Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_P&Z_03.02.2004_aMinutes Planning and Zoning Commission City of Georgetown, TX Tuesday, March 2, 2004, at 6:00 P.M. Members Present: Chairman, Chris Aadnesen, Johnny Anderson, Harry Gibbs, Will Moore, and Sarah Milburn Members Absent: Jenni Shield, Brian Ortego, Audrey McDonald, Russ Phillips and Marlene McMichael Staff Present: Amelia Sondgeroth, Director of Planning and Development Services, Quana Childs, City Architect, Bobby Ray, Chief Development Planner, Trish Carls, City Attorney, and Tammye Sharpe, Planning Specialist / Recording Secretary The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Chair, Chris Aadnesen, called the meeting to order at 6:02 1. Action from Executive Session Consent Agenda 2. Consideration of the Minutes of the February 3, 2004, regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Anderson made the motion to accept the minutes as written. Milburn seconded the motion, which passed with a vote of 5-0. Regular Agenda 3. Presentation and discussion of upcoming 04-05 City of Georgetown Budget Process and Survey. Micki Rundell, Director of Finance, gave her staff presentation. Rundell talked about a survey that she wanted the Commissioners to participate in by filling out the survey form and sending back to the City Finance Department. Rundell said that the "community type" issue topics that are on the survey are: a. What are the top 3 issues that are facing Georgetown as a whole in the next five year? (such as transportation); b. What do you like most about living in Georgetown? (Why are you here?); and c. What 3 changes would make Georgetown a better place to live? This survey will be on the City website (www.georgetown.org) for the community to participate with input, and Rundell encouraged everyone to participate. Rundell said that Finance would like to have all the feedback by the end of the month, because they are accumulating it and forwarding it to City Council to look at in April. Rundell said that this process is being done to hopefully have the budget for next year more structured. 4. Public Hearing and possible action on a recommendation to the City Council regarding an Amendments to Section 3.13.010 (B and D), 4.04.030 (G), and 16.05 and Adding New Sections 3.13.010 (E&F), 3.13.040 (E), and 4.10 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) pertaining to the Old Town Overlay District. Quana Childs, City Architect, gave the staff presentation. Childs gave a brief summation of the Old Town Overlay District for all citizens, using the updated map that shows the revised district boundaries. She talked about the updated High Priority Properties list and the changes to the proposed ordinances within the Unified Development Code, to include the review of the exterior alterations to residential/commercial structures used as, or changing to commercial uses and/or vacant property changing to commercial use (design oversight). Childs listed the issues: a) no demolition or removal of buildings without review; and b) maintaining the residential character of any residential building changing to commercial use; and c) design oversight of commercial buildings. Childs went through each amendment where there were additions, and new sections. The sections that were affected were as follows: Amend Section 3.13.010 (B), Amend Section 3.13.010 (D), add Section 3.13.010 (E & F), and add all new Section 3.13.040 (E). Aadnesen asked if the special notification had been given to the owners of high priority structures regarding this process. Childs confirmed that all property owners within the Old Town Overlay District, all property owners within 200 feet of the boundary, and all property owners of the High Priority structures were sent a notice in the mail, along with a notice that was published in the Williamson County Sun that provided the same information that was mailed out. Childs continued with the next group of sections that were affected: Section 4.04.030 (G), new purpose and intent paragraph added; Section 4.10 - add all new; and Section 16.05 - add definition of high priority structure. Aadnesen requested clarity on 4.10.020 (A) (2) paragraph re: exterior alterations. Anderson confirmed that the High Priority List had been "scrubbed" and asked that 16.05 reflect the updated changes made to the List. He talked about a site on the list that had already changed use (1703 Leander Road), and is designated as an industrial site stating it should come off the list. Moore asked about what was meant by "adjacent lot" in Section 4.10.020 (C). Childs said that it referred to adjacent residential lots, the two properties on either side of the site. Milburn said that the wording of this paragraph (Section 4.10.020 (C) says to her that the site home can match what is on either side. Does this mean it does not have to go through zoning? Sondgeroth said that the request would still have to go through zoning change but when it comes in for residential building plan review, building setbacks would be viewed against the adjacent properties (the two on either side of the property). Sondgeroth said this is to keep consistency within the neighborhood and to address platted setbacks. Moore said that Old Town setbacks should not be restricted by new subdivision setbacks. Moore said that there were restrictions for setbacks in front and back and these do not give much flexibility as to where you want to set your house. He is concerned about the distance you can build your home from the street (in the front). Sondgeroth said that this amendment was to correct setback issues so the need to go through the Board of Adjustment would be minimized, but she understood Moore's concern. Childs informed the Commission they had a fax from a high priority property owner that was in favor of the Old Town Overlay District. Lawrence Parr, 1005 Pine (since 1973) - Parr's home was originally built as a rooming house for Southwestern and has an outside door to every room. His concern was about what the procedure would be if his home would be turned into a Bed & Breakfast facility. Sondgeroth said she would like to research his question and get back to him, but did mention that there was a process he would have to go through if he was zoned commercial. He would need to obtain a special use permit. Parr said that he was before the Commission to request that the property owners be allowed to keep working on their properties to do what is necessary. He wants to keep owner property rights. Bill Russell, 315 E 6th Street - concerned about the procedure regarding the new construction/restoration part in the Amendment. Russell would like to have grandfathering in affect to existing property owners and asked what could be done about the traffic flow through the neighborhood. Jim Dillard, 1404 Maple - President of the Georgetown Heritage Society, spoke in favor of the Old Town Overlay District Amendment Ordinance. West Short, 404 E 7th Street - concerned about some of the language and the procedures in the Ordinance along with the setback issues. Short suggested that the word "historic" be put into Section 4.04.030 (G) to give clarity from residential. J. C. Johnson, 303 E. 9th Street - concern about the setback requirements and in favor of the Old Town Overlay District Amendment Ordinance. Della Green, 1901 Vine Street - agreed with amending the high priority list but asked if properties could be added on the list. Both Sondgeroth and Aadnesen confirmed that provision was not part of the Ordinance and would have to be added to the Ordinance for properties to be added. The amendment which would have to go through P&Z and Council to adopt a new process to allow the additions. Sondgeroth said that there are already provisions in the Ordinance to allow a property owner to come forward and request historic zoning. Green thinks that the list is not accurate. Green named the following properties as historic, those in the 600 Block of MLK and in the 500 Block of W. 6th Street. Green asked that if the property is designated as historical, does that raise the property owner's taxes and the value of the property. Sondgeroth said that there are a lot of factors taken into consideration when appraising property, but being zoned historic by itself does not necessarily raise the value of the property/home. Green agrees with the setback comments that have been made. Green also thinks that staff needs to designate what side of the street that is affected by the District in the definition of the boundaries of the Old Town Overlay District. Richard Cutts, 1312 Elm Street - concerned about the maintenance of the High Priority List and the homes that are on the List. Cutts questioned that if a structure was relocated would it stay on the list. Cutts informed the Commission about a house that was relocated on College Street and is not on the List, and another house on Elm Street that has been extremely modified from it's original design, and it still not on the List. Cutts was concerned that there is no protection for the historic structures that stay residential. Cutts had a question regarding the 180 day cooling off period after HARC says no, what happens? Can the structure still be demolished? (yes)....and that's the problem. Childs was asked to discuss the criteria that makes a home historical. She stated that 50+ years old (age); something historical happened at the site (historical person or event); and/or architectural consideration (certain style - Victorian, Queen Anne type, etc.). Childs said that there is emphasis on homes that reflect the history of the area and those that have historic stories of common people. Childs understood the desire and necessity for the List to be updated and let the Commission know she has been in contact with architectural firms to work on the List. One did not want the job, the second did not call back, and the third gave her a ballpark figure of $25,000 - 30,000. Childs is trying to get grant monies through the Historic Commission, but competition is tough. Charles Burson, 1224 Church Street (residence there for 42 years) - concerned about individual property rights, and asked about the procedure for a new property owner that came in and began renovating their home. Do they have to come before HARC? Sondgeroth said that they would not have to go through HARC review if they are simply remodeling a residential structure. Sondgeroth said the only time a HARC review would be necessary is when there would be a change to commercial. George Meyer, 705 E 3rd Street - relinquished time to Renee Hanson. Barbara Meyer, 705 E 3rd Street - asked for support of the Historic Overlay District, and talked about the Jesse Daniel Ames house and the importance in reading the abstracts to their properties. Sondgeroth again informed the Commission and the public that if someone wants their individual structure to be designated historic, there is a provision in the Ordinance to do so. She asked those interested to come to Planning & Development Division and request the Historic designation. The City will begin the process designating the property to historic - procedure is like going through a zoning change. Sherri Babcock, 409 E. University - in favor of the Old Town Overlay District and asked if someone other than the owner could ask for historic designation if they found out something significant that would change the designation to historic. Mark McCarthy, 907 Pine Street - concerned about the Section 4.10.020 (C) Residential Contextual Standards - needs clarity and allowances for unusually shaped lots to get the best use. McCarthy warned the Commission about the issue of getting a Certificate of Design Compliance for residential changes. He thinks that this would become a litigation trap for the City. McCarthy said that overall the Ordinance should be passed with all the changes. Kevin Brass, 1208 S. Austin Avenue - in favor of the Old Town Overlay District but concerned about when property goes through residential to commercial change and the stated purpose and intent of the Old Town Overlay definition. He wanted to change the word "residential" character to "historic" character in the last sentence of the purpose paragraph. Brass said that he was concerned that the tear down provision was not strong enough to save homes. Anderson asked Carls, City Attorney, to clarify why the provision cannot be made stronger (because of emanate domain). Carls said that the best solution that could be made was to make that time period as long as possible, the provision was made with 180 days in hopes that it would allow ample time for some other opportunity to present itself so that the structure could be saved. Renee Hanson, 1252 S. Austin Avenue - was representing herself and the Board of the Heart of Georgetown Association. Hanson touched on the importance of planning and the need for more planning due to the acceleration of growth and asked for the support of recommending the approval of the Old Town Overlay District and the amendments to the UDC for requirements for demolition or relocation of High Priority structures. Sondgeroth said she wanted to hear discussion from the Commissioners to find out which areas needed to be addressed in the Ordinance. Milburn wants the setback issue to be addressed to give relief for variety in the homes and the preservation of trees and thinks the Residential Contextual Standards should be reworded to give variance. Milburn also wants to know how we can maintain the List in the future. Gibbs was concerned about all the same issues that Milburn brought up. Moore said that the setback requirements should be changed (need to address how far back property owners can build their homes). Moore said the following rules should not apply to Old Town: sidewalks, setbacks, waiver processes, existing buildings. Moore said that by adopting this ordinance, the City and neighborhoods can adopt changes and special rules to make Old Town residents, City staff, and future builders from dealing with issues that really do not apply to this district. Anderson said that he felt that all the issues he had brought up two months ago have been addressed and thanked staff and Hanson for the hard work they had done. The two issues that Anderson was concerned about were the setback issue and the rewording. Also the updating of the database needs to be attached to the ordinance definition for high priority structures. Aadnesen wants to recommend the Ordinance to be passed with a few changes, and to suggest to City Council to start the process in having future amendments. Aadnesen listed his suggested changes to the amendment: change the "purpose and intent" paragraph word "residential" to "historic"; to clarify wording in Section 4.10.020 (A) (2) for having the setback section be looked at and revised to be flexible; and, to show the amendments done in 2004 to be added to Section 16.05. There was a discussion on the process, expense and participating parties regarding obtaining grant monies through the Historic Commission. Anderson made the motion to recommend to City Council the approval of the following amendments to: Section 3.13.010 (B) and (D), and Section 4.04.030 (G), and Section 16.05; and to the adding of the following new Sections: Section 3.13.010 (E&F), Section 3.13.040 (E) and Section 4.10, to the Unified Development Code pertaining to the Old Town Overlay District, with the following changes: 1) to Section 4.04.030 (G) purpose and intent, change the word "residential" to "historic" in both places the word appears; 2) to Section 4.10.020 (A) (2), adding words "For the purposes of this section" to the front of the sentence that says "Exterior alternations shall not include...."; 3) to Section 4.10.020 (C), Residential Contextual Standards, that the language be revisited by the Staff prior to the City Council receiving this recommendation; and 4) to Section 16.05, Definitions, be amended to say, "...as amended in the Committee Survey of 2004", to reflect the updating of the List. Motion was seconded by Gibbs, which passed with a vote of 5-0. 5. Consideration and possible action on Public Hearing for a Rezoning of Crestview Addition, Unit 1, Block 2, Lot 1, from RS, Residential Single Family to OF, Office District, located at 1612 Williams Drive. Bobby Ray gave the staff presentation. Applicant was not present at the meeting. Moore made the motion to recommend to City Council the approval of a Rezoning of Crestview Addition, Unit 1, Block 2, Lot 1, from RS, Residential Single Family to OF, Office District, located at 1612 Williams Drive. Commissioner Milburn seconded the motion, which passed with a vote of 5-0. 6. Comments from Director. * March 8th Council Workshop - Monday 4:00 p.m. (Re: UDC and how it is working. City manager to present proposal to update the Century Plan and long-term rewrite, making major revision as necessary. Sondgeroth will include a report on this in next month's packet. * Texas APA State Conference - October 13 - 16, Austin, Texas. Sondgeroth said that her hope was to be able to send all the Commissioners to this conference, since it will be in Austin. Mention of a session, "Planning & Zoning Commissioner Short Course" (2 day course) that Director feels would be a good one for Commission to attend. 7. Comments from Commissioners. Milburn wants to have updates on what Council does with what Commission has recommended to them. Sondgeroth said that they would start giving the Commission that information. Commissioner Anderson made the motion to adjourn. Seconded unanimously. Meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.