HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_P&Z_07.03.2001
P&Z Meeting
July 3, 2001
Page 1
Minutes
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Georgetown, TX
Tuesday, July 3, 2001 AT 6:00 P.M.
Chair, Patrick Walsh, called the July 3, 2001, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order at 6:03
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, Jim Babcock, Development Technician and Cathy Riedel, Acting City Attorney.
1. Action from Executive Session - None
Consent Agenda
Agenda Items #2 and 3 were removed from the Consent Agenda to be considered individually by the
Commission.
4. Consideration of a Public Review Final Plat of 13.553 acres in the David Wright Survey, to be
known as the Resubdivision of San Gabriel Estates, Lots 1, 2, 3, 23 & 24, located on Williams
Drive and Booty’s Crossing.
Gabe Sansing made a motion to recommend approval of Agenda Item #4 of the Consent Agenda.
Marjorie Herbert seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 7-0.
Regular Agenda
2. Consideration of the Minutes of the June 5, 2001, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting.
Robert Seamans asked that Item #11 be reviewed and/or restructured, because he knew that he
had input on that agenda item, and the minutes did not reflect comments by him. Robert
Seamans made a motion to table action on consideration of the June 5th P&Z minutes until the
August meeting for further review and revision. Richard Glasco seconded the motion which
passed by a vote of 7-0.
3. Consideration of a Public Review Final Plat of 50.38 acres in the Joseph Fish Survey, to be
known as A Planned Unit Development of Georgetown Village, Section Sev en, located along
Shell Road. Delaney Murphy, adjacent property owner addressed the Commission. He asked
who will be responsible to the maintenance of the fence that backs up to his property. Patrick
Walsh responded that the developer will be responsible for maintenance of the fence. Mr.
Murphy stated that his property is Lot 15A , which is where the drainage goes through now. He
asked if anything is going to be done to the culvert on Sequoia Spur or if it had been evaluated.
He noted that it looked like no trees behind his house will be saved and can anything be done
about that. He asked how far the 9’ berm would be from his fence line. He wanted to know
more about the 2 water quality ponds shown on the plat. John Clark and Mark Pustka
responded to Mr. Murphy’s questions. Mr. Clark stated that the 2 water quality ponds will be
sedimentation filtration ponds as required by TNRCC, and the ponds are designed to detain
water so that the drainage will not be different for the surrounding properties with th e adjacent
land changing from undeveloped to developed. Mr. Clark stated that at this time, there’s no
upgrade to the Sequoia Spur culvert planned. He stated that the ponds are designed to let the
water go within 72 hours after raining and the PID for Georgetown Village will maintain the
P&Z Meeting
July 3, 2001
Page 2
ponds as needed. Robert Seamans asked if they will be channeling water into the Sequoia
Spur pipe that before the development would have never gotten to the pipe. Mark Pustka
responded no, because of the new drainage system being designed and built. In response to
the questions about trees, Mark Pustka stated that he had flagged at least 5 trees behind Lot
16 that can be saved. Behind Lot 15, the trees in the pond area must be taken down. They will
try to minimize the damage to the trees and it may be possible to realign the berm to save more
trees. The toe of the 3 to 1 slope of the berm will start 15’ off the fence line at the beginning o f
the easement. Claudia Ibarra, Lot 16, addressed the Commission regarding the ac cess
easement on her property. She stated that no one knows if it is a City or County road and she
is paying taxes on it. She stated that she will still be paying taxes even when paved and
wanted to know how to dedicate that easement. Carla Benton stated that at this point it will be
a negotiation between the City and County as to whose road this will be and who will build the
road. Gabe Sansing stated that he would like to see as many trees saved as possible and
he’d like to see the pond reconfigured to save trees. After the discussion, Marjorie Herbert
made a motion to approve the Public Review Final Plat of 50.38 acres in the Joseph Fish
Survey, to be known as the Planned Unit Development of Georgetown Village, Section 7,
provided the Technical Issues are addressed prior to City Council consideration. Robert
Seamans seconded the motion. Gabe Sansing stated that he would vote against the plat in its
current form. He then proposed an amendment to the motion to state that recommended
approval is subject to the reconfiguration of the pond in order to save as many as trees as
possible. Marjorie Herbert accepted the amendment to her motion. Robert Seamans seconded
the amended motion which passed by a vote of 7-0.
5. Consideration of a Rezoning of City of Georgetown, Block 22, Portion of Lots 1, 2, and 3, from
RM-3, Office and Service District to C-2B, Commercial First Height, located on Rock Street.
Carla Benton gave the staff report and recommendation. Richard Glasco asked about the
existing business on this property. Carla Benton responded that it was a salvage and recycling
business that will be closing. Ronald Swain, the representative of the TRG Neighborhood
Association, addressed the Commission. He asked if an impact study had ever been done f or
this area, particularly regarding safety, roads, traffic and the increase in taxes for the
residences in this area. Mr. Swain handed out a petition which was submitted in April in
opposition to the rezoning of this property. He asked again for an impact study. Robert
Seamans asked if the tax rate question is because he thinks the property values will increase.
Mr. Swain responded that they are based on the fact that the business standards in the
downtown area are being raised, therefore adjacent property will also be affected. Chris
Aadnesen asked if the opposition is to the zoning or the fact that it’s a jail. Mr. Swain
responded that there is concern for the type of use and there are emotional and psychological
aspects of this as well, but any commercial use that would increase traffic is a concern.
Richard Glasco asked if the Commission had done a rezoning recently in this area. Carla
Benton responded that the BOA had approved variances to design standards for this site in
April of this year. Marjorie Herbert asked Mr. Swain what TRG stands for and Mr. Swain
responded that it stood for the Track, Ridge and Grasshopper neighborhoods and showed
where those neighborhoods are. Marjorie Herbert asked what else prompted the petition. Mr.
Swain responded that they don’t want to lose more than they already have and they want to
guard against further erosion of the neighborhood. Marjorie Herbert asked Mr. Swain to explain
the emotional and psychological dimensions of these issues. Mr. Swain responded that the
people in this area don’t feel they are heard like other neighborhoods. They feel like a
comprehensive impact study should be done. Gabe Sansing stated that he would like to have
the County move out of town, but wondered if there was any way to stop this County project.
Chris Aadnesen asked Cathy Riedel where the Commission stands from a legal stand point in
considering this request. Cathy Riedel stated that the Commission should look at surrounding
land uses, and ascertain whether or not this is appropriate and compatible to rezone and
consistent with the Georgetown Century Plan. Mr. Aadnesen asked what that means. Carla
P&Z Meeting
July 3, 2001
Page 3
Benton responded that according to the Century Plan, this area is Intensity Level 5, meaning
the City’s infrastructure can support this use in this area. Gabe Sansing asked if the
Commission can legally not approve this request. Marjorie Herbert stated that she felt that
given the petition signed by 186 citizens and given the surrounding uses, the Commission can
deny this request. Richard Glasco made a suggestion that City Council get together with the
neighborhood association. Robert Seamans stated that he was sympathetic to the feelings of
the neighborhood association. However, in view of the fact that it’s a small property, not on the
residential side of the tract and it’s against other businesses, he doesn’t think it will have any
bearing on the project going forward. He stated that voting against the rezoning would just
make a point. Marjorie Herbert stated that there is a history of the black community not being
heard in Georgetown and the integrity of this neighborhood is as important as any in
Georgetown. Robert Seamans stated that he agreed but doesn’t think that this one parcel will
serve the purpose that Marjorie Herbert is talking about. He stated that something should be
done, but he doesn’t feel that this will serve that purpose because of the size of this tract. More
discussion followed regarding the effect that a recommendation of denial would have on this
project. Patrick Walsh asked Mr. Swain what kind of impact study he thought should be done.
Robert Swain responded that traffic, tax base, erosion of the neighborhood, social and service
impact studies need to be done. Chris Aadnesen asked if the County would buy this parcel
without the rezoning. Carla Benton responded that the County could put parking on this
property without the rezoning. Chris Aadnesen asked if there is such a thing as an impact
study. Carla Benton stated that the City has not done any kind other than traffic impact studies
in the past. Patrick Walsh asked how denial of this request would affect the County’s design.
Carla Benton stated that denial would simply limit the design. Audrey McDonald stated that
whether the Commission turns this request down or not, it doesn’t signify whether they will
expand the jail or not, since the County will just change the design to proceed. Gabe Sansing
stated that he thought that voting against this is a way of making a statement that the
Commission doesn’t care for it. He stated that there should be a showing to the County
Commissioners that there are those opposed to the expansion. Marjorie Herbert spoke to the
issue of fatalism. She stated that this is not done until it’s done. She felt that the City Council
will take note, the County will take note and the neighborhood, with its organization, could very
well change the location of the jail. Patrick Walsh stated that he shares the concerns of the
neighborhood, however he understands the County’s decision to build on land that they already
own and expand an existing facility and he understands that one of the compelling criteria for
the expansion is the proximity of the jail to the courthouse. He stated that he felt that opposing
the rezoning is more functional than it is symbolic. Chris Aadnesen reminded the
Commissioners of the Century Plan Amendment that the P&Z approved and then the City
Council denied because of the impact on the citizens, when none were there to oppose the
request. After the discussion, Gabe Sansing made a motion to deny the rezoning of the City of
Georgetown, Block 22, Portion of Lots 1, 2, and 3, from RM-3, Office and Service District to C-
2B, Commercial First Height. Richard Glasco seconded the motion. Robert Seamans a mended
the motion to state that the Commission recommends that a neighborhood impact study should
accompany any further applications for the zoning on this piece of property. The amendment
was accepted and the motion passed by a vote of 7-0.
Richard Glasco left the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
Gabe Sansing made a motion to recess P&Z to go on to the Sign Review Board agenda. Chris
Aadnesen seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 6-0.
The P&Z reconvened at 8:55 p.m.
6. Staff comments and reports.
P&Z Meeting
July 3, 2001
Page 4
a. Council action update – Carla Benton updated the Commission on the June City Council
meetings.
b. Change of location for August P&Z meeting. There will be no change in location for the
August P&Z meeting.
c. Cathy Riedel passed out a paper from a land use seminar she and Amelia Sondgeroth
attended.
d. Important dates to remember:
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 ordinance s.
(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.
e. Amelia Sondgeroth informed the Commissioners that there are videos in the Mayor’s office
regarding zoning that can be checked out and reviewed by the Commissioners.
7. Commissioners comments and reports
a. Revision of Bylaws – Patrick Walsh informed the Commission that the City Council wants to
have a person on the Commission, designated as Secretary, to review the minutes each month.
After the discussion, Robert Seamans made a motion to accept the Bylaws, with proposed
changes to the duties of the secretary and removal of the sentence regarding the Director of
Development Services to serve as non-voting secretary of the commission. Marjorie Herbert
seconded the motion which passed by a vote of 5-1 (Gabe Sansing opposed).
b Election of Secretary - Marjorie Herbert nominated Chris Aadnesen as Commission
Secretary. Audrey McDonald seconded the nomination. Chris Aadnesen was elected by a vote
of 5-0-1 (Chris Aadnesen abstained)
Chris Aadnesen made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9:15 p.m. Marjorie Herbert seconded the
motion which passed by a vote of 6-0.
/jmr