HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Planning Commission - 07/22/20201201 Leopard Street
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
cctexas.com
City of Corpus Christi
Meeting Minutes
Planning Commission
6:00 PM Council ChambersWednesday, July 22, 2020
Call to Order, Roll CallI.
Chairman Crull called the meeting to order and a quorum was established with
no absences.
Opening StatementII.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.III.
Approval of AbsencesIV.
June 24, 2020 : Chairman Crull and Commissioner Williams
July 8, 2020: Chairman Crull & Commissioners Williams, Hovda and York
A motion to approve the absence listed above was made by Vice Chairman
Baugh and the motion was seconded by Commissioner Williams. The motion
passed.
Approval of MinutesV.
1.20-0767 Regular Meeting of June 24, 2020
2.20-0847 Regular Minutes of July 8, 2020
A motion to approve items “1 & 2” was made by Vice Chairman Baugh and the
motion was seconded by Commissioner Zarghouni. The motion passed.
Public Hearing: Budget Presentation - Discussion and Possible ActionVI.
3.20-0772 Proposed FY2020-2021 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget
presentation by Office of Management and Budget
Kamil Taras, Capital Improvement Program Manager, presented item “3” for
the record. He began by stating the budget has been amended since it was last
sent to the Commission on July 15, 2020. During Monday’s “Type A” meeting,
the board members amended the budget and capital project plan which
caused the need for an amendment to the Proposed FY2020-2021 Capital
Budget. That amendment details the changes and proposes the new
Page 1City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
FY2020-2021 Budget total of $259,915,560, down from $267,832,560. Line items
amended were the Boat Haul Out/Office/Retail Facility (decreased), New
Cooper’s Alley Boaters Facility (increased), Water Garden Fountain (removed)
and the New McGee Breakwater (added).
Mr. Taras continued with the rest of the presentation and explained that the
planning guide provides project scopes, cost and schedules for planned and
anticipated projects over the next ten years. The Planning Commission will be
making a recommendation for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 (year one) which is a fully
funded work plan based on available financial capacity and greatest
prioritized needs. Short-range program facilitates fiscal and needs-based
planning for Years 2 and three; Long-range forecast consists of projects
considered important but not funded (Years 4 – 10). Mr. Taras presented a
graph to illustrate available resources distributed over major spending areas
for FY 2021 and also a list of Funding Sources versus Funding Uses. He
continued the presentation by detailing program highlights for each
department and their funding sources.
After Staff’s presentation, Chairman Crull opened the floor for Commissioner
comments/questions. Commissioner Hovda had a question regarding the
removal of the Water Garden Fountain, the Cole Park pier/skate park and the
study for the North Beach canal project. Commissioner Williams asked about
the desalinization plant. Commissioner Schroeder inquired about marina
projects and how the budget is conceived. He felt that the design/construction
of current marina facilities were done inadequately for the type of elements
they are exposed to and deteriorate much faster. After Commissioner
comments concluded, Chairman Crull opened the public hearing. With no one
coming forward, the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Vice
Chairman Baugh to approved item “3” as amended and Commissioner York
seconded. The motion passed.
Consent Public Hearing (Items A & B): Discussion and Possible ActionVII.
Chairman Crull asked Staff to present the Consent Agenda, items VII.A and
VII.B. Andrew Dimas, Development Services, read the Consent Agenda items
into the record. New Plat items “4, 5 & 6” satisfy all requirements of the UDC
and State Law; the Technical Review Committee recommends approval. Staff
also recommends approval for New Zoning items “7, 8 & 9” as stated in Staff’s
report. After Staff’s presentation, Chairman Crull opened the floor for
Commissioner comments/questions. Chairman Crull and Commissioners
Schroeder and York asked questions pertaining to item “9”. After
Commissioner questions concluded, Chairman Crull opened the public
hearing.
Mr. Dimas read into record the following written comments submitted by using
the PUBLIC COMMENT/INPUT FORM located on the City Secretary’s webpage.
Oppositions received for item “8”: Charles and Debbie Patrick at 9726 Compton
Road; Fred T. Allen at 9725 Compton Road; Margaret Barnec at 9714 Compton
Road. They cited flooding and traffic issues, deed restrictions, a possible
decrease in property values and that the proposed development is not
consistent with the rest of the neighborhood in which homes are on one and
two acre lots. Also, two attempts were made to call Mr. Richard Bell (10014
Compton Road), per his request, and did not get a response. Mr. Bell is
opposed to the rezoning request and also cites that the proposed development
Page 2City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
is not consistent with the rest of the neighborhood.
For item “8”, Mr. Dimas informed the Commission that of the 16 public notices
mailed to property owners within the 200-ft notification area, 9 notices were
returned in opposition and zero were returned in favor. Totaling 64% of the
land within the 200-ft notification area in opposition. Once this case is
forwarded to City Council for action, it will need a super-majority vote to pass.
Representing the owner, Diane Cibrian addressed the Commission in support
of item “8”. She reiterated that City Council made no action or vote for the
“RS-15” district designation. She stated this will be a beautification project and
it will be a gated community with homes to be valued upwards of $450,000.
She mentioned that deed restrictions were not involved in the sale of the
subject property. She also confirmed that stacking (parking) requirements will
be done in accordance with the code; the subject property is not in a
flash/flood zone. She informed the Commission that the community will
include a drainage easement which will improve drainage issues in the whole
area.
With no one else coming forward, Chairman Crull closed the public hearing. A
motion was made by Commissioner York to approve items “4, 5, 6, 7 & 8” as
presented and seconded by Commissioner Hovda. The motion passed. A
motion was made by Commissioner Hovda to approve item “9” as presented
and seconded by Commissioner Schroeder. The motion passed with Vice
Chairman Baugh abstaining.
New PlatsA.
4.20-0850 20PL1047
STONEGATE UNIT 2 OCL (FINAL - 39.772 ACRES)
Located west of FM 1889 and south of Masters Street.
5.20-0852 20PL1052
PARK PID UNIT 1, BLOCK 1, LOTS 12A & 12B (REPLAT - 2.84
ACRES)
Located south of Bates Street and east of North Padre Island Drive.
6.20-0853 20PL2028
BALDWIN PARK, BLOCK A, LOT 1AR (FINAL - 1.25 ACRES)
Located east of Crosstown Expressway (SH 286) and south of Baldwin
Boulevard.
Page 3City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
ZoningB.
Tabled Zoning
7.20-0770 Public Hearing - Rezoning Property at or near 501 Heinsohn Road
Case No. 0620-02 - One Rail Group, LLC: Ordinance rezoning
property at or near 501 Heinsohn Road (located on the west side of
Heinsohn Road, south of State Highway 44 (Agnes Street), and west of
State Highway 358 (North Padre Island Drive)), from the “FR” Farm Rural
District and “IL” Light Industrial District to the “IL” Light Industrial District.
New Zoning
8.20-0857 Public Hearing - Rezoning Property at or near 10001 Compton
Road
Case No. 0720-02 - MVR Construction Company: Ordinance
rezoning property at or near 10001 Compton Road (located along the
south side of Compton Road, east of Flour Bluff Drive, and west of
Waldron Road), from the “RE” Residential Estate District to the “RS-15”
Single-Family 15 District.
9.Public Hearing - Rezoning Property at or near 2713 Segrest Street
Case No. 0720-03 - Ruben Bonilla, Jr.: Ordinance rezoning property at
or near 2713 Segrest Street (located along the south side of Segrest
Street, east of South Port Avenue, and north of Baldwin Boulevard), from
the “IL” Light Industrial District to the “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial
District.
Public Hearing (Items C & D): Discussion and Possible ActionVIII.
New Plat with Variance (Waiver)C.
10.20-0849 19PL1131
GRANGE PARK UNIT 3 (FINAL - 20.01 ACRES)
Located north of Yorktown Boulevard and east of Rodd Field Road.
Page 4City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
11.20-0851 19PL1131 - SIDEWALK WAIVER
GRANGE PARK UNIT 3 (FINAL - 20.01 ACRES)
Located north of Yorktown Boulevard and east of Rodd Field Road.
Request for a Plat Waiver of the Sidewalk Construction Requirements in
Section 8.1.4 and 8.2.2 of the Unified Development Code.
For the record, Mr. Dimas presented items “10 & 11”. For location purposes, he
presented an aerial view of the subject property. The applicant is requesting a
waiver from sidewalk construction along the frontage of Yorktown Boulevard.
Mr. Dimas cited the following factors against the waiver and in support of
requiring sidewalk construction:
1. The property is zoned “CN-1” Neighborhood Commercial District and “RS-6”
Single-Family 6 District from which a sidewalk network can be started. The
property is less than 0.25 mile from properties to the east that have already
been rezoned for single-family residential developments.
2. Future development could occur between the subject property and Rodd
Field Road to the west. Therefore, connecting the subject property to an
existing sidewalk network.
3. The subject property is located within 0.38 miles of the intersection of the
commercial node of Rodd Field Road and Yorktown Boulevard. This
commercial node also connects to the new Del Mar College southside campus.
4. The subject property is approximately 2-miles to the east of Bill Witt Park.
According to the Federal Transit Administration, a 3-mile distance is a standard
bike shed. A bike shed is defined as the reasonable distance a person will
travel via bicycle. Therefore, a sidewalk will provide a viable connection as
part of a standard bike shed from the subject property to Bill Witt Park.
The applicant states that they do not believe sidewalk should be required
because:
1. No current sidewalk network exists along Yorktown Boulevard. The nearest
sidewalk is part of the Rodd Field Road bond project 0.38 miles to the west of
the subject property.
2. The property is not located along an existing or foreseeably planned CCRTA
fixed route service.
3. Waiver of sidewalk will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
general welfare, and adjacent property will not be restricted or rendered
unfeasible.
4. The Comprehensive Plan will not be substantially affected.
Regarding sidewalk plat waivers, the UDC does state, under Section
8.2.2.B.1-4, that a waiver may be granted, in accordance with the waiver
procedure in Section 3.8.3.D., but only if certain conditions exist. None of the
enumerated conditions in UDC 8.2.2.B.1-4 for a sidewalk waiver exist on this
subject property. Weighing the factors of Section 3.8.3.D, Staff recommends
Page 5City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
denial of the waiver. Planning Commission may choose to follow or decline
Staff’s recommendation, and Planning Commission may approve, approve
with conditions or deny the waiver request.
After Staff’s presentation, Chairman Crull opened the floor for Commissioner
comments/questions. Discussion took place regarding the City’s future Bond
projects and if this area is likely to be improved. The option of “cash in lieu of
construction” was also brought up by Chairman Crull and Commissioner York.
After Commissioner questions concluded, Chairman Crull opened the public
hearing. For the record, Mr. Dimas stated that no written public comment forms
were submitted for this item and Chairman Crull closed the public hearing.
Further discussion took place and Commissioner York expressed how he has a
hard time favoring sidewalk construction in this area because there is no
connectivity and the constructed sidewalk may get removed once
improvements are made to the street. Commissioner Schroeder agreed with
Commissioner York but felt that these types of cases create a dilemma when
UDC requirements are not followed. Nina Nixon Mendez, Assistant Director,
stated Staff can, once again, take a further look into bringing forth sidewalk
amendments such as “cash in lieu of construction” and will also take it to the
Development Services Technical Advisory Group for consideration.
Commissioner Hovda added that not having sidewalks in this area is a
disservice to attaining the goal of walkable/sustainable communities; having a
sidewalk in this area will set a pattern. Commissioner Hovda made a motion to
approve Staff’s recommendation for item “11” and it was seconded by
Commissioner Schroeder. A roll call vote took place and the motion passed
with Chairman Crull and Commissioners Dibble and York voting no. A motion
was made by Vice Chairman Baugh and seconded by Commissioner Zarghouni
to approve item “10”. The motion passed.
ZoningD.
Tabled Zoning
12.20-0771 Public Hearing - Rezoning Property at or near 0 Farm to Market
Road 43
Case No. 0720-01 - Bobak Mostaghasi: Ordinance rezoning property
at or near 0 farm to Market Road 43 (located at the northwest corner of
the intersection of Farm to Market Road 43 (Weber Road) and State
Highway 286 (Crosstown Expressway), from the "FR" Farm Rural District
to the "CG-2" General Commercial District and the "CN-1" Neighborhood
Commercial District.
Mr. Dimas read item “12” into the record as shown above. The purpose of the
rezoning request is to allow for the construction of a large-scale commercial
development. As part of the annexation process, the property will be zoned
“FR” Farm Rural District. For location purposes, he presented several aerial
views of the subject property along with the Existing and Future Land Use
Page 6City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
maps. Mr. Dimas went over the history of zoning patterns in the area. Mr.
Dimas also went over UDC requirements for the rezoning (buffer yard/setbacks)
as well as available municipal facilities. He informed the Commission that zero
public notices were returned in favor or in opposition of the change of zoning
request. Based on Staff analysis, Staff recommends approval of the “CG-2”
district but denial of the “CN-1” district and, in lieu thereof, approval of the
“ON” Neighborhood Office District. Adequate buffering should be considered
along the shared property line between the residential and commercial
developments. The appropriate buffering consists of using the “ON” district in
lieu of the “CN-1” district. While the “ON” district offers the same amount of
density of multifamily units, the “ON” district prohibits retail/restaurant uses not
accessory to an office development. Additionally, the “ON” district allows
medical uses by-right. Considering the significant number of adjacent
single-family homes, medical facilities and other professional office uses will
be needed.
After Staff’s presentation, Chairman Crull opened the floor for Commissioner
comments/questions. Commissioner Williams expressed that this change of
zoning would allow too much commercial development (e.g. apartments) for
acreage of the property. Discussion also took place regarding wastewater
services/lift stations for the area. Commissioner Miller mentioned how County
Road 33 will be impacted by traffic. Chairman Crull asked Staff if the applicant
is amenable to Staff’s recommendation. The applicant is seeking a change of
zoning from their initial request. After Commissioner comments concluded,
Chairman Crull opened the public hearing.
The applicant/owner, Bobak Mostaghasi, addressed the Commission in support
of his request. Mr. Mostaghasi expressed how large-scale commercial
development is highly needed in this area as residential development is
expanding. His goal is to provide an elevated living style with mixed use
development that is like The Domain in Austin or La Cantera in San Antonio.
Apartments will be necessary and appropriate with this type of mixed-use
development in which he felt that the City is lacking. He also discussed
wastewater services regarding Master Plans/lift station upgrades. Requesting
the “CN-1” district allows for more flexibility in a mixed-use development. He
said that the option of a Special Permit is not suitable for his request because
it would hinder their development plans as it is a 20-year plan. In support of
item “12”, Moses Mostaghasi also addressed the Commission and reiterated
much of what the owner previously stated. With no one else coming forward,
the public hearing was closed. A motion was made by Commissioner Dibble to
approve the change of zoning requested by the applicant. The motion was
seconded by Commissioner York. A roll call vote took place and the motion
passed with Commissioner Williams voting no.
New Zoning
13.20-0859 Public Hearing - Rezoning Property at or near 1014 Admiral Drive
Case No. 0720-03 - Petra Dilley: Ordinance rezoning property at or
near 1014 Admiral Drive (located along the west side of Admiral Drive,
south of Melody Lane, and north of State Highway 358 (South Padre
Island Drive), from the “RS-6” Single-Family 6 District to the “CG-1”
Page 7City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
General Commercial District.
Mr. Dimas read item “13” into the record as shown above. The purpose of the
rezoning request is to allow for the construction of a drive-thru car wash. For
location purposes, he presented several aerial views of the subject property
along with the Existing and Future Land Use maps. The subject property is
currently vacant. Mr. Dimas went over the history of zoning patterns in the
area. Mr. Dimas also went over UDC requirements for the rezoning (buffer
yard/setbacks) as well as available municipal facilities. He informed the
Commission that of the 27 public notices that were mailed, one notice was
returned in favor of the change of zoning request and two notices were
returned in opposition. Based on Staff analysis, Staff recommends denial of the
change of zoning request and, in lieu thereof, approval of the “RS-6/SP”
Single-Family 6 District with a Special Permit (SP) with the following
conditions:
1.Uses: The only uses authorized by this Special Permit other than uses
permitted by right in the base zoning district is “Car Wash, automated” as
defined by the Unified Development Code (UDC).
2.Setback/Screening: A setback at a minimum of 10 feet shall be maintained
from the northern property line shared with the single-family residence. An 8
-foot solid screening fence shall be built along the northern property line
shared with the single-family residence.
3.Hours of Operation: The hours of operation shall be daily from 7:00 AM to
9:00 PM.
4.Dumpster Screening: Any dumpster located on the Property shall be
effectively screened from view by means of a screening fence or landscaping.
5.Lighting: All security lighting must be shielded and directed away from
abutting residences and nearby streets. Cut-off shields are required for all
lighting. No light projection is permitted beyond the property line near all
public roadways and residential development.
6.Noise: Must not exceed sixty (60) dB at the property line where adjacent to
residential properties.
7.Other Requirements: The Special Permit conditions listed herein do not
preclude compliance with other applicable UDC, Building, and Fire Code
Requirements.
8.Time Limit: In accordance with the UDC, this Special Permit shall be
deemed to have expired within twelve (12) months of this ordinance, unless a
complete building permit application has been submitted, and the Special
Permit shall expire if the allowed use is discontinued for more than six
consecutive months.
After Staff’s presentation, Chairman Crull opened the public hearing. For the
record, Mr. Dimas stated that no written public comment forms were submitted
for this item and Chairman Crull closed the public hearing. A motion was made
by Vice Chairman Baugh to approve Staff’s recommendation for item “13” and
it was seconded by Commissioner Dibble. The motion passed with
Commissioner York abstaining.
Director's ReportIX.
Al Raymond, Director of Development Services, thanked Chairman Crull and
Commissioners Williams and Hovda for their dedicated service over the years
Page 8City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020
July 22, 2020Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
as their terms have expired and this is their last meeting.
Items to be Scheduled: None.X.
AdjournmentXI.
There being no further business to discuss, Chairman Crull adjourned the
meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Page 9City of Corpus Christi Printed on 8/6/2020