HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 1972-06-01 Regularr i I \1 '
t
'£he Hon. Ralph Lowe lf1ayor of Friendswood City Council of Friendswood Friendswood, ·rexas
Dear Mayor Lowe and Council:
Friendswood Planning and Zoning Commission City 0f Friendswood, Texas l'fi3 June 1972
'.l!he F'r iendswood Pla.nnlng and Zoning C omruiss ion hereby requests that the City Council amend Ordinance 35 which created this Commission e,s follows:
Sect ion 1, first sentence, which now rea_d s 11 ••• which shall be composed 0f five (5) members." to read u ••• which shall be com posed of seven (7) members."
The subject ordinance was passed in 1964, when the city was less than half of its present size. ·rhis Commission 1 s duties now include interpreta.t ion of Ord l:ance 132, the Zoning Ordinance, Ordmnce 23A, the subdivision ordinance, the mobile home ordinan ce 129, and the new Flood Hazard Ordinance, No. 157. With this load, and oftentimes without a quorum, the Commission is unable to carry out its primary task of planning.
It is hoped that with an adequate number of merubers on the 6ommission, representing the various interests 0f the citizenry of Friendswood, that the Commission can become more effective in its advisory capacity to the Council 1n preparing Friendswood to meet its future opportuniti es and challenges.
For the Commission:
��� Secretary
H
f
( I l I
MINU'l1 El;> OF A rlGGULAH MEE·rlNJ-OF ·rHE �LANNli'lG 001,:il-'Il,:H:llON
C 1·ry-OF FLUEN.03WOO.D
June 1, 1972
1ittendees were Mr. Nelson, Mr. \'/alls, and Nr. K0ppa
1.Minutes ef the meeting of May 19, 1972 were read,and app.r ov ed •
2.It was m0ved by M.r. Nelson that the Secretary maila copy of the 0fficial minutes to all affected petitionersas notification of Commission action. Passed unanimously.
3.Old Business:
A.The plat for a shooping center submitted informallyto Mr. Nelson and Mr. Koppa on May 26 by Mr. Palmer ofSaber Investment C0rp. was discus sed. ·rhe workup on thisplat was done by Mr. Koppa. There appears to be no confl�ctwith C-1 zoning regulations, except a six-foot fence willbe required on the side which abuts .residential property(southwest edge). The commission considers it highly desireable to have a fence on the Heritage Drive side ofthe plat, s:i.nce the backs of several stores will fronton Heritage--an unattractive pr<Dspect for property ownerson the opposite side of the street. Discussion on thisplat was interrupted by item B
a.Mayor Lowe requested th e presence of the Commission atthe City Council meeting going en at the same time, to assistthem in evaluating new evidence presented by Mrs. MaxineEignus in behalf of her petition for rezoning that pa.rt ofthe Murphy property now zoned H-2 C-1. See minutes of May19, 1972. Mrs. Eignus presented a plat of a proposed businessand sh0pplng center for this property. The Commission hadadvised no ch ange to the zoning map in the absence of such aplat or any definite plans at the hearing held for Mrs. Elgnus'petition. Mrs. Eignus pointed out that, in any case, a shoppingcenter was in the v10rlrn for the C-1 part of the Murphy tract;
the pa.rt of the center on the R-2 zone was only 60 ft or so wide, but utilizing the entire tract as C-1 was better than leaving a narrow strip undeveloped end crowding the center closer to F.M. 518. The plat also showed multiple-family development behind the Method is_t Church property, but it was
..
H
(
( l
-2-
stlpulated by Mrs. E1gnus that such development, 1f any, would be the sub�ect of a later pet it ion ( the are a there ls now H-1) •
The council asked the Commission to meet with Mrs. Eig nus immediately and discuss this matter with her, which was done. The discussion largely went over the same ground outlined above. The plat accompanies the petition as evidence for 1t.
Based on this plat, and the fact that a specific use petition would 0nly affect the 60 ft of R-2 on the plat and not the entire tract in question the Commission voted unanimously to recommend t0 the City Council that their former .recornmendat ion on th1a pet 1t ion, dated May 19, 1972, which was not in favor of rezoning, be disregarde d by Council, and that the Gouncil amend the zoning ordmi.nce map. The Commission also observed that the thre e mandatory readings of such a z0ning map amendment would constitute a re-hearing on the Eignus petition, and permit the voice of the people concerned to be heard by Council. This advisal to Cou ncil was read to the Council as soon as it was convenient after it was formulated on June 1, 1972.
c.The City Council requested the presence of the PlanningCommission at the workshop session to be held June 8, 1972to set some guideli nes and common goals for planning.
4.New Business
A.('l'his to0k place during an intermission on the conferenceon Mrs. Eignus 1 evidence) Dr. Crump (D.V.M.) inquired aboutDelocating his veterinary practice on a lot zoned 0-1. Theproperty fronts on 518 throu5h to Winding Way. The Commissioncould find no conflict in this use with the C-1 regulations.
5.Items held over:
Final advisal to the Zonin5 Administrator on the Saber Investment Co. plat. Respectfully submitted: �il({fjfj=-R.J.Koppa Secretar y