Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 11.28.19951A NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS TUESDAY, November 28, 1995 The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, will meet on Tuesday, November 28, 1995, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, located at the northeast corner of Seventh and Main Street in Georgetown, Texas. If you need accommodations for any type of disability, please advise in advance. Detailed explanatory information on the items listed below is compiled in an agenda packet which is distributed to the Mayor and each member of the Council. An agenda packet is also available at the Public Library, for the use of interested citizens. Workshop - Call to order at 5:30 p.m. A Report from the TML Conference Regular Session - to convene Executive Session (will begin no earlier than 6:00 p.m.) Executive Session In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vernon's Texas Codes, Annotated, the items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session that follows. B Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney C Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property D Sec.551.074 personnel matters (Review applicants to serve as Assistant Municipal Court Judge) Regular Session - to begin no earlier than 7:00 p.m. E Action on Executive Session items (Appoint Assistant Municipal Court Judge) F Citizens wishing to address the Council G Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports • March 14 Board and Commission Dinner Consent Agenda Consent agenda includes non -controversial and routine items that council may act on with one single vote. A councilmember may pull any item from the consent agenda in order that the Council discuss and act upon it individually as part of the regular agenda. City Council Agenda/November 28, 1995 Page 1 of 4 Pages H Consideration of approval of meeting minutes --Regular Meeting of November 14,1995/Sandra Lee I Consideration of award of bid for 1996 Police Package Vehicles/Terry Jones and Susan Morgan J Consideration of approval of a Short Form Final Plat of a resubdivision of a portion of Block 9 of the Snyder Addition, to be known as University Place, located at SH29 and Laurel Street/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma K Consideration of approval of a variance to Section 37040 B. of the Subdivision Regulations for a Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase I, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma L Consideration of a Final Plat of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood Six/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma M Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 1.44 acre tract in the David Wright Survey, to be known as the Physician's Center Tract; and approval of variances to the Subdivision Regulations/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma N Consideration of a Variance to the plat note requirements for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase One, Block K, Lot 1, located at 30001 Edgewood Drive/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma O Consideration and possible approval of a request for a one (1) year extension of final plat approval for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Seven, Phase Two, and Section Eight, Phases Two and Three/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma P Consideration of approval of Amendment No. 23 to the contract between the City of Georgetown and Camp, Dresser, & McKee for engineering services related to the design of the Berry Creek Water Main in the amount of $39,500.00/Jim Briggs Q Consideration of direction for partial releases of assessments for I-35 frontage road/Marianne Banks R Consideration of approval of a Revised Concept Plan (Second) of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, a 5,314 acre tract in the L. Dyches, F. Foy, B. Eaves, W. Roberts, M. Lewis, R. Jenkins, L. Russell, A. Short, G. Thompson, W. Wilkinson and D. Monroe Surveys/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma S Consideration of a Preliminary/Final Plat of a resubdivision of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tract U, and 10.0 acres in the W. G. Wilkinson and George Thompson Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A; and approval of variances to the Subdivision Regulations/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma City Council Agenda/November 28, 1995 Page 2 of 4 Pages T Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 475.52 acre tract to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, and approval of variances to the Subdivision Regulations/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma U Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 111.954 acre tract in the Daniel Monroe and Frederick Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma V Consideration of approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 714072 between the City of Georgetown and the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs on behalf of Reedholm Instruments Company/Bob Hart Regular Agenda Council will individually consider and possibly take action on any or all of the following items: (Council may, at any time, recess the regular session to convene in executive session at the request of the Mayor, a councilmember, or the City Manager.) W First reading of an ordinance amending Exhibit 1 of the Century Plan - Development Plan for 11.85 acres in the Lewis Dyches Survey to be known as Pleasant Valley Estates as recorded in Volume 613, Page 419 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas from Intensity Level Two to Intensity Level Three/Ed Barry and Clyde von Rosenberg X First reading of an ordinance amending Ordinance No. 93-42 to extend the time period for payment of assessments on East I-35 Frontage Road/Marianne Banks Y Consideration of approval of the amendment to the Development Agreement with Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P., concerning the development of Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown/Marianne Banks Z Consideration of a License to Encroach for a Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma AA Consideration and possible approval of a variance from the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Seven, Phases One and Two; Section Eight, Phases One, Two and Three; and Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Eleven/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma BB First reading of an ordinance providing for the annexation into the City of a 333.490 acre portion of he Sun City Georgetown Planned Unit Development, Phase 2, located in the Daniel Monroe, W. G. Wilkinson, George Thompson, Abner Short, R. T. Jenkins, and Mary Ann Lewis Surveys/Ed Barry and Clyde von Rosenberg CC First reading of an ordinance to rezone a 2.9 acre tract to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Tract Z, from RP, Planned Residential to C-1, Local Commercial/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma City Council Agenda/November 28, 1995 Page 3 of 4 Pages DD First reading of an ordinance to rezone a 475.52 acre tract to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, from A, Agricultural, to C-1, Local Commercial, and RP, Residential Planned/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma EE First reading of an ordinance to rezone a 111.954 acre tract in the Daniel Moore and Frederick Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A/Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma FF Consideration of a priority list for the identification of specific routes for future road segments/Clyde von Rosenberg Adjournment CERTIFICATE OF POSTING I, , City Secretary of the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted on the day of , 1995, at a.m./p.m. City Council Agenda/November 28, 1995 Page 4 of 4 Pages J%e_ m / First Amendment to Development Agreement This First Amendment to Development Agreement (the "Amendment") is entered into as of the 28th day of November, 1995 by and between Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P., a Delaware limited partnership ("Del Webb") and The City of Georgetown, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation (the "City"). Recitals: A. Del Webb and the City have entered into that certain Development Agreement Concerning Proposed Subdivision and Construction of Master Planned Community By Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P., dated February 14, 1995 (the "Development Agreement"). The concept plan attached to the Development Agreement (the "Original Concept Plan") reflected, inter alia, the proposed construction of 9,500 residential homes and 10 acres of commercial development. B. On August 7, Del Webb submitted an application to the City to replace the Original Concept Plan with the amended concept plan (the "Amended Concept Plan") attached hereto as Exhibit A, which reflects, inter alia, the proposed construction of 9,500 homes and approximately 35 acres of commercial development, including an approximately 10.5 acre parcel intended to be used for medical facilities (the "Medical Facilities Parcel") and two additional 3-acre and 21 acre commercial sites (collectively, the "24 Acres of Additional Commercial Acreage"), all as depicted on Exhibit B attached hereto. C. The City and Del Webb desire to enter this Amendment to acknowledge that the Medical Facilities Parcel shall be substituted for the ten acres of commercial development depicted on the Original Concept Plan and to address the commitment of utility capacity and associated fees applicable to the 24 Acres of Additional Commercial Acreage reflected on the Amended Concept Plan. Agreement: Now therefore, in consideration of the recitals above and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is acknowledged, Del Webb and the City agree as follows: 1. Approval of Amended Concept Plan. Pursuant to Section 9(1) of the Development Agreement, the City Council has approved the Amended Concept Plan on November 28, 1995. The Original Concept Plan is hereby deleted and the Amended Concept Plan is substituted in lieu thereof. The City and Del Webb agree that the development regulations of the City in effect as of the date Del Webb submitted its application for the Amended Concept Plan were identical to the Development Regulations defined in and attached to the Development Agreement. Accordingly, any development of areas within the Project that were modified by the Amended Concept Plan will be governed by the identical Development Regulations (as modified by the Development Agreement) that are applicable to the remainder of the Project, except as expressly provided otherwise in this Amendment. 2. SIP Fees Applicable to Additional Commercial Acreage. Del Webb agrees to pay, with respect to the 24 Acres of Additional Commercial Acreage, the following development fees: a. Until such time as the City has enacted a city-wide impact fee, Del Webb will pay a SIP Fee equal to $2,432 per Service Unit Equivalent as a water and waste -water SIP fee, in lieu of the SIP fee specified in Section 5(f)(ii) of the Development Agreement. A Service Unit Equivalent is defined as the First Amendment to Del Webb Development Agreement Page 1 of 3 -jqw capacity attained through a 3/4" water meter. If a larger water meter is installed , a proportionately higher SIP Fee shall be payable. b. After the City enacts a city-wide impact fee pursuant to the Texas Local Government Code, the City and Del Webb agree that the SIP Fee established above or in Section 5(f) of the Development Agreement will not be applicable to units developed within the 24 Acres of Additional Commercial Acreage. Instead, the City will charge, and the owner of the unit will pay, the city-wide impact fee in effect from time to time, in accordance with the procedures established by the City with respect to such impact fees. This Paragraph 2 of the Amendment is applicable only to the 24 Acres of Additional Commercial Acreage and shall not be construed to alter any terms of the Development Agreement with respect to the remainder of the Project, including the Medical Facilities Parcel. 3. Commitment of Capacity. The City agrees to provide domestic water and wastewater service to all development within the 24 Acres of Additional Commercial Acreage that is a permitted use under the Amended Concept Plan and subsequent zoning approvals for the Additional Commercial Acreage. This commitment of capacity to serve the 24 Acres of Additional Commercial Acreage is in addition to the commitment of capacity set forth in Section 3 of the Development Agreement. The City agrees that the utility infrastructure described in the Development Agreement contains sufficient capacity to provide the commitment of service to the Additional Commercial Acreage as set forth above. The City agrees, notwithstanding anything in the contrary in the Development Agreement, to provide Del Webb with forty-five (45) days' written notice prior to entering into any agreement committing the City to provide capacity to an owner of land outside the Project utilizing infrastructure situated within the Project or the 16" wastewater force main connecting the Del Webb lift station to the City's existing gravity sewer system. The City and Del Webb agree to negotiate in good faith to resolve any issues arising from such commitment of capacity within such forty five day period. In no event shall any payments or installation of infrastructure to be constructed by Del Webb be increased or accelerated as a result of such commitment to provide capacity in such lines to a third party. 4. Reimbursement. The City agrees to reimburse Del Webb its direct costs incurred in relation to the design, review, construction and installation of the approximately 6,350 foot, 16", on -site wastewater force main connecting the wastewater interceptor to the City's 16" wastewater force main located at the southeast corner of the Project, as more particularly described in the plans prepared by Turner, Collie & Braden and approved by the City on September 5,1995. The City's reimbursement obligation will be reduced by an amount equal to the extra cost of materials incurred by the City in connection with the City's up -sizing of the City's portion of the non -potable irrigation line from 16" to 18". The City will reimburse Del Webb within ten (10) days following the City's receipt of funds for the on -site wastewater force main from the Texas Water Development Board ("TWDB") following inspection and approval by theTWDB of the Del Webb installed line. 5. Planned Unit Development Standards. Exhibit "G" to the Development Agreement is hereby amended to include the following: Swimming pools constructed on residential lots shall be allowed within the required rear yard setback areas so long as they are located at least three (3) feet from the property line; no privacy fence shall be required, provided that fencing (which may be wrought iron or similar type fencing) shall be required to satisfy other city requirements regarding safety. First Amendment to Del Webb Development Agreement Page 2 of 3 6. Miscellaneous. Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, the Development Agreement remains unchanged and in full force and effect. All capitalized terms used in this Amendment shall have the same meanings ascribed to them in the Development Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall be construed as one and the same instrument. Signed this day of , 1995. City of Georgetown: Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P.: 0 Leo Wood, Mayor STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON By: Del Webb Communities, Inc. Its: General Partner By: Larry M. Michels Vice President ACKNOWLEDGMENT This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the day of , 19_ by Leo Wood, a person known to me in his or her capacity as Mayor of the City of Georgetown, on behalf of the City of Georgetown. Notary Public, in and for the State of Texas STATE OF TEXAS ACKNOWLEDGMENT COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of , 1995, by Larry M. Michels, as Vice President of Del Webb Communities, Inc., an Arizona corporation, the general partner of Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P., on behalf of said limited partnership. Notary Public, in and for the State of Texas Notary Typed/Printed Name My Commission Expires: First Amendment to Del Webb Development Agreement Page 3 of 3 pbc 1Jgp bg �•S A€7f ����� 7� �n �� �F- 09. �Ff-- s �— i Y \ Ss gb �Y �� ��- \ „� "\ ..:ice! _ \ •.�� : �� ai y�� ��� � 4� ��� is � � � i p8 � \' `� +•• '� , ` \ - • j �- `, -_ !,�" _ ,' - 'k � \ � s �b�f �� 7s � � 8 � RRRRRRRRRRRRR j`\ \ �tP''` �� /'\� \.v _- .�J .r'.�.�-•-__- •�''C'i � - � i ' �• O \ ' N` `\ /' � ( •\ ,,,, � " S — / �Y\\• • � ,• , rye \ / / L+, R _ 'vim i - i �\ � � \.1'y\' � •? •� /� �/ _ �A _ � � .. —.tTJ C n z 3 T5. i 1 � 0 P=-rI. SUN CITY GEORGETOWN g �� CONCEPT PLAN m mg �x� o ors Q o �� z."� L o� zz ! it GEORGETOWN, TEXAS " y � Council meeting date: 11-28-95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Meeting Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting on Tuesday, November 14, 1995. ATTACHMENTS 1. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of Tuesday, November 14, 1995 Submi By: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Council Present: Dick Vincent George Arroyos Lee Bain Doris Curl, Mayor Pro Tem Susan Hoyt Ferd Tonn TUESDAY, November 14, 1995 Staff Present: Hartley Sappington, Acting City Manager Marianne Banks, City Attorney Council Absent: Mayor Leo Wood (Councilmember Position for District 2 is vacant due to death of Winfred Bonner) Travis McLain, Airport Manager Hildy Kingma, Chief Planner Sandra Lee, City Secretary Micki Rundell, Accounting Director Susan Morgan, Dir. of Finance & Admin. Terry Jones, Purchasing Agent Jim Briggs, Dir. of Community Owned Utilities Kevin Stofle, Police Lieutenant Randy Morrow, Dir. of Parks & Recreation Teresa Hersh, Dir. of Employee & Organizational Svcs. Bill Shanklin, Fire Chief Workshop - Called to order at 5:30 p.m. A Governance discussion on the use of bows and crossbows within the City Limits/Hartley Sappington Sappington explained to Council that one particular citizen has had arrows shot into her house accidentally by two different neighbors. Lt. Stofle demonstrated a compound bow and shared comparative information from other cities such as Leander, Austin, Round Rock, Temple and Killeen. He explained that the state has outlawed crossbows for hunting purposes, and most cities require a permit for the use of compound bows with specific ranges required for use within the city limits. B Presentation of the annual investment report for 1994/95/Micki Rundell and Susan Morgan Morgan explained the changes to the Investment Policy as requested to be approved in the Consent Agenda of this meeting in order to comply with the new state law; and demonstrated what the City of Georgetown has done with its investments, showing a comparison with last year. C Report from Councilmembers on TML/Doris Curl Due to the lack of sufficient time, this item was not discussed. City Council Meeting Minutes November 14, 1995 Page 1 of 7 Pages Regular Session - Called to order for Executive Session at 6:50 p.m. Executive Session D Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney E Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property F Sec.551.074 personnel matters (appointment of Assistant Municipal Court Judge) G Sec.551.075 conference with employee 7:07 p.m. recessed Executive Session Regular Session - Called to order at 7:10 p.m. H Action on Executive Session items This item was moved to the end of the agenda after Council adjourned the Executive Session. Citizens wishing to address the Council Paulette Taylor, 705 W. 8th Street, resident of District 2, announced that she did not plan to run for the vacant position for District 2. She read a statement that she and others support Shelley Pierre Davis, and told Council that two community meetings were held where Shelley Davis was supported by the majority of the attending residents. She asked Council to call the Special Election. J Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports Curl recognized scouts and their parents in the audience and thanked other audience members for attending. Bain also thanked scouts and audience. He suggested that when deciding on the position of Assistant Municipal Judge, the Council needs to establish policy on remuneration and when the Assistant Judge is to take authority. He suggested that the Council work with Judge Higginbotham. Bain also spoke of having received a memo from Attorney General Morales about the increased truck traffic from NAFTA needing to be addressed. Curl asked that a Council workshop on NAFTA be held in the near future. Arroyos commended Morgan and staff on the presentation of the investment report. Vincent thanked the District 2 residents for gathering and reaching a consensus of opinion regarding filling the Council vacancy. He also recognized OMI for a contribution to G.I.V.E. of $500. City Council Meeting Minutes November 14, 1995 Page 2 of 7 Pages Curl spoke of the recent train ride from San Antonio to Austin to explore the possibility of mixed transit to alleviate problems along the IH3 5 corridor. She also commended Parks and Recreation Director Randy Morrow for hosting the recent TRAPS Conference in the new Recreation Center. She mentioned having attended the Fire Services Promotion Ceremony where Tommy Bizzell, Ray Cummings, Scott Gibson, Craig Krienke, Clay Shell, and Mark Shields were promoted to the position of fire lieutenants. Curl also acknowledged the 5th Reunion of Central Texas Drug Treatment Center In recalling the recent Parks and Recreation Board and City Council Joint Meeting, Curl thanked the Parks Board for hosting Council and for exploring vital issues facing the community. She told Council she would need response, from those who planned to attend NLC Conference in Phoenix, to a dinner invitation from Waste Management Curl noted that board and commission vacancies would be occurring soon for those members due to expire in December, and asked people to make application to serve. She also reminded Council of the upcoming mid -year workshop and that salary reviews of Council appointees are approaching. Public Hearing K Conduct a public hearing on proposed Texas Capital Fund infrastructure improvements for Advanced Metal Systems/Hartley Sappington The Public Hearing was opened at 7:27 p.m. Sappington recognized Grant Administrator, Linda Dane, who read a prepared statement of Council's intent to apply for block grant funds. Arroyos asked if grants were awarded on a point system, and if that system had changed in the past year. Dane stated that the point system is weighted to greatly support south or east Texas. Bain asked how the grant would be administrated. Dane replied that awards are granted to assist companies to relocate to the City. An award will be funded, in this case, to build infrastructure to service an existing building. Former Councilmember Voltz, in the audience, asked the purpose of the sign-up sheets that had been distributed. It was explained that those sign-up sheets were not endorsement of the grant application, but merely proof to the State that the public hearing had been held. Motion by Bain, second by Arroyos to close the public hearing. Approved 5-0. Consent A_ enda Curl recused herself during the Consent Agenda portion of the meeting due to the possible appearance of conflict of interest on four items. The gavel was turned over to Senior Councilmember Ferd Tonn. L Consideration of approval of meeting minutes --Regular Meeting of October 24, 1995/Sandra Lee City Council Meeting Minutes November 14, 1995 Page 3 of 7 Pages M Consideration of a resolution approving the application for funding through the Infrastructure Program of the Texas Department of Commerce on behalf of Advanced Metal Systems, Inc./Acting City Manager Hartley Sappington N Consideration of an award of bid in the amount of $48,033.00 for reconstruction of a home at 907 East 20th Street, funded by the HOME Grant/Hartley Sappington O Consideration of approval to purchase computer equipment through an existing Interlocal Purchase Agreement from the Texas Department of Information Resources/Terry Jones and Elizabeth Gray P Consideration of authorizing the City to pay a deductible payment to the National Casualty Company/Hartley Sappington Q Consideration of -approving a resolution to authorize the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with Gayle Peery for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar/Travis McLain and Hartley Sappington Bain asked if there were a Master Plan in place for development at the Airport. Sappington replied that the Airport is required by FAA to file a site plan showing the potential location for private hangars. R Consideration of approving a resolution to authorize the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with D. E. Rhodes for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar/Travis McLain and Hartley Sappington S Consideration of a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an Airport Land Lease with Marvin Cressman for the construction of a private aircraft storage hangar/Travis McLain and Hartley Sappington T Consideration of a declaration of the light fixtures at the Grace Heritage Center as surplus and authorizing the Heritage Society to dispose of the fixtures, with the stipulation that the Heritage Society will install fixtures from the Gothic Period/Bob Hart U Consideration of approving the bid award to Williams and Thomas, Inc., d.b.a. Jamail Construction, to construct concrete curb and gutter, driveways, sidewalks, and radius units along various city streets in the amount of $116,704.88/Jim Briggs V Consideration of approving Amendment #20 to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown for engineering services related to the design of the 1996 Wastewater System Improvements in the amount of $56,000.00/Jim Briggs Bain asked, concerning Items V, W, X, and Y, how those fees were shown in the Budget. Briggs replied that the engineering costs were calculated into the Budget at 15-25% of the total cost of the project, with street projects running higher due to the geotechnical work required. He added that City Council Meeting Minutes November 14, 1995 Page 4 of 7 Pages the State publishes a list of fair and reasonable costs, and that the City is coming in below the curve set by the State. Bain asked how the engineering firms were decided upon. Briggs stated that he spoke with a principal of Roming-Parker. Those projects that Roming-Parker would be unable to complete were given to Camp, Dresser & McKee. W Consideration of approving Amendment #21 to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown, for engineering services related to the design of the 1996 Water System Improvements in the amount of $24,200.00/Jim Briggs X Consideration of approving Amendment #22 to the agreement between Camp, Dresser & McKee and the City of Georgetown for engineering services related to the design of the Railroad Street and Country Club Road improvements, in the amount of $122,950.00/Jim Briggs Y Consideration of approving an amendment to the contract between the City of Georgetown and Roming-Parker Associates, for engineering services related to paving, drainage and utility improvements of Northwest Blvd., Quail Valley Drive, and 15th . Street in the amount of $174,200.00/Jim Briggs Z Consideration of a resolution to authorize a license to encroach into the public utility easement located along the east property line of Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase III, Block A, Lot 43, located at 30406 La Quinta Drive/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry Bain asked and was told that the utility companies sign off on the application, and the fact that they signed off indicates there probably are no utilities in that location. AA Consideration of a resolution to authorize a license to encroach into the public utility easement located along the east property line of Berry Creek, Section 9, Phase I, Block A. Lot 11, located at 31000 Clearwater Court/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry BB Consideration of a resolution authorizing the City Attorney to issue a quit claim deed to be filed abandoning the platted Public Utility Easement (PUE) located along the east side lot line of Lot 2, P.W. Properties Subdivision/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry Bain asked about the status of the plat and what would be constructed there. Kingma stated that it has been platted for mini warehouses. CC Consideration of rejecting all bids relative the San Gabriel River Hike and Bike Trail; and instructing staff to revise the specifications/Randy Morrow DD Consideration of approval of a resolution revising the current City of Georgetown Investment Policy to comply with new state law and clarify requirements/Micki Rundell and Susan Morgan EE Consideration of revisions to reciprocal agreement with Round Rock Public Library/Elizabeth Gray City Council Meeting Minutes November 14, 1995 Page 5 of 7 Pages Motion by Hoyt, second by Arroyos to approve the Consent Agenda 5-0. Curl abstained from Items Q' R, S, and T. Regular As enda FF Second reading of an ordinance updating TMRS (Texas Municipal Retirement System) employee service credits/Teresa Hersh Arroyos stated that he had met with TMRS at the TML Conference in Dallas, and that he had wanted to inquire as to increasing the City's employee deposit rate. He suggested that Hersh request that TMRS provide us with communicators to inform the staff. Hersh assured Arroyos that the item would be a consideration. Hersh read the caption on second reading. Motion by Tonn, second by Vincent to approve Ordinance 95-57 on second reading. Approved 5-0. (For the record, it shall be pointed out that Mayor Pro Tem Curl chose not to exercise the privilege of voting on any of the items at this meeting.) GG Second Reading of an ordinance to rezone Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhoods One, Two and Three from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned C-1, Local Commercial, and C-2B, Commercial First Height/Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry Kingma read the caption. Motion by Arroyos, second by Vincent to approve Ordinance 95-58. Approved 5-0. (Bain asked if this was the same wording as the first reading. Kingma explained that Sun City is now recording neighborhoods, and although already read on second reading, this ordinance was being read again to include those recorded neighborhoods.) HH Consideration of approval of a resolution calling a Special Election on January 20, 1996, for the purpose of electing a councilmember for the vacant position for District 2; ordering a runoff election, if necessary, and establishing procedures for said election/Sandra Lee Mayor Pro Tem Curl called on Ed Seiner who had registered to speak to the Council. Seiner told Council that the residents of District 2 want an election. He turned in a petition from the residents of River Hills asking that a Special Election be called. Lee read the resolution. Tonn commended the people of District 2 for making their views known. Motion by Tonn, second by Hoyt to approve the resolution to call a special election. Arroyos commended the District 2 residents for their efforts to organize their neighborhood, and asked if anyone at the Council Meeting had any preference on holding the election. Seiner re - approached the podium and repeated that the vote was unanimous to hold a Special Election to fill the vacancy. Taylor again stated that it was a consensus of the residents who attended the community meetings and that she was puzzled as to why River Hills representatives weren't present at the neighborhood meetings. The consensus of those that attended was that there should be a special election in January, even knowing that the winner would face re-election in May. City Council Meeting Minutes November 14, 1995 Page 6 of 7 Pages Former Councilmember Voltz, in the audience, asked and was told that the petition stated that the residents of River Hills were requesting a Special Election and not supporting a particular candidate. Motion approved 5-0. 8:13 p.m. recessed into Executive Session - 9:08 p.m. reconvened Open Session H Action on Executive Session items Motion by Bain, second by Tonn to approve a partial release of assessment between the City, FDIC, and Georgetown San Gabriel Properties, Ltd. in settlement of the appeal of the assessment by First Madison, as submitted by City Attorney Banks. Approved 5-0. Approved: Leo Wood, Mayor City Council Meeting Minutes November 14, 1995 Page 7 of 7 Pages The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Attest: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary Council Meeting Date: November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Award of bid for three 1996 Police Package Vehicles to Draeger Motors in the amount of $76, 980.00. ITEM SUMMARY Bids were received for the purchase of four Police package automobiles approved in the 1995/96 Vehicle Internal Service Fund. The staff recommendation is to purchase these vehicles from the only bidder responding, Draeger Motor Co., Inc. of Georgetown. The bid tabulation is as follows: N.TeTe-Ta-E Draeger Motors HGAC (Orange Ford) State Contract McMorris Ford AMOUNT $761980.00 $75, 000.00 not available no response This is the first year that only one car manufacturer is producing Police vehicles. Ford has initiated a deadline for ordering Police vehicles with governmental price concessions of November 301 1995. With this deadline in place, we were at a disadvantage in attempting to receive competitive bids. The state contract bid, which we usually compare our vehicle bids to, is not accepting any additional orders. The only other comparison we were able to make is from the HGAC vendor. Since the Draeger bid is within five percent of the HGAC bid, the staff is recommending an award to the local vendor. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS none FINANCIAL IMPACT (cost of item, fund and division name, budgeted amt.) Total amount of this bid is $76, 980.00. $70, 000.00 -was budgeted in the 1995/96 Vehicle Internal Service Fund for this expenditure. The cost differential in the budgeted amount and the bid amount will be made up in cost savings from other internal service fund expenditures. COMMENTS (from City Attorney, staff, boards and commissions) none ATTACHMENTS (list individually) none Submitted By: Terry Jones, Purchasing Director rs Susan Morgan, Director of Finance & Administration Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET T SUBJECT: Consider approval of a Short Form Final Plat of a Resubdivision of a portion of Block 9 of the Snyder Addition, to be known as University Place, located at SH29 and Laurel Street ITEM SUNIlVIARY: The proposed resubdivision creates three (3) new single family lots where only one (1) currently exists. The primary issues on this plat relate to the improvements that will be required to Laurel and 13th Streets. Currently, the Laurel Street right-of-way along a significant portion of this property's frontage is paved nearly to the property line to provide a head -in parking area. By improving Laurel Street to be consistent with a typical local street section, more green space will be provided on each of the lots and parking in this area will be discouraged. In fact, if the current design of the road section continues to exist, it is possible that access to the driveways on Lots 1 and 2 will be completely blocked at times. In addition, the Community Owned Utilities Division has indicated that any reconstruction of Laurel Street must include the construction of a curb on 13th Street along Lot 3. All work must be coordinated with the City's Street Department in order to ensure that the new street design is consistent with the recent improvements made to Laurel Street south of 13th Street. A plat note has been required to state that the improvements to Laurel Street must occur before any construction is permitted on Lots 1 and 2, and the improvement to 13th Street before construction is permitter) on Lot 3. The construction plans for these improvements will be required before the plat can be recorded. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Just before this application was considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, but after the public notification was initiated, the applicant indicated to staff that they would request a variance to the front yard setback required on the secondary front yard of Lot 2 (along 13th Street). This request will be considered by the Commission and Council at their December meetings. If the request is approved, the plat will be revised to reflect the changed setback. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of November 7, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the Short Form Final Plat of University Place, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and plat Submitted By: e, - le: ��� � � Edward J. ry, AICP - , irector Division f Development' Services (ZLev", f*�,Ow Hildy L. Ki gma, AICP Chief Planner SHORT FORM FINAL PLAT OF A RESUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF BLOCK 9 OF THE SNYDER ADDITION, TO BE KNOWN AS UNIVERSITY PLACE, LOCATED AT SH29 AND LAUREL STREET OWNER/APPLICANT: Ms. Tonie Eady, Secretary/Treasurer Capitan Enterprises, Inc. 12434 FM2244 Austin, TX 263-1124 FAX: 263-2292 AGENT: Ms. Clare Easley Moreland Properties 912 Forest Street Georgetown, Texas 78626 480-0848 FAX: 480-9761 REQUEST: Short Form Final Plat of a Resubdivision of a portion of Block 9 of the Snyder Addition, to be known as University Place as recorded in Volume 1230, Page 531 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. FACTS: Location: Located at 1202 Laurel Street. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Largely vacant, with a garage apartment remaining. Existing Zoning: RS, Residential single family Proposed Use: Three (3) single family lots. Surrounding Uses North: Southwestern University (RP) and Zoning: South: Single family residences and duplex (RS and RM-1) East: Single family residences and duplex (RS and RM-1) West: Single family residences (RS) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as Intensity Level 3. The proposed development can be accommodated within this intensity assignment. SEE EXHIBIT B Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. Short Form Final Plat - University Place November 15, 1995 FP 95-17/File: UNVR-PLC.FP Page 1 CM:CS ANALYSIS: The proposed resubdivision creates three (3) new single family lots where only one (1) lot currently exists. SEE EXHIBIT C At some point in the past the structure that had been on this lot was removed and the lot has been largely vacant since. The garage that is remaining on the property is in poor condition and will be removed to allow for the construction of a new single family home. All the required public improvements - streets and utilities - are available to this lot. Some improvement to the lots will likely occur before homes are built, however. Currently, the Laurel Street right-of-way along a significant portion of this property's frontage is paved nearly to the property line to provide a head -in parking area. SEE EXHIBIT D The agent has indicated that this area will be recaptured to provide more green space, consistent with most lots where there is approximately ten (10) feet of right-of-way left as open space between the property line and the street. This improvement will also discourage parking in this area by others, such as currently occurs. In fact, if the current design of the road section continues to exist, it is possible that access to the driveway on Lots 1 and 2 will be completely blocked at times. The Community Owned Utilities Division has indicated that any reconstruction of Laurel Street must include the construction of a curb on 13th Street along Lot 3. Further, if any work is to be done in the City's right-of-way, it must be coordinated with the City's Street Department in order to ensure that the new street design is consistent with the recent improvements made to Laurel Street south of 13th Street. In order to ensure that these improvements are made consistent with the City's requirements, construction plans should be submitted prior to any improvements being undertaken. Further, the improvements to Laurel Street should be made before any construction is permitted on Lots 1 or 2, and the improvement to 13th Street should be made before construction is permitted on Lot 3. This will ensure that the improvements are made in an orderly fashion. Technical Issues: The following Technical Issues must be addressed prior to City Council consideration of this plat. If they are not addressed by December 1, 1995, or if the applicant does not concur with a delay to the City Council's consideration of the plat to allow the Technical Issues to be addressed, the plat will be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. 1. Indicate on the plat the side building setback lines as required by Short Form Final Plat - University Place November 15, 1995 FP 95-17/File: UNVR-PLC.FP Page 2 CM:CS Table 34020. Plat note #7 is not sufficient for this requirement. The actual setbacks must be shown on the lots. 2. The property owner named in the owner certification is different from that named in the City's certification. These should be correct and consistent and should match the property owner named on the application. 3. Note #S should be revised to indicate that the existing zoning is RS, Residential Single Family. 4. All certifications and signature blocks should be revised to be consistent with those included in Appendix C of the: revised Subdivision Regulations. Paul T. Weyrauch should be listed as the Chair of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 5. Provide two (2) copies of the deed restrictions or covenants if they are to be recorded for this subdivision. 6. Provide certification from all taxing authorities that all taxes due on the property have been paid. 7. Add a plat note stating that the improvements to Laurel Street must be made before any construction is permitted on Lots 1 or 2, and the improvement to 13th Street must be made before construction is permitted on Lot 3. Prior to Filing: The following requirements must be met before this plat can be recorded with the County: 1. A park land dedication fee of $450 will be required prior to the recordation of this plat. 2. The water pollution abatement plan, if required, will have to be approved before this plat can be recorded.. 3. Construction plans must be submitted for the improvements to Laurel Street and 13th Street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Short Form Final Plat of University Place, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. P & Z ACTION: At their regular meeting of November 7, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the Short Form Final Plat of University Place, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. Short Form Final Plat - University Place FP 95-17/File: UNVR-PLC.FP CM:CS November 15, 1995 Page 3 Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. -/ AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consider approval of a variance to Section 37040 B. of the Subdivision Regulations for a Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D. ITEM SUMMARY: The proposal is to construct four (4) foot tall fences with five (5) foot tall columns along RM2338 for a total distance of approximately 1,120 feet, five (5) foot tall stone walls with six (6) foot tall columns facing the intersection of RM2338 and Del Webb Boulevard and a five (5) foot tall stone wall on the opposite side of the northbound lane of Del Webb Boulevard from the entry house. Both fences are proposed to encroach into the 25 foot front setback on RM2338 over their entire lengths. The two (2) walls near the intersection encroach into the 25 foot front setback on Del Webb Boulevard and the proposed wall near the entry house encroaches into the 25 foot front setback as well as the public right-of-way for Del Webb Boulevard. All proposed features also encroach into public utility easements that are adjacent to the right-of-way. Licenses to Encroach into the easements and the public right-of-way are also being processed at this time. Both the request for the variance and the License to Encroach must be approved to allow the fences and walls to be constructed as proposed. The applicant states that the request for encroachment into the front yard setback along RM2338 is based in the "great future road widening width." The fence is proposed to encroach into the front building setback line by approximately 23 feet. The proposed wall encroaches into the 25 foot building setback measured from the Del Webb Boulevard right-of-way line by approximately 15 feet. Section 37040 B. of the Subdivision Regulations allows fences in the front building setback that are less than or equal to three (3) feet in height. None of the proposed fences or walls conform to this standard. For reasons stated in the report, the staff recommends approval of this variance. The Community Owned Utilities Division has approved the License to Encroach application regarding the compatibility with water, wastewater and electric facilities only. The issue regarding the encroachment into the right-of-way must be resolved. This is described on the agenda item for the License to Encroach. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its November 7, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to approve the requested variance to Section 37040 B. to permit four (4) foot tall fences with five (5) foot columns to encroach into the 25 foot front building line along RM2338 and five (5) foot tall stone walls with six (6) foot columns to encroach into the 25 front building line near the intersection of RM2338 and Del Webb Boulevard and on Del Webb Boulevard across from the entry house, after making the required findings of fact, provided Licenses to Encroach, which permit the walls to encroach into the public right - of way or public utility easements, are also approved. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report Submitted Bv. Edward, . Barry, AICrent - Director Division of Develop Services ^�.L._ Hildy L. Ki ma, AICP Chief Planner VARIANCE TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, TRACTS B AND D, LOCATED AT RM2338 AND DEL WEBB BOULEVARD OWNERS/APPLICANT: Mr. Robert Eck II, P.E. Director, Land Development Del Webb Development Corporation 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX: 930-6776 AGENT: Richardson Verdoorn, Inc. 712 Congress Avenue, Suite 300 Austin, TX 78701 480-0032 FAX: 480-0617 REQUEST: Variance to Section 37040 B. of the Subdivision Regulations for a Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D as recorded in Cabinet M, Slides 95-116 of the Official Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Located on F.M.2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: A, Agricultural. Proposed Use: Entry fence and walls. Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, (A and C-1) South: Undeveloped land (out of City) East: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2(C-1 and to be annexed) West: Casa Loma, single family residential (out of City) Variance - Sun City Georgetown, Phase One, Neighborhood One, November 20, 1995 Tracts B and D VR95-10/Fi1e:SCG-FENC.VAR Page 1 CM/CS Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level 2 by a Plan Amendment approved by City Council on December 13, 1994. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: A Revised Concept Plan was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. A Second Revised Concept Plan was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 51 1995. The Final Plat for Neighborhood One was approved by the City Council on June 24, 1995, and recorded with the County on September 5, 1995. ANALYSIS: The proposal is to construct four (4) foot tall fences with five (5) foot tall columns along RM2338 for a total distance of approximately 1,120 feet, five (5) foot tall stone walls with six (6) foot tall columns facing the intersection of RM2338 and Del Webb Boulevard and a five (5) foot tall stone wall on the opposite side of the northbound lane of Del Webb Boulevard from the entry house. Both fences are proposed to encroach into the 25 foot front setback on RM2338 over their entire lengths. The two (2) walls near the intersection encroach into the 25 foot front setback on Del Webb Boulevard and the proposed wall near the entry house encroaches into the 25 foot front setback as well as the public right-of-way for Del Webb Boulevard. All proposed features also encroach into public utility easements that are adjacent to the right-of-way. SEE EXHIBIT B Licenses to Encroach into the easements and the public right-of-way are also being processed at this time. Both the request for the variance and the License to Encroach must be approved to allow the fences and walls to be constructed as proposed. Approximately 970 feet of the proposed fence will be located on Tract D of Neighborhood One, which is the tract immediately south of Del Webb Boulevard. The other fence is approximately 150 feet long and is located on Tract B of Neighborhood One, which is the tract immediately north of Del Webb Boulevard. The proposed fences will have metal railings with two (2) foot Variance - Sun City Georgetown, Phase One, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D VR95-10/Fi1e:SCG-FENC . VAR CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 2 by two (2) foot stone columns that are five (5) feet tall placed every 50 feet. Between the stone columns there are metal posts located every ten (10) feet that are approximately four and one- half (4 1/2) feet tall. Two (2) of the proposed walls are joined to the fences near the intersection of Del Webb Boulevard and RM2338. These walls are placed at a 45 degree angle to RM2338, thereby creating the required sight triangle for motorists using the intersection. The other wall is located on the opposite side of Del Webb Boulevard from the entry house. It is designed in an "M" shape and is approximately 50 feet wide by 30 feet deep. The right-of-way for the northbound lane of Del Webb Boulevard is 60 feet wide, and the distance from the edge of pavement of Del Webb Boulevard and the right-of-way line is approximately 25 feet. The proposed fence is located in a narrow strip of Tract D that is about 55 feet deep. Given that there is a 25 foot front setback, there is 30 feet in which the wall can be placed without a variance. If the wall was moved out of the front yard setback it would be located approximately 50 feet from the roadway. At this location its affect on the adjacent property would be similar to a wall or fence placed on the rear lot line of a residence or other use. The applicant states that the request for encroachment into the front yard setback along RM2338 is based in the "great future road widening width. " Prior to the recording of the Final Plat of Neighborhood One, 20 feet of right-of-way was dedicated along RM2338, and an additional 20 feet for right-of-way is reserved on the plat for future road widening. The 25 foot building line is measured from the back of the future right-of- way line. The proposed fence is located approximately two (2) feet behind the future right-of-way line. Therefore, it encroaches into the front building setback line by approximately 23 feet. The proposed wall encroaches into the 25 foot building setback measured from the Del Webb Boulevard right-of-way line by approximately 15 feet. SEE EXHIBIT B Variance - Sun City Georgetown, Phase One, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D VR95 -10/File: SCG-FENC .VAR CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 3 Section 37040 B. of the Subdivision Regulations allows fences in the front building setback that are less than or equal to three (3) feet in height. None of the proposed fences and walls conform to this standard. As mentioned previously, the distances from the existing roadways are a reason for the applicant requesting this variance. The two (2) dedications equal a distance of 40 feet from what was the RM2338 right-of-way prior to the recordation of Neighborhood One. If the proposed fences were placed to conform to the standard they would be located approximately 85 feet from the existing roadway. The request is to place them approximately 62 feet from the roadway. The fences could be placed at the proposed location if they are reduced to three (3) feet in height. Generally, Tract B, north of Del Webb Boulevard, is at least 300 feet deep in the area where the fence is proposed. Tract D is approximately 200 feet deep where the fence is proposed. A pond and various landscape features are proposed to be located in this area of Tract D. A reason for the subject standard is to ensure a uniform height of structures in front yards that are visible from a roadway. Undoubtedly, the fence will be visible from RM2338. However, since the fence will be located along frontage all owned by the Del Webb Corporation that is zoned A, Agricultural and will be used as open space, the desired appearance can result by keeping it uniform over much of this frontage. Such uniformity is proposed in this request. By comparison, this situation does not occur in areas where there are 80 foot frontages along a street with individual properties under different ownership, such as a residential street. The two (2) properties adjacent to the tracts that are the subject of this request are commercial lots that are part of Sun City. The Community Owned Utilities Division is currently reviewing the License to Encroach request and indicates that the main electric line that feeds Sun City is located directly beneath the proposed wall across from the entry house. COU may possibly Variance - Sun City Georgetown, Phase One, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D VR95-10/Fi1e:SCG-FENC. VAR CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 4 not approve the request. If not, then the wall cannot be placed in the requested location. In order to avoid locating the wall above the electric line, the wall would need to be moved approximately nine (9) feet closer to the lot line. The proposed walls near the intersection are located above buried electrical and water lines. However, the electric lines in this location are not the same type as the one located under the other wall and are not as critical. COU indicates that it may be possible to approve the requested License to Encroach for these walls provided the footings and pilings are not placed directly over the lines. Approval of the variance request should be conditioned upon the approval of the Licenses to Encroach. Since the License to Encroach issue will not be resolved until after the Planning and Zoning Commission acts on this request, any motion for approval should be worded such that it provides for the wall to be located in accordance with the outcome of the License to Encroach request. By doing this, the variance request would not have to be considered again by the Commission. Variances: After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staff's recommendation, the Commission makes the following findings of fact as required by Section 60070.B of the Subdivision Regulations: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an Variance - Sun City Georgetown, Phase One, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D VR95-10/Fi1e: SCG-FENC. V AR CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 5 economic nature; and 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The applicant's Documentation of Basis for Requested Variance form is attached. SEE EXHIBIT C STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the requested variance to Section 37040 B. to permit four (4) foot tall fences with five (5) foot columns to encroach into the 25 foot front building line along RM2338 and five (5) foot tall stone walls with six (6) foot columns to encroach into the 25 front building line near the intersection of RM2338 and Del Webb Boulevard and on Del Webb Boulevard across from the entry house after making the required findings of fact, provided Licenses to Encroach, which permit the walls to encroach into the public right-of-way or public utility easements, are also approved. P & Z ACTION: At its November 7, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to approve the requested variance to Section 37040 B. to permit four (4) foot tall fences with five (5) foot columns to encroach into the 25 foot front building line along RM2338 and five (5) foot tall stone walls with six (6) foot columns to encroach into the 25 front building line near the intersection of RM2338 and Del Webb Boulevard and on Del Webb Boulevard across from the entry house, after making the required findings of fact, provided Licenses to Encroach, which permit the walls to encroach into the public right -of way or public utility easements, are also approved. Variance - Sun City Georgetown, Phase One, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D VR95-10/Fi1e:SCG-FENC. VAR CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 6 SUN CITY GEORGETOWN Proposed. Fen-ceand Welf Je Jr Ar SCI EXHIBIT B-t PROPOSED FENCE AND WALLS, ON F.M. 2338 17 A I Z r f _ D I Z F i Z 2 n y 1 Z � H N > S D C � r t I, -'�- DEL WEBB BLVD. 7; i� NI C p O z ! IJ Ii A r D C '0 3 C r t- i 3 D N r _ Z " o E f c � z C Q r, II � I� III 1N II r � I �m '. I WEBS BLVD Z,- '30POSED ST WALL %0,NE BACK RIGHT OF WAY 2MAdling IS-Ine. ----------------- ------------------------------- WALL AT ENTRY HOUSE DOCUMENTATION OF BASIS FOR REQUESTED VARIANCE Date: 10/20/95 - Applicant: Del Webb Development Corporation, L.P. This request is for a variance from the literal enforcement of Section(s) of the Subdivision Regulations. 37040 Give a brief description of the variance requested: variance to allow a 4' height open rail fence along F.M. 2338 and 5' height stone landscape walls at the edge of F.M. 2338 and Del Webb Blvd. and at the Entry House on Del Webb Blvd. You have requested a variance to the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations. In order to be able to recommend and approve such a variance, Section 60070 B. of the Regulations, requires that the Planning and `toning Commission and City Council must be able to "ensure that the variance is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship." The Commission and Council are directed to meet these requirements by making specific findings of fact. in order to assist the Commission and Council in conducting their deliberations regarding your requested variance, please complete this form to document how this request will impact the issues described below. These issues relate directly to the eight (8) findings of fact that must be cited by the Commission and Council when recommending approval of any variance. You may attach an additional sheet, or submit this information in the form of a letter. 1. In what manner will the public convenience and welfare be substantially served? Public convenience and welfare will be substantially served with the construction of these attractive, appropriately scaled landscape walls and fence. The fence an entry wall features will serve to alert drivers and visitors of the upcoming community entrance. These features are an integral part of the entire community entrance landscape which includes a lake, fields of wildflowers and native land- scaping which will be a source of pride for citizens of Georgetown. 2. Will the appropriate use of surrounding propert)F6eSubst.antially or permanently inTpairea -or- diminished in any manner? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. No. The area where the variance occurs does not abut any neighboring properties. 3. What are the hardships involved? How were those hardships created? How are those hardships different from those affecting the rest of the public faced with the enforcement of this same provision? Note that the Commission and Council cannot approve a variance for which the hardship claimed is solely of an economic nature. The great distances from the existing roadway edges to the right-of-way make a 3' height fence and wall inappropriate in scale. Since we have set the fence and we beyond the future right-of-way a 4' height fence and a 5' height wall are requires to be visible and at an appropriate scale. This project differs due to its vast size. The visibility of these entry features is important because it alerts the driver of the upcoming major community intersection. b6/Zl paslna�j •sivamaaTnbaa aoupuTpao aqi f-q paTTdmT sanssT oTiagjsap pup Alajps aqi gjTM 2uTdaa�j UT sT luui u2Tsap aoupa:jua.anTsuauaa dm©o u jo :Iapd aap sTTPm pup saouaJ Aa:tua aql ,palueA si lsonbol sigl ji auop aq oonsnf IEilumsgns MAN mOH 'g 'fITTTgTsTn auTnoTgan juaTTaoxa pup A4ajus JOJ KUM—JO—lgBTJ 2uTj3aSJajuT moat ,0L JO aouulsTp apaTo p apTnoad of paTgup aip sTTPm aduospupT auols auZ •aanivaj aaium aql pup splaTj uado aqj of aoua3 aTfjs uado au1 g2noagj papTnoad sT AjTTTgTsTn poo0 �pa�uEso st isanbai sigi j! panJasgo aq aouEuiplo aye jo mids ;)qi IWA MOH -L • aouualua AlTununuoo 2uTmoodn sapTil g££Z 'N' d UT ananD -M-0--a aaninj aoj s->jopgias TuuoiiTppy aouEt.tEn aql 10 I~.:nolddE aqi Apisnf pue ,�ij--Aojd sigi loaljE �Ega suo��lp�jzioads ai;> >si-1 9 '8££Z *N*d UT anano p of aoTad uoTioasaaiuT 2uTwoodn jo saanTap saTJTlou aoupalua TEToads auZ •paloaload sT Ajajus oTTgnd �Paloa33E lsalalui oilgnd aLjl sl MOH S -maul of aTgejTunp aq pTnoM aoupTaun p JOJ sailTunlaoddo amps aqi lugs naTTaq am lsaouujsuinoaTo auTTmTs anpq 01 aaaM saauMo Xiaadoad OuTpunoaans aqi jj 'ON 'ajgmjoddns oq of snob 2natjaq nog Xqm suOsIeal OPiAOJd �,�l�ado�d �uipunollns puE sejii_uis jo slouMo oql of ajgej!EnE 3o po_Mgs XIuOWwoo lou a2alinud 10 lg211 Ietoads E luEoildde aql uodn jojuoo at llim `panolddE 3t aouEtlEn palsanbal ayl 31 'V nnn ionn J J 1 0nA017 n r Krr r cnu _ w r RMIj J ur17n * 71 Cp_c 1 _fi'— Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET L SUBJECT: Consideration of a Final Plat of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood Six. ITEM SUMMARY: The subject Final Plat is consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat for Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1. All design and information requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its October 3, 1995 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of a Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood Six, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration and the construction plans are submitted by October 9, 1995. The subject construction plans were submitted to the City on October 3, 1995, and have been approved. A revised plat has been submitted to the City that addresses all Technical Issues. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Final Plat Submitted By: Edward, . Barry, AICP - Director Division of Developmeht Services !� Hildy L. Ki gma, AICP Chief Planner FINAL PLATS OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN SUBDIVISION, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOODS SIX AND SEVEN OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Bob Eck, P.E. Del Webb Development Company 203 IH35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX 930-6770 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 329-5002 FAX 329-0802 REQUEST: Final Plats of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhoods Six and Seven as recorded in Volume 2712, Page 103 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Located on F.M.2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: RP, Residential Planned Development. Proposed Use: Neighborhood Six contains 183 residential lots. Neighborhood Seven contains 199 residential lots, seven (7) tracts for open space and one (1) tract for a portion of the fire station site. Surrounding Uses North: Sun City, Neighborhood Four (RP), and Sun City, Phase and Zoning: 2 (out of City) South: Sun City, Neighborhood Five-B (RP), and undeveloped land (out of City) East: Sun City, Neighborhood Four (RP), and undeveloped land, (out of City) West: Sun City, Phase I, Neighborhoods One and Five -A (RP Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, N'hoods 6 and 7 November 20, 1995 FP 95-22/File:SC-1-6-7.FP Page 1 CM:CS and C-1) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level 2 by a Plan Amendment approved by City Council on December 13, 1994. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: A Revised Concept Plan was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. A Preliminary Plat which includes these tracts was approved by City Council on February 28, 1995. A Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1995. The Development Agreement addressed issues such as the commitment of utility capacity, the required public improvements, compliance with the City's development regulations, and the fees to be paid by the Del Webb Corporation. The Agreement makes specific modifications to the design standards in the Subdivision Regulations which apply to this development. These modified design standards include such elements as street design, sidewalk location, setbacks, lot layout, and impervious cover. It was determined to be appropriate to make these modifications specifically for the Sun City Georgetown development because of its size and the fact that it is being developed and built by one developer. These facts ensure a greater level of control and consistency throughout the life of the project than would be possible for the same number of dwelling units built by numerous developers. Given these modifications to the design standards, all Sun City plats will be approved as planned unit developments (PUDs). ANALYSIS: The subject Final Plats are consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat for Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1. SEE EXHIBITS B AND C All design and information requirements of the Subdivision Regulations have been met. Tract H of Neighborhood Seven, which is to be a portion of the fire station site, is only 0.27 acres, whereas the minimum size of a public use lot is 0.5 acres. It also has no public street Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Whoods 6 and 7 FP 95-22/File:SC-1-6-7.FP CM:CS November 20, 1995 Page 2 frontage. It is being created because the adjacent tract, Tract X of Neighborhood One, which is the primary lot for the fire station site, was designed with an uneven rear lot line. After the plat for Neighborhood One was approved and the Fire Services Division began working on designs for the site, it was discovered that the irregular shape made the design difficult. The applicant agreed to include more land for the fire station by creating Tract H and dedicating it to the City. Tract H will only be used for the fire station in conjunction with Tract X. Therefore, a note shall be placed on the plat indicating this. No construction plans have been submitted for this subdivision at this time. The process for plat approval requires that the subdivision construction plans be submitted and approved before the final plat is considered for approval. In order to avoid the potential for changes to the final plat, and therefore a second review of it, the construction plans were required to be submitted prior to Commission consideration of the plat. They still have not been submitted. Unless the construction plans are submitted by October 9, staff recommends that this application be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. Further, if the plans are submitted by that date, the plat will not be forwarded to the City Council until the City staff has had the opportunity to review the plans sufficiently to ensure that they are consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat. The staff review period for construction plans is 30 days. Therefore, given the late submittal of the plans, it may become necessary for the applicant to concur with a delay to the City Council's consideration of the plat in order to provide for sufficient review of the plans. Otherwise, the plat will be forwarded to the City Council with a recommendation for denial. TECHNICAL ISSUES: The following Technical Issues must be addressed prior to City Council consideration of these plats. If they are not addressed by November 3, 1995, or if the applicant does not concur with the delay to the City Council's consideration of the plats to allow the Technical Issues to be addressed, the plats will be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. These corrections must be made if the staff recommendation is Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Whoods 6 and 7 November 20, 1995 FP 95-22/File:SC-1-6-7.FP Page 3 CM:CS adopted. 1. An avigation easement in accordance with Appendix D of the Subdivision Regulations shall be established over the portion of Neighborhood Six that is within two (2) miles of the Georgetown Municipal Airport. The plat must also be changed to refer to the note concerning the established avigation easement rather than Note #15 which refers to right-of-way width. 2. A note shall be placed on the Neighborhood Seven plat stating that Tract H can only be used in combination with Tract X of Neighborhood One. 3. Submit the subdivision construction plans by October 9, 1995. 4. Submit written concurrence with a delay in City Council consideration of this request until construction plans have been reviewed by the City. Before Filing Plat: The following items must be addressed before the plat will be recorded: 1. The construction plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City with no substantial changes to the final plats required. 2. The public improvements must be completed or financially secured. 3. The cabinet and slide references shall be added to the adjacent properties where they are currently blank. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Final Plats for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhoods Six and Seven, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration and the construction plans are submitted by October 9, 1995. P & Z ACTION: At its October 3, 1995 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of a Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood Six, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration and the Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Whoods 6 and 7 November 20, 1995 FP 95-22/File:SC-1-6-7.FP Page 4 CM:CS construction plans are submitted by October 9, 1995. Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, N'hoods 6 and 7 FP 95-22/File:SC-1-6-7.FP CM:CS November 20, 1995 Page 5 EXHIBIT' A r— — -- — - r � hood 1, N �\ i I r� 'q- d''� m -Neighborhood 1� h o d 2 _ _--� Neigh y � 0 i i f I i J i tt 4 Q I JI' \ 1 1 i J i i Q I �(rhood 1 a i I i , EXHIBIT C SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1 NEIGHBORHOOD SEVEN Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUB.TECT: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 1.44 acre tract in the David Wright Survey, to be known as The Physician's Center Tract; and approval of variances to the Subdivision Regulations. ITEM SUMMARY: The proposed lot contains all of the contiguous property held by the owners and the proposed use is for a medical office. Water service to the proposed lot is provided through a 20 inch line along the RM2338 right-of- way. There are existing fire hydrants in the area that satisfy the distance requirements. Therefore, no new fire hydrants or water lines are required. This property was identified in the 1987 Freese and Nichols, Inc. Reata Wastewater Interceptor Improvements, Cost Allocation Analysis which computed the additional loads imposed on the existing system. The contribution cost for this development is based on $275.23 per one (1) Living Unit Equivalent, which is equal to 1,000 square foot of commercial space. Ordinarily, such a cost would be remitted prior to recording the Final Plat; however, the proposed square footage will be undetermined at that time and the cost cannot be calculated. Therefore, a note should be placed on the plat which states that the fee will be required prior to approval of a Detailed Development Plan for the lot. The proposed lot is only 128 feet wide compared to the minimum standard of 150 foot width for commercial lots. Therefore, a variance is requested to permit a lot with less than the standard width. The narrow width also causes the lot to be non -conforming to the width to depth ratio standard. The only possible way to correct the non -conformities is to add land and bring the lot into conformance, which is not easily achievable since all adjacent land is owned by other parties. The narrow lots are a direct result of the illegal subdivision of the parent tract. Another result is the number of accesses that will be requested along Williams Drive in this area. Reducing the number of access points along arterial streets is one of the concerns of the design standards. Taking the number of access points concerns into consideration and realizing that the number of accesses are directly related to the amount of frontage for each lot, approval of a variance to allow a lot narrower than the standard 150 feet should be conditioned upon the provision of a shared access. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its November 7, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of a Preliminary Plat for the Physician's Center Tract provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. Recommend approval of variances to Table 34020 B. to permit a lot with less than 150 foot width provided a shared access is established and shown on the plat and Section 34020 to permit a lot with a depth to width ratio greater than 2.5:1, after making the required findings of fact. A revised plat has been submitted to the City that addresses all Technical Issues. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Preliminary Plat Submitted Bv: Edward J. rry, AICP - Djector Division R Development Services A- 9( Ac '/� . �ti111 Hildy L. ldngma, AICP Chief Planner PRELEVIINARY PLAT OF A 1.44 ACRE TRACT IN THE DAVID WRIGHT SURVEY TO BE KNOWN AS THE PHYSICIAN'S CENTER, LOCATED ON RM23389 SOUTH OF BRIARWOOD DRIVE; AND VARIANCES TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OWNER/APPLICANT: Dr. Richard C. Male Dr. Murray A. Snook 3010 Williams Drive, Suite 25 Georgetown, Texas 78628 869-7310 AGENT: Mr. Don Bizzell, P. E. Steger and Bizzell Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 858 Georgetown, Texas 78627 863-4521 FAX:863-4523 REQUEST: Preliminary Plat of a 1.44 acre tract in the David Wright Survey, to be known as The Physician's Center Tract, as recorded in Volume 2565, Page 785 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas; and variances to the Subdivision Regulations. FACTS: Location: Located on F.M. 2338 south of Briarwood. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Vacant lot. Existing Zoning: C-2A, Commercial First Height. Proposed Use: A clinic/doctor office is proposed for this site. Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Rocky Hollow Estates (RM-1) and Briarwood (RM-2) South: San Gabriel Heights, single family residential (out of City) East: Lansdale Automotive and Northwest Animal Clinic (C-2A) West: Undeveloped land (C-2A) Preliminary Plat - The Physician's Center Tract November 20, 1995 PP 95-10/File: PHY-CTR.PP Page 1 CM:CS Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as Intensity Level 4. SEE EXHIBIT B Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: According to City and County records, the subject property was part of a six (6) acre tract that also included the property to the northwest and southeast of the proposed lot. The property was illegally subdivided in June 1989 when a deed conveying the subject property to Georgetown National Bank was recorded in the Williamson County Deed Records. ANALYSIS: The proposed lot contains all of the contiguous property held by the owners. SEE EXHIBIT C The proposed use of the lot is for a medical office. For the purpose of considering a variance request discussed later in this report, the applicant provided staff with a sketch of the detailed development plan to evaluate prior to filing the actual DDP. SEE EXHIBIT D Water service to the proposed lot is provided through a 20 inch line along the RM2338 right-of-way. There are existing fire hydrants in the area that satisfy the distance requirements. Therefore, no new fire hydrants or water lines are required. One issue of this proposed subdivision is the extension of wastewater service to the lot. The Community Owned Utilities Division has offered two alternatives to make the connection. The applicant proposes a connection in conformance with one of the alternatives. SEE EXHIBIT E Although the plat indicates that the line will terminate at the northeast corner of the proposed lot, the applicant has indicated that the line will be extended to the northwest corner in accordance with the alternative presented by COU. This property was identified in the 1987 Freese and Nichols, Inc. Reata Wastewater Interceptor Improvements, Cost Allocation Analysis which computed the additional loads imposed on the existing system capacity. The contribution cost for this development is based on $275.23 per one (1) Living Unit Equivalent (LUE), which is equal to 1,000 square foot of commercial space. Ordinarily, such a cost would be remitted Preliminary Plat - The Physician's Center Tract PP 95-10/File: PHY-CTR.PP CM:CS November 20, 1995 Page 2 prior to recording the Final Plat; however, the proposed square footage will be undetermined at that time and the cost cannot be calculated. Therefore, a note should be place on the plat which states that the fee will be required prior to approval of a Detailed Development Plan for the lot. Variances: Table 34020 Lot Width The proposed lot is only 128 feet wide compared to the minimum standard of 150 foot width for commercial lots. As mentioned earlier, the lot under consideration encompasses all of the contiguous property under common ownership. Prior to the illegal subdivision, the parent tract was substantially wider than 150 feet. In order to bring the proposed lot up to standard, an additional 22 feet of land would have to be acquired from the adjacent properties to the northwest or to the southeast. This would force the current owners to acquire property that is not under their control and approval of this plat would then be subject to the owner of the adjacent property's willingness to sell. Like the proposed lot, the other properties that front RM2338 in this area are relatively narrow. Therefore, there are several driveways existing or possible over a short distance. There are already six (6) driveways in the same block and on the same side of RM2338. All of them are actually located between the proposed lot and Western Trail, a distance of approximately 750 feet. The undeveloped section of the block that has no driveways on it currently is approximately 550 feet long. If each undeveloped property is permitted to have a driveway exclusively for its use, there will be at least four (4) additional driveways onto RM2338 in this block. In an effort to allow access to all sites while managing the access points to RM2338, it was suggested to the applicant to propose a shared driveway with the property to the northwest, which is also a part of the original parent tract. The applicant requests that this lot be allowed a driveway for its exclusive use for the reasons in the attached letter. SEE EXHIBIT F Had the parent tract been subdivided through the subdivision review process, the possible access points would have been an Preliminary Plat - The Physician's Center Tract PP 95-10/File: PHY-CTR.PP CM:CS November 20, 1995 Page 3 item of concern at that time, and the properties as they exist today would probably not have been approved as lots without a provision for managed access to RM2338. Therefore, the narrow lot frontages and the pressure to allow additional driveways on this block are a direct result of the illegal subdivision. Taking the number of access points concerns into consideration and realizing that the number of accesses are directly related to the amount of frontage for each lot, approval of a variance to allow a lot narrower than the standard 150 feet should be conditioned upon the provision of a shared access. Section 34020 B. Lot Depth to Width Ratio Since the dimensions of the lot are 493 feet deep and 128 feet wide, the lot exceeds the standard of 2.5:1 depth to width ratio. Such ratio is approximately 3.85:1. The depth to width standard does not apply to lots that are at least one and one-half (1 1/2) times the minimum lot size standard and are the required width and depth. Since this lot has less than the 150 foot width standard it is not eligible for this exception. It does satisfy the other two criteria, however. Therefore, the only possible way to correct the non -conformity is to add land and bring the lot into conformance with the width standard, which is not easily achievable. The concern that the approval of this plat would be dependant on the adjacent property owner's willingness to sell should be considered in this variance request also. After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staff's recommendation, the Commission makes the following findings of fact as required by Section 60070.B of the Subdivision Regulations: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special Preliminary Plat - The Physician's Center Tract PP 95-10/File: PHY-CTR.PP CM:CS November 20, 1995 Page 4 right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an economic nature; and 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The applicant's Documentation for Basis of Requested Variance form is attached. SEE EXHIBIT G TECIINICAL ISSUES: The following Technical Issues must be addressed prior to City Council consideration of this Preliminary Plat. If they are not addressed by December 1, 1995, or if the applicant does not concur with a delay to the City Council's consideration of the Preliminary Plat to allow the Technical Issues to be addressed, the Preliminary Plat will be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. 1. The plat shall be revised to indicate that the proposed wastewater line shall be extended to the northwest corner of the proposed lot with a 20 foot public utility easement established along the rear lot line. 2. The plat shall indicate a proposed 20 foot wide easement centered on that portion of the proposed wastewater line that is off -site. The easement is to be dedicated by separate easement and will be required prior to recordation of the Final Plat. The Final Plat shall indicate the volume and page reference of the easement dedication. 3. If required, the plat shall be revised to indicate an easement for a proposed shared driveway with the Hartman property to the northwest. The easement shall be designed to accommodate a driveway in accordance with Section 33042 of the Subdivision Regulations. 4. A note shall be placed on the plat which states that a fee of $275.23 per one (1) Living Unit Equivalent, which is equal to 1,000 square feet of commercial space shall be paid prior to approval of any Detailed Development Plan for this lot. Preliminary Plat - The Physician's Center Tract PP 95-10/File: PHY-CTR.PP CM:CS November 20, 1995 Page 5 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Preliminary Plat for the Physician's Center Tract provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. Approval of variances to Table 34020 B. to permit a lot with less than 150 foot width provided a shared access is established and shown on the plat and Section 34020 to permit a lot with a depth to width ratio greater than 2.5:1, after making the required findings of fact. P & Z ACTION: At its November 7, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of a Preliminary Plat for the Physician's Center Tract provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. Recommend approval of variances to Table 34020 B. to permit a lot with less than 150 foot width provided a shared access is established and shown on the plat and Section 34020 to permit a lot with a depth to width ratio greater than 2.5:1, after making the required findings of fact. Preliminary Plat - The Physician's Center Tract PP 95-10/File: PHY-CTR.PP CM:CS November 20, 1995 Page 6 EXHIBIT .A PHYSICIAN'S CENTER ;-, cv Ij L. 1 y `- v ., ,. lo ,,dentaI Off 9 - � 0(1)w > rr, Co o D caw WcZo :Wr�0,. co zo < 0 0 '�' Z 00 W m r ~ V =m i N I.44 AC. J0C YN ro m m I o DAV I D A. HARTMAN Ep ND S �c NNE:L �-4> I A N 2348 /032oco wARp USE, N Z x I I N N x Mtr p�ONNEC.` II wA I mZ � 2113 �g9j , J. rn 0 > - - o I Ny c r F D� I m� `yzOnm'�° o �� N49°19�E,,� 493.20I Mw r O (� Z n « I `" (S 49° 18 35 W 493.14 REC.) -- w x �� -+ _ (N49 19'E, 493.20'REC.) °'� THO ..';.X m � O r4 0 Z m Ao Z 10'8� 20'8� cn v^ TlET�MAS,A.'`;i !n m fA N ?t W N NI �O r �� fV WE/1iO -•O `-� n 14o v w �^ RICHAR AC. .A �� I F' o _.4 v o w 450/24 W g � m� Q �< ca A- MURK D C. MALE $ A- I o N° W� 2' 0— m?` � oLn o I �.4 VOL.2565 A. �O�K 85 D ! Im s�°�<o cnw (Al -- x '� o - r v v �A m �' M. Q L eERT n 0D = ,� �m ? � I _ io' e� (S49°19�W 1493.27� REC.) - ---� H%ECK n, mOr .� 0 x m ( N 49019'�, 493.19 � REC.) !'' � O Z •-i S 4 9° 1 9 V� 4 9 3.27 -X_ n O C O O— m z --I I m? "'� Cn Z* V p -4 I rn ~ °b z N A I LANSDALE AUTOMOTIVE INC. m N W W N (A Om b (V I I m N THE NORTHWEST ANIMAL CLINIC 25 6 A n n W w N CAB. E, SL 113 I 63/ 08 I N m �= W . 0 I N z z mo - OD 0 Lin wrn N v m O o o Z z � o D D � -C EXHIBIT ROCKY HOLLO TRAM BRIARINOOD Q. ROCKY HOLLOW _ESTATES BLOCK B SECTION ONE r� I CAB. E, C. 1.30= 131- ------ CAB. D, SL. 337- Q �' I 4--� 338 `� I O�I tv 2 3 )z to U I Y(N) = 375, 349.119 I Q I I 1 x(E) = 2,828, 836.149 0 IS 34 0154'E) Y(N) = 375, 244.226 °ca 79. 87') 4.$,14'X(E) = 2,828, 909' 327 i ! I (S �4055' 30"E -- I 7.91' REC.) ' v 6" PROPOSED S34°55 30 Z E - W.W LINE I�7. sl w w 1J I N 1 i OD 2 0NM d ; c O� Io toll, N ' 0 Q (D 0) 00 to —wN w w N W w � — CD �O af �, M Z < M (p / GSM OA N Q F- SN PP` O�(?G- N Z � Z P \O Q 0 — - _ _ E Q Go t $ I W-P .E. [t > N 1� �"t O O , Z a Z(n I U o Jo co \m Q Ow UQZ� u, a % l (n Q 1 w E O �' Q c� 2 co to to (v cr I O Q J cD 250' _ O m Z �Y(N) = 375,027.624 i(E)=2,828,462.136 25 8L Y(N) - 374,922 .705 t N 34054�\Y1/, X(E) = 2,828,535-305 — — = - 127.912' REC. _ _ "ZONE NEW RIGHT -OF 30'FOOT-WIDE EASEMENT�010' N 34°54*W, 127.92' I — CITY OF GEORGETOWN RIGH ��-OLD RIGHT -OF -WAY VOL�41 wPG.6AY 0EE �- 20.10, VOL. 114f , PG. 352 Zi FARM � TO co a MARKET 0.189AC. NO. 2338 CAUSE NO. 88-521_C277 STYLED CITY OF GEORGETOWN. TX BILLY CHARLES WILLIAMS VS. GEORGETOWN IND. SCHOOL GIST CITY OF GEORGETOWN, WILLIAMSON COUNTY 8 GEORGETOWN NATIONAL BSON BANK OF THE 277TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAM RIOT, COUNTY, TEXAS WN cb \ —I 1«�w�013n 3C K.�•OI X.`b:;3: :S3.w � / C ` / Y a • p \� p 1 n \ 1\ 906 / 6021 •NNOO B NNOf e°0! // I —A a1. r Ul IX \� \ . c 1rP� ~ I `-may � Y—.•�G /' r• `` � �� r . v Ll L EXHIBIT G _ BRIARWOOD w Q ROCKY HOLLOW ESTATES SECTION ONE 2 2 { 0 BLOCK B CAB. D, SL. 337— 00j p 1 � Z cv CAB. E, SL. 130— 131 338 �005 1 O4IN 2� M 2 t' 1 2 i 3 _ �— cu o 40 -J N I V U �QQ e14 Q Y(N) = 375,3Q2C'X(E) = 2,828,34 °54E) Y{rv) = 37s,2aa.226 87,)(48.14 x(E)=2,828, 909.327 00"055'30`E� _ I_7.91 REC.) v °55`30"E z 127.91' W^ O J O . �N ' �O 0 OD N0) O U O� fri � N Q Cn rh u) Q cD 3 Cn CD 60 94- ^ - w N W � - J w 6U Q Z 00 Cn SON w � Q 0) ° °IKT �OGP� C. Z Cr Z v PPP�0 - a) N Q TOa N N Q K) cn Z a� 5� to 0 i M U = O _E 111 0 C QCD - - (\j Q' LOB `C o � 0 I z - jl�.4Q P v) zc�n v i aM in w Z Y� p J O B m I Q J cn I I Q�cna p � w E O U Z co' �Q LO Q Q N I F U U Cr p I O I > 1 I w Proposer Joint access _ N 34054� We X E)1 = 27628 535o3OS 12 7.92' _ REC. ) — 3o F EASE0.10,.. 54 N 34° W _ _ OOT WIDE EASEMENT 7� .92 � NEW RIGHT OF -WAY CITY � 12 GEORGETO WN RIGHT - I OF VOL .1141, PG. 352 VOL 4 6,WAY PG.60 ED� 20.10' C-OEO R1GHT -OF µAY FARM TO MARKET - 0.189 AC. NO. 2338 CAUSE NO. M521-C277 STYLED C'TY OF GEOR BILLY CHARLES WILL GETOVyN, Tx CITY OF GEORGET LN. V VS. GEORGETO NATIONAL BAN 7N' W�LLIA SON COUNT & SCHOOL DISTRICT, COUNTY TES OF THE 277TH DISTRICT ' COURT GEORGETOyyN OF�WILLIAMSON PHYSICIAN'S CENTER EXHIBIT H-1 J. PATRIC:K ROEDVIZ AACHITEC T, 5 5 2 i nc,c C..ivc Road, Surtc j-6. ALJ.Sdn, T1�'-Nas +fs7 ici Mr. Charles Simon, AICP Senior Planner City of Georgetown RE: Physicians Center Tract Preliminary Plat of 1.44 Acres DRC review comment concerning Dear Mr. Simon, Oct. 13, 1995 in David Wright Survey shared entry. Please find enclosed a preliminary schematic site plan of to above referenced development. This building will be natural limestone veneer designed at a scale that is compatible with residential type development including porches and a pitched roof. As the sketch indicates, it would be preferable to locate the majority of the parking area at the rear of the lot with the building toward the front. We feel this would look much better than the parking at the front. Toward this goal, we request not to establish shared parking with the lot to the northwest, as it would be difficult to share an entry unless we locate our parking lot in front of the building. In addition, the northwest corner of the lot contains several large oak trees that would have to be removed in order to place the shared entry. We feel these oaks in our "front yard" is a valuable asset to the development and to the community that we would like to preserve if possible. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Your consideration is appreciated. Best regards, A 7 12' i C- (<--- - R'n'e- Patrick Roeder Architect EXHIBIT H-2 Planning and Zoning Commission City of Georgetown RE: Variance request Physicians Center Tract Oct. 13, 1995 Applicant; Richard Male Murray A. Snook Variance request from required 150' minimum to 127.9' Varience request from width to depth ratio greater than 2.5:1. This request is for the formation of a one lot subdivision that encompasses all of the property in its present configuration. This is not a situation of subdividing a larger tract into several smaller parcels. This variance would allow for the development of a planned Physicians Office that would serve the general public. The use of the surrounding property would not be substantially or permanently impaired as the adjacent property to the south is presently developed (animal clinic) and this variance request has no effect on the property to the north. The present tract configuration was created prior to knowledge of the most appropriate use of this tract (C-O). This hardship is different because this subdivision is a one lot subdivision involving the entire tract which is different from a request that would involve subdividing a larger tract into smaller parcels. This lot could not be developed for its most appropriate use (C- 0) without a variance. This approval would not confer a special right or privilege as this minor variance has no appreciable effect on the surrounding property. The public interest would be affected by allowing the most appropriate use of the property. The special conditions that affect this property and justify the approval of the variance is that this involves creation of a one lot subdivision out of the entire tract and that the most appropriate use of the property (presently zoned C-O) could not otherwise be achieved. The spirit of the ordinance will be observed as this tract =s 1.44 acres, which is much larger than the minimum 0.5 acre required. Substantial justice will be done as even though the lot will be slightly narrower than required ( 127.9 in lieu of 150' be much deeper than required ( 493.2' in lieu of 120' ) Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. Al AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a Variance to the plat note requirements for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase One, Block K, Lot 1, located at 30001 Edgewood Drive ITEM SUMMARY: This request is for a variance to Section 33044 of the Subdivision Regulations which specifies that on local streets, no driveway shall be permitted closer to a corner than 60 feet, unless lot dimensions prohibit such spacing. The purpose of this provision is to maintain safe, efficient traffic flow. Consistent with this standard, a note was added to the plat requiring that the subject lot take its access from Oakland Hills Drive. The requested variance would allow driveway access to Lot 1, Block K from Edgewood Drive and restrict vehicle access to Oakland Hills Drive. If this variance is approved, it will allow the subject residence to be constructed in conformance with the adjacent lots fronting Edgewood Drive. The lot is 80 feet wide on its Edgewood Drive frontage. Assuming an additional ten (10) feet of unpaved right-of-way, there is 90 feet of frontage on Edgewood Drive. The applicant's site plan shows that an 18 foot driveway will be constructed. Provided the driveway is built at the far northwestern property line, the 60 foot spacing requirement will be met. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of November 7, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the requested variance to Plat Note No. 12 for Lot 1, Block K of the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase One, thereby allowing driveway access to Edgewood Drive, provided the driveway is built at the far northwestern property line, after making the required findings of fact. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and attached exhibits. Submitted By: 7 Edward J Varry, AICP - irector Division of Development cervices Hildy L. ngma, AIC Chief Planner VARIANCE TO THE PLAT NOTE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE RESUBDIVISION OF BERRY CREEK, SECTION EIGHT, PHASE ONE, BLOCK K, LOT 19 LOCATED AT 30001 EDGEWOOD DRIVE OWNER: Mr. Robert Wunsch Berry Creek, Section Eight, Ltd. 30444 Berry Creek Drive Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-9995 FAX:930-9317 AGENT: Mr. Charles Wirtanen, P.E. 30444 Berry Creek Drive Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-9995 FAX: 930-9317 REQUEST: Variance to Plat Note No. 12 which states that "Driveway access to Lot 1, Block K is limited to the east 76 feet of its frontage on Oakland Hills Drive", for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase One, Block K, Lot 1 as recorded in Cabinet L, Slides 88-89 of the Official Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas. FACTS: Location: Intersection of Oakland Hills Drive and Edgewood Drive. Residence located at 30001 Edgewood Drive. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Single family residential lot. Existing Zoning: This property is located outside the City limits, so zoning does not apply. Proposed Use: Single family residence, with driveway access to Edgewood Drive. Surrounding Uses: Single family residences. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: The Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase One Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. Eight, Ph. One, Blk K, Lot 1 November 14, 1995 VR95-31/ File:BC8-1.VAR Page 1 CM:HK was recorded on June 15, 1994. A July 1993 Staff Report noted that "Construction on Lot 1, Block K may be constrained due to the requirement that driveways on residential property be located a minimum of 60 feet from an intersection". In addition, Plat Note No. 12 of the referenced subdivision requires that driveway access to Lot 1, Block K be limited to the east 76 feet of its frontage on Oakland Hills Drive. At that time, however, the area immediately west and north was unplatted, and thus, the lot and street layout in this adjacent area was unknown. Subsequently, this adjacent area, known as the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase Three was final platted. The lots adjacent to Lot 1, Block K on the north and west are planned to take access from Edgewood Drive. SEE EXHIBIT B The residence is presently staked out, but no other pre - construction activities have ensued since the developer discovered that the driveway did not meet the access requirements outlined in the Subdivision Regulations. ANALYSIS: This request is for a variance to Plat Note No. 12 of the referenced subdivision and concerns Section 33044 of the Subdivision Regulations. This section specifies that on local streets, no driveway shall be permitted closer to a corner than 60 feet unless lot dimensions prohibit such spacing. The purpose of this provision is to maintain safe, efficient traffic flow. The requested variance would allow driveway access to Lot 1, Block K from Edgewood Drive. Driveway access to Oakland Hills Drive would then be prohibited, as stated in Section 34020 F.2, of the Subdivision Regulations. This arrangement would also allow the subject residence to be constructed in conformance with the adjacent lots fronting Edgewood Drive. A total of 84 feet between the north property edge of Lot 1, Block K and the corner of the Edgewood Drive / Oakland Hills Drive intersection is needed to conform with Section 33044 of the Subdivision Regulations. The applicant's site plan submitted with their building plans shows that an 18 foot driveway will be constructed, which fulfills residential drive widths, as outlined in Section 34021 C. of the Subdivision Regulations. The lot is Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. Eight, Ph. One, Blk K, Lot I VR95-31/ Fi1e:BC8-1.VAR CM:HK November 14, 1995 Page 2 80 feet wide on its Edgewood Drive frontage. Assuming an additional ten (10) feet in unpaved right-of-way, there is 90 feet of frontage on Edgewood Drive. If the driveway is built at the far northwestern property line, it will meet the 60 foot spacing requirement. VARIANCE: After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staff s recommendation, the Commission makes the following findings of fact as required by Section 60070 B. of the Subdivision Regulations: "In granting approval of a request for variance the Commission shall make findings that: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an economic nature; and 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The applicant's documentation for the requested variance is attached. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the requested variance to Plat Note No. 12 for Lot 1, Block K of the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Section Eight, Phase One, thereby allowing driveway access to Edgewood Drive, provided the driveway is built at the far northwestern Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. Eight, Ph. One, Blk K, Lot 1 VR95-31/ Fi1e:BC8-1.VAR CM:HK November 14, 1995 Page 3 property line, after making the required findings of fact. P & Z ACTION: At their regular meeting of November 7, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested variance to Plat Note No. 12 for Lot 1, Block K of the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase One, thereby allowing driveway access to Edgewood Drive, provided the driveway is built at the far northwestern property line, after making the required findings of fact. Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. Eight, Ph. One, Blk K, Lot 1 VR95-31/ Fi1e:BC8-1.VAR CM:HK November 14, 1995 Page 4 EXHIBIT A s AI 0, Ic le iz t31 C %�- FIRS T EXHIBIT B k O1LV.U/ o O a 120 00 Ja Om 1 `O 3 mO` � mS72'38'20"w 3c _ 1 8' N72"38'20"E120.0, o m o 120.00' 0 2 L; 4 O o 32 m o 7 w O j 120.09' N72'38'20"E 00 0 o 1 0 o O � 120.00' rn -� co \ S72'38'20-W �/ L C8 548a' O B RENTW OOD r- ;---�.----- C9 ag.9t 25 i3 : & D a 2S Y 00 Proposed Driveway area uA,K! A ND HI L L S DR. Approved Driveway area by Plat Note No. 12 BERRY CREEK, SECTION EIGHT, PHASE ONE, BLOCK K, LOT 1 M J CITY OF GEORGETOWN _-��-----�✓ R NOTICE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNES OF A PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the City of Georgetown will hold its regular public meeting of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. This meeting will be held on the 7th day of November , 1995, at 6:00 p,m. at its regular meeting place in the Council Chambers, 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas to consider the proposed: Variance to the Subdivision Regulations for Berry Creek, Section Eight, Phase One, Block ri, Lot 1, located at the intersection of Oakland Hills Drive and E'gewood Drive. As one of the owners of adjacent property you are invited to be present at such meeting if you desire to discuss the proposed plan. See attached Exhibit A for more detail. Date: 10/23/95 City of Georgetown A copy of the planning report related to this item will be available at the Division of Development Services and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Friday prior to the meeting described above. For further information phone the Development Services Division at 930-3575. PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name:Berry Creek, Section Eight, Ph. One, Blk K, Lot 1 Name of Respondent: b4` Address of Respondent: 2(D2 I am in favor: I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 1 1 / 1 /95, it �vrl11 be provided to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Council meeting November 14, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and possible approval of a request for a one (1) year extension of final plat approval for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Seven, Phase Two, and Section Eight, Phases Two and Three ITEM SUMMARY: The subject plats were approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on August 2, 1994, and by the City Council on September 13, 1994. The subdivider is not yet prepared to record these plats because the construction plans have not been prepared. It is possible that the property will actually be developed in smaller increments than what is currently represented by the approved phases. The applicant has had some difficulty in getting Section Eight approved by the County because the County has required that an additional road access to the Berry Creek Subdivision be built with Section Eight. For these reasons, the developer has not recorded these plats at this time. At the time these plats were approved, the Subdivision Regulations required that a final plat be recorded in the County Clerk's office within six (6) months of Planning and Zoning Commission approval or the approval of the final plat is void. It also, however, allowed the City Council to grant an extension to the final plat not to exceed one (1) year if the subdivider shows just cause for such extension. Currently, the ordinance allows an initial period of one (1) year to record the plat, as long as fiscal surety was provided within six (6) months of the initial plat approval or the construction of the subdivision improvements had been initiated. The current ordinance also allows for an extension to the plat approval not to exceed one (1) year. As stated above, the subject final plats were approved in September 1994. A one (1) year extension, effective until March 14, 1996, was granted in March 1995. At this time, the applicant is requesting another one (1) year extension until March 1997. The Subdivision Regulations do not allow for a second extension of the final plat approval. However, the current ordinance permits a total of two (2) years from the time the final plat is approved until it must be recorded, provided an extension has been requested and granted. At the time the subject plats were approved, a total of 18 months was allowed from the time the final plat was approved until it had to be recorded. Therefore, it may be reasonable to grant the subject plats a six (6) month extension, thereby giving them the same consideration that a plat approved now would get. In that case, the plats must be recorded, with all public improvements installed or the required fiscal surety in place, by September 1996. If a six (6) month extension is granted, until September 1996, and the subject plats are still not recorded at that time, the applicant would have the option of resubmitting the final plats, with the repayment of fees, for Commission and Council consideration. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a six (6) month extension, rather than the requested one (1) year extension, to the final plat approval for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Seven, Phase Two; Section Eight, Phase Two; and Section Eight, Phase Three. ATTACHMENTS: None. Submitted Bv: - e6�5����z Edward J. garry, AICP - irector Hildy L. Kinfima, AICP Division of Developme t Services Chief Planner Council Meeting Date: November 28, 1995 AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Item No. ;Z' SUBJECT Council approval of Amendment #23, to the contract between the City of Georgetown and Camp, Dresser & McKee, for engineering services related to the design of the Berry Creek Water Main in the amount of $39,500.00. ITEM SUMMARY: The City of Georgetown purchased the Berry Creek Water and Wastewater system and facilities last spring. In order to provide adequate water service to all residents of Berry Creek, it is necessary to provide the subdivision with an additional source of water. A new water main is proposed to be constructed to provide adequate water service. Staff has requested a proposal from the engineering firm of Camp, Dresser & McKee, who have a standing contract with the City to provide such services. Therefore, staff recommends approval of Amendment *23 of the contract with Camp, Dresser & McKee to provide these services in the amount of $39,500.00. This amount includes $31,500.00 for engineering and $8,000.00 for surveying, for a total of 11.28% of the project for consulting services. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: NONE FINANCIAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $39,500.00 are to be paid from Account Number: 661-101-6000-00. COMMENTS: NONE ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposal and Letter from Camp, Dresser & McKee S Hy; Jim Briggs, Director CDMCamp Dresser & McKee Inc. environmental Westech 360 services 8911 Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 4240 Austin, Texas 78759-7267 Tel: 512 345-6651 Fax: 512 345-1483 November 10, 1995 Mr. Jim Briggs Director Community Owned Utilities City of Georgetown 1101 N. College Georgetown, TX 78626 Re: Berry Creek Water Main Dear Mr. Briggs: Transmitted with this letter are two signed and notarized copies of Amendment No. 23 which provides for the design of the Berry Creek Water Main. We are proceeding with the surveying at this time because of the short schedule of the project. Surveying is not a basic service and if there are difficulties with our selection by Council, the surveying information can be used by the engineer ultimately selected. We would like to get as early a start on the design as possible, so a copy of the Council action on this matter will be sufficient for us to start the engineering effort. If you have any questions regarding Amendment 23, please call. Sincerely, CAMP DRESSER & McKE INC. Allen D. Woelke, P.E. Principal Engineer ADW:hsp Enclosures A2262LTR.ADW AMENDMENT NO. 23 TO THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO DESIGN THE BERRY CREEK WATER MAIN The General Services Agreement between OWNER and ENGINEER last authorized on November 26, 1991, is hereby amended as follows: The scope and cost of the anticipated services are set forth in the attached Exhibit 1. The fee for the work in Amendment No. 23 is to be paid on a lump sum basis. Your signature below will constitute your acceptance of Amendment No. 23. EXECUTED in duplicate original this day of , 1995 at Georgetown, Texas, where this contract is performable and enforceable. Approved as to form: Party of the First Part: CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Party of the Second Part: CAMP DRESSER & McKEE I C. By: Allen D. Woelke, P.E. Principal Engineer STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS Leo Wood Mayor Attest: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the 'day of 19-1 -by Mr. Allen D. Woelke in his capacity as Principal Engineer of Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Printed name: Jri Not , y Publi , St "of as Commission Expires: 2 q ------------------ A 1281 AMD.N23 JULIA FINNEY NOTARY PUBLIC 'v State of Texas Comm. Exp. 02-03-97 EXHIBIT 1 SCOPE OF WORK Project Description: The Berry Creek Water Main consists of approximately 1.2 miles of treated water pipeline starting south of the intersection of Airport Road and Vortac Lane and running in the right-of-way of Airport Road to the entrance of the Berry Creek subdivision. The project will serve Berry Creek with water from the City's North Pressure Plane. The project also includes a pressure reducing valve to reduce the pressure serving Berry Creek from a static elevation of 980 to a static elevation of 906.7. The project must be operational by May 1, 1996 in order to meet the summer water demand in Berry Creek. Preliminary Engineering Phase. This phase involves determination of project scope and economic and technical evaluation of feasible alternatives. Services during this phase include: 1) Reviewing available data and consulting with the OWNER to clarify and define the OWNER's requirements for the project. 2) Advising the OWNER as to the necessity of providing or obtaining from others additional data or services. These additional services may include photogrammetry, reconnaissance surveys, property surveys, topographic surveys, geotechnical investigations and consultations, compilation of hydrological data, traffic studies, materials engineering, assembly of zoning, deed, and other restrictive land use information, and environmental assessments and impact statements. 3) Identifying and analyzing requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction to approve the design of the project, and participating in consultations with such authorities. 4) Providing analyses of the OWNER's needs, planning surveys, and comparative evaluations of prospective sites and solutions. 5) Providing a general economic analysis of the OWNER's requirements applicable to various alternatives. 6) Preparing a letter report presenting alternative solutions available to the OWNER with the consulting engineer's findings and recommendations. The letter report may contain schematic layouts, sketches, conceptual design criteria with appropriate exhibits to indicate clearly the considerations involved (including applicable requirements of governmental authorities having jurisdiction), and the consulting engineer's conceptual opinion of probable costs for the project. The number and distribution of report copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 7) Consulting with the OWNER, reviewing preliminary reports, clarifying and defining the project requirements, reviewing available data, and discussing general scheduling. Conferences may also be required with approving and regulatory governmental agencies and affected utilities. A 1281 AMD.N23 EX 1-1 8) Advising the OWNER as to whether additional data or services are required, and assisting the OWNER in obtaining such data and services. 9) Preparing preliminary design documents consisting of final design criteria, preliminary drawings, outline of specifications, and written descriptions of the project. The number and distribution of copies will be as stipulated in the agreement with the OWNER. 10) Preparing revised opinions of probable total project costs. Final Design Phase. This phase of project development is undertaken only after the OWNER has approved the preliminary engineering phase material. The basic services for the final design phase includes: 1) Preparing construction drawings and specifications showing the character and extent of the project based on the accepted preliminary engineering documents. 2) Preparing and furnishing to the OWNER a revised opinion of probable total project costs based on the final drawings and specifications. 3) Furnishing the necessary engineering data required to apply for regulatory permits from local, state, or federal authorities. This is distinguished from and does not include detailed applications and supporting documents for government grant-in-aid or planning grants that would be furnished as additional services. 4) Preparing basic documents related to construction contracts for review and approval by the OWNER (and the OWNER's legal and other advisors). These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid, instructions to bidders, insurance and bonding requirements, and preparation of other contract -related documents. 5) Furnishing to the OWNER the specified number of copies of drawings, specifications, and other contract documents. Bidding Phase. Services under this phase include: 1) Assisting the OWNER in advertising for and obtaining bids for each separate prime construction contract, maintaining a record of prospective bidders to whom bidding documents have been issued, attending pre -bid conferences, and receiving and processing deposits for bidding documents. 2) Issuing addenda as appropriate to interpret, clarify, or expand the bidding documents. 3) Assisting the OWNER in determining the qualifications and acceptability of prospective constructors, subcontractors, and suppliers. A1281AMDN23 EX 1-2 4) When substitution prior to the award of contracts is allowed by the bidding documents, consultation with and advising the OWNER as to the acceptability of alternate materials and equipment proposed by the prospective constructors. 5) Attending the bid openings, preparing bid tabulation sheets, and providing assistance to the OWNER in evaluating bids or proposals and in assembling and awarding contracts for construction, materials, equipment, and services. Construction Phase. Services under this phase involve consulting with and advising the OWNER during construction and are limited to those services associated with performing as the OWNER's representative. Such services comprise: 1) Preparing for and conducting a preconstruction conference and issuing a Notice to Proceed on behalf of the OWNER. 2) Reviewing shop and erection drawings submitted by the constructors for compliance with design concepts. 3) Reviewing laboratory, shop, and mill test reports on materials and equipment. 4) Visiting the project site monthly as construction proceeds to observe and report on the progress and the quality of the executed work. 5) Issuing necessary interpretations and clarifications of contract documents, preparing change orders requiring special inspections and testing of the work, and making recommendations as to the acceptability of the work. 6) Preparing sketches required to resolve problems due to actual field conditions encountered. 7) Determining amounts of progress payments due, based on degree of completion of the work, and recommending issuance of such payments by the OWNER. 8) Preparing record drawings from information submitted by the CONTRACTOR. 9) Making a final inspection and reporting on completion of the project, including recommendations concerning final payments to constructors and release of retained percentages. A1281AMDN23 EX 1-3 CITY OF GEORGETOWN 1996 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ENGINEERING FEE ESTIMATE • Preliminary Engineering Phase: $ 8,800.00 • Design Phase: $ 149200.00 • Bid Phase: $ 2,500.00 • General Services During Construction Phase: $ 4,500.00 • Other Direct Costs, including: $ 1,500.00 Travel Telephone Copying/bluelines Postage/facsimile Computer time Total Basic Engineering Services $319500.00 Surveying $ 8,000.00 Total Special Services $ 8,000.00 TOTAL $399500.00 A 1281 AMD.N23 EX 1-4 Council meeting date: 11/28/95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Direction for partial releases of assessments for I-35 Frontage Road ITEM SUMMARY In anticipation of development of the properties that have been assessed for the construction of the I-35 Frontage Road, direction is requested from the Council on the ability to provide partial releases of the assessment. For example, if one of the large tracts is sold off in smaller parcels, the developers would prefer to have a method to release these smaller tracts from the assessment. The staff is proposing that partial releases be provided upon payment of the full amount of the assessment for the smaller parcel. The full amount of the assessment for that part of the property would be determined according to that parcel's share of the assessment based on a pro rata valuation according to the square footage of the smaller parcel. ATTACHMENTS Map of Frontage Road properties Submitted By: Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney 1+2.1106 AC IrJ �� .r rJ. r. r-• •• i tAL '� 1 REFER 0 3 OU14 AYLOR /SPRI"G ST. 1 REFER TO 30016 t • A • �tJ VALLEY ST. .. �5� + MORROW ST. • w . s ALE t. l~ 2'400' � T.YLOR 3 0317 l oc�� •� - :. IMZ,110 ACi D ro Fa so s oANlc, rya • • ` r �' �'`' ,4>V-6>{18R1K r `tT� e. '., w • 16RAlTER SAv6S INA330CIATION i •,•�' $2. 72A&i10loo N 2P. : A-°tv 1 4 9 7 -� 5 ,,1N S,4,v ='— 3 v1:1 ��ff_`� ROE' REFER To OL 1 3 1011 •• REFER TO _ t� 3 1016 CEMET • ' CITY OF GEORGETOWN (36.49wj Znd ST. 26.84 AC. a � r h I 3 re ST. i� 'iiLLliwlwMJl/:� C 3P COUNTY JUST IC11--- Z FACILITY.. AT �. OL2 x. \ (v 61h STREET 2 j — -OL6 OL5 OL3 � (1 �117Ae1 I � OL•4 W REFER TO TIA STREET J CITY OF 3 1216 r d ORGETONN 1-2� 01706/232 aL 36." Ar-) I Sib STREET olSmit / t•r�.T.r.�r Turn JV..� • r J1� . •� 3jot 1 1 i v GR.W. GAUGLE ..... 342/428 17.00 AC OLT I log I: STATE HIGH AY 29 lomw lw�~ta..s jo . 1 Lit r I I am$* � AYNESWORTH TV I -�- M 306/ 229 u �• 1 ES T 6.34 AC 'TW". 4 n _ _ _ y- - N • l.• Nil . _ / /OL32 � Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consider approval of a Revised Concept Plan (Second) of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, a 5,314 acre tract in the L. Dyches, F. Foy, B. Eaves, W. Roberts, M. Lewis, R. Jenkins, L. Russell, A. Short, G. Thompson, W. Wilkinson and D. Monroe Surveys ITEM SUMMARY: The subject second revision to the Concept Plan for Sun City Georgetown involves changes to the proposed land uses in specified areas of the development, including: 1) A 10.5 acre commercial tract at the south end of the property along RM2338, which is shown on the current Concept Plan as open space (0.5 acres) and single family residential (10 acres). This property is being considered as a plat of Neighborhood Ten -A on a separate agenda item, and will be developed for a medical clinic. 2) A 21 acre commercial tract at the north end of the property along RM2338. Ten (10) acres of this property, with frontage on RM2338, is already platted, zoned and used for commercial purposes (the Sun City temporary sales and construction offices). The remainder of this property is shown on the current Concept Plan as single family residential. 3) A 2.9 acre commercial tract at the southwest corner of Del Webb Boulevard and Sun City Boulevard is currently shown on both the Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Phase 1 as single family residential (the "vacation villas"). The proposed new use will be a retail shopping center. 4) The original proposal to build 9,500 dwelling units in the overall Sun City development is still applicable. 5) Two (2) fire station sites have been designated, consistent with the requirements of the Development Agreement. Staff has conducted a review of the Development Agreement and the Century Plan to determine if these revisions can be supported by those documents. It has been determined that sufficient capacity exists in the utility systems to support these increases in utility demands. Further, the intensity allocation for the entire Sun City development is sufficient to support these localized changes in intensities. It may be advisable, however, to amend the Century Plan for the specific commercial parcels because they will likely not be developed by Del Webb. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Consideration of this item was delayed, with the applicant's consent, to make the necessary revisions to the Development Agreement, being considered by a separate agenda item. Approval of this revised Concept Plan must be contingent on approval of the Development Agreement revisions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of September 5, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Revised Concept Plan (Second) for Sun City Georgetown conditioned on the following occurring: 1. If required, Development Agreement revisions and Century Plan amendments are completed. 2. All provisions of the Development Agreement are fulfilled. 3. Utilities are provided by the City as agreed to in the Development Agreement. 4. At the time a preliminary plat is submitted for the applicable section of the development, additional information must be submitted regarding how and when upgrades wilt be made to CR245. The attached Concept Plan has been revised to address the Technical Issues. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Concept Plan Submitted By: Edward J arry, AICP Director Hildy L. Kingma, AICP Division bf Development Services Chief Planner REVISED CONCEPT PLAN (SECOND) OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, A 5,314 ACRE TRACT IN THE L. DYCHES, F. FOY, B. EAVES, W. ROBERTS, M. LEWIS, R. JENKINS, L. RUSSELL, A. SHORT, G. THOMPSON, W. WILKINSON AND D. MONROE SURVEYS OWNERS: Del E. Webb Development Company Mr. Clark Lyda Mr. Theron E. Bradford - 778 L.T.D. Mr. John Byram Mr. John Yearwood Mr. D.C. Young Estate Mr. Ernest C. Young Lewis E. Cook, Jr. APPLICANT: Mr. Robert L. Eck, P.E. Director, Land Development Del E. Webb Development Company 203 South IH35, Suite 100 Georgetown, TX 78628 930-6753 AGENT: Mr. Joe Verdoorn Richardson Verdoorn 712 Congress Avenue, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78701 480-0032 REQUEST: Revised Concept Plan (Second) of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, a 5,314 acre tract in the L. Dyches, F. Foy, B. Eaves, W. Roberts, M. Lewis, R. Jenkins, L. Russell, A. Short, G. Thompson, W. Wilkinson, D. Monroe Surveys as recorded in Volume 2183, Page 982, Volume 1875, Page 518, Volume 1898, Page 597, Volume 2041, Page 155, Volume 1922, Page 382, Volume 623, Page 429, Volume 544, Page 582, Volume 444, Page 121, Volume 444, Page 98 and Volume 2185, Page 060 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Located between FM2338 and SH195, northwest of IH35. See attached Concept Plan. Revised Concept Plan - Sun City Georgetown November 15, 1995 Project # CP 94-0/File:SUNCTTY.RCP Page 1 Existing Site: Phase 1 of the project, which encompasses 983 acres, is underway. Phase 1 includes single family residential, the sales center, village center, a park, the golf course, and related facilities. The remainder is undeveloped land at this time. Existing Zoning: Phase 1 is zoned A, RP, C-1, and C-2B. The remainder of the property is outside the City limits, so zoning does not apply. It will be annexed and rezoned as appropriate as preliminary plats are submitted and the property purchased by Del Webb. Proposed Use: An active adult retirement community, known as Sun City, of approximately 9,500 dwelling units and 72 planned holes of golf on 3,344 acres. The applicant estimates that 80 percent of the dwelling units will be detached and 20 percent will be attached. Community facilities will occupy 71 acres and commercial sites are proposed for a total of 90 acres, including a large parcel identified as boat/recreational vehicle storage. The remaining 1,809 acres will be in roads, open space and flood plains. Surrounding Uses North: Undeveloped land and Whisper Wood Subdivision, and Zoning: single family residences (out of City) South: Undeveloped land and Chaparro Estates Subdivision, single family residential (out of City) East: Undeveloped land, (out of City) West: Undeveloped land, a portion of the 4-T Ranch Subdivision and Lakewood Estates Subdivision, single family residences (out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level Two. Additional analysis is underway to determine if the land use changes proposed by this Second Revised Concept Plan can be accommodated within this intensity designation. Notification: The notification requirements have been met. HISTORY: The original Concept Plan for Sun City Georgetown was approved by the City Council on April 26, 1994. That Concept Plan included 3,991 acres. A Revised Concept Plan for the current 5,314 acres was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. That approval included the following conditions: 1) the required Century Plan amendments are Revised Concept Plan - Sun City Georgetown November 15, 1995 Project # CP 94-0/File:SUNCTTY.RCP Page 2 approved; 2) the development agreement is finalized and all provisions are fulfilled; 3) utilities are provided by the City as agreed to in the development agreement; and 4) at the time a preliminary plat is submitted for the applicable section of the development, additional information must be submitted regarding how and when upgrades will be made to CR245. A Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1995. The Development Agreement addresses issues such as the commitment of utility capacity; the required public improvements; compliance with the City's development regulations; and the fees to be paid by the Del Webb Corporation. The Agreement makes specific modifications to the design standards in the Subdivision Regulations which apply to this development. These modified design standards include such elements as street design, sidewalk location, setbacks, lot layout, and impervious cover. It was determined to be appropriate to make these modifications specifically for the Sun City Georgetown development because of its size and the fact that it is being developed and built by one developer. These facts ensure a greater level of control and consistency throughout the life of the project than would be possible for the same number of dwelling units built by numerous developers. ANALYSIS: The revisions in this Concept Plan involve changes to the proposed land uses in specified areas. These changes include: 1. A 10.5 acre commercial tract is identified at the south end of the property along RM2338. This is the parcel that will be optioned by Scott & White for their proposed new clinic. The current Concept Plan shows the 0.5 acre portion of the tract along RM2338 as part of a larger open space lot, and the remainder of the tract (10 acres) as single family residential. The approved Final Plat for Neighborhood One designates the 0.5 acre tract for commercial use, and it was rezoned to the C-1 zoning district. 2. A 21 acre commercial tract is identified at the north end of the property along RM2338. The current Concept Plan shows the 10 acre portion of this tract along RM2338 as commercial and the remainder as single family residential. The approved Final Plat for Neighborhood One designates the 10 acre tract along RM2338 for commercial use and it is zoned C-1, Local Commercial. This tract is now being used as the temporary sales and construction administration offices. It is likely that the entire 21 acre tract will be used for a single commercial Revised Concept Plan - Sun City Georgetown November 15, 1995 Project # CP 94-0/File:SUNCTTY.RCP Page 3 development. 3. A 2.6 acre commercial tract is identified at the southwest corner of Del Webb Boulevard and Sun City Boulevard. This tract is currently shown on both the Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Phase 1 as single family residential lots (the "vacation villas") . The proposed new use will be a retail shopping center. 4. The original proposal to build 9,500 dwelling units in the overall Sun City development is still applicable. 5. Two (2) fire station sites have been designated, consistent with the requirements of the Development Agreement. The changes in land use and intensity proposed by the Second Revised Concept Plan may have an impact on the utility capacities planned for by the Development Agreement, the Service Improvements Program (SIP) fees established by the Development Agreement, and the overall Intensity Level Two assigned to the entire property. City staff is conducting a review of the Development Agreement and Century Plan to determine if changes to those approvals will be required to finalize approval of the Revised Concept Plan. Staff review of those approvals has not been completed as of the time of the Planning and Zoning Commission review of this application. If no changes to the Development Agreement or Century Plan are determined to be necessary, then City Council consideration of this application can proceed within the 45 day time period required by Section 23060 of the Subdivision Regulations. If either or both of those approvals must be reconsidered as a result of this proposed revision, then the applicant must authorize a delay in the approval time period, or this application will proceed to the City Council with a recommendation for denial. Technical Issues: The following Technical Issues must be addressed prior to consideration of this Concept Plan by the City Council. If they are not addressed by September 29, 1995, or by the time this item is forwarded to City Council if that is a later date, or if the applicant does not concur with a delay to the City Council's consideration of the plat to allow the Technical Issues to be addressed, the Concept Plan will be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. 1. If staff determines that sufficient utility capacity is not available to accommodate the revisions proposed by the subject application, then Del Webb shall work with the City to consider revisions to the Development Agreement and Concept Plan. 2. Identify on the Concept Plan the proposed elevated water storage Revised Concept Plan - Sun City Georgetown November 15, 1995 Project 11 CP 94-0/File:SUNCTTY.RCP Page 4 tank locations. 3. Pay the required concept plan review fee. 4. Provide more detail in Note #6 regarding the proposed square footage for each non-residential tract, by tract. This will act as the approved development limit per tract. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Revised Concept Plan (Second) for Sun City Georgetown conditioned on the following occurring: 1. If required, Development Agreement revisions and Century Plan amendments. 2. All provisions of the Development Agreement are fulfilled. 3. Utilities are provided by the City as agreed to in the Development Agreement. 4. At the time a preliminary plat is submitted for the applicable section of the development, additional information must be submitted regarding how and when upgrades will be made to CR245. P & Z ACTION: At their regular meeting of September 5, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Revised Concept Plan (Second) for Sun City Georgetown conditioned on the following occurring: 1. If required, Development Agreement revisions and Century Plan amendments are completed. 2. All provisions of the Development Agreement are fulfilled. 3. Utilities are provided by the City as agreed to in the Development Agreement. 4. At the time a preliminary plat is submitted for the applicable section of the development, additional information must be submitted regarding how and when upgrades will be made to CR245. Revised Concept Plan - Sun City Georgetown November 15, 1995 Project # CP 94-0/File:SUNCTTY.RCP Page 5 Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET s SUBJECT: Consideration of a Preliminary/Final Plat of a resubdivision of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tract U, and 10.0 Acres in the W.G. Wilkinson and George Thompson Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A; and approval of variances to the Subdivision Regulations. ITEM SUMMARY: The proposal combines the existing Tract U in Neighborhood One with ten (10) acres that was included in the Preliminary Plat of Phase 2 and creates a 10.499 acre tract for a proposed medical clinic. The plat conforms to the Final Plat for Neighborhood One with respect to Tract U and to the proposed design of Phase 2 for the additional ten (10) acres. The purpose of including Tract U in the proposed subdivision is to give the property access to RM2338. Without it, the proposed medical clinic would be forced to take its only access through the residential streets of Phase 2. It is undesirable to route all the traffic generated by the clinic through the residential streets. Therefore, frontage on RM2338 is supported by the City. The applicant proposes Acacia Way as a secondary access so that Sun City residents can avoid the intersection of Del Webb Boulevard and RM2338 when travelling to the clinic by vehicle. This will allow that intersection to maintain a higher level of service than if all trips were routed through it. Consequently, a high rate of traffic, including emergency vehicles, will occur on the section of Acacia Way between the clinic and Red Poppy Trail. Therefore, that section of Acacia Way and the section of Red Poppy Trail between Acacia Way and Del Webb Boulevard should be designed with a Neighborhood Collector pavement width of 44 feet, but within the existing 60 foot wide right-of-way. The required frontage for commercial lots is 150 feet. The frontage of the proposed lot on RM2338 is approximately 139 feet. Therefore, the applicant requests a variance to the standard. As stated in the report, the staff supports a variance to this standard. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its November 7, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of a Preliminary/Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration and provided Acacia Way and the portion of Red Poppy Trail between Acacia Way and Del Webb Boulevard are constructed with a 44 foot wide pavement width. Recommend approval of the requested variance to Table 34020 to permit a lot width less than 150 feet, after making the required findings of fact. A revised plat has been submitted to the City that addresses all Technical Issues. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Preliminary/Final Plat Submitted By: Edward I Barry, AICP r Director Hildy L. ngma, AICP Division f Development Services Chief Planner PRELIIVHNARY/FINAL PLAT OF A RESUBDIVISION OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, TRACT U, AND 10.0 ACRES IN THE W.G. WILKINSON AND GEORGE THOMPSON SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A, LOCATED ON RM2238; AND VARIANCES TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OWNERS/APPLICANT: Mr. Robert Eck II, P.E. Director, Land Development Del Webb Development Corporation 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX: 930-6776 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 329-5002 FAX: 329-0802 REQUEST: Preliminary/Final Plat of a resubdivision of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tract U, and 10.0 Acres in the W.G. Wilkinson and George Thompson Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A as recorded in Volume 2687, Page 945 of the Official Deed Records and Cabinet M, Slides 95-116, of the Official Plat Records of Williamson County, Texas; and variances to the Subdivision Regulations. Location: Located northeast of F.M.2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: The original Tract U is zoned C-1, and the zoning for the additional ten (10) acres will be finalized upon annexation. The Planning and Zoning Commission on September 5, 1995, recommended zoning the remaining ten (10) acres C-1, Local Commercial. First reading of the rezoning ordinance for that Preliminary/Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, November 20, 1995 Neighborhood Ten -A #PP95-09/File:SCG10A.PFP Page 1 CM/CS land is being withheld until the Development Agreement is amended to address the Second Revised Concept Plan, which includes this additional commercial property. Proposed Use: Medical clinic. Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Sun City Georgetown, Phase Two (currently undeveloped, to be annexed) South: Single family residential (A) East: Sun City Georgetown, Phase Two (currently undeveloped, to be annexed) West: Sun City Georgetown, Phase One (A) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level 2 by a Plan Amendment approved by City Council on December 13, 1994. The proposed development on this property can be accommodated within the development allowances assigned to the entire 5,300 acres. However, it may be desirable to amend the intensity assigned to this property so the development on it can be accounted for without regard to the development throughout Sun City Georgetown. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: A Revised Concept Plan was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. A Second Revised Concept Plan, which is consistent with the proposed land uses of this subject Preliminary/Final Plat, was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on September 5, 1995. The Final Plat for Neighborhood One was approved by the City Council on June 24, 1995, and recorded with the County on September 5, 1995. Neighborhood One includes Tract U, the 0.5 acre tract that is part of this resubdivision. ANALYSIS: The proposal combines the existing Tract U in Neighborhood One with ten (10) acres that was included in the Preliminary Plat of Phase 2 and creates a 10.499 acre tract for a proposed medical clinic. SEE EXHIBIT B Preliminary/Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, November 20, 1995 Neighborhood Ten -A #PP95-09/File:SCG10A.PFP Page 2 CM/CS The plat conforms to the Final Plat for Neighborhood One with respect to Tract U and to the proposed design of Phase 2 for the additional ten (10) acres. At the time the Preliminary Plat of Phase 2 was reviewed, five (5) of the ten (10) acres was indicated as being either commercial or residential use. This was done because it was uncertain how much property the prospective buyer would acquire. The purpose of including Tract U in the proposed subdivision is to give the property access to RM2338. Without it, the proposed medical clinic would be forced to take its only access through the residential streets of Phase 2. It is undesirable to route all the traffic generated by the clinic through the residential streets. Therefore, frontage on RM2338 is supported by the City. The Preliminary Plat for Phase 2, which was approved by the Commission, shows that Acacia Way, a residential collector street, will stub -out into the proposed lot. SEE EXHIBIT C The applicant proposes this as a secondary access so that Sun City residents can avoid the intersection of Del Webb Boulevard and RM2338 when travelling to the clinic by vehicle. Among other things, this will allow that intersection to maintain a higher level of service than if all trips were routed through it. On the other hand, the number of trips on Acacia Way is increased. In the review of the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2, Acacia Way was required to be designed as a residential collector with a 60 foot right-of-way width to accommodate the traffic generated by the medical clinic. A calculation of the possible number of trips generated by the clinic based on its 100,000 allowable square feet results in a total number of trips greater than 5,000 using rates established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. An exact figure cannot be calculated since the exact square footage of the clinic is not known. According to the Kirkham, Michael and Associates Study of Internal Roadway Classifications for Sun City, roadways with 4,000 or greater trips per day should be classified as neighborhood collectors which have a 90 foot right-of-way width according to the Development Agreement. Given that the trips generated by the clinic will be distributed between RM2338 and Acacia Way, the actual number of trips on Acacia Way will Preliminary/Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A #PP95-09/File:SCG IOA.PFP CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 3 most likely be below the 4,000 trip per day threshold. However, a high rate of traffic, including emergency vehicles, will occur on the section of Acacia Way between the clinic and Red Poppy Trail. Therefore, that section of Acacia Way and the section of Red Poppy Trail between Acacia Way and Del Webb Boulevard should be designed with a Neighborhood Collector pavement width of 44 feet, but within the existing 60 foot wide right-of-way. The off -site utilities serving this proposed lot are included in Phase 2. The construction plans for public improvements in Phase 2 have not been received by the City for review. The construction plans that include the improvements that will serve Neighborhood Ten -A must be submitted prior to City Council consideration of this plat. The Subdivision Assurance Trust currently being held by the City shall act as the guarantee for the construction of the improvements which will enable the plat to be recorded prior to actually providing the improvements. No building permits will be allowed, however, until the public improvements are in place. Variances: Table 34020 Lot Width The required frontage for commercial lots is 150 feet. The frontage of the proposed lot on RM2338 is approximately 139 feet. Although this is a resubdivision of Tract U in Neighborhood One which was platted under the same standards without a variance, the substandard lot width went undetected in the initial review, and must be addressed at this time. One reason for the minimum lot width requirement is to ensure adequate area for development of a commercial use. Although a copy of the Detailed Development Plan for the clinic has not been prepared, the applicant indicates that the clinic parking and buildings will be located at the rear of the lot where it widens to greater than 1,000 feet. The 10.499 acres is substantially adequate to accommodate the clinic buildings and associated features without the need for variances to the building setbacks. Another reason for the lot width standard is to space driveway access points on the arterial street. In this case, the tract to the Preliminary/Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A #PP95-09/File:SCG IOA.PFP CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 4 north of the subject lot that fronts on RM2338 has approximately 1,200 feet of frontage. It is zoned A, Agricultural and is proposed as open space on which there will be a pond and landscaping. There are no driveways onto RM2338 planned for this tract. Therefore, with a driveway into the subject lot, the result will be one (1) driveway over a distance of approximately 1,300 feet. This exceeds the 400 foot standard of driveway separation on major arterial streets. After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staff's recommendation, the Commission makes the following findings of fact as required by Section 60070.B of the Subdivision Regulations: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an economic nature; and 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The applicant's Documentation of Basis for Requested Variance form is attached. TECHNICAL ISSUES: The following Technical Issues must be addressed prior to City Council consideration of this Preliminary/Final Plat. If they are not addressed by December 1, 1995, or if the applicant does not Preliminary/Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A //PP95-09/File:SCG 1 OA.PFP CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 5 concur with a delay to the City Council's consideration of the Preliminary/Final Plat to allow the Technical Issues to be addressed, the Preliminary/Final Plat will be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. 1. Construction plans for the off -site utilities must be submitted to the City for review. 2. The volume and page reference for the 20 foot road widening dedication along RM2338 shall be indicated on the plat. 3. The title of the plat shall be changed to be consistent with the heading on Page 1 of this report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a Preliminary/Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown-, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration and provided Acacia Way and the portion of Red Poppy Trail between Acacia Way and Del Webb Boulevard are constructed with a 44 foot wide pavement width. Approval of the requested variance to Table 34020 to permit a lot width less than 150 feet, after making the required findings of fact P & Z ACTION: At its November 7, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of a Preliminary/Final Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration and provided Acacia Way and the portion of Red Poppy Trail between Acacia Way and Del Webb Boulevard are constructed with a 44 foot wide pavement width. Recommend approval of the requested variance to Table 34020 to permit a lot width less than 150 feet, after making the required findings of fact. Preliminary/Final Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, Neighborhood Ten -A 1/PP95-09/File:SCG 1 OA.PFP CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 6 SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE Neighborhood Ten -A E XHIB I T B ago T P 4 i0.227.482.89 cn LIN CITY c PGE T' wN GHBOP;�OOD ONF • o P. TRACT 0 m 10.499 ACRES 4a- \;� c ZONED •s � J N3 \ S 69- P. 0. C. �l\\ \\ , P. 0. B. \ r = 10. -26. 178. 64 3. 1 12. 57 1. 53 0. 2_ 7. 98 1. 29 / N\, kp 1 \ sm �" AC a� IA o N\Z \1 95 i0 A.\ t•I /D 1 11 co /c i f \ m _ PLANNED LIN "T DE _ SUN CITi" GE s SO. F T 66 \ x = 3 4 o \ i I iO W. G. WILK INSO� TGEORGE THOMPSOI` 1 492. 27 / \ EXHIBIT C .10 co ��Q2 f�, RF •.r to �. ",Op 7--t- ol t-�,�` _•t V-r^ .%/ \, \ c.,, •O PUF_n //I'i_ ?, ^•'s O cj Cry CO 4V) Lu 0) 0.1 (70 CIO cr) (b 01) D I.E ct, fj C\l 01, t.0 4�0 co -le 41, (D A.- d2 01) < 00 do L) V Q-1 L) ID L-Li T IN, C) --i < (:�� Ln < -7., C) c[i ct a- cr -f � CD < LL L-Li Ul 0-- U-i < Lij Cn C . r -i z C) 4L-) Ln r1i 68 N6 -3 9 N 6 1-30 w 460. o: Qj� jCL- 1�3 w C::� :2t Or_ Q:) co -t CID lq 3 DOCUMENTATION OF BASIS FOR REQUESTED VARIANCE Date: 10/16/95 Applicant: Del E. Webb Development Co. , Inc. /Del Webb 's Sun Georgetown This request is for a variance from the literal enforcement of Section(s) Table 34020 of the Subdivision Regulations. Give a brief description of the variance requested: To plat a lot on an arterial with less than 150' frontage. You have requested a variance to the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations. In order to be able to recommend and approve such a variance, Section 60070 B. of the Regulations, requires that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council must be able to "ensure that the variance is not contrary to the public interest and, due to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship." The Commission and Council are directed to meet these requirements by making specific findings of fact. In order to assist the Commission and Council in conducting their deliberations regarding your requested variance, please complete this form to document how this request will impact the issues described below. These issues relate directly to the eight (8) findings of fact that must be cited by the Commission and Council when recommending approval of any variance. You may attach an additional sheet, or submit this information in the form of a letter. 1. In what manner will the public convenience and welfare be substantially served? The proposed commercial property will have frontage on an arterial in addition to a local street. This is appropriate for the use. 2. Will the appropriate use of surrounding property be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished in any manner? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. No. Resubdivision is of an existing tract with less than 150' frontage. Frontage is to support a driveway to the primary use behind a significant open space parcel. - 3. What are the hardships involved? How were those hardships created? How are those hardships different from those affecting the rest of the public faced with the enforcement of this same provision? Note that the Commission and Council cannot approve a variance for which the hardship claimed is solely of an economic nature. The existing tract has been contracted for sale along with the additional acreage. The resubdivision is to provide primary access to the site from the arterial roadway in lieu of residential streets. Revised 12/94 City 4. If the requested variance if approved, will it confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. No. This is the resubdivision of an existing lot to add additional unplatted land to the existing tract. Tract U is adjacent to another parcel that has a very long frontage, but without driveways to the arterial. 5. How is the public interest affected. It is not. Adequate ROW and reserves are being maintained through the re - subdivision. The adjacent open space tract creates an average driveway spacing exceeding ordinance requirements. 6. List the special conditions that this oropc:rtV and JUst:tV the aC,nroval or t`he variance. 1. Frontage is a legal lot at less than 150'. 2. Frontage on the ROW reserve (20' additional to the 20' dedicated) is greater than 150'. 3. Property is under contract for sale as described in the resubdivision. 4. The average lot frontage of all lots on this arterial is significantly greater than 150'. 7. How will the spirit of the ordinance be observed if this request is granted`' What was once approved would be reapproved. 8. How will substantial justice be done if this request is aranted? The owner of the land under contract is still the same as the adjacent open space tract. However, the open space lot would have to be resubdivided as well to increase the frontage. Tract U can be sold and developed as is if the re - subdivision is denied. The approval of the variance does not alter the owner's ability to subdivide and develop the land. Revised 12/94 Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET r SUBJECT: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 475.52 acre tract to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2 and approval of variances to the Subdivision Regulations. ITEM SUMMARY: The plat submitted substantially meets the information requirements and design standards of the Subdivision Regulations and the Development Agreement. The plat proposes 1,261 single family residential lots, three (3) commercial tracts and the remainder as open space. The City has examined the request to shorten the distance that selected local streets must be widened to collector street standard and recommends that such streets be widened to 60 feet for a length of 150 feet from the intersection with an arterial street with a transition down to the 50 foot right-of-way width over a distance of 150 feet. The Development Agreement permits back to back corner lots to reduce their secondary front yard setback to 15 feet provided the driveway access is from the front yard with a 20 foot setback. In several instances, corner lots are adjacent to streets of unequal classification and the frontage with a 20 foot setback is along the higher classification street. Such access is not permitted by Section 34020 F.3. The variance would allow that access. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Consideration of this item was delayed with the applicant's consent, to make the necessary revisions to the Development Agreement being considered by a separate agenda item. Approval of this Preliminary Plat must be contingent on approval of the Development Agreement revisions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its September 5, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration (Technical Issue #2 changed to: If the proposed design of the local streets that intersect with minor arterials or neighborhood collectors is determined to be sufficient, ensure that each affected local street is designed as a residential collector for a minimum distance to 500 feet from the intersection unless staffdetermines a lesser distance is su,. j`icient), and recommend approval of the requested variance to Section 34020 F.3., thereby allowing corner lot access to the residential collectors, after making the required findings of fact. This approval is subject to completion of the changes to the Development Agreement and Century Plan if such are necessary. The revised plat addressing the Technical Issues and the right-pf--way width concerns is attached. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation; unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Preliminary Plat Submitted Bv: Edward J Barry, AICP - rector Hildy L. ngma, AICP' Division f Development ervices Chief Planner PRELIMINARY PLAT OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, A 475.52 ACRE TRACT IN THE B. EAVES, R. JENKINS, D. MONROE, M. LEWIS, A. SHORT, G. THOMPSON, AND W. WILKINSON SURVEYS; AND VARIANCES TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS OWNERS: Del E. Webb Development Company Mr. Clark E. Lyda, Trustee Mr. Theron S. Bradford, Trustee APPLICANT: Mr. Robert L. Eck, II, P.E. Director, Land Development Del Webb Development Company 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX: 930-6776 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Mr. James Bolduc, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 329-5002 FAX: 329-0802 REQUEST: Preliminary Plat of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, a 475.52 acre tract in the B. Eaves, R. Jenkins, D. Monroe, M. Lewis, A. Short, G. Thompson and W. Wilkinson Surveys as recorded in Volume 2679, Page 744, Volume 2687, Page 945, Volume 2712, Page 103, Volume 1898, Page 597, Volume 1270, Page 305, Volume 2246, Page 561, of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas; and variances to the Subdivision Regulations. Location: Located northeast of F.M. 2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: Rezoning of this property is being considered by separate agenda item. Annexation will be considered by the City Council as Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown September 1, 1995 #PP95-05/File:SUNC1TY2.PP Page 1 CM/CS parcels within the Preliminary Plat are purchased by the Del Webb Development Company. Proposed Use: 1,261 single family residential lots with the remaining area used as commercial, open space, drainage easements, and golf course. Surrounding Uses North: Undeveloped land (out of City) and Zoning: South: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 (A, RP and C-1) and undeveloped land and Chaparro Estates (out of City) East: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, (A, RP and C-1) undeveloped land (out of City) .West: Undeveloped land (out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level Two. Additional analysis is underway to determine if the land use changes proposed by the Second Revised Concept Plan (see separate agenda item) and reflected on the subject Preliminary Plat can be accommodated within this intensity designation. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: The original Concept Plan for Sun City Georgetown was approved by the City Council on April 26, 1994. That Concept Plan included 3,991 acres. A Revised Concept Plan for the current 5,314 acres was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. A Second Revised Concept Plan will be considered by the Commission and Council on a separate agenda item. That Concept Plan proposes land uses that are consistent with the subject Preliminary Plat. A Development Agreement between the City and Del Webb was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1995. The Development Agreement addresses issues such as the commitment of utility capacity; the required public improvements; compliance with the City's development regulations; and the fees to be paid by the Del Webb Corporation. The Agreement makes specific modifications to the design standards in the Subdivision Regulations which apply Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown #PP95-05/File:SUNCITY2.PP CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 2 to this development. These modified design standards include such elements as street design, sidewalk location, setbacks, lot layout, and impervious cover. It was determined to be appropriate to make these modifications specifically for the Sun City Georgetown development because of its size and the fact that it is being developed and built by one developer. These facts ensure a greater level of control and consistency throughout the life of the project than would be possible for the same number of dwelling units built by numerous developers. ANALYSIS: The subject Preliminary Plat substantially meets the information requirements and design standards of the Subdivision Regulations as modified by the Development Agreement. SEE EXHIBIT B The significant issued related to this Preliminary Plat deal with the roadway design and access to the proposed commercial tracts. The Preliminary Plat under consideration proposes four (4) streets to be designed to the residential collector roadway status. The residential collector is a roadway classification established by the Development Agreement for the Sun City development. These streets have 60 feet of right-of-way and will be built with a 40 foot section. The residential collectors in Phase 2 include Pedernales Trail, that portion of Red Poppy Trail north of Del Webb Boulevard, Plover Pass, and Acacia Way. In a conventional development, several more of the streets designed to a local standard in Sun City would likely function as collectors, and therefore should be designed to the same standard described above. The applicant has indicated that due to the different traffic generation characteristics of Sun City residents, residential collector streets are not necessary. They have indicated this is supported by a traffic study that examines the internal traffic generation patterns within Sun City Georgetown. At this time, the City has not received the study, nor had the opportunity to review its conclusions. Therefore, City staff has indicated that it is possible that additional streets will have to be developed to the residential collector level status. In response to this concern, the applicant has designed each local street that intersects with a minor arterial (Del Webb Boulevard or Sun City Boulevard) or neighborhood collector so it widens to the residential collector standard at the intersection with the higher classification street. This will increase the capacity of those streets at the point where the most traffic is likely to accumulate. The Community Owned Utilities Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown NPP95-05/File:SUNCITY2.PP CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 3 has indicated that, subject to the review of the traffic study, this may be a reasonable alternative provided the additional right-of-way and street section extends for a distance of 500 feet from the streets' intersection with the higher classification street. In the event it is determined that the proposed design is not sufficient, the Planning and Zoning Commission reserves the right to review the plat again based on the new information regarding the additional residential collector streets. At that time the proposed street alignment must either be redesigned or additional variances regarding the radii of curves on those streets must be considered. Currently, the proposed curve radii conforms to the standard for local streets, but not residential collector streets. The subject Preliminary Plat proposes three (3) commercial tracts. Three (3) of the residential collectors, Red Poppy Trail, Plover Pass, and Acacia Way, provide access to these tracts from within the residential areas. This design was required by the City in order to provide a minimum level of access to the commercial areas. However, the optimum design of a commercial tract would include access from an arterial level street. In addition, one (1) of the proposed commercial tracts provides no access to a public right-of-way as required by Section 33010 of the Subdivision Regulations. Tracts G and J are currently optioned by Scott and White for development of their health care clinic. SEE EXHIBIT C-1 Tract J is likely to be the first parcel purchased, along with Tract U in Phase 1. Tract G will be purchased in the future only if it is determined to be necessary for expansion of the clinic. For this reason, the Preliminary Plat indicates that Tract G will develop either commercial or residential, and an alternate lot layout for residential development is provided. In order to address the City's concerns about traffic access to these lots, and the fact that Tract J currently has no access, a note should be added to the plat to indicate that Tract J will only be developed if part of a resubdivision with Tract U so it will have access to a public right-of-way. The note shall also state that Tract G will only be developed for commercial purposes if it is developed with Tract J. Further, the primary access to both Tracts J and G, if developed for a commercial use, will be from RM2338. Similarly, at this time it appears that the only access to Tract O will be from the residential collector streets within the adjacent residential area (Red Poppy Trail and Plover Pass). SEE EXHIBIT C-2 This tract is, Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown #PP95-05/File:SUNCrrY2.PP CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 4 however, adjacent to Tract A, located in Phase 1, which is platted and zoned for commercial use. Currently, Tract A is developed for the temporary sales and construction administration offices for Sun City Georgetown. It is likely that these uses will be discontinued within the next year when the permanent sales center within Sun City is completed. At that time the tract, combined with Tract O in Phase 2, may redevelop for a larger commercial development. Given that likely scenario, it is recommended that a note be added to, the plat that primary access to Tract O will be from RM2338 through Tract A in Phase 1. This does not preclude access from the residential collectors, but encourages a site design that will route traffic to the RM2338 access. As noted in the report on the Second Revised Concept Plan, amendments to the Development Agreement and the Century Plan may be required as a result of the proposal to revise land uses. City staff is conducting a review of the Development Agreement and Century Plan to determine if changes to those approvals will be required to finalize approval of the Second Revised Concept Plan. Staff review of those approvals has not been completed as of the time of the Planning and Zoning Commission review of this application. Because Phase 2 reflects the revisions to the Concept Plan it cannot proceed to City Council approval until the Concept Plan proceeds. If no changes to the Development Agreement or Century Plan are determined to be necessary, then City Council consideration of the Concept Plan and • Preliminary Plat can proceed within the 45 day time period required by Sections 23060 and 24060 of the Subdivision Regulations. If either or both of those approvals must be reconsidered as a result of the proposed revision to the Concept Plan, then the applicant must authorize a delay in the approval time period, or both the Concept Plan and Preliminary Plat applications will proceed to the City Council with a recommendation for denial. Denial will also be recommended if such changes are needed, but not agreed upon. VARIANCES: Section 34020 F.3. Access to Streets of Unequal Classification This variance is the same as that requested for Neighborhoods Two, Three, and Four. It involves two design standards, one in the Subdivision Regulations and one in the Development Agreement, that conflict. Section 34020 F.3. states "corner lots adjacent to streets of Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown UPP95-05/File:SUNCTTY2.PP CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 5 unequal classification shall access the lower classification street only and only one (1) drive approach shall be allowed, except as otherwise approved by the Commission." The PUD standards in the Development Agreement allow residential back-to-back corner lots to provide a 15 foot front yard setback on the secondary front yard, provided the driveway access is from the front yard with the 20 foot setback. This ensures that the driveway on the private property is sufficient to accommodate a vehicle without encroaching into the public right-of- way. Four (4) corner lots have been identified in Phase 2 that are required to access the adjacent higher classification street when they take advantage of the PUD standard. These include Lots 238 and 254, Block 31, and Lots 23 and 32, Block 42. It is possible that additional lots may be impacted if some streets currently designed to a local standard are required to be upgraded to a residential collector standard. This variance will not be required for those segments of the local streets that are widened to the residential collector standard when they intersect with a minor arterial or neighborhood collector. During its consideration of the requested variance related to Neighborhoods Two, Three and Four, the Planning and Zoning Commission determined that given the limited number of additional driveways that will be allowed onto the residential collectors as a result of granting this variance, the impact would not be substantial. Therefore, they voted to recommend approval of the variance, and the City Council concurred with that recommendation by approving the variance. The same basis appears to exist for approving the requested variance. After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staffs recommendation, the Commission makes the following findings of fact as required by Section 60070. B of the Subdivision Regulations: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown NPP95-0S/File:SUNCrrY2.PP CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 6 sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an economic nature; and 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The applicant's documentation for the variance is attached. Technical Issues: The following Technical Issues must be addressed prior to consideration of this plat by the City Council. If they are not addressed by September 29, 1995, or if the applicant does not concur with a delay to the City Council's consideration of the plat to allow the Technical Issues to be addressed, the plat will be forwarded to the Council with a recommendation for denial. 1. Provide the traffic study documenting roadway design issues internal to Sun City Georgetown. 2. If the proposed design of the local streets that intersect with minor arterials or neighborhood collectors is determined to be sufficient, ensure that each affected local street is designed as a residential collector for a minimum distance of 500 feet from the intersection. In the event it is determined that the proposed design is not sufficient, the plat shall be redesigned to include the required collectors and the Planning and Zoning Commission reserves the right to review the plat again based on the new information regarding the additional residential collector streets. 3. Add a note to the plat to indicate that Tract J will only be developed if part of a resubdivision with Tract U. Tract G will only be developed for commercial purposes if it is developed with Tract J. The primary access to both Tracts J and G, if developed for a commercial use, will be from RM2338. 4. Add a note to the plat that primary access to Tract O will be from RM2338 through Tract A in Phase 1. Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown #PP95-05/File:SUNCTTY2.PP CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 7 5. Provide some indication on all lots impacted by plat note #19 that there is a plat note that impacts their development. 6. Revise the setback lines on Tracts G, J, and O, such that a 20 foot setback is provided along the tracts that are designated for open space and zoned A, Agricultural (Tracts B and D) . 7. Revise Lots 87 and 88, Block 26, and Lots 238 and 266, Block 31, to provide 15 foot setbacks on the secondary front yards. 8. Lots 37 and 58, Block 26, should be reconfigured or eliminated to prevent future concerns about unbuildable lots, irregular setbacks, and driveway access. 9. Provide the water, wastewater, and drainage plans for the residential development of Tract G, as required by Section 24032 B. Issues to be addressed at final plat: The following items should be addressed when the final plat for each neighborhood is submitted: 1. Wastewater and water line easements should be established in their specific alignment as indicated on the utility plans. 2. The side and rear building setback lines shall be indicated on each lot. STAFF RECONEVMNDATION: Approval of the Preliminary Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration, and approval of the requested variance to Section 34020 F.3. , thereby allowing corner lot access to the residential collectors, after making the required findings of fact. This approval is subject to completion of the changes to the Development Agreement and Century Plan if such are necessary. P & Z ACTION: At its September 5, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration (Technical Issue #2 changed to: If the proposed design of the local streets that intersect with minor arterials or neighborhood collectors is determined to be sufficient, ensure that each affected local street is designed as a residential Preliminary Plat, Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown #PP95 -05 /File: S UNC ITY2. PP CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 8 collector for a minimum distance to 500 feet from the intersection unless staff determines a lesser distance is sufficient), and recommend approval of the requested variance to Section 34020 F.3., thereby allowing corner lot access to the residential collectors, after making the required findings of fact. This approval is subject to completion of the changes to the Development Agreement and Century Plan if such are necessary. September 1, 1995 Page 9 ,� ..: ° •.tip`: .u•,�.• �`•-.��= `r /l m x a II EXHIBIT 6=1 W1 i O O W Q U �A SCALE- 1­-300' SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE 2 ELLLU* el ry m TS EXHIBIT C71 .I - N649 646 N645 N N64q - ' 9 s. V TRAC T G BB OQ ' I .1- O n " COMMERC I AL OR _ �, .. VSINGLE FAMILY + r'Sp�.� �Lz (ZONED C- I OR RP) + ,: )7 `•'` �J� $ e 9 4 10.; 9 SUN ` QT 1' I -- ... .II 606E +<. � �\`s .. `\\\\• �' ' <... (EORGE rDWN ', S c N4QOR9000 -ONE S L 7tDE — — — o }< •l, ;e - _ -E6o, 22. �,...oFw��" 'IS Fog Al TRACT ' J' see COMMERCIAL ZONED. - C - 1.) o rc: j r �-9 6.6'._ G. WILKINSON SURVEY, A-67 I VVE -- - - - -- -=- ; , GE ORGE TH - o < OMPSON UY. A-�° CEOPCETOWN S 69-03-37 W 293. 18 \O� CITY L lU TS L lAIE 30 P. 0. C. OP PARCEL TWO P. 0. a. TRACT Z H` PARCEL -TWO OPEN SPACE , o M �C9 AND P. U. E. ( ZONED -RP) 3. , n Z _ •jam �° - EXHIBIT C-2 ow/v "llf / 7s 11V6 cryop / /V (o 7-s //Vc wo) D4NIEL MONPOE SURVEY, 4-450! N ro 7 - P4 5 - 06 E 787. 49 W 67 A- W WILKINSON SURVEY, 4 6 7 /9 10 RED POPPY --TRAIL T RA C T o < 0 COMMERCiAi Joj':."q.3 (ZONED C- t -09 W 1. -, m o 6 o Z v� '- 35 . ol THEPCIN S. BP,40FOPD 0 4A VOLUME 1898, P,4GE .597 W. C. D. P. i II- j 6 .9 i 'o FORGE TOWN Z z. HOOD ONE ti m roll ; O f• SLIDE vo --- P.R. 1"9, - 'o �� Via` SJ cp c I N % 2B/- e _ ,gs 7RACr C01144�p 4/ 0- C/At N748 ZOIVED C- /) 00 /s. Yoop I Is Ck 89, 6 SO. 00 Turner ColheOBraden Inc. Engineers • Planners • Project Managers August 17. 1995 Mr. Paul T. Weyrauch, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission City of Georgetown 113 East 8th Street P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409 Attn: Ms. Hildy Kingma Re: Request for Approval of Driveway Locations in Sun City Georgetown Phase 2 - Preliminary Plat TC&B Job No. 72-07558-100 Dear Mr. Weyrauch: PO ltcik 27190 Au.Un. fr\.tti 7fi7 i5-129(1 )OOo 111.1,.1 ( hi I -Ile lake ������• I ;u i7tt7a(�I ;)002 iP)-uti(, On behalf of Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P. ("Del Webb"), this letter requests the City's approval of Del Webb's proposed location of driveways on certain back-to-back corner lots that front on a residential collector and are adjacent to local streets. This situation arises for at least two lots in Sun City Georgetown Phase 2; Block 42, Lots 23 and 32. Additional lots may be affected by changes in the street rights -of -way recommended by the City's staff. Del Webb is requesting driveway access to the residential collector from all corner lots fronting on the residential collector. In response, the City has referred to the Subdivision Regulations Section 34020 F.3., which states as follows: Corner lots adjacent to streets of unequal classification shall access the lower classification street only and only one (1) drive approach shall be allowed, except as otherwise approved by the Commission. Del Webb has proposed, for certain back-to-back corner lots along a residential collector, that driveway access be taken from the residential collector (instead of the adjacent local street). We believe that this proposal is reasonable and approvable for several reasons, as discussed below. First, the safety considerations that may form the basis of the general guidance in Section 34020 F.3. have been addressed in this specific situation. The residential collector will have driveways along it for many other lots, and the driveway separation distances established by the City for intersection setbacks will be satisfied. The wider pavement of the residential collector also provides additional room for vehicles to steer around residents who are entering or exiting their driveways along this street. Second, from an aesthetic perspective, these back-to-back corner lots appear to front on the residential collector, and driveway access from the front of the lot is preferred to driveway access from another side of the lot. According to lot shape and lot orientation provisions included in Section 34020, it appears reasonable to consider the front of the lots as facing the residential collector. "Beginnit�q our 7hirrl Oe(,irle of Scrtw e to -Austin ,Intl Ccntt,tl Tc'�,c• " Turner CollieOBraden Inc August 17, 1995 Mr. Paul T. Weyrauch Planning and Zoning Commission City of Georgetown Page 2 Third, the Development Agreement between the City and Del Webb dated February 14, 1995 addresses this situation. In Paragraph 6g of the Development Agreement, the City approved the Sun City Georgetown Planned Unit Development Standards that appear as Exhibit G to the Agreement. These standards in Exhibit G are the standards applicable to all applications for developing the property, and are deemed to be included within the development regulations for the project. Exhibit G-1 of the Development Agreement includes specific standards that have been approved by the City for setbacks on the residential lots. For standard lots, a 20' front setback is established, and 20' is the approved distance for corner side setbacks. However, "(o)n back-to-back corner lots only. 15' setback is allowed on secondary front setbacks. Driveways on back-to-back corner lots must take access from the 20' front yard." Del Webb interprets this provision to authorize driveways that take access from the front of the lot, which, in this case, would be access to the residential collector. If the City disallows driveway access to residential collectors for back-to-back corner lots, the purpose of this negotiated standard would be defeated. Further, a City requirement to take access from the corner side of these back-to-back corner lots creates a significant hardship for Del Webb with respect to the size and orientation of a home garage and a driveway on such lots. We appreciate your consideration of this request information, please let us know - Very truly yours, Scott A. Smiley E. Manager, Land Develoi nt ' SAS/JWB:vgm xc: Bob Eck If you have any questions or need any additional "/_:17558 1(10U W 11-019.1-T R Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of an 111.954 acre tract in the Daniel Monroe and Frederick Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A. ITEM SUMMARY: The subject Preliminary Plat substantially meets the information requirements and design standards of the Subdivision Regulations as modified by the Development Agreement. Similar to previously reviewed phases, this Preliminary Plat includes streets that intersect with one of the proposed arterial streets that may require them to be designed to collector street standards. The proposal in this plat to design those streets with a 60 foot right-of-way width for a distance of 150 feet from the intersection and transition down to 50 foot width over a distance of 150 feet is consistent with the Community Owned Utilities Division's position on the necessary right-of-way width. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Consideration of this item was delayed to make the necessary revisions to the Development Agreement, being considered by a separate agenda item. Approval of this rezoning must be contingent on approval of the Development Agreement revisions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its October 3, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A, provided the needed changes to the Concept Plan or Development Agreement are completed. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Preliminary Plat Submitted By - Edward J. arry, AICP - irector Division Development Services Hildy L. Ydngma, AIC Chief Planner PRELIMINARY PLAT OF AN 111.954 ACRE TRACT IN THE DANIEL MONROE AND FREDERICK FOY SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2A OWNERS: Del Webb Development Corporation Mr. Clark E. Lyda, Trustee Mr. Theron E. Bradford, Trustee APPLICANT: Mr. Robert Eck II, P.E. Director, Land Development Del Webb Development Corporation 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX: 930-6776 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 329-5002 FAX: 329-0802 REQUEST: Preliminary Plat, of an 111.954 acre tract in the Daniel Monroe and Frederick Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A, as recorded in Volume 2679, Page 744 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Located northeast of F. M.2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: Rezoning of this property is being considered by separate agenda item. Annexation will be considered by City Council as parcels within the Preliminary Plat are purchased by the Del Webb Development Company. Proposed Use: 236 residential lots and eight (8) tracts for open space. Preliminary Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A November 20, 1995 /1PP95-08/File:SUNCITY2A.PP Page 1 CM/CS Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Undeveloped land (out of City) South: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 (RP and C-1) East: Undeveloped land, (out of City) West: Undeveloped land (out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level 2 by a Plan Amendment approved by City Council on December 13, 1994. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: A Revised Concept Plan was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. The Commission recommended approval of a Second Revised Concept Plan on September 5, 1995. The City is researching to determine if the committed utility capacity for Sun City is sufficient to accommodate the Revised Concept Plan. A Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1995. The Development Agreement addresses issues such as the commitment of utility capacity, the required public improvements, compliance with the City's development regulations, and the fees to be paid by the Del Webb Corporation. The Agreement makes specific modifications to the design standards in the Subdivision Regulations which apply to this development. These modified design standards include such elements as street design, sidewalk location, setbacks, lot layout, and impervious cover. It was determined to be appropriate to make these modifications specifically for the Sun City Georgetown development because of its size and the fact that it is being developed and built by one developer. These facts ensure a greater level of control and consistency throughout the life of the project than would be possible for the same number of dwelling units built by numerous developers. Given these modifications to the design standards, all Sun City plats will be approved as planned unit developments (PUDs). ANALYSIS: The subject Preliminary Plat substantially meets the information requirements and design standards of the Subdivision Regulations Preliminary Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A November 20, 1995 #PP95-08/File:SUNCTTY2A.PP Page 2 CM/CS as modified by the Development Agreement. SEE EXHIBIT B Similar to previously reviewed phases, this Preliminary Plat includes streets that intersect with one of the proposed arterial streets that may require them to be designed to collector street standards. Both Rodeo Drive and Great Frontier Drive intersect with Sun City Boulevard. The plat proposes those streets with a 60 foot right-of-way width for a distance of 150 feet from the intersection and transition down to 50 foot width over a distance of 150 feet. This is consistent with the Community Owned Utilities Division's position on the length of widened right-of- way necessary, provided it is not necessary to design the entire streets to collector standard. The applicant has provided a traffic study of Sun City to the City staff which recommends that status of streets within the Sun City development. Great Frontier Drive and Rodeo Drive are not recommended as collector streets. The staff is in the process of reviewing the study and will determine if it agrees with the conclusions regarding the streets prior to the Commission meeting. The City staff will allow the widening at the intersections as an alternative to designing the entire streets to collector standard only if the study's conclusions are acceptable. If the study's conclusions are not acceptable, Great Frontier Drive and Rodeo Drive, as well as streets in other phases, must be designed as collectors. Not only will a change in classification of the streets to collector status require a wider right-of-way, but it may also require revising the street layout. Curve 47 on Rodeo Drive and Curve 86 on Great Frontier Drive each have 225 foot radii, which translates to 250 foot centerline radii. The Development Agreement reduces the standard for collector street curves from the 600 foot standard in the Subdivision Regulations to 300 feet. If these streets are considered collector streets, those curves must be redesigned to increase the centerline radii. This may necessitate another review of the Preliminary Plat by the Commission. It has been determined that amendments to the Development Agreement are required as a result of the proposal to revise land Preliminary Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A #PP95-08/File:SUNCTTY2A. PP CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 3 uses included in the Second Revised Concept Plan reviewed by the Commission last month. Therefore, the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2A cannot be forwarded for City Council consideration until that amendment is made. The applicant has agreed to authorize a delay in the City Council consideration of the Preliminary Plat until the November 28, 1995, meeting. This allows enough time to amend the Development Agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the Preliminary Plat of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A, provided the needed changes to the Concept Plan or Development Agreement are completed. P & Z ACTION: At its October 3, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A, provided the needed changes to the Concept Plan or Development Agreement are completed. Preliminary Plat - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A 11 PP95-08/File:SUNC rrY2A. PP CM/CS November 20, 1995 Page 4 It 0 P s SCALE: 1" =300' BERRY CREEK PHASE 1 71 70 2 69 3 �4� 72 68 73 107 67 6s 4Y 4 GQ- 106 � 74 105 S1 0 64 63 62 61 0� 5 81 104 f 75 80 103 102 6 101 100 98 z 82 99 97 76 79 s 96 95 7 84 85 94 z 88 e 77 78 83 87 88 89 90 91 92 HRRNESS LANE 93 HARNESS LANE 123 108 131 130 129 128 127 9 126 125 S 124 z 122 109 z 132 133 134 135 136 10 1 151 _ 0 121 110 RANCH HOUSE CONE 137 O C 150 ti 11 A 120 111 02 177 0 142 141 140 Z 138 149 176 m - i io 12 13 14 15 16 GREAT FRONTIER DRIVE 17 18 19 20 21 22 BERRY CREEK PHASE 1 BOUNDARY FUTURE PHASE PHASE 2A BOUNDARY PHASE 1�PHASE 2A BOUNDAR SUN CITY BLVD. 1� 6 53 54 O 55 �02 52 59 58 57 56 c^ 60 51 LONGHORN TRAIL 192 191 50 190 185 186 187 188 189 49 184 196 195 194 193 4-8199 183 198 197 47 182 200 48 181 201 q 0 217 218 219 220 221 A 4.5 202 0 216 44 203 �~ 215 0 223 222 0� 204 214 224 rM 225 205 213 1RON CO`1E 10 227 43 3 234 230 233 42 232 231 DRr'E 41 pG 9�T 171 ��se 35 36 37 COVE 39 34 40 33 32 31 30 23 RARNDANCE COVr 29 24 25 26 27 28 PHASE 1\PHASE 2A BOUNDARY PHASE 1 NEIGHBORHOOD 8 FUTURE PHASE SUN CITYGEORGETOWN - PHASE 2A Council meeting date: 11-28-95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 714072 between the City of Georgetown and the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs on behalf of Reedholm Instruments, Inc. ITEM SUMMARY This amendment is to revise the contract with the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs to show that the administration function of the contract is transferred to the Texas Department of Commerce. ATTACHMENTS l . Letter from Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs 2. Amendment No. 2 3. Proposed Resolution mine Ay: 14, Bob Hart, City Manager TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS George W. Bush GOVERNOR Larry Paul Manley EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR October 16, 1995 RECEIVED N O S if 3 1995 The Honorable Leo Wood Mayor, City of Georgetown 609 Main Street Georgetown, Texas 78627 Re: Texas Community Development Program (TCDP) / Texas Capital Fund Contract No. 714072 -- Amendment No. 2 Dear Mayor Wood: BOARD MEMBERS Margie Lee Bingham CHAIR Donald R. Bethel Harvey Clemons Jr. Florita Bell Griffin, Ph. D. Richard C. Hile Joseph Kemp Walter Martinez Paul R. Rodriguez Mary Sanger As you are aware the administration function of this contract has transferred to the Texas Department of Commerce (Commerce). To help facilitate with Texas Capital Fund administration issues, an amendment has been generated giving Commerce full authority for administering this Texas Capital Fund project. This amendment must be signed and returned in order to allow Commerce the ability to independently approve administration issues. If this amendment is not signed and returned, this may affect future amendment requests, administration requests, and/or drawdown requests. Enclosed are two (2) copies of Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. 714072 between the city of Georgetown and the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, for your review and signature. Please sign and return both copies to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, Post Office Box 13941, Austin, Texas 78711-3941, at your earliest convenience. After the amendment has been signed by the Executive Director of our Department, we will provide you with a copy for your files. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to call Karl Young, Texas Department of Com, °erce, at 512/936-0281. Sincerely, Rut Cedillo, Director Texas Community Development Program RC/LMM;cIt 811 BARTON SPRINGS ROAD - SUITE 100 • P. O. BOX 13941 9 AUSTIN, TEXAS 7871 1-3941 • (512) 475-3800 AMENDMENT NO.2 TO TEXAS CAPITAL FUND CONTRACT NO.714072 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF TRAVIS Section 1. The Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, an agency of the State of Texas, hereinafter referred to as "Department", and the City of Georgetown, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor", do hereby contract and agree to amend their original contract, as initially executed by the Executive Director of the Department effective November 21, 1994, through November 20, 1997, for the performance of economic development activities. Section 2. The parties hereto agree to amend the contract identified in Section 1 above by deleting in its entirety Section 1, Parties to Contract, and replacing it with the following: Section 2. PARTIES TO THE CONTRACT This contract and agreement is made and entered into by and between the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, an agency of the State of Texas, hereinafter referred to as "Department", and the City of Georgetown, a political subdivision of the State of Texas, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor". Department has contracted with the Texas Department of Commerce, hereinafter referred to as "Commerce", to provide certain services relating to this and other Capital Fund agreements. In recognition of the contract between Department and Commerce, Department and Contractor agree that Commerce shall provide the following services relating to this agreement on behalf of Department: 1.) provide. technical assistance to Contractor; 2.) administer this agreement nn behalf of Department; and 3.) provide audit resolution, monitoring, contract enforcement and collection services under this agreement on behalf of Department. The parties further agree that Contractor shall continue to make any payments due under this agreement to Department and that Department shall continue to provide accounting services associated with the agreement. The parties hereto have severally and collectively agreed and by the execution hereof are bound to the mutual obligations and to the performance and accomplishment of the tasks described herein. Page 1 of 2 Section 3. The parties hereto agree that this amendment shall become effective on July 1, 1995. Section 4. The parties hereto agree that this amendment shall require no change to previously approved funding. Section 5. The parties hereto agree that all of the terms of the contract identified in Section 1 above shall remain in effect and shall continue to govern except to the extent that they conflict with the terms of this amendment. Section 6. The parties hereto agree that nothing in this amendment shall be construed as authorizing any violation of federal, state or local laws or regulations as they pertain to the contract identified in Section 1 above. Section 7. By the signing of this amendment, the parties hereto expressly understand and agree that this amendment shall become a part of the contract. identified above in Section 1 above as though it were set forth word for word therein. WITNESS OUR HANDS EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 1995. The Honorable Leo Wood Mayor, City of Georgetown Approved and accepted on behalf of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. Larry Paul Manley, Executive Director Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs This contract amendment is not effective unless signed by the Executive Director of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, or his/her authorized designee. Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF A CONTRACT AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR THE TEXAS CAPITAL FUND CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS, CONTRACT NUMBER 714072, ON BEHALF OF REEDHOLM INSTRUMENTS COMPANY. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown entered into a contract with the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs on behalf of Reedholm Instruments Company; and WHEREAS, the administration function of this contract was transferred to the Texas Department of Commerce from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs; and WHEREAS, the Director of the Texas Community Development Program has requested that an amendment to the contract be signed to help facilitate with Texas Capital Fund administration issues. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements Economic Development Policy 1 of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "The City will encourage diversified growth and promote business opportunities to create jobs, broaden the tax base and minimize the impact of economic fluctuations" and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The City Council authorizes a contract amendment to show that the administration function of the contract is transferred to the Texas Department of Commerce from the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. Reedholm Amendment Resolution No. Page 1 of 2 Pages SECTION 3. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto Amendment No. 2 to the contract with the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs on behalf of Reedholm Instruments Company. SECTION 4. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this day of ATTEST: 1995. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. u/ AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and first reading of an ordinance amending Exhibit 1 of the Century Plan - Development Plan for 11.85 acres in the Lewis Dyches Survey to be known as Pleasant Valley Estates as recorded in Volume 613, Page 419 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas from Intensity Level Two to Intensity Level Three. ITEM SUMMARY: The applicant has proposed a Concept Plan with 36 single family residential lots on the 11.85 acre site. At the site's current Intensity Level Two designation, only 28 average sized single family lots are allowed, with water and wastewater service as the utilities limiting development. The proposed increase to Intensity Level Three would allow for 45 single family lots to be developed on the site. The increase in the actual demand level from 28 single family detached units to 36 single family detached units is only 29 percent for both water and wastewater. The Community Owned Utilities Division reports that there are adequate water and wastewater facilities to serve the proposed 36 single family detached units. The increase in the actual transportation demand level between 28 single family detached units and 36 single family detached units is 28 percent. The site will have access to FM1460, an arterial street, via Georgetown View Lane and two other access points will be provided into the subdivision. These will be adequate to serve the site with the increased number of trip ends generated. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None FINANCIAL IMPACT: None COMMENTS: The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0, at their meeting on November 7, 1995, to recommend approval of the proposed Century Plan Amendment of 11.85 acres in the Lewis Dyches Survey to be known as Pleasant Valley Estates. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report; Ordinance Submitted By. i Edward J. Barry, AI - Director Division of Development Services a, --,� pu--� Clyde von RosenberP Chief Planner, Long Range Planning CENTURY PLAN AMENDMENT OF 11.85 ACRES IN THE LEWIS DYCHES SURVEY, TO BE KNOWN AS PLEASANT VALLEY ESTATES, LOCATED ON GEORGETOWN VIEW LANE AND SUNRISE VALLEY LANE, FROM INTENSITY LEVEL TWO TO INTENSITY LEVEL THREE OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Vincent L. Bove 2101 Wynchwood Drive Austin, Texas 78746 512/328-9252 AGENT: Mr. Don Bizzell, P.E. Steger & Bizzell Engineering, Inc. P. O. Box 858 Georgetown, Texas 78627 512/863-4521 FAX 863-4523 REQUEST: Century Plan Amendment of 11.85 acres in the Lewis Dyches Survey to be known as Pleasant Valley Estates as recorded in Volume 613, Page 419 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Located on Georgetown View Lane, off F.M. 1460 SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: This property is located outside the City limits so zoning does not apply. Proposed Use: 36 single family residential lots. Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Pleasant Valley, average lot single family residential (out of City) South: Rabbit Hollow, average lot single family residential (out of City) East: Rabbit Hollow, average lot single family residential (out of City) Century Plan Amendment - Pleasant Valley, Section Two November 17, 1995 Page 1 West: Georgetown South, Phase I, single family residential (out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan Development Plan designates this development as Intensity Level Two. The surrounding properties are designated as Intensity Levels Two and Three. SEE EXHIBIT A A Concept Plan is being considered by separate agenda item. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. ANALYSIS: The applicant has proposed a Concept Plan with 36 single family residential lots on the 11.85 acre site. At the site's current Intensity Level Two designation, only 28 average sized single family lots are allowed, with water and wastewater service as the utilities limiting development. SEE EXHIBIT B-1 The proposed increase to Intensity Level Three would allow for 45 single family lots to be developed on the site. SEE EXHIBIT B-2 Water and Wastewater From Intensity Level Two to Intensity Level Three, the total allowable demand, measured in maximum gallons per day of water and wastewater capacity, increases by 57 percent for water and 66 percent for wastewater. However, the increase in the actual demand level from 28 single family detached units to 36 single family detached units is only 29 percent for both water and wastewater. SEE EXHIBIT C The Community Owned Utilities Division reports that there are adequate water and wastewater facilities to serve the proposed 36 single family detached units. Transportation Since water and wastewater are the limiting factors for the development of single family detached residential units in both Intensity Level Two and Intensity Level Three, the total allowable demand created for trip ends is not a factor in this analysis. However, the increase in the actual transportation demand level between 28 single family detached units and 36 Century Plan Amendment - Pleasant Valley, Section Two November 17, 1995 Page 2 single family detached units is 28 percent. SEE EXHIBIT C The site will have access to FM 1460, an arterial street, via Georgetown View Lane, which will serve as a minor collector street. Two other access points will be provided into the subdivision, Sunrise Valley Lane to the north and Rabbit Run to the south, both local streets. Rabbit Run is planned to eventually intersect with the Inner Loop Road, which is an arterial street. Existing substandard portions of Georgetown View Lane and Rabbit Run will be improved as a condition of Final Plat approval. These access points will be adequate to serve the site with the increased number of trip ends proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the proposed Century Plan Amendment of 11.85 acres in the Lewis Dyches Survey to be known as Pleasant Valley Estates as recorded in Volume 613, Page 419 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas, from Intensity Level Two to Intensity Level Three. P & Z ACTION: At their November 7, 1995 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the Century Plan Amendment. Century Plan Amendment - Pleasant Valley, Section Two November 17, 1995 Page 3 EXHIBIT A INTENSITY LEVEL MAP C. TwN LEVE -L\-5 L VEL L Ey, E L N V 100, 0000" PLEASANT VALLEY ESTATES EXHIBIT B-1 DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT GIVEN A SINGLE LAND USE 1. 'DATE`: October 5, 1995 *PROJECT NAME': Pleasant Valley Estates Concept Plan 2. 'GIVEN" acres of Intensity Level 1 11.85 acres of Intensity Level 2 acres of Intensity Level 3 acres of Intensity Level 4 acres of Intensity Level 5 acres of Intensity Level 6 11.85 TOTAL ACRES 3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND: INTENSITY WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION LEVEL Peak GPD Average GPD Peak Trip Ends 1 0 0 0 2 28,440 7,703 47 3 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND: Maximum GPD Water Capacity: 28,440 Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity: 7,703 Maximum Trip Ends: 47 5. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT: (a) (b) (c) (d) POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY MAXIMUM PER DEV DEVELOPMENT LAND USES WATER --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION UNITS REGS ALLOWED/UNIT Detached SF - -------------- -------------------- Large Lot 25 27 79 25 24 24 housing units Average Lot 28 31 33 2 j 86 2-8- housing units Zero Lot Line 28 31 53 28 115 28 housing units Attached SF 44 44 44 ( 44 172 44 housing units Multifamily 54 49 21 21 342 21 housing units Mobile Home 44 40 56 40 40 housing units Lodging 148 126 34 34 34 rooms Institutional 82,915 83,723 56,361 56,361 56,361 square feet Church -with day care 92,338 92.801 3,046 3,046 3,046 square feet -w/o day care 152,903 154,050 65,833 65,833 65,833 square feet Medical Office 68,365 68,772 14,689 14.689 14,689 square feet General Office 78,132 Retail, Mixed 84,643 18,588 18,588 18,588 square feet 43,754 Retail, Restaurant 18,231 47,255 16,047 2,870 4,169 2,870 4,169 2,870 square feet 4,169 feet Retail, Store 87,508 87,528 9,871 9,871 square 9,871 square feet Employment Centers 78,132 84,643 10,358 10,358 10,358 10,358 square feet Warehouse 498,947 Mini -Warehouse 7,110,000 550,179 7,702,500 79,000 182,308 79,000 182,308 square feel ------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 182.308 square feet EXHIBIT B-2 DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT GIVEN A SINGLE LAND USE 1. 'DATE': October 5, 1995 'PROJECT NAME'. Pleasant Valley Estates Concept Plan 2. 'GIVEN' acres of Intensity Level 1 acres of Intensity Level 2 11.85 acres of Intensity Level 3 acres of Intensity Level 4 acres of Intensity Level 5 acres of Intensity Level 6 11.85 TOTAL ACRES 3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND: INTENSITY WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION LEVEL Peak GPD Average GPD Peak Trip Ends 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3 44,556 12,798 119 4 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND: Maximum GPO Water Capacity: 44,556 Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity: 12,798 Maximum Trip Ends: 119 5. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT: (a) (b) POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY MAXIMUM LAND USES --------____- --- --------------- WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION UNITS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Detached SF --------------------, Large Lot 39 44 198 39 Average Lot 45 51 134 45 J Zero Lot Line 45 51 134 45 Attached SF 69 73 109 69 Multifamily 84 82 52 52 Mobile Home 69 66 140 66 Lodging 232 210 85 85 Institutional 129,901 139,109 140,904 129,901 Church -with day care 144,662 154,193 7,616 7,616 -w/o day care 239,548 255,960 164,583 164,583 Medical Office 107,106 114,268 36,721 36,721 General Office 122,407 140,637 46,471 46,471 Retail, Mixed 68,548 78,515 7,174 7,174 Retail, Restaurant 28,562 26,663 10,422 10,422 Retail, Store 137.095 145,432 24,677 24,677 Employment Centers 122,407 140,637 25,896 25,896 Warehouse 781,684 914,143 197,500 197,500 Mini -Warehouse ------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11,139,000 12,798,000 455,769 455,769 - - - - (c) (d) PER DEV DEVELOPMENT REGS --- ----- --- ALLOWED/UNIT ------------------ 24 24 housing units 86 j 45 housing units 115 45 housing units 172 69 housing units 342 52 housing units 66 housing units 85 rooms 129,901 square feet 7,616 square feet 164,583 square feet 36,721 square feet 46,471 square feet 7,174 square feet 10,422 square feet 24.677 square feet 25,896 square feet 197,500 square feet 455,769 square feet EXHIBIT C UTILITY DEMAND LEVELS FOR DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY, AVERAGE LOT DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES 28 UNITS 36 UNITS WATER (Peak GPD) 281000 363000 WASTEWATER (Average GPD) 79000 900 TRANSPORTATION (Peak Trip Ends) 25 32 (Based on Development Plan Exhibit 3 Land Use Activity to Demand Conversion Chart) PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: Century Plan Amendment of Pleasant Valley Estates from Intensity Level Two to Intensity Level Three Name of Respondent: �✓G�Lrlg ,� ,� ,�i-��Q ��,� �� Address of Respondent:_ //�p/l`) C6-11 w _ I am in favor: I object: l/ - y 11/l/95; it will be provided to the it and City Council. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING EXHIBIT 1- INTENSITY MAP OF THE CENTURY PLAN - DEVELOPMENT PLAN PASSED AND ADOPTED ON THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 1990, TO CHANGE 11.85 ACRES IN THE LEWIS DYCHES SURVEY, TO BE KNOWN AS PLEASANT VALLEY ESTATES, LOCATED ON GEORGETOWN VIEW LANE AND SUNRISE VALLEY LANE, FROM INTENSITY LEVEL TWO TO INTENSITY LEVEL THREE; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Charter of the City of Georgetown was amended by vote of the people in April 1986 such that comprehensive planning was established as a continuous and ongoing governmental function; and WHEREAS, the City Council did, on March 8, 1988, adopt by Ordinance Number 880097 the Georgetown Century Plan - Policy Plan as the Comprehensive Plan for the City pursuant to Section 1.08 of the City Charter; and WHEREAS, the City Council did, on March 13, 1990, adopt by Ordinance Number 900149 the Georgetown Century Plan - Development Plan as the Land Intensity, Transportation, and Utilities functional plan elements pursuant to Section 1.08 of the City Charter; and WHEREAS, the Century Plan Development Plan contains the Intensity Map designed to assign development intensities throughout the Georgetown Planning Area; and WHEREAS, an application has been made by Mr. Vincent L. Bove for the approval of a Concept Plan of an 11.85 acre tract in the Lewis Dyches Survey to be known as Pleasant Valley Estates, necessitating changing the intensity assignment of the tract from Intensity Level Two to Intensity Level Three; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission did, on November 7, 1995, conduct a public hearing regarding the proposed amendment to EXHIBIT 1 of the Century Plan - Development Plan; and WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, which stated the time and place of hearing which time was not earlier than fifteen (15) days for the first day of such publication; and Century Plan Amendment -Pleasant Valley Estates Ordinance No. Page 1 o f 3 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 two hundred feet of the property, as required by law; and WHEREAS, the applicant for such Plan amendment placed on the property at the 11.85 acre tract in the Lewis Dyches Survey, 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 such hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission did, on November 7, 1995, recommend that the City Council approve the proposed amendment to EXHIBIT 1 of the Century Plan - Development Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following Policies of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element: 1. Economic Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will encourage diversified growth and promote business opportunities to create jobs, broaden the tax base and minimize the impact of economic fluctuations", and 2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations;" and 3. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2, which states: "The City's regulatory actions will efficiently and effectively implement the Policy Statements and provide the opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense;" as well as the following Goal of the Century Plan - Development Plan Element: 1. Policy 8, Goal A, which states: "The City will prepare and adopt a land use management program to promote orderly growth, address environmental issues, and coordinate provision of City services;" and further finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. Century Plan Amendment -Pleasant Valley Estates Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 2. EXHIBIT 1 - Intensity Map, contained within the Century Plan - Development Plan, is hereby amended by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, to change the Intensity Level Two designation to Intensity Level Three for the 11.85 acres in the Lewis Dyches Survey to be known as Pleasant Valley Estates, as recorded in Volume 613, Page 419 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas, and as shown on Attachment A of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. SECTION 4. If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect in (10) ten days on and after publication in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the 28th day of November, 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of , 1995. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Century Plan Amendment -Pleasant Valley Estates Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 Leo Wood Mayor EXHIBIT A INTENSITY LEVEL MAP LEVEL ` �• ..ter .� a, y � S _ \ C 31 • LE'y,EL 0000, 100101.1".. A000, 00001, ti �0000, -, PLEASANT VALLEY ESTATES Council meeting date: November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 93-42 to extend the time period for payment of assessments on East 1-35 Frontage Road (first reading) ITEM SUMMARY This ordinance extends the time period for payment of assessments from five to seven years after completion of the frontage road improvements and acceptance by the City. FINANCIAL IMPACT We are treating these funds as a specially authorized investment of the Electric Fund Contingency 5 to 7 years Reserve. It will not have a material effect on operations. ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed Ordinance. Submitted By: Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE 93-42 TO EXTEND THE TIME PERIOD FOR PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENTS ON EAST 1-35 FRONTAGE ROAD WHEREAS, on December 14, 1993, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 93-42 levying assessments on certain properties abutting the East 1-35 Frontage Road Project; determining the method of apportionment; establishing the terms and conditions for payment of the assessments; authorizing the issuance of certificates of assessment; and establishing an effective date; and WHEREAS, Section 4.a. of the Ordinance set the time for payment of the assessments at a set for a period of five years; and WHEREAS, the City desires to extend the time or payment of the assessments to a period of seven years; and WHEREAS, the City Council determines that the extension of the time period for payments of the assessments is in the best interest of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: 1. Ordinance No. 93-42 is hereby amended in Section 4.a. to read as follows: The assessments shall be due and payable over a period of seven years in annual installments to begin after completion of the frontage road improvements and acceptance by the City. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the 28th day of November, 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of , 1995. ATTEST: Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary East 1-35 Frontage Road Assessment Ordinance No. Page 1 of 2 THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: 0 Leo Wood, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Council meeting date: 11/28/95 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT Amendment to Development Agreement with Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P., concerning the development of Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown ITEM SUMMARY This amendment substitutes the proposed Amended concept Plan for the current Concept Plan under which Sun City Georgetown is developing. No additional acreage is being added to the site. The development is still within the original 5,302.774 acres. The Amended Concept Plan adds 25 additional acres of commercial development within the project, while retaining the ability to develop 9,500 residential units. The additional commercial acreage will not be tied to the SIP fees established in the Development Agreement, but will pay an SIP fee based on the size of meter needed to serve the commercial development. The City is making a commitment to provide the water and wastewater service to this additional commercial acreage. The City is also agreeing to repay Del Webb for the construction of a portion of the 16-inch wastewater force main. The Planned Unit Development standards are being modified to allow for the construction of swimming pools. Screen fencing is not proposed; however, fencing of the swimming pool in compliance with the Building Code will be provided. ATTACHMENTS Proposed Amendment to Development Agreement (to be delivered on Monday 11/27/95). miffed By: A5�� / "--Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET z SUBJECT: Consideration of a License to Encroach for a Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tracts B and D ITEM SUMMARY: The proposal is for two (2) fences and three (3) walls to encroach into either public utility easements or street right-of-way. All affected utility companies have approved the request including the Community Owned Utilities Division. However, the Director of COU approves the License to Encroach into the road right-of-way with regard only to the effect that the proposal has on water, wastewater and electrical facilities. This item should be considered with the requested variance to encroach into the front building setbacks that is also on this agenda. For the fences and walls to be placed in the proposed locations, both the License to Encroach and the variance would have to be approve. A denial of either would effectively prohibit the subject structures from being placed in the proposed locations. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Since one (1) of the proposed structures encroaches into the right-of-way for Del Webb Boulevard, the City has concerns with the liability of allowing it. The Director of Community Owned Utilities' approval does not address the issue of liability by allowing the wall to be placed in the right-of-way. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, unless stated otherwise. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibits A. B and C Resolution Submitted Bv: Edward J arry, AICP Director Division of Developme t Services Hildy L. K' gma, AICP Chief Planner RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A LICENSE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN AND THE DEL WEBB DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF PROPOSED STONE AND METAL FENCES AND STONE WALLS INTO THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS LOCATED ON LOTS B AND D OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, AND INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR DEL WEBB BOULEVARD, AS RECORDED IN CABINET M, SLIDES 95-116 OF THE PLAT RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND LOCATED AT RM2338 AND DEL WEBB BOULEVARD; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has received an application for a license to encroach into the public utility easement and street right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown has enacted Ordinance No. 1645 regulating, controlling, and governing encroachments; and WHEREAS, in order for a license to be granted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, the Council must make certain findings of fact; and WHEREAS, after hearing the application of Richardson Verdoorn, Inc. to encroach into the public utility easement and street right-of-way, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, finds the following facts: 1. That there are no utilities which would be interfered with by the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 2. That there are no utilities which would interfere with the utilization of the property in the proposed manner. 3. That the proposed structures are in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate them outside the public utility easement or street right-of-way. 4. That the land use in the neighborhood appears to be stable and the use to which this property is being put is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and is compatible with other uses in the neighborhood; and Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Lots B and D and Del Webb Boulevard Right -of -Way License Resolution No. Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the City Council after hearing the application and finding the specific facts as stated above now concludes and finds that: 1. The fact that the proposed structures are in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate them outside the public utility easement or street right-of-way constitutes special circumstances and conditions affecting the property which if not taken into consideration would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of their property. 2. The fact that the land use is not likely to change within the foreseeable future and that it is not economically feasible to remove the part of the proposed structures that encroaches into the public utility easement or street right-of-way does provide a basis for granting the license necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of the substantial property rights of the applicant. 3. The fact that the use of the easement or street right-of-way area by the property owner does not interfere with the utilities or access to the utilities and is not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or injurious to the property in the area; and WHEREAS, the applicant agrees to accept the terms of the license agreement as presented to them. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this resolution are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this resolution implements the following policies of the Century Plan - Development Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations;" and 2. Utilities/Energy Policy 2, which states: "The City will establish utility policies which take into consideration the needs of all citizens of the community and take necessary precautions to prevent harmful ecological impact to the environment;" and further finds that the adoption of this resolution is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Lots B and D and Del Webb Boulevard Right -of -Way License Resolution No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 2. The Mayor is hereby authorized to execute, and the City Secretary to attest thereto on behalf of the City of Georgetown a License Agreement with the Del Webb Development Company, pertaining to the encroachment of proposed stone and metal fences and stone walls into the public utility easements located on Lots B and D of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, -Phase 1, Neighborhood One, and into the right-of-way for Del Webb Boulevard, located at RM2338 and Del Webb Boulevard. SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption. RESOLVED this day of ATTEST: 1995. THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee By: LEO WOOD City Secretary Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Lots B and D and Del Webb Boulevard Right -of -Way License Resolution No. Page 3 of 3 1'1 , i i w 1 ,a tz Az.' • I N % i • MATCH LINE TO EXHIBIT A NORTH WEBB BLVD. OPOSED STONE WALL o BACk- 0Pz RIGHT OF WAY ----------..�.�_.-- 2MAdina Llne PORTION OF WALL IN P.U.E. OR RIGHT-OF-WAY WALL AT ENTRY HOUSE ao Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consider approval of a variance from the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Seven, Phases One and Two; Section Eight, Phases One, Two, and Three; and Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Eleven ITEM SUMMARY: At their regular August meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of variances for the above -referenced sections of Berry Creek, as well as Section Six. Those variances allowed the encroachment of a driveway to side entry garages into platted side setbacks (Section 34020 G.2.) and an increase in the maximum impervious cover per lot from 40 percent to 65 percent (Table 34020 and Section 34020 E.) provided sufficient documentation acceptable to the City Attorney was approved prior to City Council consideration to ensure that the golf course will be perpetual open space. The impervious cover variance included a request to not consider swimming pools as impervious cover. The Commission recommended denial of that portion of the request. The City Council approved the variance to Section 34020 G.2. at the August 22 meeting, but has not considered the impervious cover variance requests pending the submittal of documentation regarding the golf course for the City Attorney's review. The applicant has submitted documentation indicating that the golf course will continue to be used as a golf course, and therefore will not add to the impervious cover in the subdivision. The applicant has also changed the request since it was considered by the Commission, reducing the potential for total impervious cover. The original request was for 65 percent per lot impervious cover, the revised request is for 59 percent per lot impervious cover. In addition, Section Six has been removed from the variance request. Further, the variance will only apply to those lots in the subject subdivisions that are 80 feet in width or greater, and that will have a home with a "swing -in" or side entry garage. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of August 1, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of variances for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Six; Section Seven, Phases One and Two; Section Eight, Phases One, Two and Three; and Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Eleven to Section 34020 E. and Table 34020 to allow a maximum of 65 percent impervious cover on the lots provided sufficient documentation acceptable to the City Attorney is approved prior to City Council consideration to ensure that the golf course will be perpetual open space, after making the required findings of fact. Denial of the requested variance to Section 34020 E. and Table 34020, thereby requiring swimming pools to be included in the calculation of impervious cover. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation, with the exception that the impervious cover variance will not apply to Section Six, will be for a maximum of 59 percent per lot impervious cover, and will apply only to homes with a "swing -in" or side entry garage. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report. Submitted By: Edward.i. barry, AICP , Director Hildy L. King a, AICP Divisigh of Development Services Chief Planner r VARIANCE FROM THE DESIGN STANDARDS OF THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR THE RESUBDIVISION OF BERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION, SECTION SIX; SECTION SEVEN, PHASES ONE AND TWO; SECTION EIGHT, PHASES ONE, TWO AND THREE; AND BERRY CREEK SUBDIVISION, SECTION ELEVEN OWNER: Mr. Robert D. Wunsch Berry Creek Partners 30444 Berry Creek Drive Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-9995 AGENT: Mr. Charles Wirtanen, P.E. CWC 30444 Berry Creek Drive Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-9995 REQUEST: Variance to the building setback and impervious coverage requirements of the Subdivision Regulations for Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Six; Section Seven, Phases One and Two; Section Eight, Phases One, Two and Three; and Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Eleven as recorded in Cabinet K, Slides 271-276, Cabinet L, Slides 88-89 and Slides 315-316 of the Official Plat Records and Volume 2231, Page 114 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. FACTS: Location: Berry Creek Subdivision. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Single family residential lots. Existing Zoning: This property is located outside the City limits, so zoning does not apply. Proposed Use: Single family residences. Surrounding Uses: Single family residences. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. 's Six, Seven, Eight and Eleven VR/1-95-15/ File:BC67811.VAR CM:HK August 11, 1995 Page 1 HISTORY: The Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Six, was recorded on June 30, 1993; Section Seven, Phase One, was recorded on March 15, 1995; and Section Eight, Phase One, was recorded on June 15, 1994. Section Seven, Phase Two, and Section Eight, Phases Two and Three, were approved by the City Council on September, 13, 1994, and were granted a one (1) year extension on March 14, 1995 (to expire on the same date in 1996). The Preliminary Plat for Section Eleven was approved by the City Council on March 28, 1995, and a Final Plat for Phase One was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 5, 1995. It has not yet been considered by City Council pending submittal of the construction plans. Although these plats received variances with their approvals, none were applicable to the subject request. ANALYSIS: Section 34020 G.2. Impervious Construction in Side Setbacks This section prohibits structures or impervious construction in required side and rear setbacks except for limited exceptions for single family residential uses. Those exceptions do not apply to this request. The applicant has requested this variance in order to allow for the design and construction of side entry garages where desired. In order to ensure sufficient room for a range of vehicle sizes to turn into a side entry garage, the garage must be built 28 feet from the outside edge of the driveway. The typical lots in the subject subdivisions range from as small as 65 feet wide in Section Eight, Phase Three, to over 100 feet wide in Section Eleven. Most lots are in the range of 70 feet to 80 feet wide. If a home with a side entry garage is to be built on lots this small, it would have to be considerably smaller than the typical homes being built in Berry Creek in order to avoid any encroachments into the side setback. This may be a reasonable variance, in light of the previous similar variance approved by the Commission and Council, if it is limited to only those lots on which a house with a side entry garage will be built, and only for the encroachment of the driveway to the garage. The subject design standard was included in the current Subdivision Regulations when they were originally adopted in 1988. This standard appears to address the desire for unobstructed open space on each platted lot. It applies to lots platted for all land use types, with exceptions only for swimming pools, playscapes, and satellite dishes on single family residential lots. While a driveway by itself will not create a visual obstruction, it does create the possibility for parked vehicles which would become a visual obstruction. If this variance is considered Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. 's Six, Seven, Eight and Eleven VR#-95-15/ File:BC67811.VAR CM:HK August 11, 1995 Page 2 appropriate, staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council revise Section 34020 G.2. of the Subdivision Regulations to add the driveway to a side entry garage as an exception to the prohibition on impervious cover in side setbacks. Section 34020 E. and Table 34020 Impervious Cover Limit These provisions establish a maximum impervious coverage limit for single family lots of 40 percent. The applicant has requested a variance to allow up to 65 percent impervious cover on each lot and to not consider swimming pools as impervious cover. The basis for the request for an increase in the impervious cover is the fact that the golf course will remain in open space. However, the golf course is owned by someone other than the applicant in this case. The City Attorney is reviewing documentation provided by the applicant to determine if it sufficiently limits the use of the golf course such that it will always remain open space, and to ensure that the golf course owners understand that their open space is being used as mitigation for additional open space on property they do not own or control. It is possible that additional documentation will be required. This documentation is important in order to make this variance request supportable. In one other case, Sun City Georgetown, the per lot impervious cover has been increased due to the amount of open space being platted in the entire development. In that development, however, the open space is restricted by plat as such, and it will continue to be owned by the developer or the homeowners' association. Further, the plats for Sun City Georgetown commit to maintaining an overall impervious cover limit of no greater than 40 percent, consistent with the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations. EXHIBIT B is documentation submitted by the applicant to prove that there is sufficient open space in the golf course to maintain a maximum of 40 percent impervious cover overall if all the subject lots are developed to 65 percent impervious cover. Regarding the request to not include swimming pools in the calculation of impervious cover, the City Attorney has determined that variances cannot be granted for definitions contained within the ordinance. The definition of impervious cover contained in Section 70000 is as follows: "Roads, parking areas, buildings, swimming pools, rooftop landscapes and other construction limiting the absorption of water by covering the natural land surface; this shall include, but not be limited to, all streets Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. 's Six, Seven, Eight and Eleven VR#-95-15/ File:BC67811.VAR CM:HK August 11, 1995 Page 3 and pavement within the development." Any change to this definition will require a revision to the Subdivision Regulations. Section 34020 E. and Table 34020 Front Yard Setback These provisions establish a front yard setback of 25 feet. The applicant states that "previous interpretations have taken the position that corner lots have two front yards." This is not merely a staff interpretation. Section 34020 F.4. states "the building setback line for all corner lots shall conform to the minimum requirements for the land use designated but shall never be less than twenty-five (25) feet from an existing or proposed street right-of-way. " Given this standard, corner lots are required to have a 25 foot front yard on both street frontages. The applicant specifically requests to be allowed to establish 15 foot setbacks on the secondary front yards of the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Seven, Phase One, Block D, Lot 12, and Block L, Lot 39. The Commission and Council have typically approved this requested variance when the corner lot is situated back-to-back with an adjacent corner lot and with the condition that access must be from the front yard with the 25 foot front yard setback. As illustrated by EXHIBIT C. the subject lots will not be back-to-back with adjacent corner lots. Further, both lots have over 4,000 square feet of buildable area with the two (2) 25 foot front yard setbacks as platted. Therefore, there does not appear to be a hardship relating to size constraints. A similar variance request in Riverview Estates was denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council in June 1994 because it would result in an inconsistent frontage. VARIANCE: After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation provided by the applicant and the staffs recommendation, the Commission makes the following findings of fact as required by Section 60070.B of the Subdivision Regulations: "In granting approval of a request for variance the Commission shall make findings that: 1. The public convenience and welfare will be substantially served; and 2. The appropriate use of surrounding property will not be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished; and Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. 's Six, Seven, Eight and Eleven VR11-95-15/ File:BC67811.VAR CM:HK August 11, 1995 Page 4 3. The applicant has not created the hardship from which relief is sought; and 4. The variance will not confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege not commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property; and 5. The hardship from which relief is sought is not solely of an economic nature; and 6. The variance is not contrary to the public interest; and 7. Due to special conditions, the literal enforcement of the ordinance would result in an unnecessary hardship; and 8. In granting the variance the spirit of the ordinance is observed and substantial justice is done." The attached letter has been submitted as documentation for the requested variance. STAFF RECOMIIMNDATION: Approval of the following variances for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Six; Section Seven, Phases One and Two; Section Eight, Phases One, Two, and Three; and Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Eleven: to Section 34020 G.2. to allow only the encroachment of a driveway to a side entry garage; and to Section 34020 E. and Table 34020 to allow a maximum of 65 percent impervious cover on the lots provided sufficient documentation acceptable to the City Attorney is provided prior to City Council consideration to ensure that the golf course will be perpetual open space, after making the required findings of fact. Denial of the following variances on the subject property: to Section 34020 E. and Table 34020, thereby requiring swimming pools to be included in the calculation of impervious cover, and requiring Lot 12, Block D, and Lot 39, Block L in the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Seven, Phase One, to maintain two (2) 25 foot front yard setbacks. Also, staff recommends a revision to Section 34020 G.2. to add the driveway to a side entry garage as an exception to the prohibition on impervious cover in side setbacks as outlined in Agenda Item #13. P & Z ACTION: At their regular meeting of August 1, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the following variances for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. 's Six, Seven, Eight and Eleven VR.#-95-15/ File:BC67811.VAR CM:HK August 11, 1995 Page 5 Six; Section Seven, Phases One and Two; Section Eight, Phases One, Two and Three; and Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Eleven: to Section 34020 G.2. to allow only the encroachment of a driveway to a side entry garage; and to Section 34020 E. and Table 34020 to allow a maximum of 65 percent impervious cover on the lots provided sufficient documentation acceptable to the City Attorney is approved prior to City Council consideration to ensure that the golf course will be perpetual open space, after making the required findings of fact. Denial of the following variances on the subject property: to Section 34020 E. and Table 34020, thereby requiring swimming pools to be included in the calculation of impervious cover, and requiring Lot 12, Block D, and Lot 39, Block L in the Resubdivision of Berry Creek Subdivision, Section Seven, Phase One, to maintain two (2) 25 foot front yard setbacks. Variance - Berry Creek, Sec. 's Six, Seven, Eight and Eleven VR#-95-15/ File:BC67811.VAR CM:HK August 11, 1995 Page 6 APPROXIMATE TOTAL IMPERVIOUS COVER BERRY CREEK SECTIONS 6,7,8 & 11 INCLUDING GOLF COURSE SECTION 6 j 7-1 7-2 8-1 8-2 8-3 �11-1 1 1 -2 11 -3 1 1 -4 SUBTOTAL GOLF COURSE I T NO. OF LOTS AC TOTAL AC ROW i 56 15.161 2.267 22 6.774 1.239 t 37 14.866 2.089 31 6.875 1.24 51 14.887 3.145 46 10.929 2.187 24 11.484 2.873 48 20.036 4.393 47 16.959 3.516 3 8.791 0.482 - - - -oj -- - - ROAD ", LOT MAX. AC AC 50' ROW 1 60' ROW 64' ROW ; I.C. I.C. I.C.1 OPEN --- ---- -- - LOTS - - LF -- -� LF - -- LF i AC ----- 1 - - - 0 t 12.893 1975 ' O j 1.984 8.380 68.4% �i 0 5.535 1080I j 0 0.996 3.598 67.8% 0 12.777 1820 1 0 1.677 8.305 j 67.1 0 0 5.635 11.742 1240 2740 0 1.2031 3.663 70.8% 0 1 2.477 7.632 67.9% 0 8.742 1905 0 1.831 5.682 ' 68.7% 0 8.611 13701 885 I 2.544 5.597 70.9% t 0 15.643 1 190 i 20601 4.4171 10.168 ' 72.8% 0 0 13.443 _ .. _. 8_309 695 - 420 - -- - - 18501 3.741 8.7381 73.6% 0.3301 5.401+ 65.2% 365 i 126.761 23_431_ _ _0 _ _ 103.33 _ 14435 _ _ _ 47951 21_199_ 67_ 165 69.7% I � r _ 0 133.33 260.091 0.523 _23.9544159 132.807 _.._......_._._ 1.32.807_ 0 __......__._._ 103_33 0 _ _ 14435 380 . - _._380 0 4795_1_ 0.358 0 ! 0.3% __- 21.-.556 J _ 67 165-,34.1 % - 365 CWC Charles Wirtanen, P.E., Inc. 30500 Berry Creek Drive Georgetown, TX 78628 PH: 512/930-9995 FAX: 512/930-5080 July 3, 1995 Ms. Hildy Kingma City of Georgetown P.O. Box 409 Georgetown, TX 78626 Subject: Berry Creek Section Eleven Resubdivision of Berry Creek Section Six Resubdivision of Berry Creek Section Seven- Phase One Resubdivision of Berry Creek Section Seven- Phase Two Resubdivision of Berry Creek Section Eight- Phase One Resubdivision of Berry Creek Section Eight- Phase Two Resubdivision of Berry Creek Section Eight Phase Three Variance Request Dear Ms. Kingma: This letter is to request a variances to the following sections of the City of Georgetown Subdivision Ordinance for the above listed subdivisions: 1) Section 34020 G of the subdivision ordinance. The ordinance does not allow impervious cover in the side setback. The applicant requests a variance to allow driveway construction in the side setback for driveways servicing side entry or "swing -in" garages. 2) Section 34020 E of the subdivision ordinance Table 34020 allows a maximum 40% impervious cover for R-SFD uses. The applicant requests the following variances: a) to allow up to 65% impervious cover on the lots, and b) to not count the water surface area of swimming pools as impervious cover. 3) Section 34020 E of the subdivision ordinance. Table 34020 requires a 25 ft. front setback. Previous interpretations have taken the position that corner lots have two front yards. The applicant requests that corner lots be allowed to have a 15' street side setback provided that access is limited to the front property line. Ms. Hildy Kingma July 3, 1995 Page Two Specifically, variances are requested to allow 15 ft. street setbacks on Las Colinas Dr. for Lots 125 Block D and Lots 39, Block L Amended Resubdivison of Berry Creek Section Seven, Phase One; provided that the homes on those lots are required to face La Quinta Drive. The following lists our response to the issues required to be considered by the Commission and Council. In what manner will the public convenience and welfare be substantially served? The variances allowing driveway encroachments into side setbacks and additional impervious cover will allow an improvement in project aesthetics. The current ordinance requirement encourages two story houses with front entry garages. If the variances are allowed more side entry and rear entry garages will result. Additional impervious coverage will allow the construction of more single story homes providing a more varied street scene. 2. Will appropriate use of the property be substantially or permanently impaired or diminished in any manner? Provide reasons why you believe your answer is supportable. No, the resulting construction will result in an aesthetically more pleasing project with diverse floor plans and street scenes. 3. What are the hardships involved? How were those hardships created? How are those hardships different from those affecting the rest of the public faced with enforcement of this same provision? Note that the Commission and Council cannot approve a variance for which the hardship claimed is solely of an economic nature. The hardship creating the request for this variance is the desire of homebuyers to construct appropriate sized homes using side entry and or single story homes. Side entry garages are penalized by the impervious cover and side .setback limitations. Single story homes cannot achieve similar square footages as multi- story homes. Similarly, counting swimming pools as impervious cover substantially limits potential home size. 4. If the requested variance, if approved, will it confer upon the applicant a special right or privilege no commonly shared or available to the owners of similar and surrounding property? Provide reasons why you believe your answer to be supportable. Ms. Hildy Kingma July 3, 1995 Page Three proposed variance confers no special right or privilege for the following reasons: a) Berry Creek has substantial golf course property which remain as open space with no impervious cover. The resulting overall impervious cover, if the requested variances are allowed is still substantially below that could occur in similar developments that do not provide the additional open space. Other developments, such as Sun City -Georgetown have received variances to allow additional impervious cover in similar circumstances. Riverview Estates has obtained variances to allow driveway construction in the side setback for side entry garages. Anyone proposing a condition equal, or superior to, that required by ordinance should receive similar treatment. 5. How is the public interest affected? There should be no negative effect on the public interest. The effect should be beneficial because the variances will allow more aesthetically pleasing street scenes. 6. List the special conditions that affect this property and justify the approval of the variance. The Resubdivisions of Berry Creek Sections Six, Seven and Eight are replacement plats that substantially reduced the number of lots originally platted and recorded. The original plats had no impervious cover limitation. The justification for the impervious cover limitation is to minimize elimination of potential recharge. The geology of this area consists primarily of clay soils overlaying limestone. As such, little recharge occurs in these subdivisions. the provision of some 130 acres of golf course provides an area equivalent to 390 lots upon which no impervious cover occurs. Inclusion of the golf course in the impervious cover calculations would allow approximately 600 lots to increase their impervious cover to 65%. 7. How will the spirit of the ordinance be observed if this request is granted.) The impervious cover ordinance requirement was adopted to preserve potential recharge. The provision of the Berry Creek golf course and the fact that the soils in the area do not allow recharge means that the goals of that ordinance will be substantially preserved. The allowance of driveways in the side setback for lots with side entry and "side swing -in" garages will result in aesthetically more pleasing street scenes. The houses will still have the minimum separations Ms. Hildy Kingma July 3, 1995 Page Four required by the setbacks. The requirement for a 25 ft. front yard for both street yards assumes that the house could face either street. The requirement is effectively met when the house is required to face a particular street. S. How will substantial justice be done if this request is granted? If this request is granted, the Resubdivisions of Berry Creek Section Six, Seven, and Eight will be allowed to proceed as originally platted (although with substantially fewer lots) when there was no impervious cover limitation. In addition, the provision of additional open space will not be penalized. If you should have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincerely yours, eu i Unnuft i Charles Wirtanen, P.E. CITY OF GEORGETOWN NOTICE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY O OF A PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the City of Georgetown will hold its gular public meeting of the: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ❑ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT This meeting will be held on the 1st day of August , 19951, at 6:00 p.m. at its regular meeting place in the Council Chambers, 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas to consider the proposed: Variance from the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Phase One. Two and Three, Section Eight, Phase one and Two and Section Eleven. As one of the owners of adjacent property you are invited to be present at such meeting if you desire to discuss the proposed plan. See attached Exhibit A for more detail. Date•07/ 17/95 City of Georgetown A copy of the planning report related to this item will be available at the Division of Development Services and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Friday prior to the meeting described above. For further information phone the Development Services Division at 930-3575. PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: Variance - Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Section Eight and Section Eleven Name of Respondent Address of Respondent: I am i favor : I obj ect : If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 07/26/95, it will be provided to the Board of Adjustment or Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 N J Z�7/ G' n 7Z- i 7.11 '7 FFF .UL 2 4 1995 CITY OF GEORGETOWN NOTICE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNEII�k OF A PUBLIC MEETING Notice is hereby given that the City of Georgetown will hold its gular public meeting of the: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ❑ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT This meeting will be held on the 1st day of August , 1995, at 6:00 p.m. at its regular meeting place in the Council Chambers, 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas to consider the proposed: Variance from the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Phase One, Two and Three, Section Eight, Phase One and Two and Section Eleven. As one of the owners of adjacent property you are invited to be present at such meeting if you desire to discuss the proposed plan. See attached Exhibit A for more detail. Date:07/17195 City of Georgetown A copy of the planning report related to this item will be available at the Division of Development Services and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Friday prior to the meeting described above. For further information phone the Development Services Division at 930-3575. PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name:Variance - Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Section Eight and Section Eleven Name of Respondent: _ �— i\*J &J .C- _ �\ Address of Respondent: 3 i O CD A • �� �,., �-��.� C��. I am in favor: I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 07f26Z95, it will be provided to the Board of Adjustment or Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 -71i y e-aX'-c-- CITY OF GEORGETOWN NO`i'ICE TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNER OF A PUBLIC MEETING � IEUIm JUL 2 6 �4�5 Notice is hereby given that the City of Georgetown will hold its r gular public meeting of the: ot PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ❑ BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT This meeting will be held on the 1st day of August , 1995, at 6:00 p.m. at its regular meeting place in the Council Chambers, 101 East 7th Street, Georgetown, Texas to consider the proposed: Variance from the design standards of the Subdivision Regulations for the Resubdivision of Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Phase One, Two and Three, Section Eight, Phase One and Two and Section Eleven. As one of the owners of adjacent property you are invited to be present at such meeting if you desire to discuss the proposed plan. See attached Exhibit A for more detail. Date• 07/17f95 City of Georgetown A copy of the planning report related to this item will be available at the Division of Development Services and the Georgetown Public Library no later than the Friday prior to the meeting described above. For further information phone the Development Services Division at 930-3575. PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: Variance - Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Section Eight and Section Eleve 11 Name of Respondent: /C- - /t 1� � Address of Respondent/W„ d I am in favor: /,� L-- I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 07/26/951 it will be provided to the Board of Adjustment or Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 ,�? Georgetown, Texas 78627 Project Name: Variance - BerrV Creek Section Six Section Seven Section Eight and Section Eleven S4��e ti 6 6�0MC40 g �timQoao Name of Respondent: d�S Address of Respondent: I am in favor: S I object: -------- ------------------------- -- :�_ h� s — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — -- — — — -- — — — — — — — — . — — — — — — — — PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: Variance - Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Section Eight and Section Eleven 14 ame of Respondent•D61��oU S �- +��, q T:),u Address of Respondent: �OO / 7 0RKL-�ANO h ++-L-s �R I am in favor:- `� I object: ------.----------1_.- - v��!'r�1'� /a _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: Variance - Berry Creek Section Six Section Seven Section Eight and Section Eleven Name of Respondent: �A-,Vk1 Address of Respondent: 5DD/r I am in favor: ✓ I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 07 26 95, it will be provided to the Board of Adjustment or Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. O. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Project Name: Variance - Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Section Eight and Section Eleven Name of Respondent: _ LL6yP F , L0 (-+-'Wo a 0 Address of Respondent: 1�'{u1 7 OWY '(ILL CT I am in favor: X I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 07/26 95, it will be provided to the Board of Adjustment or Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division ------ P. 0. Box 409__ --------------- --- PROPERTY OWNER'S COMMENTS Project Name: Variance - Berry Creek, Section Six, Section Seven, Section Eight and Section Eleven Name of Respondent: CU. Address of Respondent: _3016 7 /qVq,-e,;P'(!-, I am in favor: 11� I object: If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 07/26/95, it will be provided to the Board of Adjustment or Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. Please reply to: City of Georgetown Development Services Division P. 0. Box 409 Georgetown, Texas 78627 Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. -BB N AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration and first reading of an ordinance providing for the annexation into the City of a 333.490 acre portion of the Sun City Georgetown Planned Unit Development, Phase 2, located in the Daniel Monroe, W.G. Wilkinson, George Thompson, Abner Short, R.T. Jenkins, and Mary Ann Lewis Surveys. ITEM SUMMARY: On October 10, 1995, the City Council passed a resolution to adopt the proposed service plans and set the public hearing dates for the annexation of this property. Two (2) public hearings were held, on October 18, 1995 and on October 24, 1995, as required by State law to describe and receive comments on the City's plans for providing services to the annexation areas. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The property owner(s) have requested voluntary annexation. FINANCIAL IMPACT: The service plan, which is to be adopted as a part of the annexation ordinance, describes the City services to be provided to the areas. COMMENTS: The prior Council actions referred to the proposed annexation area as an approximately 300.6 acre portion of the Sun City Planned Unit Development, Phase 2. A more accurate description of the property resulted in the 333.490 acreage figure. ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance and exhibits. Submitted By- - Edward arry, AICP, - Director Divisio of Development Services ,' -tom 2e --,- Clyde on Rosenberg, XqP Chief Planner, Long Range Planning ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, PROVIDING FOR THE EXTENSION OF CERTAIN BOUNDARY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AND THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY CONSISTING OF 333.490 ACRES IN THE DANIEL MONROE, W.G. WILKINSON, GEORGE THOMPSON, ABNER SHORT, R.T. JENKINS, AND MARY ANN LEWIS SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS A PORTION OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE TWO, AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A OF THIS ORDINANCE; WHICH SAID TERRITORY LIES ADJACENT TO AND ADJOINS THE PRESENT BOUNDARY LIMIT OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS AND NOT BEING A PART OF ANY INCORPORATED AREA; PROVIDING FOR SERVICE PLANS; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, may under the Charter of said City, Section 1.06, annex areas as allowed by State law; and WHEREAS, notices of two (2) public hearings were published according to law in a newspaper having general circulation in the City of Georgetown, Texas, and in the herein described territory to be annexed not more than twenty (20) days nor less than ten (10) days prior to those hearings; and WHEREAS, two public hearings by the City of Georgetown, Texas, where all interested persons were provided with an opportunity to be heard on the proposed annexation of certain tracts of land located in Williamson County, Texas, including: AN APPROXIMATELY 300.6 ACRE PORTION OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE TWO, WITHIN IN THE W.G. WILKINSON, GEORGE THOMPSON, ABNER SHORT, R.T. JENKINS, MARY ANN LEWIS AND DANIEL MONROE SURVEYS, LOCATED NORTH OF RM2338 APPROXIMATELY ONE AND ONE-HALF MILES NORTH OF CEDAR BREAKS ROAD; were held, the first being on the 18th day of October 1995, and the second being on the 24th day of October 1995; and WHEREAS, at such public hearings, a proposed service plan was presented to and discussed by the Council and all interested persons; and WHEREAS, such public hearings were held not more than forty (40) nor fewer than twenty (20) days prior to the institution of these proceedings; and Sun City - Portion of Phase 2 Annexation Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the legal description for the property to be annexed has since been more accurately described as: 333.490 ACRES IN THE DANIEL MONROE, W.G. WILKINSON, GEORGE THOMPSON, ABNER SHORT, R.T. JENKINS, AND MARY ANN LEWIS SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS A PORTION OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE TWO, AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A OF THIS ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the total corporate area of the City of Georgetown, Texas, on the lst day of January, 1995, was 9,577 acres; and WHEREAS, the population of the City of Georgetown, Texas includes approximately 18,800 inhabitants; and WHEREAS, all of the herein -described property lies within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the City of Georgetown, Texas; and WHEREAS, the herein -described property lies adjacent and contiguous to the City of Georgetown, Texas; and WHEREAS, all notices and other prerequisites of state law and the City Charter have been complied with; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following policies of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element: 1. Environmental and Resource Conservation Policy 1, which states: "The Physical attributes that make Georgetown attractive are protected"; and 2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "Land use patterns within the City provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations"; and 3. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2, which states: "The City's regulations implement the policy statements and provide the opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense"; and 4. Growth and Physical Development Policy 3, which states: "Annexations procedures and standards benefit the community"; Sun City - Portion of Phase 2 Annexation Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 and further finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Georgetown hereby annexes: 333.490 ACRES IN THE DANIEL MONROE, W.G. WILKINSON, GEORGE THOMPSON, ABNER SHORT, R.T. JENKINS, AND MARY ANN LEWIS SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS A PORTION OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE TWO, as described in Exhibit A of this ordinance, which contains maps, descriptions, and the service plans for the tracts. SECTION 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. SECTION 4. If any provision of this ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full, force and effect in (10) ten days on and after publication in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the 28th day of November, 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of 91995. ATTEST: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Sun City - Portion of Phase 2 Annexation Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: By: LEO WOOD Mayor EXHIBIT A, Page 1 of 22 333.490 ACR SUN CITY GEORGE� ANNEXATIOP 11-A— 2 \ NEiGnBOR�OO� � -q,�T 00 2 COMMERCIAL A Ose I/Phase 2 Boundary--� S-' C �SEORGCIOWN —ASE ji C'aDRHOOr —SE � C"' —AS[ CITY SCOTT & W.,-,.- SUN ASf SCOTT O 7F SCALE: 1"=500' THIS MAP IS TENTATIVE AND REMAINS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PENDING FINAL GOVERNMENTAL THE DEVELOPER HAS RESERVED THE RIGHT, Wrl-HOUT NOTICE, To MAKE 0WIGES To TM MA? PAAF EXHIBIT A, Page 2 of 2 2 Metes and Bounds Description For City of Georgetown, Texas Annexation 333.490 Acres (14,526,840 Sq. Ft.) Being a tract of land containing 333.490 acres (14,526,840 Sq. Ft.) of land situated in the Daniel Monroe Survey, Abstract No. 450, W. G. Wilkinson Survey, Abstract No. 671, George Thompson Survey, Abstract No. 792, Abner Short Survey, Abstract No. 593, R„ T. Jenkins Survey, Abstract No. 360 and the Mary Ann Lewis Survey, Abstract No. 406, Williamson County, Texas, and portions of a called 330.927 acre Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P. tract as recorded in Volume 2679, Page 744, Doc. No. 9506561 of the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas (O.R.W.C.T.), and a called 566.05 acre Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract, as recorded in Volume 1898, Page 597 of the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas. Said 333.490 acre tract being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: with all coordinates and bearings being referenced to the Texas Coordinate System, Central Zone; all coordinates recited herein are grid; all surface distances recited herein may be converted to grid by multiplying by the combined factor of 0.999856056: Metes and Bounds Description Parcel 1 83.102 Acres (3,619,942 Sq. Ft.) Commencing for reference at a 1/2-inch iron rod (X= 3,110,494.4369, Y:=10,228,777.6545) found on the northeasterly right-of-way of R.M. 2338 (80' wide) as recorded in Volume 834, Page 809 of the Williamson County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.), said 1/2-inch iron rod also being the most westerly northwest corner of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One, a subdivision of record in Cabinet M, Slides 95-116 of the Williamson County Plat Records (W.C.P.R.), and common to the most westerly southwest corner of Lakewoods Estates Subdivision as recorded in Cabinet D, Slide 323 of the Williamson County Plat Records (W.C.P.R.). THENCE, leaving the said northeasterly right-of-way of R.M. 2338, and along and with the line common to said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One and Lakewoods Estates Subdivision, said common line also being the same line called out in a Boundary Line Agreement recorded in Volume 739, Page 654 W.C.D.R., the following two (2) courses: 1. North 671,27'50" East, passing at 32.25 feet a point for the westerly corner of Tract "A", said point also falling on the easterly 20 foot widening dedication for said R.M. 2338, per said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One plat, and continuing for a total distance of 122.72 feet; 2. North 77002'31" East, a distance of 802.39 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described (X=3,111,389.6170, Page 1 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 3 of 22 Y=10,229,004.5838) said point also being a common corner for said Tract "A" and the said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract; THENCE, continuing along and with a line common to said Lakewoods Estates Subdivision and the said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract the following eight (8) courses: 1. North 20033'36" East, a distance of 177.46 feet; 2. North 67045'06" East, a distance of 787.49 feet; 3. North 67043'11" East, a distance of 284.71 feet; 4. North 68002'01" East, a distance of 356.85 feet; 5. North 67047'46" East, a distance of 173.32 feet; 6. North 71 °05'26" East, a distance of 257.52 feet; 7. North 48053'11" East, a distance of 5.34 feet; 8. North 43017'06" East, a distance of 29.41 feet to a point for the most westerly southwest corner of a called 330.927 acre tract conveyed to Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P., as recorded in Volume 2679, Page 0744 of the O.R.W.C.T.; THENCE, leaving the said line of Lakewoods Estates and along and with the line common to said Del E. Webb called 330.927 acre tract and the northerly line of said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract the following three (3) courses: 1. North 72052'44" East, a distance of 104.00 feet; 2. North 68045'01" East, a distance of 898.74 feet; 3. North 69017'56" East, adistance of 86.52 feet- to a point falling on a , westerly line of a Tract F , a golf course and drainage easement of said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One to a point for the most north northeasterly corner of the parcel herein described; THENCE, along and with the said westerly line of Tract "F" the following four (4) courses: 1. South 29002'48" East, a distance of 473.88 feet; 2. South 12036'53" West, a distance of 346.12 feet; 3. South 22010'57" East, a distance of 161.82 feet; Page 2 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 4 of 22 4. South 57003'31" East, a distance of 221.78 feet to a point falling on a non -tangent curve to the left; 5. THENCE, 40.76 feet along and with said arc of a non -tangent curve to the left, having a central angle of 01 °51'13, a radius of 1,260.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 26039'10 West, 40.76 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 6. South 25043'33" West, a distance of 41.08 feet to the point of curvature of a tangent curve to the right; 7. THENCE, 1,384.34 feet along and with said arc to the right, having a central angle of 63027'12", a radius of 1,250.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 57027'09" West, 1,314.67 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 8. THENCE, South 89010'45" West, a distance of 322.09 feet to a point for the most southerly southeast corner of Tract "B", an open space, of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One; THENCE, along and with a line common to said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract and said Tract "B" and Tract "A" of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One the following nine (9) courses: 1. North 44042'48" East, a distance of 31.60 feet; 2. North 00017'13" West, a distance of 93.46 feet; 3. South 76007'52" West, a distance of 304.06 feet; 4. North 89021'37" West, a distance of 504.74 feet; 5. South 84014'19" West, a distance of 326.03 feet; 6. South 79036'17" West, a distance of 111.05 feet; 7. North 79003'31" West, a distance of 95.63 feet; 8. North 65049'18" West, at 17.43 feet passing the common corner for said Tract "B" and Tract "A" of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One and continuing for a total distance of 199.82 feet; 9. North 32005'04" West, a distance of 525.66 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described and containing a computed area of 83.102 acres (3,619,942 Sq. Ft.) of land for Parcel 1. Page 3of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 5 of 22 Metes and Bounds Description Parcel 2 52.743 Acres (2,297,489 Sq. Ft.) Commencing for reference at a 1/2-inch iron rod (X=3,110,494.4369, Y==10,228,777.6545) found on the northeasterly right-of-way of R.M. 2338 (80' wide) as recorded in Volume 834, Page 809 of the Williamson County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.), said 1/2-inch iron rod also being the most westerly northwest corner of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One, a subdivision of record i.n Cabinet M, Slides 9`►-116 of the Williamson County Plat Records (W.C.P.R.), and common to the most westerly southwest corner of Lakewoods Estates Subdivision as recorded in Cabinet D, Slide 323 of the Williamson County Plat Records (W.C.P.R.). THENCE, leaving the said northeasterly right-of-way of R.M. 2338, and along and wiith the line common to said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One and Lakewoods Estates Subdivision, said common line also being the same line called out in a Boundary Line Agreement recorded in Volume 739, Page 654 W.C.D.R., the following two (2) courses: 1. North 67027'50" East, passing at 32.25 feet a point for the westerly corner of Tract "A", said point also falling on the easterly 20 foot widening dedication for said R. M. 2338, per said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One plat, and continuing for a total distance of 122.72 feet; 2. North 77002'31" East, a distance of 802.39 feet to the point for a corner of said Del E. Webb tract, said point also being a common corner for said Tract "A" and the said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract; THENCE, continuing along and with a line common to said Lakewoods Estates Subdivision and the said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract the following eight (8) courses: 1. North 20033'36" East, a distance of 177.46 feet; 2. North 67045'06" East, a distance of 787.49 feet; 3. North 67043'11" East, a distance of 284.71 feet; 4. North 68002'01" East, a distance of 356.85 feet; 5. North 67047'46" East, a distance of 173.32 feet; 6. North 71 °05'26" East, a distance of 257.52 feet; 7. North 48053'11" East, a distance of 5.34 feet; Page 4of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 6 of 22 8. North 43017'06" East, a distance of 29.41 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING herein described (X = 3111*31203.21491 Y=10,229,884.0772), said point also being the most westerly southwest corner of a called 330.927 acre tract conveyed to Del E. Webb Development Co., L.P., as recorded in Volume 2679, Page 0744 of the O.R.W.C.T.; THENCE, continuing along and with a line common to said Lakewoods Estates Subdivision and the said Del E. Webb called 330.927 acre tract the following twenty- two (22) courses: 1. North 01 027'36" East, a distance of 34.16 feet; 2. North 17050'06" East, a distance of 41.42 feet; 3. North 21 °56'06" East, a distance of 247.97 feet; 4. North 22008'36" East, a distance of 308.00 feet; 5. North 22020'46" East, a distance of 178.05 feet; 6. North 25035'01" East, a distance of 23.19 feet; 7. North 21 °3856" East, a distance of 57.09 feet; 8. North 2101016" East, a distance of 270.00 feet; 9. North 21 °17'56" East, a distance of 93.56 feet; 10. North 22047'16" East, a distance of 161.25 feet; 11. North 21 °15'01" East, a distance of 298.18 feet; 12. North 21 °58'46" East, a distance of 172.30 feet; 13. North 11 °50'41" East, a distance of 15.97 feet; 14. North 22013'46" East, a distance of 186.05 feet; 15. North 21 °25'41" East, a distance of 280.72 feet; 16. North 23017'21" East, a distance of 261.58 feet; 17. North 33002'31" East, a distance of 52.25 feet; 18. North 84026'01" East, a distance of 26.25 feet; 19. North 77057'31" East, a distance of 17.91 feet; Page 5 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 7 of 22 20. North 86049'26" East, a distance of 48.28 feet; 21. North 85026'31" East, a distance of 28.65 feet; 22. South 58053'43" East, a distance of 46.86 feet; THENCE, leaving the said common line for Lakewood Estates Subdivision and the said Del E. Webb called 330.927 acre tract the following sixty-three (63) courses: 1. South 57058'24" East, a distance of 71.70 feet; 2. South 20002'43" East, a distance of 118.20 feet; 3. South 52051'55" East, a distance of 54.82 feet; 4. North 7602325" East, a distance of 90.00 feet; 5. South 68011'40" East, a distance of 154.88 feet; 6. South 18046'21" East, a distance of 70.00 feet; 7. South 02021'09" East, a distance of 70.00 feet; 8. South 23046'45" West, a distance of 77.88 feet; 9. South 42015'43" West, a distance of 314.53 feet; 10. South 34059'21" West, a distance of 90.20 feet to a point of curvature of a non -tangent curve to the right; 11. THENCE, 54.68 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the right, having a central angle of 101,29'4711, a radius of 298.50 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 49053'07" East, 54.61 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 12. North 72003'05" East, a distance of 108.30 feet; 13. North 66018'58" East, a distance of 55.03 feet; 14. North 64016'19" East, a distance of 54.92 feet; 15. North 62030'34" East, a distance of 52.06 feet; 16. North 56031'51" East, a distance of 310.77 feet; 17. North 60059'25" East, a distance of 72.04 feet; Page 6 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 8 of 22 18. North 73015'16" East, a distance of 72.20 feet; 19. North 83057'33" East, a distance of 72.20 feet; 20. South 85020'09" East, a distance of 72.20 feet; 21. South 74037'51" East, a distance of 72.20 feet; 22. South 63055'33" East, a distance of 72.20 feet; 23. South 51 °38'13" East, a distance of 72.04 feet; 24. South 41 °45'45" East, a distance of 140.46 feet; 25. South 86033'15" East, a distance of 85.27 feet; 26. South 81 °22'35" East, a distance of 85.40 feet; 27. South 73018'17" East, a distance of 85.48 feet; 28. South 66025'48" East, a distance of 155.97 feet; 29. South 66019'32" East, a distance of 43.68 feet; 30. South 60045'04" East, a distance of 77.65 feet; 31. South 19027'17" East, a distance of 157.86 feet; 32. South 33049'37" West, a distance of 245.00 feet; 33. North 67034'41" West, a distance of 248.65 feet; 34. North 50000'31" West, a distance of 218.81 feet; 35. South 85011'24" West, a distance of 177.19 feet; 36. South 61 °45'49" West, a distance of 992.52 feet; 37. South 61 °45'49" West, a distance of 10.72 feet to the point of curvature of a non -tangent curve to the left; 38. THENCE, 130.83 feet along and with the arc of said non -tangent curve to the left, having a central angle of 30035'47", a radius of 245.00 feet and a chord which bears South 36055'34" East, a distance of 129.28 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 39. South 52013'27" East, a distance of 234.77 feet to the point of curvature Page 7of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 9 of 22 of a curve to the right; 40. THENCE, 146.60 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the right, having a central angle of 13026'20", a radius of 625.00 feet and a chord which bears South 45030'17" East, a distance of 146.26 feet to a point of tangent of the curve herein described; 41. South 38047'07" East, a distance of 154.95 feet to the point of curvature of curve to the left; 42. THENCE, 155.47 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the left, having a central angle of 10010-49", a radius of 875.00 feet and a chord which bears South 43052'31" East, a distance of 155.27 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 43. South 55005'40" East, a distance of 91.94 feet to the point of curvature of a non -tangent curve to the left; 44. THENCE, 8.96 feet along and with the arc of said non -tangent curve to the left, having a central angle of 00035'24", a radius of 870.00 feet and a chord which bears South 55017'32" East, a distance of 8.96 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 45. South 55035'14" East, a distance of 157.98 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 46. THENCE, 38.74 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the left, having a central angle of 88047'11", a radius of 25.00 feet and a chord which bears North 80001'10" East, a distance of 34.98 feet to a point, falling on the northerly right-of-way line of Del Webb Boulevard (width varies) of said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One; 47. South 34033'38" West, along and with the said northerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard, a distance of 109.47 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 48. THENCE, 39.27 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the left, having a central angle of 90000'00", a radius of 25.00 feet and a chord which bears North 10035'14" West, a distance of 35.36 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 49. North 55035'14" West, a distance of 89.71 feet to a point; 50. North 55029'07" West, a distance of 84.73 feet to a point; 51. North 48036'00" West, a distance of 90.59 feet to the point of curvature of a non -tangent curve to the right; Page 8of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 10 of 22 52. THENCE, 164.35 feet along and with the arc of said non -tangent curve to the right, having a central angle of 10010'49", a radius of 925.00 feet and a chord which bears North 43052'31" West, a distance of 164.14 feet to a point of tangent of the curve herein described; 53. North 38047'07" West, a distance of 154.95 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 54. THENCE, 134.87 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the left, having a central angle of 13026'20", a radius of 575.00 feet and a chord which bears North 45030'17" West, a distance of 134.56 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 55. North 52013'27" West, a distance of 234.77 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the right; 56. THENCE, 147.06 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the right, having a central angle of 28033'44", a radius of 2�5.00 feet and a chord which bears North 37056'35" West, a distance of 145.54 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 57. South 67036'16" West, a distance of 111.47 feet to a point; 58. North 42012'31" West, a distance of 248.04 feet to a point; 59. South 88047'13" West, a distance of 183.37 feet to a point; 60. South 57052'48" West, a distance of 119.83 feet to a point; 61. South 21 °35'14" West, a distance of 293.57 feet to a point; 62. South 53011'49" East, a distance of 289.55 feet to a point; 63. South 29002'48" East, a distance of 323.20 feet to a point falling on the northerly line of said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract; THENCE, along and with the line common to said Del E. Webb called 330.927 acre tract and the said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract the following three courses: 1. South 69017'56" West, a distance of 86.52 feet; 2. South 68045'01" West, a distance of 898.74 feet; 3. South 72052'44" West, a distance of 104.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described and containing a computed area of 52.743 acres (2,297,489 Sq. Ft.) of land for Parcel 2. Page 9of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 11 of 22 Metes and Bounds Description Parcel 3 120.366 Acres (5,243,127 Sq. Ft.) Commencing for reference at a 1/2-inch iron rod (X=3,112,678.2841, Y==10,226,769.9059) found on the northeasterly right-of-way of R.M. 2338 (80' wide) as recorded in Volume 834, Page 809 of the Williamson County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.), said 1/2-inch iron rod also being the most westerly southwest corner of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One as recorded in Cabinet M, Slides 95-116 of the Williamson County Plat Records, and also being common to the most westerly corner of a called 6.25 acre W. D. Ischy tract as recorded in Volume 836, Page 887 W.C.D.R.; THENCE, North 69003'37" East, leaving the said northeasterly right-of-way of R. M. 2338 and along and with the common line for said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One and the Ischy tract, at 24.43 feet passing the southwesterly corner of Tract "U" Commercial of said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One, said point also falling on the easterly 20 foot widening dedication for said R.M. 2338, per said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One plat, and continuing for a total distance of 223.52 to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described (X = 3,112,887.01411 Y=1012261849.7780); THENCE, leaving the said line common to the said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One tract and the Ischy tract and following the line common to said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One and said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract, the following eighteen (18) courses: 1. North 69017'41" West, a distance of 179.78 feet; 2. North 11 001'38" East, a distance of 140.99 feet; 3. North 82039'27" West, a distance of 142.69 feet; 4. North 26017'30" West, a distance of 460.68 feet; 5. North 10054'24" West, a distance of 105.14 feet; 6. North 03031'36" East, a distance of 97.16 feet; 7. North 12028'57" East, a distance of 89.36 feet; 8. North 20004'02" East, a distance of 81.09 feet; 9. North 39041'18" East, a distance of 113.39 feet; 10. North 54003'13" East, a distance of 152.41 feet; Page 10of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 12 of 22 11. North 65025'44" East, a distance of 87.56 feet; 12. North 54022'55" East, a distance of 74.57 feet; 13. North 47058'39" East, a distance of 85.71 feet; 14. North 54018'38" East, a distance of 99.59 feet; 15. North 67029'17" East, a distance of 189.15 feet; 16. North 88022'08" East, a distance of 101.18 feet; 17. North 05004'48" West, a distance of 32.69 feet; 18. North 50004'47" West, a distance of 26.53 feet to a point falling on the southerly right-of-way line of Del Webb Boulevard (width varies) of said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One; THENCE, along and with the said southerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard the following four (4) courses: 1. THENCE, 21.31 feet along and with a non -tangent arc to the right having a central angle of 02017'27", a radius of 533.00, a chord bearing and distance of South 88005'04" East, 21.31 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 2. South 86056'20" East, a distance of 353.82 feet to the point of curvature of a tangent curve to the left; 3. THENCE, 1,249.52 feet along and with said arc to the left, having a central angle of 59039'37", a radius of 1,200.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 63013'51" East, 1,193.83 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 4. THENCE, North 33024'03" East, a distance of 128.79 feet to a point falling on a curve to the right; THENCE, leaving the said southerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard, 40.00 feet along and with said tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 91 °40'22", a radius of 25.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 79014'14" East, 35.87 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; THENCE, South 54055'35" East, a distance of 98.63 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the right; THENCE, 23.56 feet along and with said tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 90000'00", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of Page 11 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 13 of 22 South 09055'35" East, 21.21 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; THENCE, South 54055'35" East, a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of curvature of a tangent curve to the right; THENCE, 23.16 feet along and with said tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 88027'11", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 79018'00" East, 20.92 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein describe; THENCE, South 56028'24" East, a distance of 156.43 feet to the point of curvature of a tangent curve to the left; THENCE, 41.97 feet along and with said tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 04022'18", a radius of 550.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 58039'33" East, 41.96 feet to the point of curvature of a reverse curve to the right; THENCE, 22.50 feet along and with said tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 85056'25", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 17052'30" East, 20.45 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; THENCE, South 64054'17" East, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point for the point of curvature of a tangent curve to the right; THENCE, 22.50 feet along and with said tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 85056'25", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 68003'55' East, 20.45 feet to the point of curvature of a reverse curve to the left; THENCE, 166.59 feet along and with said tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 17021'17", a.radius of 550.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 77038'31" East, 165.96 feet to the point of curvature of a reverse curve to the right; THENCE, 22.58 feet along and with said tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 86°15'25", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 43011'26" East, 20.51 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; THENCE, South 88040'53" East, a distance of 50.01 feet; THENCE, South 00003'43" East, a distance of 112.58 feet; THENCE, North 88040'48" East, a distance of 306.50 feet; Page 12 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 14 of 22 THENCE, South 77000'25" East, a distance of 68.45 feet; THENCE, South 65050'18" East, a distance of 273.89 feet; THENCE, South 48020'41" East, a distance of 229.90 feet; THENCE, North 64040'42" East, a distance of 74.95 feet; THENCE, North 27027'13" East, a distance of 82.05 feet; THENCE, North 01 041'58" East, a distance of 93.30 feet to a point falling on a curve the left; THENCE, 96.30 feet along and with said non -tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 06041'17", a radius of 825.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of: South 86031'33" East, 96.25 feet to the point of curvature of a reverse curve to the right; THENCE, 22.89 feet along and with said tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 87024-55", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 46009'43" East, 20.73 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; THENCE, North 88031'29" East, a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of curvature of a non -tangent curve to the right; THENCE, 23.56 feet along and with said non -tangent curve to the right having a central angle of 90000'00", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 42032'44" East, 21.21 feet to the end of the curve herein described; THENCE, North 87032'44" East, a distance of 81.51 feet to the point of curvature of a tangent curve to the right; THENCE, 207.60 feet along and with said curve to the right having a central angle of 38059'56", a radius of 305.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 72057'18" East, 203.62 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; THENCE, South 53027'20" East, a distance of 34.33 feet; THENCE, South 36032'40" West, a distance of 132.00 feet; THENCE, South 24009'40" West, a distance of 51.94 feet; THENCE, South 37011'23" West, a distance of 158.00 feet; THENCE, South 16037'08" East, a distance of 140.11 feet; Page 13of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 15 of 22 THENCE, South 56031'46" East, a distance of 95.00 feet; THENCE, South 40046'32" East, a distance of 53.19 feet to a point falling on the south line of the said 566.05 acre Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract, said point also falling on the north line of the Chaparro Estates Subdivision as recorded in Cabinet D, Slide 276 of the W.C.P.R.; THENCE, South 68038'37" West, along and with the common line for said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract and Chaparro Estates Subdivision a distance of 3,500.46 feet to a point falling on the easterly line of said Ischy tract; THENCE, along and with the common line for said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract and the Ischy tract the following four (4) courses: 1. North 29040'21" West, a distance of 25.50 feet; 2. North 34023'06" West, a distance of 190.54 feet; 3. North 40025'06" West, a distance of 188.06 feet; 4. South 69003'37" West, a distance of 293.18 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of 122.116 acres (5,319,366 Square Feet) of land for Parcel No. 3. Metes and Bounds Description Parcel 4 75.529 Acres (3,290,043 Sq. Ft.) Commencing for reference at a 1/2-inch iron rod (X=3,112,678.2841, Y=10,226,769.9059) found on the northeasterly right-of-way of R.M. 2338 (80' wide) as recorded in Volume 834, Page 809 of the Williamson County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.), said 1/2-inch iron rod also being the most westerly southwest corner of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One as recorded in Cabinet M, Slides 95-116 of the Williamson County Plat Records, and also being common to the most westerly corner of a called 6.25 acre W. D. Ischy tract as recorded in Volume 836, Page 887 W.C.D.R.; THENCE, North 69°03'37" East, leaving the said northeasterly right-of-way of R. M. 2338 and along and with the common line for said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One and the Ischy tract, at 24.43 feet passing the southwesterly corner of Tract "U" Commercial of said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One, said point also falling on the easterly 20 foot widening dedication for said R.M. 2338, per said Sun City Georgetown neighborhood One plat, and at 223.52 feet passing a corner of said Tract "U" of Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One and continuing -For a total distance of 516.70 to a point for the northeasterly corner of said Ischy tract, said point also being an interior corner of the said 566.05 acre Theron S. Page 14of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 16 of 22 Bradford, Trustee tract; THENCE, along and with the common line for said Ischy tract and the Bradford Trustee tract the following three (3) courses: 1. South 40025'06" East, a distance of 188.06 feet; 2. South 34023'06" East, a distance of 190.54 feet; 3. South 29040'21" East, a distance of 25.50 feet to a point falling on the south line of said Bradford Trustee tract, said point also falling on the north line of Chaparro Estates Subdivision as recorded in Cabinet D, Slide 276 of the Williamson County Plat Records (W.C.P.R.); THENCE, North 68038'37" East, along and with the common line for said Bradford Trustee tract and said Chaparro Estates Subdivision a distance of 3,500.46 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described (X-311161662.54641 Y- 1012271906.5780); THENCE, leaving the said Bradford Trustee tract south line the following thirty- four (34) courses through the interior of the said Bradford Trustee tract: 1. North 40046'32" West, a distance of 53.19 feet; 2. North 56031'46" West, a distance of 95.00 feet; 3. North 16037'08" West, a distance of 140.11 feet; 4. North 37011'23" East, a distance of 158.00 feet; 5. North 24009'40" East, a distance of 51.94 feet; 6. North 36032'40" East, a distance of 132.00 feet; 7.. North 53027'20" West, a distance of 34.33 feet; 8. THENCE, 207.60 feet along and with a tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 38059'56", a radius of 305.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 72057'18" West, 203.62 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 9. South 87032'44" West, a distance of 81.51 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 10. THENCE, 23.56 feet along and with a tangent curve to the left having a central angle of 90°00'00,,, a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 42032'44" West, 21.21 feet to the point of tangent Page 15 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 17 of 22 of the curve herein described; 11. South 881131'29" West, a distance of 50.01 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 12. THENCE, 22.89 feet along and with a curve to the left having a central angle of 87024'55", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 46009'43" West, 20.73 feet to a point for a reverse curve to the right; 13. THENCE, 96.30 feet along and with said curve to the right having a central angle of 06041'17", a radius of 825.00 feet and a chord bearing of North 86031'33" West, 96.25 feet to a point of tangent of the curve herein described; 14. South 01 041'58" West, a distance of 93.30 feet; 15. South 27027'13" West, a distance of 82.05 feet; 16. South 64040'42" West, a distance of 74.95 feet; 17. North 48020'41" West, a distance of 229.90 feet; 18. North 65050'18" West, a distance of 273.89 feet; 19. North 77000'25" West, a distance of 68.45 feet; 20. South 88040'48" West, a distance of 306.50 feet; 21. North 00003'43" West, a distance of 112.58 feet; 22. North 88040'53" West, a distance of 50.01 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 23. THENCE, 22.58 feet along and with a curve to the left having a central angle of 86015'25", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 43011'26" West, 20.51 feet to the point of curvature of a reverse curve to the right; 24. THENCE, 166.59 feet along and with said curve to the right having a central angle of 17021'17", a radius of 550.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 77038'31" West, 165.96 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 25. THENCE, 22.50 feet along and with said curve to the left having a central angle of 85056'25", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 68003'55" West, 20.45 feet to the point of tangent of Page 16of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 18 of 22 the curve herein described; 26. North 64054'17" West, a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 27. THENCE, 22.50 feet along and with a curve to the left having a central angle of 8505625", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 17052'30" West, 20.45 feet to a point of curvature of a reverse curve to the right; 28. THENCE, 41.97 feet along and with said curve to the right having a central angle of 04022'18", a radius of 550.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 58039'33" West, 41.96 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 29. North 56028'24" West, a distance of 156.43 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 30. THENCE, 23.16 feet along and with a curve to the left having a central angle of 88027'12", a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 79018'00" West, 20.92 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 31. North 54055'35" West, a distance of 50.00 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 32. THENCE, 23.56 feet, along and with a curve to the left having a central angle of 90°00'0011, a radius of 15.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of North 09055'35" West, 21.21 feet to the point of tangent of the curve herein described; 33. North 54055'35" West, a distance of 98.63 feet to the point of curvature of a curve to the left; 34. THENCE, 40.00 feet along and with a curve to the left having a central angle of 91 °40'22", a radius of 25.00 feet and a chord bearing and distance of South 79014'14" West, 35.87 feet to a point falling on the southerly right-of-way line of Del Webb Boulevard (width varies) of said Sun City Georgetown Neighborhood One; THENCE, North 33024'03" East, along and with the said southerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard, a distance of 110.37 feet; THENCE, leaving the said southerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard and through the said Theron S. Bradford, Trustee tract the following twelve (12) courses: 1. South 05003'11" East, a distance of 32.16 feet; Page 17 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 19 of 22 2. South 56004'20" East, a distance of 292.96 feet; 3. South 891150'33" East, a distance of 728.30 feet; 4. North 661,53'21" East, a distance of 432.95 feet; 5. South 68046'23" East, a distance of 156.04 feet; 6. North 61 °27'05" East, a distance of 345.41 feet; 7. North 67028'10" East, a distance of 790.53 feet; 8. North 49050'12" East, a distance of 411.75 feet; 9. North 57024'59" East, a distance of 168.78 feet; 10. North 63059'32" East, a distance of 263.31 feet; 11. South 37055'50" East, a distance of 608.35 feet; 12. South 74015'24" East, a distance of 415.31 feet to a point falling on the line common to said Bradford Trustee tract and a called 195.137 acre tract conveyed to Joy Shell Adkins as described in Exhibit "E" out of a partition deed recorded in Volume 1872, Page 708 of the W.C.D.R.; THENCE, along and with the common line for said Bradford Trustee tract and the Joy Shell Adkins tract the following seven (7) courses: 1. South 31 °55'30" West, a distance of 72.58 feet; 2. South 02056'30" East, a distance of 66.91 feet; 3. South 20000'30" East, a distance of 59.51 feet; 4. South 11 029'30" East, a distance of 135.80 feet; 5. South 06004'30" East, a distance of 125.11 feet; 6. South 05004'30" West, a distance of 111.87 feet; 7. South 13014'30" West, a distance of 44.60 feet to a common corner for said Bradford Trustee tract, the Joy Shell Adkins tract, and the northeasterly corner of said Chaparro Estates Subdivision; THENCE, South 68038'37" West, along and with the line common to said Bradford Trustee tract and Chaparro Estates Subdivision a distance of 2,254.91 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of 75.529 acres (3,290,043 Square Feet) of land for Parcel No. 4. Page 18of19 EXHIBIT A, Page 20 of 22 Prepared by: Larry L. Conwell Rec►istered Professional Land Surveyor Texas Registration No. 4002 SURVCON INC. 5000 Plaza On The Lake Suite 180 Austin, Texas 78746 Job No. 4728-47 November 6, 1995 ZASURVC0M4728-47\NH-00I.M&B Page 19 of 19 EXHIBIT A, Page 21 of 22 CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS ANNEXATION SERVICE PLAN SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - 333.490 ACRE PORTION OF PHASE 2 Introduction This service plan has been prepared in accordance with Texas Local Government Code, Chapter 43 - Municipal Annexation. This requires that the service plan provide for the extension of full municipal services to the area to be annexed by any of the methods by which it extends services to any other area of the municipality. Police Protection Regular and routine patrolling of streets, responses to calls, and other police services will be provided upon the effective date of the annexation. Fire Protection and Code Enforcement Fire protection and prevention services are currently being provided to the area through an agreement with Williamson County. These services will continue to be provided to the area upon the effective date of the annexation. Upon the effective date of the annexation, the City Code Enforcement Officer will periodically patrol streets in the area to ensure that all properties are in conformance with City Code. Solid Waste Collection Solid waste collection and disposal services will be provided upon the effective date of the annexation, in accordance with the rates, terms and conditions contained in the City Code. Water Service Water service will be provided to the annexation area through the terms of a development agreement with the City of Georgetown. Sewer Service Wastewater service will be provided to the annexation area through the terms of a development agreement with the City of Georgetown. Maintenance of Roads, Streets, and Drainaee Roads, streets and drainage facilities dedicated to the public will be maintained according to City Code and policy upon the effective date of the annexation. Street Lighting Street lighting will be made available upon the effective date of the annexation, upon request of the property owners, in accordance with City Code and policy. Annexation Service Plan, Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT A, Page 22 of 22 Parks and Recreation Parks and recreation facilities dedicated to the public will be maintained according to City Code and policy upon the effective date of the annexation. Recreation services will be provided to all residents in accordance with the rates, terms and conditions contained in the City Code. Planning and Zoning Upon the effective date of the annexation, the planning and zoning jurisdiction of the City will extend to this area. The area will be zoned according to the uses described in the Sun City Georgetown Revised Concept Plan (Second), as approved through regular procedures. Inspection Services All inspection services, including building, electrical, plumbing, etc., provided by the City will be extended to the area upon the effective date of the annexation. Library Services Library services will be provided to all residents in accordance with the rates, terms, and conditions contained in the City Code upon the effective date of the annexation. Other Services Other services provided by the City, such as animal control, court, and general administration, will be made available upon the effective date of the annexation, in accordance with the City Code and policies. Utility Expansion and Improvement Policy City Ordinance Number 900404, a Utility Expansion and Improvement Policy, guides the planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of all utility system improvements, including water, wastewater and electrical service. Annexation Service Plan, Page 2 of 2 Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET ac SUBJECT: First Reading of an ordinance to rezone a 2.9 acre tract to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z from RP, Planned Residential to C-1, Local Commercial. ITEM SUMMARY: This rezoning is a request to change a 2.9 acre portion that was originally proposed for single family residential use. The location of the proposed rezoning is at the intersection of Sun City Boulevard and Del Webb Boulevard, two (2) minor arterial streets. Uses that are permitted in the C-1 zoning district are appropriately located along minor arterial streets. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The second reading of this rezoning will occur when Neighborhood One -A is recorded. Consideration of this item was delayed to make the necessary revisions to the Development Agreement, being considered by a separate agenda item. Approval of this rezoning must be contingent on approval of the Development Agreement revisions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its September 5, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested rezoning from RP, Residential Planned to C-1, Local Commercial, for the proposed Tract Z, Neighborhood Eight, Phase 1, of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, provided the final design of Tract Z conforms to the design standards for lots and any amendments determined to be necessary to the Development Agreement and/or Century Plan are completed. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report and Ordinance Submitted Bv: Edward/J. Barry, AIC - Director Divisign of Development Services Hildy L. Ki gma, AIC Chief Planner REZONING OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETO WN, PHASE 1, TRACT Z, FROM RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED TO C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL, LOCATED AT DEL WEBB BOULEVARD AND SUN CITY BOULEVARD OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Robert Eck, P.E. Del E. Webb Development Company 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX: 930-6770 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 329-5002 FAX: 329-0802 REQUEST: Rezoning of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Tract Z from RP, Residential Planned to C-1, Local Commercial as recorded in Volume 2712, Page 103 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Southwest corner of Del Webb Boulevard and Sun City Boulevard. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: RP, Residential Planned district. Proposed Use: Commercial retail. Surrounding Uses North: Undeveloped land -future Sun City (out of City) and Zoning: South: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, single family residential portion (RP) East: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Village Center tract (C- 2B) West: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, single family residential portion (RP) Rezoning- Phase 1, Tract Z- Sun City Georgetown August 31, 1995 f/RZ95-18/Fi1e:SUNCTYIZ.REZ Page 1 CM/Cs Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level Two. The proposed land use change on this tract is part of the request for a Second Revised Concept Plan to be considered on a separate agenda item. Additional analysis is underway to determine if the land use changes proposed by the Second Revised Concept Plan can be accommodated within this intensity designation. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed: HISTORY: The original Concept Plan for Sun City Georgetown was approved by the City Council on April 26, 1994. That Concept Plan included 3,991 acres. A Revised Concept Plan for the current 5,314 acres was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. A Second Revised Concept Plan will be considered by the Commission and Council on a separate agenda item. That Concept Plan proposes land uses that are consistent with the subject Preliminary Plat. A Development Agreement between the City and Del Webb was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1995. The Development Agreement addresses issues such as the commitment of utility capacity; the required public improvements; compliance with the City's development regulations; and the fees to be paid by the Del Webb Corporation. The Agreement makes specific modifications to the design standards in the Subdivision Regulations which apply to this development. These modified design standards include such elements as street design, sidewalk location, setbacks, lot layout, and impervious cover. It was determined to be appropriate to make these modifications specifically for the Sun City Georgetown development because of its size and the fact that it is being developed and built by one developer. These facts ensure a greater level of control and consistency throughout the life of the project than would be possible for the same number of dwelling units built by numerous developers. ANALYSIS: The Preliminary Plat for Phase 1 was approved by the City Council on February 28, 1995. That approved plat indicates that the subject property will be developed as single family residential. SEE EXHIBIT B However, the proposed change in land use is reflected in the Second Revised Concept Plan to be considered as a separate agenda item. Staff analysis is underway to determine if the Development Agreement and Rezoning- Phase 1, Tract Z- Sun City Georgetown August 31, 1995 #RZ95-18/Fi1e:SUNCTYIZ.REZ Page 2 CM/Cs Century Plan have allocated sufficient utility capacities to accommodate this change. This request will not be forwarded to the City Council until that analysis is completed, and any amendments to the Development Agreement and/or Century Plan are completed if they are determined to be necessary. The subject tract will be designed within the final plat to be submitted for Neighborhood Eight, Phase 1. If approved, this rezoning will not proceed to second reading until the final plat for Neighborhood Eight is recorded. The subject property will be approximately 2.9 acres in size and is located at the southwest corner of Del Webb Boulevard and Sun City Boulevard. SEE EXHIBIT C These are both considered minor arterials under the design standards established by the Development Agreement for the Sun City project. Sun City minor arterials are designed with 120 feet of right-of-way and a 66 foot wide section, including an 18 foot median. This section accommodates two (2) driving lanes in each direction. The proposed use is for a commercial retail development. The C-1 zoning district allows all residential uses, as well as general retail, service shops, and indoor recreation uses. Commercial uses are appropriate along the minor arterials, as long as they conform to the design standards contained in the Subdivision Regulations. The sketch plan for the proposed lot indicates that it will conform to those standards. STAFF RECO ATION: Approval of the requested rezoning from RP, Residential Planned to C- 1, Local Commercial, for the proposed Tract Z, Neighborhood Eight, Phase 1, of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, provided the final design of Tract Z conforms to the design standards for lots and any amendments determined to be necessary to the Development Agreement and/or Century Plan are completed. P & Z ACTION: At its September 5, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested rezoning from RP, Residential Planned to C-1, Local Commercial, for the proposed Tract Z, Neighborhood Eight, Phase 1, of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, provided the final design of Tract Z conforms to the design standards for lots and any amendments determined to be necessary to the Development Agreement and/or Century Plan are completed. Rezoning- Phase 1, Tract Z- Sun City Georgetown August 31, 1995 /1RZ95-18/Fi1e:SUNCTYIZ.REZ Page 3 CM/CS EXHIBIT A / IZ ^ 427 � \ ` oo| ) | | r` ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE PASSED AND ADOPTED ON THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1968, AND AMENDING PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE A 2.9 ACRE TRACT IN THE DANIEL MONROE SURVEY, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE -A, TRACT Z, FROM RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING CLASSIFICATION TO C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION AND; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, an application has been made to the City Council for the purpose of changing the zoning district classification of the following described real property ("the property") : A 2.9 ACRE TRACT IN THE DANIEL MONROE SURVEY, TO BE KNOWN AS, THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE -A, TRACT Z, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 2712, PAGE 103 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, hereinafter referred to as "the property"; WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change in the Base Ordinance to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration in a public hearing and for its recommendation or report; and WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; which stated the time and place of hearing, which time was not earlier than fifteen (15) days for 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 two hundred feet of the property, as required by law; and WHEREAS, the applicant for such zoning change placed on the property 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 such hearing; and Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on September 59 1995, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property from the RP, Residential Planned district zoning classification to C-1, Local Commercial district zoning classification, in accordance with Exhibit "A". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following Policies of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations"; and 2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2, which states: "The City's regulatory actions will efficiently and effectively implement the Policy Statements and provide the opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense"; and 3. Growth and Physical Development Policy 4, which states: "The City will encourage new development and infill redevelopment in the community"; and 4. Environmental and Resource Conservation Policy 1, which states: "The City will take the steps necessary to protect the physical attributes that make Georgetown attractive"; and further finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Base Ordinance and the Zoning Map of the City, as well as the Zoning District for the Property shall be and the same is hereby changed from the RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED district to C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL district, in accordance with Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, is hereby adopted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. SECTION 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this Ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This Ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect in (10) ten days on and after publication in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the th day of , 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of 1995. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 By: LEO WOOD Mayor EXHIBIT A- 1 1 4 \ ti� a .r i Cl I QJ wl 1 1 ��y v ~r �Q Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. -DD AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: First Reading of an ordinance to rezone a 475.52 acre tract to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial and RP, Residential Planned. ITEM SUMMARY: This request is to rezone the entire Phase 2 of Sun City Georgetown. The request is consistent with similar requests for Phase 1 and is consistent with the Second Revised Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2. Generally, the request is for C-1, Local Commercial zoning districts for Tracts G and J of Block 1 and Tract O of Block 26 and RP, Residential Planned for the remaining lots. Tracts G and J of Block 1 are the proposed site of the Scott and White medical clinic. They are ten (10) acres combined and are located adjacent to a tract fronting RM2338 which has already been assigned C-1 zoning. Since a portion of Phase 2 is being platted as Neighborhood Ten -A at the same time that this rezoning is considered, an ordinance rezoning the area of Neighborhood Ten -A will be considered for Second Reading at the December 12, 1995, meeting. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The second reading of this rezoning will occur in phases as each neighborhood is recorded. Consideration of this item was delayed to make the necessary revisions to the Development Agreement, being considered by a separate agenda item. Approval of this rezoning must be contingent on approval of the Development Agreement revisions. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its September 5, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested rezoning of a 475.52 acre tract, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial (Tracts G and J, Block 1, and Tract O, Block 26), and RP, Residential Planned (all other lots) subject to completion of the changes to the Development Agreement and the Century Plan if such are determined to be necessary. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Ordinance Submitted Bv: Edward J. arry, AICP - rector Division f Development �ervices Hildy L. K' gma, AICP Chief Planner REZONING OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, A 475.52 ACRE TRACT IN THE B. EAVES, R. JENKINS, D. MONROE, M. LEWIS, A. SHORT, G. THOMPSON, AND W. WILKINSON SURVEYS FROM A, AGRICULTURAL TO C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL, FOR TRACTS G, J, AND O, WITH THE REMAINDER TO RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED OWNERS: Del E. Webb Development Company Mr. Clark E. Lyda, Trustee Mr. Theron S. Bradford, Trustee APPLICANT: Mr. Robert Eck, P.E. Director, Land Development Del E. Webb Development Company 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 930-5424 FAX: 930-6770 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 329-5002 FAX: 329-0802 REQUEST: Rezoning of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, a 475.52 acre tract in the B. Eaves, R. Jenkins, D. Monroe, M. Lewis, A. Short, G. Thompson and W. Wilkinson Surveys from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial for Tract J and O with the remainder to be RP, Residential Planned as recorded in Volume 2679, Page 744, Volume 2687, Page 945, Volume 2712, Page 103, Volume 1898, Page 597, Volume 1270, Page 305, Volume 2246, Page 561 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas. Location: Located northeast of F.M. 2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Rezoning- Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown //RZ95-17/Fi1e:SUNCrrY2.REZ CM/CS August 31, 1995 Page 1 Existing Zoning: Annexation of this property will be considered by the City Council as parcels within the Preliminary Plat are purchased by the Del Webb Development Company. Proposed Use: 1,261 single family residential lots with the remaining area used as commercial, open space, drainage easements, and golf course. Surrounding Uses North: Undeveloped land (out of City) and Zoning: South: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 (A, RP and C-1) and undeveloped land and Chapparo Estates (out of City) East: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 (A, RP and C-1) and undeveloped land (out of City) West: Undeveloped land (out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level Two. Additional analysis is underway to determine if the land use changes proposed by the Second Revised Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2 (see separate agenda items) and reflected in the subject rezoning request can be accommodated within this intensity designation. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: The original Concept Plan for Sun City Georgetown was approved by the City Council on April 26, 1994. That Concept Plan included 3,991 acres. A Revised Concept Plan for the current 5,314 acres was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. A Second Revised Concept Plan will be considered by the Commission and Council on a separate agenda item. That Concept Plan proposes land uses that are consistent with the subject Preliminary Plat. A Development Agreement between the City and Del Webb was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1995. The Development Agreement addresses issues such as the commitment of utility capacity; the required public improvements; compliance with the City's development regulations; and the fees to be paid by the Del Webb Corporation. The Agreement makes specific modifications to Rezoning- Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown #RZ95-17/Fi1e:SUNC1TY2. REZ CM/CS August 31, 1995 Page 2 the design standards in the Subdivision Regulations which apply to this development. These modified design standards include such elements as street design, sidewalk location, setbacks, lot layout, and impervious cover. It was determined to be appropriate to make these modifications specifically for the Sun City Georgetown development because of its size and the fact that it is being developed and built by one developer. These facts ensure a greater level of control and consistency throughout the life of the project than would be possible for the same number of dwelling units built by numerous developers. ANALYSIS: This request would result in the following zoning districts applied to the subject property: Tracts G and J. Block 1: C-1, Local Commercial Tract O, Block 26: C-1, Local Commercial All remaining lots: RP, Residential Planned This request is consistent with the Second Revised Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2 of Sun City Georgetown, both of which are to be considered by separate agenda items. Since the area of this rezoning is based on the possible change in intensity due to the Revised Concept Plan, the rezoning request cannot proceed to City Council for consideration unless any changes determined to be necessary to the Century Plan and Development Agreement are completed. The following portion of this report will describe the impact of each of the requested zoning districts. SEE EXHIBIT A C-1, Local Commercial Tract G, Block 1 is a 5.0 acre parcel shown on the Second Revised Concept Plan as a commercial lot and on the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2 as a single family or commercial lot. An alternate lot layout for this tract is shown on the Preliminary Plat if it develops for single family residential. This tract, along with Tract J, is currently optioned by Scott and White for development of their health care clinic. Tract G will be purchased in the future only if it is determined to be necessary for expansion of the clinic. For this reason, the Preliminary Plat shows the two alternate uses of this tract. The City's practice when rezoning parcels that are undergoing platting is to hold the second reading of the Rezoning- Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown #RZ95-17/Fi1e:SUNCITY2.REZ CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 3 rezoning until the final plat is recorded with the County. At the time the subject tract is included within a final plat, it will be known whether it will develop as commercial or single family residential. The City Council will then be able to finalize the rezoning to the appropriate district, either C-1 as requested in this application, or RS if that is the proposed use at the time. The City's primary concern with development of this tract for commercial purposes is its roadway access. The Preliminary Plat designates Acacia Way, the only public street access to the tract, as a residential collector. This provides additional right-of-way and street width to accommodate the increased traffic likely to be generated by a commercial use. Further, staff review of the Preliminary Plat includes the recommendation for a plat note to state that Tract G will only be developed for commercial purposes if it is developed with Tract J, and its primary access in that case will be from RM2338. Tract J, Block 1, is a 5.00 acre tract designated on both the Second Revised Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2 as a commercial tract. As noted above, this tract is optioned by Scott and White for development of their health care clinic. This tract is likely to be the first parcel purchased, along with Tract U in Phase 1, for the clinic. As currently designed in the Preliminary Plat, Tract J has no access to a public right-of-way, as required by Section 33010 of the Subdivision Regulations. In order to address this concern, staff's recommendation on the Preliminary Plat is that a plat note be added to state that Tract J will only be developed if part of a resubdivision with Tract U so it will have access to public right-of-way. In addition, the plat note shall state that the primary access to Tract J will be from RM2338. Tract O, Block 26, is a 9.693 acre tract designated on both the Second Revised Concept Plan and the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2 as a commercial tract. The plat shows that the only access to this tract will be from the residential collector streets within the adjacent residential area. This tract is, however, adjacent to Tract A in Phase 1, which is platted and zoned for commercial use. Currently, Tract A is developed for the temporary sales and construction administration offices for Sun City Georgetown. It is likely that these uses will be discontinued within the next year when the permanent sales center within Sun City is Rezoning- Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown /1R2-'95-17/Fi1e:SUNCITY2.REZ CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 4 completed. At that time Tract A, combined with the subject tract, may redevelop for a larger commercial development. As a result, staff's recommendation on the Preliminary Plat is that a plat note be added to state that primary access to Tract O will be from RM2338 through Tract A in Phase 1. The C-1 zoning district allows all residential uses, as well as general retail, service shops, and indoor recreation uses. Commercial uses are most appropriate when the primary access is from an arterial. The plat notes recommended as part of the Preliminary Plat consideration are intended to address any potential concerns about access to Tracts G, J, and O, and to make them more suitable parcels for commercial development. Provided the recommended plat notes are added, each of the tracts proposed for C-1 zoning will conform to the design standards contained in the Subdivision Regulations. RP, Residential Planned The remainder of the property included within Phase 2 of Sun City Georgetown is proposed to be zoned RP, Residential Planned district. This district is consistent with the consideration of the Preliminary Plat as a planned unit development (PUD) under the Subdivision Regulations. In Phase 2, the primary use in the RP district will be single family residential lots, although there are also golf course and open space lots. The Zoning Ordinance allows any residential use in the RP district, as well as commercial facilities which will provide a needed service or convenience for the PUD and the immediate area. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the requested rezoning of a 475.52 acre tract, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial (Tracts G and J, Block 1, and Tract O, Block 26), and RP, Residential Planned (all other lots) subject to completion of the changes to the Development Agreement and the Century Plan if such are determined to be necessary. P & Z ACTION: At its September 5, 1995, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested rezoning of a 475.52 acre tract, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2, from A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial (Tracts G and J, Block 1, Rezoning- Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown #RZ95-17/Fi1e:SUNC1TY2.REZ CM/CS September 1, 1995 Page 5 and Tract O, Block 26), and RP, Residential Planned (all other lots) subject to completion of the changes to the Development Agreement and the Century Plan if such are determined to be necessary. Rezoning- Phase 2 - Sun City Georgetown f/RZ95-17/File:SUNCITY2.REZ CM/CS August 31, 1995 Page 6 EXHIBIT A III IWASPOS VZ �Afi VA W A &W., WA Wfi- *192 M El Proposed RP ;p 11 111 illiN . . .. . . . . . . . ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE PASSED AND ADOPTED ON THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1968, AND AMENDING PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE A 475.52 ACRE TRACT IN THE B. EAVES, R. JENKINS, D. MONROE, M. LEWIS, A. SHORT, G. THOMPSON, AND W. WILKINSON SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, FROM THE A, AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION TO C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL AND RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DISTRICT ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, an application has been made to the City Council for the purpose of changing the zoning district classification of the following described real property ("the property") : A 475.52 ACRE TRACT IN THE B. EAVES, R. JENKINS, D. MONROE, M. LEWIS, A. SHORT, G. THOMPSON, AND W. WILKINSON SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2 AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 2679, PAGE 744, VOLUME 2687, PAGE 945, VOLUME 2712, PAGE 103, VOLUME 1898, PAGE 597, VOLUME 1270, PAGE 305, VOLUME 2246, PAGE 561 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, hereinafter referred to as "the property"; WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change in the Base Ordinance to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration in a public hearing and for its recommendation or report; and WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; which stated the time and place of hearing, which time was not earlier than fifteen (15) days for 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 two hundred feet of the property, as required by law; and Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2 Rezoning Ordinance No. Page I of 3 WHEREAS, the applicant for such zoning change placed on the property 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 such hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on September 59 1995, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property from the A, Agricultural district zoning classification to RP, Residential Planned and C-1, Local Commercial district zoning classifications, in accordance with Exhibit "A". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following Policies of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations"; and 2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2, which states: "The City's regulatory actions will efficiently and effectively implement the Policy Statements and provide the opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense"; and 3. Growth and Physical Development Policy 4, which states: "The City will encourage new development and infill redevelopment in the community"; and 4. Environmental and Resource Conservation Policy 1, which states: "The City will take the steps necessary to protect the physical attributes that make Georgetown attractive"; and further finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Base Ordinance and the Zoning Map of the City, as well as the Zoning District for the Property shall be and the same is hereby changed from the A, AGRICULTURAL district to RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED and C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL districts, in accordance with Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, is hereby adopted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2 Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. SECTION 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this Ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This Ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect in (10) ten days on and after publication in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the th day of , 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of . 1995. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2 Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 By: LEO WOOD Mayor EXHIBIT A Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET E7E SUBJECT: First Reading of an ordinance to rezone an 111.954 acre tract in the Daniel Monroe and Frederick Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A. ITEM SUMMARY: This request is to rezone the entire area of Phase 2A from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned, which is consistent with the Concept Plan and zoning of other preliminary and final plats filed to date. Phase 2A is composed entirely of single family residential and open space lots. Consistent with City policy, second reading of this rezoning ordinance will be withheld until final plats are recorded for the area to be rezoned. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. COMMENTS: At its October 3, 1995 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of a rezoning from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned for a 111.954 acre tract in the D. Monroe and F. Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A. ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and Ordinance Submitted Bv: Edward . Barry, AIC - Director Division of Development Services Hildy L. gma, AICP Chief Planner REZONING OF AN 111.954 ACRE TRACT IN THE DANIEL MONROE AND FREDERICK FOY SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2A, FROM A, AGRICULTURAL TO RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED OWNERS: Del Webb Development Corporation Mr. Clark E. Lyda, Trustee Mr. Theron E. Bradford, Trustee APPLICANT: Mr. Robert Eck II, P.E. Director, Land Development Del Webb Development Corporation 203 South IH-35, Suite 100 Georgetown, Texas 78628 512/930-5424 FAX: 930-6776 AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E. Turner, Collie & Braden, Inc. 5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 150 Austin, Texas 78746 512/329-5002 FAX: 329-0802 REQUEST: Rezoning of an I11.954 acre tract in the Daniel Monroe and Frederick Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A, as recorded in Volume 2679, Page 744 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned. Location: Located northeast of F.M.2338. SEE EXHIBIT A Existing Site: Undeveloped land. Existing Zoning: Annexation will be considered by City Council as parcels within the Preliminary Plat are purchased by the Del Webb Development Company. Proposed Use: 236 residential lots and eight (8) tracts for open space. Rezoning - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A November 20, 1995 #R7-95-21/Fi1e:SUNC1TY2A.REZ Page 1 CM/CS Surrounding Uses and Zoning: North: Undeveloped land (out of City) South: Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1 (RP and C-1) East: Undeveloped land, (out of City) West: Undeveloped land (out of City) Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location to be Intensity Level 2 by a Plan Amendment approved by City Council on December 13, 1994. Notification: The notification requirements have been completed. HISTORY: A Revised Concept Plan was approved by the City Council on October 25, 1994. The Commission recommended approval of a Second Revised Concept Plan on September 5, 1995. The City is researching to determine if the committed utility capacity for Sun City is sufficient to accommodate the Revised Concept Plan. ANALYSIS: A Development Agreement was approved by the City Council on February 14, 1995. The Development Agreement addresses issues such as the commitment of utility capacity, the required public improvements, compliance with the City's development regulations, and the fees to be paid by the Del Webb Corporation. The Agreement makes specific modifications to the design standards in the Subdivision Regulations which apply to this development. These modified design standards include such elements as street design, sidewalk location, setbacks, lot layout, and impervious cover. It was determined to be appropriate to make these modifications specifically for the Sun City Georgetown development because of its size and the fact that it is being developed and built by one developer. These facts ensure a greater level of control and consistency throughout the life of the project than would be possible for the same number of dwelling units built by numerous developers. Given these modifications to the design standards, all Sun City plats will be approved as planned unit developments (PUDs). This request is to rezone the entire area of Phase 2A from A. Rezoning - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A November 20, 1995 1fRZ95-21/Fi1e:SUNC1TY2A.REZ Page 2 CM/CS Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned, which is consistent with the Concept Plan and zoning of other preliminary and final plats filed to date. Phase 2A is composed entirely of single family residential and open space lots. It has been determined that amendments to the Development Agreement are required as a result of the proposal to revise land uses included in the Second Revised Concept Plan reviewed by the Commission last month. Therefore, the Preliminary Plat for Phase 2A cannot be forwarded for City Council consideration until that amendment is made. It is proper to also withhold the first reading of the rezoning so that it can be considered at the same time as the Preliminary Plat. The applicant has agreed to authorize a delay in the City Council consideration of the rezoning and Preliminary Plat until the November 28, 1995, meeting. This allows enough time to amend the Development Agreement. Consistent with City policy, second reading of the rezoning ordinance will be withheld until final plats are recorded for the area to be rezoned. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of a rezoning from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned for a 111.954 acre tract in the D. Monroe and F. Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A. P & Z ACTION: At its October 3, 1995 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of a rezoning from A, Agricultural to RP, Residential Planned for a 111.954 acre tract in the D. Monroe and F. Foy Surveys, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A. Rezoning - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A #RZ95-21 /File: S UNC rrY2A. REZ CM/Cs November 20, 1995 Page 3 EXHIBIT A \� o0 PROPOSED RP -y 7 .y 0100, SUN CITY GEORGETOWN PHASE 2A u /.. f L�y l ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE PASSED AND ADOPTED ON THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 1968, AND AMENDING PART OF THE ZONING DISTRICT MAP OF THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE, TO CHANGE A 111.954 ACRE TRACT IN THE DANIEL MONROE AND FREDERICK FOY SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2A, FROM THE A, AGRICULTURAL ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION TO RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DISTRICT ZONING CLASSIFICATION; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, an application has been made to the City Council for the purpose of changing the zoning district classification of the following described real property ("the property") : A 111.954 ACRE TRACT IN THE DANIEL MONROE AND FREDERICK FOY SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2A AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 2679, PAGE 744 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS,,, - hereinafter referred to as "the property"; WHEREAS, the City Council has submitted the proposed change in the Base Ordinance to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its consideration in a public hearing and for its recommendation or report; and WHEREAS, notice of such hearing was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; which stated the time and place of hearing, which time was not earlier than fifteen (15) days for 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 two hundred feet of the property, as required by law; and WHEREAS, the applicant for such zoning change placed on the property 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 such hearing; and Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on October 3, 1995, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property from the A, Agricultural district zoning classification to RP, Residential Planned district zoning classification, in accordance with Exhibit "A" . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT: SECTION 1. The facts and recitations contained in the preamble of this ordinance are hereby found and declared to be true and correct, and are incorporated by reference herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The City Council hereby finds that this ordinance implements the following Policies of the Century Plan - Policy Plan Element: 1. Growth and Physical Development Policy 1, which states: "The City will ensure that future land use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses and organizations"; and 2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2, which states: "The City's regulatory actions will efficiently and effectively implement the Policy Statements and provide the opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense"; and 3. Growth and Physical Development Policy 4, which states: "The City will encourage new development and infill redevelopment in the community"; and 4. Environmental and Resource Conservation Policy 1, which states: "The City will take the steps necessary to protect the physical attributes that make Georgetown attractive"; and further finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not inconsistent or in conflict with any other Century Plan Policies, as required by Section 2.03 of the Administrative Chapter of the Policy Plan. SECTION 2. The Base Ordinance and the Zoning Map of the City, as well as the Zoning District for the Property shall be and the same is hereby changed from the A, AGRICULTURAL district to RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED district, in accordance with Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, is hereby adopted by the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas. SECTION 3. All ordinances and resolutions, or parts of ordinances and resolutions, in conflict with this Ordinance are hereby repealed, and are no longer of any force and effect. SECTION 4. If any provision of this Ordinance or application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions, or application thereof, of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby declared to be severable. Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 5. The Mayor is hereby authorized to sign this Ordinance and the City Secretary to attest. This Ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect in (10) ten days on and after publication in accordance with the provisions of the Charter of the City of Georgetown. PASSED AND APPROVED on First Reading on the th day of , 1995. PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of , 1995. ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN: Sandra D. Lee City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM: Marianne Landers Banks City Attorney Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2A Rezoning Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 By: LEO WOOD Mayor \ o0 I I � (PROPOSED RP EXHIBIT A SUN CITY GEORGETOWN PHASE 2A A . ` 000000., •' 1 - Council meeting November 28, 1995 Item No. FF AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET SUBJECT: Consideration of a priority list for the identification of specific routes for future road segments. ITEM SUMMARY: On October 10, 1995 the City Council approved a process for further defining the arterial roadway locations that are described in Exhibit 6 and Exhibit 7 of the Transportation Element of the Century Plan. The Planning and Zoning Commission, who is to begin this process by studying the potential routes, has recommended a prioritized list of the road segments and is prepared to begin the study of the first priority. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The proposal is for City staff to hold discussions with the City and County engineers and the affected property owners, and for public hearings to be held at the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. This would result in specific road alignment locations for adoption by ordinance as a part of the Transportation Element. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None COMMENTS: At their November 7, 1995 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the priority list on a 6-0 vote. ATTACHMENTS: Road Segment Priority list Submitted By: Edward arry, AI - Director Divisio of Development Services . 't� Ejt� Clyde von Rosenberg , ICP Chief Planner, Long ange Planning ROAD SEGMENT PRIORITIES 1. Inner Loop Road (SH29 west - SH130/CR102) IH35 - SH29 east 2. Inner Loop Road (SH29 west - SH 130/CR 102) SH29 west - Leander Road 3. Inner Loop Road (SH29 west - SH130/CR102) Leander Road - IH35 4. Cedar Breaks/D.B. Wood Road (Williams Drive - SH29 west) intersection with Williams Drive opposite Sequoia Spur/align with Shell Road Williams Drive - Booty's Crossing Road (realignment) Booty's Crossing Road - bridge over N. Fork San Gabriel River - D.B. Wood Rd. (realignment) 5. Cedar Breaks/D.B. Wood Road (Williams Drive - SH29 west) D.B. Wood Rd. - SH29 (realign northern end to meet new river crossing) 6. Inner Loop Road (SH29 west - SH130/CR102) CR110, north to CR151 A 7. Inner Loop Road (SH29 west - SH130/CR102) CR110 - SH130/CR102 8. Shell Spur connection to Berry Creek subdivision 9. Rivery Boulevard 10. Airport Road (CR 190) 11. CR115 extension 12. Lakeway Drive extension from IH35 to future SH130 Italicized road segments are in addition to those listed in the Transportation Element 0 10000 20000 Prepared by Development Services, 1/17/95