER 2, 1986 recommended the changing of said Zoning District Classification as provided in the Zoning Ordinance on the above described property from an RM -3 RESIDENTIAL MULTI—FAMILY District to R—P RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT District Zoning Classification. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas: That the Zoning Ordinance, and the Zoning Georgetown, as well as the Zoning District for described above as COLLEGE PLACE A 1.165 ACRE VOLUME 1190, PAGE 568 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF W TEXAS shall be and the same is hereby changed RESIDENTIAL MULTI—FAMILY District to R—P RESI DEVELOPMENT District Zoning Classification. READ on this 17TH day of DECEMBER, 1986. READ, passed, and adopted this day of 19_ on the second and final reading. ATTEST: Pat Cabellero City Secretary Approved as to form: Stump and Stump City Attorney Map of the City of the property RACT DESCRIBED IN rom the RM -3 ENTIAL PLANNED Jim Colbert, Mayor City of Georgetown Page .7, of 3 VF JY PARA f' I At A Mc OANCLE C/TY OF GEORGETOU.N 3 .00 00 b1O5 572 //O OO1°S 2nd STREET 60' ROW a/ o' I- V. V b N N 870 48.29++E /82.94 N(Yl- 36453/.95!8 NOL°10'23 W W v I E(X/=2836835.0554 — p l9•,^76 N B7°2B''20"E 491 6 5 4 I 2 bVV bV A_7! 45.Ois'Bc µ bVV SOSVRVEY i C SCALE 1"- 50•B7°2B• 20E, PORNeR V5 G') x:64/' 1546 1507/SOC Sq/ 50d 3 ti 5 oc, C. r RUSSEC, A' 6/' PAUL CO. 71RA4 3 ry i N I 458 1,14Y O\ P- 0, N 6800, o. 6 7 8 9 20 o COMMON AREA 25, 9 B7°93;10 N cl n h ROW £' SEKEN• V 13.4 1107 1 5 1600 59_/ 776 2 y 3 v87°ze'2o'E_ i;zl'"_A'.87°28-X20-'E-- 180 78 Q Q e 4346 °-— 5 87°48'79•"W ' 370°' y /5 b 'N 01 31"40- W_ O y 4346' h 1 B.// O" POE 5 83°41' 30' I 3 g PrivateStreetI4o, 61. 9E" N 8J°1B": C' E J. oo • O o'al /3 'Q ;, ourtor 22 1' 46 46 n Y N 01°J/'JO '1:' .: C Q O 5 E9 x °646' 20" E 11 f N 87028 /80. 34 M 50 00" I 3 3 .00 00 b1O5 01 1bO 07 bPV3OO1° S i a/ o' Q V. V b I a C5 S B7°28 20 YY' o W v I COMMON AREA 50 00" 3 3 .00 00 b1O5 01 1bO 07 bPV3OO1°S 6,// O a/ o' W o C5 S B7°28 20 YY' o p v I COMMON AREA bVO/ 3FOO. p 6 5 4 3 2 bVVbV b1 J3/ bVV10? IOJ MAIN ST.4 EE1SrtFE V5 61' 3.00 50d 300 3 ti 5 oc, 3JJ 6/' REZONING FROM R -M3 to R - P 3 W o C5 S B7°28 20 YY' o p v I COMMON AREA E (X) 2816843. 2435 p REZONING FROM R -M3 to R - P S W 166.21 • 1 11 NO2°4/ 54 E M S B7°28 20 YY' 245.3/ I -. ; IV (Y) 364318. 1271 2.65 COMMON AREA E (X) 2816843. 2435 PO? I S(tEPRE-? U V I: COrKR. 71, 425/468 Exhibit A I I OWNEA MAF. OlAT PfN/ URE 445624 I10? IOJ MAIN ST.4 EE1 SrtFE COLLEGE PLACE GEORGETOWN, TA, REZONING FROM R -M3 to R - RIVERY SECTION ONE - FINAL PLAT AND REZONING. RESIDENTIAL V), CLUB RESIDENTIAL Location Map Applicant/Owner: RESIDENTIAL r STATION e II Georgetown Partners, 5050 Quorum Dallas, Tx 512) 472-3400 3 Project X00099 L, PARK 1"=2000' No. 1, Ltd Agent: Urban Engineering Group, Inc. PO Box 996 Austin, Tx 78767 346-1896 NWr, 0 Request: Final plat approval for the Rivery Section One, a 193.76 acre multi—use development. Variances have been requested to waive detention requirements, allow block lengths in excess of 1200 ft, and to allow a minimun curve radius of 500 feet. Also requested is rezoning for fourteen of the lots and variances from SEctin 2.0502 Height Restrictions of the Zoning Ordinance, for nine of the lots, as follows: Rivery 1 Lot Existing Requested Requested Number Zoning Height Variance 'ft) 6A R -S RM -3 2C R -S RM -3 3A R -S RM -3 3B R -S C-1 4 R -S C2 -A 55 5A R -S C2 -A 55 5B R -S C2 -A 55 7A R -S C2 -A 55 8 R -S C2 -A 70 9 R -S C2 -A 70 10 R -S C2 -A 70 11 R -S C2 -A 84 7B R -S C2 -A 84 Note: 1. The maximum height allowed for all Districts requested is 40 ft./3 stories. 2. See Exhibit A for location of parcels Facts: Location: Along the south bank of the North Fork of --lie San Gabriel River between IH -35 and the Middle Fork of the San Gabriel River, within the City Limits and the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. Surrounding Uses: IH -35 borders the property to the 0-ast; a proposed multi -family development and existing large lot single family homes adjoin the southern border; the Middle Fork of the San Gabriel River, and the Georgetown Country Club to the west. The North Fork of the San Gabriel River borders the property to the north. Existing Site: Undeveloped. Proposed Uses: 412 multi -family units at a density of 15.7 units/acre; 50,000 sq. ft, of Neighborhood Commercial use at 9,300 sq. ft./acre; 657,090 sq. ft. of R&D Office at 15,250 sq. ft./acre; 1,073,000 sq. ft. of Commercial Office Use at 14,500 sq.ft./acre;and 27 acres of greenbelt. Utilities: The applicant is requesting water and wastewater service from the City and electric service from either the City or PEC. Rivery PARCEL BB i r PealroaPln.e leu r Rr. u asaxwaua an m. PARCEL ix ' sr arwAv r.raoc rAaa ORnIBI \ ' xr.r ,arra " PARCEL 2CxC naM,.ar _ we,orxur wrer 1 _ eW m. n m/arm//ja PARCEL 8A i m VPf M4M,Ilr uuarwm tannrou PARCEL xB aa. TA or ar wnlrel ! • - WR aa'Mr.nalalm I(/ _ J II PARCEL B 0 0 PARCEL 9 PARCEL 2A ve sorra r.w eN rn+c rr rr.a manJrarmoa m m sr soasala urta wl.vr PPS. V i ! \/ Waar xr.nmorzn P-WES J^,,.r. -• p- G - .. T % 1 PARCEL 10 V 11 a..arara PARCEL BA Imo- _ S $ \ l / 0 PAHCM .p ! 1 4m°1O rt. fla,PEL1e VIr6RA ra .. Wl tl'M n91(M'I r / ry ux ws-..... I jr rr PARCEL 1 r.a F, 1 4, I i , ` 1"•^' PA'RCEL 7A J saoa Irs.aEu mr.a PARCEL 79 p''I PARCEL 69 J, Wa L M. 1. arAVP u.4a b R r aQMEPn4/arY1f£ OY I/7 57'or)JsArs,o russn y,aea ..as,orsreo r.a - - nroeg awer,.ser r'^` rvwam aam 1 scrrel.a s.ra wr.us II u»'.nw y.res Y Hr lr arwn L 1£vF1 rVlr..a slAlCrU( 1'k114sY\1N1' t Wir AJI 11k _ EXHIBIT A Development Plan: District 3a. Large lot single family development is recommended in the plan; however, final plat substantially conforms to the approved Preliminary Plat and Concept Plan. History: The Concept Plan for the Rivery was conditionally approved by the City Council on April 9, 1995 for roadway layout and land uses only. The Preliminary Plat for the Rivery was approved by City Council on February 4, 1986. The applicant is a participant in a joint utility development project with the City commonly referred to as the "Tri—Tract Agreement". City Council approved the Preliminary Plat on February 11, 1986 with the conditions as described in the Analysis section of this report. Analysis• Overview: At the Preliminary Plat public hearings for the Rivery, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council reviewed the following aspects of the proposed development: land use, density,compatibility, environmental impacts on the rivers and adjacent property, and the City as a whole, and the plat document itself. It was in these areas where major questions and issues needed to be resolved. Since the approval of the Preliminary Plat for the Rivery, the City and IH -35 Joint Venture, of which the subject property is a part, executed an agreement regarding capital recovery fee credits for off—site water and sewer improvements required to serve this project. The Texas Water Commission, on October 30, 1986, approved the Water Pollution Abatement Plan for the Rivery. Resolution of these two major issues prompted the submittal of the Final Plat for Section One of the Rivery. Since issues not resolved at the time of Preliminary Platting were containeu in the conditions of approval for the Preliminary Plat for the Rivery, the Analysis Section of this report will focus on those conditions and on the zoning requests. Conditions of Approval (indicated by bold face type): Rivery 3 1) All Subdivision Ordinance requirements shall be met. The Final Plat for The Rivery lacks designation of specific easements and building setbacks that are detailed in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for The Rivery, associated with this plat as well as some technical minutia. These items can be addressed with Construction Plan Review. 2) Utilities being adequate. The -t'igning of the Tri -Tract agreement between the City and the applicant will assure that all necessary off-site utility improvements necessary to serve The Rivery propertie=s will be completed. 3) Approval of a Water Pollution Abatement Plan by the T.W.C. The Texas Water Commission approved the Water Pollution Abatement Plan for The Rivery on October 30, 1986. 4) All provisions of the agreement regarding water and wastewater facilities and services shall be met. At this time all applicable provisions appear to be in the process of being met. 5) A revised preliminary plat shall be submitted for staff review with the following revisions: a. Proposed development column of Land Use Summary chart shall be revised to reflect LUE conversions to 1297 LUE's. LUE's are to be defined as water flow only, rather than density. This item is no longer necessary due to provision of the 2nd IH -35 Joint Venture agreement. b. Street width and alignment as recommended by City Engineer. Has been approved. C. Clear indication of all drainage and utility easements. Has been done satisfactorily. Needs refinement with Construction Plan Review. d. Pedestrian access easements shall be indicated in conjunction with all drainage easements leading into the flood plain of the San Gabriel River. Specific areas have been selected to provide both pedestrian and emergency vehicle access to the River. Rivery 4 e. The greenbelt and flood plain (Lot 12) along the San Gabriel River shall be dedicated as a public park to be accepted by the City upon annexation, with maintenance and pedestrian access provided. Applicant has agreed that this will be done. f. The greenbelt and drainage easement at the rear of Parcels 8-11 shall be removed from individual lots and designated as common open space to be maintained by a property owners association with pedestrian and maintenance access provided. This issue has not yet been fully resolved, however, staff has modified its position to that of having the common open space shown as part of the lot but with an individual description provided. 6) The following shall be addressed with the submittal of the final plat: a. Justification for the variance from detention per City Engineer's comments. City Engineer has approved this justification. b. Plan for street improvements as identified in T.I.A.(Williams Drive intersection only). This item has been submitted An issue which remains to be resolved is how to signal the intersection so that Shannon Lane is operable which can be done during Construction Plan review. C. Revised utility layout per City Engineer comments, to include a layout for electric service. Has been done. d. The detailed alignment and configuration of the Rivery Boulevard extension to Williams Drive. A proposal has been submitted and needs modification. Applicant has agreed to make these modifications in construction plan review. e. A realistic phasing sequence for the buildout of the project. m:2s been submitted but still needs to be tied in to off-site traffic and utility requirements in a more specific manner during construction plan review. Rivery 5 7) A Detailed Development plan shall be submitted for staff approval for each tract prior to application for building permit. No response needed at this time. 8) The construction plans for the subdivision shall include details for drainage and buffering for Tract 1, 2A, 2B. No response needed at this time. Zoning: The Rivery was voluntarily annexed into the City on November 25, 1986. Property annexed into the City, by Ordinance, is required to be zoned R—S, Residential Single family. The applicant has requested rezoning for those parcels of the Rivery listed in the "Request" section of this report. Each of the zoning classifications requested by the applicant appear to be consistent with the proposed land use approved for each parcel except for Parcels 6A, 2C, and 3A which are for multi—family use. Staff feels that these tracts should be zoned as RM -2 Districts. Variances: Variances from the maximum height restrictions are requested for the nine lots proposed to be rezoned to the C -2A zoning district (See "Request"). The Zoning Ordinance limits the height of buildings in the C -2A zoning classification to 40 feet. The applicant has requested height variances to extend the maximum building height to 55 feet (4 stories), 70 feet (5 stories) and 84 feet (6 stories), as listed in the "Request" section of this report. Staff has no objection to the variances as requested except that lots 4, 5A, 5B, and 7A which are for R&D use should be limited to 34'%tory and 45 ft. due to their proximity to residential areas. Staff Recommendation: (November 26, 1986) I. Approval of the Final Plat of Rivery Section One subject to approval of construction plans & staff confirmation that technical requirements of the ordinance are satisfied and the staff approval of the Restrictive Covenants. II. The following variances from the Subdivision Ordinance as requested at Preliminary Plat and discussed in this report should be granted: 1. Waiver of stormwater detention 2. Permit block length in excess of 1200 ft. 3. Allow reduction of specified centerline curve.radii from 800 ft. to 500 ft. Rivery 6 ft R III. Approval of the following amendments to the Zoning Map: 1. Lots 6A, 2C, and 3A should be zoned RM -2 Multiple Family District 2. Lot 3B should be zoned C-1 Local Commercial District 3. Lots 4,`5A, 5B and 7A should be zoned C2—A, Commercial District and granted a variance for maximum allowable height of 3 stories or 45 feet 4. Lots 9,9, & 10 should be zoned C2—A and granted a variance for maximum stories or 70 feet 5. Lots 11 and 7B should be zoned C2—A and granted a variance for maximum stories or 84 feet. P&Z Recommendation: (December 2, 1986) Commercial District allowable height of 5 Commercial District allowable height of 7 I. & II. (4-0) Recommend approval of the Final plat and variance requests per staff recommendations above. III. a. (4-0) Recommend approval of the amendments to the Zoning Map as recommended by staff above. b. (4-0) Recommend grating the variances from Section 2.0502 Height Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to: 1. allow a maximum height of 3 stories or 45 feet for Lots 4, 5A, 5B and 7A Rivery Section One. 2. allow a maximum height of 5 stories or 70 feet for Lots 8,9 and 10 Rivery Section One. 3. allow a maximum height of 7 stories or 84 feet for Lots 11 and 7B Rivery Section One. City Council Action: (December 17, 1986) Approved per P&Z recommendation above. CZnNua eH Is,- jzw) Rivery 7 RIVERY REZONING LOCATION MAP SCALE 1' - RESIDENIIAL e RESIDENTIAL 35 8 FIRE STATION COUNTLUBRY 13R e O PAR: RESIDE` 7. AL SA 10 5B 17, 7 PARK COURTHOUSE SQUARE 12TH H ST: UNIVERSITY I Exhibit A, page 1 of 4 Ordinance Number 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 GEORGTOWN PARTNERS NO. 1, LTD. LOTS 2C, 3A, AND 6A RIVERY SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO.497, AND THE JOSEPH P PULSIFER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 498 IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FROM R—S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO RM -2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI—FAMILY 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: LOTS 2C}_ 3A, AND 6A RIVERY SECITON ONE — BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED -MAP EXHIBIT- A 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 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 date set for said hearing; and PAGE 1 of 3 on the the WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on DECEMBER i 1986 recommended the changing of said Zoning District Classification as provided in the Zoning Ordinance on the above described property from an R—S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY District to RM -2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI—FAMILY District Zoning Classification. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas: 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 LOTS 2C, 3A, AND 6B RIVERY SECTION ONE shall be and the same is hereby changed from the R—S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY District to RM -2 RESIDENTIAL MULTI—FAMILY District Zoning Classification. READ on this 17TH day of DECEMBER, 1986. READ, passed, and adopted this day of _ 19_ on the second and final reading. Jim Colbert, Mayor City of Georgetown ATTEST: Pat Cabellero City Secretary Approved as to form: Stump and Stump City Attorney RAGE 2 of 3 17°41' 31 1- 30.0030.00 m 340 -II Ki -7.4 04 30 F- LOT 2C 10.68 Ac. MULTI FAMILY RM -2 " 0t9 3 to 00 1 P 25 6. — 5 75`31°35 W 1 =' -7q'07'40 w G - 160.7Ccl. 4 50 85 l i 57T4N 48'-'.V c.: 232 -59' a : 233.!ti? N f3o'0I !o = 2(05.00 N i DRAINAGEN'Du ---.:_STRIAN Q N r ti ti, 19 ti• ti - v D n or A z 5 t o i LOTN 5.39 Ac RETAIL O4 •', l' EXHIBIT A Q N N page 2 of 4 O G z 32 • S - ° ^7 4C HILLVIEW S 63 3j' OCo' W 5(o5 !Bz' DRIVE m 2!05.0(- N 50' 01• ID E 705.97 S 14`13 37°W GE AND U PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT -- Q < 83%2°=80-,',NN r meq' ' 0\ 1 ` M 7-I a(p*c '451A/ 9541 \ oI/ ' i LOT Z3A i' o I a 6.79 Ac. N , J` ? MULTI FAMILY 3' / o RM-2 U Q= 5GAL E APE gLlFt '. .` X62^ i/ 1_0I 8 4 iEXHIBIT A or „ S 29'Oq 25 W 83.1(0 Page 3 of 4 5 w2' SO' 4:50' E. q,2.Co8 V LOT 3 B `' Mti ea 5.39 Ac. i N^ 2. ,iny arva re RETAIL O dj 0 recreation and Sim requeatinq apprnv representatives. 22 E 4 / t _ s 27.09 // & o.a,. Q) S73.34, s 38 8336Z.q: EXHIBIT40 X02 S SrC.-sF':. page 4 of 4 WN W N ro2rs C: M 3 S 41 6 00/ X 573. 2" 38$4 J AD 39LOT6A 8.35 Ac. \ MULTI FAMILY RM -2 S 55'59'55"E G: IOD.00 A: 100.0$ S 30, 22' 48" W 120..00 I A m 6 T r 113.(di' c6 NO3'2)&li"W I W Ca 2 I AD 39LOT6A 8.35 Ac. \ MULTI FAMILY RM -2 S 55'59'55"E G: IOD.00 A: 100.0$ S 30, 22' 48" W 120..00 I A Z418 6 T X74.12' 113.(di' c6 NO3'2)&li"W I Crrl02ISS. Ca 2 4s5. A lvOfl.23 r P80.2ro L 495.31' cs s ld 1-7,07'E. 6 Ordinance Number 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 GEORGTOWN PARTNERS NO. 1, LTD. LOT 3B RIVERY SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO.497, AND THE JOSEPH P PULSIFER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 498 IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FROM R—S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO C-1 LOCAL COMMERCIAL 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: LOT 3B RIVERY SECTION ONE — BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED MAP — EXHIBIT A. WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change in the Zoning Ordinance to the City Planning and Zonint - 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 date set for said hearing; and page l of 3 _. WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on DECEMBER 2L 1986 recommended the changing of said Zoning District Classification as provided in the Zoni1;g Ordinance on the above described property from an RR_S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY District to.C-1 LOCAL COMMERCIAL District Zoning Classification. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas: 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 LOT 3B RIVERY SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION shall be and the same is hereby changed from the R—S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY District to CC_1 LOCAL COMMERCIAL District Zoning Classification. READ on this 17TH day of DECEMBER, 1986. READ, passed, and adopted this day of , 19_ on the second 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 3 RIVERY REZONING LOCATION MAP SCALE T' - aW RESIDENrAL d COUNTRY 5a2yyC 3 s CLUB PRESIDENTIAL a 5A 4' 10 513 BA. 7A 7B' RESIDENTIAL FIRE STATION 35" 8 P,A R: PARK COUIRTHOUSE SQUARE 12TH ST. UNIVERSITY Exhibit A page 1 of 2 5 EXHIBIT A LOT 2C page 2 of 2 LOT 10.68 Ac./ N LOTV1 ULTI FAMILY m 5.39 Ac. RETAIL O N C-1 HILLVIEW DRIVE 3A 6.79 Ac. FAMILY B.L. r; o JP c o. 0 s 29'04'2 v\N ry 0. revised 7/86 Ordinance Number 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 GEORGTOWN PARTNERS N0. , LTD. LOTS 4. 5A, 5B, 7A, 8, 9, 10, AND 11 RIVERY SECTION ONE SUBDIVISION IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO.497, AND THE JOSEPH P PULSIFER SURVEY ABSTRACT NO. 498 IN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, FROM R—S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT TO C2—A COMMERCIAL FTRCT 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: LOTS 4, 5A: 5B, 7A, 7B, AND 8-11 RIVERY SECITON ONE _ BEING MORE. PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED IN ATTACHED MAP — EXHIBIT A 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 date set for said hearing; and revised 7/86 WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on DECEMBER j 1986 recommended the changing of said Zoning District Classification as provided in the Zoning Ordinance on the above described property from an R—S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY D#strict to C2—A COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT District Zoning Classification. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas: 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 LOTS 4, 5A, 5B, 7A, 7B7_ AND 8-11 RIVERY SECTION ONE shall be and the same is hereby changed from the P.P.=S RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY District to C2—A COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT District Zoning Classification. READ on this 17TH day of DECEMBER, 1986. READ, passed, and adopted this day of 19_ on the second and final reading. ATTEST: Pat Cabellero City Secretary Approved as to form: Stump and Stump City Attorney Jim Colbert, Mayor City of Georgetown Page a of 3 revised 7/86 THE STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON CITY OF GEORGETOWN I, , being the current City Secretary of the City of Georgetown do hereby certify that the attached ordinance of the City Council of the City of Georgetown is a true and correct copy of such ordinance adopted at a council meeting open to the public and notice of said meeting, giving the date, place, and subject thereof, having been posted as prescribed by Article 6252-17, Section 3A, VATCS. Dated this day of , 19 City Seal) City Secretary Page 3 of 3 :__4 RIVERY REZONING LOCATION MAP Exhibit A page 1 of 10 1 ca pRIVf ryr5' i3 GEORGE lOWN PARTNERS No. 1, LII). ` gyp V. 1169 P 785 D V. it G 9 P 811 LOT q m 7.15 AC. s s l l R- a D. OFFICE a Q' C 2—A A ry EXHIBIT A z 9 u 4- qpm page 2 of 10 I \ c; , `. I jsT -z,6 I-OT 6A \ \ A a X32 FJ qc 2 q9'- ---- 25• 6.L. I - ag Is G7 LOT 5A 7 76 AG. R 81 D. OFFICE C2 -A 0 8 3r 9 37E O'_n EXHIBIT A, page 3 of 10 0 I I I 50004' I(c'W I c=1'17.78' c= 198.(01 I S 1004-9'l a W c=Q= 2nno, EMMEME_M m S 1104.4' 10" W- I 2s.9 3 ' R. a D. OFFICE 97`300•.. - LOT 5B 20.70 AC. R a D. OFFICE C2 -A UU 4 lUi w C = 1^17.78' P -19g.0, S 11'44'1, foo. NIS tia 9 19' 19 * 09" W . U 3 03 A=371(0— 2500 GZ(e.27• \ ` Sbl•54'00"W' 3043' 21t. 61' 105 4j I I I 1 co I 0r r A I NEW- n o RLK z n Ir LC- 1 1 2419 110.45 94 77' 217'50 110s2'L 501'44'16 v! L,R 19' 19 w l SHEET 01151 EXHIBIT A LCT ; 13 01.72' LOT i A \ . x.2c.. page 4 of 10 8S e A 100 05 12600 s \ s CROSSING c: Sag 2a' A 5ft 3`1 LOT 7A 7.47 Ac. R. 6( D. OFFICE C2 -A L ` 39.25 0 4 \q2 •. 4' O L s a 0 Q3 r3 CP D 9 g43.14 O W 5 •• S V 0- 3 g0.00 NrIA- F EXHIBIT A 1 Daae 6 of 10 LOT 7.0C COMMERC! X05" \ °.( - _,•;> p ag9.25 oa dp 'o. S 0% O / 66. A N • 2 p,.m2 tri c. 3sJr. R P( Ig \ 1 ` @ Fg. \ o• A ia 17 3 d 0 LOT 7B 3. 0^ 7.06 Ac. \ ` N/O COMMERCIAL OFFICES C2 -A on \ cQ• , ti 443.24 7- V ` ^ 4 off, 0 EXHIBIT A page 6 of 10 E`er 2'364, BajeJ Sto f 632 / 2 54 9. 0/ A61i 654-00 EXHIBIT A page 7 of 10 SEC71'11OX ONE \h 194.14 ACRES 14 LOTS \ i::ii/TF t ra.00 L :STA 8 80.42 23' E/ n 3-1 w BK. 8 G2 E E 2235 ( 00 oo \ L 26g g1'25 34 ` >"Sa•'. i'. 30 o. e. zse v NOS 3 \ r O. N of 20' 53"W I 53."!5' `• `p, 0 m itI m N m sLOT9 - o 17.02 Ac. I COMMERCIAL OF CEy° P 7:07 AC GREENBELT 1 C2 -A W AJ 9.95 NET AC.) c C T N Ak to Au TA V, -A Q, 6 ejS. r fj 6. Q R1AN dy0l- X 4 90 OE PEOEST \ 9 2 o C QACCESS i PUE ` tea N 00 y 3C`' BO C two2 . I q 2_- _..C N-/•-_-. W 7p03q_ 2 ON ta\ Ide 3\ \EXHIBIT A Qi. Noa'3:'S1-W 14390'_.. page 8 of 10 a0" S•" Ci \ 7.62 %A. GREENBELT) - 1,1 UD O c 17- m D d 9.95 NET AC.) EXHIBIT page 9 of 10 C. 90. OE, veoe5T R%AN . ACCESS i 9UE 04' t4 WW 17.02 Ac. r COMMERCIAL OFF 7.47 AC GREENBELT wl N A 1m 92 NO'i'32'S1"W 143 io' 3-7 NET AC.) o-• p ci, Fi 09 LOT 10 13.99 Ac. COMMERCI L OFFICE C2 -A W 10. 32' 34• E 274 64- 7.62 q- GREENBELT) F I 1 0\ A f N 61'43'19' E 44.&0 A: GREENOEL N 3a• aro 34e' e - -1 3 y`, W 0 90'DE 2j, rJ 04.34.'36'E t3nm River Ch6M, Y 7.G2 A GREENBELT) \ c * LOT 10 . 13.99 Ac. to COMMERCIAL OFFICE 37 NET AC) EXHIBIT taiDDD } m N I6' 32 34 E 274.64-' to g page 10 of 10 0(,K tk O A 9\ \ 2fg 44lA O r QI rn % ,*0 `OrLlfp."1 i-:::: V ( 3.9(o AC.GREENBELl) V2' a2' o!d' '>a. N4o•2s'is• 7s.00' •p •'J s3 r 61 N3N•3(n3EuB 3 ah U • cm 30'DE J L Nea••3•36•e 130.00' q b1• N9 fl \ - 7•E , . J AQ 564"31.'3t%W Ib1.05' C C2—A- o m \ COMMERCIAL OFFICE C2 —A 7.57 NET AG. h; CID a c \ •(, ° EL<7 2,e 7Y, 843.59 S+ale i%N Caordino+e 3 A 1.0 1 o c f 13 \\ pMh 0 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Counci APPROV 'BBS/ A"4110TRNZ, AL "111 An"T Tr. ANT the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. 06 Le-- Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: WINDSONG SECTION ONE - PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT. Project #00553. Applicant: Vergil and Jesse Poarch Owner: same Request: Approval of a Preliminary/Final Plat for Windsong Section 1. Also requested is a variance from Section 5.01 Part 19 and from 5.02-8a, to allow access to the proposed lot via a private access easement and from the Storm Water Drainage Ordinance to waive required stormwater detention and associated calculations. Appoordal of the final plat for Windsong Section One with the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met, 2. Applicant shall furnish information indicating the present impervious cover on the lot and indicate by plat note that impervious cover on this lot will not be increased except in conformance to the City Drainage Ordinance. A variance should be granted to waive the requirement for frontage on a public street due to the following findings of fact: a. The primary intent of property as opposed to b. The primary use being easement providing the C. The health, safety and will not be negatively 4. A temporary deferral from the subdivision is the sale of the development of land, served as well as the legal access service are existing conditions, general welfare of the community impacted by this decision, the City policy for Fire Protection Improvements should be granted due to the finding that no additional risk to the community will be incurred as a result of this action with the condition that adequate fire protection shall be provided for this lot with the development of the remainder of the property indicated on the Concept Plan. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Counci ROV / ItrPROVES /'T* OF THE *Ff'bfe*Wr the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. OL Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: PARK CENTRAL ONE - FINAL PLAT - AMENDED REPORT. Project #00128 Applicant: Park Central Joint Venture & John Felter Owner: same Request: Approval of final plat for Park Central One A variance is requested to exceed maximum block length. Subdivision Ordinance Sec. 5.03 la.) ACTION: Approval of the final plat of Park Central One Subdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met, 2. City Policy for Fire Protection Improvements shall be met, 3. A Drainage Facility Maintenance Covenant shall be filed with the plat, 4. Restrictive Covenants shall be filed with the plat which indicates interior, individual lot landscaping requirements and provides for maintenance of all landscape areas, 5. A plan for perimeter landscaping shall: a. Be included in construction plans and completed with subdivision improvements, b. Provide a Type E bufferyard (as shown on attached copy) along the perimeter of the plat, C. Provide for ground cover within the landscaped area, d. Function in harmony with drainage and utility plans, e. Use hardy, low maintenance type materials, 6. The plat shall not be recorded until streets, drainage, perimeter landscaping and fire protection improvements have been accepted by City or surety sufficient to cover the costs of installation has been provided. 1 REuUIRCD PLAN! u_ririlgcn PLANT UNITS PER 100' UNITS PER 100' A D RDeciduousTreesDeciduousTreesVol r Deciduous Shrubs ./ . 1. Deciduous Shrubs f • Y Evergreens Everprsene N Dorm B B REQUIRED PLANT UNITS PER 100' oo REQUIRED PUNT UNITS PER 100' Deciduous Trooe NNC or / /oo' Deciduous Shrubs ( C Deciduous Trees nEverproos r Deciduous Shrubs Evergreens'L— REQUIRED PUNT Dorm B j{ UNITS PER 100' C N 00 r Fence 44 -- Deciduous Trees '_ Deciduous Shrubs EvorOroone ry_ 1' FIGURE .37030 U1=FERYARD REQUIREMENTS N 01 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Counci PR the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: OAK CREST ESTATES RIVERSIDE UNIT, LOT 1 BLOCK 8- RESUBDIVISION PLAT. PROJECT #00520 Applicant: Robert and Barbara Choate Owner: same Request: Approval for a resubdivision of Lot 1, Block 8, of the Oak Crest Estates, Riverside Unit subdivision, as recorded in Cabinet B, Slide 154 of the Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. Approval of the resubdivision subject to the following conditions: 1. All ordinance requirements shall be met, 2. All drainage requirements shall be met; a. Minimum finished floor elevations and the 100 -year flood plain elevation, for each lot, shall be indicated, as determined by a Professional Engineer, b. Variance from stormwater detention requirements is hereby granted, 3. Utilities being adequate; a. Applicant shall construct a 6 -inch water line to City standards along Northcross Road from River Road to the common property line of Lot 1B & 2 of Oak Crest Riverside, or from Ridgecrest to the common line of lA & 1B." (See Exhibit "B" attached) b. The following note shall be added to the plat: "NOTICE: No building permits or utility connections shall be allowed for Lot 1B of this plat until such time as the City Director of Public Works has determined that utility service levels are adequate and has approved the new connections in writing, 4. A survey plat shall be submitted to verify that the existing structure on Lot lA meets ordinance requirements. 1 RIVER ROAD / I CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Counc' PROV / / WTTHnRAWS AT THE REQ111:cT nc T,tg A_!e*N the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: TURTLE BEND SECTION ONE LOTS 1-4 BLOCK A - RESUBDIVISION PLAT. Project #00554. Applicant: Carl Luzius Owner: same Request: Approval for a resubdivision of Lots 1-4, Block A, Turtle Bend Section One, as recorded in Cabinet E, Slide 150-151 of the Official Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. Also requested is a variance from Chapter 331, Subchapter B, Section 331.106(d)(3) of the Texas Administrative Code to allow lot sizes under one acre. ACTION: Approval of the requested resubdivision, subject to the following conditions: 1. Written approval from the TWC allowing for lots less than 1 acre in size over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone, 2. All ordinance requirements being met, 3. A 15 foot dedication for street widening along Booty's Crossing Road shall be required, 4. Access shall be restricted by plat note to one approach to Lot 1 and no approaches to Lot 2 from Booty's Crossing Road and the structure built on Lot 2 shall face Tortoise Lane. 1 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Council T 0 /D T the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. W L - Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: LOT 12, BLOCK A WILLIAMS ADDITION UNIT 6 AND LOT 13, BLOCK A WILLIAMS ADDITION UNIT 7 - PARTIAL VACATING AND AMENDING PLAT. Project #00556. Applicant: Hazel D. Talbot Hood Owner: same Request: Approval for a partial vacating and amending plat for Lot 12, Block A Williams Addition Unit 6 and Lot 13, Block A Williams Addition Unit 7, as recorded in Cabinet D, Slides 282-83 and Cabinet E, Slides 91-92, respectively, of the Official Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. Also requested is a variance from Section II of the Stormwater Drainage Ordinance for stormwater detention. ACTION: Approval of the requested vacating and amended plat and variance, contingent upon written approval from the Department of Public Works. 1 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Council ROV / / W L oAWS AT. THE nonnnom ni vc •RPT IG AM the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. L k 11 Do L '_ ' Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: RIVERCREST P.U.D.— AMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND PRELIMINARY RESUBDIVISION OF SOUTH FORK APARTMENTS PUD. Project #00528 Applicant: Venture Investment Properties Owner: same Request: Approval for amended site development plan and preliminary resubdivision of the South Fork Apartments PUD, a 22.30 acre tract as recorded in Volume 534, Page 661, of the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas. The following variances are requested: 1. A 10—foot building line for Lot 1 and Lot 16 of Block C, 2. The preliminary plat is printed at a 1"=50' scale for legibility, 3. A majority of lots are designed approximately 20 degrees from perpendicular to the proposed streets, 4. The subdivision street centerline radii are less than the 300—foot requirement, 5. A waiver of the City Stormwater Drainage Ordinance for stormwater detention, 6. Elimination of interior yard building setbacks and PUE's. 7. Lots with excessive width to length ratios, 8. Allowance for the length of Block C to be 3151, while the desirable minimum set by the Subdivision Ordinance is 500'. ACTION: Approval with the following conditions being met: 1. All ordinance requirements being met, 2. Utilities being adequate; a. The Utility Plan shall be revised to reflect the resolution of comments by Public Works and the City Engineer and resubmitted in conjunction with the final plat. Specifically, all off—site improvements shall be shown and a proposed electrical, gas, telephone, and cable layout submitted, b. Placement of sufficient fire hydrants and fire hydrant linework to bring the site up to City standards, to be approved by the City Fire Marshall, 3. Erosion and sedimentation controls and stormwater filtration shall be provided to improve the quality of stormwater discharged into the river and shall be shown conceptually on the site grading and drainage plan, See attached page(s) for rest of conditions Conditions of Approval for Rivercrest PUD cont'd 4. Detailed Development Plans shall be required for each lot, to be approved by staff before the issuance of building permits, 5. A Final Plat and Site Development Plan shall not be submitted for P&Z or Council approval until the applicant has furnished the City a letter of agreement signed by the property owners of Past and Presents, The Overlook, Circle -R, and the adjacent apartments that attests that each agrees to off-site street improvements. 6. Lots adjacent to the Interstate shall be screened and/or landscaped along the rear property lines. 7. Applicant in conjunction with other project participants should fund any signalization required to handle the increased traffic flow at the new road entrance to Leander Rd. and a signal be requested from SDHPT at this location before the final plat be approved. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Counci PRO D the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. Ji "- ()L L \6- Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: SERENADA OARS - UTILITY SERVICE AGREEMENT. Project #00089 Applicant: Gil Johnson, Brandi Lane Investments Owner: same Request: Approval for a Utility Service Agreement for Serenada Oaks, as a pre -condition for Final Plat approval. ACTION: Approval of the principle terms for the Utility Service Agreement, subject to approval of the final document by the City Attorney and Public Works Division and as satisfying condition #5 of the preliminary plat approval of Serenada Oaks. See attached page(s) for rest of conditions 1 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Counci It PROVES DTA" ji/ri16 A muF RF FCT nF muF ennTl..uT the request listed below WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name WINDRIDGE VILLAGE VARIANCE - EXTENSION OF FINAL PLAT. Project 00097 Applicant: Tim L Wright, President West of the Tracks Development Co., Inc. Owner: same Request: Extension of Final plat approval for Windridge Village, a 10.97 acre subdivision situated in the William Addison Survey, Abstract No. 21. ACTION: Approval of request for extension of Final Plat approval until June 23, 1987, with conditions of Final Plat as approved by City Council on June 24, 1986. See attached page(s) for rest of conditions 1 17J 0 CITY COUNCIL CITY OF GEORGETOWN The City of Georgetown City Council,PROVES I W the request listed below. WITNESS OUR HANDS this 17 day of December, 1986. J t.ul, D—, L Mayor, City of Georgetown Project Name & #: BRIARWOOD SECTION IV - VARIANCE - EXTENSION OF FINAL PLAT Applicant: Timber Trek Development Co., Inc. Owner: same Request: Extension of Final Plat approval for Briarwood, Section IV a 22.04 acre subdivision situated in the David Wright Survey, Abstract No. 13. Approval for requested extension of Final Plat approval for six months, to June 23, 1987, with conditions of Final Plat as approved by City Council on June 24, 1986, and payment of all development review fees prior to recordation of plat. See attached page(s) for rest of conditions See attached page(s) for rest of conditions 1 1