Laserfiche WebLink
<br />SCU 02-00 1 and SCU 02-002 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />La Porte P & Z Commission <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Meeting Date: 051l~/02 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />4.2 Recitals: How d~es the multifamily residential fit in this picture? <br /> <br />4.3 8.3 Page 6 of 9: <br /> <br />· What is the role and influence of th~ Port of Houston Authority in this project and what are the links to the <br />proposed PHA project in Seabrook? , <br />· Grade separation: Does this refer to the overpass on Fairmont? Is it the same one as described earlier whereby the <br />developer is no longer contributing to the expense of the engineering design?'Did somebody miss something? <br /> <br />The rest of this document is mostly a re-hash in other terms of the preceding section with no value added. Two <br />interesting point~ however, the address of the, developer: Houston, not La Porte, and the owner or Agent: Los Angeles <br />, California (Do these people have any interest in the Long BeachILos Angeles corridor? If you have been privileged, as I <br />have been to see this, you will not want to see this happen to your neighborhood). <br /> <br />5.0 Exhibit D: <br /> <br />5.1 As outlined previously, three consecutive paragraphs excluding the use of shipping containers. <br /> <br />5.2 Article VIII: <br /> <br />· Section 5. (g): Shipping containers again, and as we already know, there will,be no violation of the City ordinance <br />regulating their use. . <br /> <br />In conclusion, I fail to see the harmonious coexistence of such an endeavor with the proposed planned community around the <br />newly created golf course. How is this compatible? Who would be fool enough to invest heavily in private or even public housing <br />around such a creation? I was under the impression that this part of town would be ciassified as residential. We already have an <br />"industrial doldrums" at the opposite side of town, I do not think we need to create another one here. <br /> <br />If any other classification should co-exist with the residential aspect of this part of the city along the new 146, it should be light <br />commercial to better serve the residents as it is done in all other communities along 146 such as Seabrook and Kemah. Industry if any <br />should be kept on the West Side ofthe railroad track, invisible from 146. <br /> <br />File Name:05-16-02 P&Z SCU 02-001_02-002.doc <br /> <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />