6.A.1. 22P-060 (17528 Bristow Drive) Request For Beachfront Construction Certificate And Dune Protection Permit To Include Proposed Construction Of A Cargo-Lift. Property Is Legally Described As Abstract 121, Hall And Jones Survey Lot 48, Gulf Palms. Applicant: Nancy Liebel Property Owner: Salvatore & Antonietta Costanza

[6.A.1. 22P-060 (17528 Bristow Drive) Request For Beachfront Construction Certificate And Dune Protection Permit To Include Proposed Construction Of A Cargo-Lift. Property Is Legally Described As Abstract 121, Hall And Jones Survey Lot 48, Gulf Palms. Applicant: Nancy Liebel Property Owner: Salvatore & Antonietta Costanza]

IT IS 22P-06.

MR. COLE.

HOWDY. HOWDY.

Y'ALL SOUND LIKE AGGIES 22-060.

TESTING. ALL RIGHT.

HOWDY PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, CASE 22 P-060, ADDRESS 17528 BRISTOW DRIVE.

[00:05:06]

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

AND THIS IS A REQUEST FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A CARGO LIFT ADDRESS.

AS MENTIONED IS 17 528 BRISTOW DRIVE.

THE PROPERTY IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS ABSTRACT.

121 HALL AND JONES SURVEYED 48 GULF PALMS, A SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE CITY IN COUNTY OF GALVESTON, TEXAS.

THE SUBJECT SITE IS LOCATED IN THE GULF PALM SUBDIVISION.

SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS ARE LOCATED TO THE EAST AND WEST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

A BEACH AND DUNE SYSTEM ARE LOCATED TO THE SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

ACCORDING TO THE BUREAU OF ECONOMIC GEOLOGY, THIS AREA IS ERODING AT A RATE OF 4 TO 5 FEET PER YEAR.

STAFF HAS PREPARED PHOTOS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR YOUR VIEWING.

FIRST, WE HAVE OUR FIRM AND BEG MAP SHOWING THE DISTANCE OF THE STRUCTURE FROM THE DUNE SYSTEM AND RELATION TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

JUST GENERALLY GIVING PERSPECTIVE OF THE SITE.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE PROPERTY SURVEY ZOOMED IN ON THE RIGHT, SHOWING THE STRUCTURE'S PLACEMENT ON THE PROPERTY AND THE ABNORMAL SIZE OF THE DECK. THIS IS DUE TO PREVIOUS YEARS STORMS CAUSING A NECESSARY MODIFICATION OF THE DECK, WHICH WILL BE RELEVANT LATER.

BUT AS YOU CAN SEE TOWARDS THE LEFT IT NARROWS SIGNIFICANTLY.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE A REPRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PLACEMENT OF THE CARGO LEFT ON THE SITE.

AND THIS IS WITH THE PREVIOUS.

SIZE OF THE DECK.

BUT AS YOU RECALL FROM THE FORMER SLIDE, THIS IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE DECK WHERE IT ACTUALLY IS TO THE FULL SIZE, WHEREAS TO THE LEFT.

NOW, IT'S ONLY, AS I UNDERSTAND, ABOUT TWO FEET WIDE ON THE DECK THERE.

ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDE, WE HAVE ACTUAL PHOTOS OF THE SITE ON THE LEFT, THAT WIDER PORTION OF THE DECK, THE ACTUAL PLACEMENT OF THE CARGO LIFT ITSELF ON THE RIGHT OF THE HOUSE, LOOKING NORTH FROM THE LEFT SIDE.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE, WE HAVE LOOKING TO THE EAST AT THE DUNE SYSTEM AND THE FENCE THERE, LOOKING SOUTH FROM THE BALCONY AT THE DUNE SYSTEM AND ON THE FOLLOWING SLIDE, LOOKING TO THE WEST.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THIS IS AN AREA THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY BENEATH THE DECK THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN OPTIMAL TO PLACE THE CARGO LIFT HERE ABOVE THE ACTUAL CONCRETE PAD.

BUT BECAUSE OF HOW MUCH THE DECK NARROWS HERE, THIS WAS NOT AN OPTION.

WE EXPLORED THIS FROM A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, BUT IT UNFORTUNATELY COULD NOT BE PLACED OVER THIS ALREADY IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.

HOWEVER, THE DESIGN OF THIS TYPE OF CARGO LIFT IS ALMOST ENTIRELY PERVIOUS.

THE FOOTER THAT'S PLACED IN THE GROUND HAS A HOLES THROUGHOUT IT.

IT'S BURIED IN THE GROUND RATHER THAN POURING ANY SORT OF CONCRETE.

AND THE CARGO LIFT ITSELF HAS GAPS IN THE FLOOR TO ALLOW RAIN TO COME THROUGH.

SO REALLY THE ONLY IMPACTS AS FAR AS BEACH IS CONCERNED IS JUST THE ACTUAL INSTALLATION WHERE IT'S BEING DUG AND PLACED IN THE GROUND.

AND THEN FINALLY ON THE RIGHT THERE IS THE DOCTOR'S NOTE INDICATING THAT THIS CARGO LIFT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO THE HOMEOWNERS THEMSELVES.

THIS CONCLUDES STUFF'S PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. COLE. COMMISSIONERS, WHO HAS QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES, COMMISSIONER PENA.

SO IS THE IS THE LIFT GOING BACK TO THE PIT TO THAT THE PICTURE WHERE IT'S DRAWN ON? IS IT GOING TO BE ACCESSIBLE FROM THE PAD SITE OR IS IT GOING TO BE JUST ON THE GRASS OR ..

IT'LL BE ON THE GRASS THERE? SO THAT LOUVERED PORTION WOULD BE REMOVED SO THAT IT COULD BE ACCESSED FROM UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE.

OKAY. I SEE.

THE CONCRETE PAD IS PROBABLY ABOUT TEN FEET TO THE LEFT OF THIS PHOTO HERE.

OKAY. I UNDERSTAND. AND YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT THAT THE GROUND UNDER WHICH THAT CARGO LIFT WILL BE LANDING ON WILL BE A PERMEABLE SURFACE. NON CONCRETE.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY.

THANK YOU. DOES THAT.

YES. COMMISSIONER EDWARDS.

SORRY, Y'ALL. I WAS GONE FOR TWO PERIODS AND FORGOT HOW TO USE THE MIC.

OKAY, SO IS THERE GOING TO BE A FENCE SURROUNDING THE LIFT SO THAT FOR SAFETY PURPOSES? THAT'S NOT THE TYPICAL DESIGN, TO MY UNDERSTANDING.

[00:10:01]

I BELIEVE THAT USUALLY RESTS IN THE DOWN POSITION.

I THOUGHT I WAS I'M NOT SURE 100%, BUT I BELIEVE THAT THE LAST LIFTS THAT WE PUT IN WHEN WE READ THE RECOMMENDATION, IT NEEDED TO HAVE A SAFETY FENCE SO THAT KIDS CAN GET CAUGHT IN IT.

AND I'M NOT SURE THAT WAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO, BUT I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S NOT A PART OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WHEN YOU PUT THE LIFTS IN, THAT MAY BE PART OF IT, BUT THAT WOULD BE ON THE BUILDING SIDE OF THE PERMITTING.

THIS COMPANY HAS GOTTEN SEVERAL BEACHFRONT PERMITS FOR BUILDING THEIR LIFTS.

THEY'RE ESTABLISHED HERE IN THE CITY.

THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE FEW THAT THEY'VE GOTTEN WITHIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S PURVIEW.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SHORT TIMER, BROWN.

THANK YOU. JUST A LITTLE CLARIFICATION, PLEASE.

THE SPECIFICATIONS SAY THAT THE CONCRETE FOOTING IS TO BE 36 INCHES LONG BY 18 INCHES WIDE, BY 18 INCHES DEEP.

AND I ASSUME THAT THIS WILL HAVE TO BE CONNECTED TO THE LIFT IN SOME WAY SO THAT YOU COULD ROLL A WHEELCHAIR INTO IT.

AND OF COURSE, THE GLUE DOESN'T PERMIT ANY PAVING UNDER THE LIFT.

SPECIFICALLY, IT SAID, BUT I DON'T REALLY SEE HOW THOSE HOW YOU COULD ACTUALLY ANCHOR A THING LIKE THIS WITHOUT A CONCRETE FOOTING.

AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING, THERE'S GOT TO BE SOME EXCEPTION FROM THE GLO FOR STUFF LIKE THIS.

HOW DO WE RECONCILE THAT? CAN YOU ELABORATE ON WHERE YOU ARE FINDING THAT THE SPECIFICATIONS ARE IN A LETTER FROM STRUCTURAL INNOVATIONS IN THE PACKET ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING.

IT'S IN A LITTLE PARAGRAPH CALLED GEOMETRIC LAYOUT.

IT'S IN THE..

IT'S ONE TO THIRD BULLET DOWN.

MASS RAILS ARE TO BE EMBEDDED IN A CONCRETE FOOTING.

CONCRETE FOOTING IS TO BE 36 INCHES LONG BY 18 INCHES WIDE BY 18 INCHES DEEP CONSTRUCTION OF 3000 PSI, 28 DAY COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH CONCRETE.

OKAY, SO THIS IS THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR NORMAL CARGO LIFT INSTALLATION.

THIS COMPANY, TO THEIR CREDIT, HAS ACTUALLY REENGINEERED.

I BELIEVE THEY AND THIS IS A LITTLE OUTSIDE OF MY EXPERTISE, BUT I BELIEVE THEY HIRED A SECONDARY ENGINEER BECAUSE OF THE BEACHFRONT AND GLO REQUIREMENTS.

IF YOU LOOK ON THE I THINK IT'S THE THIRD PAGE OR FOURTH PAGE OF THAT REPORT, YOU'LL SEE THE BLUEPRINTS FOR THEIR METHOD OF INSTALLATION.

THERE'S THE PERMEABLE PAVERS AND YOU'LL ALSO SEE THE FINS IF YOU'LL TURN A FEW PAGES LATER, RATHER THAN HAVING A SINGLE SLAB OF CONCRETE THAT ANCHORS IN THE BEAMS THAT SUPPORT THIS TYPE OF LIFT.

THEY HAVE THESE PERMEABLE FINS THAT ARE EMBEDDED IN THE GROUND TO SUPPORT IT RATHER THAN CONCRETE TO ENSURE THAT THE ENTIRE INSTALLATION IS PERMEABLE.

OKAY, SO THERE'S THERE'S ANOTHER PAGE.

THERE'S A PAGE OF PRINT ON PAGE THREE OF THREE THAT'S GOT THE STAMP, GUYS STAMP ON IT.

IT ALSO SHOWS THE BASE PLATE BOLTED TO ONE HALF, LIKE BOTH INTO CONCRETE.

SO THAT'S THAT'S INCORRECT AS WELL.

THAT'S INCORRECT. THAT'S FOR THE REST OF THE LIFT PRIOR TO THE AMENDMENT WITH THEIR DESIGN ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE.

OKAY. SO THE FOLLOWING PAGE WITH THOSE WHAT LOOKS LIKE ONE, TWO, THREE PERFORATED FINS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE MAST, THE TWO STEEL POSTS.

THAT'S THE THAT IS THE ANCHORING METHOD, NOT CONCRETE.

THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY.

YEAH. SO TO THAT END, I'M GOING TO THAT, THAT PAGE IS NOT SIGNED BY STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AND I'M GOING TO REQUEST THAT BE SIGNED AND REVIEWED BY THE CITY BECAUSE HE'S ONLY INCREASING THE DEPTH OF THE FOUNDATION FROM 18 INCHES TO 24 INCHES AND HE'S REPLACING 3600 PSI CONCRETE WITH WITH PERMEABLE PAVERS THAT ARE INTERCONNECTED BETWEEN THREE FILL WELLS, THREE FINS, SO THAT NEEDS TO BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.

I YEAH, I AGREE.

AND I'LL NOTE AGAIN THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THESE LIFTS HAVE BEEN INSTALLED.

THERE'S PROBABLY SEVERAL DOZEN OF THESE OUT ON THE ISLAND ALREADY THAT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED, BUT WE CAN ENSURE THAT THAT'S ON THE RECORD.

OKAY. WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ADD AS A SPECIFIC CONDITION OR WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CAUGHT IN NORMALLY IN THE PERMITTING PHASE? IT WOULD BE FOR THE FOR THE LADDER, ABSOLUTELY.

FOR THE FORMER, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD IT IN HIS CONDITION, FEEL FREE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE COMMISSIONER FINKLEA WORK ON HOW YOU WOULD LIKE THAT WORDED AS A AS ADDING IT AS A SPECIFIC CONDITION.

[00:15:02]

FIVE, PLEASE.

SPECIFIC CONDITION. FIVE, I WILL.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

IN THAT CASE, WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 22P-060.

IS THE APPLICANT IN THE AUDIENCE? THE I'M SORRY.

OH, JUST THAT I KNOW THEY LIVE OUT OF TOWN, SO.

OKAY, THE APPLICANT IS NOT IN THE AUDIENCE.

THEN IN THAT CASE, IS THERE ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON 22P-060 ON THIS SIDE? ON THIS SIDE? IN THAT CASE, WE ARE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:45 P.M.

AND I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON 22P-060.

YES, COMMISSIONER FINKLEA SINCE I'M POINTING ESSENTIALLY LOOKING AT YOU.

SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 22P-060 WITH ONE SPECIFIC CONDITION NUMBER FIVE.

OK ADDED, AND THAT SPECIFIC CONDITION IS THAT THE REVISED FOUNDATION DRAWINGS SHALL BE SIGNED AND SEALED BY A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.

THANK YOU. AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT? A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER PENA.

DO WE HAVE DISCUSSION? SEEING NO DISCUSSION.

I'LL CALL THE VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE ON TO CHANGING ZONING.

[6.B.1. 22P-059 (Vacant Parcels Located South Of Seawall Boulevard, East And West Of Boddeker Drive, And East And West Of Apffel Park Drive; And A Vacant Tract Located South Of Seawall Boulevard, East Of 9001 Seawall, West Of A Vacant Parcel, And North Of The Gulf Of Mexico) Request For A Change Of Zoning From Residential, Single-Family (R-1) To Commercial (C) Zoning District. Properties Are Legally Described As M.B. Menard Survey, Tract 1555, Seawall Corridor, East Beach To 53rd Street, 73.862 Acres; And A Vacant Tract Adjacent To The West Of A Property Legally Described As: Part Of Lot 311 (311-5), Trimble & Lindsey Section 1, Part Of Lot 312 And Half Of Adjacent Road (312-1), Trimble & Lindsey Section 1; In The City And County Of Galveston Texas. Applicant: City Of Galveston, Development Serv]

THAT'S CASE 22P-059.

COMMISSION. OH, THAT'S YOU, MR. TIETJENS? YES, MA'AM.

THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO STEP OUT, BUT COMMISSIONER BROWN, IT'S BEEN A PLEASURE WORKING WITH YOU.

OH, PLEASURE WORKING WITH YOU TOO.

ALL RIGHT, GOOD AFTERNOON.

I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF 22-059.

THIS IS A REZONING OF THREE TRACTS OF LAND WHICH DO NOT HAVE A GCAD DEFINITION TO THEM.

THERE IS NO GCAD NUMBER TO THEM.

AND THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF A OF A STRANGE ANIMAL, SO TO SPEAK.

BUT IT'S GENERALLY A HOUSEKEEPING ITEM.

AND I'LL EXPLAIN WHY HERE IN JUST A SECOND.

ALL ALONG THE SEAWALL, THERE IS A COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY ADJACENT TO THE SEAWALL.

IN MOST CASES, IT'S 50 FEET WIDE, MOSTLY OUT TO THE WEST END OF THE OF THE SEA WALL, BUT IT WIDENS.

IT'S OF VARIOUS WIDTHS AND IT WIDENS OUT AT THE EAST END.

AND WITH THAT IN OUR ZONING MAP APPLICATIONS, WE HAVE ZONING THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH TRACKS THAT ARE SEAWARD OF THE SEA WALL AND, AND THAT STRIP.

THERE ARE THREE CASES, HOWEVER, WHERE FOR WHATEVER REASON, THAT STRIP IS ZONED SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE ADJACENT ZONING.

AND SO WHAT THIS DOES IS BASICALLY MAKES THAT ZONING CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING THAT'S ADJACENT TO IT ON THE SEA WALL SIDE AND AS OPPOSED TO THE ZONING ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF SEAWALL BOULEVARD.

NOW, TWO OF THOSE CASES YOU'LL SEE IN THE MAP ARE AT THE EAST END OF THE ISLAND.

AND THESE ARE A LITTLE BIT HARD TO SEE, BUT YOU'LL YOU'LL NOTICE THE YELLOW IN YOUR MAP.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT UP THAT WE CAN.

WE GET THAT UP ON THE SCREEN.

I DON'T THINK THERE WAS ANYTHING IN THE POWERPOINT, BUT WE CAN.

OH, OKAY.

WELL, FROM THE OPEN, THE STAFF REPORT FROM AGENDA CENTER.

YOU JUST GO ON TO THE CITY'S WEBSITE.

SO THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE THE PACKETS BEFORE YOU, YOU WILL SEE THERE'S TWO MAPS SHOWN THERE.

THE ONE ON THE TOP SHOWS THESE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED AREA ADJACENT TO A COMMERCIAL AREA OUTSIDE OF THE SEAWALL RIGHT UP BY BODICKER DRIVE.

FURTHER DOWN FROM THAT, THERE'S ANOTHER YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED AREA THAT IS JUST BASICALLY NEAR THE SUBDIVISION PRESERVE AT GRAND BEACH AND JUST IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THAT.

AND THEN THERE'S A TRACT OUT NEAR I THINK IS AROUND 90.

[00:20:03]

IS IT 90? 90? YEAH 96 STREET, 95TH YEAH.

THOSE THREE TRACKS ARE WHAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS REZONING REQUEST.

AND IT'S SIMPLY THE STRIP ITSELF, THE COUNTY STRIP ITSELF.

SO THIS IS NOT DEVELOPABLE LAND.

IT BASICALLY JUST KIND OF CLEANS UP AND MAKES THAT ZONING ALL ALONG THE SEAWALL CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT.

THAT'S REALLY THE PURPOSE OF THIS.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING FROM THE COUNTY'S PERSPECTIVE.

I HAVE ADVISED THE COUNTY WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE, AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY OBJECTION WHATSOEVER.

BUT THIS IS SIMPLY TO MAKE THE ZONING CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S ADJACENT TO IT.

THERE HAVE BEEN THREE INDIVIDUALS WHO CONTACTED ME ABOUT THIS WHO JUST WERE KIND OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IT IS WE WERE DOING.

AND AFTER I EXPLAINED THAT TO THEM, THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF IT, ALTHOUGH I THINK ONLY ONE OF THEM SUBMITTED A LETTER OF IN FAVOR.

THERE WERE, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE 249 NOTICES SENT.

AND THAT'S PRIMARILY BECAUSE OF THE CONDOMINIUM COMPLEXES DOWN THERE IN THE IN THE 9000 BLOCK OF SEAWALL, EACH OF THE OWNERS HAD TO BE NOTIFIED WITHIN THOSE COMPLEXES.

LET'S SEE. OTHER THAN THAT, REALLY, IT'S JUST A FAIRLY FAIRLY MUCH A CLEANUP ITEM TO MAKE THE ZONING CONSISTENT.

AND WITH THAT, I WILL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

IT'S LIKE WE'RE PLAYING JEOPARDY UP HERE.

I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. I JUST HOW WAS THIS INITIATED? I INITIATED IT AT THE STAFF LEVEL.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

YES. COMMISSIONER FINKLEA, CAN YOU STATE AGAIN THAT YOU SAID THAT THIS PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY OR OWNED BY THE COUNTY, OWNED BY THE COUNTY AND IS ALSO NOT DEVELOPABLE.

CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT.

IT'S OWNED BY THE COUNTY.

AND ITS ENTIRE PURPOSE IS TO OWN AND OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THE SEAWALL, PROVIDE ACCESS TO IT, PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE SEAWALL STRUCTURE, TO THE PIERS THERE UNDER TO THE THE RIP WRAP THAT'S AT THE BASE OF THE SEAWALL ALL ALONG IT.

AND THAT'S THAT'S ITS PURPOSE.

RIGHT. THANK YOU. VICE CHAIR BROWN.

IN THE NOTIFICATIONS WE GOT, THERE WERE SIX PEOPLE OPPOSED, I GUESS.

DID ANYBODY SPEAK WITH ANY ANYBODY KNOW ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THE THE REASON THAT PEOPLE WERE OPPOSED? NO, I DIDN'T SPEAK WITH ANY OF THOSE FOLKS.

I JUST SPOKE TO THE THREE THAT CONTACTED ME DIRECTLY.

AND AND IT WAS JUST AN EXPLANATION OF WHY YOU WERE DOING IT AND WHAT WAS WHAT IT WAS FOR.

AND IT'S JUST THAT IT'S JUST A STRIP.

IT'S JUST A COUNTY OWNED STRIP.

YES, SIR. AFTER I EXPLAINED THAT THIS IS NOT DEVELOPABLE LAND.

THAT PRETTY MUCH ANSWERED MOST PEOPLE'S QUESTIONS RIGHT THERE.

WELL, ANY IDEA WHY IT WAS ZONED RESIDENTIAL IN THE FIRST PLACE? NO, I DON'T KNOW.

I'M NOT REAL SURE ABOUT THAT.

COULD THE COUNTY SELL IT? IDEALLY. I MEAN, NOT IDEALLY.

I DON'T BELIEVE SO.

I MEAN, THE COUNTY HAS A FAIRLY INTENSE REGIME OF LOOKING AT DEVELOPMENT, EVEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SEAWALL, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, BECAUSE THE SEAWALL ITSELF HAS TIE BAGS THAT GO UNDER THE ROAD, THAT TIE THE SEAWALL BACK TO A SORT OF A SUPPLEMENTAL SEAWALL, AS YOU WILL, ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF NORTH SIDE OF SEAWALL BOULEVARD.

AND THEY ARE VERY INTENT ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT DOES NOT GET IMPEDED IN ANY WAY.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER.

JIM, WHY SPEND THE TIME AND EFFORT DOING THIS? JUST TO BASICALLY CLEAN IT UP.

AND IF THERE WERE DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO TO TO THIS ON TWO OF THE THREE TRACKS, IT'S ADJACENT TO SOME COMMERCIAL ZONING.

THEN IT JUST MAKES IT CONSISTENT WITH IT.

AND THAT COULD AFFECT THEIR COMMERCIAL ZONING, THEIR SETBACKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

YES, SIR. GOOD.

HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHAT'S GOING ON WITH BABES BEACH? NO. OKAY.

JUST A QUESTION.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

[00:25:04]

IN YOUR NARRATIVE, YOU SAID IT HAD.

IT WOULD HELP ELIMINATE ISSUES OF SPOT ZONING.

HOW WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT? WELL, IT DOESN'T ELIMINATE THE ISSUES OF SPOT ZONING ON THE TWO TRACKS ON THE EAST END BECAUSE YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL ZONING TO THE NORTH OF SEAWALL BOULEVARD THERE AND SOME TO THE SOUTH.

SO THAT'S CONSISTENT.

THE TRACK THAT'S OUT FOR THE IN THE 9000 BLOCK OF SEAWALL, HOWEVER, IS ALL SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL USES BASICALLY.

IT'S GOT [INAUDIBLE] AT THE SOUTH END.

[INAUDIBLE] AT THE SOUTH, BUT OTHERWISE ALL SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL.

AND THEN THERE'S LITERALLY THE TRACT OF LAND THAT'S R 1 IS THE COUNTY 50 FOOT TRACT.

THAT'S IT. AND THE HALF OF THE ROAD THAT GOES ALONG WITH IT ON SEAWALL BOULEVARD.

YES, COMMISSIONER PENA.

DID YOU REMEMBER SOMETHING HERE IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION THAT WAS PROVIDED ONLINE? SOMEBODY THAT TOWARDS THE THE FAR EAST END OF SEAWALL COMMENTED THAT IT WOULD DECREASE PROPERTY VALUES.

CAN YOU THINK OF ANY.

CAN YOU SPEAK TO ANYTHING ON THAT? I DON'T SEE HOW TO BE QUITE HONEST.

IT'S I MEAN, I REALLY DON'T SEE HOW IT COULD DECREASE VALUES.

COMMERCIAL ZONING IN ITSELF, USUALLY AS IS HIGHER VALUE THAN RESIDENTIAL ZONING AS A GENERAL RULE.

BUT THEY MAY BE SPEAKING OF DECREASING THEIR OWN VALUES DUE TO SOME POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, WHICH OF COURSE, ON THE TWO TRACKS ON THE EAST END WOULD THERE WOULD BE POTENTIALLY DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO THIS TRACT SEAWARD OF THIS TRACT THAT'S PERMISSIBLE ON THE TWO COMMERCIAL ZONING TRACKS, BUT STILL UNDER THE EXISTING R-1 OR RESIDENTIAL, NOT OF ANY CHANGE TO THE COMMERCIAL TO THAT 50 FOOT ZONING CHANGE THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY.

NO, NO, I DON'T THINK THERE WOULD BE ANY CHANGE WHATSOEVER TO THE TRACT SUBJECT TRACT.

THEY MAY PERCEIVE THAT THERE WOULD BE A REDUCTION IN THEIR VALUE BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT MIGHT HAPPEN DUE TO DEVELOPMENT FURTHER OUTSIDE OF THIS TRACT. BUT THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT WITH THIS TRACT ITSELF.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

AND I'M NOT SURE IF YOU SAID THIS OR NOT, BUT IN THE COMMENTS THAT WE RECEIVED FROM CATHERINE PRIOR TO THE MEETING, THERE WERE SEVEN RETURNED, ONE IN FAVOR AND SIX OPPOSED.

SO, YES, AND AND IT WAS MY MISTAKE FOR NOT LOOKING AT THOSE EARLIER.

AND I HAVE LOOKED AT THEM NOW, AS I'M SURE ALL OF THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE.

YES. SHAME ON ME.

WELL, I WISH THOSE FOLKS WOULD HAVE CALLED.

BUT CERTAINLY THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO THEIR OPINION AND TO EXPRESS THAT OPINION.

ADDITIONALLY, THE THREE THAT I TALKED TO, AT LEAST ONE OF THEM SENT IN, I THINK IT WAS JUST AN EMAIL SAYING HE SUPPORTS IT, BUT THAT WAS NOT OFFICIALLY ON THE COMMENT LETTER.

AND CERTAINLY THEY HAVE TIME TO DO THAT BECAUSE IN THIS CASE, WE ARE JUST IT'S A REZONING.

WE ARE RECOMMENDING BODY.

AND THIS DOES GO TO CITY COUNCIL.

CITY COUNCIL HAS THE LAST APPROVAL ON IT.

SO ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SEEING? NONE IN THIS CASE.

WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:58 P.M.

IN THIS CASE, WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE APPLICANT FROM THE CITY.

SO ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS SIDE? ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS SIDE? WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 3:58 P.M.

AND I'LL BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION.

YES, COMMISSIONER PENA, I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE 22P-059 AS WRITTEN.

AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER EDWARDS.

ANY DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONERS? NO DISCUSSION, IN THAT CASE WE'LL TAKE A VOTE.

ALL IN FAVOR. PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS.

WE'LL MOVE ON NOW.

[6.B.2. 22P-061 (1901 23rd Street / Tremont) Request For A Change Of Zoning From Commercial, Height And Density Development Zone Three (C-HDDZ-3), To Urban Neighborhood (UN) Zoning District. Property Is Legally Described As M.B. Menard Survey North 89-5.5 Feet Of Lots 6 And 7 (1006-1), Northeast Block 92 Galveston Outlots, In The City And County Of Galveston Texas. Applicant: Tricon Land Surveying, LLC. Property Owners: Ted Shook And Al Fichera]

AND AS I SAID, CITY COUNCIL HAS A FINAL SAY ON THIS AND THEY WILL HEAR THIS ON OCTOBER 27TH.

WE'LL MOVE ON NOW TO 22P-061.

MR. LUNSFORD.

THANK YOU. THIS IS 1901 23RD STREET, OR TREMONT.

THIS IS ANOTHER REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING IN THIS CASE FROM COMMERCIAL, A HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE THREE TO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING.

THERE WERE 25 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT.

THREE RETURNED. ALL THREE OF THOSE WERE IN FAVOR.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE OF ZONING FROM COMMERCIAL HEIGHT AND DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE THREE TO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING.

[00:30:01]

SO THIS WOULD CHANGE THE BASE ZONING AND THE KIND OF CARVE BACK THE OVERLAY.

THE APPLICANT'S INTENT IS TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING PAVEMENT ON THE SUBJECT PARCEL.

IT'S A PARKING LOT THAT'S BEEN THERE FOR WHO KNOWS HOW LONG, REPLAT THE EXISTING LOT AND CONSTRUCT THREE SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARDS PRESCRIBED IN URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING.

AS CHANGES OF ZONE. PLEASE NOTE THE ZONING AND LAND USE AND ADJACENT IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AS CHANGES OF ZONING OR PERMANENT NATURE REGARDLESS OF THE PRESENT PROPOSED LAND USE OF PROPERTIES PLANNING COMMISSION. STATE COUNCIL MUST CONSIDER ALL POTENTIAL FUTURE LAND USES.

IT WILL BECOME PERMITTED AS WELL.

PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENT C FOR COMPARISON LIST OF THE PERMITTED USES OF THE COMMERCIAL AND URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICTS TO COMPARE.

OTHER SUBJECT PROPERTY FORMS PART OF THE 23RD STREET COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR IS ALSO SURROUNDED BY URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING AND ADJACENT TO THE SAN JACINTO NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICT.

THE INTENT OF URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD IS TO ACCOMMODATE THE RANGE AND PATTERN OF RESIDENTIAL USES FAMILIES.

THESE OLDEST ESTABLISHED URBAN CORE NEIGHBORHOODS TOGETHER WITH SOME LIMITED NONRESIDENTIAL USE.

FOR THIS REASON, STAFF FINDS THE PROPOSED USE OF SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING USES AND ZONING.

SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ALSO IN THE HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE, WHICH TYPICALLY ONLY APPLIES TO MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY, COMMERCIAL AND MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT.

THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO HD STANDARDS AS PRESENTED.

PLEASE NOTE THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL FOR REZONING IN THE STAFF REPORT.

STAFF FINDS REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CHANGE OF ZONING APPROVAL CRITERIA AS PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 13.601C OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

THE PROPOSED USE OF SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED HOMES WILL MEET HOUSING NEEDS AND MAINTAIN A COMPETITIVE LAND MARKET AND PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.

THE PROPOSED DWELLINGS WILL CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS FOR URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING AND ARTICLE THREE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

AND AGAIN, THE CURRENT HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT ZONE IS NOT APPLICABLE TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AND THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE HUC THREE OVERLAY BEING REMOVED FROM THE SUBJECT TRACT, AS WELL AS CHANGING THE BASE ZONING TO URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAKES THE FINAL DETERMINATION AND THEY WILL CONSIDER THE REZONING REQUEST THAT THEIR OCTOBER 27, 2022 MEETING.

WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS HERE, SO WE HAVE A VICINITY MAP SHOWING THE SUBJECT PARCEL.

THEY'RE HIGHLIGHTED AND WE HAVE A PHOTO OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS IT SITS TODAY.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND HERE WE HAVE ON THE LEFT, WE HAVE THE PROPOSED REPLAT OF THE LOTS INTO THREE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT.

AND THEN ON THE RIGHT THERE WE HAVE KIND OF THE SAME REPLAT OVERLAID ONTO THAT PARCEL.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND WE HAVE THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WHICH SHOWS THE PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS MENTIONED, PROPERTY TO THE NORTHEAST, TO THE EAST AND TO THE WEST. AND THIS CONCLUDES STAFF REPORT.

THANK YOU. DOES ANYONE HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES. VICE CHAIR BROWN SO THE HEIGHT AND DENSITY IS NOT APPLICABLE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T APPLY TO SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING, RIGHT? CORRECT. YEAH. THE HTZ IS TYPICALLY, YOU KNOW, LONG SEAWALL AND SOME OTHER PLACES, AND YET TYPICALLY IT'S MEANT TO PROVIDE SOME DESIGN STANDARDS AND SOME RELIEF FROM ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL FOR POTENTIAL HIGH RISE HERE.

RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? I WAS JUST WONDERING, LOOKING AT THE COMPARISON OF THE TWO ZONING, WHAT'S ALLOWED AND WHAT'S NOT IN THE TWO ZONING CATEGORIES, THE UN AND THE CHDDZ3. I WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT'S THE ADVANTAGE OF CHANGING THE ZONING BECAUSE IT'S MUCH MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE ONE THAT IT'S ALREADY HAD.

WELL, THE THE SETBACKS CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY.

SO OH, COMMERCIAL HAS A REQUIRES A FIVE FOOT SIDE SETBACK, TEN FOOT REAR IN SOME CASES.

AND URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SETBACKS.

BUT OF COURSE, WE DO HAVE SOME BUILDING STANDARDS.

YOU KNOW, THAT GOVERN FIRE RATING YEAH.

SO BASICALLY.

YEAH. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THAT MAKES SENSE.

AND I ASSUME ALL THE UNITS ARE GOING TO BE FACING AVENUE P BASED ON THE WAY THE REPLAT..

WE CAN PRESUME.

SO I BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS IN THE AUDIENCE MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS.

ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAD. THANKS.

ANYONE ELSE HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? COMMISSIONER PENA? A GENERAL QUESTION, IS THERE ANYWHERE WITHIN THE CITY, WITHIN THE URBAN CORE OF THE CITY, WHERE THAT WHERE THE CHANGE IN ZONING THAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR THE IS IT THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THAT WOULD NOT BE ADMISSIBLE, BE ALLOWED FOR A ZONING CHANGE?

[00:35:02]

I MEAN, THAT'S VERY, I THINK, VERY SUBJECTIVE TO SPECIFIC CONDITIONS OR REQUESTS.

IT'S VERY SITE SPECIFIC, I WOULD SAY.

OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, IT REALLY KIND OF DEPENDS.

OKAY. URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD IS USED GENERALLY EAST OF 39TH STREET AND IS USED FOR THE OLDEST PARTS OF THE ISLAND.

SO IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS ON THE WEST END WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS DON'T MATCH THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS FOR URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD, THEN THAT MIGHT NOT BE APPROPRIATE.

SO. SO IT MIGHT DEPEND MORE ON PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT AND MATCHING THAT CRITERIA VERSUS THE SIZING OF THE LOTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

CHARACTER AND CHARACTER IN THE COMP AND THE COMP PLAN.

ABSOLUTELY. ANYTHING ELSE, COMMISSIONERS? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

THEN I DO BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE THE APPLICANT WITH US AND SO WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:06.

PLEASE COME FORWARD.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS AL FISHER.

MY PARTNER TED IS ILL WITH THE VIRUS OF SOME KIND.

BUT IF I HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I CAN ANSWER FOR YOU, I'LL BE MORE THAN GLAD TO.

WE DEVELOPED ACROSS THE STREET IN THE LAST TEN MONTHS OR 11 MONTHS THE PROJECT WE CALL PAINTED LADIES.

AND IT'S DONE WELL.

AND WE ACQUIRED THIS TRACK.

WE REALLY HAVE HAD IT.

WE USED IT STORE MATERIAL ON AND STUFF.

IT WAS AT ONE TIME IT WAS A THE BUILDING WAS MOVED OFF WHEN WE TOOK IT OVER JUST TO USE IT FOR STORAGE.

AT ONE TIME IT WAS A USED CAR LOT, REALLY.

THE ENTIRE TRACK ON THAT SIDE WAS MANY YEARS AGO CALLED GILLESPIE AUTOMOTIVE, WHERE IT WAS A LINCOLN DEALER.

THEN IT WAS TORE DOWN AND, YOU KNOW, SORT OF SPLIT UP OR GO FROM THERE.

BUT WE'D LIKE TO TAKE IT AND BUILD THREE MORE STRUCTURES THERE.

AND THEY WOULD FACE BEING ORDERED TO GALVEZ FOR ACCESS TO THE GARAGE AND AND ANYTHING ELSE I CAN ANSWER FOR YOU.

WELL, THAT ANSWERED MY QUESTION.

THANKS. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE? THANK YOU, MR. FISHER.

ANYONE ELSE HERE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON 22P-061. THIS SIDE.

THIS SIDE.

SING NONE.

WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 22B061 AT 4:07 P.M.

AND I'LL BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION.

YES. VICE-CHAIR BROWN I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE 20 2P-061 IS PRESENTED IN THE STAFF COURT AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER FINKLEA.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE.

WE'LL TAKE A VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR, PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

AGAIN, THIS IS WHERE A RECOMMENDATION IT GOES TO COUNCIL AND WE'LL GO TO THEM ON OCTOBER 27TH.

GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR PROJECT.

I SHOULD. YOU LIKE THOSE ACROSS THE STREET? NICELY DONE.

NEXT WE WILL GO TO 22P-055.

[6.C.1. 22P-055 (Vacant Tracts Located East Of Ohana, South Of San Luis Pas Road/FM 3005, And West Of 8 Mile Road) Request For A Preliminary Plat To Incorporate 39.79 Acres Of The Subject Tract As Part Of Beachside Village, Section 9, And Extend Starfish And Beachside Drive. Properties Are Legally Described As The Preserve At West Beach, Section 1 (2010), Abstract 121, East 39.79 Acres (0-0-0), In The City And County Of Galveston, Texas. Applicant: Kahala Development, LP C/O Debbie Reinhart Property Owners: Kahala Development, LP And Marquette Galveston INV.]

ADRIEL. YES, MA'AM.

22P-055. IT'S VACANT TRACTS LOCATED EAST OF OCEANA, SOUTH OF SAINT LOUIS PASS ROAD AND WEST OF EIGHT MILE ROAD.

THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT.

THERE WERE 44 PUBLIC NOTICES SENT.

WE DO HAVE A COMMENT FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE AND THE FIRE MARSHAL IS REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINT LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THE DEVELOPMENT THERE, OR ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT, RATHER.

AGAIN, THIS IS A REQUEST TO INCORPORATE FOR REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO INCORPORATE THE LAST 3030 9.79 ACRES OF THE SUBJECT TRACT AS PART OF BEACHSIDE VILLAGE SECTION NINE FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO ADD 89 RESIDENTIAL HOMES TO THE EXISTING 259 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND THE SUBDIVISION.

PLEASE NOTE THE ZONING AND LAND USES AS WELL AS THE LOT AND BLOCK CONFIGURATION IN WHICH ALL THE LOTS ARE PROPOSED TO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO WIDTH, DEPTH AND AREA FOR THE TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

TEN ZONING.

PLEASE NOTE THE OPEN SPACE AS WELL AS BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION AND BEACH ACCESS AND EASEMENTS REQUIREMENTS ON PAGES TWO, THREE AND FOUR OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

[00:40:06]

THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PROPOSING TO ESTABLISH TWO BLOCKS THAT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH LENGTH OF 700 FEET.

THE APPLICANT PROPOSES A PERMANENT STREET WITHOUT A TURNAROUND OF AT LEAST 50 FEET OUTSIDE OF THE STREET RADIUS UNDER SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE ON PAGES FOUR AND FIVE OF YOUR REPORT.

AND THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THIS CASE BE THIS APPROVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, SUBJECT TO CORRECTIONS.

AND THOSE ARE LISTED AS THE CONDITIONS ONE THROUGH SIX AND SEVEN THROUGH 12 PAGES, FIVE AND SIX OF YOUR STAFF REPORT.

AND NOW WE HAVE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AERIAL MAP AND THE NEXT SLIDE WILL SHOW THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY PLAT AND THAT CONCLUDES STAFF REPORT.

THANK YOU, MR. MONTALVAN.

I APPRECIATE IT.

BEFORE WE GO FORWARD WITH ANY SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ON THIS, THIS CASE ITSELF, I WOULD LIKE, AGAIN, BETWEEN YOU AND MS. FAIRWEATHER TO EXPLAIN TO THIS BODY AGAIN THE PROCESS OF PRELIMINARY PLATTS, HEARING PRELIMINARY PLATTS, WHY WE HEAR THEM, THE PROCESS AND WHAT IT MEANS TO DISAPPROVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE, WHICH IS WHAT THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS IN THIS CASE, SO THAT EVERYBODY IS ON BOARD.

BECAUSE I KNOW THAT I THINK THE LAST TIME WE DID THIS, I DON'T THINK THAT COMMISSIONER HUMPHREY WAS HERE.

AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE SOME OF OUR COMMISSIONERS ARE STILL A LITTLE BIT UNCLEAR ABOUT WHY WE HEAR CERTAIN THINGS AND WHY WE APPROVE THINGS IN THE MANNER THAT WE DO SO.

WHY DON'T I TAKE THIS ONE? OH, I DIDN'T EVEN PUT IT IN YOUR COURT.

SO. SO THE.

I'M PUTTING IT IN THE DOUBLES OVER THERE.

OKAY. SO THIS IS THERE'S TWO SEPARATE ISSUES THERE.

THERE'S THERE'S A PRELIMINARY AND A FINAL PLAT ISSUE.

AND THE REASON WE GO THROUGH A TWO STEP PROCESS IS BECAUSE WHEN THERE'S A PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND CONSTRUCTION OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE BY THE DEVELOPER, IT'S IT SETS OUT SORT OF THE THE THE CHRONOLOGICAL THINGS THAT HAVE TO HAPPEN PRIOR TO A FINAL PLAT HAPPENING.

AND THE FINAL PLAT IS REALLY THAT'S THAT'S THE POINT AT WHICH WE GET A PLAT CAN BE RECORDED AND THEN INFRASTRUCTURE IS CONSTRUCTED AND, AND SENT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL ACCEPTANCE.

AND THEN THE CITY TAKES OVER AND MAINTAINS THAT INFRASTRUCTURE FROM THAT POINT FORWARD AFTER THERE'S A, THERE'S A BOND PERIOD AS WELL THAT THAT'S IN THERE.

BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, THAT'S HOW THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A TWO PHASE PROCESS FOR PRELIMINARY PLATS AND THEN FINAL PLATS.

IT'S IT'S DIFFERENT THAN SOME OF THESE PLATS WHERE WE SEE WHERE THERE'S JUST A COUPLE OF LOTS THEY'RE FRONTING ON EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE.

YOU'RE NOT HAVING TO DO ANY OF THOSE KIND OF STEPS.

SO IT'S IT'S A LITTLE BIT MORE OF AN EXTENDED PROCESS, BUT IT'S IT'S PART OF OUR, I'LL CALL IT BUREAUCRACY JUST TO MAINTAIN, YOU KNOW, THE PROPER STANDARDS AND APPLICATION OF OUR REGULATIONS.

THE DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICED LANGUAGE RELATES TO STATE LAW, WHICH SAYS YOU CAN'T APPROVE A PLAT UNLESS IT'S FULLY APPROVABLE.

YOU HAVE TO DISAPPROVE THAT PLAT UNTIL SUCH TIME AS IT BECOMES FULLY APPROVAL.

SO THE THE EXCUSE ME, THE DISAPPROVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE, SUBJECT TO CORRECTIONS BEING MADE BASICALLY IS A WAY FOR YOU TO APPROVE A PLAT IN ESSENCE APPROVE.

ALTHOUGH THAT LANGUAGE SAYS DISAPPROVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IT'S ESSENTIALLY IT'S A CONTINGENT APPROVAL.

AGAIN, THAT LANGUAGE IS NOT ALLOWED IN STATE LAW.

SO SO THAT'S WHY IT'S WORDED THAT WAY.

THE AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN AN ADVOCATE OF THAT LANGUAGE THROUGHOUT PLANNING DEPARTMENTS ALL AROUND THE STATE OF TEXAS.

AND MOST JURISDICTIONS THAT I KNOW OF USE IT.

IT'S APPROPRIATE.

AND SO BASICALLY WHEN YOU'RE DISPROVING WITHOUT PREJUDICE, YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING AS SOON AS YOU CORRECT THESE ITEMS THAT ARE LISTED IN THIS DEPARTMENT REPORT THAT PRELIMINARY PLAT BECOMES APPROVED, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE YOU GUYS AS ANOTHER PRELIMINARY PLAT STEP.

[00:45:01]

HENCE THAT'S KIND OF SAVING SOME BUREAUCRACY FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPERS.

SO THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THAT.

DID I ANSWER THAT? RIGHT. OKAY. SO, SO IT JUST TO CLEAR UP ANY CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE MEANS BECAUSE SOMETIMES WE DON'T SEE THOSE FOR A WHILE. AND WE SAW ONE I THINK, WHEN YOU WEREN'T HERE LAST TIME.

AND SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS ONCE AGAIN WHAT IT IS THAT IS BEING RECOMMENDED BY STAFF BEFORE WE'RE ASKED TO VOTE ON IT.

THANK YOU. CERTAINLY.

ABSOLUTELY. OKAY.

SO NOW ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AND I BELIEVE, BOB, YOU HAD ONE.

YES. SO VICE CHAIR BROWN.

OKAY. IN THE STAFF REPORT, YOU MENTIONED A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THE PLAT WAS OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH AND ONE OF THEM WAS THE MAXIMUM BLOCK LENGTH OF 700 FEET.

THE OTHER ONE WAS A DEAD END STREET WHERE YOU MUST HAVE A 50 FOOT RADIUS TURNAROUND AT THE END.

AND THEN YOU SAID THEY COULD MEET THESE OR HAVE AN ALTERNATE STANDARD OF COMPLIANCE.

AND I'M NOT SURE I DIDN'T SEE EITHER ONE OF THOSE THINGS.

IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BECOME PART OF ONE OF THE THINGS THEY WOULD ONE OF THE THINGS IS THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING BACK AS PART OF A SPECIFIC THING THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING BACK.

OR IS THERE AN ALTERNATE STANDARD OF COMPLIANCE THAT I JUST DIDN'T SEE? WELL, THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING.

SO THE RULE STATES THAT, YOU KNOW, BLOCK LENGTH, YOU KNOW, WEST OF 61ST SHOULD BE AN AVERAGE OF 450.

SO RIGHT NOW THEY HAVE ABOUT 700.

SO THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING.

AND THAT'S WHAT THIS BODY IS CAPABLE OF, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY APPROVING AND MOVING FORWARD AS A VARIANCE FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

OH, THEY'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE 450 TO 700 FEET.

YES, SIR. YES, SIR.

SO THIS IS ESSENTIALLY A DEVIATION FROM THE SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS, WHICH STATE THAT BLOCKS WEST OF 61ST MUST BE OR MUST HAVE AN AVERAGE OF 450 FEET.

SO THAT'S WHERE THEY ARE REQUESTING, WHICH IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN THE PAST THROUGHOUT THE OTHER SECTIONS THAT WERE DEVELOPED.

SO THIS IS THIS IS NOTHING THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE IN THE PAST BY THE SAME DEVELOPER, AND IT'S BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST THROUGH OTHER PRELIMINARY PLAT PROCESSES AND FINAL PLATS.

MM HMM. NOW, THE OTHER ITEM THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING PERTAINING TO THE TURNING RADIUS.

WELL, IF WE LOOK AT THE REQUEST OF THE FIRE MARSHAL, THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY SOLVE THAT, BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL ACCESS AT THAT POINT.

SO IT WOULDN'T BE A DEAD END STREET.

IT WOULD BE A AN ACCESS.

RIGHT. LOOKING AT THAT PLAT, I COULDN'T FIND A DEAD END STREET ANYWHERE ANYWAY.

IF YOU LOOK AT AN EIGHT MILE, YOU CAN'T ACCESS A MILE.

THERE'S A LANDSCAPE RESERVE THERE.

SO IT'S JUST A COUPLE OF LOTS HERE THAT ARE IMPORTANT.

7115, 200 FEET, MORE OR LESS.

WAIT A MINUTE. THESE STREETS ARE GOING TO CONNECT TO EIGHT MILE ROAD, RIGHT? OH, THEY'RE NOT. OH, OKAY.

IT DOESN'T CROSS THAT RESERVE.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PREPARED TO ANSWER.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE PROVIDED THE COMMENTS FROM THE FIRE MARSHAL AND THEY ARE PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION AS WELL.

OKAY. WELL, THEN, IF YOU WOULD BACK UP FOR ME A LITTLE BIT, BECAUSE I GUESS I MISSED IT ABOUT THE 50 FOOT RADIUS.

TURN AROUND FOR THE FIRE MARSHAL.

YEAH. SO THE FIRE MARSHAL, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE ONE OF YOUR STAFF REPORT, THE FIRE MARSHAL IS ASKING FOR AN ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINT ON THE EAST END OF THAT OF THAT PROPOSED LOT THERE. AND THAT ACCESS WOULD BE WHERE? WELL, THAT'S THAT'S WHERE THE THAT'S WHERE THE APPLICANT WILL WORK WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL TO SORT OF ADHERE TO THE REQUEST.

OH, THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS.

RIGHT. THAT IS ALSO PART OF CONDITION, I BELIEVE FOUR OR FIVE IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT THEY MUST COMPLY WITH ALL DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS.

SO REALLY, THE ONE THAT IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO IS THE 700 FOOT LENGTH OF THE ROAD ? ESSENTIALLY IT COULD POTENTIALLY JUST COME DOWN TO THAT ONE.

YES. YEAH. OKAY.

SO IT IS CONNECTING TO THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT TO THE WEST BY STARFISH AND BEACHSIDE.

RIGHT, WHICH IS ALL PART OF BEACHSIDE.

RIGHT. ALL PART OF IT. YEAH.

IT'S JUST NOT CONNECTING TO EIGHT MILE ROAD, EXCEPT I GUESS AT THE PARKING LOT RIGHT THERE.

NO, THAT'S THAT'S ALSO IF YOU IF YOU TAKE A CLOSER LOOK, IT'S ALSO IT'S NOT CONNECTING TO THE PARKING LANE.

OH, OKAY. ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE THANK YOU.

[00:50:04]

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YES. OH, GO AHEAD.

VICE CHAIR BROWN.

I'M SORRY. THE COMMENTS WE HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED THAT ASKED ABOUT JUST FOR CONSTRUCTION ACCESS, THAT IT WOULD BE MORE CONVENIENT TO HAVE ACCESS FROM EIGHT MILE ROAD FOR CONSTRUCTION, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S A IT'S A MAJOR ROAD AND GETTING IN AND OUT OF THE AREA WOULD BE MORE CONVENIENT FOR EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IF THEY COULD USE EIGHT MILE ROAD. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT PLANNING GETS INVOLVED IN OR NOT.

BUT I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY MORE OF A QUESTION THAT THE APPLICANT SHOULD, YOU KNOW, SHOULD ANSWER.

OKAY, I'LL DO THAT. THANKS.

COMMISSIONER FINKLEA. ON PAGE THREE, YOU START TO ADDRESS THE BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION.

AND I WANTED TO BRING UP A POINT THAT WE SAW RECENTLY ON A CASE A FEW MONTHS AGO OVER THE GRAND.

WHAT'S THAT DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST END YOU JUST MENTIONED? YEAH, THE PRESERVE AT GRAN BEACH, WHERE WE HAD A PARCEL THAT WAS SEEKING APPROVAL FOR A BEACHFRONT CONSTRUCTION PERMIT, BUT THERE WAS NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE OTHER THAN TO CONSTRUCT IT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE DUNE PROTECTION AREA.

AND THAT WAS BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT THE PLAT WAS APPROVED.

I WOULD MAKE A COMMENT TO STAFF THAT THIS IS A NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THAT IN FACT THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT DOES NOT SHOW THE NORTH TOE OF THE DUNE. IT SIMPLY SHOWS THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION LINE THAT I'D WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THOSE BEACHFRONT PROPERTIES ARE WELL OUTSIDE OF THE DUNE PROTECTION AREA SO THAT THEY CAN DEVELOP WITHOUT HAVING TO PUT A STRUCTURE WITHIN THE THE DUNE PROTECTION, THE NORTH TOE OF THE DUNE.

OKAY, THAT'S A POINT WELL TAKEN.

COMMISSION, AS YOU LOOK DOWN TO TO THE WEST, THIS TIES ON TO THE EXISTING PREVIOUS SECTIONS OF BEACHSIDE VILLAGE.

AND YOU'LL SEE THAT THAT DEPTH IS IS BASICALLY CONSISTENT GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN.

SO THESE LOTS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DEEPER THAN THE PRESERVE AT GRAND BEACH.

PRESERVE AT GRAND BEACH, IS IT'S OWN ANIMAL.

IT'D BE THE SAME DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AS, AS TO THE WESTERN SECTIONS.

SURE, I UNDERSTAND.

IT'S JUST FROM THIS VIEW YOU CAN'T TELL WHERE THE NORTH TOE OF THE DUNE IS, BUT IT'S AND NONETHELESS THE BEACHFRONT DUNE PROTECTION CERTIFICATE WILL WILL STILL BE REQUIRED.

YEAH, BUT I DON'T WANT TO BE PUT IN THE POSITION THAT WE WERE LAST TIME WHERE WE HAD NO OPTION BUT TO APPROVE A STRUCTURE IN THE DUNE AREA.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO IT'S A VERY GOOD POINT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF COMMISSIONERS? SEEING NONE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 4:23 P.M.

AND WILL THE APPLICANT, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

WHO'S GOING TO DO THE HONORS? I SEE. I SEE THREE ABLE BODIES THERE.

LOOKS LIKE YOU DREW THE BLACK BEAN, BRUCE.

YEAH. BRUCE RHINEHART, KAHALA DEVELOPMENT AND THE DEVELOPER OF THIS SUBDIVISION AND ALL OF THE BEACHSIDE FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS.

CAN YOU BELIEVE IT'S BEEN THAT LONG? AND WHAT WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY ABOUT THIS ONE? WELL, I CAN ANSWER A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

HE WAS. WE THE STREET THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL WOULD LIKE AN EMERGENCY EXIT.

IT'S NOT GOING TO CONNECT EXCEPT WITH A FIRE KEY THAT WILL BE AT THE END OF EACH SIDE ON THE EAST END, ALL THE WAY THERE.

AND THERE'S NO CUL DE SAC REQUIRED BECAUSE THAT PIECE OF THE STREET IS LESS THAN 150 FEET.

AND IF THE CUL DE SAC BESIDE BECAUSE IT'S ALSO A LOOP SYSTEM, YOU'LL SEE TWAIN LANE THERE.

SORRY OLD EYES.

SO THE FIRE MARSHAL WILL BE ABLE TO CONNECT TO EIGHT MILE ROAD WITH A FIRE KEY.

YES. OR IT MAY BE EXIT ONLY GATES, THAT KIND OF THING.

RIGHT? CAN I ASK A QUESTION? YES, ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, BRUCE.

NO, NO. THAT'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I THINK.

GO AHEAD. HELP YOU WITH BOB.

WE HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS FROM THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE OUT THERE THAT WAS THERE THEY WERE.

I'LL JUST READ ONE OF THEM. IT SAID, HE SAID, I'D LIKE TO SEE ACCESS GRANTED ON THE EAST SIDE ON EIGHT MILE ROAD TO SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION AND HOME CONSTRUCTION.

AND LATER, AS AN EMERGENCY ACCESS POINT AS WE CURRENTLY HAVE OFF NAUTILUS.

STARFISH IN PARTICULAR IS A NARROWER ROAD WITH A SHARP 90 DEGREE TURN.

WHEN SEA BUTTERFLY TURNS INTO STARFISH, CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC AND THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT OFF STARFISH, GRANT AND BEACHSIDE WOULD BE VERY DISRUPTIVE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND DIRTY.

[00:55:04]

SO IN SECTION SIX, THE LAST SECTION THAT WE DID THERE THAT'S ADJACENT TO THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE, I CAN SHOW YOU, GO BACK TO THE AERIAL. UH, PROBABLY SHOW A LITTLE BETTER.

WELL, THIS IS THE SECTION WHERE IT ENDED RIGHT HERE.

AND THERE'S WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS.

THERE WAS NO WAY TO COME OFF A 3005 BECAUSE OF THE PROXIMITY TO THE REGULAR ENTRANCE.

AND TXDOT GOT THIS REAL THING ABOUT YOU CAN'T HAVE TOO MANY ENTRANCES TOGETHER LIKE YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU HAVE NOW.

YOU MIGHT HAVE THEM 50 FEET APART.

WELL, THEY DON'T WANT THAT.

SO WE DID HAVE TO RUN THE TRUCKS THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION.

THERE WAS NO ALTERNATIVE.

IT DID CREATE SOME DUST.

AND ONE OF THE HOMEOWNERS, WHICH IS IT SOUNDS LIKE HIM, HIS CAR, HIS BRAND NEW CAR GOT COVERED IN DUST ONE DAY.

SO WE ARE AS I EXPLAINED TO HIM, WHEN THEY HAD A BOARD MEETING THE OTHER DAY, I EXPLAINED TO HIM AT THE BOARD MEETING THAT THERE WILL BE SOME CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT IN THE VERY BEGINNING, BUT WE ARE HOPING THAT IT'S ACTUALLY NOT THE CITY, BUT IT IS A PIPELINE THERE AND THE PIPELINE IS GOING TO HAVE TO ALLOW US TO GO OVER IT. THE PIPELINE RUNS UP AND DOWN EIGHT MILE ROAD ALL THE WAY BACK TO STUART ROAD.

AND I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT PIPELINE RULES, BUT WHEN WE WERE DOING THAT LAST, WHEN WE TRIED TO BRING THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT AND WE CROSS THE PIPELINE, I SAID, NO, NO, THEY DO HELICOPTER FLYOVERS ON IT ALL THE TIME AND WE GOT CAUGHT.

SAID NO, NO.

SO THAT'S ONE. ANOTHER REASON WE COULDN'T COME IN THAT WAY, BUT WE'LL GET THAT WORKED OUT.

THEY'RE JUST GOING TO MAKE US PAD IT OR SOMETHING THAT, OH, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO COME IN.

YEAH, YEAH. IT'S JUST LIKE THE PARKING LOT THAT WE PLAN ON PUTTING.

IT'S JUST YOU GOT TO LET THEM KNOW AND THEN THEY'VE GOT CERTAIN CRITERIAS.

OKAY. OKAY. SO THEY'LL GO OVER A PIPELINE.

OKAY. BRUCE, WHERE'S THE PIPELINE AT? IT RUNS DOWN THE EIGHT..

THE RIGHT OF WAY OF EIGHT MILE ROAD.

NO, IT'S NOT IT. RIGHT AWAY.

IT'S IN BETWEEN. MM HMM.

I GUESS IT JUST DOESN'T SHOW UP HERE ON THE SPOT.

IT DOESN'T REALLY SHOW UP HARDLY AT ALL UNLESS YOU'RE DOWN THERE.

BUT THERE'S AN EASEMENT THAT THEY HAVE.

IS THAT EASEMENT WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY OR WITHIN? NO, IT'S ON WHAT IS NOW MARQUETTE PROPERTY OR THE PROPERTY THAT I'M PURCHASING.

IT DOESN'T YEAH. IT DOESN'T SHOW UP ON ANYTHING.

IT'S NOT IN RESERVE D I MEAN, LOOKING AT A SATELLITE MAP AND IT DOESN'T SHOW.

IT'S ON THE SURVEY.

SURVEY. OH, IS THAT RESERVED? YOU SEE? SEE, THE BRAINS IS BACK THERE.

TELL THEM WHERE IT IS.

OH, YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE EXISTING SURVEY, WHICH IS WHERE IT'S THIS PROPERTY IS ALREADY PLATTED.

OH YEAH. AND WE ARE ACTUALLY REPLATTING AND DECREASING THE DENSITY FROM ABOUT 50%.

AND INCREASING THE WETLAND.

OH, IS THAT OAQL? YEAH, THEY SAY THE AMOCO PIPELINE.

OKAY. IF YOU'RE DOWN THERE, THAT PIPELINE COMES OFF THOSE OIL RIGS THAT ARE ABOUT SEVEN MILES OUT.

OH. AND THEN GOES DOWN TO STEWART ROAD TAKES GOES WEST TO THAT GAS TERMINAL THAT'S THERE.

WHAT DOES THAT LITTLE SQUARE CUT OUT RIGHT OFF OF EIGHT MILE ROAD THAT SAYS CITY OF GALVESTON? THAT'S A PIECE OF PROPERTY THE CITY OF GALVESTON OWNS.

IT USED TO BE A WATER TANK WHEN THE CITY USED TO HAVE ITS AH, THE COUNTY WATER SYSTEM.

THE TANK WAS TORN DOWN, I BELIEVE, AFTER HURRICANE IKE.

AND THAT BUT THAT IS A PIECE OF THE CITY'S RIGHT THERE.

WE FOUND THAT WHEN WE WERE DOING THE LDR, THE CITY DIDN'T KNOW THEY OWNED IT.

SO THEN THE AS FAR AS THESE EXCEPTIONS THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED, IT APPEARS THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL CONCERN WILL BE THAT'LL BE THAT'S NOT A THAT'S GOING TO BE HANDLED.

SO THEN THE ISSUE THAT WILL BE OF PRIMARY CONCERN THAT THE EXCEPTION WILL BE WITH THE STREET LENGTH.

YES, I GUESS THAT'S IT.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE'LL BE ASKING WHERE YOU ALL WILL BE ASKING FOR THE MAJOR EXCEPTION.

YEAH. THE ONLY OTHER WAY TO DO IT WOULD BE TO PUT A STREET IN THE MIDDLE RUNNING RIGHT THROUGH THAT BIG WETLAND THAT WE'RE TRYING TO AVOID.

AND IT WOULD JUST AND AND THEN ADRIAL, THAT EXCEPTION DOES NOT NEED TO BE SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSED.

IT'S SIMPLY PART OF OUR OVERALL APPROVAL PROCESS.

THANK YOU. AND COMMISSIONER HUMPHREY, YOU HAD A QUESTION? YEAH. REFERRING BACK TO THE.

JUST LOOKING AT THE COASTAL, I'VE GOT A SATELLITE PULLED UP ON THE COASTAL AND RUNNING PARALLEL BEACHSIDE DRIVE.

IF YOU EXTEND BEACHSIDE DRIVE OUT TO THE EAST LIKE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, IT APPEARS THAT THE BEACH KIND OF ENCROACHES UP A LITTLE BIT FURTHER NORTH

[01:00:10]

OVER ON THAT SECTION.

AFTER WE JUST GOT THROUGH TALKING ABOUT MITIGATION AND NOT HAVING TO GO THROUGH ALL THE STUFF WITH THE GLO AGAIN AND THE BEACH PROTECTION.

DO YOU HAVE ALTERNATIVE PLANS FOR YOUR LOT SIZES FURTHER EASTBOUND? NO, THERE LOT SIZES SHOULD BE FINE.

IF YOU'LL NOTICE, THOUGH, THE SUBDIVISION KIND OF GOES AT AN ANGLE.

IT ACCOMMODATES THAT.

OKAY. IF YOU'LL SEE THAT THE SUBDIVISION ON THE EAST END IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THE SUBDIVISION ON THE WEST.

I'M SORRY. THE WEST END IS MUCH BIGGER THAN THE EAST END.

SO WE'RE WE'RE ACCOMMODATING FOR THAT.

OKAY. LOT SIZES GET SMALLER TOWARD THE EAST.

YEAH. THIS TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT AND THIS IS THIS LOT SIZE IS WHAT WE'VE FOUND TO BE THE BEST FOR BEACHFRONT.

AND THEN THE BACK ROWS ARE THE SAME WIDTH.

AND IF YOU'LL NOTICE, EVERY LOT LINE LINES UP TO THE CENTER, THE BEACH FRONT LINES UP TO THE CENTER OF THE SECOND ROW.

SO THEY'VE GOT A GUARANTEED VIEW.

WE ALSO DID THE SAME ON THE BACK.

ROW 3 WILL BE OVERLOOKING A WETLAND AND THEN ROW FOUR WILL BE JUST ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY CAN HAVE BACK THERE IS SWIMMING POOLS.

WE NEVER HAVE GOT THAT CHANGED YET.

BUT SO AND THERE AGAIN, WE STAGGERED ALL THE LINES.

SO WE TRIED NOT TO BLOCK ANYBODY'S, YOU KNOW, LET EVERYBODY HAVE SOME VIEW.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. RINEHART? COMMISSIONERS.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I LEFT A PEN TO.

OH, THANK YOU.

OH, YES, ABSOLUTELY.

MS.. WEST, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

GOOD AFTERNOON. SO THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE EAST.

AND PLEASE SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME.

OKAY. BEVERLY, I KNOW YOU DID, BUT PLEASE, IT'S.

IT'S JUST. I WILL PUT THIS IN THE RECORD.

ABSOLUTELY. THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE EAST OF THIS IS SUNNY BEACH.

AND I LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD OFF OF REAGOR WAY.

AND WHAT WE'VE LEFT OUT, I KNOW THERE'S A CONCERN, IT SOUNDS LIKE, ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS BEING IN BEACHSIDE, BUT EIGHT MILE ROAD IS A VERY NARROW ROAD. AND IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN HERE IS ALL THE INDIVIDUALS THAT USED TO GO DOWN EIGHT MILE ROAD AND GO INTO THE BEACH AND PARK ARE GOING TO PULL INTO EIGHT MILE ROAD AND TURN AROUND AND GO BACK OUT.

IS THERE A TURN? I MEAN, AND I KNOW I CAN'T ASK YOU QUESTIONS, BUT I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S A TURNAROUND ONCE YOU GO INTO EIGHT MILE ROAD, I'M ASSUMING IT'S JUST GOING TO END THERE.

SO BUT I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF OTHER QUESTIONS.

I WASN'T CLEAR OR IT'S NOT CLEAR WHERE THE PARKING LOT ACCESS IS IF IN FACT, THE PARKING LOT ACCESS IS OFF OF EIGHT MILE ROAD.

THERE'S ALREADY A HUGE TRAFFIC ISSUE THERE.

SO INDIVIDUALS WOULD HAVE TO TURN INTO EIGHT MILE ROAD AND IMMEDIATELY TURN INTO THE PARKING LOT.

AND IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE THAT'S BEEN FIXED.

I GUESS THEY'RE GOING INTO BEACH SIDE AND THEN PULLING INTO THAT PARKING LOT.

I'M NOT SURE. I CAN'T REALLY TELL.

THAT'S SOMETHING FOR YOU ALL TO CONSIDER.

IT'D BE NICE IF THERE WAS MAYBE A TRAFFIC STUDY OR SOMETHING WHEN THIS HAPPENS, BECAUSE CURRENTLY ANY TIME THERE'S A HOLIDAY OR THE SUN SHINES, GPD IS OUT THERE WITH THE 200 KIDS THAT ARE GOING TO THE BEACH AND THEY'RE HAVING TO MAKE PEOPLE LEAVE BECAUSE IT'S JUST TOO CROWDED.

SO THEY'RE BASICALLY TAKING THAT WHOLE LOT, WHICH IS FINE.

I MEAN, I ACTUALLY LIVE ON THE OTHER END OF SUNNY BEACH.

I DON'T REALLY SEE THAT AREA, BUT IT DOES.

THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY INTO SUNNY BEACH.

IT'S EIGHT MILE ROAD.

SO ANYBODY GOING IN THERE TO ANY OF THOSE STREETS IS NOW GOING TO HAVE POSSIBLY A PARKING LOT ACCESS THERE.

IT SOUNDS LIKE BEACHSIDE WANTS TO HAVE ALL THE CONSTRUCTION ON EIGHT MILE ROAD.

I DON'T KNOW. IT'S JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

SIDEWALKS. SO YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE THE PARKING AND YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

PEOPLE ARE GOING TO NEED ACCESS TO THE BEACH STILL.

ARE THERE SIDEWALKS INVOLVED HERE? IS THERE A PATH? IT'S NOT CLEAR.

ANYBODY THAT USED TO PARK ON THAT BEACH IS NOW GOING TO GO INTO SUNNY BEACH AND PARK ON THE STREETS IN SUNNY BEACH BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO WANT TO GO TO THAT PARKING LOT.

THEY WANT TO BE CLOSER TO THE BEACH.

SOMETHING ELSE TO THINK ABOUT.

AND LIKE I SAID, EIGHT MILE ROAD IS NARROW.

IT'S A VERY NARROW ROAD.

[01:05:03]

IS THERE GOING TO BE PARKING ON EIGHT MILE ROAD? SIGNAGE. IS THERE GOING TO BE SIGNS THAT SAY THIS IS A DEAD END STREET FOR EIGHT MILE ROAD BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO END? THE EMERGENCY.

IT LOOKS LIKE THE FIRE MARSHAL NOTICED THAT THERE'S NOT.

WELL, I GUESS I GET A COUPLE EXTRA MINUTES BECAUSE I HAD TO SIGN IN.

WE'LL GIVE YOU WE'LL LET YOU HAVE AN EXTRA MINUTE.

YES. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THE PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES.

IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. PEOPLE ARE EITHER GOING TO TURN AROUND IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY'RE GOING TO TURN AROUND ON EIGHT MILE ROAD.

THERE ARE ACTUALLY IT'S A TWO LANE ROAD.

THERE'S NO WAY TO TURN AROUND.

SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING ELSE FOR Y'ALL TO CONSIDER.

AND THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT BECAUSE I YOU KNOW, YOU SEE ME HERE ALL THE TIME, SO NOT BEFORE YOU, BUT ADVISING YOU.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT.

APPRECIATE IT. AND AND YOU'RE RIGHT THAT WE CAN'T ANSWER QUESTIONS.

BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IN IN THOSE MATTERS THAT YOU BROUGHT UP ARE NOT THE MATTERS THAT ARE TECHNICALLY BEFORE US.

THEY'RE NOT PART OF THE PLAT ITSELF, BUT THEY ARE CITY RELATED MATTERS.

AND SO I WOULD ASK MAYBE THAT Y'ALL, TIM, I MEAN, IT'S NOT LIKE YOU ALL WORK FAR APART, BUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE Y'ALL COULD TALK ABOUT THOSE AND TALK ABOUT HOW THINGS LIKE THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED WITH, WITH THE CITY.

SO AND IF THERE'S ANY PART OF THAT, BRUCE, THAT Y'ALL COULD, THAT Y'ALL COULD TALK ABOUT THAT COULD BE DISCUSSED ABOUT THAT AND I'LL BE GLAD TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT.

AND AND I KNOW THAT IF ANYBODY'S GOOD NEIGHBORS Y'ALL ARE SO, SO.

WORK IT OUT WITH WORDS.

THANK YOU. SO.

THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE TO COMMENT ON THIS, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 437 AND I'LL BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION.

VICE CHAIR BROWN. I'LL MOVE THAT WE APPROVED 22P, WHAT, DISAPPROVE WITHOUT PREJUDICE 22P-055 . OKAY, AND DO I HAVE A SECOND AND I HAVE A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER EDWARDS.

AND IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONERS? YES. ABOUT THE THE 700 FOOT BLOCK LENGTH THING THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.

I'M NOT SURE I REALLY UNDERSTAND THE RULE, THE LIMITATION OF THE HUNDRED AND 40 FEET OF THE LENGTH OF THE STREET.

IN THIS CASE, THE WHOLE STREET IS A U SHAPE WITH ACCESS TO OTHER STREETS.

THERE REALLY IS NO DEAD END TO SPEAK OF, AND I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHY THE 140 FEET MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE OR THE 700 FEET MAKES ANY DIFFERENCE.

SO, I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE STAFF CAN EXPLAIN THAT TO ME.

THEY'RE JUST, THEY'RE JUST, UM, PART OF THE, UH, SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS.

THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES. YOU HAVE TURNED AROUND AND YOU HAVE BLOCKED LENGTH.

SO IT'S JUST, I GUESS IT'S JUST OPTIMAL CONDITIONS.

YEAH. WELL, I GUESS MY UNDERSTANDING, JUST PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, IS IT REALLY DOESN'T THERE'S REALLY NO REASON TO MAKE THEM HAVE 140 FOOT LENGTH LIMITATION JUST GIVEN THE GEOMETRY OF OF THE SUBDIVISION IN THE ROADS.

I SEE NO REASON A 700 FOOT ROAD IS.

THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT.

I UNDERSTAND IT CONCERNS.

MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADDRESS IN THE NEAR FUTURE FOR FUTURE REVISIONS FOR TO THE LDR.

OKAY. YEAH. OKAY.

THANK YOU. ADD IT TO THE LIST, PLEASE, SIR.

THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? SO, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE HAVE A MOTION. A SECOND.

DISCUSSION IS CLOSED AND WE'LL VOTE ALL IN FAVOR OF DISAPPROVAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

PLEASE SIGNIFY BY RAISING YOUR HAND.

AND THAT'S UNANIMOUS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, MISS WEST.

WE'LL MOVE FORWARD NOW TO 22 ZA-05.

[6.D.1. 22ZA-005 Request For A Text Amendment To The Galveston Land Development Regulations, Article 2 To Provide Additional Standards For The Arena/Stadium Land Use. Applicant: Development Services Department]

THAT WOULD BE YOU GORMAN.

IT IS. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A TEXT AMENDMENT.

THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT STAFF HAS BEEN MEETING WITH THE GALVESTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT REGARDING THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE KERRVILLE STADIUM AT 27TH AND AVENUE N.

DURING THESE DISCUSSIONS, IT WAS FOUND THAT SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE ARENA STADIUM LAND USE ARE REQUIRED TO FACILITATE THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT.

THE CURRENT STADIUM SITE IS ZONED URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD.

ARENA STADIUM IS NOT CURRENTLY A PERMITTED LAND USE IN THE URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICT, SO STAFF IS PROPOSING TO INCLUDE ARENA STADIUM AS A LIMITED USE WITH THE FOLLOWING LIMITED STANDARDS.

ONE MINIMUM SITE AREA THE AREA SHALL OCCUR ON THIS USE SHALL OCCUR ON THE SITE OF AT LEAST FOUR ACRES, 2 HOURS OF OPERATION NEAR RESIDENTIAL, THE USE OF WITHIN 200 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE OF RESIDENTIAL USE OR OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT THAT INCLUDES A RESIDENTIAL USE OR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT BOUNDARY MEASURED AS THE RADIUS FROM

[01:10:09]

PROPERTY LINES SHALL NOT OPERATE BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 12 A.M.

AND 8 A.M. NOISE LIMITATION.

ALL ONSITE ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S NOISE REGULATIONS.

ADDITIONALLY, ANY OUTDOOR SPEAKERS SHALL BE ORIENTED TOWARDS THE INTERIOR OF THE SITE AND AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINES.