Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8-16-21 PC Minutes*MINUTES* JOINT PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING COMMISSION CITY COUNCIL City Council Chambers August 16, 2021 A Joint Public Bearing of the Planning Commission and City Council was held on August 16, 2021 and called to order at, 3:00 p.m. with the following members present: Commission Members present: Chairman Sina Nqjad Commissioner Johnny Beatty Commissioner Shawn Javed Commissioner Lynda Kay Makin Commissioner Tom Noyola Commissioner Eddie Senigaur Commissioner Roy Steinhagen Commission Members absent: Commissioner Bill Little CommissionerTalier Quraishi Alternate Commissioner Marty Craig Alternate Commissioner Erika Harris Alternate Commissioner Lauren Williams Mason Councilmembers present: Mayor Robin Mouton Mayor Pro Tern Audwin Samuel Councilmernber Randy Feldschau Councilmernber A.J. Turner *anive(l after roll call Councilmember Mike Getz Councilmember Taylor Neild Councilmernber Chris Durio Also present: Chris Boone, Director of Planning and Community Development Adina Josey, Senior Planner Tyrone Cooper, City Attorney Catherine Allen, Recording Secretary Planning Commission August 1.6, 2021 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner SeDigaUr moved to approve the minutes of the Joint Public Hearings held on July 19, 2021. Commissioner Steinhagen seconded the motion. The motion to approve the minutes carried 7:0. REGULAR MEETING 1) PZ2021-198: Request for Preliminary Plat approval of The Crossing at Pine Island, Phase 2, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. Applicant: Jeremy Mitchell of Soutex Surveyors and Engineers Location: South of Hwy 90 and cast of S. Pine Island Road Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Jeremy Mitchell of Soutex Surveyors and Engineers, has requested Preliminary Plat approval of The Crossing at Pine Island, Phase 2. This Preliminary Plat will consist of twenty-four (24) lots and a detention pond to be maintained by the home owners. Water will be supplied by Meckcr Water District and each property will have on -site septic systems. The 32.99 acre property lies at the edge of the Planning Area, but is not within the Planning area. As such it is required to meet City of Beaumont design standards. The Planning area was created to allow developers the option of conforming with Jefferson County standards as opposed to City of Beaumont standards if the development is located within our ETJ (Extra Territorial Jurisdiction), but more than two (2) miles from the city limits. The Subdivision Ordinance design standards for rural streets See. 26.03.002(11) are as follows: lb,tral streets may be provided in neighborhoods zoiiedAgi-ici.ilti.ii-al-Resi(l(,iiii(iI (A-]?) or outsicle the city limits, but within our exti,citei,i*itoi-i(iljt.ii,iv(liction with lots conforming to the A-R District. A single outlet rural street shall serve no more than tiienty- fibur (24) dwelling units and incry be eight hundred (800)feet long as a cud -de -sere. A 7*ural street shall have a sixty foot right- qf4i,ay ii,ith a twenty (20) fool concrete pavement. Curbs are not required and open roaclside ditches inaj) be used for drainage. No parking shall be alloit,ed along a rural street right-qf-ivay. Streetlights shall be at each street intersection, but may be spaced at an average qfsix. hundred (600),feet beiiieen intersections." Many of the proposed lots do not meet the minimum lot size for A-R which requires a minimum lot width of 200 feet and a minimum lot area of one acre. Mr. Mitchell is requesting a variance to the lot size and width. Reasons for the variance are due to 1/3 of the property being in the regulated floodway, the southwest corner of the property crossing into the Planning area, the county no longer requiring larger tracts and Phase I being approved with smaller tracts. The length of the proposed roadway is approximately 1,491 feet. The Subdivision Regulations require that the street be no more than eight hundred (800) feet long. A Variance has been requested for the cul-de-sac street length, Mr. Mitchell states the request is due to 1/3 of the property being in the regulatory floodway, the adjacent pipeline corridor and an increased roadway width of 24' as opposed to the required 20' giving more room for vehicles. Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Mr. Mitchell has requested a variance to the sidewalk requirements due to the rural nature of the development and open ditches that do not leave room for the sidewalk. Ile states that Jefferson County Engineering is requesting wide ditches and wants minimum culvert lengths due to drainage which eliminates the ditches being filled to accommodate the sidewalks. A variance has been requested for street lights. Although street lights are required every 600 feet, the subdivision would not be connected to City utilities. These street lights would not be operational unless connected to private utilities. The entire plat is located in flood zone AE, defined as areas with a I% chance of flood in any given year. In addition, a large area is designated as floodway. Development in the floodway should be avoided, but will at a minimum require a Do -rise certificate per Jefferson County standards, which should be indicated on the plat. Jefferson County Engineering and Drainage District No. 6 have requested changes to the plat concerning drainage and utility eascinents. Slides of the proposed plat were shown. If the Commission should choose to approve this Plat with the requested variances, staff recommended the following conditions: 1. A note be included on the plat stating that all development in the regulatory floodway will require a no -rise certificate based on development plans prior to construction. 2. Lot lines should stop at the Drainage District No. 6 easement. The easement may be deeded to the district. Mr. Boone explained the ETJ street requirements and the exceptions for rural subdivisions. Commissioner Steinhagen asked about the wording of the second condition, specifically the word "may" and if it could be changed to "should" and Mr. Boone stated that it could be changed. Chairman Ne n ' jad questioned the wording of the staff recommendation in that it did not state a clear recommendation of approval or denial. Mr. Boone stated that due to questions about why they are recommending approval if waivers and variances have been required, staff has changed the wording process in the staff reports. He added that staff s role should be presenting the facts and issues concerning the variance requests. He explained that according to the subdivision regulations, it is up to the Commission to determine if the burden of proof is met for waiver or variance approval. Mr. Boone added that this is similar to the procedure for the Board of Adjustments, in which the staffdoes not present recommendations. Chairman Nejad stated that the applicant is a wonderful engineer, but that in this case every portion of the request seems to be out of compliance. Mr. Boone agreed that several waivers had been requested. 9 Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Commissioner Beatty asked about the land in the development that is in the floodway and potential liability for flood damage. Mr. Cooper stated that the question of who is liable Could not be answered, but that potential buyers would assume the risk. Discussion followed concerning potential flood hazard, liability and county regulations. The applicant was present. Jeremy Mitchell, representing Soutex Surveyors and Engineers, 3737 Doctors Drive, Port Arthur, TX, addressed the Commission. He stated that the developer was also in the audience. He added that the staff report was a good summary. Mr. Mitchell added that Phase I of this project had the same lot sizes and was already approved by the Commission. He stated that this would be a private road Subdivision and that the County Commissioners had approved similar lots under TCEQ regulations. He stated that there are lots in the floodway which will require a no -rise certificate and that they want to build on the portions of the lots that are outside the floodway to try to eliminate the problem. He added that they have been working with the county engineer on drainage solutions. Finally, he stated that the plan was methodically thought out and that the hardships justify the waiver requests. Chairman Nejad stated that when the waivers are granted to one group that it sets a precedent for others to ask for the same which can cause problems. He also asked why the subdivision could not have sidewalks. Mr. Mitchell replied that with open ditches, they will only have a few feet on each side, not leaving space for sidewalks. Ile stated that the count), prefers open ditches. Ile concluded that the requirements for variance approval have been satisfied. Commissioner Senigaur asked if the subdivision would be a private, gated subdivision and Mr. Mitchell replied that it would be private, gated and regulated by a home owners association. Commissioner Makin asked how many lots were in the floodway and Mr. Mitchell replied that there are eight (8) lots and indicated their locations on the plat. Discussion followed about ensuring that potential buyers are informed of the flood risk, Commissioner Senigaur moved to approve the request for Preliminary Plat approval of The Crossing at Pine Island, Phase 2, Beaumont, Jefferson County, "Texas, as requested in file PZ2021-198 with the following conditions: 1. A note be included on the plat stating that all development. in the regulatory floodway will require a no -rise certificate based on development plans prior to construction. 2. Lot lines should stop at the Drainage District No. 6 easement. The easement may be deeded to the district. Commissioner Makin seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0. 2) PZ2021-21 1: Request to vacate Lot I A & I B, CUM111iDS Place Addition. Applicant: Darleen Wisby Location: 7810 & 7820 Halliday Lane Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Darleen Wisby has requested to vacate the Replat of Lot 1, Cummins Place and a 2.3 acre Tract H. Williams Survey into Lots I A & I B, Cummins Place, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. Ms. Wisby intended to purchase the portion of land conveyed in the plat, but decided not to proceed with the transaction after the plat had already 0 Planning Commission August 16, 2021 been filed. Therefore, both Ms. Wisby and the Bushnells, wish to cancel the Replat and reestablish the property as it existed prior to the recordation of the plat, which was filed April 22, 2021. Ms. Wisby, Cleigliton L. Bushnell, Jr. and Robert Lee Bushnell are the sole owners of the property and have all signed the letter of request. Slides of the plat were shown. Staff recommended approval of the request. Chairman Nciad stated that the request was straightforward and comments from. the applicant were not necessary. The applicant was not present. Commissioner Noyola moved to approve the request to vacate Lot I A & I B, Cummins Place Addition, as requested in file PZ2021-21 1. Commissioner Steinhagcii seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0. 3) PZ2021-214: Request for a Replat of a portion of Lot 18 into Lots 18-A & 18-B, Annie'r. Warren Subdivision, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. Applicant: Scott Brackin of Access Surveyors. L.I.-C. Location: 1465 & 1475 W. Highland Drive Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Scott Brackin of Access Surveyors, L.L.C., has requested approval of a Replat of a portion of Lot 18 into Lots 18-A & 1. 8-B, Annie T. Warren Subdivision, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. The intention of the plat is to divide the property into two (2) lots. All utilities are present and available, Slides of the proposed replat were shown. Six (6) notices were mailed to property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property. No responses were received in favor or opposition. Staff recommended approval of the request. The applicant was not present. The public hearing on this item was opened and closed without comment, Commissioner Makin moved to approve the request for a Replat of a portion of Lot 18 into Lots 18-A & 18-B, Annie T. Warren Subdivision, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas, as requested in file PZ2021-214. Commissioner Javed seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0. 4) 1IZ2021-234: Request for a Replat of Lots I & 2 into Tracts I -A & I -B, Block 20, Calder Highlands, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. 5 Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Applicant: Stacey Garza of Soutex Surveyors and Engineers Location: 1320 East Drive and 3960 Gladys Avenue Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Stacey Garza of Soutex Surveyors & Engineers, has requested approval of a Replat of Lots I & 2 into Tracts I -A & I -B, Block 20, Calder I lighlands, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. The intention of the plat is to divide the property into two (2) lots allowing a new home to be built on the vacant lot. All utilities are present and available. Slides of the proposed plat were shown, Thirteen (13) notices were mailed to property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property. One response was received in favor and one was received in opposition. Mr. Boone summarized the letters received. Staff recommended approval of the request. The applicant was present. Jeremy Mitchell, representing Soutex Surveyors and Engineers, 3737 Doctors Drive, Port Arthur, TX addressed the Commission. Mr. Mitchell stated that the staff report was a good summary. He stated that there were two (2) lots that would be split in a different fashion in order to allow for a buildable lot for a new residence. He added that the lot would not be cramped and will meet the minimum lot requirements. The public hearing on this itcm, was opened and closed without comment. Commissioner Senigaur moved to approve the request for a Replat of Lots I & 2 into Tracts I -A & I -B, Block 20, Calder Highlands, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas as requested in file PZ2021-234. Commissioner Makin seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0. 5) PZ2021-239: Request for Minor Plat approval of Jackson -Powell Addition, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas. Applicant: Aaron Ward of Faust Engineering and Surveying, Inc. Location: 885 Powell Street and 890 Jackson Street Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Richard Faust of Faust Engineering and Surveying, Inc., has requested approval of a Replat of the Minor Plat of Jackson -Powell Addition, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas, Both properties are owned by one individual, but the lot line encroaches on one of the structures. To resolve this encroachment this plat proposes moving the lot line so that both structures are equal distance from the new lot line. Moving the lot line will widen lot 2, but it will still not meet the minimum width requirements of the Ordinance. The applicant is requesting a variance to the lot width of Lot 2. The new lot will be 49.19 feet wide along Jackson Street and 48.11 feet wide along Powell Street. City ordinance states, 'Wec. 26 03.007(a) jAllininittin ividth, depth and area. Lots shall hate a mininium iiidth, depth and area of not less than that mquii-ed by the zoning ordinance far the zoning district it? - Mich the lots are located " Planning Commission August 16, 2021 The property where 885 Powell is located is zoned RM-H (Residential Multiple -Family Dwelling -- Highest Density). Minimum lot width in RM-H is fifty (50) feet. Slides of the proposed plat were shown. If the variance is approved, staff recommended approval of this Minor Plat. Chairman Nejad asked how old the structures on the property were and Mr. Boone estimated them to be over fifty (50) years old. Chairman Nejad stated that it seemed this was the proper solution to the problem. The applicant was present. Richard Faust, representing Faust Engineering and Surveying, Inc., 5550 Eastex Freeway Suite 0, addressed the Commission. Mr. Faust provided a partial survey to the Commissioners. Ile stated that during the Survey, they found the encroachment and were working to find the best solution to the problem. He stated that the options were to have neither lot meet the requirements or to have one comply and the other be I V2feet shy. Filially, he stated that they worked with staff to find the best resolution. Commissioner Beatty moved to approve the Request for Minor Plat approval of Jackson -Powell Addition, Beaumont, Jefferson County, Texas, as requested in file PZ2021-239. Commissioner Javed seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0. JOINT PUBLIC HEARINGS Mayor Mouton called the Joint Public Hearings of August 16, 2021 to order at 3:32 p.m, and explained the purpose of the Joint Public Hearing process. Mayor Mouton then turned the meeting over to Chairman Nciad to conduct the Joint Public Hearings. 6) PZ2021-23 1: Request for a Specific Use Permit to expand a cemetery in an RM-1 I (Residential - Multiple -Family Dwelling) District. Applicant: Joe Mattox of Shine and Associates Location: 3945 Scranton Avenue Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Community Cemeteries, Inc. has submitted a request for a Specific Use Permit to allow the expansion of cemetery at 3965 Scranton. The cemetery was previously expanded in 2001 and 2009. This latest expansion incorporates 0.193 acres immediately south of the previous expansions. No buildings or other structures are proposed for this site. The only improvements will be private drives, ditch culverts to provide access to the property and drainage swales. Upon review staff noticed that it appears some graves to the north may be placed in the City alleyway. A survey needs to be provided to confirm the location of the graves. Slides of the subject property, site plan and surrounding area were shown. N Planning Commission August. 16, 2021 Mr. Boone stated that staff noticed that the graves to the north may be in the City alleyway so a survey was needed. He added that the applicant found that the headstones were in the City's right-of-way or alleyway, so they were since moved. Thirty-two (32) notices were mailed to property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property. No responses were received in favor or opposition. Staff recommended approval of the request with the following condition: 1. Provide a survey to locate graves to the north that appear to be in the alleyway. If graves are in the alleyway, alleyway must be abandoned by Community Cemeteries. Chairman Nejad asked about the proposed condition and alleyway issue. Mr. Boone replied that the options were to either move the headstones or abandon the alleyway and that the applicant has moved them. Ile added that they are unsure if the graves themselves are in the alleyway and that is why a survey is a proposed condition. Chairman Nejad asked about combining the abandonment with the specific use permit and Mr. Boone replied that it would be a separate process. The applicant, Clayton Mayfield, 2295 Thomas Road, addressed the Commission. He stated that they have probed the markers where the headstones were to make sure that no vaults were in the alleyway. Ile added that the headstones had shifted into the alleyway, but have been moved back into their original placements. Mr. Mayfield stated that if they did have to move the graves, they would have to contact all of the family members of the deceased buried there. Finally, he stated that they have tried to comply with the requirements. Chairman Nejad stated that they may need to pursue the abandonment and Mr. Mayfield agreed that they would do so. The public hearing on this item was opened. Bridgette Barnes, 3920 Scranton Avenue, addressed the Commission. She stated that she lives almost directly across from the cemetery and that she has had issues because there are a lot of young people buried in the cemetery and their friends have balloon releases and parties there. She stated that they play loud music, swerve up and down the street, block driveways, drink and smoke, shoot guns and otherwise cause a disturbance to the neighborhood. Ms. Barnes stated that they have to call the police to help with these problems. She stated that this expansion of the cemetery would make the problems worse, The public hearing on this item was closed without further comment. The applicant was given an opportunity to speak in rebuttal. He stated that he tried to talk to Ms. Barnes before the meeting about her concerns, but that she wanted to make her statements first. He stated that now that he knows of her concerns that he will work with her to resolve them. Ile stated that he can put chains or gates on the cemetery drive way at night, but that lie cannot control the people who visit their loved ones. He stated that he will try to research what restrictions he is able to make. Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Commissioners Senigaur and Makin suggested that the cemetery have a closing time that is posted by sign. Chairman Nejad stated that the owner has a duty to not be nuisance to the neighborhood, Ile added that even if the Commission were to deny this request that these problems may occur, but that perhaps they can add some restrictions to alleviate the neighbors' concerns. Mr. Mayfield stated that he will work with the neighbors and his attorneys to see what restrictions they can add to find a balance between stopping nuisances and giving loved ones the freedom to visit graves. Commissioner Noyola stated that perpetual care cemeteries require closing times, lights and gated areas. Mr. Mayfield stated that they were not formed as a perpetual care cemetery and that the cemetery has been there for his entire lifetime, over seventy (70) years, so it does not fall under the same requirements. Commissioner Noyola asked if the applicant will reach out to Ms. Barnes and Mr. Mayfield replied that he would. Chairman Nejad stated that having signs posted allows for the ability to call the police to deal with nuisances. Mr. Mayfield replied that they would get this done. Chairman Nejad assured Ms. Barnes that the Commission, staff and City Council have heard her complaints. Commissioner Beatty asked Ms. Barnes if she could readdress the Commission and if her complaints were satisfied. Ms, Barnes stated that only the denial of this request would satisfy her. She reiterated her previous complaints. Mayor Mouton asked if she has called the police before and if they come when she calls. Ms. Barnes stated that she sometimes calls and that they -usually come. Mayor Mouton suggested that she continue to call if they do not come. Chairman Nejad explained that even if they were to deny the request, they cannot change that there are already graves there, but that if they add conditions they must be followed and it may help satisfy Ms. Barnes's complaints. Commissioner Makin moved to approve the request for a Specific Use Permit to expand a cemetery in an RM-H (Residential - Multiple -Family Dwelling) District, as requested in file PZ2021-231 with the following conditions: 1. Provide a survey to locate graves to the north that appear to be in the alleyway. If graves are in the alleyway, alleyway must be abandoned by Community Cemeteries. 2. Gates, fences, no trespassing after hours signs, security and cameras be added to the expansion of the cemetery. Commissioner Senigaur seconded the motion. Councilmeniber Neild asked if the Commission and City Council had the authority to add these conditions to the request. Mr. Cooper stated that reasonable conditions could be added by the Commission and that if they are violated that the specific use permit can be withdrawn. Ile added that whether or not they were reasonable was up to the Commission and ultimately the 9 Planning Commission August 16, 2021 City Council to decide. Discussion rollowed amongst the Commission about whether security and cameras were a reasonable condition. Commissioner Makin amended her motion to approve the request for a Specific Use Permit to expand a cemetery in an RM-1-1 (Residential - Multiple -Family Dwelling) District, as requested in file PZ2021-231 with the following conditions: 1. Provide a survey to locate graves to the north that appear to be in the alleyway. If graves are in the alleyway, alleyway must be abandoned by Community Cemeteries. 2. Gates, fences, and no trespassing after hours signs be added to the expansion of the cemetery. Commissioner Senigaur seconded the amended motion. The motion to approve carried 6:1 (Noyola.) 7) PZ2021-237: Bequest for a Specific Use Permit to allow Funeral Service - embalming and a storage facility a GC-MD-2 (General Commercial -- Multiple-Farnily — 2) District. Applicant: Broussard's Mortuary Location: 2220 Calder Avenue Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Broussard's Mortuary is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow funeral service embalming and storage at 2220 Calder Avenue. The nearly 30,000 square foot property was previously occupied by Controlled Fluids. As this previous use was Just office space and storage, some changes may be needed to accommodate embalming. Broussard's Care Center, where embalming is performed, is currently located two (2) blocks away at 2000 McFaddin Avenue. This is an internal operation that is run by licensed professional embalmers. They would like to relocate the facility to this property and utilize the open warehouse space for inventory and supplies. Five (5) to ten (10) full-time staff are expected to located at this facility. Slides of the subject. property, site plan and surrounding area were shown. Twenty-eight (28) notices were mailed to property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property. One response was received in favor and one was received in opposition. Mr. Boone summarized the responses. Staff recommended approval of the request with the following condition: 1. Construction plans must meet all requirements by Water Utilities for water and sanitary sewer improvements including, any requirements of the City's backflow, pre-treatment and/or F.O.G. program. The applicant was present. Jayme Toeppich, representing Broussard's, 2000 Mcfaddin. Avenue, addressed the Commission. She stated that they will not be having funerals at this location and that it will be private use for warehouse, inventory and the care center. She stated that they have not received any complaints about odors at any of their other locations and that odors will not be an issue. IN Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Commissioner Makin asked if they will be purchasing or renting and Ms. Toeppich stated that they will be purchasing the property, if the Specific use permit is approved. The public hearing on this item was opened, Kevin Payton, representing the Hancock Whitney Trust for the Chambers Charitable Foundation, PO Box 3928, addressed the Commission. He stated that lie is pleased that the Broussard family is interested in this property and praised their work in the community, but that he wanted to make sure that this will not be detrimental to the area or the Chambers House Museum, Mr. Payton stated that he wants to maintain viability for the museum. Ile added that he is not as concerned with the Broussard family, but with any future occupant after the permit is granted. Finally, he stated that this area of Calder has been going through a rough patch and supports its development. The applicant was given the opportunity to speak in rebuttal. She stated that she understands the concerns and assured that odors will not be a problem. Sam Parigi, 445 N 14"' Street, addressed the Commission. Ile spoke in support of the Broussard family and the request. The public hearing on this item was closed without further comment. Commissioner Senigaur moved to approve the request for a Specific Use Permit to allow Funeral Service - embalming and a storage facility a GC-MD-2 (General Commercial — Multiple -Family — 2) District, as requested in file PZ2021-237 with the following condition: 1. Construction plans must meet all requirements by Water Utilities for water and sanitary sewer improvements including, any requirements of the City's backflow, pre-treatment and/or F.O.G. program. Commissioner Steinhagen seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0. 8) PZ2021-238: Request for a Specific Use Permit to allow a Communication Tower in an Ll (Light Industrial) District. Applicant: David Bocherick Location: 6300 block of Walden Road Mr. Boone presented the staff report. David Bochenek is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow a Communication Tower in an 1.1 (Light Industrial) District iii the 6300 block of Walden Road. KFDM has been forced to relocate due to future Interstate Highway 10 revisions. One requirement for their new facility is a 1.50 foot self-supporting transmission tower. The proposed tower would be similar in appearance to an existing cell tower on the south side of Walden Road. The tower would be located at the rear of the new facility. Slides of the subject property, site plan and surrounding area were shown. 11 Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Ten (10) notices were mailed to property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject. property. One response was received in favor and no responses were received in opposition. Mr. Boone summarized the letter in favor. Staff recommended approval of the request, The applicant was present. David Ostmo, Regional Engineering Director, Sinclair Broadcast Group, the parent company of KFDM, 2955 IH 10, addressed the Commission. He stated that KFDM is in need of a new location and that they have the sub ' ject property under contract. fie stated that the tower will be needed to establish a studio to transmitter microwave link to their transmitter in Vidor. Finally, he stated that it will be low radiation and not cause any problems for the area. The public hearing was opened and closed on this item without comment. Commissioner Steinhagen moved to approve the request for a Specific Use Permit to allow a Communication 'rower in an LI (Light Industrial) District, as requested in file PZ2021-238. Commissioner Noyola seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0, 9) PZ2021-241: Request for a Revised Specific Use Permit to allow two driveways accessing the north cul-de-sac of W. Lucas in a GC-MD-2 (General Commercial — Multiple -Family Dwelling-2) District. Applicant: Darlene Hanna Location: 622 W. Lucas Drive Chairman Nejad stated that he was recusing himself from this item, as he owns property within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property, and turned the meeting over to Commissioner Makin to conduct this item. Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Darlene Hanna is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow two driveways accessing the north cul-de-sac of W. Lucas in a GC-MD-2 (General Commercial — Multiple -Family Dwelling-2) District at 622 W. Lucas Drive. In February of 2011, Ms. Hanna was approved for a Specific Use Permit. The approved site plan did not have any driveways accessing the residential cul-de-sac to the east. In 2016, a driveway was poured and eventually permitted by Building Codes without approval from the Planning Division. Now, Ms. Hanna has applied to pour a second driveway accessing the same residential cul-de-sac. The new driveway is for a cookie company. Slides of the subject property, historic aerial views, traffic camera footage, site plan and surrounding area were shown. Sixteen (16) notices were mailed to property owners within two hundred (200) feet of the subject property. Two (2) responses were received in favor and six (6) were received in opposition. Mr. Boone stated that four (4) of the six (6) letters in opposition were from one property owner, but that they did own four (4) separate properties in the cul-de-sac behind the business. Ile then summarized the responses. M Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Staff initially recommended approval of the request with the following condition: 1. Drive way for drive-thru must be one way only. After the staff report was written, staff further reviewed the site plans and subject property and found that what is on the ground does not match either the original approved site plan or the new application. Discussion followed concerning the permitting history of the subject property. Mr. Boone stated that the specific use permit approved in 2011 did not include driveways. Ile added that in 2015 and 2016 permits were pulled for driveways, but they did not go before the Planning Commission as they should have. He stated that the City now has a better system which integrates various City departments which allowed the Planning department to catch the issue this time. The applicant was present. Brian Dunigan, 622 W Lucas, addressed the Commission. He stated that lie is the co-owner of the cookie business and that his mother owns the property. Ile also stated that he went to Building Codes to get approval for the driveway. He showed a collection of red tags that he had received from the City. Mr. Dunigan said that he has done what he was told to do and that lie has already spent $50,000 on the project. He added that the business must have a drive-thru, because the pandemic and crime make people not want to get out of their vehicles. He stated that this business will be a benefit to the City. He reported that an inspector from the City came out and that there was no problem mentioned to him until lie had already spent the money. Ile stated that it was a miscommunication and that someone in the City had dropped the ball. He added that City Engineering had approved the driveway. Finally, lie stated that the residential homes in the cul-de-sac were in terrible shape and that they will not be affected. The public hearing on this item was opened. Counci linember Neild asked how many specific use permits had been issued on this property and Mr. Boone replied that there had been one in 2011. Councilinernber Neild asked if a condition of that specific use permit was that some of the parking at this property was to be used as parking for the nearby dance studio. Ile also asked about the occupancy of the businesses on the subject property. Mr. Boone confirmed that eight (8) of the parking spots were supposed to be for dance studio parking and referred to Brandon Belaire to address the parking and occupancy question. Brandon Belaire, City of Beaumont Roadway Engineer, 801 Main Street, addressed the Commission. He stated that the parking is based on gross leasable floor area and that this building requires six (6) parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet. Ile stated that this location would require twenty-two (22) spaces and has twenty-nine (29) with eight (8) spaces for the dance studio, so they are missing one. He added that while the site was not built according to the site plan, they have room to add eight (8) more spaces to comply with the original specific use permit and current parking requirements. Councilinerriber Neild asked if they are currently over or under the parking requirement for the 13 Planning Commission August 16, 2021 dance Studio and Mr. Belaire replied that they are under by one and have room to add oil the southeast corner. Councilmember Neild expressed concerns with traffic stating lie has seen traffic backing tip all the way to I.Alcas and additional traffic will be a disaster, especially being adjacent to residential property, Mr. Belaire stated that the cars do wait in the street in the opposite lane and that could be an issue, but that the added volume would not be significant. Commissioner Steinbagen stated that cul-de-sacs are generally meant to be the quietest and most desirable places for residences and that doubling the traffic will be detrimental to that, Mr. Belaire agreed that it would double the traffic, but stated that the existing traffic is very low. He also clarified the drive-thrU paths. Commissioner Steinhagen asked how the first driveway appeared and Mr. Belaire stated that it was approved by Engineering because they were unaware of the specific use permit at the time. Discussion followed about why the current request is for two (2) driveways. Mr. Boone clarified that the request is to add one additional driveway and approve the already existing one, as it never came before the Commission. Council member Turner asked about the applicant's statements about a drive-thru being needed for crime problems and asked if they have had crime problems at that location, The applicant replied that they had not, but that it would help prevent crime. The public hearing on this item was opened. Darlene Hannah, 770 Carolyn Street, Winnie, TX, addressed the Commission. She stated that she owns the subject property. She added that her dance clothing business used to be located in the dance studio, but moved to the subject property, no longer requiring additional parking. She added that the new drive-thru will be in the back and will not interfere with the drive-thru traffic for the Quenchies snow cone business. Manuel Ramirez, 698 W Lucas Drive, addressed the Commission, He stated that cars currently line tip and down the streets and the cul-de-sac for the drive-thrU at Quenchies and that they have had to call the police several times, Mr. Ramirez added that people are unable to turn or to get out of their driveways and that an additional drive-thru will increase the problem. Ile also questioned how one of the driveways was approved without the neighbors having an opportunity to comment. He concluded that this request would not be a good idea. Donna Harris, 137 Rolling Hills Drive, Lumberton, TX, addressed the Commission. She stated that she is the owner of Quenchies. Ms. Harris stated that they got their driveway approved, but got a red tag so they went to the City and showed their permit and were told that everything was fine, She stated that she has received complaints, but that they do their best to get people through the drive-thru as quickly as possible. She added that their busiest time is 2:30 pm. to 5:30 p.m. especially in the summer, but that it is not as busy at other times. Ms. Harris stated that she could post signs, but is not sure what else they can do to help. She also added that during the pandemic the drive-thru has been very popular, but that inside business has recently increased thereby reducing drive-thru traffic. E Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Eugenia Coffin, 3999 North Street, addressed the Commission. She stated that she owns four (4) of the properties on the cul-de-sac and that she is in the process of renovating them to rent. She stated that. she has invested a lot of money into these properties and intends them to be income producing properties and nice places to live. She added that when the properties are rented out, it will increase traffic on the cud -de -sac. Ms. Coffin stated that the traffic situation is terrible and that this project is not giving back to Beaumont. She stated that Quenchies is a great and Successful business, but that the layout is not a good one. She added that other drive-thru businesses in Beaumont have drivers waiting on commercial property not residential streets. She also added that the cul-de-sac is not wide enough to add another drive-thrU. Ms. Coffin stated that approval of this request would not be good planning. Finally, she added that her father was on the Planning Commission so she understands and appreciates their work, but that this request does not need to be granted. Sam Parigi, 445 N 14"' Street, addressed the Commission. He stated that he had spent the morning drafting an email to staff to state that his family is opposed to the request. He referenced a similar situation with a business on I I "' Street. He inquired about the specifies of the proposed layout and drive-thru paths. He added that he is not opposed to business, but that the current traffic and layout of the property is a problem that will be compounded with increased traffic, Mr. Boone and Mrs. Josey clarified the width and direction of the proposed drive-thru. Laurie Leister, 1240 Wilchester Circle, addressed the Commission. She provided a photograph to the Commission of the Quencbies drive-thru window taken from the cul-de-sac. She stated that she is an investor with Ms. Coffin in the properties on the cul-de-sac. She also stated that they are putting money into the properties to upgrade them and are looking to purchase more of them. Ms. Leister stated that currently the traffic backs tip to where people cannot back out of their driveways and this will worsen with the addition of another drive-thru. She stated that the turning radius needs to be addressed and that a fence across the back of the property is needed. She also mentioned that trash is being put on the property for the City to pick up and the increased traffic will make it difficult for the trash to be picked up. Finally, she stated that she previously served on the Planning Commission and appreciates the difficult decisions that they have to make, but supported denial of this request, Commissioner Steinliagen asked about the driveway sizes and Mr. Boone explained that the aerial photographs do not always match up to exact measurements. Discussion followed to clarify the dimensions of the driveways. The public hearing was closed on this item without further comment. The applicant was given an opportunity to speak in rebuttal. Mr. Dunigan stated that there is a 14.8 foot fence line to the back of the property. He stated that the property was purchased from the City. Ile added that the drive-thrus will go in different directions and not conflict with each other. He stated that the garbage is not from the businesses on the property, but rather from the nearby apartment complex, Mr. Dunigan stated that when people move out of the apartments, if the dumpster is full they put their trash there and that he has called the City about it. He stated U9 Planning Commission August 16, 2021 that they have thirty-eight (38) marked parking spaces and that a nearby tequila bar only has fourteen (14) spaces, but its customers park across the street. He asked why his customers could not receive the same consideration. He also mentioned the traffic congestion at St. Anne's school. He concluded that traffic is a sign of growth and development and that there needs to be a give and take with the City to allow businesses to thrive. Commissioner Steinhagen moved to deny the request for a Revised Specific Use Permit to allow two driveways accessing the north cul-de-sac of W. Lucas in a GC-MD-2 (General Commercial --Multiple-Farnily Dwelling-2) District, as requested in file PZ2021-241. Commissioner Noyola seconded the motion. The motion to deny carried 6:0:1 (Nejad). I0)PZ2021-242: Request for a Specific Use Permit to allow on premise consumption of beer and wine at a convenience store in a GC-MD-2 (General Commercial — Multiple -Family Dwelling - 2) District. Applicant: Gurnam Sandhar Location: 3529N.Major Drive Mr. Boone presented the staff report. Gurnarn Sandhar is requesting a Specific Use Permit to allow on -premise consumption of beer and wine at a convenience store in a GC-MD-2 (General Con-uriercial — Multiple -Family Dwelling - 2) District at 3529 N. Major Drive. Mr. Gumam has purchased a number of daiquiri machines and is currently selling daiquiris to go. He would like to sell these daiquiris and other beer/wine products for on -site consumption. Although Crystal's does sell a number of fried foods, it is predominantly a convenience store. On -site consumption of alcohol in a convenience store would create a bar atmosphere and therefore requires a Specific Use Permit in a GC -MD (General Commercial — Multiple -Family Dwelling) or GC-MD-2 zoning district, Hours for daiquiri sales would be Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to midnight, Saturday 7 a.m. to I a.m. and Sunday noon to midnight. Although Mr. Sandhar has requested the required certificates and permits for his convenience store that serves food, not all of these permits have been completed. Slides of the subject property, site plan, interior of the building and surrounding area were shown. Nineteen (19) notices were mailed to property owners within two hundred (200) fcet of the subject property. No responses were received in favor or opposition. Staff recommended approval of the request with the following conditions: 1. Crystal's must obtain a completed Certificate of Occupancy and must complete an active food permit with the City of Beaumont. 2. Must meet all requirements by Water Utilities for any water and sanitary sewer improvements, including any requirements of the City's backflow and/or pre-treatirient, programs. w Planning Commission August 16, 2021 Chairman Nejad asked how the business was Currently operating if they did not have a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Boone stated that they are under a new owner so they have to apply for a new certificate of occupancy, but that they can operate for thirty (30) to sixty (60) days during the permitting process. Chairman Nejad asked about there being a game room on the premises. Mr. Boone replied that they did have eight -liner machines, but since alcohol sales would not be allowed where there are eight -liner machines, the machines will be removed if the request is granted. He added that there is an arcade connected to the convenience store. The applicant was not present. Chairman Nejad stated that he is not aware of all the legal implications, but that lie did not see a reason to allow drinking in the store, Councilmember Getz stated that it was his understanding that the eight -liner machines would be removed and that the arcade is not a game room but a video game type arcade. The public hearing on this item was opened. Sam Parigi, 445 N 14"' Street, addressed the Commission. Ile stated that he owns the property across the street. fie stated that lie had driven by the property and called the City to get the details about the request. He added that lie could understand the sale of alcohol in a bar type setting, but worries about the sale of alcohol where there is no age restriction to enter and children may be at the arcade or in the store. The public hearing on this item was closed without further comment. Chairman Nejad moved to deny the request for a Specific Use Permit to allow on premise consumption of beer and wine at a convenience store in a GC-MD-2 (General Commercial — Multiple -Family Dwelling - 2) District, as requested in file PZ2021-242. Commissioner Steiriliagen seconded the motion. The motion to deny carried 7:0. 11) PZ2021-270: Consider an arrangement between the City of Beaumont and Hardin County as to the regulation of subdivisions within the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) Mr. Boone presented the staff report. The State Legislature enacted a law in 2001 that requires that all municipalities and counties enter into a written agreement outlining regulator), responsibility of subdivisions within Extraterritorial Jurisdictions (ETFs). Sooii after, the City of Beaumont entered into an agreement with Jefferson County, but not Hardin County. The issue has now arisen as a plat for a large development is being submitted to Hai -din County. The purpose of regulating subdivisions within a city's ETJ is to ensure proper plarming and development standards in anticipation of eventual arinexation by a city. While Beaumont's five - mile ETJ currently extends north of Pine Island Bayou into Hardin County, the likelihood of the City of Beaumont annexing into Hardin County is very low. It should be noted that the proposed M Planning Commission August 16, 2021 agreement would not alter the existing ETJ and would not prevent the City of` Beaumont from fixture annexations into this area, Slides of the map of the City's boundaries and ETD's were shown. Staff recommended approval of the agreement. Chairman Nejad stated that it sounded like the idea is that if property is in another county, to leave the regulation to the county, Commissioner Steinhagen moved to approve the request for an arrangement between the City of Beaumont and Hardin County as to the regulation of subdivisions within the Extraterritorial Jurisdiction (E'I'J), as requested in file PZ2021-270. Commissioner Makin seconded the motion. The motion to approve carried 7:0. OTHER BUSINESS None. THERE BEING NO OTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING ADJOURNED AT5:1.3 P.M. In THE STATE OF TEXAS. § COUNTY OF JEFFERSON _47�i�as a member of th" e (City Council, Commission, or Bodrd) - make flils affidAt and hereby on oath state thefollowing: 1, and/or a person or persons related to me, have a substantial interest in a business entity that would be peculiarly affected by a vote or decision of the )` (City Council, Commission, or Board) as those terms are defined in V.T.C,A., Local Government Code, §171.002. The business entity is: (Name) (Address) (9," or name of relative and relationship) have/has a substantial interest in this business entity for the following reasons: (check all of which are applicable.) Ownership of 10 percent or more of the voting stock or shares of the business entity, Ownership of either 10 percent or more or $15,000 or more of the fair market value of the business entity. Funds received from the, business entity exceed 10 percent of (my, her, his) gross income for the previo"us year. Real property is involved, and (1,-he, she) have an interest which is an equitable or, legal ownership with a fair rnarket value of at least $2,500. A relative of mine, within the first or second degree by blood or marriage, has a substantial interest in the business entity or property that would be affected by a decision of the public body of which I am a member. Upon filing of this affidavit with the City Clerk, I affirm that I will abstain from voting on any decision involving this business entity and from any further participation on this Matter whatsoever. ,;� Signed this the fi day of 20. N SignatOFe of Official Title ,4e:) BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, on this day personally appeared S'�- ,.- and on oath stated that the facts hereinabove stated are true to the best of his/her knowledge or belief. SWORN to and subscribed before me on this the. 16 day of 20.24 CATHERINE SAUR ALLEN Notary Public in and for the Sate of Texas k My Notary ID # 132300044 Expires January 3,2024