HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_P&Z_01.03.2012
Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda / January 2, 2012 Page 1 of 6
City of Georgetown, Texas
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday January 3, 2012 at 6:00 PM
Council Chambers
101 E. Seventh Street, Georgetown, Texas 78626
Commissioners: Ercel Brashear, Chair; Porter Cochran, Annette Montgomery, Gene Facey,
Pat Armour, Sally Pell and John Horne
Commissioners in Training: Scott Rankin, Roland Peña and Robert Massad
Commissioner(s) Absent:
Commissioner(s) in Training Absent:
Staff Present: Carla Benton, Planner; Valerie Kreger, Planner; Mike Ellagarger, Planner; Robie
Wyler, Planner; David Munk, City Engineer; and Stephanie McNickle, Recording Secretary.
Chair Brashear called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Chair Brashear stated the order of the meeting and that those who speak must turn in a speaker
form to the recording secretary before the item that they wish to address begins. Each speaker
will be permitted to address the Commission once for each item, for a maximum of three (3)
minutes, unless otherwise agreed to before the meeting begins.
1. Action from Executive Session. There was not an Executive Session.
Consent Agenda
2. Consideration of the Minutes of the December 6, 2011, meeting of the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
Motion by Commissioner Horne to approve the consent agenda including the Minutes of the
December 6, 2011 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Second by Commissioner
Facey. Approved (7-0)
Regular Agenda
3. Public Hearing and possible action on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the
future land use designation from Mixed Use Community (MUC) to High-Density Residential
(HDR) and Mixed Use Neighborhood Center (MUN) for 59.21 acres in the Low Survey, located
on CR 111 west of FM 1460. CPA-2011-003 (Mike Elabarger)
Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda / January 2, 2012 Page 2 of 6
4. Public Hearing and possible action on a rezoning of 59.21 acres in the Low Survey, from
Agricultural (AG) District to Multifamily (MF) District and Local Commercial (C-1) District,
located on CR 111 west of FM 1460. REZ-2011-021 (Mike Elabarger)
Staff reports for item #3 and #4 were requested, for presentation purposes to be combined.
Staff report by Mike Elabarger. The property was annexed into the City, effective December
31, 2011. At the time of annexation, the property was zoned Agricultural (AG) District. The
applicant is requesting to change the future land use designation from its existing Mixed
Use Community (MUC) to Mixed Use Neighborhood Center (MUN) and High‐Density
Residential (HDR). Additionally, the applicant is requesting to rezone the property from
Agricultural (AG) District to the Local Commercial (C-1) and Multifamily (MF) Districts.
The re-zoning of the property and approval of the requested Comprehensive Plan
Amendments are but the first two steps needing completion prior to the actual
development of the property. Prior to any development activity occurring on the property,
any future property owner, would need to process and receive approval of :
Necessary Subdivision Plats;
Site Development Permit Application, including stormwater drainage permits
Construction plans;
Building permits for construction; and
Certificate of Occupancy for any new structures and tenants.
The proposed amendment – from Mixed Use Community to approximately 30% Mixed Use
Neighborhood Center and 70% High Density Residential – is supported by Staff for the
following reasons:
1. Recent Approvals - Recently approved future land use changes approved by City
Council in the immediate area, supporting a broader mix of High Density Residential, C-
1 Commercial zoning and increased Employment Center designation along
Westinghouse Road.
2. Non-binding - Because ultimate development is not assured with any Rezoning (or
Compehensive Plan Amendment), there is general support for the inclusion of higher
density residential uses as a component of the new mixed-use model of development.
3. Synergy – Should this property develop as proposed by the applicant, it may ultimately
work to bolster the Southeast Development Zone area as a live-work-play
multifunctional activity center, provided that enough land in the corridor retain the
Employment Center future land use designation necessary to produce the employment
activity necessary to anchor the proposed residential densities.
4. Appropriate Zoning District – The MF and C-1, in their respective locations, would
fulfill the Future Land Use designations being sought by the applicant (High Density
Residential and Mixed Use Neighborhood Center, respectively) in CPA-2011-003.
Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda / January 2, 2012 Page 3 of 6
Though done in the past, the City no longer approves “conditional” rezonings , and
therefore, cannot limit the use of the property to a single defined activity , presented by an
applicant. Staff must consider the impact of all the permitted uses in the requested districts
(MF and C-1) when evaluating a rezoning request.
5. Utility Impacts: The City’s Water and Wastewater Master Plans are based on the
anticipated land uses and land use densities as stipulated in the Future Land Use and
Growth Tier Plans. Applicant-driven amendments may require that the City amend these
master utility plans, triggering necessary changes to the projected long-term capital
improvement costs. Any proposed changes and the financial implications on the City’s
budget require close scrutiny, deliberation, and review by Staff, Planning and Zoning
Commission (P&Z), and the City Council. This property falls within the Tier 2 designation;
any infrastructure improvements necessary to facilitate the development of this property –
specifically related to water/wastewater improvements – will likely be built solely at the
cost of the developer. Should the City, at some point in the future, decide to assign this area
a Tier 1 designation, then the cost of utility infrastructure improvements for this area would
likely be shifted to the City’s Capital Improvement Program.
The proposed Southeast Development Zone, which includes this property, is intended to be
one of the key locations inside the City reserved for economically oriented development (ie,
non-residential) land uses in the City’s 2030 Plan. To facilitate the growth of employment
type development inside the Southeast Development Zoned, there is the possibility that the
City’s 4-A and 4-B Economic Boards may determine that some developer funded
infrastructure improvements for the Southeast Development Zone area are eligible for some
level of financial reimbursements. Tradionally, these type of financial incentives are limited
to developments that create full-time, permanent jobs 1, and other eligible kinds of economic
development. Multifamily housing, resulting from the proposed HDR land use (and
accompanying Multifamily zoning district) would thus not be eligible for infrastructure
reimbursements. The applicant is aware of this fact and has chosen to seek a residential
zoning component for the property. However, other uses allowed by-right in the C-1
zoning district may or may not be eligible for future infrastructure reimbursement
incentives.
The Local Commercial District, C-1, is intended to provide areas for commercial and retail
activities that primarily serve residential areas, with pedestrian access to the nearby
residential areas, but location should be along major and minor thoroughfares and
corridors, and not on residential streets or collectors. Typical uses would include
townhouse/multifamily dwellings and group living situations, institutional uses,
restaurants, hotels, and retail sales. In order of intensity, the C-1 District is the middle of the
three Commercial districts (between CN, Neighborhood Commercial and C-3, General
Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda / January 2, 2012 Page 4 of 6
Commercial).
The Multifamily District, MF, is intended for Multifamily residential development, such as
apartments, townhouses, and associated uses. This District is appropriate in areas
designated on the Future Land Use Plan for higher density and mixed-use and may be
located along major thoroughfares, and adjacent to both Residential and Non-Residential
Districts.
Chair Brashear invited the applicant to speak.
Erin Welch, Land Strategies gave a presentation including aerials showing a heavily tree area
and ponds, which shall serve as a 150-250 foot buffer to the Teravista neighborhood. Ms.
Welch cites the City’s approval last year of similar requests for the nearby Windmill Hill and
Bourne projects and feels C1 Commercial and MF Multi-family is an equally good
classification for this property.
Ms. Welch stated she was open to questions.
Commissioners asked if the buffered area addressed by the applicant can be zoned as AG
Agriculture. Staff stated that without a request from the applicant requesting AG zoning along
the south and east perimeter of the property, the Commission does not have the authority to
place a “condition” on the Rezoning of the property. The buffered area would have to be
zoned as open space, but only if the applicant requests the property to be zoned as open space.
Staff stated that given the language of the public notice requirements already posted, any
deviation from the applicant’s request not generated by the applicant would need to be
reposted. Staff did agree the applicant could postpone tonight’s decision and adjust the zoned
area and include field notes showing the buffer area to be voted on during the next meeting.
Chair Brashear opened the Public Hearing.
Dawn Dillard, 4627 Monterosa stated she is here representing the Teravista neighborhood and
has a signed petition from 64 neighbors who oppose to the proposed development. Ms.
Dillard also stated they are not only concerned with the buffer, but also the noise, traffic, crime
and the likelihood that apartments being built on the property would inevitably lead to the
devaluing of the adjoining Teravista properties.
Mike Newton, 4625 Monterosa thanked the Commissioners for taking the time to listen to their
concerns. He stated the map that is being shown by Ms. Welch is two years old and would feel
better if a more current picture showing current homes on the lots. He also stated he opposes
apartments being built in the development. He appreciates progress and understands
Georgetown is looking for what serves their citizens. Mr. Newton stated he would like some
guarantee there will not be access to his neighborhood. He is concerned with apartments
Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda / January 2, 2012 Page 5 of 6
being close to his neighborhood that renters are able to look down into the home owner’s
property in Teravista.
Janet Litten, 1902 Colony Glen Lane, explained other expansion being made by Teravista and
is concerned with school children crossing a busy street. She would also like to see a buffer
added.
Chair Brashear closed public hearing
Erin Welch, Land Strategies explained that apartments are not the only development allowed
in a multi-family zoning.
Staff stated State codes require notifications be mailed to Georgetown residents who currently
live 200 feet from the adjacent property. Staff extended the notification list to include Teravista
which is generated from the Williamson Central Appraisal District records.
Staff was asked and answered that the existence of the petition submitted by the residents
would change the number of votes needed to approve the application to a majority plus one, if
the petition was signed by residents within the city limits. Given the neighbors are not
residents of the City, a simple majority is required to approve the application.
Motion by Commissioner Facey to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 59.21 acres in the Low Survey, from Mixed Use
Community (MUC) to High‐Density Residential (HDR) and Mixed Use Neighborhood Center
(MUN). Second by Commissioner Armour Approved (7-0)
Discussion was held by the Commission regarding the rezoning request and allowing the
applicant time to revise, amend and send the request back to Staff.
The applicant then requested the rezoning application be postponed to the February 7, 2012
Planning and Zoning Meeting.
Motion by Commissioner Facey to table the Rezoning for 59.21 acres in the Low Survey,
from Agricultural (AG) District to Multifamily (MF) District and Local Commercial (C-1)
District until the February 7, 2012 Planning and Zoning meeting. Second by Commissioner
Pell. Approved. (7-0)
5. Public Hearing and possible action on a rezoning of 0.126 acres at Glasscock Addition,
Block 5, Lots 5 (w/pt) & 6 (sw/pt) from Multifamily (MF) District to Mixed-Use Downtown
(MU-DT) District, located at 415 W. 10th Street. REZ-2011-024 (Robbie Wyler)
Planning & Zoning Commission Agenda / January 2, 2012 Page 6 of 6
Staff report by Robbie Wyler. The applicant has requested to rezone the 0.126 - acre lot at
the northeast corner of MLK and 10th Streets from MF to MU-DT, with the intention of
redeveloping the property into a single-family residence.
David Voelter representing the applicant briefly explained the applicant’s request and stated
he will be glad to answer questions.
Chair Brashear Opened the Public Hearing. No one came forward, the Public Hearing was
closed.
Motion by Commissioner Montgomery to recommend to the City Council approval of the
Rezoning for 415 W. 10th Street from MF, Multifamily District, to MU-DT, Mixed-Use
Downtown District. Second by Commissioner Horne. Approved. (7-0)
6. Update on the Georgetown Transportation Advisory Board (GTAB) Meetings. (Annette
Montgomery) There was not a meeting.
7. Questions or comments from Commissioners-in-Training about the actions and matters
considered on this agenda. Questions were asked and addressed by Chair Brashear.
8. Reminder of the February 7, 2012, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
9. Adjourn 7:06pm
_____________________________________ __________________________________
Ercel Brashear, Chair Annette Montgomery, Secretary