HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda CC 07.23.1996Z]
NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY
OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
Tuesday, July 23, 1996
The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, will meet on Tuesday, July 23, 1996, at 5:00 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 disability, please advise in advance.
An agenda packet, containing detailed information on the items listed below, is distributed to the
Mayor, Councilmembers, and the Georgetown Public Library on the Thursday preceding council
meetings. The library's copy is available for public review.
Policy Development/Review Workshop - Call to order at 5:00 p.m.
A Discuss the solid waste contract for residential and commercial service and the city -operated
Collection Station -- Hartley Sappington
B Answer questions on Statutory Consent Agenda Items listed specifically below under the
Regular Session that will begin no sooner than 7:00 p.m. (for questions only, no action to be
taken until Regular Session)
Regular Session - to convene Executive Session
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.
C Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney
D Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property
E Sec.551.075 conference with employee
Regular Session to begin no earlier than 7:00 p.m.
F Action on Executive Session Items
G Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports
H Citizens wishing to address the Council
City Council Agenda/July 23, 1996
Page 1 of 4 Pages
Statutory Consent Agenda
The Statutory 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. Please note that the
following items may be discussed with no action taken during the Workshop at 5:00 p.m.
Consideration of approval of meeting minutes for regular meeting of July 11, 1996 --
Sandra Lee
J Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility
easement to within five (5) feet of the west side property line of Amended Wood Ranch,
Section Two, Lot 5, located at 209 La Mesa Lane -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
K Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility
easement located along the north and a portion of the east side property line of Revised
Berry Creek, Section Nine, Phase 1, Lot 8, located at 31006 Clearwater Court -- Ed Barry
and Hildy Kingma
L Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the wastewater
easement located on Tract Z-2, Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood One -A, located
southwest of the intersection of Del Webb Boulevard and Sun City Boulevard -- Ed Barry
and Hildy Kingma
M Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility
easement located along the east property line of Lot 2, Block A, Unit III, River Bend,
located at 214 John Thomas Drive -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
N Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility,
water and wastewater easements located on .Tracts A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-5, Sun City
Georgetown, Neighborhood One, located north of the intersection of RM2338 and Del
Webb Boulevard -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
O Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 48.49 acre tract; being a resubdivision of Park
Central One, Section I, Lots 1 and 2, and a 31.48 acre tract in the F. Hudson and J.
Patterson Surveys, to be known as Park Central One, located on Westinghouse Road and
County Road 116 -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
P Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of 5 1. 01 acre tract in the John Sutherland and A.
Williams Surveys, to known as Fountainwood Estates, Phase 6A, and a 44.31 acre tract in
the John Sutherland, A. Williams, Isaac Jones and Peter Novel Surveys, to be known as
Fountainwood Estates, Phase 6B, and variance to the Subdivision Regulations, located off
Fountainwood Drive -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
Q Consideration to approve a Resolution of the Georgetown Industrial Development
Corporation Taking Affirmative Official Action Toward the Issuance of Bonds to Provide
Manufacturing Facilities for Chatsworth Products, Inc. -- Bob Hart
City Council Agenda/July 23, 1996
Page 2 of 4 Pages
R Authorization for the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of Georgetown and
Advance Metal Systems, Inc. -- Bob Hart
S Council approval of Change Order #6 to the contract between the City of Georgetown and
Griffin -Austin Company, Inc., in the amount of $45,970.00 -- Jim Briggs
T Council award of the bid, from Odell Geer Construction Company, of Belton, Texas, to
rehabilitate 7th and 8th Streets, in the amount of $939605.00 --"Jim Briggs
U Approval of an amendment to the City's Wholesale Power Agreement with the Lower
Colorado River Authority (LCRA) -- Jim Briggs
Legislative 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.)
V Second Reading of an ordinance Rezoning a 2.18 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-2 from RP, Residential Planned to C-2A, Commercial First
Height - Restricted, located southwest of the intersection of Del Webb and Sun City
Boulevards -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
W Second reading of an ordinance Rezoning a 5.09 acre tract in the W. G. Wilkinson Survey,
to be known as the Resubdivision of a Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown,
Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tract A-4 from C-1, Local Commercial to C-2A,
Commercial First Height - Restricted, located northwest of the intersection of RM2338 and
Del Webb Boulevard -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
X First reading of an ordinance Rezoning a 9.481 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter and Joseph
Pulsifer Surveys, from C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted to C-2A, Commercial
First Height - Restricted to permit multifamily residential uses, located east of IH35
between the North and South forks of the San Gabriel River -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
Y First reading of an ordinance rezoning a 9.72 acre tract in the William Addison Survey
from RS, Residential Single Family and A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial, located
on State Highway 29 East, west of St. Helen Catholic Church -- Ed Barry and Hildy
Kingma
Z First reading of an ordinance to rezone a part of Dalrymple Addition, from RS. Residential
Single Family to RM-3, Office and Service Use or RP, Residential Planned, located at 406
West University Avenue -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
City Council Agenda/July 23, 1996
Page 3 of 4 Pages
AA Resolution accepting requests from property owners in the Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract
No. 229, and Lewis P. Dyches, Abstract No. 171, to voluntarily include approximately
2,139 acres within the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction of the City of Georgetown -- Marianne
Banks
BB First Reading of an ordinance to extend the effective date of the Georgetown Sign
Ordinance, also known as Chapter 12.10 of the Georgetown Municipal Code, from the
current expiration date of August 24, 1996, to a revised expiration date of December 31,
1999 -- Ed Barry and Hildy Kingma
CC First reading of an ordinance amending Section 10.12.090 of the Code of Ordinances
relating to school speed zone on Northwest Boulevard -- Marianne Banks
DD Consideration and first reading of an amendment to Ordinance No. 95-62, correcting the
legal description for the annexation of an approximately 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 -- Ed Barry and Clyde von Rosenberg
EE Consideration and first reading of an amendment to Ordinance No. 95-13, correcting the
legal description for the annexation of an approximately 983.539 acre portion of the Sun
City Georgetown Planned Unit Development, Phase 1, located north of RM2338
approximately one and one-half miles north of Cedar Breaks Road -- Ed Barry and Clyde
von Rosenberg
Adjournment
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I, , Deputy City Secretary of the City of Georgetown, Texas, do hereby
certify that this Notice of Meeting was posted on the day of , 19969
at a.m./p.m.
Cari Speegle, Deputy City Secretary
GOVERNANCE DISCUSSION
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
J U LY 23, 1996
ON
SOLID WASTE SERVICES
I. Solid Waste Contract
Background: Since June, 1989, the City has had an exclusive contract for
residential and commercial solid waste services with Longhorn Disposal, Inc.
The original contract was for three (3) years, but Councils have granted
extensions until September 30, 1997.
A. Staff is seeking direction from the Council in preparing a Request for
Proposals.
B. Major issues to be defined in preparing to negotiate a new contract
include the following:
1. Exclusive contract inside city limits for residential services and
billing for solid waste services provided in ETJ by contractor in
competition with other private haulers. Currently, the City has
5,424 residential customers inside the City and 1,069 residential
customers outside the City in the ETJ.
2. Exclusive contract, inside city limits for all commercial solid waste
services. The City has 462 commercial customers inside the City.
3. Provision of curbside recycling services to all residential customers
inside the city limits. The City had a set -out recycling rate of 35%
for the period of January, 1996, through June, 1996. The set -out
rate means the percentage of the residential customers in the City
who set out recycling each week. In the customer survey
completed in February, 1994, the respondents indicated that 73%
of them participated in the recycling program. Nationally, the
participation rate is usually double the set -out rate because
households don't recycle every week.
4. Provision of optional recycling service to commercial customers.
There are currently 18 commercial customers who are participating
in a commercial recycling program with the City's contractor.
5. Nature of contract:
a. Number of years and option years
b. Fixed price for "x" years; or,
C. Council approval on any rate increase, not more than once a
year
6. Type of residential service (Attachment "A" provides a comparison
of Georgetown's rates with ten other cities):
a. Twice a week pick-up
b. Once a week with contractor -furnished cart (phased in over
time or at start of new contract). Since May, 1995, the City
has been conducting a pilot program of once a week trash
service with carts in the San Gabriel Heights and Thousand
Oaks neighborhoods. A satisfaction survey was conducted
Page 1
in May, 1996, on 100% of the customers in these
neighborhoods with a 50.8% response. The full analysis of
the survey is attached in Attachment "B", but some of the
significant findings were:
► 67% were very satisfied with the pilot program
► 51 % indicated services had improved under the pilot
program
► 87% recommended the program be expanded to
other areas of the City
The City also has implemented once -a -week trash service
with carts in the following areas:
► Churchill Farms (continued once a week service
when annexed)
► Portion of Penny Lane off of RM 2338 when annexed
► Portion of Sedro Trail off RM 2338 when annexed
► Residents annexed along RM 2338 between Cedar
Breaks Road and Sun City Georgetown
► Sun City Georgetown: this was the type of service
requested by Del Webb Corporation
C. Fully -automated service limiting the waste to provided
service container only.
d. Continue monthly bulky waste service.
7. Quality control issues:
a. Starting and stopping times: The current contract allows
residential service to occur between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
Service can go beyond 8.00 p.m. because of equipment
failure and sometimes after holidays. A customer complaint
sometimes received related to "same time" pick-up each
week. Routes are supposed to be run the same way each
time, but trash volume and equipment problems can impact
time.
b. Penalty clauses for poor service: There are no specific
penalties for poor service in the current contract. The City
will give customer credit for repeated poor service and
charge this back to the contractor.
C. Holiday pick-up schedule: The current contract allows the
contractor to take the following holidays: New Year's Day,
July 4, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day.
The Contractor has chosen to take only New Year's Day,
Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. If the holiday falls
on one of two pick-up days in a week, it is not made up; but
if it falls on a once -a -week pick-up day, it is made up the
next working day or on the following Saturday.
Page 2
d. Supervision of contractor's staff: Currently, the contractor
has a supervisor check on trash crews periodically. Any
new contract should require daily "in -town" supervision of
truck crews.
In 1994, 1,000 citizens were sent a questionnaire about solid waste
services. 374 (37.4%) responded and rated the service as follows:
Excellent
20%
Above Average
31 %
Average
37%
Fair
9%
Poor
3%
No Response
1 %
100%
The most frequent complaints received on this survey related to
proper handling of trash cans and quality control on service
(Attachment T77 provides a complete analysis of February, 1994,
survey).
II. Collection Station Operation
The City operates a Collection Station at the site of the City's closed landfill.
The City receives residential solid waste, bulky waste, some construction waste,
and grass/leaves. The Collection Station also chips brush for use by citizens,
and recycles oil, antifreeze, oil filters, vehicle batteries, tires, and cooking
oil/kitchen grease. This operation has received an award from the Lower
Colorado River Authority for its operation and is also a key element in the City's
recognition as a Clean Cities 2000 member by the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC). The City, as a member of the Clean Cities
2000 program, is committed to strive to reduce its waste going to the landfill by
50% by the year 2000. TNRCC recognizes the City has made excellent efforts
toward meeting this voluntary goal.
Over the last four years, landfill disposal costs for dumpsters hauled from the
collection Station to the Landfill have increased from $3.00 per cubic yard to
$8.00 per cubic yard. The primary reason for the cost increase is directly
attributed to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Subtitle "D" Regulations.
This has raised the annual disposal cost of the Collection Station to the
Sanitation Fund from $30,000 to $80,000.
The current fee structure at the Collection Station is to allow City solid waste
customers three cubic yards each month at no charge and three cubic yards
Page 3
each month for a fee of $8.00 per cubic yard. Non -City customers can bring up
to six cubic yards each month for a fee of $8.00 per cubic yard. For fiscal year
1995/96, the total fees collected are projected to be $9,000.00, while the
disposal cost is projected to be $80,000.00.
Collection Station staff recognize that many times the free use provision at the
Collection Station is abused by small remodeling contractors, yard service
crews, and rental leasing companies, as well as card -sharing by customers with
non -customers. Staff requires payment of obvious abusers, but in many cases,
it cannot be easily proven that abuse is occurring and fees cannot be collected.
In 1994, the customer survey indicated that 51 % of the respondents never used
the Collection Station, which indicated that half the customers are subsidizing
this service for other customers.
Sanitation Rate Comparison
Rate Comparison for 1995-96
City
Austin
Provides
City
Residential
$11.54
Times Per Curbside Brush/ Bulk Special Collection
Week gecyclin g pickup pickup Station
2/1' residential only 2x per year yes landfill
Round Rock
Contract
$9.60
2x residential no on -site mulching 1x per year w/ Ecology Action
Pflugerville
Contract
$12.15
2 yes yes (wfi specs) yes no
San Marcos
Contract
$8.92
2 yes yes yes no
New Braunfels
City
$8.15
2 yes (��5 ��-�++Pt�Ix per Vear yes landfill
Belton
Contract
$9.03
2 XWRjAI included w/ service yes no
Temple
City
$9.95
2 no yes yes yes
McKinney
Contract
$11.25
2 yes as needed fee based recycling center
Plano
City
$12.52
1 yes yes on request yes
Taylor
Contract
$8.80
2 no on -site mulching scheduled recycling center
Georgetown
Contract
$10.50
2/1, VOQ „ee
cwov,tu�
' There is a pilot program for once a week automated pickup with large capacity carts.
2 City provides the location, Ecology Action provides the manpower and keeps the profits.
City of Georgetown
garbsur2.wk4 08/14/95
VI I IF Lit
eor own
rauNaco IN 1 B49
DATE: May 28, 1996
TO: Bob Hart
City Manager
FROM: Hartley Sappington
Director of Community Services
Community Services
Memorandum.
SUBJECT: Analysis of Survey Results of Pilot Solid Waste Program
In May, 1996, the City completed its one year pilot program for solid waste in the San
Gabriel Heights, Thousand Oaks, and Sierra Vista neighborhoods. The approximately
600 families were provided containers by the contractor and placed on a once -a -week
pick-up schedule.
On May 13, 1996, 573 questionnaires were mailed out. By May 24, 291 (50.8%) were
returned, which is a return rate high enough to give excellent validity to the results.
The summary results of the 291 responses are listed below. A copy of the
questionnaire with full results is attached.
► 64% responded that the container was adequate to handle their waste each
week, and 32% responded that the container was adequate most of the time.
10- 92% responded that they disc not want to pay an optional fee for an additional
container.
91 % described the container as easy to use and 3% described it as difficult
while 4% preferred to use their own container.
10. Of those responding, 75% had participated in the pilot program 9-12 . P p 9 months � -E`t
{ C
and 15% had participated for 6-9 months.
It'll
► 67% of the respondents were very satisfied with the program and 27% were
satisfied, while 2% considered the program fair and 3% considered the program
poor.
► 51 % indicated that the solid waste service had improved under the pilot program;
32% indicated that the service had remained the same, and 6% indicated that
the service had declined.
► 87% recommended the program be expanded to other areas of the City,
whereas 8% recommended against expansion.
Although the questionnaire did not provide comment space, several respondents wrote
comments. Attached behind the questionnaire results is a summary of the comments.
Based on the results of the questionnaire, the following recommendations are made:
1. Make a decision as to whether or not the City-wide contract will be re -bid or re-
negotiated.
2. Based on the decision regarding recommendation #1, develop a three-year plan
to phase in the balance of the City to a once -a -week pick-up program with
contractor -provided containers.
1. What size container are you using?
Percentage
Actual Number
0 50 100 150 200
No Response E Own ContainerBag 64-Gallon 96-Gallon
2. Was the container. adequate to handle your family's solid waste each week?
Percentage
Actual Number
0 So 100 150 200
No Response N No Most of the Time ❑ Yes
3. For an optional fee, would you like the choice of a second container?
Percentage
Actual Number
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
No Response ■ No Yes
4. How would you describe your impression of the container?
Percentage
Actual Number
0 50 100 150
No Response Prefer Own Container ■ Difficult to Use
5. How long have you participated in the pilot program?
Percentage
Actual Number
200 250
❑ Easy to Use
0 50 100 150
Not Reported Less than 3 Months 3-6Months
6-9 Months 9-12 Months
6. What is your overall impression of the pilot program?
Percentage
Actual Number
200
300
250
0
200
50
100
150
Not Reported
® Poor
■ Fair
Adequate
■ Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
7. In your opinion, how has the service of the pilot program been compared to the
regular solid waste program?
Percentage
Actual Number
XV au 60 80 100 120 140 180
Not Reported No Opinion About the Same Improved
8. Would you recommend this program be expanded into other areas of the City?
10-
1 liked twice -a -week pick-up. On the other hand, the neighborhood looks better
without trash out twice -a -week.
The difference is, with the trash being picked up only once a week, it often
smells badly before the pick-up time.
► This service has been a plus. One big can is better than a bunch of bags or
small cans. It has also cut down on litter. There are no bags or cans tipped by
stray or loose animals!
10- Please urge people to recycle. We have little trash for the landfill. Our trash can
is too huge, but we use our own recycling containers. The recycling containers
are too small for two people, let alone larger families.
Another satisfied Georgetown customer! Thanks.
I see no point in having two trucks make two passes each on our street just to
pick up trash. The expense must be incredible and containers are left in the
street all day, to be traffic hazard. Containers are oversized and cumbersome
for a family of two. The container is not needed. Please cancel the program.
10- We are so impressed and pleased with the neatness and convenience of the
containers. They really keep the neighborhood attractive!! Thank you!
► We personally think this program is great and we highly recommend it to all
areas of Georgetown!
Raw garbage attracts rodents — rats and mice specifically — much worse than
before. Storage of container is a problem. Degrading to appearance of
neighborhood.
► I don't think you need to pick up 7 or 8 sacks of bagged grass my neighbor
acquires weekly. Garbage container and recycling bin are both too small.
Garbage container is difficult to maneuver, and smells awful. If you are not out
with your "waste" by 8:00 a.m. you miss the pick-up. Usually picked up at 7:50
a.m.!
I am a senior citizen and widow and 80 years old so don't need such a container.
Makes it rather had to take care of household foods for a week's time frame.
Recommend program be expanded into other areas of the City if it saves the
City money.
► Container is actually too big. Container is more difficult than putting out a bag.
Program is pointless. Prefer original system of trash pick-up twice -a -week. We
average 1-1'/2 bags of trash per week. The 96-gallon container is much to large
for our average week. We do like the recycling of metal, plastic, and glass
containers. This has cut our bulk refuse about in half, and we'd like to see this
service continued if these materials are actually being c1. Your
experiment with the 96-gallon containers is not welcomed by the elderly in our
neighborhood. We just found it useless.
► Container is good because it's big — heavy duty and held a lot of trash.
Impression of the program is satisfactory because if a week came that I had
more trash, I knew I could add my own container. Expand the program if it
saves money.
10. No lids tossed or blown down the street — roll in and roll out!
► Pick-up people tend to allow trash to blow from containers and truck.
► I just wish everyone would put them out of sight and not leave them in the front
of the house. It's definitely an eyesore.
► On those unusual occasions when the container wasn't enough, I've been very
glad that trash bags were alsD picked up. This needs to continue to be the
policy. I never had any service problems with the old program, either. Expand
the program, especially if it saves man-hours and gasoline and other expenses
over the other option.
► This container either fills the garage or uglys the neighborhood.
► I do like the container. There does seem to be more blowing paper trash in the
neighborhood. It could be the recycle box since there is no lid (they hauled off
my home-made lid). If you forget to take out the trash (to curb) on the "one" day,
you have to wait another whole week for trash pickup.
► Try and get into their contract that they place the contractor -furnished cart and
recycling bin off the street. Often they empty them and place them in the street.
Drive down our street (San Gabriel Blvd.) and you'll see what I'm talking about.
A kid or car could hit one of the cans or bin. Also, it looks bad.
► Containers are heavy when they're full. The container doe not get blown down
the street by the wind, nor does the lid get run over like other containers.
► Containers won't fit in garage and look awful in front of your house. Older
people can't handle it. Have to complain to get newspapers picked up. I hate
that square bin. The container on wheels is better than square bin. I have to
carry it to curb empty, then carry each sack of papers to put in it. Why can't I just
put the papers in sacks beside the curb? It is a hassle!!
► The majority of people (not us) tend to leave the containers sitting in front of their
houses all the time, instead of putting them in their garages or back yards. It
makes a neighborhood look very trash, to drive down a street and see all of
these containers. If you are going to keep using them, make it a fine to leave
them out, except on garbage day.
I. We really like the recycling bin. Too bad more people don't use theirs.
10. It would be nice to have a separate container for yard debris.
I. One wheeled container is easier for me to handle.
► Just move here in early February. I like the recycling program very much.
► Container is easy to use, but very hard to store due to its large size.
► The container is difficult to use. Heavy when full. No handles on both sides.
► I prefer having my trash picked up twice a week. Trash pick-up arrives too early
in the morning.
10- Prefer twice a week, especially during summer months.
/Im
SOLID WASTE
CONTRACT
EVALUATION
SURVEY ANALYSIS
Submitted To:
Bob Hart
City Manager
Prepared By:
Hartley Sappington
Director of Community Services
February, 1994
SOLID WASTE CONTRACT EVALUATION
SURVEY ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND: In June, 1989, the City Council entered into a contract with
Longhorn Disposal, Inc., to provide residential and commercial solid waste services
within the city limits of Georgetown. On October 1, 1991, the contract was amended
to provide for a rate increase; curbside recycling, implemented January, 1992; and a
contract extension until October 1, 1994, with an additional possible extension until
October 1, 1997. A condition of the contract extension until 1997 required an
evaluation be made of the solid waste contract in January, 1994. Depending on the
results of this evaluation, the City Council would either extend the contract to October
1, 1997, or direct the City staff to develop a bid package for solid waste services.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY: The evaluation survey (Attachment "A") comprised of
seven questions concerning current services and four questions concerning future
service options were mailed to 1,000 randomly selected customers. Each survey
contained a postage -paid return envelope to assure convenience of response on the
part of the respondent. The City received 374 responses, or a 37.4% return. This
can be considered a valid survey based on the percent of return.
SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS: The 374 persons who responded indicated
46% were Monday/Thursday customers, 51 % were Tuesday/Friday customers, and
3% gave no response. Trash services were rated as follows:
Rating
Responses
Percent
Excellent
74
20
Above Average
115
31
Average
137
3 7
Fair ,
33
9
Poor I
11
( 2
No Response
4
1
Totals
374 I
100 ,
As indicated by the numoers in the char above, 88 % of the survey respondents rate
the trash service "Average" or "Above Average", and 12% rated the service "Fair",
"Poor", or gave no response.
Sixty-seven percent (67%) of the 357 who responded indicated support for a once
per week trash pick-up if the cost of this service could be reduced. Thirty-three
percent (33%) did not support once a week service.
The survey asked for a level of support for the concept of the solid waste fee covering
all its costs, rather than being subsidized by other City funds. Of the 344 who
responded, 34% (126) said "Yes", 62% (212) said "No" and 1 % (6) were undecided.
CONCLUSIONS AND AREAS FOR FUTURE POLICY DISCUSSIONS:
1. The current service provider is providing an acceptable or better level of
service.
2. Problem areas for service improvement previously identified were confirmed and
need to be monitored for improvement.
3. Recycling is being well -utilized by citizens. Continued public education and
improvement need to be ongoing.
4. The Public Collection Station program needs further study. Several options
which could be considered include:
A. Reduction of hours or days
B. Improve public awareness
C. Charge for all solid waste brought in to reduce dependence on monthly
rates. The exception to the fees would be brush which is brought in for
chipping and automotive waste which is brought in for recycling.
5. Further study and use of focus groups to evaluate the feasibility of variable size
containers and once a week trash pick-up.
6. Explore on a local, county, and regional basis the implementation of a yard
waste composting facility and future co -composting facility with sewer sludge.
l■
09
Solid Waste Contract
Evaluation Survey
Dear Georgetown Resident:
The City of Georgetown has selected you to participate in a survey which will be used
to evaluate the City's solid waste contract. Your response is important to us in
continuing to improve the solid waste services provided by the City, through its
contractor, Longhorn Disposal.
In addition, the City is asking you to respond to some questions that will help us plan
for the future. Please take a few minutes to respond and return this survey to us in
the enclosed postage -paid envelope by January 20, 1994.
Sincerely,
Bob Hart
City Manager
QUESTIONS CONCERNING CURRENT SOLID WASTE SERVICES
1 . My trash pick-up days are: Monday/Thursday Tuesday & Friday No Response
172-46% 191 —51% 11 -30,,0
2. My trash service is (check one):
Excellent Above Average Average Fair Poor No Response
74-20% 115--319/0 137 —370/0 33--oO/C 11 --2oio 4— 10,0
3. Services could be improved by (check all that apply):
Same time pick-up each pick-up day (123 — 23 01/0) Better placement of trash cans (100 — 19 %)
Pick-up of spilled trash (178 — 34%) Other (126 — 24%) — See Attachment "B"
ATTACHMENT "B"
COMMENTS"
'ION #3
,VEY
HOW
COMMENTS
OFTEN?
11
Putting trash can back in place where picked up and not in street where it can
be smashed by cars.
9
All OK
* Better treatment of trash cans
7
1 have not received a recycling bin.
6
* Pick up all trash when spilled.
3
* If they (Longhorn] spill, they should pick it up; if tenant's fault, they (tenant]
should pick up their own.
2
* City -owned garbage containers.
* Pick-up the day after, if trash isn't picked up on a holiday.
* Self-supporting service -- NO -- I am retired and live on a fixed income.
1
* Who is responsible for damage to trash can -- City or Longhorn?
* Experience shows that charging for these services (solid waste/recycling) would
not reduce our other costs (taxes). We would pay twice.
* I don't need trash left in my yard by your people -- I can do that myself, thank
you -- but I don't.
* If everyone had a container (either by sale of or rented) that would have
capacity to hold at least four sacks of garbage that animals would not be able
to into.
get
* I'm truly impressed with City's recycling efforts.
* I have found pick-up service overall excellent.
* In recycling, I have very little -- enough to put out once or twice a month.
Living on limited income, I just cannot pay any more.
* They have left my trash cans out in the street not up on my lawn area at least
I
7 to 10 times this oast year.
* Pick-up all trash when spillec.
* No complaints -- my situation -- once a week pick-up would be fine -- don't
have a lot to pick-up.
* Our trash is picked up about the same time every Tuesday and Friday -- I have
no complaint and personally think they are doing a good job.
* I do feel I'm paying more for pick-up than 1 would like to pay; so if fewer pick-
up days would cut costs, I'm for it.
Bills are zoo high as is:'
* It's getting to the point we older people cannot always remember or able to do
all of those things that 1994 is bringing about -- however, all your plans are a
must and I will cooperate.
Longhorn drivers are not courteous to the traffic or property owners.
* If the City has to deal with outside services, at lease have the recourse to
complain about the service rendered.
The workers slam the can at the back of the truck and never make an effort to
pick up what they spill.
HOW
OFTEN?
COMMENTS
1 How does it become cheaper to use a subcontractor vs. the City itself providing
the garbage service as it once did? Is this really more cost-effective? If it really
would cost more (a minimal cost), I wouldn't mind paying to keep the same
services (twice a week) .
* Please change recycle items to include used motor oil.
* Pick-up (trash) by 10:00 a.m.
* I don't believe you are not covering your costs by the rates charged.
* Cut out Spring Clean -Up.
* Pick-up small tree branches piled by trash cans.
* You do a good job.
* Charge to collect yard waste separately.
* The drivers drive way too fast.
* Stricter enforcement of laws to prevent dos from P 9 getting into garbage and
scattering it.
* More pick-ups a week.
* They should pick up corrugated cardboard.
* You charge enough for sewer to take care of trash. We need a "can -do" City
Manager instead of a "can't -do" City Manager.
* Container provided by contractor.
* They tore up by garbage cans -- since using plastic bags, it has been fine.
* Increase the annual Spring Clean -Up
p g -p program to twice ayear -- suggesting April
and October.
* We pay enough for what we have.
* Special arrangement for large quantities of yard debris and/or other trash.
* Charge the customers only that use the service.
* Other than the price, I am very satisfied.
* We moved here from Aus Lin in July -- trash Pick-up twice as good.
' Spilled trash blows throucn our neighborhood quite often.
* I would eliminate, or c:7arge extra, for Spring Clean -Up, Collection Station
operation, recycling, anc keep basic services at basic rates as much as
possible.
* Can placement sometimes blocks drive access.
* Pick-up all trash when spiiled.
* No complaints -- my situation -- once a week pick-up would be fine -- don't
have a lot to pick-up.
* Our trash is picked up a-cout ;he same time ever Tuesday and Friday Y Y y -- I have
no complaint and personally think they are doing a good job.
I do feei I'm paying for pick-up than I would like to pay; so if fewer pick-up
days would cut costs, I'm for it.
* Bills are too high as is!
It's getting to the point we older people cannot always remember or able to do
all of those things that 1994 is bringing about -- however, all your plans are a
must and I will cooperate.
* Longhorn drivers are not courteous to the traffic or ro e p p rty owners.
HOW
OFTEN? I COMMENTS11
1 Gave up on metal cans because of rough treatment. They even put creases in
plastic cans.
* My trash is picked up about the same time each trash day.
Add another man to pick up -- was three and now only two.
* Pleased to learn magazines will be recycled.
* They stop to pick up my trash when they want to. If not, the truck comes by
at 40 m.p.h.
* I think we pay enough for services we receive. Prices go up but service does
not improve as promised.
* I put my trash out in trash bags but neighborhood is quite cluttered with how
cans are thrown after pick-up.
* No complaints.
* I think it would be fair to charge for Spring Clean -Up pick-up.
* The lid is thrown one direction and the emptied barrel in another direction, and
some of the trash goes in still another direction. I've talked with the pick-up
guys and told them thanks, so the lid and container don't fly as far.
* Have lived in a community in which the container was supplied (pretty big) and
manipulated by the truck once a week, but a household could add more as
necessary -- that would be OK.
* I don't understand when we can/can't put out branches and have them hauled.
* I think people who do not recycle should pay more than those who do! This
would be an incentive for them to recycle their trash and reduce the landfill
required.
* I do not see them come on Friday.
* I have no suggestions. Service is fine, especially curbside recycling.
* We pay enough for utilities now. One of the benefits of living in Georgetown
was a lower utility bill.
Throw lids and bend Te-ai cans.
* No problem on the wnoie vvith our twice weekly pick-up.
* What does it presently cost for trash pick-up separately from recycling, Spring
Clean -Up, and Collection Station?
* Want to bill City or Longhorn when can left in the street and is run over by a
car.
* I am opposed to any increase in the rates and costs of any City Szrvicn.
* By just picking :t uo .,veer, -hey are su000sed -o. I spend an awful lot of time
calling that they dicn'- pick it up.
Glass broken at times and not all of it is picked up (recycling trucks).
* Poor management is unfair. Hi Tech '94 should be the time to become more
efficient -- getting more things accomplished in less time/effort/expense.
* Consider the many problems and end results before beginning the project.
Pick-up of spilled trash -- rarely needed.
HOW
OFTEN?
COMMENTS
1 * If the City has to deal with outside services, at least have the recourse to
complain about the service, rendered.
* Add another man to pick up -- was three and now only two.
* Pleased to learn magazines will be recycled.
* They stop to pick up my trash when they want to. If not, the truck comes by
at 40 m.p.h.
* I think we pay enough for services we receive. Prices go up but service does
not improve as promised.
* I put my trash out in trash bags but neighborhood is quite cluttered with how
cans are thrown after pick-up.
* They're doing a fine job -- better than what City employees had previously
provided.
* They do a good job.
Require that trash cans be used instead of plastic bags being P g g placed at the curb
where animals get into them.
* Optional pick-up at house rather than curb.
* They refuse to pick up anything that might be considered extra.
* The truck always seems in a great hurry and doesn't clean up what is spilled.
* Lid could be replaced on can. Can sometimes left to roll out into street.
* Never pick up limbs, etc.
* Pick-up is good, but can should not be destroyed and left in street.
* The workers slam the can at the back of the truck and never make an effort to
pick up what they spill.
* Gave up on metal cans because of rough treatment. They even put creases in
plastic cans.
* My trash is picked up about the same time each trash day.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE GOVERNING BODY
OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
TUESDAY, July 11, 1996
The City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, met in Regular Session on the above date with
Mayor Leo Wood presiding.
Council Present:
George Arroyos
Susan Hoyt
Ferd Tonn
Shelley Davis
Charles Burson
Lee Bain
Dick Vincent
Staff Present:
Hartley Sappington, Acting City Manager
Marianne Banks, City Attorney
Sandra Lee, City Secretary
Susan Morgan, Director of Finance
Jim Briggs, Director of Community Owned Utilities
Elizabeth Gray, Dir. of Information Resources
Ed Barry, Dir. of Development Services
Murray Blackman, Asst. to the City Manager
Council Absent:
None
Clyde von Rosenberg, Chief Planner
Hildy Kingma, Chief Planner
Wendy Walsh, Senior Planner
Marsha Iwers, Buyer
Policy Development/Review Workshop - Called to order after 5.00 p.m.
A Discuss development standards for manufactured housing
Standards were discussed, using a comparison from other cities in Texas, Nevada,
Oklahoma, and Florida as well as from the Planners Advisory Service.
B Answer questions on Statutory Consent Agenda Items listed below under the Regular
Session that will begin no sooner than 7:00 p.m. (for questions only, no action to be
taken until Regular Session)
Burson asked about a site development plan for the parking lot at 9th and Rock Streets
and asked for repair of sidewalks on Austin Avenue and University
City Council Minutes/July 11, 1996
Pagel of 5 Pages
Arroyos suggested he look at the Capitol Improvement Plan (CIP) for sidewalks the
schedule of when certain areas were due for repair of sidewalks. Morgan noted that the
CIP will be discussed during the Budget Workshops to be held in August.
Item N - Bain asked if it was common for applicants to request variances "after the fact."
Barry replied that it was in fact common, especially in areas outside the City where a
building permit is not required. Kingma noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission
had asked the same question, and explained the options that are customarily given to
developers. It was suggested that an ordinance be drawn up.
Regular Session - to convene Executive Session
Executive Session
C Sec.551.071 consultation with attorney
D Sec.551.072 deliberation on real property
E Sec.551.075 conference with employee
Regular Session - called to order 7:07 p.m.
F Action on Executive Session Items
Executive Session was postponed to the end of the meeting.
G Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff comments and reports
Arroyos thanked Wood for attending San Jose Health Fair and commended the Parks and
Recreation Division for the support that they provided.
Wood noted that girls from a softball team in Lyndoch, Australia had visited Georgetown
over the last weekend.
Bain commended Sertoma Club for the 4th of July fireworks display. Wood noted that
he had received many compliments, and there would be a special plan next year for
dealing with the traffic.
H Citizens wishing to address the Council
Bob Space, Purchasing Agent for Williamson County, spoke of the joint effort with the
City to purchase an automated citizen answering system, and informed the Council that
the County would be able to put up their share at the beginning of the contract, allowing
the City to pull their share from the next budget year that begins in October.
City Council Minutes/July 11, 1996
Page2 of 5 Pages
Arroyos thanked Space for attending and asked him to convey to the County
Commissioners that the City is appreciative of their efforts to work together. Wood
noted the intent of the City to cooperate with the County for cost savings to the citizens.
Statutory Consent Agenda
I Consideration of approval of meeting minutes for regular meeting of June 25,1996 --
Sandra Lee
J Consideration to award an annual bid for water meters and accessory kits to the Rohan
Company in the estimated amount of $23,461.24 -- Terry Jones and Jim Briggs
K Consideration to award an annual bid for office supplies to Corporate Express in the
estimated amount of $26,113.00 -- Terry Jones and Susan Morgan
L Consideration to award a bid to Griffin -Austin Company to construct the 1995/1996
Water System Improvements in the amount of $225,375.00 -- Jim Briggs
M Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 51.01 acre tract in the John Sutherland and A.
Williams Surveys, to be known as Fountainwood Estates, Phase 6A, and a 44.31 acre
tract in the John Sutherland, A. Williams, Isaac Jones and Peter Novel Surveys, to be
known as Fountainwood Estates, Phase 613, located off Fountainwood Drive and variance
to the Subdivision Regulations -- Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry
N Consideration of a Variance from the Subdivision Regulations for Serenada East, Unit
Two, Block 4, Lot 3, located at 805 Sabinas Court -- Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry
O Consideration of a resolution to authorize an abandonment of a portion of a public utility
easement located along the north property line of Lot 3, Block 4, Unit Two, Serenada
East, located at 805 Sabinas Court -- Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry
P Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility
easement located along the west side property line of Amended Wood Ranch, Section
Two, Lot 13, located at 214 La Mesa Lane -- Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry
Q Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public utility
easement located along the west side property line of Serenada East, Unit One, Lot 35,
located at 509 Serenada Drive -- Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry
R 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 on Lot 2, Block A,
Park Meadow Subdivision -- Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry
City Council Minutes/July 11, 1996
Page3 of 5 Pages
Motion by Tonn, second by Davis to approve the Consent Agenda in its entirety. Approved 7-0.
Legislative Regular Agenda
S Consideration and second reading of an ordinance amending the 1995/96 Annual
Operating Plan Element (budget) to build emergency water improvements to serve the
Indian Mound Subdivision in the amount of $186,175.00 -- Susan Morgan
Morgan read the caption. Motion by Bain, second by Tonn to approve Ordinance 96-23
on second reading. Approved 7-0.
T Consideration and second reading of an ordinance to rezone a 6.25 acre tract in the Isaac
Jones Survey, from A, Agricultural to C-2A - Restricted, Commercial First Height,
located on RM2338 north of Sedro Trail -- Hildy Kingma and Ed Barry
Kingma read the caption. Motion by Tonn, second by Burson to approve Ordinance 96-
24 on second reading. Approved 7-0.
U Consideration and second reading of an ordinance to amend the Georgetown Subdivision
Regulations to add specific parking standards for hotels and motels -- Hildy Kingma and
Ed Barry
Kingma read the caption. Motion by Hoyt, second by Burson to approve Ordinance 96-
25 on second reading. Approved 7-0.
V Consideration and second reading of an ordinance to amend the Georgetown Zoning
Ordinance to add specific parking standards for hotels and motels -- Hildy Kingma and
Ed Barry
Kingma read the caption. Motion by Bain, second by Davis to approve Ordinance 96-26
on second reading. Approved 7-0.
W Consideration of a resolution providing guidance to the Planning and Zoning
Commission on the development of standards for manufactured housing -- Clyde von
Rosenberg and Ed Barry
von Rosenberg explained that the exhibits listing the standards would be revised to
indicate the changes that the Council made in the workshop and read the resolution.
Motion by Vincent, second by Burson to approve the resolution. Approved 7-0.
Wood thanked John Warden and Bruce Barton for working with the Council and noted
that the City is most anxious to have affordable housing available for the citizens.
City Council Minutes/July 11, 1996
Page4 of 5 Pages
X Consideration for approval of a contract with Tele-Works Inc. for a joint City/County
automated citizen answering service in the total amount of $21,500, one half each to be
paid by the City and Williamson County -- Elizabeth Gray
Gray explained the message system as a positive service to offer to the citizens. Wood
suggested to Vincent that the GIVE Board could possibly become involved. Gray was
asked about the possibility of a complaint line and told Council that this system would
not be monitored on a regular basis, and therefore the caller would be told that this call
should not be used for emergencies.
Motion by Bain, second by Hoyt to approve the contract. Approved 7-0.
7:25 p.m. recessed for Executive Session
9.27 p.m. resumed Open Session
F Action on Executive Session Items
City Secretary
07/ 23/ 1996 17 : 25 1-512-329-0659
SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 02
AMC) F
CORRECTING
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS
FOR
CITY of GEORGETOWN, TEXAS ANNEXATION
334.667 ACRES
Being a tract of land containing 334.567 acres 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 tract DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP as recorded Document No. 95581755-9558177 of the Official Records
Of Williamson County, Texas (O.R_W.C.T_), also being portions of a called 83.158 acre
and a 16.586 acre DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP tracts as recorded in
Document No. 9622352 O.R,W.C.T., and being portions of a called 566.05 acre Theron
S. Bradford, Trustee remainder tract, as recorded in Volume 1898, Page 597
O.R.W.C.T., Texas. Said 334.567 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
83.297 ACRES
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. Road 2338, and along and
with the northerly line said SUM CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the
southerly line of Lakewoods Estates Subdivision, said 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 -
North 67"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 to a point,
North 77°02'31" East, a distance of 802.39 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the
tract herein described (X=3,111,389.6170, Y=10,229,004.5838) said point also being a
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 03
• 1
common comer for said Tract "A" and the northwest Corner of said DEL WEBB TEXAS
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP called 83.158 acre tract;
THENCE, continuing along and with a line common to said Lakewoods Estates
Subdivision and the said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 83,158 acre
tract the following eight (8) courses:
I. North 19°56'55" East, a distance of 179.06 feet to a point;
2. North 67°50'02" East, a distance of 787.59 feet to a point;
3. North 67047'02" East, a distance of 284.87 feet to a point;
4. North 68°05'56" East, a distance of 356.96 feet to a point;
5. North 67"51'25" East, a distance of 173.42 feet to a point;
6. North 71 °09'48" East, a distance of 257.58 feet to a point;
7. North 50"02'19" East, a distance of 5.31 feet to a point;
8. North 43°17106" East, a distance of 29.41 feet to a point for the most westerly
southwest corner of said 330.927 acre DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP tract and an angle point of said Lakewood Estates,
THENCE, leaving the said east line of Lakewoods Estates and along and with the
southerly line said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 330.927 acre tract and
the northerly line of said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 83.158 acre tract
the following three (3) courses. -
North 72"5244" East, a distance of 104.00 feet to a point;
North 68°45'01 " East, a distance of 898.74 feet to a point,
North 69"17'56" East, a distance 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 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 29"02'48" East, a distance of 473.88 feet to a point;
2. South 12°36'53" West, a distance of 346.12 feet to a point;
3. South 22" 10'57" East, a distance of 161.82 feet to a point;
4. South 57°03'31" East, a distance of 214.08 feet to a point;
•
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 04
THENCE, along and with a northerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE the following
1. South 29003'29" West, a distance of 243.92 feet to a point, for the Paint of
Curvature of a tangent curve to the right,
2. 1,164.74 feet along and with said arc of said curve to the right, having a Central
Angle of 60"07' 16", a Radius of 1,110.00 feet, a Chord gearing of South 59007'07"
West, a Chord Distance of 1,112.03 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the
curve herein described,
3. South 89010'45" West, a distance of 387.10 feet to a point;
4. North 44042'48" East, a distance of 31,60 feet to a point;
5. North 00`17'13" West, a distance of 93.46 feet to a point;
6- South 76"07'52" West, a distance of 304.06 feet to a point,
7. North 89"21'37" West, a distance of 504.74 feet to a point;
8. South 84014'19" West, a distance of 326.03 feet to a point,
9. South 79"36'17" West, a distance of 111.05 feet to a point;
10. North 79°03'31" West, a distance of 95.63 feet to a point,
11. North 65*49-18" Vilest, 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 to a point;
12. 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 83.297 acre of land
for Parcel 1,
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 2
53.079 ACRES
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_ Road 2338 (80'
Wide) as recorded in Volume 834, Page 809 of the \Nilliamson 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
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PACE 05
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:
North 67027'50" East, passing at 32.25 feet a point for the westerly corner of Tract "A''
said point also failing 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 to a point;
North 77°02'31" East, a distance of 802.39 feet to the point for a corner of said SUN
CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and said DEL WEBS TEXAS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP 83.158 acre tract;
THENCE, continuing along and with the northerly line said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP 83,158 acre tract and the southerly line of said Lakewoods Estates
Subdivision the following eight (8) courses:
1. North 19"56'55" East, a distance of 179.06 feet to a point;
2. North 67"50'02" East, a distance of 787.59 feet to a point;
3. North 67047'02" East, a distance of 284.87 feet to a point;
4. North 68°05'56" East, a distance of 356.96 feet to a point;
5. North 67651'25" East, a distance of 173,42 feet to a point;
6. North 71 009'48" East, a distance of 257.38 feet to a point;
7. North 50°02' 19" East, a distance of 5.31 feet to a point,
8. North 43°17'06" East, a distance of 29.41 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING
herein described (X=3,113,203_2149, Y=10,229,884.0772), said point also being
the most westerly southwest corner of a said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP called 330,927 acre tract;
THENCE, continuing along and with the easterly line of said Lakewoods Estates
Subdivision and the westerly line of said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
called 330.927 acre tract also being the proposed westerly line a PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD
TWELVE -A the following twenty-two (22) courses:
North 01 °27'36" East, a distance of 34.16 feet to a point,
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 06
2. North 17°50'06" East, a distance of 41.42 feet to a point;
3. North 21 °56'06" East, a distance of 247.97 feet to a point;
4. North 22°08'36" East, a distance of 308.00 feet to a point;
5. North 22"20'46" East, a distance of 178.05 feet to a point;
6. North 25°35'01" East, a distance of 23.19 feet to a point;
7. North 21 "38'56" East, a distance of 57.09 feet to a point;
8. North 21 010'16" East, a distance of 270.00 feet to a point;
9. North 21 ° 17'56" East, a distance of 93.56 feet to a point;
10. North 22"47116" East, a distance of 161.25 feet to a point;
11. North 21 ° 15'01" East, a distance of 298.18 feet to a point;
12. North 21 "58'46" East, a distance of 172.30 feet to a point;
13. North 11 °50'41" East, a distance of 15.97 feet to a point;
14. North 22"13'46" East, a distance of 186.05 feet to a point;
15. North 21 a25'41" East, a distance of 280.72 feet to a point;
16. North 23"17'21" East, a distance of 261.58 feet to a point;
17. North 33°02'31" East, a distance of 52.25 feet to a point;
18. North 84"26'01" East, a distance of 26.25 feet to a point;
19. North 77"5731" East, a distance of 17.91 feet to a point;
20. North 86"49'26" East, a distance of 48.28 feet to a point;
21. North 85026'31" East, a distance of 28.65 feet to a point;
22. South 58"53'43" East, a distance of 46.86 feet to a point;
THENCE, leaving the said easterly line for Lakewood Estates Subdivision and the
westerly line of the said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP called 330.927
acre tract and the said proposed westerly line for SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A and over and across the said DEL WEBB TEXAS
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP called 330.927 acre tract the following twenty-seven (27)
courses, for the northerly and easterly line of said proposed SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURUCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 07
.,t.
1. South 57°5824" East, a distance of 71.70 feet to a point;
2. South 54"23'30" East, a distance of 211.18 feet to a point;
3. South 68011'40" East, a distance of 154.88 feet to a point;
4. South 18"46 21" East, a distance of 70.00 feet to a point;
5. South 02"21'09" East, a distance of 70.00 feet to a point;
6. South 23a36'51" West, a distance of 77.92 feet to a point;
7. South 42" 15'43" Vilest, a distance of 313.64 feet to a point;
8_ South 35007'35" Vilest, a distance of 91.09 feet to a point of curvature of a non -
tangent curve to the right;
9. 54.57 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 10028'25 a Radius of 298.50 feet, a Chord Bearing, of South 49"52'25" East, a
Chord Distance 54.49 feet to a point for the end of the curve herein described;
10. North 72"03'03" East, a distance of 108.29 feet to a point;
11. North 66° 18'58" East, a distance of 55.01 feet to a point,
12. North 64'016'27" East, a distance of 54.92 feet to a point;
13. North 60°08'56" East, a distance of 54.92 feet to a point;
14. North 56°5344" East, a distance of 307.78 feet to a point;
15_ North 61 000'36" East, a distance of 72.04 feet to a point;
16. North 73a16'22" East, a distance of 72.20 feet to a point;
17. North 83"58'40" East, a distance of 72.20 feet to a point;
18. South 85"19'02" East, a distance of 72.20 feet to a point,
19. South 74036'45" East, a distance of 72.20 feet to a point;
20. South 63"54'27" East, a distance of 72.20 feet to a point;
21 _ South 51 "37'07" East, a distance of 72.04 feet to a point;
22. South 41 `48'17" East, a distance of 140.35 feet to a paint:
23. South 86628'38" East, a distance of 113.70 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 08
24. South 77°52'22" East, a distance of 85.49 feet to a point;
25. South 69°57'59" East, a distance of 91.73 feet to a point;
26. South 66"25'48" East, a distance of 246.14 feet to a point,
27. South 16°32'36" East, a distance of 161.05 feet to a point failing on a northerly line
of SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD EIGHT A a subdivision of record
in Cabinet N, Slides 56-60 W.C.P.a.;
THENCE, along and with the said northerly and westerly line of SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD EIGHT -A the following
I- South 33"49'37" West, a distance of 245,00 feet to a point;
2. North 67°34'41" West, a distance of 248.65 feet to a point;
3_ North 50000'31" West, a distance of 218.81 feet to a point;
4. South 85*11'24" West, a distance of 177.19 feet to a point;
5. South 61 °45'49" Vilest, a distance of 992.52 feet to a point;
6. South 32338'43" East, a distance of 121.28 feet to a point,
7. South 52"07'49" East, a distance of 237.52 feet to a point;
8. South 11'*24'34" East, leaving the said westerly line of SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGH130RHOOD EIGHT -A, a distance of 4.39 feet to a point falling on a easterly
line of said proposed SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A;
THENCE, along and with the said proposed easterly line of SUN. CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A the following
1 _ 146.60 feet along and with the arc of a non -tangent curve to the right, having a
Central Angle of 13°26'20", a Radius of 625.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South
45"30'17" East, a Chord Distance of 146,26 feet to a point, for the Point of
Tangency of the curve herein described;
2. South 38047'07" East, a distance of 154.95 feet to a point, for the Point Of
Curvature of tangent curve to the (eft;
3. 155.47 feet along and with the arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
Of 10 10 49 , a radius of 875.00 feet, a Chord Bearing, of South 43052'31" East, a
Chord Distance of 155.27 feet to a point, for the Point Of Tangency of the curve
herein described,
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 09
4, South 55"05'40" East, a distance of 91.94 feet to the Point Of Curvature of a non -
tangent curve to the left;
5. 8.96 feet along and with the are of said non -tangent curve to the left, having a
Central Angle of 00a35 24 , a radius of 870.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South
55'17'32" East, a Chord Distance of 8.96 feet to a point, for the point of Tangency
of the curve herein described,
6. South 55°35'14" East, a distance of 167.98 feet to the point of curvature of a
tangent curve to the left;
7. 38.74
feet along and with the arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
711 , a Radius of 25.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 80°01'10" East, a
Chord 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 GEORGETOWV
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE,
THENCE, along and with the said northerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard the
following two (2) Courses:
1. 26.69 feet along and with the arc of a non -tangent curve to the left, having a Central
Angle of 01 12 49 , a Radius of 1,260.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 35°01'10"
West, a Chord Distance of 26.69 feet to a point, for the end of the curve herein
described;
2. South 34°24'46" West, a distance of 82.79 feet to a point for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
THENCE, leaving the said northerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard and over and
across said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS called 16,586 acre tract and
along and with the said proposed westerly line of SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A the following eight (8)
1. 39.27 feet along and with the are of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
90°00'00", a Radius of 25.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 10°35'14" West, a
Chord Distance of 35.36 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
2_ North 55035'14" West, a distance of 89.71 feet to a point;
3. North 55029'07" West, a distance of 84.73 feet to a point;
4. North 48°36'00" West, a distance of 90.59 feet to a point, for the Point Of Curvature
of a non -tangent curve to the right;
5_ 164.35 feet along and with the arc of said non -tangent curve to the right, having a
central angle of 10°10'49", a radius of 925.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North
43°52'31" West, a Chord Distance of 164.14 feet to a point, for the Point of
Tangency of the curve herein described;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 10
6, North 38347'07" West, a distance of 154.95 feet to the point, for the Point of
Curvature of a tangent curve to the left;
7. 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, a Chord Bearing of North 45"30'17" West, a
Chord Distance of 134.56 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
8. North 54"14'39" West, leaving the said proposed westerly line of SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A, a distance of 193.50 feet to a
point falling on a said easterly line of SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE,
THENCE, along and with a easterly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE the following two (2)
1. North 52°07'49" West, a distance of 92.11 feet to a point;
2. North 32°3843" West, a distance of 101,15 feet to a point falling on a southerly line
of said ,SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A;
THENCE, along and with a northerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and southerly line for said proposed SUM CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWELVE -A the following seven (7) courses:
1. South 67°36' 16" West, a distance of 101.47 feet to a point;
2. North 42'1731" West, a distance of 248.04 feet to a point;
3. South 88°4713" West, a distance of 183.37 feet to a point;
4. South 5752'48" West, a distance of 119.83 feet to a point;
5. South 21 *35'14" West, a distance of 293.57 feet to a point,
6. South 5301149" East, a distance of 289.55 feet to a point;
7. South 29"02'48" East, a distance of 323.20 feet to a point failing on the southerly
line of said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP called 330,927 acre tract
and the northerly line of said DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP called
83.158 acre tract;
THENCE, along and with the said southerly line of DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP called 330.927 acre tract and the northerly line of said DEL WEBB
TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP called 83.158 acre tract; the following three 3 courses: ( )
1. South 69° 1 T56" West, a distance of 86.52 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 11
2. South 68"45'01" West, a distance of 898.74 feet to a point;
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 53.079 acres of land
for Parcel 2.
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 3
122.116 ACRES
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_ Road 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 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.
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. Road 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 the most westerly corner of
a Galled 6.26 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.
Road 2338 and along and with the southerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the northerly line of said Ischy tract, at 24.43 feet passing
the southwesterly corner of a PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A, said point also falling on the
easterly 20 foot widening dedication for said R.M. 2338, per said SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, and continuing for a total distance of 223.52
to a % inch iron rod (X=3,112,887.0141, Y=10,226,849.7780) found for the POINT OF
BEGINNING of the tract herein described;
THENCE, leaving the said southerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A and the northerly line of said Ischy tract and along and with a
easterly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD? ONE and the
westerly line for the said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TFAI-A the
following ten (10) courses -
North 69"17'41" West, a distance of 179.78 feet to a point;
2. . North 11 001'38" East, a distance of 140.99 feet to a point;
3. North 82039'27" West, a distance of 142.69 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 12
4_ North 26°17'30" West, a distance of 460.68 feet to a point;
5_ North 10°54'24" West, a distance of 105.14 feet to a point;
6, North 03°31'36" East, a distance of 97.16 feet to a point;
7. North 12028'57" East, a distance of 89.36 feet to a point,
8. North 20°04'02" East, a distance of 81.09 feet to a point:
9. North 3904118" East, a distance of 113.39 feet to a point;
10. North 54"03'13" East, passing at a distance of 81.04 feet the northeasterly corner of
said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A, also being exterior
corner of a said Bradford's Remainder tract, and continuing for a total distance of
152.41 feet to a point;
THENCE, along and with the said southerly line of SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the northerly line of said Bradford's Remainder tract the
following
North 55a25'44" East, a distance of 87.56 feet to a point;
North 54022'55" East, a distance of 74,57 feet to a point;
North 47°58'39" East, a distance of 85.71 feet to a point;
North 54° 18'38" East, a distance of 99.59 feet to a point;
North 67°29'17" East, a distance of 189.15 feet to a point;
North 88022'08" East, a distance of 101.18 feet to a point;
North 05004'48" West, a distance of 32.69 feet to a point;
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. 21,31 feet along and with a non -tangent Arc to the right having a Central Angle of
02°17'27", a Radius of 533,00, a Chord Bearing of South 88°05'04" East, a Chord
Distance of 21.31 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve herein
described;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURUCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 13
2. South 86056'20" East, a distance of 353.82 feet to a point, for the Point Of
Curvature of a tangent curve to the left;
3. 1,249.52 feet along and with said Arc to the left, having a Central Angle of
59°39'37", a Radius of 1,200.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 63013151" East, a
Chord Distance of 1,193.83 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
4. North 33"24'03" East, a distance of 128.79 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the right;
THENCE, leaving the said southerly right--of-way of Del Webb Boulevard and over and
across the said Bradford's Remainder tract the following thirty-four (34) courses;
1. 40.00 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 91 °40'22", a Radius of 25.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 79"14'14" East, a
Chord distance of 35.87 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
2. South 5405635" East, a distance of 98.63 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the right;
3. 23.56 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
Of 90°00'00", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 09055'35" East, a
Chord Distance of 21.21 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described,
4. South 540S535" East, a distance of 50,00 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the right;
5. 23.16 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
Of 88"27' 11 ", a Radius of 15,00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 79° 18'00" East, a
Chord Distance of 20.92 feet to a point for, ..the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
6. South 56"28'24" East, a distance of 156.43 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
7. 41.97 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
04°22' 18", a Radius of 550.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 58°3933" East, a
Chord Distance of 41.96 feet to a point for, the Point of Curvature of a reverse
curve to the right,
8. 85 �0 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right having a Central Angle of
5 25 , a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 17°52'30" East, a
Chord Distance of 20.45 feet to a point for, the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
07/23/199G 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 14
9. South 64a54117" East, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the right;
10. 22.50 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having. a Central Angle
of 85056'25", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 68°03'55' East, a
Chord Distance of 20.45 feet to a point for, the Point of Curvature of a reverse
curve to the left;
11. 166.59 feet along and with the Are of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 17°21'17", a Radius of 550.00 feet, a Chore! Bearing of South 77°38'31" East, a
Chord Distance of 165.96 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature of a reverse
curve to the right;
12. 22.58 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 86*15'25", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 43*11'26" East, a
Chord Distance of 20.51 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
13. South 88°40'53" East, a distance of 50.01 feet to a point;
14. South 00"03'43" East, a distance of 112.58 feet to a paint;
15. North 88"40'48" East, a distance of 306.50 feet to a point;
16. South 77"00'25" East, a distance of 68.45 feet to a point;
17. South 65"50' 18" East, a distance of 273.89 feet to a point;
18. South 48°20'41" East, a distance of 229.90 feet to a point;
19. North 64°40'42" East, a distance of 74.95 feet to a point;
20. North 27*27'13" East, a distance of 82.05 feet to a point;
21. North 01 °41'58" East, a distance of 93.30 feet to a point falling on a non -tangent
curve the left;
22. 96.30 feet along and with the Arc of said ' non -tangent curve to the left, having a
Central Angle of 06°41'17", a Radius of 825.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South
86°31'33" East, a Chord Distance of 96.25 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a reverse curve to the right;
23. 22.89 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 87°24'55", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 46°09'43" East, a
Chord Distance of 20.73 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
24. North 88°31'29" East, a distance of 50.01 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the right;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 15
25. 23.56 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 90a00'00", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 42°32'44" East, a
Chord Distance of 21.21 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
26. North 87°32'44" East, a distance of 81.51 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the right;
27. 207.60 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 38"59'56", a Radius of 305.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 72057`18" East, a
Chord Distance of 203.62 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
28. South 53°27'20" East, a distance of 34.33 feet to a point;
29. South 36"32'40" West, a distance of 132.00 feet to a point;
30. South 24009'40" West, a distance of 51.94 feet to a point;
31 _ South 37011'23" West, a distance of 158.00 feet to a point;
32. South 16037'08" East, a distance of 140.11 feet to a point;
33. South 56331'46" East, a distance of 95.00 feet to a point;
34. South 40"46`32" East, a distance of 53.19 feet to a point falling on the southerly line
of the said Bradford's Remainder tract, said point also failing on the north line of the
Chaparro Estates Subdivision a subdivision of record in Cabinet D, Slide 276 of the
W.C.P.R.:
THENCE, South 66°38'37" West, along and with the southerly line of said Bradford's
Remainder tract, -and the north line of said Chaparro Estates Subdivision, a distance of
3,500.46 feet to a point falling on the westerly line of said Bradford's Remainder tract
and the easterly line of said Ischy tract;
THENCE, along and with the said westerly line of Bradford's Remainder tract and the
said easterly line of Ischy tract the following three (3) courses:
1. North 29°40'21" West, a distance of 25.50 feet to a point;
2. North 34"23'06" West, a distance of 190.54 feet to a point;
3. North 40"25'06" West, a distance of 188.06 feet to a point for the southeasterly
corner of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBQRHOOD TEN -A, also being
the northeasterly corner of said Ischy tract;
THENCE, South 69003'37" West, along and with the south line of said SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A, and the said north line of said Ischy tract a
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 16
distance of 293,18 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area
of 122.116 acres of land for Parcel No. 3.
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 4
76,075 ACRES
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. Road 2338 (80'
wide) as recorded in Volume 834, Page 809 of the Williamson County Deed Records
(W.C.D.R.), said 112-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 the most westerly corner of
a called 6-25 acre W, D. Ischy tract as recorded in Volume 836, Page 867 W.C.D,R.;
THENCE, North 69"03'37" East, leaving the said northeasterly right-of-way of R. M.
Road 2338 and along and with the southerly line of said SUN CiTY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the northerly line of said Ischy tract, at 24.43 feet passing
the southwesterly corner of a PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A, said point also falling on the
easterly 20 foot widening dedication for said R.M. 2338, per said SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, and continuing for a total distance of 516.70
feet to a point for the southeasterly corner of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN,
NEIGH80RHOOD TEN A, and the northeasterly comer of the said Ischy tract, also
being an angle point of said Bradford's Remainder tract;
THENCE, along and with the westerly line of said Bradford's Remainder tract and the
easterly line of said Ischy tract the following three (3) courses:
1. South 40°25'06" East, a distance of 188.06 feet to a point;
2. South 34"23'06" East, a distance of 190.54 feet to a point;
3. South 29"4021" 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 a subdivision of record in Cabinet D, Slide 276 of the
(W.C.P.R.);
THENCE, North 68°38'37" East, along and with the south line of said Bradford's
Remainder tract and the north line of said Chaparro Estates subdivision a distance of
3,500.46 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described (X-
3,116,662.5464, Y-10,227,906,5780):
THENCE, leaving the said south line of Bradford's Remainder tract and the north line of
said Chaparro Estates the following thirty-four (34) courses through the interior of the
said Bradford Remainder tract:
07123/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 17
L
1. North 40946'32" West, a distance of 53.19 feet to a point;
2. North 66"31'46" West, a distance of 95.00 feet to a point;
3. North 16°37'08" West, a distance of 140.11 feet to a point;
4. North 37° 11'23" East, a distance of 158.00 feet to a paint;
5. North 24009'40" East, a distance of 51.94 feet to a point;
6. North 36°32'40" East, a distance of 132.00 feet to a point;
7. North 53027'20" West, a distance of 34.33 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of tangent curve to the left;
8_ 207.60 feet along and with the Are of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 38°59'56", a Radius of 305.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 72°57'18" West, a
Chord Distance of 203,62 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
9. South 87032'44" West, a distance of 81.51 feet to a point, for the point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
10. 23.56 feet along and with Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
90°00'00", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 42032'44" West, a
Chord Distance of 21.21 feet to a point for, the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
11. South 88°31'29" West, a distance of 50.01 feet to the point of Curvature of a
tangent curve to the left;
12. 22.89 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
87024'56"1 a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 46°09'43" West, a
Chord Distance of 20.73 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature of a reverse
curve to the right;
13. 96.30 feet along and the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle of
06°41'17", a Radius of 825.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 86031'33" West, a
Chord Distance of 96.25 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
14. South 01 °41'58" West, a distance of 93.30 feet to a point;
15. South 27*27'13" West, a distance of 82.05 feet to a point;
16. South 64"40'42" West, a distance of 74.96 feet to a point;
17. North 48°20'41 " West, a distance of 229.90 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 18
18. North 65"50'18" West, a distance of 273.89 feet to a point;
19. North 77'000'25" West, a distance of 68,45 feet to a point;
20. South 88"40'48" West, a distance of 306.50 feet to a point;
21. North 00003'43" West, a distance of 112.58 feet to a point;
22. North 88"40'53" West, a distance of 50.01 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
23. 22.58 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
86015'25", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 43° 11'26" West, a
Chord Distance of 20,51 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature of a reverse
curve to the right;
24. 158.59 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 17°21'17", a Radius of 550.00 feet, a Chord Searing of North 77"38'31" West, a
Chord Distance of 165.96 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature of a reverse
curve to the left;
25. 22.50 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
85"56'25 a Radius of 16,00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 68°03'55" West, a
Chord Distance of 20.45 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
26_ North 64054'17" West, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
27. 22.50 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
85°55'25", a Radius of 15-00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 17°52'30" West, a
Chord Distance of 20.45 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature of a reverse
curve to the right;
28. 41.97 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 04°22'18", a Radius of 550.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 58"39'33" West, a
Chord Distance of 41.96 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
29. North 56028'24" West, a distance of 156,43 feet to a point, for the Point of
Curvature of a tangent curve to the left;
30. 23.16 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
88027111 ", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 79' 18'00" West, a
Chord Distance of 20.92 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
07!23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 19
31. Noah 54°55'35" West, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
32. 23.56 feet, along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
90"00'00", a Radius of 15.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 09°55'35" West, a
Chord distance of 21.21 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
33, North 54°55'35" West, a distance of 98.63 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
34. 40.00 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
91°40'22", a Radius of 25.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 79°14'14" West, a
Chord Distance of 35.87 feet to a point failing on the southerly right-of-way line of
Del Webb Boulevard (width varies) of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE;
THENCE, North 33"24'03" East, along and with the southerly right-of-way line of del
Webb Boulevard (width varies) of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD
ONE a distance of 110.37 feet to a point;
THENCE, leaving the said southerly right-of-way of Del Webb Boulevard and following
the said southerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and
the northerly line of said Bradford's Remainder tract the following five (5) courses:
1. South 05003'11" East, a distance of 32.16 feet to a point;
2_ South 56°04'20" East, a distance of 292.96 feet to a point;
3. South 89°50'33" East, a distance of 728.30 feet to a point;
4. North 66"53'21 " East, a distance of 432.95 feet to a point;
5. South 68°4623" East, a distance of 156.04 feet to a point,
6. North 24040'05" East, a distance of 210.39 feet to a point, for an exterior angle point
of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE;
THENCE, North 81 "16'581' East, over and across the said Bradford's Remainder tract, a
distance of 69.91 feet to a point falling on the said southerly line of SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE;
THENCE, along and with the said southerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the northerly line of said Bradford's' Remainder tract the
following
1. South 75055'55" West, a distance of 151.04 feet to a point;
2. North 67"28' 10" East, a distance of 790.53 feet to a point;
07123/1996 17:25 1-512-329-6659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 20
3. North 49"50'12" East, a distance of 411.75 feet to a point;
4. North 57°24'59" East, a distance of 168.78 feet to a point;
5. North 03"59'32" East, a distance of 263.31 feet to a point, for a common corner of
said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, and the AMENDED
PLAT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWO a subdivision of
record in Cabinet M, Slides 263-269 W.C.P.R,;
THENCE, along and with the westerly line of said AMENDED PLAT OF SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWO, and a easterly line of said Bradford's
Remainder tract the following two (2) courses:
1. South 375550" East, a distance of 608.35 feet to a point;
2. South 74" 15'24" East, a distance of 415.31 feet to a point falling on the southerly
line of said Bradford's Remainder tract, and the northerly line of 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 southerly line for said Bradford's Remainder tract and the
northerly line of said Joy Shell Adkins tract the following seven (7) courses:
1. South 31 °55'30" West, a distance of 72.58 feet to a point;
2. South 02"56'30" East, a distance of 66.91 feet to a point;
3. South 20000'30" East, a distance of 59.51 feet to a point;
4. South 11 °29'30" East, a distance of 135.80 feet to a point;
5. South 06"04'30" East, a distance of 125.11 feet to a point;
6. South 05°04'30" West, a distance of 111.87 feet to a point;
7. South 13014'30" West, a distance of 44.60 feet to a point, for the most
southeasterly corner for said Bradford's Remainder tract, also being the
northwesterly corner of the said Joy Shell Adkins tract, also being the northeasterly
corner of said Chaparro Estates Subdivision;
THENCE, South 68"38'37" West, along and with the southerly line of said Bradford's
Remainder tract, and the northerly line of said Chaparro Estates Subdivision a distance
of 2,254,91 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of
76.075 acres of land for Parcel No. 4.
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 21
Arthur W. Girts, Jr.
Registered Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 4741
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake
Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 417-483
C:\TEXT\ANNEX2.DOC
07/22/96
t 4F r
COO
ib�i�•-y
ARTHUR W. GIRTS JR.
�... 4741 •��
<�
1iroP �\c�.•�O
s u1
11� I -d' 3 - V�--
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 22
i tcfx tPO-T- -A.
CORRECTING
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
FOR 983.543 ACRES
Being A Tract Of Land Consisting Of 983.543 Acres Of Land Situated In The W_G.
Wilkerson Survey, Abstract No, 671, George Thompson Survey, Abstract No, 792, Isaac
Jones Survey, Abstract No. 361, Daniel Monroe Survey, Abstract No. 450, Abner Short
Survey, Abstract No. 598, R.T. Jenkins Survey, Abstract No, 360 Lewis M, Russell
Survey, Abstract No. 537, Mary Ann Lewis Survey, Abstract No. 406, And The William
Roberts Survey, Abstract Number 524 Situated In Williamson County, Texas, And Being
Portions Of A Called 566.05 Acres Conveyed To Theron S. Bradford Trustee
(Remainder Tract) As Recorded in Volume 1898, Page 597 Official Records Of
Williamson County, Texas (O.R.1/1/.C.T.), Also Being Portions Of A Called 2,167.239
Acre Tract Conveyed To Del Webb Texas Limited Partnership In Document Numbers
9558175-9558177 O.R.W.C.T.. Said 983.543 Acre Tract More Particularly Described By
Metes And Bounds As Follows: With All Coordinates And Bearings Being Referenced
To Texas State Plane Coordinate System Central Zone. All Coordinates Recited Herein
Are Grid; All Surface Distance Recited Herein Maybe Converted To Grid By Multiplying
By The Combined Factor Of 0.999856056,
BEGINNING at a 1/2 inch iron rod (X = 3,110,494,4369 Y = 10,228,777.6545) falling on
the easterly right-of-way of R.M. Road 2338 (80' wide) as recorded in Volume 834, Page
809 Williamson County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.), also being the southwest corner of
Lakewood Estates a subdivision of record in Cabinet D, Slide 323, Williamson County
Plat Records (W.C.P.R.), also being the most westerly northwest corner of SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE a subdivision of record in Cabinet M, Slides
95-116 W.C.P.R., also being the POINT OF BEGINNING of Boundary Line Agreement
between Mac Brannen, J.W. Green and M.A. Forbes,Jr,,. as recorded in Volume 739,
Page 654 of the W.C.D.R.
THENCE, along and with the said south line of Lakewood Estates and the north line of
said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEiGHBORHOOD- ONE and the said Boundary Line
Agreement the following two courses;
1. North 67"27'50" East, a distance of 122.72 feet to a point:
2. North 77°02'31 " East, a distance of 802.39 feet to a point:
THENCE, leaving the said south line of Lakewood Estates and continuing along and
with the northerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE the
following thirty-eight (38) courses:
1. South 32°05'04" East, a distance of 525.66 feet to a point;
2. South 65"49'18" East, a distance of 199.82 feet to a point;
3. South 79003'31" East, a distance of 95.63 feet to a point;
4. North 79'36'17" East, a distance of 111.05 feet to a point,
S
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 23
5, North 84"14'19" East, a distance of 326.03 feet to a point;
6. South 89Q21'37° East, a distance of 504.74 feet to a point;
7. North 76°07'52" East, a distance of 304.06 feet to a point;
8. South 00°17'13" East, a distance of 93.46 feet to a point;
9. South 44"42'48" West, a distance of 31.60 feet to a point,
10. North 89°10'45" East, a distance of 387.10 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a curve to the left;
11. 1,164.74 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 60*07'16", a 'Radius of 1,110.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 59"07'07" East, a
Chord Distance of 1,112.03 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
12. North 29°03'29" East, a distance of 243.92 feet to a point;
13. North 57"03'31" West, a distance of 214.08 feet to a point;
14. North 22010'57" West, a distance of 161.82 feet to a point;
15. North 12"36'53" East, a distance of 346.12 feet to a point;
16. North 29a02'48" West, a distance of 797.08 feet to a point;
17. North 53"11'49" West, a distance of 289.54 feet to a point;
18. North 21 "35'14" East, a distance of 293.57 feet to a point;
19. North 57°52'48" East, a distance of 119.83 feet to a point;
20. North 88"47' 13" East, a distance of 183.37 feet to a point;
21. South 42"12'31" East, a distance of 248.04 feet to a point;
22. North 67°36'16" East, a distance of 101.47 feet to a point;
23. South 32"38'43" East, a distance of 101.15 feet to a point;
24. South 52007'49" East, a distance of 92.11 feet to a point;
25. South 29015'51" West, a distance of 105.02 feet to a point;
26. South 22"41'21" West, a distance of 47,01 feet to a point;
27. North 81 "12'41" West, a distance of 123.05 feet to a point;
28_ South 01 "37'57" East, a distance of 209.30 feet to a point:
A
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 24
29. South 24434'33" East, a distance of 107.34 feet to a point;
30. South 40025'45" East, a distance of 107.93 feet to a point;
31. South 44°02'2$" East, a distance of 167.61 feet to a point;
32. South 29"11'41" East, a distance of 81.30 feet to a point;
33. South 04" 13'42" East, a distance of 414.31 feet to a point;
34. South 44Q25'50" East, a distance of 165.75 feet to a point;
35. North 44°46'29" East, a distance of 111.25 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a curve to the left;
36. 206.17 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 10'21'43", a Radius of 1,140,00 feet a Chord Bearing of North 39935'37" East, a
Chord Distance of 206.89 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
37. North 34°24'46" East, a distance of 507.91 feet to a point, for the Point of curvature
of a curve to the right;
38. 840.48 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 38"13'08", a Radius of 1,260.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 53°31'20" East, a
Chord Distance of 824.98 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described, said point also being a common corner for said SUN CITY
GEORCETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and a PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD EIGHT -A a
subdivision of record in Cabinet N, Slides 56-60 W.C.P.R.;
THENCE, along and with the common line for said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and SUN CITY NEIGHBORHOOD EIGHT -A the following
thirteen (13) courses:
1. North 29030"41" West, a distance of 261.67 feet to a point;
2. North 66"15'52" West, a distance of 442.81 feet to a point;
3. South 61 *19'40" West, a distance of 582.01 feet to a point;
4. South 54"25'16" West, a distance of 197.43 feet to a point;
5- North 52"07'49" West, a distance of 237.52 feet to a point;
6. North 32°38'43" West, a distance of 121.28 feet to a point;
7. North 61 °45'49" East, a distance of 992.52 feet to a point;
8. North 85*11'24" East, a distance of 177.19 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 25
9. South 50°00'31" East, a distance of 218.81 feet to a point;
10. South 67°34'41" East, a distance of 248.65 feet to a point;
11. North 33049'37" East, a distance of 371.40 feet to a point;
12. North 17036'14" East, a distance of 660.20 feet to a point;
13. North 51 °42'59" East, a distance of 468.83 feet to a point for an exterior corner of
said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, -
THENCE, departing the said northerly line of SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and continuing along and with the northerly line of said SUN
CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD EIGHT -A the following three (3) courses-
1. North 12"38'11" East, a distance of 532.85 feet to a point;
2. North 07"26'59" East, a distance of 286.64 feet to a point;
3. North 00* 14' 15" West, passing at 33.77 feet a point for the northwest corner of said
SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD EIGHT -A and continuing for a total
distance of 398.01 feet to a point, falling on a non -tangent curve to the left;
WHENCE, 340.00 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central
Angle of 1402411", a Radius of 1,352.54 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 76*66'53" East,
a Chord Distance of 339.11 feet to a point falling on a westerly line of said SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE;
THENCE, along and with a northerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE the following Six (6) courses:
1. North 20015' 12" West, a distance of 120.00 feet to a point falling on a non -tangent
curve to the left;
2. 246.51 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 11027'34", a Radius of 1,232.54 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 64"01'01" East, a
Chord Distance of 246.10 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
3. North 58017'14" East, a distance of 535.93 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the right;
4. 683.56 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 20°14'25", a Radius of 1,935.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 68"2426" East, a
Chord Distance of 680.01 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
5. North 78031'39" East, a distance of 397.15 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 26
6. Along and with the Arc of said curve to the left passing at an Arc Length of 105.61
feet a point for an common corner of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR
a subdivision of record in Cabinet N, Slides 61-68 W.C.P.R., and continuing for a
total Arc Length of 603.91 feet, having a Central Angle of 25°3751 ", a Radius of
1,350.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 65042'44" East, a Chord Distance of 598.89
feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve herein described;
THENCE, along and with northerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR the following two (2) courses:
North 52°53'48" East, a distance of 1,045.42 feet to a point, for the Point of Curvature of
a tangent curve to the left;
Along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, passing at an Arc Length of 189.71 feet
a common corner for said ,SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR and
PROPOSED SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD SEVEN ,and continuing for
a total Arc Length of 757.62 feet, having a Central Angle of 3002743", a Radius of
1,425.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 37°3957" East, a Chord Distance of 748.73 feet
to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve herein described;
THENCE, along and with the said northerly and easterly line for PROPOSED SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD SEVEN the following four (4) courses:
1. North 22°26'05" East, a distance of 200.00 feet to a point for the northerly corner of
said PROPOSED SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD SEVEN;
2. South 673355" East, a distance of 120.00 feet to a point;
3_ South 78°16'18" East, a distance of 631.31 feet to a point;
4_ South 45°00'00" East, passing at a distance of 745.43 feet an exterior corner of
said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR and continuing for a
total distance of 1,228.07 feet to a point;
THENCE, along and said easterly line for SUN CITY GEOPGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR the following five (5) courses:
1- South 84030'56" East, a distance of 689.81 feet to a paint,
2. North 61 006' 10" Past, a distance of 395.00 feet to a point;
3. North 66°25'43" East, a distance of 50.22 feet to a point;
4. South 28053'50" East, a distance of 9.10 feet to a point;
5. North 61 °06'10" East, a distance of 135.00 feet to a point for a common corner of
said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD FOUR;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 27
THENCE, along and with the said northerly, and easterly line of SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, and the westerly line of the N_T_ Purcell tract
as recorded in Volume 817, Page 549 W.C.D.R., the westerly and southerly line of the
William Fuller tract as recorded in Volume 1908, Page 139 O.R.W.C.T., the southerly
line of the Ronald R. Beckman tract as recorded in Volume 1976, Page 862 O.R.W.C.T.,
the westerly line of the a.l... Matthews tract as recorded in Volume 1988, Page 578
O.R.W.C.T., the westerly line of the S.W. Marshal tract as recorded in Volume 1911,
Page 237 O.R.W_C.T., the following eight (8) courses:
1. North 69025'08" East, a distance of 91.62 feet to a point;
2. North 20°34'52" West, a distance of 200.00 feet to a point;
3. North 68°21'42" East, a distance of 396.31 feet to a point;
4. South 21'338' 18" East, a distance of 207.35 feet to a point;
5. South 19" 10' 11 " East, a distance of 375.79 feet to a point;
6. South 21 °30'55" East, a distance of 1,192.91 feet to a point;
7. North 69042'47" East, a distance of 646.95 feet to a point;
8. South 21011'17" East, a distance of 1,760.32 feet to a point;
THENCE, along and with the southerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the northerly line of the Marla Shell tract as recorded in
Volume 2091, Page 330 O_R.W.C.T., and the northerly line of the Stephen M. Shell tract
as recorded in Volume 1872, Page 708 O.R.W.C.T. the following five (5) courses:
1. South 672617" West, a distance of 810.83 feet to a point;
2. South 18"57'19" East, a distance of 424.09 feet to a point;
3_ South 70051'53" West, a distance of 4,518.17 feet to a point;
4. North 51 °28'09" West, a distance of 222.06 feet to a point;
5. North 61 °28'13" West, a distance of 15.45 feet to a point for a common corner of
said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the AMENDED
PLAT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWO as recorded in
Cabinet M, Slides 263-269 W.C.P.R_;
THENCE, along with the southerly line of said AMENDED PLAT OF SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWO and northerly line of the said Stephen M.
Shell tract and the northerly line of the Joy Shell Adkins tract as recorded in Volume
1782, Page 708 O.R.W.C.T. the following eight (8) courses:
1. South 57° 14'41 " West, a distance of 1,155.88 feet to a point:
2. South 20°49'35" East, a distance of 165.31 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-6659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 28
3. South 63005'26" West, a distance of 593.28 feet to a point;
4. South 83"49'30" West, a distance of 401.77 feet to a point;
5. South 80031'30" West, a distance of 118.55 feet to a point;
6. South 58°35'30" West, a distance of 58.49 feet to a point;
7. South 28006'30" West, a distance of 81.94 feet to a point;
8. South 12°36'30" West, a distance of 70.65 feet to a point for the southwesterly
corner of said AMENDED PLAT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD
TWO, also being the most southeasterly corner of said Bradford's Remainder Tract;
THENCE, along and with the said westerly line of the AMENDED PLAT OF SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWO and the easterly line of said Bradford's
Remainder Tract the following two (2) courses:
1 _ North 74"16'24" West, a distance of 415.31 feet to a point;
2. North 375650" West, a distance of 608.35 feet to a point for a common corner of
the said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the said
AMENDED PLAT of SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD TWO
THENCE, along and with the southerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and the easterly and northerly line of said Bradford's
Remainder Tract the following forty-nine (49) courses:
1. South 63°59'32" West, a distance of 263.31 feet to a point;
2. South 57°24'59" West, a distance of 168.78 feet to a point;
3. South 494'50'12" West, a distance of 411.75 feet to a point;
4. South 672810" West, a distance of 790.53 feet to a point;
5_ North 75*55'55" West, a distance of 151.04 feet to a point;
6. North 25"30'43" East, a distance of 151.09 feet to a point;
7. North 10014'38" East, a distance of 137.81 feet to a point;
8. North 72" 15'07" East, a distance of 238.10 feet to a point;
9. North 54"55'58" East, a distance of 224.50 feet to a point;
10. North 43"50'07" East, a distance of 241.51 feet to a point;
11 _ North 62°29'46" East, a distance of 127.41 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCQN AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 29
12. North 48°47'46" East, a distance of 194.02 feet to a point;
13. North 4602349" East, a distance of 93.81 feet to a point;
14. North 35"19'28" East, a distance of 189.57 feet to a point;
15. North 83°31'57" East, a distance of 113.31 feet to a point;
16. North 37°35'50" East, a distance of 185.22 feet to a point;
17_ North 34*11'54" West, a distance of 164.17 feet to a point;
18. North 60'039'00" West, a distance of 797.52 feet to a point falling on a non -tangent
curve to the right;
19. 529.75 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the right, having a Central Angle
of 24"05'21 ", a Radius of 1,260.00 feet, Chord Bearing of South 64°34'05" West, a
Chord distance of 525.86 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
20. South 76036'46" West, a distance of 373.51 feet to a point, for the Point of
Curvature of a tangent curve to the left;
21. 839.64 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 42012'00 , a Radius of 1,140.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 55°30'46" West,
a Chord Distance of 820.79 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
22, South 34°24'46" West, a distance of 594.40 feet to a point, for the Point of
Curvature of tangent curve to the left;
23. 98.97 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle of
04°58'27", .a Radius of 1,140.00 feet, . a .Chord Bearing of South 31 °55'32" West, a
Chord Distance of 98.94 feet to a point, for the point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
24. South 29a26'18" West, a distance of 59.68 feet to a point;
25. South 47"53'23" East, a distance of 491.41 feet to a point;
26. North 89°12'09" East, a distance of 177.51 feet to a point;
27. North 7003459" East, a distance of 659.79 feet to a point;
28. South 60"00'10" East, a distance of 143.24 feet to a point;
29. South 11 004'33" East, a distance of 171.05 feet to a point;
30. South 24"40'05" West, a distance of 137.08 feet to a point;
31. South 24°40'05" West, a distance of 73.31 feet to a mint,
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 30
32. North 68046'23" West, a distance of 156.04 feet to a point;
33, South 66453'21" West, a distance of 432.95 feet to a point;
34. North 89°50'33" West, a distance of 728.30 feet to a point;
35, North 56004'20" West, a distance of 292.96 feet to a point;
36, North 05°0311" West, a distance of 32.16 feet to a point,
37. South 33"24'03" West, a distance of 239,16 feet to a point for the Point of Curvature
of a tangent curve to the left;
38. 1,249.52 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 59°39'37, a Radius of 1,200.00 feet, a Chord Bearing of South 63013'51 " West, a
Chord Distance of 1,193,83 feet to a point, for the Point of Tangency of the curve
herein described;
39. North 86056'20" West, a distance of 353.82 feet to a point, for the Point of
Curvature of a tangent curve to the left;
40. 21.31 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left having a, Central Angle of
02°17'27", a Radius of 533,00 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 88005'04" West, a
Chord Distance of 21.31 feet to a point, for the end of the curve herein described;
41. South 50"04'47" East, a distance of 26-53 feet to a point;
42. South 05°04'48' East, a distance of 32.69 feet to a point;
43. South 88°22'08" West, a distance of 101.18 feet to a point;
44. South 67*29'17" West, a distance of 189.15 feet to a point;
45. South 54° 18'38" West, a distance of 99.59 feet to a point,
46. South 4758'39" West, a distance of 85.71 feet to a point;
47. South 54"22'55" West, a distance of 74.57 feet to a point,
48. South 65b25'44" West, a distance of 87.56 feet to a point,
49. South 54*03'13" West, passing at a distance of 71.37 feet a point for the common
corner of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE and a
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2,
NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A a subdivision of record in Cabinet M, Slides 225-227
W.C.P.R., also being the most westerly northwest comer of said Bradford's
Remainder Tract, and continuing for a total distance of 152.41 feet to a point;
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURUCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 31
THENCE, along the a easterly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN
NFIGHBORHOOD ONE and the westerly line of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN,
PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A the following nine (9) COURSES-
1- South 39°41'18" West, a distance of 113.39 feet to a point;
2. South 20D04'02" West, a distance of 81.09 feet to a point;
3. South 12°28'57" West, a distance of 89.36 feet to a point;
4. South 03"31'36" West, a distance of 97.16 feet to a point;
5. South 10'54'24" East, a distance of 105.14 feet to a point;
6. South 26"17'30" East, a distance of 460.68 feet to a point;
7. South 82°39'27n East, a distance of 142.69 feet to a point;
8. South 11 *01'38" West, a distance of 140.99 feet to a point;
9. South 69°17'41" East, a distance of 179.78 feet to a point failing on the southerly
line of said OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A,
also falling on the northerly line of a called 6.25 acre tract conveyed to W.Q. Ischy in
Volume 836, page 887 W.C.P.R.;
THENCE, South 69°03'37" West, along and with the southerly line of said SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN, PHASE 2, NEIGHBORHOOD TEN -A and the northerly line of said
Ischy tract a distance of 223.52 feet to a point falling on the arc of a non -tangent curve
to the right on the said easterly right-of-way of R.M. - Road 2338, also being the
southwesterly corner of said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE;
THENCE, along and with the said easterly right-of-way of R.M. Road_ 2338 and the
westerly line of the said SUN CITY GEORGETOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ONE the
following four (4) courses;
1 _ 851.37 feet along and with the Arc of said non -tangent curve to the right, having a
Central Angle of 17°1521", a Radius of 2,826.86 feet, a Chord Bearing of North
47"13'21" West, a Chord Distance of 848.16 feet to the end of the curve herein
described;
2. North 38°33'18" West, a distance of 1,164.68 feet to a point, for the Point of
Curvature of a non -tangent curve to the left;
3. 952.32 feet along and with the Arc of said curve to the left, having a Central Angle
of 37003'01", a Radius of 1,472.69 feet, a Chord Bearing of North 57"10'30" West,
a Chord Distance of 935.81 feet to a point, for the end of the curve herein
described;
4. North 74°13'03" West, a distance of 51.25 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and
containing a computed area of 983,543 acres of land.
07/23/1996 17:25 1-512-329-0659 SURVCON AUSTIN TEXAS PAGE 32
- Q6Y� `w .
Arthur W. Girts, Jr.
Registered, Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No, 4741
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza on the Lake
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 417-483
C:\TEXTIANNEXI.DOC
07122/4r%
AA�
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, ACCEPTING REQUESTS FROM PROPERTY
OWNERS IN THE FREDERICK FOY SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO.229, AND
LEWIS P. DYCHES SURVEY, ABSTRACT NO. 1719 TO VOLUNTARILY
INCLUDE APPROXIMATELY 2,141 ACRES WITHIN THE
EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN
WHEREAS, the City has. received requests from the following owners of the
following properties to voluntarily be included within the City's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
(ETJ):
Gray Tract - 104 acres
4-T Ranch Associates Tract - 326 acres
4-T Ranch Associates Tract - 104 acres
Del Webb Texas Limited Partnership/Commonwealth Land Title Co. of
Austin, Inc., Tract A-3 - 331 acres
Akers/Duckworth/Ward/Bridges Tract - 264 acres
Young Tract - 46 acres
Byram Tract - 307 acres
Del Webb Texas Limited Partnership/Commonwealth Land Title Co. of
Austin, Inc.:
Tract A-1 - 93 acres
Tract A-2 - 27 acres
Tract A-4 - 302 acres
Young Tract - 237 acres
WHEREAS, all parcels are identified on a map and by metes and bounds
descriptions attached to this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, since all parcels are being accepted at one time, and certain of the
parcels are currently contiguous to the City's existing ETJ, then all the property requested
to be included within the ETJ will be contiguous to the current ETJ; and
WHEREAS, Section 42.022 of the Texas Local Government Code allows for
properties that are contiguous to the ETJ of a City to voluntarily be included into the City's
ETJ upon request of the property owner, and acceptance by the City; and
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
ETJ Voluntary Inclusion Res. No.
Page 1 of 2
.to
herein and expressly made a part hereof, as if copied verbatim. The.City Council hereby
finds that this resolution implements Growth and Physical Development Policy 1 of the
Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states: "The City will ensure that future land
use patterns provide economic, cultural, and social activities to all residents, businesses
and organizations"; 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 hereby accepts these properties into the City's ETJ for all
purposes, effective immediately, and will prepare and file a document in the Official
Records of Williamson County, Texas, as notice to future purchasers that the property is
now within the City's ETJ.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
RESOLVED this day of July, 1996.
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
ETJ Voluntary Inclusion Res. No.
Page 2 of 2
THE CITY OF* GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
Council Meeting Date: 07/23/96 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Workshop on solid waste services.
ITEM SUMMARY
The workshop will deal with the solid waste contract for residential and commercial services
and the City -operated Collection Station.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
None
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None
COMMENTS
None
ATTACHMENTS
1. Information on solid waste services and Collection Station.
ctor of Community Services
GOVERNANCE DISCUSSION
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
J U LY 235 1996
ON
SOLID WASTE SERVICES
Solid Waste Contract
Background: Since June, 1989, the City has had an exclusive contract for
residential and commercial solid waste services with Longhorn Disposal, Inc.
The original contract was for three (3) years, but Councils have granted
extensions until September 30, 1997.
A. Staff is seeking direction from the Council in preparing a Request for
Proposals.
B. Major issues to be defined in preparing to negotiate a new contract
include the following:
1. Exclusive contract inside city limits for residential services and
billing for solid waste services provided in ETJ by contractor in
competition with other private haulers. Currently, the City has
5,424 residential customers inside the City and 1,069 residential
customers outside the City in the ETJ.
2. Exclusive contract' inside city limits for all commercial solid waste
services. The City has 462 commercial customers inside the City.
3. Provision of curbside recycling services to all residential customers
inside the city limits. The City had a set -out recycling rate of 35%
for the period of January, 1996, through June, 1996. The set -out
rate means the percentage of the residential customers in the City
who set out recycling each week. In the customer survey
completed in February, 1994, the respondents indicated that 73%
of them participated in the recycling program. Nationally, the
participation rate is usually double the set -out rate because
households don't recycle every week.
4. Provision of optional recycling service to commercial customers.
There are currently 18 commercial customers who are participating
in a commercial recycling program with the City's contractor.
5. Nature of contract:
a. Number of years and option years
b. Fixed price for "x" years; or,
C. Council approval on any rate increase, not more than once a
year
6. Type of residential service (Attachment "A" provides a comparison
of Georgetown's rates with ten other cities):
a. Twice a week pick-up
b. Once a week with contractor -furnished cart (phased in over
time or at start of new contract). Since May, 1995, the City
has been conducting a pilot program of once a week trash
service with carts in the San Gabriel Heights and Thousand
Oaks neighborhoods. A satisfaction survey was conducted
Page 1
in May, 1996, on 100% of the customers in these
neighborhoods with a 50.8% response. The full analysis of
the survey is attached in Attachment "B", but some of the
significant findings were:
► 67% were very satisfied with the pilot program
► 51 % indicated services had improved under the pilot
program
► 87% recommended the program be expanded to
other areas of the City
The City also has implemented once -a -week trash service
with carts in the following areas:
No. Churchill Farms (continued once a week service
when annexed)
No. Portion of Penny Lane off of RM 2338 when annexed
► Portion of Sedro Trail off RM 2338 when annexed
► Residents annexed along RM 2338 between Cedar
Breaks Road and Sun City Georgetown
► Sun City Georgetown: this was the type of service
requested by Del Webb Corporation
C. Fully -automated service limiting the waste to provided
service container only.
d. Continue monthly bulky waste service.
7. Quality control issues:
a. Starting and stopping times: The current contract allows
residential service to occur between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m.
Service can go beyond 8:00 p.m. because of equipment
failure and sometimes after holidays. A customer complaint
sometimes received related to "same time" pick-up each
week. Routes are supposed to be run the same way each
time, but trash volume and equipment problems can impact
time.
b. Penalty clauses for poor service: There are no specific
penalties for poor service in the current contract. The City
will give customer credit for repeated poor service and
charge this back to the contractor.
C. Holiday pick-up schedule: The current contract allows the
contractor to take the following holidays: New Year's Day,
July 4, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day.
The Contractor has chosen to take only New Year's Day,
Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. If the holiday falls
on one of two pick-up days in a week, it is not made up; but
if it falls on a once -a -week pick-up day, it is made up the
next working day or on the following Saturday.
Page 2
d. Supervision of contractor's staff: Currently, the contractor
has a supervisor check on trash crews periodically. Any
new contract should require daily "in -town" supervision of
truck crews.
In 1994, 1,000 citizens were sent a questionnaire about solid waste
services. 374 (37.4%) responded and rated the service as follows --
Excellent
20%
Above Average
31 %
Average
37%
Fair
9%
Poor
3%
No Response
1 %
100%
The most frequent complaints received on this survey related to
proper handling of trash cans and quality control on service
(Attachment "C" provides a complete analysis of February, 1994,
survey).
II. Collection Station Operation
The City operates a Collection Station at the site of the City's closed landfill.
The City receives residential solid waste, bulky waste, some construction waste,
and grass/leaves. The Collection Station also chips brush for use by citizens,
and recycles oil, antifreeze, oil filters, vehicle batteries, tires, and cooking
oil/kitchen grease. This operation has received an award from the Lower
Colorado River Authority for its operation and is also a key element in the City's
recognition as a Clean Cities 2000 member by the Texas Natural Resource
Conservation Commission (TNRCC). The City, as a member of the Clean Cities
2000 program, is committed to strive to reduce its waste going to the landfill by
50% by the year 2000. TNRCC recognizes the City has made excellent efforts
toward meeting this voluntary goal.
Over the last four years, landfill disposal costs for dumpsters hauled from the
collection Station to the Landfill have increased from $3.00 per cubic yard to
$8.00 per cubic yard. The primary reason for the cost increase is directly
attributed to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Subtitle "D" Regulations.
This has raised the annual disposal cost of the Collection Station to the
Sanitation Fund from $30,000 to $80,000.
The current fee structure at the Collection Station is to allow City solid waste
customers three cubic yards each month at no charge and three cubic yards
Page 3
each month for a fee of $8.00 per cubic yard. Non -City customers can bring up
to six cubic yards each month for a fee of $8.00 per cubic yard. For fiscal year
1995/96, the total fees collected are projected to be $9,000.00, while the
disposal cost is projected to be $80,000.00.
Collection Station staff recognize that many times the free use provision at the
Collection Station is abused by small remodeling contractors, yard service
crews, and rental leasing companies, as well as card -sharing by customers with
non -customers. Staff requires payment of obvious abusers, but in many cases,
it cannot be easily proven that abuse is occurring and fees cannot be collected.
In 1994, the customer survey indicated that 51 % of the respondents never used
the Collection Station, which indicated that half the customers are subsidizing
this service for other customers.
Sanitation R )mparison
�n Rate Comparison for 1995-96
�hC
Austin
Provides
City
Residential
$11.54
Times Per Curbside Brush/ Bulk Special Collection
.Week Recycling PickuP pickup Station
2/1' residential only 2x per year yes landfill
2x residential no on -site mulching 1x per year w/ Ecology Action'
2 yes yes (wfi specs) yes no
2 yes yes yes no
2 yes (��5 ��-�'iP�x per Vear yes landfill
2 XpWjAlb included w/ service yes no
Round Rock
Contract
$9.60
Pflugerville
Contract
$12.15
San Marcos
Contract
$8.92
New Braunfels
City
$8.15
Belton
Contract
$9.03
Temple
City
$9.95
2 no yes yes yes
2 yes as needed fee based recycling center
McKinney
Contract
$11.25
Plano
City
$12.52
1 yes yes on request yes
Taylor
Contract
$8.80
2 no on -site mulching scheduled recycling center
Georgetown
Contract
$10.50
9111 VAQ vl�
,__ YVQ ym-3
ewov,tla�
' There is a pilot program for once a week automated pickup with large capacity carts.
' City provides the location, Ecology Action provides the manpower and keeps the profits.
City of Georgetown
garbsur2.wk4 08/14/95
,Gew a T we,
or ROUown
NENCO IN 1842
DATE: May 28, 1996
TO: Bob Hart
City Manager
FROM: Hartley Sappington
Director of Community Services
Community Services
Memorandum -
SUBJECT: Analysis of Survey Results of Pilot Solid Waste Program
In May, 1996, the City completed its one year pilot program for solid waste in the San
Gabriel Heights, Thousand Oaks, and Sierra Vista neighborhoods. The approximately
600 families were provided containers by the contractor and placed on a once -a -week
pick-up schedule.
On May 13, 1996, 573 questionnaires were mailed out. By May 24, 291 (50.8%) were
returned, which is a return rate high enough to give excellent validity to the results.
The summary results of the 291 responses are listed below. A copy of the
questionnaire with full results is attached.
► 64% responded that the container was adequate to handle their waste each
week, and 32% responded that the container was adequate most of the time.
00. 92% responded that they did = want to pay an optional fee for an additional
container.
► 91 % described the container as easy to use and 3% described it as difficult
, kD
while 4% preferred to use their own container.
► Of those responding, 75% had participated in the pilot 9-12 monthsram ro
P 9
and 15% had participated for 6-9 months. '
► 67% of the respondents were very satisfied with the program and 27% were
satisfied, while 2% considered the program fair and 3% considered the program
poor.
51 % indicated that the solid waste service had improved under the pilot program;
32% indicated that the service had remained the same, and 6% indicated that
the service had declined.
87% recommended the program be expanded to other areas of the City,
whereas 8% recommended against expansion.
Although the questionnaire did not provide comment space, several respondents wrote
comments. Attached behind the questionnaire results is a summary of the comments.
Based on the results of the questionnaire, the following recommendations are made:
1. Make a decision as to whether or not the City-wide contract will be re -bid or re-
negotiated.
2. Based on the decision regarding recommendation #1, develop a three-year plan
to phase in the balance of the City to a once -a -week pick-up program with
contractor -provided containers.
1. What size container are you using?
Percentage
Actual Number
DU 100 150 200
No Response Own Container/Bag 64-Gallon 96-Gallon
2. Was the container. adequate to handle your family's solid waste each week?
4. How would you describe your impression of the container?
Percentage
Actual Number
o0 100 150 200 250 300
No Response ■ Prefer Own Container ■ Difficult to Use Easy to Use
5. How long have you participated in the pilot program?
7. In your opinion, how has the service of the pilot program been compared to the
regular solid waste program?
Percentage
Actual Number
v zu 40 60 so 100 120 140 160
Not Reported 0 No Opinion About the Same Improved
8. Would you recommend this program be expanded into other areas of the City?
10- 1 liked twice -a -week pick-up. On the other hand, the neighborhood looks better
without trash out twice -a -week.
► The difference is, with the trash being picked up only once a week, it often
smells badly before the pick-up time.
► This service has been a plus. One big can is better than a bunch of bags or
small cans. It has also cut down on litter. There are no bags or cans tipped by
stray or loose animals!
10- Please urge people to recycle. We have little trash for the landfill. Our trash can
is too huge, but we use our own recycling containers. The recycling containers
are too small for two people, let alone larger families.
01 Another satisfied Georgetown customer! Thanks.
► I see no point in having two trucks make two passes each on our street just to
pick up trash. The expense must be incredible and containers are left in the
street all day, to be traffic hazard. Containers are oversized and cumbersome
for a family of two. The container is not needed. Please cancel the program.
10- We are so impressed and pleased with the neatness and convenience of the
containers. They really keep the neighborhood attractive!! Thank you!
10. We personally think this program is great and we highly recommend it to all
areas of Georgetown!
10- Raw garbage attracts rodents — rats and mice specifically — much worse than
before. Storage of container is a problem. Degrading to appearance of
neighborhood.
► I don't think you need to pick up 7 or 8 sacks of bagged grass my neighbor
acquires weeMy. Garbage container and recycling bin are both too small.
Garbage container is difficult to maneuver, and smells awful. If you are not out
with your "waste" by 8:00 a.m. you miss the pick-up. Usually picked up at 7:50
a.m.!
am a senior citizen and widow and 80 years old so don't need such a container.
Makes it rather had to take care of household foods for a week's time frame.
Recommend program be expanded into other areas of the City if it saves the
City money.
Container is actually too big. Container is more difficult than putting out a bag.
Program is pointless. Prefer original system of trash pick-up twice -a -week. We
average 1-1 %2 bags of trash per week. The 96-gallon container is much to large
for our average week. We do like the recycling of metal, plastic, and glass
containers. This has cut our bulk refuse about in half, and we'd like to see this
service continued if these materials are actually being recycled. Your
experiment with the 96-gallon containers is not welcomed by the elderly in our
neighborhood. We just found it useless.
00. Container is good because it's big — heavy duty and held a lot of trash.
Impression of the program is satisfactory because if a week came that I had
more trash, I knew I could add my own. container. Expand the program if it
saves money.
► No lids tossed or blown down the street — roll in and roll out!
10- Pick-up people tend to allow trash to blow from containers and truck.
10. 1 just wish everyone would put them out of sight and not leave them in the front
of the house. It's definitely an eyesore.
10. On those unusual occasions when the container wasn't enough, I've been very
glad that trash bags were al -so picked up. This needs to continue to be the
policy. I never had any service problems with the old program, either. Expand
the program, especially if it saves man-hours and gasoline and other expenses
over the other option.
► This container either fills the garage or uglys the neighborhood.
► I do like the container. There does seem to be more blowing paper trash in the
neighborhood. It could be the recycle box since there is no lid (they hauled off
my home-made lid). If you forget to take out the trash (to curb) on the cone" day,
you have to wait another whole week for trash pickup.
► Try and get into their contract that they place the contractor furnished cart and
recycling bin off the street. Often they empty them and place them in the street.
Drive down our street (San Gabriel Blvd.) and you'll see what I'm talking about.
A kid or car could hit one of the cans or bin. Also, it looks bad.
► Containers are heavy when they're full. The container doe not get blown down
the street by the wind, nor does the lid get run over like other containers.
► Containers won't fit in garage and look awful in front of your house. Older
people can't handle it. Have to complain to get newspapers picked up. I hate
that square bin. The container on wheels is better than square bin. I have to
carry it to curb empty, then carry each sack of papers to put in it. Why can't I just
put the papers in sacks beside the curb? It is a hassle!!
► The majority of people (not us) tend to leave the containers sitting in front of their
houses all the time, instead of putting them in their garages or back yards. It
makes a neighborhood look very trash, to drive down a street and see all of
these containers. If you are going to keep using them, make it a fine to leave
them out, except on garbage day.
P. We really like the recycling bin. Too bad more people don't use theirs.
► It would be nice to have a separate container for yard debris.
► One wheeled container is easier for me to handle.
► Just move here in early February. I like the recycling program very much.
► Container is easy to use, but very hard to store due to its large size.
► The container is difficult to use. Heavy when full. No handles on both sides.
► I prefer having my trash picked up twice a week. Trash pick-up arrives too early
in the morning.
► Prefer twice a week, especially during summer months.
/Im
SOLID WASTE
CONTRACT
EVALUATION
SURVEY ANALYSIS
'S V
SOLID WASTE CONTRACT EVALUATION
SURVEY ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND: In June, 1989, the City Council entered into a contract with
Longhorn Disposal, Inc., to provide residential and commercial solid waste services
within the city limits of Georgetown. On October 1, 1991, the contract was amended
to provide for a rate increase; curbside recycling, implemented January, 1992; and a
contract extension until October 1, 1994, with an additional possible extension until
October 1, 1997. A condition of. the contract extension until 1997 required an
evaluation be made of the solid waste contract in January, 1994. Depending on the
results of this evaluation, the City Council would either extend the contract to October
1, 1997, or direct the City staff to develop a bid package for solid waste services.
SURVEY METHODOLOGY: The evaluation survey (Attachment "A") comprised of
seven questions concerning current services and four questions concerning future
service options were mailed to 1,000 randomly selected customers. Each survey
contained a postage -paid return envelope to assure convenience of response on the
part of the respondent. The City received 374 responses, or a 37.4% return. This
can be considered a valid survey based on the percent of return.
SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS: The 374 persons who responded indicated
46% were Monday/Thursday customers, 51 % were Tuesday/Friday customers, and
3% gave no response. Trash services were rated as follows:
Rating I Responses I Percent
I Excellent 1 74 1 20
Above Average 1 115 1 31
Average 1 137 I 37
Fair I 33 I 9
Poor I 11 I 2
No Response I 4 1 1
Totals 1 374 1 100
As indicated by the numoers in the chari above, 88 % of the survey respondents rate
the trash service "Average" or "Above Average", and 120% rated the service "Fair",
"Poor", or gave no response.
Sixty-seven percent (67%) of the 357 who responded indicated support for a once
per week trash pick-up if the cost of this service could be reduced. Thirty-three
percent (33%) did not support once a week service.
The survey asked for a level of support for the concept of the solid waste fee covering
all its costs, rather than being subsidized by other City funds. Of the 344 who
responded, 34% (126) said "Yes", 62% (212) said "No" and 1 % (6) were undecided.
CONCLUSIONS AND AREAS FOR FUTURE POLICY DISCUSSIONS:
1. The current service provider is providing an acceptable or better level of
service.
2. Problem areas for service improvement previously identified were confirmed and
need to be monitored for improvement.
3. Recycling is being well -utilized by citizens. Continued public education and
improvement need to be ongoing.
4. The Public Collection Station program needs further study. Several options
which could be considered include:
A. Reduction of hours or days
B. Improve public awareness
C. Charge for all solid waste brought in to reduce dependence on monthly
rates. The exception to the fees would be brush which is brought in for
chipping and automotive waste which is brought in for recycling.
5. Further study and use of focus groups to evaluate the feasibility of variable size
containers and once a week trash pick-up.
6. Explore on a local, county, and-ecional basis, the implementation of a yard
waste composting facility and future co -composting facility with sewer sludge.
ATTACHMENT "A"
SURVEY INSTRUMENT
AND
DETAILED RESPONSES
Solid Waste Contract
Evaluation Survey
Dear Georgetown Resident:
The City of Georgetown has selected you to participate in a survey which will be used
to evaluate the City's solid waste contract. Your response is important to us in
continuing to improve the solid waste services provided by the City, through its
contractor, Longhorn Disposal.
In addition, the City is asking you to respond to some questions that will help us plan
for the future. Please take a few minutes to respond and return this survey to us in
the enclosed postage -paid envelope by January 20, 1994.
Sincerely,
Bob Hart
City Manager
QUESTIONS CONCERNING CURRENT SOLID WASTE SERVICES
1. My trash pick-up days are: Monday/Thursday Tuesday & Friday No Response
172-46% 191 —51% 11 —3%
2. My trash service is (check one):
Excellent Above Average Average Fair Poor No Response
74-209% 115 --31°0 1.1-379/0 35--9% 11 --290 4-- 1°0
3. Services could be improved by (check all that apply):
Same time pick-up each pick-up day (123 — 23 °U) Better placement of trash cans (100 —19 %)
Pick-up of spilled trash (173 — 34%) Other (126 — 24%) — See Attachment "B"
ATTACHMENT "B"
DETAILED "OTHER COMMENTS"
TO QUESTION #3
OF SURVEY
HOW
COMMENTS
OFTEN?
11
Putting trash can back in place where picked up and not in street where it can
be smashed by cars.
9
All OK
* Better treatment of trash cans
7
* 1 have not received a recycling bin.
6
* Pick up all trash when spilled.
3
* If they (Longhorn] spill, they should pick it up; if tenant's fault, they (tenant]
should pick up their own.
2
* City -owned garbage containers.
Pick-up the day after, if trash isn't picked up on a holiday.
* Self-supporting service -- NO -- I am retired and live on a fixed income.
1
* Who is responsible for damage to trash can -- City or Longhorn?
* Experience shows that charging for these services (solid waste/recycling) would
not reduce our other costs (taxes). We would pay twice.
* I don't need trash left in my yard by your people -- I can do that myself, thank
you -- but I don't.
* If everyone had a container (either by sale of or rented) that would have
capacity to hold at least four sacks of garbage that animals would not be able
to get into.
* I'm truly impressed with City's recycling efforts.
* I have found pick-up service overall excellent.
* In recycling, I have very little -- enough to g put out once or twice a month.
Living on limited income, I just cannot pay any more.
* They have left my trash cans out in the street not up on my lawn area at least
I
7 to 10 times this oast year. I
* Pick-up all trasn when smiled.
* No complaints -- my situation -- once a week pick-up would be fine -- don't
have a lot to pick-up.
* Our trash is picked up about the same time every Tuesday and Friday -- I have
no complaint and personally think they are doing a good job.
* I do feel I'm paying more for pick-up than I would like to pay; so if fewer pick-
up days would cut costs, I'm for it.
* Bills are :oo hign as is'.
It's getting to the point we older people cannot always remember or able to do
all of those things that 1994 is bringing about -- however, all your plans are a
must and I will cooperate.
Longhorn drivers are not courteous to the traffic or ro e p p rty owners.
* If the City has to deal with outside services, at lease have the recourse to
complain about the service rendered.
* The workers slam the can at the back of the truck and never make an effort to
pick up what they spill.
HOW
OFTEN?
COMMENTS
1 How does it become cheaper to use a subcontractor vs. the City itself providing
the garbage service as it once did? Is this really more cost-effective? If it really
would cost more (a minimal cost), I wouldn't mind paying to keep the same
services (twice a week) .
* Please change recycle items to include used motor oil.
* Pick-up (trash) by 10:00 a.m.
* I don't believe you are not covering your costs by the rates charged.
* Cut out Spring Clean -Up.
* Pick-up small tree branches piled by trash cans.
* You do a good job.
* Charge to collect yard waste separately.
* The drivers drive way too fast.
* Stricter enforcement of laws to prevent dos from getting into
p 9 g g garbage and
scattering it.
* More pick-ups a week.
* They should pick up corrugated cardboard.
* You charge enough for sewer to take care of trash. We need a "can -do" City
Manager instead of a "can't -do" City Manager.
* Container provided by contractor.
* They tore up by garbage cans -- since using plastic bags, it has been fine.
* Increase the annual Spring Clean -Up
P g -p program to twice ayear -- suggesting April
and October.
* We pay enough for what we have.
* Special arrangement for large quantities of yard debris and/or other trash.
* Charge the customers only that use the service.
* Other than the price, I am very satisfied.
* We moved here from Austin in July -- trash pick-up twice as good.
* Spilled trash blows through our neighborhood quite often.
* I would eliminate, or c:-arge extra, for Spring Clean -Up, Collecticn Station
operation, recyc!ing, anc keep basic services at basic rates as much as
possible.
` Can placement sometimes blocks drive access.
* Pick-up all trash when spiiled.
* No complaints -- my situation -- once a week pick-up would be fine -- don't
have a lot to pick-up.
* Our trash is picked up about .he same time ever Tuesday and Friday y Y y -- I have
no complaint and personaily think they are doing a good job.
* I do feel I'm paying for pick-up than I would like to pay; so if fewer pick-up
days would cut costs, I'm for it.
* Bills are too high as is!
* It's getting zo the point we older people cannot always remember or able to do
all of those things that 1994 is bringing about -- however, all your plans are a
must and I will cooperate.
* Longhorn drivers are not courteous to the traffic or ro e p p rty owners.
HOW
OFTEN 7
1
COMMENTS
* Gave up on metal cans because of rough treatment. They even put creases in
plastic cans.
* My trash is picked up about the same time each trash day.
* Add another man to pick up -- was three and now only two.
* Pleased to learn magazines will be recycled.
* They stop to pick up my trash when they want to. If not, the truck comes by
at 40 m.p.h.
* I think we pay enough for services we receive. Prices go up but service does
not improve as promised.
* I put my trash out in trash bags but neighborhood is quite cluttered with how
cans are thrown after pick-up.
* No complaints.
* I think it would be fair to charge for Spring Clean -Up pick-up.
* The lid is thrown one direction and the emptied barrel in another direction, and
some of the trash goes in still another direction. I've talked with the pick-up
guys and told them thanks, so the lid and container don't fly as far.
* Have lived in a community in which the container was supplied (pretty big) and
manipulated by the truck once a week, but a household could add more as
necessary -- that would be OK.
* I don't understand when we can/can't put out branches and have them hauled.
* I think people who do not recycle should pay more than those who do! This
would be an incentive for them to recycle their trash and reduce the landfill
required.
* I do not see them come on Friday.
have no suggestions. Service is fine, especially curbside recycling
* We pay enough for utilities now. One of the benefits of living in Georgetown
was a lower utility bill.
* Throw lids and bend me jai cans.
* No problem on the wnoie with our twice weekly pick-up.
* What does it presently cost for trash pick-up separately from recycling, Spring
Clean -Up, and Collection Station?
* Want to bill City or Longhorn when can left in the street and is run over by a
car.
* I am opposed to any increase in the rates and costs of any City Service_
*
y just picking :t uQ caner -hey are supposed to. I spend an aw;ui lot of time
calling that they didn' ; pick it up.
Glass broken at times and not all or it is picked up (recycling trucks).
* Poor management is unfair. Hi Tech '94 should be the time to become more
efficient -- getting more things accomplished in less time/effort/expense.
Consider the many problems and end results before beginning the project.
Pick-up of spilled trash -- rarely needed.
HOW
OFTEN?
COMMENTS
1 * If the City has to deal with outside services, at least have the recourse to
complain about the service- rendered.
* Add another man to pick up — was three and now only two.
* Pleased to learn magazines will be recycled.
* They stop to pick up my trash when they want to. If not, the truck comes by
at 40 m.p.h.
* I think we pay enough for services we receive. Prices go up but service does
not improve as promised.
* I put my trash out in trash bags but neighborhood is quite cluttered with how
cans are thrown after pick-up.
* They're doing a fine job -- better than what City employees had previously
provided.
* They do a good job.
* Require that trash cans be used instead of plastic bags being
P g g placed at the curb
where animals get into them.
* Optional pick-up at house rather than curb.
* They refuse to pick up anything that might be considered extra.
* The truck always seems in a great hurry and doesn't clean up what is spilled.
* Lid could be replaced on can. Can sometimes left to roll out into street.
* Never pick up limbs, etc.
Pick-up is good, but can should not be destroyed and left in street.
* The workers slam the can at the back of the truck and never make an effort to
pick up what they spill.
* Gave up on metal cans because of rough treatment. They even put creases in
plastic cans.
* My trash is picked up about the same time each trash day.
Council Meeting Date: 07/23/96 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
S
SUBJECT
Meeting Minutes of the City Council Meeting on Thursday, July 11, 1996.
ITEM SUMMARY
None
► = ►
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None
COMMENTS
None
ATTACHMENTS
1. Minutes of Regular City Council Meeting of Thursday, July 11, 1996.
Submitted By:
Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary
Council meeting July 23, 1996 Item No. %T
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public
utility easement to within five (5) feet of the west side property line of Amended Wood Ranch,
Section Two, Lot 5, located at 209 La Mesa Lane
ITEM SUMMARY: All utility providers, including the Director of the Community Owned
Utilities Division have agreed to allow a License to Encroach into the public utility easement to
within five (5) feet of the west side property line for a driveway turn -around that accesses a side
entry garage as illustrated in Exhibit A. Although the driveway turn -around also encroaches
upon a building line, the Subdivision Regulations now permit such encroachment.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: None.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A
Resolution
Submitted By:
f C / I /-," ��
Edward J B rry, AIC - Director
Division of Develop ent Services
Hildy L. Kingma, 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 ELIOT LAWRENCE
AND KIM LAWRENCE, PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF
A DRIVEWAY TURN -AROUND INTO THE PUBLIC UTILITY
EASEMENT TO WITHIN FIVE (5) FEET OF THE WEST SIDE
PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 5 OF AMENDED WOOD RANCH, SECTION
TWO, AS RECORDED IN CABINET K, SLIDES 267-268 OF THE PLAT
RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND LOCATED AT 209
LA MESA LANE; 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
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 Eliot Lawrence and Kim Lawrence to
encroach into the public utility easement to within five (5) feet of the west side property line,
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 driveway is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it
outside the public utility easement.
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
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 driveway is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to
relocate it outside the public utility easement constitutes special circumstances and
Lot 5, Amended Wood Ranch, Section Two
License Resolution No.
Page 1 of 3
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 driveway that
encroaches into the public utility easement 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 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.
Lot 5, Amended Wood Ranch, Section Two
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 Eliot Lawrence and Kim
Lawrence, pertaining to the encroachment of a driveway turn -around located on Lot 5 of
Amended Wood Ranch, Section Two, commonly known as 209 La Mesa Lane, into the public
utility easement to within five (5) feet of the west property line.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
RESOLVED this day of
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Lot 5, Amended Wood Ranch, Section Two
License Resolution No.
Page 3 of 3
1996.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
209 LA MESA LANE
I II i A n
25�1111 ___
INTO P.0
Council meeting July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public
utility easement located along the north and a portion of the east side property line of Revised
Berry Creek, Section Nine, Phase 1, Lot 8, located at 31006 Clearwater Court
ITEM SUMMARY: All utility providers, including the Director of the Community Owned
Utilities Division have agreed to allow a License to Encroach into the public utility easement
located along the north and a portion of the east side property line for a driveway that accesses
a side entry garage as illustrated in Exhibit A. Although the driveway also encroaches upon a
building line, the Subdivision Regulations now permit such encroachment.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: None.
ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A
Resolution
Submitted By:
Edward J. airy, AICP - Director
Division Qf Developmen Services
c - �
Hildy L. Kingma, 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 PITT BUILDING
COMPANY, PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A
DRIVEWAY INTO THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON
THE NORTH AND A PORTION OF THE EAST PROPERTY LINE OF
LOT 8 OF REVISED BERRY CREEK, SECTION NINE, PHASE 1, AS
RECORDED IN CABINET K, SLIDES 275-276 OF THE PLAT RECORDS
OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND LOCATED AT 31006
CLEARWATER COURT; 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
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 Pitt Building Company to encroach into the
public utility easement, 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 driveway is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to relocate it
outside the public utility easement.
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
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 driveway is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to
relocate it outside the public utility easement constitutes special circumstances and
Lot 8, Revised Berry Creek, Section Nine, Phase I
License Resolution No.
Page 1 of 3
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 driveway that
encroaches into the public utility easement 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 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.
Lot 8, Revised Berry Creek, Section Nine, Phase I
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 Pitt Building Company,
pertaining to the encroachment of a driveway located on Lot 8 of Revised Berry Creek, Section
Nine, Phase 1, commonly known as 31006 Clearwater Court, into the public utility easement
on the north and a portion of the east property line.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
RESOLVED this day of
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Lot 8, Revised Berry Creek, Section Nine, Phase I
License Resolution No.
Page 3 of 3
. 1996.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
31006 aearwater Court
Plat of survey of property at C lei.irt►.l
w�Ler Cot�l.
described as i_ot �j Block of KII;\f'ISI;O Y 131,:R1 CIZI-;I':I\ SF:CI'IUN \I I-: I'11�1�.1; I
a subdivision of record in MCID or Plat
Volume/Book/Cabir►et h at Pages)/Slide(s) of the 11'illi�tl►►c►1►
d G F Dated:
County, Texas Plat Recor s. /,
Ref: PI`1"I' BUILDERS
41
ifAW
�C
f
�i
'y
NOTES:
1 ) llo Title P.eoort tarnished.
2) Sub:ect to an 4vigation =asemen
the plat.
Council meeting July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the wastewater
easement located on Tract Z-2, Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood One -A, located southwest
of the intersection of Del Webb Boulevard and Sun City Boulevard.
ITEM SUMMARY: All utility providers, including the Director of the Community Owned
Utilities Division have agreed to allow a License to Encroach into the platted wastewater
easement to allow the proposed parking lot to encroach into the subject wastewater easement, as
illustrated in Exhibit A.
The wastewater line that serves Tract Z-1 and is covered by the subject easement must
be located through Tract Z-2 in order to gravity flow to the existing wastewater facilities in
Neighborhood Eight-B. Since the two (2) lots are effectively being developed as a planned unit
development with shared access and parking areas, it is necessary for the parking lot to encroach
into the easement.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: None.
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: Resolution
Exhibit A
Submitted Bv:
- ZZ
Edward J Ba ry, AICP Director
Division of Developme t Services
Hildy L. Kingma, A
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 SCG PARTNERS, LTD.,
PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A PARKING LOT INTO
THE WASTEWATER EASEMENT LOCATED ON TRACT Z-2 OF THE
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN,
NEIGHBORHOOD ONE -A , LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF DEL
WEBB BOULEVARD AND SUN CITY 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
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 SCG Partners, Ltd. to encroach into the
public utility easement, 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 structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to
relocate it outside the public utility easement.
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
WHEREAS, the City Council after hearing the application and finding the specific facts
as stated above now concludes and finds that:
Tract Z-2, SCG, Neighborhood One -A
License Resolution No.
Page 1 of 3
1. The fact that the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be
feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement 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 existing structure that
encroaches into the public utility easement 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 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 L. 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:
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.
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 SCG Partners, Ltd.,
pertaining to the encroachment of a parking lot located on Tract Z-2 of Planned Unit
Development of Sun City Georgetown, Neighborhood One -A, into the wastewater easement.
Tract Z-2, SCG, Neighborhood One -A
License Resolution No.
Page 2 of 3
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
RESOLVED this day of
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Tract Z-2, SCG, Neighborhood One -A
License Resolution No.
Page 3 of 3
1996.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
GEOi �(f LIN_ E
OITY LIMA"`
_�
BOULF"
D
-
SUN Cj�Y,R.Ow-) So
.90
i .� c1
X. 3,117,60T.33
C Y. 10. n3.312. 16
i
C 2s*e.� N
23•8.L. P.U.£ O
25'B_L.9
ACCESS ESWT N TRACT Z - I
2 _ COMMERCIAL
EORGETOWN CD
^' ` m I ZONED CI)
100D ONE- B w r
0 32.486 SF 1
3E TEXAS
K b w2s c sa.dG
ARTNERSHIP • Nz'
9558175-9558177 B.L.
Q.O.R. f COMMERCIAL ) tv C,4.
< Y
( ZONED C2 - A )
2 RESTRICTED t
94.778 SF W t
X. 3,11T.313.24 Q b t
Y. 10,233,400.11 P.U.E. BASELINE
20.v/ W. E C �-
-� t
20
S 72'07-30 W 378.74 I- a
SEE DETAIL / TRACT" A " 1 F b t
Ili Xa 3.117.M-64 I
X. ziTr�� I Y. 10.233.bid.34
Y. 10.213.4.TO I
VERBENA DRIVE
PROPOSED
U PROPOSBD
N CITY BOULEVARD
(720'R0.r,.)
X� 3 117.168.OA /
Y. 10,213,s87.1T
P.O.B.
X. 3,i1T,251.0a
Y. IO.Z33,714.$3
---_ C 14 ve, `o C I
LI
9 N5 v .
Council meeting July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public
utility easement located along the east property line of Lot 2, Block A, Unit III, River Bend,
located at 214 John Thomas Drive.
ITEM SUMMARY: All utility providers, including the Director of the Community Owned
Utilities Division have agreed to allow a License to Encroach into the platted public utility
easement to allow the proposed driveway to encroach into the subject public utility easement, as
illustrated in Exhibit A.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: None.
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: Resolution
Exhibit A
Submitted By
Edward J.karry, Al P - Director
Divisi0 of Develo ent Services
Hildy L. Kingma, 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 JAN AND REX
TITSWORTH, PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A
DRIVEWAY INTO THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED ON
THE EAST PROPERTY LINE OF LOT 2 OF BLOCK A, RIVER BEND ,
UNIT III SUBDIVISION, AS RECORDED IN CABINET F, SLIDE 36 OF
THE PLAT RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND
LOCATED AT 214 JOHN THOMAS DRIVE; 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
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 Jan and Rex Titsworth to encroach into the
public utility easement, 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 structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to
relocate it outside the public utility easement.
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
WHEREAS, the City Council after hearing the application and finding the specific facts
as stated above now concludes and finds that:
Lot 2, Block A, River Bend, Unit III
License Resolution No.
Page 1 of 3
1. The fact that the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be
feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement 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 existing structure that
encroaches into the public utility easement 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 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.
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 Jan and Rex Titsworth,
pertaining to the encroachment of a driveway located on Lot 2 of Block A, River Bend, Unit III,
commonly known as 214 John Thomas Drive into the public utility easement on the east property
line.
Lot 2, Block A, River Bend, Unit III
License Resolution No.
Page 2 of 3
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
RESOLVED this day of
ATTEST:
Sandra D . Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Lot 2, Block A, River Bend, Unit III
License Resolution No.
Page 3 of 3
1996.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
D(HIBIT A
214 JOHN THOMAS DRIVE
2
J
24
IIlIN� NOISIAIa
Council meeting July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a resolution to authorize a License to Encroach into the public
utility, water and wastewater easements located on Tracts A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-5, Sun
City Georgetown, Neighborhood One, located north of the intersection of RM 2338 and Del
Webb Boulevard.
ITEM SUMMARY: All utility providers, including the Director of the Community Owned
Utilities Division have agreed to allow a License to Encroach into the platted easements to allow
the proposed parking lot to encroach into the subject public utility easements, as illustrated in
Exhibit A.
The lots are being developed as a_ planned unit development with shared access and
parking areas. The lot lines will not be apparent when looking at the development since the
parking area and driveway aisles cross over the lot lines. The water lines and wastewater lines
follow lot lines and the shortest routes to the buildings on the site. Therefore, it is necessary for
portions of the parking lot to encroach into the easement.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: None.
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: Resolution
Exhibit A
Submitted Bv:
Edward Jif
arry, AICP Dt
ector
Division Development Svices
Hildy L. Kingma, A16?-/
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 SCG PARTNERS, LTD.,
PERTAINING TO THE ENCROACHMENT OF A PARKING LOT INTO
THE WATER, WASTEWATER, AND PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS
LOCATED ON TRACTS A-1, A-29 A-39 A-4, AND A-5 OF THE PLANNED
UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, RESUBDIVISION
OF TRACT A, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, LOCATED NORTHWEST OF
THE INTERSECTION OF 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
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 SCG Partners, Ltd. to encroach into the
public utility easement, 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 structure is in such a manner that it would not be feasible to
relocate it outside the public utility easement.
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
WHEREAS, the City Council after hearing the application and finding the specific facts
as stated above now concludes and finds that:
Tracts A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-5, SCG,
Resub of Tract A, Neighborhood One
License Resolution No.
Page 1 of 3
I . The fact that the proposed structure is in such a manner that it would not be
feasible to relocate it outside the public utility easement 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 existing structure that
encroaches into the public utility easement 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 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.
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 SCG Partners, Ltd.,
pertaining to the encroachment of a parking lot located on Tracts A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-5
Tracts A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-5, SCG,
Resub of Tract A, Neighborhood One
License Resolution No.
Page 2 of 3
of Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Resubdivision of Tract A, Neighborhood
One -A, into the water, wastewater, and public utility easements.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
RESOLVED this day of
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Tracts A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-5, SCG,
Resub of Tract A, Neighborhood One
License Resolution No.
Page 3 of 3
1996.
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
Y- 10,228, 97 0.01
\\�CAB.
t46 \ \ ` GEORGETOWN /
-02-31 E 802.39 CITY LIMITS LINE
TRACT p,-1 - -� _ _ - - - - - _
.► --- — ----- X=
MMERMAL
\ F\ ZONED Cl) -�
15' WATERLINE \ ,�,,,; v ....1 r Ym 1
x, 'k rs:.a- TRACT `.
�o 52,561 SO.FT. BEGIN T \ \ �,�^" l�
.. E� 1o.a7s.7a >Q 4 COMMERCIAL
3,
Cl)
Y. 10.228,707 a \ "-Z' �,ZONEO
TRACT p,
109,634 i
OMMER :pry \ M:\ - IAL
(20NED
CT &SEumTER
EAS
Y_ 1
BEGIN WASTEWATER
AYd\ ..?
ATER
EASEMENT
'zle.R
A
43 �
WATERUNE 1 N�
3.111,oa8.o3 TRACT » A— 4» c'
0,228,577.58 _ C�
OMMERC-
Xa 3.111,323.03 ZONED
�Y� 10,228,365.18 C�D )
3.111,339.5E RELIC
Y1r3a6 45 221.755
I � �
�� 1
N1, / TRACT » A-T
CCIAL-
OMMER
\' ZONED Cl)C41aa< sF s
R 34,129 SO.FT•
V\ IL
o
021
,. P Q, s:
n
.... : SUTr CITY
o \ \\ \ P.O.B.
r�
=1
Council meeting July 23, 1996
Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Preliminary Plat of a 48.49 acre tract; being a resubdivision of Park Central
One, Section I, Lots 1 and 21, and a 31.48 acre tract in the F. Hudson and J. Patterson Surveys, to be known
as Park Central One, located on Westinghouse Road and County Road 116
ITEM SUMMARY: The proposed development is for a total of twelve (12) industrial lots of varying sizes
and includes two (2) existing buildings on Lot 6. This subdivision fronts on Westinghouse Road and County
Road 116. The property owners have dedicated an additional 15 feet of right-of-way on County Road 116
which will provide the appropriate width for this roadway, as outlined in the Century Plan. Per Section
24040 C. of the Subdivision Regulations, the property owners have requested that the City initiate
proceedings to annex this subdivision. This annexation may not initially include Block B, Lot 6, due to a
pre-existing development agreement with the property owners.
Water, wastewater and electric services will be provided by the City of Georgetown. While the
Short Form Final Plat for Park Central One, Section I included a variance to defer design and construction
of drainage improvements until further development occurred, this subdivision will be subject to the full
range of public improvements required by the Subdivision Regulations.
The property to the east has been reviewed by staff as a sketch plan for a concept of a manufactured
home community for senior citizens. Commerce Boulevard ends in a cul-de-sac near its eastern property
line. Based on two (2) sections of the Subdivision Regulations, staff has requested that the plat provide for
the extension of Commerce Boulevard to the adjacent property. The purpose of this right-of-way is to secure
the necessary land should Commerce Boulevard be extended to the east at some future date.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of July 2, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0
to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat of Park Central One, provided the Technical Issues are
addressed prior to City Council consideration.
The Preliminary Plats addressing the Technical Issues were received by the City.
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, Exhibits and Preliminary Plats.
Submitted By:
Edward . Barry, Alit
P - Director
Divisio of Develont Services
U
Hildy L. Kingma, AICP
Chief Planner
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF A 48.49 ACRE TRACT; BEING A RESUBDIVISION OF
PARK CENTRAL ONE, SECTION I, LOTS 1 AND 2, AND A 31.48 ACRE TRACT IN
THE F. HUDSON AND J. PATTERSON SURVEYS,
TO BE KNOWN AS PARK CENTRAL ONE,
LOCATED ON WESTINGHOUSE ROAD AND COUNTY ROAD 116
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Mr. William Booth
Westinghouse Road J.V.
3304 Brangus
Georgetown, Texas 78628
863-3052
Mr. John V. Felter
3008 West Avenue
Austin, Texas 78705
472-8158
AGENT: Mr. John Warden, AICP
3541 D North Hills Drive
Austin, Texas 78731
345-6592 FAX: same
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat of a 48.49 acre tract; being a Resubdivision of
Park Central One, Section I, Lots 1 and 2, as recorded in
Cabinet J, Slides 181-182, and a 31.48 acre tract in the F.
Hudson and J. Patterson Surveys, to be known as Park Central
One, as recorded in Volume 1255, Page 667 of the Official
Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas.
FACTS:
Location: Located at County Road 116 and Westinghouse Road. SEE
EXHIBIT A
Existing Site: There is one (1) existing industrial business with the remaining
acreage undeveloped.
Existing Zoning: RS, Residential Single Family and primarily out of City. A
small strip of land extending west from County Road 116 is
located in the City limits and is zoned RS, Residential Single
Family (refer to Exhibit A).
Preliminary Plat - Park Central One July 10, 1996
PP 96-16/File: PKCENI.PP Page 1
CM/WW
Proposed Use: Twelve (12) industrial lots are proposed.
Surrounding Uses: Undeveloped land.
Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as
Intensity Level 3 and 4. SEE EXHIBIT B Intensity Level 3
occupies approximately the northern two-thirds of the property,
and Intensity Level 4 occupies approximately the southern one-
third of the property.
Notification: The notification requirements have been completed.
HISTORY: The Final Plat of the original 50 acre subdivision known as Park
Central One was approved by the City on December 17, 1986.
This plat was never recorded. SEE EXHIBIT C A Short
Form Plat of the 17 acres located in the southwest corner of the
original 50 acres was recorded as Park Central One, Section I,
on November 29, 1988. SEE EXHIBIT C-1 That plat
included two (2) lots bounded by Westinghouse Road, ACM
Way, Commerce Boulevard and County Road 116. A variance
was granted to defer design and construction of drainage
improvements until further development occurred. Two (2)
structures exist on one of the platted lots.
ANALYSIS: The subject site includes two (2) existing buildings on Lot 6.
The proposed development is for a total of twelve (12) industrial
lots of varying sizes. SEE EXHIBIT D This subdivision
fronts on Westinghouse Road, a major arterial street and County
Road 116, a collector street. Commerce Boulevard and Park
Central Boulevard (renamed from ACM Way) are designed to
rural standards (without curb and gutter) and serve this
subdivision. On County Road 116, the property owners have
dedicated an additional 15 feet of right-of-way which will
provide the appropriate width for this roadway, as outlined in
the Century Plan. Therefore, the subdivision will be adequately
served by the existing transportation network.
Preliminary Plat - Park Central One
PP 96-16/File: PKCENI.PP
CM/WW
Per Section 24040 C. of the Subdivision Regulations, the
property owners have requested that the City initiate proceedings
to annex this subdivision. This annexation may not initially
July 10, 1996
Page 2
include Block B, Lot 6, due to a pre-existing development
agreement with the property owners.
Water, wastewater and electric services will be provided by the
City of Georgetown. While the Short Form Plat for Park
Central One, Section I, (recorded in 1988) included a variance
to defer design and- construction of drainage improvements until
further development occurred, this subdivision will be subject to
the full range of public improvements required by the
Subdivision Regulations, including the installation of detention
basins and related drainage improvements, water and wastewater
lines, and fire hydrants and appurtenances.
The property to the east has been reviewed by staff as a sketch
plan for a concept of a manufactured home community for
senior citizens. As shown in Exhibit C, Commerce Boulevard
ends in a cul-de-sac at Block A, Lot 4 and Block B, Lot 5.
Based on two (2) sections of the Subdivision Regulations, staff
has requested that the plat provide for the extension of
Commerce Boulevard to the adjacent property. Section 33030
B. states that "the proposed street system shall extend all major
streets and such existing secondary and local access streets as
may be desirable for convenience of circulation." In addition,
all improvements shall be designed and installed so as to provide
for a logical system of utilities, drainage and streets and to
create continuity of improvements for the development of
adjacent properties (Section 41030). The purpose of this right-
of-way easement is to secure the necessary land should
Commerce Boulevard be extended to the east at some future
date. As addressed in the Technical Issues below, a 70 foot
wide right-of-way easement must be established from the end of
Commerce Boulevard to the adjacent property.
Technical Issues: The Subdivision Regulations require that the following technical
issues are addressed prior to Planning and Zoning Commission
consideration of this application. In order to assist the
applicant, however, this application has been forwarded to the
Planning and Zoning Commission prior to the completion of the
technical issues. State Statute and the Subdivision Regulations
require that the City Council take action on plats within 45 days
of consideration by the Commission. Therefore, in order to
Preliminary Plat - Park Central One July 10, 1996
PP 96-16/File: PKCENI.PP Page 3
CM/WW
meet this deadline, the Technical Issues must be addressed by
August 2, 1996, or the application will be forwarded to the
Council with a recommendation for denial. Alternatively, the
applicant has the opportunity to request a delay to the City
Council's consideration of the application in order to complete
the technical issues.
1. The side setbacks must be changed from ten (10) to 15 feet.
2. Establish a 70 foot wide right-of-way easement from the end
of Commerce Boulevard to the adjacent property to the east.
3. Please make the following corrections to the Certifications
and Signature Blocks:
- Replace the staff or elected official's name with the words in
parentheses;
- Leon Douglas is the correct spelling of the Chair of the
Planning and Zoning Commission;
- Edward J. Barry is the Planning and Zoning Secretary;
- Remove the Amended Plat certification.
- Remove the Detailed Development Plan certification.
4. Label the existing right-of-way on Westinghouse Road and
the 35 foot road widening dedication on this roadway.
5. Provide a 25 foot by 25 foot (25 x 25) Public Utility
Easement (PUE) for the existing lift station.
6. Identify the City limit line along Westinghouse Road and the
east boundary of this subdivision.
7. Include a note on the plat which states: "This tract is
located in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. An approved
Water Pollution Abatement Plan is required by the Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission prior to
construction. It
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the Preliminary Plat of Park Central One, provided
the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council
consideration.
P & Z ACTION: Approval of the Preliminary Plat of Park Central One, provided
the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council
consideration.
Preliminary Plat - Park Central One July 10, 1996
PP 96-16/File: PKCENI.PP Page 4
CM/WW
EXHIBIT A
>` ALBCRT GRAPSK( �' 1
DR. C.1t. I- ANGl0RO •O)
2211/714 - s•o
U 390/ 2 3 7 &no K •Oy
:o
( A1 TRESS ENTERPRISES_
a� ••a '
2 ACc - .)''
17 raC
62.22 AG J.T. OOIO W(E
'u
'r
•i
• o:
/ Y
•
8 0.6e K lO K
r N Yf�,;
LOA-
•'�•. O.LGROAS t
9
2y K
t
r~ 11 ` JEFFRET (r77/3e6
SCR AC
�qf
SCOTT
b Ys�i
- FR
GEOP ET c vN
2190 A•. ..�
4"9J/Z72 �.
�
T E(.
L(X� L6S6K
307Ac
IdO3/t3
(
Ar- PARK
0, MALI
JAPES 6R0Ct[ S 2O22/K:
221 AG
.4` 134/705 BAG A.1
\
'
\ p w J.S.+I1111R
M1aosiACAA.AC
�s4✓ / 1902/!22 L
�• I
r ` t
SAMIAL FOX
4a1/404
, \
d
off•.
`V
• as 3 t.t2 At
L4AcIt
31O4t AC LOOAC
A1401EYsON Q. 4 t4ALL
\ \ ff3r/e3
�
'
t IJI Ac
,E
�7af/721 _
�K
I1T01
10
}
vIN4s
e
t"WZ13IL94 AC
1
/ 6aEDORY HALL
L 2147/462 �.
M�
l a i
,r•.'O
/. DCLYIN 4 Ilt9 AC
y
.�
Tt.
720/266
, •`
SS NONEA
LSSION SAYtNGS ASSOC Or
1646/457
14 990 AC
.4
a+'
aDOOAC
r s/`) W3 NONCA
673/ 20G
1O.54 AC
° 161 3 / 417
JA+IES AIEEN &0 AC
7 30/2 79
o SOAC
/
.•a
AIL 1_tALL 6AUt0• Ja 3 0 AC
)e69 /771
ZO 00 AC
671/ 2O4 //�
x JONM RANI Iu.SaAc /
b a2O/311 10
S aDOAC Q \ N�r 6 0 9
0
A [,s 5 9
10
I,o FREO C. 5-ITN, JR '� 9 8
4 6 T
ISc3/loe \
= 250 Ac
a
1 • a``J ~�- ROBERT ARuSTRONG
b[• a '•+e ROBE PrT
4co4.a row a!� AA*CMG 670/53O
wn/9rr s° S7O/S30 3177 AC
FRED C SUIT". JR.0 3&77AC
[JO C
c• (J ��
44.4z7 AC . ID Ac I v YS
RM
a>
rt
TLlR.
CNARLIC 0 SARTON
6/704
lad 43 AC LOOAC SOACTom
w 0
Z9074 AC.
NlCS
\ "MSG"
g � ••" e.o/ar
11 Y 3 2717 NOA.A S. STEELE I'03aAC
`� � � � \ \
:� ••, \I II 19.00AC 1O0 AC a
`.- 1`1 ( •'mac..` �' DA54/11 1 p4n Ac.0. iy
/' crnl c. t'. nnn• tosuln tOAr. \\\
S.E. CREEK /
21aY275
( 60.0 A C I
l0t.79 AC
.o'ao
`o
sT`
7
\\\
•o
2i.00 AC
a)t
.i4p o •� j�
••f
•,.,.°
l�
CHARGES J
\ter
e4e/e
\
(60 A(
49AC
JOE 0
\:NnEASON
\664/6<_
10 AC
Y
1
; /
,K• %)1 •4
e2.
EXHIBIT B
DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT
GIVEN A SINGLE LAND USE
1. 'DATE': June 24, 1996
'PROJECT NAME': Park Central One
2. 'GIVEN' acres of Intensity Level 1
acres of Intensity Level 2
32.93 acres of Intensity Level 3
15.56 acres of Intensity Level 4
acres of Intensity Level 5
acres of Intensity Level 6
48.49 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
3 123,817 35,564
329
4 104,563 29,875
1,245
5 0 0
0
6 0 0
0
4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND:
Maximum GPO Water Capacity:
228,380
Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity:
65,440
Maximum Trip Ends:
1.574
5. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY
MAXIMUM
PER DEV
DEVELOPMENT
LAND USES WATER
----- ------------------------------------------
WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION I
UNITS I
REGS I
ALLOWED/UNIT
----------------- ----------------------
Detached SF
----------------------------------
I --------------------
I
I
-------- -------- I -----------------------------------
Large Lot 197
226
2,628 I
197 I
97 I
97 housing units
Average Lot 229
262
1,777 I
229 I
352 I
229 housing units
Zero Lot Line 229
262
1,777 I
229 I
469 I
229 housing units
Attached SF 351
374
1,448 I
351 I
704 I
351 housing units
Multifamily 433
419
693 I
419 I
1,406 I
419 housing units
Mobile Home 351
339
1,858 I
339 I
I
339 housing units
Lodging 1,189
1,073
1,136 I
1073 I
I
1,073 rooms
Institutional 665,831
711,300
1,871,700 I
665,831 I
I
665,831 square feet
Church
I
I
I
-with day care 741,494
788,429
101,163 I
101,163 (
I
101,163 square feet
-w/o day care 1,227,849
1,308,792
2,186,250 I
1,227,849 I
I
1,227,849 square feet
Medical Office 548,990
584,282
487,791
487,791 I
I
487,791 square feet
General Office 627,418
719,116
617,294 I
617,294 I
I
617,294 square feet
Retail, Mixed 351,354
401,470
95,296 I
95,296 I
I
95,296 square feet
Retail, Restaurant 146.397
136,333
138,443 I
136,333 I
I
136,333 square feel
Retail, Store 702,708
743,632
327,801 I
327,801 I
I
327.801 square feet
Employment Centers 627,418
719,116
343,990 I
343.990 I
I
343,990 square feet
Warehouse 4,006,667
4,674,257
2,623,500 I
2,623,500 I
I
2,623,500 square feet
Mini -Warehouse 57,095,000
--------------------- ---------------------------------
65,439,600
--------------------------
6,054,231 I
6,054,231 I
I
6.054,231 square feet
EXHIM C
v
•
-N)Ia1J0977J
E2A)s 57s.;60
a STRO.0 TRACT
vd, 454 p— 290
168-a6-3(
109�9
S=af
C2035eZ 77
164.45
I44.37
—1 F
16a.33
LIS"✓v!� F
41446
,5'pVCr
-1
246m _ _3 n
g
a
z5oK
J
BLOCK 1
I^
"
5I
1 +022
16 •.))
16+.J) T--
a1Qa6
a.
4r
el
Ii •1 t
COMMERCE
S66-a6-Sav
BOULEVARD, -
is
la7nB
M68-ab-Saf
aa.9)
61 b6
220.7)
n.v
C
av w66-a6-3+E Ya.99
164LW
( !� /D�
I)6, 99 •�a. f OF
.�"AYa��r (S Fa o wrll
160.19
a,
` ,.01 K
..0 « .J «
2) «.
I� T
I
( _>�• � � 72 «. , �
al I la
I I
�
I
�
T
,sTtlE 3 J L-
I)L61
�3 �
2aa.T)
J L
Za37)
LQd—
I
Tlh I )7 1
—z07m J
_
..rLK-2A _
A-3 —
—
rK6-a6-39E
6fa�6 _ _
e I
j
t, 7 W
ryl oo Ea S•DE o- eJ
J
p I
m
BLOCK 1
dig
QI�_
rau v
NGB 37-58E
I
20019 Yl I
BLOCK 2
/
ors
PVE — 25' OR.r•J.GE - -' f6e-2�-Sav
I I — 1 nT7z
J
/
I '
I
"iW
I
I
I
I
0
100 200
SCALE
10
c i
'It
-
.67-a1 -54E
25' dtu NAGE T — —
—L�-------J
al
�Il
_
Af
Y
O`
dII
J
kO>a.IsuG
RAE EASEMENT
[ RT-ELATION Pout)
RESERVE
of • ' _
b
- - I • -
e�•` - -F�' 11 �1.`�`
:�'-
iO.ECIT
a�lII Iai
1
PACT
lip
R
IIR
I i,
70' RO...
I
I as
256.E k wmSCAPE .AfA _ �J
1. — —1
------
Ls'dL L l pOSLA- ARCS —
—
-�
— � ^g
--
LocAnoN nnAF
56]-al-Sav a]E 71 at>yu-t..
wr--- �]-al-SaV 365-%
�•
ADOL li DEDICw iD a5
PUBLIC 3S DE CATO
6Ck6E t�f000
S6]-a1-Sav
WESTINGHOUSE
ua2.J0
ROAD
EMSTWC 55' P-O.
1 2J (prTe.6
r'
'4' ? SiJ CdGFESS
CEIVEO
APR 7 19"
�¢
Awl KN NRE
a1iE-, SIi TE 20.
(3 .
AM
STECU MACI—0ERso. 7R JOr« TT1RD7 M7p1ES7S
vd. 381. Pep. ) Id N. 670aOrwSOw TRACT . pep. 717 d. 6 P _ vr. eb. Pepe B,7 ew .:T v.•Jr6rla.r� SOoe .EST .1()1A
.uSM 7E
O � (312) a72-6, 4,S Sa
C 9 FWAL PUT
1b
Aonoa, .oAu LEGEND —et•- ARK CENTRAL Or
A 5040 ACRE80147
6 c o 6 T c h.J
40-.. � �'V AJ90N
Po 7 WAY SITUATED N A PORTION OF
9o-11•ao- 69•s91oo- 90•00•00- w•77•or 7Go-r•6>- 16•ol w w•o'-w 17•pG•c6' vVE_ I � �.` P. FRANCIS A. ►UDSON SURvEy
,luqun EA 17 ' (o MRA,17.N0. i95
- SLR D6ac 1,.,/ �( C .i6.. 3 AND THE
1 S PATTERSON SURVEY
DR —AGE EASEuEM7 S ABSTRACT NO- 502
/�,..a/..Gc•e+-w CITY OF CEORCETCvoN
41
t • .1,04 M9LIJANSON COUNTY. TEXAS
P1w fwr.4-.CC_-_0GL._ �L9P��✓_�
Mw SE-T G`EBHARD ENGINEERS
S750 64LC043 Or6C S.Tc 210
SA7w TART ATM. 7Y 76721
,9A 7ER EASEMENT AROVwO
\ � ER WELL TEL (312) 157-6NB
REVISED Ftseu.&r• IB66
4-1-64 9-M-012
C)m
0
GE OR GET OWN CITY LIMITS
iA
m
COUNTY '004.39' ROAD No. 116 115.71'
-4
N 21012 W —N21001'3dlw`
N 21012W, 1943.50 15 ROAD WIDENING DEDICATION• 15.00,
0 0
z ---------N21001 ,q "
733W
< 01 -- L4 0U 10N -0 35*BLDG. LJNF
is 0 0
0 .
0
In z L"-W 0) _ _ -------
cD
G)
m D rn
55' R.O.W. 0
�U a
;0
m
0)
z
-4 mN
z 2 0' 8L DG. LIN E
0 z
75 — — — — — — +LL— —
c I
SAk TAqY 0. 0
z ZCNE N1 21010'3Q"W -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
2-'BLDr.. LINE
z z 759.82
O. a X.
-t�'M t m
9-4,-4 lk
0 _4 00
OO C) -,jin 2
4-4. r
n Lw -4 0
:-4 0 1 m
rn
.91 >
ro
m . . i I I (A
I �!
r
m cl)
0 . .1 IL
Z— > U) I z -4
L4
r\) -4
0
r z
rn
U, cx)
m -------- 000
z r 0
C) A CD'
r, -4
07D 1 0 0
m 11 m-
9 L-.---1 I m
n
-,� D-� �? -. U)
L. (D ct)
0 Z\, r) 7. 0 to �s (L4, I
�n 0 �u M
ZD
0Lrl I0)
0 m
m 0 z z
> -n
0
296.15'
0 N 120 Ill'W
m M LO
0 309.89' >
�INfL
m
>
ACM -1-35.0
/V e
Z
0
N 2 2 0184 Fj
M 309.89'
o
> -i m —
to WA y
(A -4 -4 (A r\)
cT, 14983'
T �(A (A r\) N0 0 (D 0 0:) cD (D 0) 0 -11A Nc N210i3'�
0
�0—
Ln (D Ln �Ocn0,5 0 z ro 'Z' in, EXISTING
z r\)cw �A�jbb8 5 -N -A 3s w
r\) c_n OP .1 .08, 0
m -�O�b -0 T 0 EXISTING
0
: STREET
aDo,;�3 11A
IN 210 13'
149.83 Y/
>
04
L4 ww.N(A a)
0WW17W 0
0
F -4 --4--AJ0 -- 1 b
8 : 0--r, : I
EXHIBIT D
'ARK CENTRAL ONE
RELIMINARY PLAN
PRELIMINARY PLAT
48.49 ACRES
ol
pa0vtac •aapO' ' M � �O i'PC. z o�i J
--�
e %
1S
,` - 0� , J5 \.. v�<v j •tip: h 1 ; 1
lie /. _OIL
-
20
1000
8L0 �- S PG
IL
1l'•. \,\ 1- —` s�,- � `� / �C. „ ,1 ,� �} "- � : � + mot ; • g No'a�
/ J
\ `\ ^•,.',, i - )�) )+ - �� ExISfING i ,t 1 •. 1 i
{
:\'l \ \ 1 �.•� n \ hoc W�
)t
k.11 \
ro
pG \ I I 1tt ` 96 pG
SS 1 EXIS
gull U1llG
NG- 001
O,
C ot- -� 1
Z� r
V OIL.
4 �
�.
O `\ \\ S1 PC Lflog P
l \. \ - \ \ \t ����� r`,°• , � .ram\\ y n_e�•)_a":+_- _ �-_ j � g
J a
IL
t
w\tS `\,•C kol PC. ,\ i pie/r•` �f �,-�
t / 1, / \ .•\';.•� ll( I \
tp
w0 Co VOL 6; 0. ('c 217 I
Council meeting July 23, 1996
Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Final Plat of a 51.01 acre tract in the John Sutherland and A.
Williams Surveys, to be known as Fountainwood Estates, Phase 6A, and a 44.31 acre tract in the
John Sutherland, A. Williams, Isaac Jones and Peter Novel Surveys, to be known as Fountainwood
Estates, Phase 613, and variance to the Subdivision Regulations, located off Fountainwood Drive
ITEM SUMMARY: The subject Final Plats are for 65 single family residential lots and two (2)
park land lots. These Final Plats address the Technical Issues contained in the staff report prepared
for the Preliminary Plats and the staff comments forwarded to the applicant.
The applicant requests a variance to Section 33030 L. of the Subdivision Regulations which
requires that reverse curves be separated by a minimum tangent of one hundred (100) feet. The
Community Owned Utilities Division has indicated they can support a variance to this standard to
allow a reverse curve of 92.17 feet along Bonnie Rose near its intersection with Allen Circle.
Community Owned Utilities is supportive of this variance because it is within ten (10) feet of the
required tangent distance and close to an intersection where traffic will be decelerating.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of July 2, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission
voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the Final Plat of Fountainwood Estates, Phases 6A and 6B,
and approval of a variance to Section 33030 L. of the Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing
a tangent distance of 92.17 feet between the reverse curves on Bonnie Rose, after making the
required findings of fact.
The Final Plats addressing the Technical Issues were received by the City.
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, Exhibits and Final Plats.
Submitted By:
ell - �v
Edward J arry, AlC - Director
Division f Develop nt Services
Hildy L. ingma, AICP
Chief Planner
FINAL PLAT OF A 51.01 ACRE TRACT IN THE JOHN SUTHERLAND AND A.
WILLIAMS SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS FOUNTAINWOOD ESTATES, PHASE
6A, AND A 44.31 ACRE TRACT IN THE JOHN SUTHERLAND, A. WILLIAMS,
ISAAC JONES AND PETER NOVEL SURVEYS, TO BE KNOWN AS
FOUNTAINWOOD ESTATES, PHASE 6B, LOCATED OFF FOUNTAINWOOD
DRIVE, AND VARIANCE TO THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
OWNER/APPLICANT: Mr. Ross W. Hester, Ms. Elizabeth R. Hester and
Mr. Max D. Allen
dba Fountainwood Estates
1000 Fountainwood Drive
Georgetown, Texas 78628
869-2462 FAX: 869-6565
AGENT: Mr. Thomas Watts
Ralph Harris Surveyor, Inc.
1406 Hetter Street
Austin, Texas 78704
444-1781 FAX: 444-6123
REQUEST: Final Plat of a 51.01 acre tract in the John Sutherland and A.
Williams Surveys, to be known as Fountainwood Estates,
Phase 6A, and a 44.31 acre tract in the John Sutherland, A.
Williams, Isaac Jones and Peter Novel Surveys, to be known as
Fountainwood Estates, Phase 6B, and variance to the
Subdivision Regulations, located off Fountainwood Drive.
Existing Zoning: This tract is located outside the City limits so zoning does not
apply.
Proposed Use: Phase 6A consists of 33 single family lots; Phase 613 consists of
32 single family lots; two (2) park land lots.
HISTORY: A Revised Concept Plan for Fountainwood Estates was approved
by City Council in July 1993. SEE EXHIBIT D A
Preliminary Plat for Phases 6A and 613 will be forwarded to
City Council on July 9, 1996. The Preliminary Plat application
included a variance request to Section 36050 C. of the
Subdivision Regulations, thereby allowing a total of 15 lots to
be smaller than one (1) acre in size, provided that on -site
Preliminary Plat - Fountainwood Estates, Phase 5 July 10, 1996
PP//-95-07 / File: FTNW-5.PP Page 1
sewage facility designs for each of these lots is prepared by a
registered sanitarian or a professional engineer, that Williamson
County approve the proposed layout, and that the Williamson
County Health District review and approve each of the on -site
sewage facilities constructed on each of these lots.
ANALYSIS: The subject Final Plats are for 65 single family residential lots
and two (2) park land lots which is consistent with the approved
Preliminary Plat of Phases 6A and 6B of Fountainwood Estates.
SEE EXHIBIT E, F Water service will be provided by the
Chisholm Trail Special Utility District and electric service will
be provided by the Pedernales Electric Cooperative. Each lot
will be served by an on -site septic system.
VARIANCE:
These Final Plats generally address the Technical Issues
contained in the staff report prepared for the Preliminary Plats
and the comments forwarded to the applicant from the
Development Review Committee review. The applicant has also
submitted a computer disk showing that Chisholm Trail Special
Utility District is capable of serving this development with the
required fire flows. The applicant has also added plat notes to
Phases 6A and 6B which state that for lots smaller than one (1)
acre in size, on -site sewage facility designs will be prepared by
a registered sanitarian or a professional engineer, that
Williamson County approve the proposed layout, and that the
Williamson County Health District review and approve each of
the on -site sewage facilities constructed on each of these lots.
Section 33030 L. - Reverse Curves
The applicant requests a variance to Section 33030 L. of the
Subdivision Regulations which requires that reverse curves be
separated by a minimum tangent of one hundred (100) feet. The
Community Owned Utilities Division has indicated they can
support a variance to this standard to allow a reverse curve of
92.17 feet along Bonnie Rose near its intersection with Allen
Circle. Community Owned Utilities is supportive of this
variance because it is within ten (10) feet of the required tangent
distance and close to an intersection where traffic will be
decelerating.
After listening to the testimony presented at the Planning and
Zoning Commission meeting, and reading the documentation
Preliminary Plat - Fountainwood Estates, Phase 5
PPN-95-07 / File: FTNW-5.PP
July 10, 1996
Page 2
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."
Technical Issues: The Subdivision Regulations require that the following technical
issues are addressed prior to Planning and Zoning Commission
consideration of this application. In order to assist the
applicant, however, this application has been forwarded to the
Planning and Zoning Commission prior to the completion of the
technical issues. State Statute and the Subdivision Regulations
require that the City Council take action on final plats within 30
days of consideration by the Commission. Therefore, in order
to meet this deadline, the Technical Issues must be addressed by
July 12, or the application will be forwarded to the Council with
a recommendation for denial. Alternatively, the applicant has
the opportunity to request a delay to the City Council's
consideration of the application in order to complete the
technical issues.
1. Please include a note on each plat which states: "This tract
is located in the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. An approved
Water Pollution Abatement Plan is required by the Texas
Natural Resource Conservation Commission prior to
construction."
Preliminary Plat - Fountainwood Estates, Phase 5
PP#-95-07 / File: FTNW-5.PP
July 10, 1996
Page 3
Prior to Filing: Before any portion of this plat can be recorded, the following
actions must occur:
1. A copy of the water pollution abatement plan approved by
TNRCC must be received before the Final Plat can be recorded.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the Final Plat of Fountainwood Estates, Phases 6A
and 6B, and variance to Section 33030 L. of the Subdivision
Regulations, thereby allowing a tangent distance of 92.17 feet
between the reverse curves on Bonnie Rose, after making the
required findings of fact.
P & Z ACTION: Approval of the Final Plat of Fountainwood Estates, Phases 6A
and 6B, and variance to Section 33030 L. of the Subdivision
Regulations, thereby allowing a tangent distance of 92.17 feet
between the reverse curves on Bonnie Rose, after making the
required findings of fact.
Preliminary Plat - Fountainwood Estates, Phase 5
PP#-95-07 / File: FTNW-5.PP
July 10, 1996
Page 4
EXHIBIT A
3 t9
3 3 )O k
99
to
log Ac _
=
3.Or Ac 6
4
to
i Ac
OA%AO w. OefRREMOCR
4
Il
t!
S
t340/ 691
(,O To �) ,/ `4•
2 L00rz
9
1.493c
3
S
1.96K.
3d K.
SAK.
•.
92
�f� 7
/2340/e96
6
_
3.0 Ac.
VE
6
e (60.50 AG)
a
7
iAi.
/rOaA/>•
_ 2. f 9 Ac
O S
OM S
4 AK
r p!a
L_ •
GrfStCxE
r
3.0 Ac
•� z
3479J63�
300 A[.
FE
�.►
3
- �.. O
S.C.L.
TRAA- MOP..
3.0 A..
2
e
i.
I./C-
Z.06/Z" 94E.LA 6
7 3
3.09Ac
3.02 A.
a f
2406/263
3939 AC S(,OrIA« S
727e /3C
1479/659 -
/. Tr,ERo« S. eRAKORA_ TR)T-
/ le9e/s97
t566.05 Act
."• - .� � a �' f. 2 :- yy��'' : tom.. ` _ Z 'rf
a7
,_ ` �.[, �'•; ,,�;i„) ski -.. -: , , i
a -�,t
a r 3 rz
�•,!l!!�'lil� f '. 'ice � �s �-
T. ; lji, ti �' fit �t`. :c � ts�. '��� • if � CK 3
cI �t - l / �3�•Si ' ` J is tt� y-! 3 ..
• ` � \ JAY l . MGLP
676/557
w.
05
1` • ` •1 :: +. J � _ ��..� `_ fry.
STwTCS of A.C«,CA IF S a i:,•_" _ - �..
i`
Z •7J�irt, %'/�� �; V...r(O .rar CS Or •..(«,CA
EXHIBIT C
DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT
GIVEN A SINGLE LAND USE
1. 'DATE': May 9, 1996
'PROJECT NAME': Fountainwood Estates Phase 6B
2. 'GIVEN'
44.31 acres of Intensity Level 1
acres of Intensity Level 2
acres of Intensity Level
acres of Intensity Level 4
acres of Intensity Level 5
acres of Intensity Level 6
44.31 TOTAL ACRES
3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND:
INTENSITY
WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION
LEVEL
Peak GPD Average GPD
Peak Trip Ends
1
46,526 13,293
89
2
0 0
0
3
0 0
0
4
0 0
0
5
0 0
0
6
0 0
0
4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND:
Maximum GPD Water Capacity: 46,526
Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity: 13,293
Maximum Trip Ends: 89
5. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT:
(a)
POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY
LAND USES
----------------------------------------------------
WATER
------------------------------------
WASTEWATER
TRANSPORTATION
Detached SF
---
Large Lot
40
46
148
Average Lot
47
53
100
Zero Lot Line
47
53
100
Attached SF
72
76
82
Multifamily
88
85
39
Mobile Home
72
69
105
Lodging
242
218
64
Institutional
135,643
144,489
105,375
Church
-with day care
151,057
160,157
5,695
-w/o day care
250,137
265,860
123,083
Medical Office
111,840
118,688
27,462
General Office
127,817
146,077
34,753
Retail, Mixed
71,578
81,552
5,365
Retail, Restaurant
29,824
27,694
7,794
Retail, Store
143,155
151,057
18,455
Employment Centers
127,817
146,077
19,366
Warehouse
816,237
949,500
147,700
Mini -Warehouse
11,631,375
13,293,000
340,846 I
(b) (c)
MAXIMUM PER DEV
UNITS REGS
-------- ------ -------------
40
47
47
72
39
69
64
105,375
5,695
123,083
27,462
34,753
5,365
7,794
18,455
19,366
147,700
340,846
(d)
DEVELOPMENT
ALLOWED/UNIT
89
40 housing units
322
47 housing units
429
47 housing units
643
72 housing units
1,285
39 housing units
69 housing units
64 rooms
105,375 square feet
5,695 square feet
123,083 square feet
27,462 square feet
34,753 square feet
5,365 square feet
7,794 square feet
18,455 square feet
19,366 square feet
147,700 square feet
340,846 square feel
-- -------------- ------------------ --------
EN D
_
3 t9 3
3 JO Jac
a
6 16
06ERAEMOCR
a K�
Z.
3
paab +c
x340/694 a
y
(0.70 ►G)
2LOOAC- It -
-
/23aare98 �
x- 9 9 AC.
'e (MIW3G1 3 a
-
R
tt 6.o ��
q(SEtf.E
t
nc.
t
3959 •OLY
300
0 ♦
TRSA MOr�
a
ra06/2u
33E1A
�.• •�
KJ 2a0c 6/263 59S9.
SCgWAw
`•
7235 OC
ra79/639
t..ra .ct
]959 K 3
?
nKt
2
I—
to 2
3.04 J4.
3 .Ot •c 6
ll
3A4 4.
,
3.0 ac.
t2
5.0 K.
NE
O G S
0S
`fit- C
7 r 3.02
3. 09.E
Arc
a
3.0 Ac-
3
3.0 A.
2
K
ta9E/597
a 3. - C !
PHASE 6A F. 6 r7
-411
A. ,
/ '- ,i'y�t!1 "•. - _ 'E ti.a..' C, is \
% 'r. ire � y -r-1a' -�s ,-\-�F• :• ��' n r
CK
.ail N
'i- i •`' : • r 1- (1` -`ice •l \� - _ � � -
•00-faIF Im
A\
-0a3aa i \. �`� •
r \ "�
i r .J-� 1
i
r ter/ n t
BOSS M, AND CUTABETN N, r•u..n
AND -A4 D. Au_6 r `
' c' I NOTE: BASED ON THE TEXAS STATE PLANE SOtf,y.4¢f A TEXAS GENERAL PMTNCRS'MP
3` b SCAM - 1 • = 1 00' COORDINATE AEM,THE COORDINATES OF THE � - _ _ � - 19p•�' S2730'18'E 320.48' -_
MAJOR CORNERS OF THI$ $UBOMSION ARE: _ _-� 145.
F O U N TA I N W 0 0 D ESTATES POINT No. CORD. Y CORD.
.•o 1 ^ - - - - 23 8.� 1
01 15'P.U.E. �$ �.
PHASE 6 A 7.e 12.e92.999 JBS,949.462 0 1
NI B t,iil, IEIOSi m f r
r ae/e,ee9,oe �Ui.e>,4r. ts� 34 h ' a
LEGEND: 1.05 AC. h 1
• IRON ROD FOUNO m p' m b -� m ,+
01 R09S w. ANo CLxAB(TN R. NESTER : m a O 33 J: 32 J'ri I ;
O IRON R00 SET ,'0 V' A TEXANO AS °MAX
C0. RAL P�ARTNCRSHIP' n rb n n 1.0! AC. n „ ^ 1.06 I
L q'. T 31
h W I,l�1 () •RECORD DATA O wL. 7190, Pc. 3eo ^ 1 -
ooc. No. 4e1.a. �so'e.L
CM • CONTROL MONUMENT m c r N
P.U.E.- PUBLIC EASE EASEMEM c l21 U. I' D.E. • DRAINAOE EASEMENT C I `pA es C2p ' ,C. JO•B l 1
e.L BUILDiNC UNE CB g L 1 6 �-
m [ 45 C 0,49 -_-_--- �1
^ I D \\ 11 $I SO6'Jee gA11` _ _ - lJ111
I I t» f5.1.. rr••\^4 w -':j I s12
♦ \. (AI Ai'`" \w `' _ - N C�• C� _ a Ja?-w 1 $i h° 151.62�W i Cil/h No4.3
\ C7 S.S C, H.SA)�. y15'P.u.E_ ---;0'___ 06•JS•1e.w J69 18 C13 c.\Y''fq�bp � 76, 5- SIS't2'26'f 1 C26,'g3 ?J'-w
NROE SURVEY S t^� '°
DAME MO - \.�� 9pd%' 2 49 zs �41J spy -S�r - c12 /�`° 2
_ .p .00 y SO �
r
_ _ - ? w'/o m Bl. 1J'P. u. E. - \ I r 0 B jo ^ cl 7 S IJ7.7�. f E
p SURVEY A-553 P\. - 1.0oAc. ^^�,_h �1 '------- - L g: II/ Bf���_ _C6s_'
JOHN SUTHERLAN c35
� `bo. o /gam (\ g' c
C ��. \ 1.00 AC. I! r I e �! ~ m m T• ^!I r+ I N I ,an m 50 0. N1 1 Z
y0�.1 \ J o �o� I c A; _ u q n 0.98 AC. ai ,I
''\\ y f, cm' ! a I 38 �1,ti al 39 U I 40
'1 17�' 0�0 �' •e .5 9 \ • s r' o h $m 36 " h. '^ I`. .ten'_ 1.00 AC. � \ V• 11.00 AC. 0 4A 1.00 AC. '
I(\ - wti u \VI I\ E
n 1.00 AC. a ;m
\� m\1ye��t. C. .G w I J' I� 37 vm:�>o I nr \ i`SP B.1 y. 1
/ �PI�,eSQ'�O ♦ `Q7 .♦�' / 1 'l ' \ �` `SP '•J. '�t, �� _^" ,^� m 1.03 AC. t'r y ' r u .- 1 60 .r\t \\\lll��� 1% 4 1
/ l
�' J Q ) S • \\' 1 w/ R m "u gY p" / n
G� �`
•' E� �Q)' ♦p �.�8 1.19 AC. / \ e•�if i \\ 48 $ ^M7• £'S P. U.f. G• , E.
f'JPu `�.'' r t•4 U' w ; A•°i
O°4"6 1♦4 \♦ 'J. ` 01 /� \ \ \r+o.:r ` ou• �1
J.' g'• ` +n \ t.ot AC. /\) is B.L. �_� 2°3.0,' I xs'•� 1As.o0' ^ro..\c. 5'gL 18. b �Qy$1
65
+S'P.U.C. / IJ• 190.99. \ bZ � t'IC 1
r♦( e ``\ �►J N-A`I \ e)4J 11 �. 6 00 2 10' iS'E• '• •Jp o•w N) 191•w ` % 4 �\ 0.98 AC, 1
\ \ti9V�...a,t ,0, .t� f� I .• �� .+o ;jJ� �.E �`. o pL1` o m N5265
•w
cb.` ,y h IS.S0. 1 1T'2T S. •o a .P a. 1 •O
</ \V(/ �`
�~ ♦ // �?J \` \ 1.00 AC. \ `\ \ `\\` ,� ' j 25aPu.f. NS' �; 43 ,,; J m( �`` \\� ♦ye�"A ♦ 1 6.
D. \ ♦y a -7 0 %+ 1.0� AC. g O 0 4 1
18 ♦ 0.1 C.
< 47 J I ^ 1.00 AC. -n I.00 AC. 1 .' y"� ♦y� j
♦ / J \.L ♦y ♦S o \ \ \ 1.00 AC. lm h b H w+ G V"f W _ b h '� ') J Ih
O \ ` y. �,;�• / 'U� .\ �" // y� i 1\ pp J Iw „I 4J "e ii m' Ivmi o.
-- / ♦ %�dy j / r^ y0• \ _ ro 46` - A o u, m ^ Ir ^ h m 3 1 N 1 ♦ 0�• 1
CJ / I ►♦/ ;g. 6' \\ ` \•i7. U H 1.00 AC. m m 1•a1 U �, �' .GS'B.L.
/ ��<<I EU♦y \lo f NI lJO'OJ'w 274���•^^-3---��� 60_Oo. tM
__ /// ��,'. 19 `\ ( `� �. f ! 64 y;,,•l� c
``� / ✓ a \ 3 ` AC. J•j \ �� y0'0�.� '?- 1S'P.U.C. \ u J IS'B.L /I I_ o o 1 'W 0.99 AC. ti 1 f 1 _M
42 m a b b rP y�I
\ ,• '� ` \ �_ Pu
p T Nov ♦ 1S 1.02 AC. r+I �, = vI 1 °.% I
♦.\ FOUNTNNW000,ESTATE$ �1 \a� v�� ♦\JJ C -- --_.__ - Cx•1.))' w�e�e SO B.L. 1 0
r" 4!• ♦ JO 112T C C S 3 0 1 U / _n (1S• G PHASE 2 Y 11 C52 531 L.L I C4 / S J, J•B; f. J s. I� 60.00. I bt �ti• P. i1'i
17 >♦ CAS.K SLD.358-359 1 /iyt ti.%i CIR 6 °! 4 )ly\ [. - �e T \� ^,I • y 1
. \ J1�/ W 2A1.JJ' a C4 C•
♦\ \ �NJ+1727 IBi _ __S.P .NOO w79 / \ .___-J q _ -_
20 `♦hQ , /JpUF �.i' _ gl - q-°°- --- --� O b'f /9J / ``C4° ___ 59.69�� _90 �Q- S2741'38'E g(C�1:
1 ` / _ C C58 p u.E'�' ' 1
\ 1S - _, \ �� `� �666 / g� N6e'14'310. 65.91' 1$
` \1 r� •� \ 1.14AC. 3 JO\ - ---- - - 11 1-C6
1 \ - BC.�� JC)'B �6 -27.29
C416 �I N2741"SSW 310.J0'
r/r, m'�' 1� m1 g 1
`I u, \ Y ~ h.Q' /3 NJN
�' i, l I.,1 o ! \ 1 S'P.U.E. I g 1 1
-'\ - :T 5 //�//�b I i ci In - m • 'P c 1 .02 AC. �J p ���•••--��� 1
1 G ` O \ / �l'O N ^ 7 1Nm•" O (I,qJ��' I
1\ __ J w I.OS AC. /, la r� o U m' o n./ / I
1 ml - m v,� c 1.01 AC. i I \n 6n O• ;' \ 1 a
\ l
21 ,,�fJ� 6 mIV�Q I.00Ac r f `�, \ /=mti„ 10
1.06 AC. 'I 1 / I.00 AC. - I a a vu I a 13
1 1 ,Y::•Ypuf i 1 I m halm° uy-. v 4 12 �� j f
`` 0 ` `'� `A'or• Fid \ I I 1 1 7S'e.L.-� __ `/ j B r g' r� vm o Po 1.00 AC. 1• I
IS `1 •"y rf�•\' I 1--- " f \ 'Pu <.\ J it 1 1 ^r ! n
r "K! eJ `]\ 2S9J _--'61.91. NIS'S3.4Q+y
v o V
1?� ''\ r- nM1,` y,,.^•�., ?e•� - i112f .2.5971r a51.6e 9e.75- \\ � 7?O. I.00 AC,
0
♦° ''6 ` I -�., NO _ IS'P.U.L ~ ~ - U'i41�►L 1 ,.�
1 , 1 22 \.\ I r°
4+ LOT 66 _ 2J'Je. ` zs'e.L tse.
�` M1pPD 1 11 10.70 AC. 'tb C JOJ.J ej•JT _ _ - 2741 .
11 + PpT[MW PVeLIC PM. AS COMNA.Ci 2S�`-p.�F. IO NYTa1'SSw
0 Co.14 \ 1 .•�•• '!• w AN CuShNt AORCoocrf BCTMEw •!t+' F'6r, ��� H296. Sw' 11y 1 6,
CAsa 1 � 11 � 91�.pp I n,►n F.s^` nlc nrr W GCORonoWN r /'•d Ai..I� J 96.90'
ERE 112t♦ \1 SSey)6R p� ye.^ .. 1'�c �.���•. O M"1�0• ^,r(r�
40� SS .. AND [UtABM R. CSTLA
y` PN45E 6A PHASE 68 -1 A TE7U5 CCNCRAL PMTNCRSNIP • • ° e
, DOc x-o 9e a, ` • • o� LOT 87
`e 7
S PROPOSED
y m N2V I I'STW 377.e0 � -� a ! •V FOUrTTA1NW00D
t NIC LE wA v p� Nob•?0 4 ti ; ESTATES
R. P: / 02' )T W 2q9 4 Y,,1 3.+.r., FOUHTv00 HASE 5 ESTATE$ ` I S 9 w 2,4.e° z rh �' r� PHASE 6B
N)7 23 �yaw�6 ��II 12 CAB. M SLD..319... •' J _� Y�jir"a" /<+.. I< r 16 y '�'RMS 0.sAe['"utt� Mo'°I
'7'°�', GOQtK MRINER9M
FOUrRAlIvw000 ESTATES NO620. n `� t114.ro�eo
),YEAR S44' - . J4Y L WOLF 100.74 AC.VOL6/e,r4..+...
IN 21'2SE. ____
- A It.AAS 1iLNt1w rM1hLn>n.r rr.•- >a/5;•a• ( 226.46' I3.71' �------------------•,i
( 160.4a'1/_-- r--- -- ---- - S VOL. 2190. PC. 3e0 _ `_- S37.-- L 52642__ 177.
` 'P+?• \ �' _ _ - - - � 34. r i�_".3'= --� POINT 'C 7F_ -�
J'( 3 OOC. NO. 96t444 ••SC �'A 12' __ \ FLOWAGE EASCVCNf TRACT 20C- 4
INT 'B' I `25•B.L ` 31.6J• S353 _ ��7.�•-' S•6Ltt.��r•� 5 ' 2 ' ` 'G.a vpLsss.Pc.2e1
000 1 J 1t Lp�.24 O "h 9�k'26'o�E ,ei..,� �i w `�\ �� c
I -L
1.03 6 to I 61 ; z I N rta 511.E �1'?"w>a �` R,o I
AC. < ^ 1 Q Q ?rm `' s7„f r�P7� SCALE:1 " =100
i 32 0 -4\ u 30 J' I �j£col•.> JI. b <V 11) 1.97 AC. `\ J 4'1if
1 ? J 3 J 1.02 AC. J ^ 1 ` 27 < \ �\ OC a N
I I�•`'! n I„ r„ �_ rh r 29 ml^',j� 4 28 u:19 1.02 AC. V d ^_1 V••-) g II HOME OWNERS CLUB HO \`\ ,r N
-liy 1.O AC. n s h 1.04 AC. m\ m om �I • I s26.71'Se" "`l \
- : - .`- slc,9'2rE 200.4 • 1 97." m. ISAAC_JONES_SUftVEY _A-361
_ _ _ _ I ~ J� - W _ PETER NOVEL SURVEY A-486
ANIEL MONROE SURVE\-450 ; _ ^� _ _ - - - - a - - - _ _ +0.77 _ ! P y - �� - - - -q \\� 4 - - _ p
3HN SUTNERLAND SURF A-553 I n
--L_ 5o'B.L �- 1{3pe.l I �/� a ` ��`� '6• - LEGEND:
1A ` J 0. S t^ i IRON ROO POUND
/45'Di? J l t5'P.U.C. __�__ __ C6-IS•P•U.E. /\ �� �' \1 1O L\\
'�- 7 7 CS I --�.. Or�'"\\ __--- Cl, /Ta. P 24 IPnoo .IRON PIPE FOUND
- / w Cy • • 60D NAIL FOUND
c1 N T26'45-w 1 \ ` ,. F . IRON ROD SET
t' .3 ,' 1 1 g Np¢03,I-el.p0.�_----- �_\ Iej0L `70 \'''/i" L,rJ 1 ♦ \ / 1.11 AC. �•// ; '!l IO) RECORD DATA
CZ 53T26'4SC 1t192' C4 SO9• I W 19g•43' I C7 \P A?` `\�.C• \ 'JiO�� I ` \ 0`q j pR' z CM " CONTROL MONUMENT
5 �- - - - ' - - - e t �' /f/�\ \ \ y 3 d2 • '^ •� - . P.U.E. • PUBLIC VM.rTY EASEMENT
I 56.92� �• -3.4J• pJ I E 199 I 5�q -` P Gf• y ' SoL 1 Q = V•.
, � r•- __ ___ -- .a3r yq •.' 6V ` \ •� �ATO �I lu.q) I N g�Zp O.E. DRAINAGE fASEI.EIR
1 I 1 \ I s•P.U.( - - - - I I+.Op. CB 0 � `p 'A j 1\�\ B.L.- BUIIDINC UNE SO 8 = 11 �� IJP'V•E.- C9-- C`- A'� o,\0't, m\ I`\\ bo00,
I�' m 9 f , x
M o
1 h o 1(Z so•e.L�' / \ N �: a 56 _ i y / F
52 So•B.L:-�-�� e `/' 55 .6 m f •r 0.99 AC.
1 1� 0 1 51 _ N J I� 0.9!9 AC. �\� J\ TV s .a I \ ? 23 I 1 u
1 60 00' 1 u. £ in a 0.98 AC. 41 o r+t ''0 t'' 1'1A �' ml n - I
\ ____ A�. ml4m�� ml. mid 53 W 54 �m. s. _ -� , 25 AD. ; / I U FO U NTAI NWOOD
r1 0.99 n .n n . ; fmfo4i �,\\ = f.
_ n, n 0.99 AC. o m.ul
1 t 1 T if- J' n m c 1 V\ \S. '\_-
\11 O ,- a 11 g.l. J�7Sl�-SB. j w NI _nl_�I� 0.98 AC. C\\c\� `'NAOAlS w I\m c'1 ..�.ISB.L� L_7 _ - J� ESTATES
\\ • 1 / 25. W 22i�� 5'09 46'w •r 6 %. \5• y; 0 2 �L.4
S , / t4.3 17 05.00* 7t.00. -� `97.� Pi 15'P.U.E. �N. 15 w \S9.p0 \j 0' ` C. 1
L \ 15 Ill ly 231.00. 25•B.L�_ 5? - C• PHASE B
IL L 1 ,B375• 236.63' QS'B.L. 2at.pp''� NAOT AT. C. 11 - C44 P..E. -,
7.5'
i --- 92.30' N2657'S1'W I \5P/� ` 57 1 I IS'B.L t �, I
\ 1 IL 1 '� - i IS•P,,),E. Ei. I I 571' 23'01yr
1 O l '0 3J.50• 141.50' 0�' N
\ 5' P.U.E. 25'B.L. /-� 25 0.99 AC. I n.1 TJ'A 22T1e S) ' q r55
11 ` SyA 160O i' q•(� ,P rti5 3 ' 61 0 /y 7S'B.L� �25J.00p. 1.17 AC. �
41 \ 1 I q /I \ a 62 J 0.98 AC. J t Fi1� •. m m r 1 po
1.00 AC.J/Q 60 N 'A 58 N I •0/ J' I v. i.' E 7 N� 1tOr.O
m e. „ nti r a
F 4T $. �•. ,r 0.99 AC. ? f 4\ .a' m Ic w
1 o n w 0.99 AC. �I_ I 4r\ \�. \ / I N+`"''
1 �G Sore_L. ,A ,.:, m 59 m a c I �/ 3' L ' ;.., w LOMA
PROPCSEO FOUNTNNVQO J •�7, 1 '� r^ H o 611'. G [^ . r - it
ESTA-ES PHASE 6. ; 1 \ m ��\ H d m - C e -B' ` I ply Ca.
1 ` 2 .� ` U C - - - I r 0.96 AC. , \•A� J \'r• \ !, L:�rr f �3 e` I I N SITE
64 I IJ 63 ,\v °s. ASP':--j ^I w' \-\N, r 1 \ V �i4 v'� L. Ct rS•PUE`y 0.97 AC. C33- o y, S23�•Z0
lu.i1 % PHA Be y
Rosa W,AN MWZ N :STER ^ �' I� cJ. -,/ hpr �.3jP`. �C; �� SO'9.L / ,. 21ALLEI$ / 4.. a PNAS6E 6A y� •.:C
A TEXAS .GO+ERAL PARTWEOP h 1 \ / 40• - \5' C' /� ATw i ,� ' 1�•
47. 36 -_ _ J F --- P.U. •� 0�' yo 7q Ti i p'11
VOL ]tf0, k, 3e0 i I e'/ � A5 - - _ 9 TO \ 1i i h i
] DOC. MO. 961M4 1 yPV�'�r 6C A9 A �� Sp1,3 a /g C3t N]T•33'tTw 104.913' C2 A TO ATC 'J. I ~ ' bo. \ by
�/' - s• r G15 ?� /. ti a• N1C- WAY
1•q.;��. I^\\ �eCP. a?I► /,p' 1 I �•
' 'I I S•4 'S6� `yP B� I \ p`�` CJ2 1 1 e / F7 8 2 �i , �' I
" ALLEN CIRCLE I 6•,� / \.' ,.� •� DR.
5 V33'ITE 154.92' C2 ^I ` '� a JJ Y 6�
a ---J.o93' ---f '�1 \ 20 CATION MAP
38it.3sE es.1 i$ 1.01 Ac. h ( s T.o3 AC. ' S(TE LOf
1$ 405o'a.L. NOT
TO scxE
•----T--r-- i33�--- > \� S 16 I ��. 131 CURVE TABLE: -
{/ . 1.01 AC. R ' TM Say Nio4,e2' ne .oe'E
I I 1 '--- \ vll� �W e �7 1
1 15'P.V.E• N Vim e _ b h J/t W 1 / _ 'n 1 ^ s id ��' 1' i Cci URVE 0 220.00'S 77'33l4�' 13. LEIC"'TM
66.6f' 1",,41' 21"1'46i
1 I 1 S N At 1 4 m e r �,R W :, „t p' 1.01 AC. J '^ ? 1 $ "1"' �' 7 I r \ �1 I f C2 26p.00' 77.33'S+' ,3..7t• 57.97' 113.53 N20'4+'S6•M
m 9 r 4S.S4' 61.20' S20'44'56i
I I I r \ -L u; .� �' 1,02 AC. '�m ��' 1 t0 C3 260.00' 7373'31' 114,32'
N2741'5e' W 1`\�\' �' 1 .04 AC, \ ✓r n 1W1.09 /�, m £ . I I C' C4 220.00' 1175'33' e9.e2'
I I I 26.e7' ;q 1�:o �t� /n /w b-tI-t r r o � CS 280.00' �6,05,03' 76.67 )9.56' 76.3•• 524'24'13i
1 ° 1 ' c6 200.00' 718'30' )5.722 17,e0' M.61' M1 T47'26•w
m`N E V \ , C7 1220.00' 3613'49' 1.6.79' 76.25' Iw.09• 52e10'06'C
13 25 B.L 15'P u E_ II J 97.04' 183.38' S2610.06"E
\ �__ :..'� � I_A_ 1125'B.L. _ L Ce �•' 2e0.00' 3e1]'49' 106.e3' jp.74' 91.63' M111Zr'R
1 I 1 u I d 7 1 .05 AC, r - - .. _ _ _ -, C9 e0.00' 20.3r 1oa.39' .3.57' 66.10' 530,2rzrE
oY -' -�J LY 2 32
c+o teo.00' nv1'1r ee.0 2.6.42' 32e 23' SOPDr32".
y - w 103.55, ,' c1, 220.00' 9679'05' 37047' 9'05*311 3' •17.74' No07T32'c
10, j7'w 163.12� N270 2'I8'W 42B.S2' NI T76'OS 471.51,
K, 710.)O' ..rrN3S 4]37 .CIS 260.00 77?7'D•• 135.76' 69]S' 134,45' N)327'26'W
1 1 j C14 720,tq 17'4J')1' M.66' 24,53' •6.76' S40'SS1a'(
t17, 25' 293,73' so711'Ie'W
f L� 126.57, 230.1r SO4.41'SJw
I 1 N 1•I%'./ r ,• C15 120.00' 63••5'.l!' 321.e1'
1 6 Pi ROSS W, 40.50' 97..1' SMV34:1
G.'v. +` / a6 2eo.00' 4e's6'3e' 237,75'
I 1 1 ,L6 y.15• ' ' 5 1 AND EUSABCTh R. HCSTER
'b ' ��'"�:, „ �� cn 2eo.oc' 2ov3'o2' n.w 75o.9s 3.73.75' sam'51'E
I I w 4• b o w/0 UM 0. ALLEN I ,'/ c16 2e0.00' e3••4'Oe' •.02.21'
I I ��•• NA2\6 Or a,1 q6 I �' - A T GENERAL PARTNCRSHIP , c19 220.00' 63'u'00' 321,S2' 197.1T 293.5 Se6-•S'SI'E
LOT 67 I ..:r ]s sv NSYOrorE
----� L------ -- I I APPROX. 100 YEAR 2190, PG. 3e0 , C20 2e0.00' S'S0'Os' 20.51' 10.01' 21.00'. 55794'56'w'
Q^4a1nd4+♦0 Qre1n N N0, 961444 7•') , FLOWAGE (/SEMEN? TRACT 200(- C21 2D0,00' 49S'3e' 70.Ot'
CSm'j 6.33 AC. cif , m1 FLOOD PLAIN 60.fa• 119.oe' N7t7i27'E
7 5.., + NI VOL.535,Pc.2e1 C22 2eo.00' ]4'33'19' 20.00' . 6t 30' t19.76' •$W'50'DO•E
\6,\6w) POT(MUL PUBLIC PARK AS CONTAINCO ,.\1 11.1 2S YE40. FtAOD C23 260.00' 2•'41'+r 120.69' , 6C.94' 119.06' NSf70'SYW
NAL AN EXISTNC AGREEMENT BL1\VE[N 1pil PLAuE -- - -- -- I I L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ C74 260'00' 24'33'19' 120.00' 4f.ed 17.14'. N3416'30'w
C25 • 220.00' 25'30'35' 97.f3'
A lY ISB• �.. THE CITY OF GEORCETOWN. '61 , r iIT2E'OS'[ j70.e6 - --I--r-------------- C7e 200.00' 23'30'35' 121.66' �I •f 3' '1li9a' 53632'•6C
o C 1 wi 1 ice- • • ) �'f ' - 19 C27 2e0.00' , 8-20 32 6 .42, : 20.75' m.3e' 325.47 A6M
c2e 2eo.00' a 2e'32' .1.42' :'
w' ! f^1 It"il 0 (�CL1I,, 1 C20 220.00' 2M'le'' Me- 43,4T 05.29' N3373•I>a:
r � rid I �'• n1 `"•I /� •• FOUNTAINWOOD ESTATES C30 220.00• 309.17' 12.11• 6.06' ILIV M39r31'e
}z�113�� I PHASE 4B c3t 220.00' 7••31*52' 9•.t9' ' - 47.63' fJ.4T N091f16'1
4'^ 4. j I 1 „1 / �I Q j CAB. L SLD.--d'-40G c32 2eo.Do' 2.'3,'sY 11o.ee' ' 60.sr 11e.9r sof1TT6T
22 i Q H C33 1e0.00' 52'30'1e' 256.51'1' - 136.10* 247.70' M2316'29'r
W , w�'! \j6 q1 !1-� N2705`3fr i 253.3e' i n �. I..I c34 220.00' 52.30'te' 201.e0'1' 1oe.50' 194.62' 's2316'29i
IA r�e N•\ \4'1Sw ql;;, y� �rItijm .1 n T'C 1 f': ,�I i e35 220.00' t9.4rtr 21 71' 42.50'35' 20.24' s07.2A'S6'E
a s.i1" M4r0S'3 e3e 270.00' 3,•43'06' 171.79•r •2.50' 120.24' NST4o'OS•r
Li 36 70.00' c41 POIKT '0' .' L°J I NOTE BASED ON THE TEXAS STATE PLANE c37 :e0.00 n,t'58' 201.94 M5r 1/7.sr N:e9r36�
COORDINATE SYSTEM.THE COOROINATES OF THE Cie 260.00' I1,pse' Saes' ; 27.41' 54,56' NO'2'36'•f'1
'•r i' Z I MAJOR CORNERS OF ,THIS SUBOMSION ARE: C39 220.00' 26*49*40' 103.01'1• 52.4T IcLor N3696'4e'7
/ NO•>• .•A' , I C40 2e0.00' 26'40'40' 131.11' 66.75' 120,91' N36V6'46'w
QOO ea �90Z'M - •' ' Q I POINT N0. 'X' F•ORO., 'Y'CORO. C41 3t0.00' )975.20' 213.21' i 111.06' 209.11' S]311'42't
FOUNTNNW000 ESTATES .' . `��I - - - - - - - - _ / Iy. �. ,� to 1 • A r. �i. >J1 -97 -07, et?I. 9J7 C12 :74.09' 2S19'05' 76.93' 1' 39.10• 76.30, N219S'33"T
P01W PHASE 49 �' , Y" - / - 81 � .' � 0 i ' e F, e/7, o9e. �r7 �i, riG. J u c44 s4.o7' 33'44*25,19's' 51.ov' F 26.65' 67.54' s]1os 33 E
2 CAD. L SLO. ��•• / OV --r 4Dti/ �� , 2, 1 c44 e7.67' 33'•e's1' S,.7.'t' 26.65' 50.99• •S27i077i
E �''c a 24:3..071 JM, 7-U 70 C45 67.67' )S'•e'51' )9.94'4' i0.5T 30.36''Nri'20-57-V
-19� Np6. ti --r �' // -.�` /Q i' '1 h ..' n . n .,.n aaW .� .... �4r ..� .. .... 73.•0• 140.59' W2570'SYY
iDtp,W 37 .0 f ylI•'•.•••�w.. e -.. .. .-.....I' 70.37' I34.26' $24.49'09i
X.
°gip• , . ,
/o171rtAiNWDoo aTATCS PI1r5 �:�..;' / �• �
- r 1 J'ira�
Council Meeting Date: 07/23/96 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Consideration to approve the resolution of the Georgetown Industrial Development
Corporation taking affirmative official action toward the issuance of bonds to provide
manufacturing facilities for Chatsworth Products, Inc.
ITEM SUMMARY
City staff and the Georgetown Industrial Foundation have, for the past 3'/ years, been working
with Chatsworth Products, Inc. of Chatsworth, California about a proposed manufacturing
expansion into Georgetown. Chatsworth Products, Inc. builds cabinets for computers and
diagnostic equipment and cable trays for the telecommunications industry. The company
plans to build a 70,000 square foot building and to create 150 jobs. The company has applied
to the Georgetown Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) for the issuance of $7 million
in industrial revenue bonds. The bonds will finance their proposed expansion into
Georgetown. The GIDC will meet on Monday to authorize the issuance of the IRBs.
This item has been placed on the agenda for you to consider approval of that action, as
required by law. These bonds have no impact on the City of Georgetown's bond rating; the
City is not liable for repayment. This is the same process that we followed in the issuance of
bonds for Triple S Plastics last year. The necessary paperwork has been prepared by our
bond attorneys, McCall, Parkhurst, & Horton, LLP.
l•I'
FINANCIAL IMPACT
None
COMMENTS
None
ATTACHMENTS
1. Community and Business Agreement for the Development of the Advance Metal
Systems, Inc., Project.
ittedfiy:
Bob Hart, City Manager
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE RESOLUTION OF THE GEORGETOWN
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION TAKING AFFIRMATIVE OFFICIAL
ACTION 'TOWARDS THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS TO PROVIDE A
MANUFACTURING PROJECT FOR CHATSWORTH PRODUCTS, INC.
THE STATE OF TEXAS §
CITY OF GEORGETOWN §
WHEREAS, the Georgetown Industrial Development Corporation (the "Corporation") is a
nonprofit industrial development corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State
of Texas, including particularly the Development Corporation Act of 1979, as amended (the "Act");
and
WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown, Texas (the "City") has authorized and approved the
creation Of the Corporation to act on its behalf to further certain public purposes of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Corporation has received an application for financing from Chatsworth
Products, Inc. ("Chatsworth") for the issuance of revenue bonds by the Corporation to enable
Chatsworth to acquire, constrict and equip an approximately 70,000 square foot manufacturing
facility to manufacture fabricated metal structural support products and components for use in voice
and data communication devices, which will be located within boundaries of the City; and
WHEREAS, Chatsworth is opening the manufacturing facility in response to customer
demand for fabricated metal structural support products and components for use in voice and data
communication devices in the Texas market area; and
WHEREAS, the plant will initially employ approximately 40 people with the potential to
employ up to 150 people in three years; and
WHEREAS, on July 22, 1996 the Board of Directors of the Corporation approved the
resolution attached hereto as Exhibit A in connection with the Chatsworth project; and
WHEREAS, any bonds issued by the Corporation shall never constitute an indebtednem or
pledge of the City, or the State of Texas, within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory
provision and the holders of the bonds shall never be paid in whole or in part out of any funds raised
or to be raised by taxation or any other revenues of the Corporation, the City or the Statc of Texas
except revenues of Chatsworth; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.92.050 of the Cites Code requires the City to approve the resolution
of the (corporation; and
WHEREAS, the meeting at which this Resolution is adopted was open to the public and
public notice of the time, place and purpose of the meeting was given, all as required by Chapter 551,
Texas Government Code, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the passage of this Resolution implements Finance Policy 4 of the Century Plan
- Policy Plan Element.
THEREFORE, BE ) T RESOLVED BY THE CTTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Or
GEORGETOWN, TEXAS:
1. The City hereby approves the Resolution of the Corporation attached hereto as Exhibit
A and hereby appoints the Board of Directors of the Corporation to act as the hearing officer for
purposes of Section 147(fl of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
2. The City Council hereby finds that the Resolution implements Finance Policy 4 of the
Century Plan - Policy Plan Element, which states; "'The City shall develop a strategy to provide
sufficient financial resources, for both short term and long term needs", and Economic Development
Policy which states "Tlhe City will encourage diversified growth and promote business opportunities
to create jobs, broaden the tax base, and minimize the impact of economic fluctuation"; and further
finds that the enactment 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.
3. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon adoption. The Mayor and City
Secretary are hereby authorized and directed to execute the certificate to which this Resolution is
attached on behalf of the City and to do any and all things proper and necessary to carry out the intent
of this Resolution.
RESOLVED this 23rd day of July, 1996.
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APYROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
2
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: Leo Wood
Mayor
EXHIBIT "A"
RESOLUTION TAKING AFFIRMATIVE OFFICIAL ACTION TOWARDS
THE ISSUANC): OF $ONDS TO PROVIDE A MANUFACTURING
PROJECT FOR CHATSWORTH PRODUCTS, INC.
WHEREAS, Georgetown Industrial Development Corporation (the "Corporation") is a
nonprofit industrial development corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State
of Texas, including particularly the Development Corporation Act of 1979, as amended (the "Act");
and
WHEREAS, the City of Georgetown, 'texas (the "City") has authorized and approved the
creation of the Corporation to act on its behalf to further certain public purposes of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Corporation is considering proceeding with the acquisition and construction
of certain manufacturing facilities and the acquisition of equipment for use at such facilities, all of
which will be located within the City, as more fully described in Exhibit "A" to this Resolution (the
"Project"), for use by Chatsworth Products, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under the laws
of the State of Delaware (the "Company"); and
WHEREAS, the Company has advised the Corporation that a contributing factor which
would further induce the Company to proceed with providing for the acquisition, construction and
equipment of the Project would be a commitment and agreement by the Corporation to issue bonds
pursuant to the Act (the "Bonds") to finance and pay for the Project; and
WHEREAS, the Company has proposed to the Corporation that the Company will be further
induced to proceed with the acquisition, construction and equipment of the Project if the Corporation
will hake such commitment and agreement and adopt this Resolution; and
WHEREAS, the Corporation finds, intends and declares that this Resolution shall, in
accordance with its provisions, constitute the commitment and agreement of the Corporation to issue
the Bonds, in one or more series, in such aggregate principal amount, presently estimated not to
exceed $7,000,000 as is actually required to finance and pay for the acquisition, construction and
equipment of the Project, together with all costs and fees of or incurred in connection with the
issuance of the Bonds and the acquisition, construction and equipment of the Project to the extent
permitted by federal or state law; and
WHEREAS, the Corporation finds, considers and declares that the issuance of the Bonds in
such amount and for such purposes will be appropriate and consistent with the objectives of the Act,
and that the adoption of this Resolution is and constitutes, and is intended as (i) an inducement to the
Company to cooperate with the Corporation in providing for the acquisition, construction and
equipment of the Project, (ii) the taking of affirmative official action by the Corporation, acting, by
and through its Board of Directors, towards the issuance of such Bonds, and that such action is and
is intended to be, similar to the adoption of a bond reu)lution, within the meaning of Section 1. 103-
3
8(a)(5) of the Income Tax Regulations or such other applicable provisions of Income Tax Regulations
promulgated pursuant to Section 142 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1486, as amended (the
"Code"), and (iii) the official declaration of the intention of the Corporation, in accordance with the
provisions of Section 1.1 S0-2 of the Federal Treasury Kegulations, to reimburse expenditures for the
Project at such time or times as the Bonds are issued.
THEREFORE. BE 1T RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
GEORGETOWN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION THAT:
Section 1. The Corporation is committed and agrees as follows:
(a) To adopt a bond resolution or bond resolutions, when requested by the Company,
authorizing the issuance of Bonds pursuant to the Act, and to issue the Bonds, subject to the
requirements of the Act, the execution of the appropriate agreements or contracts described in
subparagraph (b) below, and the sale of the Bonds under terms and conditions satisfactory to the
Corporation and the Company, to finance and pay for the acquisition, construction and equipment
of the Project, including amounts sufficient to pay the foes, expenses and costs in connection with
such issuance, including an amount adequate to reimburse the Corporation for its administrative and
overhead expenses and costs with respect to the Bonds and the Project, with the Bonds to be payable
fi-otn payments by the Company to the Corporation and/or to a corporate trustee in such sums as are
necessary to pay the principal of, interest on, and redemption premium, if any, together kith the
paying agent's and trustee's fees on, the Bonds, as and when the same shall become due and payable.
(b) Prior to the issuance of the Bonds, when requested by the Company, to enter into such
loan agreement, installment sale agreement, lease, and/or any other appropriate contracts or
agreements between the Corporation and the Company as are mutually acceptable in all respects to
the Corporation and the Company, under which the Company will be obligated to make payments
to the Corporation and/or to a corporate trustee in such sums as are necessary to pay the principal
of, interest on, and redemption premium, if any, together with the paying agent's and trustee's fees
on, the Bonds. as and when the same shall become due and payable, and with such payments also to
be sufficient to defray the Corporation's administrative, overhead and other expenses and costs with
respect to the Bonds and the Project.
(c) To take, or cause to be taken, such other action, and to execute such additional contracts
and agreements mutually agreeable to the parties in all respects, when requested by the Company, as
may be required in accordance with the Act and this Resolution to cause the issuance of the Bonds.
(d) By the acceptance of this Resolution and proceeding with the Project, the Company
thereby agrees that it will fully indemnify and hold the Corporation harmless from any and all
damages, losses and expenses, including attorney fees, arising at any time from or with respect to the
Bonds and the Project.
Section 2. The adoption of the Resolution shall be deemed to constitute the acceptance
Of the Company's proposal that it be further induced to proceed with the acquisition, construction and
equipment of the Prc icct, and said proposal and acQeptance shall constitute an agreement between
4
the Corporation and the Company in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution.
Section 3. Immediately after the adoption of this Resolution the acquisition of the
equipment constituting the Project may commence and continue to completion in accordance with
methods and procedures determined by the Company, or by the Company and the Corporation,
pursuant to this Resolution and the agreement it constitutes.
Section 4. The Secretary of the Board of Directors of the Corporation is hereby
authorized and directed to transmit to proper representatives of the Company one or more certified
copies of the Resolution and such parties are hereby authorized to rely upon the inducements for the
purposes herein stated.
Section 5. The Presidents Mee President or Secretary of the Board is hereby further
authorized to sign all documents and do all things necessary as advised by Bond Counsel to the
Corporation to submit the proper documentation to the Texas Bond Review Board for reservation
of a portion of the State's volume cap allocation.
Section 6. The adoption of this Resolution shall be deemed to constitute the official
declaration of the intention of the Corporation, in accordance with the provisions of Section 1. l 50-2
of the Federal Treasury Regulations, to reimburse expenditures for the Project at such time or times
as the Bonds are issued.
EXHIBIT A
Project Description
The project includes the acquisition, construction and equipment of an approximately 70,000
square foot manufacturing facility to manufacture fabricated metal structural support products and
components for use in voice and data communication devices. The project will be located within the
City of Georgetown, Texas.
Council Meeting Date: 07/23/96 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Authorization for the Mayor to execute an agreement between the City of Georgetown and
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
ITEM SUMMARY
Earlier, you approved the contract between the City and the State for grant funds of $269,550
to be used to construct road improvements in support of. Advance Metal Systems, Inca
This agreement obligates Advance Metal Systems to create 14 jobs and locate in Georgetown.
The job creation allows us to obtain grant funds to rebuild 21 st Street fro Austin Avenue to the
business.
•
COMMENTS
None
ATTACHMENTS
1. Community and Business Agreement for the Development of the Advance Metal
Systems, Inc., Project.
Submitted By:
Bob Hart, City Manager
STATE OF TEXAS § CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
§ COMMUNITY AND BUSINESS AGREEMENT
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON § FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ADVANCE
§ METAL SYSTEMS, INC. PROJECT
CITY OF GEORGETOWN §
THIS IS AN AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN the CITY OF GEORGETOWN,
TEXAS, a Texas Home Rule Municipal Corporation ("Community"), and ADVANCE
METAL SYSTEMS, INC., a Texas corporation ("Company"), to further economic growth
in Community by development of the Advance Metal Systems, Inc. Project, as described
in detail in the Texas Capital Fund contract dated the 26th day of February, 1996,
between the City of Georgetown and the Texas Department of Commerce ("Department"),
which provides the funding to Community necessary for the Project ("TCF Contract").
The parties for and in consideration of the agreements herein set forth to be kept
and performed by them respectively have agreed to and do hereby agree together as
follows:
1. GENERAL AGREEMENT
The Advance Metal Systems, Inc. Project is funded through the Texas Capital
Fund Program in order to further Economic Development in the State of Texas. The
Project will provide infrastructure improvements in the form of road improvements and a
detention pond to support the operation of Company. These infrastructure improvements
will allow Company to relocate its current operations to the Community. Company is a
steel building fabricator. After construction of the infrastructure improvements, Company
will employ a percentage of low to moderate income persons, in accordance with the
hiring plan (See Exhibit A - "Hiring Plan") and responsibilities (See Exhibit B -
"Performance Statement") detailed in the TCF Contract and this Agreement.
2. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
A. Improvements. Community shall construct infrastructure improvements in the
form of improving and widening approximately 705 linear feet of road on West
21 st street, including a 31 foot side curb and gutter section and building an
approximately 34,000 cubic foot concrete -lined detention pond, with two ten foot
curb inlets using approximately 100 linear feet of R.C.P. drainage pipe identified
in Exhibit A - Performance Statement of the TCF Contract ("Financial
Information"). Except as provided in this section, the construction of the
infrastructure Improvements shall begin no later than March 1, 1997 and must
proceed with all due diligence and skill until completed, and be completed no later
than January 1, 1998.
B. Construction Schedule. If the time of commencement or completion of
construction of the Infrastructure Improvements is delayed because of material
shortages, labor disruptions, war, insurrection, governmental restrictions, fire, flood,
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
Community and Business Agreement
Page 1 of 8
dAcontract\advmeta1\032096.fin Initial as to approval: Advance Metal City
storm or any other cause not reasonably within control of Community (including
Community's contractor), the time for commencement and completion will be
extended for as many days as construction is delayed by one of the factors listed
in this section.
3. COMPLIANCE WITH TEXAS CAPITAL FUND PROVISIONS
A. Job Creation. Company shall create a minimum of fourteen (14) equivalent
permanent jobs, of which eight (8) shall be provided to low and moderate income
persons, prior to the expiration date of this contract. In the event more than
fourteen (14) jobs are created, Company shall ensure that at least fifty-one percent*
(51 %) of all jobs created are provided to low and moderate income persons. A low
to moderate income person is defined by the current U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development Section 8 Housing Assistance Program for Existing
Housing income guidelines for the County of Williamson, Texas. Company agrees
to create and hire employees as follows:
FULL TIME JOBS
NO.
JOB TITLE
SKILL LEVEL
FIT
PAY RATE
DATE OF HIRE
Prod. Manager
Skilled
1
$36,057/yr
1996
Engineer
Skilled
1
$36,057/yr
1996
Saw Operator
Skilled
1
$9.51/hr.
1996
Welder
Skilled
2
$9.06/hr
1997
Plasma Arc Op.
Semi -skilled
1
$7.51/hr
1997
Painter
Semi -skilled
1
$7.51/hr
1997
Fitter
Skilled
1
$9.01/hr
1997
Driver
Skilled
1
$9.51/hr
1996
Laborer
Semi -skilled
2
$7.01/hr
1996-97
Sheet Metal Wrkr
Skilled
1
$8.51/hr
1998
Sheet Metal Hlpr
Semi -skilled
1
$7.51/hr
1998
Receptionist
Unskilled
1
$7.51/hr
1997
Company agrees to use the Texas Employment Commission ("TEC") and the
Rural Capital Area Private Industry Council (PIC) as recruiting sources for qualified
applicants as well as placing recruitment advertisements in local newspapers. In
such ads Company will state that it is an equal opportunity employer.
Company may vary the training of personnel according to the job to be
performed. If appropriate, Company may utilize the TEC's Job Corps Program or
PIC's On-the-job training program for basic job training with the more specific job
knowledge acquired through in-house training provided directly by Company.
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
Community and Business Agreement
Page 2 of 8
d:\contract\advmeta1\032096.fin
Initial as to approval: Advance Metal City
Company shall have all employment positions required by this section to be
filled no later than February 25, 1999.
B. Fundingof f Project. Community shall expend a total of Two Hundred Sixty -Nine
Thousand Five Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($269,550.00) of contract funds,
as stated in this Section. Community shall provide to Department, upon request,
evidence that project funds, both private and public, were expended as specified
in the attached Exhibit B ("Performance Statement"). Company shall inject a total
of Five Hundred Sixty Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($560,000.00) to be utilized
in conjunction with the Project.
1. Engineering Design. Community shall inject Twenty-two Thousand and
No/100 Dollars ($22,000.00) of contract funds to pay for all eligible project -
related engineering services, including preliminary and final design plans and
specifications, all interim and final inspections.
2. Road Improvements. Community shall inject Two Hundred Twenty-two
Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety-eight and No/100 ($222,798.00) of
contract funds to pay for the construction of the road improvements and
detention pond.
3. Real Estate Purchase. Community shall ensure that all acquisition of
needed real property, easements and/or rights -of -way is in compliance with
the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies
Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 4601 et.seq.) and HUD implementing
regulations (49 CFR Part 24). Company shall inject a minimum of One
Hundred Fifty-three Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($153,000.00) for the
acquisition of the real property identified in Exhibit C ("Real Property"),
where the Building Improvements will be constructed.
4. Construction of Building. Community shall ensure Company expends a
total of Two Hundred Forty-seven Thousand and No/100 Dollars
($247,000.00), toward the construction of a building.
5. Contract Administration. Community shall expend a maximum of
Twenty-four Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-two and No/100 Dollars
($24,752.00) of contract funds to carry out project administration activities,
including the cost associated with the required program fiscal and
compliance audit.
6. Machinery and Equipment. Company shall inject a total of One Hundred
Two Thousand Six Hundred Sixty-five and No/100 Dollars ($102,665.00)
in net equity value in machinery and equipment.
7. Salaries. Company shall inject a total of Fifty-seven Thousand Three
Hundred Forty-five and No/100 Dollars ($57,345.00) in cash for salaries.
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
Community and Business Agreement
Page 3 of 8
d:\contract\advmetal\032096.fin Initial as to approval: Advance Metal City
C. Repayment of Grant Funds. Company hereby agrees to be liable and shall
repay to Community for any and all Texas Capital Fund grant funds expended by
Community for this project and determined to be ineligible expenditures by either
the Texas Department of Commerce or by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development, but not to exceed a maximum of Two Hundred Forty-four
Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety-eight and No/100 Dollars ($244,798.00), in the
event Company does not fulfill its responsibilities under this agreement, or does not
relocate its operations of a manufacturing facility located in Community.
D. Ownership. The principal owner of Company is hereby restricted from
reducing her proportionate ownership in Company without prior approval from
Community during the contract period specified in the agreement between
Community and Department. Company affirms that the only principal owner of
Company at the time of execution of this Agreement is Ellen Welker.
E. Quarterly Visits. Community shall be required to make quarterly visits to
Company at the project site to assess/monitor Company's progress toward job
creation requirements of this agreement and requiring Company to provide to local
officials of Community at the time of on site visits information regarding job creation
and any other information deemed necessary by Community to administer the
agreement.
F. Records. Company shall be required to maintain records and provide reports
regarding the documentation of low and moderate income benefit and beneficiaries
by race, ethnicity, gender, and handicap status in the same manner and to the
same extent as required in the agreement between Department and Community.
Company shall submit to Community documentation (e.g., canceled checks,
receipts and invoices) of Company's injection of Five Hundred Sixty Thousand and
No/100 Dollars ($560,000.00), for verification of the injection of funds to be utilized
in conjunction with the TCF Project. Company shall provide to Community, upon
request, evidence that project funds, both private and contract, were expended as
specified in Exhibit A and in Exhibit B of this Agreement.
G. Easements. Company shall grant to Community by donation all necessary
easements pertaining to the infrastructure improvements under the agreement
between Department and Community. Any acquisition of real property shall be
subject to compliance with the Relocation Assistance and Real Property
Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (U.S.C. Sec 4601, et. seq.) and HUD implementing
regulations (49 CFR, Part 24).
H. Loan Agreement. Company shall submit to Community a copy of the executed
loan agreement of Three Hundred Twenty-five Thousand and No/100 Dollars
($325,000.00) from Texas Heritage Bank to be utilized in conjunction with this
project.
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
Community and Business Agreement
Page 4 of 8
dAcontract\advmeta11032096.fin
Initial as to approval: Advance Metal City
I. Financial Statements. Company shall submit to Community a copy of a
compiled Balance Sheet and Income Statement (due sixty (60) days after the fiscal
year end) on an annual basis.
J. Special Conditions. Any other relevant details or special conditions placed on
this agreement as outlined between Community and Department, to include all
program related compliance responsibilities, shall be incorporated into this
agreement as if they were written here. All such rights and remedies may be
exercised and enforced concurrently and whenever, and as often, as occasion of
their exercise arises.
4. MISCELLANEOUS:
A. Notice and Addresses.
All notices required hereunder must be given by certified mail or registered mail,
addressed to the proper party, at the following addresses:
to Community: City Manager
City of Georgetown
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409
to Company: Mrs. Ellen Welker
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
P.O. Box 961
Round Rock, Texas 78680
Either party may change the address to which notices are to be sent by giving the
other party notice of the new address in the manner provided in this section.
Notices shall be deemed to have been received three (3) days after deposit in the
mail.
For ease of administration of this contract, a main contact person has been
designated for the parties as follows:
for Community: Laurie Brewer, Senior Accountant
City of Georgetown
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
Community and Business Agreement
Page 5 of 8
d: \contractladvmeta 1\032096. fin
Initial as to approval: Advance Metal City
for Company:
B. Parties Bound.
Mrs. Ellen Welker
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
P.O. Box 961
Round Rock, Texas 78680
This agreement shall be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of, the parties to
this agreement and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, legal
representatives, successors, and assigns, when permitted by this agreement.
C. Prior Agreement Superseded. This agreement constitutes the sole and only
agreement of the parties to the agreement and supersedes any prior
understandings or written or oral agreements between the parties respecting the
subject matter of this agreement.
D. Amendment. No amendment, modification, or alteration of the terms of this
agreement shall be binding unless it is in writing, dated subsequent to the date of
this agreement, and duly executed by the parties to this agreement.
E. Taxes. Company hereby certifies that all taxes are current and that all future
taxes shall be paid when due during the contact period specified in the agreement
between Community and Department. Community may require at any time and
from time to.time, at its option, that Company provide timely proof of payment.
F. General Waiver by Company. Company hereby waives and releases
Community from all claims for loss or damage caused by any act or omission of
Community, its employees, or agents, except for willful misconduct and except as
otherwise provided by the Texas Uniform Commercial Code.
G. Violation of Law. Company shall not use the improvements under the
agreement between Department and Community in violation of any Federal, State
or local laws, regulations or ordinances. In addition, Company shall not use, or
permit the use of the infrastructure in any manner that results in waste of the
infrastructure or constitutes a nuisance, or violates any statute, ordinance, rule, or
regulation applicable to the infrastructure and shall not in any manner utilize the
infrastructure for any illegal purposes.
H. Definition of Terms. Unless the context otherwise indicates, all terms used
herein which are defined in the Texas Uniform Commercial Code shall have the
meaning herein stated.
I. Successors. This agreement shall inure to the benefit of and bind the heirs,
personal representatives, successors and assigns of the parties.
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
Community and Business Agreement
Page 6 of 8
dAcontract\advmeta1\032096.fin
Initial as to approval: Advance Metal City
J. Enforceability. If any provision of this agreement proves unlawful or
unenforceable by a court having jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter,
such provision shall be severable for the other provision of this agreement, and all
remaining provisions shall be fully enforceable.
K.. Governing Law and Place for Performance. This agreement shall be governed
by the laws of Texas, which state shall also be deemed the place where this
agreement was entered into and the place of performance and transaction of
business and parties. In the event of litigation pertaining to the agreement, the
exclusive forum, venue and place of jurisdiction shall also be the County of
Williamson and the State of Texas unless otherwise designated in writing by
Community.
L. Exhibits Incorporated. All exhibits to this agreement are incorporated by
reference as if completely set out in the agreement.
M. Signature Warranty Clause. The signatories to this agreement represent
and warrant that they have the authority to execute this agreement on behalf of
Advance Metal Systems, Inc. and the City of Georgetown, Texas, respectively.
IN WITNESS HEREOF,
on the day of
Texas.
COMPANY :
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
IN
Company and Community have executed this Agreement
, 1996, at Georgetown, Williamson County,
Ellen Welker, Vice -President
Approved as to form:
Kirby King, Attorney for
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
PRINCIPAL OF COMPANY:
Ellen Welker
Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
Community and Business Agreement
Page 7 of 8
d:\contract\advmetal\032096.fin
COMMUNITY :
The City of Georgetown, Texas
M
Leo Wood, Mayor
Attest:
Sandra D. Lee, City Secretary
Approved as to form:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
STATE OF TEXAS §
§ CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON §
This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the day of ,
1996, by Leo Wood, a person known to me, in his capacity as Mayor of the City of
Georgetown, Texas.
Notary Public, State of Texas
STATE OF TEXAS
§ CORPORATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON
This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the day of ,
1996, by Ellen Welker, a person known to me, in her capacity as Vice -President of
Advance Metal Systems, Inc., a Texas corporation.
Notary Public, State of Texas
STATE OF TEXAS §
§ PERSONAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON §
This instrument was acknowledged before me on this the day of ,
1996, by Ellen Welker, a person known to me, individually and as a principal of Advance
Metal Systems, Inc., a Texas corporation.
Notary Public, State of Texas
Exhibit A
HIRING PLAN
The Company will identify low and moderate income applicants. Company shall establish a
training program that serves to train and prepare all potential and current employees. All new
employees shall be provided an orientation program which shall consist of appropriate training
and operations and safety on the jobsite. Current employees shall participate in updated
education and safety and improved working techniques and regulations.
EXHIBIT B
PERFORMANCE STATEMENT
the City of Georgetown
Contractor shall carry out the following activities in the target area(s) identified on the
map in its 1995 Economic Development application:
Project Description
The purpose of this Economic Development project is to provide infrastructure
improvements in the form of road improvements in support of Advance Metal Systems, Inc.
(hereinafter referred to as the Company). The infrastructure improvements will allow the
Company to expand and relocate its operations in the City of Georgetown. The Company is
a steel building fabricator.
Financial Information
Contractor shall expend Two Hundred Twenty-two Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety-
eight and No/100 Dollars ($222,798) of contract funds to improve and widen approximately
seven hundred five linear feet (705 I.f.) with a thirty-one foot (31 ft.) side curb and gutter
section, approximately thirty-four thousand cubic foot (34,000 cu.ft.) concrete -lined detention
pond, with two ten foot (10 ft.) curb inlets, approximately one hundred linear feet (100 I.f.) of
R.C.P. drainage pipe. Construction will take place on West 21st Street, between Leander
Street and U.S. Highway 81.
Contractor shall ensure that the Company injects a minimum of Five Hundred Sixty
Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($560,000) of which a minimum of One Hundred Thirty-two
Thousand Three Hundred Forty-five and No/100 Dollars ($132,345) is from cash equity, One
Hundred Two Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-five ($102,655) is from net equity in equipment,
and the remaining funds from a loan from Texas Heritage Bank. Funds shall be utilized for
the purchase and construction of building improvements, equipment equity and payroll.
Contractor shall comply with all acquisition of needed real property, easements and/or rights -
of -way in compliance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition
Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 4601 et.seq.) and HUD implementing regulations (49
CFR Part 24).
Contractor shall provide to Commerce, upon request, evidence that project funds, both
private and contract, were expended as specified in this EXHIBIT A and in EXHIBIT B of this
contract.
Engineering
Contractor shall expend Twenty-two Thousand and No/100 Dollars ($22.000) of
contract funds to pay for eligible project -related engineering services, including preliminary and
final design plans and specifications, interim and final inspections.
Administration
Contractor shall expend Twenty-four Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-two and 44/100
Dollars ($24,752.44) of contract funds to carry out project administration activities, including
the cost associated with the required program fiscal and compliance audit.
Project Outcomes
As a result of this project, Contractor shall ensure that the Company creates fourteen
(14) full-time equivalent permanent jobs of which eight (8) shall be held by low and moderate
income persons prior to the expiration date of this contract. In the event more than fourteen
(14) permanent jobs are created, Contractor shall ensure that at least fifty-one percent (51 %)
of all jobs created, during the contract period, are held by low and moderate income persons.
Exhibit C
Real Property
Tract No. 1 - Parcels, 23, 24, 25 and 26, Vol. Sec. T-6-A, Map S-4-B
Beginning at the intersection of the center line of the Missouri -Kansas -Texas Railroad
Comany's I.C.C. Track No. 11 (old I&GS interchange track) with the West line of Austin
Avenue (formerly Brushy Street, 80' wide) in the City of Georgetown;
Thence northerly along the West line of Austin Avenue to a point that is distant 25 feet
measured northerly at right angles from the center line of said I.C.C. Tract No. 11;
Thence westerly parallel with and 25 feet northerly from the center line of said I.C.C.
track a distance of 874 feet, more or less, to a point of curve;
Thence by arc of curve to the right, northwesterly, parallel with and 25 feet northerly
from the center line of said track, said curve having a radius of 477.5 feet a distance of 583
feet to a point of tangent;
Thence continuing in a northwesterly direction parallel with and 25 feet westerly from
the center line of said track a distance of 493 feet to a point of curve;
Thence by arc of survey to the right, northerly, parallel with and 25 feet easterly from
the center line of said track, said curve having a radius of 562 feet a distance of 186 feet to a
point of tangent;
Thence northerly parallel with and 25 feet easterly from the center line of said track a
distance of 226 feet, more or less, to a point in the southerly line of 18th Street;
Thence westerly along the South line of 18th Street a distance of 160 feet, more or
less, to the easterly line of Leander Street,
Thence southerly along the Easterly line of Leander Street a distance of 1210 feet to
an angle point;
Thence deflecting an angle of 70 degrees, more or less, to the left, easterly, to a point
that is distant 25 feet, measured southerly, at right angles from the center line of said track;
Thence easterly parallel with and 25 feet southerly from the center line of said track
and being on a curve to the left, having a radius of 527.5 feet, a distance of 160 feet . more or
less, to an angle point;
Thence deflecting an angle of 58 degrees, more or less, to the right, southerly. tangent
to last -described curve to a point I the South Corporate City Limits line of the City of
Georgetown,
Thence easterly along said South Corporate Limits line to the West line of Austin
Avenue;
Thence northerly along the West line of Austin Avenue to the point of beginning.
Containing an area of 3.75 acres, more or less.
Tract No. 2
0.71 of an acre of land, more or less, out of the C. STUBBLEFIELD SURVEY, Abstract No.
558, and being a part of Outlots 4, 5, and 6, Division "A", City of Georgetown, in Williamson
County, Texas, and being more fully described by metes and bounds below:
Field notes for a tract of 0.71 acre of land situated in the City of Georgetown,
Williamson County, Texas, being that tract of land described in a deed from Mallie C.
Burnham to W. L. Hunt, et ex. dated February 9, 1957 and recorded in Volume 416, Page 282
of the Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas.
Beginning at a 4" old cedar fence corner post, beside which is set an iron stake, at the
southeast fence corner of the above described Hunt tract; said point being 24.7 ft. northerly of
the center of the tracks of the old M. K. & T. Railroad bed, said railroad running north of West
21 st Street of Georgetown; for the POINT OF BEGINNING and Southeast corner hereof.
Thence proceeding along the south line of said Hunt tract, and along a chain link
fence. N88039'W 156.11 ft. to a 4" iron pipe fence corner post at the southwest corner of said
Hunt tract; said point tying 25.3 ft. northerly of said railroad track center; for the Southwest
corner thereof.
Thence proceeding along the west line of said Hunt tract, and along an old wire fence
line. N 19°30'W 209.60 ft. to an old 8" cedar corner post, beside which is set an iron stake;
for the Northwest corner thereof.
Thence proceeding along the north line of said Hunt tract, and along an old wire fence
line, S89043'E 157.02 ft. to an old 8" cedar corner post, beside which is set an iron stake; for
the Northeast corner thereof.
Thence proceeding along the east line of said Hunt tract, and along an old wire fence
line. S19°00'E 212.01 ft. to the POINT OF BEGINNING, containing 0.71 acre of land.
Tract No. 3
All of the BURNHAM ADDITION, to the City of Georgetown, Williamson County, Texas,
according to the map or plat thereof recorded in Cabinet A, Slides 299-300, SAVE AND
EXCEPT Lots 19 and 20 of Burnham Addition.
Council Meeting Date: July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Council approval of Change Order #6 to the contract between
the City of Georgetown and Griffin -Austin Company, Inc., in the
amount of $45,970.00.
ITEM SUMMARY:
In conjunction with the construction currently being conducted
by Griffin -Austin Company, water system improvements are required
to provide water services along Booty's Crossing Road. The water
line will be an 8-inch water line, beginning at Oak Ridge Circle,
heading eastward toward Williams Drive. Total linear feet
installed will be 1,150. The total dollar amount of this change
order is $45,970.00. This line will provide much needed public
water system improvements and fire protection services in the area.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS•
NONE
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Funds in the amount of $45,970.00 are to be paid from Account
Number 661-101-6110-00.
COMMENTS
NONE
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter from Camp, Dresser & McKee
2. Change Order Number 6 to the contract between the City of
Georgetown and Griffin -Austin Company, Inc.
S
1a
Jim Briggs, Director
Community Owned Utilities
CDMCamp Dresser &McKee Inc.
environmental 8911 Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 4240
services Austin, Texas 78759-7267
Tel: 512 345-6651 Fax: 512 345-1483
July 10,1996
Mr. Jim Briggs
Director
Community Owned Utilities
City of Georgetown
1101 N. College
Georgetown, TX 78626
RE: City of Georgetown
Berry Creek Water Main
Change Order No. 6
Dear Mr. Briggs
Transmitted with this letter are three copies of Change Order No. 6 to the Berry
Creek Water Main Contract with Griffin -Austin Company, Inc. Change Order No. 6
is for the installation of 1,150 L.F. of 8-inch water line along Booty's Crossing Road
starting at Oak Ridge Circle and heading eastward towards Williams Drive. The
total amount of Change Order No. 6 is $45,970. Through Change Order No. 6, the
total change order amount for this contract is $52,121.20, which is below the 25
percent limit for contracts.
If you have any questions concerning Change Order No. 6, or need additional
information, please call.
Sincerely,
z
DRESSER & MCK
zuINC.
Allen D. Woelke, P.E.
Principal Engineer
A2498CO6.LTR
PROJECT: City of Georgetown, Texas CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 6
Berry Creek Water Main
Project No. 6000
TO: Griffin -Austin Company, Inc. INITIATION DATE:
P.O. Box 9
Manchaca, TX 78652 CONTRACT DATE:
06/18/96
02/26/96
You are directed to make the following changes in this Contract:
1. Install 1,150 L.F. of 8-inch PVC potable water line along the south side of Booty's
Crossing Road starting at an existing 6-inch potable water line in Oak Ridge
Circle. The specific quantities for this addition are itemized below:
a. Insurance, bonds and move -in related expenses
Add
$2,200.00
b. Right-of-way preparation
Add
1,400.00
c. Traffic Safety System
Add
1,500.00
d. 1,150 L.F. of 8-inch PVC
Add
28,750.00
e. One connection to an existing line
Add
2,000.00
f. One 8-inch gate valve
Add
600.00
g. 30 sq. ft. asphalt repair
Add
300.00
h. Furnish, install and maintain sedimentation and erosion control devices
Add
400.00
i. Three fire hydrants
Add
5,250.00
j. Two single services
Add
3,570.00
Change Order No. 6 Total
Add
$459970.00
Not valid until signed by both the Owner and Engineer.
Signature of the Contractor indicates his agreement herewith, including any adjustment in the Contract
Sum.
The original Contract Sum was ...................................................
......................... $228,447.00
Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ..................................... $6,151.20
The Contract Sum prior to this Change Order was ...................................... $234,598.20
The Contract Sum will be increased by this Change Order ..:.............................. $45,970.00
The new Contract Sum including this Change Order will be ............................... $280,568.20
The Contract Time will be increased by ................................................ 120 days
AUTHORIZED:
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
8911 Capital of TX Hwy., Suite 4240
Austin, TX 78759
1 1.1 Z,
By:
Date:
___7/_/_0/6
A2498AW.CO7
Griffin -Austin Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 9
Manchaca, TX 78652
By:
Date: - -
City of Georgetown
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, TX 78627
By: -
Date:
Council Meeting Date: July 23, 1996
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
Item No. "r
SUBJECT:
Council award of the bid, from Odell Geer Construction
Company, of Belton, Texas, to rehabilitate 7th and 8th Streets, in
the amount of $93,605.00.
ITEM SU MARY :
A Council priority to maintain and enhance the City's
transportation system is being aggressively accomplished. One of
the projects being planned, is the rehabilitation of 7th and 8th
Streets in downtown Georgetown. Bids were received and opened on
July 11, 1996. Roming-Parker, the engineer responsible to handle
this project, confirmed that the low bid, received from Odell Geer
Construction Company, Inc. was the low bid and did conform to the
bid specifications. Last year bids were received which exceeded
the budgeted amounts available, therefore construction was delayed.
The bids from last year were approximately $135,000.00.
Therefore, staff recommends Council award of the bid for the 7th
and 8th Street Rehabilitation project to Odell Geer, in the amount
of $93, 605.00
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS•
NONE
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Funds in the amount of $100,350.00 are available to fund this
project as follows.
$851350.00 Account
$15,000.00 Account
COMMENTS:
NONE
#110-101-6004-00
#641-101-6110-00
ATTACHMENTS
Tabulation from Roming-Parker Associates
S
1,?A
Jim Briggs, Director
Community Owned Utilities
ROnIING - PARKER ASSOCIATES, L.L.P.
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
3513 Southwest H.K. Dodgen Loop, Suite 103
RPTernple, Texas 76502 (817) 773-3731
W. CLAY ROMING, P.E.
WM. MACK PARKER, P.E.
RICK N. KASBERG, P.E.
July 18, 1996
Mr. Don M. Rundell, P.E.
Manager, Systems Engineering
Community Owned Utilities
City of Georgetown
1101 N. College - P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627-0409
Re: City of Georgetown
Downtown Street Renovations
7th Street and 8th Street
Georgetown, Texas
Dear Mr. Rundell:
Fax (817) 773-6667
JAMES E. LAUGHLIN, P.E.
Staff Consultant
Sealed Bids were received until 2:00 p.m. local time on July 11, 1996 at the office of
Community Owned Utilities for the above referenced project. The Bids were opened publicly
and read aloud. The tabulation of those bids are enclosed.
The low, successful bidder for the project was Odell Geer Construction Company, Inc. of
Belton, Texas in the amount of $93,605.00. Our opinion of probable cost for the project was
$1009000.00.
We have worked with Odell Geer on many similar projects.
personnel, management and experience to complete the 7th
successfully. We hereby recommend award of the contract t
Company, Inc.
Sincerely,
Wm. Mack Parker, P.E.
WMP/tmm
Enclosure
94-124-40
o
They have the equipment,
and 8th Streets project
Odell Geer Construction
Item
No.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
R
Bid Data
Bonds, Mobilization & Insurance
Barricading, Lighting & Signing
Traffic Plan, Sequence Schedule & Pedestrain Plan
Unclassified Excavation
Subgrade Preparation
71h" depth Black Base
1 1h" depth HMAC T "D"
6" Concrete Driveway Approach
Concrete Paver Foundation & Border
Concrete Pavers Frunished & Installed
36" x 30" Concrete Drainage Box
HMAC Type "D" Patch Material
Removal & Replacement of Handicapped Ramp
5" Concrete Pad
Silt Fence Installation, Maintenance & Removal
4" Width White Pavement Striping for Parking Areas
Double 4" Width Yellow Street Center Line Stripping
Handicapped Symbol Painted Yellow
TOTAL BID AMOUNT
BID TABULATION
DOWNTOWN STREET RENOVATION OF
7th AND &h Street
JULY 11, 1996 - 2:00 P.M.
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
Estimated
tity Unit
100 % LS
100 % LS
100 % LS
1,000 CY
3,300 SY
3,240 SY
3,240 SY
30 SY
60 SY
52 SY
2 EA
4 TN
10 SY
75 SY
150 LF
1,800 LF
5501 LF
81 EA
Odell Geer Const. Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 1089
Belton Texas 76513
Unit Price
Extended Prue
$14,750.00
$14,750.00
$1,300.00
$1,300.00
$3,200.00
$3,200.00
$6.25
$1.00
$12.40
$6,250.00
$3,300.00
$40,176.00
$3.10
$10,044.00
$47.00
$1, 410.00
$35.00
$70.00
$400.00
$65.00
$64.50
$43.00
$2.50
$0.35
$2.00
$50.00
$2,100.00
$3,640.00
$800.00
$260.00
$645.00
$3,225.00
$375.00
$630.00
$1,100.00
$400.00
$93,605.00
Did Bidder Acknowledge Addendum No. 1 ? Yes
Did Bidder Provide Bid Security? _ Yes
I hereby certify that this is a correct and true tabulation of all bids received.
� psi
Wm. Mack Parker, P.E. Date w�' •o• PARKE
Rowing -Parker Associates, L.L.P. 40�O Q�44M
Consulting Engineers ��•p4'aIVAL
ia T�'�► a�+s
Bidders
Bay Maintenance Co., Inc.
Horseshoe Bay Box 8859
Horseshoe Ba Texas 78657
Unit Prue
Extended Price
$9,000.00
$9,000.00
$4,500.00
$4,500.00
$1,000.00
$1,000.00
$6.50
$6,500.00
$1.75
$5,775.00
$14.00
$45,360.00
$3.10
$10,044.00
$30.00
$45.00
$900.00
$2,700.00
$55.00
$2,860.00
$1,100.00
$2,200.00
$100.00
$400.00
$50.00
$500.00
$35.00
$2,625.00
$2.50
$375.00
$0.30
$540.00
$2.30
$1,265.00
$50.00
$400.00
$96,944.00
Yes
Yes
JKL, Inc.
14701 IH 35, Bldg. 2
Buda Texas 78610
Unit Prue
Extended Price
$10,000.00
$10,000.00
$3,450.00
$690.00
$11,000.00
$5,280.00
$3,450.00
$690.00
$11.00
$1.60
$12.00
$38,880.00
$9,720.00
$3,810.00
$3.00
$127.00
$18.40
$1,104.00
$2,194.00
$42.00
$1,800.00
$3,600.00
* $1,600.00
$2,500.00
$400.00
$250.00
$100.00
$1.70
$7,500.00
$255.00
$0.30
$540.00
$2.301 $1,265.00
$46.001 $368.00
** $103.746.00
Yes
Yes
Extension Total Error (Corrected as Shown)
Total Bid Amount Error (Corrected as Shown)
Page 1 of 3
BID TABULATION
DOWNTOWN STREET RENOVATION OF
7th AND 8th Street
JULY 11, 1996 - 2:00 P.M.
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
(Continued)
Bid Data
Bidders
Item
No.
Description
Estunaled
t'
Unit
Smith Contracting Company
15308 Ginger Street
Austin Texas 78728
Tempk Asphalt Recyclers, Inc.
P.O. Box 851
Tem k Texas 76503
Unit Prue
$5,000.00
$7,500.00
Extended Price
$5,000.00
Unit Price
$15,000.00
Extended Price
A
B
Bonds, Mobilization & Insurance
Barricading, Lighting & Signing
100%
100%
LS
LS
$15,000.00
C
Traffic Plan, Sequence Schedule & Pedestrain Plan
100 %
LS
$7,500.00
$4,500.00
$4,500.00
$1,000.00
$35.00
$1.00
$1,000.00
$35,000.00
$3,300.00
$1,000.00
$25.40
$2.00
D
Unclassified Excavation
1,000
CY
$1,000.00
$�,400•00
E
Subgrade ration
3,300
SY
F
7'fi" d Black Base
3,240
SY
$6,600.00
$13.00
$42,120.00
$15.00
G
I1h- depth HMAC T "D"
3,240
SY
$48,600.00
H
6" Concrete DrivewayApproach
30
SY
$3.20
$50.00
$60.00
$10,368.00
$1,500.00
$3,600.00
$4.00
$45.00
$35.00
$12,960.00
$1,350.00
1
Concrete Paver Foundation & Border
60
SY
J
Concrete Pavers Frunished &Installed
52
SY
$2,100.00
K
36" x 30" Concrete Drainage Box
2
EA
$66.00
$3,432.00
$40.00
$2,080.00
$3,000.00
L
HMAC Type "D" Patch Material
4
TN
$1,250.00
$2,500.00
$1,500.00
M
Removal & Replacement of HandicappedRam
10
SY
$90.00
$360.00
$.00
$1,000.00
5750.00
$3,375.00
N
5" Concrete Pad
75
SY
$60.00
$600.00
$7575.00
$44.00
$3,300.00
S45.00
O
Silt Fence Installation, Maintenance & Removal
150
LF
P
4" Width White Pavement Striping for Parkin Areas
1,800
LF
$2.00
$300.00
$3.00
$450.00
$0.30
$540.00
$0.50
$�•�
Q
Double 4" Width Yellow Street Center Line Stripping
550
LF
$2.40
$1,320.00
$2.50
$1,375.00
R
HandicappedSymbol Painted Yellow
8
EA
TOTAL BID AMOUNT
$48.00
$384.00
$150.00
$1,200.00
$122124.00
$131, 640.00
Did Bidder Acknowledge Addendum No. 1 ?
Did Bidder Provide Bid Security?
Yes
Yes
Austin Bridge do Road
8906 Wall Street, Suite 403
Austin Texas 78754
Unit Price
Extended Price
$3,900.00
$3,900.00
$1,200.00
$1,200.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
S36.00
$36,000.00
S 1.80
$5,940.00
$12.60
$40,824.00
$3.40
$11,016.00
S93.00
$2,790.00
S 137.00
$8,220.00
$85.00
$4,420.00
S 1,800.00
$3,600.00
$250.00
$1,000.00
$421.00
$4,210.00
S76.00
S5,700.00
$4.50
$675.00
$0.25
$450.00
$2.00
$1,100.00
$40.00
$320.00
$135,365.00
Yes
Yes
Page 2 of 3
Item
No.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
R
Bud Data
Bonds, Mobilization & Insurance
Barricading, Lighting & Signing
Traffic Plan, Sequence Schedule & Pedestrain Plan
Unclassified Excavation
Subgrade Preparation
7'fi" depth Black Base
1'h" depth HMAC T "D"
6" Concrete Driveway Approach
Concrete Paver Foundation & Border
Concrete Pavers Frunished & Installed
36" x 30" Concrete Drainage Box
HMAC Type "D" Patch Material
Removal & Replacement of Handicapped Ramp
5" Concrete Pad
Silt Fence Installation, Maintenance & Removal
4" Width White Pavement Striping for Parking Areas
Double 4" Width Yellow Street Center Line Stripping
Handicapped Symbol Painted Yellow
TOTAL BID AMOUNT
Did Bidder Acknowledge Addendum No. 1 ?
Did Bidder Provide Bid Securitv?
BID TABULATION
DOWNTOWN STREET RENOVATION OF
7th AND &h Street
JULY 11, 1996 - 2:00 P.M.
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS
(Continued)
Estimated
t Unit
100 % LS
100 % LS
100 % LS
1,000 CY
3,300 SY
3,240 SY
3,240 SY
30 SY
60 SY
52 SY
2 EA
4 TN
10 SY
75 SY
150 LF
1,800 LF
5501 LF
81 EA
Edward R. Coleman Const.
P.O. Box 50324
Austin Texas 78763
Unit Price
Extended Price
$19,450.00
$19,450.00
$5,100.00
$5,100.00
$4,700.00
$4,700.00
$25.00
$25,000.00
$2.50
$8,250.00
$14.00
$45,360.00
$3.50
$11,340.00
$45.00
$1,350.00
$43.00
$2,580.00
$53.00
$2,756.00
$1,500.00
$3,000.00
$150.00
$600.00
$65.00
$650.00
$35.00
$2,625.00
$10.00
$1,500.00
$0.27
$486.00
$2.10
$1,155.00
$42.001
$336.00
*** $136.238.00
Yes
Yes
Bidders
Reddico con stn ction Co.
2505 S. Highway 183
Leander Texas 78641
Unit Price
Extended Prue
$5,600.00
$5,600.00
$2,576.00
$2,576.00
$2,576.00
$2,576.00
$19.00
$19,000.00
$1.40
$4,620.00
$24.10
$78,084.00
$3.35
$10,854.00
$35.00
$1,050.00
$32.50
$1,950.00
$53.50
$2,782.00
$700.00
$1,400.00
$46.00
$194.00
$60.00
$600.00
$33.00
$2,475.00
$2.25
$337.50
$0.30
$540.00
$2.25
$1,237.50
$50.001
$400.00
$136,266.00
Yes
Yes
Burris Construction, Inc.
P.O. Box 331
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Unit Prue
Extended Price
$20,000.00
$20,000.00
$10,000.00
$10,000.00
$4,000.00
$4,000.00
$40•00
$40,000.00
$4•00
$13,200.00
$15.00
$48,600.00
$3.30
$10.692.00
$30.00
$900.00
$50.00
$3,000.00
$50.00
$2,600.00
$3,000.00
$6,000.00
$200.00
$800.00
$100.00
$1,000.00
$30.00
$2,250.00
$5.00
$750.00
$1.00
$1,800.00
$2.00
$1,100.00
$100.00
$800.00
$167,492.00
Yes
Yes
*** Total Bid Amount Error (Corrected as Shown)
Page 3 of 3
Council Meeting Date: July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT:
Approval of an amendment to the City's Wholesale Power
Agreement with the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA).
ITEM SUMMARY:
. The City has an exclusive contract with the LCRA, dating back
to 1974, to buy wholesale power from the LCRA. Each year, this
contract requires us to update data on our electrical consumption
and projected load. The LCRA uses this information for their Five
Year Plan.
These figures are 'based upon our levels of prior use of
electricity and anticipated future consumption. We anticipate
aggressive growth in electric consumption this year, due to the
rapid rate of development in the service area. Therefore, staff
recommends amending the contract to compensate for that growth.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS•
NONE
FINANCIAL IMPACT•
No direct impact
COMMENTS:
NONE
ATTACHMENTS
1. LCRA Cover Letter and Exhibit "'A"
Subrtitt'dd Bv: _
Jim Briggs, Director
Community Owned Utilities
rAmn'A
Lk," .
7HE POWER TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
July 2, 1996
Bob Hart
City Manager
City of Georgetown
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, TX 78627-0409
Dear Bob:
RECEIVED
J U L 9 1996
Enclosed for your consideration and approval are two revised copies of the Exhibit "A"
in accordance with the Wholesale Power Agreement covering your power and energy
requirements. Please review and, if necessary, revise the estimates. These estimates
assist LCRA in planning to meet your needs at each of your points of delivery.
The revised Exhibit "A" should be executed by your authorized officials in the same
manner as the Agreement. Please attach a copy of a resolution from your council or
board authorizing the execution. Return both copies of the executed Exhibit "A" to the
attention of Tom Bao by July 31, 1996. A self-addressed stamped envelope is included
for your convenience. After execution by LCRA, a fully executed copy will be returned
for your records.
Should you have any questions or require additional copies of the Exhibit "A", please
contact Tom Bao at 1-800-776-5272, ext. 7696.
Sincerely,
Stuart Nelson, Manager
Transmission Planning and Implementation
Enclosures
The mission of the Lower Colorado RiverAuthority (LCRA) is to provide reliable, low-cost utility and public sen)ices in partnership with our customers and communities and
to use our leadership role and environmental authority to ensure the protection and constructive use of the area's natural resources. The LCRA is a Texas conservation and
reclamation district operating with no taxing authority.
P.O. BOX 220 A(ISTM. TX 78767-0??1 (5]?) 473,1?00 (,l�) 473.310,q FAN•
Effective:
June
1, 1996 Revised Sheet
No. 1 of
4
EXHIBIT A
OF WHOLESALE
POWER AGREEMENT DATE
JUNE 25, 1974
Revisions of Sheet 1
and Total Maximum Demand Stated in Paragraph 1
of Sheet
2
POINTS OF DELIVERY
to
City of Georgetown
Distributor
Contract
Load
(KW, NCP)
Estimated Contract
Load
Year Ending
(KW, NCP)
Years
Ending June
25
No.
Location
Phase
Season 6/25/97
1998
1999
2000
2001
1
Georgetown
3
Sum 23490
24170
23030
23950
24630
Win 16420
17090
16550
17030
17240
2
Gabriel
3
Sum 24290
27620
24450
25100
25820
Win 18100
7200
17100
17560
18100
3
Glasscock
3
Sum 0
0
8000
11800
14000
Win 0
0
6400
9440
11200
4
Chief Brady
3
Sum 7080
7990
8350
9600
9900
Win 5000
5600
5850
6720
6930
Summer Totals:
Winter totals:
Paragraph 1, Page 2 of Exhibit A
LOWER COLORADO RIVER AUTHORITY
ATTEST: BY:
General Manager
DATE:
54860 59780 63830 70450 74350
39520 29890 45900 50750 53470
City of Georgetown
ATTEST: BY:
DATE:
Page 1 of 1
Council meeting July 23, 1996
Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Second Reading of an ordinance Rezoning a 2.18 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-2 from RP, Residential Planned to C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted, located
southwest of the intersection of Del Webb and Sun City Boulevards.
ITEM SUMMARY: The subject parcel of land is presently zoned RP, Residential Planned, which
restricts its use to single family residential purposes and such other uses that are approved by the
Development Agreement and the approved plat for this area.
The request is for a rezoning to C-2A - Restricted for the purpose of operating a golf cart sales
and service facility on Tract Z-2 only. The request is to allow all uses permitted in the C-1, Local
Commercial zoning district plus golf cart sales and service, which is not permitted in the C-1 district.
Therefore, the change to C-2A - Restricted is requested.
When the applicant initially contacted the City staff regarding this proposed rezoning he was
advised that a rezoning to C-2A that would allow all C-2A uses would likely receive a recommendation
for denial from the staff. Staff's reasons for such a denial were attributed to the intensity of uses
permitted in the C-2A district. For example, wholesale bakeries, bottling establishments and newspaper
publishing are all permitted uses in the C-2A district. Since the applicant's only interest was in retail
sales and service of golf carts, he requested that the restriction be placed on the rezoning.
There is a C-2B zoning district in the vicinity. The Village Center tract, which is east of the
subject site, was assigned a C-2B classification due to the height of the main building. The building's
height exceeds the 45 foot limit for the C-1 and C-2A zoning districts. There is no height restriction
on the C-2B district at that location. All of the uses proposed for the Village Center are permitted
within the C-2B district.
The City has assigned restricted zoning classifications in other cases. The Rivery and the First
Madison property, both fronting on IH35, south of the Williams Drive interchange, are C-2A restricted.
The restriction in this case is to allow all uses permitted in the C-2A district except those permitted in
the "R" districts.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: At its May 7, 1996, meeting the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to
recommend approval of the rezoning of a 2.18 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-2 from
RP, Residential Planned to C-2A - Restricted, Commercial First Height.
At its May 28, 1996, meeting the City Council approved this ordinance on first reading.
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 ordinance
Submitted By:
Edward J. ry, AICP - Director
Division o Development Services
4JJ,�__ f
Hildy L. Ringma, AICP
Chief Planner
REZONING OF A 2.18 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-2, FROM RP -
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED TO C-2A, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT -
RESTRICTED, LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF DEL WEBB
BOULEVARD AND SUN CITY BOULEVARD.
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Mr. Robert Eck II, P.E.
Director, Land Development
Del Webb Development Company
203 South IH-35, Suite 100
Georgetown, Texas 78628
931-6900 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: Rezoning of a 2.18 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-2 as
recorded in Volume 2679, Page 744 of the Official Deed
Records of Williamson County, Texas from RP, Residential
Planned to C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted.
FACTS:
Existing Zoning: RP, Residential Planned (Rezoning to C-1, Local Commercial
approved for First Reading; Rezoning to C-2A, Commercial
First Height - Restricted. also being considered at this time.)
Proposed Use: Two (2) commercial tracts.
Notification: The notification requirements have been completed.
ANALYSIS: The subject parcel of land is presently zoned RP, Residential
Rezone - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z-2 July 16, 1996
RZ-96-06 File: SCG_IA_R.REZ Page 1
CM/CS
Rezone - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z-2
RZ-96-06 File: SCG_lA_R.REZ
CM/CS
Planned, which restricts its use to single family residential
purposes and such other uses that are approved by the
Development Agreement and the approved plat for this area.
The request is for a rezoning to C-2A - Restricted for the
purpose of operating a golf cart sales and service facility on
Tract Z-2 only. SEE EXHIBIT A The request is to allow all
uses permitted in the C-1, Local Commercial zoning district plus
golf cart sales and service, which is not permitted in the C-1
district. Therefore, the change to C-2A - Restricted is
requested.
When the applicant initially contacted the City staff regarding
this proposed rezoning he was advised that a rezoning to C-2A
that would allow all C-2A uses would likely receive a
recommendation for denial from the staff. Staff's reasons for
such a denial were attributed to the intensity of uses permitted in
the C-2A district. For example, wholesale bakeries, bottling
establishments and newspaper publishing are all permitted uses
in the C-2A district. Since the applicant's only interest was in
retail sales and service of golf carts, he requested that the
restriction be placed on the rezoning.
There is a C-213 zoning district in the vicinity. The village
center tract, which is east of the subject site, Del Webb
Boulevard, was assigned a C-2B classification due to the height
of the main building. The building's height exceeds the 45 foot
limit for the C-1 and C-2A zoning districts. There is no height
restriction on the C-2B district at that location. All of the uses
proposed for the village center are permitted within the C-2B
district.
The City has assigned restricted zoning classifications in other
cases. The Rivery and the Tri-Tract property, both fronting on
IH35, south of the Williams Drive interchange, are C-2A
restricted. The restriction in this case is to allow all uses
permitted in the C-2A district except residential. The reason for
that restriction is to ensure that high density development occurs
at those locations.
July 16, 1996
Page 2
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the rezoning of a 2.18 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-2 from RP, Residential Planned to C-2A - Restricted,
Commercial First Height.
P & Z ACTION: At its May 7, 1996, meeting the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the rezoning of
a 2.18 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-2 from RP, Residential
Planned to C-2A - Restricted, Commercial First Height.
Rezone - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z-2
RZ-96-06 File: SCG_lA_R.REZ
CM/CS
July 16, 1996
Page 3
EXHIBIT' A'
REZONING TRACT Z-2
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE -
SUN C IT Y BOUL EV
QRD
(/20, R. O. We
X . 3. 1 17. 168. 08
Y= 10. 233. 687. 1 AT
CIQ
25' 8. 1
Y GEORGE TOWN c
)RHOOD ONE-8
r
VERB TEXAS
PARTNERSHIP
9 558175 - 9558177
.C.O.R.
Y= 3, 11T. 313.24
Y= :0. 233, 400. 1 1
B� L, �,E`) �
I T Y
CII
P. o. B. s �� N
0/
R � .
\
x= 3. ( 17. 25 1. 58 12
Y: 10. 233. 714. 93
x_ 3. 1 1 T. 507. 33
Y= 0. Z33. 812. 16
,= C
a
P. U. E. 0
25-B.L. n
1
ACCESSEs►1.
co
N TRACT " Z- I" m
/`V6
;_
COMMERCIAL
C
m
o
d (ZONED Cl)
m
_
r
32.486 SF
r
°
a
C- 1
10• e. L.
---�-
10 B.lj__�] 166. 8f
z N 6 8 - 2 5-+ 6.
-�
N2 10B_ L.
10. 8. l .
CTl
'
TRACT Z-2'
COMMERCIAL PROPOSED
t ZONED Cl) C-2A, RESTRICTEM 4
v�
94, 778 SF
v
20
20' 8.
S 72- 7-30 W 378. 74 l_
( N SEE DETAIL T RAC T,4
Q�C1
1 f I!I
Y= 3. 117.673.��
Y= 10. 233. 5 16. "
RP \ I
V ERBEN A DR / V E \
f---- -7 \
SUN C I T r GEORGE TOWN \
vE IGNBORHOOD EIGHT B \ \�
' ; I TRACT\
j E„
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 2.18 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-2, AS RECORDED IN VOLUME
2679, PAGE 744 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON
COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM THE RP -RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DISTRICT
TO C-2A, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT- RESTRICTED 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 2.18 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-2 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 1,
Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z-2 Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page I of 3
WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on May 7,
1996, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property
from the RP, Residential Planned district zoning classification to C-2A, Commercial First Height
- Restricted district zoning classification to allow all uses in the C-1, Local Commerical zoning
district and golf cart sales and service, 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-2A, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT - RESTRICTED district to allow
all uses in the C-1, Local Commerical zoning district and golf cart sales and service, 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 1,
Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z-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 day of , 1996.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of . 1996.
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One -A, Tract Z-2 Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 3 of 3
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
EXHIBIT A'
REZONING TRACT Z-2
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1. NEIGHBORHOOD ONE
SL/N CITY BO(/L [-VAD U �-
20R0 C1TY B � )
"R.O.W.) P.0.e. SHIN
X= 3, 1 1 T. Z5 1. 58 L
K= 3, 1 17. 168. 08 Y= 10. 233. T 14. 93
Y= 10. 233. 687. IT
X= 3. 1 1 7, 507. 35
i
Y: :O. 233. 812. 16
fi_ i 1—'
c'
C 14 O
25' 8. [ . P, U.. E.
25' B• t _
accFss EswT.
,,, w
N TRACT Z - I"
/�/�
Y GL- ORGE TOWN ca
COMMERCIAL
_
?RHOOD ONE-8 o C
m
( ZONED CI)
m
_
32,486 SF
r r
a
C- 1 .
1 L X 4S
VEBBT
' PARTNERSHIP
IC B.0 166. Bf
_ u N 6 - 6. —�
1
10
10 B. i . �
9558175-9558177 6
QD
.C.O.R. TRACT Z- 2'+'
C�
y COMMERC I AL PROPOSED`,-
-' (ZONED C-2A, RESTRICTEM
CI) W
r^
N i '
Y= 3, 117,313.24 94, 778 SF o
Y= :0.233.400. 11
L1J
20 M. w.
20'
20'8.t,
(—
S 72_ 7-30 w 378. 74 I-
1 � •III
<
i � .
Q SEE DETAIL l T,R!-� C T A°
=1
O
R Pi
Y= 3, 117.673.E,
Y= 10. 233. 516-
V ERBEN,4 � \
DR VL /
SUN C I T GEORGE TOWN
i
wF- i
GHBORH000 E 1 GHT B \ \�
TRACT \
I
Council meeting _ July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Second reading 'of an ordinance Rezoning a 5.09 acre tract in the W. G. Wilkinson
Survey, to be known as the Resubdivision of a Planned Unit Development of Sun City
Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tract A-4 from C-1, Local Commercial to C-2A,
Commercial First Height - Restricted, located northwest of the intersection of RM2338 and Del
Webb Boulevard.
ITEM SUMMARY: The request is for a rezoning to C-2A - Restricted for the purpose of
operating a golf cart sales and service facility on Tract A-4 only to allow all uses permitted in
the C-1, Local Commercial zoning district plus golf cart sales and service.
When the applicant initially contacted the City staff regarding this proposed rezoning he
was advised that a rezoning to C-2A that would allow all C-2A uses would likely receive a
recommendation for denial from the staff based on the intensity of uses permitted in the C-2A
district. For example, wholesale bakeries, bottling establishments and newspaper publishing are
all permitted uses in the C-2A district. Since the applicant's only interest was in retail sales and
service of golf carts, he requested that the restriction be placed on the rezoning.
There is no other C-2A zoning district in the vicinity. The City Council has indicated in
the past that the C-2A district is inappropriate at the entrances to the City, because of their
concern about the appearance usually associated with quasi -industrial and warehousing businesses.
The C-2A district permits several of these uses. The subject request to rezone this lot to C-2A
Restricted more closely resembles the C-1 district rather than the C-2A district since the only C-
2A type use that will be permitted will be golf cart sales and service.
The City has assigned restricted zoning classifications in other cases. The Rivery and the
Tri-Tract property, both fronting on IH35, south of the Williams Drive interchange, are C-2A
Restricted. The restriction in those cases is to allow all uses permitted in the C-2A district
except residential. The reason for that restriction is to ensure that high density development
occurs at those locations.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: At its June 4, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0
to recommend approval of a rezoning of a 5.09 acre tract in the W.G. Wilkinson Survey, to be
known as a Resubdivision of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One, Tract A-4 from C-1, Local Commercial to C-2A - Restricted, Commercial
First Height to allow all uses permitted in the C-1 district plus golf cart sales and service.
At its June 25, 1996, meeting, the City Council approved this ordinance for first reading.
ATTACHMENTS: Staff report and ordinance
Submitted Bv:
Edward J. Barry, Al - Director
Division of Development Services
HiIdy L. KingAa,.A
Chief Planner
REZONING OF A 5.09 ACRE TRACT IN THE W. G. WILKINSON SURVEY, TO BE
KNOWN AS A RESUBDIVISION OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF
SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, TRACT A-4, FROM
C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL TO C-2A, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT -
RESTRICTED, LOCATED NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF DEL WEBB
BOULEVARD AND RM2338.
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Mr. Robert Eck II, P.E.
Director, Land Development
Del Webb Development Company
203 South I11-35, Suite 100
Georgetown, Texas 78628
931-6900 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: Rezoning of a 5.09 acre tract in the W. G. Wilkinson Survey, to
be known as the Resubdivision of a Planned Unit Development
of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tract
A-4 as recorded in Cabinet M, Slides 95-116 of the Official Plat
Records of Williamson County, Texas from C-1, Local
Commercial to C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted.
FACTS:
Existing Zoning: C-1, Local Commercial
Proposed Use: One (1) commercial tract.
Notification: The notification requirements have been completed.
ANALYSIS: The subject parcel of land is presently zoned C-1, Local
Commercial, which restricts its use to certain commercial uses.
Rezone - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One, Tract A-4 July 16, 1996
RZ-96-06 File: SCGl_TA.REZ Page 1
CM/CS
Rezone - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One, Tract A-4
RZ-96-06 File: SCG1_TA.REZ
CM/CS
The request is for a rezoning to C-2A - Restricted for the
purpose of operating a golf cart sales and service facility on
Tract A-4 only. SEE EXHIBIT A The request is to allow all
uses permitted in the C-1, Local Commercial zoning district plus
golf cart sales and service, which is not permitted in the C-1
district. Therefore, the change to C-2A - Restricted is
requested.
When the applicant initially contacted the City staff regarding
this proposed rezoning he was advised that a rezoning to C-2A
that would allow all C-2A uses would likely receive a
recommendation for denial from the staff based on the intensity
of uses permitted in the C-2A district. For example, wholesale
bakeries, bottling establishments and newspaper publishing are
all permitted uses in the C-2A district. Since the applicant's
only interest was in retail sales and service of golf carts, he
requested that the restriction be placed on the rezoning.
There is no other C-2A zoning district in the vicinity. The City
Council has indicated in the past that the C-2A district is
inappropriate at the entrances to the City, because of their
concern about the appearance usually associated with quasi -
industrial and warehousing businesses. The C-2A district
permits several of these uses. The subject request to rezone this
lot to C-2A Restricted more closely resembles the C-1 district
rather than the C-2A district since the only C-2A type use that
will be permitted will be golf cart sales and service.
The City has assigned restricted zoning classifications in other
cases. The Rivery and the Tri-Tract property, both fronting on
IH35, south of the Williams Drive interchange, are C-2A
Restricted. The restriction in those cases is to allow all uses
permitted in the C-2A district except residential. The reason for
that restriction is to ensure that high density development occurs
at those locations.
July 16, 1996
Page 2
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the rezoning of a 5.09 acre tract in the W. G.
Wilkinson Survey, to be known as a Resubdivision of the
Planned Unit Development of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One, Tract A-4 from C-1, Local Commercial to
C-2A - Restricted, Commercial First Height to allow all uses
permitted in the C-1 district plus golf cart sales and service.
P & Z ACTION: At its June 4, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of a rezoning of
a 5.09 acre tract in the W.G. Wilkinson Survey, to be known as
a Resubdivision of the Planned Unit Development of Sun City
Georgetown, Phase 1, Neighborhood One, Tract A-4 from C-1,
Local Commercial to C-2A - Restricted, Commercial First
Height to allow all uses permitted in the C-1 district plus golf
cart sales and service.
Rezone - Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1,
Neighborhood One, Tract A-4
RZ-96-06 File: SCG1_TA.REZ
CM/CS
July 16, 1996
Page 3
EXHIBITS A- r- — -- — -
SUN CITY GEORGET INN, PHASE I NEIGH RHOOD ON TRACT A
Ln
> I hb hoed 1 0
e1j
i9 0 z.
f 1 0
I Q
i
I
rho ) i
i
I Q d I h o d 2
2 ) i � r
Neighborhood 1'
m
1` 1—A
N%ighborhoo,
_ \ REEK
C�elghbo oo-8A !
I� I
-� Go
I ti F i
I
� Q
4
I
N i h hood 1
A
• I
EXHIBIT t3
DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT
GIVEN A MIXED LAND USE PROPOSAL
1. *DATE'"
September 13, 1995
'PROJECT
NAME': Sun City Georgetorn - Revised Concept Plan (Second)
2. 'GIVEN':
acres of Intensitylevel 1
5314 acres of Intensitylevel 2
acres of Intensity level 3
acres of Intensity Level 4
acres of Intensitylevel 5
acres of Intensity level 6
5,314.00 TOTAL ACRES
3. ALLOWABLE
DEMAND:
INTENSITY
WATER WASTEWATER
TRANSPORTATION
LEVEL
Peak GPO Average GPO
Peak TrpEnds
1
0 0
0
2
12,753.600 3.454.100
21,256
3
0 0
0
4
0 0
0
5
0 0
0
6
0 0
0
4, TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND_
Maximum GPD Water Capacity_ 12.753.600
Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity: 3.454.100
Maximum Trip Ends: 21.256
5. EFFECTIVE ALLOWABLE SYSTEM INTENSITIES:
GPD/Acre Water: 2.400
GPD/Acre Wastewater. 650
Trip Ends/Acre Traffic: 4
6. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT BASED ON GIVEN MIX OF LAND USES:
(b) (c)
(a) TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND (1) POTENTIAL UNITS BY UTILITY
LAND USES j 'ACRES' WATER WASTEWATEF TRANSP I WATER WASTEWATEF TRANSP
i
Detached SF
Large Lot
Average Lot
Zero Lot Line
Attached SF
Multifamily
Mobile Home
Lodging
Institutional
Church
-with day care
-w/o day care
Medical Office
General Office
Retail, Mixed
Retail, Restaurant
Retail, Store
Employment Centers
Warehouse
Mini -Warehouse
Greenbelt
Sub -Total
Road Right -of -Way
TOTAL
0
0
0�
3.163.00
7,5912W
2.055.950
12,652
0
0
0
517
1.240,800
336.050
2,068
0
0
0',
0
0
0
0
0
OI
29.15
69.960
18,948
117
0
0
0,
0
0
0,
80.75
193.800
52.488
323
16.00
38,400
10.400
64
1508.1
3 619,440
980.265
6,032
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5,314.00
5,314.00
0
0
0
7,606
8,224
14.280
0
0
0
1,909
1.920
1.902
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
204
206
139
0
0
0
0
0
0
466
469
100
105
114
25
5,568
6.014
365
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(units in this section should
be multiplied by 1000)
(d)
MAXIMUM
UNITS I
(e)
PER DEV
REGS j
(f)
DEVELOPMENT
ALLOWED/UNIT (2)
I
0 1
I
0 j
0 housing units
7.606 j
22,963 j
7.606 housing units
0 I
0 j
0 housing units
1,902 I
7.507 j
1,902 housing units
0 j
(5) j
(5) housing units
0 I
(
0 housing units
0 (
j
0 rooms
138.644 j
j
138 644 square feet
I
0 j
I
j
0 square feet
0 I
j
0 square feet
100.093 j
j
100,093 square feet
25,098 I
(
25,098 square feet
365.202 I
I
365.202 square feet
0 I
j
0 square feet
0 I
j
0 square feet
0 I
j
0 square feet
0 I
j
0 square feel
0 I
I
j
I
0 square feet
EXHIBIT k"
SUN CITY GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, TRACT A
\ 1 \
X = 3. 0. 5.2 4. 2 2\ /rC T \' / / \ TWO
N6 \ �• f3L C K l .
J r l L e
CAb .• r_ , 19
�7-02-31 E \
\ �J9 TRACT " A_ 842. 3g GE�RGET
OWV
COMMERCIAL \ -`� CT L (ZONED CH ,_ a.-lz� ` Ts
L /NE
\ \ 52. 561 S0. \ of
TRACT !" A-2" TRACT -A-3-
COMMERCIAL
AL �_•
COMI+IERC-1 AL - 10. ?29. 004.
oso \ t ZONED C I) ( ZONED C 1) sa
III. 389. 62
4 ` \ 40, 5 10 SO.FT.
,109.634 S0, FT.
' 6. r• i \ \� i J. M3
\ e
•.o Syt q Z
1 \ ` µ • N
\ 'J. • W
N
or
Ln
\ (5)
s; rn
\� TRACT ". A-4"
n
COMMERCIAL
ct
(ZONED-CZA) ,r1
221.755 S0. FT.
JVN
\ TRACT A- 5"
:I COMMERCIAL
I -A (;I( ZONED CH -0.\
I I un Z \ Q' 34. 129 S0. F T.
z �\-
• J,^a s. E.
cap
co
A5 �.11
I I 1 e`_•S [�'I1 V i` X= 3, III. 835. Ic
2 Q✓`s zo. i7B.i �`8 r= 10. 228, 484. 55
I Q 1 1
SUIV C I T Y GEOPGE T0Vv
X= 3. 111.448.93
i I FL l` . I Y= 110. 228. 139. 40
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 5.09 ACRE TRACT IN THE
W.G. WILKINSON SURVEY, TO BE KNOWN AS THE RESUBDIVISION
OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY GEORGETOWN,
PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, TRACT A-4, FROM THE C-1, LOCAL
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT TO THE C-2A - RESTRICTED,
COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT 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 5.09 ACRE TRACT IN THE W.G. WILKINSON SURVEY, TO BE KNOWN AS
THE RESUBDIVISION OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF SUN CITY
GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, TRACT A-4 AS RECORDED
IN CABINET M, SLIDES 95-116 OF THE OFFICIAL PLAT 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, Tract A-4 Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 1 of 3
WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on June 4,
1996, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property
from the C-1, Local Commercial district zoning classification to C-2A - Restricted, Commercial
First Height district zoning classification to allow all uses in the C-1, Local Commerical zoning
district and golf cart sales and service, 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 C-1, LOCAL
COMMERCIAL district to C-2A - RESTRICTED, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT district to
allow all uses in the C-1, Local Commerical zoning district and golf cart sales and service, 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 1,
Neighborhood One, Tract A-4 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 day of , 1996.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of 1996.
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, Tract A-4 Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 3 of 3
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
aHisR A
SUN CITI` GEORGETOWN, PHASE 1, NEIGHBORHOOD ONE, TRACT A
L4KEVIOODcSTaTES
X- 3. : 10.524.22\ \' n \ i
10. 2?9. 790. O \ SEC T / /i f f WO
D.
eo..a \
-� „o ,; C48. c , S L , 19
rc
_ 77-02-31
E 8a2
TRACT . 3g
\ C/TCyECRCETTOWCOMtiERCIAL L/M I
\ (ZONED C I) /NE
\ \ 5 2. 561 SO. r T.
el
TRACT A-2" TRACT -A-3- -
\`y"« 6
369. 62COMMERCIALeCOMMERC.IAL
( ZONED CH (ZONED CH = 10. 229. 004. 58
40.510 SO. FT. 109.634 SO. FT.
tp O. \ yJFf�GF
9
•' \
'o N
\ Zco \ U 0'• ' CP
tar
Ul
\ \ \ Jm ON
C ol
TRACT " A- 4'
COMMERCIAL o
----�� — `� ( ZONED • CZA )
221,755 SO. F T.
....TRACT A-5"
COMMERCIAL
I I -; -A\ _ ( ZONED CH
34.129 SO. F T.
I I 77— ^s ) S
C?
CID
E �ZS
•. OE
r \ g`.y' 3 ! I. 835. +c
° id o.L ° Y= 10. 228, 484. 59
I
S (_I N C r T Y E O P C t TO its
X- 3, 111. 448.93
' L)L l ! Y= 10. � 1 1 \228. 139. 40
Council meeting July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: First reading of an ordinance rezoning a 9.481 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter and
Joseph Pulsifer Surveys, from C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted to C-2A, Commercial
First Height - Restricted to permit multifamily residential uses, located east of IH35 between the
North and South forks of the San Gabriel River.
ITEM SUMMARY: The existing zoning of C-2A - Restricted, assigned in 1994, allows the
property to be developed as anything except a use that would be permitted in any of the "R"
districts. Some of the prohibited uses are single family and multifamily residences, churches,
schools, hospitals, small offices, and personal service shops.
The current proposal is to construct a multifamily residential complex with a density of
about 19 units per acre on the subject 9.5 acre property. That would result in about 180 total
units. The applicant also is in the process of submitting a concept plan for the entire 52.72 acre
property. If the property is developed as proposed by the Concept Plan, there will be no need
to rezone the remainder of the property.
The request is not to completely remove the restriction on the C-2A zoning currently
assigned to the property. Instead, it is a request to adjust it to add multifamily residential uses
only to those permitted. All other uses that are permitted in the "R" districts would still be
prohibited if the rezoning is approved as requested.
The proposed rezoning area is adjacent to the IH35 frontage road. While this area may
not be suitable for single family residential use, it is suitable for multifamily use. Typically,
multifamily uses seek highly accessible areas. The proposed rezoning area is deep enough so that
an apartment complex may be designed with residential uses located away from the interstate
highway and noise impacts are reduced. If approved, the rezoning will also still allow for
permitted commercial uses on the site.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: At its July 2, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0
to recommend approval of the requested rezoning of a 9.481 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter and
Joseph Pulsifer Surveys, to be known as San Gabriel Village, from C-2A, Commercial First
Height - Restricted to C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted to permit multifamily
residential uses of 19 units per acre or greater.
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 ordinance.
Submitted Bv:
Edward arry, AIC - Director
Division of Development Services
Hildy L. Kingma, AIC
Chief Planner
REZONING OF A 9.481 ACRE TRACT IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER AND JOSEPH
PULSIFER SURVEYS, FROM C-2A, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT -
RESTRICTED TO
C-2A, COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT - RESTRICTED TO PERMIT
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, LOCATED EAST OF U135 AND BETWEEN
THE NORTH AND SOUTH FORKS OF THE SAN GABRIEL RIVER
OWNER/APPLICANTS: Mr. Don Martin
Mr. Bill Smalling
Georgetown San Gabriel Partners, Ltd.
808 West loth Street
Austin, Texas 78701-2042
322-0112 FAX: 322-0124
AGENT: Mr. Scott Smiley, P.E.
Turner, Collie and Braden, Inc.
5000 Plaza on the Lake, Suite 150
Austin, Texas 78746
329-5002 FAX: 329-0802
REQUEST: Rezoning of a 9.481 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter and Joseph
Pulsifer Surveys, from C-2A, Commercial First Height -
Restricted to C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted to
permit multifamily residential uses as recorded in Document No.
9555857 of the Official Deed Records of Williamson County,
Texas.
FACTS:
Locations: Located on the east side of IH35 south of the North San Gabriel
River. SEE EXHIBIT A
Existing Site: Undeveloped land.
Existing Zoning: C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted which prohibits all
uses that are permitted in the "R" districts. SEE EXHIBIT A
Rezone - San Gabriel Village
RZ-96-15 File: S-GB-VLG.REZ Page 1
CM/CS
Proposed Use: A multifamily development is proposed for this site.
Surrounding Uses
and Zoning: North: Undeveloped land (C-2A,Restricted)
South: Undeveloped land (C-1)
East: Undeveloped land (C-2A, Restricted)
West: IH35 (RS)
Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as
Intensity Level 6. SEE EXHIBIT B
Notification: Notification has been completed as required.
History: The rezoning of this property initiated by the City from RS,
Residential Single Family to C-2A - Restricted was approved by
City Council in April 1994.
ANALYSIS: The rezoning to C-2A - Restricted in 1994 allows the property to
be developed as anything except a use that would be permitted in
any of the "R" districts. Some of the prohibited uses are single
family and multifamily residences, churches, schools, hospitals,
small offices, and personal service shops. The reason that these
uses were restricted from being on this property is that an
Intensity Level 6 had been assigned to the property and utility
improvements occurred to allow the high level of intensity.
More than one million dollars in utility improvements has been
invested to accommodate a high intensity user and the City also
contributed one million dollars for the construction of the
frontage road. The investment in the utility system may only be
recouped through the sale of water and electricity to the site.
The debt incurred as a result of the contribution to the frontage
road is being paid off by assessing those properties having access
to it, based on the increased value of the property being derived
from the frontage road. A low density single family residential
development would not be able to generate the utility revenues
and would severely limit the increase in value of the land due to
the frontage road. Therefore, such low density development
Rezone - San Gabriel Village
RZ-96-15 File: S-GB-VLG.REZ Page 2
CM/CS
would be a fiscal liability to the City since the money to pay for
the utility and transportation improvements would have to come
from other sources within the City budget.
The current proposal is to construct a multifamily residential
complex with a density of about 19 units per acre on the subject
9.5 acre property. That would result in about 180 total units.
The applicant also is in the process of submitting a concept plan
for the entire 52.72 acre property which is situated between the
North and South San Gabriel Rivers and between Austin Avenue
and IH35. The concept plan will include multifamily residential
uses, office space, retail space, and restaurants. If the property
is developed as proposed by the Concept Plan, there will be no
need to rezone the remainder of the property.
The applicant is also in the process of filing a preliminary plat
for the first phase of the development. This first phase includes
the proposed multifamily site that is the subject of this rezoning
and a cul-de-sac street that intersects with the IH35 frontage
road.
The request is not to completely remove the restriction on the
C2-A zoning currently assigned to the property. Instead, it is a
request to adjust it to allow multifamily residential uses only.
All other uses that are permitted in the "R" districts would still
be prohibited if the rezoning is approved as requested.
The proposed rezoning area is adjacent to the IH35 frontage
road. While this area may not be suitable for single family
residential use, it is suitable for multifamily use. Typically,
multifamily uses seek highly accessible areas. The subject site is
very accessible since it has direct access to the frontage road and
is located between two (2) interchanges. The proposed rezoning
area is deep enough so that a complex may be designed with
residential uses located away from the interstate highway and
noise impacts are reduced. If approved, the rezoning will also
still allow for the commercial uses that are permitted on the site
currently.
Rezone - San Gabriel Village
RZ-96-15 File: S-GB-VLG.REZ Page 3
CM/CS
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the requested rezoning of a 9.481 acre tract in the
Nicholas Porter and Joseph Pulsifer Surveys, to be known as San
Gabriel Village, from C-2A, Commercial First Height -
Restricted to C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted to
permit multifamily residential uses of 19 units per acre or
greater.
P & Z ACTION: At its July 2, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the requested
rezoning of a 9.481 acre tract in the Nicholas Porter and Joseph
Pulsifer Surveys, to be known as San Gabriel Village, from C-
2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted to C-2A, Commercial
First Height - Restricted to permit multifamily residential uses of
19 units per acre or greater.
Rezone - San Gabriel Village
RZ-96-15 File: S-GB-VLG.REZ Page 4
CM/CS
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSED C2A
ORO DISTRICT RESTRICTIONS
i
Existing
20
VALLY
IT
_
�l_j
r —�
/-• ••-k71�.`../`.ti• �Mi�T.-ti.ri `\_•�_C;�: clT• :.......
:. :....�
Isifing
:�:. -'
. . ...2A
d
:� := _
�.
.......... _-�/�-tiMJ`1�...M��l••�cl�-/`_/`till. �iL�:—.��'�J>.'�:_1�:�•.
.:.:•:•:•:•:-:':•:•:•:-:•:-:•:•:.....
OT
�j-
x'c.
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 9.481 ACRES IN THE
NICHOLAS PORTER AND JOSEPH PULSIFER SURVEYS, FROM C-2A,
COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT - RESTRICTED TO C-2A,
COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT - RESTRICTED TO PERMIT
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE, 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 9.481 ACRE TRACT IN THE NICHOLAS PORTER AND JOSEPH PULSIFER
SURVEYS AS RECORDED IN DOCUMENT NO. 9555857 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED
RECORDS OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, AND DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT
B, 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
9.481 Acres, Porter and Rdsifer surveys
Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page I of 3
WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on July 2,
1996, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property
from the C-2A, Commercial First Height - Restricted district zoning classification to C-2A,
Commercial First Height - Restricted district zoning classification to permit multifamily
residential uses of 19 units per acre or greater, in accordance with Exhibit "A".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF GEORGETOWN, TEXAS, THAT:
SECTION L. 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 C-2A,
COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT - RESTRICTED district zoning classification to C-2A,
COMMERCIAL FIRST HEIGHT - RESTRICTED district zoning classification to permit
multifamily residential uses of 19 units per acre or greater, 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.
9.481 Acres, Porter and Pulsifer Suivevs
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 , 1996.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the th day of , 1996.
ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
9.481 Acres, Porter and Pulsifer Surveys
Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 3 of 3
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSED C2A
ORO DISTRICT
Existing
-7-
EXHIBIT k
Metes and Bounds Description
9.481 Acres (413,015 square feet)
Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract 497
Williamson County, Texas
BEING a tract containing 9.481 acres (413,015 square feet) of land situated in the
Nicholas Porter Survey, Abstract 497 of Williamson County, Texas and a portion of a
called 52.72 acre tract recorded in a deed to Georgetown San Gabriel Properties, Ltd.
in Document number 9555857 of. the Official Records of Williamson County, Texas
(ORWCT). Said 9.481 acre tract being more particularly described by metes and
bounds as follows with all bearings and coordinates referenced to the Texas Coordinate
System, Central Zone. Coordinates recited herein are in terms of the NAD83 Datum,
converted to US Survey Feet and reduced to surfoce. Coordinate origin is based on
TXDOT monuments N2460035 (N = 10,196,188.75. E - 3,129,949.29) and N24.60045
(N = 10,211,462.75, E = 3,131,165.59). Surface distances and coordinates recited
herein may be converted to grid by multiplying by the combined factor of 0.999864303:
BEGINNING at a 1/2—inch Iran rod found (N = 10,208,099.77, E = 3,129,042.20) in
the southeast right of way line of Interstate Highway 35, for the common northerly
corner of Lot 1 of Riveroaks of Georgetown Office Park being a subdivision recorded
in Cabinet H. Slide 260 of the Williamson County Plat Records and most westerly comer
hereof;
THENCE, with the southeast right of way line of Interstate Highway 35, 225.64 feet
along the are of a curve to the right, with a radius of 5429.58 feet, a delta angle of 07
22 '52 ' and the chord of which bears North 30 *54 '04 " East, a distance of 225.63
feet to a half inch iron rod set;
THENCE across said 52.72 acre Georgetown San Gabriel Properties, Ltd. tract, South
57" 26 '25 " East. a distance of 402.52 feet to a 1/2—inch iron rod set;
of a tangent curve to the left;
THENCE, North 8731 '33 " East, a distance of 360.14 feet to a 1/2—inch iron rod set;
THENCE, South 20'54 '49 " East, a distance of 354.78 feet to a 1/2—inch iron rod set
in the southerly line of said Georgetown San Gabriel Properties, Ltd, tract and the
northerly line of said Riveroaks subdivision:
THENCE with the common line between said Georgetown San Gabriel Properties, Ltd.
tract and said Riveroaks subdivision the following four calls:
(1) South 66'42 '26 West, a distance of 42.46 feet to a 40d nail found in a 12 inch
cedar tree;
2 South 69*1 '45 " West, a distance of 341.81 feet to a 1/2—inch iron rod found;
3 South 7618 '00 " West, a distance of 380.95 feet to a 1/2—inch iron rod found;
4 North 20'30 ' 19 " West, a distance of 609.58 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING
and containing 10.077 acres (413,015 square feet) of land.
Council meeting July 23, 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: First reading of an ordinance rezoning a 9.72 acre tract in the William Addison Survey from
RS, Residential Single Family and A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial, located on State Highway
29 East, west of St. Helen Catholic Church.
ITEM SUMMARY: The applicant indicates that the proposed use of the property is an assisted living
facility. The development site will not encompass the entire 9.72 acres. It will be approximately 270
feet wide and 300 feet deep. The entire property has about 480 feet of frontage on SH29 and is about
1,100 feet deep. There is currently no proposed development on about 80 percent of the property.
Therefore, a large area (7.9 acres) could be rezoned to C-1 without any immediately proposed use.
Immediately east of the subject property is approximately 15 acres currently being used as a
church with accessory uses (e.g., meeting hall, classrooms, offices). All of the uses on the church
property are permitted in the RS zoning district classification. Churches and their associated uses are not
detrimentally affected by C-1 type uses. Therefore, there does not appear to be a potential conflict with
the property to the east if the subject property is rezoned.
Immediately south of the subject rezoning area is a ten (10) acre property that is currently in
agricultural use. It does not have frontage on a public street and takes its only access through an
easement along its east side that intersects SH29 via the church property. It is bounded on the east by
a future phase of Churchill Farms subdivision that is proposed for single family residential development.
Likewise, the properties immediately south and southwest of this ten (10) acre property take access only
through the same access easement and do not front on any public street. It is highly likely that all of these
properties will be developed for residential use.
The only adjacent property remaining to be discussed is the 16 acre tract west of the subject
rezoning area. This property has frontage on SH29 and adjoins the subject property entirely on the
subject property's west side. Given that its only access is on SH29, it is likely that this property (at least
the front portion) will develop commercially.
The C-1 district is generally thought to be compatible with a residential area when it is buffered
from a low density residential development by higher density residential development. If the requested
rezoning is approved, the ability for the area to develop in this manner will still exist. Therefore, there
does not appear to be any reason why the request could be considered detrimental to the City and the local
area.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Consistent with City policy, the applicant requests a waiver of the $250
rezoning fee. This is the first rezoning request following annexation.
COMMENTS: At its July 2, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to
recommend approval of the requested rezoning of a 9.72 acre tract in the William Addison Survey from
RS, Residential Single Family and A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial.
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 ordinance
Submitted By:
Edward J BArry, AICDirector
Division of Developmeht Services
Hildy L. Kingma, AICP
Chief Planner
REZONING OF A 9.72 ACRE TRACT IN THE WILLIAM ADDISON SURVEY,
FROM RS, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY AND A, AGRICULTURAL
TO C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL, LOCATED ON STATE HIGHWAY 29 EAST
OWNER/APPLICANTS:
Mr. Joe McMaster
114 W. 8th Street
Georgetown, Texas 78626
863-0531 FAX: 863-7312
Ms. Barbara Petrosky
150 Whispering Wind
Georgetown, Texas 78628
863-0156
AGENT: Ms. Karalie Nunn
Eleven Thirteen Architects
8050 Airport Drive
Georgetown, TX 78628
869-1104 FAX 863-6357
REQUEST: Rezoning of a 9.72 acre tract in the William Addison Survey
from RS, Residential Single Family and A, Agricultural to C-1,
Local Commercial as recorded in Volume 960, Page 453 of the
Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas
FACTS:
Locations: Located on State Highway 29 East. SEE EXHIBIT A
Existing Sites: Undeveloped land.
Existing Zoning: This parcel is currently zoned RS, Residential Single Family and
A, Agricultural.
Proposed Use: An assisted living center is proposed for a portion of this
property.
Rezone - William Addison Survey, 9.72 acres
RZ-96-15 File: ADDISONI.REZ Page 1
CM/CS
Surrounding Uses
and Zoning: North: Undeveloped land (RS)
South: Undeveloped land (A)
East: St. Helen Catholic Church (A)
West: Undeveloped land (RS and A)
Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as
Intensity Level 3. SEE EXHIBIT B
Notification: Notification has been completed as required.
History: The front portion of the subject property was annexed in 1986
and assigned an RS, Single Family Residential zoning
classification. The back portion of this property was annexed in
1995 and assigned an A, Agricultural zoning classification. Both
zoning assignments are a result of the automatic assignment upon
annexation. Previously, newly annexed properties were assigned
an RS classification. Between the time of the annexation of the
front portion and the time of the annexation of the rear portion,
the automatically assigned zoning classification was changed to
the A district. Therefore, this property has the two (2) different
zoning assignments.
ANALYSIS: The applicant indicates that the only proposed use of the
property at this time is an assisted living facility. The applicant
has provided a copy of the proposed site design with the
rezoning application. The plan indicates that the assisted living
center will be located at the most eastern corner of the property
fronting on SH29. It appears that the development site will be
approximately 270 feet wide. The entire property has about 480
feet of frontage on SH29. The proposed assisted living facility
also does not appear to extend the full depth of the property.
The property that is being rezoned is approximately 1,100 feet
deep and the development site appears to occupy the northern
300 feet, leaving 800 feet of developable area. These
dimensions are important to the rezoning request since the
request includes all of the area. There is currently no proposed
development on about 80 percent of the property. Therefore, a
Rezone - William Addison Survey, 9.72 acres
RZ-96-15 File: ADDISONI.REZ Page 2
CM/CS
large area (7.9 acres) could be rezoned to C-1 without any
immediately proposed use.
Zoning classifications have been assigned to property for which
there is no immediately proposed use before. In fact, there is
much property in the City of Georgetown that is vacant and has
a zoning classification other than RS or A. The objective is to
determine if a requested zoning classification would be
appropriate given the location, surrounding properties, road
network and other factors. To determine that, the surrounding
properties and their uses must be examined. SEE EXHIBIT C
Immediately east of the subject property is approximately 15
acres owned by the Catholic Diocese of Austin for the St. Helen
Church site. It is currently being used as a church with
accessory uses (e.g., meeting hall, classrooms, offices). All of
the uses on the church property are permitted in the RS zoning
district classification. Although the church uses are permitted in
the RS district, they are not generally thought to be incompatible
with uses permitted in the C-1 or other commercial districts. In
other words, churches and their associated uses are not
detrimentally affected by C-1 type uses. Therefore, there does
not appear to be a potential conflict with the property to the east
if the subject property is rezoned.
Immediately south of the subject rezoning area is a ten (10) acre
property that is currently in agricultural use. It does not have
frontage on a public street and takes its only access through an
easement along its east side that intersects SH29 via the St.
Helen property. It is bounded on the east by a future phase of
Churchill Farms subdivision that is proposed for single family
residential development. Likewise, the properties immediately
south and southwest of this ten (10) acre property take access
only through the same access easement and do not front on any
public street. It is highly likely that all of these properties will
be developed for residential use.
Rezone - William Addison Survey, 9.72 acres
RZ-96-15 File: ADDISONI.REZ Page 3
CM/CS
The only adjacent property remaining to be discussed is the 16
acre tract west of the subject rezoning area. This property has
frontage on SH29 and adjoins the subject property entirely on
the subject property's west side. The 16 acre tract is
approximately 300 feet deeper than the subject rezoning area.
Given that its only access is on SH29, it is likely that this
property (at least the front portion) will develop commercially.
Taking all of the above examined scenarios into account, it is
possible that the subject property will be surrounded by a
church, a single family residential development, and possibly
another commercial development. The C-1 district is generally
thought to be compatible with a residential area when it is
buffered from a low density residential development by higher
density residential development. If the requested rezoning is
approved, the ability for the area to develop in this manner will
still exist. Therefore, there does not appear to be any reason
why the request could be considered detrimental to the City and
the local area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the requested rezoning of a 9.72 acre tract in the
William Addison Survey from RS, Residential Single Family and
A, Agricultural to C-1, Local Commercial.
P & Z ACTION: At its July 2, 1996, meeting, the Planning and Zoning
Commission voted 4-1 to recommend approval of the requested
rezoning of a 9.72 acre tract in the William Addison Survey
from RS, Residential Single Family and A, Agricultural to C-1,
Local Commercial.
Rezone - William Addison Survey, 9.72 acres
RZ-96-15 File: ADDISON 1.REZ Page 4
CM/CS
EXHIBIT A
v
j RS
A 1995
PARK
YO
R$ 198
A
RS
WOO
gt
PROPOSED C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL
EXHI6IT B
DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT
GIVEN A SINGLE LAND USE
1. 'DATE': June 13. 1996
'PROJECT NAME': 9.72 acres in the William Adfison Survey
Rezoning
2. 'GIVEN' acres of Intensity Level 1
acres of Intensity Level 2
9.72 acres of Intensity Level 3
acres of Intensity Level 4
acres of Intensity Level 5
acres of Intensity Level 6
9.72 TOTAL ACRES
3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND:
INTENSITY WATER WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION
LEVEL Peak GPO Average GPD
Peak Trip Ends
1 0 0
0
2 0 0
0
3 36,547 10.498
97
4 0 0
0
5 0 0
0
6 0 0
0
4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND:
Maximum GPD Water Capacity:
36,547
Maximum GPD Wastewater Capacity:
10,498
Maximum Trip Ends:
97
5. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT:
(a)
(b)
POTENTIAL UNITS
BY UTILITY
MAXIMUM
LAND USES WAT13R
WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION
---------------------------------
UNITS
- - -
------- ------------------- -----------------
Detached SF
Large Lot 32
36
162
32
Average Lot 37
42
110
37
Zero Lot Line 37
42
110
37
Attached SF 56
60
89
56
Multifamily 69
67
43
43
Mobile Home 56
54
115
54
Lodging 190
172
70
70
Institutional 186.552
114,104
115,577
106,552
Church
-with day care 118.660
126,477
6,247
6,247
-w/o day care 196,490
209,952
135,000
135,000
Medical Office 57.854
93,729
30,121
30,121
General Office 100,404
115.358
38,118
38,118
Retail, Mixed 56,226
64,402
5,884
5,884
Retail, Restaurant 23,428
21,870
8,549
8,549
Retail, Store 112.453
119,291
20,242
20,242
Employment Centers 100,404
115,358
21,241
21,241
Warehouse 641,179
749,829
162.000
162,000
Mini -Warehouse 9.136,800
------------------- ----------- ----------------- -----
10,497,600
----- ----- ------------------
373,846
-------------
373,846
-----
(c) (d)
PER DEV DEVELOPMENT
REGS I ALLOWED/UNIT
19
71
94
141
281
19 housing units
37 housing units
37 housing units
56 housing units
43 housing units
54 housing units
70 rooms
106,552 square feet
6,247 square feet
135,000 square feet
30,121 square feet
38,118 square feet
5,884 square feet
8,549 square feet
20,242 square feet
21,241 square feet
162,000 square feet
373,846 square feet
IS AC
ONLr
"ALO MAHAN
358/225
e6 AC
w COA v.
le/os2
1.29 AC.
63 AC.)
Exhibit .p
1•
DAVID L. KCLLET ,1
40 AC-. {3
213.33t AC_. s069AC i \
3.70 AG.�-
(e.so AC�
J402 AC
24 OOAC y
CITY ONLY
1 O(&C c•�.7 .qNN NCCyt
Ty Om-*f . i7 / II O
CIT (kL` if' S7. 11CLENS C3
r
CHURCH
9 10
- o y
fie,,
SAW n
8RA0 "6J&TPOSJ(Y
972 B
N.1z, AC
�a
0
a 0. I.3c1 C\.1
a
GEa
M
$A VA�O•Y
t{3 6.30 / 201 / c
_ I h6 AG. r
GERALO ECKLE'
63• /164
13 36 AC
.O
O
H
O
LIROA
O qO1
,o C
O P u
� V
• � V � r
1 - V
P C
O
V
V V
0 n z
• ot�
a
a.O
a•
DAVIO L. KELLEY
,931, 1627
(332 569 AC )
211 39 AC., 40 69 �C
3 70 AC
(7��
1C
VLY
(3.101
Project. Name: Rezoning -William Addison
Name of Respondent: Msgr. Louis J. Wozniak, Pastor
Address of Res ondent: St. Helen Catholic Church, 2700 E. University Ave.
P
I am in favor:
Georgetown, TX 78626-9803
I obj ect: x
If you wish to submit written comment, please respond by 6/2/6/96 , it will be provided to
the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council_
Please reply to: City of Georgetown
Development Services Division
P. O. Box 409 a t� , ":� 1► `
Georgetown, Texas 78627
26
U
ST. HELEN CATHOLIC CHURCH
2700 East University Avenue
Georgetown, TX 78626-9803
(512) 863-3041
Mane ."S, 1996
City of Georgetown
Development Services Division
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, !wn, TX. 76
RF Rez+_!ninq of a S. 72 Acre Tr..IA c _ Cis_^ S+_:r ey
Dear Planning Zoninr_, G_++rtmi�sy,�:'•;
A few days ago we rice, vs---'+ rt•--tic regr--%rdIn❑ Rians �+�+
on1nQ t!f a.7:: aCi'2 a= =^ hc' Lq1 !. I lctm ddiS+=+r
.ram t_l i' `J f r ! m R S and ri I: f t C F�+ f IEr. 1:.`!
t:`te C-1 classification, we ct`r'_ a 1' F.' : 1 y t%_ .1; ='
proposed change_ Now that we now Z 1 . t t 1 e more abou+ — :he
re.as+=n for the proposed chz nc , 1 tF',i n-: we wr--+ald
+b.ject to a propose a5�ir ��� L1..Y�.7-; fc+ciI � y +_:;. � +e
f?� -:if the property. i-iowevc -:,!e wc-1_E:.d ti l i h a v e a sere+
concern about the rema,i(ling t.�!_+rt1'=:+fl of tj`+�!e tract, wEt WClA�d
+-. 1r:C1 v + Somet�hi�Ig '>..1�!x1. 1.`.:� +.t+^+�. .75.-+��i.��? 1'i C+='t:'sr:ari�� �e
ourhurch surrr:_tnd-i+ills.
Wez I,cspe t!:+ attend meetlnq C+n T+_l1y artdi w o u I d .l l:•:E
�; soa :air n the issue if F:;!_,ssib1.e.
L ,:,uis bJt �``nip%'
St. Helen
Catho1iC. l�'hurc.-t _
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 9.72 ACRE TRACT IN THE
WILLIAM ADDISON SURVEY, FROM RS, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE
FAMILY AND A, AGRICULTURAL TO C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL;
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 9.72 ACRE TRACT IN THE WILLIAM ADDISON SURVEY AS RECORDED IN
VOLUME 960, PAGE 453 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
WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on July 2,
1996, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property
from the RS, Residential Single Family and A, Agricultural district zoning classifications to C-1,
Local Commercial district zoning classification, in accordance with Exhibit "A".
9.72 Acres, Addison Survey Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page l of 3
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 RS, RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY and A, AGRICULTURAL districts 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.
9.72 Acres, Addison Survey 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 , 1996.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the th day of , 1996.
ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
9.72 Acres, Addison Survey Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 3 of 3
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
EXHIBIT A
/ I C--1' \
C-1
� fJ
RS
)POSED C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL
-S•
Council meeting July 23, 1996
Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Rezoning of a Part of Dalrymple Addition, from RS, Residential Single Family to RM-
3, Office and Service Use or RP, Residential Planned, located at 406 West University Avenue
ITEM SUMMARY: This property fronts University Avenue (SH29) and is zoned RS, Residential Single Family. The
current request is for a change from RS, to RM-3, Office and Service Use. The subject lot is included in a two and
a half (2 1/2) block stretch along the south side of University Avenue that is zoned RS. In the initial review of this
application, staff requested that the applicant submit a preliminary site plan illustrating how the subject lot could support
a change in use to allow offices. The preliminary site plan shows that the existing structure could be maintained and
that an additional seven (7) parking spaces could be provided at the rear of the structure.
A zoning designation which allows for a range of uses compatible with the historical character of the
neighborhood and incorporates the tools to protect that character is most desirable. Given that this residence and the
adjacent residences front on SH29, a major arterial roadway, and nearby lots are zoned to accommodate commercial
uses, it may be appropriate to rezone the subject lot to a district that would permit commercial uses.
The RP, Residential Planned district allows for any residential uses and would also allow for the proposed
office use, as well as other low intensity commercial uses. The RP district also requires that a site plan be prepared
for any proposed use of the site. It may be appropriate to rezone this property to the RP district rather than the
requested RM-3 district. Because a specific site plan is required in the RP district, it may be reasonable to require a
detailed development plan (DDP) as required by the Subdivision Regulations. The DDP requirement will be important
to ensure that any non -single family use of the properties maintain their historical character and minimize impacts such
as parking and access on the adjacent single family properties. The site plan should be required at the time that any
permits are requested that would substantially change the design, use or character of the subject properties.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The subject lot as well as several of the residences that front on SH29 between
Timber Street and Austin Avenue were considered to have historic value in the 1984 Historic Resource Survey. The
City Council should consider directing staff to rezone all other RS zoned property along SH29, between Timber Street
and Austin Avenue, to the RP zoning district with the conditions placed on the subject property. Therefore, the RP
zoning district with the DDP requirement will provide for a range of uses compatible with the historical character of
the neighborhood and incorporate the tools to protect that character.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: At their regular meeting of July 2, 1996, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend
approval of the requested rezoning from RS, Residential Single Family District to RP, Residential Planned District,
thereby allowing any uses in the RS district by right, and any uses in the remaining "R" districts provided a detailed
development plan is approved by the Commission and City Council and provided the Commission and Council
determine the proposed use will preserve the historic appearance of the property and will not create detrimental uses
of the property, including but not limited to, excessive noise and traffic.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will be consistent with the Planning
and Zoning Commission's recommendation and direct staff to initiate rezoning of other residences zoned RS along
SH29, between Timber Street and Austin Avenue.
ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report, Exhibits and Ordinance.
Submit By•
Edward .Barry, AICP irector
Divisio of Developme- Services
I _
Hildy L. ingma, AICP
Chief Planner
REZONING OF A PART OF DALRYMPLE ADDITION,
FROM RS, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY TO RM-39 OFFICE AND SERVICE OR
RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED, LOCATED AT 406 WEST UNIVERSITY AVENUE
OWNER: Mr. Mike Luna
8617 Minot Circle
Austin, Texas 78748
416-1212
AGENT: Mr. I.T. Gonzales
I.T. Gonzales Engineers
P.O. Box 3336
Austin, Texas 78764
447-6382 FAX 447-6389
REQUEST: Rezoning of a part of Dalrymple Addition, from RS, Residential
Single Family to RM-3, Office and Service or RP, Residential
Planned. This lot is recorded in Volume 2634, Page 792 of the
Official Deed Records of Williamson County, Texas.
FACTS:
Locations: Located at 406 West University Avenue. SEE EXHIBIT A
Existing Site: Single family residence.
Existing Zoning: This parcel is currently zoned RS, Residential Single Family.
SEE EXHIBIT A
Proposed Use: Conversion of the residence to office space is proposed.
Surrounding Uses
and Zoning: North: Fleager Addition parking lot (RM-3) and single family
residences (RS)
South: Single family residences (RS)
East: Single family residences (RS)
West: Autozone (C-1) and single family residences (RS)
Rezone - 406 West University Avenue
RZ-96-11 File: DALRYMPL.REZ Page 1
CM/WW
Century Plan: The Century Plan -Development Plan designates this location as
Intensity Level 3. This Intensity Level allows for 1,020 square
feet of general office space. Of the approximately 1,200 square
feet of usable space within the building, approximately 900
square feet can be used for office space, with the remaining 300
square feet being reserved for hallways, bathrooms, kitchen,
etc. The proposed office square footage is within the allowable
limits for this Intensity Level. SEE EXHIBIT B
Notification: Notification has been completed as required.
History:
we
At some time during 1994, a sign was posted advertising the
Law Offices of Mike Luna. In late 1994, staff informed Mr.
Luna that this property was zoned for single family residential
uses and that the only office use allowed was under the home
occupation provision. No confirmation is available that the
property was used as a residence at the same time it was an
office. There is no record of permits issued for improvements
of the property or the business sign. The sign has been
removed and the structure has been gutted.
This property was identified as a high priority historic resource
in the Historic Resource Survey of Georgetown, Texas prepared
in July 1984 for the Georgetown Heritage Society. While all
high priority sites were considered for possible inclusion in a
National Register Multiple -Resource preliminary submission,
this inventory has not been formally implemented. The interior
of the residence has been removed and only the outside building
frame remains.
This property fronts University Avenue (SH29) and is zoned
RS, Residential Single Family. SEE EXHIBIT A The RS
district classification was assigned to this location when the
Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1968. The subject lot is
included in a two and a half (2 1/2) block stretch along the
south side of University Avenue that is zoned RS (between
Timber Street and Austin Avenue). This zoning designation
also extends to the neighborhoods directly south of the subject
lot.
Page 2
The current request is for a change from RS to RM-3. Some of
the uses allowed by right in the RM-3 district are hospitals or
clinics, religious and educational institutions, clubs and lodges,
small offices, personal service shops, artist and photographer
studios, pre-school, kindergarten, and other private schools, and
assisted living centers.
In the initial review of this application, the DRC staff requested
that the applicant submit a preliminary site plan illustrating how
the subject lot could support a change in use to allow offices.
The preliminary site plan prepared for the subject lot shows that
the existing structure could be maintained and that an additional
seven (7) parking spaces could be provided at the rear of the
structure, accessed by the existing driveway. Detailed
information regarding landscaping, detention, impervious cover
was not included in the preliminary site plan. SEE EXHIBIT C
While the preliminary site plan indicates that this lot may be
able to support the proposed use, it is likely that it will not be
able to meet all of the design standard criteria outlined in the
Subdivision Regulations, and therefore it would require
variances. If rezoning of this site is approved, a Detailed
Development Plan (DDP) must be prepared prior to occupancy
of the structure. The DDP will address any variances requested
to the Subdivision Regulations.
A zoning designation which allows for a range of uses
compatible with the historic character of the neighborhood and
incorporates the tools to protect that character is most desirable.
Given that this residence and the adjacent residences front along
SH29, which is designated as a major arterial roadway, and
nearby lots are zoned to accommodate commercial uses, it may
be appropriate to rezone the subject lot to a district that would
permit commercial uses. The requested RM-3 district does not
incorporate a means to ensure that site design on this property is
compatible with the character of the area and minimizes the
impact on surrounding property.
The RP, Residential Planned district would allow for the
proposed office use, as well as other low intensity commercial
uses. The RP district allows for any residential uses including
Rezone - 406 West University Avenue
RZ-96-11 File: DALRYMPL.REZ Page 3
CM/WW
detached, semi -attached, attached, or multifamily dwelling units.
It also allows for commercial uses, if these businesses provide a
needed service or convenience for the immediate area. These
uses may include professional offices, cleaners and laundry
facilities, barber / beauty shops, pharmacies, repair shops and
convenience stores. In addition, the RP district does require
that a site plan be prepared for any proposed use of the site.
It may be appropriate to rezone this property to the RP district
rather than the RM-3 district requested by the applicant. In
addition, because a specific site plan is required in the RP
district, it may be reasonable to require a detailed development
plan (DDP) as required by the Subdivision Regulations. These
standards reflect the most up-to-date set of community standards
for site design. The DDP requirement will be important to
ensure that any non -single family use of the properties maintain
their historical character and minimize impacts such as parking
and access on the adjacent single family properties. The site
plan should be required at the time that any permits are
requested that would substantially change the design, use, or
character of the subject properties. This would include requests
for alterations to the structure that may jeopardize the historic
significance of the structure, demolition requests, or any change
in use from the current single family use of the properties.
The subject lot as well as several of the residences that front
along SH29 between Timber Street and Austin Avenue were
considered to have historic value in the 1984 Historic Resource
Survey. Therefore, it may also be reasonable to consider
initiating the rezoning of the other residences from RS to RP.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of the requested rezoning from RS, Residential Single
Family District to RP, Residential Planned District, thereby
allowing any uses in the RS district by right, and any uses in the
remaining "R" districts provided a detailed development plan
approved by the Commission and City Council and provided the
Commission and Council determine the proposed use will
preserve the historic appearance of the property and will not
Rezone - 406 West University Avenue
RZ-96-11 File: DALRYMPL.REZ Page 4
CM/WW
create detrimental uses of the property, including but not limited
to, excessive noise and traffic.
P & Z ACTION: Approval of the requested rezoning from RS, Residential Single
Family District to RP, Residential Planned District, thereby
allowing any uses in the RS district by right, and any uses in the
remaining "R" districts provided a detailed development plan is
approved by the Commission and City Council and provided the
Commission and Council determine the proposed use will
preserve the historic appearance of the property and will not
create detrimental uses of the property, including but not limited
to, excessive noise and traffic.
Rezone - 406 West University Avenue
RZ-96-11 File: DALRYMPL.REZ Page 5
CM/WW
9
DETERMINATION OF PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT EXHIBIT B
GIVEN A SINGLE LAND USE
1. 'DATE': June 13, 1996
'PROJECT NAME': Dalrymple Addition, part of Block G
Rezoning
2. 'GIVEN' acres of Intensity Level 1
acres of Intensity Level 2
0.26 acres of Intensity Level 3
acres of Intensity Level 4
acres of Intensity Level 5
acres of Intensity Level 6
0.26 TOTAL ACRES
3. ALLOWABLE DEMAND:
INTENSITY WATER
WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION
LEVEL Peak GPD
Average GPO
Peak Trip Ends
-------------------------
2 0
0
0
3 978
281
3
4 0
0
0
5 0
0
0
6 0
0
0
4. TOTAL ALLOWABLE DEMAND:
Maximum GPD Water Capacity:
978
Maximum GPO Wastewater
Capacity.
281
Maximum Trip Ends:
3
5. PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT:
(a)
POTS TIAL UNITS BY UTILITY
(b)
MAXIMUM
(c)
PER DEV
(d)
DEVELOPMENT
LAND USES
WATER
- ----------------------------------------
--------- -
WASTEWATER TRANSPORTATION I
-----
UNITS I
------ ------------
REGS I
-
ALLOWED/UNIT
---------------- ----------
--------------------------------------------------
Detached SF
1
1
4 I
1 1
1 1
1 housing units
Large Lot
1
1
3 1
1 1
2 1
1 housing units
Average Lot
1
1
3 1
1 1
3 1
1 housing units
Zero Lot Line
2
2
2 1
2 1
4 1
2 housing units
Attached SF
2
2
1 I
1 I
6 I
1 housing units
Multifamily
2
1
3 1
1 1
I
1 housing units
Mobile Home
5
5
2 1
2 1
I
2 rooms
Lodging
Institutional
2,850
3,052
3,092 I
2,850 I
I
2,850 square feet
Church
-with day care
3,174
3,383
5,616
167 I
3,611 I
167 I
3,611 I
I
I
167 square feet
3,611 square feet
-w/o day care
Medical Office
5,256
2,350
2,507
806 I
806 I
I
806 square feet
General Office
2,686
3,086
1,723
1,020 I
157 I
1,020 I
157 I
I
I
1,020 square feet
157 square feet
Retail, Mixed
1,504
627
585
229 I
229 I
I
229 square feet
Retail, Restaurant
Retail, Store
3,008
3,191
541 I
541 I
I
541 square feet
Employment Centers
2,686
3,086
20,057
568 I
4,333 I
568 I
4,333 I
I
I
568 square feet
4,333 square feet
Warehouse
Mini -Warehouse
------------ --------------
17,151
244,400
---- ----------------
280,800
10,000 I
----- - I
10,000 I
- I
I
------ I
10,000 square feet
--------- ------------- -
I
R M
LEGEND
G) PROPERTY CORNER i
EXIST. CONC. TO REMAIN I W
PROPOSED PAVEMENT I
z
s >
NO022'01'w 150.21'
LLJ
/ CONC '—
Ex / 42.6' o I m
CD
Ln
i ";�
1REXISTING
G
WOOD RESIDENCE
3 ^
oW
/ / 2 1303 S.F. I o
42.6' _.� 60.0' R.O.W
of �
a o
/ Rs
°
In
°
S0022'01'E 150.21' II
RS
ENGINEER: I.T. GONZALEZ ENGINEERS PROPERTY: PART OF w B. DALRYMPL.CS ADDITIOI',
P.O. BOX 3336 BLOCK PT G, 0 2586 ACRES RE -ZONING IRS TO RM-
AUSTIN, TX 78764
(512) 447-6382 '' �• OWNER: MR. MIKE LUNA /1
`r 8167 MINOT CIRLLE PROPOSED PARKING I M
.............
6 1.T. CONZAL12 fl AUSTIN, IX '8748
Cf3`EP�c,+� SCALE, I' = 10. 0' 4 06 W. UN i VERS : TY
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 PROPERTY OWNED BY MIKE
LUNA, A PART OF THE DALRYMPLE ADDITION AS RECORDED IN
VOLUME 2634, PAGE 792 OF THE OFFICIAL DEED RECORDS OF
WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM THE RS, RESIDENTIAL
SINGLE FAMILY 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") :
PROPERTY OWNED BY MIKE LUNA, A PART OF THE DALRYMPLE ADDITION
AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 2634, PAGE 792 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
WHEREAS, the City Planning and Zoning Commission in a meeting held on July 2,
1996, recommended changing said zoning district classification of the above described property
406 W. University Avenue Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 1 of 3
from the RS, Residential Single Family District to RP, Residential Planned District, thereby
allowing any uses in the RS district by right, and any uses in the remaining "R" districts
provided a detailed development plan is approved by the Commission and City Council and
provided the Commission and Council determine the proposed use will preserve the historic
appearance of the property and will not create detrimental uses of the property, including but
not limited to, excessive noise and traffic, 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 RS,
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY district to RP, RESIDENTIAL PLANNED district, thereby
allowing any uses in the RS district by right, and any uses in the remaining "R" districts
provided a detailed development plan is approved by the Commission and City Council and
provided the Commission and Council determine the proposed use will preserve the historic
appearance of the property and will not create detrimental uses of the property, including but
not limited to, excessive noise and traffic, 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.
406 W. University Avenue Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 2 of 3
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 day of , 1996.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of 1996.
ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
406 W. University Avenue Rezoning Ordinance No.
Page 3 of 3
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
Council meeting date: Ju1y 23, 1996 Item No. 44 Ar
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Resolution accepting request's from property owners in the Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract
No. 229, and Lewis P. Dyches, Abstract No. 171, to be voluntarily include approximately 2,141
acres within the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction of the City of Georgetown
ITEM SUMMARY
The City has received requests from the following the owners of the following properties to
voluntarily be included within the City's ETJ:
Gray tract -- 104 acres
4-T Ranch Associates tract -- 326 acres
4-T Ranch Associates tract -- 104 acres
Del Webb Texas Limited Partnership/Commonwealth Land Title Co. of Austin, Inc.:
Tract A-3 -- 331 acres
Akers/Duckworth/Ward/Bridges tract -- 264 acres
Young tract -- 46 acres
Byram tract -- 307 acres
Del Webb Texas Limited Partnership/Commonwealth Land Title Co. of Austin, Inc.:
Tract A-1 -- 93 acres
Tract A-2 -- 27 acres
Tract A-4 -- 302 acres
Young tract -- 237 acres
All parcels are identified on a map attached to this item. Since all parcels are being accepted
at one time, and certain of the parcels are currently contiguous to the City's existing ETJ, then
all the property requested to be included within the ETJ will be contiguous to the current ETJ.
Section 42.022 of the Texas Local Government Code allows for properties that are
contiguous to the ETJ of a City to voluntarily be included into the City's ETJ upon request of the
property owner, and acceptance by the City. Approval of this item would accept these properties
into the City's ETJ for all purposes, effective immediately. A document will be filed in the Deed
Records of Williamson County for notice to future purchasers that the property is now within the
City's ETJ.
ATTACHMENTS
Map of area requested to be included within the City's ETJ
Letters of Request from property owners, with legal descriptions of properties
Proposed Resolution (to be provided on the dias)
Su miffed By:
.)/9 Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney
Del Webbs
Sun City Georgetown-
July 16, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Request to Include 104 acres Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of
Georgetown
To Whom it May Concern:
Commonwealth Land Title Company of Austin, Inc., Trustee ("Owner") is the owner of the
104 acre parcel of land described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") and generally depicted
on Exhibit "A- V attached hereto. Del Webb Texas Limited Partnership is the beneficial owner of
the Property and executes this letter to evidence its consent thereto. Pursuant to Section 42.022 of
the Texas Local Government Code, the undersigned hereby requests to include the Property within
the extra -territorial jurisdiction ("ETT') of the City of Georgetown. Owner, on behalf of Owner and
its successors and assigns, consents to the inclusion of the Property within the ETJ of the City of
Georgetown.
COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE COMPANY OF AUSTIN, INC.
By: iyy V
Name: - u��l vV , C kA �)
Title: �/� ye Z 4?,Z
DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
an Arizona limited partnership
By: Del Webb Southwest Co., an Arizona corporation
Its: General Partner ,
'J
By:
Name: Richard L. Vandermeer
Title: Vice President & General Manager
203 South IH-35 • Suite 100
Georgetown, Texas 78628
(512) 930-6700 Fax (512) 930-6770
EXHIBIT "A"
Metes and Bounds Description
104.069 Acres (4,533,262 square feet)
4-T Ranch Survey
Williamson County, Texas
Being a tract containing 104.069 acres (4,533,262 square feat) o
Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract No. 229, Williamson County,T f land situated in the
and a part of a called 570.5 acre exception tract descriin and being out d
recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060 Official Records Williamson in Exhibit B in dead
(O.R.W.C.T.). Said 104.069 acres being more particular mson County, Texas
bounds as follows. All coordinates and bearings are ref described by metes and
Plane Coordinate System, Central Zone; all coordinates referenced to the Texas State
surface distances recited herein may be converted to rid by ited herein are Grid; all
combined factor of 0.999856056: g by multiplying by the
COMMENCING for reference at a 1/2 inch iron rod 4
Y=10,234,117.43) found for the northeast corner of a 263.34 a 3,10,,,908.84,
E. Joe Duckworth by dead recorded in Volume 1042, Page 687 O da
. tract conveyed to
the northwest corner of a 2,030.967 acre tract conveyed to thR.W.C.T., same being
deed recorded in Volume 1270, Page 305 (O.R.W.C.T.) and in e L so Family Trust by
the so
570.5 acre tract, uth line of said
THENCE, along a Boundary Line Agreement as agreed to b r
Ranch Associates, and the Lyda Family Trust on January 16 by of 4-T
(2) courses: �6 she f ollowing two
1- 402.60 feet along the arc of a non -tangent curve to t
central angle of 35'21'41", a radius of 652.33 feet, with ae left, having a
and distance of North 51020'46" East, 396.24 feat to 112 in hog d bearing
for the end of said curve; on rod se�
2. North 33°42'46" East, 291.14 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod —
Y and rn 10,234,607.03) set for the POINT OF BEGINNING s 110, then ,
corner hereof; ost southerly
THENCE, across said 570.5 acre tract North 22037'07" West a to a 1/2 inch iron rod set in the southerly northwest line�distance of 2812.01 feat
of the most westerly corner hereof; said 570.5 acre tract for
THENCE, along the southerly northwest line of said 570.5 acr
East, a distance of 1,938.95 feet to a 112 inch iron rod e tract North 68°50'S3"
set
corner hereof; for the most northerly
THENCE, with the most easterly northeast line of said 570.5 acre tract. � -� ► ° '07 ,.
East, a distance of 2,1e the afor;.mentioned
75.61 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set i Seth 2237
Boundary Line Agreement for the most easterly corner hereof;
Page 1 of 2
THENCE, along said Boundary Line Agreement the following fourteen (14) courses:
I. South 70°05'50" West, a distance Of 0.32 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
2. South 71 °38'31" West, a distance of 381.81 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set,
3. South 71 "11'37" West, a distance of 53.71 feet to a 112 inch iron rod set;
4. South 69°14'18" West, a distance of 43.08 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
S. South 67"51'03" West, a distance of 26.82 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
a
6. South 64°13'47" West, a distance of 75.04 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
7. South 61 °02'02" West, a distance of 42.54 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
8. South 57'39'34" West, a distance of 118.73 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
9. South 55"15'07" West, a distance of 159.09 feet to a 112 inch iron rod set;
10. South 51 "43'01" West, a distance of 144.88 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
11. South 45212'41" West, a distance of 196.54 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
12. South 39"47'21" West, a distance of 197.79 feat to a 112 inch iron rod set;
13. South 371,24'27" West, a distance of 146.75 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
,
14. South 33"42'46" West, a distance of 504.75 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING and containing a computed area of 104.069 acres (4,533,262
square feet).
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survey.
Do gl s J. Anderson
Reg red Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-74
11 January 1996
Z'-MRVMM4773-7aJa-o-1. waa
DOUGLAS J ANDERSON
512.8 -O
MM
Page 2Of2
E,"--- "A-111
VIC "TV WP
161.60-ors loop
rup-too
Iw
—rof ;ikvimi ;
"Me I"
it.l.- $flat
MorggnugPital
INVESTMENT PRORERTIES
July 9, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Request to Include 326 acres Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of
Georgetown
To Whom it May Concern:
The undersigned (the "Owner") is the owner of the 326 acre parcel of land described in
Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") and generally depicted on Exhibit "A- I" attached hereto.
Pursuant to Section 42.022 of the Texas Local Government Code, the undersigned hereby requests
to include the Property within the extra -territorial jurisdiction ("ETF) of the City of Georgetown.
Owner, on behalf of Owner and its successors and assigns, consents to the inclusion of the Property
within the ETJ of the City of Georgetown.
Sincerely,
vis E. Cook SR
'Ranch Associates,
.alifomia limited partnership
California 94965-2943
W -3373
EXHIBIT "A"
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
FOR 4-T RANCH ASSOCIATES
326.096 ACRES (14,204,741 SQUARE FEET)
FREDERICK FOY SURVEY, ABSTRACT 229
WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS
Being a tract containing 326.096 acres (14,204,741 square feet) of land situated
in the Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract Number 229 of Williamson County, Texas
and a portion of a called 570.5 Acre 4-T Ranch Associates as described in
(Exhibit "B") of the instrument of record in Volume 2185, Page 060 of the Official
Records of Williamson County, Texas (O.R.W.C.T.). Said 326.096 acres tract
being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: With all
coordinates and bearing 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:
BEGINNING at a Y2-inch iron rod (X = 10,232,751.6147, Y = 39106,370.2623)
found for the southwest corner of the said 4-T Ranch tract also being the
southeast corner of Four-T Ranch Section One a Subdivision of record in
Cabinet K, Slide 395 of the Williamson County Plat Records (W.C.P.R.) for the
southwest corner of the tract herein described;
THENCE, North 21 °07'16" West along and with the west line of said 4-T Ranch
tract and the east line of said Four-T Ranch Section One, a distance of 376.83
feet to a Y2 inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, North 28028'32" West, continuing along and with the west line of said
4-T Ranch tract and the east line of said Four-T Ranch Section One, a distance
of 342.39 feet to a Y2 inch iron rod found for the northeast corner of said Four-T
Ranch Section One, also being the southeasterly corner of Northlake Section E
subdivision as recorded in Cabinet H, Slides 354-370 W.C.P.R. for an angle
point;
THENCE, along and with the said west line of 4-T Ranch tract and the east line
of said Northlake Section E the following Ten (10) courses:
1. North 21 °19'47" West, a distance of 273.86 feet (called 273.77 feet) to a Y2
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
2. North 21 °44'23" West, a distance of 2,012.87 feet (called 2,013.47 feet) to a
Y2 inch iron rod found for an angle point;
3. North 21 °42'18" West, a distance of 133.49 feet (called 133.53 feet) to a Y2
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
Page 1 of 3
4. North 12°40'12" West, a distance of 257.14 feet (called 257.21 feet) to a '/2
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
5. North 12'18'11" West, a distance of 115.64 feet (called 115.51 feet) to a Y2
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
6. North 12° 15'26" West, a distance of 376.82 feet (called 376.90 feet) to a.'/z
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
7. North 15°36'01" West, a distance of 143.16 feet (called 143.07 feet) to a Y2
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
8. North 20*52'16" West, a distance of 110.70 feet (called 111.14 feet) to a Y2
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
9. North 21 °02'01" West, a distance of 700.28 feet (called 699.32 feet) to a Y2
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
10. North 22°45'51" West, a distance of 50.57 feet (called 54.47 feet) to a Y2 inch
iron rod set for the northwest corner of said 4-T Ranch tract, also being a
southwesterly corner of a called 1,633.75 Acre John D. Byram (remainder
tract) as recorded in said Volume 2185, Page 060 O.R.W.C.T. for the
northwest corner of the tract herein described;
THENCE, North 68°13'53" East, along and with the north line of said 4-T Ranch.
tract and a south line of the said Byram remainder tract, a distance of 2,794.96
feet (called 2,796.20 feet) to a Y2 inch iron rod found for the northeast corner of
the said 4-T Ranch tract, also being an exterior corner of the said Byram
remainder tract and the northwest corner of a called 331.000 Acre DEL WEBB
TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP tract as recorded in Document Number
9622645 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 21 °46'07" East, along and with the east line of the said 4-T
Ranch tract and the west line of the said DEL WEBB tract, a distance of
1,816.85 feet to a Y2 inch iron rod found for an interior angle point of the said 4-T
Ranch tract also being the southwest corner of said DEL WEBB tract;
THENCE, South 21 °46'07" East, over and across the said 4-T Ranch tract, a
distance of 3,097.30 feet to a '/2 inch iron rod set on the southerly line of the said
4-T Ranch tract, also falling on the north line of a called 263.34 Acre E. Joe
Duckworth tract as recorded in Volume 1042, Page 687 O.R.W.C.T. for the
southeast corner of the tract herein described;
Page 2 of 3
THENCE, South 68053'40" West, along and with the said south line of the said 4-
T Ranch tract and the north line of the said Duckworth tract, a distance of
2,909.86 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of
326.096 acres (14,204,741 square feet) of land.
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survey.
Do I s J. Anderson
Regis ered Professional Land Surveyor
Registration Number 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza on the Lake, Suite 180
Austin, TX 78746
Job No.4752-20
16 July, 1996
C:\TEXT\475220.M&B
DOUGLAS J. ANDERSON
7
5128 —%
9,y�t2s% * -°
�� sulk�
Page 3 of'
EXHIBIT "A-1"
VICNft "W
=:__
1l16!!
R
m6r anCic �taI
g ��
INVESTMENT PRORERTIES
July 9, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Request to Include 104 acres Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of
Georgetown
To Whom it May Concern:
The undersigned (the "Owner") is the owner of the 104 acre parcel of land described in
Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") and generally depicted on Exhibit "A-1 " attached hereto.
Pursuant to Section 42.022 of the Texas Local Government Code, the undersigned hereby requests
to include the Property within the erna-territorial jurisdiction ("ETF) of the City of Georgetown.
Owner, on behalf of Owner and its successors and assigns, consents to the inclusion of the Property
within the ETJ of the City of Georgetown.
Sincerely,
Lewis E. Cook J-M-
4-T Ranch Associates,
A California limited partnership
Its: ypre--T
v
LEC/ce
cc: Jeff Brawner, Esq.
Three Harbor Drive - Suite 303 • Sausalito, California 94965-2943
(415) 331-3393 - FAX (415) 331-3373
E:chib i : "A►►
4-i RANCH PRELIMINARY
ME i ES AND SCUNCS OESaZipMC.y
207.308 ACRES
BEING A 17AC7, CONSiSi 1NG OF 207-908 AC ES OF LAND
SMJATEO IN THE ;REDERICC FOY SURVEY, A13STRAC; NC.
=9 1NILLIAMSCN COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING A PORTION
OF A SOS ACRE REMA1NCER AS RECORDED IN VOLUME
218S, PAGE 060 WILLIAMSON COUNTY OEM RECORDS
tW-C.D-RJ, WILLIAMSON CCUNTY, TEXAS. SAID 207.9C3
A0E TRAC, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCM13ED BY
METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS WITH ALL BEARINGS
RE'E?UC`7 TO THE TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATE
SYSMM =-WRAL ZONE:
BEC;NNINC AT A 117 INCH IRCN ROD FOUND FOR T HE NORTHEAST CORNER OF
A 26334 ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1042, PACs 687 W-C.D,R- SAME 8EiNG THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF A 2030.967 ACRE TRACT RECORDED W VOLUME 1270,
PAGE 305 W.CD-R- AND IN THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID 570.5 ACRE TRACT;
THENCE ALONG THE UNE COMMON WITH THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID S70S ACRE
TRACT AND THE NORTH UNE OF SAID 2030-367 ACRE TRACT THE FOLLCWING TEiV
(10) COURSES: WITH COURSES 3 THROUGH 10 BEING A SCUNOARY UNE AGREEMENT
NOT OF RECORD:
I. ALONG A CURVE TD THE LE -- WHICH HAS A RADIUS OF 63233 FED, AND A
C."EN"i'RAL ANGLE OF 36-1S-7 AND AN ARC DiSANC OF 412-20 F-=T, AND THE
CHCRD OF SAID ARC BEARS NORTH 50-29-22 =,AS;', 406.04 FEET TO A PC1NT,
Z. NORTH 33-49-16 EAST, 774.25 ~rT;
3- NORTH 37-27-44 _AST, 1613.-
4. 330.49 F~, ALCNG THE ARC OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A CENTRAL
O - 3.24-44, A RAOIUS OF 5349.43 cr t , WITH A G�{CRD BEARING AND
OISTANCr OF- NORTH 41-21-34 EAST, 0.44
S. NORTH 50.47-43 EAST, 198.19 Fz
6- NORTH 53-12-27 EAs , 168.91 F= i;
7- NORTH 59-43-33 EAST, 157 05
S. NORTH 65-:4-11 FAST, 93.62
9. NORTH 69-SS-15 EAST, 114.57 F'=?;
10. NORTH 71.36-50 EAST, 382-19 FEET;
THENCE ALONG THE UNE COMMON WITH THE NCRTHEASERLY UNE OF SAID
370-5 ACRE TRAC' WUH THE SOUTHWESMLY UNE OF SAID 1061.946 ACRE TRACT
THE FOLLOWNC 0 TWO COURSES:
1. NORTH 22-37--07 WEST, 2176.54 Fir, TO A POINT IN COWAN C2EZ:- .
2 SOUTH 68-50-53 WEST, 3400.00 Fi=T TO AN IN MIRICR CORNER OF SAID S70S
ACRE TRACT,
1
THENCE SOUTH 21-46-C7 EAST, 3097.31 F=iTHRCUCH THE TNT'-.iqIOR OF SAID
57C S ACRE TRACT TO THE NORTH UNE OF SAID 26334 AC2E TRACT,
THENCE NORTH 63-53-33 EAST, 883.70 FEET ALONG THE UNE COMMON WITH THE
SOUTH UNE OF SAID SMS ACRE TRACT AND THE NORTH UNE OF SAID 75334 ACRE
TRACT TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AND CONTAINING A COMPUTED AREA OF
M7.908 ACRES OF LAND -
TARRY L CONWUL
REGIS I =w PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
TEXAS REGISTa RATION NO.4002
TURNER COLLIE & BRADEN INC
5000 PLAZA ON THE LAKE
AUS IN, TEXAS 78746
JOB NO.72-C7533-020
January 13,1995
SAVE AND -EXCEPT THE 104.069 ACRE TRACT DESCRIBED BELOW:
EXHIBIT "A"
Metes and Bounds Description
104.069 Acres (4,533,262 square fearj
4-T Ranch Survey
Williamson County, Texas
Being a tract containing 104.069 acres (4,533,262 square feet) of !
Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract No. 229, Williamson County,Texas and situated in the
and a part of a called 570.5 acre exception tract described and being out d
recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060 Official Records Williamson Exhibit B in dead
(O.R.W.C.T.). Said 104.069 acres being more particular) described
County, Texas
bounds as follows. All coordinates and bearings are referenced scribed by metes and
Plane Coordinate System, Central Zone; all coordinates recited ed to the Texas State
surface distances recited herein may be converted to grid b herein are Grid; all
combined factor of 0.999856056: Y multiplying by the
COMMENCING for reference at a 112 inch iron rod
Y=10,234,117.43) found for the northeast corner of a 263.34 a= 3, conveyed
to'
E. Joe Duckworth by dead recorded in Volume 1042, Page 687 ere tact conveyed to
the northwest corner of a 2,030.967 acre tract conveyed to the Lyd .C.T., same being
deed recorded in Volume 1270, Page 305 (O.R.W.C.T.) and in e L so Family Trust by
570.5 acre tract. the south line of said
THENC,, along a Boundary Line Agreement as agreed to b representatives
Ranch Associates, and the Lyda Family Trust on Janu Y of 4-T
(2J courses: January 16, 19„6 the following two
1. 402.60 feet along the arc of a non -tangent curve to the
central angle of 35321'41", a radius of 652.33 feet, with a chop' having a
and distance of North 51 020'46" East, 396.24 feet to 1/2 inch ironb be
for the end of said curve; d set
2. North 33 ° 42'46" East, 291.14 feet to a 112 inch iron rod =
79.80
Y 10,234,607.03) set for the POINT OF BEGINNING and Most
southerly'
corner hereof; st southerly
THENCE, across said 570.5 acre tract North 2203707" West a di
to a 1/2 inch iron rod set in the southerly northwest line of s stance of 2812.a feet
the most westerly corner hereof; said 570.5 acre tract for
THENCE, along the southerly northwest line of said 570.5 acr East, a distance of 1,938.95 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod Set e tract North 68°50'53"
corner hereof; for the most northerly
THENCE, with the most easier►y northeast line of said 570.5 acr c ° "
East, a distance of 2,175.61 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set in trace "oath 22 37 07
Boundary Line Agreement for the most easterly corner here the aforementioned
Of,
Page 1 of 2
THENCE', along said Boundary Line agreement the foi'lowing fourteen (14) courses:
1. South 70°05'50" West, a distance of 0.32 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
2. South 71 °38'31" West, a distance of 381.81 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
3. South 71 "11'37" West, a distance of 53.71 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
4. South 69"14' 18" West, a distance of 43.08 feat to a 112 inch iron rod set;
S. South 67"51'03" West, a distance of 26.82 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
r
6. South 64"13'47" West, a distance of 75.04 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set-
,
7. South 61 °02'02" West, a distance of 42.54 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
8. South 571,39'34" West, a distance of 118.73 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
9. South 55'15'07" West, a distance of 159.09 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
10. South 51 "43'01" West, a distance of 144.88 feet to a 112 inch iron rod set;
11. South 4512'41" West, a distance of 196.54 feat to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
12. South 3904721" West, a distance of 197.79 feetto a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
13. South 37"24'27" West, a d istan ce of 146.75 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod set;
14. South 33°42'46" West, a distance of 504.75 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING and containing a computed area of 104.069 acres (4,533,262
square feet).
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survev.
A-, L7Acb-;>>/- �
Do gl s J. Anderson
Reg red Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-74
11 January 1996
OF
r
'1'. Tt'`�e
DOUGLAS .j ANDERSON
+5128 � f —
IC
Ct • s1°�r�
z�svKvcrrnarza-;naa-0o,.was Page 2 of 2
Lmatji L "A-1"
IAN .4
Ito' u.ulu,
MCU4ni1
M
- w-
,,r, Del Webb's
'Sun City George-townm
July 16, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Request to Include Land Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of
Georgetown
To Whom it May Concern:
The undersigned (the "Owner") is the owner of the four parcels of land more particularly
described by metes and bounds descriptions in Exhibits "A-1 ", "A-2115 "A-3" and "A-4" attached
hereto, comprising 93 acres, 26 acres, 331 acres and 301 acres, respectively (the "Property") and
generally depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto. Pursuant to Section 42.022 of the Texas Local
Government Code, the undersigned hereby requests to include the Property within the extra -territorial
jurisdiction ("ETJ") of the City of Georgetown. Owner, on behalf of Owner and its successors and
assigns, consents to the inclusion of the Property within the ETJ of the City of Georgetown..
DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
an Arizona limited partnership
By: Del Webb Southwest Co., an Arizona corporation
Its: General Par:ner
By:
Name: Richard L. Vandermeer
Title: Vice President & General Manager
203 South IH-35 - Suite 100
Georgetown. Texas 78628
(512) 930-6700 Fax (512) 930-6770
EXHIBIT"A-3"
Metes and Bounds Description
331.000 Acres (14,418,360 Sq. Ft.)
Frederick Foy Survey, A-229
Williamson County, Texas
BEING a tract containing 331.000 acres (14,418,360 square feet) of land situated in the
Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract No. 229 of Williamson County, Texas and being out of
and a part of a called 1,633.75 acre remainder tract described in deed to John D.
Byram recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060 of the Official Records of Williamson
County, Texas (O.R.W.C.T.). Said 331.000 acre tract being more particularly described
by metes and bounds as follows with all bearings and coordinates referenced to the
Texas Coordinate Syst6'm, Central Zone; all coordinates recited herein are grid values;
all surface distances rKited herein may be converted to grid by multiplying by the
combined factor of 0.,999856056:
BEGINNING at a 1/2-inch iron rod (X = 3,113,740.3226 Y = 10,237,223.0026) found
marking the most southerly corner of a called 425.964 acre tract conveyed to DEL
WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP described in deed recorded under Document No.
9558175-9558177, of scaid O.R.W.C.T.; also being a point in a boundary line agreement
between John D. Byraim and the Lyda Family Trust as recorded in Volume 2718, Page
354 of said O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, southwesterly/ along the lines of said boundary line agreement the following
eleven (11) courses:
1. South 4'1 °36'23" West, a distance of 247.07 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
2. South 43016'37" West, a distance of 209.25 feet to a 1/2 inch iron rod
found for an angle point:
3. South 4'704437" West, a distance of 519.65 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
4. South 5,4020'26" West, a distance of 282.93 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
5. South 5'71,48'21" West, a distance of 199.07 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
6. South 591,17'32" West, a distance of 414.83 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
7. South 60049'09" West, a distance of 99.42 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
8. South 613056'48" West, a distance of 98.26 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
Page 1 of 3
9. South 67017'20" West, a distance of 89.04 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
10. South 70000'50" West, a distance of 99.39 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point:
11. North 18001'36" West, a distance of 3.93 feet to a'/z-inch iron rod set
for the most southerly corner of the herein described tract, and being
the southeast corner of a called 104.069 acre tract described in deed to
DEL WEB13 TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP recorded under Document No.
9602325 ,of said O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, North 22037"07" West, along the easterly line of said 104.069 acre tract, a
distance of 2,171.67 fE.,et to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for the northeast corner of said
104.069 acre tract;
THENCE, South 68050'53" West, along the northerly line of said 104.069 acre tract, at
1,938.95 feet pass a 1/2--inch iron rod found for the northwest corner of said 104.069
acre tract and continuing along a northerly line of a called 570.5 acre tract described
in deed to 4-T Ranch recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060 of said O.R.W.C.T., for a total
distance of 3400.00 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an interior angle point of said
570.5 acre tract;
THENCE, North 21 °4+3'07" West, along an easterly line of said 570.5 acre tract, a
distance of 1,816.85 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an angle point;
THENCE, North 43006'19" East, departing said 570.5 acre tract, a distance of 575.85
feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an angle point;
THENCE, North 37048'08" East, a distance of 607.33 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for
an angle point;
THENCE, North 31 °04'00" East, a distance of 428.26 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for
an angle point;
THENCE, North 28007'217" East, a distance of 268.06 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for
an interior corner common to the aforementioned 1663.75 acre tract and to a called
301.519 acre tract described in deed to DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
recorded under Document No. 9620533 of said O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, easterly along a boundary line agreement between John D. Byram and Artie
D. Young as described in deed recorded under Document No. 9620532 of said
O.R.W.C.T. the following eight (8) courses:
1. North 75058'26" East, a distance of 506.65 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
Page 2 of 3
2. North 7804705" East, a distance of 385.57 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
3. North 78008'24" East, a distance of 223.07 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
4. South 86031'17" East, a distance of 96.80 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
5. South 60053'48" East, a distance of 1,065.85 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
6. South 5;2056'58" East, a distance of 210.00 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an interior angle point common to said 543.41 acre tract and
to said 1,163.75 acre tract;
7. North 64°'52'34" East, a distance of 34.59 feet to a'/2-inch iron rod found
for an angle point;
8. North 68"23'37" East, a distance of 1,187.39 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for the most easterly corner of said 301.519 acre tract and being
an angle point in the southwesterly lines of the aforementioned
425.964 acre Del Webb tract;
THENCE, South 26050'05" East, along said southwesterly line, a distance of 1,482.50
feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 43006'.239" East, continuing along said southwesterly line, a distance
of 1,869.61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of
331.000 acres (14,418,360 square feet) of land.
Ly 30 -96
Arthur W. Girts, Jr.
Registered Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 4741
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-106
25 April 1996
ZISURVCOM4728-1061AWG-001.M &8
OF ,rt
...:.............:...
ARTHUR . �.d GIRTS. JR.
�.� 4741
Page 3of3
i
DATE: July 10, 1996
TO: Mr. Bob Hart
City Manager
City of Georgetown
CC: Charles Simon
Development Services Group
City of Georgetown
FROM: Fred Akers, Trustee
RE: Request for Inclusion into the Georgetown ETJ
for property AWO 229 Foy, FSUR Acres 263.43
Situs 2338 FM Georgetown, TX 7
We request that the property we own, referenced above, be included in the
Georgetown ETJ. It is our understanding that the southern portion of our
property is now in the ETJ. We ask that the entire property be included in the
Georgetown ETJ.
We have discussed this request with Charles Simon in the Development Services
Group.
We thank you for yow- prompt attention to this request.
-17 r J!
Signatur
Name
Telephone number
DATE: July 10, 1996
TO: Mr. Bob Hart
City Manager
City of Georgetown
CC: Charles Simon
Development Services Group
City of Georgetown
FROM: E. Joe Duckworth, Trustee
RE: Request for Inclusion into the Georgetown ETJ
for property AWO 229 Foy, FSUR Acres 263.43
Situs 2338 FM Georgetown, TX 7
We request that the property we own, referenced above, be included in the
Georgetown ETJ. It is our understanding that the southern portion of our
property is now in the ETJ. We ask that the entire property be included in the
Georgetown ETJ.
We have discussed this request with Charles Simon in the Development Services
Group.
We thank you for you- prompt attention to this request.
Signs e
Name
Telephone number
DATE: July 10, 1996
TO: Mr. Bob Hart
City Manager
City of Georgetown
CC: Charles '->imon
Development Services Group
City of Georgetown
FROM: Charles Ward, Trustee
RE: Request for Inclusion into the Georgetown ETJ
for property AWO 229 Foy, FSUR Acres 263.43
Situs 2338 FM Georgetown, TX 7
We request that the property we own, referenced above, be included in the
Georgetown ETJ. It is our understanding that the southern portion of our
property is now in the ETJ. We ask that the entire property be included in the
Georgetown ETJ.
We have discussed this request with Charles Simon in the Development Services
Group.
We thank you for your prompt attention to this request.
Signature
CA PQ'.� IES W,ft-'�7>>
Name
!] I � .- q�z;�A q
Telephone number
DATE: July 10, 1996
TO: Mr. Bob Hart
City Manager
City of Georgetown
CC: Charles Simon
Development Services Group
City of Georgetown
FROM: J. E. Bridges
RE: Request for Inclusion into the Georgetown ETJ
for property AWO 229 Foy, FSUR Acres 263.43
Situs 2338 FM Georgetown, TX 7
We request that the property we own, referenced above, be included in the
Georgetown ETJ. It is our understanding that the southern portion of our
property is now in the ETJ. We ask that the entire property be included in the
Georgetown ETJ.
We have discussed this request with Charles Simon in the Development Services
Group.
We thank you for your prompt attention to this request.
Signature
Name
S - .-�'j; _ ii 41-1,/'
Telephone number
DOCH 9551937
STATE OF TEXAS
{ KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENCE:
COUNTY OF WILLIAMSON {
That I, J. E. Bridges, of the County of Travis and State of
Texas, for and in the consideration of the sum of ten and no/one
hundred dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration to the
undersigned paid by the Grantee herein names, the receipt of which
is hereby acknowledged, have GRANTED, SOLD AND CONVEYED, and by
these presence do GRANT, SELL AND CONVEY unto THE MARBRIDGE
FOUNDATION, INC., of the County of Travis in the State of Texas,
an undivided twenty-five percent (25%) interest in and to
approximately, 263.34 acres of land out of the Frederick Foy Survey
Abstract 229 located in Williamson County, Texas ("Property"),
which Property is more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and incorporated herein for all purposes.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the undivided twenty-five percent (25%)
interest in the above -described Property, together with all and
singular the rights and appurtenances thereto in any wise belonging
unto said Grantee and assigns forever, and I do hereby bind myself,
my heirs, executors and administrators to WARRANT AND FOREVER
DEFEND all and singular the said premises unto the said Grantee,
his heirs and assigns, against every person whomsoever lawfully
claiming or to claim the same or any part thereof, by, through or
under me, but not otherwise.
Record Title to the Property was previously held by E. Joe
Duckworth, Trustee for the benefit of Fred S. Akers, Trustee of
the Fred S. Akers Profit Sharing Plan, E. Joe Duckworth, Trustee
of the E. Joe Duckworth Profit Sharing Plan, Charles Ward, Trustee
of the 2002 Cypress/Houstonian, Inc. Employee Profit Sharing Plan
and J. E. Bridges, each of which parties had an equal undivided
twenty-five percent (25%) interest in the Property.
Executed this _ /G day of 1995
-,�/�P44FFges
STATE OF TEXAS )(
COUNTY OF TRAVIS )(
This instrument was acknowledged before me on the 1 6 day of
-, 1995 by J. E.
"al). .
l4
Marling-Ai6ress of
P.O. Box
Manchaca,
Bridg
By:
Nota Public in and for
the State of Texas
Grantee:
250
Texas 78652
OFFICIAL RECORDS
WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS
' t �% S 421- l
• • PERIHETE:R FIELD NOTES:
DE1NC 263.34 acres of land, situated in the Frederick Foy Survey Abstract
C4 No. 229, in Williamson County, Texas; cold land being that certain tract of
LIM) land called 262.93 acres, as conveyed to Williato L. Putney, 111, Trustee,
M by deed as recorded in Volume 601. Page 709. of tha Deed Records of William-
son County, Texas, and also being a portion of an abandoned County Road,
C surveyed on tho around in the month of Harch, 1974, under the supervision
a of Don IL, Dittzell. Registered Public Surveyor, and belne more particularly
Q� described as follows:
C�
111:(:INN)IM, At not (rnll lolls fnllllll stroll' 11 liltpe crdnr 1:urlN•r }tint «ultl:iltit rite
Cq N.1% eurinur of lit" nhltvu-rufell ltnci•d 'lG7:q'. ncle tr101't9 (1.t L11u It.C. 1•011tit- r
hereof;
J
1111:IICL, 41 69' 17' U. 5651.01 ft•ct multi; nu t•xin, ln}; fitter• t1r 111► 111.n }.Ili
foutid on the nrlat IJne of Filrm to flaiket (tlttld lilt. 23*111. 1n:ookloig the 11,1.1.
earlier of the cold 262.93 acre tract. fur the N.N. corner herauf;
Ilil:flt;!!, 11le11111 this fill III nnnt I1list of h'.It. Jill. 7.:1111. tin (to llt.wn:
nllnol; n eurva to tilt: rJl;ht, (Itndlun 1947.U6 feet. (:hard
livaru S 62' 113, 30" l', 711.40 feet). an Are dictnncer of 715.41 I've:t
tcl a concrete nlonumelit found;
]Junco. S 52' 13' L•', 1,657.65 feet to a concrete ntunu"lcnt found nt
tiro beginning of n curve to the left. (Itci(Ilua S.lrfl7.5U ft'ot. I.oe1r
Cllurd bonris .1 S4" 5U' 3(),, 1:. 521.;1U fee,t);
Thoance. n.lo olt the nalti eut'vr 11t e,n me 411vtlorove of 571.49 lust Iltorn
- an troll pin marklr►It tile. g.W. earner of the Valli 20.75 Acre trnct,
fur. n tutnl are il)nttincr. ttf 521.49 Pert to fin )ran l,Jn ne1 ltu this
pouth lltlu of Lilo unld Ilbnridoeird Culll►ty Itullel for the ::.1/. c.ornt.r
It
TIIENCE. ganernl ly nlon0 th1, line fill .irnr.rJhe11 oil n Ro111111J11-y Llur Ai;o re t«1 fit of rr'cord Jtt Vollune 739, 1•n}tn 651, of the baud Itecurda of Illlll:omrltfi County,
Toxna, no followu; N 71' 12' E. 956.07 feet to ion Trott lilt, found [oetir a
cedar corner pout; and generally with all exiating fence, 11 69' 27' E. 3043.34
t feet to it lnrgo live oak tree marking the soloist notethcrly !i.r. corner of tile.
,tl said 262.95 acre tract, for tiro Moot aoutioerly S.E. corner hereof;
�a
•� TiIENCE, N 20' 37' W. 10.00 feet n]on}; at, cxluttng fetsce ton larl;a cellar
corner post morklnR nu interior corner of Lisa until 262.95 acre tract. for fill
a .0 Interior corner hurnof;
TIIENCL•', N 61' 10' 1% 14.14 feet alulti; nil exit:LJng fct,ce: Lu it 1nrgr.. rcilror
corner post markinit the input rnntnrly :. Cartier of Lilo rlilil 762.95 III -retract, for Elio U1011t easterly I.S.E. C0111017 ItVreuf;
711ECNF., N 20. 351 W, 2.407.37 feet nlung fin exiVting fence to the Places of
Iti:C11:N1NC ouJ cuntfiln)slg 763.34 acrt.n of lnnil.
STATE OF TMS I
KHOW AI.1. NI:N by '1'111:C1: 1'It1::11:N'fS:
COUNIT OF W11.I.IAH(:ON j
I. iron 11. Dlzzell. ltcgiotered I'OblJc Surveyor, du hcrchy certify dint title:
sni•vey wnn inndu fin the p.cutet,d of lilt. 1.ri111i1rLy ingoilly dtincrlhrtl hcrt•ot, and
Jos correct, mid tltslt tHut'u nru nu n111,11ri•111 ilirscrt•inilleJt•n, n1/parent cantlJctn.
shortnges in area, boundary ]!fie conflictll. encronchmenLV, overlappinl; of
lmprovementa, visible utility linen or roads it, place, exr.ept IV Chown
lirruon, and tlhnt onid property Ilan necenu to and frota it dedicated rondwity.
except fin tshol.tii hereon.
TO CERT11'Y WIIJCII. WITNESS my hand and veal at Ceorgrtuwn. W11111t01t)o11 Comity.
Texna, title t1 lh day of 'rbrunry. 19114. A. U.
•.......• .
Real terec� l'ub11 11urvey0r. No. 2210 f 11:'/.Illl
UU�1 11
State of Texas ........................ks
f
fteger t 0133CIL, 1110.
Bto+.ttxliwo tN�lwtt«t � tu�r[ro�•
r. 0 soot W .ell 01111(lowlt in tM)i
1"' 1 1 1 t• l •i' "• •'
EXH IE31T "Art
July 9, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Request to Include 46 acres Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of
Georgetown
To Whom it May Concern:
The undersigned (the "Owner") are the owners of the 46 acre parcel of land described in
Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") and generally depicted on Exhibit "A-1 " attached hereto.
Pursuant to Section 42.022 of the Texas Local Government Code, the undersigned hereby requests
to include the Property within the extra -territorial jurisdiction ("ETJ") of the City of Georgetown.
Owner, on behalf of Owner and its successors and assigns, consents to the inclusion of the Property
within the ETJ of the City of Georgetown.
Sincerely,
ERNEST CLAY YO Gc
PAULINE YOUNG
ECY/ce
cc: Dale Illig, Esq.
EXHIBIT ••A••
MET ES AND BOUNDS FOR 138.81 ACRES
BEING 138.81 ACRES 1N THE F. FOY LEAGUE SURVEY, ABSTRACT
1229 AND THE L. P. DYCHES SURVEY, ABSTRACT 1171 IN
WILLIAMSON COUNTY TEXAS, SAME ALSO BEING THAT
PARTICULAR PARCEL OF LAND DESCRIBED BY DEED AS THE
72.22 ACRES OF THE L. P. DYCHES SURVEY AND 66.5 ACRES OF
THE F. FOY SURVEY, SECOND TRACT, CONVEYED TO ERNEST
CLAY YOUNG RECORDED IN VOLUME 444, PAGE 98, DEED
RECORDS, WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID 138.81 ACRE
TRACT BEINC MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY THE
FOLLOWING METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION, WITH ALL
BEARINGS BASED ON TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATES,
TEXAS CENTRAL ZONE. ALL COORDINATES ARE GRID AND CAN
BE CONVERTED TO SURFACE BY MULTIPLYING BY THE
COMBINED RECIPROCAL FACTOR OF: 1.00014396S.
BEGINNING AT A FOUND IRON ROD, (N = 10,237.778.33 E - 3,101,S94.94) SAME
BEING THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, AND THE SOUTH WEST
CORNER OF THE 31.32 ACRE DONALD H. KYLBERG TRACT, VOLUME 752, PAGE 229. THENCE
NORTH 69-41.36 EAST, 2662.15 FEET ALONG THE FENCED AND OCCUPIED COMMON LINE
BETWEEN THE HEREON DESCRIBED TRACT, AND THE SAID 31.32 ACRE TRACT, TO THE
NORTH EAST CORNER OF THE HEROIN DESCRIBED 7PACT, SAME BEING THE SOUTH EAST
CORNER OF THE SAID 31.32 ACRE TRACT, AND INTERSECTING WITH THE FENCED COMMON
LINE WITH OF THE 1061.846 ACRE JOHN D. BYRAM TRACT, VOLUME 2185, PAGE 60.
'THENCE ALONG THE COMMON LINE WITH THE SAID 1061.846 ACRE TRACT, THE
FOLLOWING THREE COURSES:
1. SOUTH 22.13.07 FAST, 848.28 FEET TO A FOUND IRON ROO.
2. SOUTH 83.48.07 EAST, 26.42 FEET TO A FOUND IRON ROD.
3. ,SOUTH 2O.03-07 EAST, 335.24 FEET. TO A FOUND IRON ROD, SAME BEING THE NORTH
EAST CORNER OF THE UNRECORDED NORTH LAKE SUBDIVISION
'THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT AND THE
NORTHERLY AND WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTH LAKE SUBDIVISION (UNRECORDED) THE
FOLLOWING (24) TWENTY-FOUR COURSES.
1. SOUTH 63.40.53 WEST, 201.40 FEET,
2. ,SOUTH 71-16.53 WEST,19.22 FEET,
3. SOUTH 66-24-53 WEST,119.49 FEET,
4. 'SOUTH 68.31-53 WEST, 294.05 FEET,
S. ;SOUTH 66-56-20 WEST,161.28 FEET,
6. SOUTH 70-43.20 WEST, 203.91 FEET,
7. SOUTH 68.48-20 WEST, 249.30 FEET,
S. SOUTH 68.40.44 WEST, 609.61 FEET,
9. :SOUTH 69-17-17 WEST, 192.60 FEET,
10. SOUTH 68-22-17 WEST, 315.47 FEET,
11. SOUTH 64-48-17 WEST, 87.27 FEET,
12. !SOUTH 22-51-35 EAST, 300.12 FEET,
13.. :SOUTH 2O.47-35 EAST, 266.77 FEET,
. 6
14. ;SOUTH 2O.25.35 EAST, 309.95 FE=_T,
15. :SOUTH 20.59-35 EAST, 192.94 F T ,
16. 'SOUTH 17-45-35 EAST, '161.43 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE CILES
ESTATES RECORDED IN CABINET I, SLIDE 51,
17. SOUTH 69.34.2S WEST, 352.81 FE27,
18. SOUTH 67-15-00 WEST.135.14 FEET,
19. SOUTH 70.17.31 WEST, 280.2S RET,
20. SOUTH 68-34-00 WEST, 55.93 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID GILES
ESTATES,
21. SOUTH 68.30-00 WEST, 365.46 FEET,
22. SOUTH 68-01.00 WEST, 399.33 FEET,
23. SOUTH 71-58-00 WEST, 90.08 FEET,
24. SOUTH 33.54.35 WEST, 34.50 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY R.O.W. LINE OF SAID FM
2338,
THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHEASTERLY R.O.W. LINE THE FOLLOWING (2) TWO
COURSES:
1. NORTH 44-10.29 WEST, 401.00 FEET,
2. NORTH 44.33-29 WEST, 76.50 F-Et l TO THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF A. DANIELL
2.20 ACRE TRACT,
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH SAID 2.20 ACRE TRACT AND SAID 89:54
ACRE TRACT THE FOLLOWING (2) COURSES.
I. NORTH 25-24-31 EAST, 391.00 FEET,
2. NORTH 53.10-29 WEST, 214.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY R.O.W. LINE OF COUNTY ROAD
245,
THENCE NORTH 21-22-32 EAST, 2202.69 FEET ALONG SAID EASTERLY R.O.W. LINE TO
THE PRINT OF SECINNINC CONTAINING A COMPUTED AREA OF 138.81 ACRES.
SAVE AND EXCEPT THE 93.003 ACRE TRACT DESCRIBED BELOW:
LARRYL CO ELL
REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
TEXAS REGISTRATION NO.4002
TURNER COLLIE & BRADEN INC.
5000 PLAZA ON THE LAKE
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78746
JOB NO.72-07558-041
Mardi 2311995
Ra:
t
Zvssao.,�tR oc..suR O"EU
4002
- �-_�.e1�°..• 1.
40 � a6ed
ulaJay aoeJI 9y3 40 Jawoo AIJBISM41nos ayQ J04 asod aoua4
le puno4 poJ uoJl a �o aseq aye
a oyoul-Z/� 11aa4 Z"OZ 40 a0ueZs!a a 'Ise3 4SZ,S17ooZ U1noS
b
ueJoj1aspoJuoJ1youLK a o13aaJ 6S'04 40 aoueZslp a 'Zse3 .() .�rZoZZ ujnoS
•£
ue J0419s poJ uoJl youHK e 03 4994 bZ'Z� Jo ao3 uejslp a 'Ise '�uoES
yjnoSnos •Z
'iulod albue ue JOJ punoj poi uoJl you!-Z/, a o1(wej), q 'Iaaj 8Z•8b8
Pa11eo) '(6unoA1jaaj �S'Lb8 Palleo) Jaaj E0.8b8 uo aouegslp a'weaAe ue 6u
uaaM�aq aull paldn�oo pue paoua a P nog
U� U1IM pue 6uoie �se3 ..,Eb,t Z.ZZ UjnoS •�
:sesJnoo (b) Jno4 bulMoliO4 ay, '9661 `ZZ I!Jd)v 4o se pagep 'LuejAS
*Cl uUor pue 6unoA ACID 3s9uJ3 u99nr4aq 4u9w9aJ6d 9u11 AJepLano8 e y41M '3oN3Hl
'sexal 'AaunoO uoswe1111M 40 spJooad le!�►1440 ay3 40 Q90 96ed
`S8!-Z auanlo� ul pap�ooaa se uy„ 41q!yx3 Zoej4 Japulewal LUEJAS •(3 uyor 9J:T
Palle:)a 40 au11 AIJa'saM a uo 6u►lle4 osie poi uoJl ples '1oeJl aloe SL•9l9 N
Z9 I,S 6JaglAN
p!es 40 JauJoo A1Jazseay4nos a bulaq osle poi u0J1 pies 'paglJosap u!aJay ;oeJ3 ay 40 JauJoo AlJ9Zseay3Jou 9y3 J04 4sod aoua
4 e 10 ase q a U4 le pun04 poJ uoJ! you14K
e 01G994 00'OS9'Z 40 aoueaslp pallet) aaa4 ZS•L99'Z 40 aoue2slp a '6JaglA>l pue 6unoA
uaanraaq aull pa!dn000 pue paou94 9141 y41M pue 6uoie pue 'S17Z 'ON Peod /3uno
40 aull AlJa,,)sea paldn000 pue paou94 p!es aye 6ulnea1 `M3 -I Z 0 �8So69 U�JoN `3oN3Hl
SE �:Tij 6JaglA)i 'H pleuoo aloe ZE-1 ,a � 0•M 6ZZ a6ed 'ZSL awnlOA u1 papJooaJ
P Ileo a 40 JauJoo AlJa�saMyznos a 6u!aq
osle pot uoJ! pies `Pagl.cosap u!aJay �oeJ1 aye 30 JauJoo AlJa�.saM
/�unoO pap.,00aJun ue 'SbZ 'oN peon /�.uno0 4o aull /�1Ja�sea �, dn� 0 U� Job peoJ
ay1 uo puno4(656�'8LL'LzZ'O�=Jk'9bS£•S6S'l.Ol.`2=� pot uoJ! p of-z e e pue Paoua8
y . /� � ONINN1038
:9S09S8666'0 Jo J030el paulgwo:) ay1 Aq buiAld!alnw
Aq P1J6 04 pa�Januoo aq /dew ulaJay PalloaJ saouelslp aoe4Jns Ile !p1J6 ate u*
aLl
PaaloaJ sajeulpJ000 Ile =auoz le-13u90 'wazsAS ajeulpJooO sexal ay, 03 paouaJaJ aJ
6ulaq s6upeaq pue saIeulp.a000 Ile U1IM :sMot104 se s uno
Al-lelnol�Jed aJow hula P q Pue sa�aw /�q paglJosap
q �oeJ3 aloe '00',26 P!eS '(WO'0'M) spJooad paaa /Quno0
uoswelll!M ay3 40 86 a6ed 'bbb awnloA ul papJooaJ se ,oej3 ��uooas 6unox /fie jsauJ3 aloe ZL'821. Palleo a 40 uo13Jod a bu!a I0
'oN Zoe.lzsgy 'A9iunS Ao� �lo!JapaJd ayp pue q P•o 'sexal 'Aauno,� uoswellllM 40 '6ZZ
LLB N ZoeJasgy 'l�anans sayo/�a •d s1Ma-1
aU� ul pa�en�ls puel �o c�aa4 aJenbs I,I,Z'I✓SO`b) saJoe j00'j6 6u!u!E>juoo ZoeJl e 6uia
.8
sexal '/�wno0 uoswellllM
6ZZ-V '/�anJnS Ao� >ppgpaJ� ay1 pue
�L�-d'AanJnS sayol�a •d siMal
Uj:� 'bS "Z'�SO'b) SaJoy 200'26
uOpdp:)saa spuno8 pue saaaW
described, said iron rod also being the point of termination of said boundary
line agreemE�nt between Young and Byram, said iron rod also being the
northeast corner of a called 5.13 acre Alan C. Williams tract as recorded in
Volume 1952, Page 06 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 63343'31" West, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Williams tract, a distance of 201.46 feet (called distance of 201.40 feet) to
a 60d nail found in a 15" oak tree for an angle point;
THENCE, South 71 °141'26" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Williams , a distance of 19.21 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle Iooint;
THENCE, South 66°2!5'32" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Williams, a distance of 119.42 feet (called distance of 119.49
feet) to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 68123:219" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Williams, a distance of 293.29 feet (called distance of 294.05
feet) to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an angle point of the tract herein described,
said iron rod also Toeing the northwesterly corner of said Williams tract and the
northeasterly corner of a called 5.19 acre Larry F. Kasper, Jr., tract as recorded in
Volume 2148, Page 569 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 66'56'46" West, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Kasper, a distance of 161.28 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an angle
point;
THENCE, South 70°43'46" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Kasper, a distance of 203.91 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for
an angle point;
THENCE, South 69"00'25" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kasper, a distance of 249.33 feet to a 1/2-Inch iron
rod found for an angle point of the tract herein described, said iron rod also being
the northwesterly corner of said Kasper tract, and the northeasterly corner of a
called 16.35 acre Herbert R. Kent tract as recorded in Document No. 9606912
O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 68°.-58'12" West, along and with fenced and occupied line between
Young and Kent, a distance of 298.45 feet (called 298.59 feet) to a found 60d nail in
a 12-inch oak tree found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 67°155'43" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kent, a distance of 132.16 feet (called 133.63 feet)
to a 60d nail in a 18-inch cedar tree found for an angle point;
Page 2 of 3
THENCE, South 68`116'28" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kent, a distance of 178.81 feet (called 180.11 feet)
to a'/z-inch iron rod found for an angle point of the tract herein described, said iron
rod also being the northwesterly corner of said Kent tract, and the northeasterly
corner of a called 16.36 acre Barry Kendrick Tract as recorded in Volume 2501, Page
379 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 69026'28" West, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Kendrick, a distance of 193.31 feet (called distance of 192.60 feet) to a 1/2-
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 68°14'20" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kendrick, a distance of 315.54 feet (called distance
of 315.47 feet) to a'/2-inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 64"53'03" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kendrick, a distance of 86.34 feet (called distance
of 87.28 feet) to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an angle point of the tract herein
described, said iron, rod also being the northwesterly corner of said Kendrick tract;
THENCE, South 68°419'12" West, over and across said Youngs 138.72 acre tract, a
distance of 1,405.41 feet to a'/z-inch iron rod set on the said fenced and occupied
easterly line of County Road No. 245, for the southwesterly corner of the tract
herein described;
THENCE, North 21023'22" East,.along and with the said fenced and occupied easterly
line of County Road No. 245, a distance of 1,720.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING
and containing a computed area of 93.003 acres (4,051,211 square feet) of land.
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survey.
ug as J. Anderson
Re ered Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-95
April 16, 1996
Z-%URVC0M4'M-& s1NM-0 ..%M8 Page 3 of 3
JOHN D. BYRAM, OWNER
GARY D. STILLWELL, PRESIDENT
DENISE V. SOTO, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT
July 10, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
GARY P. HEINEMANN, CONTROLLER
SHERRY PUGH, HUD GENERAL MANAGER
JOHN Ma SANCHEZ, VICE PREsmENT
CONSTRUMON/MAINTENANCE
Re: Request to Include 307 acres Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City
of Georgetown
To Whom It May Concern:
The undersigned (the "Owner") is the owner of the 307 acre parcel of land described in
Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") and generally depicted on Exhibit "A- l"
attached hereto. Pursuant to Section 42.022 of the Texas Local Government Code, the
undersigned hereby requests to include the Property within the extra -territorial jurisdiction
("ETJ") of the City of Georgetown. Owner, on behalf of Owner and its successors and
assigns, consents to the inclusion of the Property within the ETJ of the City of
Georgetown.
Sincerely
John D. Byram
cc: Bill Brown, Esq.
510 SOUTH CONGRESS, SUITE 400 - AUSTIN, TEXAS 78704 - 512-474-4242
FAX 512-474-5213 -HUD FAX 512-474-5013
s
EXHIBIT A
ME i ES ANO HOUNDS 0E:CR!PTICN
10611.846 ACRES
?E:PJC A TRAC: CONSISTING OF 1061.346 AC.'<ES OF LAND
SITUATED IN THE FRECOEYIC< FOY SURVEY, AES T RACT NO.
22E, IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY TEAS AND EEING A
PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 1,633.75 ACRE TRACT
RECuRCE0 IN VOLUME 2185, PAGE 060 WILLIAlMSCN
COLNTY 0EE0 RECORDS, (W.C.D.RJ WILLIAMSON COUNTY,
TEXAS. SAID 1061.346 ACRE TRACT BEING MCRE
PARTICULARLY OESCRIHEO BY METES AND BCUNDS AS
PC.. L LOWS:
6ECINNIN(; AT A 112 INCH IRON ROO FOUND FOR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
A 20.0 ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 811, PAGE 507. SAME EE:NC 'riat
NORTHWEST COF!NEZ OF THE HEREIN 0E:CRIEE0 TRACT AND IN THE EAST RIGHT-OF-
WAY (R.O.W.) LINE OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 245;
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMCN WITH THE SOUTH AND EAST LINE CIF SAID
20.0 ACRE TRACT WITH THE NORTH AND WEST LINE OF THE HE-=N CESCRIEEp
TRACT AS FEj1C:0 ANO OCCUPIED THE FOLLOWING (4) FOUR CCU'—-
S2
1. NCRTH 71 •:1-57 A� a 3 - , , . .. E ..T, 18 .�� FE_ T +'0 �, 1!2 INC: f IRON ROC FCUNC,
2. NORTH 71•1?•S7 EAST, 1045.15 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRCN RCO FOUNC,
3. NCRTH 71-21.57 EAST, 547-30 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRCN RCO ; CUNO F C4P. ,AN
ANGLE POINT ,
4. NORTH 18 _2-33 WEST, Sv6.541 F==-
-_ � TO A 112 INCH IRCN R00 FCl1NC : uR AN
ANGLE POINT ANO IN THE SOUTH LINE OF A 26.96 ACRE TRACT ;RECOROEO IN
VOLUME 444, PAGE 121 W.C.O.R.,
THENCE ALONG THIE LINE COMMON WITH TI :E SOUTH LINE OF Snip S ACRE
TRACT WITH THE NCRTH LINE OF THE HEREIN CESCR/BED TRACT THE FOLLOWING (4)
FOUR COURSES:
1. NCRTH 70-•58-E7 EAST, 681.09 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRON RCO FOUNC,
2. NORTH 72-15-57 EAST, 326.37 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRON ROO FOUND,
3. NORTH 71.42-57 EAST, 1,350.50 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRON ROO FOUND,
4. NORTH 71-21-57 EAST, 1025.11 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRON ROO FOUND FOR THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 26-96 ACRE TRACT SAME BEING A NCR T HE.AST
CORNER OI= THE .w.EREiN DESCRIBED TRACT ANO IN THE WES LINE CPA 545.14
ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 544, PAGE 582 W.C.O.R.,
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMCN WITH THE WESTERLY, SOUTHERLY ANC
EASTERLY LINE OF SAID 543.14 ACRE WITH THE EASTERLY, NORTHERLY AND
WESTERLY LINE OF THE HEREIN GESCRIEEO TRACT THE FOLLOWING (10) TEN
COURSES:
1. SOUTH 19-48-C3 EAST, 1129.21 FEET TO A 117 INCH IRON ROO FOUND FOR AN
ANCLE FAINT,
Z. NORTH EAST, 1761.23 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRON ROD FOUND FOR AN
ANGLE POINT,
3. SOUTH 0a-13.03 EAST, 334.04 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON RCO FOUND,
4. SOUTH 09-16-03 EAST, 646.04 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROO FOUND FCR AN
ANGLE POINT,
5, NORTH 78- 6-3557 EAST, 506.60 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRCN RCO CGUNC,
S. NORTH 81-14-57 EAST, 385.52 FEET TO A 1/7 INCH IRCN RCC FCUNO FCR AN
ANGLE PCINr,
7. SOUTH 66-22-03 EAST, 1155-44 FEET TO A 1/2 INC: i IRCN RCO F-CUNC,
S. SOUTH S3-3::-03 EAST, 366.13 F:=' TO A POINT,
9. NORTH 66-59-57 EAST, 69.21 FEE ►► TO A POINT,
10. NORTH 70.54-57 EAST, 1187.19 FEET TO A 1/7 WC:-f IRCN RCC FOUND FCR THE:
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 543.14 ACRE TRACT,
THEVC= NORTH 19-43-403 WEST, 788.57 FE;T ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH
THE EAST LINE 01: SAID 543.14 ACRE TRACT WITH A WEST LINE OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED TRACT AS FENCED AND OCCUPIED TO A 1/2 INCH IRCN ROO FOUND FOR
THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF A 125.324 ACRE TRACT RE::OROED IN VOLUME 24141,
PAGE 793 W.C.O.R.
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH THE SOUTH AND EAST LINE CF SA 10
125.324 ACRE TRACT WITH THE NORTH AND WEST LINE OF Ti-?E HE=EiN CESCRIEEO
TRACT AS FENC=D AND OCCUPIED THE FOLLOWING (101 TEN COURSES:
1. NORTH 70-::4--7 EAST, 2664.11 FEET TO A 1/2 INC:-i IRCN RCC FOUND wR AN
ANGLE POINT IN THE WEST BANK OF SE?RY CREEK,
2. NORTH 50-12-03 WEST, 555.85 FEET TO A 1/2 INC:I IRCN RCC FOUND,
3. NORTH 58416-03 WEST, 3E0.72 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRCN RCO FOUND,
4. NCRTH 31-12-03 WEST, 389.74 FEET TO A 117 INCH IRON ROO FOUND,
S. NORTH 45•:;9-03 WEST, 150.84 FEET TO A 1/2 INC:-f IRON ROO FCUNO,
6. NORTH 25-08--7 EAST, 33.46 FEET TO A 112 INC:-4 IRON ROO FOUND,
7. NORTH 40-12 ?3 WEST, 73.66 FEET TO A 112 INC:-1 IRON ,ROO FOUND,
8. NORTH 36-40-03 WEST, 351.79 FEE ii TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND,
NORTH 22-18-03 WEST, 340.48 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON R00 FOUND,
10. NORTH 13-15-03 WEST, 174.54 FE=T TO A 1/7 INCH IRON R00 FOUND FOR THE
NORTHEAST CORNET OF SAID 125.324 ACRE TRACT SAME BEING THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF A 747.17 ACRE TRACT RE::OROE0 1N VOLUME 1813,
PACE 66i ,ANO IN THE WEST BANK OF BERRY CREEK, j 1
THENC; ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID
742.17 ACRE TRACT WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE HE:cEiN DESCRIEED
TRACT THE FOLLOWING (8) EiCHTT COURSES:
1. NORTH 05• 56-03 WEST, 89.53 FEET TO A 112 INCH IRON ROO FOUND.
2. SOUTH 82-39-03 EAST, 63.67 FEET TO A POINT IN BERRY CREEK,
3. NORTH 00-42-57 EAST, 37.03 FEET TO A POINT IN BERRY CREEK,
4. NORTH 75-29-57 EAST, 158.41 FEET TO A 117 INCH IRON ROO FOUND IN THE
EAST BANK OF BERRY CREEK,
S. NORTH 46-30-57 EAST, 438.37 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON RCO FOUND,
S. NCRTHrf 30-CS-ES7 EAST, 1395.38 tE=T TO A 117 INCH IRCN RCO FICUNO,
7. NCRT'rt 21.4S-57 EAST, 581.96 FEET TO A 1/7 INC:-f IRON ROO FCUNO,
8. NCRTH Q3-26-r7 EAST, 167.74 FEE; TO A 1/2 INCH IRON . 0 FOUND IN THE
WEST �� LINE OF A 424.228 ACRE TRACT RECORCEO IN VOLUME 2111, PACE GO;
W.C.O.R. AND IN THE EAST LINE OF SAID 742.17 ACRE TRACT AND BEING THE
MCST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THE HE REIN OESCRIEE•0 TRACT,
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMCN WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID 424.28 ACRE
TRACT WITH THE: =SST LINE OF THE HEREIN OESCRIEED TRACT THE FOLLOWING (7)
TWO COURSES.-
1. SOUTH 19-04-03 EAST, 5776.55 FE=-1 TO A 1/2 INC:-i IRON RCO FOUND,
2. SOUTH 21-27.35 EAST, 1573.97 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROO FOUND FOR THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID 424.28 ACRE TRACT SAME BEING THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE HEREIN 0ESCRIEE0 TRACT AND IN THE NORTH
LINE OF A 2030.967 ACRE TRACT RECORDEO IN VOLUME 1270, PACE 305 AND
IN A DIRT ROAD,
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID 2030.2E7
ACRE TRACT WITH THE SOUTH LINE OF THE HEREIN OE:CRIEEO TRACT THE
FOLLOWING (1C) TcN COURSE:
1. SOUTH 89-05-48 WEST, 2.33 FEET TO A POINT,
2. NCRTH SS-21-13 WEST, 1394.9S FEET TO THE EECINNING OF A CURVE TO THE
LE= T� ,
3. 602.13 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURIE TO THE LEFT He' A CENTRAL
ANG""Cll= 75-53-46, A RADIUS OF 454.56, AND A CHICRO BEARING APID
DISTANCE OF SOUTH 47-00-56 WEST, S53.06.FEE ,
4. SOUTH 17 -50-28 WEST, 262.43 FEE-1 TO THE EECINNING OF A CURVE TO THE
RIGHT,
S. 196.71 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A
CENTRAL ANCLE OF 24-15-34, A RADIUS OF 4E4.152, AND A CHCRO BEARING
AND DISTANCE OF SOUTH 3C-21-58 WEST, 195.24 FEET,
6. SOUTH 4:I-53-28 WEST, 403.35 FEET TO A POINT,
7. SOUTH 441-24-45 WEST, 1337.84 FE: ii TO A POINT,
S. SOUTH 50-18-12 WEST, 519.65 FEET TO A POINT,
4. SOUTH 61-30-02 WEST, 1079.79 FEET TO THE BEGINNING O� A CURVE TO' THE
RIGHT,
10. 181.8E FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING
CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11-08-08, A RADIUS OF 955.66. AND A CHORD BEARING
AND 01S i ANCE OF SOUTH 64.44-25 WEST, 181.5E FEET, TO THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF THE HEREIN 0ESCRIEE0 TRACT SZE SEWC THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF A 570.5 ACRE RENIAINDER TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 2185,
PAGE 06() W.C.O.R.
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID
570.5 ACRE TRACT WITH THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF THE HEREIN OESCRIEEO
TRACT THE FALLOWING (4) FOUR COURSE:
1. NORTH 2O-05-03 WEST, 2171.57 FE= T TO A POINT IN COWAN CREEK
-3- BYftm
s
2. SCaUTri 71-?_-r; WEr ► r 34C0.00 _-, I i 0 A INT
r
3. NCRT:� 19-14-+73 WET, 1816.35 0 A =LINT IN CC,WAN CR=_<,
�. Sl, U114 70-45-z7 WEST, 2793-5-r_E-i TO r'E NCR : i:WE: Cu RNc:; CS - 4 10
570.: ACRE TRACT SAME 3EiNG THE SCUTHWE� i CORNER OF
0E=C::IEE0 TRACT A N 0 IN THE EAST U N E OF A S.13; ACRE TRACT ;c"CRIr. IN
VOLUME 1951, PACE 006 W.C.O.q.
THENCE NCRTH, 20-18-03 WEST, 295.50 TO A 112 INCH IRON ROD .=;,UNO FOR
THE NCRTHEaST CORNER OF SAID 3.13 ACRE TRACT SAME 8E;NG THE SCUTIHEAST
CORNER OF A 86.50 ACRE TRACT REC ORGE7 IN VOLUME 444, PACE 98
THENC= ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH THE EAS, 2RLY LINE OF SAID 30-.!:o
ACRE TRACTWITH THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE HEREIN CE:CRIEEO TRACT, AS FcVC=O
AND OCCUPIED THE FOLLOWING (3) THREE COURSES:
1. NORTH 17-31-03 WEST, 333.24 FEET TO A 1/2 INC:46 IRCN ROD FOUND
I NORTH 81-16--33 WEST, 26.4". F-c_t TO A 112 INCH IRCN RCO FOUND,
3. NORTH 19-41-03 WEST. 848?8 FEE TO A 1/Z INCH IRGN RCO FtOLINO 7 THE
NCR "HEAST CORNER OF _AID S6.550 ACRE 7RACT SAME EE:NG THE SCL1 T i-:EAS T
C0��ER OF A 31ACRE T?.aCT
R-*,.32 RECORDED IN VCLUME 75_, P.aOc C'g
W.C.:).R.,
THE�IC= ALCNC THE LINE CC;MMCN INI T H THE =AST ERLY AND NC TrERLY LINE
OF SAID 31.352 ACRE TRACT WIT; ; THE WESTERLY ANO SCUTHERLY LINE OF T FE
HEREIN OE..CRIEEO TRACT AS FE��CSO AND CCC'JP!EC T'r-E FOLLrWINC (S) THREE
COURSc:;
1. NCRTi 11a-=5-0„ WEST, S35.41 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IR N G RGO FGUNO r., THE
NOR i m'EAS ►T CORNER OF SAID 31.32 ACRE TRACT,
2. .. 1 7 cE ►► TO A 112 INCH IRC-N RCO
�OLIT'u 7 -"7 WEST. ��T ala.as = ; vUNC,
3. SOUTH 71-3c-57 WEST, 1964.15 FEET TO A FENCE POST FOUND IN THE EAST
R.O.W. LINE OF SAID COUNTY ROAD NO. 245 AND SEiNC THE NCRTi 'lE3 ►7
CORNER OF SAID 31.32 ACRE TRACT SAME EE:NG THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
THE HERE?N DESCRIBED TRACT,
THENCE NORTH 17-03-03 WE: T , 626.68 FEET T ALONG THE EAST R.O.W. LINE OF
SAID COUNTY ROAD NO. 245 TO THE POINT OF EECINNING AND CONTAINING A
COMPUTED AREA OF 1061.846 ACRES OF LAND.
OF'^ t
LARRY k.'CONWELL
REGM CIE:) PRGFESSiONAL L,;NO SURVEYOR
TEXAS Rom"°NO4 2 : ��
�L.,u..STRATICN , LAPZY L. Ct� IVI
TURNEF CC:LLtE & ?RA • ���',� •; `Zt
CE ! INC.
5000 PILAZ; ON THE LAtCE ;U'•••..:...-•:i%,��
AUS i iN, TEXAS 787,16
Joe NO.77.0753a-010
Aprtl 27, 1994
SAVE AND EXCEPT THE 331.000 ACRE TRACT AND THE 425 ACRE TRACT MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BELOW:
-a- aYRAM
Lt�01Et: SYiLVrE9IIWJ �EY�ILC DOS. sue
Metes and Bounds Description
331.000 Acres (14,418,360 Sq. Ft.)
Frederick Foy Survey, A-229
Williamson County, Texas
BEING a tract containing 331.000 acres (14,418,360 square feet) of land situated in the
Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract No. 229 of Williamson County, Texas and being out of
and a part of a called 1,633.75 acre remainder tract described in deed to John D.
Byram recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060 of the Official Records of Williamson
County, Texas (O.R.W.C.T.). Said 331.000 acre tract being more particularly described
by metes and bounds as follows with all bearings and coordinates referenced to the
Texas Coordinate System, Central Zone; all coordinates recited herein are grid values-
all surface distances recited herein may be converted to grid by multiplying by the
combined factor of 0.999856056:
BEGINNING at a 1/2--inch iron rod (X = 31113,740.3226 Y = 10,237,223.0026) found
marking the most southerly corner of a called 425.964 acre tract conveyed to DEL
WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP described in deed recorded under Document No.
9558175-9558177, of said O.R.W.C.T.; also being a point in a boundary line agreement
between John D. B�(ram and the Lyda Family Trust as recorded in Volume 2718, Pa e
354 of said O.R.W.C.T.; g
THENCE, southwesterly along the lines of said boundary line agreement the followin
eleven (11) courses;: g
1. South 41 °36'23" West, a distance of 247.07 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
2. South 43°16'37" West, a distance of 209.25 feet to a 1/z inch iron rod
found for an angle point.
3. South 4704437" West, a distance of 519.65 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
4. South 54020'26" West, a distance of 282.93 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point,
5. South 571148'21" West, a distance of 199.07 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
6. South 59017'32" West, a distance of 414.83 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
7. South 60049'09" West, a distance of 99.42 feet to a '/z-Inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
8. South 631,56'48" West, a distance of 98.26 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
Page 1 of 3
9. South 67017'20" West, a distance of 89.04 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
10. South 70000'50" West, a distance of 99.39 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point:
11. North �I8001'36" West, a distance of 3.93 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set
for the most southerly corner of the herein described tract, and being
the southeast corner of a called 104.069 acre tract described in deed to
DEL WE138 TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP recorded under Document No.
9602325 of said O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, North 22037"07" West, along the easterly line of said 104.069 acre tract, a
distance of 2,171.67 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for the northeast corner of said
104.069 acre tract;
THENCE, South 68"50'53" West, along the northerly line of said 104.069 acre tract, at
1,938.95 feet pass a 1/rinch iron rod found for the northwest corner of said 104.069
acre tract and continuing along a northerly line of a called 570.5 acre tract described
in deed to 4-T Ranch recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060 of said O.R.W.C.T., for a total
distance of 3400.00 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an interior angle point of said
570.5 acre tract;
THENCE, North 21 °-46'07" West, along an easterly line of said 570.5 acre tract, a
distance of 1,816.85 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an angle point;
THENCE, North 431106'19" East, departing said 570.5 acre tract, a distance of 575.85
feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an angle point;
THENCE, North 37°4,3'08" East, a distance of 607.33 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for
an angle point;
THENCE, North 31 °04'00" East, a distance of 428.26 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for
an angle point;
THENCE, North 28007'27" East, a distance of 268.06 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for
an interior corner common to the aforementioned 1663.75 acre tract and to a called
301.519 acre tract described in deed to DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
recorded under Document No. 9620533 of said O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, easterly along a boundary line agreement between John D. Byram and Artie
D. Young as described in deed recorded under Document No. 9620532 of said
O.R.W.C.T. the following eight (8) courses:
1. North 75058'26" East, a distance of 506.65 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
Page 2 of 3
2. North 7804705" East, a distance of 385.57 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
3. North 78008'24" East, a distance of 223.07 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found fcr an angle point;
4. South 86031'17" East, a distance of 96.80 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found fcr an angle point;
5. South 60053'48" East, a distance of 1,065.85 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
6. South 521,56'58" East, a distance of 210.00 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an interior angle point common to said 543.41 acre tract and
to said 1,163.75 acre tract;
7. North 64"5234" East, a distance of 34.59 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found
for an angle point;
8. North 6@023'37" East, a distance of 1,187.39 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found fcr the most easterly corner of said 301.519 acre tract and being
an anglE1 point in the southwesterlV lines of the aforementioned
425.964 acre Del Webb tract;
THENCE, South 26050'05" East, along said southwesterlV line, a distance of 1,482.50
feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 43"06'39" East, continuing along said southwesterlV line, a distance
Of 1,869.61 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of
331.000 acres (14,418,360 square feet) of land.
. Y- 3a - g6
Arthur W. Girts, Jr.
Registered Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 4741
Prepared bV:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-106
25 April 1996
Z-M RVC0 M4728-1061AWC-001.M &8
f, OF 7-
� P��G�S7cRFlY9cP
..:..................
0TNUR
GIRTS, JR..
...
4741
�vn
Page 3 of 3
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
425.964 ACRES
BEING A TRACT OF LAND CONSISTING OF 425.964 ACRES OF
LAND SITUATED IN THE FREDERICK FOY SURVEY, ABSTRACT
NO. 229, IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS AND BEING A
PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN 1,633.75 ACRE TRACT RECORDED
IN VOLUME 2185, PAGE 060 WILLIAMSON COUNTY DEED
RECORDS, (W.C.D.R.I WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS. SAID
425.964 ACRES BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY
METES AND BOUNDS AS FOLLOWS, WITH ALL BEARINGS
REFERENCED 'TO THE TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATE
SYSTEM, CENTRAL ZONE; ALL COORDINATES ARE GRID AND
CAN BE CONVERTED TO SURFACE BY MULTIPLYING BY THE
RECIPROCAL COMBINED FACTOR OF 1.000143965:
BEGINNING AT A SET IRON ROD, 0( = 3,116,526.31 Y = 10,239,034.85) FOR THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 1633.75 ACRE TRACT AND BEING THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT AND IN THE NORTH LINE OF A 2030.967 ACRE
TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 1270, PAGE 305 AND IN A DIRT ROAD.
1'HENCE ALONG THE APPROXIMATE CENTER LINE OF SAID DIRT ROAD PER
BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT BETWEEN REPRESENTATIVES OF SAID 1633.75 JOHN D.
BYRAM TRACT AND SAID 2030.967 LYDA FAMILY TRUST TRACT THE FOLLOWING (6)
COURSES:
1. SOUTH 88-34-28 WEST, 1375.99 FEET TO A SET IRON ROD, BEING THE POINT OF
CURVATURE FOR A CURVE TO THE LEFT.
2. 602.52 FEET ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 75-56-44, A RADIUS OF 454.56 FEET, WITH A CHORD BEARING AND
DISTANCE OF: SOUTH 46-07-36 WEST, 559.37 FEET, TO A SET IRON ROD.
3. 'SOUTH 11-07-07 WEST, 74.76 FEET TO A SET IRON ROD.
4. SOUTH 10-43-58 WEST, 73.33 FEET TO THE POINT OF CURVATURE FOR A CURVE
TO THE RIGHT.
S. 288.17 FEET ALONG 'fHE ARC OF SAID CURVE TO THE RIGHT, HAVING A CENTRAL
ANGLE OF 35-32-23, A RADIUS OF 464.58 FEET, WITH A CHORD BEARING AND
DISTANCE OF: SOUTH 22-57-32 WEST, 283.57 FEET TO A SET IRON ROD.
6. SOUTH 41-27-17 WEST, 1312.48 FEET TO A SET IRON ROD.
THENCE INTO THE INTERIOR OF SAID 1633.75 ACRE TRACT THE FOLLOWING TWO
COURSES:
1. NORTH 43-06-39 WEST, 1869.60 FEET TO A SET IRON ROD.
2. NORTH 26-SG-05 WEST, 1482.52 FEET TO A FOUND IRON ROD, SAME BEING THE
MOST NORTHWEST CORNER OF HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT, AND THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF A 543.14 ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 544, PAGE 582
(W.C.D.R.).
THENCE NORTH 22-13-23 WEST, 788.57 FEET, ALONG THE COMMON LINE WITH
THE EAST LINE OF SAID 543.14 ACRE TRACT AND WITH A WEST LINZ OF HEREIN
DESCRIBED TRACT AS FENCED AND OCCUPIED TO A'/2 INCH IRON ROE) FOUrlD FOR THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF A 125.324 ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 2441, PAGE 293
(W.C.ID.R.).
THENCE NORTH 67-54-37 EAST, 2664.11 FEET ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH
THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID 125.324 ACRE TRACT WITH THE NORTH AND WEST LINE OF
THE HEREIN TRACT AS FENCED AND OCCUPIED TO A'/z INCH IRON ROD FOUND FOR AN
THENCE NORTH 67-44-35 EAST, 146.89 FEET, LEAVING THE DEED LINE OF SAID
1633.75 ACRE TRACT, FOLLOWING SAID 125.324 ACRE DEED LINE TO A SET IRON ROD
IN THE APPROXIMATE CENTER LINE OF BERRY CREEK.
THENCE ALONG THE APPROXIMATE CENTER LINE OF SAID BERRY CREEK THE
FOLLOWING EIGHT (8) COURSES:
1. NORTH 53-30-25 WEST, 374.90 FEET.
2. NORTH 58-25-25 WET, 310.91 FEET.
3. NORTH 53-05-25 WEST, 449.87 FEET.
4. NORTH 42-25-25 WEST, 451.87 FEET.
S. NORTH 36-10-25 WEST, 547.35 FEET.
6. NORTH 17-05-19 WEST, 287.20 FEET.
7. NORTH 19-20-56 WEST, 90.90 FEET.
S. NORTH 05-54-37 EAST, 25.07 FEET, TO THE SAID 1633.75 ACRE DEED LINE.
THENCE ALONG THE SAID 1633.75 ACRE TRACT DEED LINE THE FOLLOWING
SEVEN (7) COURSES:
1. SOUTH 84-03-10 EAST, 16.18 FEET.
2. NORTH 01-47-23 WEST, 37.03 FEET.
3. NORTH 72-59-37 EAST,158.41 FEET TO A 1/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND.
4. NORTH 44-M37 EAST, 439.37 FEET TO A'/z INCH IRON ROD FOUND.
5. NORTH 27-39-37 EAST, 1395.88 FEET TO A'/z INCH IRON ROD FOUND.
6. NORTH 19-15-37 EAST, 581.96 FEET TO A'/z INCH IRON ROD FOUND.
7. NORTH 00-56-37 EAST, 167.74 FEET TO A '/2 INCH IRON ROD FOUND IN THE
WEST LINE OF A 424.28 ACRE TRACT RECORDED IN VOLUME 2111, PAGE 602
(W.C.D.RJ AND BEING THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED TRACT.
THENCE ALONG THE LINE COMMON WITH THE WEST LINE OF SAID 424.28 ACRE
TRACT WITH THE EAST LINE OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED TRACT THE FOLLOWING TWO
(2) COURSES:
1. SOUTH 21-34-23 EAST, 5776.55 FEET TO A'/z INCH IRON ROD FOUND.
2. SOUTH 24-09-44 EAST, 1599.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AND
CONTAINING A COMPUTED AREA OF 425.964 ACRES.
LARRY L_ ONWELL
REGISTE: ED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
�•EF, TF
TEXAS REGISTRATION NO.4002
TURNER COLLIE & BRADEN INC.
LARRY L. CONWFLL-
5000 PLAZA ON THE LAKE
< = 9 4002 ; Q.
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78746
92'0 Asss� O
JOB N0. 72-07558-041
Sua�
April 24, 1995
EXHIBIT "A-1"
W"" WP
a
0
Ir
r�
,r^Del Webb's
��)°Sun City Georgetown
July 16, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and :Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Request to haclude Land Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of
Georgetown
To Whom it May Concern:
The undersigned (the "Owner") is the owner of the four parcels of land more particularly
described by metes and bounds descriptions in Exhibits "A-1 ", "A-21, "A-3" and "A-4" attached
hereto, comprising 93 acres,, 26 acres, 331 acres and 301 acres, respectively (the "Property") and
generally depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto. Pursuant to Section 42.022 of the Texas Local
Government Code, the undersigned hereby requests to include the Property within the extra -territorial
jurisdiction ("ETT') of the City of Georgetown. Owner, on behalf of Owner and its successors and
assigns. consents to the inclusion of the Property within the ETJ of the City of Georgetown.
DEL WEBB TEXAS LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
an Arizona limited partnership
By: Del Webb Southwest Co., an Arizona corporation
Its: General Partner
By:
Name: Richard L. Vandermeer
Title: 'Vice President & General Manager
203 South IH-35 - Suite 100
Georgetown. Texas 79629
(512) 930-6700 Fax (512' 930-6770
%•
EXHIBIT "A-1"
Metes and Bounds Description
93.003 Acres (4,051,211 Sq. Ft.)
Lewis P. Dyches Survey, A-171
and the Frederick Foy Survey, A-229
Williamson County, Texas
Being a tract containing 93.003 acres (4,051,211 square feet) of land situated in the
Lewis P. Dyches Survey, Abstract No.171 and the Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract No.
229,.of Williamson County, Texas, and being a portion of a called 138.72 acre Ernest
Clay Young second tract as recorded in Volume 444, Page 98 of the Williamson
County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.). Said 93.003 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:
BEGINNING at a 1/2-inch iron rod OC= 3,101,595.3346, Y=10,237,778.1939) found on the
fenced and occupied easterly line of County Road No. 245, an unrecorded County
road, for the northwE-isterly corner of the tract herein described, said iron rod also
being a southwesterly corner of a called 31.32 acre Donald H. Kylberg tract as
recorded in Volume 752, Page 229 W.C.D.R.;
THENCE, North 69038':21" East, leaving the said fenced and occupied easterly line of
County Road No. 245, and along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Kylberg, a distance of 2,661.32 feet (called distance of 2,650.00 feet) to a
1/2-inch iron rod found at the base of a fence post for the northeasterly corner of
the tract herein described, said iron rod also being a southeasterly corner of said
Kylberg 31.32 acre tract, said iron rod also falling on a westerly line of a called
1,633.75 acre John D. Byram remainder tract Exhibit "A" as recorded in Volume 2185,
Page 060 of the Off icic'll Records of Williamson County, Texas;
THENCE, with a Bounclary Line Agreement between Ernest Clay Young and John D.
Byram, dated as of April 22,1996, the following four (4) courses:
1. South 22021'43"' East, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Byramm, a distance on 848.03 feet (called 847.51 feet, Young), (called
848.28 feet, Byram) to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for an angle point;
2. South 80016'53"' East, a distance of 12.24 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an
angle point;
3. South 23023'20"' East, a distance of 140.59 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an
angle point;
4. South 20°45'35" East, a Distance of 201.12 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found at
the base of a fence post for the southeasterly corner of the tract herein
Page 1 of 3
'k r
described, said iron rod also being the point of termination of said boundary
line agreement; between Young and Byram, said iron rod also being the
northeast corner of a called 5.13 acre Alan C. Williams tract as recorded in
Volume 1952, Pc-ige 06 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 63"43'31" West, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Williams tract, a distance of 201.46 feet (called distance of 201.40 feet) to
a 60d nail found in a 15" oak tree for an angle point;
THENCE, South 71 °14'26" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Williams , a distance of 19.21 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 66025'32" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Williams , a distance of 119.42 feet (called distance of 119.49
feet) to a'/z-inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 68032'19" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Williams, a distance of 293.29 feet (called distance of 294.05
feet) to a '/z-inch iron rod found for an angle point of the tract herein described,
said iron rod also being the northwesterly corner of said Williams tract and the
northeasterly corner of a called 5.19 acre Larry F. Kasper, .Jr., tract as recorded in
Volume 2148, Page 569 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 66056'46" West, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Kasper, a distance of 161.28 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an angle
point;
THENCE, South 70043'46" West, continuing along and with said fenced and occupied
line between Young and Kasper, a distance of 203.91 feet to a'/z-inch iron rod set for
an angle point;
THENCE, South 69000'25" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kasper, a distance of 249.33 feet to a'/z-inch iron
rod found for an angle point of the tract herein described, said iron rod also being
the northwesterly coiner of said Kasper tract, and the northeasterly corner of a
called 16.35 acre Herbert R. Kent tract as recorded in Document No. 9606912
O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 68038'12" West, along and with fenced and occupied line between
Young and Kent, a distance of 298.45 feet (called 298.59 feet) to a found 60d nail in
a 12-inch oak tree found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 67055'43" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kent, a distance of 132.16 feet (called 133.63 feet)
to a 60d nail in a 18-inch cedar tree found for an angle point;
Page 2 of 3
t s
THENCE, South 68016'28" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kent, a distance of 178.81 feet (called 180.11 feet)
to a'/Z-inch iron rod found for an angle point of the tract herein described, said iron
rod also being the northwesterly corner of said Kent tract, and the northeasterly
corner of a called 16..36 acre Barry Kendrick Tract as recorded in Volume 2501, Page
379 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 69026713" West, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
Young and Kendrick, a. distance of 193.31 feet (called distance of 192.60 feet) to a 1/2-
inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 68"14'20" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kendrick, a distance of 315.54 feet (called distance
of 315.47 feet) to a 1/2--inch iron rod found for an angle point;
THENCE, South 64053'03" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Kendrick, a distance of 86.34 feet (called distance
of 87.28 feet) to a 1/::-inch iron rod found for an angle point of the tract herein
described, said iron rod also being the northwesterly corner of said Kendrick tract;
THENCE, South 68049'12" West, over and across said Young's 138.72 acre tract, a
distance of 1,405.41 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set on the said fenced and occupied
easterly line of County Road No. 245, for the southwesterly corner of the tract
herein described;
THENCE, North 21 °23'22" East,. along and with the said fenced and occupied easterly
line of County Road No. 245, a distance of 1,720.00 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING
and containing a computed area of 93.003 acres (4,051,211 square feet) of land.
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survey.
9*&4_z�11,
ug as J. Anderson
Re . ered Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-95
April 16, 1996
ZISURVCONI4T. &"\NH-0M.M&j3
Page 3 of 3
1, ,s
EXHIBIT "A-2"
Metes and Bounds Description
26.852 Acres (1,169,664 Sq. Ft.)
Frederick Foy Survey, A-229
Williamson County, Texas
Being a tract containing 26.852 acres (1,169,664 square feet) of land situated in the
Frederick Foy Survey, Abstract No. 2291 of Williamson County, Texas, and being all of
a called 26.96 acre Earnest Clay Young third tract as recorded in Volume 444, Page 98
of the Williamson County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.). Said 26.852 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:
BEGINNING at a 1/rinch iron rod 0(=3,101,255.0987, Y=10,239,439.6719) found on the
fenced and occupied easterly line of County Road No. 245, an unrecorded County
road, for the southwesterly corner of the tract herein described, said iron rod also
being the northwesterly corner of a called 20.00 acre Louis D. Miller and Gladys Miller
tract as recorded 'in Volume 2476, Page 0302 of the Official Records of Williamson
County, Texas (O.R.W.C.T.);
THENCE, North 2001;2'59" West, along and with the said fenced and occupied easterly
line of County Road No. 245, a distance of 226.89 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for the
northwesterly corner of the tract herein described, said iron rod also being the
southwesterly corner of a (called 142.5 acre remainder) A.C. Young et al second tract
as recorded in Volume 544, Page 582 W.C.D.R.;
THENCE, North 681,57'24" East, leaving the said fenced and occupied easterly line of
County Road No. 245, and along and with the common line for said Young 26.96 acre
tract (third tract) and A.C. Young et al called 142.5 acre remainder tract (second tract)
a distance of 5,16730 feet (called distance 5,180.60 feet) -to a-1/z-inch iron rod set for
the northeast corner of the tract herein described, said iron rod also being the
southeast corner of said A.C. Young et al 142.5 acre (second tract), said iron rod also
falling on the westerly line of a 285 acre A.C. Young et al (third tract) as recorded in
said Volume 544, Page 582 W.C.D.R.;
THENCE, South 21°22:9'09" East, along and with the line common to said Young's 26.96
acre (third tract) and said A.C. Young et al 285 acre (third tract), a distance of 226.70
feet to a '/z-inch iron rod found at the base of a fence corner post for the
southeasterly corner of the tract herein described, said iron rod also being an
exterior corner of: a called 1,633.75 acre John D. Byram remainder tract Exhibit "A"
as recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060 O.R.W.C.T.;
Page 1 of 2
VMF
THENCE, along and WV a Boundary Line Agreement between Ernest Clay Young and
John D. Byram, dated as of April 22,1996 the following six (6) courses:
1. South 68"50'07" West, a distance of 512.49 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an
angle point;
2. South 691100'S3" West, a distance of 1,020.71 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for
an angle point;
3. South 69011'45" West, a distance of 842.09 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found for
an angle point;
4. South 69°43'39" West, a distance of 66.44 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an
angle point;
5. South 681138'2105" West, a distance of 809.80 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set for an
angle point;
6. South 68057'-,17" West, a distance of 130.80 feet to a 1/2-inch iron set for an
exterior cornEsr of said Byram Tract, from which a 1/2-inch iron rod bears South
20057'22" East, a distance of 1.89 feet, said found iron rod being a
northeasterly corner of a said Louis D. Miller et al 20.00 acre tract as recorded
in Volume 2476, Page 0302 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, South 681,57'17" West, along and with the said fenced and occupied
southerly line of Young's tract, a distance of 1,790.01 feet to the POINT OF
BEGINNING and containing a computed area of 26.852 acres (1,169,664 square feet)
of land.
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survey.
D gl s J. Anderson
Regis red Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration M0. 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-95
April 16, 1996
ZISURVC0M4728-95W H-002.M&8
Page 2of2
EXHIBIT "A-4"
Metes and Bounds Description
301.519 Acres (13,134,185 Sq. Ft.)
Frederick Foy Survey, A-229
Williamson County, Texas
Being a tract containing 301.519 acres (13,134,185 square feet) of land situated in the
Frederick Foy Survey, A-229, of Williamson County, Texas, and being a portion of a
called 543.04 acre tract owned by Artie D. Young, Ernest Clay Young, Lena Young
Tucker, and Jane Shaw, guardian of the person and estate of Hazel Young Shaw
(collectively the "Youngs"), as recorded in Volume 544, Page 582 of the Williamson
County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.), and being all of the third tract a called (285 acre
tract). Said 301.519 acre tract being more particularly described by metes and bound
as follows: With all coordinates and bearings being referenced to the Texas
Coordinate System, Central Zone; all coordinates recited herein are grid; all surface
distance recited herein may be converted to grid by multiplying by the combined
factor of 0.999856056:
BEGINNING at a 1/2-inch iron rod (X = 3,111,793.6569, Y = 10,239,910.3529) found for
an exterior angle corner of a called 1,633.75 acre John D. Byrum remainder tract
"Exhibit A" as recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060, Official Records of Williamson
County, Texas (O.R.W.C.T.) and also being in the west line of a called 425.964 acre Del
Webb Texas Limited Partnership Tract 4 as recorded in document numbers 9558175-
9558177 O.R.W.C.T.; said iron rod also being the most southerly southeast corner of
said Young third tract: herein described;
THENCE, South 68023'37" West, along and with the said line between Young and
Byram as fenced and occupied upon the ground a distance of 1,187.39 feet to a 1/2-
inch iron rod found at the base of a fence post for an angle point;
THENCE, South 64052'34" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Byram, a distance of 34.59 feet to a 1/2-inch iron
rod set;
THENCE, with a Boundary Line Agreement between the Youngs and Byram, dated
as of April 15, 1996, North 52°56'58" West, a distance of 210.00 feet to a 1/2-inch iron
rod set for an angle point;
THENCE, continuing with said Boundary Line Agreement North 60°53'48" West, a
distance of 1,065.85 fE►et to a 1/2-inch iron rod set on the Meander line of Berry Creek
as determined in the field and described in said 543.04 acre Young tract;
THENCE, along and with said Young Creek Meander Line the following two (2) courses:
1. North 86031'17" West, a distance of 96.80 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set;
2. South 78008'24" West, a distance of 223.07 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
THENCE, along and with the said fence and occupied line between Young and Byram
the following six (6) courses;
Page 1 of 3
1. South 781,47'05" West, a distance of 385.57 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an angle point;
2. South 75"58'26" West, a distance of 506.65 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an exterior corner of the tract
herein described;
3. North 11 "45'00" West, a distance of 646.04 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an angle point;
4. North 11 `,45'30" West, a distance of 339.09 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an interior corner of the tract
herein described;
5. South 701350'53" West, a distance of 1,761.43 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an exterior corner of the tract
herein described;
6. North 22020'39" West, a distance of 1,129.28 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an angle point, said iron rod also
being an exterior corner of said Byram tract and also being the
southeasterly corner of a called 26.96 acre E. C. Young (third tract) as
recorded in Volume 444, Page 98 W.C.D.R.;
THENCE, North 21 "29'09" West, along and with the easterly line of said Young tract
and E. C. Young's 26.96 acre tract, a distance of 226.70 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set
for the common corner of said E. C. Young's called 26.96 acre tract and Artie D.
Young, et al, called 142.5 acre tract (second tract) of the said 543.04 acre;
THENCE, North 21 °29'09" West, along and with the easterly line of said Artie D. Young,
et al, (second tract and first tract) as described in said 543.04 acre tract, a distance
of 1,474.22 feet to a corner fence post for the northwesterly corner of the tract
herein described, said fence post also being an exterior corner of a called 963.84 acre
John F. Yearwood (tract 1) as recorded in Volume 1813, Page 665 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, along and with the fenced and occupied line for the said Young (third tract)
and Yearwood (tract 1) the following three (3) courses:
1. North 681IC18'46" East, a distance of 2,204.01 feet to a large fence corner
and gate post for the most northerly northeast corner of the tract
herein described;
2. South 2202.4'55" East, a distance 2,300.57 feet to a large cedar fence
corner post, for an interior corner of the tract herein described;
3. North 68004'33" East, a distance 2,551.17 feet to a fence post for the
most easterly northeast corner of the tract herein described, said fence
post also falling on the westerly line of a called 125.379 acre Del Webb
Texas Limited Partnership (Tract 3) as recorded in said document
Z\SURVCOP\4T-'8-441DJA-002.` &8
Page 2 of 3
-A i
numbers 9558175-9558177 O.R. W. C. T.;
THENCE, South 21 °38'2.4" East, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
said Young (third tracII and said Del Webb's called 125.379 acre (Tract 3) a distance of
2,028.26 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found at the base of a fence post for an angle
point of the tract herein described, said iron rod being the southwesterly corner of
said Del Webb's called 125.379 acre (Tract 3) and the northwesterly corner of said
425.964 acre Del Webb (Tract 4);
THENCE, South 22013'23" East, along and with the fenced and*occupied line between
said Young (third tract) and Del Webb's called 425.964 acres (Tract 4), a distance of
788.57 feet to the POUNT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of 301.519
acres (13,134,185 square feet) of land.
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survey.
Dou s J. Anderson
Registered Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-94
8 April 1996
Revised 9 April 1996
Z\SURVCOM4728-44\ OJA-002..M&B
Page 3of3
LAllibiI "B"
26
Exh
a
by Del Webb Limited Partnership, dated July 16, 1996.
V/CNh NM
011 11.111111
! 111u 1111
I.N.' 1// 11.0
July 9, 1996
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
P.O. Box 409
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Request to Include 237 acres Within the Extra -Territorial Jurisdiction of the City of
Georgetown
To Whom it May Concern:
The undersigned (the "Owner") are the owners of the 237 acre parcel of land described in
Exhibit A attached hereto (the "Property") and generally depicted on Exhibit "A-1 " attached hereto.
Pursuant to Section 42.022 of the Texas Local Government Code, the undersigned hereby requests
to include the Property within the extra -territorial jurisdiction ("ETF) of the City of Georgetown.
Owner, on behalf of Owner and its successors and assigns, consents to the inclusion of the Property
within the ETJ of the City of Georgetown.
Sincerely,
ARTIE YO G
_� �1�rze A
ERNEST CLAY YOUNG (in his individual capacity
and as spouse of Pauline Young)
PAULINE YOUNG (in her individual capacity and as
spouse of Ernest Clay Young)
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
July 9, 1996
Page 2 of 2
LENA YOUNG TUCKER, BY BRUCE TUCKER
HER ATTORNEY -IN -FACT UNDER THAT
CERTAIN POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED
SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 RECORDED IN VOL. 2192,
PAGE 263, OFFICIAL RECORDS, WILLIAMSON
COUNTY, TEXAS
BRUCE TUCKER (executing this deed to evidence
his individual consent thereto and acknowledgment
thereof)
WILBURN TUCKER (spouse of Lena Young Tucker,
executing this deed to evidence his consent thereto and
acknowledgment thereof)
JANE SHAW, GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON
AND ESTATE OF HAZEL YOUNG SHAW
ADY/ce
cc: Dale Illig, Esq.
City of Georgetown
Department of Planning and Zoning
July 9, 1996
Page 2 of 2
ADY/ce
cc: Dale Illig, Esq:
LENA YOUNG TUCKER, BY BRUCE TUCKER
HER ATTORNEY -IN -FACT UNDER THAT
CERTAIN POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED
SEPTEMBER 14, 1992 RECORDED IN VOL. 2192,
PAGE 263, OFFICIAL RECORDS, WILLIAMSON
COUNTY, TEXAS
BRUCE TUCKER (executing this deed to evidence
his individual consent thereto and acknowledgment
thereof)
WILBURN TUCKER (spouse of Lena Young Tucker,
executing this deed to evidence his consent thereto and
acknowledgment thereof)
JANE SHAW, GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON
ESTATE OF HAZEL YOUNG SHAW
4
EXHIBIT uAll
METES AND BOUNDS FOR S27.567 ACRES
BEING 527.567 ACRES IN THE F. FOY LEAGUE SURVEY,
ABSTRACT 1229 IN WILLIAMSON COUNTY TEXAS, SAME ALSO
BEING A PORTION OF THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL OF LAND
DESCRIBED BY DEED AS THE ARTIE YOUNG 543.04 ACRE TRACT,
IN VOLUME 544, PACE 582, WILUAMSON COUNTY TEXAS DEED
RECORDS. TRACTS ONE, TWO, AND THREE. SAID 527.567 BEING
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED BY THE FOLLOWING METES
AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION, WITH ALL BEARINGS BASED ON
TEXAS STATE PLANE COORDINATES, TEXAS CENTRAL ZONE. ALL
COORDINATES ARE GRID AND CAN BE CONVERTED TO SURFACE
BY MULTIPLYING BY THE COMBINED RECIPROCAL FACTOR OF:
1.000143965.
BEGINNING AT A FENCE POST (NORTH = 10,239,649.90, EAST = 3,101,179.14) S
AME
BEING THE MOST SOUTH WEST CORNER OF THE HEREON DESCRIBED 527.567 ACRE TRACT,
AND THE NORTH WEST CORNER OF THE 26.96 ACRE E. C. YOUNG TRACT, IN VOLUME 544,
PAGE 58'.2 TRACT TWO, SAVE AND EXCEPT. FROM WHICH THE NORTH WEST CORNER BY
DEED FOR THE SAID 543.04 ACRE TRACT BEARS: NORTH 24.54-27 WEST,
2008.73 FEET
WHICH OVERLAPS THE 472.78 ACRE WILL S. YOUNG, JR. TRACT NOW KNOWN AS THE MY A,
YOUNG TRACT, VOLUME 444, PAGE 121. THENCE ALONG THE APPARENT EAST BOUNDARY
OF COUNTY ROAD 245 AS DEFINED BY A MEANDERING FENCE APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET
EAST OF'HE SAID MYRA YOUNG DEED, THE FOLLOWING 8 COURSES:
I. NORTH 19.51-40 WEST, 184.43 FEET.
2. NORTH 17-50-01 WEST, 381.80 FEET.
3. NORTH 13-16-57 WEST, 205.67 FEET.
4. NORTH 6.36.12 EAST, 570.94 FEET.
5. NORTH 16-32-34 WEST, 149.70 FEET.
6. NORTH 42.58-45 WEST, 222.71 FEET.
7. NORTH 46-38.58 WEST, 127.00 FEET,
8. NORTH 43-48-11 WEST, 280.71' FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE HEREIN
DESCRIBED TRACT.
THENCE NORTH 68-54-32 EAST,SO58.75 FEET ALONG THE COMMON LINE WITH
WHISPER WOOD SUBDIVISION VOLUME 1692, PAGE 197 TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE
963.84 A16"'RE YEARWOOD TRACT IN VOLUME 1813, PAGE 665.
THENCE ALONG THE COMMON:UNE WITH THE SAID YEARWOOD TRACT, AS FOUND
FENCED AND OCCUPIED THE FOLLOWING 4 COURSES:
1. SOUTH 22-24-14 EAST, 531.54 FEET TO A FENCE POST.
2. NORTH 68.08.40 EAST, 2204.19 FEET TO A FENCE POST.
3. SOUTH 22.24.65 EAST, 2300.57 FEET TO A FENCE POST.
4. NORTH 68-04-35 EAST, 2551.17 FEET TO A FENCE POST. SAME BEING INTERSECTING
WITH THE WEST BOUNDARY LINE OF THE 4TH STREET LIMITED 125.324 ACRE TRACT,.1N
VOLUME 2441, PAGE 293.
THENCE SOUTH 21.38.24 EAST, 2028,2E FEET, ALONG THE COMMON LINE WITH THE
SAID WEST LINE OF THE 4TH STREET LIMITED, TO A FENCE POST. SAID FENCE POST BEING
THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF THE SAID 4TH STREET LIMITED, AND THE INTERSECTION WIT}
THE 1061.846 ACRE JOHN D. BYRAM TRACT IN VOLUME 2185, PACE 60.
. THENCE ALONG THE COMMON LINE WITH SAID 1061.846 ACRE JOHN D. BYRAM
TRACT, THE FOLLOWING TWO COURSES:
1. SOUTH 22-13-23 EAST, 788.57 FEET.
2. SOUTH 68.24-37 WEST, 1187.19 FEET TO THE COWAN CREEK.
THENCE ALONG COWAN CREEK THE FOLLOWING 6 COURSES:
1. NORTH 46-37-31 WEST, 553.17 FEET.
2. NORTH 51-29-19 WEST, 311.04 FEET.
3. NORTH 75-40-26 WEST, 209.30FEET.
4. NORTH 86-33-45 WEST, 349.72 FEET.
S. SOUTH 7EI-05-56 WEST, 223.07 FEET, WHERE IT COINCIDES WITH THE COMMON LINE
WITH THE SAID 1061.846 ACRE JOHN D. BYRAM TRACT.
THENCE ALONG THE SAID COMMON LINE THE FOLLOWING 6 COURSES:
1. SOUTH 7 3-44-37 WEST, 385.52 FEET.
-56-37 WEST, 506.60 FEET. 2. SOUTH 75
3. NORTH 11-46-23 WEST, 646.04 FEET.
4. NORTH "111-43-23 WEST, 339.04 FEET TO A FENCE POST.
5. SOUTH 70-51-37 WEST,1761.23 FEET AS FENCED AND OCCUPIED.
6. NORTH 22-18-23 WEST, 1129.21 FEET, TO A FENCE POST. SAME BEING A CORNER
POINT FOR THE: SAID 1061.846 ACRE TRACT, AND THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF THE SAID
26.96 ACRE E. 11 YOUNG TRACT.
THENCE: ALONG THE COMMON LINE WITH THE SAID 26.96 ACRE TRACT, THE
FOLLOWING TWO COURSES:
1. NORTH 21-30-38 WEST, 226.71 FEET
2. SOUTH 68-56-07 WEST, 5198.00 FEET AS FENCED AND OCCUPIED., TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING, CONTAINING A COMPUTED AREA OF 527.567 ACRES.
SAVE AND EXCEPT THE 301.519 ACRE TRACT DESCRIBED BELOW:
O
LARRY Lr ONWELL
REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR
TEXAS REGISTRATION NO.4002
TURNER COLLIE & BRADEN INC.
5000 PLAZA ON THE LAKE
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78746
JOB NO.72-C7558-041
March 20, 1995
T' �TF
It E q •. %-
f� "a• N
4002 ' Q'
. -9,LO•ys U P►°��-:o S
Mo.
It
L +�
EXHIBIT "A"
Metes and Bounds Description
301.519 Acres (13,134,185 Sq. Ft.)
Frederick Foy Survey, A-229
Williamson County, Texas
Being a tract containing 301.519 acres (13,134,185 square feet) of land situated in the
Frederick Foy Survey, A-229, of Williamson County, Texas, and being a portion of a
called 543.04 acre tract owned by Artie D. Young, Ernest Clay Young, Lena Young
Tucker, and Jane Shaw, guardian of the person and estate of Hazel Young Shaw
(collectively the "Youngs'), as recorded in Volume 544, Page 582 of the Williamson
County Deed Records (W.C.D.R.), and being all of the third tract a called (285 acre
tract). Said 301.519 acre tract being more particularly described by metes and bound
as follows: With all coordinates and bearings being referenced to the Texas
Coordinate System, Central Zone; all coordinates recited herein are grid; all surface
distance recited herein may be converted to grid by multiplying by the combined
factor of 0.999856056:
BEGINNING at a 1/2-inch iron rod (C = 3,111,793.65691 Y = 10,239,910.3529) found for
an exterior angle corner of a called 1,633.75 acre John D. Byram remainder tract
"Exhibit A" as recorded in Volume 2185, Page 060, Official Records of Williamson
County, Texas (O.R.W.C.T.) and also being in the west line of a called 425.964 acre Del
Webb Texas Limited Partnership Tract 4 as recorded in document numbers 9558175-
9558177 O.R.W.C.T.; said iron rod also being the most southerly southeast corner of
said Young third tract herein described;
THENCE, South 68023'37" West, along and with the said line between Young and
Byram as fenced and occupied upon the ground a distance of 1,187.39 feet to a 1/2-
inch iron rod found at the base of a fence post for an angle point;
THENCE, South 64052'34" West, continuing along and with the said fenced and
occupied line between Young and Byram, a distance of 34.59 feet to a 1/2-inch iron
rod set;
THENCE, with a Boundary Line Agreement between the Youngs and Byram, dated
as of April 15, 1996, North 52056-58" West, a distance of 210.00 feet to a 1/2-inch iron
rod set for an angle paint;
THENCE, continuing with said Boundary Line Agreement North 60053'48" West, a
distance of 1,065.85 feet to a'/z-inch iron rod set on the Meander line of Berry Creek
as determined in the field and described in said 543.04 acre Young tract;
THENCE, along and with said Young Creek Meander Line the following two (2) courses:
1. North 8603117" West, a distance of 96.80 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set;
2. South 78008'24" West, a distance of 223.07 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found for an angle point;
THENCE, along and with the said fence and occupied line between Young and Byram
the following six (6) courses;
Page 1 of 3
1. South 78047'05" West, a distance of 385.57 feet to a '/z-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an angle point;
2. South 75°58'26" West, a distance of 506.65 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an exterior corner of the tract
herein described;
3. North 11 °45'00" West, a distance of 646.04 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an angle point;
4. North 11 °45'30" West, a distance of 339.09 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an interior corner of the tract
herein described;
5. South 70050'53" West, a distance of 1,761.43 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at the base of a fence post for an exterior corner of the tract
herein described;
6. North 22"20'39" West, a distance of 1,129.28 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod
found at then base of a fence post for an angle point, said iron rod also
being an exterior corner of said Byram tract and also being the
southeasterly corner of a called 26.96 acre E. C. Young (third tract) as
recorded in Volume 444, Page 98 W.C.D.R.;
THENCE, North 21 °29'09" West, along and with the easterly line of said Young tract
and E. C. Young's 26.96 acre tract, a distance of 226.70 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod set
for the common corner, of said E. C. Young's called 26.96 acre tract and Artie D.
Young, et al, called 142.5 acre tract (second tract) of the said 543.04 acre;
THENCE, North 21 °29'09" West, along and with the easterly line of said Artie D. Young,
et al, (second tract and first tract) as described in said 543.04 acre tract, a distance
of 1,474.22 feet to a corner fence post for the northwesterly corner of the tract
herein described, said fence post also being an exterior corner of a called 963.84 acre
John F. Yearwood (tract -1) as recorded in Volume 1813, Page 665 O.R.W.C.T.;
THENCE, along and with the fenced and occupied line for the said Young (third tract)
and Yearwood (tract 1) the following three (3) courses:
1. North 68008'46" East, a distance of 2,204.01 feet to a large fence corner
and gate post for the most northerly northeast corner of the tract
herein described;
2. South 22024'55" East, a distance 2,300.57 feet to a large cedar fence
corner post, for an interior corner of the tract herein described; _
3. North 681,04'33" East, a distance 2,551.17 feet to a fence post for the
most easterly northeast corner of the tract herein described, said fence
post also falling on the westerly line of a called 125.379 acre Del Webb
Texas Limited Partnership (Tract 3) as recorded in said document
Z.\SURVCOM4728-44\DJA-002. &B
Page 2 of 3
numbers 9558175-9558177 O.R. W. C. T.;
THENCE, South 21 °38'24" East, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
said Young (third tract) and said Del Webb's called 125.379 acre (Tract 3) a distance of
2,028.26 feet to a 1/2-inch iron rod found at the base of a fence post for an angle
point of the tract herE�in described, said iron rod being the southwesterly corner of
said Del Webb's called 125.379 acre (Tract 3) and the northwesterly corner of said
425.964 acre Del Webb (Tract 4);
THENCE, South 22013'2.3" East, along and with the fenced and occupied line between
said Young (third tracIn and Del Webb's called 425.964 acres (Tract 4), a distance of
788.57 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING and containing a computed area of 301.519
acres (13,134,185 square feet) of land.
This metes and bounds description is accompanied by a separate plat of survey.
Dou as J. Anderson
Registered Professional Land Surveyor
Texas Registration No. 5128
Prepared by:
SURVCON INC.
5000 Plaza On The Lake, Suite 180
Austin, Texas 78746
Job No. 4728-94
8 April 1996
Revised 9 April 1996
or
DOUGLAS J. ANDERSON
5128 !.
� ♦r
j0
O SU,�.
Z.\SURVC0N14728-(WD1A-=. M&B
Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT "A-1"
4
Council meeting Jul, 23, 1996 Item No. Bla
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: First Reading; of an Ordinance to extend the effective date of the Georgetown Sign
Ordinance, also known as Chapter 12.10 of the Georgetown Municipal Code, from the current
expiration date of August 24, 1996, to a revised expiration date of December 31, 1999
ITEM SUMMARY: The Georgetown Sign Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on
February 9, 1993, and became effective on February 24, 1993. It was adopted with a sunset date
established three (3) years after the effective date of the original ordinance. The purpose of this
sunset provision was to ensure that the Ordinance was reviewed to determine the effect of the
regulations and whether revisions were necessary. On February 13, 1996, the City Council
approved an extension to August 24, 1996, to permit further review of proposed revisions to the
Sign Ordinance. At their budget retreat in June 1996, the Council directed the staff to suspend
work on revisions to the Sign Ordinance until the Urban Design Functional Element of the
Century Plan is completed. This will permit the integration of urban design issues into the Sign
Ordinance. The Urban Design Plan is proposed to be completed during the 1997-98 fiscal year.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None.
COMMENTS: None.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: If this item is approved by the City Council, it will extend the
effective date of the ordinance to December 31, 1999.
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance.
Submitted By-
Edwar J rry, AICP - Director
Division f Developm� t Services
Hi ldy L. ingma, AICP
Chief Planner
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN,
TEXAS, EXTENDING THE EXPIRATION DATE OF THE GEORGETOWN SIGN
ORDINANCE, ALSO KNOWN AS CHAPTER 12.10 OF THE GEORGETOWN
MUNICIPAL CODE; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING. A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Section 216.901 of the Local Government Code authorizes home rule
municipalities to license, regulate, control, or prohibit the erection of signs or billboards; and
WHEREAS, Section 54.004 of the Local Government Code authorizes home rule
municipalities to enforce ordinances necessary to protect health, life, and property and to
preserve the good government, order, and security of the municipality and its inhabitants; and
WHEREAS, on February 9, 1993, by the approval of Ordinance 93-5, the City did adopt
the "Sign Ordinance of the City of Georgetown", codified as Chapter 12.10 of the Georgetown
Municipal Code, hereinafter referred to as "Sign Ordinance"; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 93-5, Section 4, provides for the sunset of the Sign Ordinance
in three (3) years, unless action is taken to extend its application and enforcement; and
WHEREAS, on February 13, 1996, by approval of Ordinance 96-04, the City did extend
the Georgetown Sign Ordinance to a new expiration date of August 24, 1996; and
WHEREAS, the Georgetown City Council has directed the staff to suspend work on
revisions to the Georgetown Sign Ordinance until the Urban Design Functional Plan Element of
the Century Plan is completed; and
WHEREAS, due to the level of development activity it is important to extend the effective
date of the current Sign Ordinance in order to ensure its continuing effectiveness.
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
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
Sign Ordinance Extension Ordinance No.
Page 1 of 2
2. Growth and Physical Development Policy 2 which states "The City's regulatory action
will efficiently and effectively implement the policy statements and provide the
opportunity to seek change with reasonable effort and expense"; and
3. Development Plan Policy 8, End B, Ongoing Means 1, which states "The City shall
prepare development regulations that protect neighborhoods from incompatible land uses
and assure that residential neighborhoods are accessible to community facilities and
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.
SECTION 2. The application and enforcement of the Sign Ordinance is hereby extended
to December 31, 1999, such that, unless subsequent action extends the application and
enforcement of the Sign Ordinance, it shall expire on that date.
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 day of , 1996.
PASSED AND APPROVED on Second Reading on the day of ,1996.
ATTEST: THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Sign Ordinance Extension Ordinance No.
Page 2 of 2
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
Council meeting date: July '23. 1996 Item No. ga 10,
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT
Ordinance amending Section 10.12.090 of the Code of Ordinances relating to school
speed zone on Northwest Blvd./First Reading
ITEM SUMMARY
Two private schools, Community Montessori School and Eagle's Nest Christian School,
are located along Northwest Blvd. between the West 1-35 Frontage Road and Dawn Drive.
Community Montessori has in the last two years noted increased traffic and high speeds along
Northwest Blvd., which has caused significant concern for the safety of children at the school,
especially during the drop-oll and pick-up times. COU staff have studied the location and have
determined that -a school speed zone is warranted at this location. Since the Eagle's Nest
School is also nearby, the speed zone will also include their school site.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The City will post school speed limit signs, and begin traffic enforcement, along with the other
school zones, when the new school year begins.
COMMENTS
ATTACHMENTS
Proposed Ordinance
Submitted By:
Marianne Landers Banks, City Attorney
Council meeting July 23. 1996 Item No. DD
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration and first reading of an amendment to Ordinance No. 95-62, correcting
the legal description for the annexation of an approximately 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: Ordinance No. 95-62, providing for the annexation of a portion of Sun
City Georgetown, was approved on December 12, 1995. Subsequent to approval, it was
discovered that the legal description of the area annexed, prepared by an agent of the property
owner, contained a minor error. The purpose of this ordinance is to eliminate the error by
providing a corrected legal description to replace the one in the originally approved ordinance.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: It is recommended that the requirement for reading this
ordinance on two separate days be dispensed with in order to provide an immediate clarification
of the City's boundaries. A majority, plus one vote of the Council is required in order to
approve the ordinance on a single reading.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: None
COMMENTS: None
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance and exhibits.
Submitted Bv.
Edward J' Barry, JCP Director
Divisiot of Dev opment Services
Clyde von Rosenberg, AI
Chief Planner, Long Range Planning
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN,
TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 95-62 TO PROVIDE A CORRECTED LEGAL
DESCRIPTION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 333.490 ACRE
PORTION OF THE SUN CITY GEORGETOWN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT -
PHASE TWO, LOCATED IN THE DANIEL MONROE, W.G. WILKINSON, GEORGE
THOMPSON, ABNER SHORT, R.T. JENKINS, AND MARY ANN LEWIS SURVEYS;
REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; INCLUDING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, approved Ordinance
No. 95-62 on December 12, 1995, providing for the annexation of approximately 333.490 acres,
to be known as a portion of Sun City Georgetown, Phase 2; and
WHEREAS, Exhibit A of the ordinance, prepared by an agent of the property owner,
contained a legal description of the property with a minor error; and
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 3, which states: "Annexations procedures
and standards benefit the community";
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 legal description contained in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 95-62 is
hereby replaced with the legal description contained in Exhibit A of this ordinance.
Amendment to Ordinance No. 95-62
Ordinance No.
Page 1 of 2
SECTION 3. Pursuant to Section 2.10 of the City Charter, the City Council hereby
dispenses with the requirement for reading this ordinance on two separate days, providing an
immediate clarification of the City's boundaries, in order to eliminate confusion and provide for
public safety.
SECTION 4. 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 5. 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 6. 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 Emergency Reading on the 23rd day of July, 1996.
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Amendment to Ordinance No. 95-62
Ordinance No.
Page 2 of 2
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
Turner Colhe OBraden Inc.
Engineers + Planners • Project Managers
July 16, 1996
Mr. Charles L. Simon, .4ICP
Senior Planner
City of Georgetown
113 E. 8th Street
Georgetown, Texas 78627
Re: Annexation of 13un City Georgetoum
Turner Collie & Braden Inc. Job No. 72-07558-090
Dear Mr. Simon:
PO. Box 27290
Austin, Texas 78755-1290
5000 Plaza On The Lake
5uile 150 (78746j
5i!J29-50011
Fax 512 329-0802
In the course of completing the final plats for Sun City Georgetown Phases 1 and 2, some differences
have been noted between the annexation descriptions and the boundaries of the plats. This correction
ordinance will resolve the differences so that there are no gaps, overlaps or partial lots within the
City. The differences were created by adjustments to the final plats to realign roadways to preserve
trees, the final definition of the golf course corridor and adjustments to lot depths will ensure the
appropriate building envelope.
The first zoning ordinance (Phase 1) was for 983.335 acres which is being revised to 983.543 acres.
The second ordinance (Phase 2) covers 333.490 acres and is revised to 334.567 acres. The intent of
both initial descriptions and the revised descriptions was to annex the respective phases of the
development. Revised descriptions will be provided to the City prior to the Council meeting.
If you need any further information regarding these correction requests, please call me.
V ly yours,
Scott Smiley
Principal
SASAb
Z:175580901SAS-OO8.LTR � � N
E R S A R Y
En1;lntetira --- xcellence fnr One half ce..nIury
Council meeting � Jul 23 1996 Item No.
AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET
SUBJECT: Consideration and first reading of an amendment to Ordinance No. 95-13, correcting
the legal description for the annexation of an approximately 983.539 acre portion of the Sun City
Georgetown Planned Unit :Development, Phase 1, located north of RM2338 approximately one
and one-half miles north of Cedar Breaks Road.
ITEM SUN MARY: Ordinance No. 95-13, providing for the annexation of a portion of Sun
City Georgetown, was approved on April 11, 1995. Subsequent to approval, it was discovered
that the legal description of the area annexed, prepared by an agent of the property owner,
contained a minor error. The purpose of this ordinance is to eliminate the error by providing
a corrected legal description to replace the one in the originally approved ordinance.
SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS: It is recommended that the requirement for reading this
ordinance on two separate days be dispensed with in order to provide an immediate clarification
of the City's boundaries.. A majority, plus one vote of the Council is required in order to
approve the ordinance on a single reading.
FINANCIAL IMPACT;: None
COMMENTS: None
ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance and exhibits.
Submitted Bv:
Edward J. B rry, AICP - irector
Division of evelopme Services
Clyde von Rosenberg, &CJ
Chief Planner, Long Range Planning
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN,
TEXAS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 95-13 TO PROVIDE A CORRECTED LEGAL
DESCRIPTION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 983.539 ACRE
TRACT KNOWN AS SUN CITY GEORGETOWN - PHASE ONE, LOCATED NORTH
OF RM2338 APPROXIMATELY ONE AND ONE-HALF MILES NORTH OF CEDAR
BREAKS ROAD; REPEALING CONFLICTING ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS;
INCLUDING A SEVEI.tABILITY CLAUSE; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Georgetown, Texas, approved Ordinance
No. 95-13 on April 11, 1.995, providing for the annexation of approximately 983.539 acres, to
be known as Sun City Georgetown, Phase 1; and
WHEREAS, Exhibit A of the ordinance, prepared by an agent of the property owner,
contained a legal description of the property with a minor error; and
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 3, which states: "Annexations procedures
and standards benefit the community";
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 legal description contained in Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 95-13 is
hereby replaced with the legal description contained in Exhibit A of this ordinance.
Amendment to Ordinance No. 95-13
Ordinance No.
Page 1 of 2
SECTION 3. Pursuant to Section 2.10 of the City Charter, the City Council hereby
dispenses with the requirement for reading this ordinance on two separate days, providing an
immediate clarification of the City's boundaries, in order to eliminate confusion and provide for
public safety.
SECTION 4. 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 5. 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 6. 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 Emergency Reading on the 23rd day of July, 1996.
ATTEST:
Sandra D. Lee
City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Marianne Landers Banks
City Attorney
Amendment to Ordinance No. 95-13
Ordinance No.
Page 2 of 2
THE CITY OF GEORGETOWN:
By: LEO WOOD
Mayor
Turner Collie OBraden Inc.
Engineers • P(aliners • Project Managers
July 16, 1996
Mr. Charles L. Simon, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Georgetown
113 E. 8th Street
Georgetown, Texas 7M27
Re: Annexation of Sun City Georgetown
Turner Collie & Braden Inc. Job No. 72-07558-090
Dear Mr. Simon:
PC). Box 27290
Austin, Texas 78755-129i?
5000 Plaza On The Lake
�i iIF 150 (78746)
5i! 29-ti002
Fax 512 329-0802
In the course of completing the final plats for Sun City Georgetown Phases 1 and 2, some differences
have been noted between the annexation descriptions and the boundaries of the plats. This correction
ordinance will resolve the differences so that there are no gaps, overlaps or partial lots within the
City. The differences were created by adjustments to the final plats to realign roadways to preserve
trees, the final definition of the golf course corridor and adjustments to lot depths will ensure the
appropriate building envelope.
The first zoning ordinmce (Phase 1) was for 983.335 acres which is being revised to 983.543 acres.
The second ordinance (Lase 2) covers 333.490 acres and is revised to 334.567 acres. The intent of
both initial descriptions and the revised descriptions was to annex the respective phases of the
development. Revised descriptions will be provided to the City prior to the Council meeting.
If you need any further information regarding these correction requests, please call me.
V ly yours,
Scott Smiley
Principal
SAS: fb
Z:17S58090\SAS-008.LTR
N N
En¢intcrirr Excellence f*, One.iialf c:.ntury
Saving the Legacy/Preserving the Heritage
Remarks of N. David Spurgin presented to Georgetown City Council, July 23, 1996
I am David Spurgin. I wrote to each of you last week concerning the need for a
moratorium on development along the San Gabriel River and the IH 35 frontage until a
comprehensive development standards study can be performed and action taken to
implement appropriate standards and policies. These should include both measures to
protect the river from any possible degradation and to preserve the extraordinary views
of the city from IH 35 and nearby public property.
My family has lived in Georgetown for three years. But I am not a newcomer. I have
owned property here for six years. We decided long before that to move here and raise
our young family. I aim not a newcomer to government, either. I have spent most of my
professional career of over 30 years advising elected officials on policy at the state level.
I am conservative and a traditionalist. I am not a proponent of the environment at all
costs. I am, as you are, dedicated to this city and its best interests. I have been in love
with this place and this area since I came here as a student at Southwestern University
about 35 years ago.
There are four areas that should be covered by the recommended development
standards study and city policies: the San Gabriel River; City Views; Architectural
Standards; and Trees.
The San Gabriel River. Do you know who has the responsibility for protecting and
preserving the San Gabriel River in Georgetown (and its ETJ)? You do. The City
Council of Georgetown. Nobody else. Do you know what the chemical and biological
characteristics of the river are? Does the city take regular measurements? Are there
benchmark quality standards? The Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission
(TNRCC) has responsibility for issuing permits for direct discharges into the river, but
that's all. It also has authority for the Edwards Acquifer, which is why the developers
along IH 35 have to treat the first one-half inch (that's all) of storm runoff. But the city,
and only the city, has responsibility to see to it that any specific development or all the
development taken together, does not ruin the river. Nobody else.
The developers of the San Gabriel Village propose to build apartments on their property
adjoining the river-1180 units. How many leaking crankcases will that be every day and
night? How many leaking transmissions? How many leaking brakes? How many
leaking radiators? Where will the spills go? In a commercial building there are usually
two restrooms on each floor. In the proposed apartments, there would be at least one
complete bathroom per unit, plus laundry facilities, I assume. What if the system
overflows? Where will the contents go?
The issue, of course, is even larger. The whole river area —both the South San Gabriel
and the North San Gabriel from somewhere west of IH 35 and including the new
frontage— is going to be developed. The City of Georgetown, as far as I have been
able to determine, does not have the study it needs to guide and control this
development in a way that ensures the protection of the river and its north and south
forks. But, it isn't too late —if you establish a moratorium and study and do not approve
the requested zoning change in San Gabriel Village.
City Views. Development along the IH 35 east frontage also poses a major threat to the
magnificent and defining views of the city from IH 35, its frontage roads and adjoining
public property. These views are priceless and irreplaceable. They are like works of
art —cod's and man's. Even the C2A zoning threatens them. How could that happen?
How is it possible? The skyline of the city is a major asset of Georgetown. It's our front
door. If you question its importance, look at Sun City. A lot of creative thought and
money have gone into creating that front door, and they're not finished. As an
alternative, consider Round Rock. You can't tell where it starts or stops. It has no
defining characteristic:3. It's just a commercial strip. Don't destroy Georgetown in the
process of developing it.
Look, if you will, at the photograph accompanying these remarks. It pictures part of the
property in the development where rezoning to apartments and a hotel are requested.
Much to the benefit of the city, in my opinion, the current C2A zoning limits building
heights to 40 feet. I applaud that limitation. I do believe it is probably too high in some
cases as I'll explain. (Signs, by the way, can only be 28 feet whether attached to a
building or free standing. I wish not only to applaud but to thank you sincerely for that
limitation.) But how high is 40 feet? Well, the according to city staff, utility poles stand
above the ground about 40 to 45 feet. So, you can easily see in this picture that
construction of this height would completely wipe out any view of the city. Here's what
you might not have expected me to say: This is a view that probably could be lost
without losing much. It's one of the poorer views. Left (north) and right (south) of the
view pictured here, however, are some very clear views of the courthouse and church
steeples and other landmarks that should never be lost. Only if you declare a
moratorium and act to study and establish these view corridors will the views be
preserved. If they are lost, they will be lost forever. Their fate is in your hands.
By the way, I think it is outrageous that the developers put up signs that declare, in
effect, that the building of apartments and a hotel have been approved by this Council
even before the matter ever reaches the Council and before you hear any public opinion
on the proposal. You can see one such sign in the photograph. It is contemptuous of
the Council and the residents of Georgetown. But it is perfectly legal under present
ordinances according to the city staff. I hope you will outlaw it immediately.
I want to mention, briefly, the two other areas that I believe are quite important.
Architectural Standard;j. In our city with its historic significance, picturesque beauty, and
restored downtown, it is immensely important to assure architectural continuity.
Otherwise, with development, the historic physical character of the city can be lost.
What if everything started to look like Hollywood Video? What an atrocity to the
cityscape! What an abomination! How hideous! And how totally out of character with
Georgetown. The new Texaco is almost art deco enough to be compatible, but the
colors are too vibrant. The city needs architectural standards for commercial and public
buildings and facilities, especially at the front door along IH 35.
N
Trees. Save the trees. The city staff tells me there are incentives for saving trees in the
present development ordinance, incentives great enough that many trees are saved. I
applaud that. I believe, just the same, that any development should have to have city
approval to cut down any tree over, say, three inches in diameter. Trees not only
beautify and define the look of the city, they convert carbon dioxide to oxygen, you
know. They provide habitat for birds and other wildlife. I won't belabor the point, but
save the trees. Only God can make a tree, but you can save them.
The city needs an immediate, temporary moratorium on development along the east IH
35 frontage and a comprehensive development standards study under the general
guidance of a citizen;>' committee appointed by the Council. These is no time to lose.
But there is everything to lose if you do otherwise. It isn't too late. Don't approve this
rezoning request now. If you do, it may be too late, forever.
In closing, let me addl this statement. There may be some discussion of past actions or
good faith. Remember, the residents and voters of this city have placed their ultimate
faith in you to save our legacy and preserve our heritage and to lead us in a way that
benefits our city in this future. That is where your ultimate allegiance lies. Nowhere
else.
Thank you so much for your attention and for the opportunity to appear before you.
3