Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Deer Park council adopts ordinance to rezone 22.9-acre Red Bluff Road tract to M‑1 industrial
Summary
After a joint hearing with the Planning & Zoning Commission, the Deer Park City Council adopted an amendment to Ordinance No. 3886 to rezone a 22.9-acre tract on Red Bluff Road from Highway Service to M‑1 Industrial; the applicant said three projects could bring about $300,000 in tax revenue and jobs. No public opposition was recorded.
The Deer Park City Council voted unanimously on June 16 to amend Ordinance No. 3886 and rezone a 22.9‑acre tract of undeveloped land on Red Bluff Road from Highway Service to M‑1 Industrial.
At a joint public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission, applicant Ryan Taylor, representing E and S Construction, told the council the parcel is outside the floodplain, lies in an Opportunity Zone and is suited for office‑warehouse development and a storage yard. "We think the highest and best use is for office warehouse with storage yard," Taylor said, adding the group expects three projects could generate approximately $300,000 in tax revenue for Deer Park.
The city read the legal public notice before taking public comment; no members of the public spoke for or against the rezoning. On the results of the joint hearing, Councilman Garrison moved to approve the ordinance amendment and Councilman Haid seconded. Mayor Jerry Mouton called the vote and announced the motion carried.
Why it matters: The rezoning allows industrial‑park uses on the 22.9‑acre tract (addresses in the public notice include 5151, 5301 and 5401 Red Bluff Road), which the applicant and supporters say could spur local economic development and job creation. The ordinance text as adopted also retains a civil penalty provision referenced in the draft, including fines up to $2,000 for violations described in the ordinance.
Council documents and the Planning & Zoning Commission's preliminary recommendation were made available for inspection, and the council did not modify the ordinance on the record. The matter will proceed under the city's usual permitting and site‑plan review processes.
