HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-17-2005 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission•
•
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 17, 2005
Members Present: Pat Muston, Doretta Finch, Paul Berner, Dottie Kaminski, Nick Barrera,
Hal Lawler (Alt. 1), Les Bird (Alt. 2)
Members Absent: Kirby Linscomb, Jr., Claude Meharg
City Staff Present: Planning Director, Wayne Sabo; Planning Coordinator, Masood Malik;
James Eastep, Assistant Director of Parks and Recreation; Assistant City
Attorney, Clark Askins; and Planning and Zoning Secretary, Peggy Lee
1. CALL TO ORDER
Meeting called to order by Chairperson Muston at 6:00 p.m.
2. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY Z0, 2005, REGULAR MEETING ~ PUBLIC
HEARING.
Motion by Paul Berner to approve the Minutes of January 20, 2005. Second by Doretta
Finch. The motion carried.
Ayes: Berner, Finch, Kaminski, Barrera, Lawler, and Muston
Nays: None
Abstain: None
3. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE TO NEWLY APPOINTED ALTERNATE N0.2 LES
BIRD.
Assistant City Attorney, Clark Askins, administered the Oath of Office to Les Bird. Upon
conclusion, Mr. Askins excused himself in order to meet with the newly created Building
Code Appeals Board for a brief period.
4. CONSIDER PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR PROPOSED UNDERWOOD BUSINESS PARK
TO BE LOCATED ALONG OLD UNDERWOOD ROAD, IN THE ENOCH BRINSON
SURVEY, A-5, LA PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS.
Planning Coordinator, Masood Malik, presented staffs report. Clay Development 8~
Construction Co. has plans to develop Underwood Business Park along Old Underwood
Road, south of the UPRR and State Highway 225. Approximately 32 acres will be
subdivided into five reserves (A-E) with restricted reserve (F) to be platted later.
Staff recommended approval of the plat with the conditions outlined in staff's report.
Motion by Nick Barrera to approve the Preliminary Plat for Underwood Business Park to
be located along Old Underwood Road, with the following conditions:
• Add a statement on the plat to ensure that waterline wilt be extended and
easement shall be secured to the south with the future development.
Planning and Zoning Commis3Ton •
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 2
^ Final Plat must demonstrate 10' waterline easement dedicated to the City of La
Porte for future water main along north property line adjacent to UPRR.
^ Final construction drawings shall indicate off-site drainage improvements to
ensure proper drainage of the adjacent property.
^ Final Plat and construction drawings shall provide details showing construction of
utilities and 12' perimeter around the detention basin.
^ Future rail access, spur design, and UPRR approval shall be required.
^ Detention shall be the sole responsibility of the owner/developer.
^ Submit a copy of the business park covenants and restrictions.
Second by Hal Lawler. The motion carried.
Ayes: Barrera, Lawler, Berner, Finch, Kaminski, Bird, and Muston
Nays: None
Abstain: None
5. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL REGARDING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 106, SECTION 106-801, CONCERNING REQUIREMENTS
FOR TREE REPLACEMENT, PROTECTIVE FENCING, AND VISIBILITY TRIANGLES
WITHIN THE ZONING DISTRICTS.
Chairperson Muston opened the public hearing at 6:05 p.m. No public input was given.
James Eastep, Assistant Director of Public Works, presented staff's report. Mr. Eastep
reported that the tree ordinance enhancement issue was discussed by City Council
during a workshop. City Council asked Parks and Planning staff to assess current
development conditions and provide strategies relating to tree preservation and other
beautification efforts. Mr. Eastep stated that the City could enhance its public image by
participating in the Tree City USA Program.
Staff's review revealed that the tree preservation provisions, found in the current
ordinance, are adequate. Staff recommended that tree replacement, along with
protective fencing, be added to the current regulations. Certain trees, such as Arizona
Ash, Mesquite, and Tallow, would be removed from the City's list of recommended trees
and plants.
Commission Members had questions about permit fees for tree removal on private
property and if the recommended changes would affect tree removal on private property,
or only public property. Staff will provide clarification on these issues.
Motion by Nick Barrera to table a recommendation to City Council regarding a Zoning
Ordinance amendment establishing requirements for tree replacement, protective
Planning and Zoning Commis• •
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 3
fencing, and visibility triangles within the zoning districts. Second by Dottie Kaminski.
The motion carried.
Ayes: Barrera, Kaminski, Lawler, Bemer, Finch, Bird, and Muston
Nays: None
Abstain: None
6. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL REGARDING REZONE REQUEST #R05-001 FOR 15.6 ACRES OF LAND
LOCATED ALONG BOTH SIDES OF FARRINGTON BOULEVARD AT FAIRMONT
PARKWAY, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS TR 31 & TR 32, SITUATED IN THE W.M.
JONES SURVEY, A-482, LA PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. THE APPLICANT,
EDDIE V. GRAY, SEEKS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM GENERAL
COMMERCIAL (GC) TO LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) TO PROVIDE FOR
SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS.
Chairperson Muston opened the public hearing at 6:20 p.m.
Mr. Malik presented staff's report. The applicant, Eddie Gray, has requested a rezone
from General Commercial to Low-Density Residential for 15.6 acres along both sides of
Farrington Blvd. at Fairmont Pkwy. for the purpose of constructing single-family
dwellings in the proposed Fairmont Park East, Section 12.
Notices of public hearing were mailed to property owners within 200' of the subject area.
Of the 55 mailed, the City received one response in opposition.
Staff recommended approval of the rezone.
Motion by Hal Lawler to recommend to City Council, approval of #R05-001 to rezone
15.6 acres of land along both sides of Farrington Boulevard at Fairmont Parkway from
General Commercial (GC) to Low-Density Residential (R-1). Second by Dottie
Kaminski. The motion carried.
Ayes: Lawler, Kaminski,
Nays: None
Abstain: None
Berner, Barrera, Finch, Bird and Muston
Chairperson Muston suspended Item 7 on the agenda to move to Item 8.
8. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL REGARDING REZONE REQUEST #R05-003 FOR THE PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 11820 NORTH "H" STREET NEAR SENS ROAD. THE PROPERTY IS
.FURTHER DESCRIBED AS TR 239A BEING 2.08 ACRE TRACT OF LAND OUT OF
OUTLOT 239, LA PORTE OUTLOTS, IN THE ENOCH BRINSON SURVEY,
ABSTRACT-5, LA PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. MR. RICHARD DETWILER
OF CHEM COAST, INC., SEEKS TO REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM LOW-
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (GC).
Planning and Zoning Commis3'fon •
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 4
Chairperson Muston opened the public hearing at 6:25 p.m.
Mr. Malik presented staffs report. The applicant, Richard Detwiler, for Chem Coast, has
requested a zone change from low-density residential (R-1) to General Commercial (GC)
for property located at 11820 North "Hn Street. The requested change would allow for
additional office space and a parking facility for the present use. Mr. Malik reviewed
some background information on the property with the Commission, including the zoning
history, which describes how the current zoning classification came to be. Staff's
recommendation was to approve the rezone citing the requested change is compatible
with zoning and uses of nearby properties.
Notices of public hearing were mailed to property owners within 200' of the subject area.
Of the 11 mailed, the City received one response in favor of the rezone.
Fred Hanzelka, of 11801 N. "H" bought his property in 1973. He spoke about previous
zoning in the area. Mr. Hanzelka feels that Chem Coast has been a terrible neighbor
and referred to a "chemical release" that occurred. He does not feel they should be
allowed to expand.
James Cummings, of 11806 N. "H" stated that he came home from work 9'/s years ago
to find his family had been taken to the hospital due to a chemical release by Chem
Coast. Mr. Cummings does not feel Chem Coast has taken the necessary precautions
to prevent a similar incident.
Charles Jones, of 11804 North °H" for about 3'/i years, has experienced foul odors but
cannot identify the source. Mr. Jones does not feel this type of business should be
located in a residential area.
Phil Murray, owner of Chem Coast, said the Company relocated to La Porte in 1986.
Mr. Murray apologized to the neighbors for their unpleasant experience and said it was
not their intent to be a terrible neighbor. Mr. Murray described a release they had in the
late 90's. He said that steps have been taken to insure it won't happen again. He
invited neighbors to drop by anytime if they had any questions or just wanted to took
around.
James Gardner, of 11801 N. °H", was unclear as to the business use. Mr. Gardner feels
that granting the request would allow for expansion, which he opposes. He said it would
also create a negative financial impact on neighboring properties.
Mr. Murray and staff responded to questions from the Commission and the residents.
Motion by Doretta Finch to recommend to City Council, denial of #R05-003 to rezone
property located at 11820 N. "H" Street from Law-Density Residential (R-1) to General
Commercial (GC). Second by Nick Barrera. The motion carried.
Ayes: Finch, Barrera, Bird, and Lawler
Nays: Kaminski, Berner and Muston
Abstain: None
Planning and Zoning Commis`3Ton •
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 5
7. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL REGARDING REZONE REQUEST #R05-002 FOR 14.46 ACRES OF LAND
LOCATED AT 3900 UNDERWOOD ROAD BETWEEN FAIRMONT PARKWAY AND
SPENCER HIGHWAY. THE PROPERTY IS FURTHER DESCRIBED AS TR 813,
LOTS 698 81699, TRS 698A, 699A, Sz 814, AND TRS 698B, 6998 81815, LA PORTE
OUTLOTS, IN THE W.M. JONES SURVEY, A-482, LA PORTE, HARRIS COUNTY,
TEXAS. MICHAEL A. FISCO OF LA PORTE PROPERTIES, LLC., SEEKS TO
REZONE THE PROPERTY FROM LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) AND MEDIUM
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (R-2) TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC).
Planning Director, Wayne Sabo, presented staff's report. The applicant, Michael Fisco,
has requested a zone change from Low-Density Residential (R-1) and Medium-Density
Residential (R-2) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC) for property located at 3900
Underwood Road in order to bring the property into some degree of conformity with the
current ordinance. The subject property has commercial establishments operating as
pre-existing and non-conforming.
Notices of public hearing were mailed to property owners within 200' of the subject area.
Of the 70 mailed, the City received one response in favor and nine opposed to the
rezone. Four additional responses in opposition were received at the meeting.
Chairperson Muston opened the public hearing at 7:05 p.m.
J.B. Williamson, of 10916 Spencer Hwy., Attorney for AAA Flexible Pipe Cleaning
Company, noted that no change in property use is requested. The zone change is
requested to make the property consistent with the current use. Mr. Williamson showed
photographs of the property and stated that the owner, in trying to be a good neighbor,
constructed a fence 30 feet from the property line. One of the neighbors had planted a
garden on Mr. Fisco's property and then became upset when asked to remove it. With
regard to domestic livestock on the property, while the neighbors may not like the
animals, the property owner is in compliance with City regulations. Mr. Williamson
recommended the request be approved and answered questions from the Commission.
Donald L. Davis, of 3621 E. Desert Dr., has always got along well with Mr. Fisco. His
wife was not aware she had placed her garden on Mr. Fisco's property and when it was
brought to her attention, the garden was removed, without a squabble. Mr. Davis does
not have a problem with the current number of animals on the property, but questioned if
additional animals would be allowed if the zone change were approved. In response,
Mr. Sabo noted that by ordinance, two large grazing animals per acre are allowed and
the subject tract consists of approximately 14 acres.
Fred Young, of 9505 Dry Desert Way, commented that when he moved to the
neighborhood, he was of the understanding it was a residential neighborhood and AAA
Flexible Pipe Cleaning was grandfathered. Mr. Young does not feel that AAA is a good
neighbor. He commented about the business's exterior lighting being a nuisance. Mr.
Young takes issue with the City's definition of "domestic animal." He also noted there
were drainage problems in the front part of the subdivision during a previous storm.
Allowing commercial zoning would not help the drainage situation. Mr. Young does not
believe this rezone would be in the community's best interest.
Planning and Zoning Commis3Ton •
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 6
Mr. Sabo responded to questions from the Commission.
Cheryl Hargett, of 3617 E. Desert Dr., commented there had been many animals on the
property and there was a foul odor. Ms. Hargett inquired when the owner started
clearing the land and was told it was none of her business. Ms. Hargett stated the trees
that were creating a buffer were removed. She noted drainage problems. The property
drains foul smelling stagnant water onto her property. She complained of stacks of
wood, standing water, and excess lighting.
J. B. Williamson noted that all excess animals have been removed.
Cliff Hagemeister, of 3613 E. Desert Dr., reported that excess lighting is a problem. He
does not have an issue with the animals.
Donald Davis, of 3621 E. Desert Dr., spoke again to confirm the comment by Mr. Davis
about the .drainage issue. He spoke of the problems the subdivision experiences during
rain events. Commercial businesses mean more concrete.
Russell Hargett, of 3617 E. Desert Dr. opposes future commercial development along
Underwood Rd.
During Commission discussion, it was pointed out that if rezoned, it could allow
Neighborhood Commercial development throughout the entire tract.
Chairperson Muston closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m.
Motion by Nick Barrera to recommend to City Council, denial of #R05-002 to rezone
property located at 3900 Underwood Rd., from Low-Density Residential (R-1) and
Medium-Density Residential (R-2) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC). There was no
second. The motion failed.
Motion by Les Bird to recommend to City Council, approval of #R05-002 to rezone
property located at 3900 Underwood Rd. from Low-Density Residential (R-1) and
Medium-Density Residential (R-2) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Second by Dottie
Kaminski. The motion failed.
Ayes: Bird, Kaminski and Muston
Nays: Finch, Barrera, Bemer and Lawler
Abstain: None
Motion by Nick Barrera to recommend to City Council, denial of #R05-002 to rezone
property located at 3900 Underwood Rd. from Low-Density Residential (R-1) and
Medium-Density Residential (R-2) to Neighborhood Commercial (NC). Second by
Doretta Finch. The motion carried.
Ayes: Barrera, Finch, Berner and Lawler
Nays: Bird, Kaminski and Muston
Abstain: None
Planning and Zoning Commi~n •
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 7
9. CONDUCT PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDER RECOMMENDATION TO CITY
COUNCIL REGARDING SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #S0005-003 FOR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 2000 BLOCK OF POWELL ROAD (SOUTH 16T"
STREET) FOR 3421 ACRE TRACT IN THE GEORGE B. MCKINSTRY, A-47; WILLIAM
P. HARRIS SURVEY, A-30; JOHNSON HUNTER SURVEY, A-35; CITY OF LA
PORTS, HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS. MR. STUART HAYNSWORTH, GENERAL
PARTNER, IS SEEKING APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AND A PERMIT FOR
THE DEVELOPMENT OF PROPOSED TEXAS IMPORT/EXPORT PARK, ARAIL-
ORIENTED WAREHOUSE FACILITY WITHIN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
(PUD) ZONE.
Chairperson Muston opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m.
Mr. Sabo presented staff's report and reviewed the background information on the
request by Stuart Haynsworth for a special conditional use permit for Texas
Import/Export Park located in the 2000 block of Powell Rd. Mr. Sabo noted the
Development Agreement was a draft and is a condition of the special conditional use
permit.
The applicant, Stuart Haynsworth, addressed the Commission. Mr. Haynsworth stated
that Doyle Toups, Sr. Vice-President of Grubb & Ellis, is present and is the authorized
representative of all the property owners. Mr. Haynsworth spoke about the annexation
history of the property. He feels the current PUD zoning with the special conditional use
permit can allow development to occur. Mr. Haynsworth believes the development
would be an asset to the community.
Doyle Toups, of 819 Heathcliff, Houston, Texas, represents Mr. Haynsworth, as well as
other property owners. Mr. Toups has been associated with this project for 7"/2 years.
The first phase of construction will include a 250,000 sq. ft. warehouse that is pre-
leased. Market conditions are favorable for development at this time. Mr. Toups
responded to questions from the Commission.
Dean Snider, of 202 Bay Colony Dr., does not oppose industry, but feels that the SH 146
corridor is a billboard for the community and this project would portray a bad image of
the City. He commented it would be another spilling over of industry into residential.
Joe Fogarty, of 1518 Ash Meadow, Houston, Texas, is the developer of the property on
the opposite side of SH 146. Mr. Fogarty commented on his significant financial
investment with his project. He does not oppose this project, but there are issues that
have not been fully resolved. Mr. Fogarty commented that Mr. Haynsworth had
previously agreed to sell him a majority of this property and there is currently a contract
at the title company. Mr. Fogarty's plans for the property included a portion for rail and
warehousing and the remainder as mixed-use, with a large segment of detached single-
family residential. Mr. Fogarty commented that Mr. Haynsworth decided not to honor his
contract. He wanted the Commission to be aware there are other alternatives possible.
Mr. Haynsworth stated this is not a courtroom and not the place to argue the pros and
cons of litigation. He added he is trying to avoid the occurrence of industry and
residences infringing upon one another.
Planning and Zoning Commis~on
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 8
Staff recommended approval of the Special Conditional Use Permit. Additional reviews
will follow at a later date to review an amended general plan and plat. Mr. Sabo asked
the City Attorney to advise the Commission on their options due to the pending litigation.
Mr. Askins wanted to make sure the Commission was aware of their options. The
Commission could table the action indefinitely for the purpose of ascertaining more
information or continue the public hearing to a time, date, and location specific.
Ms. Haynsworth does not think the City should be concerned with the litigation, but with
development issues relating to the land. He noted that postponing action would be of
detriment to the owners since market conditions are currently favorable for import/export
businesses.
Russell Plank, resident of Houston, Texas, is a Developer on the west side of Powell Rd.
He is concemed about the portions of the property that are planned for commercial
development that are clear of litigation. It is important for his company, National
Property Holdings, LP, to receive approval.
Joe Fogarty noted that if he ends up being involved in the property, his plans included a
100' landscape buffer between the building and Powell Rd. Mr. Fogarty does not
oppose the other portion moving forward.
Mr. Sabo clarified that the City is dealing with a general plan and gland -use concept with
the representative of the landholders. The City is not a party to the litigation. If the
litigation were to change something, then the general. plan would need to be
resubmitted.
Motion by Dottie Kaminski to recommend to City Council, approval of Special
Conditional Use Permit #S0005-003 for the development of Texas Import/Export Park in
the 2000 Block of Powell Rd. with the following conditions:
1. This SCUP does not go into effect until amended General Plan, Development
Agreement, and all other supporting documents are considered by the
Commission & approved by City Council.
2. This SCUP is not applicable to any specific development anticipated or proposed
by this General Plan.
3. This SCUP outlines in general terms the proposed Planned Unit Development.
The developer recognizes and understands that any future construction or
development of the private or public improvements anticipated by this SCUP and
the General Plan shall require further submittal and approval of plats, site plans,
construction drawings, engineering analysis, covenants, etc.
4. Said submittals shall be in accordance with the SCUP, the approved General
Plan, and the future approved Development Agreement.
5. The Developer shall comply with all other applicable laws and ordinances of the
City of La Porte and the State of Texas.
Second by Nick Barrera. The motion carried.
Ayes: Kaminski, Barrera, Finch, Berner, Lawler, Bird and Muston
Nays: None
Abstain: None
Planning and Zoning Commission •
Minutes of February 17, 2005
Page 9
10. STAFF REPORTS
Mr. Sabo reported the following:
^ HGAC Planning Commissioner's Workshop from 8:30-4:30 on March 11 in
Houston. Persons interested in attending should contact Peggy Lee.
^ Special Conditional Use Permits for DNV 8~ Clay Development were approved
unanimously by City Council.
^ Tax Abatement related to Clay Development was approved by City Council.
11. ADJOURN
Motion by Hal Lawler to adjourn. Second by Nick Barrera. The meeting adjourned at
8:40 p.m.
Submitted by,
Pe9gY
Secretary, tanning and Zoning Commission
on this
~7
day of l~ V ~-Q~-~' ~ , 2005.
Pat Mustdn
Chairperson, Planning and Zoning Commission
•
•
Fairmont Park East, Section 12
(Preliminary Plat)
Exhibits
A. Commission's Action Request
B. Aerial Map
C. Staff Report
D. Preliminary Plat
•
Fairmont Park East Section Twelve -Preliminary Plat
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 17, 2005
:7
Location of Subdivision Farrin ton Blvd. at Fairmont Parkwa
Legal Description TR 31 & Pt. TR 32 in the W. M. Jones Survey,
A-482, La Porte, Harris Count ,Texas.
A licant Eddie V. Gra Trustee, Fairmont Park, JV.
Present Zonin Low Densit Residential R-1
Requested Zoning Single-Family Residential
Acreage 15.6064 acres
Surrounding Zoning North Low Density Residential (R-1)
East Low Density Residential (R-1)
South General Commercial (GC)
West Low Densit Residential R-1
Land Use Ma Residential
Activit Pro osed Residential
Summary:
• The applicant is requesting approval of a preliminary plat for proposed
Fairmont Park East Section Twelve to be located on both sides of
Farrington Blvd.
• During the February 17, 2005 public hearing, the Commission
recommended rezone of the said property from General Commercial
(GC) to Low-Density Residential (R-1) for single-family dwellings.
• The proposed subdivision abuts commercial development to the south
along Fairmont Parkway.
• The adjacent properties are zoned low-density residential except
commercial along Fairmont Parkway.
• The area is earmarked for residential/commercial uses in the Land Use
Plan.
• Streets/roads should have adequate capacity to handle the traffic
generated by this proposed development.
Recommendation:
The Preliminary Plat is in accordance with the City's Development Ordinance.
Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with the following
considerations in place:
• Construction drawings shall indicate off-site drainage improvements to
ensure proper drainage of the adjacent commercial property and residential
subdivision.
• As agreed, the developer is responsible for installation of sidewalks along
both sides of all public streets within the subdivision and along east and
west right-of--way line of Farrington Blvd. upto end of the subdivision line.
Actions required by
The Commission:
• Approval of the Preliminary Plat as submitted.
• Conditional approval of the Preliminary Plat requires submission of an
amended Preliminary Plat and additional documentation as specified by the
Commission.
• Disapproval of the Preliminary Plat requires submission of a new
Preliminary Plat.
~~-9~q~
• •
Staff Report Fairmont Park East, Section Twelve March 17, 2005
Preliminary Plat
Requested Action: Consideration of Preliminary Plat for Fairmont Park East, Section Twelve
Requested By: Mr. Eddie V. Gray, Trustee
Requested For: A 15.6064 acre tract out of the William M. Jones Survey, Abstract No. 482,
Harris County, Texas.
Present Zoning: Low-Density Residential (R-1)
Requested Use: Residential Subdivision - (Single Family Dwellings)
Background: The subject tracts are approximately 15.6064 acres of land out of W. M.
Jones Survey, A-482, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. The property is
located along both sides of Farrington Boulevard just south of Fairmont
Park, Section 2. The 9.786 acre tract is bounded by single-family residential
subdivision (Fairmont Park Central Section 2) on the north, commercial uses
to the south along Fairmont Parkway, east with Farrington Boulevard, and
adjacent to the Big Island Slough on the west. The 5.159 acre tract is
bounded by Fairmont Park Central Section 2 to the north, adjacent to
existing commercial uses and unrestricted reserves along Fairmont Parkway
on the south, and west on Farrington Boulevard.
The developer applied for a zone change request with the City in February,
2005. The public hearing for Rezone Request #ROS-001 was held at the
February 17, 2005 meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. City
Council at their March 14, 2005 meeting, approved the Commission's
recommendations for rezoning of the said tracts from General Commercial
(GC) to Low-Density Residential (R-1).
Analysis: Section 4.03 and Appendix D of the City's Development Ordinance establish
review criteria for major subdivisions. Staff also used criteria in the City's
Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan to review this project.
Land Use -The project's proposed residential use conforms to the character
of the surrounding land uses and the R-1 zoning district. Properties adjacent
to the site are overwhelmingly residential with some commercial properties
along Fairmont Parkway.
Fairmont Park East, Section 1 preliminary Plat •
3/17/05 - P & Z Meeting
Page 2 of 3
Transportation/Interior Circulation -The proposed project is situated
approximately 200' north of Fairmont Parkway and just south of the
Fairmont Park Subdivision Section 2. The main access to the proposed
subdivision is along Farrington Blvd., which has 80' of Right-of--Way
(ROW). Fairmont Parkway, a primary arterial with 250' of ROW, may
accommodate the traffic generated by this development.
The proposed subdivision will have internal streets with 50' of ROW. The
layout creates two points of access off Farrington Boulevard to this proposed
development.
Sidewalks - As a part of the Plan approval, the developer agreed to construct
sidewalks along both sides of all public streets within the subdivision and
along east and west right-of--way of Farrington Blvd. towards the end of the
subdivision lines to the north and south with Fairmont Parkway.
Parks and Recreation -Section 12.0 of the City's Development Ordinance
requires the developer to provide on site open space and recreational space
or fees in lieu of parkland, to the City. Per the Ordinance, an area of land
dedicated to the city for parkland purposes shall equal one acre for each 160
proposed dwelling units. This subdivision has 65 lots. Dedication of
parkland less than one acre in size is prohibited per Section 12.03 of the
Development Ordinance. Therefore, money in lieu of parkland dedication is
applicable. The nearest park facility is in Fairmont Park Central Section 2
along Farrington Boulevard at Collingswood Drive. This facility serves the
parks and recreation needs of several neighborhoods within a 1 to 2 mile
radius. The proposed subdivision will be well served by this facility.
Utilities -There are sufficient water and sewer facilities in the vicinity to
provide service to this proposed development. The developer is responsible
for providing all necessary public infrastructure or improvements necessary
to accommodate the subdivision's water and sanitary .sewer needs. The
design and construction of all water and sewer systems shall be in
conformance with the City's Development Ordinance.
Drainage -Storm water design and management are the issues resolved
carefully with the developer of the proposed subdivision. The proposed
section is adjacent to the Big Island Slough. Currently, a 10' drainage
easement is shown through the proposed subdivision and out falling into Big
Island Slough. A 1.5741 acre tract to the west is reserved for detention area.
The detention area's size and capacity are reviewed to ensure that it will
adequately serve the proposed development. The developer shall provide all
the necessary easements required for proper drainage including storm water
inlets within the subdivision.
Fairmont Park East, Section preliminary Plat •
3/17/05 - P & Z Meeting
Page 3 of 3
Conclusion and
Recommendation: The Preliminary Plat is in accordance with the City's development
regulations. Staff recommends approval of the Preliminary Plat with the
following considerations in place:
• Construction drawings shall indicate off-site drainage improvements to
ensure proper drainage of the adjacent commercial property and
residential subdivision.
• As agreed, the developer is responsible for installation of sidewalks
along both sides of all public streets within the subdivision and along
east and west right-of--way line of Farrington Blvd. to the end of the
subdivision line.
Options available to the Commission are as follows:
• Approval of the Preliminary Plat as submitted.
• Conditional approval of the Preliminary Plat requires submission of an
amended Preliminary Plat and additional documentation as specified by
the Commission.
• Disapproval of the Preliminary Plat requires submission of a new
Preliminary Plat.
• •
Green Crest Subdivision
(Preliminary Plat -Ext.)
Exhibits
A. Staff Report
B. Aerial Map
C. Preliminary Plat
• •
Staff Report Green Crest Subdivision March 17, 2005
Preliminary Plat (Ext.)
Requested Action: One-year extension of Preliminary Plat approval for proposed Green Crest
Subdivision
Requested Bv: Jay Hyle, Consultant
Civil Concepts, Inc. on behalf of
Richard W. Cansler, Trustee
Requested For: A 12.950 acre tract out of lots 411 and 412, La Porte Outlots, Volume 1,
Page 33, H.C.M.R. in the Nicholas Clopper Survey, Abstract No. 198 and
the Enoch Brinson Survey, Abstract No. 5, La Porte, Harris County, Texas.
Present Zoning: Low-Density Residential (R-1) & General Commercial (GC)
Requested Use: Residential Subdivision - (Single Family Dwellings)
Baclc~round: Green Crest is a residential subdivision to be located along North "L" Street
approximately 350' east of Underwood Road. As proposed, the subdivision
has two blocks, 54 lots, and five restricted reserves including a detention
reserve 1.5 acre towards west of the subdivision. About four dwelling units
per acre conform to the City's Comprehensive Plan and Section 106-333,
Table B, residential area requirements of the Code of Ordinances.
The Planning and zoning Commission, at the April 15, 2004 meeting,
approved a Preliminary Plat of proposed Green Crest Subdivision.
Ana sis: Section 4.03 of the Development Ordinance No.1444 requires developer to
file a final plat within one year of approval of the Preliminary Plat.
Otherwise, approval of the said plat shall terminate upon written notice to the
owner/developer. In addition, the developer may request, in writing, a one
year extension specifying reasons not to file a Final Plat.
Staff received a written request from the developer before the expiration date
(copy attached). The developer states that the plan review and approval by
other entities is in progress. Drainage details between the developer, Harris
County, and LPISD have been ongoing and make this extension necessary.
~~`~~~~~o`~ A~
Green Crest -Extension (PP)
3/17/05 - P & Z Meeting
Page 2 of 2
Conclusion:
Staff reviewed the request for cone-year extension. There are no notable
changes in the development conditions that would affect the subject
property. All infrastructure requirements are the same as they were when
this project received initial approval.
Section 4.03 of the Development Ordinance No.1444 provides that the
applicant may request an extension for one additional year, and the Planning
and Zoning Commission may grant such extension. The applicant has
requested an extension, which is attached herewith as Exhibit A.
Staff is recommending approval of a one-year extension for the Preliminary
Plat of proposed Green Crest Subdivision.
•
•
CIVIL CONCEP?'S, INC.
3425 Federal Street Pasadena, Texas 77504
Phone 713-947-6606 Fax 713-947-6609
www. civi lc oncepts. com
RECEIVED
Dated: February 22, 2005 FEB ~ ~ 2005
PLANNING DEPT.
Mr. Wayne J. Sabo
_ __ _ .- City_of_LaPorte, Texas_P_lanning_Department- __ _ _ _- _ _ _ _ `__
604 West Fairmont Parkway
LaPorte, Texas 77571
Re: Green Crest Preliminary Plat
Mr. Sabo,
We would like to request the preliminary plat status of Green Crest Subdivision, granted
on April 15'h° 2004, be extended for another year. We have been working with LaPorte
ISD to gain an easement across Lomax Jr. High to Harris County Flood Control Ditch for
drainage outfall. We have gained approval from LaPorte ISD and now have our plans at
Harris County Engineering and Harris County Flood Control for their review and
approval. We believe that we should have approval from them soon, but do not want the •.
preliminary plat to run out.
If you should need any further'information please feel free to contact me.
• •
Special Conditional Use Permit
#SCU05-004
Exhibits
A. Commission Action Request
B. Aerial Map
C. Staff Report
D. Draft SCUP
E. General Plan
Special Conditional Use Per~SCU05-004 •
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 17, 2005
Location of Pro osed Develo ment 1200 Block of McCabe Road
Legal Description TRS 8, 8A, SF-1, 49, 49A, & 9B; W. P. Harris
Surve , A-30.
A licant Robert Burchfield
Present Zonin Planned Unit Develo ment PUD
Project Name Preserve at Taylor Bayou
Acreage 31.96 acres, 75.16 acres (nature preserve)
Surrounding Zoning North Planned Unit Development (PUD)
East Low Density Residential (R-1)
South Low Density Residential (R-1)
West Planned Unit Develo ment PUD
Land Use Ma Residential
Activity Proposed Single-Family, Multi-Family Residential,
Townhomes, Commercial/Flex and Nature
Preserve
Summary:
• This project has an approved SCUP. This submittal is an amended General Plan.
• The subject property is located at the southeast corner of McCabe Road at SH 146 near Taylor Bayou.
• The said parcel of land consists of 31.96 acres out of 107 acres tract located south of McCabe Road and the
easterly right-of--way line of State Highway 146.
• The previous submittal was for 418 apartment units and was denied by P&Z and City Council.
• The applicant is now proposing single-family residential, multi-family, townhome, and commercial/flex
development at this site. Corresponding densities now meet densities allowed by the strict compliance of
Chapter 106 (Zoning). The Commission may vary from strict compliance within a PUD.
• The current proposal still intends to dedicate a 75..16 acre nature preserve.
• The plan also shows two points of entrance/exit along McCabe Road.
• The applicant has stated that funding for PUD portion of the said project is in place. The funding for the
trails will be determined once a decision is made about who "owns" the Nature Preserve. Harris County
has expressed an interest in the Preserve dedication.
• Anew lift station is proposed near the east end of the property and McCabe Road in accordance with the
City's sanitary sewer master plan for this area. Army Corps of Engineers has issued a preliminary opinion.
• It is anticipated that the proposed development will be hooked up to the new 24" trunk main going north for
sanitary sewer.
• The Environmental Assessment and Traffic Impact Analysis studies have been completed for the said
project.
Recommendation:
Based on the above analysis, staff believes that the current submittal has merit. We recommend approval of the Special
Conditional Use permit and General Plan. Staff will conduct further coordination in the area of utility planning and the
preserve dedication. In addition, we solicit the Commission's input while considering the following conditions:
1. An overall density of the multi-family (apartments) and townhomes shall not exceed 14 and 10
dwelling units per acre respectively.
2. The nature preserve "conservation easement" ownership and responsibility for its maintenance must be
established. The City requirement for compensating open land will apply. The City must approve the
conservancy dedication instrument.
3. The applicant/developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of the 75.16 acre Nature Preserve/
Conservation Easement until transfer of ownership and/or responsibility.
4. Provide an irrigation system to ensure that all landscaping and screening is properly maintained by the
owner/developer.
5. The design of the detention will be reviewed by staff to ensure consistency with the Ordinances and
the Taylor Bayou Watershed Plan. Permits with Army Corps of Engineers and County Flood Control
must be presented to the City.
6. The developer shall contribute to traffic calming devices/tools (e.g. right turn lane) to ensure that
traffic congestion does occur as a result of his project.
7. The applicant must secure a maintenance bond, according to the City's multi-family provisions, or
seek an approved alternate showing evidence of bonding insurance or participate in a "reserve fund
Tx~~~~l~Q~ ~
Special Conditional Use Per~SCU05-004 •
Planning and Zoning Commission
March 17, 2005
mechanism" that establishes an account for the sole purpose of maintenance to the project. This fund is
for the lifetime of the project.
8. The owner/applicant must construct a lift station and dedicate an easement to the City at Taylor Bayou
and McCabe for the lift station.
9. The owner/applicant must contribute 31.2% as proportionate cost for the construction of a 24" trunk
main, portion of the lift station to be built north, and the portion of the off-site lift station that needs to
be upgraded to handle both north and south developments.
10. The applicant must provide proof of funding allocation.
11. The applicant must provide a covenant that the multi-family portion of the project remains on the
City's tax rolls.
12. A letter from Army Corps of Engineers for approval of the lift station must be submitted prior to the
building permit.
13. The proposed complex must provide an area designated for accommodation of school buses, pick
up/drop off sites as per LPISD's design standards.
14. Utility Plans must be approved by the City Staff.
15. Proposed sidewalks must be annotated on the General Plan.
16. All utilities should be planned for underground routing.
17. The applicant must provide a covenant for maintenance of common areas.
18. The Developer shall comply with all other applicable laws and ordinances of the City of La Porte and
the State of Texas.
Options available to the Commission are:
• Recommend to Council approval of this SCUP#OS-004.
• Recommend to Council approval of this SCUP with additional conditions.
• Recommend to Council denial of this SCUP. OR Continue discussion at the Commission's next regular
meeting to allow further study of this item. This results in tabling any action on this item.
• •
Staff Report Preserve at Taylor Bayou March 17, 2005
General Plan &
Special Conditional Use Permit #SCU05-004
Request: Approval of General Plan for 107.19 acre tract and Special Conditional Use
Permit.
Requested By: Mr. Robert Burchfield, Burchfield Development, L.P.
Requested For: A 107.19-acre tract out of the W. P. Harris Survey, A-30, La Porte, Harris
County, Texas. This property is further described as being located in the
1200 Block of McCabe Road.
Present Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Requested Use: Single-Family, Multi-Family Residential, Townhomes, and
Commercial/Flex Bldgs.
Background: This property is located at the southeast corner of SH 146 and McCabe
Road. It is bounded on the east by Shady River Subdivision and on the south
by Shoreacres. Several years ago, the Commission and Council approved a
General Plan and Special Conditional Use Permit for this location. In 2001, a
one year extension was granted; however, no construction occurred and the
permit expired in November 2002.
The applicant submitted a new General Plan and applied for a Special
Conditional Use Permit. During the Commission's April 17, 2003 meeting,
Mr. Burchfield presented his proposed General Plan. During the
presentation, Mr. Burchfield provided the lay out of 400+ units situated on
28 acres. The proposed development included a 4-acre detention pond/water
feature surrounded by jogging trails, and play areas.
The Commission recommended denial of the application based upon issues
including excessive density of 418 units, lack of information concerning the
Preserve, financing and outstanding Army Corps of Engineer
documentation. Chapter 106, Code of Ordinances, allows a maximum cap
of 180 units within apartment complexes. City Council disapproved the
request on Apri126, 2004.
The developer filed a new General Plan and Special Conditional Use Permit
#SCU04-013. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing
to receive citizen input on the new concept which include the followings:
• 180 Multi-Family units and 150 Townhome units on 28.43 acres
• 1 lot, Neighborhood Commercial on 1.35 acres
• 1 lot, Private Park on 2.25 acres
• 1 lot, Nature Preserve on 75.16 acres.
• The apartment density is 13.85 units per acre (14 allowed).
• The townhome density is 9.72 per acre (10 allowed per Chapter 106).
~~.~~ ~ .
Preserve at Taylor Bayou
March 17, 2005
Page 2 of 5
The Commission recommended approval of the above General Plan and
Special Conditional Use Permit. City Council, at the October 11, 2004
meeting, approved the General Plan and Special Conditional Use Permit
#SCU04-013.
Now, the developer has submitted an amended General Plan with a new
concept. The features of the plan are as follows:
• Single-Family Residential - 201ots, 4.17 acres (4.8 du/a allowed)
• Single-Family (Patio Homes) - 76 lots, 12.67 acres (6 lots/acre allowed)
• Townhomes -12 units, 1.20 acre (10 units/acre allowed)
• Multi-Family -180 units, 12.86 acres (14 units/acre allowed)
• Commercial/Flex Bldgs. - 4 (zoned Neighborhood Commercial)
Development in a PUD zoning district requires that a General Plan (for the
entire proposed project) and a Special Conditional Use Permit (SCUP) be
submitted and processed simultaneously. Upon approval of the General Plan
and SCUP by City Council, the applicant would be authorized to proceed
with the platting and development plans for the site.
Analysis: Section 106-659 of the Code of Ordinances establishes the following
criteria for review of development projects within a PUD zoning district:
• Uses -Review of the City's Land Use Plan indicates this 107-acre
area was envisioned as developing as low density residential with a
small corner for commercial uses. However, this proposed
development is not considered to be low-density residential. In
addition, Mr. Burchfield stated that the 75.16 acre Conservation
Easement would serve as a buffer between their proposed development
and surrounding properties.
• Streets -The proposed development is located at the corner of SH 146
and McCabe Road The developer is proposing two points of
entrance/exit off McCabe Road. These common access drives serve an
entire development and Nature Preserve. Further coordination with
TXDOT for future plans for S.H. 146 is needed. The possible addition
of turn lanes on McCabe road should also be considered.
Traffic Analysis: The applicant has submitted a traffic analysis study
report. The report previously had taken into account an entire
development for abuild-out in 2007. It also included the Commercial
Strip Center and Nature Preserve as an estimate with no other detail of
their nature.
Preserve at Taylor Bayou ~ •
March 17, 2005
Page 3 of 5
The study mentions the future TxDOT Highway 146 improvements,
but concludes no impact on the study or development. The study gives
a cursory mention of other developments but generalizes a 5% annual
growth and takes that factor into the estimates for the survey. That
rate is average for the HGAC region although local estimates can be
much higher. The growth, according to the study, will not have a
significant impact on the development or the traffic flow in relation to
level-of-service ratings because of the limited access between McCabe
Road and SH 146 now and in the future.
With Level-Of-Service (LOS) A being the best, LOS D being
acceptable and LOS F being severely congested service, the study cites
that the development, given the parameters stated above, will rate no
worse than LOS B and concludes no adverse impact for this
development.
• Topography -This area is relatively flat and stable and should not be an
obstacle to this type of development. The site for this development does,
however, split Flood Zone X to the west and a Flood Zone AE to the
East.
• Density -Staff utilized the Land Use Plan as a guide with the designated
land use as Low Density Residential. In previous conversations, the
applicant stated that due to changes in legislation, he received
notification from the Army Corps of Engineers that more acreage of this
project could be developed. There are 20 single-family lots proposed
for 4.17 acres with a development ratio of 4.8 units per acre. Single-
family Patio Homes with 761ots on 12.67 acres equal to 61ots per acre.
Twelve townhomes on 1.20 acre come out to be 10 units per acre. 180-
unit multi-family residential development yields 12.86 acres with a
density allowed by ordinance 14 units per acre (Section 106-333).
• Utilities -There are sufficient water distribution facilities along McCabe
Road to supply potable water and fire protection to this proposed project.
Provisions will have to be made to ensure that sufficient utility
extensions are made to serve this development. Sanitary sewer service is
not readily available to this site, and must be coordinated with the
development to the north.
The City prepared along-term sanitary sewer master plan for providing
sewer service to areas of southeast La Porte. The master plan calls for the
elimination of a lift station #12 and new lift station to be constructed near
the corner of intersection of A104 and McCabe Road. Utility plans must
be coordinated with the City Staff.
The project engineer expressed his intension on taking the sanitary sewer
flow north through the Lakes at Fairmont Greens, a proposed subdivision
Preserve at Taylor Bayou • •
March 17, 2005
Page 4 of 5
off SH 146. Based upon the preliminary studies, the Preserve at Taylor
Bayou, if hooked up to the new 24" trunk main going north for sanitary
sewer would represent 31.2% of the total anticipated capacity.
Coordination and contribution shall be required for the system upgrade
to handle both developments with each developer being expect to share
the prorated cost of construction.
Drainage -This property lies within the Taylor Bayou Watershed. The
City has a master drainage plan for the Taylor Bayou Watershed that was
performed by the Civil Tech. The plan calls for regional detention for
this area. Efforts should be made to work with the developer north of
McCabe Road towards .the implementation of this master drainage plan.
The channel improvements to Taylor Bayou are not designed to directly
receive storm water runoff from this project. The General Plan,
therefore, shows that storm water will be detained using a basin system
in each phase to regulate run-off. Outfalls have to be determined and
coordinated with the Army Corps of Engineers and the Harris County
Flood Control District. The copies of the permits must be presented to
the City.
• Nature Preserve -The applicant is willing, and the Army Corps of
Engineer permit states that the dedication of approximately 75.16 acre
nature preserve is to be made to the County/City. The issues are being
worked towards resolution. The City of La Porte remains a party to
facilitating any dedication to Harris County or other agency. These
issues may be coordinated and approved in a separate dedication
instrument.
• New Multi-Family Regulations - At the present time, changes from
the previous submittal make this General Plan conform to the
regulations. In addition, the total development is located within Planned
Unit Development (PUD)Zone.
• Army Corps of Engineer Issues:
- US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) issued a permit on Feb
14, 2000, to fill 9.6 acres of wetlands to construct an apartment
complex. This.area must be shown on the plan.
- According the applicant, this Individual Permit(IP) is valid
until December, 2005.
- This permit is for a single and complete project that would
include all minor deviations mandated by the City.
- USAGE agreed with NAI environmental assessment that if the
lift station is moved slightly west. The applicant's Engineer,
David Sepulveda, is working on with the City Engineering staff.
Preserve at Taylor Bayou • •
March 17, 2005
Page 5 of 5
Based on the above analysis, staff believes that the current submittal has merit, and recommends
approval of the SCUP and GP. Staff will continue further coordination in the areas of utility
planning and Preserve dedication. We solicit the Commission's input while considering the
following conditions:
1. An overall density of the multi-family (apartments) and town homes shall not exceed
14 and 10 dwelling units per acre respectively.
2. The Nature Preserve "conservation easement" ownership and responsibility for its
maintenance must be established. The City requirement for compensating open land
will apply. The City must approve the conservancy dedication instrument.
3. The applicant/developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of the 75.16 acres
Nature Preserve/ Conservation Easement until transfer of ownership or responsibility.
4. Provide an irrigation system to ensure that all landscaping and screening is properly
maintained by the owner/developer.
5. The design of the detention will be reviewed by staff to ensure consistency with
ordinances and the Taylor Bayou Watershed Plan. Permits_with Army Corps of
Engineers and County Flood Control must be presented to the City.
6. The developer shall contribute to traffic calming devices/tools (e.g. right turn lane) to
ensure that traffic congestion does not occur as a result of his project.
7. The proposed complex must provide an area designated for accommodation of school
buses, pick up/drop off sites as per LPISD's design standards.
8. The applicant must secure a maintenance bond, according to the City's multi-family
provisions, or seek an approved alternate showing evidence of bonding insurance or
participate in a "reserve fund mechanism" that establishes an account for the sole
purpose of maintenance to the project. This fund is for the lifetime of the project.
9. The owner/applicant must. construct a lift station and dedicate an easement to the' City
at Taylor Bayou and McCabe for the lift station.
10. The owner/applicant must contribute 31.2%their portions of the lift station to be built
north of the site and the portion of the off-site lift station that needs to be upgraded to
handle both north and. south developments.
11. The applicant must provide proof of funding allocation.
12. The applicant must provide a covenant that the multi-family portion of the project
remains on the City's tax rolls.
13. A letter from Army Corps of Engineers for approval of the lift station must be
submitted prior to the building permit.
14. Utility Plan must be approved by City Staff.
15. Proposed sidewalks must be annotated on the General Plan.
16. All utilities should be planned for underground routing.
17. The applicant must provide a covenant for maintenance of common areas.
18. The Developer shall comply with all other applicable laws and ordinances of the City
of La Porte and the State of Texas.
Options available to the Commission are:
Recommend to Council approval of this SCUP#OS-004.
Recommend to Council approval of this SCUP with additional conditions.
Recommend to Council denial of this SCUP. OR Continue discussion at the Commission's
next meeting to allow further study of item. This results in tabling any action on this item.
• •
City of La Porte
Special Conditional Use Permit # SCU 05-004
This permit is issued to: Robert Burchfield
Owner or Agent.
2123 W. Governor's Circle #400 Houston, TX 77092
Address
For Development of: The Preserve at Taylor Bayou
Development Name
1200 Block of McCabe Rd. aC~. SH 146, La Porte, TX
Address
Legal Description: 31.96 acre tract out of 107 acre tract of land, W.P. Harris Survey
Abstract-30, La Porte, Harris County, Texas
Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) & NC
Use: Single-family, multi-family residential (apartments),Townhomes,
Commercial/Flex Buildings & Nature Preserve.
Permit Conditions:
1. An overall density of the multi-family (apartments) and townhomes shall not exceed 14 and
10 dwelling units per acre respectively.
2. The Nature Preserve "conservation easement" ownership and responsibility for its
maintenance must be established. The City requirement for compensating open land will
apply. The City must approve the conservancy dedication instrument.
3. The applicant/developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of the 75.16 acre Nature
Preserve/ Conservation Easement until transfer of ownership and/or responsibility.
4. Provide an irrigation system to ensure that all landscaping and screening is properly
maintained by the owner/developer.
5. The design of the detention will be reviewed by staff to ensure consistency with ordinances
and the Taylor Bayou Watershed Plan. Permits with Army Corps of Engineers and County
Flood Control must be presented to the City.
6. The developer shall contribute to traffic calming devices/tools (e.g. right turn lane) to
ensure that traffic congestion does not occur as a result of his project.
7. The applicant must secure a maintenance bond, according to the City's multi-family
provisions, or seek an approved alternate. showing evidence of bonding insurance or
participate in a "reserve fund mechanism" that establishes an account for the sole purpose
of maintenance to the project. This fund is for the lifetime of the project.
8. The owner/applicant must construct a lift station and dedicate an easement to the City at
Taylor Bayou and McCabe for the lift station.
9. The owner/applicant must contribute 31.2% as proportionate cost for the construction of a 24"
trunk main, the portion of the lift station to be built north of the site, and the portion of the off-
site lift station that needs to be upgraded to handle both north and south developments.
10. The applicant must provide proof of funding allocation.
11. The applicant must provide a covenant that the multi-family portion of the project remains
on the City's tax rolls.
12. A letter from Army Corps of Engineers for approval of the lift station must be submitted
prior to the building permit.
~~~
13. The proposed cor~ex must provide an area designated fo~commodation of school
buses, pick up/drop off sites as per LPISD's design standards.
14. Utility Plan must be approved by City Staff.
15. Proposed sidewalks must be annotated on the General Plan.
16. All utilities should be planned for underground routing.
17. The applicant must provide a covenant for maintenance of common areas.
18. The Developer shall comply with all other applicable laws and ordinances of the City of La
Porte and the State of Texas.
Failure to begin construction within 12 months 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 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.
Validation Date:
Director of Planning
City Secretary
• •
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
(Shipping Containers)
Exhibits
• Staff Report
• Draft Ordinance
(Section 106-751)
•
•
Staff Report March 17, 2005
Shipping Containers
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Background:
This review is being conducted in accordance with the Section 106-64(11) of the Zoning
Ordinance (Chapter 106) of the City of La Porte. It requires the Planning and Zoning
Commission to recommend any change or modification of the Zoning Ordinance to determine
whether the Ordinance has become deficient, obsolete, and inadequate for any reason.
Staff proposed this amendment as requested by the First United Methodist Church & Life
Community Church located along Fairmont Parkway (letter attached). Currently, both the
churches are in the midst of major commercial building projects and need the containers
for storage of construction material and tools:
Existing Requirement:
Shipping Containers may be used as temporary material storage facilities
on construction sites in all zoning districts except residential (R-1, R-2,
and R-3).
Proposed Requirement:
Shipping Containers may be used as temporary material storage facilities
on construction sites in all zoning districts except residential (R-1, R-2,
and R-3). In addition, commercial construction allowed in residential
zoning districts may use shipping containers as temporary material
storage facilities. (Note: Certificate of Occupancy shall not be issued until
shipping container is removed from the site.)
Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward their
official position for action by City Council the amendment to Section 106-
751 of the Code of Ordinances.
Staff s opinion is that the intent of the current zoning ordinance was to
allow temporary use of shipping containers at commercial construction
sites and views the exclusion of this use by commercial construction sites
in residential zones as an oversight.
Actions available to the Commission are as follows:
• Conduct public hearing.
• Recommend approval of the above amendment,
• Recommend denial of the amendment
• Continue the public hearing until next meeting.
•
First United Methodist Church of La Porte
9601 W Fairmont Parkway
La Porte, TX 77571
281.478.4673
REC~~~®
Tammy Noel F~ ~ ~ ~00~
604 W. Fairmont Parkway
La Porte, TX 77571
Life Community Church
9529 W Fairmont Parkway
La Porte, TX 77571
281.478.0594
Dear Tammy,
Thank you for bringing to our attention the problem with storage containers. We realize you are
only enforcing the zoning code as it is presently written.
As you know we are in the midst of major commercial building projects and need the containers
for storage of construction materials and tools. We would like to use the containers until the
-- -= - ~ -project-is complete-in~ther=present-location=even••though~-it=is-zoned•R-2: We=do•~have-NC-zoning -•~~•~=.-z•.~~-r=•~a..~~
on part of our property, but that location would be much more visible to the community and less
accessible to our building site
We would like the city to consider a friendly amendment to the ordinance similar to the
following (the amendment is in italics):
Sec. 106-751. Shipping containers. Shipping containers may be used as temporary material
storage-facilities on construction sites in all zoning districts ezcept residential (R-1, R-2,
and R-3). Commercial construction allowed in residential zoning districts may use shipping
containers as temporary material storage facilities. (Ord. No. 1501-II, § 7, 3-27-00)
Please consider this an official request for your consideration.
y in Jesus Christ,
G~
Methodist Church of La Porte
9601 W Fai nt Parkway
La Porte, T 7571
d
Alan Neel
Pastor Life Community Church
9529 W Fairmont Parkway
La Porte, TX 77571
• LA PORTE CODE •
§ 106-751
Sec. 106-751. Shipping containers.
Shipping containers may be used as temporary material storage facilities on construction
sites in all zoning districts except residential (R-1, R-2, and R-3). (Ord. No. 1501-II, § 7, 3-27-00)
In addition, commercial construction allowed in residential zoning districts may use shipping
containers as temporary material storage facilities. (Note: Certificate of Occupancy shall not be
issued until shipping container is removed from the site.)
Secs. 106-752-106-770. Reserved.
DIVISION 3. AREA REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 106-771. Yard requirements.
The following shall not be considered as encroachments on yard setback requirements:
(1) Chimneys, flues, belt courses, etc. Chimneys, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills,
pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, cornices, eaves, gutters, steps, stoops, and the like,
provided they do not project more than four feet into any front or rear yard, and two feet
into any side yard.
(2) Terraces, decks, patios, etc. Terraces; decks, patios, or similar features, provided they
do not extend more than one foot above the height of the exterior finish grade elevation,
or to a distance less than two feet from any lot line, or encroach upon any utility
easement. Further, pools shall not be considered as an encroachment on a front yard
setback, provided that such pools are located in a front yard adjacent to Galveston Bay,
and provided further that such pool does not extend more than one foot above the exterior
finish grade elevation, or to a distance less than two feet from any lot line or encroach
upon any utility easement.
(3) Rear yards only. An unenclosed, attached patio cover, awning, or canopy, provided
that no portion of such patio covers, awnings, or canopies shall encroach into any utility
easements, or any vertical projection thereof, and provided further that no portion of such
patio covers, awnings, or canopies shall be located at a distance less than five feet from
the side property line or three feet from the rear property line, or any vertical projection
thereof.
(4) Front and side yard carports. Front and side yard carports shall be permitted for
single-family detached homes subject to the following requirements:
a. Carports in a required front or side yard shall not be located closer than five
feet from any front or side property line.
Supp. No. 4
CDI06:8
•
•
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
(40%Maximum Lot Coverage)
Exhibits
• Staff Report
• Draft Ordinance
(Section 106-333, Table B footnotes)
•
Staff Report
40% LOT COVERAGE
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
March 17, 2005
Background
The City's Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBOA) had several hearings for variances to
the maximum lot coverage rule as stated in the Zoning Ordinance and there are several
cases pending to date. At issue are houses that are built close to, or at the maximum
allowable lot coverage leaving little or no room for patio covers, accessory buildings,
sheds, etc. There have been several requests to study the issue to determine if there is
some formula or calculation that better defines lot coverage than what is currently being
used to set the standards.
Existing Requirements:
Zoning Definition: Lot Coverage means the area under roof on any given lot.
Zoning Requirements:
• Section 106-333 Table B, residential area requirements:
- Single Family Detached-------40%
- Single Family Large Lot------ 30%
- Single Family 0-Lot Line----- 60%
- Duplexes------------------------ 60%
- Single Family converted/MF- 50%
- Townhouses, quadraplexes--- 75%
- Manufactured Housing-------- 60%
• Section 106-443 Table B, commercial area requirements:
- Neighborhood Commercial---50%
- General Commercial---------- 40%
- Main Street District----------- 60%
- Main Street Overlay---------- 80%
• Section 106-522 Table B, industrial area requirements:
- Business Industrial------------ 50%
- Light Industrial---------------- 70%
- Heavy Industrial-------------- 30%
40% Coverage Rule • •
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Page 2 of 2
Analysis•
• As stated, the issues before the ZBOA have been maximum coverage issues for
single family, detached dwellings. Staff habitually sees subdivisions with homes
at 39.9% coverage. These homes are built with uncovered patio slabs that
homeowners, eventually, desire to cover in order to gain maximum use and value
of their homes. Covering the patios with a roof adds to the square footage of
cover for the lot and inevitably pushes the house beyond the 40% threshold.
ZBOA, in most cases, has authorized the variances.
Staff analyzed the situation with all of the pending cases to determine an equitable
way to possibly alter the zoning criteria to maintain the intent of the ordinance
while alleviating the need for ZBOA to hear additional cases for variances. The
Public Improvement Criteria Manual (PICM) uses a 55% coverage factor for
drainage. The criteria, however, take into account the roofed structures and all
impervious cover created by driveways, carports, sidewalks and slabs. Applying
these criteria to pending cases did not resolve the issue in that all properties
remained in violation of coverage requirements.
• Staff also considered elevating the coverage criteria to a higher percentage of the
lot. We agreed, however, that builders would tend to simply construct the homes
to a larger size thereby presenting the same challenges.
Recommended Requirements:
• The International Residential Code exempts a detached accessory structure of not
more than 200 S.F. from permit requirements. Placement issues, however, does
require the City of La Porte to require a permit regardless of size. The City could
choose to exempt this type of structure from the 40% rule and leave the maximum
25% rear yard coverage requirement without adversely affecting the open area.
• Patio Covers are a major issue for most homeowners. To solve the issue of
coverage, Staff recommends exempting from the 40% rule patio covers of up to
900 S.F. This will allow the City of La Porte to limit the total square feet of the
primary structure and still be sensitive to the needs of the citizens.
Conclusions•
Recommend exemption of the following structures from the 40% coverage
calculations on Single Family Detached homes:
- Accessory Buildings 200 S.F. or less.
- Patio covers up to 900 S.F.
• Coverage requirements for all other developments remain intact.
2
• ~
i
.~
CT
i,
.~
w
c~
...
y
i.i
.a
C!1
M
M
M
0
~ ~ ~ •~ ~ Q d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o
~
Q ~j ~7j ~7j 77 ~j
N
N ~
~
o
N _
~.~ ~
~
~
~ C C C C C
~ c
~
~_ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O
j ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ° ° ° ~ ° ~
~ ~ ~
o ~
o ~
o
N
~~
~ ~ ~ ~
.~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ o ~ o
° ~ z o ~ o~ o
° ~
~ ° ° w
q O~ G w G w
o Q o Q o Q
~~
~ ~ r'' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ D D z ~ '" ~ '^ D ~ D
~
~
' ~
.bo
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
~ ~n v~ v~ ~n ~n v~ v~ ~n
~, ~ M ~ M ~ M ~ ~ N
~
U ~n v~ O ON v~ ~ ~ ~
'C
c '-'
~
- ~"' ~ k. ~ N V7 ~ O ~ O ~ ~ O
~ ~ ,~ rn N N N N N N N N
N
•
~ p ;ZS
. GL ~ O ~ N O
~ N ~
~l
.-~ d' ~p
.-- ~
~ o Q ry °o `~° °o °o °o °o ° °o
~ ~
+ t~..,
r-
O ~ ~
b
A
~ ~ ~ ~ O .~ ~~
•
U
~ y
bA
~- •V ~ O 3 cn
~
O
b ~ Q' V O ~ ,~
~,
A
~ N
~, ~ ~ ~ 'O
~ a3 ~ ~
w w w o ~ ~ w o ~.~ ~
N N N
~ ~
~ ~ '~ i. ~
? f~.., ~
c
c c c ~ ~- ~ ~ 3 ~ °
~~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o
~- ~o ~ ~
O
Q
U
M
M
M
O_
~z
z~
o~
LA PORTE CODE
106-333
10. No sign shall be located in a sight triangle so as to obstruct traffic visibility at a level
between three feet and six feet as measured above adjacent road grade.
11. In the case of multifamily residential. developments with 50 or more units, said
complexes must be located at least 1,000 feet from other multi-family residential
developments of 20 or more units.
12. Within the building setback, there must beaten-foot opaque screen consisting of shrubs
and fencing. (See section 106-334(1) for screening and fencing requirements.)
13. Residential developments that are townhouses, quadruplexes, or multi-family dwelling
units must have a minimum of 25 percent landscaping.
14. Multifamily residential developments adjacent to single-family residential
developments must establish a 25-foot. buffer between the two developments. This
buffer is in addition to the setback as established by this table.
15. In the case of multifamily residential developments, no off-street parking shall be placed
within the required setback, or within the required additional 25-foot buffer when the
development is situated adjacent to asingle-family residential development. The space
needed to meet the required parking spaces shall be exclusive of the required setback and
the additional buffer.
16. In the case of multifamily residential developments being adjacent to single-family
residential developments, the buildings within the multifamily residential developments
that are directly adjacent to the single-family residential development shall be limited to
two-stories in height. Buildings within the interior of the multifamily residential
developments may be three-stories in height.
17. Multifamily residential developments cannot exceed 180 dwelling units.
18. See section 106-334(1)(3) for open space utilization criteria.
19. Following structures exempted from 40% lot coverage on single-family detached:
Accessory buildings 200 s.f. or less
Patio covers up to 900 s.f.
(Ord. No. 1501-JJ, § 6, 10-14-02)
Cross references-Contents of mobile home park plans, § 98-92; minimum area requirements for
mobile home parks, § 98-95; location of mobile homes with respect to property lines and public
streets, § 98-99.
Supp. No. 9
• •
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
(Main Street District)
Exhibits
• Staff Report
• Draft Ordinance
(Section .106-441, Table A)
• MSD Map
• •
Staff Report March 17, 2005
Main Street District
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Background:
• Last year, City Council passed a moratorium on new construction within an area identified
as the Main Street District.
• The purpose of the Main Street District was to prevent any decay of the existing uniqueness
of the area, preserve the district and to aid in its vitality.
• The Main Street District Committee reviewed the current zoning regulations and suggested
possible changes or modifications.
• The Main Street District area needed regulations that had more flexibility than any of
the zoning classifications allowed. The end result was amixed-use zone. In addition,
single-family detached shall be permitted.
• The interior of this district, however, had some unique characteristics that needed
some additional considerations, so an overlay district was created where residential
activities were allowed above the first floor.
• The Planning and Zoning Commission, during their September 16, 2004 meeting,
held a public hearing to receive citizen comments for the creation of Main Street
District classification and regulations.
• City Council, at the November 24, 2004 meeting, approved an Ordinance for the
Main Street District.
Analysis:
• The City received a request to lease and remodel an existing structure at 120 S.
Broadway. It has a commercial facility along with a house in the rear. Currently, the
property is zoned Main Street District (MS).
• It was discovered that new wording to the zoning ordinance inadvertently excluded
single-family detached from Main Street District.
• The current Ordinance permits residential activities within the overlay portion only
above the first floor. This is a misinterpretation of the concept or scope of the creation
of Main Street District. The intent is to preserve the value and character of the
original Main Street area of La Porte and keep single-family detached intact.
Conclusion & Recommendation:
Staff reviewed the current ordinance and found a correction is needed in this regard.
Staff recommends that single family detached should be permitted in Main Street District as
intended.
Actions available to the Commission are as follows:
• Conduct public hearing.
• Recommend approval of the above amendment,
• Recommend denial of the amendment
• Continue the public hearing until next meeting.
• EXHIBIT "F" •
ARTICLE III. DISTRICTS
Division 3. Commercial District Regulations
Subdivision 1. Generally
Sec. 106-441. Table A, Commercial uses.
P (ABC) -- Permitted uses (subject to designated criteria established in section 106-444).
P -- Permitted uses.
A --Accessory uses (subject to requirements of section 106-741).
C -- Conditional uses (subject to requirements of sections 106-216 through 106-218 and
designated criteria established in section 106-444).
* -- Not allowed.
Uses (SIC Code #)
All uses permitted or/accessory in
R-3 zone, except single-family
detached and special lot, duplexes,
quadruplexes, townhouses, and multifamily
Single Family Detached
All conditional uses in R-3 zone
Agricultural service (076--078)
Amusements (791--799)
Amusement (7993)1
Antique and used merchandise stores (5932)
Arrangements for passenger transport (472)
Arrangement for shipping and transport (473)
Apparel and accessory stores (561--569)
Automotive dealers and service stations (551,
552, 553, 555--559)
Automotive repair, services (751--754)
Banking (601--605)
Building construction--General contractors
(152--161)
Building construction--Special trade contractors
(171--179)
Building materials, garden supply
(521--523, 526--527)
Zones
CR NC GC MS
P P P'
* * * Ps
* C C C
* * P P
C * P P
C * P P
* P P P
* * P P
* * P2 P
C * P P
* * P P
* *
P P
* * P P
* * P P
* * P P
* * P P
•
Business services (731, 732, 736--738)
Business services (7359)
Civil, social and fraternal organizations, (8641)
Communications (481--489)
Convenience stores (5411)
Credit agencies (611--616)
Dog grooming
Drugstores (591)
Eating and drinking places (5813)
Eating places (5812)
Electric, gas and sanitary services
(491, 4923, 493, 494, 4952)
Engineering, architectural, accounting
services (871--872)
Food stores, general
(541, 542, 544, 545, 549)
Freestanding on-premises signs
Governmental and public utility buildings
(911--922, 9631, 4311)
Grocery, fruit and vegetable stores (542, 543)
Hardware stores (525)
Home furnishing stores (571--573)
Hotels and motels (701, 7032, 704)
Hospitals, laboratories (806--809)
Insurance, real estate, legal, stock and
commodity brokers, agents (641--679)
Laundry (plants) (7216--7219)
Membership organizations (861--869)
Miniwarehousing (4225)
Misc. retail (592, 593, 5948, 596--599, 5399)
Misc. repair services (762--764)
Misc. shopping (5941--5947, 5949, 5992--5994)
Misc. shopping (5995, 5999)
Motion picture theaters (7832)
Museums, art galleries (841--842)'
Offices for doctors, dentists, etc. (801--805)
L'
* P P
* * P(A, B, C, D) P
C C C C
* * P P
* P P P
* * P P
* * P (H) P
* P P P
C * P P
C P P P
* P P P
* P P P
* * P P
See article VII of this chapter
C * P P
* P P P
* P P P
* * P P
C * P P
* * P C
* P P P
* * P *
* * P C
* * C *
C * P P
* P P P
C P P P
C * P
* * P P
C * P P
* P P P
• •
Passenger transportation (411--415) P P
Personal services (7211--7215, 722--729) P P P
Recreational buildings and community centers C P P P
Reproduction, photography, and
cleaning services (733--734) P P P
Repair services (7699) (except tank
truck cleaning) P P
Retail bakeries (546) P P P
Securities and insurance (621--639) P P
Service stations (554) '' P P
Service stations, excluding truck stops (554) C P P
Underground pipelines (461) P P P
Veterinary services (0742) P P P
Video rental and sales shop P P P
Parking ramps and structures C P P C
Commercial PUD (Refer to section 106-636) C C C
Outdoor sales as a primary or accessory use P (C, G) P
Outdoor storage as a primary or accessory use C '` P (B) P
Off-site parking C C C C
Off-street loading C C C C
Joint parking C C C C
Drive-in or drive through facilities as an
accessory or principle use C C C C
Kennels, boarding (0752) C C
Kennels, breeding (0279) C C
Unlisted uses, similar to uses listed above C C C C
'. Within the Overlay portion, residential activities are only allowed above the first floor.
2' Refer to chapter 10 of this Code. (Must be at least 300 fe et from church, school or hospital.)
s' Single Family Detached prohibited in Main Street Overlay Zone, but permitted in Main Street
District.
(Ord. No. 1501-JJ, § 7, 10-14-02)
• •
DIVISION 3. COMMERCIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS
Subdivision V. Main Street District with Overlay
Sec. 106-510 Purpose; Main Street District; Main Street Overlay District Defined
The purpose of the Main Street District is to preserve the character of the original Main Street area of La
Porte. The intent of a Main Street District within an Overlay area is to allow greater flexibility of normal
City requirements and create an environment reflective of an era when travel was based less on vehicular
traffic and more on pedestrian access with retail trade more closely clustered. The general boundaries of
the Main Street Overlay portion of the District shall extend from SH 146 to Kansas, and include the
properties along both sides of Main Street. These properties are bounded on the north by the alley
located north of and parallel to Main Street and on the south by the alley located south of and parallel to
Main Street (see map). The general boundaries of the Main Street District shall be from SH 146 eastward
to Kansas St. on both sides of Main Street from the alley one-half block north to the alley one-half block
south of Main Street. The overall boundary shall be SH 146 to Kansas plus one block south (15t and W.
"B" to Virginia and back up to E. "A"). (See Map)
Sec. 106-511 Permitted, accessory, and special conditional uses.
Commercial and all residential activities are permitted, except warehousing and storage;
however, if owned by or incidental to a primary business they would be allowed as indicated in Table A,
Main Street Overlay uses, section 106-441
Sec. 106-512 Density/intensity regulations.
Refer to Table B, Main Street Overlay requirements, section 106-443
Sec. 106-513 Special regulations and procedures.
For new construction no customer parking is required; however, businesses are required to
provide a minimum of two employee parking spaces. Also for new construction, no parking lots shall be
developed in front of the building within the Overlay portion of the Main Street District. Alley ways within
the district shall be considered as driving aisles for the purposes of parking requirements.
Each business is allowed one wall sign not to cover more than 25% of the their exterior facade,
as well as one shingle with a maximum face of 15 sq. ft. per side and a required 8 ft. minimum clearance.
When most of a dumpster is visible from a public street the dumpster shall be screened. If it is
visible only via the alley from a public street, screening will not be required.
Property owners are not required to install sidewalks within the district.
Refer to articles IV, V, VI and VII of this chapter for further regulations and procedures.
Secs.106-514-520 Reserved
• ~
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
(Truck Stops)
Exhibits
• Staff Report
• Draft Ordinance
• Truck Route Map
• •
Staff Report
Truck Stops
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
March 17, 2005
City Council has directed the Planning and Zoning Commission consider proposed
amendments to the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 106), Section 106-521; Table A,
Industrial Uses, to amend, change or modify conditions to allow truck stops in a Business
Industrial (BI) zone. Staff assessed existing development conditions and future
development strategies relating to the development of truck stops in a Business Industrial
zone. Staff analyzed the situation thoroughly and presents this item to the Planning and
Zoning Commission for their discussion and recommendations to City Council for the
following changes to the Code of Ordinances relating to the development of truck stops:
Definitions of Truck Stop:
• A commercial/industrial use of property on one site for the refueling, maintenance
and/or servicing of large over the road vehicles carrying large loads and which
may have service activities for such vehicles and their drivers including but not
limited to dispensing of motor fuels and petroleum products directly into motor
vehicles, restaurants or cafes, overnight accommodation, shower or laundry
facilities, truck service and overnight truck parking, truck scales, and parking area
in association with the above services. (Definition is added to Section 106-1)
Definition of Convenience Store:
• A small retail store that is open long hours and that typically sells staple groceries,
snacks, and sometimes gasoline. (Definition is added to Section 106-1)
Service Stations:
A retail establishment at which motor vehicles are refueled, serviced, and sometimes
repaired. Also called filling station, gas station .
Difference between Truck Stop & Convenience Store/Service Station:
The difference between truck stop and convenience store/service station is quite
clear from the above definitions. Truck stop is an establishment where trucks may
be parked overnight and truckers are provided with all the facilities and amenities
related to trucking operations. Truck stops usually have 10 to 12 diesel dispensers
with a canopy approximately 20' high. The Zoning Codes require truck stops to be
located along major truck routes to facilitate entrance and exit to major highways or
freeways.
Planning & Zoning Common •
Truck stops
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Page 2 of 4
On the other hand, a convenience store and/or service station is a place which
sells a limited variety of food and other grocery items, snacks, gasoline along with
diesel, and automotive accessories, or other convenience items.
Existing Requirements:
Zoning -Under Section 106-441, Table A, Commercial Uses, truck stops
are not permitted in commercial zoning districts. The interpretation of the
classification is that service stations (SIC Code#554) are permitted uses,
i.e. automobile service stations, filling stations, gasoline but excluding
truck stops. Under Section 106-521, Table A, Industrial Uses, there are a
variety of activities relating to trucking operations or requiring large trucks
for business purposes (i.e. general contractors, heavy construction,
highway transportation terminal and service facilities, etc.) Truck stops,
however, specifically are not mentioned and considered to be an unlisted
use as per Code of Ordinances. An unlisted use, such as truck stops
require a Special Conditional Use Permit (SCUP) from the City.
Building Setbacks - Section 106-522, Table B, Industrial area
requirements stipulates predominantly 50' front, 40' rear, and 30' sides
setback for Business Industrial zoning districts. In addition, when BI
zoning districts are adjacent to residential zoning districts, same setbacks
are applicable to the sites and no construction of any kind is permitted
within said setback areas.
Landscaping /Screening - For the facilities having parking areas adjacent
to residential zones and abutting public rights-of--way, screening is required.
A planting strip of four feet wide with evergreen plants that are minimum
height of four feet and within two years grow up to six feet in height is
required. In addition, landscape plans with trees, shrubs, and ground cover,
are required to be submitted and approved by the enforcement officer.
Recommended Requirements:
Zoning -Truck stops should 'be permitted in the Business Industrial (BI)
zoning district subject to restrictive measures such as the limitation of
smoke, dust, odor, lighting and glare and strictly along an
approved/established truck routes. Currently, there are vacant parcels of
land within Business Industrial (BI) zoning districts along Barbour's Cut
Boulevard and State Highway.146.
Planning & Zoning Common •
Truck stops
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Page 3 of 4
Building Setbacks -Truck stops should adhere to the minimum building
setbacks already established for the BI zone as Front 50', Rear 40', and
Sides 30'. When adjacent to residential zones, same setbacks shall be
applicable to the sites with no construction of any kind being permitted
within said setback areas.
Landscaping /Screening - Truck stops development, specifically truck
parking, should be screened from the view of adjacent residential districts.
Staff suggests a minimum landscape setback of 20 feet adjacent to
residential areas. Landscaping and screening could be achieved as
currently stated in the zoning ordinance. However, a more effective
technique needs to be employed that actually achieves this objective. This
could be accomplished in a number of different ways. 1) The property
owner could leave in place existing trees, vegetation, underbrush, etc. to
provide a thorough and effective visual screening. 2) The property owner
could use earthern berms with a combination of trees, shrubs, and
groundcover that after three years growth will be at least 10-15 feet in
height and creates a continuous visual screen.
It is recommended that this particular provision of the ordinance may add
a minor change to the footnotes. In the case of a property adjacent to
residential zoning districts, screening and other performance standards
shall be applicable for this particular use. Along with the screening
requirement, a minimum percentage of landscaping along front and sides
should be stipulated as per ordinances. A 15% of landscaping/screening is
recommended in addition to the current requirements for the development
of a truck stop in the Business Industrial zoning districts adjacent to
residential areas. The required screening would count toward the
minimum landscaping requirement. The landscape buffer is also
recommended for this particular activity.
Performance Standards -Truck stops should meet the following
minimum performance standards and be in compliance with the
appropriate federal, state and local regulations:
• Lighting and glare
• Radiation and electrical emission
• Smoke
• Dust
• Odor
• Explosives
• Noise
In addition, truck stops when adjacent to residential areas, shall only
operate during the hours of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. and no overnight
facilities will be allowed on the premises.
Planning & Zoning Com~on •
Truck stops
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Page 4 of 4
Conclusions•
City Council intends to provide the best services to its citizens and visitors
to La Porte. Future development of the community depends on
maintaining and enhancing the local economy. Truck trafficking is an
existing commodity due to the Barbour's Cut Terminal and the Port of
Houston. Barbour's Cut Boulevard is an established major truck route,
which provides services to these travelers. Council has set priorities with
the economic development as one of the highest on the list. The goal is to
foster the growth and retention of business activity through a healthy local
economy, which can provide employment opportunities and a strong tax
base to the City.
The above stated recommendations are based on Planning Department
staff research and direction provided by the Commission during the
January 20, 2005 meeting: The definitions for Truck Stop and
Convenience Store have been included in Section 106-1 of the Ordinances
as suggested.
Staff recommends truck stops should be permitted in a Business Industrial
(BI) zoning districts only subject to specific conditions as listed above. It
is staff's opinion that the above provisions will allow for reasonable
development of truck stops with the said stipulations that will provide
sound development and promote public health, safety, and general welfare
of the community. The La Porte Comprehensive Plan guides us to make
policy decisions .relating to the physical and economic development of the
community. The above change would not be contrary to the goals and
intent of the Comprehensive Plan.
• ZONING •
§ 106-521
Uses (SIC Code #)
Zones
BI LI HI
On-premises freestanding signs
Paper and allied products (265-267)
Printing and publishing (271-279)
Rubber and miscellaneous plastics (301,
302,304,306,307)
Stone, clay, glass and concrete (321-325,
3261, 327-329)
Tank truck cleaning
Truck Stops
Textile mill, and finished products
Light (224, 225, 231-239)
Medium (222, 223, 226, 229)
Tobacco manufacturers (211-214)
Loading berths at the front or sides of
buildings adjacent to R.O.W.
Industrial PUD (refer to section 106-636)
Facilities in excess of height restrictions
imposed in section 106-522
Unlisted uses, similar to uses listed above
See article VII of this chapter
P
P(ACDE) P(ACDE) P
* C P
* * p
* * p
P(H,I)
P(ACDE) P(ACDE) P
* P(ACDE) P
* P(ACDE) P
C C C
C C C
C
C C C
(b) Interpretation and enforcement. Property uses, except as provided for by section 106-
521(a), Table A, are prohibited and constitute a violation of this chapter.
(c) Footnotes. All permitted uses in industrial zones must meet the following minimum
performance standards. If requested by the enforcement officer, all applications for building
permits must include a certification from a registered engineer that verifies compliance with
these performance standards. Where applicable, all permitted uses in industrial zones must meet
and be in compliance with the appropriate federal, state, or local regulations.
A. Lighting and glare. Any lighting used shall be arranged so as to deflect light away
from any adjoining residential zone or from public streets. Direct or sky-reflected glare,
where from floodlights or from high temperature processes such as combustion or
welding shall not be directed onto any adjoining property. The source of lights shall be
hooded or controlled in some manner so as not to light adjacent property. Bare
incandescent light bulbs shall not be permitted in view of adjacent property or public
right-of--way. Any light or combination of lights which cast light on a public street shall
not exceed one footcandle (meter reading) as measured from the centerline of such street.
Any light or combination of lights which casts light on residential property shall not
exceed 0.4 footcandles (meter reading) as measured from such property.
•
Supp. No.4
CD106:67
CC
H. Hours of Operation. Hours of operation are limited for truck stops adjacent to
residential areas only. The facility shall only operate during the hour of 6:00 a.m. to 9:00
p.m. and no overnight facilities are allowed on the premises.
I. Truck Stops. The facility shall be permitted in the Business Industrial (BI) districts on
truck routes along Barbour's Cut Boulevard and State Highway 146. No construction of
any kind shall be permitted within the stipulated setbacks for Business Industrial zoning
districts.
•
LA PORTE CODE
§ 106-1
Business frontage means the linear measurement of the side of the building which
contains the primary entrance of the building.
Carport means a roofed structure, freestanding or attached to another structure designed
to provide covered parking for vehicles. A carport shall have no enclosing walls. A structure
shall not be considered to be a carport unless it is located directly over a driveway.
Clinic means an institution, public or private, or a station for the examination and
treatment of patients by an individual or group of doctors, dentists, or other licensed members of
a human health care profession.
Controlled access highway means any thoroughfare which is a high volume freeway
(without signalization on principal lanes) designed for four to eight main lanes and four service
lanes with aright-of--way capacity that allows two to four additional lanes.
Controlled access highway corridor means a corridor extending 500 feet to either side of the
right-of--way of a controlled access highway as designated on the city's land use map.
Notes:
The definition of Controlled Access Highway (with some minor rephrasing) was
taken from Volume One, Section 1.3 of the city's comprehensive plan.
Controlled access highway corridors are established on the city's land use map
and designated by a cross hatched highlight. State Highway 225 and New State
Highway 146 are the only thoroughfares within the city presently designated as
controlled access highways.
Interim sign regulations. Signs located within a controlled access highway
corridors shall be limited to a maximum height of 65 feet.
Commercial amusement or recreation means an enterprise whose main purpose is to
provide the general public with an amusing or entertaining activity, where .tickets are sold or
fees collected at the gates of the activity. Commercial amusements include zoos, carnivals,
expositions, miniature golf courses, driving ranges, arcades, fairs, exhibitions, athletic contest,
rodeos, tent show, ferric wheels, children's rides, roller coasters, skating rinks, ice rinks, traveling
shows, bowling alleys, pool parlors, and similar enterprises.
Commercial motor vehicle means any motor vehicle designed or used for the
transportation of persons or property for hire, with a rated carrying capacity in excess of one ton,
including every vehicle used for delivery purposes.
Common property means a parcel or parcels of land, together with the improvements
thereon, the use and enjoyment of which are shared by the owners and occupants of the
individual building sites.
Condominium means two or more dwelling units on a lot with individual ownership of a
unit rather than a specific parcel of real property; together with common elements. See V.T.C.A.,
Property Code 81.001 et seq., and the building code adopted in section 82-31.
Convenience Store means a small store that is open long hours and that typically sells
staple groceries, snacks, and sometimes gasoline.
CDI06:10
s
ZONING
§ 106-1
L~
Special exception means only those exceptions provided for under section 106-191.
Standard Industrial Classification Code (SIC) means the numerical code established by
the U.S. Department of Commerce and used in the Standazd Industrial Classification Manual,
1987 as amended and supplemented.
Street, private means a vehicular access way, under private ownership and private
maintenance, providing access to buildings containing residential dwelling units without direct
access to an approved public street right-of--way, or a public right-of--way, however designated,
dedicated or acquired, which provides vehicular access to adjacent properties. Alleys, parking
lots, and private driveways within shopping centers, commercial azeas, or industrial
developments shall not be considered as streets.
Street, public means a public right-of--way, however designated, dedicated, or acquired,
which provides vehiculaz access to adjacent properties.
Street, thoroughfare means a public street designed for heavy traffic and intended to
serve as a traffic artery of considerable length and continuity throughout the community and so
designated on the city's thoroughfaze plan.
Structure means that which is built or constructed.
Structure, principal means the principal structure which fulfills the purpose for which the
building plot is intended.
Substantial improvements means any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a
structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent of the mazket value of the structure as
determined by a licensed appraiser, either (a) before the improvement is started, or (b) if the
structure has been damaged and is being restored, valuation before the damage occurred.
Substantial improvement is started when the first alteration of any structural part of the building
commences.
Temporary sign means a sign not to exceed 18 inches by 24 inches in size which is
intended for a limited period of display.
Townhouse means one of a group of no less than three nor more than 12 attached
dwelling units constructed in a series or group of attached units with property lines sepazating
such units.
Trailer means every vehicle, with or without motive power, other than a pole trailer or
ranch trailer, designed for carrying persons or property and for being drawn by a motor vehicle
and so constructed that no part of its weight rests upon the towing vehicle.
Truck means any motor vehicle designed, used or maintained primazily for transportation
of more than nine persons or property.
Truck Stop means acommercial/industrial use of property on one site for the refueling,
maintenance and/or servicing of lazge over the road vehicles cazrying lazge loads and which may
have service activities for such vehicles and their drivers including but not limited to dispensing
of motor fuels and petroleum products directly into motor vehicles, restaurants or cafes,
overnight accommodation, shower or laundry facilities, truck service and overnight truck
pazking, truck scales, and pazking area in association with the above services.
CDI06:19