Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_P&Z_06.04.20243"Ilinutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission City of Georgetown., Texas Tuesday,, June 4,, 2024 The Georgetown Planning and Zoning Commission met on Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 6:00 PM at Council and Court Building, 510 W. 9th Street. 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 The following Members were in attendance: Present were: Scott A Allen, Stephen F Dickey, Pierce P Macguire, Michael D Charles, Shelley G G Roclocker, Alice L York Public Wishing to Address an Advisory Board table at the entrance to the mee ng room. Clearly print your name and the le er of the item on which you wish to speak and present it to the Board Liaison prior to the start of the mee ng, You will be called forward to speak when the Board considers that item. Only persons who have delivered the speaker form prior to the mee ng six minutes, it is oermissible to use another reauestor's granted me to speak. No more than six minutes for a speaker may be granted. The requestor gran ng me to another speaker must also submit a form and be present at the meeting. prior to the day the agenda for this mee ng is posted. Each speaker will be given three minutes to address the Board or Commission members, No action can be taken at this meeting. Call to Order Pledge of Allegiance Comments from the Chair Announcements Action from Executive Session 1. Statutory Consent Agenda The Statutory Consent Agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that may be acted upon with one single vote. An item may be pulled from the Consent Agenda in order that it be discussed and acted upon individually as part of the Regular Session. 1.A Meeting Minutes Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the May 21, 2024, etiao of t"t I♦I _i ino oirilrilrissio 92MM Moved by Scott A Allen; seconded by Michael D Charles to Approve the minutes from the May 21, 2024, regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission. Motion Approved: 6- 0 Voting For: Scott A Allen, Stephen F Dickey, Pierce P Macguire, Michael D Charles, Shelley G G Rodocker, Alice L York Voting Against: None 2. Regular Session 2.A 2024-2.WAV Grace Academy Sidewalk Variance Public Hearing and possible action on a Subdivision Variance from the construction of public sidewalk pursuant to Section 12.07.01 O.A. 1 of the Unified Development Code, for the property generally located at 225 Grace Blvd, Georgetown, TX 78633, bearing the legal description of a 34.41 -acre tract, located in the Grace Academy Subdivision, Block 1, Lot 1, in Williamson County (2024-2-WAV) -- Wesley Wright, P.E., Systems Engineering Director m3mm� Commissioner Allen inquired about the fee -in -lieu. Wright explained that the fee -in -lieu is serfr1ho a ama-i�­ows collected from. Alternate Commissioner Rodocker inquired about the time limit the applicant has in order to either pay the fee or build the sidewalk. Wright explained that the Engineering department would allow up to the point of receiving the certificate of occupancy. Doug Noble, applicant, approached the podium to address the Commission and provided context as to why they think the sidewalk is unnecessary. ♦# highlighted that the church is about 100 to 125 yards from the cul-de-sac and that there are no buildings on the properties to the southeast and northwest of the property in question, Noble explained that the proposed sidewalk would interfere with a future building that the church plans to build. Noble highlighted that cars are queued near the cul-de-sac and mentioned that having a sidewalk there would be more dangerous than having none. Noble shared that the purpose of the code is mainly to promote connect ability of the city and highlighted that the property is far from any current or future connections. Noble explained that Grace Academy does not receive state or federal funding and mentioned that the intent is for all funds to be used for the Academy. Noble acknowledged that Grace Academy currently has an ADA accessible sidewalk near the main campus. Alternate Commissioner York inquired about the location of the front entrance to the gymnasium. Noble explained that the entrance is on the northwest corner of the gymnasium. Chair Dickey opened and closed the public hearing with no speakers coming forth. Chair Dickey asked for a motion from the dais. Moved by Scott A Allen; seconded by Stephen F Dickey to Deny deny the subdivision variance for a public sidewalk. Commissioner Allen spoke about an event in which he had worked with a developer that did not include sidewalks for the development and acknowledged that he did not see an issue with relieving the requirement of building a sidewalk if the fee -in -lieu was paid. Alternate Commissioner Charles mentioned that he agreed with Wright's assessment in that financial hardship is not a qualifying item and acknowledged that the area will not have a problem with connectivity in the future. Commissioner MacGuire shared that he agreed with Alternate Commissioner Charles. Alternate Commissioner York inquired about the possibility of a connection to the roundabout from development southeast of the property. Wright explained that if a property to south was to develop and had frontage along Grace Boulevard, they would be required to build a sidewalk along Grace Boulevard. Wright further explained that sidewalk would potentially connect to the sidewalk that is in question for this item. With no further discussion, the Commission proceeded to vote on the motion. Motion Failed: 3- 3 Voting For: Scott A Allen, Stephen F Dickey, Alice L York Voting Against: Pierce P Macguire, Michael D Charles, Shelley G G Rodocker After the failed motion, Chair Dickey asked for another motion from the dais. Moved by Michael D Charles; seconded by Shelley G G Rodocker to Approve . Motion Failed: 3- 3 2. B 2024 -!- ANX YMCA of Georgetown Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Zoning Map Amendment to zone, upon annexation, a 22.03 acre tract in the Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract No. 229, as the General Commercial (C-3) zoning district, for the property generally located at 6200 Williams Drive (2024-1-ANX) -- Ryan Clark, AICP, Senior Planner Travis Baird, Assistant Planning Director, presented the staff report on Ryan Clark's behalf. Orr)(hissiontr r, I -71—MITITIPMer zoning a ric al�ppl== achieve the same purpose. Baird explained that the public facility zoning district would allow for recreational facility, but potential amenities planned in the future would not be defined under that use. lllllllil� lin I . . . . . . . . . . "I'll Chair Dickey asked if the property is on one lot. Baird explained that it is currently one property and will need to go through the subdivision process. Alternate Oommissioner Rodooll inquired about the building height. Andresen acknowledged that it would be between 43-45 feet. Alternate Commissioner Rodocker inquired about the distance from the proposed building to the neighborhood. Andresen believed the proposed building to be 250 feet from the neighborhood. Terry Haygood, engineer, approached the podium to address the Commission and confirmed that the building would be about 43-45 feet in height and noted that the setback is in an excess of 150 feet, Kathleen Baker, 214 Woodland Park, approached the podium to address the Commission and highlighted that she lives adjacent to the property it i question. Baker expressed objection in the proposal and requested that Commission table the item. Baker explained that deed restrictions limited the property for church and church functions. Baker shared that Wellsprings Church violated the restrictions by selling land to the YMCA and expressed that annexation prior to the resolution of the deed restriction violation will cause more concerns. Baker shared her concern with the traffic patterns at the intersection of Majestic Oak Lane and Woodland Park and explained that the annexation of the property in question will increase the traffic. Baker recommended the installation of a stop light at the intersection. Steven Baker, 214 Woodland Park, approached the podium to address the Commission and expressed concern with the increase in traffic which would include the use of the cul- de-sac in his neighborhood by parents of students who attend the YMCA. Baker recommended that the Commission table the item to allow time for negotiations. Jimmy Pike, 200 Woodland Park, approached the podium to address the Commission and highlighted that he was 1 of the 6 landowners that were a part of the settlement agreement. Pike explained that he and his neighbors were working with Commissioner Covey from Williamson County regarding the traffic concerns. Pike shared statistics for traffic patterns on West Majestic Oak Lane and Four T Ranch Road. Pike highlighted that the neighbors are not opposed to the construction of YMCA but emphasized the concern for the current traffic in the area. Pike requested that the Commission consider the safety and possible mitigation impacts. Pike explained that Wellspring Church sold two lots that were part of a conservation zone which became a violation to the deed restrictions. Pike requested that the Commission table the item until the matter is settled. Chair Dickey closed the public hearing and asked for a motion from the dais. Moved by Alice L York; seconded by Scott A Allen to Approve. Alternate Commissioner Charles shared that this request has his support. Commissioner Allen inquired about the point in which a traffic impact analysis would be prompted. Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering Director, approached the podium to address the Commission and explained that if the property was annexed into the City, they would be required to pay transportation impact fees unless the development generated 5,000 trips per day. Commissioner Allen asked at what point in time would a traffic signal be considered. Wright explained that traffic signals are evaluated once traffic patterns are established. With no further discussion, the Commission proceeded to vote on the motion. Motion Approved: 6- 0 Voting For: Scott A Allen, Stephen F Dickey, Pierce P Macguire, Michael D Charles, Shelley G G Rodocker, Alice L Yo' Voting Against: None I 2,C 2024-6-REZ Pam's House Public Hearing and possible action on a request for a Zoning Map Amendment to rezone Lot 1, Block G of San Gabriel Heights Section 5 Subdivision, from the Two -Family zoning district to the Local Commercial zoning district, for the property generally located at 101 Tallwood Drive (2024-6-REZ) -- Haley Webre, Planner Alternate Commissioner Rodocker recused herself at 7:16 PM prior to the start of item 2.C. mmml� Commissioner Allen asked if there were other zoning districts considered that would accomplish the same purpose. would not be ideal along Leander Road. Webre explained that staff considered high density and low -density multi -family districts but recognized that the lot size of the property disqualified it from those considerations. r provided a presentation on the request. Alternate Commissioner York inquired about possible modifications to the building. F explained that there would be some modifications but no major construction. ii Alternate Commissioner York inquired about the number of individuals anticipated for the Ncilitv. F*y shared tiat thev a-ttici o.vted 2 bout 20 individuals and clarified that the intent is not pormanont housing. Alternate Commissioner York asked if the applicant anticipated that not all 20 individuals would have a car. Fox explained that only women who have a car are the ones who currently live out of them, Rene Fox, Applicant, approached the podium to address the Commission and stated that there were two demographics that are anticipated. Fox shared that senior women who generally are unlikely to have a car will likely share two to a room and women with children will more likely have a car. Fox clarified that there would be 4 bedrooms designated for the women with children which is why they anticipate a maximum of 4 cars on the property. Fox explained that the onsite manager would be one of the senior women. Unair LACKeY aSKea ariout Me previous use on mis pM77M. previous use was a nursing home that started in 1985. Webre clarified that the zoning district was RN which was later moved to TF with the new zoning codes. Alternate Commissioner York asked if electrical and plumbing modifications would prompt driveways to be up to code. Webre explained that internal work should not prompt site modifications. Alternate Commissioner York asked if the applicant would be required to request a variance if external site work is done. Webre acknowledged that it would be a possibility with the inclusion of lot size. Alternate Commissioner Charles inquired about a potential tie in with the adjacent parking lot to alleviate the parking concern. Webre explained that there was no confirmation and explained that one of the site requirements for a commercial property is inner parcel connectivity. Webre acknowledged that the adjacent commercial site has a drive aisle that wraps around the building and explained that there is a possibility of connecting to the drive aisle. Travis Baird, Assistant Planning Director, approached the podium to address the Commission and noted that the Planning Department would have to confirm that the development met the parking requirements for its own space. Chair Dickey opened and closed the public hearing with no speakers coming forth. Chair Dickey asked for a motion from the dais. Moved by Pierce P Macguire; seconded by Michael D Charles to Approve as presented. Commissioner Allen shared that he supported the use but is hesitant with a C1 designation without parameters and explained that approval of the request would allow any of the permitted uses found in the C1 zoning district. Alternate Commissioner York agreed with Commissioner Allen and explained that the building is sufficient for the intended use. Alternate Commissioner York shared that due to the lot size other uses in the C1 zoning district would not fit the parcel if the building were to ever be demolished. Chair Dickey commented that C1 requirements do not fit the site. With no further discussion, the Commission proceeded to vote on the motion. Motion Failed: 2- 3 Voting For: Pierce P Macguire, Michael D Charles Voting Against: Scott A Allen, Stephen F Dickey, Alice L York 2.D Transit Development Plan Presentation and discussion on the results of the Transit Development Plan -- Nat i MMIMORMISM 2.E Discussion Items Updates, Commissioner questions, and announcements -- Travis Baird, Assistant Planning Director I• ME= Adjournment These minutes were approved at the meeting of air 'Attest