Laserfiche WebLink
Planning and Zoning Commission <br />Minutes of December 18, 2014 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br />Michael Prasek, 10925 Dogwood Dr., Secretary of the Fairmont Park East Homeowners <br />Association, stated the Association neither endorses nor opposes the request. As a <br />homeowner, Mr. Prasek asked the Commission to do the right thing. <br />Sara Ragen, 10841 Sycamore Dr. N., opposes the request because it is not a good location <br />for the development and it will reduce property values. <br />Robbie McClaren, Sycamore Dr. N., opposes the request because the location is not <br />appropriate. <br />Mark Lindsey, 10991 Spruce Dr. S., opposes the request. Mr. Lindsey is concerned about <br />how the wastewater from the facility is going to be treated. <br />d. Question and Answer <br />Commissioner Follis asked the following questions of Mr. Kawahara: <br />What will be the hook height and crane capacity? <br />Will there be machines in the facility? <br />Will there be 18-wheeler traffic? <br />Is the facility in Carona, California in a zoned area? <br />What is the closest residential subdivision to the facility in Carona, California? <br />What will be the building's eave height? <br />Was a zoning permit obtained from the City of La Porte? <br />Does the Carona plant have a classification number of 3563? <br />Mr. Kawahara responded to Mr. Follis's questions: <br />The hook height will be 28' from the hook to the floor. <br />There will be a mill and lathe. <br />In some cases, 18-wheeler traffic will be necessary. <br />The Carona, California location is a manufacturing plant. <br />The closest houses to the Carona, California facility are approximately 600'. <br />The building's eave height will be 42'. <br />A zoning permit from the City of La Porte was not requested. <br />The Carona plant does not have a classification number of 3563, but it is in the 3500 series. <br />Commissioners inquired as to whether the City was contacted and the development plan <br />discussed prior to the land being purchased. Mr. Kawahara stated that there were meetings <br />with the City. City Planner Eric Ensey responded that at the time the early meetings <br />occurred, the SIC classification code that was being discussed was 7699. It wasn't until after <br />staff received additional information from the applicant as to what they were proposing to <br />do at the site that staff determined SIC #7699 was not the correct classification code. <br />Commissioner Barrera expressed concern that an apparent industrial use would try to <br />develop in a commercial area. Mr. Barrera was also concerned about the risk of chemical <br />exposure with the compressors and how that would be handled. He inquired about the <br />weight capacity of the cranes because of the roadway damage that could occur with <br />transporting the compressors. <br />