HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 08/05/2009 •
RECEIVED
MINUTES arc 31 2009
REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Council Chambers-City Hall
Wednesday August 5,2009 CRYSECREIARyS OFFICE
5:30 P.M.
COMMISSIONERS: STAFF:
Rudy Garza,Chairman ABSENT Johnny Perales,P.E., Interim Assistant City
A.Javier Huerta,Vice-Chairman Manager, Development Services
James Skrobarczyk Faryce Goode-Macon,Assistant Director of
John C.TamezABSENT Development Services/Planning
Johnny R. Martinez Mark Simon, Plans Examiner Coordinator
Evon J. Kelly ABSENT Lisa Wargo,Senior City Planner
Govind Nadkarni Robert Payne,AICP,City Planner
Mark Adame Deborah Brown,City Attorney
John Taylor Elena Juarez,Recording Secretary
Si usted quiere dirigirse ala comision y su ingles es limitado,habra un interprete de
esparto'a ingles en la junta para ayudarle
I. CALL TO ORDER
A quorum was declared and the meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the regular Planning Commission meeting minutes from
July 22,2009,was made by Commissioner Martinez and seconded by Commissioner
Nadkami. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,Commissioner Tamez and
Commissioner Kelly being absent.
III. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS
A. PLATS
I. New Plats
Mr. Mark Simon,Development Services,read New Plats agenda items"a"and
"d"(shown below) into the record stating these items have been submitted for
continuance to August 19,2009. Staff recommends approval.
a. 0709036-NP031 (09-21000015)
Bay Terrace No.2,Block 803A, Lot I 3A(Final Replat-
0.34 Acre)
Located south of Booty Street, between South Staples
Street and Seventh Street.
d. 0709040-NP035(09-21000018)
nr I s w a rm South Bayfront Park, Block I, Lot I (Final Replat-9.12
' t y '''�y' Acres)
V Ni ti ,1 i L Bounded by Kinney Street,north bound Shoreline
Boulevard, Park Street and south bound Shoreline
Plannins Commission Minutes
2009
Page 2
Motion for continuance was made by Commissioner Martinez and seconded by
Commissioner Skrobarczyk. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,
Commissioner Tamez and Commissioner Kelly being absent.
Mr.Mark Simon, Development Services,read New Plats agenda items"b-c"
(shown below)into the record stating these items are final replats and have been
submitted for approval. Staff recommends approval.
b. 0709037-NP032(09-21000016)
Beach Portion, Block 3, Lot 4A(Final Replat-0.104
Acre)
Located west of North Water Street between Schatzel
and Lawrence Streets.
c. 0709039-NP034(09-20000003)
River Crossing,Block I,Lots I &2(Preliminary-9.182
Acres)
Located east of East Riverview Drive,south of the
Nueces River and north of Northwest Boulevard(FM
624).
Motion for approval was made by Commissioner Nadkarni and seconded by
Commissioner Taylor. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,Commissioner
Tamez and Commissioner Kelly being absent.
B. ZONING
1. NEW ZONING
a. Case No.0809-01
Alicia Romero—A change of zoning from"AB"
Professional Office District to'B-I"Neighborhood
Business District resulting in a change of land use from
professional office use to neighborhood business use
PHILLIPS, BLK A,LTS 14, 15 AND ADJ 30 FT OF
LOT 16,generally located on the northeast side of
Baldwin Boulevard,approximately 571 feet southeast of
South Port Avenue.
Lisa Wargo,Development Services presented the above stated case via PowerPoint
presentation. The applicant is Alicia Romero. Ms. Wargo stated the applicant is
requesting to rezone .49 acres formally known as PHILLIPS LTS 14, 15&ADJ 30 FT
OF LT 16 BLK A, and generally located on the northeast side of Baldwin Boulevard,
approximately 571 feet southeast of South Port Avenue,from"AB"Professional Office
District to B-I"Neighborhood Business District to establish a nutrition sales center.
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 3
Ms. Wargo stated the subject property is zoned as an "AB" Professional Office
District. This district permits business and professional office uses and also includes
single-family,duplex, multiple-family uses(maximum 36.30 units per acre),rooming and
boarding houses, clinics, beauty culturist and hair shop, studio for an artist, clinics and
hospitals. Retail sales uses, including storefront displays are not permitted. No
machinery or equipment other than what is customarily found in a professional or
business office shall be used or stored in the building or on the property lot. The district
requires a front yard setback of twenty (20) feet and a side and rear yard setback of ten
(10)feet. The maximum height in the"AB" District is 45 feet or three(3)stories.
Ms. Wargo stated the "B-I" Neighborhood Business District allows for single-
family, duplex, multiple family, office professional service and retail uses. This District
requires a twenty(20) foot building setback from the street right-of-way lines. There are
no side or rear yard setbacks for nonresidential development unless adjacent to a
residential district; in which case a ten (10) foot setback is required. The "B-1" District
permits a residential density of 36.30 units per acre and a building height of 35 feet not to
exceed three(3)stories. Outside storage is not a permitted use in the"B-I"District.
Ms. Wargo stated staff recommends approval of the "B-1" Neighborhood
Business District for a Nutritional Sales Center, subject to site plan submittal and the"B-
1" Neighborhood Business District regulations, prior to scheduling review by the City
Council. There are no outstanding code violations. There were twenty-six (26) notices
mailed within the 200'notification area and two(2)outside the notification area with zero
(0),zero(0)returned in opposition and one returned undeliverable.
Faryce Goode-Macon, Development Services, stated she would like to make one
correction to staffs recommendation. Mrs. Goode-Macon stated the "B-I" District will
not be subject to a site plan.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated no traffic,
ingress,egress problems are projected and lighting and shielding issues are covered under
nuisance ordinance should there be a complaint.
Public hearing was opened. No one came forward in favor or opposition. Public
hearing was closed.
Motion for approval was made by Commissioner Nadkarni and seconded by
Commissioner Skrobarczyk. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,
Commissioner Tamez and Commissioner Kelly being absent.
b. Case No.0809-02
Mostafa Bighamian—A change of zoning from "B-4"
General Business District to "1-2" Light Industrial
District resulting in a change of land use from
general business to light industrial use
WOODLAWN ESTS, BK 4, LTS 11 & 12,generally
located on the north side of S. Padre Island Drive,
approximately 2,800 feet southeast of Airline Drive.
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 4
Ms. Wargo presented the above case via PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Wargo
stated the applicant is requesting to rezone the property formally known as
Woodlawn Estates, Block 4, Lots I I & 12 from"B-4"General Business District to
"1-2" Light Industrial District. The .98 Acre property is generally located on the north
side of S. Padre Island Drive,approximately 2,800 feet southeast of Airline Drive.
Ms. Wargo stated the subject property is zoned`BA".The purpose of the"B-4"
General Business District is to provide sufficient space in appropriate locations for
commercial and miscellaneous service activities. Permits uses such as multiple-family
dwellings,boat and auto sales,hotels,and taverns. Residential density is a maximum of
36 units per acre. Warehousing,manufacturing, heavy auto repair,open storage and off-
site advertising uses are among the uses which are not allowed in the"B-4" District.The
"B-4" District requires a 20-foot front yard setback and no side or rear yard setbacks
unless adjacent to a residential district,then a 10-foot setback is required.
Ms. Wargo stated the purpose of the"1-2"Light Industrial District is to provide
for light manufacturing,fabrication,warehousing,and wholesale distributing in high or
low buildings with access to an arterial street,freeway,or railroad in central or outlying
areas of the city. Residential uses are not allowed.The"1-2" District requires a minimum
20-foot front yard setback and no side or rear yards unless abutting a residential district;
then 10-foot side and rear set back is required. The"1-2" District does not have a
minimum lot size, lot frontage,height limitation,open space requirement,or floor area
intensity factor requirement.
Ms. Wargo stated the site future land use map shows the subject property as
being planned for Commercial use and the surrounding properties planned as: to the north
low density residential,to the south commercial,to the east commercial,and to the west
commercial. Ms. Wargo stated nine(9)notices were sent within the notification area and
zero(0)outside the radius with zero(0) in favor and six(6)in opposition for 43.71%.
Ms. Wargo stated on December 22,2008 the subject property received a citation
from the City's Enforcement Division for operating an automobile painting business as an
illegal land use with "B-4"General Business District. The citation also included
complaints from the surroundings neighborhood of odor,noise, insufficient setbacks for
the portable accessory buildings,and lack of screening fence between the business and
neighboring residential use. Ms. Wargo stated the subject operated a business under the
name"Absolute Detailing"and "Absolute Car Care Center'
Ms. Wargo further stated on June 18, 2009, the subject property was cited by the
City's Code Enforcement Division for performing automobile spray painting operations
onsite. Although the facility has approved booths for spray painting associated with auto
sales being the primary use, the spray painting use alone is a nonconforming and illegal
use in the current BA "General Business District". On July 14, 2009 the applicant
submitted a request to the City's Zoning Division to rezone the property to the "1-2"
Light Industrial Zoning District.
Ms. Wargo stated the following were departmental comments: The rezoning
request does not take advantage of expansion of industrial use within existing industrially
zoned areas;the proposed rezoning request is not consistent with the Adopted Future
Land Use Map;the proposed rezoning request is not consistent with the Southeast Area
Development Plan; the Planning&Zoning Division is still receiving complaints from the
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 5
neighboring development of excessive noise being generated by the current use and staff
at the subject property. Staff recommends a limiting operational use of the business to
reduce the noise being produced at later hours. Ms. Wargo stated staff recommends
denial of the Applicant's request to rezone the subject property from the"B-4"General
Business District to the"1-2"Light Industrial District
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated staff does not
recommend a Special Permit.
Public hearing was opened.
Mostafa Bighamian, property owner, stated the business has been operating for
eight (8) years. There has apparently been a conflict between a neighbor and an
employee and the employee in question has been fired. All codes have been passed and
the City has issued a Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Bighamian stated not allowing this
business to operate will affect not only for the eighteen (18)employees but for eighteen
(18) families as well. Mr. Bighamian stated the tenant is only requesting equal treatment.
The tenant has been at the location for eight (8) years and had not had any issues with
then neighbors. Mr. Bighamian also stated Lundquist Paint&Body is "B-4" Zoning and
is operating the same type business as his tenant.
In response to Commissioner Adame, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated the use in
question at Lundquist Paint& Body is an accessory use to the dealership.
Mr. Delbosque, 1429 Claire Drive,came forward in opposition. The police have
been called over seventy-four (74) times last year and as of March of this year twenty-
four (24) times. Mr. Delbosque stated his son has breathing and hearing health issues.
Jose Saenz and Gilbert Luna have noise violations pending. Mr. Delbosque stated he has
issues with trash being thrown into his yard in addition to illegal dumping in the ditch and
in his yard. Mr. Delbosque stated a crew manager at the property location threatened his
family and has an attempted murder charge on his arrest record. Mr. Delbosque stated
his family lives in fear and other neighbors feel the same but are in fear of coming
forward.
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated issues with fumes
and ventilation were not addressed because the case at hand is related strictly to zoning.
Lilly Silva, 6358 South Padre Island Drive, came forward in favor. Ms. Silva
stated she is the co-owner of the business at the property location. Ms. Silva stated she
does not run background checks on her employees and she primarily employs persons
from half-way houses to allow them an opportunity at gainful employment. Ms. Silva
stated she believes Mr. Delbosque may actually rent at the adjacent property and has no
financial obligation. Ms. Silva stated the Special Permit will give the business a chance.
Ms. Silva stated they have had a Certificate of Occupancy for eight (8) years and have
had no issues with the fire marshal. Ms. Silva stated the business is in Occupational
Safety and Health Administration(OSHA)compliance as well as city compliance.
In response to Vice-Chair Buena, Ms. Silva stated the business closes at 8 p.m.
and there is no activity at the location after 8 p.m. Ms. Silva stated there is security on
location after 8 p.m. Ms. Silva also stated calls or complaints made to the police can not
always be substantiated and she believed the previous stated complaints to be frivolous.
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 6
In response to Commissioner Taylor, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated there is no
previous Special Permit.
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated the department is
aware of the business operating in the "B-4" zoning district as Absolute Detailing and
was unaware of the automotive body or other operations and has been "B-4"since at least
the last thirty(30)to thirty-five(35)years.
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Ms. Silva stated in regards to setbacks all
detail ports have been moved forward to the front of the property.
Mr. Joe Ortiz, 3723 Mendan Hall, came forward in favor. Mr. Ortiz stated
families will be displaced and believes the previous complaints are not truthful. Mr.
Ortiz stated he is in support of the Special Permit and the business has operated for nearly
ten (10) years. Mr. Ortiz stated he would like the Commission to take into account the
police reports and accounts having been from the same person.
In response to Mr. Ortiz, Commissioner Nadkarni, stated notices were sent and
43%of property owners within the notification area with six of the surrounding property
owners in opposition.
In response to Mr. Ortiz, Vice-Chair Huerta stated the business has been in
operation for eight (8) years not ten (ten) as stated by Mr. Ortiz and that for eight (8)
years the business has not been compliant and has been violating the ordinance. Mr.
Huerta further stated the home in all likelihood was in existence before the business.
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated Development
Services is unsure how long the business has been operating in non-compliance.
Paul Hurt, 137 Tropical Lane, came forward in favor. Mr. Hurt stated people
have a tendency to use governmental bodies as a "hammer" and encouraged the
Commission to take this into consideration. Mr. Hurt stated this business provides a
service,employs families and does not want to see business move out of town.
Mr. George Oresco, 6630 Vienna Drive, came forward and stated he has been to
the property. Mr. Oresco stated the property's compressors have been moved up to the
main building, the fence is being replaced and the detailing part of the business is
operating along the fence along the apartment complex. Mr. Oresco stated the business
has been approved by the Fire Department. Mr.Oresco further asked the Commission to
take into account whether anyone was ever arrested at the property when considering the
number of police complaints.
Mr. Bighamian, came forward in favor and stated one additional point. Mr.
Bighamian stated most of the police complaints have come from the same complaintant.
Public hearing closed.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated it is unfortunate the business is not compliant.
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 7
Commissioner Martinez stated some of the larger businesses mentioned previously have
certain requirements such as buffers that must be followed.
In response to Commissioner Adame, Mrs. Goode-Macon stated an applicant
cannot apply for a special permit but must apply for the desired district, in this case an "I-
2" Light Industrial District. The Planning Commission or the City Council have the
ability to make the use achievable through a Special Permit. Upon staff review a Special
Permit was not recommended due to buffer spacing and because of the commercial
designation on the future land use map.
Motion to approve staffs recommendation and deny the requested zoning was
made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk and seconded by Commissioner Martinez. Motion
passed unanimously with Chairman Garza, Commissioner Tamez and Commissioner
Kelly being absent.
Mrs. Goode-Macon stated this case would be forwarded to the City Secretary's
office for scheduling with City Council and the notification of that meeting will be met in
accordance with State Law which will occur within six(6)to eight(8)weeks.
c. Case No.0809-03
Mary L Molina—A change of zoning from "RIB"
One-family Dwelling District to"B-I"Neighborhood
Business District resulting in a change of land use from
single-family residential to neighborhood business and
single-family residential uses
Alameda Park, Block 6, Lot 31,generally located
on the northeast side of Everhart Road,
approximately 465 feet south of Avalon Street.
Ms. Wargo presented the above stated case via PowerPoint presentation. The
applicant is Mary Molina.The applicant is requesting to rezone.17 acres formally known
as Alameda Park, Block 6, Lot 31, generally located on the northeast side of Everhart
Road, approximately 465 feet south of Avalon Street from"RIB"One-Family Dwelling
District to "B-I" Neighborhood Business District for the construction of a 2,200
square foot alteration shop and single family residence.
Ms. Wargo stated The"R-1B"One-Family Dwelling District provides for single-
family residential development of moderately spacious character together with such
public buildings,schools,churches, public recreational facilities and accessory uses. The
district requires a minimum 6,000 square feet per lot with a minimum 50 foot width,25
foot front yard setback,5 foot side and rear yard setbacks and a maximum height of 35
feet/three stories. The maximum density in the district is 7.26 units per acre.
Ms. Wargo stated the applicant is requesting to rezone the property to the"B-I"
Neighborhood Business District,which allows for single-family,duplex, multiple family,
office professional service and retail uses. This District requires a twenty(20)foot
building setback from the street right-of-way lines. There are no side or rear yard
setbacks for nonresidential development unless adjacent to a residential district; in which
case a ten(10)foot setback is required. The"B-I"District permits a residential density
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 8
of 3630 units per acre and a building height of 35 feet not to exceed three(3)stories.
Outside storage is not a permitted use in the"B-I"District.Site Existing Land use map,
showing the subject property and the properties to the north,east,and west,as being used
for low-density residential purposes,and the property to the south being used for
commercial purposes.
The Southeast Area Development Plan states the following; POLICY
STATEMENT B.12: Much of the area long Everhart Road between SPID and Staples
Street is transitioning from residential,office and neighborhood commercial use to a
more intensive commercial use. As this transition occurs the City will encourage the
most intensive nodes of commercial development at the intersection of SPID and Staples
Street. Between these high intensity nodes of commercial development the City will
encourage a transition to a combination of unrestricted neighborhood commercial uses
and some limited general commercial uses.
Ms. Wargo stated staff comment is the subject property is located within the
vicinity mentioned by this policy. The use immediately to the north of the subject
property is still zoned for residential purposes, and is planned for Professional Office use
through the adopted Future Land Use Map,and the property to the south is zoned"B-I A"
Neighborhood Business. Staff feels that during the transition period of this neighborhood
that the "B-I A" Neighborhood Business district would be more appropriate for this site
since it also allows for the alteration/tailoring/dressmaking and residential use. Since the
proposed building will only be one-story and therefore will not exceed the 26 foot
maximum height, and the property meets the minimum lot square footage, lot width, and
the maximum building square footage, Staff recommends consideration of the "B-IA"
Neighborhood Business District. In addition,the alteration business use proposed for the
subject property does not typically produce high traffic or sound volumes.The Applicant
proposes operating business hours between 9:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday—Saturday,and
currently has 5 full-time employees and two-part-time employees.
Ms. Wargo stated staff recommends denial of the applicant's rezoning request
for the "B-I" Neighborhood Business District, in lieu thereof, approval of the "B-I A"
Neighborhood Business District, subject to site plan submittal and the "B-I A"
Neighborhood Business District regulations, prior to scheduling review before the City
Council. Ms. Wargo stated within the notice area 29 notices were mailed out with one
(I)notice in favor and I in opposition for 7.14%
Public hearing was opened. No one came forward in favor or opposition. Public
hearing was closed.
Motion to approve staff's recommendation was made by Commissioner Martinez
and seconded by Commissioner Adame. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman
Garza,Commissioner Tame and Commissioner Kelly being absent.
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 9
C. CORPUS CHRISTI BEACH/DUNE COMMITTEE MEETING
AGENDA
CORPUS CHRISTI BEACH/DUNE COMMITTEE MEETING
Wednesday—August 5,2009
5:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chambers
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission recessed and the Corpus Christi Beach/Dune
Committee was called to order at 6:58 p.m.
2. NEW BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATES
a. Case No.BCC 0809-01
Carl&Sherry Badalich-Application for a Beachfront
Construction Certificate for construction of a sanitary
sewer line and two man holes within a 20'easement
along State Highway 361
Sunrise Shores, Block 1,Lot 3,generally located
1.7 miles north of Mustang Island State Park on
the east side of State Highway 361.
Robert Payne, Development Services presented the above case stating the
applicants were Carl & Sherry Badalich. Mr. Payne stated the applicant's previous case
before the Planning Commission was withdrawn. Mr.Payne stated the applicant is
requesting a beachfront construction certificate to install a sewer line across the
southern most lot along 361 and still have "AT"Apartment House District zoning on the
lot.The sewer line would also serve whatever development is on the lot. Staff has no
issues and staff has received a letter from the Texas General Land Office stating there is
no comment. Mr. Payne stated the property is landward of the 200 foot erosion line, is
not on existing public beach access road,does not functionally support or otherwise
depend on structures that might encroach on public beach,does not contain any
retaining walls or otherwise interfere with right to use public beaches.
In response to Commissioner Nadknarni,Mr. Payne stated he is not aware of
the location of the two man holes and the issue will be handled by engineering.
Public hearing was opened.]
Mr.Carl Badalich,State Highway 361,came forward and stated he was
available to answer any questions and would like the Committee to approve the
beachfront construction certificate.
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 10
Motion to approve was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk and seconded by
Commissioner Taylor. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,
Commissioner Tamez and Commissioner Kelly being absent.
3. ADJOURNMENT OF BEACH/DUNE COMMITTEE
A motion to adjourn the Beach/Dune Committee meeting was made by
Commissioner Nadkarni and seconded by Commissioner
(RECONVENE REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING)
D. WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS ORDINANCE
Ms. Wargo presented information regarding the wind energy conversion systems
ordinance. Ms. Wargo stated since the last Planning Commission meeting on July 22"a
staff has taken into consideration the recommendations made by the Commission;the
suggestions made were as follows: Increase sound Level decibals on the A-weighted
scaled(dbA)to at least 55 dbA at night,consider pre-construction and ambient sound
levels in determining maximum sound levels,allow for exclusion of wind energy systems
for boats&RVs with less than I kW of power output,notify homeowners of the
possibility of Home Owner Association and deed requirements,consider eliminating
minimum spacing requirements between multiple systems/towers.
Ms. Wargo stated in the existing ordinance the minimum lot size is 1.5 acres and
the proposed ordinance requires that the system meet the proposed fall radius
requirements. The total system height in the existing ordinance is 110 feet and in the
proposed ordinance is 85, 100,or 150 feet depending on system power output. The
minimum property line setbacks in the existing ordinance is 150%of the total system
height and in the proposed ordinance is 100%of total system height. Minimum ground
clearance in the existing ordinance is 25 feet and 25 feet in the proposed ordinance.
Multiple unit horizontal clearance in the existing unit is 110 feet and in the proposed
ordinance is 110%of total system height. Maximum noise levels at property line in the
existing ordinance are 60 dbA and in the proposed ordinance are dependent upon district
and use,not to exceed City Noise Ordinance. Minimum survival wind speed in the
existing ordinance is 140 mph and in the proposed ordinance arc 120, 130,or 140 mph
depending on location. Engineer certification,building and electrical permit
requirements exist now and in the proposed ordinance.The existing ordinance does not
provide standards for medium and large system where the proposed ordinance does
provide standards. The existing ordinance does not currently provide standards for public
security and de-commissioning standards and the proposed ordinance does provide these
standards. The existing ordinance does not provide consideration for State,Federal,or
Military agency review and the proposed ordinance does provide these standards.
Ms. Wargo stated the following in regards to sound emission allowances: For
properties adjacent to or within districts allowing for residential uses;the dbA and dbC
sound levels emitted from wind energy systems may not exceed the measured
preconstruction ambient sound levels by more than 5 dbA and 15 dbC at any time of the
day or night,when measured at all the neighboring property lines allowing for residential
use.
Plannins.lommission Minutes
2009
Page II
Ms. Wargo states for properties not adjacent to or within districts allowing for
residential uses,the preconstruction ambient sound levels may not be exceeded by more
than 5 dbA and 20 dbC at any time of the day or night,when measured from all property
lines. At no time may levels exceed the City Noise Ordinance. Ms. Wargo stated
building or structurally mounted systems are permitted under the draft ordinance,
allowing for a maximum of two systems permitted as an accessory use to an existing
structure. Lot size requirements will be dependent upon meeting the fall radius within the
required setbacks.
Ms. Wargo stated as requested, staff implemented an exclusion from the Ordinance
requirements for Boat& RV wind energy use,for systems with a total rated capacity less
than I kW of power that do not,and will not,require the conversion of direct current
(DC)to alternating current(AC), with the stipulation that the system does not extend
more than 15 feet above the primary supporting section of the structure being used for
mounting.
Ms. Wargo stated the following are allowances as permitted/By-Right Use in the
proposed ordinance: for single family residential minimum lot size of 1.5 acres(65,340
sq. ft.)or greater,maximum units allowed are one small or medium free-standing system
allowed as an accessory use,one(but not more than one)per 1.5 acres on platted lots
with a max height of 85 feet, fall radius setbacks are based on the total height of the
system. The system must fall within the property lines and is subject to Section 27D-4.3
Building and electrical permits and Development Services review is required. Ms.
Wargo stated the only difference in commercial and light industrial land uses is
maximum height which is 100 feet.
Ms. Wargo stated with building or structurally-mounted systems there is no
minimum lot size, maximum units allowed include no more than 2 systems per structure
requiring energy for operation, under any land use,as an accessory use on platted lots
while maximum height is 15'above highest point of structure,excluding chimneys,not to
exceed the requirement of Section 27D-4.3(E). Fall radius equals the total system height,
with a minimum setback of 5 feet from the property line,and is subject to Section 27D-
4.3 and building and electrical permits will be required as well as Development Services
review.
Ms. Wargo stated allowances for a Special Use Exception for single family
residential and commercial and uses requires a lot size of 1.49 acres or less with one
small free-standing system allowed as an accessory use per structure requiring energy for
operation;one(but not more than one)per 1.49 acres or less per platted lot. Maximum
height is 85 feet with fall radius setbacks being the total height of the system. The system
must fall within the property lines and is subject to Section 27D-4.3. SUE permits as
well as building and electrical permits will be required. Additional requirements include
Zoning Board of Adjustment Review. Light industrial would permit one small or medium
system and heavy industrial requires a minimum of five acres with one small,medium or
large or free standing system per platted five(5)acres,with a maximum height of 150
feet.
Ms. Wargo stated Section 27D-4.3 mentioned in the above charts addresses
setback standards for all wind energy systems established in the City limits and provides
the following standards; systems are not permitted in front yards,communication and
Electrical Lines need to have setback of 110%of the system height, building-mounted
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 12
Heights may not exceed 85' in height above the natural grade of lot,and all maximum
heights may not exceed manufacturer recommendations.
Ms. Wargo addressed some questions and comments from the public. One of the
comments Staff has heard over the past several months is the statement that multiple
utility towers exist within the City that are of much higher heights than the height
allowances proposed for wind energy systems in the draft Ordinance. Staff has also
heard statements suggesting that the City's Zoning Ordinance does not restrict the heights
of other towers in the City limits,so why should the draft Ordinance restrict the heights
of wind energy systems?Ms. Wargo stated the City does not regulate utility poles and
towers. Utility poles and towers are regulated by the utility agencies themselves through
State and/or Federal guidelines that they are required to adhere to. Ms. Wargo further
stated the City does regulate the height of telecommunication and amateur radio towers,
and has a Zoning Ordinance that restricts the height of these towers in residential,
nonresidential,and historical districts according to allowable uses.
Ms. Wargo stated amateaur radio towers are allowed in non-residential and
residential uses. Self-supporting lattice,guyed and other towers up to 50 feet are allowed
in non-residential but not in residential and for over 50 feet they are not allowed in
residential and for non-residential without a Special Use Exception. For monopole
towers up to 85 feet they are allowed in non-residential districts and require Special Use
exception in residential. For monopole towers over 85 feet they are not allowed in
residential and a Special Use Exception is required in non residential.
Ms. Wargo stated another public comment was that the drafted ordinance would
increase the cost of establishing wind energy systems due to the fees imposed. The fees
and permits required to establish a wind energy system on a site have not changed and
have always been required. Building Permit is approximately$75.00,electrical Permit is
approximately$77.00,Special Use Exception Permit&Zoning Board of Adjustment
review, if required,a review fee of$688.00.
Ms. Wargo stated the average costs,in addition to permitting as mentioned
above, is as follows:On the average,systems cost$3,000 to$6,000 per kW of output,
small systems with I kW of power output or less equal=$9,000 to$15,000 installed,
small systems with 10 kW of power output or less equal=$35,000 to$60,000 installed,
hooking up to a grid can cost an additional $20,000-$30,000 per''/.mile.
Ms. Wargo stated the average monthly cost of a small wind energy system
costing$35,000 at an interest rate of 8.5"/for a loan period of 10 years is$433.95 per
month. Ms. Wargo stated Operating&Maintenance Cost=(= 1%of system cost)
$35,000 x.01 (0& M)_$350 yr./ 12 months=$29.00,$433.95+$29.00=for a total
of approximately$463.12 per month estimated cost. U.S. Dept.of Energy estimates that
an owner can begin seeing a return on their investment for a system costing$9,000-
$15,000 in m 15 years.
Ms. Wargo stated the last change to address in the differences from the current
ordinance and the proposed ordinance(in addition to addressing the multiple questions
and statements made by the public),is the added language to address the requirements of
interagency review and consideration. Anyone who has submitted an application for,or
received a permit for a wind energy system within the last 10 months has actually gone
through some of these agency reviews in order to be permitted for the system; Staff has
Plannink Commission Minutes
2009
Page 13
consulted with these agencies in reviewing submitted applications for wind energy
systems permits,to ensure that the system,the Applicant,and the City were not in
violation of any Civil or Military regulation or agreement,or a State or Federal Law. Ms.
Wargo stated the inclusion of this language is not something new that is being added to
the City's review process,the language was included as a formality and to provide the
public with the information that may be required during the review process,and in
considering the establishment of a wind energy system on a site.
Ms. Wargo stated the language added included the possibility of review by the
following agencies,depending on the system siting location:The Army Corp of
Engineers,Texas General Land Office for systems proposed in,or in close proximity to
jurisdictional wetlands& State waters,Texas Parks&Wildlife and U.S. Fish& Wildlife
for consideration of protected species that exist on a proposed site, F.A.A. if the proposed
system is located within proximity of a civil airport to address any possible domestic
airspace and radar interference,Naval Air Station Corpus Christi facility(NAS)—
NAVAID& Defense Radar Interference,or if the wind energy system is located within
an Accident Potential Zone,or Aircraft Installation Compatibility Use Zones(AICUZs).
Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated concern regarding ground clearance and
ordinance limitations.
Vice-Chair Huerta stated the ordinance language should differentiate between
structure mounted and ground mounted units in regards to ground clearance.
Commissioner Skrobarczyk stated concern with City Noise Ordinance not
allowing the dbAs necessary to operate the wind turbine systems.
Vice-Chair Huerta stated ambient noise should be measurement factor.
Johnny Perales,Development Services,stated there are two sections in the
proposed ordinance with potential conflict. This area will need to be re-evaluated with
regards to noise limits and the City Ordinance.
Vice-Chair I luerta stated concern with ambient noise being higher than City
Ordinance provides.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Lisa Wargo stated size classifications
such as small, medium,and large in regards to unit size are determined by power output.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mrs.Goode-Macon stated there has
been input from those selling the wind turbine systems and parties who live near these
systems. In addition, Mrs.Goode-Macon stated Lisa Wargo has expertise in this area.
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Mr. Perales stated one unit is allowed per 1.5
acres or less and any additional units in a more dense application would require Special
use Exemption.
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Ms. Wargo stated the purpose of distance
limitations between units is a matter of public safety.
Planning Commission Minutes
2009
Page 14
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Mrs.Goode-Macon stated the fees associated
with Zoning Board of Adjustment(ZBA)were determined by City Council and City
Council would be the only governing body with the ability to change those fees. In
addition,Mrs.Goode-Macon stated any changes within the ZBA fee structure would not
be a part of the wind energy conversion systems ordinance and were only presented in
this discussion for informational purposes.
Vice-Chair Huerta stated concerns over pricing of fee structure and a desire to
have fee structure adjusted to make use of wind energy conversions systems financially
viable.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mrs.Goode-Macon stated minimum
spacing requirements recommendations were made as a part of this ordinance review
process are staffs recommendations to Planning Commission and City Council. Mrs.
Goode-Macon stated separate recommendations can come from the Planning
Commission.
In response to Commissioner Skrobarczyk, Mr. Perales stated staffs
recommendations are based on consideration for pubic safety,aesthetics,visual impact
and wind patterns. Mr. Perales stated according to an industry representative most
manufacturer's recommendations do not include minimum spacing requirements.
Vice-Chair Huerta called a point of order and questions whether a public hearing
would be opened.
In response to Vice-Chair Huerta, Mr. Perales stated a public hearing will be
opened on this ordinance.
Mr. Darrell Smith came forward and had concerns regarding health issues that may
be attributed to the wind energy systems. Mr. Smith requested the Planning Commission to
table this item in order to do add more specifications regarding health concerns and has
concerns about stringent requirements regarding land size in addition to complaints of cost.
Mr.John Hooper, 1118 Graham Road,came forward and stated concerns regarding
noise. Mr. Hooper stated the noise generated is obnoxious but also stated he is not opposed
to wind energy. Mr. Hooper stated the noise is a high pitched siren type noise that is
nonstop. Mr. Hooper stated issues with hollow metal pole amplifying the unpleasant noise.
Cheryl Hooper, 1118 Graham Road,came forward and stated concerns regarding
noise.Mrs. Hooper stated she wrote all City Council Members and the Mayor and invited
them to come to her home and listen to the noise. Mrs. Flooper stated Ms. Wargo came to
her home and took ambient noise levels. Mrs. Hooper requested this issue not go forward
until the noise concerns can be addressed.
John Hearn, 730 County Road 57,outside of the City limits,came forward and
requested the ordinance including the ETJ.
In response to Mr. Hearn,Mr. Pcrales stated all codes are limited to City's authority
however there is a possibility of inter-local agreement with the county.
Planniuy Commission Minutes
2009
Page 15
Tracey Long,419 Schatzel Street,came forward and stated concerns about sound
level and sound level complaints in the ordinance being subjective.
In response to Commissioner Martinez, Mr. Long stated the pole is not a factor
regarding the noise but the blades can be.
In response to Commissioner Taylor,Mr. Long stated the proposed ordinance is
very stringent.
Chuck Burnett, 5631 Holly Road,came forward stating issues regarding building
inspectors being called in regards to these issues versus police officers.
V ice-Chair Huerta stated a desire to form a sub-committee to review the wind
energy systems ordinance.
Commissioner Martinez stated there was not enough information to move this
ordinance forward to City Council.
A motion to table was made by Commissioner Martinez and seconded by
Commissioner Taylor. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,Commissioner
Tamez and Commissioner Kelly being absent.
In response to Commissioner Nadkarni, Mrs.Goode-Macon stated there was no
time limit in forwarding to City Council.
A motion to amend the previous motion to table was made by Commissioner
Martinez to table the ordinance to September 30,2009 and in addition to consider the
Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction(ETU as a part of the ordinance.
A motion to create a sub-committee to review the wind energy systems ordinance
was made by Commissioner Skrobarczyk and seconded by Commissioner Martinez with
the sub-committee to include two(2)Planning Commissioners,specifically Vice-Chair
Huerta and Commissioner Taylor, Development Services staff,one(I)to two(2)persons
from the public, persons from industry and one person from the City's Legal Department.
Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,Commissioner Tamez and
Commissioner Kelly being absent.
IV. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
A. FUTURE SCHEDULED MEETINGS
Mrs. Goode-Macon stated the following are upcoming regular Planning
Commission meetings:
August 19, 2009
September 2,2009
B. ABSENCES
Mrs.Goode-Macon stated there are no absences to report.
Plannir'x Commission Minutes
2009
Page 16
C. ZONING CASES SCHEDULED FOR CITY COUNCIL
Mrs. Goode-Macon stated the following zoning cases are scheduled for City
Council:
August 18,2009
C0609-02 City of Corpus Christi Annexation
OCL to"F-R"
0609-01 Scott Ellison/Carl Howard
"F-R"to"B2-A'"
Mrs.Goode-Macon stated the wind energy conversion systems ordinance was
scheduled to go before the City Council on the date below and will be rescheduled to
allow for sub-committee meetings and recommendations.
August 25,2009 WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS
ORDINANCE—Tabled to the September 30,
2009 Planning Commission Meeting
D. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON NEXT AGENDA
Mrs.Goode-Macon stated there were no items to be placed on the next agenda.
V. ADJOURNMENT
Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Commissioner Skorbarczyk and
seconded by Commissioner Taylor. Motion passed unanimously with Chairman Garza,
Commissioner Tamez and Commissioner Kelly being absent and meeting adjourned at
8:08 p.m.
. I e u' o
a ce G,4de-Macon Elena hi z
Assistant irector of Development Recording Secretary
Services/Ptanning
H.\PLN-DIR\SHARED\WORD\PLANNING COMMISSIOMAGENDAS\2OneAOENDA SHELL 2008DOC