The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMinutes_UDCAC_01.10.2024Minutes of the Unified Development Code Advisory Commission City of Georgetown., Texas Wednesday, January 10, 2024 The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). IY 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, Joshua A Baran, Brian A Carr, Troy Hellmann, Travis Perthuis, Shelley G G Roclocker, Brad Strittmatter Public Wishing to Address the Board 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. Oil A request must be received by the Advisory Board or Commission Liaison 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. 1. Regular Session 1.A Meeting Minutes Consideration and possible action to approve the minutes from the November 13, 2023 regular Unified Development Code Advisory Commission meeting -- Erica Metress, WSZMIM�� Moved by Joshua A Baran-, seconded by Troy Hellmann to Approve. Motion Approved: 6- 0 Voting For: Joshua A Baran, Brian A Carr, Troy Hellmann, Travis Perthuis, Shelley G G Rodocker, Brad Strittmatter Voting Against: None 1.13 Review of the Zoning District Use Table Discussion on Unified Development Code (UDC) Chapter 5 Zoning Use Regulations -- Sofia Nelson, Planning Director Sotiernelso uses that can be consolidated, added, or removed. Discussion on the definition of Single Family, Att-a-cffe-U —anCF-fownnome wnic can5e found in Chapter 16 of the Unified Development Code. 7fIlk i i•7 fTIfMTFr&T*IIT=7 3,74,111" iii - IT in Manufactured Housing, but questioned if an accessory dwelling unit could be Nelson highlighted that obtaining a special use permit is necessary for an accessory dwelling unit and mentioned that discussing this matter further will be reserved for Committee Member Baran stated that a halfway house and hospice facility are in homes with protected rights but is defined as a residence. Committee Member Baran continued with the question of whether the city has rights to withhold or not disclose that state code. Baird further stated that group homes do not necessarily require direct licensure from the state to fall within this category. these specific terms and to revisit the number of categories. Nelson brought rooming house and boarding house to the attention of the committee and proceeded to read the definition of rooming house from Chapter 16 of the Unified Development Code. Committee Member Baran questioned if a rooming house is similar to a bed and breakfast. Chair Perthuis questioned if there are special conditions allowed for student housing. Nelson clarified that larger cities with universities of a greater size have requirements for apartments that are targeted towards students. Nelson further explained that in Georgetown the multi -family situation can be deemed as an apartment. Baird noted that student housing is separate from an apartment complex due to the group cooking and dining facilities that service the entire residency of the dormitory complex. Chair Perthuis explained that he does not envision student housing as a standalone category in this community. Chair Perthuis inquired whether the staff had encountered applications where there was no clear category specified. Nelson responded that they have not situations that they have already combined in Unified Development Code and questioned if there are uses in other communities that aren't occurring in this community. Committee Member Carr mentioned a hostel. Chair Perthuis asked what is considered a commercial recreation. Baird referred to the definition from the Unified Development Code. Chair Perthuis expressed his opinion that the category seemed unusual because it lists activities such as pool halls and ice-skating rinks. Baird highlighted that there is a list of exclusions in the definition. Chair Perthuis recommended that items that have their own use needs to be removed from the definition for example, indoor and outdoor firing ranges and driving ranges. Nelson noted the recommendation and asked the committee if there are additional uses to discuss. Chair Perthuis questioned the definition of movie production. Nelson referred to the definition from Chapter 16 of the Unified Development Code. Jessica Lemanski, Associate Planner, described a situation she encountered where the request primarily pertained to manufacturing and content creation, but ultimately ended up classified as an accessory use. Nelson suggested that the committee revisit the definition because of the activity occurring in Central Texas. Committee Member Baran raised the topic of automotive sales, rental or leasing of #*-"m AV&--a"'J LrQJLId essentially perform the same function. Baird explained that the terms were separated out in 2017 and noted that there are relevant regulations for each category. Committee Member Baran mentioned the confusion regarding office showroom and expressed uncertainty about whether they should be classified as retail, office warehouse, or business office. Committee Member Baran further elaborated by mentioning the parking differences associated with each particular use. Ryan Clark, Long Range Senior Planner, explained that currently, there is only one ret category when determining parking requirements. He expressed the hope to separate t - parking requirements to make them more specific for the different uses. I Committee Member Allen noted that there are different connotations between group home and halfway house. Committee Member Allen further mentioned that combining the two terms may provide a different reaction from the neighbors. Committee Member Baran requested that Nelson make a note to consider pickleba0 and the need for a noise buffer when reviewing commercial recreation. I.0 Review of Rezoning, Special Use Permit, and POD Criteria Discussion on Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 3,06.030 (Approval Criteria for Rezoning), Section 3.07 (Approval Criteria for Special Use Permits), and Section 3.06.40 (Approval Criteria for Planned Unit Development) --,5ofia Nelson, Planning Director ITOMM"T -- -- Permit) Approval Criteria with the commission. �7• L-IXW I complies or does not comply with the approval criteria. Nelson asked the committee about the commonalities they observe between the approval criteria. nair e Mis 1 found in the Special Use Permit and Rezoning Approval Criteria. k�*fnmlllee 11 i - - I i i the Comprehensive Plan is like that of the Special Use Permit Approval Criteria Rill Ill I'M ii Ill 1 1112 iiiiii Ill I I III I I Committee Member Allen mentioned is concern about the criteria regarding the Comprehensive Plan and conforming uses with the Rezoning Approval Criteria. Committee Member Baran expressed his belief that the criteria concerning the Comprehensive Plan is opinion based and the health and safety criteria are open- ended. Committee Member Baran sought to explore ways to establish a clear distinction in how the criteria are met. Committee Member Allen shared his confusion with the meaning of the word promotes for item C on the Rezoning Approval Criteria. ME RN* VII # I lill Nelson reiterated the suggestion for specific actions, such as providing definitions for certain terms in the criteria. Committee Member Baran shared his belief that criteria C for the Rezoning Approval Criteria should be removed. Chair Perthuis expressed his appreciation for the follow up explanation of whether a criterion is compliant or not. Committee Member Hellmann suggested in removing criteria C and D for the Rezoning Approval Criteria. Chair Perthuis recommends the removal of staffs recommendations during the analysis of the Approval Criteria and to split the phrase of criteria A for the Rezoning Approval Criteria. Adjourµnment These minutes re approved, at the meeting of , Chair 5Atest