Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 06/15/2005 MINUTES REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Council Chambers-City Hall Wednesday—June 15,2005 5:30 P.M. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: STAFF PRESENT: Bryan Stone,Vice Chairman B. A. Bailey Holly, AICP, Director of Rudy Garza Development Services Fred Braselton Michael Gunning, AICP, Assistant Director Shirley Mims of Development Services Michael Pusley arrived at 5:50 pm Mary Frances Teniente, PE, Assistant Director Eloy H. Salazar of Development Services Richard Smith Priscilla San Miguel,Recording Secretary Robert Zamora Faryce Goode-Macon, Senior City Planner Miguel Saldana, City Planner Sylvia Carrillo-Arispe, City Planner Joseph Harney, Assistant City Attorney Mic Raasch, AICP, City Planner Daniel McGinn,City Planner COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: David Berlanga, Chairman Shirley Mims Si usted quiere dirigirse a la comision y su ingles es limitado,habra un interprete de espanol a ingles en la junta para ayudarle. CALL TO ORDER In absence of the Chairman and Commissioner Mims, Vice Chairman Stone acted as Chair,a quorum was declared and the meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Zamora, seconded by Commissioner Braselton to approve the June 1,2005 minutes as submitted. The motions passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. PLATS 1. Continued Plats Miguel Saldana read plat"a"(shown below) into the record and stated Staff recommended approval. SCANNED Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 2 a. 0505063-P29 Manhattan Estates Unitl (Final—26.121 Acres) Located west of Airline Road north of County Road 26A(Slough Road). i. Exception to the Maximum Cul-De-Sac Length. ii. Action on plat. Public hearing was opened. No one appeared to be in favor or in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Braselton to approve the exception to the maximum Cul-De-Sac length. The motion passes unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. Motion by Commissioner Braselton, seconded by Commissioner Salazar to approve action on the plat. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. Miguel Saldana read plat"b, d, and g" (shown below) into the record and stated the applicants' representatives were requesting a continuance of two weeks. Staff recommended a continuance of two weeks. b. 0505075-NP43 Cornerstone Subdivision Unit 3 (Preliminary—28.44 Acres) Located north of Don Patricio Road and east of Flour Bluff Drive. d. 0605081-P35 King's Point Unit 2 (Final—4.964 Acres) Located north of Yorktown Boulevard and west of Cimarron Boulevard. g. 0605087-NP49 Mustang Island Section No.2,Block 1,Lot 25A (Final Replat—4.359 Acres) Located east of State Highway 361 and south of Mustang Island Royal Boulevard. i. Variance request to plat portion of platted lot. ii. Action on plat. Motion by Commissioner Smith,seconded by Commissioner Garza to recommend a continuance to the June 29th hearing. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. Miguel Saldana read plats"c,e, f,and h"(shown below)into the record and stated Staff recommended approval. c. 0605080-P34 Flour Bluff Estates No.2,Block 9,Lots 10A& 10B(Final Replat—0.379 Acre) Located south of Scotland Street and east of Naval Air Station Drive(SH 358). e. 0605085-NP47 Cervantes Subdivision(Preliminary—25.388 Acres) Located east of South Clarkwood Road(FM 2292) and north of McGloin Road(CR 34). f. 0605086-NP48 Highway Village Section 2,Block 11,Lots 11D& 11E(Final Replat—0.310 Acre) Located south of Leopard Street and west of Robby Drive. Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 3 h. 0605088-NP50 Navigation Verizon Tract,Block 1,Lot 1 (Final Replat—6.156 Acres) Located east of Navigation Boulevard and south of Santa Elena Drive. Public hearing was opened. No one appeared to be in favor or in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Zamora to approve. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. 2. New Plats Miguel Saldana read plats"b and c"(shown below) into the record and Staff recommended approval. b. 0605092-P40 Commodore's Pointe PUD 2 Unit 2 (Final—5.662 Acres) Located west of Aquarius Street and north of Lanyard Drive,both north of Whitecap Boulevard and west of South Padre Island Drive (PR 22). c. 0605093-P41 Commodore's Pointe PUD 2 Unit 3 (Final— 10.200 Acres) Located west of Aquarius Street at Lanyard Drive,both north of Whitecap Boulevard and west of South Padre Island Drive(PR 22). In response to Commissioner Braselton's question of the funds for the park requirement, Ms. Holly stated that there should be an area dedicated by Asset Development of 46 acres. Public hearing was opened. No one appeared to be in favor or in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Braselton, seconded by Commissioner Garza to approve with condition to comply with the park settlement requirements per the platting ordinance. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. Miguel Saldana read plat "g" (shown below) into the record and stated that the applicants' representative was requesting a continuance of two weeks. Staff recommended a continuance of two weeks. g. 0605097-NP54 Los Amigos Subdivision,Lot 31 (Final—0.358 Acre) Located south of Ocean Drive and north of Amistad Street. Public hearing was opened. No one appeared to be in favor or in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Salazar to recommend a continuance to the June 29'h hearing. The motion passes unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. Miguel Saldana read plats"a, d, e, f, h, I, and j" (shown below) into the record and Staff recommended approval. Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 4 a. 0605091-P39 Brookhaven Subdivision, Block 8,Lots 2 &3 (Final—3.912 Acres) Located south of Brookhaven Drive and east of U. S.Highway 77. d. 0605094-P42 Corsica Tract,Block 1,Lots 1 & 2 (Final— 1.307 Acres) Located south of Corsica Road and east of South Staples Street(FM 2444). e. 0605095-P43 Padre Plaza Subdivision (Final— 17.193 Acres) Located between South Padre Island Drive (SH 358)and Williams Drive west of Nile Drive. f. 0605096-NP53 London School Tracts, Lot 1 (Final—2.861 Acres) Located north of FM 43 and west of County Road 33. h. 0605098-NP55 Dusty Hills Subdivision, Block 1,Lots 5 & 6 (Final— 12.127 Acres) Located south of McArdle Road and east of Airline Road. i. 0605099-NP56 King's Point Future Units (West) (Preliminary—50.427 Acres) Located north of Yorktown Boulevard and east of South Staples Street(FM 2444). j. 0605100-NP57 Padre Island-Corpus Christi Section No 4,Block 192,Lots 10-15& Tract B (Amending Plat—2.106 Acres) Located north of Cruiser Street and west of South Padre Island Drive (PR 22) Public hearing was opened. No one appeared to be in favor or in opposition. Motion by Commissioner Smith,seconded by Commissioner Garza to approve. The motion passes unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. Miguel Saldana read plats"a thru 1'(shown below)into the record and stated that the applicants' representatives have requested their first time extensions of six months. Staff recommended time extensions of six months. 3. Time Extensions Miguel Saldana read plat "a" (shown below) into the record and stated that the applicants' representatives have requested their first time extensions of six months. Staff recommended time extension of six months. a. 1203137-P78 Wood Estates Unit 6(Final—7.459 Acres) Located south of the southern terminus of Santa Gertrudis Drive and west of the western terminus of River Park Drive, all west of Wood River Drive. *4410 Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 5 b. 0604082-P48 Morningstar Estates Unit 2 (Final—7.83 Acres) Located north of Wooldridge Road and east of Rodd Field Road(SH 357). c. 0604102-P59 Tuscan Place Unitl (Final—32.324 Acres) Located between Guadalupe Drive and the Nueces River east of Riverview Drive. d. 1104184-P94 Great Outback Unit 1 (Final-46.3 Acres) Located west of FM 1889 and south of Northwest Boulevard(FM 624). e. 1104185-P95 Great Outback Unit 2 (Final—9.86 Acres) Located west of FM 1889 and south of Northwest Boulevard (FM 624). f. 1204199-P98 The Coves at Lago Vista Unit 1 (Final—79.82 Acres) Located south of FM 2444 (South Staples Street) east of King Trail Drive. Public hearing was opened for the above referenced plat. No one appeared to be in favor or in opposition. The public hearing was closed. In response to Commissioner Salazar's question of the proposed acre tracts requirement, Mr. Gunning stated that the requirement as to whether or not they need to tie into the city sewer system is a determination that the City Engineer would need to assess. It has nothing to do with the zoning of the property. If the sanitary sewer is reasonably available, they may need to tie into it. If the applicant is on a public water supply they can have septic systems as long as they have 1 acre or more. Septic systems need to be approved by the County Health Department. Motion by Commissioner Garza, seconded by Commissioner Zamora to approve time extensions. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. ZONING 1. Tabled Zoning a. Case No.0605-01 TEMET Properties: "R-1A"One-family Dwelling District to a"R-2" Multiple Dwelling District Edgewater Terrace,Block 4, Lots 8,9, 10 and 11,located along the southwest corners of Ocean Drive, South Alameda Drive and Edgewater Drive. The applicant submitted a request to table action until June 29, 2005. the Planning Commission initially tabled this item on June 1, 2005 public hearing. The applicant stated that they need more time to prepare a PUD-2 proposal and site plan. Staff recommended approval. Motion was made by Commissioner Zamora, seconded by Commissioner Garza to table until June 29th hearing. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. *NY Minutes-Planning CIMO Meeting June 15,2005 Page 6 2. New Zoning a. Case No.0605-03 Randy Maldonado: "AB"Professional Office District to a`B-1" Neighborhood Business District Tracy Subdivision, Block 8, 30 feet of Lot 1 and 24 and Lots 2 and 23, located along Baldwin Boulevard between Cloyde Street and Lynch Street. Request: Change of zoning from"AB"Professional Office District to"B-1" Neighborhood Business District Excerpts from Zoning Report Legal Description/Location: Tracy Subdivision, Block 8, 30'of Lot 1 and 24 and Lots 2 and 23, located along Baldwin Boulevard between Cloyde Street and Lynch Street. Purpose of Request: Fast food restaurant—drive-through only. Area Development Plan: Southeast— The future land use map indicates professional office uses for the subject property. However, the Baldwin Boulevard corridor is transitioning to neighborhood business uses. The requested "B-1"District is supported and a modification to the future land use map is required. Department Comments: March 2004, a change of zoning from an "R-1B"District occurred east of the subject property, along between Riggan and Elizabeth Streets Staff Recommendation: Approval of the "B-1"Neighborhood Business District Ms. Goode-Macon provided graphics of the subject property and the surrounding area. The zoning report and tape are on file. Ms. Goode-Macon stated that the applicant is looking to develop a Pete's Chicken-n- More Restaurant on Baldwin Boulevard,between Cloyde Street and Lynch Street. The subject property is west of Del Mar College. There was a zoning case in 2004 along Baldwin Boulevard between Riggan and Elizabeth Street in which there was"AB"District property that was rezoned into a`B-1"District. This particular piece of property will be the last remaining lot with regards to an"AB"District connecting to a`B-1"District along this immediate corridor. There are four lots in which this particular establishment is proposing to construct a restaurant. There is a residential"R-1B"District to the rear of the subject property and there is also commercial activity along Baldwin Boulevard with commercial activity down the street. The future land use map recommends that the area convert to non residential property. The applicant has been notified that when the establishment does occur,the access along Cloyde and Lynch Streets will be prohibited due to the fact that they will have access along Baldwin Boulevard. Staff is recommending approval of the`B-1"District as requested by the applicant. There were notices 34 notices mailed with one received in favor and none in opposition. In response to Commissioner Braselton's question regarding the two curb cuts along Baldwin Boulevard, Ms.Goode-Macon indicated that staff was not sure if they could have two, but this would be a function of the permit process. Ms. Holly stated that the applicant would not need two drive-ways; it is usually one per property. Minutes-Planning Comnussion Meeting June 15,2005 Page 7 Public hearing was opened. Randy Maldonado,6001 King Trail,stated that he is the president of Pete's Chicken-n- More. He also stated that this particular piece of property could be further developed by opening a restaurant with an express unit and no dine-in. It would all be done within code and in good taste. Public hearing was closed. In response to Commissioner Pusley's question of screening requirements,Ms. Goode- Macon stated that the applicant will be required to screen along the north property line with a 6 foot screening fence. The applicant has been in compliance with the other restaurants owned. Motion by Commissioner Salazar,seconded by Commissioner Garza to approve the"B- 1"District. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. b. Case No.0605-04 James Spencer: "R-1B"One-family Dwelling District to a"B-3" Business District Flour Bluff Estates No.2,Block 9,Lots 7A and 7B,located along Scotland Street and 125 feet east of N.A.S. Drive. Request: Change of zoning from"R-1B"One-family dwelling District to a"B-3" Business District Excerpts from Zoning Report Legal Description/Location: Flour Bluff Estates No. 2, Block 19, lots 7A and 7B, located along Scotland Street and 125 feet east of N.A.S. Drive. Purpose of Request: Development of office/retail complex. Area Development Plan: Flour Bluff—the future land use map recommends low-density residential uses for the subject property. However, the subject property is within the APZ-1 Accidental Potential Zone which recommends the area transition to non-single- family uses. Department Comments: The subject property is within the Accident Potential Zone-1) APZ-1)that supports transitioning residential to non-residential uses. Staff Recommendation: Approval of the "B-3"Business District Ms.Goode-Macon provided graphics of the subject property and the surrounding area. The zoning report and tape are on file. Ms.Goode-Macon stated that the subject property is located along Scotland Street in the Flour Bluff area,east of N.A.S. Drive. The subject property consists of two lots that are presently vacant. The applicant is requesting a"B-3"District zoning which will not allow residential development. The applicant is also attempting to comply with the regulations that are • Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 8 on the properties between Jester and Claude Street. These properties are in the APZ-1 area which discourages further residential development. The applicant would be the first test case that the City would have along this residential area in which the plan is suggesting that it convert to non residential uses. He is a prime candidate because he is adjacent to existing industrial and business zoning addresses. Across the subject property is a church. There is currently 1/3 in the neighborhood of vacant lots with a mixture of legal non conforming mobile homes along with legal conforming single family homes. The future land use map shows the property as low density residential as a stabilizing method until Planning Commission and Development Services could decide when the transition could begin. Staff is recommending approval of the"B-3" District at this time. There were 15 notices mailed with none in favor and none returned in opposition. Public hearing was opened. There appeared to be no one in favor or in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Garza, seconded by Commissioner Braselton to approve. The motion passes unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. c. Case No.0605-05 John Bratton: "F-R"Farm-Rural District to a"RE"Residential Estate District and a"B-1"Neighborhood Business District Being 350 acres out of Laurels Farm Tracts, south half of Section 31,and north half of Section 32,located south of F.M. 2444(South Staples Street)and east of County Road 41. Request: Change of zoning from"F-R"Farm Rural District to Tract 1: "RE"Residential Estate District and Tract2: `B-1"Neighborhood Business District Excerpts from Zoning Report Legal Description/Location: being 350.00 acres out of Laurels Farm Tracts, North half of Sections 31 and 32, located along the south of FM 2444(South Staples Street)and east of County Road 41. Purpose of Request: Development of a 249 lot single-family subdivision on one(1)acre lots;retail shopping and/or personal service uses. Area Development Plan: London— The future land use map recommends the subject property develop as low density residential with commercial uses at the corner of South Staples Street and County Road 41. Multi family uses are shown as a buffer use between the commercial use at the corner and residential uses to the south and east. The "B-1" Neighborhood Business District and "RE"Residential Estate Districts, as requested, are generally consistent with the Plan. Department Comments: The subject site was annexed into the city on July 18, 1995 and was zoned "FR"Farm and Rural. The purpose of zoning the property to "FR"was to place the property in a holding zoning until sufficient access to utilities became available to support development. Rezoning to "RE"Residential Estate Zoning offers the property owner an opportunity to develop the property at a density that is consistent with the surrounding subdivisions. Staff Recommendation: Approval • Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 9 Mr.Raasch provided graphics of the subject property and the surrounding area. The zoning report and tape are on file. Mr.Raasch stated that the property is located on 350 acres on Laureles Farm Tracts along the south side of South Staples Street and west of King Estates. The applicant is proposing to change zoning from a"RE"Residential Estates in order to develop a 249 lot,single family subdivision on 321.25 acres,with a minimum lot area of one acre. The applicant has also requested rezoning to`B-1"neighborhood Business District on 18.754 acres at the southeast corner of South Staples Street and County Road 41. On May 18, 2005,the Planning Commission approved the preliminary plat of the subdivision. The"RE"District provides for a large lot development without curbs, gutters and sidewalks. The request for rezoning to create a large lot subdivision is a continuation of a develop trend in the area. The comprehensive plan recommends the property that be developed as low density residential. The existing land uses of the subdivisions around the subject parcel are all subdivided into one acre parcels. Staff is recommending approval. There were 33 notices mailed with none returned in favor and none in opposition. Public hearing was opened. Craig Baker, 5913 King Trail, stated that their concerns were in regards to the drainage of the plat. There is a ditch that does not drain properly with heavy rains. The concern is how the water is going to drain from 321 acres into the neighborhood. In response to Commissioner Pusley's question of improvements for County Road 41, Mr.Veteto stated that County Road 41 will be a 100 foot right-of-way, 5 lane traffic with a center turn lane,at each right turn lane there will be a cut out for an additional right turn,and the drainage will be per the City's Master Plan. Currently there is sheet flow that is coming across the farm land that is being intercepted by the ditch in question. When the property is developed the flow will be intercepted before it gets to the ditch. It will all be directed to the larger ditch that is coming through the property. This process should help the drainage of the properties that back up to the subdivision. In response to Commissioner Braselton's question of how much of the county road will be constructed during development; Mr.Veteto indicated that he thought would be a deferment agreement because the developer will be required to build half of a 40 foot collector. The first unit will not be platted that far,but once the developer gets there,it will be a development requirement. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Smith,seconded by Commissioner Braselton to approve. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. d. Case No.0605-06 Juanita Hernandez: "R-1B"One-family Dwelling District to a "B-1"Neighborhood Business District Being.489 acres out of Lots 13 & 14,Section 54 of the Flour Bluff&Encinal Farm and Garden Tract,located at the intersection of Waldron Road and Crestline Street. Request: Change of zoning from"R-1B"One-family Dwelling District to a"B-1" Neighborhood Business District. • • Minutes-Planning Co *ssion Meeting June 15,2005 Page 10 Excerpts from Zoning Report Legal Description/Location: Located at the intersection of Waldron Road and Crestline Street. Purpose of Request: To convert the existing premises into a beauty salon and flower shop as well as a private residence. Area Development Plan: Flour Bluff Area Development Plan—the future land use snap recommends low-density residential around the subject property. A change of zoning to non-residential is not supported. Department Comments: • The proposed "B-1"District provides for the development of primarily retail shopping and personal service uses to be developed either as a unit or in individual parcels to serve the needs of nearby residential neighborhoods. • The area in proximity to the subject property, along the east side of Waldron Road, is predominantly undeveloped with many roads being a rural paved section. • The applicant is unsure as to what her specific needs are and therefore can not communicate an alternative zoning classification which would better suit the area and her needs. • The "AB"Professional ice District would accommodate a beauty salon with incidental retail sales but not a flower shop. Staff Recommendation: denial of the "B-1"Neighborhood Business District. Mrs.Carrillo-Arispe provided graphics of the subject property and the surrounding area. The zoning report and tape are on file. Mrs.Carrillo-Arispe stated that the existing land use map shows that the property is surrounded by single family residential. There are currently no zoning violations. At the time of the application,the applicant was proposing a beauty and flower shop. The applicant has since isolated her use to a beauty shop which would generate 40 average daily trips. Waldron Road could accommodate the trips but Crestline could not due to the fact that it is an unimproved street with no curb or gutter. The property adjacent to the subject property is an"A-1"District with a Special Permit which consists of a multi family development with a retail center. The future land use map recommends single family residential,however in discussion with the applicant, Staff will proceed with a denial of the`B-1"District in lieu thereof recommend an"AB"District. The "AB"District will allow accessory retail uses such as styling aids and other related products. The applicant would not be allowed access to the property from Crestline Street due to the condition of the street. Access would be limited to Waldron road only. The applicant would also be required to convert all existing systems such as the plumbing, electrical and mechanical to accommodate commercial grade. There were 14 notices mailed with one returned in favor and three in opposition. In response to Vice Chairman Stone's question,Mrs.Carrillo-Arispe stated that an"AB" District would allow for non-residential uses that would be more acceptable to the abutting residences. The applicant agrees with the"AB"District. • Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 11 Public hearing was opened. Jim Geffert, 530 Crestline Street,stated that he personally brought five of the public notices in opposition to staff. There is roughly 35%of property owners along Waldron Road that are in opposition to this zone change. Mr.Geffert and Mr.Huckabee are the only residences that live on Crestline Street. There are only three homes on Crestline Street and the street is only two homes long. The only vehicle access is through Crestline. All the parking is limited to the driveways. Any blocking of the drives would limit access of any emergency vehicles. It would stop the mailman from delivering mail due to the fact that he would have to turn around in the driveway. Anyone that goes down the street has to turn around from his driveway or attempt to knock down all the bushes while attempting to get around. Mr. Huckabee is an elderly gentleman and in the past five years has had emergency vehicles come in five times and attend to him. If this is to be any type of commercial property, it would limit the access for emergency vehicles. Before the dead-end street sign went up a few years ago,people would drive in and on occasion run out through the end of the property,knocking down trees and stealing things. That has stopped since but will happen again if there is more traffic due to the zoning change. We were not notified of the different zoning change of an"AB"District. Mr.Gunning stated that the original zoning application was for a B-1 District and the way the ordinance is structured, the application must remain as a request for a`B-1". The Planning Commission can recommend and City Council can grant a`B-1"District or any District that is of less intensity or deny. When the case goes to City Council,the 20%rule will still be in effect requiring seven votes from the Council members. The outcome would be regardless of the "AB"District. The only way to remove the opposition is for those persons opposing to remove their names in writing to the requested zoning district or appear before City Council and state that they were formally in opposition but are no longer opposed. Mr.Geffert stated that the neighbors would keep opposing. There would be no withdrawal. In response to Commissioner Salazar's question,Mrs. Carrillo-Arispe states that one of the restrictions would be to grant access only from Waldron and not Crestline Street. Mr.Gunning stated that the applicant would have to create access points from Waldron Road. The City's driveway ordinance would prohibit local street access if there is access to an arterial collector. The applicant would also need to submit to Development Services Department or a set of site plans for approval. Based on the use the applicant would need to comply with city parking and recess requirements. All parking must be accommodated on the subject property. Also,the residence would need to be retrofitted(wiring,plumbing,etc.)to be in compliance with the codes for a commercial use. This information is listed in the zoning report and will also be included in the action letter to the applicant. In response to Commissioner Zamora's question on the use of the residence,Mrs. Carrillo-Arispe stated that at the present time it is currently being used as a residence. The applicant does not intend to use this as her private residence. In response to Commissioner Pusley's question,Ms.Holly stated that when you convert residential to any type of commercial use,the whole house needs to be rewired,plumbing needs Minutes-Planning Co 'ssion Meeting June 15,2005 Page 12 to be brought to code for commercial standards. Everything would need to be brought to commercial standards. Mr. Geffert stated that if he or Mr.Huckabee ever desired to sell their home,people would not like to live near a commercial entity. The property would be worth a lot less with that zoning change. David Wallace, 5309 Williams, stated that he represented the owner Ross Michelsen. Mr. Wallace also stated that Mrs.Hernandez is a professional beautician and there has been slight mis-communication,her hobby is flowers and plants. When she approached she originally wanted to open a flower shop but due to her profession,she would like to purchase the home to live in and later convert it to a beauty shop. This is not a good residential property. It runs on a five lane street and is across the street from a 1 '/z acre strip center that has a"B-4"usage. If anyone purchases this home to live in,it will eventually be commercial. The subject property has one hundred and four feet of frontage on Waldron Road with ample room for a curb cut. There is also ample room for a parking lot in front of the home. Regardless if Mrs. Hernandez follows through with the purchase,the owner does want the zoning change due to the fact that the property does not have much value as residential. No family wants to raise their children on a five lane street. The cost of developing the property into commercial use is understandable. In response to Commissioner Zamora's question of square footage,Mr. Wallace stated that the tax records indicate 1452 square feet. It is larger than 1500 square feet. The applicant has been approved for a loan to purchase the property;her purchase is contingent upon the zoning change allowing her to operate a beauty shop there. Mrs.Hernandez does not want to purchase the home for the amount she is paying without being able to convert later into a beauty shop. Mr.Gunning stated that the only other business operation permitted under the current zoning code is a home occupation. Beauty salons and barber shops are not considered home occupations. Commissioner Pusley stated that an option for the applicant would be to table the zoning case until further discussion with the owner. Mr.Gunning stated that tabling would be advisable due to the fact that once the Planning Commission takes action;the owner is prohibited from refilling another zoning request for a period of twelve months. As of this date,the 20%rule would be in effect at the City Council public hearing. Mrs.Juanita Hernandez,222 Yorktown Boulevard,stated that she would like to have a permit to open a flower shop and beauty salon and,if desired at a later time, some apartments. She also stated that she did not want to be limited to one thing because of one person or one reason. She was either going to get the zoning change or not. The concerns regarding emergency vehicles not being able to get through to other homes is not valid. The customers going to her shop would not be parking on the street or block any entrance. There could be a sign that can state not to go beyond this point. These concerns can be talked and agreed upon. If it is not granted an"AB District,the subject property will not sell. The applicant stated that she would like to have the option of opening any business that she would like at any time without restrictions. Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 13 In response to Commissioner Pusley's question, Mrs. Hernandez stated that she would like to begin with a beauty salon and eventually have apartment homes in the rear of the subject property. Ms. Holly indicated that the`B-1"District was denied by Staff. The original application requested a`B-1"District for all of the subject property. Public hearing was closed. Motion to deny by Commissioner Pusley, and seconded for denial of"B-1"Neighborhood District. Commissioner Salazar stated that he would like to make the applicant and representatives aware that once the vote is denied, the owner would not he able to apply for future zone changes for another twelve months. Mr. Wallace stated that Mrs. Hernandez's purchase of the property for which she has been approved is contingent upon the zoning change. The true owner of the property would like to come before the commission in a month or so with a different buyer to again ask for zoning change of the subject property. In response to Commissioner Pusley's question, Mr. Gunning stated that the owner authorized for the applicant to make the request for zoning change. Mr. Gunning stated that he would request that the applicant work with the property owners that are in opposition because once the case goes to City Council, it would need seven votes to approve. Commissioner Pusley withdrew his motion to deny the"B-1"Neighborhood District. Motion by Commissioner Zamora, seconded by Commissioner Pusley to table until the June 29th hearing. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioners Berlanga and Mims being absent. e. Case No. 0605-07 Nueces Real Estate Partnership, L.P.: "R-1B"One-family Dwelling District(minimum 6,000 square foot lots)to an"R-1C"One-family Dwelling District (minimum 4,500 square foot lots) Being 55.73 acres out of Bohemia Colony Lands, Lot 3, Section 8,located west of Kostoryz Road and Galvan Elementary School. Request: Change of zoning from"R-1B"One-family Dwelling District with minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet to"R-1C"One-family Dwelling District with minimum lot size of 4,500 square feet. Excerpts from Zoning Report Legal Description/Location: being 55.730 acres out of Bohemia Colony Lands, Section 8, Lot 3, located west of Kostoryz Road and north of Saratoga Boulevard and adjacent to Galvan Elementary School. Purpose of Request: Development of a 342 lot single-family subdivision with minimum lot size of 4,500 square feet. • Minutes-Planning Commission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 14 Area Development Plan: Southside—the future land use map recommends the subject property develop as low density residential. Department Comments: This proposed low density residential development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff Recommendation: Approval. Mr. Raasch provided graphics of the subject property and the surrounding area. The zoning report and tape are on file. Mr. Raasch stated that the applicant is requesting a change of zoning to"R-1C"One- family Dwelling District in order to develop a 342 lot, single-family subdivision on 55.730 acres, with a minimum allowable lot size of 4,500 square feet and a maximum density of 9.68 dwelling units per acre. The existing"R-1B"District zoning permits a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet and a maximum density of 7.26 dwelling units per acre. The single-family development is projected to ultimately demand 119,700 gallons of water per day with a solid waste demand of 3,044 lbs. daily. The subject property is in agriculture production. The proposed subject property is within an area that is identified to develop as low density residential development,per the Southside Area Development Plan. Staff recommends approval of the zoning change of"R-1C" to permit the smaller lot development. There were 79 notices mailed with none in favor and four returned in opposition. There is also a petition with 74 signatures from the adjoining neighborhoods. Of the 74 signatures on the petition,43 represent property owners within the 200 foot notice area. Due to the large acreage involved,the neighbors have achieved 15%of the 20% rule. In response to Commissioner Salazar's question of the basis of downsizing zoning,Mr. Raasch indicated that the downsize of the zoning change would be to allow for more affordable types of development,with smaller lots closer to an elementary school to attract young families. The subject property is directly adjacent to the north part of the neighborhood where the opposition is coming from. The north and the west subdivisions are zoned"R-1B"District with 6,000 square foot minimum size lots. There are three lots that are zoned"R-1C"District and those are also 6,000 square feet minimum size lots. In response to Commissioner Braselton's question,Ms.Holly stated that to the west, Camargo Drive,is developed as a low density residential zoned an"R-1C District and"R-2" District. Public hearing was opened. Oswaldo Medellin,2909 Persimmon,stated that his house is adjacent to the subject property with his backyard on the north side of the parcel. One of the neighborhood concerns are that the definition from"R-1B"District to"R-1C' District,it's more dense zoning. The neighbors in opposition have stated that they would not like to have outsiders come in,purchasing property then moving in a few years to then have to rent the home. Camargo Drive is"R-1C" District,but the people that reside there are also opposing the development due to that fact that they live there and know what it is like. The streets are very narrow and people are parking on the sidewalks and in the yard. We do not want that type of zoning in our area. Another concern is that my daughter is going to attend Galvan Elementary School,and by allowing more people to Minutes-Planning CoTnrnission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 15 come into the area,it will only congest the school. Where a class may have 20-22 pupils per the state maximum,the limit will be pushed if more people are allowed into the area. With affordable housing,the types of people that will come are different from the people that are currently there. That is the main opposition that is heard when I walk down the neighborhood. Neighbors are also concerned that their property values will decrease. As indicated on the map, Richter Ditch separates one part of the Crestmont Subdivision from the other. Camargo Street does not have access from the subject property. Anyone would have to cross the ditch,go down Persimmon Street almost to the Ayers Street site to come into the neighborhood for access. The ditch divides"R-1C"District and"R-1B"District. When I moved into the area,my wife and I noticed the difference. We chose the area where we are currently located because of the room available. The next street over has access through the alley so there is not the same problem that more congested areas have. When the rain comes the ditch gets very full and with added development,it will over burden that ditch. The neighbors have seen that first hand. The property value and more children in the schools are some of the main concerns. One of the lesser concerns was the overcrowding in the Camargo Street area. There are currently two new homes that were developed in the last two years that are now back on the market due to the fact the owners did not want to live there. It was not what they wanted. Both homes are beautiful and cannot sell for that they are worth because no one wants to live in an overcrowded area. They literally have no yard. If this proposed development builds starter homes that start between 1100 and 1200 square feet,they will eventually be left to renters because of the size. When that does occur,the market value for the other homes will decrease. Indicated on the petition are the names of home owners adjacent to the subject property. The ownership of the people that have signed the petition is approximately 20 to 25%. Currently we have 18.95%due to the fact that some people are on vacation or others are just renters and don't feel they should have to sign a petition. If this zoning change is approved,these other people will be contacted to make the 20%rule for City Council. Corpus Christi Independent School District and the Diocese of Corpus Christi are neutral when it comes to issues such as these. The neighbors are not against development;we want to be progressive and stay in kind or get better. We do not want to go backwards for the extra dollar. Roland Barrera,3137 Elderberry, stated that he resides north of Galvan Elementary and also has another property located at 2616 Camargo Street. Mr.Barrera stated that he against the zoning for many of the same reasons Mr.Medellin has already stated. In the Camargo Street area that runs into Camway Street,it does tend to flood when there are heavy rains. Several of the • curbs are turning in as a result of the overflowing waters in the ditches. The storm water drainage is not enough to even support the overflow. The infrastructure to support the area is not available. Jeremy Monty,6101 Choctaw, stated that he resides at the end of the ditch area adjacent to the subject property. Mr.Monty also stated that it will be the only other way for traffic to come thru beside s going thru Kostoryz. At this time it is a very high traffic area. At around 1:00 AM there can be about 12-13 cars that run thru the residential area and no one stops at the four way stop. Edward Irigoyen,2925 Persimmon, stated that he is in opposition of the zoning change because of the same reasons and he has been in the neighborhood for over eighteen years. The field has been there since before they built their home. When there are heavy rains,the ditch has been to the very top. The little bridge that is adjacent to the property usually ends up with the debris of the high waters. The ditch may not support all the new drainage from the developments. The second to the last day of school,a young boy was hit by a driver in front of 2925 Persimmon. Minutes-Planning CoTnmission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 16 Mr. Irigoyen has had difficulty allowing his children to play in the front yard due to the high traffic area. There was no stop sign prior and cars were going between 60-65 mph on the long stretch of road. The neighborhood petitioned to have speed bumps and it was not possible at that time. Finally there was a stop sign placed. The last three years speed bumps were put in. As the letter carrier for the neighborhood,Mr. Irigoyen is usually told that some of the homes are not kept up due to the fact that they are rentals and they do not take care of the property. Some of the properties located in the neighborhood are valued as high as$115,000 and with starter developments,the homes might range from$40,000 to$50,000. That will decrease the property values of current home owners. Going to work in the morning and coming home in the evening, there is usually high traffic. Gerald Ortiz, 15805 Palmera, stated that he is in partnership with the development of the area. The only thing that needs to be stated is that the homes will have restrictions. They will have 2-car garages and 6/12 pitch and a square footage minimum of 1100 and maximum 1800 square feet. The values of the home will not be less than$110,000. Some are already appraised at$150,000. Affordable houses does not mean Section 8,which is for first time buyers or a starter family. There will not be chain linked fence; everything will be up to code. They will all be brick and should improve the area. As for drainage,the engineer will speak on that behalf. There will be deed restrictions of no parking in the front area. In response to Commissioner Salazar's question, Mr. Ortiz indicated that there has been no communication to the neighborhood. The developer wanted to plat the land before and was not aware of any opposition. Mr. Ortiz also stated that he welcomed the idea to speak to neighbors and show them models of homes that are planning to be built. Dan Urban,2725 Swantner,stated that the ownership is with another entity and the sale is contingent upon approval of zoning change. The developer is not planning to go down to the 4500 square feet minimum allowed in"R-1C"District. Some lots in the rear portion of the subject property are 131 feet deep. That is deeper that most lots in town. As for the drainage issues,the master plan ditch with hydraulic radiance indicate that there is sufficient capacity if the ditch is performing as the master drainage plan indicates to handle this particular piece of property. The potential owners like the zero lot line concept. That is the main reason for the"R- 1 C"District. The prices of the homes are not going to be isolated to low income types of developments. It will be slated more for the first time home buyer and hopefully quality homes and subdivisions. In response to Commissioner Pusley's question regarding the storm water,Mrs.Teniente stated that there were some improvements to the ditch as part of the Holly Road Improvement. Texas Department of Transportation also improved the box culverts that come in as part of the Kostoryz Street improvements. The constraint is the crossing of the ditch at Saratoga Road with a pinch on that capacity. That has not been addressed as it will take coordination from the state with funding being an issue. As this area develops,it will become priority. Mr.Urban stated that under the"R-1B"District constraint the densities that need to be accomplished are not greater than what"R-1B"District will allow per acre. Commissioner Braselton stated that the same amount of water drained from the property whether it is"R-1C"District or"R-1B"District. It would not really matter what zoning district it would be because the drainage would still be an issue. This land is prime land for developed,it will be developed whether it is homes or not. The street and sidewalks are exactly the same Minutes-inutes- lanning CoCoussi n Meeting • June 15,2005 Page 17 whether it is"R-1B"District or"R-1C"District. If there are people that would like to park in the yards,it is a function of deed restrictions and enforcement of deed restrictions. The developer will make the same amount of money despite what the zoning outcome may be. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Salazar,seconded by Commissioner Zamora to table this case until the June 29th hearing. The motion passed unanimously with Chairman Berlanga and Commissioner Mims being absent. f. Case No. 0605-08 Leon Johnson III/Landmark Commission: "R-1B"One-family Dwelling District to an"R-1B"/HC-IV One-family Dwelling District with a Historical Cultural Overlay Classification Del Mar Subdivision,Block 17, Lot 21, located along Clifford Street and 300 feet west of Santa Fe Street. Request: Change of zoning from"R-1B"One-family dwelling District to "R-1B"One- family Dwelling District with a"HC-IV"Historical-Cultural Landmark Overlay. Excerpts from Zoning Report Legal Description/Location: Del Mar Subdivision, Block 17, Lot 21, located along Clifford Street and 300 feet west of Santa Fe Street. Purpose of Request: Obtained historical designation for existing residential property, located at 313 Clifford Street. Area Development Plan: Southeast— The future land use map supports the continuation of low-density residential. The Preservation Plan supports retaining and designating historically significant properties of the city as a landmark. This subdivision was identified in the historical site survey as historically significant. Department Comments: The Preservation Plan states that the Landmark Commission is to identify and recommend historical classifications of historically significant properties within the City of Corpus Christi. Designating the subject property with an "HC"IV (Private property not open to the public) Overlay classification accomplishes the goal and objective setout in the Preservation Plan. Staff Recommendation: Approval Ms.Goode-Macon provided graphics of the subject property and the surrounding area. The zoning report and tape are on file. Ms.Goode-Macon stated that the subject property is one-family residential dwelling. The applicant is requesting to retain the exact zoning district and add the Overlay historic preservation district. The property is located at 313 Clifford Street and in the last two years the Planning Commission has reviewed several properties along Clifford Street for the historical Overlay. Clifford Street area has been identified by the City of Corpus Christi landmark Commission historical importance. Initially the Landmark Commission had denied this particular property for a historic Overlay due to modifications. The applicant was very insistent that they Minutes-Planning Alto nission Meeting June 15,2005 Page 18 would receive the classification. As a result,the applicant hired a contractor to tear down the modifications made to the home to return the home to its original state. He then resubmitted the application to the Landmark Commission for consideration and the Commission approved the request. Staff is recommending approval of the"HC"Overlay District. In response to Commissioner Braselton's question,Ms.Goode-Macon stated that the landowner initiated the historical overlay. Ms. Goode-Macon also stated that the applicant cannot make any changes without the approval of the Landmark Commission for a maximum period of 120 days. If there cannot be an agreement between the owner and the Landmark Commission the owner can then proceed after the initial 120 day period. Applicant requests this type of designation for the prestige that is attached with such designation. In response to Commissioner Salazar's question of notices mailed due to the fact that he owns a home on Cole Street,Ms. Goode-Macon stated that the notices were mailed to owners of property located within 200 feet of the subject property and it would not affect his property. Public hearing was opened. No one appeared to be in favor or in opposition. The public hearing was closed. Motion by Commissioner Smith,seconded by Commissioner Zamora for approval. The motion passed unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. DEFERMENT AGREEMENT—PADRE/INTERSTATE BUSINESS PARK UNIT 2, BLOCK 1,LOTS 1,2&3 Ms.Teniente stated that the developer is proposing a deferment agreement to defer the public improvements needed for this plat. In the interest of meeting the developer's time schedule,the applicant requested that the Planning Commission find reasonable cause to delay the 75 percent requirement. The developer is proposing to deposit$130,827.05 through a letter of credit. Which would be a 110 percent of the cost of construction. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find reasonable cause to delay the 75 percent requirement of the public improvements to expedite recordation of the plat. A motion was made by Commissioner Zamora, seconded by Commissioner Pusley to approve and find reasonable cause of the deferment agreement. The motion passed unanimously with Chairman Berlanga and Commissioner Mims being absent. • Minutes-Planning*ssion Meeting 0 June 15,2005 Page 19 DIRECTOR'S REPORT A. FUTURE SCHEDULED MEETINGS B. EXCUSED ABSENCES Vice Chairman Stone requested an excused absence for the last two Planning Commission meetings due to business related meetings. Motion by Commissioner Zamora, seconded by Commissioner Pusley to approve. The motion passes unanimously with the Chairman and Commissioner Mims being absent. C. OTHER MATTERS Introduction of Mr. Daniel McGinn, new City Planner. Commissioner Pusley requested investigation of the Wilcox store sign on Interstate Highway 37. ADJOURNMENT Motion made by Commissioner Garza, seconded by Commissioner Braselton to adjourn the meeting at 7:55 p.m. POSTING STATEMENT: This agenda was posted on the City's official bulletin board in the Leopard Street entry foyer, 1201 Leopard Street at AM/PM on ,2005. Michael N. Gunning Priscilla San Miguel Assistant Director of Recording Secretary Development Services Development Services H:\PLN-DIR\SHARED\WORD\PLANNING COMMISSION\MINUTES\2005\061505 MINUTES.DOC