HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_P&Z_06.05.2001June 5, 2001
P&Z Minutes
Page 1
Minutes
Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, June 5, 2001
Chair, Patrick Walsh, called the June 5, 2001, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to
order at 6:05 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Gabe Sansing, Marjorie Herbert, Chris
Aadnesen, Robert Seamans, Richard Glasco and Audrey McDonald. Staff members present
were Amelia Sondgeroth, Director, Janis Russell, Recording Secretary, David Munk,
Development Engineer, Carla Benton, Development Planner, Melissa Murphy, Development
Planner and Cathy Riedel, Assistant City Attorney.
1. Action from Executive Session - None
Consent Agenda
2. Consideration of the Minutes of the May 1, 2001, Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting.
3. Consideration of a Century Plan Amendment for 10.84 acres in the Antonio Flores
Survey, to be known as Womble Commercial Park, from Intensity Level 2 to Intensity
Level 3, located on County Road 193 (NE Inner Loop Rd.).
4. Consideration of a Rezoning from A, Agricultural, to RP, Residential Planned, or any
more restrictive district, of 72.217 acres in the Burrell Eaves Survey, to be known as the
Planned Unit Development of Sun City Texas, Phase 4-E, Neighborhoods 24A and 24B,
located along Texas Drive.
5. Consideration of a Public Review Final Plat of 72.217 acres in the Burrell Eaves
Survey, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Sun City Texas, Phase 4-E,
Neighborhoods 24A and 24B, located along Texas Drive.
6. Consideration of a Public Review Final Plat of 61.647 acres in the A.H. Porter Survey,
to be known as The Planned Unit Development of Cimarron Hills, Phase 2, Section 2,
located 7.8 miles west of Georgetown on SH29.
Gabe Sansing made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda. Marjorie Herbert seconded the
motion which passed by a vote of 7-0.
Regular Agenda
7. Discussion of the Design Guidelines for the Downtown Overlay District. Renee Hanson
addressed the Commission and gave the members an amendment to the map, not
included in their packet, and the Master Plan recommendation from the Consultant.
Richard Glasco asked what prompted the NE boundary change. Renee Hanson
responded that it would be more consistent with other boundaries and to exempt solely
residential properties out of the district. Patrick Walsh commented on the definition of
terms for the words “consider” , “context” and “guideline”. He suggested using more
definitive words such as shall, should and may when intending an imperative. Gabe
June 5, 2001
P&Z Minutes
Page 2
Sansing stated that when he sees the whole thing as a package, he’ll see that the
ordinance has “punch” when it needs to and allows alternatives as well. Patrick Walsh
asked for clarification of the application and review process. He stated that the process
may cause a bottleneck and should be looked at to expedite applications. Amelia
Sondgeroth responded that these applicants will follow the same procedures as other
applications. Renee Hanson stated that the Commission may have to meet more than
once per month to consider some applications. Patrick Walsh noted that there was no
mention of parking requirements in the downtown area. Renee Hanson responded that
the Historic district will be exempted from parking, and the outlying area will use the
parking standards in the ordinance now, knowing they are outdated, but an applicant
may be able to prove that they don’t need that much parking and they will be allowed to
include shared parking, valet parking and off-site parking to try to accommodate more
flexibility in the downtown area. There will also be a “fee-in-lieu of parking” provision.
8. Consideration of a Century Plan Amendment for 31.10 acres in the Nicholas Porter
Survey, from Intensity Level 3 to Intensity Level 4, located on Northwest Boulevard.
Melissa Murphy gave the staff report. Robert Seamans asked if there had been a study
on how this project will affect the surrounding neighborhoods and the impact with
increased traffic. Melissa Murphy responded that Northwest Boulevard. is a minor
arterial and Riverbend will be extended. Patrick Walsh asked if there had been a traffic
impact study that incorporates this site. David Munk responded that a study had not
been conducted. Matt Marshall, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission.
He stated that the applicant will extend Riverbend from Westwood to Northwest
Boulevard at their expense to alleviate traffic. Robert Seamans asked if it is prohibitive to
do a traffic study at this point for the surrounding residents. Matt Marshall responded
that the developers had met with residents and addressed their concerns and have had
no negative feedback from them. Patrick Walsh voiced his concern also regarding the
traffic in this area. David Munk explained that the Century Plan acts as a traffic study.
Robert Seamans asked if there is talk about widening Lakeway. David Munk said no.
Chris Aadnesen stated that he supports additional housing. He suggested that the
Commission approve the project but also suggest a traffic study for the good of all
neighbors in this area. Gabe Sansing said that he supported the application but would
like to see the City do a traffic study for the area. Robert Seamans stated that he felt it
would be remiss to do the study after the fact. He would like to know what’s going to
happen to Lakeway and the light at Williams Drive and Lakeway. Amelia Sondgeroth
stated that the City does not have a Traffic Engineer and they contract out studies like
these. She stated that we are constrained because the Century Plan is our only planning
tool at this time. Marjorie Herbert stated that her concern is traffic impact and
infrastructure, but the development department needs to be equipped to deal with these
questions. Audrey McDonald agreed that the study after the fact didn’t make sense.
Richard Glasco stated that we need more family and housing units, and felt that the
traffic impact was out of the Commission’s hands so he would vote in favor of the
request. Patrick Walsh stated that it needed to be communicated to City Council that
some mechanism needs to be in place to address traffic problems. After the discussion,
Gabe Sansing made a motion to approve a Century Plan Amendment for 31.10 acres in
the Nicholas Porter Survey, from Intensity Level 3 to Intensity Level 4. Chris Aadnesen
seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0.
9. Consideration of a Rezoning of Highland Park Revised, Block 1 Lot 2B (east 65 feet of
Lot 2), from RS, Residential Single Family, to C-1, Local Commercial, or any more
restrictive district, located at 206 W. 23rd Street. Melissa Murphy gave the staff report.
June 5, 2001
P&Z Minutes
Page 3
Patrick Walsh asked what the mechanism would be to deal with the other residentially
zoned properties along 1460. Discussion followed regarding residents surrounding this
property. Melissa Murphy responded that each property will have the ability to request
rezoning. Vic Flores, 2403 Highland, addressed the Commission. He stated that his
school-age children ride the school bus and wanted to know that if a Highland cul-de-sac
is made, can a school bus turn around there. He also asked about emergency vehicle
access. Melissa Murphy responded that she wasn’t sure if a cul-de-sac was going to be
built or not, but if so, it would be built to accommodate a school bus or emergency
vehicles being able to turn around. Gabe Sansing stated that he believes that ultimately
everything there will go commercial in that area and we need that extension, so he’s in
favor of the request. All Commissioners stated that they were in favor of the request
since no adjacent property owners were there to speak in opposition of the request.
After the discussion, Marjorie Herbert made a motion to approve the rezoning of
Highland Park Revised, Block 1, Lot 2B (east 65 feet of Lot 2), from RS, Residential
Single Family, to C-1, Local Commercial, or any more restrictive district, located at 206
W. 23rd Street. Robert Seamans seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0.
Gabe Sansing left at this point of the meeting.
10. Consideration of a Variance to the Subdivision Regulations for River Ridge Three,
Section E, Lot 16, located at 104 Riverview Cove. Melissa Murphy gave the staff report
and recommendation and explained the handout showing other pools in the area.
Marjorie Herbert asked if the main concern regarding impervious coverage is drainage.
Melissa Murphy stated that it also concerns water recharge. Chris Aadnesen asked if
there was record of declined permits. Melissa Murphy stated that in most cases we work
with the applicant to comply, but we don’t keep record of declined permits. Robert
Seamans stated that he didn’t see a down side to the project from a recharge stand
point and noted that the applicant had the support of surrounding neighbors. Chris
Aadnesen stated that he was aware of several permits denied because of this issue in
his neighborhood and asked about consistency in this instance. Patrick Walsh and
Marjorie Herbert responded that it’s important to be extremely circumspect when
considering variance requests and the integrity of the ordinance needs to be considered.
Chris Aadnesen stated that if the proper permitting had been done, this problem would
not be here. Mr. McKenzie, the applicant, addressed the Commission and responded to
questions. He compared Georgetown’s impervious coverage regulations to those of
surrounding cities. Richard Glasco stated that he felt that consistency is the bottom line
and he would vote to deny because there are other alternatives for the applicant.
Audrey McDonald stated that other applicants were able to cooperate within the system
and she would vote to deny. Marjorie Herbert stated that she was not swayed by the
applicant’s comparison to other cities. Robert Seamans stated that he was in favor of
this request and compared this request to the consistency of the application of the fees
paid in-lieu of park land dedication arena. Chris Aadnesen stated that the dilemma was
caused by an unfortunate chain of events, but because he was aware of other applicants
being denied similar variances, he would vote to deny. Patrick Walsh stated that this
seemed like too much on too small of a lot and he was in favor of consistency above
convenience. After the discussion, Marjorie Herbert made a motion to deny the
requested Variance to Table 34020, Design Standards for Lots, to allow greater
impervious coverage of 45% which exceeds the 40% impervious coverage limit allowed
by the code for River Ridge Three, Section E, Lot 16, located at 104 Riverview Cove.
Richard Glasco seconded the motion, which passed by a vote of 5-1 (Robert Seamans
was opposed).
June 5, 2001
P&Z Minutes
Page 4
11. Consideration of a Century Plan Amendment from Intensity Level 1 to Intensity Level 4
and Concept Plan for 118.34 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey, to be known as
Woodlake Subdivision, located along Williams Drive, across from Shell Road. Carla
Benton gave the staff report and recommendation. Robert Seamans asked why the City
looked at water, wastewater and traffic for this parcel and there was not the same
scrutiny for the previous applicant on Northwest Blvd. Carla Benton responded that it
was the same process and explained that process. David Munk further explained the
use of the Century Plan model is in place for water and wastewater and explained that
we do not re-run the model for traffic because we don’t have that requirement in the
ordinance. Tom Watts, agent for the applicant, addressed the Commission. He stated
that the applicant agrees that commercial development should be located at main
intersections of major arterial roadways of the City, but they disagree with the size of the
ultimate node of the commercial development located at the intersections. He handed
out copies of the City’s Intensity Map. He stated that the applicant disagreed with the
staff’s recommendation of Office and Multi-family uses for Blocks J, K and L. The
applicant wishes for those lots to be designated for commercial use, so they will ask for
C-1 zoning. Robert Seamans asked Mr. Watts if he sees this as an Arboretum type
complex. Mr. Watts said yes this would be an Arboretum type complex. Chris
Aadnesen stated that the concept is desirable for Georgetown, but cautioned that
Williams Drive needs to be upgraded before this is built. Mike Mersiovsky addressed the
Commission regarding wastewater and asked about connectivity for emergency services
to his site. Carla Benton responded that that would be addressed at the time of Public
Review Final Plat. Carla Benton gave the staff report for the Concept Plan. She stated
that staff approves of 45 acres of commercial land use which consists of the first two
Blocks and not the entire width of the property along Williams Drive as depicted on the
Concept Plan. She informed the Commission that the Parks Board has not looked at
this yet but because of the school's timeline, the applicant wanted to go forward this
month. Marjorie Herbert stated that she was bothered by pre-empting the Parks Board
and asked if they should delay consideration of these proposals. Carla Benton
explained that it was brought forward to expedite the process in order to have
wastewater available by November for the school district’s need. Patrick Walsh asked
about the mini-warehouses shown on the concept plan and Carla Benton informed him
that the applicant has agreed to withdraw that. Patrick Walsh asked Mr. Watts what the
impact would be of tabling this for a month to let the Parks Board meet. Tom Watts
responded that there would be flexibility on where to put the park land, but there is no
flexibility on getting the wastewater line to the school. Discussion followed regarding
timing of recommending to City Council before the Parks Board recommendation. Steve
Brook, representing Andice Development Company, encouraged the Commission to
make a recommendation contingent upon the Parks Board recommendation. More
discussion followed regarding a motion to recommend with a contingency tied to the
motion. Marjorie Herbert asked if the Commission recommended approval tonight
subject to the approval and agreement of the Parks Board, does that in any way
circumscribe what the Parks Board can do with this Concept Plan. Amelia Sondgeroth
stated that the Parks Board could make a presumption that the P&Z recommended
approval with the park land as shown on the Concept Plan. Robert Seamans asked if
that presumption wouldn’t be nullified if the P&Z approved the Concept Plan, “subject to”
the Parks Board recommendation. Marjorie Herbert stated that her question is: does the
action of the P&Z legally limit the Parks Board action in any way. Cathy Riedel stated
that the P&Z’s action will not limit the Parks Board action, because both boards are
advisory boards and can recommend to City Council individually. After the extensive
June 5, 2001
P&Z Minutes
Page 5
discussion regarding the timing of this project and the urgency of consideration by the
P&Z because of the design and construction of the wastewater line which will be
provided for the school, all the Commissioners agreed to move forward with a
recommendation. Marjorie Herbert made a motion to recommend approval of the
Century Plan Amendment from Intensity Level 1 to Intensity Level 4 for 118.34 acres in
the Joseph Fish Survey, to be known as Woodlake Subdivision; and recommendation for
approval of a Concept Plan for 118.34 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey, to be known as
Woodlake Subdivision, provided that Land use designations for Blocks J, K and L are
revised as per agreement with staff and this motion is subject to the specific proviso that
the Parks Board, without any limitation whatsoever, based on this recommendation, do
their normal procedure of looking at this concept plan and utilizing their process to either
approve or disapprove or work out an agreement. If an agreement with the Parks Board
is not worked out satisfactorily then this recommendation should not go to City Council.
Richard Glasco seconded the motion. Steve Brook informed the Commission that the
developer is in disagreement with staff on its ruling of the zoning issue on Blocks J, K
and L and would like to leave this open until the applicant can request C-1 zoning. “Land
use” versus “zoning” was discussed. Robert Buffkin, President of Andice Development
Company, addressed the Commission. He asked the Commission not to “label” Blocks
J, K and L as office and multi-family only at this time. He stated that it would affect the
marketing of the property and will close the door to certain commercial businesses
looking at this property, such as a bank. He stated that this land use designation would
stop growth in this area. Marjorie Herbert stated that her motion had nothing to do with
stopping growth and everything to do with controlling growth in a way to maintain a
healthy balance in this community. Mr. Buffkin stated that the motion restricts his ability
to design a proper plan to bring forward for approval if he can’t market it as a commercial
property. Robert Seamans stated that he understands that the restrictions by the motion
comes, in effect, carrying RM designation because of staff’s recommendation. Instead of
leaving any recommendation like that out, it’s going to look to a possible financial entity
as an uphill battle to put their business in a suitable position, from the standpoint of
being next to apartments as opposed to a nice restaurant. It already looks like it
precludes the idea of the type of investments Mr. Buffkin is talking about when we
endorse a certain recommendation for the property, whether it be C-1 or R-M. He asked
if the Commission can just leave that out altogether. Richard Glasco asked if the motion
could be amended to state “Commercial as deemed appropriate by the Commission”.
More discussion followed regarding amending the motion. Chris Aadnesen stated that
he didn’t agree with staff’s recommendation of limiting Blocks J, K and L to office and
multi-family. Ms. Herbert withdrew her motion. Patrick Walsh then made a motion to
recommend approval of a Century Plan Amendment from Intensity Level 1 to Intensity
Level 4 for 118.34 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey to be known as Woodlake
Subdivision; and approval of the Concept Plan for 118.34 acres in the Joseph Fish
Survey to be known as Woodlake Subdivision provided, first, that land use designation
for Blocks J, K and L are subject to zoning review in a subsequent application and
secondly, the proposed park land dedication for Block D as submitted is supported by
the Parks Board. Patrick Walsh amended his motion to state: “…the proposed park land
dedication is agreed to by the Parks Board, without restrictions.” Robert Seamans
seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 5-0-1. (Marjorie Herbert abstained.)
12. Staff comments and reports.
a. Council action update – Melissa Murphy updated the Commission on the May City
Council meetings.
b. Important dates to remember:
June 5, 2001
P&Z Minutes
Page 6
1. Thursday, July 12th Open House for the public at Southwestern University, 5:00-
8:00 p.m. to learn more about the issues, concerns and problems with the current
ordinances. (You are not asked to attend, but may want to see what public
reaction is.)
2. Monday, July 23rd Joint Workshop with the City Council, 4:00 p.m., to hear
presentation from Duncan and Assoc. on the critique of the development
ordinances and the Century Plan. Chris Aadnesen stated that he will be out of the
country on the 23rd.
13. Commissioners comments and reports—Patrick Walsh asked what the Commission can
do to spur-on the City Council to address the traffic problems on Williams Drive. Amelia
Sondgeroth stated that HDR is working on a study regarding driveway spacing on
Williams Dr. and that will provide some information on traffic.
With no further business, Richard Glasco made a motion to adjourn at 9:30 p.m. Robert
Seamans seconded the motion which passed unanimously.
/jmr