[00:00:03]
WE'LL CALL THIS REGULAR MEETING OF[1. Call Meeting To Order]
THE GALVESTON PLANNING COMMISSION TO ORDER ON AUGUST 2ND AT 3:37 P.M.[2. Attendance]
WE'VE TAKEN ATTENDANCE BY SIGNING IN.MS. GORMAN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING FOR US?
>> I JUST WANTED TO LET THE COMMISSION KNOW THAT THERE WAS A REQUEST TO DISCUSS CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AND THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT IS GOING TO BE DOING A PRESENTATION ON CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AT OUR NEXT MEETING, SO THAT'LL BE AUGUST 16TH.
>> THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE FROM STAFF?
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THIS WEEK?
[3. Conflict Of Interest]
>> MADAM CHAIR I HAVE A CONFLICT CASE 22 P-05 2.
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A FORM ON FILE ON THAT? [BACKGROUND] THANK YOU.
OUR MINUTES FROM JULY 19TH, 2022,
[4. Approval Of Minutes]
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONS, CHANGES, CORRECTIONS? SEEING NONE, WE'LL ACCEPT THOSE AS WRITTEN.PUBLIC COMMENT WAS ACCEPTED TODAY IN
[5. Public Comment]
WRITING AND WE TOOK THAT THROUGH 11:00 O'CLOCK TODAY.ANYTHING THAT WE ACCEPTED IN WRITING PRIOR TO THE MEETING WAS DISTRIBUTED TO THE COMMISSIONERS AND WE RECEIVED THAT AROUND NOON TODAY.
EVERYONE HAS HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT.
WE'VE RECEIVED QUITE A BIT OF COMMENT TODAY AND WE HAVE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THAT.
A LOT OF COMMENT ON CASE 22P-053, ESPECIALLY.
IN ADDITION, WE'LL BE HEARING COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS AS THOSE CASES COME UP.
DID WE HAVE ANY COMMENT TODAY ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS FROM THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM? ANY COMMENT TODAY FROM THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD.
[6.A.1. 22P-047 (43 Grand Beach) Request For Beachfront Construction Certificate And Dune Protection Permit To Include Proposed Construction Of A Single-Family Dwelling With Paver Driveway And Fibercrete Footer And Notice Of Mitigation For Disturbance Of Dunes And Dune Vegetation. Property Is Legally Described As The Preserve At Grand Beach (2014), Abstract 628, Block 2, Lot 10, Acres 0.452 Applicant: Steve Ramirez Property Owner: Gilbert & Mary Ann Markarian]
22P-047, MR. COLE.HOWDY PLANNING, COMMISSIONERS, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.
THIS IS A REQUEST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING WITH A FIBER CREEP FOOTPRINT AND BRICK PAVER DRIVEWAY AND NOTICE OF A PLAN TO MITIGATE FOR DUNES AND DUNE VEGETATION THAT HAS BEEN DISTURBED.
THE ADDRESS IS 43 GRAND BEACH.
THE PROPERTY IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE PRESERVE AT GRAND BEACH ABSTRACT 628 BLOCK 2, LOT 10, A SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE PRESERVE AT GRAND BEACH SUBDIVISION.
SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS ARE LOCATED TO THE EAST AND WEST.
A BEACH AND DUNE SYSTEM ARE LOCATED TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
ACCORDING TO THE BUREAU OF ECONOMIC GEOLOGY, THIS AREA IS ACCRETING AT A RATE OF 2-3 FEET PER YEAR.
THIS CASE CAME BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON APRIL 6TH, 2021, AND WAS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING 25 FEET FROM THE NORTH TOE OF THE CRITICAL DUNE AREA.
THE PERMIT FOR THIS PROJECT EXPIRED ONE YEAR LATER ON APRIL 9TH, 2022.
ON JUNE 22ND OF THIS YEAR, STAFF WAS MADE AWARE OF IMPACTS TO DUNES AND DUNE VEGETATION CAUSED BY HEAVY MACHINERY EXCAVATING THE NORTH TOE OF THE CRITICAL DUNE AREA.
AT THIS TIME, STAFF DETERMINED THAT THE PREVIOUSLY ISSUED PERMITS HAD EXPIRED WITHOUT REQUEST FOR EXTENSION.
THUS, THE APPLICANTS WOULD NEED TO REAPPLY FOR BCC DPP PERMIT IN ADDITION TO SEEKING MITIGATION FOR THE OBSERVED IMPACTS TO DUNES AND DUNE VEGETATION.
THEREFORE, THIS IS NOT JUST A MITIGATION HEARING, BUT AN ENTIRELY NEW REQUEST TO ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME.
NOW, STAFF HAS PREPARED PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR YOUR VIEWING.
FIRST, WE HAVE A FIRM AND BEG MAP SHOWING THE PROPERTY AND THE ACCRETING BEACH AND DUNE SYSTEM.
ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE OFFICIAL PROPERTY SURVEY ON THE LEFT AND A ZOOMED-IN CROPPED VERSION ON THE RIGHT WITH THE LOCATION OF THE NORTH TOE OF THE DUNE INDICATED IN THE BOTTOM ARROW AND THE 25 FOOT OFFSET FROM THE NORTH TOE INDICATED IN THAT TOP ARROW.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ON THIS SLIDE ARE PHOTOS OF THE FRESHLY IMPACTED DUNES WITH THE EXCAVATED SAND AND CLUMPS OF VEGETATION VISIBLE ACROSS THE YARD.
THIS IS RELEVANT BECAUSE OF THE PROPOSED MITIGATION STRATEGY.
[00:05:03]
ON THE NEXT SLIDE, IS AN EYE-LEVEL VIEW FROM THE OPPOSITE ANGLE WITH THE ORIGINAL DUNE EXTENT SOMEWHAT VISIBLE IN THE BACKGROUND, SO YOU CAN SEE THE SLOPE CURVE DOWN.ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDE, WE HAVE THE PROPOSED PROJECT OVERLAID ON SURVEYS WITH THE STRIATED MARKINGS ON THE BOTTOM THERE INDICATING THE HARVEST AREA FROM WHICH INTACT VEGETATION WILL BE COLLECTED VIA THE TEXAS GENERAL LAND OFFICES DOING PROTECTION AND IMPROVEMENT MANUAL GUIDELINES.
THIS WILL OCCUR ONCE THE DISPERSED SAND HAS BEEN COLLECTED FROM THE YARD AND RECONFIGURED BACK INTO ITS ORIGINAL SHAPE AS DETAILED IN YOUR STAFF PACKETS AND THEN WETLANDS REPORT.
SUBSEQUENTLY, THE VEGETATION IN THIS GREEN AREA HERE, AS MENTIONED, WILL BE COLLECTED IN A WAY SO AS NOT TO DISTURB THE EXISTING VEGETATION OR LEAVE LASTING IMPACTS AND WILL BE REPLANTED IN THAT BLACK-STRIPED AREA FURTHER UP.
ON THE NEXT PAGE, THIS IS A SUMMARIZED GRAPHIC OF WHAT I'VE JUST DESCRIBED, SHOWING THE SIDE PROFILE OF THE DUNE WHERE THE IMPACTED AREA ON THE LEFT AS THAT SOLID LINES SHOWING WHAT HAS BEEN REMOVED, AND CURRENTLY THERE'S THE CUT OUT THERE.
ON THE FAR LEFT THERE EXTENDING TOWARDS THE TOP IS THE TOE OF WHAT EXISTED, JUST ANOTHER WAY TO INDICATE THAT.
THANK YOU. FOLLOWING THE INITIATION OF THE RESTORATION PROCESS AS OUTLINED IN THE TIMELINE PROVIDED, CONSTRUCTION ON THE HOUSE MAY RESUME IF APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
THIS REQUEST FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING HAS NOT MATERIALLY CHANGED FROM THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL OF LAST YEAR.
HERE ARE THE UNCHANGED SIDE PROFILE VIEWS.
ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE TOP VIEW WITH THE BEACH DUNE SYSTEM TO THE RIGHT.
FINALLY, WE HAVE THE PROPOSED FOUNDATION PLAN ON THE NEXT SLIDE WITH THE BEACH DUNE'S SYSTEM ORIENTED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN NOW.
NO PILINGS OR PAVING OR PROPOSED SEAWARD OF THE 25-FOOT OFFSET AND FIBER CREEP IS USED UNDER THIS HOUSE.
AT THIS POINT, IT IS STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THIS PROPOSAL BECAUSE THE IMPACTS HAVE ALREADY OCCURRED AND WITHOUT APPROVAL, THE DAMAGE WILL REMAIN AS IT IS, WHEREAS APPROVAL WILL ALLOW FOR MITIGATION OF THESE IMPACTS, AS WELL AS RESUMPTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION ON THE HOUSE, WHICH IF WE COULD GO BACK TO PREVIOUS SLIDE WITH THE FIRST PHOTO, KEEP GOING.
THE FIRST ONE THAT SHOWS THE IMPACTS.
YOU CAN SEE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK HAS BEEN DONE.
AT THIS STAGE, DENIAL WOULD LEAVE IT IN THIS STATE RATHER THAN ALLOWING FOR MITIGATION.
THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT AND I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS FOR MR. COLE? VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> JUST TO BE CLEAR, NOTHING CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION IS AT VARIANCE WITH THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL, RIGHT?
>> OKAY. ANOTHER QUESTION, THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THE SAND THAT'S CURRENTLY THERE AND PUSH IT BACK UP TO THE DUNE, AND THAT'S HOW THEY'RE GOING TO MITIGATE IT, AND THEN RE-PLAN, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> WHAT TAKES THE PLACE OF THE SAND THAT'S THERE? THE GRADE IS GOING TO BE LOWERED.
>> IT'S THE GRADE THAT WAS ALREADY THERE.
SAND WAS SCOOPED FROM THE DUNE, DISTRIBUTED ACROSS THE YARD.
YOU CAN SEE SOMEONE POSSIBLY BETTER ON YOUR PERSONAL STAFF REPORTS, THERE'S PILES OF SAND IN SOME PLACES.
IT'S UNEVEN, SO THERE WAS ALREADY SOMETHING OF A YARD THAT THE DUNES ESSENTIALLY WERE 10 CUBIC YARDS WERE DISTRIBUTED ACROSS.
REMOVAL OF IT, LEVELING IT, AND PUTTING IT BACK ONTO THE DUNES WILL RETURN IT TO THE NATURAL GRADE.
>> IT WON'T MAKE A SWALE RIGHT THERE.
IT WON'T MAKE A BIG HOLE RIGHT THERE.
>> IT WILL STILL DRAIN LIKE IT'S SUPPOSED TO.
>> ON THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION, I ASSUMED THAT THERE WERE SOME CONDITIONS AS TO AFFECTING THE DUNE.
[00:10:07]
>> WHY WOULD AN ADDITIONAL APPROVAL BE NEEDED FOR A CONDITION THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MET WITH THE PRIOR [OVERLAPPING] ?
>> A FEW MORE COMMON WAYS THAT SOMETHING LIKE THIS PLAYS OUT IS ONE, IF SOMEONE DID NOT PAY ATTENTION TO THE TIMELINE ON THEIR PERMITS, AND IF THIS CONSTRUCTION HAD CONTINUED, AND IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE PERMIT HAD EXPIRED WITHOUT REACHING AN EXTENSION OR APPLYING FOR AN EXTENSION, WHICH FOR THE RECORD, TO 90-DAY EXTENSIONS CAN BE APPLIED FOR FOR BEACHFRONT APPLICATIONS.
THEN IT WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK THROUGH THIS PROCESS BECAUSE THE PERMIT IS EXPIRED, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE AN ACTIVE PERMIT.
SINGLE-FAMILY PERMITS ARE VALID FOR A YEAR.
A SECOND THING THAT CAN OCCUR AND WHAT WE'VE SEEN SOMETIMES IS IN THE MIDST OF AN APPLICATION LIKE BUILDING A HOME, SOMEONE ACCIDENTALLY DAMAGES THE DUNES OR VEGETATION.
THEREFORE, THEY HAVE TO PAUSE WORK.
THEY GET TO STOP WORK ORDER AND THEY HAVE TO MITIGATE FOR THE DAMAGE AND ONCE THE MITIGATION HAS INITIATED, THEN THEY MAY CONTINUE.
THIS ISN'T AN UNUSUAL CASE WHEREIN DAMAGE WAS DONE AND THAT HAPPENED TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THE PERMITS HAD EXPIRED.
WE'RE COMBINING THE MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS AND THE APPLICATION FOR A NEW HEARING BECAUSE WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO APPLY FOR A NEW PERMIT TO BUILD THE HOUSE UNTIL THE MITIGATION HAS OCCURRED.
>> THAT MAKES SENSE. IT'S MORE OF A TIME.
THE TIME FACTOR IS PARAMOUNT TO THE DUNE RECONSTRUCTION. THANK YOU.
>> OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OH, YES, STAN COMMISSIONER HUMPHREY.
>> WHEN THEY DID THE TAKING OF THIS SAND, IT CHANGED THE ELEVATION IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THE HOUSE.
THEY USED IT TO RAISE THE ELEVATION IMMEDIATELY BEHIND THE HOUSE?
>> THAT IS CORRECT. THEY DISPERSED IT ACROSS THE BACKYARD.
>> NOTWITHSTANDING WHERE THEY GOT TO SAND, IS THAT PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE REGULATIONS?
>> THAT WOULD NOT BE PERMISSIBLE WITHIN 25 FEET OF THE NORTH TOE OF THE DUNE.
CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES, GRADING GRAZING, FILLING ARE NOT ALLOWED, AND THEN PAVING OR ALTERING THE GROUND WITHIN 25 FEET OF THE NORTH TOE OF THE DUNE ARE NOT ALLOWED.
ADDITIONALLY, MOWING IS NOT ALLOWED WITHIN 25 FEET OF THE NORTH TOE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WHICH IS SOMETHING WE'RE WORKING ON ADDRESSING.
>> OKAY. THEY BASICALLY CHANGED THE ELEVATION WITHIN THE OFFSET?
>> ANYTHING ELSE COMMISSIONER?
>> MR. COLE, WOULD ALL OF THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS THAT ARE IN THE CASE 21P-009, THE PRIOR CASE, THE PRIOR STAFF REPORT, WILL THOSE STILL BE APPLICABLE ON THIS CASE?
>> I DO NOT THINK THEY WOULD BE LEGAL.
THE ORIGINAL PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED AS IT HAS SINCE EXPIRED, THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE ATTACHED TO IT, THEY WOULD NO LONGER APPLY FOR CURRENT MOVING FORWARD.
>> BUT WHAT WE HAVE HERE COMMISSIONERS IS BASICALLY WHAT'S CONSIDERED A NEW CASE, A NEW SITUATION.
THE PERMITS HAVE EXPIRED, SO I WOULD ASK THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER IT AS A NEW SITUATION AND IF THEY WANT TO HAVE THE SAME OPTIONS OR RESTRICTIONS THAT THEY PUT ON THE PREVIOUS CASE, THEY ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO REFRESH THEIR MEMORIES WITH THAT.
>> RIGHT. I'M JUST ASKING IF THOSE WOULD BE APPLICABLE.
IF WE NEED TO INCORPORATE THOSE IN, RUSSELL, IF THEY WOULD BE APPLICABLE, LIKE WE INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE WHAT'S IN THE GLO LETTERS.
IF WE SHOULD INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE, WHAT ARE IN THESE ORIGINAL CASE, 21P-009.
IS THERE ANY REASON TO DO THAT?
>> I WOULD NOT REFERENCE A CASE WHERE IT HAS EXPIRED BECAUSE IT HAS NO VALIDITY ANYMORE.
[00:15:04]
>> OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING MENTIONED IN THAT CASE, MR. COLE, THAT WE HAVE NOT MENTIONED EITHER THROUGH THE GLO LETTER OR THROUGH OUR CASE REPORT IN ANY OTHER PLACE THAT WE SHOULD COVER?
MOST OF THE CONDITIONS ATTACHED TO THAT WERE STANDARD AS IT WAS ONLY IN REFERENCE TO THE STRUCTURE ITSELF.
AS I'M SKIMMING IT HERE, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRITTEN. [OVERLAPPING]
>> I SEE ON THAT ONE 14 SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
THE REASON I'M ASKING IS IT JUST SEEMED LIKE A LOT OF SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
>> RIGHT. THAT'S BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS STANDARD FOR WRITING ACTION LETTERS WAS TO TAKE THE COMMENTS PROVIDED BY THE GLO AND LIST THEM INDIVIDUALLY AS SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
WHEREAS FOR EFFICIENCY, CURRENTLY, WE PROVIDE A SPECIFIC CONDITION THAT ALL GLO COMMENTS MUST BE ADHERED TO AS THEY ARE ALREADY REGULATIONS WITHIN THE TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND THEN ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AS SPECIFIC CONDITIONS MAYBE LISTED OUT.
WHEN THE ACTION LETTER OR THE PERMIT IS PROVIDED FOR THIS CASE, ALL THE GLOS COMMENTS WILL BE ADHERED TO.
YOU MAY NOTE ON THE LAST PAGE OF YOUR REPORT, THERE'S MANY OF THOSE AND THEN WE WILL HAVE ADDITIONAL SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
THE REQUIREMENT FOR NUMBER 14 OF HYDROLOGY MUST NOT BE IMPACTED.
THAT IS INCORPORATED IN OUR STANDARDS SPECIFIC CONDITIONS.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU LOOKED AT ALL OF THOSE.
>> WE'VE GOT THEM ALL COVERED.
>> WHAT YOU'RE ADDRESSING WAS THE REASON I ASKED THE QUESTION I DID RIGHT AT THE TOP OF THIS QUESTIONING PERIOD WAS, IS ANYTHING BEING CONSTRUCTED NOW AT VARIANCE WITH THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL? IT'S THE SAME SAME QUESTION JUST ASKED DIFFERENTLY.
>> THAT IS WHY I DID FEEL RELEVANT TO MENTION WHY THAT SECTION WAS SHORTER, THAT THERE HAS BEEN NO MATERIAL CHANGE FROM THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION BECAUSE EVERYTHING WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED TO HAVE THE SPECIFICATIONS AND THE SAME APPLICATION MATERIALS PRIMARILY WERE UTILIZED IN THIS RE-APPLICATION.
>> OKAY. YES, COMMISSIONER EDWARDS.
>> WHEN DID THE PERMIT EXACTLY EXPIRE BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING FOR IT IN HERE? WHEN EXACTLY DID IT EXPIRED?
>> APRIL 9TH. OKAY. DID THEY HAVE TO REDO THE SURVEY TO MAKES SURE THAT THE DUNES HAVEN'T CHANGED SO THAT WE HAVE THE SAME 25 FOOT SETBACK THAT WE DID ORIGINALLY?
>> YES, MA'AM. THE 25 FOOT SETBACK, YES.
THE NORTH TOE LIKELY ISN'T GOING TO CHANGE MUCH IN AN AREA WHERE THERE'S ACTIVITY BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO GROW AS MUCH.
IN THIS AREA WHAT'S GOING TO CHANGE DRAMATICALLY IS, YOU CAN SEE IN THE BACKGROUND AS THIS IS AN ACCRETING BEACH.
THE DUNES ARE GOING TO GROW FURTHER TOWARDS THE WATER AND THEN THE HIGH AND LOW TIDE LINES, ALL OF THOSE ARE GOING TO CHANGE.
BUT IN SECTION B OF YOUR STAFF PACKET, A NEW SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED AND THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN SPECIFICALLY ON JUNE 28TH OF THIS YEAR.
>> OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO KNOW.
THEN I WANT TO KNOW ALSO, I'M ASSUMING THIS PICTURE WE HAVE AT THE FRONT IS THE ORIGINAL PICTURE FROM BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION STARTED? IT IS THIS ONE.
>> THE AERIAL. THAT'S THE ORIGINAL PICTURE FROM BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION STARTED. YES?
>> THIS PHOTO IS FROM EITHER JANUARY OR FEBRUARY OF THIS YEAR.
IT'S THE CITY'S MAPS AND SO IT'S THE AERIAL PHOTOS THAT WERE TAKEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.
>> OKAY. WELL, REASON WHY I'M ASKING THE QUESTION IS BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE, HOW AND HOW MUCH OF THE BEACH OF THE DUNES DID THEY TAKE AWAY? I KNOW YOU CAN'T TELL ME SPECIFICALLY, BUT HOW MUCH OF THAT SAND THAT THEY TAKE FROM THE BEACH, HOW MUCH OF THAT AT THE TIME THAT THEY TOOK IT WAS A PART OF THE DUNES AND HAD THAT CHANGE FROM WHEN THEY FIRST GOT THE PERMIT TILL NOW.
>> WE DO HAVE THAT QUANTIFIED AND THAT IS ONE OF THE SERVICES THAT IS PROVIDED BY A&M WETLANDS AND IS INCLUDED IN THEIR REPORTS.
IT'S APPROXIMATELY 10 CUBIC YARDS AND I BELIEVE APPROXIMATELY 285.
[00:20:08]
MIKE HERE CAN CORRECT ME ON THAT, [OVERLAPPING] SQUARE FEET. THANK YOU, SIR.THEY ANALYZED THE AREA AND DO MATH THAT I'M NOT GOING TO BORE ANYONE WITH OR FULLY UNDERSTAND TO CALCULATE EXACTLY.
CATHERINE, SCROLL TO THE GRAPH LOOKING PAGE.
IT'S A 2.5 FEET WIDE AND 73 FEET LONG AND APPROXIMATELY A TRIANGULAR PRISM IN SHAPE.
THERE'S FORMULAS FOR THAT TO DETERMINE IT.
I'LL LET HIM COMMENT MORE ON THEIR METHODS. THEN ONE MORE THING.
THERE WE GO. THIS IS HOW THEY GET THAT.
BUT IT DOES ALLOW US IN THAT SECTION THERE ON THE LEFT, THE TRIANGLE, THAT'S WHERE THE SAND HAS COME FROM.
IT'S JUST FROM THIS LITTLE NICHE THAT'S BEEN CUT OUT.
THAT'S HOW WE KNOW HOW MUCH SAND WAS TAKEN.
>> OKAY. I ONLY SAY THAT BECAUSE I CAN READ THIS, BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE WATCHING US, THEY PROBABLY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
LIKE SOMETIMES WE CAN EXPLAIN IT A LITTLE BIT MORE TO THEM SO THEY ALL UNDERSTAND WHY SO IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE'RE ARBITRARILY MAKING OUR DECISIONS HERE.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT.
>> ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE WE MOVE ON? THANK YOU.
THEN AT 3:59, WE WILL OPEN OUR PUBLIC HEARING AND IS THE APPLICANT IN THE AUDIENCE? PLEASE COME FORWARD, AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN-IN.
>> THANK YOU. [NOISE] PLEASE JUST TELL US WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO TELL US ABOUT YOUR PROJECT.
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU SO KINDLY FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND TO SPEAK BEFORE YOU AND GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT'S HAPPENED.
WE WERE NOT THERE, WE HAD NO IDEA THAT THIS WAS GOING ON AND WHEN WE FOUND OUT WE WERE HONESTLY DEVASTATED BECAUSE WE KNOW HOW IMPORTANT THE DUNES ARE.
THEY CAN MAKE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US GOING THROUGH A STORM WELL IN OUR COMMUNITY OR NOT.
FIRST OF ALL, WE JUST WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR WHAT HAPPENED, WE FEEL VERY BADLY ABOUT IT, BUT WE ALSO ARE VERY HIGHLY MOTIVATED TO GET THIS DUNE BACK IN PERFECT CONDITION.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, WITHIN LITERALLY A COUPLE OF HOURS WHEN WE FOUND OUT LITERALLY THESE GUYS, BRANDON AND MICHELLE AT THE GLO, THEY GOT ON, WE DID A VIDEO TOGETHER AND WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO OR WHAT STEPS TO TAKE, BUT THEY GAVE US DIRECTION, HELPED US THROUGH THE PROCESS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS WE HAD HIRED MIKE WITH A&M WETLANDS BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD HE'S THE BEST.
IT'S OUR HEART TO GET OUR DUNE BACK IN SHAPE.
WE KNOW HOW IMPORTANT IT IS, NOT JUST FOR OUR HOME BUT FOR THE WHOLE COMMUNITY.
WE WANT TO TAKE THE STEPS THAT ARE NECESSARY WE JUST CAN'T BELIEVE THIS HAPPENED.
IT'S ONE OF THOSE CRAZY THINGS IN LIFE.
WE ARE TRYING TO BUILD OUR DREAM HOME TO RETIRE IN AND BECOME A GALVESTONIAN OFFICIALLY, WE'VE BEEN DOWN HERE ENOUGH WITH OUR KIDS OVER THE YEARS.
THIS HAS BEEN A DREAM OF OUR WORLD TO HAVE A HOME HERE.
WE'RE ASKING FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD ONCE AGAIN, TO BE ABLE TO RESUME, TO GET THESE DUNES BACK INTO BEAUTIFUL SHAPE, SAFEGUARD THEM IN THE PLAN.
BELIEVE ME, IF IT WASN'T IN THE PLAN, I WOULD HIRE A GUARD.
BUT WE'RE GOING TO PUT BOLLARDS AND PROTECT THOSE DUNES SO THAT NO ONE CAN STEP NEAR THEM, NO ONE CAN GET NEAR THEM AND BRING RESTORATION TO THEM.
IT'S BEEN A CRAZY JOURNEY TRYING TO BUILD THIS HOME.
COVID DECIDED TO HAPPEN AND THEN THE SUPPLY CHAIN.
I JUST WANT TO EXPLAIN THIS, IT LITERALLY TOOK EIGHT MONTHS FOR US JUST TO GET OUR PILINGS, LET ALONE ALL THE WOOD AND ALL THE SUPPLIES THAT WE NEED AND THEN THIS HAPPENED.
IT WAS CRAZY. WE DID NOT EVEN KNOW THAT WE WERE
[00:25:02]
OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT UNTIL THIS HAPPENED.WE'RE TRYING TO CROSS EVERY T WE WANT A DOT EVERY I, AND WE'RE RULE FOLLOWERS.
WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DO SOMETHING ON THE EDGE.
WE WANT TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT, AND SO I JUST WANTED YOU TO KNOW THAT AND WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR YOUR VOTE TODAY THAT WE CAN ONCE AGAIN GET THE DUNES BACK INTO SHAPE AND ALSO CONTINUE CONSTRUCTION.
>> THANK YOU. JUST ONE MOMENT AND LET ME SEE IF ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
JUST ONE SECOND. COMMISSIONERS ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER WALLA.
>> WHEN THIS HAPPENED, YOU CONTACTED COASTAL RESOURCES RIGHT AFTER IT HAPPENED?
>> WHO DID WE CALL, HOW DID THAT HAPPEN HONEY, HOW DID WE GET IN TOUCH WITH THEM?
>> HE CALLED YOU AFTER THE FACT?
>> YOU DIDN'T CALL THESE GUYS.
IT HAPPENED THEN THEY CALLED YOU.
>> IT WAS LITERALLY LIKE JUST A COUPLE OF HOURS LATER AND THEN WE GOT A PHONE CALL.
WE WERE EXCITED BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO, SO WE WERE HAPPY TO HEAR FROM THEM.
>> I'M GLAD YOU DO KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF THOSE DUNES BECAUSE IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN HERE WHEN MOTHER NATURE IS NOT HAPPY, IT'S NASTY WHERE THOSE DUNES ARE, YOU CAN'T BELIEVE.
>> SORRY IT HAPPENED, GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR HOUSE.
HOPE YOU HAVE YOUR WINDOWS AND DOORS ORDERED [LAUGHTER]
THIS IS A CRAZY TIME TO BE BUILDING, WE WOULD NOT RECOMMEND THIS FOR ANYBODY ELSE, TRUST ME, I THINK WAIT A LITTLE BIT.
WE'RE TRYING TO JUST CONTINUE ON FORWARD.
>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ANYONE ELSE? THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.
>> ANYONE ELSE ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM HAVE ANYTHING WANT TO SPEAK? ANYONE ELSE ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM? IN THAT CASE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT AT 04:04 PM.
COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON 22P-047. COMMISSIONER PENA.
>> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE 22P-047, AS WRITTEN.
>> THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WALLA.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONER SING, NO DISCUSSION.
WE'LL CALL THE VOTE ON 22P-047 ALL IN FAVOR OF 22P-047 SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
NEXT, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH 22P-053, MR. MELBOURNE.
[6.B.1. 22P-053 (10010, 10012, 10014, 10016, 10020, 10022, 10026, 10030, 10102, 10128, 10202, 10206, 10210, 10214, 10220, 10304 And 10308 Cloud LN; 1002, 1006, 1010, 1014, 1022, 1120, 1200, 1204 And 1208 Darcy; 10210 And 10224 Hall; 10220, 10223 And 10224 Bryan; 1112, 1114, 1118, 1120, 1122, 1204, 1212, 1214, 1218, 1220, 1222, 1224, 1228, 1408, 1410, 1414, 1416, 1502, 1504, 1508, 1510, 1512, 1512, 1516, 1518,1522 And 1526 103rd St.; 1210, 1212, 1214, 1216, 1218, 1222, 1224, 1226, 1234, 1308, 1312, 1314, 1316 And 1318 Skipper; And Adjacent Vacant Parcels) Request For A Change Of Zoning In Order To Designate A Portion Of The Crash Boat Basin Neighborhood As A Restricted Residential, Single-Family (R-0) Zoning District. Properties Are Legally Described As Lots 1 Schmidt’s Place Replat Of Lot 11 & N]
MR. MELBOURNE, BEFORE YOU GET STARTED, MAY I HAVE A MOMENT, PLEASE, SIR? COMMISSIONERS, I JUST WANT TO SAY SOMETHING REAL QUICKLY SINCE THIS IS AN ART ROW CHANGE OF ZONING CASE.CUT ME A LITTLE SLACK HERE, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY, SINCE YOU KNOW, I'M NOT FEELING A 100 PERCENT TODAY.
I KNOW THAT WHEN WE HAVE HAD OUR ZEROS, THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION UP HERE AMONG US.
COMMISSIONERS, I WANT TO REMIND YOU ALL THAT WHETHER OR NOT YOU AGREE WITH THE PREMISE OF AN R-0, THIS IS A METHOD THAT IS ON THE BOOKS.
IT IS ALLOWABLE ZONING THAT IS ON THE BOOKS OF THE CITY OF GALVESTON.
IT'S ALLOWABLE BY THE LDRS AND WHAT IS BEFORE US TODAY IS A CASE THAT IS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE FOLKS WHO ARE HERE, THE APPLICANTS VARIOUS HAVE MET THE CRITERIA.
IT IS NOT A REFERENDUM ON WHETHER OR NOT YOU PERSONALLY AGREE WITH R-0 OR NOT.
IT'S NOT A REFERENDUM ON WHETHER YOU THINK R-0 WILL STAND UP TO THE LEGISLATURE OR WHATEVER.
IT IS SIMPLY WHETHER OR NOT THESE APPLICANTS HAVE MET THEIR CRITERIA.
LET'S KEEP THAT IN MIND, COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE, AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
>> THANK YOU. TODAY WE HAVE CASE 22P-053, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A CHANGE OF ZONING IN ORDER TO DESIGNATE THE AREA
[00:30:05]
AS A RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY R ZERO ZONING DISTRICT.STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVAL.
THE PUBLIC NOTICES AND COMMENTS WE SENT 141, [NOISE] YOU RECEIVED THE UPDATE BUT I NEED TO UPDATE IT JUST A LITTLE FURTHER.
I WAS NOTIFIED BY CAO YARBOROUGH OF 1002A CLOUD LANE.
SHE INITIALLY SUBMITTED HER NOTICE THAT SHE WAS IN FAVOR.
THEN SHE NOTIFIED ME THAT SHE INTENDED TO MAKE THAT OPPOSED.
THE TOTAL IS WE HAD 141 SENT, 42 OF THOSE WERE RETURNED, 25 WERE IN FAVOR, AND 19 WERE OPPOSED.
WE HAD AN ADDITIONAL OTHER TWO THAT WERE SENT IN FAVOR.
THE CITY DEPARTMENT NOTIFICATIONS AND RESPONSES THAT HAD NO OBJECTIONS.
THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, THE REQUEST IS TO DESIGNATE THE PROPERTY SHOWN ON THE MAP THAT'S INCLUDED ON THE SCREEN AND THE STAFF REPORT, AS A RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY R-0 ZONING DISTRICT.
THE AREA IS CURRENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY, R-1.
THE PRIMARY DISTINCTION BETWEEN R-0 AND R-1 ZONING DISTRICTS IS THE ABILITY OF PROPERTY OWNERS TO LEGALLY USE THEIR HOMES AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL DWELLING.
SHORT-TERM RENTALS ARE NOT ALLOWED IN THE R-0 ZONING DISTRICT.
NOTE IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE CRITERIA TO ESTABLISH THE R-0 ZONING DISTRICT.
I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT TWO OF THAT CRITERIA IN PARTICULAR.
THOSE ARE THE 75 PERCENT OF THE DWELLINGS IN THE ZONING AREA MUST BE SINGLE-FAMILY, OWNER-OCCUPIED, AND 75 PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS SHALL INITIATE A PETITION TO REZONE TO R-0.
IN BOTH CASES, THE NEIGHBORHOOD MET 81 PERCENT.
BASED ON THIS REQUEST, MEETING THE CRITERIA OUTLINED IN THE LDRS, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CHANGE OF ZONING IN ORDER TO DESIGNATE THE AREAS AS RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY, R-0 ZONING DISTRICT.
CITY COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL DECISION AUTHORITY AND WE'RE HERE THIS REQUEST AT THE AUGUST 25TH, 2022 MEETING AND I'D LIKE TO DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN.
THIS IS THE BOUNDARY FOR THE SUBJECT AREA REQUESTING THE ZONING CHANGE AND THERE IS ONE ADDITIONAL SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE BOUNDARY AREA AND THE EXISTING SHORT-TERM RENTALS THAT ARE CURRENTLY REGISTERED WITHIN THE BOUNDARY AND WITHIN THE VICINITY.
>> BEFORE THE BOARD CONTINUES, CAN GIVE US JUST AS A QUESTION THAT,
>> MS. FAIR WEATHER, CAN YOU MAKE SURE YOUR MICS ON, PLEASE?
>> I WANT TO CLARIFY WITH THAT NOW OPPOSITION OR THE NUMBER IS STILL THE SAME.
>> RIGHT. THE PUBLIC NOTICE DOESN'T IMPACT THE NUMBERS THAT ARE USED TO MEET THE CRITERIA IN THE GUIDELINES.
>> THAT WAS STRICTLY PUBLIC NOTICE THE CRITERIA, THE GUIDELINES REMAIN THE SAME.
>> THEY STAY STILL MEET THEIR 81 PERCENT.
COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS FOR STAFF WILL BEGIN WITH VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> THAT WAS A GOOD LEAD INTO MY QUESTION.
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, THE PROPOSED ZONING AREA IS DIFFERENT FROM THE NOTIFICATION AREA, RIGHT?
>> OH, WAIT, COULD YOU REPEAT.
>> THE PROPOSED ZONING AREA AS DESCRIBED IN THE STAFF REPORT.
THAT IS, WHEN YOUR SAY, 75 PERCENT OF THE DWELLINGS AND THE PROPOSED ZONING AREA MUST BE SINGLE, FAMILY OWNER-OCCUPIED, AND AT LEAST 81 PERCENT OF THE DWELLINGS ARE OWNER-OCCUPIED.
THAT AREA IS DIFFERENT FROM THE NOTICES SENT AREA, RIGHT?
>> WELL, WITH THE NOTICES SENT, THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE NOTICES THAT ARE SENT.
THE FIRST NOTICE IS SENT TO THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE WITHIN THE BOUNDARY.
THE SECOND NOTICE IS SENT TO THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE WITHIN THE 200 FEET OF THE BOUNDARY.
>> THERE WE GO. BECAUSE THE PROPOSED ZONING AREA CAN REALLY BE ANYTHING YOU WANT IT TO BE.
>> CORRECT. WHENEVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD DECIDE IS THE BOUNDARY.
>> CORRECT. THAT CAN BE ANYTHING YOU WANT IT TO BE.
[00:35:02]
ONCE THAT'S ESTABLISHED, THEN YOU DRAW 200 FEET, CIRCLE AROUND THAT, AND THEN THAT BECOMES THE NOTIFICATION AREA. IS THAT RIGHT?>> THAT ALSO BECOMES THE PUBLIC NOTICE AREA? CORRECT.
>> FIRST, YOU HAVE TO ESTABLISH WHATEVER THAT PROPOSED ZONING AREA IS THAT YOU WANT IT TO BE.
I WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THAT BECAUSE THE COMMENTS RECEIVED, THERE WAS A WHOLE EAST SIDE.
I THINK HE SAID I'M NOT REALLY SURE.
THE COMMENTS RECEIVED, THERE WAS JUST A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE AGAINST IT.
THEY WEREN'T REALLY PEOPLE OR PRACTICALLY ONE PROPERTY OWNER.
IT APPEARED 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14, OR 15 OR 16 PEOPLE WERE AGAINST IT AND THEY ALL SEEM TO HAVE THE SAME ADDRESS.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. I THINK YOU'RE REFERENCING THE BAY MEADOWS AREA THAT'S SHOWN ON THE MAP.
>> NO, SIR. ALLOW ME TO STEP UP.
>> YEAH, THAT'S HELPFUL. OH, THAT AREA.
SO THEY WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE PROPOSED AREA I ASSUME.
BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO BE IN IT, OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THEY OPPOSE THIS CHANGE OF ZONING.
>> YEAH. SO THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO CLARIFY WITH THE PROPOSED AREA CAN BE ANY BOUNDARY YOU WANT IT TO BE.
THEN ONCE THAT'S ESTABLISHED, THEN YOU DRAW 200 FEET AROUND IT AND THAT BECOMES THE NOTIFICATION AREA.
>> WE KNOW IT. YES, AND WE ALSO NOTICED WITHIN THE BOUNDARY.
>> RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW. THANKS.
>> COULD WE GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE CURRENT STRS? DO WE HAVE A NUMBER WITHIN THE ZONE THAT OUR STR.
>> FROM MY QUICK COUNT, IT'S EITHER 17 OR 18.
>> THAT SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT, CATHERINE. THANK YOU.
>> A CANDIDATE AGAIN AND THEN I GOT 16.
>> THOSE 16 WILL BE GRANDFATHERED WITHIN ON THE OLD R1.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THE ONES THAT ARE INSIDE OF THE BOUNDARY IF THEY MAINTAIN THEIR REGISTRATION WILL BE GRANDFATHERED.
THEY DIDN'T EXPIRE, BUT THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS EXPIRE NOW ON DECEMBER 31ST.
SO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THEY EXPIRE?
>> IT WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO RENEW THEIR REGISTRATION.
>> ARE THEIR REGISTRATION AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL OR DO THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A NEW PROCESS IN ORDER FOR THEM TO GET THEM TO RETURN TO HAVING A SHORT-TERM RENTAL?
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF A NEW PROCESS.
THEY WERE SIMPLY NEED TO RENEW.
>> THE RENEWALS ARE DONE THROUGH THE PARK BOARD.
>> OKAY. WELL, I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.
>> THE RENEWALS HAD DONE THROUGH THE PARK BOARD.
IT'D BE THROUGH THEIR PROCESS.
>> WELL, YEAH, I UNDERSTAND THAT.
>> IT'D BE ALLOWED TO RENEW IS WHAT I'M ASKING BECAUSE I'M ASKING I KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS CURRENTLY, BUT I'M ASKING THAT IF WE CHANGE TO R0 AND PEOPLE HAVE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL HERE CURRENTLY, AND THERE ARE GRANDFATHERED IN BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING.
WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE'S A CHANGE IN THE POLICY AND THEY NO LONGER CAN HAVE THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTALS?
>> THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL ABILITY IS CURRENTLY BASED ON REGISTRATION.
YOU DO NOT EVEN HAVE TO USE THE PROPERTY AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, SO LONG AS IT'S REGISTERED AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
YOU CAN SELL YOUR PROPERTY AND IT CAN STILL REMAIN AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, SO LONG AS ANY NEW OWNERSHIP REGISTERS THE PROPERTY AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
SO GRANDFATHER MEANS IT RUNS WITH THEM LAND.
IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IT RUNS WITH THE LAND BASED UPON THE ACTIVITY OF REGISTERING THE PROPERTY.
>> THERE IS A POSSIBILITY IF THE PARK BOARD CHANGES THE WAY THEY DO THINGS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SHORT-TERM RENTALS WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO HAVE THEM AFTER REGISTRATION.
>> AS WE ARE WELL-AWARE WITH THE ISSUES IN TEXAS.
I WOULD DARE SAY ACROSS THE COUNTRY, THE CITY IS NOT IN THE HABIT OF JUST TAKING AWAY PEOPLE'S LAND RIGHTS TO THEIR PROPERTY.
[00:40:03]
HOWEVER, AGAIN, THE OWNER WILL HAVE TO DO SOMETHING DEFINITIVE WHICH IS REGISTERED THE PROPERTY, AND IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THAT ABILITY.>> THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER WALLA.
>> HOW DO YOU HANDLE A LOT OF VACANT LOTS IN THAT AREA?
>> WELL, FIRST OF ALL, YES, THERE ARE SEVERAL VACANT LOTS.
IN PARTICULAR, YOUR QUESTION OF HOW WE HANDLE LOTS.
>> THEY WOULDN'T BE 75 PERCENT OF AN OCCUPIED OR OWNER OCCUPIED STRUCTURE BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO STRUCTURE.
IN THE FIRST SET OF CRITERIA WE DEAL WITH STRUCTURES.
WE TAKE 75 PERCENT OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES.
AND ONCE WE MEET THAT REQUIREMENT OF 75 PERCENT, THEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ABLE TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PHASE, WHICH IS 75 PERCENT OF THE PROPERTIES WITHIN THE BOUNDARY AND THAT'S WHERE THE PETITION IS CIRCULATED.
>> HOW DO WE END UP DEFINING OWNER OCCUPIED? REMEMBER WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION ONCE BEFORE AND DON'T GIVE ME THAT LOOK.
>> BUT I KNOW THAT'S WHERE I'M GETTING AT.
IF I OWNED A LOT THERE AND I SO DESIRE TO HAVE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON IT.
AFTER WE AFTER IF THAT GETS TURNED TO ZERO, I'M OUT OF LUCK.
IF MY REGISTRATION EXPIRES, I'M OUT OF LUCK TO THE GRANDFATHERING THING IS GETTING, YOU KNOW, YOU SELL IT TO SOMEBODY AND THEY DON T KNOW TO GO REGISTER, THAT'S A PROBLEM.
ANYWAYS, I MADE THREE COMMENTS, BUT MY QUESTION REALLY IS, WHAT DID YOU COME UP WITH THE DEFINITION OF OWNER OCCUPIED?
>> I'M GOING TO LET THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING COMMITTEE.
>> I'M GOING UP THE FOOD CHAIN.
>> I THINK THE DEFINITION IS GOING TO BE AN EXISTING RESIDENCE IN WHICH THE OWNER LIVES FOR AT LEAST HALF THE TIME AND OR VOTES IS ABLE TO VOTE FROM THAT PARTICULAR UNIT.
>> AND THEY VOTE, IS THAT WHAT YOU KNOW?
>> THEY HAD THE ABILITY TO VOTE.
IF THEY WERE REGISTERED VOTERS, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO VOTE, BUT THEY'D NEED TO BE.
>> BUT THEY HAVE TO LIVE THERE A MAJORITY OF THE TIME.
>> THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. I'M NOT AND I'M JUST MAKING MY COMMENT, WHICH I'VE MADE MORE THAN ONCE, AND I KNOW THAT.
BUT I AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT VACANT LOTS IN WHAT WE'RE DOING IS THOSE GUYS.
ONCE AGAIN, THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN, YOU COULD HAVE A GUIDE, THERE COULD BE 10 LOTS AND THE NUMBER OF HOUSES, AND THE WAY IT GETS VOTED.
YOU WANT TO PUT A LOT OF VULNERABILITY, SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON YOUR LOT, YOU'RE OUT OF LUCK.
>> THANK YOU. LET'S STAY FOCUSED ON THE MATTER.
>> I KNOW I'M OFF BASE, BUT ANYWAY.
>> THANK YOU. YOU'VE EXPRESSED YOUR CONCERN.
LET'S STAY FOCUSED ON OUR CASE THAT'S BEFORE US.
LET ME FINISH THIS SIDE OVER HERE.
ANYONE ELSE ON THIS SIDE HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS CASE? NOW WE'LL COME BACK OVER HERE.
>> THANK YOU. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, A PERSON BUILDS OR BUYS A LOT, PURCHASES A LOT THERE WITH THE INTENTION OF BUILDING A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
>> LET'S STAY FOCUSED ON THE CASE AND NOT HYPOTHETICALS, PLEASE, SIR.
>> MAYBE THIS WILL JUST DEFINITELY SAY IF THE ZONE IS CHANGED TO R0, UNLESS A PROPERTY IS EITHER CURRENTLY REGISTERED AS AN STR OR REGISTERS DOING THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THEY OF COURSE HAVE THE FINAL DECISION ON THIS.
BEFORE THAT ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED REGISTERS AS AN STR, THEN THEY CAN HAVE THE STR ABILITY.
>> I THINK THE CLARIFICATION I'M LOOKING FOR, A LOT IS NOT A BUILDING, IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE OCCUPIED THERE.
>> IT'S IN FAKE BECAUSE THE ZONE IS OVER A VACANT LOT OR AN OCCUPIED LOT STRUCTURES.
IT'S OVER THE ENTIRETY OF THE ZONE.
[00:45:01]
>> BUT A PERSON COULD NOT APPLY FOR STR IF THERE WAS NO BUILDING THERE?
>> I DON'T KNOW THAN ANY OF US ACTUALLY KNOW WHAT THE RULES ARE ON AN STR SINCE WE DON'T WORK FOR THE PARK BOARD.
I'M ASKING THAT, WE DON'T WORK FOR THE PARK BOARD.
DO WE REALLY KNOW WHAT THE RULES ARE ON THAT? I'M ASKING LEGAL.
>> WELL, ANYWAY, I DON'T KNOW.
WE'LL MOVE ON. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SO WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SINCE WE HAVE VARIOUS APPLICANTS ON THIS.
WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 22P-053 AT 4:23 PM.
WE'LL START WITH THIS SIDE OVER HERE.
WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO STAND UP AND SPEAK ON 22P-053? PLEASE COME FORWARD AND I'LL ASK YOU ALL TO STATE YOUR NAMES AND THEN JUST SIGN IN FOR US, PLEASE, SO WE HAVE YOUR INFORMATION.
>> HI, I'M [INAUDIBLE] OBAMNEY, AND SORRY, I'M NERVOUS, BUT I HATE [OVERLAPPING] SPEAKING.
ANYWAY. THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR SERVICE.
I KNOW IT'S A TOUGH THING TO GET UP THERE AND MAKE DECISIONS AND I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
I LIVE ON CLOUD LANE AND MY FAMILIES HAD THAT PROPERTY IN OUR FAMILY FOR GENERATIONS, AND MY TWO SISTERS HAVE THE PROPERTIES NEXT DOOR.
I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETS THE CRITERIA.
I'M HAVING A VERY DIFFICULT TIME UNDERSTANDING THE 75 PERCENT OF THE DWELLINGS IN THE PROPOSED ZONING AREA MUST BE SINGLE-FAMILY, OWNER-OCCUPIED.
I CAN'T SEEM TO GET A SOLID ANSWER, WHICH YOU GUYS HAVE JUST UNDERSCORED MY DESIRE ON WHAT THAT MEANS.
I USED TO BE SECRETARY OF OUR CBB HOA, WHICH INCLUDES ALL THE WAY TO SIDNER, SO I'M CONFUSED AS TO WHY WE'RE GERRYMANDERING THIS WHOLE AREA.
WHEN I LOOK AT MY PAST RECORDS OF WHERE PEOPLE ARE REGISTERED TO HAVE THEIR MAIL SENT, 31 OF THE 72 ADDRESSES THAT YOU'VE OUTLINED WERE GETTING THEIR MAIL NOT AT THE CBB ADDRESSED, SO THAT'S WEIRD.
ANYWAY, INTERESTING AND WEIRD.
ALSO I'VE BEEN ASKING FOR THE PETITION.
I WAS NEVER ASKED TO SIGN A PETITION PROBABLY BECAUSE PEOPLE KNEW I WOULDN'T WANT TO.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT PERSUASION THEY USED TO GET PEOPLE TO SIGN IT.
I HAVE NOT SEEN THAT YET EITHER.
THEN MY THIRD BIG THING AND THE MAIN REASON WHY I JUST REALLY DON'T THINK WE'RE MEETING THE CRITERIA IS THE WORD SAY THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD MUST BE SIMILAR IN DESIGN AND CHARACTER, AND THEN THEY RESPOND TO THEIR OWN QUESTION, I GUESS THAT'S HOW IT WORKS.
BY SAYING THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS VERY SIMILAR IN DESIGNING CHARACTER, LOTS, LAYOUTS, SETBACKS, STREET LAYOUT, AND TYPE OF THE CONSTRUCTION IS CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
WE HAD THAT PROPERTY FROM WHEN IT WENT UP ON AUCTION BACK IN THE '70S AND I CAN TELL YOU THERE'S NOTHING CONSISTENT ABOUT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S NOT SIMILAR IN DESIGN, IT'S NOT SIMILAR IN CHARACTER.
THE LOT SIZES ALONE ARE CRAZY, DISCOMBOBULATED.
IF YOU LOOK AT THAT, YOU CAN SEE YOU'VE GOT A LITTLE TINY TRIANGLES, YOU'VE GOT RECTANGLES, YOU'VE GOT PARALLELOGRAMS, ESPECIALLY ON CLOUD LANE, WHICH IS WHERE I LIVE.
SOME ARE HUGE, SOME ARE SMALL.
THAT SAME THING HOLDS TRUE WITH THE HOME, SOME ARE HUGE, SOME ARE SMALL.
WHAT DO YOU CALL IT, WHERE YOU GOT FILL IN YOUR WRITE-UP? MY NEIGHBOR HAS IT COMPLETELY FILLED AND THEN THERE'S A WALL AND I'M ON PILINGS.
>> THANK YOU. [BACKGROUND] WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM? PLEASE COME FORWARD. SIGN IN, STATE YOUR NAME.
[00:50:01]
I'M SORRY, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.I APOLOGIZE IF I DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR.
MY ISSUE IS THAT ON 130, THERE'S THREE OR FOUR OF THESE HOMES OR AIRBNB.
I HAVE TO GO THROUGH THEIR MESS EVERY TIME.
THEY DON'T ADHERE TO THE PARKING, THEY OVERLOAD THE HOUSES, THEY HAVE NO RESPECT FOR THEIR NEIGHBORS, AND IT'S JUST VERY ANNOYING.
IT'S REALLY WEARING US DOWN, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.
I'M SURE THERE'S PEOPLE HERE BECAUSE THEY'RE MAKING MONEY OFF IT.
THEY'RE GETTING DEFENDANT, BUT WE LIVE THERE AND IT'S OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
>> THANK YOU. WHO ELSE ON THIS SIDE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO COME FORWARD OVER HERE ON THIS SIDE? YOU WANT TO COME FORTH?
YOU CAN COME FORWARD IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK.
>> YOU CAN SIGN IN [OVERLAPPING] AND JUST STATE YOUR NAME.
>> IS THIS ACTIVE? I'M PATTY HICOHIME, AND I'M AT 10020 CLOUD LANE.
I BROUGHT MY VOTE WITH ME, BUT THEN AS I'M READING IT SINCE IT NEEDED TO BE TURNED IN.
I DON'T KNOW WHY I'M [NOISE] STAGE FRIGHTENED.
>> IT SAYS IT NEEDED TO BE TURNED IN BY 11:00 TODAY, BUT I DO NOT.
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. [OVERLAPPING] YOU CAN JUST HAND IT TO MR. MELBOURNE.
IT'S FINE. HE DOES NOT BUY IT EITHER?
>> NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TEAR IT.
>> NO, THAT'S FINE. CATHERINE, THEY'LL START OR OVER.
>> I JUST WANTED TO SAY I BROUGHT THIS WITH [INAUDIBLE].
>> I SAID THAT I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS REZONING.
>> I'LL SPEAK NOW, BUT I THINK IT'S WEIRD THAT WE DON'T HAVE THE APPLICANTS SPEAKING FIRST.
I'M HERE TO TESTIFY IN FAVOR OF THE REZONING.
THIS IS A CASE THAT I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN FROM THE BEGINNING.
THIS TRULY WAS AN UPHILL BATTLE.
MAYBE TO ANSWER OF SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS AS THIS MAN HAS EDUCATED ME, MATTER OF FACT, I LOST A DOLLAR, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT IT WON'T LET ME PAY BECAUSE YOU'D RATHER I OWE HIM.
HOW IS THAT DEFINED IN THE FIRST PETITION? YOU HAVE TO GET 75 PERCENT OF THE HOMESTEAD PROPERTIES OR THE PROPERTIES THAT THEY ARE INEXISTENCE, THAT PERSON HAS TO BE WILLING TO SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT SAYING THAT IT IS THEIR SECONDARY DWELLING.
>> YES. THE AFFIDAVIT STATES THAT THEY [OVERLAPPING]
>> OKAY. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING AS PETE DEFINED IT.
TRULY, THIS WAS AN UPHILL BATTLE BECAUSE THE MAJORITY OF THEIR PROPERTIES HAD TO SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT STATING THAT EVEN THOUGH IT WAS THEIR SECOND HOME, THEY WERE THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO USE THE PROPERTY.
AS FAR AS THE PARK BOARDS PROCESS IS A RENTAL HAS TO REGISTER ANNUALLY AND IT HAS TO HAVE A LICENSE NUMBER.
IF THEY DON'T DO THAT, THEY LOSE THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
MY UNDERSTANDING AND I GUESS DONNA COULD CLARIFY THIS IS, ONCE THIS IS WHERE I LOST THE DOLLAR BECAUSE I THOUGHT NOW OUR ZERO,
[00:55:02]
ONCE A HOUSE WAS SOLD, IT LOST ITS GRANDFATHERING, WHICH IT DOESN'T UNLESS IT DOES NOT FILE AS A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.I BELIEVE THAT'S THE ONLY TIME THEY WOULD LOSE THEIR SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
BUT ANYWAY, I'M TESTIFYING IN FAVOR.
IT'S AMAZING TO ME THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO GET 81 PERCENT COMPLIANCE WITH THE OBSTACLES THAT THEY HAD TO GO THROUGH.
THIS IS SOMETHING I'D BECOME VERY FAMILIAR WITH BECAUSE I HAVE SO MANY NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ARE IN THE PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH THIS.
I WOULD ASK YOU TO SUPPORT IT.
THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE THE PEN. IT'S HERE.
>> JUST AS A CLARIFICATION, MS. ROB IS HERE TODAY AS A CITIZEN, IS THAT CORRECT?
JUST TO CLARIFY ALSO WITH YOU, MS. ROB, THE PROPERTY OWNERS OR THE APPLICANT IS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
WHO'D LIKE TO COME UP AND SPEAK NEXT? [BACKGROUND]
>> I'M GEORGE BRITAIN AND I HAVE A SECOND HOME AT 1120 DARCY INSIDE THE AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
GENERALLY SPEAKING, I'M NOT AGAINST THE CONCEPT OF SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
AIRBNB AND VACATION RENTAL BY OWNER HAS BEEN A VALUABLE MARKETING DEVELOPMENT, PUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS AND TENANTS TOGETHER TO RENT PROPERTIES.
THE PROBLEM WITH THE GENERAL CONCEPT IS ONE SIZE DOES NOT NECESSARILY FIT ALL.
REGARDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, THE CONCEPT WORKS AS LONG AS THE PURPORTED USE OF THE RENTAL PROPERTY BY THE TENANT DOES NOT INTERFERE OR RUN COUNTER TO THE INTERESTS OF THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE AREA WHERE THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS LOCATED.
THE CRASH BOAT BASIN IS ONE OF THESE EXCEPTIONS.
THE ATTRACTION OF THIS AREA TO A SHORT-TERM RENTAL PROSPECT IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO A LARGE RECREATIONAL BODY OF WATER, WHICH AFFORDS BOATING, FISHING, SWIMMING, AND OTHER AQUATIC SPORTS.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE HOMES IN THIS AREA ARE RELATIVELY LARGE, WITH SMALL LOTS AND INADEQUATE STREET PARKING.
THE ATTRACTION TO A PROPERTY OWNER, CONVERTING TO A SHORT-TERM RENTAL IS THAT A LARGER HOUSE CAN BE ADVERTISED TO ACCOMMODATE DOUBLE-DIGIT PEOPLE OCCUPANCY.
THUS ALLOWING LARGE GROUPS TO PULL THEIR FUNDS AMONG MULTIPLE PARTICIPANTS TO ESSENTIALLY TURN A LARGE FOUR BEDROOM HOUSE INTO A SMALL HOTEL.
THE TRADE NAME OF ONE OF OUR SHORT-TERM RENTALS ON 103RD STREET IS FAT TUESDAY.
[INAUDIBLE] AN ADVERTISED PARTY VENUE.
UNFORTUNATELY, THIS ATTRACTIVE NICHE TO SHORT-TERM RENTAL ENTREPRENEURS IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE PERMANENT RESIDENCE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD WHO DO NOT ENJOY CONSTANT LOUD NOISE, STREET OBSTRUCTION, AND IN MANY CASES, RUDE AND DISORDERLY PEOPLE.
AIRBNB CAN TRY TO RESTRICT ITS CLIENTS AND MONITOR THIS, BUT THE CLIENTS SIMPLY MOVE TO ANOTHER PLATFORM WHO ALLOW MORE LENIENT RULES.
IT ALL BOILS DOWN TO SHORT-TERM RENTAL.
IS A BUSINESS VERY SIMILAR TO A HOTEL OR A MOTEL.
BUSINESSES, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY OPERATE TO DESTROY THE ESSENCE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD, HAVE NO PLACE IN A RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AREA. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK TODAY? PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> MY NAME IS CHUCK BALKAN HAGEN.
I LIVE ON A 103RD STREET AT PRESTON.
I WANTED TO ADDRESS FIRST OFF, MARY JOE, SHE'S A GOOD VRBO RENTER.
SHE DOESN'T RENT OUR HOUSE OUT TO LARGE CROWDS EVERYTHING ELSE.
[01:00:03]
SHE'S NOT THE OFFENDER THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.BUT I WANT TO ALSO ADDRESS HOW WE PICK THIS BOUNDARY.
THIS IS AIRPORT HOMES HEIGHTS SECTION 4, THIS IS A WHOLE SECTION, BY PLAN, SO THAT'S HOW IT CAME UP THE BOUNDARY.
ONE CURVED OUT TO BRING SOME [OVERLAPPING] IT WASN'T CURVED OUT TO BRING SOMEONE IN, BUT IT'S THE SECTION 4 OF AIRPORT HOME SITES. THAT'S HOW WE DID IT.
WE DIDN'T EXCLUDE ANYBODY FROM THE AREA OR INCLUDE ANYBODY OUTSIDE OUR AREA.
OUR ASSOCIATION IS LARGER, BUT THIS IS THE SECTION THAT WE WERE CONCERNED WITH.
IT WAS VERY DIFFICULT TO GET OUR 75 PERCENT THAT WAS REQUIRED OR MORE.
WE HAD TO SEND AFFIDAVITS OUT TO PEOPLE THAT WOULD LIVE OUT OF TOWN AND AUSTIN THAT HAVE HOMES.
WHEN IT GOT DOWN TO THE COUNT, WE HAD TO GO FIND THEM, GET THEM TO SIGN ON AND MANY OF THOSE VACANT OWNERS DO NOT HAVE A STRUCTURE BUILT ON THE HOUSES.
WE'RE GLAD TO GET A 81 PERCENT PLUS, I GUESS, OR WHATEVER.
BUT SO I GUESS THOSE ARE THE TWO POINTS I WANTED TO MAKE HOW HE CAME UP WITH THE BOUNDARY AND IT WAS A VERY DIFFICULT TASK AND VACANT LAND OWNERS WERE IN FAVOR OF IT. THANK YOU
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE ON THIS SIDE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK? [NOISE] HI.
I'M GOING TO BE REAL SHORT AND SWEET.
I HAVE TWO BOYS, ONE SIX, ONE ELEVEN.
THEY PLAY LITTLE LEAGUE BASEBALL IN TOWN AND I LIKE FOR THEM TO RIDE THEIR BIKES.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU-ALL HAVE BEEN PASSED, BUT YOU HAVE IT.
I KNOW WE HAVEN'T BEEN DOWN OUR STREET ON A WEEKEND DURING THE SUMMERTIME WHEN THOSE BOOK TO THOSE CORPORATES THAT WE HEAR ABOUT, ARE FULL OF DRUNK AND DISORDERLIES.
I CAN'T LET MY KIDS RIDE THEIR BIKES AND THAT PISSES ME OFF.
THAT'S WHY I'M HERE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU. [NOISE] WHO ELSE ON THIS SIDE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? PLEASE COME FORWARD.
>> MY NAME IS STACY BIGGER AND AM THE HONOR OF 1503 103RD STREET.
IT IS A SECONDARY HOME FOR ME.
I ALSO HAVE A COLLEGE-AGED SON HERE THAT GOES TO TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY, AND AS A MARITIME MAJOR THERE.
HE USES THIS HOME QUITE FREQUENTLY AS A SECOND HOME, SO THAT HE HAS A PLACE TO STUDY, A PLACE TO BE.
MY FAMILY COMES DOWN AND WHEN WE HAVE THINGS AT THE UNIVERSITY, WE CAN OCCUPY THAT HOME.
I AM AGAINST THIS, WHEN I BOUGHT THAT HOME, IT WAS VERY CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
THERE ARE A LOT OF EMPTY LOTS.
THERE ARE A LOT OF LOTS THAT THEY USED FOR STORAGE.
THIS IS NOT A PLAN NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT PRIOR TO US ACROSS FROM MOODY GARDENS.
THE ABILITY TO GO BACK AND CHOOSE WHAT YOU WANT TO START HAVING ZONING IN.
I FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WHEN AND SO I OPPOSE THIS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WHO ELSE ON THIS SIDE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK?
>> MY NAME IS HEATHER PATRICK.
I WAS NOT PLANNING ON SPEAKING, BUT I WILL VERY BRIEFLY.
I LIVE ON THE CRUSH BOTH MY HUSBAND AND I BOUGHT OUR HOME IN ALMOST 20 YEARS AGO NOW, AND WE PLAN ON RAISING OUR FAMILY OUT THERE AND WE ARE NOW.
HE STATED EARLIER, I'VE ALWAYS FELT VERY COMFORTABLE WITH THEM DRIVING THEIR BIKES UP AND DOWN THE STREET.
YEAR AFTER YEAR I SEE MORE AND MORE OF THESE VRBOS COMING AND MORE AND MORE STRANGERS WHO I DO NOT KNOW.
MORE AND MORE TRASH THAT THEY LIVE ON THE STREETS.
MORE AND MORE LOUD MUSIC AT ALL HOURS OF THE NIGHT AND I'M NOT A FAN OF IT.
IT'D BE ONE THING IF THEY WERE OPERATED BY THE PERSON NEXT DOOR.
BUT I THINK ONE OF THE BIG CHALLENGES IS THAT A LOT OF THESE VRBOS ARE RUN BY PEOPLE THAT ARE IN HOUSTON OR EVEN IN ANOTHER STATE AND THERE'S NO REGULATION.
WHETHER THEIR INTENTIONS ARE BAD, I'M SURE THEY'RE NOT.
IT'S NOT GOOD FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
I HAVE LOOKED AT THIS LITTLE COMMUNITY OF MINE AS A LITTLE TREASURE AND A LITTLE GEM THAT I CALL MY HOME.
[01:05:03]
I GUESS BASICALLY I JUST WANT TO PROTECT IT AND THAT'S ALL.I REALLY SEE THIS AS THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT OUR LITTLE COMMUNITY.
IT IS A REALLY SMALL COMMUNITY AND THERE ARE A LOT OF FAMILIES THERE.
I JUST WANT TO KEEP IT AS IT IS AND THAT'S IT. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. [NOISE] MY NAME IS GREG PRATT.
I LIVE AT 1234 SKIPPER STREET, RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM BEN AND HEATHER AND AROUND THE CORNER FROM CHUCK AND DOWN THE STREET FROM GEORGE.
HURRICANE CARLA WIPED OUR HOUSE OUT AND WE REBUILT IT UNTIL LIKE AND WE REBUILT IT AGAIN, SO A LONG TIME.
MARY JOE, YOU ARE A GOOD OPERATOR AS I TOLD YOU IN THE TEXT THE OTHER NIGHT.
>> I'VE BEEN THERE SINCE I WAS EIGHT YEARS OLD. I'VE SEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT WAS LIKE THE EAST SIDE GUYS, THE WEST SIDE GUYS, WE WERE ALL FRIENDS.
WE NEVER HAD ANY ISSUES AND YOU START BRINGING IN PEOPLE THAT DON'T APPRECIATE WHAT WE HAVE THERE.
WHAT WE HAVE THERE IS A BUNCH OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN THERE.
THE ONES THAT AREN'T HOMESTEADED HAD BEEN THERE 30, 40, 50, 60 YEARS, AND WE LOVE THE PLACE.
TO SEE AN OPPORTUNIST COME IN FOR PROFIT, WHICH I'M ALL FOR THAT, BUT I'M NOT FOR THAT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT DESTROYS THE VIBE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
DEMO CASINOS, HELP ME OUT JACQUELINE, HIS ADDRESS, BRYAN STREET.
HE'S GOT TO DEAL WITH THIS EVERY WEEKEND.
I HAD PICTURES JUST THE OTHER DAY OF LIGHT WINE BOTTLES, CORN COBS, CIGARETTE BUTTS FLOATING IN OUR WATER AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT PEOPLE THAT COME THERE, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A FEW, UNDERSTAND THE ENORMITY OF WHAT WE HAVE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY A GOOD THING.
I'M VERY PROUD OF WHAT WE DID.
THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY TO BASICALLY HOPEFULLY CAN'T STOP THE ONES THAT ARE THERE.
I CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO STOP WHAT SHE'S GOT BUT THE FUTURE IS WHAT WE'VE GOT AND THAT'S ALL WE GOT. THANK YOU ALL.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE ON EITHER SIDE?
>> I'M SORRY YOU'VE HAD YOUR THREE MINUTES.
ANYONE ELSE WHO HASN'T HAD THEIR THREE MINUTES? WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:45, AND I'LL BRING IT BACK 22P-053 FOR A MOTION. COMMISSIONER PENA.
>> I WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE 22P-053 AS WRITTEN.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? [NOISE] MR. PENA.
>> I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE APPLAUDED FOR THE NEIGHBORS WHO HAVE HAD THE COURAGE TO STAND UP TO SOME OF THESE SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
I KNOW THAT THERE ARE SOME GOOD ONES AND THERE ARE A LOT OF GOOD ONES WHO LIVE HERE LOCALLY.
BUT WE'VE SEEING THIS MORE AND MORE NOT RUNNING PARALLEL TO THE GALVESTON THAT WE WANT TO MAINTAIN.
OUR HOMES ARE BEING SOLD BASED ON THEIR COMMERCIAL INCOME POTENTIAL, NOT ON LIVABILITY.
THAT IS A HUGE DETRACTANT FOR NEW FAMILIES TO OUR COMMUNITY.
BEN PATRICK MENTIONED ALL LITTLE LEAGUE.
OUR LITTLE LEAGUE TEAMS ARE GETTING SMALLER.
OUR SCHOOLS ARE GETTING SMALLER, OUR WORKFORCE IS GETTING SMALLER.
IT'S BECAUSE OF THESE COMMERCIAL ENTITIES THAT ARE COMING IN AND EATING UP OUR PROPERTY.
GALVESTON IS A GREAT PLACE TO VISIT BECAUSE IT'S A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE FIRST AND FOREMOST.
WITH THIS VOTE TODAY, I HOPE THAT WE ARE IMPLORING CITY COUNCIL TO LOOK DEEPER INTO THIS ISSUE TO SEE WHERE THE SATURATION POINT IS FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
BECAUSE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT ISN'T GOING AWAY, SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE LOOKED AT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.
[01:10:01]
>> ANYONE ELSE? YES, COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> I WANT TO SECOND WHAT MR. PENA SAID THERE.
I BELIEVE THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT DESERVES THE COUNCIL'S ATTENTION AND ATTENTION IMMEDIATELY.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S HOLLOWING OUT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, HOLLOWING OUT OUR POPULATION HERE, HOLLOWING OUT OUR SCHOOL DISTRICTS, AND HOLLOWING OUT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THIS WAY OF DEALING WITH IT IS NOT EQUITABLE.
IT'S NOT FAIR TO OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS.
IT NEEDS SOME ATTENTION NOW. THANK YOU
>> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS IS THE WAY THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS USING THIS RZ ROW.
I FULLY SUPPORT THE WAY THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS RIGHT NOW, THIS ZONING MECHANISM THAT IS IN THE LDR.
WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.
CITY COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL SAY ON THIS AND THEY WILL MAKE THE FINAL DETERMINATION ON THIS ON AUGUST 25TH.
THEY HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON THIS.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS, COMMISSIONERS? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER WALLA. I WOULD FULLY EXPECT THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SOMETHING.
>> I WOULD BE BRIEF, I PROMISE.
LOOK, IT'S GREAT THAT WE HAVE A COMMISSION THAT WE ALL HAVE OUR OPINIONS, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.
I AM VERY EMPATHETIC TO THE SITUATION THESE PEOPLE FIND THEMSELVES IN.
I AM VERY FORTUNATE THAT I LIVE IN A COMMUNITY THAT DOESN'T ALLOW SHORT-TERM RENTALS BY DEEP RESTRICTION.
I'M A LITTLE BIASED, BUT I APPRECIATE OR I EMPATHIZE WITH THESE FOLKS.
THE PROBLEM IS, WHEN WE DO THIS, YOUR KIDS STILL CAN RUN THE STREET.
>> ONE MORE THING, THIS IS THE ONLY TOOL WE HAVE AVAILABLE FOR US RIGHT NOW TO HELP PEOPLE THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE THE ZONE HERE.
IT'S THE ONLY TOOL WE HAVE AND I THINK WE'RE OBLIGATED TO USE IT TO HELP THESE PEOPLE BECAUSE I SYMPATHIZE WITH WHAT THEY'RE GOING THROUGH.
I HAVE IT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD TOO, IN THE EAST END SAME THING.
IN THE EAST END HERE, WE CAN'T MEET SOME OF THE CRITERIA TO DO THIS, BUT THE PEOPLE THAT CAN I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT WE CAN HELP THEM DO THIS.
>> ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NO MORE DISCUSSION, WE'LL CALL THE VOTE.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL OF 22P-053.
ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
ONE ABSTENTION AND ONE ABSTENTION.
IT WILL BE RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL.
YOU WILL ALL BE AT COUNCIL ON AUGUST 25TH, I ASSUME.
NEXT WE'LL MOVE FORWARD WITH 22P-048, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
[6.C.1. 22P-048 (West Isle - Approximately 100.79 Acres Adjacent To Pointe West Subdivision) Request To Revoke A Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay District Approved Under Ordinance 21-012. Property Is Legally Described As 100.79 Acres Of Land Out Of Abstract 121 Hall & Jones Survey Tr 1-7 Acres 219.885, A Subdivision In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Development Services Department Property Owner: CRVI HPW TRS, Inc.]
>> THIS IS FOR THE WEST AISLE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 100 ACRES ADJACENT TO THE POINT WEST SUBDIVISION.
THE REQUEST IS TO REVOKE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS APPROVED UNDER ORDINANCE 21-012.
TWELVE NOTICES WERE SENT, ZERO RETURNED.
IN 2017, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A REQUEST TO INCORPORATE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
IT WAS FIRST APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL AS ORDINANCE 1811 ON FEBRUARY OF 2018.
THE ORDINANCE CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING CONDITION.
THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT SHALL INITIATE A CASE TO REVOKE THE PUD.
IF CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT COMMENCE ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANTS DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE.
THE APPLICANT THEN SUBMITTED TWO REQUESTS, ONE IN 19 AND ONE IN 21 TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE.
HOWEVER, THEY HAVE FALLEN BEHIND AGAIN.
THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE IS LISTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT.
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS NOT COMMENCED AND THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE HAS NOT BEEN ADHERED TO.
FOR THIS REASONS, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF IS MOVING TO REVOKE THE PUD.
WE HAVE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE APPLICANT AND THEY'VE INDICATED THAT THERE ARE NOT PLANS TO CURRENTLY MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT.
THEY'VE BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE REVOCATION PROCESS AND HAD NO OBJECTIONS.
THE PURPOSE OF THE ORIGINAL PUD WAS TO ALLOW FOR A PRIVATE STREET.
PLEASE NOTE CRITERIA FOR REVOKING A PUD IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTS TO REVOKE ORDINANCE 20013 REGARDING A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DUE TO THE FOLLOWING FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, SECTION 4.105A, AND VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS APPROVED UNDER ORDINANCE 21-012.
[01:15:05]
CITY COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL DECISION REGARDING THIS PUD REQUEST AND THAT WILL BE HEARD ON AUGUST 25TH.WE HAVE A PICTURE WHICH IS AN AERIAL SHOWING THE LOCATION AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? VICE CHAIR BROWN?
>> YEAH. YOU MAKE REFERENCE TO ORDINANCE 21-012 AND ORDINANCE 21-013.
>> OKAY. IT'S NOT 20-013? [NOISE]
>> OKAY. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAD. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
>> THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO REVOKE THE ORDINANCE FOR THE PUD, RIGHT?
>> THAT ORDINANCE WOULD NOT APPLY TO THIS PROPERTY ANYMORE?
>> YEAH. THE RELOCATION MAKES IT EVAPORATE, IT GOES AWAY.
>> EVAPORATE. THAT'S GOOD. THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR CASE 22P-048 AT 4:54 PM.
ANYONE ON THIS SIDE WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? ANYONE ON THIS SIDE? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:54 PM.
BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION. YES, COMMISSIONER FINKLEY.
>> I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT CASE 22P-048, AS PRESENTED BY STAFF.
>> THAT'S A MOTION AND SECOND THAT WOULD BE FOR REVOCATION.
A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR REVOCATION, IS THERE DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION, WE'LL CALL THE VOTE ALL IN FAVOR OF REVOCATION.
NEXT, WE'LL HEAR 22P-054. MS. GORMAN.
[6.C.2. 22P-054 (12212 San Luis Pass Road/FM 3005) Request To Revoke A Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay District Approved Under Ordinance 20-013. Property Is Legally Described As The West 311.7 Feet Of Lot 1, Resort Subdivision, In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Development Services Department Property Owner: Prida Construction LTD.]
>> THIS IS ANOTHER REVOCATION, SO THIS IS FOR 12212, SAN LOUIS PASS ROAD, IT IS A REQUEST TO REVOKE OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPROVED UNDER ORDINANCE 20-013.
PUBLIC NOTICES SENT WERE EIGHT, ZERO RETURNED.
IN 2020, THE PROPERTY OWNER PREDICT CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTED A REQUEST TO INCORPORATE A POD IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THAT REQUEST WAS APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL AS ORDINANCE 20013 ON FEBRUARY 27TH, 2020, THAT IT CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING CONDITION THAT THE PROJECT SHALL BEGIN WITHIN EIGHT MONTHS FROM FEBRUARY 27TH TO 2020 AND BE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN 24 MONTHS, APPROXIMATELY FEBRUARY OF 2022.
TO DATE, NO PERMITS HAVE BEEN ISSUED, SO WE'RE MOVING TO REVOKE THE POD.
AGAIN WE'VE BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE OWNER, THEY'VE INDICATED THAT THEY DON'T HAVE PLANS TO MOVE FORWARD AND THEY'VE BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE REVOCATION PROCESS AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO IT.
THE PURPOSE OF THE ORIGINAL POD WAS TO ALLOW FOR DEVIATIONS FROM THE HEIGHTENED DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE.
PLEASE NOTE CRITERIA FOR REVOKING A POD IN YOUR STAFF REPORT STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THEIR REQUESTS TO REVOKE THIS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DUE TO THE FOLLOWING FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, SECTION 4.105A, AND VIOLATION OF CONDITIONS APPROVED UNDER ORDINANCE 20-013.
CITY COUNCIL HAS THE FINAL DECISION REGARDING PUTTING REQUESTS, AND WE'LL HEAR THIS REQUEST ON AUGUST 25TH.
WE HAVE, AGAIN, AN AERIAL AND THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED, THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, SIR, VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> THESE RARE VOCATIONS OF THE ORDINANCE THAT ESTABLISHES THE PODS ARE IN CONCURRENCE WITH THE OWNERS. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> WHEN WE DO REGULAR REVIEWS OF PODS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE COMPLIANT WITH THEIR STANDARDS, WHEN WE FIND ONE THAT'S OUT OF COMPLIANCE, WE CONTACTED THEM, AND IF THEY STILL WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT, THEN WE WOULD RECOMMEND THEY FILE AN APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION.
THE APPLICANT WAS MADE AWARE OF THAT AND CHOSE NOT TO.
>> THIS IS NOTHING THAT THEY WOULD, FOR INSTANCE, WANT TO CONTEST, THEY'RE JUST NOT READY TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT RIGHT NOW.
[01:20:02]
>> THEY'RE NOT READY TO MOVE FORWARD, AND THEY KNOW THAT IF THEY WANTED TO DO THE PROJECT AGAIN, THEY'D HAVE TO GET ANOTHER POD, SO THEY ARE AWARE OF THAT.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON THIS ONE? SEEING NONE, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 22P-054, 4:57 PM.
ANYONE ON THIS SIDE, WHO WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE, ANYONE ON THIS SIDE? SEEING NONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:57 PM, BRING IT BACK FROM EMOTION.
>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE 22P-054, REVOKING ORDINANCE 20-013, ESTABLISHING A POD.
>> THANK YOU. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR REVOCATION.
ALL IN FAVOR OF REVOCATION? IT'S UNANIMOUS.
MIGUEL MIGUEL, I WANTED TO LIVE IN YOUR APARTMENTS.
[LAUGHTER] NEXT, MR. LUNSFORD,
[6.D.1. 22P-049 (12240 Jenkins Road) Request For A Preliminary Plat For A New Subdivision Including Nine Lots And A New Street. Property Is Legally Described As Abstract 121 Page 52, Part Of Lots 303, 304, 293, And 294 (303-1), Trimble And Lindsey Section Two; In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Jennifer Grant, High Tide Land Surveying Property Owner: Desert Willow Fund Series Of Houston Gulf Coast Investments, LLC]
22P-049, AND IS THIS ONE WHERE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT ON ZOOM?>> BEFORE WE GET STARTED ON THIS, WE'VE GOT SEVERAL IN A ROW HERE THAT HAVE THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO DISCUSS THAT OR WOULD WE LIKE TO HAVE LEGAL TALK ABOUT THAT.
BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE SINCE WE HAVE SOME NEW COMMISSIONERS, IF WE'VE HAD THE DESIGNATION OR THE RECOMMENDATION FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN QUITE SOME TIME, IF SOMEBODY NEEDS TO EXPLAIN THAT. PLEASE, SIR.
>> SURE. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ACTUALLY.
>> BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO ACTUALLY TOUCH ON THE PRELIMINARY VERSUS FINAL PLAT PROCESS AS WELL.
YOU DO HAVE A FINAL PLAT ON YOUR AGENDA LITTLE BIT LATER SO THIS IS LIKE THE FIRST STEP AND THE OTHER CASES ON THE SECOND STEP, BUT BASICALLY HOW IT WORKS IS WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAT, IT'S BASICALLY A STATEMENT OF INTENT, YOU CAN THINK OF IT LIKE THAT.
THERE'S SOMEONE WHO HAS A PIECE OF PROPERTY THEY WISH TO REDEVELOP.
TYPICALLY, THIS INCLUDES THE ADDITION OF NEW INFRASTRUCTURE, THAT'S ONE OF THE BIG POINTS THAT MAKES THEIR PRELIMINARY OR FINAL PLAT PROCESS, I BELIEVE THAT'S PER STATE LAW, AND SO IF YOU'VE GOT NEW STREETS IN AND NEW WATER AND SEWER, DRAINAGE, THINGS LIKE THAT, YOU GO TO A PRELIMINARY FINAL PLAT PROCESS.
A PRELIMINARY PLAN IS JUST A STATEMENT OF INTENT THAT A DEVELOPER INTENDS TO DO THIS THING, AND NEW SUBDIVISION BASICALLY, WHERE WE THINK OF AS A TRADITIONAL SUBDIVISION WITH MULTIPLE LOTS.
THE FINAL PLAT THEN WOULD BE WHEN THEY'RE READY TO MOVE FORWARD.
IDEALLY WOULD HAVE ADDRESSED THE COMMENTS AND CONCERNS FROM THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
IT COMES BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION, OF COURSE, FOR A REVIEW, AND AT THE TIME THE FINAL PLAT IS TYPICALLY ACCOMPANIED BY FINANCIAL GUARANTEES THAT THE WORK WILL BE DONE AND COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS THAT CITY STAFF, WE'LL THEN TAKE A DEEPER DIVE INTO AND REVIEW TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL THE IMPROVEMENTS MEET OUR STANDARDS.
WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THE DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE IS BASICALLY IT MEANS THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSAL PENDING THESE THINGS BEING ADDRESSED AND PENDING THE PROCESS, SO IT'S NOT A DISAPPROVAL AS IN IT'S NOT APPROVAL BOWL, IT IS A DISAPPROVAL OF THERE'S THESE OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO BE MET IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD, SO THAT'S WHAT THAT MEANS BASICALLY.
>> DOESN'T IT MEAN DANIEL THIN, THAT WE ARE DISAPPROVING IT AT THIS LEVEL SAYING HERE DANIEL, BASICALLY, YOU CAN WORK THIS OUT AT YOUR LEVEL.
BASICALLY, IT MEANS THAT AT THE PLANNING OR DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LEVEL, IT CAN BE WORKED OUT?
>> GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE WOULD HAVE THESE COMMENTS AND YOU'LL SEE WHEN WE GO FORWARD WITH THE STAFF REPORTS SO THAT VARIOUS DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, NOT JUST PLANNING, BUT ALSO PUBLIC WORKS, FOR EXAMPLE, OR FIRE DEPARTMENT, THEY'VE ALREADY LOOKED AT THIS STATEMENT OF INTENT ALREADY AND THEY'VE GOTTEN BACK WITH PLANNING STAFF AND SAID, HEY, HERE'S OUR CONCERNS, HERE'S WHAT WE THINK NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
IN THAT PROCESS, THEN, BASICALLY, YES, WE WOULD GET WITH THE APPLICANT AFTER THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND GET THEM TO ADDRESS THESE THINGS SO THAT WHENEVER THEY COME TO THE FINAL PLAT PROCESS, IDEALLY, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE ADDRESSED.
NOW, OF COURSE, PLANNING COMMISSION CAN ALSO AT ANY POINT MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS OR FOR EXAMPLE,
[01:25:01]
DEFER IT IF SOMETHING DOESN'T LOOK EXACTLY RIGHT, I BELIEVE.ESSENTIALLY THIS IS EXACTLY THAT IT GIVES US TIME BETWEEN THESE TWO STEPS TO GET EVERYTHING RIGHT, SO THAT WHEN CONSTRUCTION COMMENCES AND THE FINAL PLAT IS FILED, EVERYTHING'S READY TO GO PER PLANS AND POROSITY STANDARDS.
>> IT MEANS, GO COOK IT A LITTLE BIT MORE.
>> YES, THERE'S ALMOST ALWAYS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.
I THINK I SEE THAT TIM WANTS TO SAY SOMETHING BEFORE WE ALL START CHIMING IN.
WHAT DANIEL SAID IS CORRECT, BUT THIS DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE REALLY IT'S SOMETHING THAT COMES OUT OF STATE LAW.
STATE LAW, YOU EITHER APPROVE A PLAT, OR YOU DISAPPROVE OF PLAT, THERE ARE NO IN-BETWEENS, SO YOU BASICALLY DISAPPROVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE, SUBJECT TO CORRECTIONS ON THE RESUBMITTAL.
THAT'S WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT WHEN IT WOULD COME BACK FOR FINAL OR EVEN A PRELIMINARY.
FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S NOT FULLY UP TO SPEED, IT'S NOT APPROVABLE.
ONCE IT IS UP TO SPEED, THE COMMISSION REALLY HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO APPROVE IT.
>> THIS IS JUST GETTING A FIRST LOOK OR I GUESS A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT A PLAT AND ALLOWING GETTING SOME FEEDBACK TO THE DEVELOPER, SO HE'LL KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE A PROVABLE IN THE FUTURE AND GET THAT INTO HIS PROJECT.
>> [LAUGHTER] THE NEXT TIME IT COMES WILL BE A FINAL PLAT, IS THAT RIGHT?
>> YES, IT SHOULD BE, UNLESS THERE WERE SOME CONDITIONS THAT WEREN'T RESUBMITTED WHEN THE PRELIMINARY PLATS BROUGHT BACK TO US, BASICALLY.
>> YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER, FINKLEY.
>> I'VE NEVER SEEN A PERFECT PRELIMINARY PLAT EVER SUBMITTED IN THE FIRST TIME AROUND, AND SO MY QUESTION IS, WHAT'S THE THRESHOLD BY WHICH THE APPLICANT WORKS WITH THE CITY OR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS, GETS COMMENT FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL, ETC.
AND THEN WERE PRESENTED A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR APPROVAL VERSUS WHAT WE'RE BEING PRESENTED WITH TODAY.
BUT IN OTHER WORDS, YOU MENTIONED STATE LAW, BUT WHY COULDN'T THIS BEEN WORKED OUT AT THE STAFF LEVEL, SO WE'RE PRESENTED A PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR APPROVAL?
>> WELL, WE WOULD LOVE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN, THAT'S THE INTENT BEHIND THIS.
AS DANIEL MENTIONED, THERE'S A WHOLE RANGE OF THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL AND A WHOLE RANGE OF THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR A FINAL PLAT SUBMITTAL.
IF THEY COMPLY WITH ALL THOSE THINGS THAT ARE SHOWN IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SUBMITTED IT THAT WAY WITH EVERYTHING COMPLETELY UP TO SPEED, WE COULD RECOMMEND OUTRIGHT APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
IF IT'S SHORT OF SOMETHING, IT'S DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND THEN WE BASICALLY HANDLE THAT THROUGH THAT PROCESS ONCE THEY GET US THE INFORMATION THAT BASICALLY MAKES IT RIGHT, AND THEN THEY'RE ABLE TO SUBMIT THEIR FINAL PLAT THEREAFTER WITH THE THINGS BASICALLY GOING THROUGH A PARALLEL PROCESS OF THAT SAME THING.
>> NOW, IS THAT AS CLEAR AS MUD, EVERYONE? [NOISE] GREAT. YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER WALLA.
>> I JUST DO WANT TO MAKE ONE COMMENT THAT HE DID STATE THAT THERE ARE SOME STATE LAWS THAT SAY WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T DO.
MY QUESTION WAS, AND I THINK YOU'VE ANSWERED, CAN WE DEFER THIS AND LET THEM DO IT? BUT REALLY YOU CAN'T BECAUSE WE'D HAVE TO GIVE IT A THUMBS UP OR A THUMB DOWN.
>> YES, WITHIN CHAPTER 212 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE.
>> I THINK THAT WE ALL KNOW THAT WE'RE VERY BOUND ON THESE PLATS.
WE HAVE TO APPROVE IN OUR MINISTERIAL CAPACITY UNLESS SOMETHING IS VERY WRONG WITH THEM.
THANK YOU. NOW, WE'LL MOVE FORWARD.
MR. LUNSFORD, THANK YOU FOR YOU GUYS FOR GETTING US SQUARED AWAY ON THAT 22P-049, PLEASE, SIR.
>> SURE. THIS IS Z12240 JENKINS ROAD.
IT IS A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THERE WERE 13 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, ONE RETURN THAT WENT ON OPPOSITION.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LOTS FROM 1-9 IN A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY R1 ZONING DISTRICT FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
WILL CONSIST OF NEW INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING PUBLIC STREET STRANGE AND WATER SERVICE.
[01:30:03]
A SANITARY SEWER IS CURRENTLY NOT AVAILABLE TO THE AREA.BUT THE PROPOSED LOTS ALL OVER 0.5 ACRES TO ACCOMMODATE OSSF SORT OF SEPTIC TANKS.
PROPOSED WATER BIRD WAY WHICH IS THE STREET NAME THAT WILL BE PROPOSED WILL HAVE A 60 FOOT WIDE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND AGAIN, A 100 FOOT DIAMETER CULDESAC IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE ARTICLE 6 OF OUR LDRS.
IN THE STAFF REPORT, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF EXHIBITS FOR YOU TO LOOK AT.
THE SLIDE IS COMPOSED OF TWO LARGE PARCELS OF LAND WHICH CURRENTLY CONTAIN A SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED HOUSE AND SEVERAL OUT BUILDINGS.
THE EXISTING HOUSE WILL REMAIN ON THE PROPOSED LOT 5 OF THE NEW SUBDIVISION, AND THE OUT BUILDINGS WILL BE DEMOLISHED DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE SUBDIVISION.
SO THEY WILL NOT REMAIN, THE LITTLE OUT BUILDINGS.
SUBJECT PARCEL AND SURROUNDING PARCELS ARE ZONED RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY.
THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH IS UNDEVELOPED, THE PARCELS TO THE EAST, SOUTH, AND WEST ALL CONTAIN SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS.
PLEASE NOTE THE ZONING ON LAND USE SUMMARY IN THE STAFF REPORT AND THE LOT AND BLOCK CONFIGURATION AND CONFORMANCES TABLE THERE SHOWING THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEW LOTS.
ALL THE PROPOSED LOTS DO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR WIDTH, DEPTH, AND AREA FOR R1 ZONING.
PLEASE NOTE THAT ALSO, PRELIMINARY PLAT DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY PROPOSED OPEN SPACE, ALL THAT LAND WILL BE INCORPORATED INTO PRIVATELY OWNED LOTS.
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT INDICATES A TWO-FOOT WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT PARALLEL TO THE PROS WATER BIRD WAY RIGHT-OF-WAY.
IF OTHER EASEMENTS ARE NECESSARY, WE'RE REQUIRED BY STATE APARTMENTS OR PRIVATE UTILITIES, OR THE APPLICANT SHALL INDICATE FOR LOCATION OF EASEMENTS ON THE FINAL PLAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LDR.
NO CONSTRUCTION PLANS WERE SUBMITTED WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT, OF COURSE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS, AS WE DISCUSS, WILL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED.
ASSUME THEY CONFORM TO ALL CONDITIONS POSED BY STATE DEPARTMENTS IN OUR PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES BEFORE THE FINAL PLAT CAN BE FILED.
PLEASE NOTE ALSO THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS SUBMITTED BY CITY DEPARTMENTS.
THE APPLICANT DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY VARIANCES WHICH REQUIRE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENTION.
THE APPLICANT IS ALSO NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES FROM THE CITY'S DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 6 OF THE LDR.
THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDS CASE 22 P, DAY 049 BE DISAPPROVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS.
SPECIFIC CONDITIONS BEING NUMBER 1 PRIOR TO FINAL PLAT FILING, THE APPLICANT SHALL ADDRESS AND INCORPORATE ALL COMMENTS OR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL.
OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AND PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES IN THE FINAL PLAT DESIGN, THE APPLICANT SHALL RECEIVE APPROVAL OF WATER, SANITARY SEWER, RAILWAY, DRAINAGE, ACCESS, SIDEWALKS, STREET LIGHTING, AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, BUT I'LL SAY DEPARTMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 6, DIVISION 6.200, GUARANTEE OF MAINTENANCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PER LDR AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE SECTIONS.
THE FINAL PLAT SHALL INCLUDE ALL PARKING, LANDSCAPING, AND LIGHTING PLANS THAT MAY BE RELEVANT.
THE SUBDIVIDERS SHALL PAY FOR ALL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY CITY CODE.
PLUS OUR STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR PRELIMINARY PLATS FOUR THROUGH NINE, AND WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS.
THIS IS AN OBLIQUE AERIAL SHOWING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND IT IS ACTUALLY TWO LEGAL PARCELS AT THIS POINT.
OF COURSE, YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE WHERE THE DIVISION IS AT.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE A VICINITY MAP THERE SHOWING WHERE IT'S LOCATED TO THE AREA. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
HERE WE HAVE, ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE, WE HAVE THE PROPOSED REPLAT AND THE PROPOSED LOT LAYOUT AND STREET LAYOUT SUPERIMPOSED OVER OUR AERIAL VIEWS.
THEN ON THE RIGHT, WE HAVE A CLEAN VERSION THAT JUST SHOWS WHERE THOSE LOT LINES AND SUBDIVISIONS OF LAND ARE AT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
WE HAVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOOKING NORTH TOWARDS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OR THE PROPERTIES TO THE EAST, TO THE SOUTH, TO THE WEST.
I BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. LUNSFORD.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> [LAUGHTER] IN YOUR SPECIFIC CONDITIONS TO THE CASE YOU MENTIONED THE APPLICANT WILL RECEIVE APPROVAL OF WATER AND SANITARY SEWER, BUT WHICH HE SAID THE SEPTIC TANKS ARE GOING TO BE USED IN THIS AREA BECAUSE THERE IS NO CONNECTION TO A SANITARY SEWER. IS THAT RIGHT?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. TYPICALLY, WHAT HAPPENS WITH THESE IS DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL HOUSES, ASSUMING IT'S APPROVED, THE APPLICANTS, THE HOME BUILDERS WOULD PROVIDE OSSF DESIGNS FROM THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT BUT THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF BASICALLY A TYPO, BUT YEAH, IN THIS CASE, NO SANITARY SEWER IS AVAILABLE.
>> ONE MORE QUESTION. IS THERE A REQUIREMENT FOR OPEN SPACE RESERVE FOR SUBDIVISIONS?
>> THERE'S NOT? OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANKS.
[01:35:04]
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANYONE ELSE? SEEING NONE, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 5:12 PM.
LET'S SEE. ACTUALLY, IS THE APPLICANT IN THE AUDIENCE?
CAMERON SIDES, SO YOU HERE FOR THIS CASE? YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
>> YES, THIS IS CAMERON SIDES, CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME?
>> WE CAN. YOU'RE A LITTLE QUIET, SO IF YOU COULD SPEAK UP, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
>> OKAY. SORRY. YES, WE'RE THE ENGINEER REPRESENTING THE CLIENT.
WE'RE JUST HERE TO PRESENT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
DANIEL STATED EARLIER, AND WE JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT WE ARE GOING TO ADDRESS ALL COMMENTS FROM ALL OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS AND WE'RE JUST HERE FOR PRELIMINARY PLANS.
>> GREAT. COMMISSIONERS, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? GREAT. SEEING NONE.
ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE AUDIENCE ON THIS SIDE? YES. PLEASE COME FORWARD.
YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES, UNLESS YOU'RE ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPLICANT.
>> THANK YOU. YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
PLEASE SIGN IN AND LET US KNOW WHO YOU ARE.
I SERVE AS PRESIDENT OF GALVESTON FOUNDATION.
WE OWN THE PROPERTY THAT'S IMMEDIATELY TO THE EAST OF THE SUBJECT TRACT.
I ALSO LIVE ABOUT FOUR OR 500 FEET NORTH AND EAST OF THE SUBJECT TRACT.
MY CONCERN IS, FIRST OF ALL, I'LL SAY I'VE LEARNED A LOT ABOUT VACATION RENTALS TODAY AND WHAT [LAUGHTER] THEY MAY OR MAY NOT BRING TO THE PROPERTY INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BUT ONE OF MY BIG CONCERNS IS THAT JENKINS ROAD ON WHICH THIS IS GOING TO HAVE THEIR INGRESS AND EGRESS IS ONLY 12 FEET WIDE.
IT DOES NOT TOLERATE OPPOSING TRAFFIC.
IF YOU DRIVE DOWN JENKINS AND ANOTHER CAR IS COMING THE OTHER WAY, SOMEBODY HAS TO DRIVE OVER INTO THE DITCH.
I DON T THINK WE SHOULD BE GRANTING PERMISSION TO BUILD A SUBDIVISION ON A ONE LANE ROAD LIKE THAT.
ALSO, THE OTHER MAIN ACCESS TO THIS WILL BE DOWN TEN MILE ROAD.
TEN MILE ROAD IS NOT MUCH WIDER THAN JENKINS ROAD.
IT ALSO HAS A BRIDGE THAT HAS NO GUARD RAIL AND IS UNMARKED AND IS ABOUT PROBABLY 75 FEET LONG.
CARS CANNOT REALLY SAFELY PASS EACH OTHER IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS OVER THAT BRIDGE.
IT'S NOT SAFE WHEN THE WEATHER'S BAD.
WHICH BRINGS UP THE NEXT ISSUE, WHEN WE HAVE FLOODING AND AS WE ALL KNOW, WE FLOOD ON THE WEST END, TEN-MILE ROAD FLOODS AS DOES OSTROM MEYER.
UNLESS YOU GET OUT EARLY, YOU'RE NOT GETTING OUT.
OF THESE RESIDENTS ON JENKINS ROAD, THIS PROPOSAL, THESE NINE NEW HOMES, THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GET OUT IF THEY DILLY-DALLY WHEN THE TIDAL FLOODING OCCURS.
IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE ON AN ISLAND THAT EXPERIENCES THESE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO PERMIT A SUBDIVISION TO BE BUILT RIGHT SMACKED UP IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.
THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
>> THANK YOU MR. CAMPBELL. ON THIS SIDE? YES, PLEASE COME FORWARD.
PLEASE SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME.
I LIVE ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY 12250.
MY WIFE AND I HAVE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT 40 YEARS, RAISED A FAMILY THERE.
WHEN WE WERE THERE, JUST LIKE IT IS NOW ON THE 12240, THERE'S A HOUSE IN THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.
[01:40:03]
IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A SINGLE-FAMILY, USED TO BE HORSE RANCH THERE.IT'S ALWAYS BEEN NICE AND QUIET, ONE REASON WE MOVED THERE.
WELL, NOT TOO LONG AGO, THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD AND TURNED INTO A VIBRATO.
WILD PARTIES, POLICE HAVE TO COME, CALM THINGS DOWN, TAKE PEOPLE OFF, WHICH IS ANNOYING.
I GUESS IT'S LEGAL, BUT ONCE AGAIN, IT WAS NOT SOMETHING WE WERE LOOKING FORWARD TO.
NOW, I SEE WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT IN ADDITIONAL, ALONG WITH THAT HOME, EIGHT MORE HOMES RIGHT BESIDE US, WITH ALL THIS OTHER STUFF THAT'S GOING ON.
WE'RE JUST CONCERNED, I'M FIXING TO RETIRE.
WE'VE ALWAYS ENJOYED LIVING THERE.
I CAN SAY RAISE A FAMILY THERE, LOVED THE PROPERTY, KNOW THE NEIGHBORS, EVERYTHING'S FINE.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S FIXING.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN NOW.
I GUESS THEY MAY BE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES WITH NICE PEOPLE IN THEM, I DON'T KNOW.
THEY MIGHT BE SHORT-TERM RENTALS, THEY MIGHT BE MORE VIBRATOS.
BUT WE JUST FELT LIKE WE NEEDED TO COME AND EXPRESS SINCE WE'VE BEEN THERE FOR ALL THIS TIME.
THIS IS GOING TO BE RIGHT BESIDE US AND WE ARE CONCERNED. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS? AS WE SAID, THIS IS JUST A PRELIMINARY PLAT.
WE ARE VERY SEVERELY RESTRICTED IN LEGALLY WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO ON PLATS, BUT SOMETIMES WHAT HAPPENS AS A RESULT OF THIS IS MAYBE WE CAN FACILITATE PEOPLE COMING TOGETHER AND HAVING A CONVERSATION.
HOPEFULLY SOME PEOPLE CAN COME TOGETHER AND HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS.
I DON'T KNOW WHO'S ON THE OTHER END OF THAT ZOOM, BUT MAYBE THEY CAN HELP US GET SOME PEOPLE TOGETHER WHO LIVE CLOSE BY AND HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THEIR AREA.
IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT [NOISE] 5:19 P.M AND WE'LL BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION.
COMMISSIONERS, DO I HAVE A MOTION ON 22P-049?
>> THAT WOULD BE A DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
>> I HAVE A MOTION FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE. DO I HAVE A SECOND?
>> I HAVE A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER EDWARDS FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE, A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER WALLA.
DO I HAVE DISCUSSION? YES, VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> I WANT TO REINFORCE YOUR COMMENT THAT MR. SIDES GET TOGETHER WITH MR. CAMPBELL AND MR. GIRARD AND GO OVER THEIR PLANS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S SOME GOOD COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE DEVELOPERS AND THE NEIGHBORS OUT THERE TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YES. COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE].
>> I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT I HOPE THAT THE CITY, I KNOW THAT LOOKS AT DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES, BUT ALSO TAKES INTO ACCOUNT SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WERE MENTIONED, ROADWAYS THAT WAS MENTIONED BECAUSE THAT SEEMS LIKE IT COULD BE A DISASTER WAITING TO HAPPEN AS WELL.
>> IF STAFF MAY INTERJECT ONE QUICK THING.
JUST TO CLARIFY THE MOTION IS FOR 22P-049. IS THAT CORRECT?
>> I BELIEVE THAT THE MOTION WAS FOR 22P-050. WE HAVEN'T QUITE GOT THERE YET.
>> EXCUSE ME. SORRY. [LAUGHTER] IF I DID THAT, I'M JUMPING AHEAD.
>> OH, NO, THAT'S FINE AND STAFF HAS MADE NOTE OF THE ISSUES WITH THE ROWS AND WHATEVER AND WE WILL GET WITH PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING AND SEE WHAT PLANS THEY MAY HAVE FOR THAT AREA.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT. I'M SORRY YES, SIR.
>> REAL QUICKLY, IN ADDITION TO THAT, IF THERE IS A MEETING TO BE HELD WITH NEIGHBORING RESIDENTS AND THE DEVELOPER, WE'D BE HAPPY TO HOST THAT AT OUR SITE.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE THE CONTACT INFORMATION FOR BOTH MR. CAMPBELL AND MR. GIRARD, IF THE DEVELOPER NEEDS THAT.
I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE ON 22P-049, WITHOUT FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE WILL VOTE ON THAT.
[01:45:04]
ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION AS STATED PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND. THANK YOU.THAT'S UNANIMOUS. NOW, WE'LL MOVE ON, MR.
[6.D.2. 22P-050 (12102 Stewart Road) Request For A Preliminary Plat For A New Subdivision Including Fourteen Lots, Two Reserves, And A New Street. Properties Are Legally Described As Abstract 121 Hall And Jones Survey Part Of Lot 270 (270-2), Trimble And Lindsey Section 2 And Adjacent Right-Of-Way; In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Jennifer Grant, High Tide Land Surveying Property Owner: Chad Griffin, Reveille Enterprises Protected Series Of Houston Gulf Coast Investments, LLC.]
LENS, FOR 22P-050, PLEASE, SIR.>> OF COURSE, VERY SIMILAR TYPE OF REQUEST.
THIS IS A 12102 STEWART ROAD AND ANOTHER PRELIMINARY PLAT OF COURSE, THEY WERE 18 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT.
THE APPLICANTS REQUEST A PRELIMINARY PLAT NOR DECREASE NUMBER OF LOTS FROM 2-16, WHICH WOULD BE 14 LOTS AND TWO LANDSCAPE RESERVES IN A RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL CONSIST OF ONCE AGAIN, NEW INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC STREETS, DRAINAGE, SANITARY SEWER OF SOME SORT, AND WATER.
THE PROPOSED PALM LANE WILL HAVE A 60 FOOT RIDE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, AND AGAIN, A 100 FOOT DIAMETER CUL-DE-SAC.
I ONCE AGAIN, IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE LDR, ARTICLE 6, THE SITE IS COMPOSED OF TWO LARGE PARCELS OF LAND WHICH CURRENTLY CONTAINING NUMBERS SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED HOUSES AND BUILDINGS, EXISTING HOUSES RULE REMAIN ON THE PROPOSED LOTS.
THE BUILDINGS WERE DEMOLISHED OR MOVE TO CONFORM TO THE PROPOSED LOT LINES.
THE SUBJECT PORCELAIN PARCELS TO THE NORTH, EAST AND WEST ARE ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED, AND THE PARCEL TO THE SOUTH AS MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN HDD ZONE 6, PARCELS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ARE UNDEVELOPED AND THE PARCELS TO THE EAST AND WEST CONTAINS SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS.
YOU CAN NOTE THE TABLE THAT BREAKS THAT DOWN AND THE LOT AND BLOCK CONFIGURATION CONFORMANCE IS AS WELL.
ALL THE PROPOSED LOTS, OF COURSE, MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR WIDTH, DEPTH, AND AREA FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING.
WE WILL DISCUSS THE LANDSCAPE RESERVES HERE A BIT SEPARATELY.
PLEASE REFER TO ATTACHMENTS, SEE FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THE PERMANENT PLAT INCLUDES RESERVES A AND B INTENDED FOR OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPE AND THE FINAL PLAT MUST IDENTIFY THESE COMMON OPEN SPACES AS PART OPEN SPACE OR SIMILAR DESIGN DESIGNATION, IDENTIFYING THIS AS A RESTRICTED IN USE PER OUR ARTICLE 6, GENERALLY SITE PLANAR SUBDIVISION PLAT SHELDON LEE, AND THE LOCATION OF OPEN SPACES, IDENTIFY THEM AS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.
THE APPLICANT SHALL INCLUDE OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE PLAN AS PART OF THE APPLICATION BEFORE DEVELOPMENT.
THE PLANET YOU'LL DESIGNATE INDICATE THAT BOUNDARIES OF ALL PARKS AND OPEN SPACE AND SHALL SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH THE PARK OR OPEN SPACE SHALL BE PERPETUATED, MAINTAIN, AND ADMINISTERED.
ONCE AGAIN, THAT'S ALL SPELLED OUT IN ARTICLE 6 OF THE LDR THAT WE WILL REVIEW AGAINST.
ANOTHER BRILLIANT PLAY THE CASES TEMPLATE, WHY UTILITY EASEMENT PARALLEL TO POEM LIGHT LANE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE PROPOSED RATHER, IF OTHER EASEMENTS ARE NECESSARY OR WE'RE REQUIRED BY STATE APARTMENTS OR PRIVATE UTILITIES.
APPLICANT SHALL INDICATE THE LOCATION OF THE EASEMENTS ON THE FINAL PLAT.
NO CONSTRUCTION PLANS WERE SUBMITTED WITH PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUESTS, CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS MUST BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED AND CONFORM TO ALL CONDITIONS POSED BY STATE DEPARTMENTS AND OR PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES BEFORE A FINAL PLAT CAN BE FILED AS PART OF THAT PROCESS.
NOTE, THERE WERE SOME REQUESTS FROM SOME OF THE OTHER STATE APARTMENTS IN REGARDS TO THIS PROPOSAL.
THE APPLICANT DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY VARIANCES WHICH REQUIRES ONLY BORDER OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENTION, ANY VARIANCES FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, R1 MUST BE APPROVED BY ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND OF COURSE, ANY VARIANCES FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 6 MUST BE APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12, THE LDR.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF CONFORMANCE, I GUESS VARIANCES, SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE IS WHAT WE CALL THEM ISSUES THAT HAD BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD AND IN RELATION TO THIS PROPOSAL AND FOR THE NEW PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS, SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE BASICALLY IS A SOMETHING OF A VARIANCE, BUT THE INTENT IS THAT IT SUBSTANTIALLY MEETS THE LDR IS IF NOT IN THE EXACT LETTER.
THE FIRST IS BLOCK LENGTH AND THE PERIMETER.
THE APPLICANT IS INDICATED ON THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THE PROPOSED PALM LANE WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 759 FOOT LONG FROM THE STEWARD RODE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE CENTER PROPOSED CUL-DE-SAC, WHICH IS A BIT IN EXCESS OF OUR LDR REQUIREMENTS, WE BELIEVE IT'S 700 FOOT.
THE SECOND ONE REGARDS MULTIMODAL CIRCULATION, WHICH IS REQUIRED IN CERTAIN CASES OF A BLOCK OF AT LEAST 600 FEET LONG, SHALL INCLUDE A MULTIMODAL PATH THAT CONNECTS TO ANOTHER STREET OR ALLEY.
PREMIER PLAN IS SUBMITTED DOES NOT INCLUDE THAT.
ALTERNATIVE STANDARD OF COMPLIANCE ENABLES AN APPLICANT TO PROPOSE VARIATIONS FROM CERTAIN SUBDIVISION STANDARDS PRESCRIBED BY THESE REGULATIONS AND STILL ACHIEVE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE WITH THE REGULATIONS.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE PLANTS OR NON-CONFORMANCE PROVIDING THE STANDARDS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT ARE MET, AND I BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT IS ALSO GIVEN A NARRATIVE AS PART OF THE STAFF REPORT EXPLAINING THESE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE ISSUES AND THEIR RESPONSE TO WHY THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING WHAT THEY ARE,
[01:50:02]
THESE DEVIATIONS OR VARIANCES.PLEASE ALSO NOTE THE PLANNING COMMISSION PLAT APPROVAL CRITERIA.
IN THE STAFF REPORT, ONCE AGAIN, STAFF RECOMMENDS CASE 22P-050 BE DISAPPROVE OF THAT PREJUDICE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS.
NUMBER 1, SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND APPROVED ALTERNATE STANDARDS SHALL BE INDICATED AS NOTES ON THE FINAL PLANT PRIOR TO FINAL PLAN APPLICATION FILING, THE APPLICANT SHALL ADDRESS, INCORPORATE ALL COMMENTS OR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN THE FOREIGN MARKET LITERACY DEPARTMENTS AND PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES AND THE FINAL PLAT DESIGN.
THE APPLICANT SHALL RECEIVE APPROVAL OF WATER, SANITARY SEWER, ROADWAY, DRAINAGE, ACCESS, SIDEWALKS, STREET LIGHTING AND INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION PLANS BUT I'LL SAY DEPARTMENTS AND ACCORDING WITH ARTICLE 6 OF THE LDR, FINAL PLAT SHALL INCLUDE A PARKING, LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING PLANS IS APPLICABLE.
SUCH BUYER SHALL PAY FOR ALL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY CITY CODE, PLUS STANDARD CONDITIONS 5 THROUGH 10, AND WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS.
THIS IS ONCE AGAIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES AND ONCE AGAIN, YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE WHERE THE SUBDIVISION LINE IS, THE EXISTING LOTS, BUT IT IS TO BASICALLY LONG SKINNY PARALLEL LOTS AND THEN YOU HAVE THE VICINITY MAP AS WELL FOR REFERENCE.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. ONCE AGAIN, YOU HAVE THE PROPOSED RE-PLOT OVERLAID ONTO THE AERIAL MAPS.
YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE PROPOSED ROW WOULD PARALLEL THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE CULMINATE IN THE CUL-DE-SAC.
TWO OF THE HOUSES WOULD REMAIN ON NEW LOTS ARE REMAINING OUT BUILDINGS WOULD BE DEMOLISHED.
THE TWO LANDSCAPE RESERVES ARE, OF COURSE, NEAR THE END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC AND THE REMAINING ONE IS THE I BELIEVE IT'S THE RESERVE B AND THAT IS MOSTLY A POND WETLANDS TYPE AREA.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WE HAVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
WE HAVE THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST, TO THE SOUTH, TO THE WEST, AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
YOU CHOSE A NICE DAY FOR YOUR FIELD TRIP.
[LAUGHTER] THAT'S A MIGHTY BLUE SKY.
YOU CHOSE THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE DAY.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OH, I'M SHOCKED, VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BE APPARENTLY, IF FACED WITH AN ADJUDICATING ON ALTERNATIVE STANDARD OF COMPLIANCE WITH SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS WITH THIS LENGTH OF THE ROAD AND ITS COMPLIANCE WITH WHAT LOOKS LIKE A MULTIMODAL PATH REQUIREMENT.
IS THAT RIGHT? SINCE IT'S GREATER THAN 600 FEET?
AS YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY IS ESSENTIALLY LANDLOCKED ON THREE SIDES.
THERE'S NOT MUCH TO REALLY CONNECT TO BUT ONCE AGAIN, THE APPLICANT WAS PROVIDED A NARRATIVE OF WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING THE ASSINIBOINE, THE RATIONALE FOR THAT.
>> DEFINE WHAT A MULTIMODAL MODAL PASSES? I ASSUME THAT'S LIKE A PEDESTRIAN AT HER BIKE.
>> YEAH. BASICALLY, I GOT LIKE A HIKE BIKE TYPE TRAIL OR SOMETHING SIMILAR, CORRECT.
>> ALL OF THAT, INCLUDING THE ROAD, IS SUPPOSED TO CONNECT TO ANOTHER ROAD SOMEWHERE?
>> SOMEWHERE [LAUGHTER] AND OF COURSE, THERE'S NO PRACTICAL WAY OF DOING THAT ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
THERE'S A LONG AND SKINNY WITHOUT GOING ONTO SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY.
>> I'M SURE YOU NOTICED ON THE EXHIBITS THAT WE SHOWED THAT THERE'S NO OTHER RIGHT OF WAYS THAT ARE REALLY AVAILABLE BECAUSE THEY'RE PRETTY MUCH ISOLATED BY OTHER PRIVATE PROPERTY ON THREE SIDES.
>> IN ORDER FOR THIS ALTERNATIVE STANDARD TO BE APPROVED, IT HAS TO COMPLY WITH A CITY INFRASTRUCTURE POLICIES IDENTIFIED IN THE 2011 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MASTER PLAN, AND ALL OF THAT WILL HAVE TO SOMEHOW CONFORM TO ALL OF THAT, WHATEVER THEIR PLAN IS, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO CONFORM TO THAT, RIGHT?
>> CORRECT. A LOT OF THAT WOULD BE REVIEWED DURING THE FINAL PLAT PROCESS FOR THE NITTY-GRITTY SO TO SPEAK.
>> I'M ASSUMING THIS LETTER FROM LYNN ENGINEERING IS NOT THE ALTERNATIVE PLAT.
>> NO. I THINK IT'S JUST A NARRATIVE THAT THE APPLICANT AND OF COURSE, THE APPLICANT IS ONLY A LINE.
THE APPLICANT IS THE SAME INDIVIDUAL FOR ALL THREE OF THESE.
THEY CAN, OF COURSE ELABORATE IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THEM.
>> HE SAYS ALTERNATIVES, STANDARD REQUEST.
HE'S STATING THE OBVIOUS THAT THERE'S REALLY NO OPPORTUNITY FOR A LOOP ROAD WITHIN THE SKINNY PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT IT'S REALLY NOT THE PLAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ASKED TO JUDGE THIS PLAT ON WHEN IT COMES BACK TO US,
[01:55:02]
IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS THAT I JUST MENTIONED THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT?>> I BELIEVE THAT PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE ABILITY TO AUTHORIZE THE VARIANCES FROM ARTICLE 6 AND THESE WOULD BE BOTH VARIANCES FROM ARTICLE 6.
>> IN WHICH WE WOULD HAVE TO REFERENCE STANDARDS THAT YOU POINTED OUT IN YOUR STAFF REPORT TO PROVE THAT?
>> I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THIS LETTER IS NOT THAT.
>> UNDERSTOOD. THAT WAS WHAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDED TO US.
>> THANK YOU. YES, COMMISSIONER, FRANKLY.
>> ON THE PLAN THAT WAS SUBMITTED, THERE SHOWS AN EXISTING 50 FOOT ROADWAY THAT'S TO BE ABANDONED IN FAVOR OF 60 FOOT ROADWAY SET FORTH HEREIN.
BUT THAT 50 FOOT ROADWAY SHOWS BEING DASHED AND CONTINUING TO THE NORTH ACROSS THE PROPERTY.
IS THERE ANY MAJOR THROUGH FOR PLAN OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT WITHIN THE CITY THAT SHOWS THE INTENT TO CONSTRUCT A ROADWAY FROM STEWART ROAD ACROSS THIS PROPERTY AND OVER TO THE NEXT ONE?
>> THAT MIGHT BE A QUESTION TO POSE TO THE APPLICANT, THE REASON I SAY THAT IS THAT THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORDS INDICATE THAT THAT IS ACTUALLY A PIECE OF ROADWAY THAT WAS ABANDONED.
IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ONE THAT'S TO THE WEST THAT RUNS.
YEAH. APPRAISAL DISTRICT RECORDS INDICATE THAT THAT HAS BEEN ABANDONED.
>> IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD NEED TO BE CORRECTED ON THE FINAL PLAN, WE WILL GET WITH THE APPLICANT ON THAT.
>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER? YES. COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE].
>> DANIEL, THE FIRE DEPARTMENT, REVIEWED THIS AND THEY'RE ONLY COMMENTS LOOK LIKE THAT TURNAROUNDS [NOISE] WILL NEED TO BE MARKED NO PARKING.
THEY HAD NO OTHER CONCERNS AS TO TURNING AROUND.
TYPICALLY THE 100 FOOT RADIUS THAT WE REQUIRE IS SO A DECENT SIZED FIRE APPARATUS CAN'T MAKE A TURN AND EXIT.
THE THING THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL'S COMMENT WAS THAT THE PAVEMENT WILL BE MARKED ACCORDINGLY, SO IT'S NOT IMPEDED BY PARKING.
>> ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF?
>> HOW DO YOU ACCESS THE OPEN SPACE RESERVE POND UP THERE TO THE TOP OF THE PLAN?
MAYBE WE CAN DISCUSS THAT WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT IT DOES APPEAR TO BE BASICALLY BEHIND A PIECE OF PRIVATE PROPERTY.
PERHAPS THEIR ACCESS EASE MAYBE AN ORDER.
WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE THE OTHER RESERVE WOULD BE READ THROUGHOUT THE CALL TO SAY, BUT I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YES.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU.
THEN IN THAT CASE, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 5:35 PM AND CAN WE GET THE APPLICANT ON THE LINE, PLEASE, MS. GORMAN.
>> MR. SIDES YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
>> YES. THIS IS AN ENGINEERING CAMERON SIDES.
SAME AS BEFORE, LIKE I SAID AS BEFORE WE ARE OPEN TO REVISING PLANS WITH ALL COMMENTS FROM STAFF AND ALL DEPARTMENTS OF THE CITY.
WE APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND I JUST WANTED TO PUBLICLY STATE THAT OUR CLIENT, THE DEVELOPER, THEIR INTENT IS NOT TO SELL LOTS, TO RENT OUT AS VRBO OR AIRBNB OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
WE ARE TRYING TO BRING MORE SINGLE FAMILIES INTO THE CITY OF GALVESTON, WHICH I THINK IS A BENEFIT FOR ALL, SO SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE STATED.
>> MR. SIDES, DID YOU HEAR THE QUESTION THAT WAS POSED JUST A MOMENT AGO ABOUT THE RESERVE ACCESS TO THE RESERVE B, HOW THAT RESERVE B WOULD BE ACCESSED?
>> YES, MA'AM. WE CAN GO AHEAD AND PUT THE ACCESS.
IT'S NOT ON THE PLAN AND THAT WAY THE RESERVE B WILL BE ABLE TO BE ACCESSED. THAT'S NO BIG DEAL.
>> THANK YOU. DID WE HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION TOO ABOUT THAT EXISTING 50 FOOT ROADWAY THAT RUNS ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.
[NOISE] DID WE HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THAT, COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR BROWN?
>> NO, REALLY. MY QUESTION WAS ABOUT HOW TO CONFORM WITH THAT REQUIREMENT.
[02:00:02]
THE ALTERNATIVE STANDARD, PROVIDING THE MULTIMODAL PATH CONNECTING TO ANOTHER ROAD I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO DO THAT.WHAT WOULD BE THE ALTERNATIVE STANDARD OF COMPLIANCE? THAT'S MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING I HAVE TO WORK OUT STAFF.
>> I WILL LET THAT BE A STAFF.
WILL LET DANIEL WORK WITH THAT AND THAT'S ABOVE OUR PAY GRADE.
SINCE OUR PAY GRADE IS SO INCREDIBLY HIGH UP HERE.
YES, SO MANY ZEROS WITH NOTHING IN FRONT OF IT, JUST A PLETHORA OF ZEROS.
ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE HAD FOR MR. SIDES, COMMISSIONERS? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER FINKLEY.
>> MR. SIDES, THIS IS A COMMISSIONER FINKLEY, JUST A GENERAL COMMENT.
I APPRECIATE THE COMMENT FROM THE DEVELOPER THAT HE'S INTERESTED IN LONG-TERM RENTALS OR SALES OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES, I WOULD LIKE TO FORMALLY MAKE THE REQUEST THAT HE CONSIDER.
ALSO, IF THAT'S HIS INTENT TO A ZERO, WHICH WOULD RESTRICT AND NOT ALLOW THE USE OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
ALSO, AS IT RELATES TO LOT SIZE, I KNOW THAT THESE LOTS ARE MEETING THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR AN R1.
HOWEVER, WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE PREVIOUS CASE AND THIS CASE IS THAT, WE'RE DENSIFYING AN AREA OF THE ISLAND THAT TRADITIONALLY HAD VERY LARGE LOT SIZES AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE BOTH THE DEVELOPER TO REVIEW AS ECONOMIC MODEL FOR THE PROPERTY MAY BE CONSIDERED LARGER LOT SIZES.
JUST BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS TYPE OF DENSIFICATION OUT WEST.
WE'RE GOING TO RUN INTO OTHER PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES LIKE ROADWAYS, LIKE WATER SUPPLY, ETC. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME, COMMISSIONERS, ANYTHING ELSE FOR MR. SIDES? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU.
MR. SIDES WILL CONTINUE WITH ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON CASE 22P-050, ANYTHING FROM THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM? ANYTHING FROM THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM? YES, SIR.
PLEASE COME FORWARD AND SIGN IN.
YOU DESERVE A REWARD FOR BEING PATIENT.
>> YEAH. [LAUGHTER] MY NAME IS RALPH MONTGOMERY.
I LIVE ON THE ADJACENT STREET TO THIS PROPERTY, WESTGENE.
I'M HERE WITH MY LOVELY WIFE KAREN AND THREE OF OUR NEIGHBORS.
[NOISE] MY WIFE AND I HAVE LIVED AT 3516, OWNED AND LITTLE BIT 3516 FOR 41 YEARS, AND WE ARE VERY DEVASTATED BY THE POSSIBILITY OF THIS PROJECT BEING DROPPED INTO OUR BACKYARD.
WE WILL LOSE OUR PEACE AND QUIET OR PRIVACY AND THE PANORAMIC VIEWS THAT WE HAVE ENJOYED FOR DECADES.
THE NEW OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY BEHIND US HAVE EMPLOYED THE HOME RENTAL COMPANY, BEACHBOX, AND HAVE ENJOYED FREQUENT RENTALS OF THE TWO HOUSES THERE.
COME TRADE WHAT THE GUY SAID, WE'RE NOT INTERESTED IN MINERALS.
WE BELIEVE THAT ALL 14 OF THE PROPOSED LOTS WILL QUICKLY BE FILLED WITH BILL TO RENT HOUSES BY THE OWNER AND HIS INVESTMENT COMPANY.
SINCE THE PROPERTY IS ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS WHEN THE ZONING NEED TO BE CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL, SINCE HE WOULD BE OPERATING A BUSINESS WITH THAT PROPERTY, WHERE THEY NEED TO APPLY FOR A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT TO ENSURE ITS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA, AND TO FINISH, ALL BUT TWO OF THE ORIGINAL 26 LOTS ON WEST GENE ARE OWNED BY THE FIVE HOMEOWNERS WHO RESIDE ON OUR STREET, GIVING IT AS COUNTRY FEEL THAT WE TREASURE AND WOULD NOT WANT TO GIVE UP, THIS PROJECT AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA. THANK YOU.
>> MY NAME IS KAREN MONTGOMERY.
>> MRS. MONTGOMERY, PLEASE DO SIGN THE INVOICE, EVEN THOUGH YOUR HUSBAND DID, PLEASE, MA'AM.
>> THANK YOU. [LAUGHTER] I WANT TO TAKE SOMETHING EXCEPTION WITH WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE 50 FOOT ROADWAY, THAT IS NOT A DRIVEWAY, THAT IS A CITY STREET, IT'S CALLED VIKING.
NO, THIS IS NOT AN ABANDONED ROAD.
IF YOU BRING IT UP ON CAD, IT'S IN THE WRONG PLACE.
IN OUR STREET WEST GENE IS LISTED AS VIKING, BUT IT IS A CITY STREET, SO TAKE THAT OFF.
ALSO THIS GUY HAS A BAD HISTORY WITH ALL OF US ON REYNOLDS.
[02:05:05]
EVERYTHING HE TOUCHES IS RENTALS.IT IS NOT AND IT'S SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
THIS GUY IS FEEDING US ALL A BUNCH OF MALARKEY.
YOU'LL TALK ABOUT WANTING TO LIMIT THIS.
HELLO, THIS IS THE PERFECT PLACE TO START.
LIKE MY HUSBAND SAID, THERE'S OUT OF ALL THE LOTS, THERE'S ONLY TWO THAT ARE SINGLE FAMILY.
THAT TELLS YOU HOW MUCH WE WANT COUNTRY LIVING AND WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRULY IS.
ON THE NEXT PARCEL OVER FROM US TO THE EAST IS OWNED BY MR. CAMPBELL AND THAT'S HORSE LOTS.
IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN FOR HORSES OUT THERE.
THIS PASTURE, THAT PART OF WHAT HE'S TAKEN OVER, WAS A HORSE PASTURE, CATTLE PASTURE.
THERE WERE LIONS AND A BEAR BACK THERE AT ONE POINT, SO [LAUGHTER] IT IS VERY RURAL AND THE CITY OF GALVESTON BROUGHT ONE OF THE LIONS IN.
THEY FOUND IT IN A HOUSE IN GALVESTON AND THIS GUY ALREADY HAD A LION SO THAT THEY FIGURED HE CAN TAKE CARE OF IT AND GAVE IT TO HIM.
[LAUGHTER] PLEASE KEEP OUR AERIAL WILD AND AT LEAST MAKE HIM PUT DECENT SIZE LOTS.
YOU'RE TALKING 14 LOTS THAT ARE JUST GOING TO BE ONE PERSON ON TOP OF THE OTHER.
>> THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK? [NOISE] ARE YOU GOING TO GET UP AND TELL ME THERE WAS A TIGER UP THERE, LIONS AND TIGERS AND BEARS.
>> NO. ACTUALLY, I WAS GLAD TO SIT HERE AND LISTEN TO EVERYBODY ELSE'S IN THE OTHER CASES THAT CAME IN BECAUSE I ACTUALLY LEARNED A LOT ABOUT THE RENTAL PROPERTIES AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN A WAY THAT YOU ALL FEEL ABOUT THEM.
I JUST WANT TO ALSO SUPPORT THE FACT THAT IF WE DON'T WANT THAT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE OF THE COASTAL COUNTRY FEEL THAT WE'RE EXPERIENCING RIGHT NOW.
A LOT OF MY POINTS WERE ALREADY MADE BY MY NEIGHBORS.
THE ONLY THING THAT THEY DIDN'T SAY, BUT YOU ALL ACTUALLY BROUGHT UP WAS THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY IS SOMEHOW CONNECTED TO THE WETLANDS.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT EFFECT OR WHO REGULATES THE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO START CONSTRUCTING ON EXISTING WETLANDS.
I KNOW THAT THOSE RESERVES LIKELY PROVIDE SAFE HAVEN TO A LOT OF THE WILDLIFE THAT WE HAVE OUT ON THE WEST END NOW.
I KNOW AFTER HIKE A LOT OF THE WILDLIFE WAS WASHED AWAY, AND IT JUST SEEMS TO START TO BECOMING BACK.
AGAIN, LIKE KAREN MENTIONED, THE HORSE IS ON ONE SIDE AND THE SERENITY OF THE PLACE ON THE OTHER IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE MOVED OUT THERE, AND WE WOULD JUST HATE TO LOSE THAT.
JUST REALLY REITERATING WHAT EVERYBODY ELSE HAS SAID IN SUPPORT OF THEM.
THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAD TO SAY.
THAT'S IT. THAT'S ALL I HAD TO SAY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE AND THANK YOU FOR HANGING IN THERE.
ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? I WOULD TELL YOU ALL THE SAME THING THAT I SAID TO THE FOLKS IN THE CASE PRIOR.
SINCE WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT A PRELIMINARY PLAT, OUR HANDS ARE VERY TIED ON WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO ON THIS THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE.
BUT MR. SIDES, OUT THERE IN ZOOM LAND, AGAIN, I WOULD ASK YOU TO PLEASE TRY AND USE THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO FACILITATE A DIALOGUE BETWEEN YOUR CLIENT AND THE FOLKS ON WESTGENE.
I WILL DRIVE PAST THEIR STREET ON MY WAY HOME TONIGHT.
I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEIR STREET IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD IS ABOUT AND I KNOW WHY THEY TREASURE IT.
I WOULD HOPE, AND AGAIN, I ASSUME FROM MR. T. GENES THAT THE SAME OFFERS
[02:10:02]
STANDS FOR THEIR STREET THAT IT DOES WITH THE CASE PRIOR.THAT IF THERE IS A MEETING TO BE FACILITATED, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL HELP FACILITATE A MEETING BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE DEVELOPER TO TRY AND HELP GET SOME DIALOGUE WORKING THERE, TO TRY AND WORK SOME OF THIS OUT.
THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING, WE APPRECIATE IT.
PLEASE KNOW THAT WE HAVE HEARD YOU.
DON'T THINK THAT BY THE VOTE WE HAVE TO TAKE HERE TONIGHT THAT WE HAVE NOT HEARD YOU. THANK YOU.
WITH THAT, ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SAY ANYTHING? WITH THAT, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 5.48 PM.
COMMISSIONERS, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON 22P-050.
>> I'LL MOVE THE CASE 22P-050, BE DISAPPROVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
>> THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FINKLEY.
IS THERE DISCUSSION? YES. VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> I'M DETECTING A THEME THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE MEETING THAT PEOPLE ARE REALLY AFRAID OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY LIVE.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WILL HELP WITH THIS IS BUILDING A LITTLE TRUST BETWEEN THE DEVELOPERS AND THOSE WHO ARE AFFECTED BY IT.
THAT'S ALSO A THEME I'VE BEEN HEARING, SO I THINK WE JUST NEED TO REMEMBER THAT.
>> THANK YOU. I AGREE WITH THAT 100 PERCENT.
ANYTHING ELSE? DISCUSSION? COMMISSIONERS? YES, COMMISSIONER FINKLEY.
>> I'LL REITERATE MY COMMENT TO THE APPLICANT IN THAT.
I THINK THAT FROM A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE OF THE ISLAND, WHEN WE CONSIDER URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT, THAT WE OUGHT TO INVESTIGATE LOT SIZES AS IT IS CURRENTLY STATED WITHIN THE R1 ZONING DISTRICT AND SEE IF THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO HELP PRESERVE THE EXPENSE THAT WE HAVE OUT ON THE WEST END OF THE ISLAND. THANKS.
>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON 22P-050 FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
WITH THAT ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT MOTION, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND. THANK YOU.
THAT'S UNANIMOUS. AGAIN, THANK YOU ALL FOR STICKING IT OUT.
PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT PLANNING HAS YOUR NAMES AND ADDRESSES HERE.
IF WE DON'T HAVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, IF YOU DIDN'T SIGN IN, MAKE SURE THAT YOUR NEIGHBORS KEEPS YOU INFORMED IF THEY'RE NOTIFIED.
THANK YOU. [NOISE] NEXT, WE'LL HEAR 22P-051.
[6.D.3. 22P-051 (11123-A Stewart Road And Adjacent Vacant Parcels) Request For A Preliminary Plat For A New Subdivision With Five Lots, A Reserve, And A New Street. Properties Are Legally Described As Abstract 121 Page 75 Part Of Lot 460 (460-15), Trimble And Lindsey Section 1; Abstract 121 Page 75 Part Of Lot 460 (460-2), Trimble And Lindsey Section 1; And Abstract 121 Page 75 Part Of Lot 443 And 460 (443-15), Trimble And Lindsey Section 1; In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Jennifer Grant, High Tide Land Surveying Property Owner: Chad Griffin, High Tide Isle A Protected Series Of River Bend Development, LLC]
PLEASE, MR. LUNSFORD.>> SURE. 22P-051, THIS IS THE THIRD OF THREE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUESTS.
THERE WERE 21 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT, AND NONE OF THOSE WERE RETURNED.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY PLAT IN ORDER TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF LOTS FROM 3-6, WHICH WOULD BE FIVE LOTS IN A SMALL LANDSCAPE RESERVE IN A RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE-FAMILY R1 ZONING FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
WILL CONSIST OF NEW INFRASTRUCTURE AND CLEAN PUBLIC STREETS, DRAINAGE, SANITARY, SEWER AND WATER SERVICE.
THE PROPOSED SHARKS SIDE ROW OF A 60 FOOT WIDE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, ENDING A 100 FOOT DIAMETER CUL-DE-SAC CONFORMS WITH ARTICLE 6 OF OUR LDRS.
THE SITE IS COMPOSED OF THREE PARCELS OF LAND WHICH CURRENTLY CONTAINS ONLY A SINGLE BARN.
THE EXISTING BARN WOULD DEMOLISHED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THE SUBJECT PARCEL AND PARCELS TO THE EAST, SOUTH, AND WEST WERE ZONE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY.
THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH IS ZONE-RESORT RECREATION.
THE PARCELS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ARE UNDEVELOPED.
THE PARCELS TO THE EAST AND WEST ARE EITHER UNDEVELOPED OR CONTAINS SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS.
WE HAVE A SUMMARY OF THAT IN OUR STAFF REPORT AS WELL AS THE LATIN BLOCK CONFIGURATION FOR R1.
ALL THE PROPOSED LOTS MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR WIDTH, DEPTH, AND AREA FOR RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING.
THE ONLY EXCEPTION BEING THE RESERVE A, WHICH IS INTENDED FOR OPEN SPACE.
AS WITH THE PREVIOUS HEARING, THE THE FINAL PLAT MUST IDENTIFY THIS COMMON OPEN SPACES AT PARK OPEN SPACE OR SIMILAR DESIGNATION, IDENTIFYING IT AS RESTRICTED IN USE PER OUR LDRS.
GENERALLY THE SITE PLAN OR SUBDIVISION PLAT SHALL DELAY THE LOCATION OF OPEN SPACE IDENTIFIED AS PRIVATE OR PUBLIC.
ALL THE APPLICANT SHALL INCLUDE OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE PLANS PER THE APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT AS WELL.
SHALL DESIGNATE INDICATE THE BOUNDARIES OF ALL PARKS AND OPEN SPACE.
SHALL SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WHICH THE PARK AND OPEN SPACE SHALL BE PERPETUATED, MAINTAINED, AND ADMINISTERED.
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT INDICATES A TEN-FOOT WIDE UTILITY EASEMENT PARALLEL TO PROPOSE SHARKS SIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
IF OTHER EASEMENTS ARE NECESSARY,
[02:15:01]
WE'RE REQUIRED BY [INAUDIBLE] DEPARTMENTS OR PRIVATE UTILITIES, THE APPLICANT SHALL INDICATE LOCATION OF THESE ON THE FINAL PLAT.NO CONSTRUCTION PLANS WERE SUBMITTED WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUEST, THEY WILL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED, AND CONFORM TO ALL CONDITIONS POSED BY STATE DEPARTMENTS AND PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES BEFORE OUR FINAL PLAT WILL BE FILED.
PROPOSED UTILITIES SHALL CONFORM TO ARTICLE 6 OF THE LDR, AND PROPOSED DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS SHALL CONFORM AS WELL, AS WELL ANY COMMENTS FROM THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE WHICH REGARDS TO DRAINAGE.
NOTE THE PUBLIC WORKS HAS SUBMITTED COMMENTS REGARDING BOTH UTILITY EASEMENTS AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS.
ANN SAYS, FIRE DEPARTMENT HASN'T HAD ANY COMMENT AS WELL.
THE APPLICANT IN THIS CASE IS NOT PROPOSING ANY VARIANCES WHICH REQUIRE ZONING BORDER OF ADJUSTMENT ATTENTION AND IS NOT REQUESTING ANY VARIANCES FROM THE CITY'S SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS THAT PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD NEED TO ADDRESS.
NOTE THE PLANNING COMMISSION PLAT CRITERIA APPROVAL.
STAFF RECOMMENDS CASE 22P-051 BE DISAPPROVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS.
NUMBER 1, FINAL TO FILING THE PLAT, THE APPLICANT SHALL ADDRESS, INCORPORATE ALL COMMENTS OR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL, OR STATE DEPARTMENTS, AND PRIVATE UTILITY COMPANIES, AND THE FINAL PLAT DESIGN.
THE APPLICANT SHALL RECEIVE APPROVAL, WATER, SANITARY, SEWER, RAILWAY, DRAINAGE, ACCESS, SIDEWALKS, STREET, LIGHTING AND INFRASTRUCTURE, CONSTRUCTION PLANS, BUT ALSO DEPARTMENTS.
ACCORDING TO ARTICLE 6 OF OUR LDRS, THE FINAL PLAT SHALL INCLUDE ALL PARKING, LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING PLANS IS APPLICABLE, AND THE SUBDIVIDOR SHALL PAY FOR ALL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN CITY CODE, PLUS STANDARD CONDITIONS FOUR THROUGH NINE.
WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS. ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS THE OBLIQUE AERIAL SHOWING THE PROPOSED LOTS.
YOU SEE WHERE THE LOTS ARE NOW BY THE FENCE LINES, BUT THERE ARE BASICALLY THREE CURRENTLY, THEY'LL BE RECONFIGURED.
YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE EXISTING BAR WHICH IS GOING TO BE RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROPOSED CUL-DE-SAC, OF COURSE, WILL BE DEMOLISHED.
WE HAVE A VICINITY MAP FOR REFERENCE. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.
ONCE AGAIN, WE HAVE ON THE LEFT THE PROPOSED LOT CONFIGURATION AND THE PROPOSED STREET.
YOU'LL SEE THE LANDSCAPE RESERVE PARALLEL TO PROPOSE STREET, BASICALLY THE NORTHWEST OF THAT ONE PARCEL OVERLAID OVER OUR AERIALS.
ON OUR RIGHT WE HAVE THE PROPOSED LOT LINES A LITTLE BIT CLEAR, SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S PROPOSED.
NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. WE HAVE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
THE PHOTO IS THE PROPERTY OF THE NORTH, TO THE EAST, AND TO THE WEST, AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
[NOISE] WHO HAS A QUESTION FOR STAFF? VICE CHAIR BROWN? [LAUGHTER]
[LAUGHTER] THIS RESERVE THAT THEY'RE SHOWING HERE, THAT'S NOT REQUIRED.
IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S JUST [OVERLAPPING]
>> NO, THAT IS JUST A REMNANT.
BUT IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL PIECES OF PROPERTY ARE OWNED AND MAINTAINED BY SOMEONE, WE REQUIRE THAT THAT BE LISTED AS A OPEN SPACE RESERVE OF SOME SORT.
>> YES. I'M VERY HAPPY. THANK YOU.
I HAVE TO FIND MY LEVITY WHERE I CAN FIND IT, BOB. [BACKGROUND].
>> YES, COMMISSIONER HUMPHREY.
I NOTICED THAT THE CUL-DE-SAC TERMINATES ADJACENT TO A LOT AND IT DOESN'T MAKE A FULL CIRCLE.
WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR THAT OR HOW DO THEY ADDRESS THAT?
>> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY REQUIREMENT IN AN LDR THAT SAYS THAT THEY CAN'T TERMINATE THE COLDEST SACK AT THE PROPERTY LINE LIKE THAT.
THAT'S OF COURSE JUST GOING TO BE THE RIGHT OF WAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS A QUESTION, BUT THAT RADIUS SHOULD BE 100 FOOT AS WE REQUIRE.
>> THAT'S THE NEXT QUESTION. IT SHOULD BE 100 FOOT?
>> THAT'S SIMPLY THE BUILDING LINE AND UTILITIES MEANT TO STOP. THAT'S RIGHT.
>> YEAH. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE QUESTION IS, WHERE DO THE UTILITIES GO? THEY CAN'T CONTINUE AROUND, BUT THAT IS DEFINITELY A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
>> I SAW ON ONE OF THEM WHERE IT LOOKED LIKE THE LOT TO THE SOUTH OF THE CUL-DE-SAC, LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE LANDLOCKED OR LOCKED IN TO THE MIDDLE OF THAT.
ONE OF THE PICTURES THAT WAS ON THERE.
[02:20:04]
YES, IT WAS THAT ONE RIGHT THERE, IN THE BOTTOM CORNER YOU'LL SEE RIGHT THERE.I WAS TRYING TO FIND A ZOOMED OUT PICTURE, SOMETHING THAT PICTURE A LITTLE BETTER, IS THAT LOT STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF OTHER LOTS? WILL THAT CUL-DE-SAC BE A THOROUGHFARE OR SOMETHING THAT WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THAT LOT.
>> GO BACK TO THE PLAT PLEASE, DANIEL.
THAT LOT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS REQUEST.
>> IT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS REQUEST, BUT WILL THE CUL-DE-SAC HAVE TO OPEN UP TO THAT PROPERTY?
>> WE'RE ONLY CONSIDERING WHAT'S WITHIN THE BLUE LINE AND THE REQUEST ONLY ENCOMPASSES WHAT'S WITHIN THE BLUE OUTLINE.
>> THERE'S THE ROAD THAT'S COMING IN [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE NEW ROAD SOUTH IT COMES TO THE COLDEST SACK.
>> WHICH WE CAN SEE ON THE DOTTED.
>> CORRECT. BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A PLOT JUST SOUTH OF THAT WHERE THE CUL-DE-SAC ENDS, THAT'S GOING TO BE LOCKED IN, THAT RIGHT THERE THAT WILL BE LOCKED IN WITHOUT ACCESS TO A ROAD.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE CONDITION DOESN'T CHANGE.
IT CURRENTLY DOESN'T HAVE ANY ACCESS TO A ROADWAY.
>> THANK YOU. OH, YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER WALLA?
>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. DANIEL GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
IN YOUR COMMENTS, A LOT OF THIS IS REFERRING TO FINAL PLAT FILINGS, SO IN YOUR SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND YOUR STANDARD CONDITIONS.
I CAN SEE WHERE THESE CONDITIONS WOULD NEED TO BE MET FOR A FINAL PLAT.
ALL OF THESE WOULD BE FINAL PLAT REQUIREMENTS, [NOISE] AND I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE THIS ONE IS RELATIVELY SIMPLE.
I'M JUST CURIOUS AS TO WHAT MAKES IT NOT TO WHERE YOU CAN APPROVE IT.
I DON'T SEE IN YOUR DEAL IT SAYS TO NOT BE APPROVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
THE COMMENTS THAT YOU HAVE SAYS PRIOR TO FINAL PLAT APPLICATION, AS WELL AS THE STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUESTS.
I'M TRYING TO FIGURE THAT OUT.
>> LET ME PUZZLE THIS OUT WITH YOU, SO WE DON'T HAVE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS TO REVIEW, SO WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO PROPOSE AT THE FINAL PLAT PHASE.
WE ARE DISAPPROVING THIS AS WE DID WITH THE OTHERS, SUBJECT TO HAVING SOMETHING THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH, WHICH I THINK IT'S A PRETTY DECENT NUTSHELL DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE PRELIMINARY FINAL PLAT PROCESS WORKS.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION, BUT WE TYPICALLY DISAPPROVE THESE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND WE HAVE IN THE PAST, THIS WAS MENTIONED IN AN EARLIER CASE.
WE HAVE IN THE PAST HAD FOLKS WHO ARE MORE IN THE PROCESS ON THE DESIGN SIDE, WHERE THEY HAVE COME WITH TWO PLANNING COMMISSION WITH A PRELIMINARY PLAY IN A FINAL PLAT LIKE CONCURRENTLY THE SAME MEETING.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION OR CLARIFIES FOR YOU.
>> THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO GET A PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL WITHOUT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.
IT IS PRELIMINARY, SO IT CHANGES, IT IS DYNAMIC AND WHAT IS PRESENTED AS A PRELIMINARY SELDOM IS THE SAME THING YOU GET AS A FINAL.
I'M JUST QUESTIONING, I GUESS SOME OF THESE REQUESTS WOULD BE MORE FINAL PLAT REQUIREMENTS IN LIEU OF PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUIREMENTS.
>> IS ASKING MORE OF A GENERAL QUESTION THAN A SPECIFIC QUESTION TO THIS CASE? IS THAT CORRECT?
>> TO SOME DEGREE, SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT YOU NEED TO HAVE YOUR FINAL CIVIL DESIGN SUBMITTED BEFORE YOU CAN DO A PRELIMINARY?
[02:25:04]
ARE CIVIL DRAWINGS REQUIRED TO DO A PRELIMINARY PLAT?>> NO, THEY'RE NOT. THEY ARE REQUIRED AT THE FINAL PLAT PHASE AND SO WE MADE THESE COMMENTS BASICALLY TO ENSURE THAT IN THE PUBLIC RECORD IS NOTED, THAT THESE THINGS MUST BE DONE BEFORE A FINAL PLAT WILL BE FILED WITH THE COUNTY CLERK, AND OF COURSE, THAT ALSO INCLUDES THE FINANCIAL GUARANTEES AND I BELIEVE THERE'S SOMETHING IN OUR LDR IS THAT ACTUALLY MENTIONED ANY DEED RESTRICTIONS OR COVENANTS WOULD HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED AS WELL, ON THE FINAL PACKAGE BECAUSE ALL OF THIS GETS FILED WITH THE COUNTY CLERK, OF COURSE, INTO THE OFFICIAL RECORD.
ONCE AGAIN, AS FAR AS THE PRELIMINARY FINAL PLAT PROCESS ALLOW THIS AS LAID OUT AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 212 IS A STATE LAW THING.
>> EXACTLY. I GUESS WHAT'S THROWING ME A LITTLE BIT IS SOME OF THESE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS RELATE TO FINAL PLAT APPLICATION FILING AND IT MIGHT JUST HAVE BEEN A TYPO.
A SPECIFIC CONDITION TO THE CASE.
NUMBER 1 SAYS PRIOR TO FINAL PLAT APPLICATION FILING, THE SUDDEN THE FINAL IS A PRELIMINARY.
>> THAT'S BOILERPLATE LANGUAGE, I BELIEVE, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE COMMENT.
>> I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION.
>> WE HAVE THAT IN THE OTHER CASES SAID THE SAME THING ABOUT FINAL PLAT [OVERLAPPING].
>> NEED IT PRIOR TO FINAL PLAT APPLICATION FILING.
>> I GOT YOU. ANYWAYS THANK YOU. SORRY.
>> NO. QUESTIONS ARE NEVER A BAD THING, THAT'S HOW WE LEARN.
[LAUGHTER] MAYBE I NEED MORE COLD MEDICINE [OVERLAPPING]
>> YOU HAVE FEVER, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
>> NO, I HAVE NOT HAD A FEVER WITH THIS.
>> DO WE HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE].
>> THIS IS THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING.
THIS ONE IS MUCH MORE ALIGNED WHAT I'M ENVISIONING FOR WHAT SHE MIGHT SEE OUT IN THE SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT.
YOU'RE LOT SIZES ARE ALMOST DOUBLE THE REQUIREMENT OF WHAT DO YOU CURRENTLY ALLOW.
THE PREVIOUS APPLICANT WITH A LOT SIZES IS RIGHT AT 5,000 SQUARE FEET HERE YOU'RE PUSHING ALMOST 10,000 SQUARE FEET PER LOT, AND I KNOW IT'S A PRODUCT OF THE PARTICULAR AREA THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT OR THE PARCEL BUT THIS IS MY POINT IS THAT MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE LOOK AT IN THE FUTURE FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE.
I LIKE LARGER LOTS OUT WEST. THANK YOU.
>> I APPRECIATE THE PERSPECTIVE.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE COULD ALL TAKE ON TO CREATE ANOTHER A LARGER LOT ZONE.
IT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE CERTAINLY, IF WE WOULD LIKE TO ENDEAVOR DOWN THAT ROAD, SO TO SPEAK, WE CAN START INTO A DISCUSSION ON THAT.
>> BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TALKS ABOUT THE CHARACTER-DEFINING AREAS ACROSS THE ISLAND.
I WOULD THINK THAT THIS WOULD QUALIFY FOR A PARTICULAR CHARACTER AREA GIVEN THIS LOCATION BEING FAR MORE RURAL AND THEREFORE MAYBE HAVING LARGER LOT SIZES.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT MR. FINKLEY WAS GETTING AT.
THAT'D BE A PLACE TO START WITH LOOKING AT GOALS FOR HOW THAT AREA DEVELOPED.
>> GREAT. AGAIN, I'M OPEN TO THAT CONCEPT.
AT THIS POINT IN TIME R1 ZONE HAS A SPECIFIC LOT SIZE, SPECIFIC MINIMUM LOT SIZE.
IF PEOPLE PLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THAT IN THAT ZONE, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
OF COURSE, THERE'S DISCUSSION THAT AT ONE POINT EVERYTHING WAS SORT OF AN OPEN PRAIRIE.
THERE'S THAT TO CONSIDER AS WELL.
I MEAN, THIS IS DISTINCTLY DIFFERENT THAN THE URBAN CORE.
>> WHAT I JUST SUGGESTED TO COMMISSIONER FINKLEY IS WHEN WE GET DOWN TO DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS, WE CAN TALK ABOUT PERHAPS ADDING THAT AS A DISCUSSION ITEM IN THE FUTURE MEETING.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF ON 22P-051? SEEING NONE, WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 22P-051 AT 6:07 PM.
IS MR. SIDES STILL ON THE PHONE OR HAS HE GONE TO HAPPY HOUR? WAIT, THE HOUR IS OVER.
>> MR. SIDES IS STILL ON THE CALL, HE SHOULD BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
>> MR. SIDES, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO SAY ON THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY?
[02:30:03]
>> NO, MA'AM. I JUST WANTED TO SAY I DO WISH THAT WAS A HAPPY HOUR.
[LAUGHTER] FORTUNATELY, DID NOT MAKE IT TONIGHT.
BUT AS BEFORE, YES, WE WILL LISTEN TO ALL THESE COMMENTS AND MAKE REVISIONS TO ALL CITY DEPARTMENTS AS BEFORE, AND WE DO APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS ON WORKING WITH THE NEIGHBORS BECAUSE THAT'S OBVIOUSLY A HUGE PART OF DEVELOPMENT AND THE BEST-CASE SCENARIO FOR EVERYBODY.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU ALL FOR THAT AND SAME THING AS BEFORE.
>> THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE THAT.
COMMISSIONERS, DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. SIDES? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU.
WE'LL CONTINUE WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING.
ANYONE ON THIS SIDE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS MATTER? PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN.
>> I'M ROY BELL. I OWN PROPERTY DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS, SOUTH OF THEM.
THE PURCHASED PROPERTY THAT THEY BOUGHT WITH TIES INTO THIS IS ALSO RENTAL, AND THE ONE DIRECTLY BESIDE IT, IF THE WASN'T A SCREEN UP YOU'LL SEE BOTH OF THEM.
THE NOISE, THE TRASH, THE INTEREST OF THEM SAYING APPROVE NOW AND THEN CHANGE RULES AND ADD STUFF LATER IS VERY CONCERNING.
EVERY DAY, I'LL PICK UP BOTTLES AND STUFF AT MY HORSE PASTURE.
DIRECTLY BEHIND IT IS MY HORSE PASTURE.
THEY GO PUT FIRE PITS, THEY THROW ROCKS AT MY ANIMALS.
I GOT TO GO THROUGH AND PICK THEM UP.
IT'S HORRIFYING WHAT WE GO THROUGH WITH THIS COMPANY, THOUGH I LIKE TO NOT SEE THIS TAKE PLACE.
>> COULD YOU SHOW US THE PROPERTIES WHERE YOU WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT HERE?
>> THE END OF THE CUL-DE-SAC, DIRECTLY BEHIND IT.
>> THEN WHERE ARE THE OTHER RENTAL PROPERTIES YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT?
>> THE ONE I PUT IN Y'ALLS PICTURE, IS RIGHT THERE.
THAT'S A RENT HOUSE AND THEN DIRECTLY OFF TO THE RIGHT OF THE, WHICH BE WEST.
IF YOU GO TO THE PICTURE, WILL SHOW YOU THE FENCE.
>> WE NEED A POINTER. [LAUGHTER] THERE YOU GO. THAT'S A BETTER PICTURE.
>> THIS IS AN AIRBNB RIGHT HERE?
>> NO, THIS ONE RIGHT HERE. IS THE SAME PROPERTY OWNER.
>> WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN. THANK YOU.
>> HELLO. MY NAME IS STEPHANIE BELL.
I ALSO OWN ALL OTHER PROPERTY ON 3303, 3307, 3311, 3313, 3315 BELL LANE.
MY MOTHER-IN-LAW OWNS 3418 BELL LANE AND ALL THE PROPERTY ON THE EAST SIDE.
MY BROTHER-IN-LAW OWNS RIGHT DOWN THE STREET, 3407 BELL LANE.
ACTUALLY, MY PROPERTY BUTTS UP TO THE EAST END OF THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEING PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED.
THE TRACK OF LAND WHERE I WILL SHOW YOU, MY HOUSE IS RIGHT THERE AND I OWN THE PROPERTY BEHIND IT, IT'S A LOT BEHIND IT.
I AT ONCE OWNED THE PROPERTY THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT BEING DEVELOPED ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO.
I SOLD IT TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT USED TO OWN THE AIRBNB OF THE PROPERTY UP ON STEWART ROAD WITH THE INTENT OF THEM HAVING THEIR HORSE PASTURE THERE, AND THEY DID HAVE THEIR HORSES THERE FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS.
WHEN THEY SOLD, I WISH THEY WOULD'VE TOLD US BECAUSE WE WOULD HAVE BOUGHT OUR PROPERTY BACK, THAT WAS BEING USED AS A HORSE PASTURE.
OUR INTENT WAS NOT TO HAVE FIVE RESIDENTIAL OR WHATEVER HOUSES BEING BUILT ON THAT PROPERTY.
WE'RE VERY UPSET THAT THIS IS HAPPENING.
ALSO, IF YOU SEE THE LAYOUT OF THE LAND, MOST OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS AROUND OUR AREA HAVE LARGE LOTS OR OWN LOTS AROUND OUR PROPERTY THERE; WE HAVE OUR RESIDENTIAL HOUSES.
THE DEVELOPMENT THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING IS FIVE HOUSES IN WHAT I CONSIDER A LOT THAT MAY BE TWO, MAYBE THREE HOUSES WOULD FIT ON TO FIT THE LANDSCAPE OF THE AREA.
[02:35:06]
THIS GENTLEMAN WAS SAYING SOMETHING ABOUT AN URBAN CORE, IT WENT THROUGH TO ME BECAUSE WE'RE NOT IN AN URBAN CORE.IF YOU'VE LIVED HERE FOR ANY AMOUNT OF TIME IN GALVESTON, YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS WHEN YOU LIVE ON THE WEST END.
YOU LIVE WHERE THERE'S HORSES AND WE HAVE COYOTES IN THE PROPERTY BEHIND US.
THAT'S IT. THEY'VE BEEN THERE THE WHOLE LIFE.
WE'RE NOT READY TO GET RID OF THEM.
WE'RE NOT READY TO GIVE UP OUR LAND.
I WILL ENCOURAGE SOME CONVERSATION WITH THE PROPERTY DEVELOPER.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM.
BUT EVERY TIME I'VE TRIED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH HIM, I NEVER GET AN ANSWER.
I NEVER GET AN EMAIL BACK, I NEVER GET A PHONE CALL BACK.
SO IN MY MIND, THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE A GOOD DEVELOPMENT FOR ME, MY FAMILY AROUND ME, MY NEIGHBORS, AND WHATEVER YOU ALL WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, THE ONE RIGHT BEFORE US, THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE 14 DEVELOPMENT THINGS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO.
THOSE I CONSIDER MY NEIGHBORS, EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE THREE [INAUDIBLE] SO THAT'S HOW WE ALL FEEL ON THAT.
>> THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE Y'ALL BEING HERE.
>> I WASN'T, BUT NOW I'M RIGHT IN.
>> KATY BAR THE DOOR IS FIRED UP.
>> WEST ENDERS WHERE YOU HAVE TO [INAUDIBLE].
>> OH GOSH, RUSTY, IT'S THE WEST ENDERS. IT'S ONE OF US.
>> I WAS THE BEST HERE AND I LIKE THAT [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S US. WE'RE THE BEST IN [OVERLAPPING]
>> [INAUDIBLE]. THEN OVER THERE, ABOUT THIRTY YEARS, AND I MOVED BECAUSE OF THAT.
I HAVE TWO OF THE FOUR KIDS THAT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEY'VE ENJOYED AND HOPEFULLY, THEY WILL ENJOY IN THE NEAR FUTURE AND THE WHOLE FUTURE AND WHERE THEY CAN WALK AROUND AND RUN AROUND HYPERING.
I WOULD LOOK AT THE ENTRANCE ALSO IF THIS IS THE PATH.
BY THE WAY, THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DID AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME FOR LISTENING TO US.
IN CASE OF AN EMERGENCY, IF YOU PUT MORE THAN TWO TO THREE HOUSES IN THERE, I DON'T KNOW IF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND EVERYBODY ELSE WILL BE ABLE TO COME AND SAVE AND DO WHAT THEY HAVE TO DO WHEN [INAUDIBLE] WAS GRANTED.
THESE ARE MY NEIGHBORS, AND WE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE TASKED PICKING UP TRASH EVERY DAY OR EVERY WEEK WHEN THEY ARE THERE.
I'LL LIKE TO SAY, I USED TO SLEEP WITH BOTH EYES CLOSED BUT NOW I CAN'T, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY'RE READY.
THEY HAVE A LOT OF ACCIDENTS IN THE EVENING AND WE DON'T SLEEP AT NIGHT LIKE THE WAY WE USED TO.
ANYTHING YOU CAN CONSIDER TO HELP US OUT THERE, WE WILL MUCH APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WHAT ABOUT YOU ALL WHO WOULD [OVERLAPPING]
>> SURE. PLEASE JUST SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME.
>> I'M [INAUDIBLE] THESE PEOPLE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY PROBABLY ABOUT A YEAR AGO.
THEY HADN'T EVEN CUT THE GRASS THE ENTIRE TIME IT'S BEEN THERE.
THAT'S NOT PART OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.
EVERYBODY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD TAKES CARE OF OURSELVES AND WE HELP OUT OUR NEIGHBORS.
GRASS RIGHT NOW IS WAYSIDE, AND IF THAT'S THE NEIGHBORHOOD WE'RE GOING TO BE I MEAN, THEY'RE SHOWING ALL THIS INTENT, BUT IF THEY OWN A PROPERTY, THEY NEED TO KEEP IT UP, AND WE HADN'T SEEN ANY RESPECT OF THAT SIDE AT ALL.
THAT'S ONE OF MY COMMENTS I WANTED TO MAKE.
BUT I'M TOTALLY AGAINST THE GUYS THAT ARE TRYING TO DO IT BECAUSE OF THE TWO ABNBS THAT ARE RIGHT NEXT TO US THAT DRIVES US CRAZY.
PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND THEN SIGN IN.
CARLOS FERNANDEZ. I OWN THE HOME AT 11123 STEWART ROAD.
MY MAIN CONCERN WHAT BILL'S TOUCHED ON IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
MY CONCERN IS THAT ONE ENTRYWAY THAT'S COMING THROUGH ON MY SIDE, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK OUT.
[02:40:01]
I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE WATER RUN OFF, HOW THEY'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THE DRAINAGE BECAUSE WE GET A GOOD AMOUNT OF WATER THAT COMES DOWN ON THE EAST SIDE OF MY HOUSE AND THE WEST SIDE SO I'M NOT HAPPY WITH IT.THE BILLS TOUCHED ON EVERYTHING.
EVERYONE AROUND HERE IS PRETTY CLOSE.
EVERYONE TAKES CARE OF THEIR PROPERTIES.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT HAPPEN SO I JUST LIKE TO VOICE, MY OPINION.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT HAPPEN BECAUSE WE HAVE A GOOD NEIGHBORHOOD THERE NOW, AND THE RENTAL PROPERTY IS JUST CRAZY.
I MEAN, I'VE HAD TO PUT A CHAIN ON THAT SECOND DRIVEWAY I GOT BECAUSE THEY COME IN, THEY'RE IN PART THEY PARALLEL PARK AND THEY JUST ASSUME THAT THAT'S THEIR PROPERTY AND THEY DO THE SAME THING ON THE BILLS.
THEY JUST GO OVER THERE AND THEY CAN HAVE 20 PEOPLE IN THAT HOUSE AND THERE'S NOT ENOUGH.
THEY ONLY HAVE ONE DRIVEWAY AND THERE'S LIKE 12 CARS PARKED THERE AND THEY PARKED IN THE BIKE LANE.
THEY GO WITH THE BILLS AND IF I DIDN'T HAVE THAT CHAIN, THEY'D BE IN MY LANE AND MY YARD, AND THAT'S GETTING OLD.
WE HAVEN'T EVEN MET THESE PEOPLE.
NOW, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED IN THAT HOUSE BEFORE THE DATSUN'S THEY WERE GREAT PEOPLE, AND WE HATE TO SEE THEM LEAVE.
BUT I REALLY, I'M AGAINST THIS BECAUSE THIS IS SUCH A GREAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT'S WHY I MOVED TO THE WEST AND I'VE LIVED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE, AND ALL MY NEIGHBORS AROUND HERE, THEY'RE THE BEST NEIGHBORS THAT YOU CAN ASK FOR SO I JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT. THANK YOU.
OKAY. WHILE YOU ALL ARE SIGNING IN, I HAVE TO ASK SOMETHING, ARE THE PEOPLE WHO MOVED, ARE THEY THE ONES WHO HAD THE LITTLE DOG NAMED BERGER? YEAH.
I SAVED THAT DOG NAMED BOOGER OFFICE STEWART ROAD ONETIME.
THE DAY MY GRANDSON WAS BORN, IT WAS OUT RUNNING AROUND AND I PULLED OVER AND BEFORE I COULD EVEN FIGURE OUT WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO.
THAT DOG JUMPED IN MY CAR THAT FAST [LAUGHTER].
DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK? OKAY. SO EVERYBODY'S HAD THEIR CHANCE TO SPEAK.
OKAY. THEN I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 22P-051 AT 619.
WAIT, FIRST I HAVE TO ASK IS BOOGER OKAY? I DON'T THINK BOOGER IS WITH US ANYMORE.
I ASKED I THINK ABOUT THAT DOG ALL THE TIME.
EVERY TIME I GO BY THAT HOUSE.
ANYWAY. OKAY. CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6: 19 PM.
WHAT I WILL SAY TO YOU ALL IS THE SAME THING THAT YOU'VE HEARD ME SAY TO THE OTHER PEOPLE.
WE'RE VERY LIMITED IN WHAT WE CAN DO TODAY WITH THE PLAT THAT'S BEFORE US.
OUR HANDS ARE PRETTY MUCH TIED BY THE LEGISLATURE ON WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO.
WE WILL ENCOURAGE HIM TO TRY TO GET YOU ALL TO GATHER.
YOUR INFORMATION IS HERE WITH THE CITY.
THE CITY WILL AGAIN BE HERE TO TRY TO FACILITATE A MEETING.
THE CITY WILL BE HAPPY TO FACILITATE A MEETING.
IF THE CITY CAN DO THAT FOR YOU ALL.
WE HOPE THE DEVELOPER WILL DO THAT, WE CERTAINLY HEAR YOU.
PLEASE DO NOT THINK THAT ANY OF OUR ACTIONS TODAY HERE MEAN THAT WE HAVE NOT HEARD YOU AND THAT WE DO NOT SHARE YOUR CONCERNS BECAUSE EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US UP HERE SHARE YOUR CONCERNS.
PLEASE KNOW THAT AND KNOW THAT WE HAVE HEARD EVERY WORD THAT ALL OF YOU HAVE SAID AND THAT EVERY WORD THAT THE PEOPLE IN THE TWO CASES BEFORE YOU HAVE SAID, I'M A WESTENDOR I DRIVE BY YOUR HOUSE.
I'M SURE YOU ALL SAVED BOOGER.
RUSTY IS A WEST ENDER SO I UNDERSTAND SO THANK YOU ALL AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.
THAT BEING SAID NOW, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON 22P-051. COMMISSIONER PENA.
I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE 22P-051.
[02:45:02]
YES. DISAPPROVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.ACCEPTING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR 22P-051.
THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND FROM VICE CHAIR BROWN? THANK YOU.
I HAVE A MOTION FOR DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
DO I HAVE DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION? YES. VICE CHAIR BROWN.
I'D ALSO ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY OUT THERE WHO WE JUST HEARD FROM TO CONTACT YOUR COUNCIL PERSON AND LET THEM KNOW WHAT YOU TOLD US AND ASK THEM WHAT THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT EFFECTING SOME ENFORCEMENT IS, LIKE TILL IT GETS HIM TO TELL YOU WHO TO CALL AND WHEN TO CALL AND ASK THEM WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE A LOT MORE ABILITY TO MAKE THINGS CHANGED AND WE DO ON THE THINGS THAT ARE BOTHERING YOU OUT THERE.
THE OTHER TO THAT VERY SAME POINT AND THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT.
BOB. AT EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL MEETING, YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES EACH OF YOU HAS THREE MINUTES FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS TO SPEAK AT EVERY COUNCIL MEETING.
YOU CAN ALL GO SPEAK AT EVERY SINGLE COUNCIL MEETING, AND YOU HAVE THAT FORUM, AND YOU CAN DO IT AT EVERY COUNCIL MEETING.
YOU CAN STAND UP THERE AND SPEAK TO EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER, AND NOW YOU'VE DONE IT.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SCARY SO GO TALK TO THEM, TELL THEM WHAT YOU'RE THINKING SO I ENCOURAGE THAT TOO.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SAY AS PART OF THE DISCUSSION BEFORE WE CALL THE VOTE? OKAY. IN THAT CASE, ALL VOTING TO DISAPPROVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE ON 22 P DASH 051 SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
OKAY. THAT'S UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU.
NOW, PLEASE NOTE, PATRICK, THAT COMMISSIONER WALLA HAS LEFT THE DEUS AND WE'LL CALL 22 P DASH 052, PLEASE.
[6.D.4. 22P-052 (23500 FM 3005) Request For A Final Plat. Property Is Legally Described As Lot 2R (2-18), 10.3127 Acres, Galveston Island RV Resort Replat (2021), In The City And County Of Galveston Texas. Applicant: Russel Walla Property Owner: Bungalow Beach, LLC]
THANK YOU ALL FOR COMING.IT'S A REQUEST FOR A FINAL PLAT 30 NOTICES WERE SENT, NO OBJECTIONS FROM ANY CITY DEPARTMENTS OR PRIVATE UTILITIES.
BACKGROUND OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN WAS APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON MARCH 8TH, 2022.
IT WAS PLANNING CASE 22 P 011.
THE SITE HAS PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.
THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FINAL PLAN IN ORDER TO DEVELOP 25 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS, THREE RESERVES, AND A PRIVATE ROAD.
PLEASE NOTE THE REMAINDER OF THE STAFF REPORT.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS THE REQUEST BE APPROVED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.
ONE, THE APPLICANT SHALL ACCOMMODATE FILING OF THE PLAN BY FEBRUARY 2ND, 2023.
TWO, SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND APPROVED ALTERNATE STANDARDS SHALL BE INDICATED AS NOTES ON THE FINAL PLAN.
THREE, THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY FOR ALL IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY CITY CODE.
ITEMS FOR THROUGH 13 ARE STANDARD AND WE HAVE SOME PICTURES.
THIS IS AN AERIAL SHOWING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THEN A COPY OF THE PLOT, AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF'S REPORT.
COMMISSIONERS, DOES ANYONE HAVE A QUESTION FOR MS. GORMAN? DO I SEE A RAISED HAND? VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> I JUST LIKE A LITTLE CLARIFICATION ON SOMETHING UNDER SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE.
IT SAYS THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY APPROVE A PLAT SITE PLAN, PID, SO ON AND SO FORTH AND THEN IT SAYS, THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS AND NUMBER 4 IS REQUIRED WIDTHS FOR STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND ALLEY YET WE DID APPROVE A VARIANCE TO THAT.
>> THAT WAS DONE THROUGH THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND NOT THROUGH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE ON A PLOT.
>> OKAY. THAT WAS DONE IN A DIFFERENT.
>> RIGHT. YEAH. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ALLOWS COUNSEL TO PROVIDE FOR DEVIATIONS FROM ANY OF THE STANDARDS IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
>> IT WAS AN APPROPRIATE PATH.
>> WHEN IT SAYS THIS SECTION DOES NOT APPLY TO THE STANDARDS, IT'S TALKING ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE SECTION SPECIFICALLY.
>> RIGHT. YOU CAN'T DO SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE ON THOSE SIX ITEMS.
>> OKAY BUT YOU CAN PROVIDE A VARIANCE SOMEWHERE ELSE?
[02:50:02]
>> YES, THERE ARE OTHER METHODS TO VARY FROM IT.
>> THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THANKS.
I'M SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS.
WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:27 PM.
IS THE APPLICANT IN THE AUDIENCE? OH, HE IS.
PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN.
>> MR. WALLA. WHAT A PLEASURE TO HAVE YOU HERE TODAY.
>> HI FOR ALL THOSE OUT THERE IN RADIO LAND.
IT IS A LITTLE NERVE WRACKING TO BE ON THIS SIDE.
THE COMMISSIONERS DON'T BUY SO IF THERE WERE SEVERAL PEOPLE HERE.
YOU COULD TELL THEY WERE VERY NERVOUS.
IN THE FIRST TIME YOU'RE UP HERE IT IS, BUT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THEM PARTICIPATE.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS, BOB, YOU HAD A GOOD ONE.
I WONDERED THE SAME THING SO ANYTHING JUST LET ME KNOW.
>> DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SEEING NONE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND SINCE THERE'S NO ONE ELSE, SINCE NO ONE REMAINS IN THE AUDIENCE, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 6:28 PM.
I'LL BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION.
DO I HAVE A MOTION ON 22 P DASH 052? YES, COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR BROWN.
>> MOVE THAT WE APPROVE 22 P DASH 3052 PER STEP RECOMMENDATIONS.
>> THANK YOU AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER PENA, A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONERS? THE MOTION AND A SECOND NO DISCUSSION.
MOTION AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL.
ALL IN FAVOR? PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.
THANK YOU. PLEASE REJOIN US, COMMISSIONER WALLA.
[7.A. Discussion Of 2022 Planning Commission Awards (Staff)]
MS. GORMAN, LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION OF PLANNING COMMISSION AWARDS.IS THERE ONE FOR LET'S SEE, WHAT WOULD IT BE? STAMINA [LAUGHTER].
>> I'M GOING TO BE EXTREMELY BRIEF.
THINGS ARE CONTINUING ALONG THE PATH FOR PLANNING COMMISSION AWARDS.
WE'VE OPENED THE AWARDS TO PUBLIC NOMINATIONS THAT ARE OPENED ON AUGUST 1ST WILL REMAIN OPEN FOR ALL OF AUGUST SO WE ARE ON TRACK TO DO OUR ADOPTIONS IN SEPTEMBER.
>> OKAY. DID WE RECEIVE ANY MORE NOMINATIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS DURING JULY?
>> NO, I HAVE ONLY RECEIVED THE ONES THAT WERE PROVIDED IN OUR LAST MEETING AS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
THE LAST TIME IT WAS ON AS A DISCUSSION ITEM.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, PLEASE BE SURE AND LOOK AROUND THE CITY AS YOU'RE DRIVING AROUND, IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE, LET'S BE SURE AND BRING THOSE FORWARD.
GREAT. NOW, DID WE HAVE ANOTHER ITEM THAT WE WANTED TO MAYBE BRING FORWARD AS A POTENTIAL DISCUSSION ITEM IN THE FUTURE, COMMISSIONER FINLEY?
>> TIM, I THINK WE SAW A BUNCH OF CASES TODAY.
WE'RE OUT ON THE WEST END AND WE'VE GOT A VARIETY OF LOT SIZES ABSENT THE PART THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN CREATED THAT I THINK WOULD BE A GOOD DISCUSSION ITEM MAYBE DO A LITTLE RESEARCH.
I'D LIKE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT IT ON THE SEPTEMBER 20TH MEETING, AS I WILL BE ABSENT ON THE 816 MEETING AND I'LL PROVIDE MY ABSENCE ABOUT THAT SO MAYBE SOME RESEARCH RELATED TO AVERAGE LOT SIZES OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES, MAYBE WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT A MAP THAT SHOWS SHORT-TERM RENTALS THAT ARE OUT ON THE WEST END.
I'LL LET YOU ALL DEFINE WHAT YOU CALL THE WEST END BUT I THINK THAT THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIVING IN TOWN AND LIVING OUT FOR RUSTY [INAUDIBLE].
OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.
>> WHEN YOU SAY DO SOME RESEARCH, I THINK WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT IS RESEARCH WHAT EXISTING GUIDANCE WE HAVE ON THAT?
>> WELL, THE GUIDANCE THAT WE HAVE AS FAR AS AN R1 DISTRICT, WE HAVE A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 5,000 SQUARE FEET.
MY POINT IS, IS THAT GIVEN THE SUBURBAN NATURE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WEST END AND THE EXISTING LARGER LAND SIZES OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES OUT THERE.
THAT MAYBE AN UNDERSTANDING OF ONE, WHAT'S THE AVERAGE LOT SIZE OF A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME OUT ON THE WEST END, TWO SHOW ME A MAP OF THE REGISTERED SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND THEN THREE, MAYBE TAKE UNDER CONSIDERATION THE POSSIBILITY OF MAYBE AN ADDITIONAL ZONING
[02:55:01]
CAN CATEGORY THAT ADDRESSES MINIMUM LOT SIZE IS ON THE WEST END.>> WELL, THERE IS GUIDANCE FOR DEVELOPMENT.
>> I'LL JUST REMIND THE COMMISSION THAT'S NOT ON THE AGENDA.
>> FOR OUR BENEFIT, THERE IS GUIDANCE ON DEVELOPMENT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
>> IF WE CAN DO THAT IT WILL WORK.
>> YES. READ, READ. LET'S DON'T DISCUSS.
THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WANTED TO DISCUSS?
>> GIVEN THE LONG DURATION RATHER OF THIS MEETING, WE'RE GOING TO DOUBLE YOUR SALARY [LAUGHTER].
>> NOW TIM, I UNDERSTAND FROM A MEMO THAT I RECEIVED FROM SOMEONE ELSE THAT THERE MAY BE AN ANNOUNCEMENT.
>> YEAH. OUR COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGER IS MOVING ON.
>> OH, HE IS GOING TO MESS WITH LAKE ERIE. GOOD LUCK.
>> NOT EVERYONE'S CUT OUT TO BE A TEXAN.
>> HOWDY. AS SOMEONE WHO RAISED HER FAMILY NEAR HER PARENTS, THERE IS NOTHING TO BE SUBSTITUTED FOR RAISING YOUR CHILDREN NEAR YOUR PARENTS, SO I'M VERY HAPPY FOR HIM ABOUT THAT.
THANK YOU. NOTHING FURTHER. WE'RE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.