HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - Regular - 9/27/1972•W,46
SEPTEMBER 27, 1972
2-31-400 -964
(1)
2-31-400-965
(2)
2-31-400-966
(3)
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The City Council of the City of Lubbock, Texas, met at 10:00 o'clock a.m. in the regular meeting
place in City Hall, the following members thereof being present to -wit:
Mayor Morris W. Turner and Councilman Lonnie F. Hollingsworth, Councilwoman Carolyn Jordan,
Councilmen John E. Baker and Bryce Campbell, City Manager N. B. McCullough, City Attorney Fred 0.
Senter, Jr., Assistant City Manager Robert Wilson and City Secretary Treasurer Lavenia Lowe.
Absent: None
The invocation was given by Jim Bertram, Director of Planning.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was given in unison by those present in the Council Chamber.
NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING
NOTICE is hereby given to all interested persons as provided by law, that the City Council will
hold a public hearing on the 27th day of September, 1972,at 10:00 A.M., in the City Council
Chamber on the Second Floor of the City Hall in Lubbock, Texas, to consider the recommendation
of the Planning and Zoning Commission that the Zoning Ordinance 1695 be amended to amend Sections
of said Zoning Ordinance as described below; and at which time and place all interested persons
will be given an opportunity to be heard, after which hearing, the City Council will determine
whether the Zoning Ordinance will be amended in accordance with such recommendation:
ZONE CASE #1837 - Request of Weldon Steele to make the following changes out of Section 1, Block
J S, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas. The following Changes from Horizon West Addition,
to the City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, a preliminary plat on file in the office of the
Secretary of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Change "R-l" to "R-2"
Lots 1 thru 6, 9 thru 12, 18 thru 21, 27 thru 30, 99 thru 118.
Change R-1 to A-1
Lots 220 thru 223
Change "R-1" to "C-2 "
Lot 224
(South of Erskine Street and East of Frankford Avenue)
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council that Lots 1-6, 99-110 be
changed to R-2, and that Lot 224 to be changed to C-2 be granted.
ZONE CASE #1841 - Request of Dewie V. Rothwell to change lots 7 thru 10, Block 1, Slidell Annex
Addition from an "R-1" to a "C -1" zoning district and lots 4 thru 6, Block 1, Slidell Annex
Addition and a Tract of land South of 58th Street to the alley between Toledo Avenue and Lot 4
from an "R-1 " to an "R-2" zoning district. (South of 58th Street between Toledo Avenue and Utica)
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council that this request be granted,.
ZONE CASE #1842 - Request of Charles Patterson (for Trinity Church) to change a tract of land
out of Section 12, Block E-2, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, from an "R-1 " to an "R-2"
zoning district. Property is further described by metes and bounds to wit:
A Tract of land located in Section 12, Block E-2, Lubbock County, Texas, described by metes and
bounds as follows:
BEGINNING at -a point which is the Northwest corner of Tract "E", Caprock Addition to the City of
Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas;
THENCE S 00 Ol' 43 " W, with the West line of said Tract "E", Caprock Addition, a distance of
455.68 feet to a point in the North Right-of-way line of Loop 289; (same being the Southwest
corner of said Tract "E", Caprock Addition;)
THENCE N 89* 58' 17" W, with the North Right-of-way line of Loop 289, a distance of 668.73 feet
to a point in the center line of Elgin Avenue;
THENCE N 0° 03' 48" E, with the centerline of Elgin Avenue, a distance of 455.35 feet to a point
which bears S 00 03' 48" W, 20 feet, and West, 31.09 feet from the Southwest corner of Lot 1295,
Caprock Addition to the City of Lubbock, Lubbock, County, Texas;
THENCE East, with the South line of a dedicated alley, a distance of 668.45 feet to the Place of
BEGINNING, containing 6.991 acres.
(North of Loop 289 and East of Elgin Avenue)
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council that this request be jranted
subject to the following condition:
1. Tied to Church uses only.
l
-- - r #09%
ZONE CASE #921D - Request of Derrell G. Jones to amend Specific Use Permit on a tract of land
out of Section 3, Block E, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas. Property is further des-
cribed as follows:'
TRACT I
BEGINNING at a point which is 800'+ west of 451+ south of ICE corner of Section 3 Block E,
Lubbock County, Texas; -.
THENCE West a distance of 1337.181+ to a point;
THENCE South a distance of 410'+ to a -point;
THENCE East a distance of 508'+ to -a point; ..
THENCE South a distance of 993.5'+ toa point;
THENCE East a distance of 1442.16.1+ to a point in the West right-of-way line of Avenue Q South
Drive
THENCE Along the West right-of-way line of Avenue Q South Drive a distance of 1381.141+ to the
place of BEGINNING.
TRACT 2
BEGINNING at a point which is 2137.18'+ west and 45'+ south of the NE corner of Section 3
Block E, Lubbock, Texas;
THENCE West a distance of 445'+ to a point;
THENCE South a distance of 180'+ to a point;
THENCE West a distance of 150'+ to a point;
THENCE -South a distance -of 260'+ to a point;
THENCE East a distance of 6061+ to a point;
THENCE North a dis-tance of 423'+ to a point.;
(South of 50th Street and Avenue Q-South Drive between Avenue U and P)
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council that -this request be granted
subject to the following conditions:
- 1'. Tied to the. site plan as presented-.
2. Subject to approval by the Traffic Engineering Department on the drive way openings.
ZONE CASE #1001-A - Request of Joe V. Boerner Jr. (-for First National Bank) to change Tract A,
Ranchland Terrace Addition from an "R-l" Specific Use" to an "A-1" zoning district. Tracts A
& B Ranchland Terrace Addition, City of Lubbock, Lubbock County, Texas, is from a preliminary
plat on file in the office of the Secretary of the Planning and Zoning Commission. (Between
..Belmont.Avenue..and Chicago Avenue, South of Brownfield Road)
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended to the City Council that this request be granted.
ZONE CASE NO. 1807 - Request of Planning and Zoning Commission to change:
The west one-half of Blocks,6, 22,:38, 54-, 70 and-86, Original Town;
Lots 1.2 2, • 3., .4 and 5, Block 102, Original Town;
Xhe�north one-half of Blocks.97, 98, 99; 100 and 101, Original Town;
The north one-half of Block 134, Overton Addition;
Lots 1, 2'and 3, Block 118, Overton Addition;
The East one-half of Blocks 106, 1092 113, 114 and 117, Overton Addition;
Lot 3, Block 3, Roberts and McWhorter Addition;
Lots A and B, Block 2, Garland Subdivision;
The east 49.5 feet of the north 26.0 feet of Lot 16, Block 2, Garland Subdivision;
Lots 1, 2, 3, 13, 14 and 15, Blake's Subdivision of Block 1 of Roberts & McWhorter Addition;
Lots 1, 4, 11 and the south 161.4 feet of Lot 12, Richmond Addition;
The South 161.4 feet of Lot 14, Block 8, William Tubbs Addition;
Lots 1, 2, 3, 18, 19 and 20, Block 1, William Tubbs;
All of that portion of Block 14, William Tubbs Addition situated southwest of the Santa Fe
Railroad right-of-way;
All of that portion of Block 7, Acuff Heights Addition situated southwest of the Santa Fe
Railroad right-of-way;
.Blocks.l and 2, Ratliff Addition;
Lots 1 and 2, Safeway Addition;
All of Blocks 5 and 6, Merritt and Wild Addition;
All of Block 1, Original Town, City of Lubbock, Lubbock Coanty;'Texas, from "R-3", "C-4':, "M-1"
and "M-2" to a "C-4" Zoning District. '
..Cut 4th Street property -east of Avenue L and change rest -of property on'North side of 4th Street
to 100 feet in depth.
Section 1. - Permitted Uses:
Apartments (1 unit per 100 sq. ft. lot area)
Barber Shop
Bar, supper club, nightclub, cbcktai.l lounge, private club
Beauty Shop
Civic or Fraternal Organization -
Hotel, motel, motor hotel
Medical Uses - hospitals, clinics (except -veterinary)
Parking - off-street (Public or private)
Professional offices
Restaurants - mixed alcoholic.beverage sales permitted as an incidental use
Retail - Bakery
Department stores
Drug Store
Florist
Groceiy Stares
Pharmacies
Specialty Shops
Service Stations
Studies
Theaters
Travel Agency & Bureau
Trailer Sales
In addition to these permitted uses, the following uses shall be permitted on that
portion of the property which fronts onto Fourth'(4th) Street. Said property
being located on the north side of Fourth (4th) Street between Avenue Q and the
Santa Fe Railroad Right -of -Way.
Any use unconditionall permitted in the "C-4" commercial district provided that the
business is conducted entirely within a building. No outside storage or display
of any kind shall be permitted.
Section 2. - Yards
There shall be a minimum building setback of ten (10) feet from the front property
line for non-residential uses. Apartments shall maintain the "A-2" yard require-
ments.
Section 3. - Off -Street Parking"
USE
Apartments '
Barber Shop
Bar, cocktail lounge, night club,
supper club or private club
Beauty Shop
Civic and Fraternal Organizations
Hotel, Motel and Motor Hotel
Medical Uses - Hospitals, •
Clinics
Professional Offices
Restaurants
Retail
Service Stations
Studios
Theaters
Travel Agency and Bureau
Wholesale & all other
Section 4. - Landscaping
-REQUIREMENT
1 1/2 spaces per 1 bedroom
2 spaces per 2 or more BR.
1 space per 150 sq. ft. gross floor area
1 space per 100 sq. ft gross floor area
1 space per 150 sq. ft-of gross floor area
1 space per. 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area
1 space per room.-
2 per bed
1 per 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area
1 space per 200 sq. ft gross floor area
1 space per 100 sq. ft. gross floor area
1 space per 150 sq. ft gross floor area
1 per service stall and 1 per employee
1 space per 150 sq. ft. gross floor area
1 space per four seats
1 space per 200 sq. ft.gross floor area
1 space per employee plus 1 space for
each company vehicle
Sixty percent (60%) of the required ten (10) foot front yard shall be landscaped
and permanently maintained for non-residential uses and 15% of the total lot area
shall be landscaped and permanently maintained for apartments.
Section 5. - Advertising
�i. Sign Content
All signs shall pertain to identification of -the primary use and/or primary service pro-
vided or.primary product sold on -the premises. Signs shall not advertise incidental
products. by brand names-.
B. Sign Area
The- total' area of -the sign(s) allowed under' -this section shall not exceed 1 1/2 percent of
the gross flour -area of -the building or one (1) square foot of sign for each lineal foot
of lot frontage..
C. Sign- Types Permitted.
1. -Fascia A -sign with letter face parallel to.the.building facade extending no more
than two ($) feet perpendicularly from any facade:•-
2. Free Standing - One (1).fxee standing sign is permitted for a development lot provided
the following conditions are met:
(a) The height shall not exceed fifty-five (55) feet.
(b) No part of such signs may project horizontally beyond the -property line.
Canopy - Signs which are attached to a canopy, provided -they do not project horizontally"
-beyond-the canopy or.vertically above -the highest --point of -the canopy.
Temporary - Signs which advertise property for sale or lease or advertise the opening
of a new business. _Signs indicating a new business shall be removed within thirty (30)
days pf the opening date.
Public Service - Signs limited to depiction of time, temperature or news, provided all
other standards of this section are complied with.
ID. Sign Design
1. All electrical service lines shall not be'visible from the exterior of the building.
Z. Hanging,, -exposed neon without background letters, flashing,.roof signs or signs painted
directly on walls shall be prohibited..
E. Abandoned Business Signs - All signs and supports relating to an abandoned or discontinued
business must be removed within thirty (30) days from the date of discontinuance.
F. Non -Conforming Sign Abatement
1. Non -conforming signs of,an accessory nature (costing $100 or less) not currently in
violation of the zoning ordinance, shall be removed or brought into compliance within
ooe (1) year of -the effective date of this'ordinance.
2. Primary non -conforming signs (costing $100 to $999) not currently in violation of the
zoning ordinance, shall be removed or brought into compliance within three (3) years of
the effective date of this ordinance.
.3. Primary non -conforming signs (costing $1,000 or more) not currently in violation of the
zoning ordinance, shall be removed or brought into compliance within eight (8) years of
the date of this ordinance.
Section 6.. - Coverage
Coverage shall. not exceed 75% of the gross lot area for non-residential uses and 40%
of the gross lot area for apartments.
Section 7. - Expansion of any -non -conforming use (as defined in Section 18, Zoning Ordinance
No. 1695).created by this ordinance shall be approved as set forth in Section 19
of Zoning Ordinance No. 1695.
Isl Lavenia Lowe
Secretary -Treasurer
City of Lubbock, Texas
In accordance with the above Notice of Zoning Hearing, hearing was held on Zone Case No. 1837 y
Request of Weldon Steele to change property located south of Erskine Street and east of Frank -
ford Avenue from "R-1 " to "R-211, "A-111, and "C-2 " Zoning Districts, The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended that lots 1-6 and 99-110 be changed to "R-2" and that Lot 224 be changed
to "C -2". Mayor Turner called for proponents -and opponents to appear -before the City Council.
Mr. Weldon Steele appeared in support of this zone change request', Jim Bertram, Director of
Planning, gave a summation of the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. No
-one else came forward;•whereupon, Mayor Turner announced that the hearing was closed. After
consideration of all information presented, motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded
-by.Councilman Baker, motion carried, Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, Baker
and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to approve this zone change request subject to the con-
dition that a 2.2 ratio parking be applied -to the "C-2 " Zone and to pass Ordinance No. 6457 on
first reading;
ORDINANCE NO. 6457
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 1695 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF
LUBBOCK SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: ZONE CASE NO. 1837: CHANGE LOTS 1-6, 99-110, SECTION
1, BLOCK J S, HORIZON WEST ADDITION, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK-COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM AN "R-l" TO AN
"R-2" ZONING DISTRICT; AND CHANGE LOT 224, SECTION 1, BLOCK J'S, HORIZON WEST ADDITION, CITY OF
LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM AN "R-1" TO A "C-2" ZONING DISTRICT; SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS;
PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
72-31-404-967 In accordance with the above Notice of Zoning Hearing, hearing was held on Zone Case No. 1841 -
(4) Request of Dewie V. Rothwell to change property located south of 58th Street between Toledo
Avenue and Utica Avenue from "R-V to "R-2" Zoning District. The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended that this request be granted. Mayor Turner called for proponents and opponents to
appear before the City Council. Mr. Dewie V.Rothwell appeared before the City Council in support
of this zone change request. Jim Bertram, Director,of Planning, presented the recommendations of
the Planning and Zoning Commission. No one else came forward; whereupon, Mayor Turner announced
that -the hearing was closed. After consideration.of all information -presented, motion was made
by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilman Campbell, motion carried, Mayor Turner and Council-
men Hollingsworth, Baker and Campbell voting Yea, Councilwoman Jordan voting Nay to uphold the
recommendation of the Planning -and Zoning Commission and pass Ordinance No. 6458 on first reading.
ORDINANCE No. 6458
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 1695 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK
SO AS -TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGE: ZONE CASE NO. 1841: CHANGE LOTS 7 THRU 10, BLOCK 1, SLIDELL
ANNEX ADDITION FROM AN "R-1" TO A "C-l" ZONING DISTRICT AND LOTS 4 THRU 6, BLOCK 1, SLIDELL
ANNEX ADDITION AND A TRACT OF LAND SOUTH OF 58TH STREET TO THE ALLEY -BETWEEN TOLEDO AVENUE AND
LOT 4 FROM AN-"R-1 ":•TO AN "R-2" ZONING DISTRICT; PROVIDING A'SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR
PUBLICATION.
72-31-404-968 In accordance with the above Notice of -Zoning Hearing, hearing was held on Zone Case No. 1842 -
(5) Request of Charles Patterson (for Trinity-Chruch) to -change property located north of Loop 289
and east of Elgin Avenue from an "R-1" to an "R-2 " Zoning District. The Planning and Zoning
Commission recommended that this request be -granted subject to the condition that it be tied to
church uses only., Mayor Turner called for proponents and opponents to appear before the City
Council. Mr. Charles Patterson, Administrator for the Trinity Church, appeared before the City
Council in support of this zone change request. Rev. Morris Sheats also appeared in support of
this zone change request. Jim Bertram, Director of Planning, gave a summation of the recommenda-
tions of -the Planning and Zoning Commission. 'No one else came forward; whereupon, Mayor Turner
announced that the hearing was closed. After consideration of all information presented, motion
was made by Councilmen Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan, motion carried, Mayor
Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, 'Baker and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to
uphold the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and pass Ordinance No. 6459 on
first reading..
ORDINANCE NO. 6459
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 1695 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK
SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGE: ZONE CASE NO. 1842: CHANGE A- TRACT OF LAND OUT OF SECTION 12,
BLOCK E-2, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS, FROM AN "R-1" TO AN "R-2 ZONING DISTRICT;
SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING A PENALTY; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICA-
TION.
72-31-404-969 In accordance with the above Notice of Zoning Hearing, hearing was held on Zone Case No. 921D -
(6) Request of Derrell G. Jones to amend Specific Use Permit on property located south of 50th Street
and Avenue Q South Drive between Avenue U and Avenue P. The Planning and Zoning Commission
recommended that this request be granted subject to'the,-following conditions:
1. Tied to the site plan as presented.
2. Subject to approval by the Traffic Engineering Department on the driveway openings.
Mayor Turner called for proponents and opponents to appear -before the City Council. Jim Bertram,
Director of Planning, gave a summation of the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
No one else came forward; whereupon, Mayor Turner announced that the hearing was closed. After
consideration of all information presented,.motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by
Councilman Baker, motion carried, Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, Baker and
Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to.uphold the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning
Commission and pass Ordinance No. 6460 on first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 6460
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 5064 OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK COVERING ZONE CASE
NO. 921 D, BY AMENDING THE CONDITIONS MADE A PART OF SUCH SPECIFIC USE -PERMIT; PROVIDING A
SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
72-31-404 -970 In accordance with the above -Notice of Zoning Hearing, hearing was held on Zone Case No. 1001-A -
(7) Request of Joe V. Boerner, Jr. (for First -National Bank) to change property located between
Belmont Avenue and Chicago Avenue, south of .Brownfield Road from an "R-1',' Specific Use to a
11C-1" Zoning District and from an "R-l" Specific Use to an "A-1" Zoning District. The Planning
and Zoning Commission recommended that this request be granted. Mayor Turner called for pro-
ponents and opponents -to appear before the City Council. Mr. Joe V. Boerner, Jr. appeared be-
fore the City Council, and introduced Mr. McKay who presented this zone case. Jim Bertram, Director
of.Planning, gave a summation of the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. No
one else came forward; whereupon, Mayor Turner announced that the•hearing was closed. After
consideration of all information presented, motion was made by Councilmen Hollingsworth, seconded
by Councilwoman Jordan, motion carried, Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, Baker
and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to uphold the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning
Commission and pass Ordinance No. 6461 on first reading.
ORDINANCE NO. 6461
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 1695 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK
A SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGE: ZONE CASE NO. 1001J-A: CHANGE TRACT A, RANCHLAND TERRACE
ADDITION, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS FROM AN !"R-1" SPECIFIC USE" TO A "C-1" AND
TRACT B, RANCHLAND TERRACE FROM AN "R-1" SPECIFIC USE" TO AN "A-1" ZONING DISTRICT: PROVIDING
A SAVINGS CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
72-31-405-971 Councilman'John E. Baker did not participate in the hearing or in the City Council action on
(8) Zone Case No. 1807.
In accordance with the above Notice of Zoning Hearing, bearing was held on Zone Case No. 1807 -
Request of the Planning and Zoning Commission to change property surrounding and adjacent to
the proposed Memorial Center area from VR-311, 11C-411, "M-l" and "M-2 "-to "C-4 " Zoning District,
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that this request be granted subject to con-
ditions. Mayor Turner called for proponents and opponents to appear before the City Council,
Orvile Alderson, Bob Nash, Bill Cantrell, Mrs. Schmidt, J. B. Hance, Harold Farris, Eleanor
Fredrick, S. S. Forrest, Jr., C. L. Boggs and Alton Abbott, Jr. appeared before the City Council
and made brief statements in regard -to this zone case. Jim Bertram, Director of Planning,
gave a summation of the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission and made the
following statement.
Mr. Mayor, I feel I have a joint responsib'lity here. One of reporting the findings of the
Planning and Zoning Commission and their recommendations to you -and another responsibility
to make additional recommendations in terms of what I feel like are our proper long range
planning goals and policies for this particular area around the Civic Center in that I think
few people have realized yet the uniqueness of this project and the impact of the public in-
vestment in it. I do not think it has been fully realized. It is unlike any other area in
town that has ever had a zone case around it. Basically I will review what the case is so
there will be no misunderstanding about the area covered and what is intended. The intent of
Zone Case No. 1807 as it was originally presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission in
April, 1972, was to create an area immediately facing into the Civic Center area both public
reuse area and the proposed commercial reuse area being'sold by the'Urban Renewal Agency but
to create an area which builds in development standards comparable to development standards
within the Civic Center so when one comes into the street pattern around the Civic Center that
he is in an area where there are actually unique development standards that are not found any-
where else within the City of Lubbock. Basically the case covered is 1/2 block west of Avenue
Q facing into the Civic Center -Project approximately 160 feet north of the north right of way
fine of 4th Street facing this project, the corner bounded by 6th Street and what will be
Avenue 0 of the project, the 1/2 block facing into the project on the east side of Avenue K
facing into the prcrject on the 1/2 block to the alley facing into the project on 10th Street.
Again the original recommendations were to build in development standards both permitted uses
and sign standards as found in the Urban Renewal Plan approved and adopted by the Planning and
Zoning Commission and the City Council. This recommendation was made to the City Council in
a hearing. After a number of problems arose, the City Council asked that several things be
done. Mayor: Will you review what the original recommendation was? Jim: The original recom-
mendation of the -Planning and Zoning Commission was to grant the area in this, grant the zoning
C-4 limited to the uses basically that are found in the Memorial Civic Center Re -use Area. Do
you want me to read these individual uses? Mayor: Not unless you think it pertinent. Jim:
They were restricted more or less to facilities which were related directly to the Civic Center
itself rather than open C-4 uses. In terms of sign standards, after being studied and tabled
and restudied by the Planning and Zoning Commission, they came back basically with the sign
standards that are found in the Memorial Civic Center and that is covered by one type signs
basically and that is a facia sign which will require signs to be flat against the wall of the
building, that the letter faces would have to be perpendicular to the wall and could not ex-
tend further out than 2 feet, that the sign area could not exceed 1 1/2% of the floor area of
the commercial use on the tract. After this came to the Planning and Zoning Commission, rather
-to the City Council, it met with very stiff opposition both with land uses and signs. The City
Council referred it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission asking that several things be
restudied. Primarily the sign regulations themselves suggesting that a sign committee made up
of citizens and an ex officio, I was an ex officio member to that sign committee, be made up
of local citizens and they restudy the sign recommendations and they make recommendations to
the Planning and Zoning Commission. This committee was formed and chaired by Mr. Bob Nash
and made up of approximately six members made up of people that were found to be both on the
extreme end of the sign issues wanting them exactly as in the Civic Center and on the other
hand seeking or approaching the standards found in the exising zoning, open C-4. So in addi-
tion the sign committee was to look at the non -conforming uses and to look at the possiblity
of -expanding uses, the fact that they might be too restrictive, and to look at the possibility
of the several discussions that there is an isolated corner up here that might not be in the
case. These were the items that were restudied. The sign committee met for some four weeks
and finally made a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission which greatly expanded
the facia sign which was the only sign permitted. The recommendation was still that the sign
should pertain to identification of the primary use, prohibiting or precluding accessory signs.
They expanded the sign area to allow an either/or type situation with the original 1 1/2% of
the gross floor area or one square foot sign for each lineal foot of lot frontage that would
allow them some flexibility depending on whether they have a large lot or they go to a multi-
story type development. The signs were expanded not only to include the original facia sign
but a free standing sign - one per development lot provided that it not exceed a height of 30
feet, that no part of the sign project horizontally beyond the property line and that there be
a minimum horizontal separation of 90 feet between free standing signs in an attempt to limit
the number as well as the height. It would allow canopy signs, temporary signs to advertise
property for sale, public service signs for the depiction of time, temperature and news. The
restricted sign design requires all signs not be visible from the exterior of the building
i and that hanging, exposed neon without background letters, flashing roof signs be prohibited.
Went on further to require the removal of abandoned business signs and -create an abatement time
of eight years for those signs which would be made non -conforming by the case. These basically
were the recommendations of the sign committee to the Planning and Zoning Commission. An
1. additional area was the handling of the uses that would be made non -conforming. It was first
felt that because this was a condition of the zone case that the non -conforming uses to
expand would have to come back and re -initiate a case. After discussing this in depth, the
legal department felt that they could come within Section 18 of the Zoning Ordinance which
allows one public hearing before the Zoning..Roard of Adjustments an appointed citizen group
to review variances. One -other area -that the Planning and Zoning Commission covered and the
change -is reflected in your recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. There was
some. -feeling that because the area north of 4 th-Street was industrial, it would probably con-
tinue to be industrial, that the permitted uses be expanded. The Planning and Zoning Commission
asked the staff to expand those uses and basically what was done was that this area was allowed
to have all those permitted uses that were listed for the.balance.Qf.the area and, in addition
they would be allowed to have any C-4 use unconditionally allowed in the ,C-4 zone provided that
no outside storage of any type be permitted and that they meet the development standards -such
as setbacks, signs, what -have -you so there would be standards built in even though it is C-4.
At the.public.hearing it was pointed out that.after study by the.staff that the extreme north-
east.corner.that there was a triangle owned by Forrest Lumber Company that was more or less
isolated as.a retail tract in that it had -no access because of the ground separation of the
railroad and because of the railroad.track itself so it was recommended that it be dropped out.
What the. -Planning and Zoning.Commission is recommending is that the entire frontage onto 4th
Street,involving Forrest Lumber Company also be dropped out of the case and that 160 foot depth
off 4th Street be reduced to 100 feet. This basically, and the changes that are reflected, is
the recommendation of the.Planning and Zoning Commission. I'd like to personally say that I
was an ex officio, non -voting, member of the sign committee. They viewed two extreme issues on
a sign issue. I did not agree with individual opinions in all cases and was not entirely in
agreement with the committee's recommendations as a whole but do feel that as a whole it was
a reasonable compromise in view of the extreme position held on.two sides of the sign issue,
that being signs comparable to Civic Center area vs the wide open situation. I think that what
the sign committee came up with after some four weeks of study was a reasonable compromise as
could be .expected considering the views of the people and extreme positions. In light of the
ordinance as a whole, I would recommend: '(1) The sign as recommended be adopted which would
limit the sign height -to 30 feet. The 55 feet is unjustified considering the type area we are
trying to create in the Civic Center. You are going to have an area where even the utilities
are underground and that the signs themselves will be flat against the building. I think the
contrast of 55 feet pylon signs adjacent to,an area like this is only going to accentuate the
extreme size of the signs outside the Civic Center and those signs that are non -conforming have
eight years for compliance which will be well beyond the time the Civic Center is completed and
hopefully the -time that the commercial areas themselves.are completed. I recommend they expand
one use basically because trailer sales are existing in the area now. They added trailer sales
as a -permitted use. This is an attempt to keep.those existing uses from becoming non -conforming.
I think leaving them out as a permitted use would allow these uses to continue but it would
preclude any additional businesses from going in around the Civic Center. Mayor: Now say that
again Jim. This is the sign committee's recommendations? Jim: No. This is the Planning and
Zoning Commission's recommendations on additional uses. Mayor:' In other words, keep the uses
that are there. Jim: Allow the uses that were in the original ordinance but then add trailer
sales as permitted use. Mayor: You mean anywhere in that area? Jim: Anywhere in the area.
Yes sir. Mayor: Could.buy land and put another trailer sales.in? Jim:. The way it is written
now it is possible but not necessarily probable but it is possible. The other recommendation
is that triangular piece of Forrest Lumber Company would not be reasonable commercial property
in that it.is almost totally inaccessible off 4th Street. That lagicaily could be dropped out
because Forrest had the truck operation in this Lumber Company.which .is basically an industrial
fabrication process that would require individual zoning. Again he was asking that the Planning
and Zoning Commission drop this to 100' setback in order to take truck operation out of the zone
case. Instead the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended dropping the whole tract. I'd
recommend that it be left in. I do not think it would be unreasonable to reduce it to 100' but
still I do not think there could be a need to reduce it. Mayor: You do not mean to drop the
whole tract out - that is M-1"? Jim: That is M-2. So -in summary I, even on the sign issue,
changed some of my opinions to a certain extent after hearing the two sides but again I think
a committee that has studied this four weeks and made a recommendation after considerable study
that the recommendation should have been considered a.little stronger by the Planning and Zoning
Commission rather than changing them in the very late hour of the -meeting. If there are any
questions that I might not have covered that you have at this time, I would be happy to cover
them.
No one else came forward; whereupon, Mayor Turner announced.that the hearing was closed. After
consideration of all information presented, motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded
by Councilman Hollingsworth, motion carried, Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan
and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to approve Section 1 as recommended.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, motion carried,
Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to
delete Section 2 from this zone case.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Campbell to eliminate trailer
sales from Section 3. The vote was as follows: Councilwoman Jordan and Councilman Campbell
voting Yea, Mayor Turner and Councilman Hollingsworth voting Nay. This motion did not carry
due to a tie vote.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan to approve Section
3 as recommended. The vote was as follows: Councilman Hollingsworth and Councilwoman Jordan
voting Yea, Mayor Turner and Councilman Campbell voting Nay. This motion did not carry due
to a tie vote.,
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan that a section be
added to this ordinance to authorize presently located trailer sales in this area not be covered
by this ordinance and that the ones presently located may be allowed to expand at their dis-
cretion. Councilwoman Jordan withdrew her second to this motion; therefore, it was not voted
on.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth that Section 3
be approved as presented. This motion carried by the following vote: Mayor Turner and Council-
men Hollingsworth and Jordan voting Yea, Councilman Campbell voting Nay. w-_.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan, motion carried,
Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay
that Section 4 be approved as presented.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan, motion carried,
Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay
that Section 5 be approved as presented.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, motion carried,
Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay that
Section 6 be approved as presented.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan that Section 7 be approved as presented. This motion
died for want of a second.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan to eliminate free standing and canopy from Section 7.
This motion died for want of a second. ..
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Campbell that the City Attorney
draft a new Section that Will deal with bill boards. Councilman Campbell withdrew his second;
therefore, this motion was not voted on.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth that the City Council adopt Items 1 and 2 under
Sub -section C of Section 7 with wording changed to 30 feet on No. 2, This motion died for
want of a second.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth to adopt Items 4 and 5 under Sub -section C, adopt
Items 1 and 2 under Sub -section D, adopt b-section 19, under Sub -section -F, adopt Items 1,
2, and 3 and new Item 4 stating billboards shall become non -conforming for 15 years. This
motion died for want of a second.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan to approve Items
3, 4 and 5 down through "e" under Sub -section 7. The vote was as follows: Mayor Turner and
Councilman Hollingsworth voting Yea, Councilwoman Jordan and Councilman Campbell voting Nay.
This motion did not carry.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan that the City Council approve Sub -sections A through E
under Section 7 and delete Items 2 and 3 under Sub -section F. This motion died for want of a
second.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth to deny all of Section 7. This motion died for
want of a second.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan that Section 7 be approved as submitted by the Planning
and Zoning Commission with the elimination of "C-2" and "C-3" zones. This motion died for
want of a second.
At this time Jack Baker, who had excused himself from consideration of this zone case, appeared
before the City Council representing Lubbock Poster Company. Mr. Baker stated that his
company has bill boards in this area and he feels they should be allowed to remain.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan that Items 2 and 3 of Sub -section C and all of Sub-
section F be deleted except that billboards be non -conforming and be allowed. This motion
died for want of a second.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan that "a" under
Item 7-C-2 be changed to read 30 feet and that "b" be approved as stated. This motion was
amended by a motion by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Campbell to authorize the
above section to read 21 feet. The vote on the amendment to the motion was as follows:
Councilwoman Jordan and Councilman Campbell voting Yea, Mayor Turner and Councilman Hollings-
worth voting Nay. This motion failed to carry. A vote was then taken on the first motion that
under Sub -section C of Section 7 (advertising) sign type be permitted and that 30 feet signs
be allowed and a 90 foot separation be required between signs; also this motion, that on Sub-
section F Non -abatement existing billboards shall be non -conforming. This motion carried with
the vote as follows: Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan and Campbell voting Yea, Mayor Turner
voting Nay.
Motion was made by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, motion carried,
Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to
approve Section 8 as presented.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Councilwoman Jordan, motion carried,
Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay to
approve Section 9 as presented.
Motion was made by Councilman Hollingsworth, seconded by Coucilwoman Jordan, motion carried,
Mayor Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, Baker and Campbell voting Yea, none voting
Nay to pass Ordinance No. 6462 on first reading. II
ORDINANCE NO. 6462
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. 1695 AND THE OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK
SO AS TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING CHANGE ON PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE MEMORIAL CIVIC CENTER: THE !
WEST ONE-HALF OF BLOCKS 6, 22, 38, 54, 70 AND 86, ORIGINAL TOWN; LOTS 1, 2, 3, 4 AND 5, BLOCK
102, ORIGINAL TOWN; THE NORTH -ONE HALF OF BLOCKS 97, 98, 99, 100 AND 101, ORIGINAL TOWN; THE
NORTH ONE-HALF OF BLOCK 134, OVERTON ADDITION; LOTS 1, 2 AND 3, BLOCK 118, OVERTON ADDITION;
THE EAST ONE-HALF OF BLOCKS 106, 109, 113, 114 AND 117, OVERTON ADDITION; LOT 3, BLOCK 3,
ROBERTS AND McWHORTER ADDITION; LOTS A AND B, BLOCK 2, GARLAND SUBDIVISION; THE EAST 49.5 FEET
OF THE NORTH 26.0 FEET OF LOT 16, BLOCK 2, GARLAND SUBDIVISION; LOTS 1, 2, 13, 14 BLAKE'S
SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 1 OF ROBERTS & McWHORTER ADDITION; SOUTH 100' OF LOTS 1, 4, 11 and 12,
RICHMOND ADDITION; THE SOUTH 100' FEET OF LOT 14, BLOCK 8, WILLIAM TUBBS ADDITION; BLOCKS 1
AND 2, RATLIFF ADDITION; LOTS 1 AND 2, SAFEWAY ADDITION; ALL OF BLOCKS 5 AND 6, MERRITT AND
: 12
WILD ADDITION; ALL OF BLOCK 1, ORIGINAL TOWN, CITY OF LUBBOCK, LUBBOCK COUNTY, TEXAS; CHANGE ALL
OF THE ABOVE FROM THEIR PRESENT "R-P , "C-4", "M-1" OR "M-2" TO "C-4" ZONING DISTRICT: SUBJECT
TO CONDITIONS; PROVIDING A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION.
72-31-406B-971A On motion by Councilwoman Jordan, seconded by Councilman Hollingsworth, motion carried, Mayor
Turner and Councilmen Hollingsworth, Jordan, Baker and Campbell voting Yea, none voting Nay that
the following resolution be passed.
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Lubbock denied the requested
Zone Change in Zone Case No. 1840, and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to have an appeal from such denial heard; NOW THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LUBBOCK:
THAT the City Council does hereby express its desire that Zone Case No. 1840 be appealed
and directs that a copy of this Resolution be forwarded to the Secretary
Commission as an indication of its notice of appeal in addition to any otherthe writtenning noticedofoning
appeal given in its behalf.
Passed by the City Council this 27th day of September, 1972.
Isl Morris W. Turner
Mayor
ATTEST:
Is l Lavenia Lowe
City Secretary -Treasurer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
/sl Fred 0. Senter, Jr
City Attorney
NO FURTHER BUSINESS COMING UP FOR CONSIDERATION, THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED FROM REGULAR
MEETING, SEPTEMBER 27, 1972.
MORRIS W. TURNER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Lave"a Lowe, City Secretary -Treasurer
READ AND APPROVED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1972.
MORRIS W. TURNE , MAYOR
ATTEST:
Lavenia Lowe, City Sec tart' -Treasurer