The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes_P&Z_11.08.2022Minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, November 8, 2022 The Georgetown Planning and Zoning Commission met on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 2:00 PM at Georgetown Public Library, Friends Room, 402 W 8th Street Georgetown, TX 78626. The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King, Jr Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. This is a special joint meeting of the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission to discuss the Unified Development Code rewrite and Council priorities. No action will be taken at this meeting. The following Members were in attendance: Present were: Travis Perthuis, Doug Noble, Christopher B Stanley, Timothy E Haynie, Chere Heintzmann, Scott A Allen, Mike Tiland, Stephen F Dickey, Colin McGahey 1.A Joint Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council Workshop Presentation and Discussion regarding City Council Goals and the Unified Development Code (UDC) Diagnostic and rewrite process -- Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Welcome Sofia Nelson explained the purpose of this meeting was to make sure that P&Z and City Council are aligned in their intentions and goals for the city to prepare for our UDC rewrite process. Introductions Chance Sparks, Freese & Nichols introduced Alexis Garcia, Reese Wilson and Liz Reinstaff Nelson focused the conversation between Council and P&Z; difficult parts of their roles and making decisions on projects, etc. We will go over the survey results and establish guiding principles for UDC Steering Committee to use in their decisions and recommendations. Overview of Work Completed in 2022 and Project Background Alexis explained the purpose of the meeting and the code; UDC, Capital Improvement Planning, etc. Code is a component of the principles reflected in the Comp Plan and allows the Comp Plan to be useable and enforceable. Code diagnostic phase: Involving the community/allowing them to be participants in the rewrite, branding, etc, Assessing where the code can be improved and how these changes can be implemented. This will be done with Steering Committee meetings, a project website with an online survey for citizens and a Study Area tour to see examples of successes in other communities. This will be held between now and May 2023. Code drafting: May 2023 through May 2024 will include the draft code elements of general provisions and procedures, subdivision regulations, zoning regulations, environmental stormwater regulations and then any remaining regulations. Code testing: May 2024 through November 2024. Addressing how the code applies and works with real world projects. Adoption aimed for 2 years (Oct. 2024). It was noted that it is common to amend the ordinance after it's adopted. Staff projects there will be at least ten Steering Committee meetings, focus groups, and open houses to reach the broad community at different stages of the plan development. Discussion: Focused Questions Mayor Schroeder asked P&Z what cases stood out to them in the past year (cases where Council and P&Z were not on the same page). McCoy PUD Discussion: The group discussed how the site was reviewed and would be developed as a PUD to get the allowances and items that the city wanted, and which would work for the developer as well. The strict code zoning areas do not always apply to a project. The only way someone can develop the area they want is to develop a PUD with a single zone. Perthuis: another issue was that they wanted to waive the Heritage Tree removal process, Dickey: problem with the Comprehensive Plan is that there are a lot of projects wanting a PUD because they can't meet the Comp Plan requirements. P&Z and staff struggle with flexibility in zoning. They request more definition specificity between MF-2 and MF-1. Heintzmann: PUD developers are asking for many variances from the code. Brashear: When the UDC was first developed, the PUD was supposed to be a site - specific plan, not debating zoning, but more the layout of the property. There is now more arguing about zoning classifications because it puts more flexibility in the site plan to the benefit of the developer. A PUD is supposed to be a mechanism for projects that are good despite not complying with the zoning. Dickey/Perthuis: Lots of projects anticipate denial by Council after their P&Z meeting denial and then opt to come back as a PUD, resulting in them sitting on the land for another 6-12 months. Future Land Use Map was discussed. Perthuis: It works better on developed areas. Areas where there is less development/outlying areas don't follow the FLUM as closely because it's hard to predict what that area may need in the future. The Comprehensive Plan/UDC have competing goals, and there will be certain areas where you only partially comply with code because it doesn't follow the Comp Plan. Perthuis: For example, partially compliant in health/safety/welfare is more pressing than use/zoning with neighboring properties. Ratio Discussion Dickey: Staff has tried to push developers to make ratios more compliant, but then politics drive and allow more leniency from code requirements. SUP process: viewed differently than a rezone, can see the surrounding area. Ercel: Comp Plan is a guide, not a rule; cannot enforce that outside city limits per state law. Mayor: To what extent does market/economics impact our decisions? Answer: Can't factor in. Pre -Workshop Results and Discussion UDC doesn't offer nuance/flexibility by design. There are limits on what you can and cannot do with zoning. Not predicable when there's not a clear set of rules to get from point A to point B. Asking to know exactly what is planned for the site is not feasible for every project. Sparks: summarized the survey results and showed the Guiding Principles that were derived from the survey. Guiding principles slide 21: • Development standards should be clear, create high -quality development and nimble • enough to adapt to rapid growth and new development trends. • Development process and criteria used for decision making is as important as • development standards. • Zoning categories should balance certainty and flexibility. • Ensure alignment between UDC and 2030 Plan and Small Area Plans. • Code writing process should be transparent and involve a thorough code testing • process to ensure the right -size development regulation. • Updating the outdated UDC is a high priority and keeping on timeline is essential. All were generally in agreement with these principles. Next Steps: advisory committee meetings, focused conversations with code users, diagnostic review and report development. Each member was asked to place three dots on the principles to identify which were most important to them. zmmsmcz� Public Wishing to Address the Board On a subiect that is oosted on this aeenda- Please fill out a speaker registration form which can be found on the table at the entrance to the meeting room, Clearly print your name and the letter of the item on which you wish to speak and present it to the Board Liaison prior to the start of the meeting. You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item. Only persons who have delivered the speaker form prior to the meeting being called to order may speak. Speakers will be allowed up to three minutes to speak. If you wish to speak for six minutes, it is permissible to use another requestor's granted time to speak. No more than six minutes for a speaker may be granted, The requestor granting time to another speaker must also submit a form and be present at the meeting, _ "na subject not r)ostecloh, the Agencla: �k re U s m t r i Adjournment Moved by Travis Perthuis; seconded by Doug Noble to Adjourn at 3:35 pm. Motion Adjourn: 6 - 0 Voting For: Travis Perthuis, Doug Noble, Christopher B Stanley, Scott A Allen, Stephen F Dickey, Colin McGahey Voting Against: None 2 1 These minutes approved at the meeting of 71T7 , Chair Attest