HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-23-1988 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting
® •
LA PORTE PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF
JUNE 23, 1988
Members Present: Doug Latimer, Chairman, Inge Browder, Charlie Boyle,
Janet Graves, Bobby Blackwell, Jack Gresham
Members Absent: Lola Phillips
City Staff Present: Joel Albrecht, Director of Community Development,
Ervin Griffith, Building Official, Nina Bergeron, Secretary, John
Armstrong, Asst. City Attorney, John Joerns, Asst. City Manager
Others Present: Eddie Gray, Janet G. Warlick, J.P. Jackson, Carl
Ferguson, Harold Pfieffer, John Lloyd, Mike Shipp, Councilman, Mike
Cooper, Councilman.
Meeting was called to order by Doug Latimer, Chairman at 7:00 PM
• First item on the agenda was a Public Hearing to consider a rezoning
request, however, Gray Entprises sent a letter (read by Doug Latimer,
Chairman, copy enclosed) requesting the item to be tabled until the
next meeting in order for them to get some additional information for
the P & Z Commission to review. Motion was made by Bobby Blackwell,
(no second required on a motion to table an item), all approved.
At this time the Commission informally discussed the Rezoning request
88-002, Fairmont Park Joint Ventures and J.P. Jackson to rezone a
13.52 acre tract from R-3, (High Density residential) and NC
(Neighborhood Commercial) to GC (General Commercial).
Joel Albrecht was asked to present to the P & Z Commission the Staff's
recommendation on the rezoning request. Briefly the staff commented
that based on currently available information, there does not, at this
time, appear to be sufficient justification to warrant a rezoning of
this property.
Mr. Latimer asked if the staff had based its analysis on the following
two items: (1) is the request in conformance with the intent of the
City's Comprehensive Plan, (2) if the request is not in conformance
with the Comprehensive Plants intent, have there been sufficient
changes in the' circumstances surrounding the tract in question to
warrant a change in the Plan? Mr. Albrecht said that this was
correct.
•
}. i~
MINUTES OF P & Z COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 23, 1988
• PAGE 2
Mr. Latimer stated that the Gray's had been working very hard to
comply with the request from the Staff to supply sufficient
information for the Commission and trying to answer their concerns.
Mr. Latimer said some of the items concerning the Commission were:
"spot zoning", "thrumbprint", strong feeling about keeping Fairmont
Parkway as a parkway and not letting it become like Spencer Highway,
long term planning in the area, the City has lots of general
commercial already.
Mr. Latimer said the Gray's did not want to come before the Commission
with a negative recommendation from the Staff so they are asking for
input from the Staff and Commission as to what they would like to see
or have presented for their review.
At this point Mr. Eddie Gray came before the Commission to relate his
feelings/comments. He said he felt that Mr. Jackson was giving a
service that the people wanted and needed in the area. He said Mr.
Jackson had a waiting list of people that wanted to use his storage
units, this was the reason he wanted to enlarge. Mr. Gray said
instead of just taking a small portion and trying to rezone, maybe the
entire area could be rezoned for future use. Mr. Gray feels that this
area will grow commercially in the future. Mr. Gray said "that the
• main thing he would like to emphasize is that we have a good man, who
we all know, that is doing a good job and developing something that is
needed and wanted by the people. If we can figure out how to
accommodate the Comprehensive Plan so that he can do it, that's what
we are up here trying to ask for your guidance on, how do you want us
to do it?"
Mr. Gray asked for some feedback from the Commission as to what they
would like to see; would they like to see a "land plan" of the area?
One other thought that he wanted to give was with different areas of
commercial; "if a n`ew developer comes into town, he will have a choice
of where he would like to build". He is asking the Commission for
some feedback.
Mr. Latimer said that some of the general thought was that the economy
would dictate what areas were developed. By the same token, further
down Fairmont because somebody can buy residential land down there
should you just step in and zone him a General Commercial tract
because it is less cost than land that is now "GC".
At this point Mr. Latimer ask the Commission if anyone had any
questions or comments. Janet Graves asked Mr. Gray if they have a
overall plan at the present. Mr. Gray said he did not at this time
and didn't know it was needed for the presentation. Since meeting
with Staff and Doug Latimer, he had contacted some developers in
• Houston who have used some land planners and has an appointment with
one on Tuesday of nest week.
r :~
® •
MINUTES OF THE P&Z COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 23, 1988
• PAGE 3
Mr. Gray said if that is what the Commission wants him to do, he is
more than willing to have plans drawn up. Mrs. Graves said she sees
it as a very difficult tract to develop commercially in an attractive
manner and personally she did not care for what was there now. Mrs.
Graves said she did not feel it was landscaped very attractively and
that she had opposed it from the very beginning. Mrs. Graves said
that she felt that before they consider anything they needed to know
that it would be done attractively and that it could not be changed.
Mr. Latimer asked if the Commission felt that Mr. Gray needed to do
something like a "Mini-Plan" for the entire section? Mr. Blackwell
said he" felt like that would be asking to much at this time and it
would also be asking Mr. Gray to falsify a set of plans", and in a
sense that what we would be asking him to do. Mr. Blackwell felt that
on a realistic term Mr. Gray couldn't do this at this time, Mrs.
Graves said that she agreed with that, but there are some things in
general commercial that we would not want up against a residential
zone and once we zone it, then we have lost complete control of it.
Mr. Gray asked Mr. Blackwell if making up a plan of what may happen in
the future was falsifing something? Whether it's done now or five
years in the future it still would have some validity to it. Mr.
• Blackwell said "that plans are like goals, any type of goal is better
than none at all. I don't think you could sit down and do what Janet
is asking at this point. Mr. Gray asked if this type of plan was not
what was done on the Master Plan? Mr. Blackwell said that he hoped
Mr. Gray could tell the difference in that and what the Commission was
asking for here, if not both parties were far apart.
Mr. Gray emphasized that the land is too expensive for them to put
something in that would hurt them or the adjoining land. There is no
incentive for them to pay 2 or 3 times what they could buy land for to
put an equipment storage yard on somewhere else. Mr. Blackwell said
he didn't think you could put this type of storage in a commercial
area anyway, but Mr. Armstrong, Asst. City Attorney, said you could
put outside storage as a conditional use. Ptr. Gray stated that
whether you could or couldn't, they were not going to do it.
Mr. Gray at this point wanted to reply on Mrs. Grave's earlier
comments on what is out there now. He asked her if she could be more
percise about what she didn't like out there now? He wanted to know
if and what they could do to make it better. Mrs. Graves said she
felt it needed more landscaping, more setback, she didn't like to see
signs on public easements. She said she just saw it as a difficult
piece of land to develop commercially in an attractive way.
Mr. Latimer asked that if Mr. Gray presented a general plan for the
• Commission to see, would that be what they wanted. Mrs. Graves said
she guessed that was what she needed to see.
i f
® •
MINUTES OF THE P & Z COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 23, 1988
• PAGE 4
Mr. Latimer said that what they were doing here would set precendence
for future dealings with people and he said he would feel
uncomfortable just taking this one spot to Council after going before
them on two previous occasions for zone changes. He said he felt it
might be better to take it all or none to Council for zone change, he
felt the Commission might start to loose creditabilty with the Council
if they kept going piece by piece.
Mr. Latimer commented at this point that any discussion here tonight
was not necessarily any contract that we are working up. The
Commission will still vote on what they feel and see at a future date.
Mr. Gray said that he appreciated their comments and that they were
not sure as to what to do and were looking for some guideance from the
Commission as to what they wanted.
Mr. Boyle at this. point said he would like for the Commission to look
up and down Underwood and Fairmont Parkway and restudy the entire area
and try to come up with something better (zoning) than what we have
now.
Mr. Latimer asked the Staff what they would be looking for in order to
consider a rezoning request, than someone wanting to build something
• and us wanting something built in the City? Mr. Albrecht stated that
the things that Staff had discussed with Mr. Gray was a proposed
development plan, and getting their ideas as to what they would like
to do with the property. Also Staff would like to look at the entire
area instead of just the one spot.
Mrs. Graves asked that in a plan could certain areas be designated as
only office purpose, retail purposes, etc. Mr. Albrecht said this
would be a more detailed plan than the plan Mr. Gray would submit at
this time. Staff did not feel such a detailed plan was necessary at
this point.
At this time Mr. J. A. Jackson was asked to comment on his long range
plans for the area he is requesting rezoned. Since he has opened the
business it has gone so well and it is now necessary to expand with
long range plan of opening a Phase 3 and at a later date a Phase 4.
He is trying to render a service for the people of La Porte and wants
a place that people can be proud of. Mr. Jackson said he felt his
business had aided in getting other businesses in the area.
Mr. Latimer asked Carl Ferguson if he wished to speak since he had
signed up to speak at the Public Hearing. Mr. Ferguson is the
President of the Home Owners Assoc. of Fairmont Park West. He said
the Association is not interested in General Commercial in this area,
but Neighborhood Commercial could be handled. They felt there are
• more restrictions on the Neighborhood Commercial and would keep out
undesirable businesses.
- 3
•
•
.7
MINUTES OF THE P 8 Z COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 23, 1988
PAGE 5
Next Mike Shipp spoke to the Commission. Mr. Shipp said he had talked
to a few of the adjacent land owners and he said their main question
was "what was going to happen to this piece of land"? He said he felt
a plan was necessary to see how the developer plans to develop the
land.
Mr. Latimer asked the Commission what exactly did they want to see
from someone wanting to rezone a tract of land. Mrs. Graves said a
general layout/plan of what the developer plans to do with the tract
would be something they should be able to look at.
Mrs. Browder asked Joel Albrecht if Mr. Gray presented the Staff with
a more indepth study, was the Staff going to change or reconsider
their recommendation. Mr. Albrecht say they would definitely
reconsider their recommendation, its based on the information
received.
Mr. Latimer asked Mr. Albrecht how the Development Ordinance tied into
this item/request. Mr. Latimer ask if the Commission should be
looking at sites or impact of the entire area. Mr. Albrecht said the
Commission needs to be looking not just at the site, but the impact of
that site to the total area. Mr. Latimer asked Mr. Albrecht if he
felt that a developer could present some reasonable plans as to how it
would make an impact? Mr. Albrecht said he felt sure that they
could. At this point Mr. Latimer asked Joel if or how this tied into
the Development Ordinance. Mr. Albrecht said it did tie into the
Ordinance as the next step would be going into the general
development plan or the site plan for development if the site was
small enough. This would be giving the Commission the general concept
of what is being proposed, they will be able to look at it and see how
it will fit into the overall scheme of things. The Commission would
know from the outset that this is a general concept and not a site
specific concept. Mr. Latimer said at this point that this was the
main thing - this would be a general and not a specific site plan.
The Commission said what they would like to see a general plan of the
site development. This would show , in general, what they plan to
put on the tract.
Next on the agenda was to review the Development Flow Chart. Mr.
Albrecht explained the chart to the Commission and the process the
developer goes through.
•
1 f~.
•
•
MINUTES OF TH.E P & Z COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 23, 1988
PAGE 6
There being no further business a motion was made by Charlie Boyle and
seconded by Bobby Blackwell to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:00
PM.
Resp tfully ubmitted,
N a Bergeron, Secretary
Minutes approved on this ~~ day of 1988.
Doug Latimer, Chairman
L~
ff''''
-
"
Application: '88-002
Type of ReQuest:
Rezoning
Requested Zone Change:
From High Density Residential
Neighborhood Commercial (N.C.)
Commercial (G.C.) (see Exhibit A)
(R-3) and
to General
Requested For:
13.52 Acre tract out of the W.M. Jones Survey,
Abstract-482 (complete legal description
attached, see Exhibit B)
Requested By:
Fairmont Park Joint Venture and J.P. Jackson
Background:
The property in question is a 13.52 acre tract located on West
Fairmont Parkway between Underwood Road and the Reid Elementary
School. The majority of the tract is owned by Fairmont Park Joint
Venture with the remaining 1.7 acres being owned by Mr. J.P. Jackson.
The property is presently split into two separate zoning
classifications, High Density Residential (R-3) and Neighborhood
Commercial (N.C.)(see Exhibit A).
With the initial adoption of Ordinance /11501, the bulk of this
tract was zoned as R-3 (see Exhibit C). The portion of this tract
occupied by J.P.'s Service Center was included in this R-3 tract with
the service center being classed as a pre-existing non-conforming use.
On August 10, 1987 a one hundred sixty-five feet by one hund red
forty feet (165' x 140 t) tract located immed iately north of J. P. t S
Service Center was rezoned, at Mr. Jackson's request, from R-3 to N.C.
(Ord inance /j 150 1 A) and a Spec ial Cond it ional Use Permit issued for
the purpose of allowing Mr. Jackson to develop a boat and recreational
vehicle (R.V.) storage facility (Exhibit A). This created an isolated
N.C. zone completely surrounded on all four sides by R-3 property.
Subsequently, another portion of this tract was rezoned from R-3
to N.C. This rezoning (Ordinance /l1501-D), which was done as part of
the six month zoning review, connected the isolated N.C. zone with the
original N.C. located to the west. The resulting N.C. zone presently
contains approximately 3.2 acres of undeveloped property (see Exhibit
A).
.
'T
-'
Gray/Jackson Rezoning
Page 2
R-3, High Density Residential Zones are the highest density
res ident ial d istr ic ts allowable in the City. The purpose of these
zones as stated in the City's Comprehensive Plan, (Volume 1, Section
1.2.1) is to provide for "Multi-family development ...located on major
thoroughfares and intersections in proximity to principal activity and
amenity areas." These factors; the designation of Fairmont Parkway as
a thoroughfare and the impending widening of Underwood Road, which is
also classed as a thoroughfare; were considered during the process of
developing the Comprehensive Plan and Ordinance 1501.
Further, the Comprehensive Plan urges that "Commerc ial
development be encouraged to concentrate . . . in one of two
...commercial centers located on the east and west sides of La
Porte." Designated commercial centers can be seen illustrated on the
City's current zoning map (see Exhibit D).
The intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to have the area
extending west from Big Island Slough to the College View area and on
the north side of Fairmont Parkway to be developed with a series of
mid and high density residential complexes. The Comprehensive Plan
intends for the mid to high density residential complexes and R-1
zoned areas to be served by the two existing N.C. zones; one located
on both sides Underwood Road at Fairmont Parkway and the the other
located just west of the Canada Street extension to Fairmont Parkway.
Analvsis:
In considering a rezoning request, the Commission is charged to
consider the following questions:
1. Is this request in conformance with the intent of the
City's Comprehensive Plan?
2. If the request is not in conformance with the
Comprehensive Plan's intent, have there been sufficient
changes in the circumstances surround ing the tract in
question to warrant a change in the Plan?
In considering the first question, the City's
clearly indicates the intended use of this area for
residential development (see Exhibit E).
Land
high
Use Map
density
The portion of this tract which is currently zoned as R-3 is
comprised of 9.47 acres. This is adjoined on the east by an
additional 4.55 acre R-3 tract (see Exhibit A), yielding a total of
14.02 acres of R-3 property. If this request is granted, only the 4.5
acre tract will remain as R-3. This represents a 67% reduction of the
R-3 property included in the present zoning configuration of this
property.
..
.
Gray/Jackson Rezoning
Page 3
Given current zoning ordinance requirements regarding
landscaping/screening, parking, street access, and dedicated open
space per dwelling unit; this remaining 4.5 acres will only
accommodate a relatively small residential complex. This is contrary
to the intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
In considering Mr. Jackson's initial rezoning request (#1501-A),
the City Council expressed concern that the integrity of the remaining
R-3 tract be preserved and the rezon ing not be used a sa" stepp ing
stone" to future rezonings that would further reduce the remaining R-3
tract (Minutes of City Council Public Hearing, August 10, 1987,
Exhibit F).
In regards to the second question, a survey of existing
commercially zoned property (Neighborhood Commercial and General
Commercial) located on the north side of Fairmont Parkway between
Underwood and Driftwood Drive contains 24.84 acres. Of this acreage,
19.1 acres is vacant and undeveloped (including 3.2 acres located in
the area under consideration at this time). Granting this request
will increase the amount of vacant and undeveloped commercial property
by 9.47 add it ional ac res, represent ing a 49% increase in vacant,
undeveloped commercially zoned property located on West Fairmont
Parkway.
Additionally, as stated in the background section of this report,
the Comprehensive Plan, considered the proposed widening of Underwood
Road in designating it as a thoroughfare intended to serve high
density residential development in this area. When the widening and
extension of Underwood Road to Red Bluff Road takes place, there
exists the possibility that other major changes could take place in
the area. At such time as major changes or other conditions actually
may come to exist, they could be the basis for considering a change
to the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
Conclusion:
Based on currently available information, there does not, at this
time, appear to be sufficient justification to warrant a rezoning of
this property.
Recommendation:
Deny this rezoning request.
( \\...~,.-" .."
I _'~""
i r ~."
I L,~\\
\\~.\ ~.
\..__J \
01 \: ~
\[_JJ~I \ ·
I ~~~ \/~\ /~ a:: ~.
[~ ~ \ ~
\r-:1 + \ 10
L ~ I . ~
CXI ~ N
\L~J ~
I [~'~l --- - ------ ~
\ r.J : I --------
/[~!l ~
I:: I
~--
_JL_____.~_____._~~..___..._,__......''''.....~__,.._
"
'"
-+-'-
4 :.
c&.'"
'>I
....
o :; . '
eft ~ ;
- CJ) ";- ,
on '" <:. \
N -.,:j \
..., I
.,.
iD
'"
It) ci {f) I
!Ii .0 CI:
N ! It) I I
0
,., cr. )
II'>
0
,1191
------ I !Ii C
~"" \~
-. '::it:
t.
-0,)\
tv) V~
~'"' .
N
.,.
...
en
CXI I
,.,
... Ct: . \
en
.,. \
,.,
...
en
I 0 \
,.,'
t- It)
0 wi ...
lC\ N vi on \
N
I ~ N
..,
III
t-
o
IC'l
<.\I
\
\
~: , \
'- I
{'i.. - r-~.J 0
"I '" en. ~ ,
~ ~ I' 't: v I 0' ...
- ~ IlIl
+ I GO .,J ..).l...
\ ,., -4 :~ ."..
'^
'-'
It)
ui
- ..:!...- -=~~---=--:.-=---=====-==-~=::.-=-=:-:-===~::::-::....."....,.._..,::_":"":.=--=_._,._-
__.____M___ . .-~---...,,-.-~---..~ -.
'"
, I
I..... '"
I I \<.\1 .t
i !' N
j,l
I '
I I
I : 1,1
~ I! ~
~ 1 ~
~ .~
~ ~
ct ~
0- if
~
z
o
~
~
ct
u..
~
<D
N
. ..~~~
"1" '" \
I .
I
I I
: I
'\
I ,-
i\1 ( : '1
~ ~ N I
\ \ \
\
I
\
\
\
\
\
I
\.
\
\
,
\
~
\
\
\
~
z
o
::E
~
~
!Ii
N
\
l
:
..~
..
.,...
-
~
....
"""'C
...
::l
~
\l
&..
"
.~
....
c:
o
v
,,~
~''''
~
I) ~
'\..tJ
(j~
\l
" ~
~~
"
~
'"
.
,
13.52 ACRE TRACT
OUT OF THE
W. M. JONES SURVEY, A-482
HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
RECEIVED
JUN - 6 1988
COOE ENFORCEMENT.
Being a 13.52 acre tract of land located in the W. M. Jones
Survey, A-482, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. The 13.52 acre
tract of land as determined by mathematical calculations and not
surveyed on the ground is more particularly described by metes
and bounds as follows:
Beginning at the Southeast corner of that certain 0.6440
acre tract of land conveyed by Texas Commerce Bank-Pasadena to
J. P. Jackson according to the instrument recorded under Harris
County Clerk's File Number K 465917. The aforementioned
Southeast corner is also the Southeast corner of this 13.52 acre
tract.
Thence, North 0 degrees 06 minutes 10 seconds West; a
distance of 597.98 feet to a point for the Northeast corner of
t,his tract.
Thence, West; coincident with the South boundary line of
Fairmont Parblay Ivest, Section 4, as recorded under Volume 284,
Page 93, of the Harris County Map Records; a distance of 1,020.03
feet tc. a point for the Northwest corner of this 13.52 acre
tract.
Thence, South 0 degrees 51 minutes 00 seconds East;
coincident with the East right-of-way line of Underwood Road; a
distance of 359.29 feet to a point for corner.
Thence, East a distance of 150.00 feet to a point for
corner.
Thence, South 0 degrees 51 minutes 00 seconds East; a
distance of 299.38 feet to a point for the most Southerly
Southwest corner of this 13.52 acre tract.
Thence, in an Easterly direction' coincident with the North
right-of-way line of Fairmont Parkway (250 feet in width);
following a non-tangent curve to the right; said curve having a
radius of 5,854.58 feet, a central angle of 8 degrees 08 minutes
09 seconds with a long cord bearing North 85 degrees 49 minutes
11 seconds East a distance of 830.64; for a total arc distance of
831.34 feet to a point of tangent.
Thence, Nc.rth 89 degrees '53 minutes 16 seconds East;
coincident with the North right-of-way line of Fairmont Parkway;
a distance of 32.90 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
-~~
.1 !,I1ES F, BECK
TEXAS REGISTERED FliBLIC SURVEYOR NO, 2021
DATE: JUNE 6. 1988
c10B NO: 2204-88
E 'It h ih,.t '1)"
/
I
I~
.!
) I III
II .....
~ ::!
.. ~
r.
15 !
~
c .....
.
.
a:! ~ ?!
~ ~';:~ !-! ~
_..;!.1_2_"';::L_~
, ~
\--------!
I---R.:r--5
ij:.i
~.If,
~
.:'.
:I"":' ~-;-
""..I<CIt[$T OIl.
GLDlVIEW 011.
/
CM:ITIIAY Dfl.
V ALLEY V I [II Dfl
/
ICADOlI I'L AU Dfl.
ILlJIVALLEY Dfl.
CM:IT Dfl.
/
CIIUJCV 1[11 Dfl.
U1.
_TSlIIiIUlY
LA.
ow ......
iR-2
1 705 704 703 ~ 701 700
706
R-I
i R-3
2 713 716 :
iR-2 I Ne
! .
------
~
.....
~.
..
I
I
+
'"1'''
L" P'CIIrTI:
---------------
l K /, i h if" G .1
+
I
I
I [. T. J. Ll"IT
--~-------_..._-------
/
L
l~
.J!
-
..
~ .' .- ~\ ~
i ,. ...,.-;. "
" ~ \.-" \ ~... ~ c.
\ ~ :1\\:, \ \ ;. . i~~ Ol L" .~; ::.:
\ + :. ....
...,:.-~c0~
I
\ . ;Q I \
~ I \ \-"'.,
I \-.... /5~ .,\ .!..II
_ ~. f:\ .~ \ \ f~'!
:V'- / j 'Fr t ."c' , .. .1....J....~ ;. --
._,~,~ '" I;) · . \ . ..,~~
\ \ \ \ , \ .....
l'Jf" \ \ ~l,-i~
/ Gl I: i \, . " ,
0 ~ i , , ,
! , , , lr\
~~.~~~ . - - \ \J ; ..
G .' f ,
- , .'I! 3 : i 1M
- "1, ~ ~ ~ ~ l\~\
. ~
; I ! ~~.
0'" . l\~ ".....~
~~ 1'-- I :=c;::< ~
zo ("It.:........ l '1,.::.- -:
..'"
~-I
"'- ~~ " . r' -
z l--_
",0 ,~_ L- \ \ i i It \1 \'-i;
"'c
\ ",lIl .~. LJ~ ~\:::: r--. l'-+'" I, \' Ii \1 -
+ -I
"", .
~~ '" . t ~. ~ \" .. \~ \~ -
"'0 . \ \" t--- ...-~, -
0<1\ um "t \\,-, .
0-1 \ \ \ \ ' \
- Z'" ,,", i'. \ \ \ \ <;
-10 :>
",-I linl.. ,... \ . '1' \ \ \ "
"'.. :'\ \'q\ ~ \ '&~\ "
",lIl ;; ..
;tlil :c ~
) ~ t ? ~
~'g r '"
~~ _~.:\::. ,.:- ~- - :1.-- j
- ,- <-'" ~ =- ~ ~ ~-
-;:- ~..>'- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
-:;... I'1H-1.1 , . . , \
~~ t . , c-'
~ .. >-='?' p. ,
\ .
~ I ~ ~
:x: \ iO ~ , . . . \
\ ... , -
_\; t.\ 9 t
\ . , , . .
I , VI .
~ h' ..., . ;0. . . t
\ \ \ ~ ~. \ " \~
n\ I ~ -<A . . .
\ ~
~ \ - . , , ,
l\. \ "'0 .
\ a t Co 'j \
\J l \ v-~,.'r-. ' , , . .
\ - - I V'L
~ __ ....~-'-c~ · . . . , .
, t \..v '- i7 , \
------ - ' ,,\. ,
--..... --- . .~oIl,.o
\ rtE-1IO' . \A , ~/ . ;,
~. \, ~ "~ . i ,
, \ . .
1\ " L-- ~ ' ~ l' i ..... ;, ~ \ \ .\
. . \ .
\ ............. "/~ . ; \ ~
~
\ ... c----- , \ t ;,
---..... .
~, rJ):'''\ ~l :r. '\ , 'l ,
:' .
\L -
I.-i--: l t ; ~---
'" ~l- .---=---= =-= .. ~ ~ ,..
.. ~ .. =----:; ! ~ ~~ ~u. ,,~n.~
~ -, r:
........ ",,(.II,.ll.e
.-- ~ 1'1~~ 1 i s
il ~ ;
. i ~ ~ ~ .
i l · \ . . y t .. ~ i . . ~\.\. --
\ i , , \ 1..---
!PJ . . l i 1- .
. . t m.
i \ . . \., , \ ; \ s
i ,hI" .
~ ~g i t C ~ :?,p. .....
. ~ i W , i t
i t i ~ . ~ ~
+ ~ ,'1")1 . ~ ~y '; \
i t t '1~ : 1>'-""- -- i"[
~. ",,,' - . , , . .
\..".~,l -- .
.
.. . \ a .J.-- "_ - .,-1.- . . . . -,
...- -:-
i -U,. .;:1.- (.O~c. r 7 "\
<," ~1 ~
\ - . ~- ~ .
~ N~ .." "1C ~\ ~ ,..'l' 'a
-- .li>~ !.,
~ i 4'"''
,,~ ~ V";' " .
~ "",1
\ ~ t r\ . :0
~'" .M t$ . ;U- .n' " \1 \~ N
, '\ ~~ ~ , G)
\ \~f4 ~ \' . , . , (')
:0 \ . ,.,.,
. F:,
\ \ ~r;1i C? · . \ .'
rf1. \ , ~ '\~ L:- I ,
; l ~ / )
'\ -1 \ \-;\.~ \ .~ . . I ..o.t,.....'. " r ~ , \.
r( ~~~~. ./ ~ ?
=~~i , ,~I.Ji"",y, '. ~ fO , l
,,1\'" \ ~
, ' ? ' 'r \
....', .
~
.
~
....
l'
::s-
-.
~
.....
"""\-
~
..
.
,/"
/
/
.. .
: : i.::;;:;;;::mn:::::::;;;;:;;;;::1
.-....................................
. ~ ==::~:::E::::::H::::::::::::::::::
: :::.:::: :::: I
i~!iiiiijjjj
............. .
......... .....
./............
. .......... ,.
. ......... ..,
I::::::::: :::::
. -0' ...... ....
o. .......... " '
'0 ...... '" '0' '
... ..0.. ......
. ..........0 ,.
........ .......
I ~
~
l________~
1 ~
\---------~
"
PARKCR"EST 0.
GUHVIEW OR.
CM!lT\lAT DfO
VALLET '1'1[\1
M;AOO\l !"LAC(
iLVlVALL[T Of
/!f;AOO\l CM:!l T
LEGEND
CM:EI(Vl[\1 I
-
PUBLIC USES
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES
MID TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL USES
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL USES
INDUSTRIAL USES
-
0- 0,..,..,1....1\
LA
---------
,.
~
~
~
.. .
..
:It
C
L
..
.-.-
--------------- I
I
Exhibit- 1'[."
II = A,.e~ fo be. Gons/dr.re.d
I. . I'or re?.on1f')J
+ +
I ..u IS"",
I ______....___________~
--_-J-__
~ ~
~
CITY OF LA PORTE
LAND USE PLAN
.
,
EXCERPTED TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING
OF LA PORTE CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 10, 1987
Counciloerson Lloyd: I guess I would like to address that same
question to Mr. Paul issen. Boat storage, my understand ing, is not
covered in any of the classifications. At least this is my reading
from way back when. Where does it best fit? Would it best fit in a
neighborhood commercial with conditions or do you put that in
industrial or where?
David Paulissen, Building Official: Okay, at this point I feel like
Staff can support the neighborhood commercial with conditional use in
the use tables. Aga in keep ing in mind what the cond it ional use is
designed to do is to .... Again a conditional use permit impacts a
zone more substantially than just a permitted use unless you and the
Planning and Zoning Commission review each of those uses before it
goes in. I think that you have a good boat storage facility and then
you have the norm and I think what we're interested in is getting a
good boat storage facility and I think Staff can support neighborhood
commercial with a conditional use in the use table which would require
fencing or screening. It would also require that the parking lot be
surfaced to control dust and all light sources are hooded from the
surrounding neighborhood and that sort of thing. Again, based on what
Planning and Zoning had to go on and the fact at the time, Staff had
to concur with Planning and Zoning at the time. The developer has
done a considerable amount of homework and at this point the facts
that were presented tonight were not presented to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. In 1 ight of that, we can support Neighborhood
Commercial with a Conditional Use.
Councilperson Lloyd: David, I probably ought to say I shouldn't put
you on the spot, but I enjoyed it.
Counc ilperson Matuszak: I have one further quest ion to Mr. Gray or
Janet, one of them. Which is a concern on my part. Will the removal
of this particular tract make the R-3 of the remaining part of that
tract any less useable or workable?
Eddie Gray: We considered that. I think there is enough depth on the
north side of this tract on up to the north boundary so that the R-3
use starting down at Fairmont Park with a nice entrance, off of that,
could come up and wrap around this without distracting from the use of
the R-3. It's still separated from all the rest of the property by an
R-3 area. I don't know that this boat storage should affect the R-1
area just north of the R-3.
Councilperson Matuszak: So in effect this wouldn't be, this
particular rezoning wouldn't be used as a stepping stone to the next
one, so to speak, for further rezoning of this R-3 property as it gets
smaller. I think you've answered my question.
txh,'hi t IIF"
.
.
Transcript 8/10/87 pg. 2
Co_unc ilperson Porter: I have one quest ion about, we I re referr ing to
boat storage, is it not going to be ava ilable for RV storage or is
that intended or are we excluding something?
David Paulissen, Building .9..Lficial: At this point, I think what the
ordinance says is watercraft and other recreational vehicles.
CouncilperSOll__E..9.1"ter: Mayor, I would like to have the motion
re-stated. Are we, was the motion made for GC or NC?
CQ~ncjJ~erson Ske~ton: NC with conditional.
k~ty-A~tQrlL~ Askins: Vote on amendment first.
Mayor MaIQn~: Amendment changing to Neighborhood Commercial. All in
favor, no opposed.
~QJJ.n..G_i.l.psu:son MatJ.L~~gk: Neighborhood Commercial with the Conditional
Use Permit. Is that the proper way that should read.
Mayqr Malone: Called for adoption of the ordinance as amended.
Motion by Councilperson Porter and seconded by Councilperson Lloyd
All in favor, no opposed.
Exhibif IIF"
....
~ IlfN
.d I'I.OIlT I
T': I 0:
I
u ~ 1-=1..t1
i i' s ~
I ~~
0 'OIl oc IIlIWllfl ~
g
. , N I I
. " r0-
o r0- il
r0- t
- - ---;- - C-
-
-
~I'f
1 i\
\ ~
I \ ~ I
f-' , , I
\ \ \ I
, I I I
-. -----a I
.1 I 00...1.33'",
z, u;J I I
l!ll ~I ",I .;1
~I 3' ~II ~I
3/ ~I ~ ...,
-- ~l. ~I &1 i,
I, -..1 ,
~ :::-- l.. ..J
==::!? ~ ----
-
-
~I II ~
i'to\ f il 8
i ~aOl03
.. .
~ ! ~
I"r---... ~ i
~ .
+ ~ ~ .......
t t ~ ~
! ~ ~ i
z ~ ~ ~
~ g i
~
---- ~~
>g )G ,..., ~ ----
~~ ~
I Ii oJ " \ J-:o
I II::! ~:18, '!
i
c
...
--- '...1 l g
/' ,'oll1l7
IIO!"',~
~ II U~
.-Jl~ ~
1 !
~ ~
'4
-6
~ . N37
~ . ! ''''~a311
~ ,'~ L
~ NOdflOJ.]
-'-1"'" ~
''''''''NO.I..I.~
""'- .
'. -"'.1. ]
...............
--aOo.tilll-"it
100....
~
.
~..........x
.(Mo~J~ . ~
~
~;~
~~a
...
-'
!
:0
~ !
>
"
... I
w
u :
-
4L ~/f
~ 1""(1
-
\ ~~-""""I~
t 4 ".....~,........-I
-- - ~ - ......-,~~ ~
~~ ~>-:l J l~
a ~ ; ;w~ y ~
1 ~ ~ III u ;
c~
.. -ilia.
~ ~ \ Y :J if #. Z""
- ~ · ~ i
"- V-- '" i .. 50 J
'1 -....r;;. ~
)
~
~ t
~ ~
!i
15i
~%
I ~i
/' <1;.'
i
~.' ~
J. ~
I II
.._-..
i
-'
:0
o
~ I ~I I
~l -
~
" .
I
"
~ ...
II ~
o
....
"'"
.-
t~
/,J
..
i
-<--
~
..
L>
l!!
~
c
-'
i
~
,
.
, 'I
0::
>- ~ '-
002_,_
--c-<t
w-'
1-lA,. ~~,
<to
2>-
t!)<1:
(1)0
~~
(l)LO
<1:w
1-:1:
21-
0::2
1-0
~O
Ow
..J(I)
<t(l)
~~ +
(1)(\1
::)'It
000
~w
1-0
0::2
0<1:
a.~
>-0
<to::
000
----
----
----
~
~~
"'-
. is
,
\J
,
...
"
t t
.0 l
, 0
~ \J
...
01 '\!
,
~ "
c "-
~.c
'\- ~ ,
...
:) '"
J ~,
11 \) I)
~ .$ct
" II
"'---
i'-..
1
..
----
,r-
41
~'I
I ·
I
i ; I
-'
I
I :
I
I
I
j\J
I
r-
~
"
-\--..
.,
..q
. ......
~
~
I
~ I
.. I
.
,
Application: 188-010
Type of Request:
Special Conditional Use Permit
Requested For:
.5303 Acre tract of W.M. Jones Survey Abstract-482
(complete meet and bounds description attached, see
Exhibit A). Located at 9900 Block W. Fairmont
Parkway (see Exhibit B).
Requested By:
J.P. Jackson
Zoning:
R-3, High Density Residential
Background:
This request is being filed in
fI88-002. The tract in question is
existing boat/RV storage facility.
this tract.
conjunction with rezoning request
located adjacent to Mr. Jackson's
He is proposing the same use for
City Council, during their public hearing and regular meeting,
determined boat/RV storage to be an acceptable Neighborhood Commercial
(N.C.)/General Commercial (G.C.) conditional use.
Analysis and Conclusion:
As noted above, this request has been filed in conjunction with a
rezoning request. The requested rezoning, which has been applied for
Fairmont Park Joint Venture and J.P. Jackson, is requesting a zone
change to General Commercial for this tract and surrounding property.
The suitability of Mr. Jackson's .53 acre tract for a special
conditional use permit is contingent on the requested rezoning being
granted.
Sta ff ha s recommended aga inst grant ing thi s re zon ing request.
See analysis section of staff's rezoning report regarding rezoning
request 1/88-002.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends Planning and Zoning Commission's denial of this
request.
\ r-"ir.,.-'
, \.... ~~\,
\ \~ & j \
f~~ \. t
\L-JeE} \. I Ie) .
I 6-' \ //"'\ / ------ C!: \f)
~J +/ \ ~
\1= U):::; \ ~
L ~ I' ~ N
l~J ~
\ C::;,l:l' -- - .....-- ~
\ r.J <II I r. -----...
I en I
I[,L-~l ~.
I ~ I
~--
, ~
,., .; ~
ui '"0 ~
N ~ ,.,
0
,., a:
on
ci
(\I ,S91
I 0
<II
I en
L' \
---.. ui
I N
.... ...
rn 'I
N
.,.
,..
en
<II I
,.,
,.. ~..
en
.
,.,
,..
el>
I 0
,.,
,.. ,.,
#I to ui
~ N N /fJ
I ...
...
l'-
III
.,.
ii)
'"
~~~I "
.~~, ~
+ I
\
-
_.-
,
" \
.", ,
45 :;; l..'
~ \. lU
_ (I) v-+---,
on "" ~ \
N -":0 \
~ I
I-
I
I
}
\i \ ~
1\ :
Q)\
/z\ \
\ :
\ \ \
,..
~ ~ \ - \
\
\ \ \ ~
\ \ ' \ j
: \ \ :
).~j \~. ~
N
'--5~/~ ~,\...
~' ,\ \ r !\\ - \ \
"
"
+-..
4 ~
~:I'I
..
~t.
tn ",.:,.l;
~ ~ 'f)
'^
,.,
ui
---=-=--~.=- - .- -~----==-...==::::-:::::.=::--=-_-:-~~:-~~~
t:O
-----.---:---:. _..~ -~-'.~ .--.------ -~,:_---_..-,.-
Ie ,
i I
\ ! I
I
I
I
\ :
,......1 I ~
i l\i' I ~
\ I
1'\
\\1
~ \1
1
>-
<l:
3
~
a::
<l:
c..
r
z
o
::E
a::
<l:
u..
i
- r--.::L,) 45
, \I''''
- ~ CI>
oJ""
.-:. .,.
u
i I
: I
, \
\1 ,~
;1 ( "'1
\I~ ~ : I
\ \ \
~ 1\ 1
. ~ : \
~
\
\
\
j \
I
\.
\
~ .'
\
r
z
o
::E
a::
it
,..
::i
.....
~ ~
\l I::
... ,~
~ ..
.\l ~
~"b
c: c:
o <;)
V\)
"-
-Q .~\.
() '..
'\. ~~
d .}~
\l q;:
\"\1
~~~
11
"'.._~_'''"'''_'.....~,~'=~_,_'~_M~.....,._">~.4_'._'.._>_'__'_'~.,~~_._~~_......_'_''''''''_
!
\
l
ui
'"
.
.
0.5303 ACRE TRACT
OUT OF THE
W. M. JONES SURVEY, A-482
HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
RECEIVED
JUN - 6 1988
CODE ENFORCEMENI
Being a 0.5303 acre (23,100 square feet) tract of land
located in the W. M. Jones Survey, A-482; said tract being based
on mathematical calculations and not surveyed on the ground is
more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of that certain 0.6440
acre tract of land conveyed by Texas Commerce Bank-Pasadena to
J. P. Jackson according to the instrument recorded under Harris
County Clerk's File Number K 465917.
Thence, West; coincident with the centerline of a proposed
10.00 feet wide drainage easement; a distance of 140.00 feet to a
point for the Southwest corner of this 0.5303 acre tract.
Thence, ~orth 0 degrees 06 minutes 10 seconds West; a
distance of 165.00 feet to a point for the Northwest corner.
Thence, East a distance of 140.00 feet to a point for the
Northeast corner of this tract.
Thence, South 0 degrees 06 minutes 10 seconds East;
coincident with the West boundary line of a called 0.5303 acre
tract conveyed to J. P. Jackson in 1987; a distance of 165.00
feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
~C~
TEXAS REGISTERED PUBLIC SURVEYOR NO. 2021
DATE: JUNE 6, 1988
~TOB NO: 2205-88
.j
E)( h ; bit "/3"