Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06-1984 Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting (2)"~ . t r • AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO BE HELD DECEMBER 6, 1984, IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS OF THE CITY HALL, 604 WEST FAIRMONT PARKWAY, LA PORTE, TEXAS, BEGINNING AT 7:00 P.M. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. CONSIDER THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 15, 1984 3. CONSIDER REQUEST OF DON WELCH OF DECKER MCKIM REALTORS TO HAVE AN "UNRESTRICTED RESERVE K" TRACT OF LAND IN BROOKGLEN, SECTION 3 ON FAIRMONT PARKWAY BETWEEN THE CORNERS OF BROOKWOOD AND SOMERTON, REZONED FROM "RESIDENTIAL" TO "COMMERCIAL" TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE RETAIL-COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT - D. Welch/. B. Speake 4. REVIEW AND DISCUSS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND RELATED ELEMENTS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - B. Speake 5. ADJOURNMENT • • MII`IUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 6, 1984 1. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Doug Latimer at 7:00 P.M. Members of the Commission Present: Chairman Doug Latimer, Members Charlie Doug Boyle, Karl Johnston, Janet Graves and Bobby Blackwell Members_of_the Commission Absent: Bruce Hammack and Lola Phillips City Sta.ff_Pre.sent: Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong, City Engineer Bob Speake and Assistant City Secretary Laura Hall Others_Present: Mr. Don Welch, Decker McKim Realtors; John • Welch, Real Estate Appraiser; Pete Dudley, Bayshore Sun Newspaper; Mrs. D. Sullivan 2. The Commission considered the approval of the minutes of the Regular Meeting held on November 15, 1984. Motion was made by Karl Johnston to approve the minutes ~s presented. Second by Bobby Blackwell. The motion carried, 5 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Latimer, Boyle, Johnston, Graves, Blackwell Nays : PJone 3. The Commission considered the request of Don Welch of Decker McKim Realtors to have an "unrestricted reserve K" tract of land in Brookglen, Section 3 on. Fairmont Parkway between the corners of Brookwood and Somerton, rezoned from "residential" to "commercial" to accommodate future retail-commercial development. Mr. Don Welch called on the appraiser of the property, Mr. John Welch to make a short presentation about the property in question. Mr. Welch stated that the property was in keeping with the specifications in the Comprehensive Master Plan in that the frontage of the property facing Fairmont Parkway • A -i Minutes, Regula~leeting • La Porte Planning & Zoning Commission December 6, 1984, Page 2 • would be used for commercial use; in particular a convenience store would be built. The remaining portions of the property would be developed at a later time to include multi-family residential. The multi-family residential development would include two story walk-up garden type apartments or condominium buildings. Commercial development of the western portion of the subject property would most be in one of three forms. The tract could physically support two to three single tenant commercial or office facilities, a small strip center facility,. or a combination; but the strip center would be most likely. Mr. Welch felt this type of development would receive most of its' business from the immediate neighborhood, with additional traffic from exposer to Fairmont Parkway. Mr. Welch stated that it was his feeling that the subject property could be successfully developed if zoned either neighborhood commercial or general commercial under the Master Plan. Chairman Latimer then asked if any Commission member had any question of Mr. Welch or if they would like to review the proposed site plan. No one did. Chairman Latimer then asked the Commission for a motion and second to schedule this rezoning request for a public hearing on January 3, 1985. Motion was made by Bobby Blackwell to • schedule this rezoning request for a public hearing to be held on January ~,, 198. Second by Charlie Doug Boyle. The motion carried, 5 ayes and 0 nays. Ayes: Latimer, Boyle, Johnston, Graves, Blackwell Nays: None Chairman Latimer then discussed with the Commission a letter that he had received from City Manager Jack Owen to carry out the. rezoning of the Spenwick/College View area. Chairman Latimer read the letter aloud to the Commission. (A copy of the letter from City Manager Owen is attached to these minutes as part of the permanent record.) Chairman Latimer stated that it was the City Council's wish that the Commission hold a public hearing to rezone all of this property in the subject area, at one time. Mr. Blackwell stated that he did not feel that the Commission could study the new proposed subdivision and zoning ordinances in compliance with the Master Plan review and create a "Comprehensive Plan" to rezone the Spenwick area at the same time. He felt that this would be too much work to-do the two projects at the same time. He did feel, however, that Council was not explicit enough as to whether the rezoning of Spenwick should take precedence • ~` a ~ Minutes, Regulat~eeting • La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 1984, Page 3 • over the review of the subdivision ordinance and zoning ordinance. Assistant City Attorney Armstrong stated that if it was the Commission's desire, he could prepare a memorandum to Council stating the magnitude of such a project. The Commission agreed that he should prepare the statement. With the conclusion of the discussion concerning the rezoning of the Spenwick area, the Commission went on to the next item on the agenda. 4. The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed subdivision ordinance and related elements of the Comprehensive Plan. City Engineer Speake passed out Blue Book materials in Sections A (future optional reading assignments), E (the draft Development Ordinance), and I (PICM Section 7, Platting Graphic Standards). Mr. Speake stated that rezoning pressure on the Commission was mounting and that it would be wise for all to read the Comprehensive Plan and proposed Zoning Ordinance as we go through the Development Ordinance adoption process. In that way, the Commission will be able to being rezoning at the earliest possible date. Mr. Speake reviewed the changes which have been suggested to • date in Blue Book Section E. Those changes are .highlighted in bold print in the new pages handed out December 6th. A number of definitions were added in Section 2 of the ordinance. Assistant City Attorney Armstrong pointed out the following definitions still needed some more revision: Planned Unit Development and Variances. It was also pointed out that the legal language proposed on Blue Book Page E-11 still needed work. Mr. Speake advised the Commission that a number of sections in the proposed Ordinance now are in PICM Section 7 (Blue Book Section I). He then went over the pertinent PICM provisions for Sketch Plans, General Plans, and Preliminary Plats. He mentioned that changes which have been made since the November 15th meeting are highlighted in bold print in the revised pages handed out December 6th. By agreement of all attendees, discussion of Final Plats will be deferred until the December 20th meeting. • ;~ . - ,..:. • • Minutes, Regular Meeting La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission December 6, 1984, Page ~+ 5. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was duly adjourned at 9:08 P.M. Respectfully submitted: Laura Hall Assistant City Secretary Passed & Approved this the day of December, 1984. Doug Latimer, Chairman • • _ ~ -M~ _ • • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING • In accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 780, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of La Porte, a public hearing will be held at 7:00 P.M. on January 3, 1985, by the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission to consider rezoning an "unrestricted reserve K" tract of land in Brookglen, Section 3 on Fairmont Parkway between the corners of Brookwood and Somerton, rezoned from "residential" to "commercial" to accommodate future retail-commercial development. • This hearing will be conducted in the Council Chambers of the La Porte City Hall, 604 West Fairmont Parkway. Letters concerning this matter should be addressed to the City Secretary, P. 0. Box 1115, La Porte, Texas 77571. Those wishing to address this matter pro or con during the meeting will be required to sign in before the meeting is convened. CITY OF LA PORTS ,~ 'h +, a Cherie Black City Secretary ~- ~ • CITY OF LA PORT E INTER-OFFICE MEMO T0: BOB SPEAKE FROM: AULISSEN DATE: 12/28/84 SUBJECT : FINAL STAFF R ECOMM ENDATION ON R ES ERV E "K" BROOKGL EN SEC . 3 DON WELCH OF DECKER MCKIM REALTY The City has received a request from Mr. Don Welch of Decker McKim Realty to re-zone a tract of land that faces Fairmont Parkway between Brookwood and Somerton Streets. R DQU EST The property is owned by Mr.'s Don Elliott and Jimmy Guidry. The request is to re-zone the above described tract to "C" commercial to allow part of the tract to used for the construction of a convenience store and part to be marketed for future retail development. The • request states that this re-zoning will make the property consistent with surrounding properties. ISSU ES A. This property is located in the newly annexed area of College View. As you know, this area is currently temporarily classified as "R-1" due to its annexation. A permanent zoning classification has not yet been assigned. The Commission has been asked by the City Council to begin the process of assigning permanent classification to the College View/Spenwick area. B. This request is not in specific compliance with the proposed master plan but the plan does indicate that some "NC" neighborhood commercial should be located about a mile east of this site. Listed below are the comparisons to the pertinent plans contained in the City's proposed comprehensive plan. (1) Land Use Plan This site is designated as medium density residential. This is defined as g-14 dwelling units per gross acre. The Comprehensive Master Plan (CMP) proposes residential use on all but one small area just east of this tract. This proposed land use includes primarily single-family attached housing and low density multi-family units such as duplexes and fourpl ex es . • (2) Thoroughfare Plan The CMP proposes that Fairmont Parkway should become a PAGE 2 WELCH-REZONING CON' T. • Semi-Controlled Access Hwy (SCAH). The Parkway should • ultimately be designed for 8 moving lanes with a ROW capacity of up to 10 moving lanes. This type of thoroughfare should generally have a signal every two miles but not closer than every one mile. It should move between 800 and 1000 vehicles per hour. A SCAH should be designed to speed traffic movement. Any additional lanes could be contained within the existing ROW. The proposed project will have little impact on Thoroughfare Plan. C. It should be considered commercial sites developed Park. These developments stores, and a mini-storage areas that are currently Parkway. that there have been several other along Fairmont Parkway at Fairmont include two car washes, two convenience complex. Note that these took place in zoned "C" commercial along Fairmont D. There was some initial question as to the availability of sanitary sewer to this site because of the plant loading problem mentioned in my memo of 12/6/84. After researching this problem it was noted that the College View MUD board had granted these two owners sewer tap privileges. These were restricted to 5 commodes, 3 urinals, and 8 wash basins. The City's policy has been to accept these prior commitments. E. There exists a pipeline easement on this particular tract that • divides the tract into two segments. The eastern and smallest section of this tract is the area that is proposed for a convenience store. This tract is of slightly less than 10,000 square feet. The western two thirds of the tract has no specific use proposed other than future retail development. SUMMARY There are several areas that should be noted before re-zoning should take place. These are listed below: A. This request is somewhat contrary to the proposed Comprehensive Plan as "R-2" is proposed. B. The existing and current commercial projects along Fairmont Parkway indicate a trend toward this type of commercial development. Regional commercial growth trends along Fairmont Parkway west of the City merit consideration also. R ECOMM ENDATION This request has been reviewed based on the existing zoning ordinance with facts from the proposed plan used for support. The analysis shows little or no negative impact on the community or the proposed • master plan with the granting of this request. Based on the facts listed above and to remain consistent with the guidelines already set .forth by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the following recommendation is given: • • • PAGE 3 WELCH-REZONING CON'T Rezone that part of reserve "K" that lies east of the pipeline corridor from it's temporary "R-1" zoning classification to "C" commercial. Deny the rezoning request on that part of the tract that lies west of the pipeline corridor until a specific use is determined. At such time as a sale for development is pending or closed the applicant should re-apply for the rezoning. • `~~ i • • T0: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: BOB SPEAK E D. ~ ~ LISSEN 12/6/84 CITY OF LA PORTE INTER-OFFICE MEMO REZONING "UNRESTRICTED RESERVE K" COLLEGE VIEW DON WELCH OF DECKER MCKIM REALITY The City has received a request from Mr. Don Welch of Decker McKim Reality to re-zone a tract of land that faces Fairmont Parkway between Brookwood and Somerton Streets. This memorandum is provided to identify some of the issues involved in this request. A staff recommendation will be made after further investigation and prior to any public hearing on this matter. RE UEST The property is owned by Mr.'s Don Elliott and Jimmy Guidry. The • request is to re-zone the above described tract to "C" commercial to allow part of the tract to used for the construction of a convenience store and part to be marketed for future retail development. The request states that this re-zoning will make the property consistent with surrounding properties. ISSU ES A. This property is located in the newly annexed area of College View. As you know, this area is currently temporarily classified as "R-1" due to its annexation. A permanent zoning classification has not yet been assigned. The Commission has been asked by the City Council to b egin the process of assigning permanent classification to the College View/Spenwick area. B. This request is not in specific compliance to the proposed master plan but the plan does indicate that som e "NC" neighborhood commercial should be located about a mile east of this site. This tract is recommended to be "R-2" under the proposed ordinance. C. It should be considered that there have been several other commercial sites developed along Fairmont Parkway at Fairmont Park. These developments include two car washes, two convenience stores, and a mini-storage complex. Note that these took place in areas that are currently zoned "C" commercial along Fairmont Parkway. • - ~. • • ', PAGE 2 WELCH-REZONING CONT. • D. There is some question as to the availability of adequate sanitary sewer to the site. The question lies in the fact that the College View treatment plant is overloaded. When this area was in the College View MUD, taps were being reviewed on an individual basis with many requests being denied. Since the annexation the City has given the Texas Department of Water Resources a compliance schedule for relieving the overloaded conditions of the College View Plant. Hopefully successful adherence to this schedule will prevent a moratorium on building in the College View area. SUMMARY There .are several areas that need further investigation before re-zoning should take place. A. The re-zoning of this tract may provide additional impetus for a more rapid re-zoning of the annexed area than is currently planned by the Commission. B. This request is somewhat contrary to the proposed Comprehensive Plan. C. The existing and current commercial projects along Fairmont Parkway indicate a trend toward this type of commercial • development. Regional commercial growth trends along Fairmont Parkway west of the City merit consideration also. D. As per current City policy, utility commitments above and beyond those approved by College View Mud are being reviewed on an individual basis. On previous taps approved by the City, there has been a capital recovery fee paid to the City. Again, this memorandum is to provide you with some of the facts and issues concerning this re-zoning request. If you require any further information please contact me. • :~ ~~: ..~ • ~ JOHN D. WELCH & ASSOCI~ES Rein Estntc Ap~rur.rers & Coasultcrnts • December 6, 1984 City of LaPorte 604 West Fairmont Parkway Laporte, Texas 77571 Re: Re-zoning of Reserve "K", Brookglen, Section 3. To whom it may concern; I have been retained by the current owners of the above ref- erenced property to consider the highest and best use of the site. The tract contains a total of approximately 2.5503 acres with approximately 550 feet of frontage on Fairmont Parkway, 185 feet on Somerton Drive, and 185 feet on Brookwood Drive (re- fer to Exhibit "A"). It has an average depth of approximately 195 feet. A 50 feet wide pipeline easement traverses the eastern most portion of the site and contains approximately 10,400 square feet of land area. The entire tract is vacant • at this time. Utility of the site is greatly affected by the pipeline ease- ment. No permanent structures may be constructed within this area. Therefore, it is most likely that the property will be developed in at least two sections. Current zoning of the property calls for single family resi- dential development. In the opinion of this appraiser, this type of development is unlikely. Considering overall size and shape, and frontage to depth ratio of the property, all of the homes would most likely face Fairmont Parkway, which is a major thoroughfare. Homes with this location would be diffi- cult, if not impossible to market. The eastern most .6713 acre (refer to Exhibit "B") of the site is currently under contract to Mr. Charles G. Ballard. The contract is contingent upon re-zoning the property from residential to commercial. Mr. Ballard proposes to build a convenience store facility on the site. It is the opinion of this appraiser that the proposed improvement will well serve the surrounding neighborhood and will be consistent with the estimated highest and best use of the site. • ~37O(i Ccnlrr SlfCil • (hrr Park, I'r~:n i7~ib • 1'hunc: 171 i).~7y_?tii~) • • City of LaPorte Page 2 That portion of the subject which lies to the west of the pipeline easement contains a total of approximately 1.7 net acres. In my opinion, the two most probable best uses of this site are multifamily residential and commercial. Considering the exact location of the site, fronting Fairmont Parkway which is high speed divided boulevard, the most probable type of multifamily development is a two story walk-up garden type apartment or condominum project. This type of project typic- ally has a density of 28 to 32 units per acre. Considering the developable portion of the subject is approximatley 1.7 acres, a project would contain approximatley 48 to 54 total units. In todays market, most developers consider projects of this type to be extremely marginal if developed with less than 100 units. Therefore, this type of development is not considered to be likely for the subject. Commercial development of the western portion of the subject would most be in one of three forms. The tract could physi- cally support two to three single tenant commercial or office • facilities, a small strip center facility, or a combination of a small center and a single tenant facility. In my opin- ion, the strip center type development is most likely. This type of facility would receive the majority of it's business from the immediate neighborhood, with additional traffic from exposer to Fairmont Parkway. It is therefore the opinion of the appraiser that the estimated highest and best use of the subject,- assuming re-zoning, is for commercial development. Also considered by the appraiser was the City of LaPorte Com- prehensive Plan dated April 27, 1984. It is my opinion that the subject could be successfully developed if zoned either. neighborhood commercial or general commercial under this plan. I appreciate this opportunity to express my views and opin- ions. Please call if I may be of further assistance to you in this matter. Sincerely, U ~~ John D. Welch, MAI, SRPA :7 `...r • • • • ,,sL~ 1'u N !oo u i ~ 0 I I ~. N ,~o~' _ i~ -~ • • EXHIBIT "A~' ~ i t .. . ,_.. ..., .. .... ~ .. _ . • ~~ _~- - ~ - _ - - -- --- - -- -- -- - - -- - - - -N B6°56'5/"E 573.22' - - ---- -- -, - - - - - ~ ~` 4: 136 -- -- -- - -- ~ s.r ./1" ~+ -- - _ IB• Utility Easement a ~, 4 ~ ~• ' ~ /' ~ i ~ '. i / Q .• S,r //tar" ' O' / r o~ Z~ 95\ 5 ~~, ~',,~d~ ~ D~ U Q % i 1 O / I / O'•= h ~ ~' y ~ I ~ ^ a i ti . ~_ C r j 2. 55 03 AG. ° J ~ _ ~ O I W o- 3 ` / ~ h o~ / m' o - ~ , Q1 ~1 tD W v th i o ~ % i o Q I ( y ~ ~ 0 t/ I ~ ~ O ~ /% v I 2 / 1 s.r r/!" r " ,T-, s,r iil, r R - _ - _ ~ 10• BmlOroq l_e 8 'r+oter Lint Easement - J ' `~ I _.~ 330 E9. /TT ~, /~+~ ~°~^ S 86° 56r 5/r'W - 550.00" r J r~N 48° 03r//"N.' - /4./4r S 4/°56r5B"W - /4./4~- ~' ~ d ~d' ~2' ff ldf T l~ ~ ~'l~ Irt7~ 3f (73G~ R[.W J NOTE - nw.rr Mode Juiln Col 4 ?, ne Re°ort ~/~~PANY E' L A T 4 4 6 i SHOWING A SURVEY OF RESERVE " OUT OF BROOKGLEN ,SECTION 3 q SUBDIVISION iN THE WILLIAM M. JO~:~ SURVEY A - 482 RECORDED IN VOL- UME 199 PACE ial n~ Tur- t, , t, ' I / ~ -- / ; r ` ~ EXHIBIT "B" ~~ ~: ~„ o n I ~_.. . ! ! .. ~ ,. ~ °56r5l~•E, 153.22 ~ "~''~'•" l r N86 ~ r ~ r1, -'.I • • • I r ..., r s _' _ i . 1' ._ _. •~___._.. ... .. .. . .. • :A .y ~ ~~ .. .. ` _ .. ~u r ... ... ... J ~. h f ---.. .. ..J __._.---- - i .. ._ . - ;~ ~o _ _.... .. / J -~ ! ~~ 01 / tiv ~~ ~ I ~~~ _ I. ~1 F / 1 Il4 'I J / / ', r 1 I~ ~ ~, ''I ' t '~ r 0.6713 Acres ~I ~/~ ]~ r ~ _ 29, 240.5534 SOFT. o ,,~, _ r4 ;; Areo - I ~ I r;' !~~ ~ ~ o ~' ~ o ,~ d ' vj „ +' •• a r , ''~ so I I O a O _ ., ! • Ol ^ F~ ~) 1 I t 1~~ `J , •N C7 • ~~ M) // / ~ ~~ ~ -'~ - ~- r- ~~l ~ • o ~: - • Ur (~ J i ) `` 2 ~ t' lV ,s. ~ U i^ i ;' I ~• 1 _ • ~ ~ 1 I , ,.. , ! ---- .• _.. /N ~ J - --- - - Sf16°56~51••W, 140.00 ~ ___ , .., ~.r.. -- ~ r f ... a,rr.~•. _.. _. _ .. i ~~ ~~ • f ,• .~ .._-~.~-v---_•-_. ~. L~ 1` ° 1. r ... r .. r / _ _.--- F ~ / R~fONT P /1 R !C {~J /1 Y