The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMIN 10.27.2015 CC-WNotice of aNihititesof a Woikshop Meetilig of the GBodyufthe City of C"Coll, Texas TuesdayvOctobei- 27, 2015 The Georgetown City Council will meet �Tuesday, October 27,2015 at 3:00 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101 E. 7h St., Georgetown, Texas The city of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (AD&) If you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the City Secretary's Office, at least four (4) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or City Hall at 113 East 8 1h Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Policy Wol-lishop—Call tom�del. at 1,3:00 PM Mayor Ross called the meeting tmorder mt3:0OP0M All Councilmembers inattendance with the exception ofTyGipson, District 5. A. Overview and discussion regarding proposed revisions to the Unified Development Code (UDC) related to accessory dwelling units, accessory structures and workforce housing -- Sofia Nelson, CNUA, Planning Director, Valerie Kreger, AICP, Principal Planner and Jennifer bills, AICP, Housing Coordinator Sofia Nelson began the presentation and explained that this was afollow-up from the Public Hearing onthe UDC amendments from Council's request b/bring itback. Nelson said she would be speaking onstaff suggestions andnemouUons. She explained accessory structures and current standards in detail and spoke on set -back and impervious cover regulations. The presentation showed calculations ofmaximum size and limitations for accessory structures. Nelson spoke in length about accessory dwelling units, current rental regulations, proposed rental regulations and special use permit regulations. Nelson went on to explain the significance of a kitchen in an accessory structure as a rentaldwelling and the necessity cfspecial use permits. She also spoke onparking space limitations and the regulations that require both the primary structure and the accessory structure to remain onthe same water and electric bill. Additional parking would also berequired 0ouse enaccessory structure as aoeoto|. Nelson explained that structures prior to the UDC remain without the regulations enforced for structures constructed after the UDC. Those structures constructed after the UDC must have specific use permits. Nelson said that the Planning & Zoning Commission had approved the proposed rental changes and they were also approved bythe City Council atthe Public Hearing. Nelson said that the Planning Department has received public input and concerns regarding accessory rentals and potential overcrowding inneighborhoods. Nelson clarified that special use permit provisions are still in place and would need to receive approval from the Planning & Zoning Commission and the City Council. Nelson said the process itself would prohibit rentals from popping upeverywhere. J0nrowoasked about the 45%impervious cover regulations. Nelson said that 4bY6iothe standard everywhere in Georgetown. Jonrovwethen asked about the maximum height requirements. Nelson explained that 'mn accessory structure's height is capped at the height of the principal structure. Jonnuwesaid bwould make more sense tohave the accessory structure onosmaller scale. Jonrnweasked about family members living in accessory structures and ifthe same requirements would apply. Nelson answered that aspecial use permit ia only required ifthere iaekitchen inthe accessory unit. |tiacurrently proposed 10remove this regulation ifthe unit isnot used ommrental; the burden for reporting 1splaced onthe property owner. Nelson explained that the newconnumohonia.mfcoume,eaaiertomgu|abaduhnglhobuUdiogpemnitstage. Gonzalez said that if this problem isnot identified, claim the accessory structure family use Nelson said that the development of a kitchen ietriggers the potential for arental. The best attempt to controlia through the regulation that both structures arrequired tobeonthe same utilities. Kiaalso required that if an accessory unit iogoing tobearental, akitchen must beconstructed. Jonnowesuggested orental registration inthe City, Nelson said that special use permits are already tracked. Jnnnnmeioinfavor. She mentioned families expressing their concern for arelative back home mracollege student who may need hmbeaccommodated. She said the process can sometimes take time. Mayor Ross asked Nelson if most Home Owners Associations (HOAs) regulate these types of situations. Nelson was 'not sure but added that itiogenerally handled through deed restrictions. Mayor Ross asked Nelson if an elderly,surviving e in need ofacaregiver, would need ioget aspecial use permit. Nelson explained that "" the structures already existed, . would "= legal and ''"'''^"'""''""g'"there ' was new construction involved, there would be a special use permit requirement. Even emodification would trigger the 'current requirements. Mayor Ross asked how the percentages were set. Nelson said that the percentages used are consistent with other cities. Brainard said that he would imagine there are accessory dwelling units that are not identified or authorized. Nelson agreed. Brainard said some are likely illegal, but getting away with it. Nelson said she would imagine most of those would be structures constructed prior to the UDC regulations which would still be legal and nonconforming. Brainard asked about the maximum height allowance. Valerie Kreger 'spoke h»clarify. Kreger explained that the maximum height allowance to be the same as the principal structure provides for additions connected to the principal structure such aoenattached garage orobreezeway. Eby asked for clarification that the proposed changes only apply honew construction. Nelson confirmed that this was correct. Eby said she would like tosee something [nplace to beable totrack violations orenforce regulations. Nelson said that a preliminary plan is in the works but is not part of this presentation. Mayor said that there could beagreat cost tmregulating this. Gonzalez reminded everyone that Councilmember Eason had discussed this when the City Council was discussing home businesses. The cost ofregulating was huge and alarge burden mnthe City. Jonnmve said that the Council was talking about the protection ofthe tenant. She would like toexplore the options. Jonrowe said that if the principal structure is occupied by the owner, there is generally much better maintenance ofthe property. Jonmwe'asked Nelson ifonowner had a requirement that his tenant could not have acar, would the extra parking space still be a requirement.Nelson explained that the issue could be worked out during the special use permit process. Jonrowe then asked if the number ofpeople ineunit ieregulated. Nelson said that the limitation |aalways nomore than 4unrelated people inone unit. David Morgan added that the definition is partofCode Enforcement. Hesaid that hewill look into the health and safety regulations and will report back toCouncil. Mayor Ross said that priorhomakingaddidona|mQu|aUona.itianeoe000rytoDeteweryoneintonmmp|ianoe. Compliance iomore ofaburden with time and money. Hesaid that itcan bea.slippery slope bycreating additional regulations. Hesser asked Nelson if the City had looked e1H0A's and if they are responsible fol tiNelson said that she did not have any results currently, but could do the research and bring the results back to Council. Hesser inquired about registration for all rentals, Nelson said that they are currently looking at accessory units but would do whatever Council directs. Hesser said that is important not to fill up the streets with vehicles. He added that usually an HOA can control the street parking through deed restriction. The City cannot enforce. Fought agreed that deed restrictions are the solution. |nmost cases noaccessory units are allowed. David Morgan agreed that HOAs can control parking with covenants and restrictions. ltiathen the HOAajob ho enforce. Jennifer Bills spoke mnhousing diversity and workforce housing standards. She spoke onthe current requirements and the proposed amendments. Developers are encouraged to include 3 different types of housing in each development. This encourages attainable housing. The allowances for reduced requirements are currently in conflict with the UDC The proposed primary change would separate mixed units and affordable housing, adding some incentives for single family housing. Bills said that in August 2014, the Housing Advisory Board recommended 3 revisions: 1. Increasing the amount ofunits per structure (maximum was 4O) 2.Decreasing front setback toeminimum of15 ft. (was 26ftj 3.Increasing impervious cover. There imnproposed fee waiver. Impact fees cannot be'waived. Reduced review costs have also been considered. Bills said the City could budget th1oonnue|ly. Nudeveloper would receive incentives over $1OD thousand dollars urwould receive more than 5Q9&|nfee waivers. Removing street pavement standards was also considered but is no longer an option because of emergency vehicles. Developers would berequired homaintain the development for 10years. Mayor Ross asked about the street pavementregu|ntione. Bills said they had attempted totake 32feet of pavement to2Dfeet. They were told itwould beenissue with fire code, The Transportation Department has reviewed this also. Mayor asked that the City continue holook at this. Jonnoweasked irthis only applied humultifamily housing. Bills clarified that italso applies hosingle family housing. She mentioned that to clear the three types of housing in one development has created no interest. Nelson asked for Council direction. Gonzalez asked that breezeway and height regulation bareviewed. Heasked ifthe height affected the impervious cover regulations. Heasked Nelson ifthis was ineffect for Sun City and River Ridge. Nelson clarified that the regulations apply across the City. She specified that anHOA could have different regulations. Brainard asked about the rear setback. Nelson said that rear setback iacurrently 1Oft. Brainard voiced concern about a35foot structure that could be1Ofeet from the neighbor's home. Nelson asked about epossible public workshop. She also asked for Council direction. Mayor Ross said that there have already been multiple workshops. Jnnrmweasked how many concerns have been received from citizens. Nelson said she has received approximately 15emai|a. Gonzalez asked how many ofthe concerned citizens have attended one ofthe multiple workshops, Gonzalez said there have been enough workshops. 13Presentation and discussion of service parameters and system finance planning considerations of possible fixed route bus service in 2017 -- Nat Waggoner, Transportation Analyst and Edward G. Polasek, AICP, Transportation Services Director Ed Polasek spoke regarding past attempts to finance fixed route bus service in 2004 and 2007, The plans were not funded. He explained that now through Cap Metro we must comply. Brainard asked Why this was required. Polasek said in order to receive money from Cap Metro, a City must have a transit development plan. Georgetown has the option of doing nothing, but would receive no money. Polasek said that the City currently pays $200 thousand dollars to Carts and receives matching money. To continue to receive these matching funds we must develop the plan. Nat Waggoner spoke on the ongoing plan and the strategic goals to fund the program. The three goals of the presentation were 1. What we agreed to 2. The cost of this function 3. To understand direction from Council and whether to go forth with the plan or not. Michelle Meaux, the Regional Coordinator Planner from Cap Metro, spoke about the history of these projects and the Cap Metro service expansion plan policy� Cap metro pays 80% of a project and the local jurisdiction pays 20%. She said the estimate for Georgetown would be $16 thousand dollars and the plan must be completed in 8 months, Meaux said that public involvement would wrap up in May. She explained that in order for plans to comply they must be reviewed by a regional committee. Cap Metro approves a plan and the plan must also be approved by CAMPO and CARTS. Meaux said that current service is demand response service, or curb to curb service, through CARTS, Passengers reserve seats in advance. Last year CARTS provided 8,000 N Rai NO RArTTNIMP could go from $72 per round trip to $6 per round trip in 4 years. IRRIIIIIIIII FOR ITITIF T1!IZpII!j! i I Waggoner continued the presentation, showing the implementation of responsibilities, mostly failing to Cap Metro and CARTS. Waggoner said that he will rework the figures, subtract the rider fees, and bring it back to Council. He said the next steps would be feedback from Council and the Implementation Option. Gonzalez said that none of the routes came nearhis district and no route seems to include the airport. He said the City isnot ready for efixed route system Jonrowe said that she has been to many public meetings where people who need service reside. She suggests going forward whole hog. Fought said the City should start with small routes. Hesser said he wants more credibility. The numbers need to be correct. He said that he is owed an objective of what 10expected hobeachieved inridership and cost per rides. He'wants bmknow what basis decisions are mode. Brainard added that if the City created vouchers, there would be Uber vehicles and taxis come to Georgetown. Hesaid that overall itwould beless expensive and more efficient. Eby said that staff needs to be more detailed and accurate with their numbers, maturity and financial impact . Jonrow*said she wants mtrue cost per year. She would like tostill provide CARTS for people who cannot take the bus. Waggoner said flexibility will beconsidered inthe 'transition. 'Provisions will bemade for those with severe .mobility problems. Waggoner agreed that there needs tobemore 'study. Mayor .Ross said that there iooneed for all types ofservices bnGeorgetown and that the City should provide service wherever the needs exist. Hesaid that increasing mobility |nGeorgetown isthe goal. Mayor asked David Morgan when this could bebrought back hoCouncil. David said that heand staff would do additional research and bring itback tnCouncil 1nJanuary. COverview of the adopted interim municipal utility district (MUD) policy and update on approved and pending MUD applications -- David Morgan, City Manager, Sofia Nelson, Planning Director and Wesley Wright, Systems Engineering Director Sofia Nelson presented the Municipal Utility District (MUD) presentation. She said that it is an update from a year ago. She spoke about an overview of a MUD request for Kasper Development and the interim MUD policy. She provided a review of past approved MUD developments and said that she would be requesting feedback from Council on whether a MUD is suitable for the Kasper Development. Nelson provided maps and concept plans and described the property, the development plans and the major access points. The development would have 726 units with 40 ft. Wide to 60 ft. wide lots, which would be smaller than usual lots in Georgetown. Nelson explained that the lots would have assessed values of an average of $250,000 per lot. Utilities would be Jonah for water, Encore for electric and Georgetown for wastewater. The overall tax rate would be $2.89258. Nelson presented and discussed the Georgetown adopted MUD Policy and master plan. She showed the comparison to ultimate City Limit boundaries and raised the question if the development would be in the extension of City of Limits or farther out. For approval with UDC, the MUD request must have a "unique"factor. To grant a MUD request the City must determine if it is feasible, practical and beneficial. ESD, Fire Service and Sheriff Service must be evaluated� The cost of utility movement goes to the developer. Nelson said that there isaneed for additional review with the applicant to review debt and soft costs. Nelson showed maps of previously approved MUDs and listed the unique reasons provided for previously epproved&40]m. Nelson explained that staff believes the Kasper MUD ionot necessary. Heaaerasked how much pfMUD tax goes back hothe City. Nelson said that City would not receive any monies since the property is i"the ETJ` Nelson showed eslide onthe overall sewer basin for the Woodhull SaddleoreehMUD and described the utilities requirements. She explained that there would be an increase to the size of the lift station, with the opportunity to service anarea outside ofthe development tract. Nelson asked Council ifthe MUD iesuitable. Does dhave the unique factor? She asked Council hoguide staff with other options. She said that staff had identified some other options that they will be working on. She said that the approval of the consent agreement still needs work and will be brought to the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Council. The developer will beasked toreexamine the proposal. She again added that staff thinks the MUD ienot necessary. Hessermentioned Hi|kmuod. Hesaid there ianot aneed for more donut holes. The City needs tostart closing those. David Morgan said that David Naime, from Sentinel Land was here for questions. Mr. NsAmmsaid that his company had developed Woodhull and completedthe work onthe sewer line. $1Omillion dollars insewer costs have been covered bythe developer. Neimesaid that over oyear ago heasked staff about compliance for e MUD. Hekshoping tokeep the development affordable. \fheioforced horaise home prices, the project would not sell well. AMUD allows the developer to pass on a better d | m ttoth*homeownemoverapehodnf 20 years. Naime said he has read the MUD Policy from the City. He said that Parkland doubles what is required. There are tough design guidelines. Naime said they will need the assistance of a MUD to develop. The intention is to connect Woodhull to Kasper. Kasper is surrounded by commercial properties. They will not have commercial development in Kasper. Naime said that his proposal also included payment to the City from MUD proceeds. Heaeersaid that heinconfused bythe City MUD Policy. Heasked ifitwas possible tolay two entities side by aWe' Brainard asked when the property would boinnorponsted. |( was explained that itwould bewhen the City pays off the bond proceed oraround the 18thyear. Hamentioned that there would benoelectricity from Georgetown and the lift station would cost $3.5million dollars. Jonnzwaquestioned the main road running through the development. She asked if itwouldn't bamloss afprofit ifnot developed onboth sides. Mayor Ross asked Council for their direction. Hesser would like to see the Hillwood development and the Kasper development side by side. David Morgan saidthat the developer would like tohave clear direction from Council. Morgan asked ifitmeets the unique factor inorder hokeep working onit. Gonzalez said if it is financially not feasible the Council would need to consider what the MUD does. It will eventually bepart oYthe City. Heasked 'ifoversize lots were necessary. Hasaid itwould make sense homake this epart nfthe City sooner than later. If kisa$20million dollar MUD, shave $5million dollars for aquicker turn tnthe City, Gonzalez continued. Gonzalez said hmconsider this aaen in City MUD that is viable. Hesser agreed. Brainard asked staff toprepare the side byside comparison. David Morgan agreed. E'Xecufive 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. D. Sec. 551.071: Consultation with Attorney - Advice from attorney about pending or contemplated litigation and other matters on which the attorney has a duty to advise the City Council, including agenda items - Litigation Update — Stephanie Hoskins Brown v. The City of Georgetown, et al. See 551.072: Deliberation Regarding Real Property - Acquisition of real property owned by the WW Laubach Trust in connection with the Southwest Bypass project - Deliberation concerning the approval of appraised values of multiple parcels in connection with the Rivery Blvd. Extension Project Sec. 551.074: Personnel Matters - City Manager, City Attorney, City Secretary and Municipal Judge: Consideration of the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal Sec. 561.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project Voyager Approved by the Georgetown City Council on kk k 0�-'-)'CAS Date Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City ecr ary