HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 07/07/2010 RECEIVED
MINUTES JUL 3 0 2010
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Council Chambers-City Hall CRYSECRETARYJS CERCE
July 7, 2010
5:30 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS: STAFF:
Rudy Garza,Chairman Johnny Pereles, P.E.,Assistant City Manager,
A. Javier Huerta,Vice-Chairman Absent Engineering& Development Services
James Skrobarczyk Andrew Dimas,City Planner
John C. Tamez Miguel S. Salda0a, AICP,Senior City Planner
Johnny R. Martinez Robert Payne,AICP, Senior City Planner
Evon 1.Kelly Deborah Brown,Assistant City Attorney
Govind Nadkarni Ashley Satterfield, Recording Secretary
Mark Adame Janysse Delgadillo
John Taylor
Si usted quiere dirigirse ala comision y su ingles es limitedo,habr6 un interprete de espa0ol a
inglds en la junta para ayudarle
I. CALL TO ORDER
A quorum was declared and the meeting was called to order by Chairman Garza at 5:32 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion for approval of the minutes from the June 23,2010,regular Planning
Commission Meeting was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk and seconded by
Commissioner Martinez. Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta absent.
III. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS
A. PLATS
1. New Plats
Mr. Miguel Saldaila, Development Services, read New Plat item "a" (shown below) into
the record. Mr. Salda0a stated the staff recommended to table the item until the regular
Planning Commission meeting on July 21,2010.
a. 0610052-1015(10-22000015)
Lena Pearse Addition,Block 2,Lots 2R&3R(Final Replat—
0.1668 Acre)
Located south of Norton Street and west of Lewis Street.
Public hearing was opened.No one came forward in favor or opposition. Public hearing
was closed.
Motion to table New Plat item"a"was made by Commissioner Nadkarni and seconded
by Commissioner Tamez. Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta being
absent.
SCANNED
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 2
Mr. Miguel Saldaila, Development Services, read New Plat item "b" (shown below) into
the record. Mr. Saldafla stated the plat is in compliance with local and state laws and staff
recommends approval of the plat action and deferment request.
b. 0710055-P017(10-22000017)
Cimarron Center(Final—38.838 Acres)
Located south of Saratoga Boulevard(SH 357)and west of
Cimarron Boulevard.
(i) Plat action
(ii) Deferment Request
Commissioner Skrobarczyk inquired about the remaining small tract parts within the lot.
Mr.Miguel Saldada stated the remaining portions were to be separate.
Public hearing was opened.No one came forward in favor or opposition. Public hearing
was closed.
Motion to approve New Plat item"b"was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk and
seconded by Commissioner Tamez. Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta
being absent.
Mr. Miguel Saldafa, Development Services, read New Plat item "c" (shown below) into
the record. Mr. Saldada stated the plat is in compliance with local and state laws and staff
recommends approval of the plat action and deferment request.
c. 0710058-NP028(10-21000012)
La Tranquila Subdivision(Final—21.119 Acres)
Located between State Highway 361 and the Gulf of Mexico,
north of Mustang Island Estates Drive.
Public hearing was opened.No one came forward in favor or opposition.Public hearing
was closed.
Motion to approve New Plat item"c"was made by Commissioner Taylor and seconded
by Commissioner Skrobarczyk.Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta being
absent.
Mr. Saldafia,read Time Extension items "a-b"(shown below)into the record. Mr.
Saldada stated staff recommends approval of a one year time extension for the preliminary item
"a"and a six month time extension for the final item"b".
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 3
2. Time Extensions
a. 0606116-NP060
Southlake Subdivision(Preliminary— 146.48 Acres)
Located east of Rodd Field Road between Brooke Road(CR
26A)and Slough Road.
b. 1106215-P080
Southlake Subdivision Unit I (Final—83.935 Acres)
Located south of Brooke Road(CR 26A),north of Slough Road
and east of Rodd Field Road.
Public hearing was opened.No one came forward in favor or opposition. Public hearing
was closed.
Motion to approve Time Extensions items"a-b"was made by Commissioner Tamez and
seconded by Commissioner Nadkarni.Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta
being absent.
Mr. Saldana,read Deferment Request item "a"(shown below)into the record. Mr.
Saldana stated staff recommends approval of the Deferment Request.
3. Deferment Request
a. 0510027-P007(10-22000007)
Rancho Vista Subdivision Unit 3A(Final—5.241 Acres)
Located east of Rodd Field Road and south of Yorktown
Boulevard.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk,Mr. Saldafia stated the deferment was for
construction of additional right of way.The north and south portions of Rodd Field Road do not
have access roads to the property.The applicant is going above the required dedication of 30 feet.
The 112 feet dedicated by the applicant did not meet the required 130 feet.The platting ordinance
states all roads must be adjacent,therefore the applicant is requesting a deferment. The applicant
is willing to put up the money required for the deferment.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Saldana stated the 112 foot dedication
was only for the plat portion of the property.Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated the remaining 18
feet would come need to come from the land owner on the other side of the property. Mr. Saldana
stated the length was going to end up being longer than 130 feet due to the power lines that would
end up in the median of Rodd Field Road.
Commissioner Skcrobarczyk questioned if the additional construction would be adequate
for the future designation of Rodd Field Road as a main arterial entering the property. In response
to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Saldana stated the additional 130 feet was adequate for Rodd
Field Road which is a six lane divided median.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 4
Public hearing was opened.No one came forward in favor or opposition. Public hearing
was closed.
Motion to approve Deferment Request item"a"was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk
and seconded by Commissioner Martinez. Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman
Huerta being absent.
In response to Chairman Garza,Mr. Saldela stated the findings needed to be made into
motion.Commissioner Skrobarczyk asked if the prior deferment needed to be made into
motion. Mr. Saldafia stated the deferment be made in motion to protect the motion even though
the persons for the case had left the room.Mr. Saldafta stated the motion needs to clarify the
recommendation.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk restated is motion to accept the deferment agreement with
the stipulations outlined in the staff's recommendation and seconded by Commissioner
Martinez.
Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta being absent.
Chairman Garza recessed the Planning Commission and convened the Corpus Christi
Beach/Dune Committee at 5:44 p.m.
B. CORPUS CHRISTI BEACH/DUNE COMMITTEE MEETING
AGENDA
Wednesday—July 7,2010
5:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Corpus Christi Beach/Dune Committee meeting was called to order at 5:44 p.m.
2. BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATES
a. Case No.BCC 0710-01
Carl and Sherry Badalich - Application for a Beachfront
Construction Certificate for construction of twenty-three
townhome units along with associated utilities, street, parking,
i_m_provements, lighting,and landscaping.
Construction will occur at the location described as Sunrise
Shores Subdivision, Block I, Lot IA and the portion of Lot 3
landward of the recorded 1,000 foot Nueces County Dune
Protection Line, generally located on the east side of State
Highway 361 and approximately 1.75 miles north of Mustang
Island State Park
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 5
Robert Payne, Development Services,presented item "a",Case No. BCC 0710-01 stating
the application is for a large scale Beachfront Construction Certificate for construction of
twenty-three townhome units along with associated utilities, street, parking, improvements,
lighting and landscaping.The issue for the Beach/Dune Committee is protection of the public's
right of access along or to the Gulf Beach.The Planning Commission approved rezoning of the
property on May 26, 2010 to "AT/PUD-2" Apartment Tourist District with a Planned Unit
Development-2 overlay. City Council approved the rezoning on June 22, 2010. The project is
not located adjacent to or on a public beach access and poses no threat to public access. The
project is located landward of the recorded 1,000 foot and mean high tide Nueces County
protection line and regulations.
Mr. Payne noted the project is not proposed for construction within the Nueces County
Dune Committee's area of authority. Mr. Payne stated the large scale beachfront construction
required GLO review. Staff sent the application to GLO for review on June 9, 2010. On June
28, the GLO provided a letter stating "no comment" regarding the large scale beachfront
construction. Robert Payne stated the response meant the GLO has no objections.
Robert Payne addressed the City's Chapter 10 code stating that the concurrent Beach
Dune Committee must find that the construction is consistent with the City's regulations. The
following are the criteria read into the record by Robert Payne:
Construction is not consistent with the City's regulations if the project:
• Reduces the size of the public beach in any manner;
• Closes an existing beach's public access or public parking area;
• Not consistent with the county's dune rules;
• Fails to comply with the Chapter 10 of the city code;or
• Functionally supports on depends on any structures that currently encroach on
the public beach.
Robert Payne stated that staff has looked at the requirements and found there are no
issues with regard to encroachment or beach access. Staff recommended approval.
In response to Commissioner Taylor, Robert Payne stated that the Beachfront
Construction line in most areas on Mustang Island and Padre Island extend to the first public
road. Robert Payne stated State Highway 361 was the boundary line.
Public hearing was opened.No one came forward in favor or opposition. Public hearing
was closed.
Motion to approve Beachfront Construction Certificate item"a"was made by
Commissioner Skrobarczyk and seconded by Commissioner Martinez. Motion passed
unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta being absent.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 6
b. Case No.BCC 0710-03
Thomas W. Hill - Application for a Beachfront Construction
Certificate for construction of landscaping and exterior
improvements(stairs,porches,sidewalks, irrigation,etc.)
Construction will occur at the location described as Beach View
Estates, Block I, Lot 17, Corpus Christi, Texas on Mustang
Island generally located on the east side of State Highway 361,
2.5 miles north of Mustang Island State Park
Robert Payne, Development Services, presented item"b",Case No. BCC 0710-03 stating
the application is a small scale Beachfront Construction Certificate for construction of
landscaping and exterior improvements.
Mr. Payne stated that on November 1, 2006, the concurrent Beach Dune Committee
approved a Beachfront Construction Certificate for a single family residence. The applicant's
three year period for the certificate expired before the completion of the home. The home is
approximately ninety percent completed but requires a Beachfront Construction Certificate to
complete exterior improvements such as stairs, porches, sidewalks, and irrigation. The
applicant is requesting a small scale Beachfront Construction Certificate to complete the home.
A letter was sent to the GLO. The construction does not fail to comply with the city's
regulations. Staff recommended approval.
In response to Commissioner Taylor, Mr. Payne stated the approval is typical when
construction has not been completed and the applicant reapplies.Additionally, Mr.Payne added
that Beachfront Construction Certificates typically include the subdivision and any houses to be
built in the subdivision for future reference. The Beachfront Construction Certifications are
valid for three(3)years.
The public hearing was opened.
Charles Thompson, owner of units 27 and 28 in Los Colonies Villas, came forward in
opposition. Mr. Thompson stated he was against any construction in Beachview Estates
because of the mitigation issues with the original developer. Mr. Thompson stated that original
developer caused drainage problems and flooding. Mr. Thompson inquired about the persons
responsible in overseeing the mitigation issues with the developer because nothing is being
done.
In response to Chairman Garza, Mr. Juan Perales opted to collect all of the public's
inputs before making a comment.
Orlando Ortiz, P.E. of Urban Engineering representing the applicant, came forward
stating he could answer any questions.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Ortiz stated Urban Engineering was
representing the Hill's residence alone. The Beach Management Advisory Committee oversees
the completion of the mitigation and has taken steps to complete the cases against the original
developer. The Beach Management Advisory Committee has been in contact with the original
developer but is having trouble finding a solution to the problem. Mr. Ortiz stated the case was
for an individual owner and individual lot. The original problem with the drainage was it was
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 7
initially designed as a ditch section behind the subdivision with no curb and gutter section on
the street. A curb and gutter were installed but the drainage plan was not modified. Mr. Ortiz
presented the drainage from the Hill's residence drained in the cul-de-sac and drains out to
detention ponds near State Highway 361. The Bill's lot is one of the few lots that drain
properly. Mr. Ortiz continued by stating the Beach Management Advisory Committee have
several drainage plans proposed, Urban Engineering and Naismith Engineering have provided
plans to the committee. The payment is absent from the developer to go on with any proposed
plan.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated for clarifications that each individual lot would be
examined in the future to ensure that the drainage and so forth were adequate.
Juan Perales stated the issues with the subdivision go back to the original design. The
graving and paving were not done in accordance with the approved design. The attempts to
resolve the issues through the developer have failed. The city's standpoint is to abandon any
further attempts with the original developer. Mr. Perales stated a small contract with Naismith
Engineering has been developed. Naismith Engineering will be tasked with correcting the
drainage issues associated with the nonconforming construction. The execution of the contract
is to be complete by the next week(July 12-16). The design work will begin shortly thereafter
and completion of the project is set at the end of the calendar year. Mr. Perales stated the city
will be looking into filing suit against the original developer in attempt to recoup costs
Chairman Garza asked if permits were to be held off until mitigation was complete. Mr.
Perales responded by stating a hold was placed on lots in the subdivision for building permits in
the past. An agreement was reached with the lot owners stating a building permit would be
issued if the lot owner presented the grading plan for the individual lot. Over the last three to
four years, three building permits have been issued. Mr. Perales stated the city was hesitant on
reinstating any holds on permits and instead,are focused on correcting the drainage issues.
In response to Commissioner Tamez, Craig Thompson, P.E. for Naismith engineering,
came forward. Mr. Thompson stated the duration of the work would amount to a couple of
weeks due to boundary survey for easements that may be needed. The easements and ditches
are more than likely going to extend into the 1,000 foot dune protection line. The GLO states a
thirty day period for the review process. The reviewing process can stretch the project into a
couple of months.
In response to Chairman Garza, Mr. Thompson stated he felt comfortable that he had a
solution for the localized issue. Mr. Thompson stated he does not have an overall solution for
the drainage issue for the subdivision.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Robert Payne stated three houses are built in
the subdivision. Mr. Ortiz clarified that the surrounding homes were completed and occupied.
The applicant held a permit previously and needed a renewal to complete the landscaping. The
main structure of the Hill's residence was completed.
Public hearing was closed.
Motion to approve Beachfront Construction Certificate item"b"was made by
Commissioner Skrobarczyk and seconded by Commissioner Tamez. Motion passed
unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta being absent.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 8
3. ADJOURNMENT OF BEACH/DUNE COMMITTEE
Chairman Garza adjourned the Beach/Dune Committee meeting at 6:08 p.m. and reconvened
the regular Planning Commission Meeting
(RECONVENE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING)
C. ZONING
1. New Zoning
a. Case No.0610-02 David B.Allred: A change of zoning from the
"B-2A/IO/SP" Barrier Island Business District/Island Overlay/Special
Permit to the "B-4" General Business District without resulting in a
change of land use.
The property to be rezoned is Padre Island No. I, Block 2, being the
south half of Lot 8A, Lot 9A & IDA, located on the westside of South
Padre Island Drive(SPID)or Park Road#22,at the address 14237 South
Padre Island Drive(SPID)or Park Road 22
Andrew Dimas, Development Services, presented New Zoning item "a" Case No.
0610-02 via Apple Keynote, stating the applicant is requesting a change of zoning from the
"B-2A/IO/SP" Barrier Island Business District/Island Overlay/Special Permit to the "13-4"
General Business District.The purpose of the request is so the applicant can work on boats larger
than the Special Permit is currently allowing.The Special Permit was granted in 1996 to allow for
repairs on boats up to thirty (30) feet. The applicant is requesting to work on boats lesser than
fifty (50) feet, therefore modifying the Special Permit. The repair of private non-commercial
boats is the extension of the Island Residential Community to be in conformity with the "B-2A"
District.
Andrew Dimas stated staffs denial of applicant's request to rezone the subject property to
the"B-4"General Business District in lieu thereof approval of a rezoning to"B-2A/1O/SP"Barrier
Island Business District/Island Overlay with a Special Permit.The special permit would allow for
the operation of a boat repair facility and would be subject to the following six(6)conditions:
1. Uses: All uses allowed in the "B-2A" Barrier Island Business District with an"-
10" Island Overlay District and the operation of a boat repair facility, indoor and
outdoor boat storage facility or boat sales facility are allowed with the issuance
of this Special Permit. This includes boat structure and boat engine repair,
outside storage of boats, and outside storage of trailers that are not for sale. The
boat repair facility is limited to three (3) repair bays. Boat repairs shall not
include fiberglass work, bottom work, or body work on boats in excess of fifty
(50)feet. All repair work is to be completed inside of a building. Outside storage
oftoats and trailers that are not for sale may not occur within 130 feet of South
Padre Island Drive(S.P.I.D.)/Park Road#22 right-of-way.
2.Landscaping: Landscaping must be provided in accordance with Article 27B,
Landscape Requirements, for the "B-2A" Barrier Island Business District and "-
10" Island Overlay as if new construction. All plant material must be kept in a
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 9
healthy growing condition at all times. All landscaping must be installed prior to
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
3.Screening: A standard screening fence with a minimum height of six (6) feet
must be placed along the north, south, and west property lines, as well as, the
easterly edge of boat and trailer (not for sale) storage yard as shown on the
attached site plan. This screening fence many not be located within the street
yard. A building wall may be substituted for the screening fence. This screening
fence must be installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
4.Speakers: Outside paging,speakers,or telephone bells are prohibited.
5.Lighting: Overhead lighting shall be directed away from adjacent neighboring
properties.
6.Time Limit: The Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within 12
months of the date of this ordinance, unless the property is being used as outlined
in Condition #1 and in compliance with all other conditions.
The notices mailed out totaled nineteen (19). One (I) notice was returned in favor and
zero(0)returned in opposition.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk inquired whether or not the existing permit had the words
"non-commercial" in the Special Permit and the purpose was to increase the footage of the boats
being repaired and not the types of boats.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Andrew Dimas staled staff could incorporate
the language of"non-commercial" into the Special Permit Robert Payne added that the language
in the zoning report but the applicant is not looking at commercial boats in the form of fishing
guides. The applicant is looking at vessels of much larger character. The language of "non-
commercial" is stated in the report and not the conditions. Mr. Dimas stated that the original
Special Permit does not specifically state"non-commercial"and only limits the scope and size of
the work. Commissioner Skrobarczyk expressed concern with shrimp boats and boats of that
nature consuming the yard. Commissioner Skrobarczyk inquired about the wording that could be
used to safeguard against an offensive yard.
Commissioner Tamez stated the language can read as commercial pleasure craft being
allowed. In response, Commissioner Skrobarczyk agreed with the language of commercial
pleasure crafts but not commercial. Commissioner Nadkarni modified the language to state the
prohibiting of commercial vessels but not pleasure crafts.
In response to Commissioner Adame, Mr. Dimas stated the original site plan was in the
1996 file and illustrated the way the current building sitting and the storage yards around it. Mr.
Dimas stated screening was only needed on the north, south,and west of the property. Mr. Dimas
added that properties must be screened besides lines facing South Padre Island Drive or Park
Road 22.
In response to Chairman Garza, Mr. Dimas clarified that the subject property does have
fencing along the perimeter of the property.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 10
Chairman Garza commented on the difference between the full and empty lot from the
pictures in the presentation. Mr.Payne stated the landscaping requirement according to the
"B-2A"requires a twenty(20)foot, 100%landscape strip exclusive of driveways.
The public hearing was opened.
David B. Allred, owner of the property, came forth. Mr. Allred stated he built the
property in 1997 and had been in business for twenty-five years. Mr. Allred stated his business
was for private boat ownership clientele, pleasure crafts, boats from small sizes and up to sixty
(60) feet. Mr. Allred commented he does business with island residence and does not work on
commercial vessels at all.
Deborah Brown commented on Mr. Allred's statement of up to sixty(60)foot boats. Ms.
Brown inquired as to why the Special Permit was for only fifty (50) feet when Mr. Allred did
repair work on boats up to sixty (60) feet. Ms. Brown asked the applicant as to why he did not
request up to sixty (60) feet. In response, Mr. Allred stated he wanted fifty (50) feet to be the
minimum but did not want the sizes to continue to get larger, forcing him to acquire another
Special Permit. In response to Ms. Brown, Mr. Allred agreed that a sixty (60) foot maximum
would be adequate.
Public hearing was closed.
Motion to approve new zoning item"a"was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk for the
denial of the"B-4"and go forward with staff's approval with the new sixty(60)foot limit and
the language of`commercial, pleasure craft inclusive."The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Kelly. Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman Huerta being absent.
b. Case No. 0710-01 Proportional Prosperity, LLC: A change of zoning
from the "B-4" General Business District to the "1-2" Light Industrial
District resulting in a change of land use from general business to light
industrial use
The property to be rezoned is 2.12 acres of Las Colonias, Unit 4, Block 1
Lots 25, 26, and 27 located at 1302 Saratoga on the northeast corner of
Saratoga Blvd and Calle Las Colonias Dr.
Andrew Dimas, Development Services,presented New Zoning item "b"Case No.
0710-01 via Apple Keynote,stating the applicant is requesting a change of zoning from the"B-4"
General Business District to the "1-2" Light Industrial District. The purpose of the request is to
convert the land into a specialty vehicle storage facility for the Corpus Christi Police Department.
The property is located outside the city limits passed Saratoga. Mr. Dimas stated the case was
based on a previous case heard back in January 2009 which approved a Special Permit for
outdoor storage. The applicant has participated in a long-term lease with the city to use this
building as a warehouse for specialty vehicles including SWAT Team vehicles, bomb squad,
marina vehicles used by the Police Department,oxygen tanks,and Homeland Security vehicles.
Andrew Dimas stated staffs denial of applicant's request to rezone the subject property to
the "1-2" Light Industrial District in lieu thereof approval of a rezoning to'B-4/SP"General
Business District with a Special Permit and subject to a site plan and the following five(5)
conditions:
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 11
I. Uses: The only uses permitted by the Special Permit other than those uses
permitted by right in the"B-4"General Business District is the use of the property
for a warehouse use with outdoor storage.The outdoor storage shall be located on
Lots 26 and 27 with a setback of 50 feet from the rear property lines and not
within the 20 foot front yard setback, such storage may not project above the
fence.
2. Landscaping: Landscaping must be provided in accordance with Article 27B,
Landscape Requirements, as if new construction. All plant material must be kept
in a healthy growing condition at all times. All landscaping must be installed
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
3. Screening: The fencing of outdoor storage shall consist of the existing cyclone
fence covered by an opaque dark green privacy mesh. Such fence with mesh shall
be located along the northern,eastern property lines,and along southern property
lines of Lots 26 and 27. Mesh to be placed along the western fence line, which
does not impede the security sensors for ingress/egress to the property.
4.Lighting: All overhead lighting shall not bleed into neighboring properties and
shall be directed away from adjacent properties.
5.Time Limit: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within 12
months of the date of this ordinance,unless the property is being used as outlined
in Condition 141 and in compliance with all other conditions.
Mr. Dimas stated that the original Special Permit had screening and landscaping
problems. The conditions are to ensure the safety of the single family homes to the north and
adjacent of the subject property.
Thirty (30) notices were mailed to surrounding residents. Three (3) came back in favor
from the subject property owner and zero(0)came back in opposition.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Dimas restated the intended use of the
subject property as being a specialty storage facility for operational city vehicles.
The public hearing was opened.
Marco Gamboa, subject property owner, came forward. Mr. Gamboa stated his concerns
regarding the characteristics surrounding the subject property. Mr. Gamboa mentioned the five
separate locations between the subject property and Crosstown Expressway where "1-2" is
directly adjacent to residential zoning districts.
The public hearing was closed.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk,Mr.Gamboa stated that he did not know if the
Special Permit with the conditions would suit his needs. Commissioner Skrobarczyk responded
by stating an"1-2" is hard to receive when the property is adjacent to residential. Chairman Garza
added that the Planning Commission has never issued an`7-2"next to residential settings.
In response to Chairman Garza, Mr. Gamboa stated the purchase of a 4,800 square foot
metal building that corresponds to the project that had begun last year. In response, Chairman
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 12
Garza addressed the staff's recommendation of allowing warehousing through the Special Permit
with conditions. Mr. Gamboa stated he plans to build another 5,000 square foot building on the
property. Mr.Gamboa expressed concerns about receiving a building permit.
In response to Mr. Gamboa, Mr. Payne stated the first condition in the Special Permit
limited the amount of outside storage to two(2)lots.The indoor use of a warehouse is allowed on
the property. Chairman Garza added that a metal building does not constitute as warehouse
necessarily.
Chairman Garza inquired about the duration of time it would take Mr. Gamboa to
complete the project, therefore the Special Permit may be modified to where the expiration is not
until the completion of the project. In response, Mr. Gamboa stated that the completion could be
done in twelve(12)weeks if no setbacks occurred with Development Services.
Mr. Perales stated no concerns regarding the case at the present time and the full granting
of the zoning change will take place through City Council actions,
Mr. Payne stated that the building requirements would have to be met before construction
of the building took place. In response,Mr. Gamboa stated his understanding of the requirements.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated that previously, the subdivision had concerns of
sidewalks. Commissioner Skrobarczyk referenced the drainage ditch east of the property.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk questioned the pedestrian accessibility from Saratoga. In response,
Chairman Garza stated that sidewalks were not present in the area.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Dimas stated that a Special permit
becomes expired if the premises are vacant for more than twelve (12) months. Commissioner
Skrobarczyk asked if the twelve (12)month regulation was universally listed on Special Permits.
In response, Ms. Brown recited the ordinance associated with Special Permits. The expiration
issued expires when the uses of the property stop. Mr. Payne added that expired Special Permits
are removed from the zoning maps.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk requested further information on the process of modifying
the wording on the Special Permit and ordinances. Commissioner Skrobarczyk went on to voice
his concern of the open language on the final permit.
Ms. Brown stated that no date can be provided for the Special Permit. In response,
Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated that the owner(s)should be notified. Mr. Payne reiterated that
the ordinance would not provide a date but the applicant should be notified as they are receiving
the building permit for construction.
Ms. Brown stated the provision added a chance to make a motion for an extension
through the council. Additionally, Ms. Brown stated she would add the additional provision for
clarification issues. In response, Commissioner Skrobarczyk requested that all Special Permits
include the additional provision.
The public hearing was closed.
Motion to approve new zoning item"b"was made by Commissioner Tamez and
seconded by Commissioner Martinez.Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chairman liuerta
being absent. In abstention: Commissioner Nadkarni,Commissioner Adame
Planing Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 13
IV. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
A. ABSENCES
July 7,2010—Vice-Chair Huerta was not present for the July 7,2010 regular
Planning Commission meeting
June 23,2010—Commissioner Adame and Commissioner Kelly were not present
for the June 23,2010 regular Planning Commission meeting
Commissioners Adame and Kelly stated they were out of town. Motion to excuse the
absences was made by Commissioner Tamez and seconded by Commissioner Taylor. Motion
passed unanimously with Vice-Chair Huerta being absent.
B. CITY,STATE,FEDERAL BUSINESS—NONE TO REPORT FOR JUNE
23,2010
Commissioner Kelly requested information on a scanning process that could cut down
costs such as e-files.In response,Mr. Perales stated that the current process is one of electronic
submittal and review capabilities. Research will be done on the size issues and absorption of the
costs.Commissioner Martinez asked if the files are capable of being archived and produced
cheaper. In response, Mr. Perales answered yes to both the questions asked of Commissioner
Martinez.
C. FUTURE PLANNING COMMISSION SCHEDULED MEETINGS
+ July 21,2010
+ August 4,2010
D. CITY COUNCIL ACTION
+ July 20,2010
I. Case No. 0610-01 Ralph and Irma Rivera
E. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON NEXT AGENDA
Commissioner Adame stated the timing of the Special Permits is confusing to many
people. Additionally, the Special Permit process is confusing with different applications and no
knowledge of the ability to request a time frame.
In response, Chairman Garza stated that the Special Permit process should be reviewed
and staff is encouraged to return with options to improve the Special Permit process.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 7,2010
Page 14
V. ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Martinez and seconded by Commissioner
Skrobarczyk. Motion passed unanimously with Vice-Chair Huerta being absent and meeting
was adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
aryce G.jde Macon Ashley S:.erfield r
Assistant Erector of Development Recording Secretary
Services/Planning