Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1964-12-28 Special Meeting MINUTES - SPECIAL MEETING of the LA PORTS CITY COMMISSION, LA PORT E, TEXAS December 28, 1961+ 7 :00 PM. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION PRESENT: Mayor H. P. Pfeiffer, Commissioners W. A. Stabs, Jr., Tom W. Osburn, Russell Shepherd. (Commissioner Frank G. Baker absent for Public Hearing, but present for the remainder of the meeting. MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ABSENT: None, except as noted above. OTHER CITY OFFICIALS PRESENT: City Attorney C. L. Pitman and City Clerk Clovis D. Mann. + + + 1. Public Hearing to determine whether to re-zone certain property, (description by metes and bounds attached as Exhibit No. 1 and made a part of these Minutes, from "CLASS 'A' SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING DISTRICT," to "CLASS 'E' APARTMENT BUILDINGS, DUPLEXES, AND~OR ANY OTHER MULTIPLE DWELLING DISTRICT." The public hearing was opened by Mayor Pfeiffer, who stated that all proceedings would be recorded by tape in order for the Commission to give proper study and consideration of all evidence presented. The Mayor explained that the rule would be that the Petitioners and others appearing on behalf of the re-zoning would be permitted to speak first; then any that opposed the re-zoning would be permitted to speak; then those for the re-zoning would be permitted to speak again, and last, that those against the rezoning would be permitted to speak again. Questions could be asked, but cross examination would not be permitted. Mr. Fred Westergren, Jr., presented Mr. Frank Fourmy, Attorney, who spoke for the re-zoning, stating that he believed that such would be an asset to the area and to the City. Mr. L. F. Krebs, of Krebs Construction Company, Houston, who plans on building a 101+ unit apartment building on the property, presented the preliminary plans to show that the proposed project would be an asset to the City, and to the area. He stated that the project would be valued at approximately one million dollars. The units would rent from 120.00 to $185.00 per month; that all efforts would be made to cooperate with adjacent property owners to assure that no nuisance would be created. He stated that the time schedule for construction depended upon financial arrange- ments, but that he felt that construction would be underway within 6 to 8 zweeks;,, 255 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT COMMISSIONERS ABSENT OTHER CITY OFFIC. PRESENT PUBLIC HEARING ON RE-ZONING "MINCHEN PROPERTY T 256 Continuation of Minutes, December 28, ly6~l-. • Mr. U. G. Todd, 100+ Bayshore Dr, spoke in opposition to the re-zoning, stating that the proposed project would cause him to lose money on his property; that he did not believe the project would be an asset to the City. He stated that he probably would not have objected, if the proponents had talked to him first, before he had spent money remodeling. He also felt that a proposed sewer line to the project would cause him trouble. He stated that he intended to opose re-zoning "all the way." Mr. Conway Jordan, Attorney representing Lila Gordan who ownes prop@rty at 1G 11 Bayshore Drive, stated that he had checked the proceedings in calling the public hearing and had found that everything was in order and according to law. He stated that when his client bought her property, the fact that the area was zoned for residential purposes was of major consideration; that she felt that she would have pro- per protection under the zoning law. He further stated that that the proposed project would create a traffic problem; that the apartment project would "back up" to the front of his client's property; that he felt that there were other suitable sites on the bay front for such a project that would not encroach on other property as this project would at this location. Mrs. U. G. Todd spoke, stating that they had owned their property for several years, and had planned on making a nice home for their retirement; that no one had ever approached them on rezoning the property; that she had been assured by others that the residential zoning would remain. Mr. Ira F. Davidson spoke against the re-zoning, stating that he felt that the additional automobile traffic would create a serious problem. Mr. Fred Luce, speaking for his mother, Mrs. D. R. Luce, stated that the increase in traffic would create a serious problem -- such traffic including not only automobiles, but also boat trailers. He also felt that the present image of a "resort and residential" area would be destroyed. Lila Gordan had questions as to planned parking. She was assured by Mr. Krebs that parking would be "off street park- ing", that sufficient space to permit tennant and guest park- ing is planned. She stated that she thought zoning was for the purpose of giving protection to the property owners, therefore, she did not think the area should be re-zoned. The Mayor asked if there was further comments, and there being none, he declared the hearing closed; again assuring those present that the Commission would carefully consider all evidence and statements made and would render a decision by January 8, 1y65. + + + ,~ ~. ,:r ~~~ E. _,.~ M Continuation of Minutes, December 28, 1961+. ` I. ~ / ° (.. I J ,,~ 2. In other business, the Commission considered the action of (_a.i the Planning and Zoning Connnission in their meeting of ~ December 11+, 1961+, in which that Commission requested that a c~$ joint hearing be called to consider zoning of the East one- ~ half portions of Block 98 and 337, La Porte Addition, as ~ "CLASS 'B' COMMERCIAL". This area was annexed to the City on ~ June 15, 1961+. (") After careful consideration of the request, Commissioner C~3 Baker made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Osburn, that a joint Public Hearing be called for the City Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission for February 8, 1965, at 7:00 PM, to consider zoning all of Blocks 98 and 337, La Porte Addition, as "CLASS 'B' COMMERCIAL," and that con- currance be requested of the Planning and Zoning Commission to zoning all the blocks under question, rather than just the East one-half portions. Motion carried. + + + 3. Mrs. Cliff Trainer petitioned the Planning and Zoning Commission for a Special Permit to operate a "Private School- Nursery" at 1+02 S. 6th. A Public Hearing was held by the . City Commission on February 11+, 1961+, to determine whether to authorize the Special Permit. On February 17, 1961+, the Commission tabled any further action on the request, pending receipt of sufficient evidence that Mrs. Trainer had operated a Day Nursery at this address, continuously since before the adoption of the zoning ordinance, as she had claimed. O The case was referred to the Board of Adjustment for determi- Q: nation as to whether she had operated a Day Care Nursery continuously at 1+02 S. 6th since before the adoption of the fia ~.~ zoning ordinance. The Board of Adjustment considered the case in a meeting on v December 16, 1961+, and determined in a meeting on December W 28, 1961+, that she had not operated continuously at this {n address. Q L11 In action to finalize the Public Hearing of February 11+, 0.. 1961+, Commissioner Baker made a motion, seconded by ~ Commissioner Osburn, that the request for a Special Permit ~ to grant exception to the zoning ordinance for Special Uses, ~ which would permit the operation of a Day Care Nursery at ~ 1+02 S. 6th Street, be denied. The motion carried by all O Commissioners voting "Aye". ~ r + + + 257 PUBLIC HEARING CALLED FEB ~+ FOR RE-ZONING OF BLOCxs 9 & 337, LA PORTE CLOSING OUT OF PUBLIC HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL REQUEST FOR DAY NURSERY 02 S. TH., MRS CLIFF TRAINER ~ ~ Continuation of Minutes December 28, 19611-. ~+. A proposed contract between the City of La Porte and Humble Oil and Refining Company, which would designate certain areas owned by Humble Oil and Refining Company as "Bayport Industrial District of La Porte" was considered. (Copy of Contract attached hereto as Exhibit No. 2 and made a part of these Minutes. After careful considerations Commissioner Stabs made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Bakery that the Mayor be authorized to sign the proposed contract, attested to by the City Clerk; and that the signed contract be presented to Humble Oil and Refining Company for their consideration. The motion carried with all Commissioners voting "Aye". + + + There being no further business at handy the meeting was adjourned. ,~ / ~~%~ CLOVIS D. MANN City Clerk ~~, ~~~°r ~ ~---~ H. P. PF F Mayor 258 PROPOSID CONTRACT •! ESTABLISHING "BAYPORT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT OF LA PORT E. A ~IOJ i OL1JX • ~ ~ 259 hibit N E 1 ..._.... _ .._.~ ~ __ - . ._... ---- --- x o. .. _ . . _ AdOOI O213X ~ AVti ,i ~ 0213X., AOOP.~. O:JJX (Minchen Property) Part of Lot 19 in the W. B. LOWRANCE SUB-DIVISION in the JOHNSON-HUNTER SURVEY, A-35, in Harris County, Texas, according to the map thereof re- corded in Volume 83, Page 596 of the Harris County Deed Records; being more fully described by metes and bounds as follows: BEGINNING at a 1" iron rod set in the southeast line of Shore Drive (Grand View Drive) located south 64 deg. east, a distance of 80 feet from the southerly corner of Block 17 in BAY FRONT ADDITION to the City of La Porte, according to the map thereof recorded in Volume 85, Page 440 of the Harris County Deed Records: THENCE south 52 deg. 25 min. 18 sec. east along the southwest line of a tract described in deed to JOHN BEAZLEY, JR. recorded in Volume 232, Page 188 of the Deed Records, a distance of 54.15 feet to a 1"'iron rod; THENCE north 37 deg. 57 min. 07 sec. east, 50.00 feet to a I .. , 1" iron rod; THENCE north 51 deg. 55 min. 41 sec. west a distance of 64.83 feet to a 1" iron rod in the southeast line of Bayshore Drive; THENCE north 26 deg. east along the southeast line of Bayshore Drive, a distance of 287.57 feet to a 1" iron rod; THENCE south 51 deg. 53 min. 54 sec. east along the southwest line of the former J. BEAZLEY 21.69 acre homestead tract, 523.44 feet, more or less to the easterly corner of the 2.85 acre tract described in deed from William G. Carroll to J. A. Tennant recorded in Volume 568, Page 161 of the Harris County Deed Records; THENCE south 28 deg. 40 min, 30 sec. west along southeasterly line of said Tennant Tract 400.90 feet to the southerly corner thereof; THENCE north 51 deg. 44 min. 36 sec. west'along,the southwesterly line of said Tennant Tract 504.60 feet to a 1" iron rod set in southeast line of Bayshore Drive; THENCE north 26 deg. east along the southeast line of Bayshore Drive 63.92 feet to the PLACE OF BEGINNING. ~~ 260 • ~ Exhibit No. 2 :. .. ~ J~~ ,,:r/1b-12/26/64-r~. '-'" , • This agreement made and entered into by and between the City of La Porte, Texas, a municipal corporation in Harris County, Texas, hereinafter called "City", and Humble Oil and Refining Com- pany, a Delaware corporation with a permit to do business in the State of Texas, hereinafter called "Humble"; W I T N E S SET H T H A T: WHEREAS, it is the established policy of the City Com- mission of the City of La Porte, Texas, to adopt such reasonable measures from time to time as are permitted by law and which will • tend to enhance the economic stability and growth of the City and its environs by attracting the location of new ar_d expansion of old industries therein, and such policy is hereby reaffirmed and adopted by th is City Commission as being in the best interest in the City and its citizens; and WHEREAS, in furtherance of said policy, City will, upon the execution by Humble of this agreement, immediately enact an ordinance designating and declaring the area described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto, to be an industrial district of the City, known as the "Bayport Industrial District of La Porte", herein- after called the "District", all in accordance with and pursuant to the provisions of Article I, Section 5, of the Municipal Annexa- • tion Act, H. B, 13, Acts of the 58th Legislature of the State of Texas, Regular Session, 1963; and WHEREAS, Humble is the owner of substantially all of the lard in said District, as reflected by various deeds to Humble, duly recorded in the Deed Records of Harris County, Texas, to which reference is here made for all purposes; and WHEREAS, City desires to ®ncouxage tho expansion ~nc~ , • growth of the District in furtherance of and pursuant to its policy • -2 - 261 ~- . C......: and ordinance aforesaid by entering into this agreement with Humble pursuant to the authority granted under the Texas Municipal Annexa- tion Act; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained, it is agreed by and between the City and Humble as follows: I City covenants and agrees with Humble and guarantees to Humble that during the term of this agreement, the District shall • continue and retain its extraterritorial status as an industrial district, and shall be immune from annexation by City, and such District shall not be annexed by City; the District shall not have extended to it or any part thereof, any rules, regulations or ordi- nances (a) governing plants and subdivisions of land, (b) prescribing zoning, building, electrical, plumbing or inspection code or codes or regulations, (c•) requiring the furnishing by City of police or fire pro- tection or other similar City services, (d) requiring the furnishing by City of sewers or sewerage facilities or services, water or water services or prescribing • water codes, or (e) undertaking or attempting to exercise in any manner what- soever control over the construction or expansion of industrial plants or facilities or the conduct of business in the Distr ict. II Humble shall pay to City on the land embraced and included within the District and the improvements thereon, annually, on or before December 31, oP each year, after the execution of this agree- . ment, and during the term hereof, an amount determined as follows: f~,~ri i ~;, ,. A.II >.l ' ' ou~x ca:ix `+....+ • ' -3- - .._.. n.~..~. ~Otl3X' _+.. The value of the property and improvements thereon, for • ad valorem tax purposes, within the District, shall be determined by applying the percentage of the fair=market value used by the City in arriving at its tax values for the then current year to one hun- dred per cent. (100%) of fair-market value each year during the term hereof. This basis of valuation (the City's ratio of the fair- market value) shall be determined for the property of Humble within the District, and the value so determined shall be multiplied by twenty-five per cent. (25%) of the tax rate of City for the year in question, the result being the amount which shall be paid hereunder for such year. III Fair-market value of the property of Humble to which • the percenitages specified in Paragraph II above shall be applied, shall be fixed and determined in the same manner and under the same procedures and standards as the fair-market value is fixed for property within the corporate limits of City for ad valorem tax purposes. That is, Humble sha 11 be entitled to render to City a valuation of its property for purposes of this agreement, and City shall be entitled to assess a valuation of such property for purposes of this agreement, as each might do if such property were within the corporate limits of City. Humble sh~l.l have the same right to protest the valuation so fixed by City against this property and to take all legal steps desired by Humble to contest such valuation in order to reduce such valuation in the same manner, and under the same procedure, as if its property were located with- in the corporate limits of City. IV • Even though Humble protests the valuation set by City on its said property on which industrial improvements are erected, Humble will pay City on or before the time therefor, as hereinabove 26e ~ .{:.. ~~ .,~ .•~ •. -4- • 263 provided, the total amount which would be due by Humble to City in accordance with the provisions of this agreement on the basis of value specified in rendition filed by Humble with City with respect to said property for that year. At such time as the protested valuation of such property of Humble has been finally determined, either as the result of final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction or as the result of other final conclusion of the valu- ation,then within thirty (30) days thereafter, Humble shall make payment to City of any additional amount that may be due hereunder, • based upon such final valuation. V This agreement shall extend for a term of seven (7) years from and after the date hereof, unless extended for an additional period or periods of time as provided by the Texas Municipal Annexa- tion Act, upon mutual consent of the parties hereto. In this con- nection, City hereby expresses its bell that such industrial dis- trict agreements of the kind contained herein are conducive to the development of existing and future industry, and to the best inter- est of all citizens of the City, and City does hereby encourage future City Commissions to enter into future industrial agreements and to extend for additional periods permitted by law, this indus- • trial district agreement upon the request of Humble, its successors or assigns. VI This agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon City and Humble, and upon Rumble's successors and assigns, and shall remain in force whether Humble sells, assigns, or in any other manner, disposes of all or any part of the property • belonging to Humble within the District; provided, however, that p••' • -5- upon the sale or disposition of any property of Humble within the District, responsibility and liability for performance of this contract with respect to the land affected by such sale or disposi- tion, shall be the sole responsibility of the purchaser or succes- sor of Humble. Humble agrees that it will undertake to include in each deed to land in the District executed by it a provision obligating the grantee in such deed to enter into and execute with City an agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B". City agrees to execute with each such grantee an agreement in such form. • In the event such Grantee, for any reason, fails to execute such agreement in such form, within sixty (60) days from the date of such deed from Humble, then the property described in such deed shall be excluded herefr~om and shall be subject to annexation by the City upon the expiration of such sixty (60) day period. Entered into, this _ day of 1964. HUMBLE OIL AND REFINING COMPANY By. ATTEST: Vice President Assistant Secretary CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS Y= _ ATTEST,; ~ ~- f / Mayor City Secretary 264 .;~; .~t.~'