HomeMy WebLinkAboutP&Z Minutes 1996-08-01 RegularMINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
OF THE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
AUGUST 1, 1996
A regular meeting of the Friendswood Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Thursday, August 1,
1996 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 910 S. Friendswood Drive, Friendswood, Texas.
The following members were present:
Baker -Chair
Finger
Lowe -Council Liaison
Stewart -City Attorney
Grace
Whittenburg
Burke
Henry -Development Coordinator
Brinkman -Secretary
Cress
With a quorum present, Clark absent, Chair Baker opened the meeting, calling for communications from the
public. Having none, the following items were considered:
1.The request for a Specific Use Permit [proposed Planned Unit Development (PUD)] for property
located at the Westerly line of Chelsea Lane and Northeasterly corner of Lot 7, Block 16,
Section B, Annalea Whitehall Subdivision, and being 8.1064 acres (more or less).
2.
Questions arose regarding the procedural difference between this project and other properties
zoned PUD with a Specific Use Permit. City Attorney Todd Stewart explained that this was
being handled differently because of the way it was advertised to the public. Mr. Hausman's
initial request was to rezone the property from Community Shopping Center (CSC) to Multiple
Family Residential Dwelling District -High Density (MFR-H). The public was notified to that
effect; however, at the public hearing, Mr. Hausman changed his request to a Planned Unit
Development (PUD). The City Attorney had advised both Planning and Zoning and the City
Council that this was permissible, providing that the request become more restrictive. By
changing the request to a PUD, a specific use permit is required which calls for site plan
approval. The MFR-H classification would be tied to the PUD through the site plan; therefore,
the two had to go to City Council together. A recommendation to rezone the property to PUD
could not go forth from Planning and Zoning without the site plan because a zone change
request of CSC to PUD had never been advertised.
The advertisement was to change the property from CSC to MFR-H. The recommendation has
been made to recommend the zone classification be changed to a PUD; however, the
recommendation must be accompanied by the site plan in order to bind the MFR-H density to
the PUD and to satisfy the specific use permit requirement.
There is a great expense incurred by a developer when an architect is engaged to sketch the
site plan. Therefore, Stewart advised that Mr. Hausman has two choices; either provide a site
plan that will accompany the recommendation to City Council, or withdraw this request and
apply for a zone classification change to PUD. If the request to change the zone classification
to PUD is approved, Mr. Hausman can then go to the expense of having a site plan drawn.
Motion:
Second:
Vote For:
Burke -to table this item until staff can confer with Mr. Hausman
Finger
Unanimous Motion Carried
PRE-APP MATOESIAN SUBDIVISION -Lot 1 of Block 1 of the Stonesifer Place Subdivision.
City Attorney Stewart stated that according to law, the subdivision cannot attempt to amend or
remove any covenants or restrictions. If it does, the Planning and Zoning Commission can
refuse the plat. If the replat does not attempt to remove or amend the restrictions, and can meet
all the requirements of the City's ordinances, the plat must be approved. Staff will investigate
the existence of covenants or restrictions.
I P&Z
8-1-96
Page 2
3.PRE-APP DEANS' SUBDIVISION TO BE LOCATED ON MURPHY -BLOCK D OF CENTRAL
PARK SUBDIVISION.
There is a pipeline on the property and a 30' easement indicated. The City requires a 1 O' set
back from a defined easement or 40' set back from an undefined easement. There were no
further comments.
6.PRE-APP PRETS' LUMBER YARD TO BE LOCATED ON THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER
OF SUNSET AND FM 528.
Drainage for this tract of land was addressed in 1990 when Sunwood Subdivision was
developed. The drainage plan has been before the Clear Creek Drainage District and has
received both preliminary and final approval as drainage was based on 100% lot coverage. The
coverage will not be that extensive; therefore, regardless of building layout, the drainage plan is
sufficient. There was a question regarding drainage, as to whether there is an easement or a
right-of-way for the Clear Creek Drainage District. This will be clarified. The zoning of the
property was recently changed from Neighborhood Commercial District (NC) to Community
Shopping Center District (CSC).
7.MINUTES FOR APPROVAL -JULY 11, 1996 approved as corrected; JULY 18, 1996 -approved as
corrected.
8.COMMUNICATIONS FROM:
A STAFF -none
B.COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Burke advised the Commission that the Tree Ordinance Committee had held their
first meeting and would be holding a second meeting on Tuesday, August 6, 1996. Commissioner
Cress gave City Attorney Stewart a copy of the work prepared regarding the proposed Estate Lot
Subdivision. With no further comment, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50.
{)/J/,uL 568:[L&-,/CLAUDIA L. BRINKMAN, SECRETARY