04/04/1967
THt: PLAHN ING Atm 'l.ON I HG B(MI~))
,-
\'-.,1,,,/'
Mi.nutes of the "1eetinr..t 'I'UCtid,lY) Apri.l II, U!G7.
.
.........., The meetine \olc18 called to Q]"clcl" (It 3: 30 P. 1-1. by the V.1.CC-Ctwil'rni.ln,
Hr.'. Reade, \oIho pr~sldccl i.n the abncncc of Chc1i rrniln Kr'uGc, who \"iln
in attendance i\t the Ann\lal Confel"cncc of the Arncr':l can Society of
Planning Officials in Houston, ToY-as. Prc3cnt Hore! t~cmbcrn l1ylDndm",
Harries, Butler and GalloHay, r~l". Rcttin of the l:nr,i.nccJ"inp.. Depur'tmcnt,'
and ~It'. hlOJ.l~.
The ~inutes of the meeting of i1a~ch 28t 1967, were approved as
submitted in \.tri ttcn summation to each member subject to correction
of pOl..,th Osceola to ~outh Osceola in Line 11 on Page. //11 ~
?ONING REQUEST 7.-1?-I~G7 - FROM R-le TO R_II - LOTS 5, 6, & 7,
PALM BLUFr SUBDIVISION -
APPLICPJ1T: ~mISSnER-\'lt.LKER
~ocation was described as on the south side of Palm Bluff Street,
,
to the west of Osceola Ave. The Planner presented the application with
information that, although its filing date was subsequent to the Hareh
28 Board meeting, it should be consider.ed in the same category (be-
cause of location) as the four requests for which approval was recom-
(, mended at that meeting. The Planner thus roccommendcd apPl'oval. After
, further revieH, upon motion by Mr. Butlel", seconded by tir. Harries, it
was, voted unanimously to recommend approval of P.eguest 2-12-467 for
chang~ from R-IE to R-IJ zoning subject t.9" the same conai tiol1 of the re-
..
zoning of contiguous R-1E area to R-4 as recommended for Cases Z-8
through 2-11-367.
ZONING REQUEST 2-14-/167 - FRon R-2 to R-II -
"
Lot la, 11, E. 40' of Lot 12, W. 35' of
Lot 13, S. 65' of E. 15' of Lot 13,
S. 65' of Lot Ill, all of Lot 15 and S. 5'
of Lot 17 of PALt1 BLurr SUBDIVISIOn -
APPLICANT: Donald E. Blc~kley
Location '(/as der;cribcd as on the north side of PalM !Huff Street,
west of Osceola Ave. Hap drat-line t-1ilS studied shm.1ing the mi:-:ccl residen-
tial land use to the north, east and south and the zonine of surround-
, ,.......i ing properti e5. The PlannQr made expli1na tiOll of property mmershi ps
involved in the adjacent R-? lots on both Sit40S of Osceola. 1'-11", Holle
,J~ '
.' '{~.' '\ 'I ',: .". ',:,: , "," ,':/J :.: ':' ':'. .' ':. '. ',' ,:' ~ /' ,". ,,: ' .< ..~' ~~ ,:' . I, I, . . '/~... ,< \ ; '. >' : '.:.'1.' ;...', '~' ; ."=-:" '.', < ",' ~,\ ; ",:'1/:'':,:':'' ,;>', -:,' , \: I ' :' ,.... : ~..;; ::" ~I 1,':." ..:' ~!'".'~, . :' :.'. ':' : ,l.:,~' ;': ',',: =,:, ~~.:'.: ,/:''':'.:,: ..'. .... " '~:.. ',:,~.". :S,':
N:l. (3,1. HinutcB
11/1116 "
Par.a if?
ru~thcr reported th~t:
.
I,.........,
Owners Raines) Burnet, foster and Shariks were Di~natorics
on petition of non-objection to rezoning requests within
the H-ll~ pockt:=t to the south of Palm Bluff Street t but to
his knowledge were not aware of the Bleaklc~ request.
The roste~ and Shanks properties o~the northeaat corner of
Palm Bluff and Osceola were prr::scntly occupied hy one 'I-unit
and one 2-unit structure (a unagc nonconforming to duplex'
zonin'g dens i ty) .
The Davenport 'property (the north portion of Lot lit) HilS
occupied 'by a structur'e.
(;.~;,
The west 10 ft. of l~t 17 is dedicated as an alley (on
Cleart.Jater tax' roll in name of the Ci ty of Clc8T'water).
The Planner recommended approval of Request Z-llr and outlined tHO al-
ternatives (under Agenda #3) for consideration as a planning recommenda-
tion fot' expansio.n of the Bleakley request -
l.To take in properties approximately in line with the
northern boundary of Lot 15 of.the Bleakley parcel extended
to R-2 zoned lots on the west and east side of Osceola Ave.
To take in, in addition to the Bleakley parcel,' only
those R-2 zoned lots fronting on Palm Bluff Street.
The Planner presented the above proposal #2 as hi~. recommended alter-
2 .
native.
'In the following' discussion, so~c reservation was expressed by Mr.
Butler of the Zoni~g Committee as to ~hether siBnatories to the above T'e-
ferred to petition might have the same attitude to a change of zoning
immediat~ly adjacent to them as to a chance involving properties in the
next block. Consideration 'das glven to the fact that the location~
land area, and site of the property of request was adapi~blc to apart-
~' ' l'
.~"
ment group development; ftirther to the points that an expanded rezoni~g
would permit modernization of e~istinD multi units in the area and pro-
vide opportunity for a 1arce parcel of water frontage to more ndequatc-
ly meet a growing rental market. It was notQd thRt the properties
;1'; , ','. ~ ,... "~,l: ,'/ : /" ", \'~'" : : .:': ;', ;,', ",';:/:',:<; i, .::....:." ",h < ". ',': '. -: " " .: ,:' . . ,> ,,;.:; : ':" ,:., ...', "'. ;", I~:;:':': ',I' I '~:' :: :,' ....~ I '.':',: :~':' >:::",~ ~ .',: ~ ~ '.: ;:,:' ~; ", ',': ::' \ :.: ~\:t, :'':':(, !: '::.: ... :.::: ,: ,:,,:",' ,: ;:. .',; ;::.,:' ,;,::):, : ,;:' : ...,':.'~::: i ':,:':',',.:: ,~: ',' ~:: ':: .,' ~
Pf;?, Bd. Ninutf!o
II / II / G 'I
f\1gc 1/3
fronting on Pt1lrfl InufJ iH'e so si.tuc1ted to r;hiu'c OT' complement dcvl'dop-
!,>~ mcnt potential south of Pnlln Bluff. lh~. Nylilndnr, offered the opinj.on
that to limi t the l"c7.oninr, to the Bl(:ilklcy propcl'ty t-1ould be spot
zoninc.
In final action, ~otion wnn marle flV Hr. Hvlnndcr that the "nard
_I ":... .....~.-I
,accept the Plilnner's S\l1,!(-',<wtioI1 itncl T'ecorr:rr:~nd dopro,!al of the Bleak lev
request Z-lll-llq1.Jor chanr..e from R-7. to !~-H.,-_ nn~\ ina~di ti'on under
Agenda Item if) aPE:rov~}- of Chtlnf;inp. the remainder of Lots] 3 ~nd 14
and all of Lots 23, ?ll, and 25, Pt1tl~.J:t1ff SUhdiv,iRion, from R-2' to
R-4. l'~otio}} t\'as seconded by Hr'. Hal'ries and pa~~5ecJ unanimously ~
CONSI DERATI DB OF ORDI NAlICl~ ^t,n~!~DHr.HT
CONCERNIHG R-3 PUD m.nU:R'SI\Ir
The Planner presented verbally a proposal for an ordinance am~nd-
ment t'o change (in Sec. 2G-5^) "common Q\.mershipu as a prerequisite to
, (, ~',
R-3 pun usage to ucommon plan" in order to provide for several owner-
ships under one plan. He explained this as having the purpose of mak-
ing available for planned 'development a l~rger number of limited size
and limited use properties. He said the broader base could result in
l~rger use 6f the PUD classification.
Mr. Wolle advised that it was his own interpretation that the ori-
ginal and existing ordinance intent WitS to have a pun under one owner-
ship and that, as confirmation, he was se~~inc the Assistant City Attor-
ney t s interpretation of IIcommon ot-.'nershi?" as used in the te.xt. He
stated that he had not as yet been able to reach Mr. Kennedy to dis-
buss this matter with him. Mr. Wolle requested sp~cifically a motion
fl;om the BOal.'d to the effect that in the event that the f'.ssistant City
Attorney t S ruling con fi rrncd the req ui r'er.en t of one o...rncr'Gh.i p that th e
Planner and Mr. Mylandcr be authorized to .submit an ordin~nce amend-
, (
, ... ,'~
"-/
mcnt proposal for a change to perr:1i t sepClrClte m'!ncl'ship~ un(~et' one plan.
,He indicated urgency for, action in order to have such pr'QPosal to be
::,:~, .', ~~ .,;~ i. -t~ ',:. :', :' " ,,', ..' :~~ ' " :, ~. ' ~',: ,+ ;; , :' ".:..:',:'-: ::': ':",' I ", '. I " ':"'" ;. .",' " \, :": ; ,I : :,' ,,~ : ',' : '. ' :: :. ,';.. ;', ~'~ : ' ;. ' " ' , ' ':, ". ":::' ,,::, " ,~. "::,, '; :. :.: ',~ : ',' ",:~'.' :: ~ ,.~' '. .":~ , :' '" :', ",. ',' I, ,.' I', :" ;,' . ' ".', ' . ~". :'
..
",
,
PCI'. nd. Minute!;
'1/11/67
Parte fIll
('
, '~ I
included in the notice of the AppIl ~PI Zoni.ng J'libli.c lIei'll"ing (by <lcild-
line of April 5).
, ,.,..-...,
A langthy diocusnion Hi th the Plilnncl" ,[0110\'/0 d. Arnone points
brought out wer.e:
, \
The difficuJties of having 8nSUl"i1nce of a,firm commitment
for the execution of any pli1n invol vi ng . morc thiln one o\-merosh i p.
The complexities that minht arise in recard to title 'and
financing arroonccments undero the proposed common plan.
I '
The possibili ty already affor.ded under the existi.ng ordinance
provision for' ownership in the form of a syndicate, corporation,
joint ownership, tenancy in common) etc.
'I
.'
l'..
After advice by the Board's lcga} member that the text should not be
,',
t ! .
al tared:, and an expression by Vice Chairman Reade cautioning a'gainst
, \ I
'" hasty ac~ion Hithout rnore time for consideration, the Board confirmed
1 '
a:s the s~fer cour'se adherence' to the Board's original intent of pro-
I \..~
1, , ' , '
vision ~or'oneownerShip. Motion was made by Mr. Mvlander~ seconded
by' Mr. Butler, and passed unanimously, that the Board leave the ordi-
nance' 11~s is" pending further leRal interpret'ation by the Ci t~ 15
, )
..
,
Ii'. f
"1.
'.'
:. . ..':
J:.,:, .
;, '
, "
" lep,al officiai~
~,..' ",l'l,
P ,:,' .
'f ,',
J
PILnning literature was distributed.
I '
The.. meeting Has adj ourned at 5: 00 P. t1.
, " '
"f',,, "
, ,
Respe~tfully submitted,
t}, "r9 /,;' ...
, \" . ' " ..\. . /--
, '.-' (i!. c./C '- : ((/ ,~, L-c.-.( ',_
/?pCk I., ~)olle, Seely
, C,pi ty Planne.r
"
l
, .....,/ ,
<~, ,: <. ~
'I;
'r,
"
,": .