HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-17-1988 Regular Meeting
MINUTES OF
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
NOVEMBER 17, 1988
Members Present: Janet Graves, Chairperson, Lola Phillips, Inge
Browder, Charlie Boyle, Eugene Edmonds, (Bobby
Blackwell came, but did not stay since there was a
quorum).
Member Absent.: Jack Gresham
City Staff Present: John Joerns, Assistant City Manager, Joel
Albrecht, Director of Community Development, Mark
Lewis, Code Enforcement, Nina Browning, Community
Development/Engineering Secretary, John Armstrong,
Assistant City Attorney.
Others Present: Henry Ramirez, PPG Plant Manager.
Chairperson Janet Graves called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM
2) There was a motion by Inge Browder and a second by Lola Phillips
to approve the minutes of the special called meeting of August 30,
• 1988. Vote was unanimous.
3) Discuss Planning ~ Zoning issues related to P.P.G. Industries
tract.
John Joerns began the discussion by updating the P & Z Commission
with some previous history on the road, right-of-way, etc. since
the Comprehensive Plan completed in 1984 and the zoning portion
completed approximately 2 years ago.
John Joerns stated
Tom Bass agreed on
Bay Area Blvd. Thi
the owners at that
PPG. There was an
is on file and is
roadway.
in 1974 the City of La Porte and
a concept for the connection of
Bay Area Blvd. right-of-way was
time of this large tract of land
actual dedication of a 150' righ
dedicated to the public for the
Commissioner
Sens Road to
dedicated by
now owned by
t-of-way that
purpose of a
In 1979 Harris County proposed a bond issue for the development of
many roads throughout the County as they do ever so many years.
One of the road projects that was invisioned by that bond issue
was the Bay Area Blvd. project.: The bond issue passed in 1979 and
there was a certain amount of this money ear-marked for the
development of Bay Area Blvd. During the planning stages the
Harris County Engineering reviews each projectwith Harris County
• Flood Control.
Minutes of 11/17/88 Meeting
Page 2
s
Out of these planning efforts came the request from Harris County
Flood Control to plan for the drainage of about 300 acres that was
land-locked north of Spencer Hwy, through the Bay Area Blvd.
project by putting a channel down the middle of the road similar
to the channel by the Bay Area Park. This would require an
additional 50 foot right-of-way for a total right-of-way width of
200 feet and 150 foot drainage area.
During the years that followed Harris County Flood Control and PPG
worked on an agreement for the additional 50 foot right-of-way and
the 150 foot drainage without the assistant of the City of La
Porte. This summer (1988) the City of La Porte got involved again
because we had needs relating to the LPAWA and it looked like a
good route to deliver water to our storage facilities and water
plant. We opened discussion again with PPG, which resulted in
the letter of July 1, 1988 that is in the packet. Our current
status on Bay Area Blvd. right-of-way is that the description and
design are complete. Still to be dealt with is the funding
deficit, if we build the road as invisioned (4 lanes and separate
with the appropriate drainage), the additional requirement of the
50 foot road right-of-way and the 150 foot east/west drainage
right-of-way.
• Joel Albrecht briefly went over with the Commission the things
which had taken place in past meeting with PPG, starting in 1986
when the Planning & Zoning Commission got involved in the various
meetings concerning the land use plan and eventually the zoning
map.
~,~gust 1~{, 1986 meeting: The staff proposed the area of PPG
Commercial and Business Industrial all the way to Fairmont. Where
Magna Flow is, staff recommended Business Industrial. On 146 and
the southside of Fairmont by the railroad track is all Planned
Unit Development except for the Commercial where Fairport Green
Shopping Center is built. (Exhibit F in packet)
~u~ust 21, 1986 meeting: Zoning Ordinance precludes any plant,
such as PPG, being built in La Porte because it is an organic
chemical plant. Their area is not zoned, but will be put on a
land use plan. Between Bay Area Blvd, and PPG, is zoned Light
Industrial on the land use plan. The area on the west side is an
R-3 area, staff is going to propose this area as Light Industrial
on the east side of Bay Area Blvd. and R-2 and R-3 on the west
side. (Exhibit G in packet)
Minutes of 11/17/88 meeting
Page 3
•
•
September ~~. 1986 meeting. Ron Evans and Harold Neely of PPG felt
their plant could not be expanded because of the designation of
the land use map. This is because the S.I.C. code prohibits use
No. 286, organic chemical manufacturing. Mr. Neely of PPG said
that he could not recommend to his management that the land be
sold off as Light Industrial. It was suggested by one of the
Commissioners that it be zoned Business Industrial. (Exhibit H in
packet)
Next to address the Commission was Mr. Henry Ramirez, Plant
Manager of PPG in La Porte. Mr. Ramirez told the Commissioners
that he was not here to ask for a decision tonight, but as an
information exchange. He informed the Commission of what the
plant did and what their plans were for the future.
He related to the Commission that PPG Industries is willing to
provide the additional 50 foot right-of-way, which is required for
the Bay Area extension, at no cost. PPG Industries does ask for
some considerations of some other things which would help their
long-range business plans, that is the' main reason for him
speaking to the Commission tonight. (Exhibit A - July 1, 1988
letter)
• Mr. Ramirez said he would like to request, and he would go
through the proper channels for an agenda item, to simply
discuss with the Commission again for information purposes only at
another meeting.
~4) BayHUD Annexation
There was a general discussion of the BuyMUD annexation and what
would be required of the P & Z Commission. The Commissioners were
given a copy of Vernon's Government Codes, Section 211.006,
"Procedures Governing Adoption of Zoning Regulations and District
Boundaries". The guidelines outline the steps to be taken and the
public hearing, etc. All of this will be completed by July 1,
1989.
5) 1988 Texas Chapter APA Conference
Everyone that attended got something out of the conference and
said it was worth the time. Chairperson Janet Graves,
complimented Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong and the City
staff on the support they give the Commission and said after the
conference she realized what a help they were and that many P & Z
Commission do not have the support they receive.
L~
... _)
~ s
Minutes of 11/17/88 meeting
Page 4
•
6) Resumption of work on sign regulations
Joel Albrecht told the Commission it was time once again to resume
work on the sign ordinance. Joel handed out a schedule for
getting this ordinance done.
7) A motion was made by Charlie Boyle and seconded by Inge Browder to
adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 8:55 PM.
Next meeting scheduled for December 15, 19$8.
Respectfully submitted,
Nina Browning, Secret ry
Community Development/Engineering
Minutes approved on the ~~~ day of ~-~ , 1988.
•
Jan s Graves, Chairperson
Pla~.ning & Zoning Commission
/nb
11-18-88
•
ITEM THREE: P.P.G. INDUSTRIES DISCUSSION
EXHIBIT A:
EXHIBIT B:
EXHIBIT C:
EXHIBIT D:
EXHIBIT E:
EXHIBIT F:
EXHIBIT G:
EXHIBIT H:
EXHIBIT I:
EXHIBIT J:
EXHIBITS: P.P.G. INDUSTRIES DISCUSSION
July 1, 1988 letter from P.P.G. Industries to City
Manager
November 10, 1988 letter from Director of Community
Development to Mr. E. G. Ramirez, P.P.G. Plant Manager
Zoning Map excerpt, P.P.G. tract
Land Use Map excerpt, P.P.G. tract
Excerpt from the August 14, 1984 steering committee
report to City Council regarding the Comprehensive Plan
Minutes of the August 14, 1986 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting
Minutes of the August 21, 1986 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting
Minutes of the September 4, 1986 Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting
September 18, 1986 letter (with map attachment) from
P. P. G. Industr ies to Doug Latimer, Plann ing and Zon ing
Commission Chairman
Excerpt from the November 13, 1986 Plann ing and Zon ing
Commission preliminary report to City Council regarding
Ordinance 1501 Zoning Map
RECEIVEf-l-Yl Ll __ ~ 0 ~
'1,.. /q - .1'-10 D u r
00MM.DEV. ~
j")I'...._'U-. ,'.'", \""" .. "'"
". .! "', , ~., . '.' I: ,':i' "-., . :, ' '.~
;: .11 """~ ! 1..1 -. J....--. ~'f J ~,l~ , .,0 i .'
" '.' I';. '.. ,...,.:;;;1 ~,. d ; ~ i ~ill"
:. ;\~~., ;:..:' .-.... " (--l:,;,! U .
\j. v' ,\"
'.., '"! 1088
_ .~;._ i :..,
PPG Industries, Inc. P.O. Box 995 LaPorte, Texas 77571-0995
ASST. CITY M..:\,Nf.\GER
OFFiCE
(713) 471-0943
LaPorte Plant
Fine Chemicals
J u 1 y 1, 1988
Mr. Robert T. Herrera, City Manager
City of La Porte
P. O. Box 1115
La Porte, TX 77571
Dear Mr. Herrera:
This is in response to your request that PPG Industries provide the
City of La Porte with the additional right-of-way required for the Bay
Area Boulevard Extension, an additional 150-foot East/West drainage
easement, and a 10-foot wide utility easement adjacent to the Bay Area
Boulevard Extension right-of-way.
"
PPG Industries is pleased to participate in the continued development
of our community by agreeing to provide the additional right-of-way and
the necessary easements mentioned above, without charge, to the City of
La Porte. This willingness is subject to the following mutually
acceptable terms and conditions.
PPG Industries sees itself as a long-term member of the La Porte
community and as such continues to explore possible additional
investments at the La Porte location. In order to enhance La Porte
as the location for future PPG Industries capital investments, we
request that the City of La Porte agree to the following:
1. A vehicle crossing be provide across the east-west drainage
ditch in the area where PPG Industries' property has Fairmont
:c~-J?arkway frontage.
2. A fence of the same type which presently exists around PPG
Industries' property be built on both sides of Bay Area
Boulevard Extension before any construction starts.
3. That portion of PPG Industries property bounded by Bay Area
Boulevard Extension on the west, Spencer Highway on the north,
and Fairmo~t Parkway on the south and approximately 300-foot
wide be zoned Business Industrial. The remainder of PPG
Industries property bounded by Sixteenth ,Street on the east be
zoned Heavy Industrial.
4. PPG Industries property zoned Heavy Industrial be redefined to
include SIC,Use No. 286 (Organic Chemicals).
.'
FXHIB1T A
Mr. Robert T. Herrera-
July 1. 1988
Page 2 of 2
We believe the above requests are of mutual benefit to the City of La
Porte and PPG Industries. Upon agreement, our respective Legal
Departments can prepare the necessary legal documents.
We look forward to a successful completion of this project and a
continued strong working relationship.
Yours truly, ~
#~"/ ~
E. G. "Henry" Rami re:)
Plant Manager
cc:
A. G. Baker - 34W
John Joerns,' Ass i stant Ci ty Manager /
----~-~'-
.'
EXHIBIT A
CITY OF LA PORTE
PHONE (713) 471.5020 . P. O. Box 1115 · LA PORTE. TEXAS 77571
November 10, 1988
Mr. E. G. "Henry" Ramirez, Plant Manager
PPG Industries, Inc.
P. O. Box 995
La Porte, Texas 77572-0995
Dear Mr. Ramirez,
The City appreciates PPG Industries willingness to provide the
necessary road and drainage right-of-way for the extension of the Bay
Area Blvd. through the PPG Industries property.
Your letter discusses several issues that involves future planning and
zoning decisions which would be appropriate to discuss with the
Planning & Zoning Commission prior to a formal application on these
items. The La Porte Planning & Zoning Commission has a meeting
scheduled for November 17, 1988. The issues addressed in your letter
of July 1, 1988 will be placed on the agenda as a discuss ion i tern.
Based on information exchanged and discussions at that meeting you may
then deem it appropriate to proceed with a formal rezoning
applicat ion. The Planning & Zoning Commiss ion could then hold the
required Public Hearj.ng and make a recommendation to City Council for
the possible rezoning of properties owned by PPG Industries.
I will send you a copy of the agenda prior to the November 17, 1988
meeting and will also call your office to make sure that you or a
representative of your firm will be able to attend the Planning &
Zoning Commission meeting to discuss the issues. Thank you for your
concern in the quality development of our community. I am looking
forward to working with you on the development of the PPG property.
r::XH\BlT H
E..,c. "Henryll Ramirez - PPG Industries
~ November 8, 1988
Page 2
If you would like to meet Hith me prior to the Planning & Zoning
Commission meeting please give me a call.
Sincerely,
~J1~
oel H. Albrecht
irector of Community Development
JHA/neb
xc: Robert T. Herrera, City Manager
John Joerns, Assistant City Manager
EXHlBlT tl
..c.c
Nen
-f
~~
enl>
(J)r
!TIO
0-
0(1)
2~
-fO
:J:-f
!TI)>
en(/)
:i!0
!TI
0(1)
l>-
-<Q
02
"T1~
c:..!TI
l>--D-
2m
c:-<
l>
;0
-<
..
(i)
.....
o
_0
"
"" """
~.f.
"1\0-,, d
"'. - 111
." "y' "." \ ( ) .~
\0
.
~ :;;;
0
~ :;;; <;i
.. <A
j ~ ~
:;; t
'"
. (i)
:;; :;;; (')
'" '"
:! ~
.J r
~
~
~IL%
,~
'IH:LIiIE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:;;
o
iii
...
8i
:.--1
..... m
0;
'"
~
!
~
--
f-tD
o
..
p
'"
..
~
'"
..
~
..
...
...
..
~
..
...
Of
, III I
I
Ii IE n ,~
!...:
r--~ ~__
--
Jio,-fh
-
- I
(i)
(')
~
:I:
-
.
Of
.,
<A
z ~ I
..
:< -(
- I
s l:r
~ ..
'"
..
r
-
~
.
u n I
::0
(~
i li \
I~ ~
~l ,i\
.~
AIR~ BLVD.
-~
,.
....
::0
Ll
o
::0
~
---- I
-
\---
- - -'--- - _.-
\J
C
C
~v. Il:V~ Xn.-.......
1.0 .e. -- - -f -.; ::::!lION
~~....../ "
--~ ......
-- ~ "-
- ~
'-
'-~-
l!
... ....
- fo7O
~...
I~J:.
-
(1
....
'"
c
)
~
...
....
.... ... - I
':\'" ... "'-,
~ ~ d1 Ii :. l.
....
....
!
I s:
>>:
...
Of
...
'"
...
...
III
2!
'"
o
&
t
:;
~
:..
&
...
...
...
'"
I:
...
N
!! ..TH ~T. ...
(KIftJ '0.
~ ...
:!
~ ...
.... ./
N
....
'"
II ST....
....
'"
'"
~
...
~
.
~:
...~ I ~
..
.~
I r r-
{~~ oj --
I
11TH ST.
..
~ ~
~~
Of ..::/ '- ~ ...
~ ::: ~ I
~
I-
...
'"
...
&
~
~
i
1
t T ~ -~ ~-+- ~
..
8l
Of
...
...
Ii
i
...
g
Of
z:
! ~ ~ ~ .'irH S .
~ ~CJ ~ ~ ~
~~ff ~
EXHlB\1' C -
-==:: ;:;
~ U-~(lr~
a
..
'"
:l: a-o ST.
... ...
~ JI
'" ..
... ....
... '"
....
(;
... ...
~ at
~A ~
....
(i
u~~
e~
~
~LL ."
\
J
]
)
ill I
,
I
Ii
Ig
n Ii
I
I~
I
I~
'-
m U>
~ -t
N :u
-
l>
-0 r
l>
U> 0
U>
('T1 U>
0 -t
:u
0 -
(')
Z -i
-i l>
:I:
('T1 U>
OlO
--i--rn-
:I: U>
-
0 G)
l> Z
-< l>
-i
0 IT1
"'TJ 0
c.. m
l>
Z -<
W
....,
0
0
----
-1Jlol'th
T
r
,.
-c
"1l a
,. ~
r ~
T 8lVD.
I
I
I
~........................
'0. ........ '0' .... _0..0..
0..... ...... .... .0.. .....
.0......... ....... .......
. ........ .......... ......
.-~~ H~ ~~.~
. .::::::..................
I ::::::::
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
" .0""
~~"
ll.-l.1, I
...
~
.,
. .
. .
. .
.
.
. .
. . .
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
~,
. .
. . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . ...
EXf-IB1T D
.
. .
I l:::::::::t::::~ r....
---,-_.._-_._~----........
the following three areas as being overly dense: Barbours Cut Blvd.
as a proposed R2 neighborhood, R3 west of Highway 146, and R3 in
existing Rl neighborhoods. Individual areas of concern included
housing east of Bay Area extension, dense housing along the bay
front, and the overall increase of high density housing throughout
the City.
The committee recognised the importance for the provision
of housing to all citizens, and the econolnic facts undergirding the
observed trend to smaller lots and dwelling sizes. It was stated at
the same time, though, that La Porte should not try to be everything
to everyor.e, and that one should look to our neighboring cities'
supply of very high and very low density housing before committing
to such housing here.
Land Use
Land use assignments of the
Plan (shown in Exhibits 4
and public/open spaces were
Specific comments are given
through
generally
below.
6) for industrial, co~nercial,
supported by the committee.
Placement of industrial land as shown in Exhibit 4 was
generally felt to be proper. This land links industrial land to the
north and south of La Porte, and brackets major transportation
corridors. The major industrial installations bring jobs and tax
revenue to the .City,
and have proven to be good neighbors to the
- 7 -
EXHIBIT E
~._.._-_._-~----~~~-~.,_.~,~->---....
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1\
1\
II
II
Ii
1\
City.
It was felt by several of the committee that the industrial
land use area should be extended south along the 16th street/SP
track corridor (as this area is in the La Porte ETJ) to the City
limits. It was also stated by committee members that buffering of
residential areas from the industrial sites was imperative, and that
some areas such as east of Bay Area extension should be reexamined
as to land use. Additionally, it was stated that zoning requirements
concerning landscapping, open storage of materials, fencing, set
back, and parking should be addressed in the new ordinance to
beautify industrial areas.
Commercial land use designation in Exhibit 5 was generally
supported. Most of the committee felt that Fairmont Parkway should
be more con~ercial, especially around Underwood Road. Extensive
co~nercial tracts, as appears on West Main/Spencer, should have
green space incorporated to keep this area attractive. The comment
was made that the south side of West Main, west of Underwood, should
also be zoned cOIlwercial. Another comment on commercial space given
by committee members was the overabundance of commercial designation
in East La Porte and the Lomax area on Underwood (are these areas
reasonable?).
The public use and open space map (Exhibit 6) was felt to
be desirable, but expensive, by committee members. Portions of the
open space plan could be incorporated, with trails for walking/
- 8 -
EXHIBIT E
PLEASE REFER TO MAP EXHIBITS CONTAINED IN VOLUME ONE
OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
I
I
(
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f-
I
MINUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING FOR AUGUST 14, 1986
1.
Aft era 11 owing time for c it i zens and the Commi ss ion to
look over the zoning maps, Chairman Doug Latimer called
to the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
Those members of the Commission present: Chairman Doug
Latimer, Karl Johnston, Charlie D. Boyle, Lola Phillips,
Janet Graves and Bobby Blackwell
Members of the Citv Present: Chief Building
Official/Zoning Administrator David Paulissen, Secretary
to the City Manager Gwen Vann, Asst. City Attorney John
Ar'ms t rong
Citizens
Decker
1'1 a h r 1 i c h
Osborne,
Don Ford
and Others Present: Mrs. Adair Sullivan,
McKim of Decker McKim Realtors, Janet Gray
of Gray Enterprises, Attorney and Hrs. Bill
Gus Farris, Fred Westergren, Mr. Lewis, and Mr.
2. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON JULY
31, 1986.
Motion was made bv Chairman Doug Latimer to accept the
minutes, Bobby Blackwell seconded the motion and it
pas sed ,I i t h n 0 00 p 0 sit ion .
At this point on the agenda, Chairman Doug Latimer requested
that we interchange item 3 and 4 on the agenda. A motion was
made by Bobby Blackwell and Seconded by Karl Johnston to move
forward with Item 4 first.
3. CONSIDER REQUEST TO REZONE 12.203 ACRES IN RICHARD
PEARSALL 1/3 LEAGUE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO INDUSTRIAL FOR
FRED WESTERGREN, JR.
Chairman Latimer explained that there was a letter from
Ticor Title Insurance Company confirming that they have
a pending transaction in their office by and between
Allied Bank Gulf Freeway, as seller and Fred E.
Westergren, Jr., Trustee, as buyer on the real property
as referenced above and the same being fully described
on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof
for all purposes. All closing documents are in escrow
andd closing is scheduled for 10 a .m. on Friday, August
15, 1986.
EXHIBIT F
I'
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
MINUTES OF TH~
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 2
Fred ~vestergren came forth and sho'.-led the Commission
where the tract of -land was located between BFI and Pipe
and Valve, about 1,050 linear ft. of land on Fairmont
Parkway. It was originally annexed by La Porte and
automatically became Residential property and we feel it
is..lndustrial-.-.-Pr-Operty.--ho\-lever on this map you are
calling it Business Industrial which I \-lholeheartedly
agree with and prefer that classification to Industrial
but under. the circumstances we're under the old zoning
ordinance so I'm asking that you zone it Industrial.
Charlie Doug Boyle: Let me ask you a question, Is it zoned
industrial out by Exxon Pipeline & SFI?
Doug Latimer: No.
Boyle:
When was it changed?
Doug Latimer: It never was zoned industrial. When it came
in to the Ci t Y J i t r e c e i v e d ate m p 0 r a r y R - 1
classification as required by the ordinance.
David Paulissen:
That's \-lhere Exxon Pipeline and BFI and
sOr.Je other industries are and it I S been
out of the city limits and in our "in
lieu of" district and I forget what the
dates are, Charlie, but it has been
recently anne~ed with all the light
industrial, industrial development there,
again we're stuck with that old ordinance
and that requires us to come in as R-l.
I
Latimer: The board has asked people not to rezone things
unless they had plans to do some building and he
does have a client who wants to start construction
and he contacted me and I told him I thought it
best to do the whole 12 acres as it will be
rezoned
I
I
f-
I
EXH1B1T 1")
I.
t
,C
I
I
I
I
,
I
Ie
I
MINUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 3
again whatever official zoning map is approved by
City Council sometimes prior to January 1st.
Are there any other questions anybody would like to
ask Fred. The next item would be to set it up for.
a public hearing.
Bobbv Blackwell made a motion to ero ahead and s...et
Fred's request uo for oublic hearing for Seotember
4, 1 g86. Seconded bv Karl Johnston. The motion
passed with no opposition. Public Hearing was set
for September 4.
Fred Hestergren stated-that he would have a full set of plans
available.
4.
Doug Latimer wanted to
rezon ing map and rev iew
July 31st meeting.
continue the discussion
of old business discussed
on
at
Doug asked David Paulissen to come forward and go over
the difference between a Business Industrial Park and
Light Industrial due to questions on this.
I
I
I
I
I
I
J,e
I
David Paulissen explained the difference.
Lot Coverage for Business Industrial is 50% and Light
Industr~al is 70%.
David Paulissen gave an overall discussion of terms that were
not clear.
He explained what was allowed in the different zones and what
Wdsn't.
Janet Wahrlich asked David to explain the difference in the
permitting requirements for Business Industrial to Light
Industrial.
David explained that at this point he was not prepared to get
into the text that deep, but he could do that for her at a
later time.
EXHIBIT F
t.
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
,
MINUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 4
Janet Wahrlich explained that there is a list of six (6)
d iff ere n t thin g s t hat a nap p 1 i can t has top r e par e and h a v e
approved under Business Industrial, and under Light
Industrial there vlere none. David explained that the city
was looking at Business Industrial as a much higher quality
industrial and "yes" there are some steps there that are not
required.
Doug Latimer explained that the staff had prepared a map and
had Randy Walters, a land planner with Vernon Henry &
Associates, came out Tuesday. Much time was spent - and gone
over since the last meeting.
One of the concepts among all things is "buffering". The
Business Industrial Park is considered a buffer to
Residential as versus light Industrial. Another part of the
ordinance that is going to effect the zones, is a part of the
ordinance that is already passed that calls for special
circumstances when you go up against Residential.
John Armstrong explained that when a Commercial or Industrial
abuts a residential zone for use, there are increased setback
requirements. Many instances there has to be screening. In
terms of the concept of buffering itself, what we are trying
to do is to attempt to maintain the integrity of districts so
that both districts will develop as fully as possible without
adjoining districts adversely impacting one upon the other.
Obviously an Industrial District or even a business use that
is heavy that abuts Residential could make Residential
prope rty undevelopa bl e. The Commerc ia 1 a t some po int and
time, the two have to meet. Thus, we have to find out about
land in La Porte. We don't have any major natural features
that would provide natural buffer, so - in a heavy industrial
type of use, if Residential is zoned too close to that, you
might prohibit or inhibit the development of industrial
property due to its' proximity Reside~tial. Examples of this
is PPG and the Southern Pacific property. In both cases,
what we've done and this is something that the planners did
not do, when you have those heavy industrial uses, we've gone
next door to a light industrial or a compatible use, then to
a business industrial, then to a Residential or Commercial as
a pattern, then by doing that hopefully without question the
property will all develop according to its potential with no
inhibition between the highly residential areas of Fairmont,
EXHIBIT F
I
I
(
I
MINUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 5
I
Lomax and old La Porte and the industrial corridor that goes
through the middle Df the city with railroad tracks that has
occurred on both sides.
I
Doug explained that there will be some zones where you will
say there are some hODes and the zones are being changed, but
the nature of the ordinance as it now exists, allows
protection and to maintain the integrity of those homes even
though they are not in a Residential district.
I
I
Consul tant was very posi ti ve on what had been done on the
map. He said you could not afford someone to do what has
been done.
I
Doug Latimer began discussion of the map from the West side
of town along Underwood Road. It was suggested that there be
some higher density residential there.
I
Ie
I
Another question that was asked was "Why R-2 in the center of
Lomax?
I
One of the improver:Jents is to be with the drainage ditch.
Proposed to bring Lomax School Rd. and tie in with Houston
Drive and there should be an overpass exchange at Hwy. 225.
We use that as a line of demarcation to keep Residential on
one side and the other on this side. Again, we're looking at
along the major arterial where we \-Jant real high quality
industrial, the thought was that perhaps Business Industrial
was a real possibility along there~
I
Doug Latimer asked if there were any questions up to this
point?
,
There were questions about Brookglen, but Chairman Latimer
ex pI a ined .tha t he wan ted to proceed wi th the ma pas \ve had
already discussed Brookglen at one of the previous meetings.
He explained that he would go over that area after \ve
finished with the discussion tonight.
I
I
J
Il
Doug Latimer explained that right now we will try to follow
up the LOr.Jax across the northern part and try to come dO\vn
the corridor between Sens Rd. and 146. Anyone have questions
on this section.
I
EXHIBIT F
~
.
,
! (
.
.
,MINUTES OF THE:
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COmnSSION
PAGE 6
.
.
Gus Farris had an appointment at 7:45 p.m. tonight, so Doug
Latimer let him give his input on this area before he h3d to
leave.
.
Gus Farris explained that the area between 16th Street and
146 and Spencer Hwy. and Fairmont Parkway is pretty \>lell
zoned out as Business Industrial. His main interest was the
fact that this is where Magna Flow is located and it looks as
if he may have some potential purchasers for this property
and they wanted to be sure the pl"Operty was zoned as Business
Industrial before they purchased it. He was pleased with the
way it is zoned out.
.
IC
I
Mr. Lewis had a que~tion about block in Battleground
Estates, when the subdivision was built, it was unrestricted
for Co mm e r cia lor bus in e s s use. H e i n d i cat e d t hat the r e \.J a s
about a 2-1/2 acre tract that was originally in restriction
for the subdivision to be Commercial or Industrial use, he
wanted to know if since we were abutting this right now, if
we could maintain this same usage. He also explained that
there was a low pressure pipe line with pipe sticking up out
of the ground.
I
I
Doug Latimer suggested to Hr. LeHis that he get with David
Paulissen. David \>lent on to explain more to Mr. Lewis on the
property he was concerned with.
I
David Paulissen indicated that he~wanted to pull the platt
and give it a closer look.
I
Do u g La t i mer \01 e n ton to d i s c u s s the n a r r 0 \.J S t rip 0 v e r by
Louisiana Chemical. David said the section around Louisiana
Chemical ended up to be Residential.
I
The next discussion \-Jas on the at"ea between the railroad
track and Sens Rd.
I
David Paulissen gave a brief talk on the utility situation
between Sens Rd. and the railroad tracK.
I
,(
David said in looking at it, staff \-lent \-lith Light
Industrial, Business Industrial and Heavy Industrial that we
didn't impact the utili ties plant. Southern Pacific where
heavy industrial is proposed originally, but was ch3nged to
I
EXHIBIT F
I
I
.c
-
-
-
-
-
-
.'C
,
-
I
I
I
,
I
-{
1-
MINUTES OF THE:
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 7
light industrial so that water and se~ver Has not wiped off
the map.
David also explained that there is very little sewer on Sens
Rd. and that there is a possibility of getting a large sewer
truck main down Sens Rd. but that is in the far future.
Doug ~atimer stated that the section between Sens Rd. and the
railr6ad up in the Lomax area does not have a sewer and that
it will be hard to get sewer there because of the elevation.
Doug Latimer said this was the reason for not making this a
prime residential area.
Charlie Doug Boyle said that it didn't make sense to him to
have business industrial along H to Spencer. He felt it
should be light industrial all the way down to Spencer at the
major intersection.
Janet Hahr Ii ch ga ve he r inpu t on what she fe 1 t from 26th
Street, a major thoroughfare coming up from the Bayport
Industrial area, that she feels it needs Industrial on both
sides, some type of business industrial on the west. She
indicated that she felt strongly and hoped that they were not
ignoring that.
After much discussion, Zoning Administrator David Paulissen
told the commission that one of the things talked about with
the planners is to hold the line at 26th Street because that
is the last O'rowth area of Residential. Staff recommends
o
that the Industrial stop at 26th Street.
Bobby Blackwell indicated that in his travel to and from
work, he .did not 'feel light industrial would please the
people living in Lomax area, but they wouldn't mind business
industrial.
Janet Wahrlich stated that as a land owner what she was
requesting was light industrial up to Sens Rd.
On the west side of 26th, Don Ford commented on his property
on the corner of P and Sens Rd., 274 on Sens, and 480 feet on
P Street, and the present says high density residential.
Probably the best thing for that corner is a little
EXH1B\T F
I
I'
e
I
-
MINUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 8
convenience store at P and Sens Rd. He was concerned t/ith
the three acres that belonged to him.
I
There was much discussion between the Commission
different citizens on the area to the railroad track.
and
I
David Paulissen explained what was happening on 26th Street.
I
Doug Latimer and the Commission decided to table this section
until a later date.
I
The next area d~scussed
Consultants indicated that
airport except single family.
\.,ras the
anything
airport
be put
area.
next to
The
the
I
Da v id sa id that one thing he needs- to res ea rch is the BI on
26th Street and see what impact there is.
Ie
I
The next section of the map that Chairman Doug Latimer
suggested for discussion is the area for Southern Pacific.
I
David introduced Mr. Bill Osborne as the Attorney for
Southern Pacific and Mr. Lloyd Simpson the Regional Manager
f9r Southern Pacific. What staff did was look at their use
or proposal and run it by our Planning and Zoning Consultant,
and Hhat we came up with agreed with the land use plan as
presented but changes the zoning someHhat. The zoning map
initially proposed the whole area be Planned Unit Development
wi th indus tr ial uses wi th in tha t ,... but a ra i 1 s to rage ya rd
does not fit the parameters of a PUD. When talking to Randy
Walters, the Consultant, he agreed that the thought was to go
ahead and the expansion that may come be zoned Heavy
Industrial to allow that when it happens.
I
I
Doug proposed that' we - go ahead and change this into Heavy
Industrial.
I
I
Ie
Attorney for Southern Pacific Mr. Bill Osborne spoke in their
behalf and explained to the Commission what their plans were.
He explained that the Railroad Company is not in the business
of doing actual development of buildings, streets,etc. so we
can't build a business industrial park on this acreage, but
\.,r e can res p 0 n d tot he con c ern s 0 f b u f fer i n gar e sid en t i a I
situation, what a PUD is designed to do.
EXHIBIT F
t
I'
e
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I1INUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 9
He also indidated that Southern Pacific was compatible with
the Comprehensive Plan.
The next section that the Commission moved to was the area of
the La Porte Terrace. We left the enclave of residential in
the r e . You may t a k e i t toR - 1 i f yo 'J pre fer. 1,1 a y wan t to
change to R-1. It is R-2 right now.
The area along 146 s ta r't ing be low the Southe rn Pac i fie PUD
all the way do~m to Fmt. Parl<way Clnd crossing Fair::1ont has
been made Commercial on the I'Jest side, all the way to the
ditch. The area of PPG, is proposed to make this area
Co mm e r cia 1 and Bus in e s sIn d u s t ria 1 a 11 t he way t 0 Fa i r m 0 n t .
Where Magna Flow is, staff recommended business industrial.
Chairman Latimer moved down to 146 and the southside of
Fairmont by the railroad track, \.Jhich is all Planned Unit
Devel opmen t e xc ept for the Commerc i a 1 whe re Fa i rpo rt Green
Shopping Center is built. Property owners have talked about
donating ground to increase the street. David indicated that
staff thought it well to go ahead and lool< at some 1 ight
industl~ial along the rail, business industrial, and 146, if
the grand parkway scheme flies is going to be in that grand
park way length, will come right through La Porte. If this
goes, He have talked about Hhere there is a major
intersection, the thought was on the land use plan to
corisider some commercial in the area.
David Paulissen explained that alQng the golf course on the
east side of 146 there will probably be consideration for
some higher density residential.
I
The othel1 area on the west side of 146 is PPG who \.Jas not
present at this meeting. Basically proposed by Staff is that
there will be an industrial area up to Bay Area Blvd. PPG
had indicated that they Hould like to go over that. Staff
has had a problem with the land use land. Hoping to go to a
more general type of drawing. David Paulissen indicated at
this point looking at a business industrial land use and a
light industrial land use in that area up to Bay Area with
high density residential paying to some R-2.
I
Ie
Doug Latimer asked if the basic concept made sense to the
Commission.
I
EXHIBIT F
.
I
.c
I
I
I
I
I
*
tIle
I
I
I
I
tUNUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PAGE 10 .
Charlie Doug Boyle stated that the highlines and ditch in
part of the area around PPG makes some of the land unusable.
After much discussion between the Commission, Staff and
citizens present, Chairman Doug Latimer made a motion that
the meeting adjourn.
5. There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at
9:10 p.m.
Respectfully submitted
Gwen Vann
Secretary to the City Manager
Passed and approved this the
day of
1986.
Janet Graves, Secretary of P&Z
/gv
I
I
J
f
l\l
I
EXHIBIT F
I.
I
Il
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1'(
I
tHNUTES OF THE
LA PORTE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MEETING FOR AUGUST 21, 1986
1. After allowing time for the review of maps by various citizens and
Commissioners: Chairman Doug Latimer called the meeting to order
at 7:10 PH.
Hembers of t\:e Commission oresent: Chairman Doug Latimer, Karl
Johnston, Charlie D. Boyle, Janet Graves, Lola Phillips.
Members of the Commission absent: Bobby Blackwell
Othe r s Pre s en t : At to rney a t Law Bi 11 Os borne, Freel ~'!es te reren ,
Decker HcKim of Decker HcKirn Real ty, Counc ilman John Lloyd, Ron
Evans and Harold Neely of PPG, Don Ford, and Gus Brieden.
City Staff Present: Chief Building Official/Zoning Adminisrator
David Paulissen, Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong, Code
Enforcement Clerk Kelley Anderson.
2. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF ~1HIUTES OF THE j'JIEETHlG HELD ON AUGUST 14,
1986.
Hotion \.Jas made by C. D. Boyle and seconded by Karl Johnston to
accept the minutes of August 14, 1986. It was passed \-lith no
opposition.
3. DISCUSS SCHEDULE OF PLANNING AND ZONING MEETINGS FOR THE MONTHS OF
SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER.
It was explained by David Paulissen the procedure that. would be'
taken on notification of citizens for the Neighborhood meetings.
4. DISCUSS AREA OF HIGHWAY 146 EAST TO THE BAY.
It was stated by Doug Latimer that the Zoning Map would be
available for public viewing with suggestion slips available for
public input.
D a v ids tat e d t hat he had got ten i n put i nth e 1 a s t \.J e e k a b 0 u t
considering some General Commercial in the area of the North side
of East Main. He suggested considering getting something
d i ffe ren tin the area" ad j acent to the ra i 1 road tracks. Doug
Latimer suggesting talking about it at a later date.
Different areas of the map wel'e discussed by separate groups of
both the Commission and citizens.
Decker McKir;] made the comment about the drainage problem in the
area of the S. 16th planning area, on either side of Powell Rd.
It was agreed upon that it would be a good idea to. leave the area
East of Powell Rd. a P.U.D. because it Hould require people to
work together.
EXHIBiT G
.
.
It
.
-
-
-
-
-
-c
-
-
-
,
"
,
f
I'l
~Minutes of the La Porte Planning
ana Zoning Commission
September 4, 1986
Page 2
The area of central Lomax was discussed next. It is hoped that
drainage ditch in this area will be improved to help with some of
the Lorna x d ra inage. There was some oppos i ti on on thi s a rea by
Council.
The area around the Airport was then discussed. Mr. Paulissen
stated that the only place that the noise level becomes a problem
would be the area where 85% of landing and take offs are on the
southeast corner of the airport. Mr. Latimer said that the
biggest problem they have been having is the question on what zone
to put in that area. The general agreement was that R-3 would be
the best bet for that-area. .
The next area discussed was the area down Sens Road. Mr.
Paulissen said that one of the things that staff had tried to do
was to leave 26th St. as the line of demarcation for Industrial.
In summing up the area of Lomax, Mr. Paulissen mentioned the
several different areas zoned. There is Neighborhood Commercial
on 26th St. All the way to "H" St. is a band of General
Commercial that is two outlots deep, which is the line that
Planning and Zoning had thought was as far as Commercial. was to
encroach in the Lomax area. The area around the Airport has some
high densi ty Residential and some General Commercial that is in
the flight path just south of Spencer Highway.
The Mayor brought up a question about Modular Homes. Mr.
Paul i ssen expl ai ned the government requi rements on put ti ng these
homes in La Porte.
The next area discussed was the Spenwick and Fairmont Park areas.
Mr. Paulissen stated that there was limited depth on the General
Commercial in this area. The area ~round San Jacinto College had
been discussed as zoning it R-3. General Commercial has been
located at intersections at both Luella and Spencer Highway.
There is the problem in the Spenwick area with the depth of the
residential area, so the General Commercial is extremly practical
in this area.
'./:
There had been some changes made on the map that Mr. Paulissen
went over. The area between Spencer Highway and Fairmont Parkway
and Driftwood and the proposed Underwood extension was
discussed. It was pointed out that there is some Business
Industrial that is on one 12 acre tract, which is the only tract
in that area that is not developed. The Business Industrial was
decided on so that it could be developed.
The PPG Plant area was discussed next. Mr. Latimer stated that
the present Zoning Ordinance precludes any plant, such as PPG,
being buil t in La Porte because it is an organic chemical plant
and our Zoning Ordinance doesn't allow such plants. This area is
not zoned, but it will be put on a land use plan.
EXH\B\T G
""",,_-'-~=--.'-'-"""""~~"--'~.~~---~"--_._---~."-'----'-"
. "
.
.(
.
.
.
.
.
.
IIC
II
[I
[-
~
t__i
"!II
Ii
II
le-
II
~
Miftutes of the La Porte Planning
and Zoning Commission
September 4, 1986
Page 3
The basic ideas are to allow Heavy Industrial between Bay Area
Blvd. and where they exist. This area, between Bay Area Blvd. and
PPG, is zoned Light Industrial on th~ lan~ use plan. The ~rea on
the west side is an R-3 area. Staff 1S gOlng to propose th1S area
as Light Industrial on the east side of Bay Area Blvd. and R-2 and
R-3 on the west side.
Mr. Paulissen stated that the biggest single change that has
happened throughout the hearing process of Planning and Zoning was
the consideration of an industrial corridor and limiting the
corridor between Bay Area Blvd. and Highway 146 through La Porte.
One of the goals of the Planning and Zoning Commission is to limit
the Heavy industrial expansion in La Porte. Mr. Paulissen said
that stopping Heavy Industrial in this area precludes railroad
tracks from going east of the line on to Business Industrial.
This area was discussed in length by Council and the Planning and
Zoning Commission and various citizens.
The next areas discussed were the Golf course area, which has R-3
around it along with some R-1 and R-2, and the area around North
Holmes, Brownell and Nugent. Thi s area was designed to keep it
residential status and put a Business Industrial along that
area.
Next discussed was the area south of town. Where
Independant School District has about 95% of this area.
osuth of town along the Bay is zoned R-2.
La Porte
The area
5.
With there being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Kelley Anderson
Code Enforcement Clerk
Approved this the
day of
, 1986
Secretary of Planning & Zoning
EXHIBIT G
-n
--
.
..1
.
~
MINUTES OF LA PORTE PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION
SEPTEMBER 4, 1986
1. Chairman Mr. Latimer called the meeting to order at 7:00 P. M.
Those Commissioners present: Chairman Mr. Latimer,
Charlie Doug Boyle, Karl Johnston, Lola Phillips,
Bobby Blackwell.
Commissioners
Janet Graves,
Those Councilpersons present: Mayor Norman Malone, Councilpersons
Waters, Matuszak, Porter, Pfeiffer, Gay, Skelton, and Westergren.
Citv Staff present: Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong, Chief
Building Official/Zoning Administrator David Paulissen, Assistant
City Manager, Assistant City Manager Richard Hare, City Secretary
Cherie Black.
Others Present: Decker McKim of Decker McKim Realtors, Janet Gray
Wahrlich and Eddie Gray of Gray Enterprises, Attorney At Law Bill
Osborne, Joe King, Joel King, Don Ford of Don Ford Realty, Jack
Phillips, Mrs. Adair Sullivan, Mrs. Helen Farren, a repr~sentative
from Titan Electric and various other citizens.
2. CONSIDER APPROVING MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 21, 1986.
The motion was made by Bobby Blackwell and seconded by C. D. Boyle
to accept minutes of August 21, 1986.
3. CONSIDER APPROVING PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SITES.
Mr. Latimer made a motion to suspeQd the agenda so that he could
rev iew the Neighborhood meeting si tes. It was seconded.
Discussion of the sites was followed by Mr. Paulissen.
A motion was made by Karl Johnston to accept the meeting dates and
seconded by Charlie Doug Boyle.
"
4.
DISCUSS INPUT OF COUNCIL ON OVERALL ZONING MAP.
Mr. Latimer went over the areas that would be discussed. Mr.
Paulissen discussed the area of Spencer Highway and Sens Road
first. He started wi th the northern corner of the Lomax area.
This area was discussed by both the Council and the Commission.
Mr. Paulissen stated that one of the things that the zoning
consul tants and staff had tried to do was to buffer the heav ier
uses from the areas that are residential. That is what the R-2,
both behind Underwood Road and below the P. U. D, are designed to
do. It gives a little higher density residential and buffers the
R-1 from the heavier uses.
EXHIBIT H
I
I
I(
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ie
I
I
I
I
,
I
J
J\(, ,
Minutes of the La Porte Planning
and Zoning Commission
August 21, 1986
Page 2
5. DISCUSS REZONiNG OF PPG AREA.
Ron Evans and Harold Neely of PPG felt that their Dlantcould not
be expanded because of the designation on the la~d'use map. This
is because the S.LC. code prohibits use 286 organic chemical
manufactoring. Johh Armstrong suggested that anything within the
City Limits having to do ioJith Heavy Industrial be studied on a
case by case basis with it being so close to residential.
David suggested that the thing to do Hould to be look at the
zoning in that section. It had pretty well been decided that the
area in question be designated Heavy Industrial on the land use
plan East of the proposed Bay Area Blvd. extension and the
Ordinance would have to be reviewed at the Council level.
Mr. Neely of PPG said that he could not recommend to his
management that the land be sold off as Light Industrial.
He felt that zoning the area Light Industrial would be better than
Residential. It was suggested by one of the Commissioners that it
be zoned Business Industrial.
6. OhTNERSHIP PATTERN AND RESERVES EXCLUDED FROM PLAT IN BROOKGLEN
SUBDIVISION.
David suggested bringing General Commercial back to the same depth
as decided on in the Fairmont area at Main & Luella and Fairmont
Pkwy. & Luella. He suggested putting some R-3 in that area,'
a~ong with some Neighborhood Commercial. He stated that property
owners would like to see some General Commercial at the Luella
intersection. He also said that he would establish the lines on
the map for the next meeting.
7. With there being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
submitted,
~-sq
'K e 11 e y fI. d e r son
Code Enforcement Clerk
Passed and approved this the ______ day of
1986.
Janet Graves, Secretary of Planning & Zoning
-=XH1BlT II
~
.:
1 1
~ ...,.
.ur:
PPG Industries, Inc. P.O. Box 995 LaPorte, Texas 77571-0995 (713) 471-0943
.
I
L
LaPorte Plant
Specialty Products
Chemicals Group
RECEIVED
SEP 23 1986
CODE ENFORCEMENT
E. G. Ramirez
Plant Manager
.:
Iii
pI'l
:,1 J
.1
, !
.':
. ))
iJ
"I
.'!
I'
.!
I
September 18, 1986
Doug Latimer, Chairman
La Porte Planning & Zoning
604 W. Fairmont Parkway
P.O. Box 115
La Porte, TX 77571
Commission
Dear Doug:
IJ
Since our meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission
August 21, 1986, we understand area 2 of the land use map and
specifically the approximate 500 acres owned by PPG has been
rezoned. However, the changes to the map as explained to us by
David Paulisson, do not appear to be consistent with the changes
we understood your commission to have agreed to at the August 21
meeting concerning PPG's property. We consider the land uses now
slated for finalization to be adverse, to PPG's interests. We will
outline below our proposal for the zoning of PPG's property west
of the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks.
.!
IJI
IJ!
I!'
As we mentioned at the August 21 meeting, we are actively pursuing
a joint venture with a Japanese firm that would involve construction
of an Acrylic resins chemical production facility immediately west
of the Southern Pacific tracks. This could involve employment of
some 30 employees in the initial phase and an area of approximately
104 acres would be ample for this production facility and any
subsequent expansion. This parcel is immediately west of the
Southern Pacific tracks and extends to the proposed Bay Area
Boulevard extension. (See attachment) We see this 104 acre tract
most appropriately zoned Heavy Industrial and not part of any
Planned Unit Development. The parcel of land would be contiguous
with our existing plant and be an extension of an existing Heavy
Industrial zone. It will be necessary that the permissible land
uses 'under Heavy Industrial be expanded from the present S.I.C.
code numbers 282 through 285 to include S.I.C. code number 286
"Industrial Organic Chemicals."
IJ
IJ
"
IJ
.'
"
.
EXHIBIT I
-
I
I'
Beyond tbe 104 acres we have requested to be zoned Heavy Industrial)
PPG has no problem witb the City utilizing the Planned Unit
Development concept for the remainder of our property. We would
propose) however) the land use for the PUD be zoned per the
attacbment.
I
I
PPG remains the single largest taxpayer to the City of La Porte.
We are a key raw material supplier to major local industry
including tbe Du Pont La Porte Plant and AKZO Chemie. Our annual
plant payroll is in excess of $4.5 million and our total plant
economic impact upon the La Porte area is in excess of $7.0 million.
PPG provides high-paying jobs for 130 area residents. In sbort)
PPG contributes significantly to the economic standard to which La
Porte bas become accustomed. It is PPG's intent to continue to
operate and enhance its La Porte facility. However) the plant does
have financial return requirements set by PPG which in the long
run must be met in order for the plant to remain a viable PPG
entity. Being able to respond to business opportunities such
as the proposed Japanese venture is essential to meet our
corporate financial objectives. We ask that you accept our land
use and zoning compromise so PPG-La Porte can continue to be a
viable operation.
I
I:
Ii
II
If you have any questions concerning this) please let me know. We
would welcome the opportunity for any such discussion.
-;
u
Sincerely)
M.
E. G. R~
Plant Manager
D
u,
J
J
1
1
EXHIBIT 1
....
.,
.
i e
~. , ,~. ....,1'00
. . I.,..
. .
. .
.
.
MU
l. (!l
Q'.~
.tl
IJ
Il
"
J!
JJ
I
1
~
M
.
a:
, Jot.,,'
....r .
N
1
a=
-
...J
-
...J
.
\,\
M
, I
'a:
.~
l :~
,~1~,~
~~ "
.
I
\, \
\ '..... \
- \ I
;V~
........
-
'[0
!
: I
11\--\ t
i1~1
. 'L I
C::-~"1
-
[Xl
., c
~
...
.
o
.
::>
.
a..
( .
I _
I I ...;....
' · -- . . ,.... 11 wtft"
. -, " :, I,' I".
. .:.-rr--
"-\,-,
$~.
, ~
~.
mamrr 1
EXCERPT FROM NOVEMBER 13, 1986 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
PRELIMINARY MAP REPORT
EXHIBIT J
Page 14
proposed and yet still allow increased flexibility for
developers. It was decided that a commercial land use for this
strip along Fairmont Parkway was the most appropriate. In an
effort to offset a reduction in high-density residential land
uses, a high-density residential land use area was added along
Dr i ftwood Dr i ve bet ween the Eas t/Wes t d ra inage channe 1 and the
commercial land use_that would adjoin it on its Northern end.
PPG P.U.D. AREA
The next area that was considered is that area which is known as
the PPG Plan Unit Development area. The area is bounded by
Spencer Hwy., Fairmont Pkwy., 16th St. and the Eastern boundary
of Fairmont Park East. The original plan did not accurately
depict the boundary of PPG's property in some areas. For
example, along the Spencer Highway frontage, there is a much
greater depth of property owned by private individuals than what
is shown on the original proposal as all PPG. The Planning and
Zoning Commission decided that since this area is in immediate
prox imi ty to a proposed ma j or thoroughfa re inter see t i on a t Bay
Area Boulevard and Spencer Highway that a commercial land use
EXHIBIT J
Page 15
would be most appropri.ate. The original land use proposal did
not include the Fairmont Parkway frontage in this area as it was
not within our City limits. It has been subsequently annexed
into the City limits. It was decided that some form of
industrial land use in this area was most appropriate. No change
in the proposed residential use in this PUD was affected West of
the 26th St ./Bay Area Blvd. The remainder of this PUD will be
discussed in the section entitled Industrial Corridor.
INDUSTRIAL CORRIDOR
The area of La Porte with the most restructering of land use
designations occurred in what will be known as La Porte's
industrial corridor. This corridor is located between Bay Area
Boulevard, 26th St. and Highway 146 and between the North and
South City limits of La Porte. This entire land use area
received a substantial restructuring as compared to the original
proposal. This area will be discussed in two parts. First is a
description of the original proposal. Secondly is a discussion
of the land uses recommended by the Planning and Zoning
Commission.
c~H'B\" J
~~.........--.-
Page 16
ORIGINAL LAND USE PROPOSAL:
The original land use proposal showed a relatively narrow
industrial corridor on either side of the Southern Pacific
railroad tracks with mid and low-density housing East of the
corridor to 26th St.
The Southern Pacific rail yard area was
proposed to be an i.ndustrial PUD, and the existing residential
uses in the La Porte Terrace area were proposed to become an
industrial use of some form. South of Barbours Cut Boulevard and
in the corridor East of 16th, was a proposal to include mid and'
high-density residential uses South to approximately Fairmont
Parkway.
East of 16th St. to the Southern Pacific railroad
tracks was shown to be industrial land use. South of Fairmont
Parkway in the corridor was proposed to be low and mid-densi ty
residential.
ADJUSTED LAND USE PLAN:
~
The following is a description of the recommendations of the
Planning and Zoning Commission with regard to land uses in the
proposed industrial corridor. This area can best be discussed by
t;XH\B\l J
Page 18
land uses tend to require, when they relate to the zoning text,
greater set backs and more pleasing aesthetics.
This type of
land use tends to make the entrance into La Porte a more
aesthetically pleasing form of industrial development.
South of
Spencer and North of Fairmont Parkway in the corridor, the
intensity of land use was reduced. It will still be industrial
in nature, but o~. a lighter industrial land use than that
originally proposed. With this reduction in the heavy industrial
land use an approximate number of acres were redistributed to
West of the existing PPG site as they have some current
facilities planned for this area.
Along the proposed Bay Area
Boulevard extension on the East side is again commercial
industrial land use. The greater setbacks required by the zoning
text will continue the continuity of similar development along
Bay Area Boulevard.
East of 16th in this area between Spencer
and Fairmont an effort was made to preserve the existing
residential community. The result is a node of residential land
use betwe~ 16th St. and Highway 146. Industrial and commercial
land uses adjoin this area but when they are related to the
zoning text, addi tional set backs mi tigate the impact of these
land uses on the residential land use of that neighborhood.
EXH\B\T J
j
f
I
Page 19
The area South of Fairmont Parkway in the industrial corridor
received a restructuring of land use designations. As discussed
earlier, this area was proposed to be primarily residential.
Subsequent to the delivery of the comprehensive plan this area
has received attention from La Porte I s "Economic Development
Group". It is known as the South 16th St. Planning Area. Land
owners have "joined..handsll and have verbally committed to both
proposed street and drainage rights-of-way that would tend to
encourage development in this area. It was determined that the
area West of South 16th St. would be best utilized with some form
of industrial land use due to its proximity to rail frontage.
East of 16th St. and \Vest of 146 South would remain a PUD as
originally designated, but the types of land uses within that
would be the commercial industrial, commercial, and some
residential land uses.
OLD LA PORTE
Some restru~ring was considered on the South side of Barbours
Cut from Highway 146 to the Eastern City limits line. It was
decided that existing trucking businesses located in the North
5th St. to North 8th St. area should be considered as a form of
W=XHtB\T J