Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 06/06/2001 V Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Commissioners Present: David Berlanga,Chairman Shirley Mims,Vice Chairman Michael Pusley Eloy H.Salazar Brooke Sween-McGloin Robert Zamora Commissioners Absent: Neill F.Amsler W.David Cheek Elizabeth Chu Richter Staff Present: Michael N.Gunning,AICP,Director of Planning Lucinda P.Beal,Recording Secretary Miguel S. Saldafia,City Planner Harry J.Power,City Planner J.C.Greenwood,Assistant City Attorney Leo Farias,P.E.,Special Services Engineer Norbert Hart,Director of Housing and Community Development John Kendall,Code Enforcement Coordinator 1'ALL TO ORDER Chairman Berlanga declared a quorum and called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m. NON PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS PRESENTATION—Discussion of Types of Homes and Regulations Mr. John Kendall, Zoning Code Enforcement Coordinator, described differences between manufactured and modular homes. A modular home is similar to a stick built home found in an "R-1B" One-family Dwelling District. Modular homes are constructed off-site and erected on site with a conventional foundation. Framing standards are approved by the state. A manufactured home is constructed in factory and state inspected. Manufactured homes are allowed only in the "T-113" and "T-1C" Manufacture Home District. In response to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's question,Mr.Kendall said that the state sets guidelines with regard to windstorm requirements. Homes not approved for coastal counties would not be allowed in the city. He informed the Commission that there is a metal identification plate in the mechanical closet that declared whether the home is acceptable for coastal counties. Mr. Kendall said that the inspectors are trained and required to locate the metal plate to determine compliance. Addressing Commission concern regarding windstorm regulations,Mr.Kendall said that the homes do not have to meet the TDI codes because they are regulated by the state. He said that state windstorm codes are not as strict as the city's windstorm code. Mr.Norbert Hart, Director of Housing and Community Development, said that modular homes are built according to the HUD code and manufactured houses are built according to ASCE7 rules. The ASCE7 regulations do not equal WIA codes. Even though the underlying engineering is ASCE7, they are not the same. Mr. Hart explained that the HUD code with regard to manufacturing has two (2) different structural components. One of the components is for the 14 coastal counties. He said that with regard to manufactured and modular homes,the city cannot require a stronger HUD housing code standard than is required in any other county. He continued that a fundamental modular house was as strong as stick homes currently being built. Although it is constructed off-site,it is a residential home for zoning purposes. With regard to aesthetics of a modular home, Mr. Kendall said that since a modular home is built on a foundation, it would be difficult to determine which home was a stick built home and which home was a modular home. SCANNED 1111100 , Planning Commission Minutes June 6.2001 Page 2 APPROVAL OF MINUTES—May 23,2001 Commissioner Sween-McGloin asked that clarification be made in the minutes when non-public hearing portion agenda items are being discussed out of order or at the end of a meeting. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested a correction to Page 2, Paragraph 5: "Padre Island — Conus Christi Section D.Block L Lot 41A(Final Reolat-0.688 Acre). Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Salazar, to approve May 23, 2001 minutes as amended. Motion passed with Amsler, Cheek,and Richter being absent. EXCUSED ABSENCES No requests. FUTURE SCHEDULED MEETINGS Mr.Gunning reminded the Commission that the July 4h meeting would had been cancelled. OTHER MATTERS Mr. Gunning said that information regarding the Bond Projects Location Map enclosed in the commission packet was forwarded to City Council by Mr. `Angel Escobar,Director of Engineering Services. Mr. Gunning said that it was included in the Planning Commission packet for information purposes only. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Mims,to adjourn until 6:30 p.m. for the Public Hearing Agenda Item portion of the meeting. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEMS PLATS Continued Plats a. 050155-P25 St. Helena Church Tract.Block 1 Lot l (Final—20.09 Acres) Located north of Wooldridge Road east of Rodd Field Road. Mr. Power said that the applicant's engineer submitted a request to continue the plat for two(2)additional weeks. Staff recommends approval of the continuance. Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or in opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Mims, to approve a two (2) week continuance. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. New Plats a. 050156-P26 Lake View Acres.Block 1.Lots 5A&5B (Final Reolat-2.710 Acres) Located north of Lake View Drive and between Holly Road and Rodd Field Road. Mr. Power said that Staff recommends approval as submitted. Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing .was closed. V r Planning Connnission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 3 In response to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's question, Mr. Power said that the easement has been abandoned and is not being used. Motion by Pusley, seconded by Zamora, to approve the plat as submitted. Motion passed with Amsler, Cheek,and Richter being absent. b. 050157-P27 Manor Home Subdivision ifinal—7.102 Acres) Located east of Benys Road between Hampshire Road and Horizon Drive,all north of Leopard Street. Mr.Power said that Staff recommends approval as submitted. He added that the plat requires a waiver of the minimum cul-de-sac length of 500 feet. The plat meets the ordinance of 24 or fewer lots and does not exceed the maximum of 750 feet. Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Sween-McGloin asked for information regarding a 50-foot wide parcel of Lot 1 out of Kinney tract. Public hearing was opened. Chuck Urban, 2725 Swantner, said that the 50-foot parcel of property is a pipeline easement that is non- buildable belonging to Equistar Chemicals. In response to Vice Chairman Mims', Mr. Urban said that it could be possible to develop a park on the property. He added that he would need to research the property to provide a definite answer. Mr.Urban said that the subject property,zoned"T-1C"Manufactured House District,would be developed with manufactured homes. Motion by Pusley, seconded by Salazar, to approve the plat as submitted. Motion passed with Amsler, Cheek,and Richter being absent. c. 060160-NP33 Peach View Estates O.C.L. (Final Reolat—11.874 Acres) Located between State Highway 361 and the Gulf of Mexico, approximately five miles south of Port Aransas,Texas. Mr.Power said that Staff recommends approval as submitted. Public hearing was opened Ron Voss, Jr., 3002 Cedar Springs, explained that the road labeled as a private road will be labeled as a public right-of-way in the notes. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Sween-McGloin expressed concern with traffic issues that may arise in the future. She said that due to the high speeds associated with a state highway,she suggested that a parallel roadway system be implemented. She asked that the Platting Ordinance be amended to review issues as expressed. In response to Vice Chairman Mims,Mr.Power said that there is a requirement as part of the infrastructure requirement that the City obtain an agreement between the developer and the property owner to the south for future extension of the street. v 'S Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 4 Motion by Mims, seconded by Salazar, to approve the plat as submitted. Motion passed with Amsler, Cheek,and Richter being absent. d. 060161-NP34 Navination Verizon Tract.Block 1 Lots 1 &2 (Preliminary— 19.49 Acres) Located east of Navigation Boulevard between Santa Elena Street and Bear Lane. Mr.Power said that Staff recommends approval as submitted. Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Zamora, to approve the plat as submitted. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. Time Extensions a. 050076-P37 Wood River Unit 15 (Final—5.05 Acres) Located east of East River Drive, north of the extension of Big Cyprus Bayou Drive, both north of Northwest Boulevard(F.M.624). Mr.Power said Staff recommends approval of a six-month time extension. Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Mims, to approve a six-month time extension. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. b. 1200140-NP79 Saratoca Industrial Place Unit 2 Block 2.Lots 3A&3B (Final Reolat—0.895 Acre) Located west of Chapman Ranch Road(S.H.286)south of Saratoga Boulevard(S.H. 357). Mr.Power said Staff recommends approval of a six-month time extension. Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Sween-McGloin, seconded by Pusley, to approve a six-month time extension. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. c. 1200142-NP80 Hazel Bazemore Estates (Final Reolat—36.26 Acres) Located north of County Road 48 and west of County Road 69. Mr.Power said Staff recommends approval of a six-month time extension. Chairman Berlanga opened the public hearing. No one appeared in favor or opposition. Public hearing was closed. Motion by Zamora, seconded by Pusley, to approve a six-month time extension. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. V Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 5 ZONING CASES New Zoning Cases Corpus Christi Outpatient Surgery,Ltd.: 0501-01 REQUEST: "R-1B"One-Family Dwelling District w/SP and"R-2"Multiple Dwelling District w/SP to"B-1" Neighborhood Business District on Port Aransas Cliffs,Block 816A,Lot 66 and north one-half of the Proctor Ditch,located on the east side of South Alameda Street, approximately 650 feet south of Ropes Street Mr. Saldafia presented a slide illustration of the subject property and the surrounding area. The subject property is part of an area that is zoned an"R-1B"District and an"R-2"District. The"R-18"District extends in all directions from the subject property. It is predominantly developed with single-family residences. The "R-2" District extends north of the subject property for approximately 300 feet and is developed with apartment units. Further to the north and along the east side of S. Alameda Street,the area is zoned an"AB"District and developed with a mixture of medical offices,business offices and apartments. Northeast of the subject property there is an area zoned a "B-4" District which is developed with a hospital (Driscoll Children's Hospital). To the south past the drainage ditch there is a 1/2-acre tract of land zoned an "AB" District developed with an office. Further south, a "B-1"District is developed with a retail store and a service station. Mr. Saldafia continued that the subject property is a platted lot located within the Taylor Shopping Center that is currently occupied by a medical clinic. A change of zoning from "R-1B" One-family Dwelling District, "R-2" Multiple Dwelling District,"R-1B" One-family Dwelling District with a Special Permit and "R-2" Multiple Dwelling District to a"B-I "Neighborhood Business District was requested in order to expand the medical center's parking area into the adjacent drainageway (Proctor Channel), also known as the Brawner Parkway. A "B-I" District or Special Permit for the parking use is required. The Proctor Channel is zoned an "R-1B" and "R-2" Districts. The existing medical clinic building needs additional parking due to increases in clientele. Adjacent to the north, is the remainder of the shopping center that requires all of its parking spaces for other retail uses located therein. Therefore,the only available area to the clinic for additional parking is within the City's drainageway. The drainageway has a gradual slope with an underground stormwater box culvert designed to carry the bulk of the stormwater runoff. The drainageway serves as a secondary runoff area that seldom carries stormwater and is considered as a green belt open space. The applicant proposes to add 24 parking spaces by extending the parking sixteen(16) feet into the drainage right-of-way buffered by four(4) feet of landscaped area. City Council must review and approve a Drainage Easement Maintenance Agreement for the applicant to use the City's right-of- way for parking,as well as,the change of zoning. City Council must approve the Drainage Easement Maintenance Agreement prior to taking any action on the zoning requested. If the agreement is not approved, this rezoning request will be withdrawn. Due to time constraints and the immediate need for additional parking, both the agreement and the change of zoning will be on the Council. It is not Staffs intent to eliminate or reduce any of the existing conditions of the approved Special Permit. Staff does not recommend changing the zoning but modifying the existing Special Permit to include the drainage right-of-way. Since the Proctor Channel is considered as a green belt. Staff further recommends the applicant provide a pedestrian sidewalk or a bike/hike path from S. Alameda Street to Topeka Street to serve as an anchor pedestrian connection to be extended at a future date. The City's position is that in granting an easement agreement for a private use of City right-of-way that there also be a comparable public benefit. The need for future pedestrian connections to arterials, parks, and neighborhood commercial centers via drainage ways has been encouraged by the Planning Commission for several years. The Southeast Area Development Plan's future land use map recommends the east side of S. Alameda Street between Doddridge Street and Texan Trail to develop with neighborhood business uses. The subject property's current use, although consistent with the ADP, was developed under a Special Permit that included specific language to protect the adjacent neighborhood. The past neighborhood concerns and special conditions still apply to the subject property and a change to"B-1"District would be inappropriate for this site. %r 'S Planning Comntission Minutes lune 6,2001 Page 6 Mr. Saldana said that Staff recommends denial of the "B-1" District, and in lieu thereof, approval of a Special Permit for a shopping center subject to a site plan and the following ten(10)conditions: 1. USES: The only uses permitted by this Special Permit other than the uses permitted by right in an"R-1B" One-family Dwelling District and an "R-2" Multiple Dwelling District are retail stores, offices, medical clinics,personal service uses and one restaurant not to exceed 2,000 square feet. The following uses are prohibited: bars, lounges, or nightclubs, discos, undertaking businesses or establishments, establishments selling, exhibiting,or distributing pornographic or obscene materials,massage parlors,convenience stores, service stations,fueling stations,liquor stores,or any business that creates strong offensive odors, fumes,or dust,or emit loud or shrill sounds. 2. SCREENING: A masonry wall with a height of not less than eight (8) feet must be installed and maintained along a line parallel to and ten (10) feet west of the Topeka Street right-of-way line. The masonry wall must be maintained from the existing masonry wall parallel to Topeka Street and the parking area. A landscaped screening that will obtain a height of six(6) feet within one year of planting,must be installed and maintained along the parking lot's south and east boundary lines. 3. LANDSCAPING: A 10-foot landscaped strip must be provided and maintained along the area between the masonry wall and Topeka Street. This landscaped strip must contain at least one, 3-inch caliper oak tree every 30 feet on center and must be fully irrigated. Landscaping along the south property line and the west portion of the property must comply with the attached site plan. 4. REFUSE: All disposable items must be placed in containers at designated fenced disposal areas. All refuse container removal must occur between the hours of 6:00 a.m.and 9:00 p.m. 5. ACCESS: Vehicular access to Topeka Street is prohibited. 6. LIGHTING: All security lighting must be directional and shielded. Lighting must be directed away from the surrounding residences and public rights-of-way. 7. SIGNAGE: All wall signs must comply with the standards set forth in the "B-1"Neighborhood Business District of the Corpus Christi Zoning Ordinance, except that wall signs are only permitted along the building facades that face S.Alameda Street. One freestanding sign is permitted provided that the area of the sign does not exceed twenty(20)square feet and a height of ten(10)feet. 8. BIKE AND HIKE TRAIL: A concrete bike path with a width of not less than eight (8) feet must be constructed to connect the S. Alameda Street sidewalk with the Topeka Street sidewalk. The bike path must be installed within one year from the date of this ordinance. Construction plans for installation must be approved by City Engineering prior to construction start. 9. ORDINANCE NO. 023438: Adoption of this ordinance does not affect the conditions or site plan for Lot 65 as set forth in Ordinance No.023438,approved by the City Council on September 15, 1998. 10. TIME LIMIT: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one(1)year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in condition #1 and in compliance with all other conditions. Mr. Saidada answered Commission's questions by saying that the existing ditch is not a primary drainage way. He informed the Commission that the existing Special Permit allows for offices, some retail and one (1) restaurant. At the request of Chairman Berlanga, Mr. Saldana explained Special Condition #9 affecting Lot 65. He said that the subject property is adjoined to Taylor Center and received a Special Permit on both lots as one property. Since that time, the subject property was sold by the owners of the Taylor Center. As a result, the owners of the subject property are requesting additional parking because they are prohibited from using parking designated for Taylor Center. He clarified that amendment to requirements for the Special Permit would be to the Special Permit placed on the subject property and not the Taylor Center. Public hearing was opened. fir Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 7 Clark Plato, 403 N. Shoreline, representing the Corpus Christi Outpatient Surgery Center, said that the applicant proposes to develop a 20-foot encroachment into the Proctor Ditch with required landscape and develop a hike and bike trail. Mr. Flato provided a brief history of Corpus Christi Outpatient Surgery Center's customer base. He said that due to changing health care needs and requiring patients to patron outpatient centers as opposed to hospital facilities, there has been an increase in procedures performed. The center needs an additional 24 parking spaces to accommodate the influx of patients as submitted in the site plan. Commissioner Zamora asked whether a parking variance would be required. Mr.Flato said that he and the applicant are working with Staff to address the parking requirements. Mr. Gunning said that as a shopping center use, the parking requirements have been met He explained that if the business were considered a stand-alone business, they would be lacking 47 parking spaces in order to be in compliance. He continued that the property owner is working with the City to acquire City-owned property to the south of the Proctor Channel to use for parking. In response to Commissioner Zamora, Mr. Gunning explained the Drainage Easement Maintenance Agreement. He said that it is similar to a Use Privilege Agreement instrument to allow someone to use city property within the right-of-way. The use will be a long term use which will require an annual lease payment. He continued that the Legal Department has devised the Drainage Easement Maintenance Agreement. It will stipulate that the lessee will maintain the landscaping and keep the area maintained around the area. There will also be a requirement to install a hike and bike trail that will extend from South Alameda Street to Topeka Street. Mr.Gunning described the hike and bike trail as being an 8-foot wide sidewalk and landscaping that will remain on city property. He provided a map illustrating the area that will be designated as a hike and bike trail and described the street layout. Mr. Gunning said that there is an opportunity to develop a pedestrian connection. The series of streets between S.Alameda and Santa Fe Street dead-end into the Proctor Channel. He referred to the map and illustrated the lack of linear availability for pedestrian connection. The additional right-of-way in the Proctor Channel,which is the subject property, is surplus land that the City acquired adjacent to the subject property but not for the entire distance to Santa Fe Street. The subject property is viewed as a parkway and open space than a drainage way because of the drainage box that was placed underneath. He said that it is rare for the ditch to carry water. Commissioner Salazar asked for the center configuration. Mr. Flato explained that the outpatient center is constructed as part of Taylor Center and has a common wall, but on two (2) different lots. He explained that additional parking being considered by the applicant and discussed with staff is city property located across the drainage ditch and is not contiguous with the subject property. Milton Lorenz,445 Brawner Parkway,said that he objected to a"B-1"District zoning on the property. He continued that he believed an extension would not be attractive to the area and hoped that the area between Alameda and Santa Fe would be treated the same as the drainage area to the west of S. Alameda Street with regard to landscaping and improvements. The extension of paved parking will block off some of the area. He asked that the area being considered for a Special Permit not be extended to the center of Proctor Ditch. Mr. Lorenz said that the Corpus Christi Outpatient Surgery Center has been a good neighbor but he doesn't want to see a precedent set in using City property to offset a private business for additional parking. He objected to the encroachment into Brawner Parkway. George Taylor,owner of Taylor Center,said that he did not object to the parking extension. However,he did express concern regarding landscaping and requested that the landscaping be consistent. Public hearing was closed. In response to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's concern, Mr. Saldatna said that the applicant will submit a revised site plan illustrating the parking, 4-foot landscaped area, and the hike and bike trail. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested that Special Permit Condition #3 be amended to reflect that the applicant will be presenting a new site plan as stated by Mr.Saldada. Commissioner Sween-McGloin said that the National Estuary Program conducted a survey which found that non-point source pollution is the greatest polluter in the area. She continued that the rte-off from the driveway will get into the bays and estuaries and requested the addition of a filtering system with vegetation or tilting the IOW ‘10 Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 8 parking toward a catch basin. Mr. Gunning said that the parking area will be designed so that the run-off does not flow directly into the Proctor Channel but into the existing drainage culvert. Commissioner Pusley said that he would have concerns with the parking spaces. The problems with parking and the effects to the drainage system would not be affected by 20 parking spaces. He suggested that Staff discuss the catch basin issue with Ms. Valerie Gray, Stomrwater Superintendent and discuss ground cover as a filtering system. Mr. Gunning said that staff met with Ms. Gray and have discussed issues regarding stormwater requirements and concerns. Commissioner Salazar said that requirement of a filtering system was a good requirement but should be addressed throughout the city and not an isolated situation. Mr.Farias provided the Commission with information regarding the catch basin being on the subject property and indicated it could easily be installed. Motion by Pusley, seconded by Mims, to deny the `B-1" Neighborhood Business District request and approve a Special Permit for a shopping center subject to a site plan and the following II conditions: 1. USES: The only uses permitted by this Special Permit other than the uses permitted by right in an"R-1B" One-family Dwelling District and an "R-2" Multiple Dwelling District are retail stores, offices, medical clinics, personal service uses and one restaurant not to exceed 2,000 square feet. The following uses are prohibited: bars, lounges, or nightclubs, discos, undertaking businesses or establishments, establishments selling,exhibiting,or distributing pornographic or obscene materials,massage parlors, convenience stores, service stations,fueling stations,liquor stores,or any business that creates strong offensive odors,fumes,or dust,or emit loud or shrill sounds. 2. SCREENING: A masonry wall with a height of not less than eight (8) feet must be Stalled and maintained along a line parallel to and ten (10) feet west of the Topeka Street right-of-way line. The masonry wall must be maintained from the existing masonry wall parallel to Topeka Street and the parking area. A landscaped screening that will obtain a height of six (6) feet within one year of planting,must be installed and maintained along the parking lot's south and east boundary lines. 3. LANDSCAPING: A 10-foot landscaped strip must be provided and maintained along the area between the masonry wall and Topeka Street. This landscaped strip must contain at least one, 3-inch caliper oak tree every 30 feet on center and must be fully irrigated. Landscaping along the south property line and the west portion of the property must comply with the attached site plan and be consistent with current landscaping. 4. REFUSE: All disposable items must be placed in containers at designated fenced disposal areas. All refuse container removal must occur between the hours of 6:00 a.m.and 9:00 p.m. 5. ACCESS: Vehicular access to Topeka Street is prohibited. 6. LIGHTING: All security lighting must be directional and shielded. Lighting must be directed away from the surrounding residences and public rights-of-way. 7. SIGNAGE: All wall signs must comply with the standards set forth in the "B-1"Neighborhood Business District of the Corpus Christi Zoning Ordinance, except that wall signs are only permitted along the building facades that face S. Alameda Street. One freestanding sign is permitted provided that the area of the sign does not exceed twenty(20)square feet and a height of ten(10)feet. 9. BIKE AND HIKE TRAIL: A concrete bike path with a width of not less than eight (8) feet must be constructed to connect the S. Alameda Street sidewalk with the Topeka Street sidewalk. The bike path must be installed within one year from the date of this ordinance. Construction plans for installation must be approved by City Engineering prior to construction start. A site plan is required. 9. ORDINANCE NO. 023438: Adoption of this ordinance does not affect the conditions or site plan for Lot 65 as set forth in Ordinance No.023438,approved by the City Council on September 15, 1998. 10. DRAINAGE- Provide a filtering system utilizing a catch basin or existing vegetation conducive to Stonnwater and Engineering specifications. rr+ rd► Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 9 11. TIME LIMIT: Such Special Permit shall be deemed to have expired within one(1)year of the date of this ordinance unless the property is being used as outlined in condition #1 and in compliance with all other conditions. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. MSW Promenade,L.P.: 0601-01 Request: "R-1B"One-family Dwelling District w/SP to "B-1"Neighborhood Business District on property described as Cullen Place Unit 1, Block 8, Lot 3, located on the east side of Airline Road, approximately 450 feet north of McArdle Road and located on the east side of Airline Road, approximately 450 feet north of McArdle Road Mr. Saldada provided a slide illustration of the subject property and the surrounding area. The subject property is part of a 3.39-acre tract of land that is zoned an"R-IB"District with a Special Permit and is developed as a retail center. Adjacent to the north and further east and west,there are 665 acres of land zoned"R-IH"District and developed with single-family residences. South and west of the subject property, there are 23 acres of land zoned a"B-1"District and developed with retail stores,offices,and restaurants. Further south is an area containing 555 acres that is zoned a"B-4"District and developed with shopping centers. Mr. Saldaiia said that the subject property is located within the north half of the Promenade Shopping Center that is currently zoned an"R-1B"One-family Dwelling District with a Special Permit. The south end of this retail center is zoned a"B-1"Neighborhood Business District. The applicant has requested a change of zoning to a "B-1"District for a restaurant use. In 1985,when the original Special Permit was approved, it permitted retail uses with a prohibition of 24-hour operations. This Special Permit required an 8-foot masonry wall along the residential boundary,a landscaped buffer area,and prohibited alcohol or food to be served in any retail establishment. In 1987, the Special Permit was modified to exclude full food service restaurants. As of recent, the applicant has received inquiries about locating a restaurant in the corner end storefront. The subject property contains a portion of the Promenade Shopping Center that has direct access to an arterial, Airline Road, and no direct access to a local residential street. The shopping center abuts a residential area that is buffered by an 8-foot masonry wall along the north and east property lines. At the time the original Special Permit was approved,there were uses permitted in the "B-1"District that were not compatible with the residential adjacency, such as an auto repair or bar. The"B-1"District has since been amended to eliminate those uses and making the"B-1"District more residential-friendly. The"B-1"District portion of the shopping center currently includes restaurants. Across Airline Road from the subject property, the "B-1" District area that includes the Crossroads Village Shopping Center, also contain restaurants. Approval of the 'B-1" District on the subject property would be an expansion of the"B-1"District to the south and west. Mr.Saldana said that the Southeast Area Development Plan's adopted future land use map recommends the area to develop with neighborhood business uses. The requested"B-1"District is consistent with the Plan's adopted future land use map. Therefore, Staff recommends approval. There were 32 notices mailed to property owners within a 200-foot radius of which none were recommended in favor or opposition. Public hearing was opened. Ramey Beene, 5866 South Staples, represented the applicant. Mr. Beene provided a brief history of the shopping center and described the shopping center. He said that the screening fence is an 8-foot tall double brick service drive fence with a 10-foot green area with 25-foot oak trees on center every 25 feet. He said that he has had several requests for restaurant businesses in the area that is currently zoned with a"R-1B"District. The applicant was requesting a"B-1"District to be consistent with other shopping centers in Corpus Christi. Mr. Beene said that there would be adequate parking for "B-I" District businesses. He continued that businesses across Airline Road currently use their excess parking which equates to approximately 50 spaces. Public hearing was closed. r.. .r Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 10 Commissioner Pusley expressed concern with the lack of parking for future patrons for the shopping center. Mr. Gunning said that as long as parking is not restricted, there would be adequate parking. Mr. Saldana said that the subject property would require 12 parking spaces if it is zoned"B-I"District as proposed. The applicant said that there are approximately 50 parking spaces which is more than required by the ordinance. Motion by Mims, seconded by Sween-McGloin, to approve the rezoning request. Motion passed with Amsler,Cheek,and Richter being absent. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS Mr. Saldana provided an overview of the Zoning Text Amendments. He said that several definitions have been added or amended. The bed and breakfast use is a new definition. Currently, the bed and breakfasts use is being used as an extension of the family use as roomers or boarders unrelated to the head of household. Interpretation of the "family" definition allows operation of a bed and breakfast in a residential neighborhood provided the homeowner does not exceed four (4) boarders. The proposed amendment establishes separate definitions for a bed and breakfast home allowed in residential and low-intensity districts and a bed and breakfast inn that would be allowed in higher intensity uses such as "A-2" Apartment-House and commercial districts. Mr.Saldafia explained that beginning with the "A-2" District to the more intense districts, boarding houses are allowed. Therefore a bed and breakfast in an"A-2"or higher zoning district are allowed more as a liberty bed and breakfast inn than would be allowed for a bed and breakfast homes located in lower intensity districts. Bed and Breakfast Mr. Saldafia reviewed the bed and breakfast home use. The home would need to be owner-occupied and limited to five (5) bedrooms available for rent, in addition to a bedroom for the owner. Restaurants, banquet facilities, and other similar uses that would impact the surrounding residential areas are prohibited. Bed and breakfast homes would be permitted in any zoning classification from "F-R" Farm-Rural to "R-2" Multi-family Dwelling District and low-intensity apartment districts. Off-street parking would not be permitted within the front yard and would have to be behind the area. There are allowances to permit on-street parking provided that it is limited to the boundaries of the bed and breakfast home property. Traffic Engineering would need to approve the parking and verify that the parking would not impede traffic flow. Another requirement would be a minimum 300 feet side separation and a minimum of 150 feet front and rear separation from each bed and breakfast home. Mr. Saldafia reviewed the bed and breakfast inn use. The inn is limited to 12 bedrooms. Currently, the "A-V District permits boarding houses limited to 20 boarders. Staff discussed limiting the inn to 20 rooms, but using the basis of a boarding house definition, the occupancy of the inn would exceed 20 boarders. All bed and breakfasts are required to comply with the hotel/motel tax per State law. Mr. Saldafia responded to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's concern by saying that the amendment states that the facility may not have more than 12 bedrooms and not exceed 20 boarders. Commissioner Sween-McGloin suggested limiting the number of boarders to 24. Mr. Gunning responded to Commissioner Sween-McGloin's concern by saying that in order to prove the bed and breakfast use to the Building Division for a Certificate of Occupancy, the owner needed to prove payment of hotel/motel taxes. Commissioner Mims expressed concern with not being able to create a bed and breakfast district. She said that it is better to create a bed and breakfast district than to amend ordinances at a later date. Mr. Saldafia agreed that bed and breakfasts uses could be located within a certain area. He explained that the transition to a bed and breakfast use will impact existing residences if several homeowners decided to operate a bed and breakfast. He suggested that a Planned Unit Development(PUD)be created in established bed and breakfast use areas at a later date. Mr. Saidada said that staff wanted to protect the integrity of single-family residences. Mr. Gunning said that it was suggested that as a prerequisite to establishing the bed and breakfast use a public hearing be required before the Zoning Board of Adjustment in order to give the affected neighborhood residents an opportunity to be heard. He said that Staff suggested requiring the bed and breakfast home use to be reviewed by the Zoning Board of Adjustment and allow the bed and breakfast inn to be allowed by right in designated zoning districts. Commissioner Mims requested that districts allowing bed and breakfast home uses by right need to be listed and identified in the ordinance. it Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 11 Commissioner Salazar said that he preferred to have the bed and breakfast home use be reviewed by the Zoning Board of Adjustments for expediency and not be required to be presented City Council. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested that the bed and breakfast home be limited to five(5)rooms and limit the number of people to ten. Mr.Gunning explained the definition of a"family" and allowance of 4 unrelated boarders. In allowing a bed and breakfast in a single-family district,typically,bed and breakfasts set up four rooms, presumably one room for each boarder. He added that patrons of a bed and breakfast use are generally couples. Therefore, staff decided to limit the number of rooms to five(5)which would accommodate 10 people,but there is no limitation regarding the number of persons to a room. Commissioner Sween-McGloin suggested that anyone wanting to operate a bed and breakfast home adjacent to a home being operated as a bed and breakfast home needed to present their case before the Zoning Board of Adjustment. A public hearing would allow the neighborhood an opportunity to address the use. She said that she believed that a district could form and the neighborhood would be the deciding factor regarding whether the use was appropriate. Mr. Saidada explained the public hearing process for the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Mr. Gunning said that he has concerns with bed and breakfast uses in residential neighborhoods without notification to the residents. However, if performance standards are in place regulating bed and breakfast homes, the neighborhood could retain its residential character. Mr. Saldafia explained the bed and breakfast distance requirements. The first bed and breakfast home would be allowed by right in a residential neighborhood; however, the second bed and breakfast home,if located within the 300 foot side yard or 150 front yard would require a variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Commissioner Pusley concurred with Commissioner Salazar's request to allow the Zoning Board of Adjustment review the bed and breakfast use in neighborhoods. He continued that he would like the city to respect the integrity of neighborhoods. By encroaching into the neighborhood, there are problems that could occur with regard to parking, trash, etc. He said that he believed that the neighborhood should be able to provide input and encouraged the Zoning Board of Adjustment process. Commissioner Pusley suggested that the number of people be limited in a bed and breakfast home and asked staff to review the parking regulations. Commissioner Zamora asked whether a restaurant would be allowed in an "AB" District. Mr. Saldafia answered in the negative. Commissioner Zamora said that a bed and breakfast use on property zoned"AB"District would allow a restaurant use that would not normally be allowed in an"AB"District. He asked for clarification of the restaurant use in a bed and breakfast. Mr. Saldafia suggested eliminating the restaurant use and addressing the banquet facility use. He added that the banquet facility could be allowed for guests only and could not be rented out for social functions. Food service as part of a bed and breakfast use is part of the bed and breakfast establishment, and not a separate and distinct commercial food service. Therefore, it is not considered a restaurant. Chairman Berlanga asked if a property owner could obtain a certificate of occupancy for a bed and breakfast use and not develop a bed and breakfast home to prohibit neighbors within 600 feet from using their home as a bed and breakfast home. Mr.Saldafia answered that the property owner would need to pay hotel/motel taxes in addition to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy,and continue paying such taxes. Public hearing was opened. Morris Englehart, 106 Alta Plaza, said that there is a bed and breakfast home in his neighborhood. In the past year, the home has been rented for wedding receptions and parties with valet parking. The parking extends down the street. There are also bands playing music late at night. Mr.Englehart asked for relief from their current problems and from the allowing the facility to be rented for parties. Joe Miller, 3202 Ocean Drive, suggested that the bed and breakfast be prohibited from having parties or receptions which cause traffic problems in the neighborhood. He expressed concern with the bed and breakfast use depreciating property values in the area. Claude De'Younger,201 Del Mar,said that he reviewed the bed and breakfast home. He suggested that a boarder is a person for a period of time and not a transient. Bed and breakfast is a transitory business. Mr.De'Younger said that the bed and breakfast would advertise and the use would impact the neighborhood. He continued that the rights of the neighborhood should be considered before a bed and breakfast use is placed in the neighborhood and asked the Commission to direct staff to review bed and breakfast definitions. ter 'S Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 12 Dorothy Spann, representing Del Mar Homeowners Association, said that the neighborhoods do not have rights regarding the establishment of a bed and breakfast in their neighborhood. She said the streets are narrow and congested which causes safety hazards. Ms. Spann said that the neighborhood has been seeking funds to install traffic calming devises. She said that a single-family residential, designated duplexes, and apartments are the highest productivity of tax valuations and tax dollars. She continued that these designations are also the safest. Deed restrictions also protect the neighborhood. Ms. Spann provided a history regarding a 1941 ordinance enacted for the military during an emergency, World War II. She said that the ordinance required residents to house the military, and that the ordinance has since lingered and is the source of devaluation of neighborhoods to date. Ms. Spann said that she believes that the misutilization of the 1941 ordinance is the result of the current problems in neighborhoods. Ms. Spann expressed concern regarding traffic safety issues. She said that the Del Mar neighborhood is the most vulnerable neighborhood because the homes are traditional with large lawns. The proposed amendments require a 150 feet front and rear setback which would not detract bed and breakfast uses from being adjacent from each other.Ms. Spann quoted the proposed amendments: "... that has been determined that this amendment would best serve the public health,necessity and the convenience of the general welfare of the City of Corpus Christi."She asked the Commission to allow the Del Mar neighborhood the opportunity to review the amendments with Staff. Dr. Stan Schumaker, 3275 Ocean Drive, owner of Ocean House, said he has been operating the home as a bed and breakfast for four and one-half years. He said that he is in compliance with city regulations. Dr.Schumaker expressed concern with the parking requirement and also asked that the use be allowed to have six (6)bedrooms. Shirley Smith,21 Hewitt,provided an example of traffic problems associated with Ocean House. She said that there were 30 cars parked in the alley behind her home. The problem prevents her and her neighbors from using the alley because of the lack of parking provided by Ocean House. Tracy Smith,211 North Carrizo,owner of Blucher House Bed and Breakfast Inn,commended Staff and the Commission on the proposed amendments. Ms.Smith suggested that the requirements not be too strict which would hinder bed and breakfast operations and make the use undesirable for future businesses. She said that the Austin zoning ordinance requires 1,000 feet between bed and breakfasts homes. Ms. Smith continued that Austin also separated bed and breakfast homes and bed and breakfast inns; however, they also have separated the uses by the age of the homes. She responded to Chairman Berlanga's previous comment and suggested that the city could check whether hotel/motel tax is being paid to verify a legitimate bed and breakfast use because 9%of the tax is paid to the city. Public hearing was closed. Commission discussed concerns expressed by residents. It was suggested that party, rental facilities, parking issues,and allowing the Zoning Board of Adjustment review the case as a public hearing be addressed in the amendments. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested that the Zoning Board of Adjustment review the bed and breakfast home use. Vice Chairman Mims asked the Commission and Staff to postpone the vote regarding the bed and breakfast use to give Staff an opportunity to address concerns expressed by the residents. Public hearing was postponed to the July 18,2001 meeting. Commissioner Sween-McGloin requested information regarding a noise ordinance. Kennels Mr. Salda0a provided an overview of the proposed dog kennel definition amendment. He said that the kennel use is a permitted use in the"1-2"Light Industrial District. A kennel is facility where four(4)or more dogs, cats, or other animals over three (3) months of age are kept, raised, sold, boarded, bred, shown, treated, groomed, exclusive of animals used for agricultural uses. Mr. Saldana said that staff is recommending adoption of the defmition. This use is allowed in"B-3"and"B-4" Business Districts without outside runs. He continued that the kennels would be allowed in the"1-2"Light Industrial District with outside runs. There is an amendment to the"I- 2"and"1-3"Districts that would require a separation of the kennels and require a setback not less than 100 feet from a residential district. Mr. Saldafia said that the amendment was part of an agreement between the city and a private party board on a court order decree. r Planning Commission Minutes June 6,7001 Page 13 Public hearing was opened. Tony Bender,7070 Road C,said that he agreed with"1-2"Light Industrial District zoning for kennels. Public hearing was closed. Commissioner Sween-McGloin expressed concern with relating the amendment to residents and business owners. Residents are allowed up to five(5) pets, but a kennel is described as four(4) or more pets. Mr. Saldafia said that the amendment addresses businesses and will not affect single-family residences. Mr. Gunning said that a single-family resident is required to comply with the city code of ordinance which limits the number of animals that may be kept on a residential lot. He suggested adding language that references payment of services to the kennel and delete age requirement of three (3)months. Mr. Gunning said that the Legal Department could reconcile the amendment with other city codes. Public hearing was opened. In response to Commissioner Pusley's question,Mr.Bender said the kennels are controlled by the city and require a city permit from the Animal Control Department. Public hearing was closed. Commission requested that the kennels be postponed to the July 18,2001 meeting. Mr. Saldafia highlighted the remainder of proposed definitions and zoning text amendments. Animal Hospital He said that the Animal hospital use is currently not defmed in the Ordinance, but is listed as a permitted use in the"B-4"General Business District. Assisted Living Facilities The assisted-living facility is a new use that needs addressing. There have been several requests for a change of zoning for the use and Code Enforcement has classified the use as being similar to an apartment hotel which is permitted in an"A-2"Apartment House District. However, there are several assisted-living facilities that were permitted in less intense districts than the "A-2" District through the use of Special Permits. An assisted- living facility is defmed as a facility comprised of seven(7)or more individuals. A facility of six(6)persons or less is regulated by state and does not allow a facility in a single-family resident. According to local assisted-living facilities operators, approximately fifty(50)percent of the residents normally do not own automobiles. Therefore, traffic impact from these facilities will be minimal. The density (number of rooms) of an assisted-living facility would be limited to the density limitation of the district. Commercial Vehicles The commercial vehicle definition has been added to clarify the commercial vehicle referenced in the definition of a private garage. Mr. Gunning said that Mr. Norbert Hart, Director of Housing and Community Development, requested that the definition read as follows: "A vehicle licensed as commercial has a Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations number or has a permanently affixed business/logo."Chairman Berlanga asked about vehicles that use magnetic signs. Mr. Gunning answered that they are not considered commercial vehicles unless they are licensed as commercial. Uguge The current definition for"Garage,Private" limits all private garages to 900 square feet and not more than four (4) motor-driven vehicles. The Zoning Board of Adjustment (ZBA) has, throughout the years, received numerous requests to allow private garages in excess of 900 square feet. The ZBA requested that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to allow larger garages based on the lot size and/or size of the house. After reviewing that requests approved by ZBA and the new windstorm standards for garages, Staff recommends that the current 900 square foot limitation not change,but to allow increased garage sizes for single-family residences larger than 1,836 ha, 400 Planning Commission Minutes June 6,2001 Page 14 square feet. In this case,a garage may not exceed 49 percent of the size of the home. Limiting the garage size based on the house size instead of the lot size would ensure that the garage would remain as an accessory to the house. Mr. Saldafia said that calculations for the garage are made for the garage based on exclusion of work area, storage area,bathrooms,and living areas. Mini-Storage The enclosed mini-storage use is being amended to increase the size of the individual unit. The increase from 300 square feet to 400 square feet will allow operators of mini-storage facilities to store boats. The current 300 square foot limitation is not large enough to store boats. The Planning Commission has recommended and City Council has approved several Special Permits for larger units to accommodate boats. This amendment will eliminate the uncertainty of whether the boat storage would be permitted and allows the developer to plan boat storage units at the outset. Mr.Saldafia said that the height limitation proposed would be 15 feet. A-IA District Mr. Saldafia explained that there have been several property owners that preferred a'B-1A"Neighborhood Business District but because of the restaurant use that is permitted,the request was defeated. He said that a"B-IA" District without a restaurant use would be more acceptable to surrounding property owners. Therefore, it is recommended eliminating the restaurant as a permitted use and. A masonry wall is curr:rdy required along the property line that is adjacent to a residential district. It was not Staffs intent to require a vasonry wall along the side property lines, if adjacent to residential zoning. The intent was only along the rear property line and a standard screening fence along the side property lines. The reason for not requiring a masonry wall along the side property lines was because there is a higher probability that the adjacent property to the side would rezone to a nonresidential district and the fence would not be required. If a masonry wall is required, it is unlikely that the wall would be removed. The end result would be a series of adjoining lots walled in on three(3)sides. Driveways Mr. Saldafia said that the access drive is not addressed in the Zoning Ordinance. He described an access drive as the driveway that extends from the drive approach at the street to the parking area interior to the lot. Currently, there are no minimum width requirements for the access drives. The purpose of this amendment is to require minimum access drive widths, based on whether it is a one-way or two-way drive. After discussion with Traffic Engineering, Staff is recommending standards: 10-foot driveway for single-family homes, 15 feet for one- way drives, 20 feet if one-way drive and designated as an emergency access driveway, and 24 feet for two-way access drives. Commissioner Sween-McGloin asked whether Staff has decided that a"B-IA" District is not appropriate for a mixed use. Mr. Saldafia said that the'B-IA"District is useful for mixed use,but the restaurant use needed to be excluded. He explained that the neighborhoods adjacent to property being considered for`B-IA"District zoning were not opposed to retail use,but were opposed to the restaurant use. Commissioner Sween-McGloin expressed concern with the allowable size of garages as proposed in the amendments.Commission discussed language for calculations for a private garage. It was decided that the language would be"49%of the gross floor area excluding garages,porches,and patios of the main building". Motion by Sween-McGloin,seconded by Mims,to approve the Zoning Text Amendments regarding access drives, animal hospitals, assisted living facilities, commercial vehicles, private garages as amended, enclosed mini-storages and "B-IA" Neighborhood Business District as amended. Motion passed with Amsler, Cheek, and Richter being absent. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Salazar, seconded by Mims, to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed with Amsler, Cheek, and Richter b-ing able L . Ritacto Il ,4i Mi "rel N.Gunning,AICP Lucinda P.Beal Director of Planning Recording Secretary