HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Board Of Adjustment - 07/22/2009 MINUTES
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING RECEIVED
City Hall, 1201 Leopard,Corpus Christi,Texas
IS` floor,City Hall Council Chamber OCT 0 6 2009
Wednesday,July 22,2009
1:30 P.M. CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE
BOARD MEMBERS: STAFF:
Taylor Mauck, Chairman Shelly Shelton, City Planner
Dan Winship,Vice Chairman Mic Raasch, AICP,Zoning&Code
William Tinney Enforcement Administrator
Ben Molina Deborah Brown, Legal Counsel
R. Bryan Johnson Debbie Goldston, Recording Secretary
Thomas E. McDonald(Alternate)
Morgan Spear (Alternate)
I. CALL TO ORDER
A quorum was declared and the meeting was called to order by Chairman Mauck.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—June 24,2009 Meeting
Motion to approve the minutes from the June 24, 2009 hearing was made by Vice Chairman
Winship and seconded by Board Member Johnson.
Board Member Tinney asked to be excused for the duration of the meeting. He noted that both
alternate members were present and there were more than enough members for a quorum. This
request was approved by the Board.
III. APPEALS
1. New Appeals
a. Appeal No. ZBA 0709-01
Chris Schonhoeft: Requests for a Special Use Exception to allow for an accessory
building covering 300 more square feet than the maximum of 900 square feet
permitted.
The site is Lexington Acres, Lots 47B and 47C, located on the east side of
Lexington Road approximately 2,000 feet north of Holly Road.
Shelly Shelton delivered a PowerPoint presentation for ZBA 0109-01. The appellant is requesting
a Special Use Exception to allow for an accessory building covering 300 more square feet than the
maximum of 900 square feet permitted. The Zoning is "R-1B" One-Family Dwelling District.
The Subject Property is Low-Density Residential, adjacent to Low-Density Residential, Vacant
land, and Light Industrial to the east. Recommended Future Land Use for the subject property and
surrounding properties is Low- Density Residential. The front yard setback requirement is 40 feet
according to the plat. The side yard setbacks are five feet on Lot 47C. The setback on the east side
or rear yard of the subject property is twenty-five feet (Lot 47B). The applicable Zoning
Ordinance reference is Section 29-3 Special Use Exceptions. Provide adjustment for uses in
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 2 of 11
July 22, 2009
appropriate locations... and 29-3.02 Garage for more than four cars and covering more than 900
square feet in a residential district. Accessory Building Regulations is ARTICLE 27.
SUPPLEMENTARY HEIGHT, AREA AND BULK REQUIREMENTS: Section 27-3.02.04
Accessory buildings which are not a part of the main building... may be constructed in a rear yard,
provided such detached accessory building does not occupy more than 30% percent of the area of
the required rear yard and provided it is not located closer than five feet to the rear lot line nor
closer than three feet to a side lot line. Staff comments: The subject property is large enough,
38,800 square feet, to accommodate the house and a detached accessory building while still
meeting the open space and setback requirements.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
In favor:
1. Chris Schonhoeft — Mr. Schonhoeft stated that he wants a garage large enough to store his
vehicles, boat,and work on his cars.
In opposition:
No one came forth in opposition.
The Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Motion for approval was made by Alternate Member Spear that in accordance with Section 29-3
of the Zoning Ordinance, I move that Appeal No. ZBA 0709-01 a request for a Special Use
Exception to allow for a garage with 1,200 square feet of floor area, on Lexington Road at 5344
Lexington Road, be approved, based on the finding and that in its opinion and as a matter of fact,
such a special use exception will not substantially affect adversely the current uses of adjacent and
neighboring properties permitted by the Zoning Ordinance, subject to the following conditions:
1. The proposed project may not be used commercially.
2. No more than one of the vehicles may be commercial, which may riot exceed one ton capacity.
3. The Special Use Exception will expire 12 months from the date of the Board's action if the
project is not commenced.
4. A building permit is required before construction starts.
The motion was seconded by Board Member Johnson. Motion passed unanimously.
b. Appeal No. ZBA 0709-02
Crown Castle: Request for a Special Use Exception to replace an existing cell tower,
approximately 80 feet in height with a new monopole cell tower 120 feet tall.
The site is a 2,500 square foot area out of Yorkwald Acres, Lot 13 located on the east
side of Waldron Road approximately 350 north of Yorktown Boulevard.
Shelly Shelton presented a PowerPoint presentation on case number ZBA 0709-02. The request is
for a Special Use Exception to replace an existing cell tower. approximately 80 feet tall. with a
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 3 of I I
July 22,2009
new tower 120 feet tall. The Zoning and Existing Land Uses are "B-3/SP" Business District with
a Special Permit for Outside Storage and Caretaker's Quarters. The subject property is surrounded
by Light Industrial to the north, Vacant land to the south, Estate Residential to the east, and Public
Semi-Public to the west. Recommended Future Land Use for the Subject Property is Commercial.
The surrounding properties are recommended for Commercial, Light Industrial, and Estate
Residential Uses.
Staff comments are as follows: Navy approval required. The location of the cell phone tower
must be consistent with the site plan submitted to the Board of Adjustment. The project must
comply with Article 27C. Special Use Exception shall expire within 12 months of the date of this
hearing if construction of the project is not commenced. A building permit is required before
construction begins.
Vice Chairman Winship asked that the photo of the fall radius be explained further. The objects in
the photograph were clarified by staff. Alternate Board Member Spear commented further on the
objects in the photograph of fall radius and asked if there would be guy wires attached. Ms.
Shelton stated that there would not be guy wires used in this case.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
In favor:
1. Ramiro Gonzalez, 1715 S. Capital of Texas Highway, Suite 207, Austin, Texas 78745. Mr.
Gonzalez presented a PowerPoint presentation. Pocket and Cricket are under lease to collocate
on this site. He stated that Sprint, T-Mobile, and Clear Wire are currently leasing levels on the
current tower. Mr. Gonzalez presented what the FCC guidelines are and that they have been
met. This tower will facilitate Pocket's coverage area in Corpus Christi. This site has also
received FAA approval. This request is being made to replace a tower with a higher tower,
120 feet, and will allow for collocation.
Alternate Board Member Spear asked if a building permit is needed for this project and Mr.
Gonzalez stated that it would need a building permit. Board Member Spear then asked if a new
foundation will be required and Mr. Gonzalez stated that a new foundation will be needed since a
new taller tower will replace the existing tower.
2. Brian Turk, Community Plans and Liaison Officer, Naval Air Station, Corpus Christi,Texas.
Mr. Turk stated that the project meets with the Navy's approval.
In opposition:
1. Jeff Geurin, 3826 Casa Blanca Ct., Corpus Christi, Texas. Mr. Geurin is a property owner of
an adjacent single-family house to the east and wanted clarification as to why there are now two
towers in the area. He needed further explanation regarding fall zone and property line. He stated
that the new tower has no light and that the planes fly low over this site.
Mr. Ramiro Gonzalez stated that the taller tower will be lit with a white light per Navy request.
Board Member Molina asked what Crown Castle's options would be if this request was denied by
the Zoning Board of Adjustment. Ms. Shelton stated that if this request was denied, Crown Castle
could still build another tower below 85 feet by right. Ms. Shelton read the applicable ordinance.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 4 of 11
July 22,2009
27C-4.04 Tower Spacing, and gave some examples of what is allowed and what is not allowed
with regard to cell phone tower spacing.
The Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Motion for approval was made by Alternate Member McDonald that in accordance with Section
29-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, I move that Appeal No. ZBA 0709-02, a request for a Special Use
Exception to allow for the installation and operation of a cell phone tower, 120 feet tall in a 2,500
square foot tract of land, more or less, out of Yorkwald Acres, Lot 13, be approved, based on the
finding and that in the Board's opinion and as a matter of fact, such special use exception will not
substantially affect adversely the uses of adjacent and neighboring property permitted by the
Zoning Ordinance subject to the following conditions:
1. The location of the cell phone tower must be consistent with the site plan submitted to the
Board of Adjustment.
2. The proposed 120 foot tall cell tower will replace the existing 80 foot tall existing tower.
3. The project must comply with Article 27C.
4. Special Use Exception shall expire within 12 months of the date of this hearing if construction
of the project is not commenced.
5. A building permit is required before construction starts.
Seconded by Board Member Johnson. Motion passed unanimously.
c. Appeal No. ZBA 0709-03
John and Debra Brooker: Request for a Variance to reduce the front yard setback
requirement to expand an existing porch.
The site is Arcadia, Block 6, Lots 33 and 34 located at the southwest corner of
Kosar Street and Florida Avenue.
Shelly Shelton presented a PowerPoint presentation on ZBA 0709-03. The appellant is requesting
a Variance to reduce the front yard setback requirement for the expansion of an existing porch.
Zoning and Existing Land Uses are "R-1B" One-Family Dwelling District. The subject property is
Low-Density Residential, adjacent to Low-Density Residential. Parkland, and Public Semi-Public
to the north. Recommended Future Land Use for the subject property is Low-Density Residential
surrounded by Low-Density Residential and Parkland. The front yard setback requirement is thirty
feet according to the plat. The side and rear yard setbacks are live feet. The height is restricted to
thirty-five feet. Applicable Zoning Ordinance Excerpt: ARTICLE 29. THE BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT. Section 29-5 Variances. The Board of Adjustment shall have power to grant the
following variances: 29-5.01 To vary the regulations...so as to relieve difficulties or hardships on
cases when and where, by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a specific
piece of property...the strict application of each regulation or restriction would result in peculiar
and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional hardship upon, the owner of such property.
The existing house is non-conforming because it does not meet the front yard setback requirement
of thirty feet. The house is located approximately 15 feet from the street right-of-way. Allowing
the expansion of the existing porch requires a reduction of the front yard setback to approximately
10 feet. Staff Comments are ARTICLE 26. NONCONFORMING USES. Section 26-2
Nonconforming Use of Buildings or Structures. If no structural alterations are made...The
nonconforming use of a building or structure may be hereafter extended. ARTICLE 3.
DEFINITIONS: 3-1.64 Structural Alterations. Any change in the supporting members of a
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 5 of I I
July 22, 2009
building, including, but not limited to, bearing walls or partitions, columns, beams or girders, or
any substantial change in the roof or in the exterior walls. The appellants are requesting a variance
to reduce the front yard setback requirement to expand an existing porch, four feet deep and six
feet wide to eight feet deep and 22 feet wide.
Nineteen notices were mailed out and none were received back in favor or opposition.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
In favor:
1. John Brooker, 1105 Florida, Corpus Christi, Texas. Mr. Brooker, the Applicant, reiterated
what he wanted to do to make his existing porch larger.
In opposition:
No one came forth in opposition.
The Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Motion for approval was made by Board Member Johnson that in accordance with Section 29-5 of
the Zoning Ordinance, I move that Appeal No. ZBA 0709-03, a request for a variance to reduce
the front yard setback from thirty feet to ten feet on Florida Avenue, Arcadia, Block 6, Lots 33 and
34,be approved on the finding that the extraordinary and exceptional situation or condition of
such a piece of property the strict application of the rear yard setback requirement would result in
peculiar or exceptional practical difficulties to, or hardship upon the owner of the subject property.
The property owner is required to obtain a building permit from Development Services. The
Zoning Board of Adjustment also requires that this porch remain an open air porch with a cover
only and is not to be enclosed in the future.
Seconded by Vice Chairman Winship. Motion passed unanimously.
d. Appeal No. ZBA 0709-04
Raymond B. Acebo: Requests a Variance to reduce the side yard setback
requirement from ten (10) feet to five(5) feet.
The site is Ocean View Addition, Block 4, East and Mid 1/3 of Lots 1 and 2,
located at the southwest corner of Fifth Street and Morgan Avenue.
Alternate member Morgan Spear stated that he is representing the owner of this property and is
withdrawing from the Board on this appeal.
Shelly Shelton presented a PowerPoint presentation on ZBA 0709-04. The appellant is requesting
a Variance to reduce the west and south yard setback requirements. The existing Zoning is "AB"
Professional Office District and the subject property is Vacant. It is adjacent to Medium-Density
Residential. Professional Office on the north, east and south, and Low-Density Residential on the
west. The Future Land Use recommendation for the subject property is Professional Office and
the recommended uses for surrounding properties are Professional Office and Commercial. The
front yard setback requirement is 20 feet. The side and rear yard setbacks are 10 feet. The height is
restricted to 45 feet. Applicable Zoning Ordinance Excerpt: ARTICLE 29. THE BOARD OF
ADJUSTMENT - Section 29-5 Variances. The Board of Adjustment shall have power to grant the
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 6 of 11
July 22,2009
following variances: 29-5.01 To vary the regulations...so as to relieve difficulties or hardships on
cases when and where, by reason of exceptional narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a specific
piece of property...the strict application of each regulation or restriction would result in peculiar
and exceptional practical difficulties to, or exceptional hardship upon,the owner of such property.
Staff Comments: In this case, the strict application of the setback requirements provides a
disincentive to infill development in a designated Historically Underutilized Business (HUB)
District where economic development is encouraged and forces required landscaping into the
street Rights-of-Way. Twenty-five notices were mailed out and one was received back in favor
and zero back in opposition. There was a question for staff from several of the members of the
Board of Adjustment inquiring what utilities are present at the subject property. Ms. Shelton
stated that water lines are on the east side of the property. Development Services staff infonned
Ms. Shelton that there is TV cable on the east side. There are no utility easements on the south or
west sides of the property.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
In favor:
1. Morgan Spear, 225 S. Carancahua, Corpus Christi, Texas. Mr. Spear, representative for this
case, gave an explanation of the request and some of the difficulties associated with corner lots.
Mr. Spear is requesting that the Board approve a five foot setback on the west and south yards.
This allows for the landscaping ordinance to be met within the property along both Morgan and
Fifth Streets. Mr. Spear offered to answer any questions. He mentioned that also there will be a
fence put up on both rear yards as required for screening of the proposed office from adjacent
residential properties to the west and south.
In opposition:
1. Salvador De La Garza, 1321 5th, Corpus Christi, Texas. Mr. De La Garza asked for an
explanation of what is going to be constructed on the property. He asked for clarification of
what the notice he received was for.
2. Sandra De La Garza, 1321 5th, Corpus Christi, Texas. Mrs. De La Garza basically had the
same request Mr. De La Garza had. The De La Garzas received the notice sent by
Development Services and came to the hearing to find out what would be happening at the
site.
Chairman Mauck explained to the De La Garzas that the appellant requested side yard setback
reductions so he could build a medical office and the De La Garzas were notified because they
own property within 200 feet of the subject property.
The Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Motion for approval was made by Board Member Molina that in accordance with Section 29-5 of
the Zoning Ordinance, I move that Appeal No. ZBA 0709-04,a request for a variance to reduce
the west and south yard setbacks from 10 feet to five feet on Morgan Avenue, Ocean View
Addition, Block 4, East and Mid 1/3 of Lots 1 and 2, be approved on the finding that the
extraordinary and exceptional situation or condition of such a piece of property the strict
application of the yard setback requirement would result in peculiar or exceptional practical
difficulties to. or hardship upon the owner of the subject property.
11110
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 7 of I 1
July 22,2009
The motion was seconded by Alternate Member McDonald. Motion passed unanimously.
2. Tabled Appeals
a. Appeal No. ZBA 0109-01
Michael and Debbie West: Special Use Exception to reduce the side yard setback
requirement.
Club Estates Unit 3, Block 4, Lot 35
This request was tabled from the April hearing due to an illness in the appellant's family. Shelly
Shelton presented a PowerPoint presentation for ZBA 0109-01. The Appellants are requesting a
Variance to reduce the side yard requirement from five feet to zero. Existing Land Use and
Zoning is Low-Density Residential (single family residences on large lots). "R-1 B" One-Family
Dwelling District: 50 foot minimum lot width, 6,000 square feet minimum lot size, 25 foot front
yard setback, and five foot side yard setback. Recommended Future Land Use for the Subject
Property is Low-Density Residential. Recommended Future Land Use for the adjacent properties
is Low-Density Residential. The add-on structure that was built extends up to six inches onto the
next door neighbor's property. In April, the Board asked the applicant to find out if buying into
some of the neighbor's property would be possible. Taking off part of the structure was another
recommendation made.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
In favor:
1. Michael West, 4906 Brinkwood Drive, Corpus Christi, Texas 78413. At the last hearing of
this case which was heard on April 22, 2009, Mr. West was asked by the Zoning Board of
Adjustment to find out if his next door neighbor would sell any property to Mr. West, since Mr.
West's contractor built into the five foot side yard setback and into his next door neighbor's
property. Mr. West stated that his next door neighbor would not sell any of his property to him.
Mr. West further stated he met with Attorney John Bell to see what his options were. Mr. Bell
recommended that Mr. West go forward with his appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment and
try to get the approval from the board on a way to get the wall of the add-on structure into his
property area. Mr. West also got the advice of an engineer, Eric Johnson, who advised him that
the garage door would have to be changed to a nine foot door. The engineer said the structure
appeared within code, except for the foundation. Mr. Johnson advised Mr. West to have the
contractor/builder place the required footings underneath the present foundation.
In opposition:
No one came forth in opposition.
The Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Motion for approval was made by Board Member Johnson that in accordance with Section 29-5 of
the Zoning Ordinance, I move that Appeal No. ZBA 0109-01, a request for a variance to reduce
the side yard setback from five feet to a minimum of one foot on Brinkwood, Club Estates Unit 3.
Block 4. Lot 35. be approved on the finding that the extraordinary and exceptional situation or
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 8 of 11
July 22,2009
condition of such a piece of property the strict application of the side yard setback requirement
would result in peculiar or exceptional practical difficulties to,or hardship upon the owner of the
subject property. Also, a building permit will be required for the final completion of this project.
Alternate Member Spear seconded the motion. Motion passed with Board Member Molina in
opposition.
b. Appeal No. ZBA 0609-03
Skip's Service, Phillip Gray: Special Use Exception for an objectionable use for
the crushing and recycling of rock and concrete. Also, the applicant is requesting
an Interpretation of an Error in the determination of an administrative official and
the enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance for landscaping, screening fence, and
dwellings or HUD-code manufactured homes for resident watchmen and caretakers
employed on the premises.
The site is Roblex Industrial Area, Block 6, Lot 1 located on the east side of Flato
Road approximately 1,200 feet south of Agnes Street.
Shelly Shelton presented a PowerPoint presentation for ZBA 0609-03 which was tabled at the
June 24, 2009 meeting, to review the requests of the appellant. The appellant requested a 1)
Special Use Exception for an objectionable use for the crushing and recycling of rock and
concrete. Also, the applicant is requesting an Interpretation of an Error in the determination of an
administrative official and the enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance for 2) landscaping, 3)
screening fence, and 4) dwellings or HUD-code manufactured homes for resident watchmen and
caretakers employed on the premises.
1) Objectionable Use: The subject property and surrounding properties are zoned for heavy
industrial uses. The operation of rock, concrete, asphalt, and brick crushing and recycling requires
Zoning Board of Adjustment approval of an objectionable use with a special use exception. If
granted a special use exception the appellant must then apply for a Certificate of Occupancy (C of
0)with Development Services for the use. Due diligence of the appellant is necessary to fulfill the
requirements for finalization of all the proper permits.
2) Landscaping: Verbally, the representative of the appellant, Mr. John Kendall, stated that the
appellant has already landscaped and the existing vegetation is providing the screening. The
Zoning Board of Adjustment has the authority to grant Alternative Compliance (Section 27B-4
Alternative Compliance) for the landscaping requirement. Requirements for relief by the Board
through Alternative Compliance are:
(A) That satisfying the requirements of this Article would prohibit an owner of property from
using land for a use that the zoning ordinance expressly permits;
(B) That the practical difficulties of meeting the requirements of this Article are unique to that
property.and not general in character;
(C) That the alternative compliance will not adversely affect: the adjoining property; the health,
safety and welfare of the general public; the purpose and intent of this Article; or the
Comprehensive Plan: and the alternative compliance is done in the public interest.
11110
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 9 of 11
July 22, 2009
(D) Financial hardship due to meeting the requirements of this chapter is not sufficient for
alternative compliance.
If these findings are not present, no Alternative Compliance may be granted, the landscape
requirements must be met. Therefore, feasible compliance with the landscape requirement is: the
site may alternatively have a continuous screen of trees and shrubs planted adjacent to property
lines abutting street frontages so that such site is totally screened from streets. The trees and/or
shrubs shall be of a variety that will mature to at least eight feet in height. This planting shall not
be provided within the visibility triangles of driveways or streets
3) Screening: Mr. Kendall contends the Zoning/Code Enforcement Administrator erred when he
determined that a fence six feet in height is required for screening so interpretation of a
determination made by a City Official was requested. The Zoning Board of Adjustment has the
authority to determine what type of screening is required. The Zoning Ordinance reads, "I-2"
Light Industrial District regulations, Section 20-2(4) i All outside storage shall be screened from
view from the at-grade public right-of-way; and in "I-3" Heavy Industrial District Regulations
Section 21(4)(1) The screening requirement must be met by the location and maintenance of a
fence, shrubbery, or any reasonable substitute. Whether screening is required is not within the
realm of the Board's authority, simply what type of screening must be provided by the appellant
can be determined by the Board.
If the Zoning Board of Adjustment determines there was no error made in the interpretation of the
Zoning Ordinance and a fence is required for screening rather than shrubbery or any reasonable
substitute then the Board does not have the authority to grant a fence exception. The Zoning
Ordinance is clear, only the City Council after recommendation from the Planning Commission
has the authority to grant fence exceptions.
4) Watchman/Caretaker Residence: The Zoning Board of Adjustment is not authorized to grant
relief for determining errors of interpretation when the Zoning Ordinance is explicit on the
requirements and certification for HUD-code manufactured homes for resident watchman and
caretakers employed on the premises.
At the June hearing, a mesh barrier between the subject property and developed adjacent
properties was considered as a possible means of mitigating the amount of dust leaving Skip's
Services. Staff asked Sonny Lopez with TCEQ if a mesh barrier is a viable option to mitigate the
dust. Mr. Lopez said"It might be".
Laura Holt, Code Enforcement, read the complaints her department had received on this property.
One complaint concerned dust/dirt, no fence up, and noise dated April 14, 2009. The second
complaint was dated May 16, 2009. This complaint was regarding dust and dirt flying around and
no fence around the use. Ms. Holt reported what she had observed at the site on two separate
occasions. During the first visit water wasbeing used to minimize dust. On the second visit the
heavy equipment being used created a lot of dust on Flato Road.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
In favor:
1. John Kendall, 6618 Vienna, Corpus Christi, Texas. Mr. Kendall reported that since the last
hearing in June. Skip's received a letter dated July 13, 2009 from the TCEQ stating that no alleged
INV ‘11110
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page l0 of 11
July 22,2009
violations had been found. Dust and air quality tests were performed at the site. He stated that
Mr. Gray bought oleander (full size variety) plants that have been planted. There has been an
asphalt material placed on the road to cut down on the dust factor. The RV will be removed and
replaced by a building that meets requirements. Board Member McDonald asked if the property
owner would be willing to put in writing that compliance will be made with all recommendations
and then proceed to get all the permits that are required. Regarding the screening issue, Mr.
Kendall stated that around the rear of the property, there is a 35 foot high wall of rubble material
which he feels stops some of the dust created by the running of the crusher. Ms. Shelton stated
that she wasn't sure the mound of rubble material would catch any of the particulate matter in the
air, but might be working more as a screening measure at the back of the property. Mr. Kendall
reiterated that the crusher machine functions with a stream of water to help control dust coming
off the crusher when it is running. The road of the property has recently been made asphalt to
further help with dust issues. Mr. Kendall offered to withdraw the requests except for the Special
Use Exception for an objectionable use.
2. Phillip Gray, 13814 Hawksnest Bay, Corpus Christi, Texas. Mr. Gray stated that he is the
owner of Skip's Service and will comply with all the recommendations made for this case and will
acquire all the necessary permits for this project.
In opposition:
None came forth in opposition.
The Chairman closed the Public Hearing.
Motion for approval was made by Alternate Member McDonald that in accordance with Section
29-3 of the Zoning Ordinance, I move that Appeal No. ZBA 0609-03, a request for a Special Use
Exception for an objectionable use to allow for the crushing and recycling of concrete, brick, rock,
and asphalt, on Flato Road at Roblex Industrial Area, Block 6, Lot 1, be approved, based on the
finding and that in the Board's opinion and as a matter of fact, such special use exception will not
substantially affect adversely the uses of adjacent and neighboring property permitted by the
Zoning Ordinance subject to the following conditions:
1. Must apply for a Certificate of Occupancy within 30 days of the Board's Action.
2. As required by Development Services the first inspection must be called for within 60 days
and all required inspections must be called for within 180 days.
3. The Special Use Exception shall expire 12 months from the date of the Board's action if all
the required permitting and inspections have not been completed.
4. To address the second and third requests made by the appellant,the appellant must provide
a continuous screen of trees and shrubs planted adjacent to Flato Road so that the site is
totally screened from Flato Road. This landscape screening will satisfy both the required
landscaping and screening requirements if the plant material matures to at least eight feet
in height. The City will re-inspect the landscaping within one year of issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy to assure compliance with these requirements.
The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Winship. Motion passed unanimously.
III. ADJOURNMENT
Before motion was made for adjournment. Alternate Member McDonald requested an
informational workshop or retreat for Board Members, Staff, and Legal Department. Staff agreed.
Zoning Board of Adjustment Minutes Page 1 l of 11
July 22,2009
Motion for adjournment was made at 4:35 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.
t+ C .Q�atcice
.�.::.:�/ '/% yam
Shelly S elton ‘� '6ebbie Goldston
City Plan - Recording Secretary
Zoning Board of Adjustment Administrator