Loading...
MIN 11.22.2016 CC-WMinutes of a Meeting of the Governing Body of the City of Georgetown, Texas Tuesday, November 22, 2016 The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, November 22, 2016 at 4:00 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101 E. 7' St., Georgetown, Texas The city of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). 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 lit' Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711. Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 4:01 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance with the exception of Councilmember Brainard, District 2, who arrived at 4:10 PM. Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 4:01 PM A. Discussion, review and possible City Council direction regarding Advisory Board Commissioners in Training, their role, usefulness and possible alternative solutions -- Mayor Dale Ross Mayor Ross introduced the discussion regarding Commissioners in Training on advisory boards or commissions. Ross described the concept of Commissioners in Training (CIT). He noted that, currently, Commissioners in Training are not able to participate or vote. Ross noted that CITs have required attendance and can lose interest when required to attend meeting after meeting without the privilege of voting or participating in discussions. Ross said that there have been times on the Planning & Zoning Commission when an action item has been reduced to only 4 voting members, because of members' recusals of certain items or member absences. Ross suggested replacing Commissioners in Training on the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) and the Historic Architectural Review Commission (HARC) with Alternates. Ross suggested appointing two alternates to each of these boards. He suggested allowing the alternates to fill in for a vacant member, with voting privileges, solving a potential quorum failure, as well as a shortage caused by a member recusal of a specific agenda item. Ross suggested appointing the alternates as Alternate 1 and Alternate 2, with the alternates taking turns each time the need for a vote participation occurs, and the turns being tracked by the Chair. Ross explained a benefit to this change would include minimizing the risk of having to cancel a meeting for quorum issues. He also noted that when an action item is considered by only 4 voting members, it is not a full consideration. Ross said that, if it is the will of the Council, he would like to make the changes prior to the next Boards and Commissions appointment process. He then welcomed feedback from the Council. Gonzalez said providing members with enough training as a Commissioners in Training or an Alternate is important and an advantage. He said he will support the Mayor's suggestions. Fought said he would also be in support. Fought said there is also the possibility of appointing 9 members to a committee instead of two alternates, avoiding the mechanics. Eby said, in the past, she had been a Commissioner in Training on HARC. She explained that she would be required to attend a four hour meeting and not be able to participate. Eby said she would be supportive of the change to alternates. She noted that there is not much value to training, if the CIT is not able to vote. Gipson said that, he too, had been a Commissioner in Training. He said he has concerns that the training is not adequate. Gipson noted the value in training the alternate members properly so that they are able to make informed decisions. Ross directed staff to bring an Ordinance for Council approval as soon as practical B. Update on Unified Development Code amendment process and presentation of recommendations from the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee -- Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director Sofia Nelson, the Planning Director, provided a presentation on recommendations from the Unified Development Code Advisory Committee for the UDC amendment process. She explained to the Council that the first part of the amendments was presented to them a few weeks ago and this will be the toughest portion. Nelson explained that it will be dealing with how subdivisions are laid out or staged. She referred to this as "the bones" of the subdivision. Nelson explained that she would follow the same format as her prior presentation, stopping periodically for Council direction. Nelson provided a Presentation Outline: • Introduction of Project Team • Overview of UDC Chapter 12 — Pedestrian and Vehicle Circulation • UDCAC Recommendations: Part 1, Update UDC Based on OTP; Part 2, Connectivity; Part 3, Subdivision Development Plats • Recap of Direction and Next Steps Nelson thanked the project lead, Jordan Maddox, and team and explained that this is a collaboration of multiple City departments. Nelson noted that the UDC Advisory Committee has a wealth of experience in its members: P.J. Stevens (Chair), Phillip Wanke (Vice Chair), Tim Bargainer (Secretary and P&Z Rep), Bruce Barton, Henry Boecker, John Philpott and Tim Haney. Nelson spoke on the UDC Chapter 12 — Pedestrian & Vehicle Circulation — and what is included. • Pedestrian and Bicycle Mobility • Streets • Driveways and Easements • Road Adequacy Standards Nelson spoke on the Priority 1 Transportation Related Amendments • Update the UDC base on the OTP update • Review connectivity requirements • Update street standards to eliminate inconsistencies with Fire Code and Williamson County regulations Nelson explained that there will be substantial revisions in the section and a red line version will be provided to the Council for further clarity in the near future. Nelson said an update to the UDC, based on the OTP goals, would include the creation of a new section for local and neighborhood streets. She explained that the developer responsibilities for comprehensive street plans would be clarified. Nelson provided a slide titled Update the UDC based on the OTP Goals • Add in context sensitive street design based on o Setting o Safety, efficiency, multimodal mobility, capacity o Relating to compatibility, urban design, cost and environmental impacts. Nelson said that the UDC update, based on the OTP Goals would allow private streets for non-residential multi -lot projects. Nelson then provided a slide of an Unloaded Collector and a slide on Optional Street Tree Sections. She said the unloaded collector street has been recently introduced and a good example is the LaContrera Subdivision entry way. Nelson explained that there is no parking on either side of the street and no driveways that come onto the street. She explained that, additionally, there are no houses fronted on this unloaded collector. It is simply an entry street that disperses traffic, explained Nelson. Neighborhood Collector pictc, i, wenstfw. Nelson spoke on the Optional Street Tree Section. She stressed the importance of providing space provisions for tree growth. Nelson said developers would be required to choose one of these three options. Councilmember Brainard asked Nelson if the right tree is chosen and the infrastructure is built properly, would that eliminate the rooting problems. Nelson explained that the City does have tree approval requirements. She said they have been working with the City's arborist to make sure trees are as healthy as possible. Councilmember Hesser said the tree species is very important and the City must pay attention to the species in the space. Nelson said the current tree requirements have been recommended by the arborist. Nelson suggested coming back to the Council in the near future with the City's arborist to have her explain the list of trees for better understanding. Brainard asked about trees under power lines. Nelson said this is addressed in the site review. Gipson asked who is responsible, if the rules for the type of tree are followed, and the sidewalk still buckles. He suggested that this be made very clear. Mayor Ross asked about vertical roots versus those of live oaks and similar trees. Nelson said she would check with the arborist and bring the information back to Council. Nelson spoke next on Private Streets in non-residential developments and provided a slide depicting the Walmart Shopping Center and said the same situation is seen at the Wolf Ranch Shopping Center. She said it is proposed to have a multi -lot unified commercial developments comes in through one site planning process. She explained that the maintenance responsibilities would be codified as part of the final plat. Nelson provided an image of a Context Sensitive Street Design and spoke on the responsibility for a comprehensive plan for streets and trails. Nelson explained that, in the proposed language, it will be very clear what is required of all developments. She said that collector roadways have been addressed and provisions for bike lanes and medians have been made. Nelson said that arterials need to be verified. She explained that collector roadways make more sense for bike trails. Nelson explained that where arterials meet arterials (very few), it will allow for 24 more feet for additional flare outs. Nelson paused for Council direction and provided a recap of the material she would like direction for. Topic Proceed as Proceed with recommended recommended -no by UDCAC changes;proceed dcl on `work is ,needed, 1. Local Street Cross Sections 2. Private Streets for Non-residential 3. Context Sensitive Street Design 4. Responsibility for Street Comp Plan Trails and Roadways Councilmember Fought said he has no problem with the recommendations. He said there are two connectivity scenarios that have been difficult in the past and he did not see them addressed here. He noted the situation found in Woodland Park where an escape hatch connector is sought to connect to a major road through another subdivision. He would like to see new direction for these situations in the future. Fought said his other concern is when a multifamily development is next to a single family development with larger lots. Fought asked Nelson what nature of connection would be recommended, when a connector road is necessary for safety reasons. Nelson said these concerns will be addressed in the second portion of her presentation. Councilmember Brainard asked Nelson to address the bicycle recommendations. Nelson said a provision will be added in the comprehensive plan for 4 foot bike lanes on major collectors. She named the collector example of Lakeway and Wolf ranch Parkway. Jonrowe said the plan sounds fantastic. She said it is safer when bikers do not have to compete with cars. Nelson said this will be examined. She noted that, ideally, bicycle lanes will be separated from roadways. Nelson began the second portion of the presentation with Connectivity Nelson spoke on the Measures of Internal Connectivity today and External Connectivity today. Nelson explained that, currently, each subdivision is looked at individually. This allows multiple subdivisions to keep adding to one another, using the same access point. Brainard asked how Georgetown stands in this regard with other cities. Nelson said many cities are facing these same connectivity problems. She said there is a shortfall and we have an opportunity to improve. Nelson said existing developments have followed the current standards. She explained the issues with proposed connections and actual connections. Nelson noted the City's opportunity, while amending the UDC, to develop new and improved connectivity standards. Nelson spoke on the Proposed Connectivity Tools. • Retain link to node • Distinguish between actual connections and future connections • Measure intersection spacing in lieu of block length • Calculate required connections based on accumulated lots vs. subdivision lots • Require pedestrian connections and mid -block connections for long blocks and cul-de-sacs Nelson provided a slide on Actual Connections vs. Future Connections, which have been recently reviewed. She noted that it is important to develop these future connections. Nelson spoke on Street Connections and Connections to Major Streets. She provided examples and described options. Nelson explained that not all developments have access to major collectors. She provided example slides of two developments with the same connectors. Nelson explained that the number of connections are based off the number of accumulated lots. Hesser asked if there is a formula for the average number of cars per household. Nelson answered that she does not have this information today, but will bring it back to the Council. Fought asked about Woodland Park. He noted that if the UDC regulations were in place, when a connector was approved for Woodland Park and Sun City, the connector would have been within the standard for connections. Nelson said the City will look at how many lots are in a subdivision and determine the minimum number of connections required. Nelson said it would not necessarily connect to a major collector road. She explained that it would have been subject to a Traffic Analysis Study (TIA) and average daily trips would have been studied. Fought said the lineage works for smaller developments but not for the larger developments. He explained that the curve levels off and this needs to be explored. He emphasized that it is not a linear relationship. Gonzalez said the City needs to have provisions for an extra level of protection in the future. Nelson said she will review these suggestions with the legal department. Nelson went on to describe intersection spacing. She spoke on major collectors, major arterials, cul-de-sac protection requirements and pedestrian pass-through. Nelson said undeveloped lots meeting cul-de-sacs would be prohibited from development. Pedestrian Pass -Through GcoPGETOWN I EMS Cul-de-sac protection Pari 2 Topic Proceed as Proceed with]:Additio recommended recommended by UDCAC changes Formula for existing and future connectivity Connections to existing major streets Intersection Spacing Cul-de-Sac Protection Fought said he is bothered by minor streets connecting to major streets. He said he would like to give serious thought to only major feeders connecting to major streets. Jordan Maddox, Principal Planner, said that this has been looked at. He said it is a concern because neighborhoods resist connectivity. He explained that this has now been addressed, with the new variance process. Maddox noted that prohibiting minor streets to major streets is next to impossible. City Manager, David Morgan, added that the traffic counts and traffic flow have to work. Nelson went on to describe development plats. She explained that a development plat would be required, Prior to development, for any non -single family property that was previously exempt from platting at the time of the division or that is otherwise un -platted. Nelson said the UDC recommended development plats for City limits. Nelson then asked for the Council's direction. Hesser asked if staff accepted the UDC Committee's recommendations. Nelson confirmed. Nelson described the next steps: • Communication Steps o Publish all amendments on planning webpage o Prepare press release • Public Outreach o Chamber Developers Alliance o Public Workshop • Public Hearing and Action o Planning & Zoning Commission Workshop in December o Planning & Zoning Commission Public Hearing in January o City Council in February Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.074 and Section 551.087 at 4.55 PM. Executive 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. C. 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 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. 551.087: Deliberation Regarding Economic Development Negotiations - Project Juniors Adjournment Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting to begin the regular City Council meeting at 6:00 PM. Approved by the Georgetown City Council on j a 113 I aO l �Q ate Dale Ross, Mayor Attest: City re ary