Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 2022-03-06 Regularn n NOTICE OF MEETING FRIENDSWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FPZC-3-6-75 Notice Notice is hereby given that a regular meeting of the Friendswood Planning and Zoning Commission will be held at Friendswood City Hall, 109 East Willowick, Friendswood, Texas, on: THURSDAY MARCH 6, 1975 7 : 30 P .M. at which time the followi ng items of business will be considered: l.MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS 2.INFORMATION REPORTS 3.SUBDIVISIONS 7:30 David Newl, Coker Engineering: Inquiry re: subdividing 72 acres, Longwood Park area.8:00 Bill Rainey: Inquiry re: subdiving Lot 3, Windsong Subdivision 4.ROUTINE BUILDING PERMITS Bill Rainey: Inquiry re: R-1 Zone regulations/storage shed for trucks used inbuilding contracting business8:45 Georg Ulbrich: Office building8:30 D.Suit: Day Care CenterAny other routine permits 5.REZONING Call hearing: RR-1975-1 Request by Crown Central Petroleum to rezone forSpecificUse: Oil Well and related structures - a four-acre tractout of the E. R. Weiss 110 acre tract in the I&GN RR survey, A-624.Reset hearings: Proposed zoning map (previously set for March 6, 13, 20, 27. 6.MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS Approval of grid map for house numberingAny other routine business which may come before the Commission 7.ADJOURNMENT � 'i)J p Y?dL CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that the above notice of meeting was posted on the City Hall Bulletin Board on the second day of March, 1975, at 11:00 o'clock P.M. ;i]dlS?'rkeft__ FPZC Secretary I 1 I l I I FPZC-M-3-6-75 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE FRIEN DSWOOD PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION March 6, 1975 A regular meeting of the Friendswood Planning and Zoning Commission was held at the Friendswood City Hall, 109 East Willowick, on THursday ev ening, March 6, 1975. Chairman Tracy Spears presided. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Tracy Spears, Chairman None Clvde Raney, Vice-Chairman Leah North, Secretary (Arr. late) Kenneth Fossler Bob Phillips James Shore John Tirado Ed Zeitler, Council Rep. AUDIENCE Signjng the register were: John Shearer, 3332 Burke, Suite 214, Pasadena William E. Murphy, Friendswood Georg R. Ulbrich, Friendswood Tommy J. Blake, #4 Windsong Friendswood Glen Cress, #10 Windcreek, Friendswood John A James, #16 Windsong Lane, Friendswood Bill Rainey, 926 Ahrens, Houston David Newell, 1008 Francis, Pasadena A.D. Helms, 1714 Kenwick PasadenaKen L. Suit, 602 Fairdale, FriendswoodHarold E. Benson, 30 5 N. Shadowbend, Friendswood 1.MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS January 23, 1975 -approved with the following correction: Under Bri armeadow School Traffic Problem, reword II The Commission made recommenda­tions ... 11 to The Commission had made similar recommendations ... 11 February 6, 1975 -approved as presented February 20, 1975 -approved as presented 2.SUBDIVISIONS ·'·. / North Quakers Landtng .,.. Mr. David Newell of Coker Engineering presented three copies of a proposed subdivision lot layout which would be located off the end of Myrtlewood Drive. Total area was 72 acres, of which 7 acres would be park. with a total of 138 lots. 100-year flood plain. Spears noted that the subdivisionwould have to meet the requirements of the 100-year floodelevation. Helms stated that the 100-year flood plain wasnot definite at this time -that they would junk the wholeproject if it did not meet the requirements. The Secretaryobtained the City Secretary 1 s large-scale copy of the flood FPZC-M-3-6-75 2 North Quaker's Landing (continued) hazard boundary map superimposed on a topographical map. This map, although unofficial, indicated that the 100-year flood level in the subdivision area ranged between 34 and 36 feet. The highest point in the subdivision, according to the topographical figures, was slightly over 33 feet. Creek Easement. Spears reminded the developer that the Commission would require an easement along Clear Creek approximately 150 feet from the centerline of the creek. This requirement would eliminate a large number of the lots on the creek, s�nce most of them were less than 200 feet deep. Mr. Helms was concerned about the loss of these lots. Half-street. One street within the subdivision had half of the dedicated right-of-way outside the subdivision. The Commission indicated that provision would have to be made in regard to the whole street. Mr. Helms wanted to swing the present right-of-way over in on e spot in order to get an additional lot on Myrtlewood. No resolution was made of this. Town houses. Mr. Helms indicated that he would like to put townhouses on a 7.5 acre triangae within the subdivision. The Commission expressed mixed feelings as to the desireability of thi•s. Commercial REserve. Two lots on Myrtlewood, measuring a total of 240 feet wide and 110 feet deep were indicated for a Commercial reserve. Mr. Helms was told that this could not be allowed. Lot Sizes. Somevof·fbhedlots'w,i1thin the subdivision did not meet present subdivision requirements. It was concluded that the developer did not have the current subdivision ordinance and that he should study it before revising his plan. Pipeline. Raney informed Mr. Helms that we now have an ordinance prohibiting building any structure within forty feet of a pipeline easement without a variance granted ona,y by City Counci 1 . Conclusion. Mr. Helms expressed the op1n1on that the Commission had shot down the whole project. 3.BUILDING PERMITS/SUBDIVISION Windsong S/D Lot #3 Mr� Bill Rainey, rowner of Lot #3 in Windsong Subdivision appeared before the Commission with two prob�ems involving building permits on the lot. The first problem involved the fact that Mr. Rainey had obtained a building permit to construct a dwelling on half the frontage of Lot #3 and planned to sell the other half of the frontage. A real estate sign is up on this half. I L 3 FPZC-M -3l.6-75 Lot #3, Windsong S/D (continued ) The question which had been raised was whether this constituted a subdivision without Planning Commission's approval and also whether Mr. Rainey could sell the other half of the lot for a building lot. The second problem involved a building permit which Mr. Rainey had obtained on another se ction of Lot #3 in order to build a storage shed for construction equipment. The question raised was whether tmis was a residential use. Question #1 -on the subdivision of the lot. Three lot owners from Windsong Subdivision were present to express their views on the subdivision of Lot #3. Mr. Tommy Blake, of #4 Windsong, the next-door neighbor of Mr. Rainey's, Mr. Glen Cress1, #10 Windcreek, and Mr. John A James, #16 Windsong Lane. Mr. Blake expressed a concern regarding the operation of a septic system on a lot smaller than the 245 foot wide lots which he and Mr. Rainey now own. He stated thathe has trouble with his septic system at the present time, that he (and therefore Mr. Rainey) could not cross the pipeline behind his house with a septic system and had to put it in front of the house. The house sets 175' back from the street and has standing water in the front yard all winter. The septic field is ninety feet wide and the water seeps fifteen feet in either direction. This creates problems in the placing of the water well, also. He did not think that a lot 122.5 feet wide could adequately handle the septic system and water system required, staying an adequate .distance from the neighbor's water supply as well. Mr. James ·informed the Commission that he had spoken to all ten lot owners presently living in Windsong and that the consensus was that they all wanted to live on acreage or they would have moved to a subdivision. They do not approve of the subdivision of the present lots in Windsong into smaller lots, whether it is illegal or legal. The Commission made the following findings regarding the subdividing or non-subdividing of the lot: (1)Lot 3, Windsong Subdivisdon, was conveyed to Mr. Raineyby Al and Paul O'Farrell on January 19, 1972, prior to annexationby the City of Friendswood.(2)Lot 3 was conveyed to Mr. Rainey in two tracts (one deed ),Tract One facing Windsong Lane and Tract Two with 18.84 feet ofaccess to F. M. 528.(3 )Lot 3 was surveyed for Mr. Rainey on August 29, 1974, intothree tracts. Tract One of the original conveyance becametracts 3-B and 3-C and Tract Two was named tract 3-A.(4)Mr. Rainey had received no approval from the PlanningCorrrnission on a subdivision of Tract One into tracts 3-B and3-C. Therefore, on advice of Counsel, the Commission accepted the division of Lot 3 into Tracts One and Two, since the conveyance FPZC -M-3-6-75 4 Lot #3, Windsong S/D (continued) was made prior to an nexation. The further division of Tract One into tracts 3-B and 3-C was made after annexation and constituted a subdivision of land which needs approval of the Planning Commission. Mr. Rainey was informed that "Tract 3-C II could not be sold with the expect ation that a building permit could legally be issued on it.· Question #2 -on the use of the storage shed. Mr. Rainey presented his position on the buildin g permit issued on Tract Two. He has a building permit for the shed. Zoning,Adminstrator Cline informed Building Official Floyd that he could issue the permit. This tract was exempted from subdivision restrictions by the conveyance. according to Mr. Rainey. Spears stated that the fact that it was exempted or not from subdivision restrictions was not relevant, since the land was zoned R-1 Single family and any activity must meet residential zone requirements. Rainey stated that he planned to store his own personal equipment in the 20 1 by 40' shed. He would use it for three trucks which he hauls tools in and for equipment storage. He presently rents a warehouse for these uses. Further discussion with Mr. Rainey revealed the following in response to questioning by the Commission: (1)The proposed storage shed (approximately 20 1 by 40 1 in dimension) was to be located on a separate tractfrom the residential building, being located on TractTwo (also designated by Mr. Rainey as Tract 3-A), whilethe residence was located on Tract One (3-B). Ord. 174 permits in R-1 Zone 11 a single-family dwelling uni t 11 and and accessory building. 11 Sec ti on 2, Paragraph 6defines accessory structure as 1 1 a ... structure on the same lot with ... theopr�nc.ipler-use or structure." (2)The shed would be used for storage of three pick-uptrucks used to carry tools to construction jobs. (3)Drivers of the vehicles would include Mr. Rainey,his wife, his brother, and at least one other man. (4)Mr. Rainey's brother and the other man do not liveon the premises. (Technically, neither do Mr. or Mrs.Rainey, since they propose living on Tract One, whilethe storage shed is proposed for Tnact Two.) Ord. 174, 3Ettion 2, Paragraph 16a states that "No person other· than members of the family residing on - l! 5 FPZC-M-3-6-75 Lot #3, Windsong (continued) the premises sha 11 be engaged in such occupation. 11 (5)Mr. Rainey stated that he would build and sell items offurniture if someone asked him to. Ord. 174, Section 2, Paragraph 16 g states that 11An,¥ activity in which ... goods ... are sold ... shall not be considered La] home occupation(s).11 (6)Mr. Rainey did not want to build the storage shed on his ownlot or build it of similar materials as his house, the latterbeing a subdivision requirement. (7)Although Mr. Rainey felt that Tract Two had been released from ·the subdivision by a paragraph in the conveyance which stated thatTract Two would not be subject to subdivision restrictions, thePlat of Windsong presented to the Planning Commission by Al andPaul O'Farrell in February of 1973 showed Tract Two includedin the subdivision. This point was not considered relevant tothe question to be resolved by the Cbmmission. (8)Mr. Rainey stated that he would not use more than two horse­power at one time, but no statement was made what the total horse­power requirement would be. Ord. 174, Section 2, Paragraph 16f states that 11 No Home occupation shall require the installation of equipment or electric motors exceeding a total limitation of 3 horsepower per dwelling unit.11 (9)The 18.84 feet of access of Tract Two to F. M. 528 alsocoincided with a drainage ditch or canal of the same approximatewidth. The Commission had been advised by Counsel that the question to be determined was whether the shed would be used for Commercial purposes. In light of the infor mation received from Mr. Rainey, the following action was taken. MOTION WAS MADE by Shore, seconded by North, that the Commission recommend to the City Manager that the Building permit issued for th� construction of the 11 storage shed' be rescinded because the activities planned constituted a Commercial venture. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, WITH ONE ABSTENTION. Fossler, Tirado, Phillips, Raney. Abstaining: conflict of interest). For: Shore, North, Spears (possible [Assistant City Manager Cline was notified of this action by phone on Friday morning, March 7. This was followed on March 10 by a detailed memo listing the above findings and reconmendations which was delivered to the City Manager and Building Official Floyd as well as Zoning ADministrator/Assistant City Manager Cline.] Mr. Rainey then asked if the Commission had any control over to whom he sold the tracts. When assured that the Commission did not, he expressed his gratification, since he had a particular type of buyer in mind. --FPZC-M-3-6-75 Lot #3, Windsong (continued) 4.BUILDING PERMITS Day Care Center306 W Edgewood Dr. Office Building l 06 E. Wi 11 owi ck 6 Mr. Rainey stated that he would talk to an attorney regarding the division of the property. Mr. Harold E. Benson and Mr. Ken Suit presented the Commission with plans for a day care center to be developed on the front of the property at approximately 306 West Edgewood Drive. Councilman Zeitler is also involved in this property as a co-owner. The Commission had previously recommended that the enitre tract not be rezoned for townhouses. Traffic Flow. The majority of comments on the plans presented concentrated on traffic flow. The Commission felt that a revision of the traffic flow plan was necessary to ensure that traffic could flow in and out easily. Also, since the developers plan eventually to use the access to the day care center as the access to the development behind the Commercial strip, they were advised that the day care buil ding should be placed so that it would meet the set-back requirements when the private access road became a public street. If left where it is shown on the sketch, the street could not be utilized in the future as public access because the building would be too close to it. A loop was suggested for the drive. Parking. Only four spaces were shown on the sketch. The Commission felt that this was inadequate. They will have three employees and will have sixty students at each session. The Commission advised Mr. Benson and Mr. �it to familiarize themselves with the Zoning Ordinance requirements, Subdivision requirements (on streets, especially) and the Curb Cut and Parking Ordinance. This is important because of the future development of the lot which is desired. They will return next week, at \'lhich time the Commission will review drainage, parking, traffic flow, and the survey of the lot. Spears and Raney will consult with them in the meantime. North would like to study the plans from the fire safety point of view. Mr. Georg Ulbrich presented pl ans for a 4300 square-·foot office building to be located accross from City Hall and fo be called City Place. Parking. Eleven spaces are need. The plan indicates seventeen. 1· 11 I 7 FPZC-M-3-6-7� Building Permits (continued) Sidewalks. A discussion took place regarding the requirement to install sidewalks. The consensus was that, since Willowick is to be improved in the near future and since sidewalks put in now would probably be destoyed at that time, that Mr. Ulbrich would not have to install the sidewalks until Willowick was improved. The plat was 11 redlined 11 for submission to the Building Official, incorp orating other minor items which were discussed. A survey had not been submitted, it was noted, but this would be submitted to the Building Official. MOTION WAS MADE by Phillips, seconded by North that the Corm,ission recommend approval of the building plans as modified. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 5.MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS. House Numbering Windsong S/D Scope of Review Buildings Heari ng Ca 11 ed 1 RR-1975-1 Mr. John James of (lot) #16 Windsong Lane appeared before the Commission presented a letter and a signed request from the ten present residents of Windsong Subdivision to be allowed to keep their present lot numbers instead of being assigned numbers from the proposed grid system. Raney asked how mail had been addressed until now. Most had used Friendswood P. 0. boxes, although the route was Alvin's. Raney expressed the opinion that he liked small numbers. Discussion followed. MOTION WAS MADE by Raney, seconded by Fassler, that the question be referred to Planning Consultant Atkinson and the Post Office, Police, and Fire Departments for their opinions in writing. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. A discussion took place regarding what aspects of building permits the Commission would concern itself with. Fassler made a proposed list which included zoning compliance, parking, traffic flow, easements, especially pipeline, drainage, plot plan and survey, building set-backs, and curb and gutter ordinance when delegated. (This is in regard to Commercial permits.) Raney suggested a letter to accompany the list. Spears suggested that Raney add his words to Fosslers list. MOTION WAS MADE BY north, seconded by Raney, that this be done. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. MOTION WAS MADE by Raney, seconded by North that a public hearing be called for March 27, 1975, at 8:00 P.M. in a special meeting in order to consider a request by Crown Central Petroleum to rezone to Specific Use: Oil Well and reiated structures, a four acre tract out of the E. R. Weiss 110 acre tract out of lot 6, Section 23, I&GN RR Co., A-623. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. FPZC-M-3-6 -75 8 Miscellaneous Business (continued) Hearings Called Comprehensive REzoning 6.INFORMATION REPORTS. MOTION WAS MADE by Raney, seconded by Fassler, to call public hearings on the four Thursday nights in April at 8:00 P.M. in order to consider the proposed comprehensive rezoning, two special meetings, on the tenth and the twenty-fourth, to be required. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Boat-Empere Chateau The Secretary reported that she had received a note this evening during the meeting informing the Commission that a group of citizens from Empere Chateau would not be coming before the Commission since the ten ton boat that was allegedly to be constructed on a residential lot in that subdivision was not going to be constructed. Trailer -East Heritage The Secretary reported on the latest status of the trailer which exists on East Heritage and which is alle1 ged to be in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Street Program North .reported a concern that the present city street program is not conforming to either the specifications as set forth in the Driveway Ordinance or the specifications as indicated on the plans, particularly in reference to driveways and curb returns. Spears will speak to the City Manager. as a citizen 1 1 fl oodee 11 Heritage Estates Fill North reported that she/was involved with the Texas Water Development Board concerning a subdivision which the Commission had approved, since the subdivision was being extensively filled and, in her opinion, would increase the flooding danger of her home. She will keep the Commission informed. Flood INsurance Ord. The Commission remin ded North and Shore that they should be working on the Flood INsurance 1 Ordinance. 7.ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned.w o.L p .';t,J1Secretary Approved: <'.'.7-V-v xz�c# 717-7.f' ; r n [ I ,I ' City Planning Committee City Hall -109 Willowick Friendswood, Texas 77546 Dear Committee Members, 3 -0 -7...5···-- March 1, 1975 We the residents and property owners of Windsong Subdivision respectfully request that we be allowed to keep our street addtesses as originally given to us. Due to the starting of mail delivery to our subdivision, you have assigned us new street numbers that do not correspond with those we have used since the devel�pment of Windsong. For the following very important reasons to us we ask you not to assign our residences with street numbers ot her than those we now have: 1.Our tract number used as a street number is recorded as part ofthe legal description of our property and is on file at the Galveston County Cuurt House. To ch ange now would mean each resident and pro­perty owner would have to change the legal description of their tracts as shown on their surveys. 2.The Deed of Trust on each piece of property in Windsong uses thetract number as the street address. Our deeds will be incorrect and required le3al changes will be at our expense. 3.Legally our street addresses as we now know them are listed andon file in our wills, our military records, our income tax, our social security, uur driver's license, our school records and even on two birth certific�tes. 4.Windsong Subdivision was in existence with legal street addressesprior to the time the City of �riendswood decided to annex this area and the last two issues of both the Greater Houston and the Houston South Suburban te lephone di rectories list our tract number as our street address. 5.The street addresses we have used for the ��st years in Win<lsongare recorded with our employers, all credit ,:md business communications, our friends and relatives, printed on gummed labels, burned into wooden street number si3ns and on file so many other places they are tuo numerous to mention. To change these \�ould cause great expense, dis­order and much inconvenience. We sinqerely think that if street addresses are needed to match a city master plan after annexation of our subdivision the assioned numbers should correspond with those used since the su bdivision°was started, To change residence numbers now would not onlt be an injustice but a real hardship on the residents Rnd property owners. cc: Ralph Lowe, Mayor Jim Morgan, City Mgr. Respectfully submitted, Windsong Subdivision (Resirlents and property owners are listed on the fo llowing page) .3'-&-7.S- WINDSONG SUBDIVISION PROPERTY OWNERS --r; '7;; /!.e. Mart in L. Alexander / ,:'i¥rl . ;/3,,,,l-d-�\1' J • B 1 a ke · �-1. Campbe 11 1, ,, 1 ���J �•,j . oserh M. Carter·-,/il"J ),1,,.'1}.;;J. tP__; Victor Clark ,_.,, len H. Cress Wi lliA.m G. De Lay � Ron D. Davis ; Jerald \,J. Grimes George F. Hueni . '2.� \4'h.-John A. James �0.:>, 1,-. ,;,'-' Tom P. Kent � -Faye S. Kirkpatrick ll AL-Cecil Don Ledbetter �a, j.�{,()CW,1, Thomas K. LedbetterBilly L. Lovelady Robert A. Mertel uf I 1v . CJ ·l�r . .#fo,,,t (l& , N.Scott MorrisAlvin L o Nettles Al W. u'li'arrell James H. O'Kane Bill Rainey Joe Srtndle 8.G. SeibR.M. SenterMelvin Smith E. E. Speller Jesse Staley Emmett Sweningson C, Toups J+�7-A.Jq,v Joe J. Unger, Jr. No. 30 Windsong Lane No. 4 Windsong Lnne No. 36 Windsong LAne No. l Windsong LaneNo. 13 Windsong Lane No. 10 Windcreek Drive No. 34 Windsong Lane No. 33 Windsong Lane No. 37 Windsong Lane No. 19 Windwood No. 16 Windsong Lane No. 32 Windsong Lane No. 2 Windsung Lane No. 29 Windsong Lane No. 27 Windsong Lane No. 31 Windsong Lane No. 7 Windsong Lane No. 6 Windson3 Lane No. 38 Windsong Lane No. 11 Windcreek Drive No o 14 Windsong Lane No. 3 Windsong Lane No. 24 Windwood · · . No. 12 Windcre�k Drive No. 35 Windsong Lnnr No. 18 Wind \.•mod, No. 39 hlindsong Lrrnc No. 17 Windwood' No. 26 Windwood: No. 20 Windwood · ·. No. 5 Windsong-Lane