HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-18-1996 Public Hearing and Regular Meeting of the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission•
C~
Minutes
January 18, 1996
•
~~
•
• MINUTES •
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
JANUARY 18, 1996
Members Present: Chairman Betty Waters, Commission Members Chuck Engelken,
Dottie Kaminski, Eugene Edmonds, Margaret Anderson, Howard
Ebow, Melton Wolters
Members Absent:
City Staff Present: Building Official Mark Lewis, City Engineer Fred Thompson,
Planning Secretary Peggy Lee, Assistant City Attorney John
Armstrong
I. CALL TO ORDER
Meeting was called to order by Chairman Waters at 6:00 PM.
•
II. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 2, 1995, AND DECEMBER 7, 1995,
SPECIAL CALLED MEETINGS.
A motion was made by Maggie Anderson to approve both sets of minutes. The n~uturi
was seconded by Melton Wolters. All were in favor and the motion passed.
Chairman Waters suspended the agenda to allow Fred Thompson, the City's Engineer,
an opportunity to address the Commission regarding F-101 Interim Drainage
Improvements. Mr. Thompson reported that the proposed improvements are sponsored
jointly by the Harris County Flood Control District and the City of La Porte at an
estimated cost of $200,000; $100,000 per entity. The channel will be widened within
the existing right-of--way, from the switching yard west past Sens Road to north of "P"
Street. These improvements should increase the capacity of the channel by
approximately 30%. The scheduled completion date is the fourth quarter of 1996.
III. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A REPEAT OF LOT 5 OF THE
CORONET ESTATES SUBDIVISION, WffiCH IS LOCATED IN THE 1200
BLOCK OF ROBINSON ROAD.
Chairman Waters opened the Public Hearing at 6:12 PM.
Mark Lewis presented staff's report regarding the replat of Lot 5 of the Coronet Estates
Subdivision, which is located at the corner of "P" Street and Robinson Road. Lot 5 is
slightly over four acres and will be split into two equal lots; each comprising a single
family homesite.
•
Mr. Lewis noted that the subdivider is responsible for all costs for notice of the public
hearing. The cost for this hearing totals $42.06. The subdivider has paid this fee. The
subdivider has also made payment in the amount of $175 in lieu of park land dedication.
The escrowed money will only be spent to acquire or upgrade public park facilities in
Page 2 of 5 • •
Planning & Zoning Commission
Minutes of January 18, 1996
Park Zone V, the zone in which Coronet Estates is located.
Public notices were mailed to 18 surrounding property owners. Two were returned, both
being in favor of the replat.
A. PROPONENTS
There were none.
B. OPPONENTS
There were none.
IV. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Waters closed the Public Hearing at 6:15 PM.
V. CONSIDER APPROVING A REPEAT OF LOT 5 OF THE CORONET ESTATES
SUBDIVISION.
A motion was made by Howard Ebow to approve the replat of Lot 5 of the ~'
• Estates Subdivision. The motion was seconded by Chuck Engelken. All were in favor
and the motion passed.
VI. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE FAIRMONT PARK EAST, SECTION IV-B
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLATS.
Mr. Lewis presented staff's report regarding the plats of Fairmont Park East, Section IV-
B and IV-C. These are subsections of the Section IV plat which has already received
approval.
Mr. Lewis noted that Section IV-B will be comprised of 74 homesites. Development of
this section will include extension of Fleetwood Drive to connect with West Main Street.
Section IV-C will consist of 16 homesites.
Mr. Lewis also reminded the Commission that both sections are being considered for
Preliminary and Final Plat approval at the same time. Staff recommended appra~-~~ ~°af
the plats contingent upon payment being made for street lighting service and street sign
installation, prior to the plats being released for recordation.
A motion was made by Melton Wolters to approve the Preliminary and Final Plats of
Fairmont Park East, Section IV-B with the following condition:
• • Payment of fees for street lighting service and street signage installation
must be paid to the City, prior to the plat being released for recordation.
The motion was seconded by Howard Ebow. All were in favor and the motion passed.
• •
• Page 3 of 5
Planning & Zoning Commission
Minutes of January 18, 1996
VII. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE FAIRMONT PARK EAST, SECTION IV-C
PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLATS.
A motion was made by Maggie Anderson to approve the Preliminary and Final Plats of
Fairmont Park East, Section IV-C with the following condition:
• Payment of fees for street lighting service and street signage installation
must be paid to the City, prior to the plat being released for recordation.
The motion was seconded by Dottie Kaminski. All were in favor and the motion passed.
VIII. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE GLEN MEADOWS, SECTION VII, FINAL
PLAT.
Mr. Lewis presented staff's report regarding the Glen Meadows, Section VII, Final Plat.
He noted that this is an 87 lot addition that received Preliminary Plat approval by the
Commission on December 7, 1995. The conditions of approval are:
• 1. A variance to front setbacks was granted for the lots located on the
Glenbay Court cul-de-sac. Terms of the variance were to be noted on the
Final Plat. This has been done.
2. Survey monument locations were to be noted on the Final Plat. Locations
for three monuments have been noted on the original (reproducible) Final
Plat document.
3. The Special Warranty Deed completing the Section II land transfer was to
be filed and recorded with the Harris County Department of Deed
Records. The warranty deed has been executed and filed for recordation.
The City has received a copy of the filed and recorded deed.
Mr. Lewis noted:
1. Franchise utility companies have not yet returned letters approving
location of easements within the subdivision.
2. Payment for street lighting costs and street sign installation should be
made to the City.
Staff recommended approval of the Final Plat, contingent upon the mentioned items being
• resolved, prior to the plat being released for recordation.
A motion was made by Howard Ebow to approve the Final Plat of Glen Meadows,
Section VII, with the provision that the plat not be released for recordation until;
• •
• Page 4 of 5
Planning & Zoning Commission
Minutes of January 18, 1996
1. letters from franchise utility companies approving the utility easements
are submitted to the City.
2. payment is made to the City for street lighting service and street signage
installation.
The motion was seconded by Eugene Edmonds. All were in favor and the motion
passed.
IX. CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE PECAN CROSSING, SECTION I, FINAL
PLAT.
Mr. Lewis presented staff's report regarding the Pecan Crossing, Section I, Final Plat.
He noted that this is a 65 lot residential subdivision that will be located on the north side
of Fairmont Parkway, immediately east of Spring Gully. Preliminary Plat approval was
granted by the Commission on December 7, 1995. The conditions of approval are:
1. Responsibility for installation of sidewalks is to be specified by covenant.
• 2. It is to be specified by the covenants that the subdivision's detention pond
is owned by the homeowner's association and that maintenance of the
pond is the association's responsibility.
3. Survey monument locations are to be shown on the Final Plat.
Mr. Lewis noted:
1. Entex has not yet returned a letter approving location of easements within
the subdivision.
2. Payment for street lighting costs and street sign installation should be
made to the City.
3. A total payment of $10,850 is due to the City, in lieu of park land
dedication. This money will be placed in an escrow account and only be
used for the acquisition or improvements of public park land or facilities
located in Park Zone I, the zone in which Pecan Crossing is located.
Staff recommended approval of the Final Plat contingent upon the items mentioned being
resolved, prior to the plat being released for recordation.
. A motion was made by Maggie Anderson to approve the Final Plat of Pecan Crossing,
Section I, with the provision that the plat not be released for recordation until the
following items are resolved:
• •
• Page 5 of 5
Planning & Zoning Commission
Minutes of January 18, 1996
1. Entex must submit a letter approving location of easements within the
subdivision.
2. Payment for street lighting costs and street sign installation should be
made to the City.
3. A total payment of $10,850 is due to the City, in lieu of park land
dedication. This money will be placed in an escrow account and only be
used for the acquisition or improvements of public park land or facilities
located in Park Zone I, the zone in which Pecan Crossing is located.
The motion was seconded by Chuck Engelken. All were in favor and the motion passed.
X. DISCUSS REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN ORDINANCE 1501, SECTION 10-500,
FENCING REQUIREMENTS.
Mr. Lewis reported that the Commission has been asked to discuss residential fencing
standards, particularly acceptable fencing materials. Chairman Waters asked staff to
gather additional information and bring this item back at a future meeting.
XI. STAFF REPORTS
There were none.
XII. ADJOURN
Chairman Waters declared the meeting duly adjourned at 6:45 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy
Planning Department Secretary
Approved on this the 15th day of February, 1996.
•
e tern
Planning and Zoning Commission Chairman
• •
•
Replat of Lots 5-28
and the Adjacent Alley of Block 133
Town of La Porte
•
•
• Staff Report February 15, 1996
Replat of the South 300 Feet, Lots 5-28
of Block 133; Town of La Porte
Item III on the agenda is to consider a Replat of Lots 5-28 in Block 133, Town of La Porte (see
Exhibit A). This block is part of the original plat of La Porte filed March 10, 1892, in Volume
58, Pg. 461, of the Harris County Map Records.
• The owner (La Porte Independent School District) has requested a Replat of the
property in question for the purpose of consolidating the alley and flanking lots
into a single tract of property. To this end, the School District has also submitted
an alley closing request, which will ultimately be acted upon by City Council.
Two points to be noted are that a Replat of the property can not by itself, close
the alley in this block. A closure ordinance, enacted by City Council, will also
be necessary. Secondly, the alley in this block contains both underground and
overhead utilities. Even following closure of the alley, it will be necessary to
retain an easement for these utilities. This will be discussed in greater detail in
a subsequent paragraph of this report.
Staff, in reviewing this submittal, has spoken at length with School District
personnel regarding the ends the District wishes to achieve by the Replat. In the
near term, the District is attempting to facilitate a proposed expansion of their
Administration Building. City staff, in reviewing the building plans, has
determined that the Replat is not necessary in order to accommodate the proposed
expansion. In the longer term, the District is attempting to maximize future
development options on the block.
• The City's Development Ordinance No. 1444 and State Law allows for a Replat
or resubdivision of a recorded subdivision plat or portion thereof, but without
vacation of the immediate previous plat, and is hereby expressly authorized to be
recorded and shall be deemed valid and controlling when:
1. It has been signed and acknowledged by only the owners of the
particular property which is being Replatted or resubdivided.
2. It does not attempt to alter, amend or remove any covenants and
restrictions.
3. There is compliance, when applicable, with Section 212.014 and
212.015 of V.T.C.A. local government codes.
4. 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
5. 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.
•
• Notifications and advertisement of the mandatory public hearing were complied
with on January 31, 1996.
• • Staff, in reviewing the Replat request, has found it to comply with most
applicable ordinance requirements. There are however, two issues, alley closing
and easement dedication, that will require resolution before the Replat can be
approved.
As was noted earlier, the Replat has been filed in conjunction with an alley
closing request that will ultimately be acted upon by City Council. When an alley
closing request is received by the City, one of the first actions taken is to notify
all of the City's franchise utility companies. These are Houston Lighting and
Power Company, Entex, Southwestern Bell Telephone Company, and Prime
Cable. The City's Public Works Department is also notified.
Alleys in "Old La Porte" primarily serve as utility corridors and each franchise
utility has a vested right to utilize the alley for its service lines. Each utility,
must therefore "sign off" and state in writing that there are no objections to
closure, or state what conditions must be attached to the closure.
In the case of this alley, there are service lines belonging to the City of La Porte
and all of the franchise utility companies. Typically, in these circumstances, the
utility companies will state that there is no objection to closure if an adequate
utility easement is dedicated. However, as of yet, there have been no official
replies received from the utility companies.
Council can not close the alley until the franchise utilities have responded..
Replatting the alley at this time would, therefore, be premature.
In addition to timing, there is the issue of the actual easement dedication itself.
Dedication language should, in this case, be noted on the Replat document. It is
not included at this time, and again, until the franchise utility companies have
responded, it is not possible to draft language that will, with certainty, establish
adequate easement provisions.
Development Ordinance No. 1444 establishes clear options and actions for the
Commission to undertake when considering a Replat. They are as follows:
1. Approve the Replat as filed;
2. Disapprove the Replat 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 Commission.
Commission action shall be noted on three (3) copies of the
Replat, which shall be distributed to the developer, Department,
• and official files of the Commission.
Final Plzts: Effect of Approval
1. Approval of a Replat as filed and all accompanying documentation
•
CJ
• by the Commission, together with approval of 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 Replat requires filing of a new Replat. ,
Based on the factors involved in this request, it is clear that this Replat document should not yet
be approved. The City, however, has no objection to approving the replat once closure and
easement issues have been resolved.
The terms of the Development Ordinance do not provide a great deal of latitude for conditional
approvals. Outright disapproval, however, would require that the entire public hearing process
be repeated with a new submittal. Staff would therefore, recommend the following:
• Open the public hearing for the purpose of taking public comment.
• Following any comment, suspend the hearing to be reopened once the alley
closure has been completed and appropriate easement dedication language is
added to the Replat document.
As noted, the District's current Administration Building expansion can be carried out without
the Replat. Deferring action on this item will, therefore, will not impede progress on the
project.
•
•
•
•
•
Rezoning Request #R96-001
n
u
:7
January 17, 1996
Mr. Mark Lewis
City of La Porte
Community Development Department
PO Boz 1115
La Porte, Tegas 77572-1115
Dear Sir,
By this letter I hereby give authorization to Decker McKim of Re/Mag
Southeast complete authority to submit request to the City of La Porte for a change
of zoning.
Attached hereto is a legal description of my property and a plat. I hereby
request a change in zoning from R2 to R3.
Please give Mr. McKim complete cooperation in this matter.
Thank you very much.
Very Truly Yours,
ohn Mariner, Trustee
# 19 Pine Wold Circle
Houston, Tezas 77056-1419
JM/sld
• ~
• 411 T ~,~~ t,A t~c)RTE •
APPLICATION FOH
CANE, CHAtJGE REQt.iFST
Applicatiarl No.:~~~6 -UOI.~~.._.
OF iC.~ liSE OJLY; Fee: QO.t7U Uate Received:
Receipt No, ; ___~
( ) wife Plan ( ) Minor I ~velopmertt Site Flan
( ) i~~a jor Pevelopn~ent >i_te Plan (x) General P7.an
( ) Ste FlariS S~ibriitted or
A~~'LICAPIT'S IdAt~IE; r~Er.KFR ,;,~C.KIi~~
•
Address; 6015 FA I~t;_14~(I__p.,K~ly STF g PA~nF _,r~05 pH; 713-437.3363,_
Date; `JANIiARY_17, 1496 Signature;
-- .ter ~ .-.m,...~---...,
0 Yd Pl E R ' S Id A t1 E ; --J-O.kLat~1A Jl.s-N~ R,--~.R~T-~-~-_..,~ ~~.~
Address; 353-7853
1~P~.lYE1J..Q.L.Q G IRG.L E_ .JiD U.S.I..O_N.._.IX_7~Z_Q5.6.-1_4~... P[ i: 9 6 l~ 0_.__ 4 3 3
Property L.elal Descr~ipt ion:
Zone: R-2 ~ Requeated Zane Change: RR-3 SIC No.
Proposed UUs~e: SENIOR__CITIZ~N ASS~]~D_LL~rar rFN-rF~_ ~_, _~_~J
(X) See At tacl~?d
I A,-i THE O~~JtdER GE' T[-IE HER ;IN DESCRIBED PROPERTY AND
15 Ai.l7'HORI 'ED TO FILE TfiTS APPLT ATIOtd ON MYl >aCHALF.
Date: sIA.J~,~JARY 1~~_~96 Signature:
OFFICE usE anrz.Y _ __~__~_~_-~..~~__ ~_.___
1) Planning & Zoning; (a) Preliminary Meeting - -~'
(b) Public Hearing/P1tg. - 2 j~~,~ ~'
Pecom-ticndation;
Applicant Nutif~.ed of Date(,); ( ) 1st Mtg.
Ad,jo~.ring Pr~~~perty Owners N~ tified:
2) City Council; (a) Ref ular P~eet.ing -
(b) Put lie Hearing/Mtg.
( ) 2nd Mtg.
Approved ( ) Ade pted by Arueridtr~er,L` Ord. ~~1501 -
D c n i e d ( ) .~,~.,
CON 'INUED ON !NEXT PAGE
•
•
•
•
zONE CHA1~1!E RC~IUEST
,~pplit:ant, Notified of Date( ~) : ( ) 1~t Mtg.
Ad,~airir~g Pr optrty Owners Pd~t.ified:
Th#.9 Application is;
App avid )
Per ;it X10.
C c~ r~ n~~ e r~ ti s ;
C-~.~~iu~-~3
•
PAGE 2
( ) 2nd M1;~;.
Denied ( )
• •
L.J
Staff Report Rezoning Request #~R96-001 February 15, 1996
Requested for: 12.83 acre tract out of the William M. Jones Survey, A-482, which is
further described as being located in the 8700-8800 blocks of Fairmont
Parkway. (See Exhibit A)
Legal Description: See Exhibit B
Requested by: Decker McKim (owner's agent)
Requested Zone Change: From R-2, Mid-Density Residential to R-3, High Density
Residential
Background: The property in question, which is located on the north side of Fairmont
Parkway, approximately 600 feet east of Brookwood Drive, comprises a
portion of a large R-2, Mid-Density Residential Zone (see Exhibit C).
The underlying land use assigned to the tract is "Mid to High Density
Residential" (see Exhibit D). As noted, the applicant is Y, , ~ x~ :,
• rezoning to R-3, High Density Residential.
In acting upon a rezoning Request, the Planning and Zoning Commission
and in turn, City Council, are charged to consider the following factors:
• Was the zoning designation placed on the property
reasonable at the time zoning was originally assigned?
• Was any error made in the assignment of the original
zoning designation?
• Have there been any changes in the area that warrant a
change to the zoning designation?
• Is the requested designation compatible with the intent and
goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan?
It is the burden of the applicant to demonstrate whether any of these
criteria have been satisfied.
Analysis: The area in which the subject tract is located is one that, based on the criteria
established by the City's Comprehensive Plan, is suitable for either the present
R-2, or the requested R-3 zoning.
• •
• The R-2 classification is intended to accommodate housing development with
overall density of 9-14 dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan calls
for R-2 zones to be sited "adjacent to major thoroughfares, which have the
capacity to support more intense residential uses and adjacent to and in support
of activity, open space and amenity areas" (Comprehensive Plan, Section 1-7).
The R-3 classification is intended to accommodate housing development with an
overall density of 15-27 dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan calls
for R-3 zones to be sited "on major thoroughfares and intersections in proximity
to principal activity and amenity areas. (Comprehensive Plan, Section 1-7)
Based on the siting criteria noted above, the tract in question is suited to either
an R-2, or R-3 designation. Additionally, the underlying land use designation of
Mid to High Density Residential would support either zoning designation. It,
therefore, appears that although the R-2 zoning assigned to the property in 1987
is a reasonable designation and that no errors were made in assigning zoning
classification, the requested rezoning would not conflict with the goals or intent
of the Comprehensive Plan.
Under these circumstances, the question at issue is whether there have been
changes in the area (development pressures, infrastructure changes, etc.) that
warrant a rezoning. As noted in the background section of this report, tr~~::
• applicant has the burden of demonstrating that a rezoning is warranted and that
the requested classification represents the most appropriate designation for the
tract.
In reviewing this request, there are two other issues to be considered. They are:
• Ability of infrastructure to support types of development that could
be constructed within the requested zoning designation.
• Impact on surrounding properties.
The highest density type of development allowed in R-3 zones is multi-family
apartments. Maximum density is 27 dwelling units per acre. Based on the 12.83
acre size of this tract, the absolute maximum number of units that could be
developed would be 346.
Although actual densities would most likely yield somewhat fewer than 346 units,
staff has used these maximums for review purposes.
Regarding the issue of infrastructure, staff would note the following:
• Fairmont Parkway is a major, four lane thoroughfare. It should
• be able to easily accommodate any traffic generated by
approximately 13 acres of R-3 development (of any type). There
• •
• should be no impact on traffic flow to and from the abutting
residential neighborhood.
Sanitary sewer, in the form of a 10" main is available along the
northern boundary of the tract. This main primarily serves homes
located on Orchard Lane in the Brookglen Subdivision. A
development of maximum possible density might tax the capacity
of this main. Any improvements to the sanitary sewer system
necessary to support new development would be at the developer's
expense.
Potable water is not readily available at this time. Neither is there
adequate fire protection. There is currently a 12" water main
under construction that will terminate at Fairmont Parkway and
Spring Gully. Additionally, there is a 12" water main that
terminates north of Fairmont Parkway at Brookwood. Either of
these mains can potentially be extended (at the developer's cost).
Extension would provide adequate service without significantly
impacting other water users in the area.
Storm water drainage and detention is also an issue that will be
carefully reviewed in conjunction with any property development.
• The City is very aware of drainage problems and concerns in this
part of La Porte. As with other infrastructure issues, it will be the
developer's responsibility to provide any structures, or
improvements necessary to accommodate the storm water
accumulation and runoff.
~ As noted on Exhibit C, the property is bordered to the west by vacant
General Commercial and developed R-1 property. A change from R-2 to
R-3 should have no impact on future development within the GC zone.
To the north (as well as to the west), the tract is bounded by an existing
neighborhood of single family homes. Based on the way in which this
neighborhood is developed there can be no direct interconnection between
the subdivision and the subject tract. Development within the subject tract
should have little, if any impact on the neighboring subdivision.
Finally, to the west is an approximately 12 acre tract that will retain its
present R-2 zoning designation. This tract is similar in size and
configuration of the property currently under consideration. Development
of the subject property should not impact the viability of the remaining R-
2property, although any utility upgrades should take into account all
vacant property in the vicinity.
•
•
Conclusion: There was no appazent error in assigning the present zoning designation
to the tract in question. It does, however, by virtue of location and
underlying land use designation, satisfy the criteria established for R-3
zoning. If the applicants aze able to demonstrate that the requested zoning
would represent the highest and best use of the property, granting the
requested change would not be contrary to the goals and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan. The rezoning would be granted, however, with the
understanding that infrastructure improvements will be necessary in order
to support development within this tract.
•
U
•
Iar-I
wi-w_
la.3et3
IX
~ W i-w.
2 W)_w.
• ., w -coo- ow
~ooo
^ti o.)e
ro).)
vthrlalc lN[ L
< ui'~
e. ,.
_ liir + ' e _
e 7 j yioa a aaW t~ a ~ S Y M~ •>sy ~ ~ asis
~ 1tEN5M9TON COUIf
iou
~I y iii ~4 . ~ 8 ~ .`. • )•4
Cgwr yr - 'ta 4 >t 8 • II 4 Lt •~ 'I an
b i Q i 3 3
' la
•>'rai y r 3 2 3 2 7 3 S sr
~ ~'Vaa ~'a ~rCRxQO L~r[ MUNTERY[LO lN( r ~r
ar tae
• . ,..,
r
a oa ~ 1
'O vErrurc l~rE
as , ' _ < ~ ai ro .. o _ a4 i .. E 4 i 1e' f r'vw~
' u ' is t 3 S S 3 3 q
II.75t 0 ' le Jar w i • + L •al h • • v .~ • YiTM
.ir )i as uS J^ ar, O as 4pn.. ~ 2 S i S 3 S S S •'S ~i)e
' ~~~. i J ~ aaae ~ ~ 4 L~ 106-640 OrCau00 LaJ[ ~ -
R o.>-~ ow my O ~ ~ `f, i ~, ~I t.7r iaio ,K^ a • $ S 1 s 9 • ~v
a ~aeo c. }" ~~ `yG;, - ,~ a°oov _ 3 3 r8
8 nv as
>... ~, .,
),~ •, ~ ~ ~ ~~ i ~1 •~A S V A „moo, 'Opa >
<an a .. : 8 'xor
q¢I °a4 r ae i' ~ ~ae v iiaa ~ Y a°r a i4 $ •>.r
( u a a °a<e ~ °'iie
•iva 4, ayes Oi:i uti °isai ~ ivi ar ~ i m
ir,r Q
< ee.,v ,. `~ ! t. vyaa aaa ffi •~• lv s nr
BnANYBA(XM ) •aIJO ~ • • )sad
~' a a.• o r ar z ®ieM iaai * wini ~
J r *'a ~ g
'.,~ are
u •
'«e> '__ 'r a "' r'"e "" 8 n
io.W ar+MOR00< 1~ F aside aaavartoolc I~VE
~ ira9
S a > J W W 0 w w
rR w ~(~~
ee0-eeia N ~ r01-Mr- ~ON-
LIOI9- I.SSIO wo-ooi~ 3.574 ~~
4
N)I
- T,~Gt7- /,u ~7-/~iC/ -
oli-w-eoo-a.
s sslo
1
1
e
ai-w-ooo-oor ~
i
1019503 1
91.e5t0 ~ •
~ r
I
1 ~ ~', 8i
1 •~
1 j I r4
i ! ? ',,T4
1 ' '
1 -
~a
1 -
.. ~ ~ .. * 1
.. 1 ,
j ~
t ai-r•[t-oao-ou
1 10000
01/12/96 FRI 11:29 FAa 713 621 ~9 KINKO'S HOLSTO'•=9 •
•
any investments or expenditures and to :aloe any and all action
which is incidental or reasonably relat:d to any of the specific
purposes recited above:
BEING Twelve and eighty-three one iundredths
(12.83} acres of land more or .less out of the
William M. Jones Survey, A-482, Harris County,,
Texas, and being more particularly described
as follows:
BEGINNING at a point in the center~ine of old
"Cardiff" or "J" Road which point is N 56° 55'
20" E, 4432.1 feet from Humble Monument No.
204, marking the southwest corner of the William
M. Jones Survey, A-482, Harris Cou;zty, Texas;
THENCE N 1° 11' S8" W at 40.30 feF~ pass
Humble Monument No. 193, in all 1x08..85 feet
to Humble Monument No. 19 b;
•
THENCE N 88° 4b' 25" E, 552.88 feet to Humble
Monument No. 197;
ThE2JCE S 1° 17 ` 02" E, at 968.64 : eet pass
Humble Monument No. 194, in all 1c: 09.75 feet
to a point in the centerline of o.d "Cardiff"
or "J" Road;.
THENCE S 88° 52' 00° W with the centerline of
said road, 554.37 feet to the place of beginning
and containing 12.83 acres of lane: more or less;
the monuments mentioned above bei..g 4° round concrete
monuments with a 3" brass plate er,~be3ded therein,
marked as mentioned, and set in 1949.
All of the property is situated in Harris County, Texas. The
property is subject to taxation by Stage, County, and School
District and other taxing authorities. The Partnership will
hold the property for investment and tree marketability and pro-
fitability is subject to all the Risk :'actors set forth below.
Additional details are presented in th.s section entitled
Description of Property.
[~ooz
FXHIBiT ~
~~
•
•
EXHiB~I' C
I~
----~
^ . •
~ . ;
• •
•
~ • •
I
1:::~~ .
I ' .::
~':
..
_ ..
J / ~
I
~AIp1110if se I
ARI II~TOM
AlfN~ -
`
!lA ~. s
//~ h~
/ ~I
= ...
........
U , ......... .....
`F ~^. ...
'' I :: : KMtWi : ~ lk : ::::::. ~
o :::~:::::;::,::::::
~ ~ :::rF ::::,...
..". ~•
. .I, .. ~. .`. .
•::::: /
.. .':. J
~ T~
iw~~s~a~i~.~~•~raars~~rar~.~
LEGEND ^
~~ ~~ CONTROLLED ACCESS HWY. ZONE SOO'ALON6 9
PARALLEL TO HIGHWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY
~-~ PUBLIC USES
LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES
-~ MID TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES
COMMERCIAL USES
,,;~3,3s<'k~ COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL USES
INDUSTRIAL USES
I-I vROVOSeo
E%ISTINO
C COMMUNITY CENTER
F FIRE STATION
FT FIRE TRAINING CENTER
LB LIBRARY
v vAn%s
Po POLICE oEn.
PO -0!T OfFICE
PM PYKIC WORNB
$ fCNOOIf
~.
WwuIRO
•
I
__
-
:::F :. fl
~ ..: •s ::: I F ~
.. .. ~ ~
`v
• ~ ..... y
:~~: ::.:: ~ 3
........
ll •'
... `T~ ... au i . ~ __ - _ - 1 _ -..-1-- -
.. r~LU~~...r ~: ..:: .. .. ... :
I ..'........ .I.. .... ... .. ~..
f . ~ ~ _~_~..~'. ........ .
. 11"1 TlT R• ~ '
~rrir ~ I ............
... ..
I .. ..... .. .. ...... .... ...
I ..~..... - .. - __- - _ -._
.....
~ -.. ,-.
I. -~--------------~----•--
/ T
J
~ ~ .
~.
~~
~ +
/ ~
i
~ LA PORTE El'.J. LIMIT
EXt-IIBiT ~
• •
Special Conditional Use Permit Request #SCU96-001
DECKER McKIM REALTORS 4971729 P. 02
• GYTY OF LA pORTE •
APPLICATION F'OR
• ~ SPECIAL COUDZTIONAL USE PERMIT
OFFICE USE ONLx; Fee; ~'~Q0.00 Date Received; ~__
Receipt N o .. ~___,_~._.,,,, ~,
Certified P].ans Submitted: .
( ).General P}.an ( ) MaSor Aevelopment Szte Plan
( ),Minor Development Site P1Gn ( ) Preliminary Flat
Person t~faking Request: r ~'~~
--~~-
M a i l i n g Address : 6019 ~a3zmorlt ~arlsway~ ~ __ ~_ ~~__ _T _ _
C i t~y / $ t a t e ; Pasadena, Texas 77505 phone ; (7].3} 971-3633
' BUSINESS NAME : ~/ Southeast
PROPERTY ADDRESS : Fairnnnt i'arkwray, dear ~HLmters Trace _ ___~ ~ ~~ „
LEGAL b E S C R 1 P T I O hJ ; ~ee attached legal & suzvev _.~ •`_~ _~_~_ __._ _ _
ZONE: SzC USE CATEGORY: _ __ _„~_..
TYPE 0 ~" BUSINESS : ,ASSi:sted~ Health Cane
1~26f96
`--r --_Date_...,___~~____.,_..__.. _^_.. ..,~_ .,.._i~_..r__r,-~-h_rized-Agerit-
i ~FFYCE USA ONT Y
i
Dabs of P & Z Publzc Hearin: Recommendation; Y 4C N
Date of City CounCi.J. Heetxng: ,~ Approved- Y or N
~atse
This application fs: Approved ( ) Denied ( )
Permit ~
CLP JOB # (xf Assi.gned Yet)
Conditiogs:
~_~,.,
uaLe [.oning ~dmin~,straLor .^
. cE~/t--~s7
• •
Staff Report February 15, 1996
Special Conditional Use Permit Request #SCU96-001
Requested for: A 5.637 acre tract out of the William M. Jones Survey, Abstract 482,
which is further described as being located in the 8700-8800 blocks of
Fairmont Parkway. (Exhibit A)
Requested by: Decker McKim, on behalf of Care Concepts of East Texas, Inc.
Purpose of Request: To allow construction of a 60 unit assisted living center for senior citizens.
Background: This request is being submitted in conjunction with Rezoning Request
R96-001, which seeks to rezone a 12.83 acre tract of property from R-2,
Mid-Density Residential to R-3, High Density Residential. The proposed
facility, which is to occupy 5.63 acres of the larger tract is assigned an
S.I.C. use number of 8361. This listing is designated as a Conditional
Use in R-3 zones. The Conditional Use Permit can not be approved
unless the zone change is also approved.
• Due to unforeseen circumstances, the applicant was unable, prior to the
deadline, to provide all information necessary for staff's preparation of an
analysis report.
The specific document that was unavailable was a site plan for the
proposed facility. As noted, the center is to consist of 60 units contained
in a single story building. As with all types of development, this facility
will be subject to certain development standards. The site plan is the
primary review tool that is utilized to insure that all applicable standards
have been satisfied. Examples of issues that will be considered as part of
the site plan review are as follows:
• Building? setbacks: Buildings and other structures must
maintain certain clearances from the properties. This
information will be noted on the site plan.
• Parking
• Landscaping and Landscape Buffers: Two faces of this
property will abut a developed subdivision. Staff will
recommend that as a condition of permit approval, a
landscape buffer be planted to insulate the facility and
subdivision from each other. The site plan will be utilized
to establish an effective planting plan.
• Storm Water: There will have to be adequate provisions
and structures to accommodate storm water runoff from the
•
facility. This could possibly include detention facilities.
The site plan will be used to determine what provisions are
• necessary.
This list, although partial, is typical of the types of issues considered.
Once the site plan is received, staff will undertake a comprehensive
review and come to the Commission with a complete analysis and
recommendation. This will most likely take place at the Commission's
March 21, meeting.
Regarding the February 15, public hearing, all required notices have been
published, posted, and mailed. There have been a number of notice
replies received. These will be provided to the Commission at the
February 15, meeting.
Based on these circumstances, staff would ask the Commission to take the
following action:
• Convene the public hearing.
• Allow ±he applicant to make a presentation regarding the
proposed project.
• Take public comment.
• • Suspend the public hearing to be reconvened at the
Commission's March 21, 1996, meeting.
A complete staff report and recommendation will be presented at the
March 21, meeting.
•
., DECKER McKIM REALTORS 4871729
M.
• ~r •-i.:.r.,.. p.,.r~.•,•.k ., ^- •r ~--~
~~MAP•'.•!JR~~ IiX,AT •RECORDED IN COUN RECORDS.
•~
•X • ,T11X3 ~D1N-NINO x8 T11L PROPERTY Ot•SNANRS T.AND SVRVBY01ts OF TSXIIS~ INC.. 111iD fiH1-LL NOT Si D3FD FOR IINY pDRpOSS p;TNUUT tfili
NItiTlElf •CONSL2iT OT J1N ]1UTSORISL~D 7-GENT OF 31U-N1~S LAND SVRVEYORS 0! 7,'EJG15 tNC. aH1-lacs LiN1o svitvaYOas or TExa9 INC. 11CCL?3'i
Wy.. •M9. ~1101181a=I~x?Y t0A TSE USG OF TBIS DRANING FOR nN1t PUtt!'4SL' l~t`lCR S7Jt (6~ J~QNTHS i11A![ i~ D]-TZ INDZGTED ptt 37118 D1e1-wINO.
~i .
. ~ t
cn .
M ~ ;
H
H
W •
H
d
~ GJ
U
7. di .
a
U p
H ~ •
H• fY] •~
P; ~ ~
W
z~
oa ,
.~~'
AH ~ p
g °C ~ ~
1~" o ~ ~+
~~ ~~
„ t3~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
O
ww
x
1E+ w A~,I
~r -+1
~~ V H
r•~ ~}
a PG ~,
V
d 4v O ~
P4
~x•W t~A ..
H
w ~ ~i
N ~ U, ~ •
~~•~~ '
N x .~~' H
PR F'+
}, .
~
h
.•.~ ~ '~
`~
~.
~
•
• a
4
~ ~
~1
~ ~
~~
• ~..
--~ .:' ..
.~~, .. ..
..
Ti~A~`T ~.C.~
.~~ /4C.~
:t~:.. .:~;:.. ~
• .a.
,~ cam' iJ`~o r ,SI " t~
P. @1
M
N ~
t ~
~~ ~
J
~ ~
y
s~RV~Y
QF A 51537 ACRD TRACT OUT OF TH~•W.ILLIA~I M~ JONES SURVEY,
• ABSTRACT x+82, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
~H~etr A
~l
~t~asHS~~~~~HM~i
aen swr~.
-~-
• s
a ,~.~,,'~ ;a
wa s~:6e ~3r~ ~~-sa-maw
_..
' 96--33730
,, ~ .
• JANUAI2X 2 2 - 19 9 6
A 5.637 ACRE TRACT OUT OF TkiE WILLIAM M. JONES
St7RVEY, A~4$2. HARRIS COUNT3~•, TEXAS, AND BEING
• avT aF A ].2.32 ACI;E {RESIDUE of A 12.83 ACRE
' TRACT) TRACT OWNED 8Y SOUTHERN EXEC. GROUP INC.:
• 'BEGINNING AT A S/$" IRON ROD FOUND AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
RESERVE J OF BROOKGLEN SECTION THREE ACCORDING TO THE PLAT AS
~CgRDED TN VOLUME 199, PAGE J.41 QF TTiE HARRIS COUNTY MAP
RECO~tUS ;
THENCE N 03° 04' S~." W, ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF $AID HROO~CGLEN
SECTION THREE, A pYSTANCE OF 967.16 FEET TO A 1/2" IRON ROD
• SET FOR CORNER;
• THENCE N 87° 07' 42"•E, ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID BRQOKGLEN
S~CTTON THREE, A DISTANCE OF 254.00 FEET TO A 1/2" IRON ROD SET
FOR CORNER;
THENCE S 03° 04' 51" E 966.36 FEET TO A 1/2" IRON ROD SET TN THE
NORTH RIGHT-OF-GJAY LINE OF FAZRMONT PARKWAY BASED ON A WIDTH OF
2S0 FEET;
THENCE S $6° 56''51" W', ALONG THE NORTH RIGHT--OF-WAX LINE OF
FA,TRMONT PARKW~,Y, A DISTANCE OF 254.00 FFFT TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING AND CONTAINING 245,557 SQUARE FEET OR 5.637 ACRE OF
LAND, MdRE O1~ LESS. .
. Q~ }''~
~ ~ ~~ +
Bl~LY l.. $MAhIKS
.e.-~
'r 1827 }~.~.
~ ,
~~y 4~~+5 S ~r•~-~~
~~~~ A
• • •• ~ ~ ~.~1.~ °~ fir....-r-
•
1 i
I~r ~ I ; ~ i
lry. ~ ,•,n. i i
Nq fILE • 'i1;25 ¢. P. q.x.v.x. [. ~ 5^ ~ j I I ~ I ~\
ICMMCx 6 Crat$r. J-IJiOi q ~ r' '
, \
~. C.- i 1l
Clrr Cv t. vqa I I j ~~ I ' 1 '
-. ' j ~ SIAKr rxntEq !0 I I 7 I _ ~
i
1 I
' •
I. 1 I
~I ti ac _~___ -~ .-__ __-___ C ~- 2 5--__ I ~. I ~ I ~ T ~. i 111
.; , ~ ~ I k, t i ,
~+'oa°R`'~ N86.55'46'E -'266.00' •~ \'
~. ... •------- - --- -- -' - -- I I
i w ', ~ ; : '~: '
, " , ;
I n r 1 I
1
i
O
.......... .............................................!.......... ~ I
., ..... L ......................_.......... 5.
, ~ ~ ,
i _ I I •r•xr. ! nn
,
3 , j ~ I '
o •~ I
c :~ ~ I ~~ ~
O ~ I STAY[ Dt TLIIAS
' ~ ~ ~~, S; _ _ ,
i ~ ~ ~ COUNTY 0i HARRIS ~
" ~ I i
'. ~.`~ . ~' .- re LsParte Inds ¢de¢t School Oiseritt, Minq ar¢en herslaaftar JIC NITY IAA?
' "' ~ raterred to a wNn o! CM 1.°320 sire Crmt described i¢ tae ' s.rs.
p ~ ............................................: :............................... ... sty[ , + . xt
............
! CI _• - j above and fo[agoiaq mp o! RLP'.At Ot TNL SOU'[X 300 iCLT Oi BLOCR
' •, ~,;; I l33 0! TN! C172 Oi 1A PORT! m AereO mks and eateblieh uid
CJ , .;,.~• ~ ~ wbdivision of uid property accordi¢q to all lime, dwiutio¢a,
i s . I ~ ' ~ ......._.1...... ~~ .... O ~ reetrictiaee and wtatfom oe uid wp or plat end Aare dedleata
L1.1 rf ..................._.................................. ;....................... .... .......
i ~ ~ , C I to the uaa oL tW puAlit forever, all atresu (except thou a[ruu -
1 ~ p ~ I dnigv'] se prints aresu), alleys, patio, ester rounaa,
' ~ ; ~'~: n drains, Naereu, sad public pleees aAOVn CWrmn for the Pu ua =
...r.........
i (~ ~ ' ~" ' ~ ~ I sad unsidaretlwa therei¢ eapreued; and do Mreby Dintl ounalws, t-.
• .:
v 1 l 1 3 I onr Aein, wceeawrs eu wiq¢a w rarrs¢t sod tocewr defau tM { A tract er porn) o! 3a¢d oxtaLlnq Lt720 srna o[ la¢d
~~ , W I title to tae lend w dNiueed. bd all 0! iron 9 thn 21, iwladw, eloek 177, and [Da '~
;;; : is ' I swtgaerl 700 feet of tAe 16 teat r1M wDlle Alle 1uiG Nid
I r A 0 ...._..Ir............_. I. , ^ - I iURTXpt, Orden here dedieacsd and Dy Cheee present. do dodiute to Bloat Ill, la ta. CITi Oi IA PORti, aecerdleq to CAa aubdivleio¢ or
V / ~e r., ' ~ Che we a[ the poDlic [or public utiliq porpoau [orevt N tavaaits Np therm! remrdad La Volme St, Pags Idl of the
~ 'e i i r unoba uct as iel esaeae¢t ties ( LN rata fro. a ¢tfi 'a Iup RstaMa of Raaie Cme i'usa; uld 1.1720 aeraa of
i Z ~ i ! j, i [rentyr(20 ~lNtcsWra eaa grosnd lev llupraM, located ed~ateetate land being wn particuls[lp daacrihad AY rue sad Wa¢da ae
j ~ ....... •5•'•""""'.._ ............................ ~................................ ......._!...... aiJ taro¢ ua lle utLl aaerats aear¢ Karma. t lwa (rlth all Aearlags Wiaq referenced to tW Sorny SyeCU of
...:, a paD icy .
o
;~ AREA =:1.:8320 ACRES=:, I .tl~. clty of IAPo[t.,: .
'v : ~~ : , P~['3 I fURTNlII, Mnan do Mreby dedleate to tae public a strip of la¢d rI- '
~ ~} ~ ~ ' ' W ~ fittws (15) test viM w esth side at tW csatar line oL uy e¢d k~~'(:dp9KIN0 at a f¢a¢d Cit of IaPorta S XarMr w. )0
ty .........~ .........................._................. ......................_..._......_.......,.......... } nrvey
I Lt~ ~ I all heyars, ermb, gullies, ravinN, dnra, Qa¢gM, or other )opted at CM LunstCla¢ of w¢[A Bnedry aed IMet '8' Street;
i ~' I natural drainage tonnN located to Nid plat, u sueraG for
.~ H '« L ~ draiNeA purposN, givip tAa CSty of ]eiorte, Harris County, or K~ T91OSCL, H 02 deg. 21' 07. 8, for a dlatwu o! 921.06 test to
' ' ..... ° ~ any o er goreroNnu aged As rl nt to enter u ¢ id a t-lecA iron apt. for • P(LC7t ~BLOI Deioq th _ _
' 1 cY. 9 Pu se IS/ [ad CA .Ot NRI110 e - .
..r.._........_.... ......1.....
i ~ '~ enees¢t et any sM all tiros for the purpose oL u¢atruc[loo od ScYeAeut mrr['o! add Bloat 137, ear Wi¢g Ua latsnNtia¢ oL ~ -- -
i ~ Nintena¢ea of drainage Gtiljties rod struetuces. tM wet llu of BroaMay t a 300 fNt ride paD11e strut) rich the
I ...._ ~.....,.:__.._ ..:........................~ i••--..........__......._...}1._.... ~ _. I iuRTHLR, a¢en do hereby rownaac rod agcN cast x31 o!'tM liu o1 '0• N[ 6 test ride):
' __ s'R.L_xv cl?r am: nur`:_.. ' / ~ property vitAi¢ tae Wuda[ies of chic plat and adjacent to say no` ATIILNCL, 8 latdsq. 55'0/a• Y, doaq tW wrta lice of •C•
I e '°"'-"'--""- - . -. - ---~~- 1 ~ ~ ge eeaerat, ditcA, dreiuge veya rod euerata clear of Stteat (a0 faK ride), fo[ ^ diatun of 236w LNt u a 5/e-1acA
4 E ~ - : is ~ .. , oe .I dzai¢a
e'r : ' ' °,2Yn• " /\s•¢t ~ fences, Wildinge, pleating sad ^LAer obsiroetions to the !roe rod ut fez ur¢ar, ear WS¢q ue 7onthrut sonar oL uld
i ~0 +2!,0~ ~ e`}• ~ operations aIW ui¢teneece of ue dr:. Wage twil7ty aM teat wee BLoeR 137, ales bai¢q ue 1¢teneeeioa o[ tea north li0e of •C•
$86.55 46 M•- 256.00 - abutting propertp aAall,we De pecu:cad u d[a7o directly ides Street vita tae Nat 11N of lint Strest (60 lest rldel;
chin eaaesent except by rang of a¢y approved drainage etrocturea.
~~ ~ TLCIICt, R 03 daq. 0/' II• Y, doag tM uat lies o! Flnt
~~ ~~ ~~ PUR'IXLR, OrOera tertiiy that tAfa replat does not attupt t0 alter, Street (60 fast rids), ear Wing tW wet line of uid Black 137,
arnd or reeove soy urenanu or natriaiou. far a dlaneN of 700.00 Lest CO the taros wst corder o! lose {
G STREET i6p'~-p•w.,
- and 5 of uid tlxt 133, t[or rhieh • 1/1-lxh ins red hun
• rituu st S 7a dp. 25' 39' M, a dlaueu of 0.10 tN[;
-------i--'---- ( T8OIC6, 8 °e SS" 1{• [, do tas coro¢ liu. o! Nld
' . /sad S, K 135.00. fact pan tae wet 11¢e oL tW alarudd la
(--------------I !- ~ ~ Ia PORTlI OLPlE8D611'I'SCHOOL D151RILT ld ~ ~
I I i loot ride Public Allsp, et 1{1.00 tut paw tM cut lies o! Nld
i I d'.. i~ IA toot vide Pablie Alle}, aa0 aetia¢ieq along tM caroo llu oL
~ ~ tyta 2t aed 29 a! uid 81oet 177, for • totQ diata¢es of 266.00
i feat toe 1/2-lash ins rod fm¢d for tor¢ar, ear Wlnq tW toron
Nat roraer oL aald c¢u 21 add 39, ales Wing tW mt line of
. - i Brrdvq;
1
, r TIIOICC, S D3 deg. u' 1{' L, along CM wet line of Brmdray,
STAY! OF tl7G5 aer Wi¢q tAs wit 11¢e of uid 81xt 137, for a dLtesce of
COUNTY 0! RARILIS 300.00 !Nt to [AS PEAR OI at0IMN2XO, o! a tnee u¢ul¢lag 3.0320
sae of Lnd.
eafore r, tW v¢deuigned authority on this day peraoNlly '
PLIT ACNMCT-CE0.TIPICAT! eppeued kowa to N to W [Ae penou rhose
War ie wbaalbed t¢ ttha torsgoinq inserur¢c add scuwledgad to I
u registered under eM lars o[ tM uu of TNN N Chet as uauted [M ear fo[ tae romidentlon sod pn[poaaa '
1, Wn Wnson, LAerein stated. - -
to pnetlu tae pr¢leuio¢ of snrnyinq su AereDp a fy CMC tAe
above plat is true and urrNt: and CMC all Marinas, diataocsa, GI9lR UXDlR MT RAND ANO SGL Oi ORICE, TeT3 _ OAT Oi
angles, cnrn radivue, a0 ecnl angles a:e acrnntalp show w 1991. ~ t
the plat.
~E QF T - X} Cawluioe eipi[u: F
~~'ri~*~~~ m¢ I Notary's siquture rt
Teua RegiaC[atio¢ r. 2011 1
..:~... 1
..; .~ :.. rotary's printed due t
Ttiaos vv..P.
0 ..[toQ:yO 1
SIjjIVE I
I, BeNrly 0. Rau[rn, C1erR Ot tas County Coatt o[ 8arria COU¢ty, CITE APPRWINC AOTIIOR1Tf aRT7iIGTION R E P L A T 0 F THE S 0 U T H
do Aereby unify that tM vthia iescrusxest vin its eart![lute Tlria is w ttrtify CASC the Clty Pla¢¢ieg aM ioaing
of sutuaeiceua¢ vu tiled for registration le ry office na 3 ~00 ~ F E E T O F BLOCK 13 3
1990 at o'clock (A. X. of P.X.), and at Flls Carission of CAS Ci[y of LaPorte, Tezes, Me approved [his plat
Code w. of tae Map 0.eroTda a[ LarTie County, Teau end tuDdivision of REPEAT Oi TXC SOUTH I00 iLL7 Oi HIACR 171 OP TXE
aed duly rerorded oa , 1996 et _ o'cloct (A.N. CITY Oi W PORTL i¢ rnntona¢ta ri[A the ordlnancea o[ tea City of
or P N ,. Q Porte aM autaarixed199{, rerordi¢q of thin plat Chla _ day O F THE CITY O F L A PORT E
rI7NE55 Ni NAMD ANO 5321E Of Oil1C6, ae Houatoa, CM day end date p
lut show mitten. U_:NG LOTS 5 THR^uUGH 28. BLOCK: 133.
°y~0i[e¢or, L Porte Planning Oept. - C I?Y 0~ LA PGR?E.
Bever) °. Reufna¢, - ~
CIerR of CM County C¢u[t 'x'OL. 58. PG.461 , ~.;,. M. R.
Xa[[ia Casnty, tezo
ATT!°T° ,;Ci-tiSOt~ LINTER SUr~1~EY, A - 35.
°Y~ gy; ty:
Wp¢cy 1 °ESERVE
IwPOrte City lnq.Ner Caeinea, uPotce Planning add (]
Zoning COriuion ~AI~iUART s I °Q6
ATTCSt:
°y: SURVEYOR OWNER
Secretary, uPorce Planaieq
end 2oninq Coriuion LAt:O pAT: SURVEYS. 1NC. LA ?ORTE INOEPENpENT SCHOOL 0lSTR!CT
P.0.80X A9002T 724 BROAOwAY. LA PORTE. T%. 7?571
wOUSTCN. i%. 7728? - 0021 IOR. JOHN SAWYER. SUPERINTENOEfiT1
(7'31 332 - T050
r u[ • n - as•
~~~ `~
City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission
Public Hearing
February 15, 1996
Any person wishing to speak i OPPOSITION of any item being considered by this Commission, please indicate below by:
A. Printed Name
B. Sig nature
C. Item Being Opposed
1. A. B. ~ C. ,~
2. A. ~ B. C.
_-- 3. _e4. Df/AN~ ~/t~/JYIF~~,cli41C B.- - C. ~E~ON//1~ -~EQOE~ ~I(o -Oc~l
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.
e o 0
City of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission
Public Hearing
February 15, 1996
Any person wishing to speak i~ FA OV R of any item being considered by this Commission, please indicate below by:
A. Printed Name
B. Sig nature
C. Item In Favor Of
1. A. B.
2. A. B.
3. A. B.
- 4. A. - - B.
5. A. B.
6. A. B.
7. A. B.
~! 8. A. B.
9. A. B.
10. A. B.
11. A. B.
12. A. B.
13. A. B.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
C.
• •