Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 01/13/2016 i MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI j City Hall Council Chambers, 1201 Leopard Street January 13, 2016 5:30 P.M. Daniel McGinn, Interim Director COMMISSIONERS: Development Services Philip Ramirez, Chairman* Julio Dimas, Assistant Director Eric Villarreal, Vice Chairman Development Services Jeremy R. Baugh Annika Gunning Yankee, Senior Project i Fred Braselton* Planner Jonas Chupe* Julian Grant, Senior Assistant City 1 Carl Crull Attorney Heidi Hovda Dolores Woods, Project Manager Mike Lippincott Catherine Contreras, Recording Marsha Williams Secretary Linda Williams, Recording Secretary *Absent t f STAFF: 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 5:32 pm by Vice Chairman Eric Villarreal. 11. ABSENCES 1 Philip Ramirez, Chairman Fred Braselton Jonas Chupe Ill. APPROVAL OF MINUTES # J 1. Regular Meeting of December 16, 2015 Motion to approve Item 1,"the December 16, 2015 minutes was made by Commissioner Crull and seconded by Commissioner Baugh. Motion passed with Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners Braselton and Chupe absent. r t IV. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action A. PLATS f New Plats J Julio Dimas, Development Services, read New Plats Items"°2" and °3S' into record as shown 1 below. Mr. Dimas stated the plats satisfied all requirements of the Unified Development Code (UDC) and State Law and the Technical Review Committee recommends approval. J 2. 0815111-P025 (15-22000030) IGLESIAS INDUSTRIAL PARK(FINAL— 17.777 ACRES) 1 Located south of Leopard Street and west of Rhew Road. 3. 1115158-NP123 (15-21000048) j BRIGHTON VILLAGE UNIT 2, BLOCK 14, LOTS 4& 5 (FINAL REPLAT—8.1967 l ACRES Located west of Airline Road and south of Saratoga Boulevard (SH 357). l I Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2U1G Page |V. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action A. PLATS New Plats— Items "2 and "3" (cont.) After Staff's presentation, the floor was opened for comments and discussion bycommissioners. There being none, the public hearing was opened with nmone coming forward and the public hearing was closed. Vice Chairman Villarreal called for amotion. Motion b/ approve New Plats Items °2and ~3" was made byCommissioner Baugh and seconded byCommissioner Williams. Motion passed with Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners Bnmsm|tonand Chupeabsent. Time Extensions Mr. Dimas read Time Extensions Item °4^ into record as shown below. Mr. Dimas stated Item ^4" was originally approved on November 20, 2013. The applicant is requesting m twenty-four month time extension tocomplete construction ofPhase 1 of the apartment project and begin construction onPhase 2. Mr. Dimas stated this iothe first time extension request for this project and Staff recommends approval. 4. 1013153-NP102 (13-20000018) SOUTHLAKE APARTMENTS UNIT 1 (PRELIMINARY—42.59 ACRES) Located south of Rodd Field Road between Brooke Road and Slough Road. After Staff's presentation, the floor was opened for comments and discussion by commissioners. There being none, the public hearing was opened with no one coming forward and the public hearing was closed. Vice Chairman Villarreal called for motion. Motion to approve Time Extensions Item "4~ for a twenty-four month time extension was made by Commissioner Baugh and seconded by Commissioner Cru||. Motion passed with Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners Braselton and Chupe absent. Mr. Dimas read Time Extensions Item "5~ into record aeshown below. Mr. Dimas stated Item ~5" was originally approved on November 19. 2O14and was approved for msix-month time extension on June 3, 2015. The applicant is requesting a six-month time extension toallow additional time toobtain needed signatures tnfinalize and record the plat. Mr. Dimas stated this in the second time extension request for this project and Staff recommends approval. 5. 0914123-P026(14-22000025) GATES ESTATE TRACT, BLOCK 1, LOT 1 (FINAL—3.076 ACRES) Located north VfOcean Drive and east ofKush Lane. After Staff's pnementgtiwn, the floor was opened for comments and discussion by commissioners. There being none, the public hearing was opened with no one coming forward and the public hearing was closed. Vico Chairman Villarreal called for a motion. Motion to approve Time Extensions Item ''5~ for a six-month time extension was made by Commissioner Lippincott and seconded by Commissioner Baugh. Motion passed with Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners Brase|tonand Chupe absent. B. ZONING New Zoning Annika Yankae, Development Services, addressed the commission. K8m. Yankee read New Zoning Item "6^ into record as shown below. W1a. Yankee stated the subject property is located within the boundaries Vfthe Westside Area Development Plan and is planned for Research/Business Park uses. Research/Business Park uses include commercial uses in addition to some light industrial uses. K4m. Yankee continued the proposed change of zoning to "CG-2^ General Commercial District is consistent with the adopted Future Land Use Plan and the Westside Area Development Plan. Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2O18 Page IV. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning—Item '^5" (cmnt.) G. Case No. 01Y6~01 ~Mint Business Professionals, LLC: Achange cfzoning from the "IL" Light Industrial District to the "CG-2" General Commercial District. Property is described as Lot 61, Block 3, 100 South Padre, located on the southwest corner ofEnbarphzeParkway and Opportunity Drive. Ms. Yankee presented several aerial views of the property and stated the purpose of the change nfzoning iatVallow development ufahotel. Ms. Yankee continued the subject property implatted and vacant and can accommodate the allowed uses in the "CG-2" General Commercial District. Ms. Yankee continued six (G) notices were mailed to property owners within the notification area, eight (8) notices were mailed outside the notification area and no notices were returned. KXe. Yankee stated Staff recommends approval of the change of zoning from the ''|L^ Light Industrial District to the "CG-2^ General Commercial District. After Staff's presentation concluded, the floor was opened for comments and discussion by commissioners. Commissioner Hovda asked about the maintenance plan for the street with regard to potholes. K8g. Yankee stated she did not know the priority statue of the street on the reconstruction list. K8e. Yankee continued streets with potholes that have to be reconstructed would have to make it onthe list and prioritized amongst the other city streets. Mr. McGinn stated staff and the street committee are going through the existing lists to come up with o ranking system. Commissioner H0vdm stated the ranking system does exist and that is how the maintenance fee is assessed. Commissioner Hovdo asked if any of this information is taken into consideration when an applicant approaches submits their proposal. K8e. Yankee stated it does not come up as a part ofDevelopment Services and permitting tVfix the street unless it is a very large project that creates 501 peak hours triggering other improvements needed to the traffic system. After all comments and discussion concluded by commissioners, the public hearing was opened with no one coming forward and the public hearing was closed. Vice Chairman ViUmrnao| called for u motion. Motion to approve the change of zoning from the °|L" Light Industrial District to the "CG-2" General Commercial District was made by Commissioner Lippincott and seconded by Commissioner Hovda. Motion passed with Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners B/ase|tmnand Chupe absent. Ms. Yankee read New Zoning Item "y'' into record as shown below. Me. Yankee stated the subject property is located within the boundaries of the Central Business Area Development Plan and is planned for pnzhamoimno| office uses. The proposed rezoning to the ~RS-4.5" Single Family 4.5 District is not consistent with the adopted Future [and Use Plan map but the concept of adding housing to the area is consistent with the Central Business Area Development Plan. 7. Case No. ¢116-W2~City pfCorpus Christi: Achange ofzoning from the^|H" Heavy Industrial District to the "RS-4.5" Single-Family 4.5 District, resulting in a ohem@e to the Future Land Use Map from professional office to low density residential Lises. Property is described as Lot 5A, Block 4, Brennan Addition, located on the north side of Lipan Street between Coke Street and 1 gth Street. Ms. Yankee presented several aerial views of the property and stated the purpose of the change of zoning is to allow construction of three(3) single-family dwellings. Ms. Yankee stated the project is part Vfthe City's initiative tocreate affordable housing and infill development. Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13,2016 Page PV. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning—Item ^^7" (cont.) K4o. Yankee mbabsd at a minimum. the Unified Development Code would allow the property to be nep|atted into three |cdg with a minimum lot size of 4,500 square feet and a 2O-hootwide front yard setback and mfive-foot side and rear yard setbacks. K4a. Yankee stated forty-four (44) notices were mailed to property owners within the notification area, three (3) outside the notification area, one (1) notice returned infavor and two (2) notices returned in opposition. K4m. Yankee stated Staff recommends approval of the change nfzoning from the "|H" Heavy Industrial District to the "IRS-4.5" Single-Family 4.5 District. After Staff's presentation concluded, Vice Chairman Villarreal opened the floor for comments and discussion by commissioners. Commissioner Williams asked if the City owned the property and Ms. Yankee stated yes. Commissioner Hovdu asked why the owners were opposed and Ms. Yankee mtobad one (1) requested street improvements and the other cited increase in property taxes every year, Commissioner Hovdo asked ifthere was someone interested in developing this property and K4m. Yankee stated she did not know, but the property has to be rezoned before it can be sold. Mr. Dimas stated at this time, there is no interest and part of the reasoning process is it will be put on the market as a pad of the Infill Housing Incentive Program. Julian Gnant, Senior Assistant City Attorney, stated City Council has approved this pilot program. After all comments and discussion concluded by commissioners, Vice Chairman Villarreal opened the public hearing. Warren Andrich, 4825 Everhart Road, addressed the commission. Mr. Andrich stated heCothe 2016 President for Habitat for Humanity and is speaking on behalf of the organization. Mr. Andrich continued they are not opposed to the rezoning and will be petitioning their board to request the City to donate the property to them once it is approved. Mr. Andrich stated Habitat for Humanity would use the property toeither build ahome or possibly expand their footprint since they have the RE-Store across the street. Mr. Andrich asked what the dimensions were for the property and K8a. Yankee stated the lot dimensions are 15Ofeet byA6feet deep. Commissioner Lippincott stated if the zoning was changed to a ^F(S-4.5^ Dimtriot, a house would have to be placed on the property. Commissioner Lippincott continued if someone obtains the property and wants to do something different, they will have to rezone the property to accommodate the proposed use. Commissioner Hovda asked if the property had to be rezoned residential to be part of the City's infield incentive and K4m. Yankee stated yes ha house was to be constructed. Commissioner Williams stated with the lot dimensions, Habitat could build three (3) houses at that location. Commissioner Lippincott stated unless someone has another use other than residential, the property will have to be rezoned. Mr. McGinn stated the property is currently designated as multi- family in the Lund Use Plan and is zoned ~|W~ Heavy Industrial and the area should be zoned for residential uses. After all comments and discussion concluded, the public hearing was closed. Vice Chairman Villarreal called for a motion. Motion to approve the change of zoning from the ^|H" Heavy Industrial District to the "RS-4.5" Single Family 4.5 District was made by Commissioner Hovda and seconded by Commissioner Williams. Motion passed with Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners Brase|ton and Chupe absent. Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2U18 Page I#. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning Dolores VVoods, Development Services, addressed the commission. K4e. Woods read New Zoning Item "8" into record as shown below. Ms. Woods stated the subject property islocated within the boundaries of the Northwest Area Development Plan and is planned for commercial uses. The proposed rezoning to the "|L^ Light Industrial District is not consistent with the adopted Future Land Use K4mp or the Northwest Area Development Plan with respect to land use. @. Case No. 0116-03- Fantozzi, Ltd.: Applicant has petitioned the City of Corpus Christi to consider change of zoning from the"CG-2" General Commercial District to the"IL" Light Industrial District, resulting in a change tothe Futuna Land Use Map from commercial to light industrial uses. Property is described as Lot 4, Block 1, Wal-Mart Subdivision, located on the north side mfLeopard Street between Violet Road and Hart Road. W1a. Woods presented several aerial views of the property and stated the purpose of the zoning change is due tothe fact that interest in leasing the property has been limited to light industrial and warehouse businesses. Ma. Woods stated nine (Q) notices were mailed to property owners within the notification area, three (3) notices were mailed outside the notification area and one (1) notice was returned in favor. &1a. Woods stated Staff recommends denial of the change of zoning to the "IL" Light Industrial District, and in lieu thereof, approval of the "CG-2/SP" General Commercial District with e Special Permit for limited industrial uses, subject toa site plan and nine(9) conditions. After Staff's presentation concluded, Vice Chairman Villarreal opened the floor for comments and discussion bvcommissioners. Commissioner Hovdaasked who ensures that the special permit conditions are in compliance and being maintained. Ms. VVmodm obahad, at a minimum, a certificate of occupancy would be required to occupy the building which would prompt m review of the special permit to make sure the conditions are met. K4o. Woods continued thereafter it would be a matter for Code Enforcement to follow up. Commissioner Hovdm stated there seems not to be a mechanism in place that ensures the tenant maintains compliance with the conditions. Mr. McGinn stated some sites may have been constructed before some of the regulations were met in place and were grandfathered in. &1r. McGinn continued to ensure compliance, Code Enforcement staff would go on m site visit and based on the outcome, they would determine if citation would be given. If citation was issued, adequate time will be given tobring everything into compliance. Commissioner Cru|| asked if the applicant has a particular use in mind or is he just trying to broaden the potential uses for the property and Ms. Woods stated to her knowledge, he does not have a specific use atthis time, but the applicant expressed that the great interest was coming from uses or users that were not allowed in o CG-2 District. After all comments and discussion concluded by commissioners, Vice Chairman Villarreal opened the public hearing. There being none, the public hearing was closed. Vice Chairman Villarreal called for motion. Motion to deny the change ufzoning from the "CG- 2" General Commercial District, and in lieu theremf, approve the "CG-2/SP" General Commercial District with e Special Permit for limited industrial uses, subject to a site plan and nine (Q) conditions was made by Commissioner Lippincott and seconded by Commissioner CruU. Motion passed with Chairman Rmminez, Commissioners Bramekon and Chupe absent. Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2O1O Page K/. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS— Discussion and Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning K4a. Woods read New Zoning Item ^A" into record as shown below. K4o. VVqoda stated the subject property ialocated within the boundaries ofthe Southeast Area Development Plan and implanned for public/semi-public and low density residential uses. The proposed rezoning to the "RS-6/1PUD" Single- Family 6 District with a Planned Unit Development Overlay is consistent with the adopted Future Land Use Plan and the Southeast Area Development Plan. 9. Case No. 0116~04 ~ Diocese of Corpus Christi: Applicant has petitioned the City of Corpus Christi to consider change ofzoning from the "RS-G^ Single-Family 6 District to the "RS-6/PUD" Single-Family 0 District with m Planned Unit Development Overlay, not resulting in a change to the Future Land Use Map. Property is described as being a 3.41 acre tract out of Lot 1, South Shore Place and Lot 20. Ocean View Estates, located on the west side of Ocean View Place between Sante FeStreet and Ocean Drive. Ms. Woods presented several aerial views of the property and stated the purpose of the change of zoning is to allow construction of gated single-family development with a Planned Unit Development Overlay (PUD). The PUO document submitted for review and approval proposes thirteen (13) single- family lots. The proposed development also includes three lots reserved for landscaped common areas. The common areae are proposed to be maintained by a Home Owners' Association. Ms. Woods continued the subject property is comprised of 3.41 acres and will be platted subsequent toapproval of the change cf zoning inaccordance with the PUD Master Site Plan. Ms. Woods stated thirty-eight (38) notices were mailed to property owners within the notification area, four (4) were mailed outside the notification area, one (1) notice was returned in favor and 30.6 percent of the homeowners are in opposition to the requested change of zoning comprising of thirteen (13) landowners. [Ws. VVoVdm stated Staff recommends approval of the change of zoning to the "RS- 6/PUD" Single-Family O District with a Manned Unit Development Overlay, subject to nine (9)conditions. After Staff's presentation concluded, Vice Chairman Villarreal opened the floor for comments and discussion by commissioners. Commissioner CruU stated that on the 3.41 acres, approximately twenty (20) units can be placed on the property. Commissioner CruU asked if the PUD process included approval of the proposed site plan that would limit it to the thirteen (13) |oby. Ms. Woods stated yes, the site plan and PUD document becomes part of the ordinance that will ultimately be approved. Commissioner Williams asked what would the open space lots be used for and K4m. Woods abahsd the open space would be used for a common area with benches. Commission Williams asked if the gate would be controlled ore guard gate and Mm. Woods obahsd she believes it will be a controlled gate. Mr. Dimas reminded commissioners that the applicant's representative was in the audience and is available to answer any questions they might have. After all comments and discussion concluded by commissioners, Vice Chairman Villarreal opened the public hearing. Gn*Q Seagrave, employee of the Diocese and also representative for Bishop K4u|vey, addressed the commission. Mr. Seagrave stated he isvery interested in this project and will also be a neighbor to it. Mr. Seagrave continued the Bishop held a meeting with neighbors of the community to discuss the proposed plans for the property. Mr. Seagrave stated the property has been in ownership of the Diocese since 1951. and onseveral occasions, the Bishop was approached by individuals looking tndownsize their current homes and would like to see the property developed into a cluster ofupscale garden-type homes. Mr. Seagrave continued the Bishop discussed the proposal with his financial council, after which hehired local architect, Johnny Cotten and Naismith Engineering toreview the proposal and develop the design. Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2U1G Page IV. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning—Item "9" (cont.) Jacob BoU, 240 Ocean View Place, addressed the commission. Mr. Boll ahabad his mppoaifionto the change of zoning is because the proposal to have a gated neighborhood is not within the characteristics of the current neighborhood. Mr. BV|| continued there are no other gated communities on any nfthe other cul-de-sacs. Mr. Boll stated it is denser than the surrounding properties where the average lot size in 14.800 square feet and the proposed dwellings are all approximately 2,000 to 3,508 square feet. Mr. Boll continued he understands they are making mitigations within the gated community with having open space |otm, but most of the lots any facing inward for benefit of the gated community ' and not for the surrounding community. Mr. Boll stated he was not opposed to developing the property, but he would like it to be developed as it is currently zoned. Mr. Boll continued he is concerned about ba�tand switch with the change ofzoning. Patti K4una|es, 4101 Ocean Qrive, addressed the commission, yWa. Morales stated she is partially opposed. K8e. K4ona|em asking Commissioner CruU what was the acreage he previously questioned. Commissioner Cru|| stated at QUOO square feet per lot grosses out to about twenty-four (24) |wts, discounting for streets, vvuu|d result in about eighteen (18) to twenty (20) lots. yWm. Morales stated her concern is that the lots would be pecked tight and it would be inconsistent with the meiQhborhoVd. Ms. Morales continued that after hearing Mr. Seagrmve'm reference to upscale garden homes allayed her concern a little, but not completely. N1m. Morales stated she would like to see a mock-up of the proposal to see what the look ofthe area would be. K4m. Morales continued the entrance off ofOcean View is very narrow and there is usually a lot of on-street parking from the residents living on Ocean View. Ms. yNnra|ee stated she is curious to see how the street will be able to support the extra traffic with the additional thirteen (13) homes. Jenad Jimenez, 5330VVondagote Drive, addressed the commission. Mr. Jimenez stated he has lived in the neighborhood for sixty-one (61) years. Mr. Jimenez continued he likes the concept of the proposal, but hedoes not like it dumping onto Ocean View. Mr. Jimenez stated it's an older community with a lot of young families moving into the area. Mr. Jimenez voiced concern about the flooding /since there are two (2) drainage ditches on Ocean View that flood and hold water consistently for two to three weeks. Mr. Jimenez stated he was also concerned about where the flood water will go once the subdivision is built up. Mr. Jimenez questioned if the water could be dumped out on C}oman Drive instead mfOcean View. Mr. Jimenez stated he was also concerned about increased traffic. Mr. Jimenez asked if there were deed restrictions on the land since it was given to the Diocese. Vice Chairman Villarreal asked staff to address the drainage review and process. Mr. Dimas stated that subdividing this property into multiple lots is the next etep, followed by the Diocese's team submitting construction plans for the public improvements associated with platting ofthe property. Mr. Dimas continued that atthat point, Staff would review all of those items, including the infrastructure for drainage, traffic impact, etc. Mr. Dimas stated after these items are addressed, then the actual building of the homes will take place. Vice Chmlrman Villarreal asked about the deed restrictions and Mr. Dimas stated the City does not enforce deed restrictions. Michael W1anbc. Deacon for the DiVceme, stated there are no deed restrictions associated with the property and the deed states single-family dwellings have to be built on the property Paul Dnaer, 209 Do|phin, addressed the commission. Mr. Drserotated he is concerned about the gated community, in that it is not the kind of signal the homeowners want in a neighborhood that joins on existing neighborhood. Mr. Ormer stated he is in favor of the general concept, but he is concerned about the differential impact of some of the neighbors particularly the ones adjoining the lots just inside the gate. Mr. Dreerconhnuad there are two (2) residential homes located there now, one facing Dolphin and one facing Ocean View. Mr. (}rmer stated it is proposed to have five (5) or six (0) lots located adjacent to the aide yards of the two existing homes and he was concerned with the density and would like to see some type of mitigation of that problem. Mr. [}rmer continued he would also like any reference to a gated community to be deleted from the proposal and see it in writing that it shall not be. Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2018 Page K/. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning—Item ^'9" (cont.) K4ankSaaVrest. 201 Ocean View Place, addressed the commission. Mr. Seagneotstabed he is in favor of the proposal, but he is concerned with the entry ways. Mr. Saagnaot continued he is opposed to the gated community because it closes him off and does not raise the value of his home. Mr. Seagrest stated he appreciates the growth to his community. Vice Chairman Villarreal stated that access off of Ocean View has come up over and over again and Staff was asked how was it reviewed, how it is moving forward or any other options and how vve come about to this plan. Mr. Dimas stated when it comes to traffic issues, they look at the streets that are already there to sem if the streets are capable to hoAd the volume being proposed. Mr. [}imam continued there is also u criteria in place if the proposed rezoning is going to be different Mr. Dimas stated if the project meets certain criterio, then a full blown traffic impact analysis isrequired. All these things were looked at and none were required because of the low density. The density that is being proposed does not have a significant impact on the streets that are there already. Ms. Yankee stated that the Technical Review Committee reviewed the driveway and asked the developer tomake stacking space available infront ufthe gate. Eileen and Jim Trammel, 225 C}coen View Place, addressed the commission. Ms. Trammel stated her concerns are the density and the narrowness of the street. K4m. Trammel continued in order for the homes toheworthy of$4DD,O0O, they will have tobmvertical homes, none ofthe rest Vfthe properties are 2-story, none of the properties on Ocean Drive are 2-story. This is going to be m vertical comnmunity, which will be gated and will not be consistent with the surrounding properties. Mr. Trammel stated he felt there was nothing he could say that would make a difference in the outcome of this zoning case; therefore he felt he would be wasting his time. Vice Chairman Villarreal stated the commission takes into account Staffs recommendation and public information in making a decision. Arnold Gonzales, 110 Ocean View Place, addressed the commission. Mr. Gonzales stated he is concerned about the traffic from Ocean View onto Ocean Drive. Mr. Gonzalez continued atthe end mfthe work doy, there is constant traffic; there is noway the City is going to expand that street, there is no way to expand Ocean View to make it wider. Mr. Gonzales stated that Ocean View is a narrow street with potholes and ugly sidewalks and heioconcerned that with the proposal, the density would bedoubled for that area. Maria and KAonue| Sm|os' 235 Ocean View Place, addressed the commission. Ms. Sa|asstated she is also worried about traffic and she has a young granddaughter that plays outside in the front yard. yWe. Salam continued she is very concerned that the outlet or inlet is directly outside of her property and her neighbor has several cars parked outside. Ms. Sa|amstated she and her husband are inopposition to the change ofzoning. Sarah Medina, 341 Ocean View Place, addressed the commission. Ms. Medina stated she is concerned about the traffic and drainage issues. Mm. Medina continued she and her5annh are opposed and will move out ofthe neighborhood ifitimapproved. Chris Bullion, 221 Ocean View Place, addressed the commission. Mr. Bullion stated he and his vviha are also concerned about the water issues and traffic. Mr. Bullion continued he would like h» have the entrance togoonto Ocean Drive. Mr. Bullion stated heand his wife are inopposition ofthe change nf zoning. Vice Chairman Villarreal asked the architect for project to come forward and address the questions from the community. Johnny Cotten, 8206 Sem Shone Drive, addressed the commission. Mr. Cotten stated that hemet with Raymond Chong, City Traffic Engineer. Mr. Cotton continued Mr. Chong Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2O18 Page R/. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA |TEKAS—D|scussionand Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning—Item "9" (cont.) thoroughly reviewed the proposal and he was asked ifthe entrance toOcean Drive could bechanged and Mr. Chong stated no. Mr. Cotten continued that Mr. Chong explained that Ocean Drive has a40-mi|e hour speed and currently has too many driveways. To add another driveway would be a dangerous situation and according to Mr. Chong, it would be too close tothe existing driveways. Mr. Cotten stated that Naismith Engineering reviewed the drainage situation. Mr. Cotten continued there was unissue and difficulty inthe storm drainage but itwill be resolved. Deacon Mantz, 620 Lipon Street, addressed the commission. Deacon Mantcaeked Mr. Cotten to address the vertical homes. Mr. Cotten stated this is o downsizing community and there will be some restrictions on some of the lots that they can only be e single story. Mr. Cotten continued the single-story homes will bethe ones that backup tothe prayer gardens and the rest ofthe homes can behwn-o{nry. Ade|a Garcia, 240 Ocean View P|ace, addressed the commission, Ms. Garcia stated she is opposed. Ms. Garcia continued that when they met at the Bishop's home, one of the arguments ofone of the potential buyers was that hewanted agated community because offear ofhis neighbors. Ms. Garcia continued they vvou|W be his neighbors. W1m. Garcia stated she like the green space and there is opportunity for the community to come together. After all comments and discussion concluded, Vice Chairman Villarreal closed the public hearing. Commissioner Baugh stated that the commission was arecommending body toCity Council and regardless of the outcome of the vote, the recommendation will be submitted to City Council forhna| action. Commissioner Hovdo asked Staff' according towhat Mr. Cotten stated about traffic engineering, if there was o possibility ofmaking this entrance from Dmson Drive and K8m. Yankee stated she could not absolutely say there was noway, Ms. Yankee continued there are different configurations she could think of, but she did not know how they would impact the Bishop's property. Commissioner Hovda asked if the developer would consider not making it a gated community and Ms. Yankee stated she would have toask the applicant. Commissioner Hovda asked ifthe applicant could answer her question and Vice Chairman abahmd he vvVu/d have to defer to Legal Staff. Julian Grant' Senior Assistant City Attorney, stated for the applicant to answer the question, the public hearing had to be reopened. Vice Chairman Villarreal asked commissioners if that was something they wanted addressed and Commissioner Lippincott stated the commission was here to appruve, not necessarily n gated community versus a non-gated community' but to approve the rezoning. Commissioner Hovda asked if the gated community was part of the PUD and Vice Chairman Villarreal asked Staff if the Qab* was part of PUD. Ms. Yankee stated the gate was not one of Staffs conditions, but it is what the included intheir PUD document. Vice Chairman Villarreal stated that because agate ieshown onthe plan does that have to be followed as a part of the PUD and Mr. K8o(S|nn stated if it is not o condition then it would not have to be. Commissioner Hovda stated she would like to make o motion to reopen public hearing and Vice Chairman Villarreal stated he would like to go back to Commissioner Lippincmthy statement that the gate is nota part of the special conditions. K4a. Yankee stated this is a private street and itwill not begCity maintained street. The option tVgate ocommunity exists inany neighborhood in Corpus Christi that has private streets regardless of PUD. Commissioner Williams stated if it is a PUD, the streets can be made smaller, but if it is not a PUD, it would be a public street which would be much wider and it would affect the entire subdivision. K4m. Yankee stated there is o different way ofgetting variances to street widths which is a waiver through the Planning Commission. Ms. Yankee continued the reason this is PUD is because there are|other zoning regulations "RS-6" District zoning standards that are being deviated from in addition to the street. Both variances were combined into the PUD. Commissioner Williams asked if it wasn't gated could you Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13.2O1S Page 10 |V. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS—Discussion and Possible Action B. ZONING New Zoning— Item '^9" <cnnL\ ehU make the same variances to leave the whole thing just like K is and K4m. Yankee mbshsd yes, the has no play in the street design. Mr. Dimas asked Commissioner Williams if he could ask the question a little differently. Mr. Dimas asked Commissioner Williams if her question was if the commission can approve this item without a PUD the way it is designed and Commissioner Williams stated yes, Mr. Dimas stated the answer was no because there are other things to be considered other than the street and the gate. lot size, etc. Mr. Dimas continued that Staff would have recommended a variance if it had been an option. Commissioner Williams asked if removing the gate was an option and Mr. Dimas stated they can remove the gate since it is not n requirement of this specific PUD. Commissioner CruU stated it can still be a private street,just with no gate. Commissioner Baugh stated if the zoning was already ~FlS-8.'^ it is already setup for 6.00O square foot lots; the PUD reduces it to 5'000 square foot lots. Vice Chairman Villarreal stated to make it clear to Commissioner Cru||'s initial commont, the property is already zoned as "RS-6^ and, without the PUD, it will remain as 6,000 square feet and they can probably create fifteen (15) to eighteen (18) lots. K4m. Yankee afabad the lots range from 5.200 to 6.000 square heed in the proposed subdivision. Ms. Yankee reiterated that the PUD has to be developed as it is shown today and it cannot deviate from that plan. K4m. Yankee continued that the "RS-6" District, when you count for roads, will get you fourteen (14) dwelling units, approximately four(4) units per more. Commissioner Hovdm asked if the property remained in its current "RS-6" zoning, would it have to comply with everything on the plan and it would not be e private street. K80. Yankee stated it would have to comply with all the zoning standards, but the street could still be private and the applicant could still request avariance bmthe street design. Commissioner Hovda stated the more she heard from the community, she realized this really does materially change the way they live their |ihm and she knows the commission is here to make decisions on zonin8, but she realizes the commission has the authority and the right to exercise discretion on what makes sense, Commissioner Lippincott asked Ms. Yankee to clarify if the applicant deviated rmm the PUD whatsoever and decided to change the enbance, vvVuN that change the layout of the PUD and Ms. Yankee stated that scenario would have a significant impact onthe configuration ofthose lots and the applicant would need to redesign it. Commissioner Lippincott asked if there is no way to amend it; if they decide they want to pursue the alternate entrance, would the applicant have to come back to this board or could it Osd an amendment or modification to what was already approved. K8m. Yankee stated any significant modification would have to come back to the commission for the same process that we are going through today after it was approved by City Council. Commissioner Williams stated it was mentioned they were only allowing two stories and asked which lots would be limited to one story and Mr. Seagrave indicated the five (5) lots on the site plan. After further comments and discussion concluded by commissioners, Vice Chairman Villarreal explained that asCommissioner Baugh previously stated, the commission is a recommending body and the action taken at tonight's meeting will be forwarded to City Council, who has the ultimate authority to make the final decision. Vice Chairman Villarreal called for a motion. Motion to approve a change of zoning from the "RS-6" Single-Family 0 District to the "RS-6/PUD" Single-Family 6 District with a Planned Unit Development Overlay was made by Commissioner Baugh and seconded by Commissioner CruU. Vice Chairman Villarreal requested uroll call vote. Motion passed with Commissioners Baugh, Cruil, Lippincott and Vice Chairman Villarreal voting yes, Commissioners Hovda and Williams voting no and Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners Bmxgehunand Chupe absent. Planning Commission Regular Meeting January 13, 2016 Page 11 V. AMENDING THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE BY REVISING SUBSECTIONS 1.11.3 DEFINED TERMS, TABLE 4.3.2 PERMITTED USES, 4.3.3 AND 4.4.3 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, TABLE 4.3.4 HOUSING TYPES, 5.1.2.1 HOUSEHOLD LIVING, 6.2.11 SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR RESTAURANTS, 5.5.3.E.6 SETBACKS FOR WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES, 7.5.3.A.1 SINGLE TENANT FREESTANDING SIGN, 7.5.3.C.1 MULTI-TENANT FREESTANDING SIGN, 7.5.27.13.110 DEFINITION OF LEGIBLE, 8.2.11.13.3 STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS, TABLE 8.2.11.13 LOCAL STREET STANDARDS, TABLE 8.2.1.0 NON-LOCAL STREET STANDARDS AND TABLE 8.11.11.1) RURAL STREET STREETS Ms. Yankee gave a brief power point presentation on the proposed changes to the Unified Development Code (UDC). Ms. Yankee stated as part of the continued improvement to address the city's development needs Staff has presented several text amendments that have been approved by the Planning Commission and City Council since the adoption of the UDC. Ms. Yankee continued today, Staff is proposing the new text amendments.After Staff's presentation, the floor was opened for comments and discussion by commissioners. There being none, the public hearing was opened with no one coming forward and the public hearing was closed. Vice Chairman Villarreal called for a motion. Motion to approve the Text Amendments to the UDC as presented by Staff with noted corrections was made by Commissioner Crull and seconded by Commissioner Lippincott. Motion passed with Chairman Ramirez, Commissioners Braselton and Chupe absent. V1. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. McGinn, addressed the commission and introduced himself and stated he is serving as the Interim Director of Development Services. Mr. Dimas introduced Renissa Montalvo, new Senior City Planner and also Catherine Contreras, who will be replacing Linda Williams, who is retiring. Mr. Dimas continued that on Thursday, January 14, 2016, from 2 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the American Bank Center, FEMA presentations will be given and at the January 27, 2016 Planning Commission meeting, the final presentation will be given on the FEMA Maps. Mr. Dimas informed commissioners that the Planning Commission future meetings will be televised like City Council meetings currently are. Mr. Dimas stated that a trail run will be done at the January 27, 2016 meeting and the live televised version will start at the February 10, 2016 meeting. VII. ITEMS TO BE SCHEDULED ON THE NEXT AGENDA None Vill. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. fw �4 C Daniel McGinn, AICP, Interim Director Date tk C ntreras rine 0 1"fnent Da Development Services Department DZelopment Services D ) e Secretary to Planning Commission Reco ding Secretary (K:DEVSVCS\SHARED\PCOMMISSION2016\2016AGENDAS\01 1316PCMTG)