HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN 10.10.2017 CC-WMinutes of Meeting of the
Governing Body of the
City of Georgetown, Texas
Tuesday, October 10, 2017
The Georgetown City Council will meet on Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 3:00 PM at the Council Chambers, at 101
E. 71' 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 three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (5 12) 93 0-3 652 or City Hall at 113 East 8'
Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay Texas at 711.
Mayor Ross called the meeting to order at 3:01 PM. All Councilmembers were in attendance, with the exception of
Anna Eby, Councilmember District 1 and Valerie Nicholson, Councilmember District 2. Mayor Dale Ross, John
Hesser, District 3, Steve Fought, District 4, Ty Gipson, District 5, Rachael Jonrowe, District 6, and Tommy
Gonzalez, District 7 were in attendance. Councilmember Eby joined the meeting at 4.29 PM.
Policy Development/Review Workshop — Call to order at 3:01 PM
A. Update on the progress of the Council Visioning Statement process -- Keith Hutchinson, Communications
Manager
Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager, spoke on long term planning. She said that the first 3 items on the
workshop agenda would be addressing this. Brewer said the purpose is to manage the rapid growth of
Georgetown well and to maintain and protect the assets of Georgetown that make it a desirable place to develop.
Brewer noted the importance of this objective from City leadership. Brewer noted that there are approximately
60,000 people in Georgetown City limits with an expectation of an additional 70,000 in the growth boundaries, for
a total of 116,000 in the City limits and 40,000 in the ETJ in the next 20 years.
Brewer described the visioning statement process, branding, marketing and advertisement. She said that the City
had contracted with Freese and Nichols, who are known for their expertise in this area, to help with the
community engagement and wordsmithing of the project.
Brewer introduced Wendy Shabay and said that she would be reviewing the survey results with the Council.
Shabay spoke on the objectives of a Vision Statement.
• City Council and community alignment on vision for Georgetown
• Building block for City Council goal setting
• First step in a future branding initiative and work on updating the comprehensive plan
Shabay explained the ideal components of a vision statement
• 5 — 20 words
• Memorable and repeatable
• Describes were you want to be in the future
• Action oriented
• Able to be achieved but aspirational
Shabay described the visioning process
• Survey #1
• Meeting with Councilmembers
• Community Event
■ Survey #2
■ Workshop with City Council
• Finalize Vision Statement November 1
Shabay spoke on the communication tools used.
• Twitter
• Facebook
Nextdoor
• City website
• Email blasts to Boards & Commissions members
Weekly newsletter email
• Media news releases
Stories in the Sun and Statesman
Shabay said that Survey #1 had received 551 responses to the following questions and she provided images of
words frequently used in the results for present and future.
• What words describe Georgetown today/
• What words describe Georgetown in the future"
• What phrases would you like to see in Georgetown's vision statement?
inclusive C,eorgetown lihera! diverse
,Cc7nv@nfP.r',t ������
a�l,trTsct1[c11
exp
en
sive
small bea attraclve
historic "'friend
l
y
' lovelyOY@fCroYdBdcaring r`ny Teur)tgUegra1green warm City nice quiet
I
fast flan evolving growth town historical
busy ,,,pry yet r traffic
progressive ^' j �j comfortable
open safe [g Y Y
rZe:v wholesome
by,elp ;)reify ,,,rrr•orip-, welcoming
home .. , parks charrn)
dynan',rc shopping food crowded hrslarY
big prar..e ovcf wonderful
relaxed downtown Innovative
people - active Hometown
conservative
Behind family quaint r..
Peaceful [;lriling
" Vibrant
welcoming s m a I I city comfortable restaurants
tanned
unique A values ` PerPlanning historical Austin
cultured responsible cro%%riled history bus
y charming transportation
compassionate education „ren.:re
r,r,r ester:! caring local toed
iprvrarc7 � '7USn1(;S�
connected Innovative respe�:llul rowth
Quaint t famlly Growing g i Ne�yr,lwrly
shappin
fJiq arts
Ramu warn}
beautiful
tt�lbra�t friendYew
ronservative
efclentberPlace
walkable Well-planned
QUiet excellence. rrl ILII 7i r Al d
QL,ality historic cultural more Opportunity traditional active
focused Hornetov.n much Accepting ;:ontrollacf Ihof anmII
Arrlsr+c Diversity
town educated affordable destination great
center green Round safe
feel community
diversewhnip,ifsriw
parks iirlkrn- Same
traffic access'b
inclusive n,rl:I home progressive
Councilmember Fought asked about the controls on the online survey. He asked if an individual was limited to
responding only once. Shabay confirmed that this was controlled by IP addresses. Fought asked about
demographics of the respondents. Shabay said this was not asked on this survey.
Shabay provided phrases that were frequently used in the survey.
• Big City innovation with small city charm
• Values the past, leads for the future
• Most beautiful town square in Texas, preserving our past, innovating for the future
• Green, growing, generous and good
• Georgetown, when you're here you're home
• A place where the love of tradition meets passion for innovation
• Friendliest small town north of Austin, where tradition and innovation walk hand in hand, and where
neighbors hold on to their past while looking forward to their future
Shabay spoke on the Community Event that was conducted. She said there had been a good turn -out. She
noted the great respect for the history and presence of Georgetown and listed words from the event discussion.
■ Present vs. future
• Progressive
• Innovative
• Caring and connected
• Growing
• Hometown
• Vibrant
Shabay said that Online Survey #2 had received 616 responses. She showed phrases that scored high-
• Small city charm
• Most beautiful town square in Texas
• Safe and friendly town to call home
• A family -friendly hometown
• Historic, small town heart
• A vibrant city with friendly people
Shabay spoke on future descriptors and word results from Survey #2
• Forward -thinking
• Passion for innovation
■ Innovating for the future
• Prosperous
• Thriving
Shabay explained that today's focus should be to discuss and agree on overall goals and specifics of the vision
statement and listed things that should be considered.
• Should it include Georgetown in the wording?
• Should it incorporate City or Community?
• Should it include some aspect of our current identity?
• Be cognizant that some words can be political or controversial (e.g. diversity, heritage, and progressive)
She provided example statements and asked the Council for feedback on today's focus questions.
F.Yample Statements
• Historic hometown with a passion for innovation
• 21y1 century progress and place with 191h century charm
• Thriving, friendly, forward -thinking community in the heart of
Williamson County
Georgetron is a
community that
and __ , (inspires)
.(friendly, fa►•ward-tt►inkirrg)
(values its history)
to be a _ (safe, innovative)
and city. (prosperous)
Mayor Ross asked if there will be an opportunity for the community to see choices to comment on before the
Council makes a decision. Shabay said this is not in the plans, but Council could give direction to do so. City
Manager, David Morgan, said there has been 3 good pieces of feedback from the community and they were
asked to rate not only words but statements. Mayor Ross said each Councilmember represents different areas of
Georgetown, and he would want everyone represented.
Councilmember Fought he would want the word "community" to be used and would want to avoid politically
charged words. He said people will focus on the offense instead of the root of what is trying to be accomplished.
Mayor Ross said it is important to have the word Georgetown in the visioning statement, because Georgetown
has a nice brand and branding should be included.
Shabay asked if all of the Council agrees with these 2 statements. All Councilmembers did agree. Morgan
asked Council if anything is inconsistent or different than what they would like to see. Morgan asked about
phrases. Fought said one of the strengths of Georgetown is its different neighborhoods and these communities'
differences should be celebrated. Gonzalez said the Council will need to take a step back. He explained that
when one topic is considered it brings up another and that will end with a 90 word visioning statement again. He
suggested examining the power of each word.
Mayor Ross said the success of Georgetown is not an accident, but instead the work of those before us - 169
years' worth, building on where we are today. He noted that Georgetown is getting international attention with its
rich history. Ross said, for a city this size, Georgetown is doing great things. He noted the importance of knowing
where we are, where we are going and where we have been.
Shabay said this is a very good point and its uniqueness differentiates Georgetown. She said these are key
elements and the City will need to find the right words to capture what has been built on.
Mayor Ross said he agrees with Councilmember Gonzalez that getting too specific makes the vision statement
too long.
Shabay asked the Council if they are in agreement so far. Jonrowe said she likes the observation of aspirational
and would like to see something more forward focused instead of where we are now.
Gonzalez said it is about preserving the past, while forward thinking into the future.
Shabay explained that the consultants and staff would next prepare some draft vision statements to choose from.
She said that when the Council meets on November 1 st, they will be able to finalize the vision statement and
begin the goal -setting process.
Mayor Ross said he liked the community involvement with the bus naming process. Gonzalez asked if Council
could choose 2 or 3 vision statements and then let the community vote. Morgan said they will know more how to
proceed after the Council meeting November 1st. Jonrowe asked about possibly using puns of the square such
as it is "hip to be square".
B. Update on the Fiscal Impact Model project -- Laurie Brewer, Assistant City Manager and Wayne Reed Assistant
City Manager
A presentation was provided to update the Council on the Fiscal Impact Model Project. Lauri Brewer, Assistant
City Manager, spoke on the background of the project and said the Council had identified expansion and
diversification of the tax base in its strategic planning session. She noted that the Council is often tasked with
making land use decisions and to provide financial incentive to certain projects and developments. Council
directed staff to work toward the development of a fiscal impact model which would objectively predict costs and
revenue impacts associated with development proposals, as well as evaluate citywide growth development
patterns. Brewer said this can also be an important tool for long range financial planning. She said she will be
seeking direction from the Council regarding the model logic before the model is finalized.
Brewer introduced Julie Herlands, Vice President of Tischler Bise, who provided the presentation
Herlands provided a presentation outline.
• Purpose of and differences in models
• Use of models
• Structure and design of models
o Fiscal Analysis Zones
• Key assumptions of the models
• Sample results
• Next steps
Herlands explained that the purpose of the model is to improve the ability to evaluate the fiscal impact of policy,
budgetary, financial and land use decisions and she then provided two model descriptions.
• Citywide Growth Model: Evaluate the fiscal impact of citywide growth at macro level
■ Project Level Model: Evaluate the fiscal impact of development proposals at micro level
Herlands spoke on the Use of Models and the Project Approach and Influencing Factors
Use of Models
o Multiple scenarios allow testing and comparing
• Propertyvalues
• Timing
• Type of land uses
o Inform land use decisions and test "what if"
alternatives
o Test and compare potential financial incentives
o Plan for short- and long-term operational and
capital improvement impacts
o Help meet City Planning, Financial, and Economic
Development goals
TischlerBise q
Project Approach and Influencing Factors
o Use City current levels of service as reflected in current
budget
• Supplemented with departmental interviews and data
analysis
• Current levels of service supplemented with CIP for capital
o Model current revenue structure
• Sources and distribution formulas, where appropriate
o Use characteristics of new development as drivers
• Population, employment, property values
o Allocate ETJ development assumed in City
Tischlersise 5
Herlands described the Design of the Models
• Developed in Excel and Visual Basic
o Allows for flexible application which can be easily modified and additional modules can be
integrated at a later date
o Transparent structure avoids "black box" concerns and data, assumptions and algorithms are fully
shown
• User input of development project/growth assumptions
o By sub -area of City (Fiscal Analysis Zones)
Herlands provided a map of the fiscal analysis zones and said that there were different characteristics within each
zone.
Fiscal
Analysis
Zones
id
W IP
Ttschl re Blse
Herlands spoke on the Citywide Model and Growth Summary.
E
t
i
i
3
W IP
Ttschl re Blse
Herlands spoke on the Citywide Model and Growth Summary.
E
Citywide Model: Growth Summary
CRY POPU LA TION
EIIPOPULATWI
NONRESIDENTIAL:
CITY HI I AIL SF
CITY OFFICE SF
CRY INlMATRIAL SF
CITY INSTITUTTIONAL SF
TOTALCRY SF
CRY JOBS
M x)"
C;IY LUMUI WSIMNIMt AM 1AXABLE VALUE
69512 k9W
5[snarip 3'
S503,663.611
CFTYCOM1Ii NON RESIDENTIAL PERSONAL TAXABLE VALUE
CfTY1MIaE TR1�Di
CITY CUMULATIVE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE
K40Q2KIU
1&Yex Nef .Nr w
RESIDENTIAL.
6rowthd
1 1 Y SINGLE FAMILY
15,616
k ; IY 4111, TIFANKY
7,261
TOTAL Cm UNITS
zF-sJ7
CRY POPU LA TION
EIIPOPULATWI
NONRESIDENTIAL:
CITY HI I AIL SF
CITY OFFICE SF
CRY INlMATRIAL SF
CITY INSTITUTTIONAL SF
TOTALCRY SF
CRY JOBS
M x)"
C;IY LUMUI WSIMNIMt AM 1AXABLE VALUE
69512 k9W
CITY COMA NONAJSIDENTIALREAL TAXABLE VALUE
S503,663.611
CFTYCOM1Ii NON RESIDENTIAL PERSONAL TAXABLE VALUE
SWL46_5,444
CITY CUMULATIVE TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE
K40Q2KIU
TlschlerBise
Herlands next described the Project Level Model and Project Inputs.
Q
Project Leve[ Model: Project Inputs
I r
ly(rr o{ r- aknx rrnit�
St.yn.OwnlIV Oatadrad Startar(i1
Slnljl► 1artrly Oetad adaalddla (SH
S"le tarraty 014=1K d adalw (Sr
9H100 *Amoy o.ltatl.•d 0*0 Rant lined 15117
towels
Pr Oj►CI P4rArlt►t►r1
PAZ [orepdewn swlert]
toNd• C:ty UnOt•i
S•rwed by Qty Ptrai
on"d►watw sorWc* ^rW3
lnalde Wattttawatar Sarwke Area l
lattdia Nrccuk Sarwca Arco 7
T ischlerBise
t+n41 N w rep..
Howl: IMe4pr6o $"Wd Naft
IteM: ran rosy Rau
lifts: Onwntaw
WSW: ftvqt�
FAZ 1 Off I.. p11ab +w+••n at..
rr[.r.ri-r nl unrr,
Tnt-1nwntarr o dYNh
.b-..o-,d—rh
NO
d" a OMM (s IVAW aq. If
No
�J1
�
L%ht b/ m&W (stn Space
are.mw: 1ras�porullonlr.4+, W xlwln
ardtarWt StaraawANar•lraua
7
t+n41 N w rep..
Howl: IMe4pr6o $"Wd Naft
IteM: ran rosy Rau
lifts: Onwntaw
WSW: ftvqt�
FAZ 1 Off I.. p11ab +w+••n at..
Yes
Olhc> Irleduld(Mryttlrarr
Yes
NO
d" a OMM (s IVAW aq. If
No
++e a 01111c•(340AMa,-ft
No
L%ht b/ m&W (stn Space
are.mw: 1ras�porullonlr.4+, W xlwln
ardtarWt StaraawANar•lraua
LddWlna. ILrdtaa SrNa
. tuda7nd, Fun se.aa
7.,r.r .41w to.1
Numb.. of
.p ayr pv A o yr h
r+ ,
1e0E�
Herlands described the City of Georgetown Funds included and noted that CVB/Tourism, GTEC and GEDCO
fund are projected separately.
• General Fund
• Special Revenue Funds: Non -restricted and used for growth -related purposes
o Street Maintenance Tax
o Paramedic
o Conservation
o PEG Fee
• Joint Services Fund
• Capital Funds: Dedicated mill levy
• Enterprise Funds or funds with restricted uses are not modeled
Herlands spoke on the Operating Assumptions
Operating Assumptions
o Major revenues are driven by property values, retail sales
per square foot; all variable revenues projected
ROI and franchise revenues derived based on projected
growth in customers for each utility
Operating expenditures driven by demand from:
• Population: Household size rates applied to housing units
• Employment: Employees per 1,000 sq. ft.
• Vehicle Trips: Trip rates by type of land use applied to residential and
nonresidential development
• Public safety calls for service: Fire/EMS and Police allocation by
residential/nonresidential development and traffic, then applied to
growth projections.
• Increase in City FTEs
• Direct operating impact from new lane miles, facilities,. (e.g., Library
branch) or aEparatus (e.g., Fire Engine)
r�
TlschlerBlse 11
She then described the Citywide Model for Capital Approach and the Project Level Model for Capital Approach.
Citywide Model: Capital Approach
o Full facilities are triggered when level of service
thresholds are triggered
o Public facility categories include:
• Streets
Parks and Recreation
Fire and EMs
Police and Animal Control
• Library
• General Government
o Vehicle purchase costs reflect initial cost as well as
replacement costs after useful life is reached
(varies by type of vehicle)
TischlerBise 12
_T_
Project Leel Model: Capital Approach
o Pro -rated share of costs included in model
• Capital projects are prorated to reflect devetoprnv.nt's la or share (e.g..
portion of a park; portion of a vehicle)
• Geographsc triggers built in (e.g., Fire Stations)
c Categories and components are same as Citywide
Model
o Vehicle Purchase costs reflect Initial costs anct
replacement costs and Vic* pro -rated
T:$Chlor iso
Herlands provided sample results in various formats for review.
13
Sample Results: Citywide Growth Model
Annual Net Fiscal Impacts (All Funds)
Georgetown Fiscal Impact Analysis
_Scrnaro 1 0TVW:DE TRENDS
TIsch�e—rblse 14
Sample Results: Citywide Growth Model
Cumulative (20 -Year) Net Fiscal Impacts
Georgetown Fiscal Impact Analysis
MAI
Sce-flo L CITYWIDE TRENDS
WRe n.ft gf,p..ditu— NNal Haul 1.pxt
Tisch
Sample Results: Project Level Charts
p
Iv
Tvsc-hler&se
Sample Results: Tables
NET FISCAL IMPACT` Cutnutatlw Rasultl
CUMUUIIV[ Yr•mwln Comlyln.onl
1 x •r r•I.rvrnlll••Jtn.". Mn k
.' — —
lI
uinafnn
I1mrLOt9W�
T1 RItas
Frt./1N iSilAl1A frarrl�AY
[ xn�nry
}II
r1 '• [Ivin. OPERA TING EMPEMDnME
DETAIL
I... •InNW1UN!\ CumW+live OyurullnN la punJllurv•WIJI ScunArlu
ComyArlcon. I.Sl,mq
r•I I I KCAL 11M/MC I CN all C.nnr t„ti wl Mrwlnl
Tischle ise,r......,
Herlands spoke on the next steps.
• Continue review of methodologies and draft outputs with City staff; update model with FY18 budget
■ Discuss reporting needs/modify model as needed
■ Develop policy/procedures on data control and integrity
• Test Project Level Model with recent development project
■ Finalize and deliver models and user manual
• Conduct staff training
• Present additional updates to GGAF and City Council
Councilmember Gonzalez said that this presentation had also been presented to the General Government and
Finance Advisory Board (GGAF). He said the models allow you to plug in numbers and see what happens.
Gonzalez said it is important that people know certain models are not final. He said final drafts need to be
differentiated from test drafts.
Mayor Ross asked about the user manuals and if they would be able to provide information for the average
person. Herlands said it is just a reference guide, and is considered a user manual for staff. City Manager, David
Morgan, said the public will have a full analysis which will be transparent. Ross said the story could tell itself but
needs to be in layman's term. Morgan said fiscal impacts of developments and zoning decisions will be able to be
reviewed and staff will have the ability to model different scenarios of various developments.
Councilmember Fought said the frozen tax rate could be examined. He explained that the gap is set at 12% but
would dissipate quickly if property values go flat in a down market. Fought spoke on how GISD members and
the Planning & Zoning Commission could judge impacts also. Fought asked about expanding the analysis to the
schools. Morgan said he will look into this and see if GISD would be interested. Morgan noted that it would be a
very different model for schools because they are paid by how many days and numbers of attendance.
Mayor Ross said we are all in the same community. He noted that 34% of homes have frozen taxes. He said this
is still good for the schools and is one of the biggest assets that the schools have. Ross said it should always be
looked at as one community.
U MARIE
j
[AN,anY
CIIVWIIAIRA"
II
CRY""! %
qlt+' f'1?N NINI�
$1,A90,Q31
lY
CIv
"AV p M54UNIIN!:inAIIfN
'.]11tS51'•!
[h
Cl1
••
W11 LI—RI
S10N Ir •.]H
a�
T
4711 VAHKY N•AIN TINANCr
Cl1 ln: r,fH
r.1
f1`.
� .
U711 HI±'Hf A+I±IY
51f •,w. 1t.0
[U..
U'.
� .
y]11 IENNI•.r EN ffH
iJ
� •.
g73A RECREA TION I•NI]CHAMS
$l1,Llfl, o)O
11'�
flr.
gx18 A11fS8 C:1l IUN1
30
Pl
06ij
..116 MIINICInA1 rrf +
�lrkl lAl
Uti
fly.
CW%F HI 1111• I+ 111 T 1 r H V I C IL
Sl 1fl.lMfl
Il+
�•+
UN7 11H(EMlw±.l N<v•.[HV�f E1
Srl 11[.1F1
•�
IM
'••
0i 14 SCII Ir WA S T f) H t C. YC I I N C. S it
`A
1
W.
iYy�
tCIIONS
O116 INS "C1101 %
SO
•IY
T
Grw
0.9a MANAI�t 1—I SVSAliNIIN
Sll
Ohl.{ CI IY 10U 11 C II
:O
01411 CI IY SCCA, IA HY
jl 2`4C -O
qY
pM
1161" t:(N 1,011 10-1 14
nhi] PUIIUC CI 1M11IINIC 1111 INS
;{U 21S
h
ati
/1
n1o1 HIIIICE Aft-1111HA111IN
•1,1 f'. tYAI
IM
IA
an
I•t)1ICI r)Hl RATIONS
ZInlai
A' ANIMAI S(I+v ICES
r IIJ,AYI
Ir
Itti
O".
I(II{I COW [NI(5HC[MINi
y1 .SO, dll
1ti
PI
Lt.\
q0W HUNUCW
t 0 -SAI -1110 -SAI -1115119],
SSHt15
i0`]
'.:. 1: •.-
V.
!:\
OS
fill
u
811
_ _ all
t6tAl
slSI.AIR Ifn
LOM.
• fa
— .
Tischle ise,r......,
Herlands spoke on the next steps.
• Continue review of methodologies and draft outputs with City staff; update model with FY18 budget
■ Discuss reporting needs/modify model as needed
■ Develop policy/procedures on data control and integrity
• Test Project Level Model with recent development project
■ Finalize and deliver models and user manual
• Conduct staff training
• Present additional updates to GGAF and City Council
Councilmember Gonzalez said that this presentation had also been presented to the General Government and
Finance Advisory Board (GGAF). He said the models allow you to plug in numbers and see what happens.
Gonzalez said it is important that people know certain models are not final. He said final drafts need to be
differentiated from test drafts.
Mayor Ross asked about the user manuals and if they would be able to provide information for the average
person. Herlands said it is just a reference guide, and is considered a user manual for staff. City Manager, David
Morgan, said the public will have a full analysis which will be transparent. Ross said the story could tell itself but
needs to be in layman's term. Morgan said fiscal impacts of developments and zoning decisions will be able to be
reviewed and staff will have the ability to model different scenarios of various developments.
Councilmember Fought said the frozen tax rate could be examined. He explained that the gap is set at 12% but
would dissipate quickly if property values go flat in a down market. Fought spoke on how GISD members and
the Planning & Zoning Commission could judge impacts also. Fought asked about expanding the analysis to the
schools. Morgan said he will look into this and see if GISD would be interested. Morgan noted that it would be a
very different model for schools because they are paid by how many days and numbers of attendance.
Mayor Ross said we are all in the same community. He noted that 34% of homes have frozen taxes. He said this
is still good for the schools and is one of the biggest assets that the schools have. Ross said it should always be
looked at as one community.
C. Presentation and discussion of the City's Comprehensive Planning Process — Nat Waggoner, AICP, Long Range
Planning Manager and Sofia Nelson, CNU-A, Planning Director
A presentation on the City's Comprehensive Planning Process was provided to the City Council. Sofia Nelson,
Planning Director, said that staff has been moving forward with the Comprehensive Plan, as directed by Council.
She said that the presentation has been provided by a team made up of herself, Nat Waggoner, Long Range
Planning Manager and Susan Watkins the City's Housing Coordinator.
Nelson spoke on the Comprehensive Plan Process and provided an agenda for the presentation.
• PART 1
o Comprehensive Plan baselines
• PART 2
o City Customer Tailored Plan
• PART 3
o Communication and involvement
• PART 4
o Council feedback and direction
Nelson had provided two handouts for the Council — one titled `Georgetown by the Numbers" and the other
handout shows the feedback requested of the Council following the presentation.
Nat Waggoner, the City's Long Range Planning Manager, began the presentation. He spoke on the 4 W's of the
Comp Plan.
1. Why is a Comp Plan needed?
2. Who uses a Comp Plan?
3. What value does it deliver?
4. Why now? Why Georgetown?
Waggoner said that the Comprehensive Plan is required by the State, as well as the City Charter. He explained
that the Comp Plan drives key decisions for many departments
• Economic Development
• Public Works
• Utilities
• GISD School placements
• Parks & Recreation
Waggoner said the new plan will incorporate the City's ongoing work to evaluate costs to provide services, align
Council goals and synchronize other departments with the strategic plans. He explained that within 20 years, the
population is expected to reach 100,000, which will bring opportunities to expand employment and economic
bases.
Waggoner spoke on Part II — Georgetown's Custom Plan and showed that not all plans are equal.
Waggoner described the elements of the plan as land use, growth scenarios, housing and gateways. He said that
staff speaks with other cities and shares lessons learned. He emphasized an engaged community and spending
the time to involve and engage the citizens of Georgetown.
Waggoner spoke on the future land use map and explained that it influences zoning changes on a regular basis.
He noted that the intent of the Map and the Plan is to allow flexibility with the market framework while establishing
some certainty in the long-term planning for essential municipal services. Waggoner said the future land use map
is an important tool for a community and will be used to evaluate and guide future annexation plans and land use
performance information.
Councilmember Hesser asked about elements of the plan and asked if commercial should be added to the
elements for manufacturing and warehousing. City Manager, David Morgan, said these come under the land use
categories. Morgan said one of the primary things the Council will be working on is the balance of commercial
and residential.
Waggoner provided a slide on Growth Scenarios through the Fiscal Impact Model
Waggoner spoke on the Housing Element. He said updating the housing element will be the City's chance to
enrich the existing element through a fuller evaluation of choice. He said that the demographics would be
updated and the broad spectrum of housing types, stocks, locations and costs would be better defined.
Waggoner said that senior housing, workforce housing and low income housing would be studied. Waggoner
mentioned a feasibility study that will review and evaluate the full list of programs available to address affordable
housing needs, the costs and benefits of these programs, and recommendations will be made.
Waggoner spoke on Gateways and development standards and capital improvements in order to enhance the
City's key entries to its community. He spoke on the landscape buffers in the various gateways.
Waggoner spoke next on Part III —Communication and Involvement. He described participation components,
public involvement and steering committees
Waggoner said that Council and Planning & Zoning Commission joint meetings would be utilized to review State
and Georgetown current challenges and perspectives. He noted that these will be opportunities for collaboration
and goal setting.
Waggoner suggest Special Council meetings.
Separate policy formation sessions
Set goals, objectives and policies
Conducted at critical point in the process
o Goal development
o Growth scenarios
o Plan (tool) development
o Implementation planning
Waggoner went on to Part IV, the desired feedback from Council. Waggoner said he would like Council to
describe what a quality plan would look like and asked for feedback on Part 1 and Part II today.
Desired Feedback
1. Confirmation of proposed element
updates:
- Land Use
- Growth scenarios
- Housing
- Gateways
2. Approval of public input process:
- Public engagement
- Steering Committee
- Special Sessions with Council
- Joint Sessions with P&Z
3. Feedback on how you want the product to be
used (future discussion)
L i EQR�f �7Ula
Next Steps
• Fall/Winter 2017
— Develop and Distribute Request for Proposal
(RFP)
• Q1
— Consultant selection
— Formation of steering committee
— Consensus on public involvement plan
Ax,
R�EETS7W14
I
Councilmember Gonzalez thanked Waggoner. He said he has wanted this for 5 years and is glad that this is the
future of Georgetown. He said it must be stirred to how we want it to look in the future. Gonzalez is in favor of
the Council and community involvement.
Councilmember Fought said he likes to get community input. He said the more community involvement, the
better the ideas. Fought said he likes Councilmember Hesser's suggestion of breaking out commercial.
Councilmember Hesser asked about the donut holes and said it is time to address these. Hesser said they need
to be added to the list and looked at carefully. Mayor Ross agreed. He said it is expensive to offer city services
there and a long term strategy is needed. City Manager, Morgan, said there had been a staff meeting on this that
morning and it will be coming to Council soon. Morgan said the law is changing on annexation and this needs to
be considered.
Waggoner summarized Council's direction.
• Public Involvement
• Special Council Meetings
• Steering Committee
• Commercial Given a Focus
• Donut Holes
• Recent Annexation Laws
D. Discussion and possible direction regarding the 3 -hour downtown parking zone and 15 -minute parking zones --
Jack Daly, Assistant to the City Manager
Jack Daly, Assistant to City Manager, provided a presentation on the 3 -hour downtown parking zone and potential
15 minute parking zones. Daly said staff is seeking direction from the Council on whether or not to extend the
Downtown Parking 3 hour spaces and add some 15 minute parking zones. Daly said the presentation would
review existing 3 -hour parking zones, review a proposed expansion of this zone, and review proposed changes to
the ordinance.
Daly explained the intent to insure appropriate turnover in downtown. He spoke on in-house parking enforcement
beginning this year. Daly said that the City has received requests to extend zones from businesses as part of the
sidewalk projects, business needs or through complaints.
Daly explained that the proposed additional 3 hour parking zones would be near the library, on 8th Street between
Rock and MLK, at the tax assessor's building, on Main Street, between 9th and 10th Streets, and on Church Street
between 8th and 9th Streets. Daly noted that the tax assessor's office receives 600 customers a day.
Daly provided the Proposed Changes to the Ordinance.
■ Amend 3 -Hour Zone
o Main Street between 9th and 10th
0 8th Street between Rock and MLK
o Church Street between 8th and 91h
• Allow for 15 -minute parking zones
o Recommendation of the parking study
o Case-by-case basis
Daly said that the Public Works Department would install the 15 minute parking zones signs. He said these would
be placed on a case by case basis, as requested by store owners or business owners.
Councilmember Fought asked how to enforce a 15 minute parking zone. Daly said it is thought that people will
enforce it themselves, because of the signage. He explained that business owners are quick to call in a violation
and this would be complaint driven.
Councilmember Hesser asked if there was a methodology to determine where these are placed. Daly said it will
be determined by the types of uses and the density of uses and gave Roberts Printing as an example of a
business that could benefit from 15 minute parking. Daly said staff will assess and do its' best.
Daly said an Item would be on the regular City Council meeting agenda that evening for Council action.
Councilmember Jonrowe thanked Jack for the presentation.
Mayor Ross recessed the meeting to Executive Session under Section 551.071, Section 551.072, Section
551.074 and Section 551.087 at 4:30 PM. He announced that the City Manager's Work Plan portion of the
Executive Session would be heard first and the meeting would begin at 4:50 PM.
Executive Session
In compliance with the Open Meetings Act, Chapter 551, Government Code, Vemon's Texas Codes, Annotated, the
items listed below will be discussed in closed session and are subject to action in the regular session.
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. 551.072: Deliberation about Real Property
- Parcel 15 (1603 Northwest Boulevard), Discussion of an Appraisal and Amended Offer, Rivery Boulevard Extension Project --
Travis Baird, Real Estate Services Coordinator
- Matter related to the granting of a Temporary Construction Easement, Rock and 91h Streets -- Travis Baird, Real Estate
Services Coordinator
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
- City Manager Work Plan
Sec. 551:087: Deliberations Regarding Economic Development Negotiations
- Project Cat Update
Adjournment
Mayor Ross adjourned the meeting to begin the Regular City Council Meeting at 6:00 PM.
Approved by the Georgetown City Council on i O � D� { �D 1 --?
Date
Dale Ross, Mayor
c7z)vj-�
Attest: City Secr t