The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10-20-1994 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting of the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission• r~ u • MINUTES • • • MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 20, 1994 Members Present: Chairman Betty Waters, Commission Members Chuck Engelken, Dottie Kaminski, Eugene Edmonds, Inge Browder, Margaret Anderson, Howard Ebow Members Absent: City Staff Present: Director of Planning Charles Harrington, Assistant City Attorney John Armstrong, Planning Secretary Peggy Lee Others Present• I. CALL TO ORDER Meeting was called to order by Chairman Waters at 6:04 PM. • II. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 15, 1994, PUBLIC HEARING AND REGULAR MEETING. A motion was made by Howard Ebow to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by Chuck Engelken. All were in favor and the motion passed. III. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 29, 1994, PUBLIC HEARING AND SPECIAL CALLED MEETING. A motion was made by Howard Ebow to approve the minutes. The motion was seconded by Chuck Engelken. Margaret Anderson objected to the way a vote had been recorded in the minutes. With no other opposition raised, the vote was taken and the motion was approved. At this time, Chairman Waters allowed persons in the audience to address items that were not being considered during public hearing. Jim Zoller, of 907 Hackberry, addressed the Commission. Mr. Zoller read an excerpt from a letter written to the Mayor and City Council by a gentleman who had been very instrumental during the Bayshore Municipal Utility District annexation process. It stated, '"The Shady River Subdivision, in fact, all of Bay MUD chose to join La Porte on the basis of remaining zoned residential except for an area of small • neighborhood stores on South Broadway. The establishment of a commercial • • • Page 2 of 8 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1994 development on the south side of McCabe Road violates the zoning expected and then approved at the time of annexation." IV. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE REPEAT OF LOT 129; BLOCK 9; SPENWICK PLACE, SECTION I, WHICH IS FURTHER DESCRIBED AS BEING LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF ANDRICKS ROAD AND MONTGOMERY LANE. THE REPEAT IS REQUESTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DIVIDING THE PROPERTY INTO TWO LOTS TO BE IDENTIFIED AS LOTS 129A AND 129B. Chairman Waters opened the public hearing at 6:10 PM. Mr. Harrington presented staff's report. The owner of Lot 129; Block 9 of Spenwick Place, Section One, is proposing to subdivide one large lot into two. Staff reviewed the replat request and found it to comply with all applicable City of La Porte ordinance and State Laws. Staff recommended approval of the request. Mr. Harrington added there had been 18 public notices mailed. Of those returned, one was received in favor and four were received in opposition of the request. • Jerry Schlott, the property owner, addressed the Commission and asked for their approval. V. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Waters closed the public hearing at 6:15 PM. VI. CONSIDER REPEAT REQUEST FOR LOT 129; BLOCK 9; SPENWICK PLACE, SECTION I. After discussion amongst the Commission, a motion was made by Howard Ebow to table the item until the November 17, 1994, meeting. The motion was seconded by Eugene Edmonds. All were in favor and the motion passed. VII. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #SCU94-003, WHICH IS REQUESTED FORA 4.3668 ACRE TRACT OUT OF OUTLOTS 71 AND 90; RICHARD PEARSAL SURVEY, A-25, WHICH IS FURTHER DESCRIBED AS BEING LOCATED AT 11230 WEST MAIN STREET. THE PERMIT IS REQUESTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AMINI- WAREHOUSE AND BOAT AND R.V. STORAGE FACILITY. Chairman Waters opened the public hearing at 6:25 PM. • • • Page 3 of 8 Planning 8c Zoning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1994 Mr. Harrington presented staff's report. David Boothe, the applicant, on behalf of Johnny Steeland, property owner, is requesting a Special Conditional Use Permit to develop amini-warehouse/boat and RV storage facility. Zoning Ordinance Section 6-400 designates mini-warehouses and outdoor storage as a conditional use in GC zones. 1VIr. Harrington concluded his report by recommending Commission approval of SCU94-003 with the attached following conditions: A formal minor development site plan, prepared in accordance with the requirements of Development Ordinance 1444, shall be submitted for review and approval by City staff prior to obtaining permits for construction of this facility. Outdoor storage areas shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of Section 6-600 of Ordinance 1501. Plans for development of these areas shall be submitted to the City and necessary permits obtained prior to development of these storage areas. • All structures and plantings on the property shall conform to height limitations necessary to maintain adequate clear airport runway approach. • All structures and plantings on the property shall conform to height limitations necessary to maintain adequate clear airport runway approach. • All property line encroachments shall be removed from the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project. • This Special Conditional Use Permit does not waive, supersede, or modify any requirement of Zoning Ordinance 1501 except as specifically enumerated by this permit, nor does it waive, supersede, or modify the requirements of any other ordinance of the City of I.a Porte. This Special Conditional Use Permit does not waive or supersede the requirement to obtain any other permit or license normally required for a business facility of this type. r~ • • • Page 4 of 8 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1994 A. PROPONENTS The applicant, David Boothe (for Johnny Steeland), who resides at 706 Sharon in Baytown, addressed the Commission. Mr. Boothe stated the owners of the property contacted him and requested he perform a survey to try and identify what the highest and best use would be for this land. Mini-warehousing was decided upon since there was a need for storage facilities that could house larger motor homes and boats. The units will also be climate controlled. B. OPPONENTS There were none. VIII. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Waters closed the public hearing at 6:36 PM. IX. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING SPECIAL • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #SCU94-003. A motion was made by Inge Browder to recommend to City Council, approval of SCU94-003 with the following conditions: • A formal minor development site plan, prepared in accordance with the requirements of Development Ordinance 1444, shall be submitted for review and approval by City staff prior to obtaining permits for construction of this facility. • Outdoor storage areas shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of Section 6-600 of Ordinance 1501. Plans for development of these areas shall be submitted to the City and necessary permits obtained prior to development of these storage areas. • All structures and plantings on the property shall conform to height limitations necessary to maintain adequate clear airport runway approach. • All structures and plantings on the property shall conform to height limitations necessary to maintain adequate clear airport runway • approach. i • • Page 5 of 8 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1994 All property line encroachments shall be removed from the site prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the project. This Special Conditional Use Permit does not waive, supersede, or modify any requirement of Zoning Ordinance 1501 except as specifically enumerated by this permit, nor does it waive, supersede, or modify the requirements of any other ordinance of the City of La Porte. This Special Conditional Use Permit does not waive or supersede the requirement to obtain any other permit or license normally required for a business facility of this type. The motion was seconded by Dottie Kaminski. All were in favor and the motion passed. X. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE FOLLOWING ELEMENTS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. • A. THOROUGHFARE PLAN B. OPEN SPACE PLAN C. PEDESTRIAN PLAN D. SEWER PLAN E. WATER PLAN F. STORM WATER PLAN Chairman Waters opened the public hearing at 6:40 PM. Mr. Harrington stated that during July, August, and September, the Commission had been reviewing portions of the Comprehensive Plan as required by state law and city ordinance. During review of the Transportation Plan, many transportation improvements proposed in the original plan have been addressed. Only one street is recommended to be deleted; the connection of Barbour's Cut Blvd. to North "P" Street at or near Sens Road. Staff feels there is no apparent need to connect the Port traffic to "P" Street and doesn't find any justification for the expense involved in making the overpass across the Southern Pacific Railyards. Transportation improvements proposed in 1984 as well as proposed transportation improvements that were developed during the workshop process are shown in Exhibit A to the minutes. Exhibit A includes major street improvements as well as intersection improvements • .necessary to enhance the traffic flow on several arterials. • • • Page 6 of 8 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1994 Mr. Harrington reported that the Commission had reviewed three areas of the Utility Plan: water, sewer, and storm sewer. The growth rate the City expected to see has not come to pass. Subsequently, the reduced growth rate has helped in the areas of water and wastewater. The slower growth rate has kept the demand down for increased services and has kept the proposed improvements still viable for the next ten years. With this in mind, staff recommended no changes to the utilities portion of the Comprehensive Plan. During review of the Open Space/Pedestrian Plan, it was determined that the City has accomplished most if not more than was originally proposed in the Comprehensive Plan. A list of original projects that have been completed as well as new projects can be found in Exhibit B to the minutes. Mr. Harrington added that in the area of pedestrian walkways, very few projects have been accomplished. Staffs review indicated we should retain the existing plan and adopt two new additions that have resulted from the adoption of the Bayfront Master Plan. The new projects are shown in Exhibit B to the minutes. Mr. Harrington recommended the Commission accept the proposed Comprehensive • Plan changes and forward them to City Council with a recommendation for approval. 1. PROPONENTS There were none. 2. OPPONENTS Helen McFerren, who resides on Oak Grove, addressed the Commission. Ms. McFerren stated the back of her property fronts Deer Creek. Ms. McFerren asked why her section of town is not included under transportation improvements. She is opposed to the City turning the Beasley property into a public park. She also told the Commission that she has been trying for years to have the City remove the pipe that crosses Deer Creek and the septic tanks and wastewater that runs into Deer Creek removed. She asked why the City started installing sewer lines last week. She also commented on how stormwater fills the streets and drains onto her property. In conclusion, she stated the City has inadequate storm water management. Ginnie Groda, who resides on Seabreeze, addressed the Commission. • She agreed with Ms. McFerren. In addition, she would like the area • • • Page 7 of 8 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1994 to be lighted better, more available street pazking, and better street maintenance. Vacant houses are also causing a problem in the neighborhood. Jazrell Burke, who resides at 1301 Bayshore Drive, addressed the Commission. He stated the proposed pazk would be at his front door and does not like it. He asked the Commission to take into consideration the people who live in the neighborhood. He brought up the incident with the young boy that drowned and proposed the City install barriers on the culverts to try and keep this from happening again. In regazds to questions concerning the Seabreeze site, Mr. Harrington emphasized the new project list calls for a park but does not, however, name a site location for that pazk. XI. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING XII. CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING • AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. A motion was made by Howard Ebow to accept the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and forward them to City Council for their approval. The motion was seconded by Eugene Edmonds. All were in favor and the motion passed. XIII. RECONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #SCU94-002, AT THE REQUEST OF COMMISSION MEMBERS DOTTIE KAMINSKI AND INGE BROWDER. (NOTE: THIS REQUEST WAS CONSIDERED IN THE COMMISSIONS SEPTEMBER 29, 1994, PUBLIC HEARING.) Chairman Waters stated she felt there had not been enough information provided at last month's meeting regarding this item and that it is why the Commission would like the opportunity to reconsider it. A motion was made by Inge Browder to reconsider a recommendation to City Council regarding SCU94-002. The motion was seconded by Dottie Kaminski. All were in favor and the motion passed. After a short discussion regarding the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation to City Council and what it would actually mean, a motion was • made by Eugene Edmonds to once again recommend to City Council approval of • • • Page 8, of 8 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes of October 20, 1994 SCU94-002. The motion was seconded by Howard Ebow. After additional discussion a vote was taken. All were in favor of the motion with the exception of Chuck Engelken who was opposed. The motion passed. XIV. STAFF REPORTS There were none. XV. ADJOURN A motion was made by Inge Browder to adjourn. The motion was seconded by Chuck Engelken. All were in favor and the motion passed. Respectfully submitted, • Peggy Planning Department Secretary Approved on this the 17th day of November, 1994. Betty T. aters Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman • ' • • • THOROUGHFARE IlVIPROVEMENTS 1994 PRIORITIES Priori Group Roadway From To Project 1, Farrington Blvd. Crestway North "H" Construct 2 Lane Section Bay Area Blvd. Fairmont Spencer Construct 5 Lane ' Section Sens Rd. Spencer SH 225 Construct 5 Lane Section San Jacinto Main Sylvan Widen to 4 Lanes Beach with Divided Median 2, Lomax School Rd. North "P" St. SH 225 Construct 2 Lane Section 16th Street I~Torth "G" St. SH 146 Construct 2 Lane Section 16th~Street Fairmont Pkwy. W. Weems Construct 2 Lane Section 4, Farrington/Lomax Crestway SH 225 Widen to 4 Lane School Road with Divided Median 16th Street North "G" St. SH 146 (S) Widen to 4 Lanes Old La Porte Rd. Underwood SH 146 Construct 2 Lane ' Section Others: Broadway Fairmont Shoreacres Widen to 5 Lane Boulevard Section Canada Street Carlow Fairmont Construct 2 Lane Section ~CHigl`t' • • INTERSECTION IlVIPROVEMENTS 1994 PRIORITIES Priori Group Location 1, Fairmont @ Driftwood Fairmont @ Farrington Fairmont ~a Underwood Fairmont @ Brookwood Fairmont @ Luella ~: ~Qirlholl-' ~ g'}'~- ~'~': In0.i~ 5~'/Broadv~ay/Saa3ar:-n-Eo 2, Fairmont @ S. 16 St. SH 146 @ Wharton Weems • Wharton Weems Blvd. Fairmont @ Canada Street Project Construct Right and Left Turn Lanes Construct Right and Left Turn Lanes Construct Right and Left Turn Lanes Construct Right and Left Turn Lanes Construct Right and Left Turn Lanes -1'r~ic, sgnals from ~~ -~o ~- S~: ~'ons}rKc~' F~ot~r~- 4 boct~: Install Traffic Signals When Warranted Install Traffic Signals When Warranted Construct Grade Separation Construct Right and Left Turn Lanes ~isrr A • LJ • 1984 PRIORITIES COMBINATION RESPONSIBILITIES Priori Group Project Current Status 1. SH 225/SH 146 Interchange Under design; construction in 1996. Alternate Truck Route to ~ _ Proposed to be deleted. Bazbours Cut Blvd. 2. Grade Separation on SH 146 Fairmont Pkwy. complete; Bazbour's Cut at Bazbour's Cut Blvd. and Boulevazd under design. Fairmont Parkway 3, SH 225 Completion as Freeway Under construction. to Intersection of SH 146 Underwood Road from Proposed Approximately 50% complete. "S" Street to Fairmont Pkwy. Upgrade to Primary Arterial. • Completion of Bay Area Blvd. from Fairmont Pkwy. to Spencer and Upgrade to Arterial Standard from Spencer to SH 225. Complete Underwood from Proposed Complete . "S" Street to SH 225. Others: Upgrade Fairmont Pkwy. to Semi- controlled Access Highway. Link "L" Street to Barbour's Cut Blvd. Delete • €7fHIeC1' • • • Priority Group 2. 3. • 4. • 1984 PRIORITIES CITY RESPONSIBILITIES Project Farrington Blvd; Crestway to Spencer; widen to 4 lanes. _ Farrington Blvd. from Crestway to North "H" Street; develop 4 lane section. Current Status R-O-W being purchased and design underway. Lomax School Road from North "H" Street to North "P" Street; widen to 4 lanes. Lomax School Road from North "P" Street to SH 225; develop 4 lane section. Old La Porte Rd. from Underwood to SH 146. 16th Street from North "G" Street to Old La Porte Rd.; widen and construct 4 lane section. 16th Street from Fairmont to Wharton Weems Blvd; widen and construct 4 lane section. Proposed to reroute to SH 146. ~Ii~1T • ~ • • ~ ORIGINAL PROJECTS Little Cedar Bavou Park Status Includes: Pool with diving well Wave pool complex 4,000 sq. ft, gym ~ Recreation Center Playground Complete 4 lighted baseball fields 3 fields complete Concession stand/pressbox Complete _ 1 soccer field 2 fields -6 tennis courts Complete p~~g Complete 3 picnic sites Complete Fishing pier Sylvan Beach Pier Foot bridge Bay overlook ~ Sea Breeze Sailing Club purchased Community Park (Northwest Area) • Includes: 2 basketball courts Complete 2 tennis courts Complete 1 football/soccer field - Complete 2 softball fields Future Facilities To Include: 2 basketball courts 2 handball courts Recreation Center 4 tennis courts 2 baseball fields 1 swinnming pool Northwest Park n U EXHl~iT ~ • • • 1VEW PROJECTS Develop Community Park to include: . Picnic Areas • Fishing Pier - Bay Overlook - Pazldng Develop Regional Park in West La Porte to include: . Four Softball Fields - • Concession Stand/Pressbox Walldng Trail • ~ Picnic Area • Parking Develop Regional Park North of Sylvan Beach to include: Waterfront/Beach Area - . Ampitheater . Festival Park Site Picnic Area . Pazking Pedestrian Walkwavs to be completed would include: • Boardwalk from Sylvan Beach to Sea Breeze Site Walkway along San Jacinto St. from Main St to Sylvan Beach. i#-tiBIT ~~ • • • • SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST #SCU94-004 • ~ . U1 • CITY OF LA PORTE • APPLICATxON FOR SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMYT • _-~--~--------~---------~_~_----------------Application No.. _SCV G+~~- OFFICE USE ONLY: Fee: $1OO.OQ Date Received: ~ /1 Receipt No.: Certified Plans Submitted: (•~) General P1.an ( ) Major Development Site Plan ( ) Minor Development Site Plan ( ) Preliminary Plat Person Making Request-___Sar_v A Mahrav r^ .. r _~_~_-+_-_-~_---..-_~__~ Mailing Address: _ 4910:One Shell Playa City/State: Houston, Texas .77002 Phone: (713) ~?-viii BUSINESS NAME: Colliers Appelt.WQmack PROPERTY ADDRESS• 502 North Broadway ' - LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See P,ttached ~ - ZONE: ~•~ PAD pZ-'z- SIC USE CATEGORY: `{~~~- TYPE of BUSIrlFSS: • _____r_ Date_r__~__^ ~_~~___.~__,._~__ oti~ner_o Authorized gent ~ w _ M __ _w._ _ •. OFFICE USE ONLY Date of P & Z Public Hearing: 1 ~7 Recommendation- Y or N Date of City Council Heeting• Approved: Y or N ~z j~s~q~ Zope: This application is: Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Permit # CLP JOB # (If Assigned Yet) Conditions: • Date Zoning Administrator C ED/ 2 .. ~ $'~ John Hancock Mutual Bond & Corporate Finance Department Agribusiness Investment Group • 200 Clarendon Street 57th Floor Post Office Box 111 Boston, Massachusetts 02117 (617)572-5332 (617) 572-1165 Fax David E. Johnson Agribusiness Investment Officer Company ~`.-°,J ~ '' ~`' w •~~.d'~ ~ ~'~~® ~n~/ October 11, 1994 • Mr. Mark Lewis Chief Building Official P.O. Box 1115 LaPorte, TX 77572-1115 Flnandal Sarvlcas RE: Amendment to the Special Conditional Use Permit for the Former ICN Facility at 502 North Broadway, LaPorte, TX Dear Mr. Lewis: This letter shall serve as authorization for Colliers Appelt Womack to act as agent on our behalf in connection with the above-referenced subject. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company is owner of the facility located at 502 North Broadway in LaPorte, and Colliers Appelt Womack represents us in the marketing of this property for sale and lease. Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, `die ~~~ David E. Joh on CC: G. Mabray, Colliers Appelt Womack .. R. Stevens • • • October 10, 1994 4910 ONE SHELL PLAZA HOUSTON, TEXAS 77002 TEL 713-222-2111 FAX 713-222-1118 Mr. Mazk Lewis Chief Building Official P.O. Box 1115 LaPorte, Texas 77572-1115 Re: Amendment to the Special Conditional Use Permit for the Former ICN Facility at 502 North Broadway Deaz Mr. Lewis: The former ICN facility on North Broadway was foreclosed on by the real estate mortgage holders and is now owned by those lenders, John Hancock Insurance Company and Rabobank Nederland. Our firm represents the owners in the marketing of this property for sale and lease. The refrigerated/freezer warehouse portion of the facility has • been leased to Associated Freezers Inc. Associated's lease did not include the azea designated on the attached exhibit as the Truck Yazd and Container Staging Area. As we discussed, ICN's plan envisioned a fully integrated business that included a trucking operation. It was that trucking operation that necessitated the need for a sepazate truck yazd. However, that plan is contrary to the industry norm. Virtually all warehouse operators depend on unrelated carriers and do not attempt to maintain a fleet of their own. Therefore, our request for the Amendment to the Special Conditional Use Permit is to allow a lease of the azea designated for truck operations to an outside operator. The proposed lessee already operates a facility approximately 500 yazds from this location and, therefore, we would not expect any type of changes in the traffic patterns in the area. Additionally, should Associated or any other user of the wazehouse facility find the need for additional truck area, there are several acres of land contiguous with the existing building designated as expansion area that could be utilized for that type of operation. Should you have any additional questions, please give us a call. Yours truly, Gary A. /jc • Enclosure Robe ey ammo ~r~ bias MDU9raMLAN00FHLE lEALTOfla y~~ APPELT, WOMACK, RICKS, HERDER & PARSLEY, INC. 5~ ~"JS/ INDUSTRIAL & COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES • OFFICE LEASE • LAND DEVELOPMENT • INVESTMENT COUNSELING ~- OwneAMcmber COLLIERS intemadoml Property Consultants A E A L i0 A • • Requested For: 502 North Broadway, which is further described by the legal descriptions attached to and following this report. (See Exhibit A) Requested By: Mr. Gary A. Mabray, on behalf of John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, property owner. Zoning: Business Industrial; R-2, Mid Density Residential; PUD with an underlying Commercial Industrial land use base. (See Exhibit B) Puraose of Request: The facility located at 502 North Broadway is a freezer warehouse complex. The facility, which was developed as a Planned Unit Development, is operating under the provisions of Special Conditional Use Permit #SCU90-002 (see Exhibit C). The applicants are seeking to amend this permit. Bac und: The facility in question consists of three basic components, a warehouse and office building, a trailer staging yard, and a stormwater detention facility. As noted in the caption section of this report, the site extends into three different zoning districts. Exhibit B illustrates the zoning boundaries. Exhibit D illustrates the facility's layout. The warehouse, loading docks and parking are located in the PUD and Business Industrial (BI) portions of the tract. The staging yard and Barbour's Cut access are located exclusively in BI zoning. The residentially zoned portion of the property is used as a stormwater detention facility. Originally, the area was also to include an employee's park. As of this date, it has not been developed. Use of this section of property for detention and open space is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan's intent for residential land use. It was also felt by the City that maintaining residential zoning would maintain a buffer between the warehouse and residential properties located further to the • east. The warehouse could not be expanded to the east without first obtaining a rezoning of additional property. For these • • • Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting of 11/17/94 SCU94-004 Page 2 of 6 reasons, the residential designation was retained for this area. It should be noted that maintenance of the detention facility will remain the responsibility of the property owners. Otherwise, stormwater detention will not enter as a factor in this request. At the time of construction the facility was owned and operated by International Cargo Network (ICN). ICN was both a warehousing and trucking company. The complex was intended to function as a single integrated business operation. ICN no longer owns or operates the complex. It is presently leased to a company that only operates the warehouse. The staging yard has remained idle and unused. The current owners propose to lease the staging area to a shipping firm. This firm will continue to use the lot as a trailer chassis staging yard. It will operate as a separate business and will not be in any way connected with the operation of the • freezer warehouse (see Exhibit D). As noted in the caption section of this report, the complex was developed and permitted as a Planned Unit Development (PUD). It is operated under the terms of a Special Conditional Use (SCU) Permit that was granted prior to construction. In order to amend the original SCU permit, it is necessary for the applicants to come before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council and petition for a new SCU permit. Analysis: Old Permit The analysis section of this report will begin with an overview of the original SCU permitting process. Staff has maintained a detailed file relating to the original development and permitting process. This file is available for review and will also be available at the Commission's November 17, meeting. Following the outline overview, points relevant to the current request will be discussed. I. Applicants submitted a preliminary plan and • • Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting of 11/17/94 SCU94-004 Page 3 of 6 • petitioned for rezoning of certain properties from Residential to Industrial designation. II. Rezoning was granted reclassifying property from Residential to Planned Unit Development. III. Land use component of the Comprehensive Plan was amended. Aland use designation of Commercial/Industrial was assigned to the rezoned area. IV. Applicant's applied for a Special Conditional Use Permit for development of a PUD complex. In conjunction with the application, the following items were submitted. A. General Plan • B. Construction schedule C. Documentation regarding property controls. Staff has reviewed the applicant's request for permit amendment and found it to be compatible with the intent and goals of the original SCU permitting process. New Permit Staff has noted certain areas that either impact on the original SCU Permit or must be considered in their own right. They are as follows: • Interior circulation will be somewhat impacted but not to a degree to warrant concern. The Barbour's Cut entrance will be under control of the new tenant and may not be available to trafi"ic to and from the warehouse. The Broadway access is designed to accommodate warehouse traffic and should be adequate to meet the needs of warehouse traffic. Traffic impact on North Broadway should be negligible. • The warehouse loading docks can accommodate 25 trailers simultaneously. The paved area • • Planning 8c Zoning Commission Meeting of 11/17/94 SCU94-004 Page 4~of 6 • • adjacent to the docks are large enough to serve as a waiting area for additional trucks should the need arise. Exhibit E indicates the location proposed for a new 12' x 24' building. This building will serve as the shipping company's on site office. The location complies with applicable setback requirements. Existing fire hydrants will provide adequate fire protection. Potable water and sanitary sewer are not readily available to this portion of the property. There are, however, City mains available in close enough proximity to be readily extended. The prospective tenant has been in communication with City staff. They understand and are willing to extend water and sewer mains in accordance with City regulations. The original SCU Permit called for a landscape buffer to be created and maintained along the east and south fences of the staging yard (see Exhibit E). Since being developed, the original plantings have been allowed to die. The buffer area now consists of weeds and scrub trees. This buffer should be mowed and replanted with a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees. Mowing and clean up should take place prior to occupancy. After clean up, surviving (and volunteer) trees should be inventoried. A planting plan should then be developed and submitted for review by the Director of Planning. Staff would ask that this be completed by January 1, 1995. Planting should then be completed by March 1, 1995. At the time of original project development, a great emphasis was placed on landscaping and attractiveness of the site. With this in mind, staff would recommend that landscaping be placed • • Planning 8c Zoning Commission Meeting of 11/17/94 SCU94-004 Page 5 of 6 • along the west face of the building to be located in the staging area. Plan submittal and planting should take place in accordance. Conclusion: In summary, staff finds the following: • The trailer staging area is not needed for operation of the freezer warehouse. • The operation of the yard by a separate company maintains the property use envisioned by the original SCU Permit. • Operating the yard as a separate lease would not seriously disrupt interior traffic circulation, nor would it seriously impact traffic on surrounding streets. • Existing fire protection is adequate. Sanitary sewer and potable water is available in close enough proximity to be readily extended to serve the proposed office building. • The 12' x 24' office building can be located in a manner that satisfies zoning setback requirements. • Subject to replanting the landscape buffer and development of additional landscaping in the manner specified, the proposed business can operate in a manner that is compatible with the intent of the original SCU Permit. It must be clearly understood that the property owner maintains full responsibility for maintenance of the stormwater detention facility. Based on the facts and considerations noted above, staff recommends granting SCU94-004 as an amendment to Special Conditional Use Permit #SCU90-002 with the following Amendment Conditions: • 1. The original landscape buffer being replanted. • • • Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting of 11/17/94 SCU94004 Page 6 of 6 2. The development of a new landscape buffer along the west face of the proposed building to be located in the staging area. Planting shall be approved by the Director of Planning prior to occupancy. 3. The stormwater detention facility is made a part of this P.U.D. and the property owner shall be responsible for all maintenance of the facility. Staff would also ask that the Commission's recommendation clearly state that except as specifically amended, SCU90-002 remains in effect. • • L~ • • SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SCU90-002 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: INTERNATIONAL CARGO NETWORK LOT AND BLOCK DESCRIPTION Lots 1-32 and alleys of Blocks 416, 417, 418, 419, 432, 433, 434, 435; • All of Block 980; Lots 1-16 of Blocks 415, 420, 438, Town of La Porte; Tyler Street from the east right-of-way of North Broadway to the west line of the alley in Blocks 415 and 420; Madison Street from the' east right-of-way of North Broadway to the west line of the alley in Blocks 420 • and 433; • Iowa Street from the north right-of-way of Adams Street to the south right-of-way of North "E" Street; • Kansas Street from the north right-of-way of Adams Street to the south right-of-way of North "L" Street; Utah Street from the north right-of-way of Madison Street to the south right-of-way of North "E" Street; EXHIBIT A ocH~st1° A ... .. .: ' - :; ~ ~ _ ~ .. ~ :Y ~ . ~~ .. _•:i - SCAIE~ ~~I"=1000.. :-: ~`~ ~ ~0 - ,:: ~~.•~_.,.: ~~ ; :~?=`~ 5~ 2000 _: ''~.-. . ~LI *.~.....X.. ._ ...,„ ..-..~ ..~ ~ ~~ ,~,.,, -.:.r., ~, r ~R-~ F ~; z ~._._.. t ~ ... T R }j : r i i ~ yR ,G :" . a = C i % - ~, s i ~ y . `f ~~ ` r •~ ' T' '•~ ~ k ~~ .~ `\ ~~ [: SMCT IM p7B?SOII L l ~ !. ®~ ~ ~~~ ~ R-2 ., BUD.. !_ ~ .' ~ ~~`~ . ... rt :. z ~ ,` • ;~+: ~ & ~ 3 ~. '~ 1eS + ~ ¢ ~ _ f t °•b _ :~ w: ~, ~ _ ~ ~ F~ i = v ~ . = :7 ; j ! C+Y. i y t - 1 L 2 -• }, ti ` ~ ... .... ...w4.s ~. - t C ~ : ~ ~ ` :.~ ~ s S _ ! ~_ .......-~ - ~ _.,r,. s i 7 .r. ~}~J^'' S~ [•++Y~ ~:.~ i~M N :~~ r.. ~' ~,^ R-2 ~~ r.' .. :,::r. ~~~ ~.. ~` s s r ......r.__..._... - . .._..r..=._._..~.~. _ _ } :~.~ `s' - ~'~ l .mow .~~ .t = ~ ~ . `~. ~s~-~ ~`'.~ ,ma'y' ~`' R- t ~ - :~ ~-= ~. ..\'. . • ~• 1, f,a tiY~ ~\F: ~..` ~;:;~:, '~ 14 .~~~~ ~ • ~/ R _ • EXHiBFP $ • • • CITY OF LA PORTE SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Ordinance #1501 Permit No. SCU90-002 CLP Job No. N/A This permit issued to: Don R Holloway Owner or Agent 600 Jefferson St. Suite 555 Houston Texas 77002 Address For Development of: International Cargo Network Inc. Development Name 502 North Broadway Address Le Qal Description is attached as • ~ Exhibit A Legal Description Zoning: PUD: BI,; R-2 PERMIT CONDITIONS Failure to begin construction within one (1) year after issuance or as scheduled under the terms of a special conditional use permit shall void the permit as approved, except upon an extension of time granted after application to the Planning and Zoning Commission. If construction is terminated after the completion of any stage and there is ample evidence that further development is not contemplated the ordinance establishing such special conditional use permit may be rescinded by the City Council, upon its own motion or upon the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of La Porte, and the previous zoning of the entire tract shall be in full effect on the portion which is undeveloped. Additional Conditions (See Exhibit B) Validation Date: • Zoning Administrator City Secretary ~HE~~ C • • r 1 U SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SCU90-002 INTERNATIONAL CARGO NETWORK PERMIT CONDITIONS I. The Barbours Cut driveway entrance width shall be a minimum of thirty (30) feet. II•. A utility easement, twenty (20) feet in width shall be dedicated to the City. The easement shall be located on the eastern edge of the North Broadway right-of-way and run from the property corner located at the intersection of North Broadway and the northern boundary of the East Adams Street right-of-way, north for a distance of 1,340 feet to the property corner located at North Broadway and the southern boundary of the North "E" Street right-of-way. An agreement dedicating this easement to the City of La Porte shall be executed prior to the issuance of any construction permits for this project. ~I. A landscaped setback area, at least thirty (30) feet in depth shall be developed along the southern and eastern faces of the container staging area. A landscape planting plan for this area shall be submitted for • review by the Director of Community Development. No construction permits for the project shall be issued until such time as the Director has deemed the plan to be satisfactory and granted his approval. n ~CW~BR' C U C~ NORTH • HARBOURS CUT DRIVE ~125:'Fr o ' e n I' a 1 ~ ~ f•S } ~• y 1 • y -'^' .~>~~~ 672 Ft. ' '' ' e•' ~. CONCRETE • ,~. r: ~ „.1. . '. ~ ,.. a: .,;~..:~'~ PARK/NG ~~; ~ -.; ,;, ., - n r•#.::• ';, ; ;.:.. CONCRETE :~°.' ~ ~ ~r~,,{,,gg: ~~v~ ,'sti'r ~y T PAVEMENT ? ' ~~~ y-~ L Truek Doors ITYlIY!) yy <r 9~7 % O .~ '~- a .~.~ ~ ~; : ; ~, ~ i z ~ ;;~~: ~ - o a F ~~ - ~ ~ (LEASED AREA) y ~ ~Y ao n~ 3~ a~ n :f. ~,+ , ~: ' ~.. ~., ~~',' J'k~. .•'. ~ .I .. .,. ~) _. ~ i~.. . ir: ~"`; . iF~.r•.....+'~'?"-{:yi? ~,.'Ar::._ l :i~r~`~ ..'~: • ~:.r~ ''.797•Ft.• ~ .. ~ '+"• -n' :?Tk~~a'v"'• _ I.i `~...:.:a~i:>~ia`~- % . .,~,x. m D I • C27 `~,. m ~: ~, . _. v _ ~~~~~ ' ~.. ~../ ~ . . . UL.v ~. I I I ~ LANDSCAPE BUFFER • S~ I I I _ ~ ~~ . ~ Ij-a" ~ I ~~• ~ ~ ' ~ I ~~ ~ _ . ~ i II FUTURE ~ - I I I ~~ ~ ~ '~ 13 of - I I ~ I ~ ~, . .. :o I;I~~ ~ ! ~ I Z ~ ~, ~ ~ ti OI ~~ ~ ' ~ ~ I v W j ~ ! i 3. ~ ~ f0 n ;I ~ ~ - I ' ~ ' I . - - _.. ~ ~ - _._ .~ I ~ -~ I 1 c I I ~~ ~~ I ~ YR 1 ~ ~ W ~ le 30 ~ 30 ~ j 30 ~ ~ 30 ~ I I ~ a ~ ! ! 0 ' ~ I m -.. CONTAINER -~ N '-- ._ STAGING _ I o ' i ~ ~ - _ ; a i 1 ~ ~ ~ I I I ' ~ I I 5, I ~ i . . r ' ~~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ I 3' SO' SO' SO' 7 SO' IS' ! . ---t I i 1 ~ TYP.) ! 1 I 1 I I f ~ ~1 ~ 1 'P Bv;t.r.r,.~j 35'cff.det~ry Ft,J~,Q ~ !'' ' coe .) -' I. ~ TRUCK PARKING ~ I l~A~( ~ ELECTRIC SLIDING ,S~ _ ~ • ~ v 201.F. WATER ENOA E1~IENT ~ I PROVI GATE ~ • 1 P w AT R.R.CRO$SING I FO 8ok38' ' ~ < 3J, 2A 1 } I 1 g~'to~ry t ti ~j.} 'P I ~t9'~TAPPING ~ E 0' ~ ~°~'I X251 ... l___.1. 1 '°l ~ g yv/ (I 1 8"TAPPING VALV _ ._ . ... ~. ~ g~ _ 3 S~ ,^ tip.. ,. .....,... ,_.,~:;3. .. S: .. .... ..,.... .. -... SS`"'• ~ 'r • CHECKLIST • PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Project # SCU94-004 YES NO N A 1. An application for a conditional use permit (X) ( ) ( ) has been filed and processed based upon procedures established by Section 10-200 of this Ordinance. 2. An application for a Major Development (X) ( ) ( ) Site Plan, Minor Development Site Plan, or Preliminary Plat has been filed and processed simultaneously with the Conditional Use Permit and shall be subject to the requirements of the La Porte Development Ordinance. 3. Submittal and filing of the major or minor (X) ( ) ( ) development site plan or preliminary plat has been in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance of the City of La Porte, and shall contain (in addition to the requirements of said Development Ordinance) the following information: • a) The entire outline, overall (X) ( ) ( ) dimensions and area of the tract described in the application. b) The use, zoning and ownership of (X) ( ) ( ) all adjacent properties within one hundred feet (100') of the tract boundaries including the location of all structures thereon and the right-of--way widths of all adjacent public roadways. c) The existing and proposed (X) ( ) ( ) topography of the tract with contour intervals not greater than one foot (1'). d) The location, general exterior (X) ( ) ( ) dimensions and approximate gross floor areas of all proposed buildings, or where appropriate, examples of housing units to be built on lots. e) The type of each use proposed to (X) ( ) ( ) occupy each building and the approximate amount of building floor area devoted to each separate use, if appropriate. f) The proposed location, arrangement and number of automobile parking stalls, or appropriate examples for each housing type. g) The proposed location, arrangement and general dimensions of all truck loading facilities, if appropriate. h) The location and dimensions of all vehicular entrances, exits and driveways and their relationship to all existing or proposed district or development examples for each housing type. i) The location and dimensions of all walls, fences, and plantings designed to screen the proposed district or development from adjacent uses. j) The general drainage system. • k) Standazds for exterior signs, azchitectural style, landscape concepts, and other vaziables which will be controlled in the design of buildings in the development area. 1) Proposed exterior azchitectural elevations illustrating the basic design elements and material appearances. 4. The applicant has submitted a proposed schedule of construction. (If the construction of the proposed Planned Unit Development is to be in stages, then the components contained in each stage must be clearly delineated.) In addition, the Developer or Subdivider must submit a General Plan in accordance with the requirements of the City of La Porte Development Ordinance. Said General Plan has been submitted rior to the submission of a Development Site Plan or Preliminary Plat, as the case may be. The • development schedule indicates the approximate starting date and the approximate completion date of the complete Development Plan. • ~X) ~ ) ~X) ~ ) ~X) ~ ) ~X) ~ ) ~X) ~ ) ~X) ~ ) ~X) ~ ) ~X) ~ ) ~ ) ~ ) ~ ) ~ ) ~ ) ~ ) ~ ~ 5. A draft of all propose eed restrictions, ( ( ) (X ) assessments, and covenants has been filed clearly delineating responsibility for • maintenance and control of public and private property, and common areas. 6. Review and evaluation criteria: a) Adequate property control is ( ) ( ) (X ) provided to protect the individual owner's rights and property values and the public responsibility for maintenance and upkeep. b) The interior circulation plan plus (X )~~ ( ) ( ) access from and onto public right- of-way does not create congestion or dangers and is adequate for the safety of the project residents and general public. c) A sufficient amount of usable ( ) ( ) (X ) open space is provided, in general conformance with the open space requirements outlined for each particular use classification in this Ordinance. d) That the arrangement of buildings, (X) ( ) ( ) structures and accessory uses does • not unreasonably disturb the privacy or property values of the surrounding residential uses. e) Acoustical controls for interior (X) ( ) ( ) areas and facilities area at a minimum in compliance with the current standards of the Standard Building Code of the City of La Porte. f) The architectural design of the (X) ( ) ( ) project is compatible with the surrounding area. g) The drainage and utility system (X) ( ) ( ) plans are submitted to the Director of Planning and the final drainage and utility plans shall be subject to his approval. h) The development schedule ensures (X) ( ) ( ) a logical development of the site which will protect the public interest and conserve the land. • i) The development is in compliance (X) ( ) ( ) with the requirements of the La Porte Development Ordinance. j) Dwelling unit~d accessory use requirements are in general compliance with the district • provisions in which the development is planned. k) The provisions of Section 10-200 of this ordinance are considered and satisfactorily met. 7. Property Controls: a) The property is in single ownership or under the management and supervision of a central authority or otherwise subject to such supervisory lease or ownership control as may be necessary to cazry out the provisions of this Ordinance. b) Prior to the use or occupancy or sale or the execution of contracts for sale of an individual building unit, pazcel, tract, townhouse, apaztment, or common area, a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions or an equivalent document has been • filed with the City of La Porte; said filing with the City has been made prior to the filing of said declaration or documents or plans with the recording officers of . Harris County. c) The declaration of covenants, conditions or restrictions or equivalent document specifies that deeds, leases or documents of conveyance affecting buildings, units, pazcels, tracts, townhouses, or apartments shall subject said properties to the terms of said declaration. d) The declazation of covenants, conditions and restrictions provides that an owners' assoc. or corporation shall be formed and that all owners shall be members of said association or corporation which shall maintain all properties and common areas in good repair and which shall assess individual • property owners proportionate . shares of joint or common costs. The declaration has been subject to the review and received approval by the City Attorney. (~ ( ) (X) ( ) (X) ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) (X) (X) LJ • 8. Public Services: The proposed shall be (X)""" ( ) served by the City water and sewer system and fire hydrants shall be installed at such locations as necessary to provide fire protection. Proposed utility connections shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. 9. Building Height: Height limitations are the (X) ( ) same as imposed in the respective districts. 10. Roadways: Private roadways within the ( ) ( ) project will have an improved surface to twenty four feet (24') or more in width and are so designed as to permit the City fire trucks to provide protection to each building. (No portion of this required twenty four foot (24') road system may be used in calculating required off-street parking space or be used for parking.) COMMENTS: "Except as otherwise noted, all answers are based on a review of the original SCU submittals. (X) ~' Interior circulation will be impacted because of lease agreement. However, adequate truck and auto access will be available for both components of the facility. No changes to the current gate/driveway arran egcment are planned. """Anew building is to be placed within the marshalling yard areas. Existing fire protection is adequate. Water and sewer mains are located in close proximity to the proposed building location. Lines • can be readily extended. • • • r 1 U • LOT 1Z9; BLOCK 9; SPENWICK PLACE, SECTION I REPEAT REQUEST • • • Staff Report November 17, 1994 Spenwick Place, Section I Replat Request This replat was considered in Public Hearing by the Commission at its October 20, 1994, meeting. Following the close of the hearing, the request was tabled before a vote was taken to approve or deny. In order to consider this request, a motion must be made to bring it up from the table. At that point the request can be acted upon either with or without (at the Commission's discretion) further discussion. Attached to and following this report are a letter and site plan (sketching in a proposed house location) submitted by Mr. Schlott, the applicant. Also attached is a copy of staff s October 20, report regarding the request. • In addition, the staff received no additional responses from the neighborhood regarding the request. Originally we mailed 18 notices and received five responses. One response was in favor and four were against. There has been no additional information received from the neighborhood. As stated in the October 20, report, staff finds this request to comply with applicable zoning and development regulations and therefore, recommends its approval. The Commission shall, within thirty (30) calendar days of the filing date, take one of the following actions: 1. Approve the replat. This will allow it to be recorded with the County. It will allow the newly created lot to (subject to normally applicable City requirements) be developed as a homesite. 2. Deny the replat. The property in question will continue as a single lot. 3. Commission action shall be noted on three (3) copies of the Final Replat, which shall be distributed to the developer, department, and official files of the Commission. • • • • We are attempting to sub-divide our property into two lots in order to build another house. We have been to the planning department to discuss plans for the new house. We've already had a survey of the property and a re- plat completed, but has not been approved by the building department. We were not aware of the opposition at the last meeting until after we spoke in favor of building the new structure. Four (4) out of the 18 contacted were opposed and one was for. There were no opposition present at the last meeting and we had no prior knowledge of their concerns. 1) One of the concerns was obstructing traffic. We are adhering with the set backs and the house will not be obstructing any traffic. There is a ditch and plenty of room to view on-coming traffic. Also I believe you were mis- lead into thinking this was going to be a two-story house. It will be a single level dwelling. 2) There were concerns about not having enough room. There is approximately 6,600 square feet of property and less than 1600 square feet will be covered with this structure. (Approx. 24%) 3) Another concern was there would not be enough parking available. You have a motorium in the city of LaPorte which states a home cannot be built without having a two car garage. We will have atwo-car garage attached to the house with additional parking in front of the garage for at least two cars. So there will be ample parking available. I might add that the driveway will be coming off of Montgomery Lane and there is an existing culvert for this purpose. 4) Someone voiced that the lot was too small and would be no room for small children to play. As stated before, it has been approved by the building department and there will be room for children to playa (and not in the streets) As a parent I would never let my children play in the streets. Mr ?? you stated you would like to drive by and take a look at the property in question. Did you have a chance to do so? If not, we have some pictures available. We have already submitted plot plans with the structure (how the house will be situated) We are asking that you proceed with acceptance of this plan. We are entering the winter months and construction will become more difficult and we are hoping to frame it in before the cold weather arrives. Thank you for your consideration. Are there any questions or concerns GERALD & MARY SCHLOTT - 3205 ANDRICKS C~ MONTGOMERY LN • ''~~tl I. , ,~ ~d 1 ,,, .... . M ~~ MAN ¢~~~~~~. 3 D .. E , • ~ ~.~. ~\ ., R= 3 oaf . ~ 7 ~ : = - ~j% :~~1~"i ' •~°:~:~~~ a~ ~N = 568 ~_ '~ ~ ~ .;f ' , l n + ~ i tt ~ ~- N u ~ ~ t; i `•~ ~ ~Q V ~'•.-~ ~ ~~._ ~• /V49 °20 "00 "W /06. 9.35 " - ~ Q ~~ ! ~ ~...~ t, ~ ~-sis ~ i I ~ ~ ~~ LOT /fig :;~, n, -~~ -f:`' ~..• '1 ~:>~. 1~..N • o; . ~,r^~fd S/dam of T%7C_'`.•C t: r ~°!' %!:'C; pJ Qi ^ ~ ,.. ~ CJ;' /7QfC!/~r !'.. ! i.ti''(1l:5c'.:':i (-7~ .Sf'!c_7lN/7 /`?!r. /'G°CnrY.l'C.°Cy~/~f. r tp N. zpn~nu pra~g9((~~cCg,0~. to ~XAS r IM cAy of _L.A_H-t ~ ~F- . IFCEhO: J.E. - UU11y Ea~~m~nt AE. - Unooawctea wpl Eaa~menl B.~ - Bwitinp `'"° `.JLI BEY C'F (NI a~ p~/ •KO/YM pal pf ~.saiw~wn) ~EEqq ~,fD RtiS10 ~ ~ ~'~a'~~ ° ,~~Dt° ~N35 H ~ 1H E N ~f2TN CGS . 8~ ~. FT . ]S WD 5 NOf IN ME 100 iEMt RODD Pt/aN. f1n5 ~ .rC I /Tr- 1,/7 C- • STAtETtEM t5 BASED ON SCy11MG THE IOCJJlOh OI fN0 SURVE7 ON ~-/1 4-•t-' 1 { G _ 1 hlE ABO,f REfDiENCEO 4M AhD 6 fOR FLl70D WSURMtCE RATES gLLY AND 110T INiEN0E0 f0 IOFNIIFY SvECtf1C FLODOIND CANOfilONS. !I 1 .` .. I 1 • • • Staff Report October 20, 1994 Spenwick Place, Section I Replat Request Item No. IV on the agenda is to consider a replat of Lot 129; Block 9 of Spenwick Place, Section One. This subdivision was platted in March of 1953 and was part of the Collegeview Municipal Utility District at that time. The area was annexed by the City of La Porte in 1984. The owner has proposed the replat in order to subdivide one large lot into two. The existing lot contains 13,992.93 sq ft, which greatly exceeds the City of La Porte minimum lot size requirements for single family residential. The proposed lots will still exceed the City's size requirements and allow construction of two homes instead of one. • The City's Development Ordinance No. 1444 and State Law allows for a replat or resubdivision of a recorded subdivision plat, or a portion thereof, but M without vacation of the immediate previous plat and is hereby expressly authorized to be recorded and shall be deemed valid and controlling when: a. It has been signed and acknowledged by only the owners of the particular property which is being replatted or resubdivided. b. It does not attempt to alter, amend or remove any covenants and restrictions. c. There is compliance, when applicable, with Section 212.014 and 212.015 of V.T.C.A. local government codes. d. It has been approved by the Commission after being prepared and filed as though it were an original plat as specified in Section 4.04 of the Ordinance; and e. All expenses incurred by the City or the subdivider in the Replat process shall be borne by the subdivider, including costs of notice of public hearing. The Commission may within thirty (30) calendar days of the filing date, take • one of the following actions. • • Planning and Zoning Commission Spenwick Place, Section I, Replat Staff Report of 10/20/94 1) Approve the Final Replat as filed; 2) Disapprove the Final Replat as filed, provided the reasons for such disapproval are stated in writing and a copy of the statements is signed by the Chairman of the Planning Commission. Commission action shall be noted on three (3) copies of the Final Replat, which shall be distributed to the developer, Department, and official files of the Commission. Final Plats: Effect of Approval 1) Approval of a Final Replat as filed and all accompanying documentation by the Commission, together with approval of the Public Improvement Construction Documents by the Director shall result in issuance of a Development Authorization by the Department which permits the developer to begin construction of subdivision improvements. Not • applicable in this case because it does not involve construction at this time. 2) Disapproval of a Final Replat requires filing of a new Final Plat. • Notifications and advertisement of the mandatory public hearing were complied with on October 9, 1994. • Staff has reviewed the replat; all changes and corrections have been completed (See Exhibit attached). • The replat will not alter, amend, or remove any subdivision covenants or deed restrictions. • If approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the chairman shall sign and release the replat for recordation. • This replat complies with applicable City of La Porte ordinance and State Law. Staff recommends approval of the replat as presented. • • • • • R. NORRIS SUBDIVISION • CITY OF~ PORTE PLAT SUBMITTAL APPLICATION • (All plat submittals to be reviewed and considered for presentation to the Planning and Zoning Commission must be accompanied by this application and necessary documentation listed herein. Submittals will not be reviewed by staff without this application.) OFFICE USE ONLY DATE RECEIVED: SUBMITTAL #: RECEIPT #: PLANNING ~ ZOMNG MEETING DATE: Type of Submittal: General Plan (~ Preliminary Plat (__) Finat Plat (~ Date: 119/94 Contact Person(s): Richard Norris Phone: 471-4844 Name of Proposed Development: R. Norris Subdivision Name of Developer: Richard Norris Phone: Address of Developer: 609 W. Main, La Porte. TX 77571 Number of Sections: 1 Number of Lots: 2 ~egal Description of Property: 2.745 ac. out of Outlot 451. La Porte Outlots. Enoch Brinson Survev A-5 and the Nicholas Clopper Survey A-198. Filing Fee: Amount: 50.00 Receipt #: Checks should be made payable to the City of La Porte. List All Other Contact Persons: Name Address Ronda Norris same Phone Fax 471-4844 N jA Billy Shanks 1414 Wavecrest. Houston. TX 77062 488-1486 • • • C, Staff Report -November 17, 1994 R. Norris Subdivision -Minor Subdivision Plat The R. Norris Subdivision is comprised of 2.745 acres of land located along Underwood Road approximately 100 feet north of Avenue "H". The property is to be subdivided into one block containing two lots. As a minor subdivision, the developer can proceed directly to the final plat process. Staff, using Appendix D of Development Ordinance 1444 as a guide, has reviewed this plat and found it to comply with all applicable City requirements. A reduced scale copy of the plat is attached and identified as Exhibit A. A checklist detailing the issues considered during review is attached and follows this report. Section 4.04 of the Development Ordinance requires covenants to be submitted in conjunction with the Final Plats. The purpose of these covenants is to create "an association of lot. owners charged with promoting recreation, health, safety and welfare...[providing] improvements and maintenance of any common areas, compensating open space, private streets, alleys or parking areas. The association shall be empowered to levy assessments to • be used exclusively in the enforcement of the covenant..." This is a two lot subdivision with a single owner. There are no private streets, alleys or common open spaces. As a commercial subdivision, there is no requirement for recreational facilities. With a single owner there is no need or means for establishing an owner's association. There is no need or means for the levy of assessments. Public improvements are existing at this site and do not need to be considered in the review process. Drainage issues were corrected as part of the recent improvements to Underwood Road by Harris County. Based on these considerations, staff would request and recommend that the Commission waive the requirement for subdivision covenants. A few minor revisions to the plat as presented will need to take place prior to signatures. 1. Add a City of La Porte survey monument at the southwest comer of the subdivision. 2. Delete the words "Laws of the State of Texas" in the approving authority certificate. • • C, . CITY OF LA PORTE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE CHECKLIST FINAL PLATS (APPENDIX D) • FINAL PLATS MUST CONTAIN ALL ELEMENTS OF THE APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT PLUS THE FOLLOWING: GRAPHIC CONTENTS: SHOWN Y N 1. Name of owner (if a company or (X) ( ) ( ) corporation, list name and title of authorized representative). 2. Name of registered engineer or surveyor (X) ( ) ( ) who prepared Final Plat. 3. Legal boundary description of (X) ( ) ( ) subdivision, consisting of a metes and bounds description of each line between each boundary point. This description ' may be In written or tabular form. 4. Legal and special statements, where (X) ( ) ( ) appropriate: a. Owners' Acknowledgement (X) ( ) ( ) (Enclosure 1) b. Lienholders' Subordination ( ) ( ) (X ) Agreement (Enclosure 2) c. Plat Accuracy Certfficate (X) ( ) ( ) (See Appendix ~ d. Final Survey Certificate (X) ( ) ( ) (See Appendix F) e. Approving Authority Certificate (X) ( ) ( ) (Enclosure 3) f. Amending Plat Certificate ( ) ( ) (X ) (Enclosure 4) g. Vacation of Subdivision Plat ( ) ( ) (X ) (Enclosure 5) h. Harris County Clerk Filing (X) ( ) ( ) Statement (Enclosure 6) • Development Ordinance Chec~t Final Plats (Appendix D) Page 2 of 3 i. Retum Map Agreement (Enclosure 7) J. Special Statements (Enclosure 8) DOCUMENTATION: 1. Proposed Streets: Submit complete public street construction drawings for approval by the Director of Community Development. (See PICM for criteria for street construction documents.) 2. Proposed Utilities: Submft complete public utility construction drawings for approval by the Director (See PICM for criteria for utility construction documents.) 3. Coordinate listing: A complete list of coordinates for each point to be marked in the final field survey. Each point on the list is to be assigned a unique number code. A copy of the Final Plat, marked with the locations of each number code, is to be submitted as well. 4. Utility Company Letters: Letters from servicing utility companies approving the easements shown on the plat for their use. 5. Private Easements: A copy of the Instrument(s) establishing private easement(s) within the subdivision. 6. Private Easement Holders Consent: A letter, statement or Instrument from the holder of any privately owned easement or fee strip within the subdivision boundaries approving any crossings of said existing easement or fee strip by proposed streets, utilities, or easements • shown on the plat. If adjustment of existing utilities is required, said letter shall specify the nature of the adjustments and the approval of the owner for such adjustment. • SHOWN Y N NA (X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) (X) (X) ( ) ( ) ~ ) ~ ) ~ X) ( X) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Development Ordinance Chec~t Final Plats (Appendix D) Page 3 of 3 • 7. Residential ParMand: Receipt for payment in lieu of required dedication of parkland, pursuant to Section 12.05 of the Ordinance or instrument of dedication pursuant to Section 12.10 of the Ordinance. 8. Conditional Approval Document: Any documents specified by the City Planning Commission in conditionally approving the Preliminary Plat. •1'1. • SHOWN Y N ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) (X) Signature: Date: l 1, ~ • • ® • i ~; P m .. m .. ynf.9n Nliit yt nvn i) > Z 2~ ono y i a > i m O ti Z A= m ^ •naz yZy ~ 0 1 Sam =~i % i-1A Z~ t-Om iNCT-1 y c~ yl,°I~ inpl_RJ Nj 1~11~ h n ..>yS~, t~l ~i ^ i _,y r e~ 'i^ TOA ='1 A > u r K y yy?Ty R j 7J_S.-l Y T 5x 3. -< K m .. n.. ~ ~ ° .. y tYO. ~~Y.R ~t 1~Q y ~ :r7J.1 t>_• c z_~ ' ~ r > y p :>c.ylK ~JS> il m ~. vyrir r h . t r _ si>.. i`j FI m y~x~O tii ^ C I Y. ~yt`9~ m a . -1 ..t I TI i 0 + T _ _l' '/. T+~ ~t Sl• _ 91^~ y07> x r S m T F~ SSyyyyyy ;•h > A = I R`U ~ n• •< > GI HI I y•IC~ i tyA iZ yI _ y y+ . C j ~' *° AI ria ~ xo ~ _ i r rrl •'e ~~ y ! , -c...•> . m+l r _ ~x==: _~ ~ " >..yWr I •-,7 v ai;..`' r ?" i .c I - ~ I ~ '~ a K i;i~ a' =y, ~^ y ~ x I .I `~ti 'v l ~ j ~ _ -1 7 I ~» > a l 1 ~ y y - I yyy s I 7 t I •J O A t: 7 /. r ~ l ' y T p - S •< T ~r J'I ;A? J~ xI ~_•~. ~ y Y, •~ ~ ~ ° m" .. ~ v k h n .y 1 .. ~ .. 1 ~~ i C+ m S ]• l'i l' 1 CJ = ~~ M c 7 ]Y ]>t j 'gym > 1 ~ '~ ~ ~ :s o u y t~ - ~ ' w ' ~, ~ y < a , A ro .. r ~) e• >< <" rn t+ Y yl ' f (" ~ a n ~ ~ ~ r .. ~ O In ! 1 •- i; l., •v .. ~ ' ~. l9 v 9 01 J; l~ . ~ N w a C N N r-i~i V r r in ~: 9 a y N s' sr v c ~' L U 2 in N >t ~ i ~~ fi S' -] rU C ~]1 4• y 1.. N ~ ;~ T .O .~ 17 in .E m J V ~ ~ to x .g :~ c ~ ]. ~ . a = ~ rn ~ O N T. 9 ~ 1 1.. 7 H ~Y nl ~ ~ ° i' c i 1 • 1': K ro N m 'O ~ ~ ~ ~ iii ~~ C~ o a't _, ~ - s ~ IT 9 ;a 1 :~ .;, _. 1. ~` ~3 ,• • -. IK H ft a »y7.1 O vrma n V. x C >~1 O>-In>yyT TT•1 9N0ryy A~7S ~aS K Oy AA O -I 1 rC aSO .Td 01'a.vG >OS>rr1YC A~yAyO \m W119•WI 4pFe! yZ ~ S -<7 S m•<07 nbAyLO S 1~zNr11~~Ln2mVjh TCI S~~ImpX2 pW 4' S yw ,~•`•2 OZ•iS 90 ~5 .r..-IAO'I C]ZOS y A>AZO a ~Cq'lWr9 T ' AO t;•1 c0 9On mi9q '0?t0 mCyyt mOC1ynC =`ylr"gCp C 0~2VC A ~ •S- 7 Op ;KS->I faA1m~A aOm~m ~C?p >ACrm m>9 ~t 41 Atl~A l N N yy>r=Z.. ^ A>f>.' T am n^>ZNN S. U, ml1ylZy~lly ymy j~ Gm CSMfff~Q .v7Cy ,c< >>OR~ S Ial1M m-a1C V'mt,O A90j ]t~NS~.9C ~`C.lics Or7 n0 > Gy -NI "•iirC;Ai n OZ>_'AS •t-^S1~9Ay Z nln3,~1C O 1~1~ CS-^C~f1100'lOS A2~-'•IA~%~+x frsll99O Qy.. o ~Yci~ ( t '-'~1N~;VS_~(allmia myN1 a'<o>n.m >>^VCAm N.i~an -1 i~ 9>C'Z• tl>r f^>A>_r Rt09+ A00' ~Or O M 0S ..1x0 n'< NlK9Rma~^O n0>Z~XON myx> Tr - a•IS> a 1O-si>~ mm o~~••v> za T yN ym ylSll L' » K °> q0 ~ >N yyn`y`>~> ]'t4J~•>:l~f S9 S OZryN ~,>d s ~ A=A~= J ym ~~Ol>y'< aAiim='SA C]r NO.<C"'lZ nS f v' S•<=im v r pN f~" lynyO tr'yjmV.Q iy.t~~A.1 .p~'O~pO MK y.Om AAtIRi 0 A A 6 xI > T•> YC 0>!• '>"YY A•1 ~!' stn s'"~ Ir o n ^iel ~ 0 yp 7m ~yma.; f-> :iym'•m: oen yN .<y a'<°j g%1 a A ~~.<_~~ > A yNm ~~'Ay9 m>y0_10~91 Z> pu~a~A NZ µ y ARa1,Ny i 1 ~ .9 V' 1019Zyp2t0 arA CRrR N2m : a.t O ~ _ ~10i>= yy' ~ na ~'~~=10°= le >z ~tZty• Atr^I pN 117jr ZSANK Z ~ N Ar91?yl .1_ O• J•`In yAy>Oy OOr yA9 A> ^~A~~m 0 m rn S'ti> A V Z> *^+Ii1N11» a-^m0~y1~0p1yR rT Ga1°C ~ p0~-1 .< I IR~ >~n.lAnt' Of naN"A • IZry y I A. I 9 ONyO zO~S> 7 C A 417 91'0091 • m~00^~•':>St n Ih ~70.900A OtNha 9s N(. c'OC wF ^I Y X•<i ~n'ty ,Y0j008a OC aFlf•IAA H A m>A>R. OZ imU.ZAOa Rn •< C~=aOt fAJ 1'l. nl T"191GC S R isAC ~ er oT>v?nos> > ZJ~mm i0 T C ^yJ lz O~yi~f an^~ x t~4yy!_ flhilhi a^];Oita m oyc Jni sm or: C.=~T Ve 1'001'90 O~> Iq > v>mn xr~Qr,~,:~vr~•aa Cmm > _ ~M^~R ~Jynlyf. l>'S 7A~a i a° Fxxrrv. r A 00,f> 007»:+I~UO°A RSV *~ ~S~Ot^myRymt ON>.. iJm tS.' As. n GSRar Omy Sfl/yO ~;~xI O. S~>m 1. .-O~^A 17 'J~r ~m. Ali ••v y•in•=•' °o u'~-im '<A An tY~yGp<t°,,m -< m z .e lrll T~. T. itiZ J:OSC2•q n> Ac xs ..r.Ja.y. c. ^I'r c~<z Aax_ls •l••=~c a-la ~s.°` ~ ~°~s~ z K ~ S :ti ' •. ~ tl O '•• ~ . l I .. '\ I .. ~T •• A n 1 C h `[ O 4 ~ ,(I s~~ ,. ' ^• ~ -` I C •1 f z r'• .' o ~ AA `J _~ ?t ___ \, i l~~~ __ -G. C W I ^J;) ;•l rC V 0 z .~ EAST 42d.16~ (__._. _ .. Q 1 n 4! !u 7 1 AI N ' Iv ~ J I• n k O 'Y r ~: o - l,l C ~ N ~ .. . . 1 .i l7 1' (1 c ' 11 ,. '? ro ~ in .. y :J N IS ~ - ~ 'ti E:t'1 428.2'!' Io I° a ~ J~1,'F NI IE. 11 H 11 (801 h' U.1~` ) • • • • C~ • • COLLEGEVIEW SUBDIVISION GENERAL PLAN • • r~ ~J Staff Report -November 17, 1994 Collegeview Subdivision -Major Subdivision General Plan The Collegeview Subdivision is comprised of 12.7223 acres of land out of the Wm. Jones Survey Abstract 482, located at Luella Boulevard and Oakhaven Road. The subdivision is divided into one block and two lots, one of which (5.5 ac.) is to be developed as a multi- family apartment complex. The developer, as required by the Development Ordinance, has submitted a General plan of the entire subdivision. Once the plan has been approved, it will be followed by separate plat submittals for each of the subdivision sections. The first phase of staff s review involved Zoning and Comprehensive Plan issues. The Collegeview Subdivision General Plan conforms to all applicable zoning regulations. The plan conforms to Comprehensive Plan guidelines as well. Elements of the Comprehensive Plan that were considered during this phase of review include the following: • Land Use Plan • Utility Plan • Thoroughfare Plan • Safety Plan • Parks/Conservation Plan The General Plan as submitted is in compliance with City regulations and all public improvements will be considered as preliminary plats are received. All building footprints, etc. shown are subject to change as actual final design of improvements are completed, reviewed and approved. Using Appendix "C" of Ordinance 1444 as a guide, staff has also reviewed the General Plan and found it to comply with all applicable Development Ordinance requirements as well. A copy of the Appendix "D" checklist follows this report. A copy of the Collegeview plan is included and identified as Map Exhibit B. Development Ordinance Section 4.01 requires that the Commission, within thirty (30) calendar days from the filing date, subsequent to review of a General Plan, take one of the following actions. 1. Approve the Genal Plan as filed; • • 2. Conditionally Approve the General Plan as filed, provided the reasons for such conditional approval are stated in writing and a copy of the statement is signed by the Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 3. .Disapprove the General Plan as filed, provided the reasons for such disapproval are stated in writing and a copy of the statement is signed by the Chairman of the Planning and Zoning Commission. As noted above, the Collegeview General Plan has been found to comply with all applicable City regulations. Staff, therefore, recommends approval of the General Plan as presented. • .• ' • • LA PORTS M//AJOR DEV/ELOPHENT ClfECKLIST Name of Development ~~~l~al~ I/eGt> Address or Legal Description v$~00 LUe/~6v //~J/U• • Acreage: _S• 5000 - O -__ 7, ZZ73 /Z • 7273 n ~ Th's Parcel Previous Parcels Future Parcels Total Developmen: nAPPLICANT SIGNATURE N11ame, Type or Print Title Date l~O~r1Mi.JN! T ~~e/c% evXr+r /j33o~s /.C/i//off /~u_//~ ,~_~. .sue (7/3~ 8 j0 5803 ~JCompan /1 Mai in Addres~070 Phone Number c:D r!S t/ ~~ n7'S~~4G , g ###############i############# TYPE DEVELOPMENT ###########################1 (~ Apartments ( ) Mobile home park ( ) Neighborhood shopping center ( ) Other shopping center ( ) Office building/park ( ) Other commercial development ( ) Industrial park ( ) Other industrial ( ) Planned Unit Development ( ) Other ################################ KEY PEOPLE ##############################+ Name Mailing Address 7 7~y$ Phone Number /~Ori7' ~/• .~arorJ Z(oooS.ry,Frw '`~70$ ~ius~ti 7/3 92-8980 and Owne (s) ~~_T ~/ ~y~u~~~~~/ i+ i~ Developer(s) _ •~ Land Planner c~ L _ 13 33 0 A~Jis~ le~,~/o,,y . f~ws~h ~~3) 890 -.TS03 Engir~eef 7'070 Su rweDy oCr~ e~rr.~P. /LIo%,~ /00 X23 a a.~ #370 uS~r1 ~7/3 6Z/ - ~ ~ t'o~ • A r c hYt e c t 770~, Landscape Architect ######## DOES THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CONFORH TO THE LA PORTS ########~ Land Use Plan? (~ (N) Beautificatn. ~ Conservatn. Plan? ~ (N; Thoroughfare Plan? (~ (!!) Safety Plan? (N; Stormwater Drainage Plan? (N) Redevelopment Plan? (N) Potable ~Jater Plan? (N) Development Ordinance? (N; Sanitary 4Jaste Plan? (N) Zoning Ordinance? (N; Open Space & Pedes. Plan? (!!) Public Improvmts. Criteria Manual? (N: Community Facilities Plan? (N) Flood Hazard Prev. Ordinance? (N) Residential Dev. Plan? (N) _ (Y) (Ni Note: Explain "no" answer s. Attach additional ahcets as necessary. #################### SPECIAL HAZARDS AND NUISANCES #################### Any portion of this land in the 100 year flood plain? ~O Flood Zone? Is this land characterized by or exposed to: Steep grades and ravines? Soil erosion? Flooding? Heavy vehicular traffic? Aircraft glide paths? Unusual noise/vibration? Explosive or fire hazard? (Y ) K~ Smoke? (Y) {~ Chemical fumes? (Y) Other odors? (Y) Poor surface drainage? (Y) High water table? (Y) Swamp or marsh? (Y) -- (Y) (Y) (Y) (Y) ~ (Y) (N) NOTE: Explain "yes" answers. Attach additional sheets as necessary. i ~ • LA PORTE MAJOR DEVELOPMENT CFIECKLIST _ Page Two Name of Development La•~[~ge _~Le~• Address or Legal Description ~v /r~DO _ G(~t /~I~~ ######################i PROPOSED LAND USE ################################1 Acreage Unrestricted reserves, acres Restricted reserves, acres Common area, acres Common area, sq. ft. per unit Residential density, units per acre Total off street parking spaces THIS SECTION ENTIRE TRACT '.Soo D /Z.7773 -~. ~_- ##############i#!####### EXISTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ####################i Are the following present or readily available: Public streets? (N) Telephone service? (FJ; Public water supply main? (N) Natural gas service? (N; Public sanitary sewer? (N) Street lighting? (N; Storm Sewer Outfall? (N) Garbage collection? (N) Fire protection? (M) ~__ __ ~ (Y) (N; Electric service lines? (N) __,~__ ___ (Y) (N) Telephone service lines? (N) _~_____~____ ~__ (Y) (N) NOTE: Explain any "NO" answers and describe other existing conditions. Attach additional sheets as necessary. • --- --- Y - -- ---- _ ---_ ---- ~~--- ~-- ~---- - ##f################### PROPOSED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ######################i PUBLIC PRIVATE COMMENTS Streets K _'' __ 1 tJater supply system ~__ -£~e~nr s e w e r system ~i1//a _ _ _~__ ~ ~/ Storm drainage system -- X _ -~- - Street lighting _ _ ~ _ 0/HEAD U/GROUND COMMENTS Power X Telephone ~~ x _____ Cable TV ~ X ___ _ Will drainage be provided by Q~) curb and gutter or ( ) surface drainage? Explain: __ __ ############################ ADDITIONAL REMARKS #####################i#### NOTE: Attach additional sheets as necessary. • • C: LJ GENERAL PLAN CHECKLIST Development Name: Type of Development: Location: Date of Commission Review: A. Graphic Contents 1. Name of Development: 2. Twe of Development: 3. Description of Land: 4. Phases: 5. Name of Developer: 6. Name of Surveyor: Name of Engineer: 7. Filin~Date: 8. Scale: 9. North Arrow: 10. Ke,~BD: 11. Perimeter Boundaries: 12. Adjacent Properties: 13. Physical Features: 14. Contour Lines: 15. Buildin Lg fines: Colle~eview Subdivision Residential Apartments Luella Blvd. Cad Oakhaven November 17. 1994 Collegeview Subdivision R-3 Apartments 12.7273 ac. Wm Jones Survey. Abst 482 Two Campus View Apartments Ltd. Community Development Consultants. Inc. November 3. 1994 1" = 100' Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown Shown • General Plan Checklist Contd. Page 2 of 2 16. Subdivisions: N/A 17. Condominiums: N/A 18. Reserves: N/A 19. Unsubdivided Developments: N/A 20. Streets: N/A . 21. Street Names: N/A 22. Utility Easements: Shown 23. Existing Public Utilities: Shown 24. Flood Hazard Area: NSA • 25. Schematic Utilit~yout: Shown (If Applicable) B. Documentation 1. La Porte Development Checklist: Received (attached) 2. Location or Vicinity Man: Shown Comments• Block 1, Lot 1 - 7.2273 ac. considered future development. • Reviewed By: Date: November 9. 1994 r ~.....,,.,..~f °f, • •. ~ ~, ~ 11 r ..~ t ~ '"a'' Y N ~ 1YN~ CC V V VTO Ir•'f ' UsT +, •+t+ ,~~ 1y wgri. m I'1.' ~ r` ~• <! 1~= J ~>.,- I Arm ' r7,_' . ~_ .. •~ '1 Ili--.~._._ .. 1~ `^, ,S I I , n ^t ~ ~ t .l ~ t° !v ^ ' ~ ~_„ uu~_„• ... C UEZ L-A I/477ZF[7A~z71. 7~9'3~: •,l~) l o~ ,ae, r'c 7F r., c .t~ R. _ ... , ;,' ; ~~ A e , ~~ .: ~ V x ~ -~ -- -- -~-,__ :~ _ _ __ r.os'sa 5.•.Jcsu oo•-• --~ 'b 1 N I ~., v w ~,, ~ ~~• '~ i ` I . C .. IJ ~ ~ ! 2773 Ac.:eS \\ . ... 1-- / 3'„-•-t..l- • ~ __ '~_. - ~ . _ I ie u_F. Voc_sss.~r.ia:ncc.c _ _ w I 1 O .. .. .. .. .. _ .:. .. .~. ~ ~.. .n _'~. i7e'"~ n sue.. ._~' ... ~ .. _ 1].8.87' ..'1l..... .. ... •.. ~ . :..'. I 1 '0T'g11 ~d'r Innn . I I ~ I C I II r r V I~a1 ~1 VLry. %~ ~ ,~V. it.'~ /7 /. Ni ~Y ~!r~ ,, a l ~ ~ 1 e>• ..~ I it}~ ~' ~ ~. I o ~, AA ~ 1 ;; I n `7 .~ :~ I b ^ , • ~° ~5~ ~ ~ ~$~~ ~d .. • ~ 3 ;, 8 8 ~ ~ r• k ~'+ ~ + ,: ate„ ~~..f ~ •:.>r• q A' 8 8 o B ~ j ~ • ,< „ __ --~_._ _ ~_~~_ _~__ ..r .~_. ~..~__~t,_ .__ _ _... _. ._.. .~.__ _ _. _ .P __.... _ _. _. -_ ]][ o ~ ° • ~ ~ i v '_ 4 M n A N .°. D V p~ r t...i.. . + / p ~. m 4.. (r.rx C.~-- - - -n.... a i ~ ~ f:. ..... 1 ;' . f ~.,, ,~ .I ~--- -- ;.~y _ W ;,~ ~ommunity C.ONSULIIMOCivI(ENGINF.I.RS ~ COLLEGE I~/F_W ~, ; '~' '"' ' ' "' ""'_' ' _~ 11.•i!~! p, , \ (AND SURVEYORS + ~_ .-._-.- •_ _ --^_. - __-_ __ _ _ I ``\ Revelopment la~~D ,.(;,,Y WIII~. _... _ ,.~.A ti ` ` \ ~ Itoo,,on. l e ar 77(170 ' _ -".... ._ '° -- ' _' _."-' --- _' . - .C ~' ,e 0 onsullants,lnc. 1t7-8~0.590J GENERAL PLAN - _ _ _,~_~ _ _ rNi. m r o... ~ o.......i...'_ .. •. n.. _-_a _..__. ._-__..___~_.__- ...~____ __. __ ... _.... _.. __ -__-- _.. ____-__._ -_____- ___ __ .. .. r . .. .. .^f' n 1 ~ J .L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w N 1 . W N ~ O ~ a a p~ n n p~ n p~ a ~ W W ~ ~ ~ W ~ W W W ~ m C] n n C7 C1 n n n n n n n n n C -P l • C1 m n D . ~ m N ~ ~ ~Q 3 7 „3,~, ~ 7 C a ~ ~ ~ m m m ~ m S O .0 O1 7 l C 4 ~ ~ . ~J .~ m Q m co A 0 a m m a A n O 3 3 o m m a e m Q m 0 C7 O r~ ~f O ~D Z -p 3 a. ~ ~ ~~ ~_ J ~ ~ ~ 1 Q ~~ 3 n 0 3 3 N N_ O City of l..a Porte Planning and Zoning Commission Public Hearing November 17, 1994 ~4ny person wishing to speak in O.~P_O.S1TtO- N: of any item being considered by this Commission, please indicafe below by: A. Printed Name B. Signature C. Item Being Opposed 1. A. B. C. 2. A. B. C. 3. A. B. C. 4. A. B, C. 5. A. B. C, 6. A. B. C. 7. A. B. C. 8. A. B. C, 9. A. B. C. 10. A. B. C. 11. A. B. C. 12. A. B. C. 13. A. B. C. ~ ~ •