• September 18, 2014

Killeen council OKs plan for single-family housing

Conditional-use permit allows home development in university, cemetery districts

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 4:30 am

The Killeen City Council narrowly approved a plan for single-family housing in the cemetery and university districts during its Tuesday regular meeting.

The conditional-use permit granted by the council will allow for single-family homes on 35 acres of property near Splawn Ranch Drive and South Fort Hood Street. The project, by W.B.W. Land Investment, shows an average lot size for home in the subdivision at 8,600 square feet with 70 feet of frontage, 25-foot front yard setbacks, 20-foot rear yard setbacks with a maximum height of two stories.

Under the conditional-use permit, homes’ exteriors also are to be composed of 90 percent stone, stucco or brick on all levels and all four sides.

Councilmen Jonathan Okray, Terry Clark and Steve Harris voted against the request for a conditional-use permit. Mayor Pro Tem Elizabeth Blackstone, Councilmen Wayne Gilmore, Jose Segarra and Juan Rivera voted in favor.

“I can’t support this particular project as it’s presented,” Clark said. “The council itself has not been involved in any of the detailed discussions. We’re planning a city, not just making a decision so we can get some more lots on the land.”

Harris attributed his vote in opposition to waiting on results from a transportation and impact fee study to come back to the city.

“I think it’s just wasting money. Why did we hire people to do (studies) and not wait for them?” he asked the body. “This is about the business of the city of Killeen and making sure that Killeen grows in the right way and is responsible. It’s responsible to me to go ahead and wait and not jump the gun.”

During the public hearing, two property owners near the proposed development and a representative from W.B.W. Land Investment spoke in favor of the development. No one spoke in opposition.

Payton Duncan, a nearby resident, said he was “very much in favor” of single-family housing in that area. His brother, Wayne Duncan, who also owns property nearby, agreed.

Point of Order

After about 35 minutes of discussion, Rivera called for a vote on the rezoning. Mayor Scott Cosper immediately asked the council to vote.

Robert’s Rules of Order — rules dictating parliamentary procedure — and city protocol require the council to vote to end discussion on an item. Only if the majority of the council agrees can members take action on the item.

Clark called a point of order regarding the vote. However, he didn’t raise his objection until the council moved on to the next agenda item.

Robert’s Rules of Order and city protocol state a council member can appeal when they believe a breach was made promptly before any further discussion or business.

City Attorney Kathy Davis said Clark was correct in finding that protocol had been violated. However, because the point of order wasn’t called promptly, it was void.

“(Rivera) asked for the vote, I looked for any other discussion very clearly before I acknowledged his request,” Cosper said. “So, therefore, I moved forward, which I would normally do anytime there were no more questions. ... I gave everybody ample time to respond whether they had a question or not, and I’m not sure that it would have changed the outcome what-soever.”

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

4 comments:

  • Alvin posted at 2:32 pm on Wed, Aug 27, 2014.

    Alvin Posts: 193

    This is a personal opinion of this writer.

    You, my lady, have hit the nail on the head. The council is comprised of Builders and Contractors. They vote in a block of 4 regardless of which way the wind blows. They will continue to build the little cheap, cookie cutter style cracker boxes until this town, and I say it is a town until people stand up and say 'enough is enough'. Why I don't know did the town n say 'enough' when the mayor and council threw $750,000.00 out of the window when Greene was fired. The town had enough gumption to recall 5 of the councilmen, one resigned following that escapade, and one was voted out. That shut the city, and the mayor down as he became powerless. Then with the new election, they started building a new base and low and behold it only took one election cycle for the3m to gain the foothold back and no they've got a 4 council member base and that is what it takes for this town to control.
    And in regard to the $750,000.00 expenditure, the existing council and mayor still have not presented a sound reason and basis for that. Shh, it's secret.
    Now how many times has the council voted for an expenditure only to hold a ballot approving before it has come to fruition. I can right off the top of my head think of 3 or 4. The latest was councilman Harris stating “I think it’s just wasting money. Why did we hire people to do (studies) and not wait for them?” Boy that is a good question.... Why does this council even bother to go thru the motions of spending money to ask for opinions and then not take the time to listen to them?
    And the show goes on on and on an on spending good money to hire consultants that have no intention of listening to because 'they have already made up their minds'.
    One of the 1 % who voted
    End of the personal opinion.

     
  • Alvin posted at 3:23 pm on Fri, Aug 15, 2014.

    Alvin Posts: 193

    This is a personal opinion of this writer.
    @ overseer,
    Yes, I remember that occasion. But you should remember, during the occasion of the recall, when everyone was so flipping mad at the city council and the mayor, the mayor was quoted as saying 'When I wake up every morning, I wake up Black' or words something to that effect'. I can't believe that was 'a slip of the tongue'. I personally feel he was trying to build support amongst black people.
    The meeting that was called by the NAACP was just another venture along the same lines. Personally I see the NAACP as an extension of the Democratic (Socialist) party. In my view, they strongly resemble Unions. They strongly represent every thing Democratic (Socialist) and always have. Yes I remember that occasion and I remember the moderator cutting off the speaker. You can only speak about what 'they want you to speak about'.
    Do you also remember one of the candidates, I won't mention his name, but this candidate, who was also recalled, made the comment, and I have to paraphrase, 'he was cognizant of what the conditions were in the vote to pay off city manager, Green', but he has not divulged 'what were the conditions or circumstances were'. I am really certain that a majority of the citizens of this town would 'still like to know'. I feel that it was just another ploy to try and get elected, and see, now he is one of the fair haired group that is sitting on the council, one of the group that 'always votes in the pack'.
    One of the 1 % who voted.
    End of personal opinion.

     
  • overseer posted at 9:04 am on Fri, Aug 15, 2014.

    overseer Posts: 45

    @ Alvin

    If my memory serves me correctly, I do remember during one of the forums leading up to this pat May's city elections, specifically NAACP, one of the mayoral candidates tried to bring up the recall but was promptly and aggressive scolded and told that the past was in the past and that he was not allowed to talk about it. I didn't know if anyone else had caught it but, the NAACP purposefully suppressed the comments of a candidate that were directly related to the integrity of candidates. The NAACP, to me, showed a bias that evening. Does our local NAACP support old Killeen?

     
  • Alvin posted at 1:07 pm on Thu, Aug 14, 2014.

    Alvin Posts: 193

    This is a personal opinion of this writer.
    Well I see the lines have been drawn between the residentialist, housing construction, and the rest of us, 4.5 to 2.5. This town accompanied 'nothing' in the attempt to recall the city council. We now have 2 of the individuals who were recalled for past dubious dealings and 2.5 individuals who constantly vote with the party.
    In the most recent dealings, one individual, made the statement, Copy: “I can’t support this particular project as it’s presented,” Clark said. “The council itself has not been involved in any of the detailed discussions. We’re planning a city, not just making a decision so we can get some more lots on the land.”. End of copy.
    Another individual was quoted as saying, Copy: “I think it’s just wasting money. Why did we hire people to do (studies) and not wait for them?” he asked the body. “This is about the business of the city of Killeen and making sure that Killeen grows in the right way and is responsible. It’s responsible to me to go ahead and wait and not jump the gun.”. End of copy.
    Makes good common sense to me... Why do we waste taxpayers money if we do not want to wait for an answer as to what is going to be said???

    As to the call for a vote;
    Copy: 'After about 35 minutes of discussion, Rivera called for a vote on the rezoning. Mayor Scott Cosper immediately asked the council to vote.
    Or;
    “(Rivera) asked for the vote, I looked for any other discussion very clearly before I acknowledged his request,” Cosper said. “So, therefore, I moved forward, which I would normally do anytime there were no more questions. ... I gave everybody ample time to respond whether they had a question or not, and I’m not sure that it would have changed the outcome what-soever.”. End of copy. Now which one is it???
    As I said, I personally believe the vote to recall, as it stands now, was a waste of time.
    One o the 1 % who voted.
    End of personal opinion.