Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. So, it's 5:30 and I'll call the planning commission meeting to order um for uh March the 18, 2026. Miss Martinez, will you call roll, please? Um Madam Chair, Salisar Garza here. Uh Vice Chairman Munos is absent at the moment. Commissioner Miller here. Commissioner Hedrickk here. Commissioner [snorts] Bud here. Commissioner Cantou here. Commissioner Telman here. Commissioner Esparza here. We we our mics are Yeah, they're having difficulty with them. I'm here. Yeah. So, we can just talk loud. Um Commissioner Jackson, uh we have a quorum present to conduct the meeting.

Thank you. Uh so, at this time, I'll go ahead and recess the planning commission meeting and uh convene to the Beach Dune committee meeting. And uh Miss Martinez, will you call Ro? Yes, ma'am. So we have uh vice chairman is still absent at the moment. Commissioner Miller here, Commissioner Hedrickk here, Commissioner Bud here, Commissioner Kantu here, Commissioner Tykeleman here, Commissioner Esparza here, and Commissioner Jackson here. We have a quorum present to conduct the meeting.

Okay, thank you. Uh could you read us the uh rules for public comment for the uh Beach Dune Committee meeting, please? The public is invited to speak on agenda on any agenda item and any other items that pertain to the Beach Dune Committee. Comments are limited to three minutes. Thank you. So, at this time, I'll go ahead and open up the public comment and ask anyone if they'd like to come and speak on anything under the tonight's Beach Dune Committee meeting agenda. Uh, you may come up and speak.

For the Yes. But you also have an opportunity to speak when the agenda item comes up. Okay. This is just for the public comment. Okay. So, if I have none, then I'll go ahead and open up the p I mean close the public comment and uh move on to the approval of absences uh for chairman York and Commissioner Mandel for May the 14th, 2025 on the Beach Dune Committee meeting. I move that we approve the absences for um Chairman York and Commissioner Mandel even though both of them are no longer on the commission anymore. I'll second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I.

All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to the approval of minutes for the Beach Dune Committee. I'll move that we approve the minutes from our last uh Beach Dune Committee meeting. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to the consent public hearing discussion and possible actions A and B.

I guess I'll I'll be speaking louder as well. So on tonight's agenda, we have two items. Starting with item two, which is case number BD9109, which is by the city of Corpus Christie as the applicant. The request is for a beach construction certificate for the construction of a new beach access road. And what I have before you on the screen, it's just a quick presentation to go through it. Uh for the sake of new members on the commission, the purpose of the beach June committee, one of the few times that this board or aspect of the planning commission will meet are to hear cases that are encroaching within a certain boundary as you approach what's called the line of vegetation. So within our mapping system and within the requirements of the general land office as well [snorts] as the municipal code as you hit certain thresholds on the seaside of buff they say coal Mexico as you approach that line of vegetation which is the most leading edge of any vegetation that is growing right behind the beach you then have a series of markers as you hit 200 ft that is where this board meets and determines if that encroachment is consistent with the rules of The general land office regard regarding access management. As you approach further, you hit a th00and foot line and that is for protection as Oasis County will meet with their beach management access committee and determine is there a negative impact. Oh, great. Here the mic came back on. Negative impact to uh any sand dunes. And then as you move further to 361, that is the furthest boundary and that is for a beachrun construction certificate because this uh section is going all the way almost to the shoreline. That is why it is being heard tonight by the beach dune committee hat of your three hats as final commission. So again, moving forward if this will there we go. Construction activities are within thousand ft landward of mean high

tide line or seawward side of the first public road which is again that furthest boundary. To give you a quick overview of the BCC process, it goes through an application, review and comment by the Texas General Land Office. We then take those comments uh produce a staff report and present it to the board for their determination. Uh on these two cases, we are still awaiting comments from the GLLO and I'll explain how that comes into play uh because this is the city project. So we want to keep it as most expedited as possible. So the concurrent beach committee, which is this board, uh is going to hear cases that are seawword of the erosion line area, that magic 200t line as on bullet point 4, that is within 200 ft of the line of vegetation. Within our staff report, [clears throat] uh it lists the amount of disturbance. Things that the general land office looks at are any critical dune structures that may be impacted. Uh the amount of soil that is disturbed and then of course if any means of access to the beach are impeded. In this case, you're getting a new access point to the beach. So it's quite the opposite effect. When it comes to staff analysis, after receiving uh various feedback and preliminary discussions with the general land office, staff has determined that we are recommending a conditional approval. So, I won't bore you with the details. Uh that's all listed in the staff report, but ultimately after receiving positive feedback from the county, so that means they were obtaining a dune protection permit. our comp compliance with the municipal code regarding beach access, I'm sorry, beach construction certificates is good. The third part is receiving the final comments from the general land office. Now, those are typically going to look at whether or not they are compliant with our code. Fortunately, as part of the doom protection permit, the GLLO has already had an opportunity to review these documents. So, because they got a positive thumbs up from the county, that

is the first green light. Second green light is more than likely we're going to receive the exact same comments from the general land office on this goound, which means that a the plans have not changed since the doom protection permit was offer or exchanged and two that the plans are consistent with access management standards that are listed in municipal code, which again is a very fancy way of saying we're not impeding the ability for folks to travel on the beach. So that being said, staff is recommending conditional approval and that is pending receiving the comments from the general land office on this goaround of the BCC and that those comments will be satisfied prior to the city issuing the beach construction certificate. And if there are any questions, I'd be happy to address them.

Okay. Thank you, Andrew. Uh commissioners, do we have any questions for staff on items two and three? I'm sorry, just just two. Sorry. I'll take an approval for number three if you'd like. [laughter] Uh yes, Commissioner, any questions for uh staff on uh number two? [clears throat] If not, then I'll go ahead and u open up the public hearing. Thank you, Andrew. Uh public hearing of public for the public to come and speak on item two. Yes. Come right up. Please state your name and city you live in.

Um, hello. I'm Samra Limeberger and I am uh the president of the homeowners association for Mustang Island Estates, which is the um street that's right that's most affected by this uh access road. Um I don't know if they the map that was up there on the screen you could see it but um it's right up against where we're building our home and um it is also going to be impacting based on what I can see and what's on the maps almost the dunes that are right there next to us is protecting our home right now. And so this been a big concern of ours. We did uh talk about this at the Dune Permit meeting and we were told that we would have many opportunities to um protest it, but from what I've understand and learned yesterday and talking to Michelle Leslie at GLLO that um I don't know that this body at this time can disapprove the project. Um I'm not against public safety. I'm all about public safety and I don't have a problem with public access. And there are pros and cons to having a road that will keep my visibility open, that will keep my view open. But my biggest concern is public safety and it's the concern the impact on these dunes. The dunes in that area, it's hitting two dunes is what it looks like. Two rows of dunes and they are some of the largest on the island. And um this road was originally platted about 900 ft south. And so the concern that we had was why it was shifted. And um that's already been analyzed from the standpoint of the GLLO looking at this particular site. There's never been an analysis of where is the best place for Corpus Christi for the speech access road. It's more been an analysis of the developer request to move the road to that side. Um offering some money, great, some taxpayer relief and then putting that road at this location um and seeing if it's feasible. Is it

feasible? Not is it better is it a better location for the whole island for Corpus Christi to put it 900 ft south where the dunes were only about 9 ft tall instead of taking down 20 ft dunes. Um you know when Hurricane Harvey hit many years ago, one of the few houses that didn't get damaged was the one sole house on our street at that time. And it's it and and was it because we had such great dunes and when we purchase the property that's what we were looking at. So it is what it is. You know if the road's going to come in and there's no nothing this committee can do then all I can do is ask the committee to to consider some provisions to make sure that if you do issue this certificate that you put in guidelines and things uh that that protect us. For example, when is this going to be built? Is it going to be built during hurricane season? Hope not. that you take down the dunes right before and and we're waiting there in the middle of construction and we're more vulnerable at that time. We're just about to finish our house. So, yes, I do have a personal interest in this, but um you know, is there some other provisions like how long is this project going to take? Is there a way to require a certain ex you know, be done in an expedited manner? You know, like I said, what season? Things that can be put in place because we are vulnerable and we had great protection. It was a great location on the island and now it's sc it's it's a bit scary. So, um you know, I'm not going to I understand there's only certain amount of things that can happen at this stage, but I just ask that you add safety provisions and also maybe a provision in the certificate that has um the project team get in touch with us.

All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. Anyone else who would like to come speak on item two? If not, then I'll go ahead and close the public uh hearing uh and uh [clears throat] entertain a motion or further discussion for item two. Yeah, I have a couple of questions, Andrew. Yes.

Yes, sir. As an insurance agent, the 40 plus years, flooding is is is always big concern to mine. So, I wanted to make certain that the city has done or they will do or have they done the proper study to make sure that they're going to minimize any possible, you know, additional flooding by opening this road. Well, I can tell you that the original location was uh on the area of wetlands, which causing more fill to compensate and and mitigate for wetlands would actually reduce the amount of area that could receive waters. So, this would be the more appropriate location to have the beach access road. I know we have a few folks from engineering department here if we need to get into the technicals but from what I was led to believe is that this is the prime location to place this road with the most minimal impact.

Okay. Thank you. Is this a road on the UTP or this just one that's one this beach access road I believe is on the the roadway master plan. Any other questions? Um, then I'll Is there an existing plan for for the the beach access roads that are in existence right now? Are there preparations for hurricanes for storm surge considerations? Do we pile sand on those as it is or I mean I know we did that during COVID, but

I would have to touch base with our emergency management department if if they do some type of shoring up in the event of a hurricane. Typically when you have tidal surge that the sand is is going to move on its own and we've had to go back and reservey the the line of vegetation especially after Harvey and most recently Hannah and the latest hurricane event where we were just barely brushed where we lost about 20 ft of dune and that was not even a direct impact but that's where it requires by state law that we go back and re-ervey to determine if the dune lines have moved. Okay. Um, any other questions for staff?

If not, then I'll u entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion. [clears throat] Have a motion. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to public hearing. Beachfront construction certificate for a property located at or near 7213 State Highway 36.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is case BD8951 Mustang Island LLC, which is located indeed along State Highway 361 at 7213. This is also a large-scale beachrunk certificate beach construction certificate request uh for a dune walkover. So as you can see as as I mentioned on the previous case where every time uh a construction activity triggers one of these lines it increases the amount of review and time and in this case the board that must review the application. Uh in this case it is crossing all the way to the shoreline as this is a I should say the line of vegetation I'm sorry not the shoreline line of vegetation by a dune walkover which are the traditional decks and docks that you see from various developments to access the beach itself. So, here are a few maps to show you how the dune walkover, which is roughly in the center of the screen, is going to traverse from a future culde-sac that will be adjacent to residential units, meander through the dunes, and to access that line of vegetation uh with a dune walkover. Of the 42 notices mailed out, we receive zero in favor and zero in opposition. And based on the request and as I mentioned uh with the previous case, this case too has gone to the beach access management committee of Noasis County received a dune protection permit and is now being heard by this board for its corresponding beach construction certificate. Staff recommends approval and if there are any questions be happy to address them.

Thank you Andrew. Uh staff, do we have any questions for I mean commissioners? Do we have any questions for staff? Andrew, this case has been before us in different shapes or forms about four different times. Can you just give a quick refresher on what's already been approved and what's already happened? Sure. So everybody's on the same page.

Great question. Thank you for bringing it up. So to go back to those maps, this is part of a larger development uh called Mustang Island. It was originally platted under uh for the life of me it's the name is escaping me but it's a a plat master preliminary plat that was a waterbury park that was approved uh they have now moving forward through the various stages of beach construction certificates how this board will see potential BCC's that they will have to be reviewed are the phasing meaning as we get through first this initial BCC to allow the dune walkover there was a pud that was approved approved that came through this board also for the uh overall development now is the work of having the final plats done and each BCC as each phase is completed. So for instance, for example, if if I choose to build a convenience store or a hotel along one of these tracks, that construction has its own beachfront construction certificate attached. And uh because it's closer to State Highway 361, it will not have to come before this board. only if they're getting within that 200T line, which fortunately not. If they're within the,000 ft uh for future residences, that will have to go to Noasis County for what we call the BMAC, the beach management advisory committee. So, as each development phase occurs, there will be a corresponding beach construction certificate. No different than building a building permit. If I'm building 10 buildings, each building will have its own permit rather than a master one. But that is where we are today. and how's it gone through the various stages of development.

So, just to be clear, the property is already zoned. It's already able to be developed into what it wants to do according to this plan. We're just essentially approving or denying the access the access for the June walkover. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any other questions?

I have a question on the Can we have the map back up again? I have to look back behind me. I I can't don't have the eyes good enough for this. The the beach walkover, is this going to be the size? We had talked about this before about the width of the walkover. Correct. Can we go into that a bit to talk a little bit about what the width? Is the width just going to be a golf cart width or is it going to be

It's roughly I believe 8 ft wide was it the last plan set that I that I personally reviewed. uh that is where the GLLO has to review it to make a determination of is there mitigation of grasses uh how it weaves through the dune structures is how we avoid impacting critical dunes so that's why it's not the true shortest point is a straight line it has to meander and weave to avoid impacting those dunes um I think on a couple of the other ones that we've come come across here is the width is it wide enough for for pedestrians to be able to access it with golf carts or is it only wide enough for just the golf?

Depending on the dunes that are impacted, the GLO signs off at times, narrowing at certain points to where you allow a golf cart and a person to walk side by side or or be able to traverse without any issues. And then you will have certain areas where it'll widen to allow the two carts to pass themselves. So, it'll come down to the plan set. What this board is looking at is purely access. Can they access the beach and determine that there is not a negative impact uh restricting access? Okay. Thank you, Andrew. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Um if not, then I'll entertain a motion. Uh public hear.

I'm sorry. At this time, I'll go ahead and open up the public comment on item number three if anybody would like to come and speak. If not, then I'll go ahead and close the public comment for item number three and now entertain a motion or further discussion. We approve this motion here to be able to approve. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. I.

All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to uh director's report um and future agenda items. Uh well, my mic is not clicking on but uh director's report. The only items I have is for the planning commission.

Okay, then I'll go ahead. I'll adjourn the beach dune committee and reconvene the planning commission meeting and um ask Miss Martinez if she could read the rules for public comment. Citizens will be allowed to attend and make public comments in person at the city planning commission meeting. The public is invited to speak on any agenda item and any other item that pertains to the planning commission. Comments are limited to 3 minutes. If you choose to speak during this period, you will not be allowed to speak again when the specified item is being considered in order of the agenda. Thank you. So, at this time, I'll go ahead and open up the public comment and ask anyone if they'd like to come and speak on anything other than tonight's agenda, please come forward. If not, then I'll go ahead and close the public comment and move on to the approval of absences, which we had none, and uh move on to the approval of minutes for March 4th, 2026.

Make a motion that we approve the minutes from March 4th, 2026. Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I.

All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to consent, public hearing, discussion, possible actions for items C and D. Thank you, Madame Chair. Uh to read into tonight for the record, Andrew Deeus with Development Services. Reading into tonight's consent agenda, beginning with item five under plat. So we have item five, a replat for Gardenale subdivision. Item six, a replat for Padre Island Corpus Christie section 4. Item seven, a final plat for London Village section 1. [clears throat] And item eight, a replat of bent tree unit 2. Staff and the technical review committee have reviewed the listed plat and determined that they meet the requirements of both the Texas local government code as well as the unified development code. Staff recommends approval. Under letter D, plat time extensions. We have two items. Item number nine, a final plat for Shannon Estates unit 13 and item 10. Final plat for Bridges Mill Village unit 3. staff has reviewed the requests for the time extension and recommended denial of those time extensions. And if there are any questions, I'd be happy to address them. Okay. Uh commissioners, do we have any questions for staff on items 5 through 10

for the denial? Andrew, what was the reason for the denial? The purpose of the denial is that there has not been forward progress on either of the time uh extension requests. So for the Bridges Mill uh this would be year four and they're requesting the fourth time extension. For the other it is the third time extension. And do these extensions are they the 12 months? They are 12 months. Yes ma'am. We have officially moved out of all the ones that were left behind that used to be six month and we are now completely on to the year ones. So it it's it's been a bit of time and there hasn't been any progress on either one of them. Correct. Okay.

Um did the applicant provide reasoning or Yes, he is in attendance and the reasoning we were given is financial constraints. Okay. Okay. Any other questions? If not, then I'll go ahead and uh open up [clears throat] the public comment for items nine, I mean uh five through 10. If anybody would like to come and speak on any one of those items, please come forward. Yes. Please state your name in the city for record.

All right. Uh Mike Mustagasi. Good afternoon, council members. I'm talking about the Shannon Estates and the U what's the other one? Bridges Mill subdivision. So, uh, we're requesting a final extension on this one. Uh, we're actively moving forward. Uh, we have a signed contract with Max Construction on the Shannon Estates and it's actually going to start hopefully within the next two weeks. I did speak with Andrew earlier. He said to talk to Bria to make sure Mr. Welsh has, you know, made the last changes. Bria said that uh, he told Rick or she told Rick that you didn't have to make any other changes. And then on the other one, if we don't get an extension uh granted, we're proposed to prepared to go ahead and begin, you know, within the next month, which is the bridges mill. Our goal is to uh move forward with both projects and hopefully we can get them uh started very shortly. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. [clears throat] If not, then I'll go ahead and close the public comment and ask for u entertain a motion or further discussion with staff.

Can I suggest that we do the plat extension separately? Sure. So, so I'll make a motion that we approve items five through eight as presented by staff. I'll second. Okay. At this time, I have a motion uh and a second to approve items 5 through 8. All [clears throat] those in favor say I. I. I. All those opposed say no.

Motion passes. Now we'll go ahead and put the discussion um on um items 9 and 10 on the time extensions. So the reason why I recommended breaking these up is because of my previous public statement that anything beyond three uh one-year extensions that you know it really needs some pretty good decent um explanation. So I am inclined to um make a motion separately on item number nine if you would be okay with that. Well then we'll go ahead and just uh I guess we'll just do number nine and then we can go on to 10.

Right. Nine nine was the third and and 10 was the fourth. Is that correct? Fourth. Right. So right now [clears throat] we'll go ahead and we'll just put the discussion uh on item number nine separately and then we'll move on to item 10. Okay. So at number nine uh item number nine um I'd like to make a motion that we approve item number nine in contradiction to staff's recommendation starting next month. That's the That's the one that's only requesting a third ex a third extension. Now, are we requesting another full year extension on that or is it That's all you can do. Understood.

Yeah, there's no way to cap it. So, item number nine has this is its third extension. Sorry, this will be this is the third request. Third request. Two granted. This will be the third request. Okay. The third request. Got it. This will be the third. Okay. Okay. So that's okay. So this is the third request. Yes. So you you made a motion. I make a motion that we approve the request for an extension for item number nine Shannon Estates unit 13. Okay.

I have one question first. So if we grant the extension then the current because that one already has PI plans that are approved correct from 2024. So if those so if we approve it then they can start with those PI plans without having to make any updates to them. Correct. And if we don't if we deny it then they have to update the PI plans to current standards or break ground by May 14th which is the the date of expiration. Oh okay.

So this one right now expires May 14th. both both plats both time extensions tonight expire on May 14th. So whether you approve or deny uh that would buy more time that the PIs would stay alive because that's the way the code measures it. So long as the plot is alive the PIs remain also compliant. If the plat expires, so for the other item, if the plat expires, then they do not break ground by May 14th. Then the process may need to start over again. Plat's submitt up to the most current and this nine already has PIs. Both have approved. Both do. Okay. Yes, sir. Okay.

Thank you. So, right now, I have a motion. Do I have a second? I'll second. Okay. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to item number 10. Commissioners, do we have any questions for staff on this? Because we already had um open comment. This they're asking for a fourth one on this one, right? Yes, sir.

I'm I'm on the same boat as Commissioner Miller about this. It's the third after three times. That's that's that's a bit too much in my opinion. So, I'm going to be I'm going to make a motion to be able to deny that extension. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Well, you've already spoken. Sorry. Um I have a motion to deny or to approve staff's approval on item 10. Do I have a second? I'll second. I have a motion and a second to deny the uh item number 10 uh as staff's approval. I mean a staff's recommendation. [laughter] Sorry.

As presented by staff. As presented by staff. Okay. So I have a motion and second. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to public hearing discussion. Possible action E. Um that's regarding the transportation master plan mobility CC amendments and here they come. [clears throat] Do I put it up or It should be coming up soon.

[clears throat]

ready to go. Um, good evening planning commission members. My name is [clears throat] Horge Chavez. I'm a traffic engineer with public works. Today's presentation is regarding an amendment to the roadway transportation master plan. I'm going to provide a little bit of um background. On January 30th, 2024, city council adopted the Rotary Master Plan that was developed with the help of consultant Pape Dawson. The Rotary master plan RMP identified the proposed beach access road as a C1 collector project designation 18V. And I'll provide a map right now in a few minutes. On December 11th of that same year, 2024, traffic presented the developer request to delete the beach access road between Texas State Highway 361 and the beach. At the time, this request was presented to planning commission as a pedestrian access road which required a 60-foot rideway dedication but had no defining public improvements. Planning commission voted for removal deletion and of the planned beach access road which aligned with the developer's request. Later after clarifying with legal on February 19th 2020 2025 we presented this item again to planning commission. The intent was to clarify and correct the classification and required public improvements. We had been reading information of the past and old documentation not the not the current one. As per the current adopted rideway master plan, project 18V is classified as a C1 collector and requires a 60-oot rideway dedication with curb and gutter sidewalk and a and a 40 foot 40ft roadway um to be constructed. At the time, staff recommendation uh was removal again deletion. However, planning commission voted on keeping the C1 collector.

After that presentation on February 19, 2025 and the recommendation of keeping the C1 collector, the the developer intended to design accordingly and keep uh with keeping the C1 collector and adhering to the roadway master plan. However, December of this past year, the developer presented challenges with meeting and adhering to the roadway master plan and requested to amend the roadway master plan again. Now the request is again removal or deletion. Part of the justification request the consultant noted several challenges such as the presence of jurisdictional wetlands, drainage concerns and proximity to another planned beach access road, beach access road 3. And just for a little information regarding the beach access road, it's approved is approved as part of the bond 2020 program which um would function as an access point approximately 1/4 mile north of this location. And I'm going to show you a map with all this information. So this is the developer location. Um, and as I mentioned to reiterate and to summarize, the developer is requesting deletion of a C1 collector, project 18V highlighted in red. The orange is the developers site. The red is the proposed um C1 collector again designated project 18V. The request is for removal. And as I mentioned, their justification is the wetlands. As you can see the wetlands within the orange um drainage concerns and proximity to another planned beach access road. And if I move on to the next slide, this gives you an overall view of the of the access roads in question. So the site is in orange. Project 18V that's being requested for removal is in red. Bon 2020 project beach access road 3 is in blue. And if you can see it's very it's far to the

right. It's also designated as project 18A and and the current existing beach access road two is to the far left uh on the image there. Um [snorts] uh I've we've spoken to engineering services and got an information regarding the beach access road 3 uh construction contract was approved in December of 2025. It's authorized by council and um just for a little bit more information improves access for emergency services and just pedestrian access to the beach. Um our recommendation city city staff recommendation is amending the road master plan and agreeing with the removal of project 18V. Oh, they took away my slides. I stand by any questions.

Okay. Any concerns? Thank you staff. Do we have any questions? [clears throat] What's the distance from uh station fire station 16 to that develop that plan development? I'm not entirely sure. And um is it is it more is it closer to Port Duranis or is it closer to you know what we call like Padra Island proper? I think it's closer to Pyadra Island proper if I'm correct. So, this would allow emergency services to access this new development quicker to the beach a/4 mile quicker.

Correct. By a/4 mile right now, currently beach uh if I have the opportunity to put the presentation back. There you go. Perfect. So, Axis Road 2, that's Corpus Christi Roadway to if we were to provide 18 project 18V, that's 2 and a half miles. Um but the pro the bond project beach access 3 that's three miles over. So um and then from beach access road three to Porter Ran's beach access 1A is 4 miles. So right now with no projects in between beach access road 2 and beach access road 1A in Porter Ranzis, it's approximately 7 and a half miles of no access. I hope that provides some context. Yes.

Any other questions? Just to be clear, so Beach Access Road 3 is a/4 mile from the 18 ft, correct? Approximately about 2,76 ft. Almost a half mile. Almost. Yeah. Approximately. Yeah. Looks longer. Yeah.

Yeah. I I I was the one that kind of drove the ship on um on requesting that this road be that this road remain. Um, at the time whenever we were hearing this item, u you know, I had similar concerns that uh that uh Commissioner Esparza had with regards to emergency access and then also, you know, traffic patterns and [clears throat] bottlenecks at the various different um beach access roads during spring breaks and things of that nature. And so and and also in um the vein of protecting um citizens of the state of Texas access to their public beaches was was one of my primary drivers. Whenever that item was heard, there was no notification uh requirements for neighboring properties, right? So it was a very quiet room whenever whenever that went down. What was a very loud room was whenever everybody came out to speak um in opposition of the development itself. [clears throat] And there were certain things that were explained at that meeting to um the crowd of neighbors about, you know, certain, you know, entitlements that the land owner has under the existing zoning and uh the various different things that could be done with the property. And I think that there was a general understanding at that meeting that um that you know that was going to happen one way or another the development itself. But the feedback that I got from the neighbors was very negative uh in opposition to [clears throat] the roadway itself. So after compiling all of that information, I am compelled to allow that um that that road not be built. But I am interested in hearing what everybody else has to say that has come all this way to come and visit us at the meeting.

So, understood. I'm looking at this again. I'm looking at this again and I'm saying on the uh if we go farther to port a pass 18A, what's the next beach access to that? The the following beach access road is Porter Ran's beach access road 1A. 1A. And from the blue the blue line to that existing road is approximately 4 and a half miles. The next one would be access road two is a proposed for you can speak on that. So currently between access road two you're you're far your far left. Mhm.

From that road to Porter Ran's access road 1A you're looking at approximately 7 and a half miles of no access. But with project 18A or bond beach access road 3 with the bond you'll have access at that location which is from access road two to there approximately 3 miles and from there to Porteran's first beach road approximately four. If we keep this current the way you know and not and not allow this change how does that change the the how does that change the what difference is that going to make a change to? going to make 2,700 square f feet. Uh meeting your feet, I'm sorry.

Yeah, you you'll just have um more access to the beach at you know between both existing access roads at the moment. And the main the main reason why this was being um rem we're trying to remove this or trying to take this away was because of because of the vegetation there. Yes. According to the engineers's assessment, they have provided information regarding those wetlands um that poses to be an issue and apparitionally drainage issues and um the fact that there's already a bond project accepted. They feel that that's sufficient enough.

But what correct me if I'm wrong here, but nothing's going to be built on those wetlands, right? as far as I'm concerned. Well, this this very early on, but I don't know if PL services has any additional information. So, this would be a min if we kept this road there, this would be a minimal impact on on on on the developments that are out there. A much less impact than moving it down, but but it's the other plan. The other one is going to happen anyway. It's going to happen anyway. So, the question is, do you want two? I see. Yes. further disturb the vegetation in the dunes or or or just have the one the consultants and engineers and the developers are here to answer any detailed information or questions. [clears throat] Well, I'll go ahead and

if no other questions for the then then I'll go ahead. I'd like to hear more about what what the proposed environmental impact is from the runoff from the road into the wetland. Just go ahead. Oh,

good evening uh commission. My name is Steven Grunwald and I'm with DCCM. We are the developers engineer. Um to build that road would cause approximately.8 acres of impacts to wetlands. The existing wetlands uh extend from State Highway 361 to basically just south of that existing lake. So that whole half of the access road would be an impact to wetlands. You'd have to fill wetlands in order to build it. Uh the threshold typically for a nationwide permit is half an acre. So this would exceed that which would push it into a full-blown permit uh classification which takes a long time and looked very carefully by the core of engineers. Um so yeah there would be huge impacts to existing wetlands which I know is on the minds of everyone. Uh in addition the other half of the [snorts] road which extends to the beach would have to breach the ridge dunes which provide protection from storm surge. I think that was brought up uh on the other another item here. Um, you know, right now the existing dunes there are elevation 22 23. So, you'd be making a significant breach in that to get this roadway through. Uh, you know, the roadway could be built up and humped to provide some protection from storm surge, but it would never be as high as the existing dunes. So there would be a greater chance of flooding from storm surge particularly to the development directly to our north uh which is already there and established and you know they can't do anything about the elevations they're at. Um, so I know at the last meeting in December, uh, a number of residents from both that

development and the one to our south came and uh, expressed a lot of concerns about having that access road as part of our development. And I'm sure some of them are here tonight that would

like an opportunity to speak on that as well. Um, so yeah, there are some pretty big uh environmental hurdles to cover uh to to build this. So that's another reason for for not including it or removing it from the master plan. Um, and I don't know if they could bring that overall bird's eye view up again with the distances to the access roads. Uh we've been talking about the one that's being built to our north, but there's also a proposed access road to our south that's about a little over half a mile. So even if you take ours out with the one being built to our north and the proposed access road 18T to our south, I mean there's little less than a mile in between those two. So that's another reason we feel like we're moving this uh would not significantly decrease access and safety to the beach because between the one to our north which is being built and the proposed one to our south, you'd still have two access roads within a mile of each other.

Okay. U staff, do we have any other questions for the developer since he's up here? If not, that's fine. Thank you. Thank you for your time. At this time, I'll go ahead and open up the uh public comment for item number 11 and ask anyone if they'd like to come and speak on item 11. Please state your name and city you live in for the record, please.

Good afternoon. Name's Charles W. Crawford Jr. I'm the president of CCMS, which is Condominium Consulting Management Services, and we're based out of Port Ranis. uh for 31 years we've been the managing agent of San Piper condominiums and then for 14 years we've been the managing agent for the seagull condominiums and so collectively between both entities there's 210 individually owned units and so with that said uh and also want to madam chair and and commissioners just want to say thank you guys for all your time and efforts and work that y'all guys put in this process because I do know it's a it's a process and appreciate what you guys do for the city of Corpus and the citizens of Corpus Christie. has been mentioned in February of 2025 this came up came about and the commissioners stated and and and at that moment in time that process got removed but since then there's been a lot of communication a lot of positive feedback moving forward and I think what they're proposing today and the path to take is is is headed in the right direction I several owners of the seagull and sandpiper were present at the December meeting at the commissioner's meeting and just stating you know we felt the importance was having a physical presence so you could see us and hear us. If you go around that area, you can tell that everything, you know, how tight congested that, you know, there's a lot of sea erosion around there and all that. Having another road there, additional traffic. There's there's a lot of different things there that can make variables. But the main thing I got from that was the process. And I want to thank Andrew Deus and his team because it through this process since December, I've emailed him on several occasions just followup. And and there's times that I've not had to. And he follows up with us. And I appreciate that because that's opened that communication up greatly. And so we're just here today in support of you guys. And then the main thing is what they're proposing is the removal of that beach access road. And if you guys can take that in consideration, we would greatly appreciate it. Just to share, um, Porto Ranzis just had their access road 1B

just opened up once we got the signage for text dot. So that's open now. And I believe that's probably about three miles away from uh the San Piper and Seagull entryway. So, I just wanted to share that with you guys. That's great. So, didn't know that just as FYI. But anyway, again, I appreciate you guys giving me time to come up and speak on behalf of the ownership and I just hope that you guys if you proceed forward that removal of that accident road, y'all take that in consideration. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else would like to come and speak?

Uh, good evening, chairman, commissioners. Uh, my name is Casey Patterson. I also uh here speak on behalf of the property owners of Sandpiper Condominiums and Seagull Condominiums uh which is located immediately adjacent to the proposed beach access road. Um, as we talked about in December, uh, most of the concerns, uh, from those property owners revolve around their properties are closer than newer developments that take place. And so, a road, especially for Sandpiper condominium homeowners, directly there would create a larger opportunity for any storm surge to create immediate damage to their property uh, in that area. So, we appreciate the commissioner's careful consideration in the past uh, for those traffic and access needs at that time. We also appreciate your willingness to revisit this item now uh and circum as circumstances have materially changed. The current planning commission packet reflects that beach access road 3 located approximately 2700 ft north of this location has now been funded bid and awarded to a contractor. So at that point this project provides a a necessary public and emergency access for this section of the coastline directly addressing the concerns that you raised in 2025. So um as a result retaining this additional planned access point is in my opinion no longer necessary and instead creates redundancy increased traffic safety concerns and additional impact to sensitive dune system. So on behalf of the property owners for the seagull and sandpiper condominiums we do respectfully ask that the commission approved removal of this roadway from the master transportation plan. So thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else like to come and speak? If not, then I'll go ahead and close the public. Uh, one more. Oh, one more. I'm sorry. Got to be quick. [clears throat] Sorry.

My name is uh Mike Broker. E R O K E R. I'm one of the owners of a unit in the in the Sandpiper. appreciate you what y'all are the due consideration you're giving to all of this. I I'll keep it short. The I only wanted to add obviously I support um the what what is on the agenda to to take that road off of the master plan. Um agree with all of the objections to it that have been raised and appreciate that your honesty in it. Uh, only thing I'll add is grandchildren, oddly enough. Um, had boys and we come down here and and mostly stay at the Sandpiper, but uh, and now I have grandchildren and Casey touched on it. The other beach access for all Texans is important and uh, access for emergency vehicles is important. um the vegetation harm and the and the sand dunes protecting us from the water. All of that is important. I get it that we're all having to balance that. I just want to add one more thing in and that's the safety factor. If you go down there now, um it is kids and pickup trucks lined up as far as you can see from one end of the horizon to the other. It's spring break, so it's not always like this, but for these two weeks it is. And there are then in the summertime it gets like that too. It becomes a dangerous situation for to especially if thinking about the um it's a dangerous situation now but if you then had a access to the beach from 361 right there right at the edge of where our the that area of the beach that is most frequently used by the seagull and the sandpiper.

it it just multiplies the the danger that's there. So that's safety for the people on the beach is something that I don't I want that to be emphasized too. Everything else is important. That's to add into appreciate what y'all are doing. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else like to come and speak? If not, then I'll go ahead and clo close the public comment and um move on for more discussion or a motion. I agree with staff and I'll make a motion.

I have one question for traffic before we move forward. Promise it'll be a quick question. when when when the CACK was looking at all the master plans, right? And y'all had discussions about I know there was a lot of amendments to the roadway master plan and you know a lot of dedication dedicated roadways got removed from the from the uh master plan. Right. Correct. I'm not sure I follow one more time from the

when the when the SEAK didn't the SEAK weren't W wasn't that the body that reviewed all of the master plans as part of moving towards um um impact fees and everything else was to create the uh master plan with the uh master CIP and everything else. Right. Didn't y'all look at um roadway dedication and uh and parts of the urban transportation plan? I think that might have been before my time. Okay. Maybe Renee knows. Yeah, I mean that was looked at. Um sorry, Rene Couture. I'm assistant director for traffic. Um I think I know where you're going with the question, but to your point, yes,

we did look at it. Um did we have eyes on everything like we should? Probably not. As Ernie has said before in some of these discussions, right? Um, and I wouldn't I wasn't calling you out or anything. I was just curious to see if y'all discussed these 18bs and 19bs.

Some of these things uh like I said, it it uh just management and oversight. Um, some of the low hanging fruit we're able to grab. Um, but with the resources we had, you know, even with the time you're looking at, you know, the two for for such a vast project. So, um, there are things that we're still looking at and changes that we're open to. For the most part, we're going to be consistent with the plan and what it has. But, um, when there are issues presented to us that we find reasonable and there's enough support and justification, we're open to looking at it.

Okay. Yeah. Just a suggestion to maybe look, [clears throat] you know, overall way down the road or whatever to kind of look and see where all of these different pedestrian access points are were originally laid out and maybe kind of come up with, you know, some kind of guidance, you know, so that whenever if this happens again, we kind of know how things are going to and we are we're tracking some of those changes and and some of the other things that need to be made in the plan. But thank you. Yeah, we'll look into that. Definitely appreciate it. Sorry, Ed. I got one more question before you [laughter]

not for traffic though. Uh so this still has to go through city council to get uh you know blessed. Uh are there any other steps that this uh developer needs to go through or can he break ground now because it's been a long time coming. Before anybody changes their mind. So before anybody changes their mind, [laughter] good to go. I'd like to make a motion that we remove the beach access road project 18B. Second. Second. Okay. I have a motion and a second to remove the of the removal of of of a proposed C1 collector project 18V. Uh all those in favor say I. I. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Just just for

moving on to director's report and future agenda items. Just Yeah, just a little bit of clarification. Um, as per our director, um, uh, city council has to approve first before any, right? Yeah. It's got to get two first and second reading for you to Yes, that that's true. Even though we approve it here, it still has to go to city council to get approved. Correct. So, I would recommend that y'all still show your support for this just so that uh, city council is aware of that. Great. Uh, anything else, Mr. Andrew?

U, so for director's report, two items just to quickly bring up. Speaking of meaningful amendments, uh we have the development services technical advisory group to restart the UDC paper topic UDC amendment process. No, I make a motion that we do not [laughter] do that.

I'm happy to we're calling for members. We have nine positions to fill. Calling for members. uh if anyone wants to join or please put the word out using your social medias and your social groups uh we need more right now we have four engineers nothing wrong against engineers but it's a little type specific right now and and uh the review so we want [laughter] a diverse group when do when do they need to when do you need to have this uh because I was thinking maybe you can email it to us so that maybe

hopefully we'll we'll get you set up with an application um also hopefully not too many because we don't want to get into quorum issues. Uh we're focused on meeting the fir the third week of the 13th of April. So April 13th is the week we're hoping to have our first meeting to get the ball rolling again. We just because we don't have enough members yet. We're still going to meet get the ball rolling. We'll get things moving and we're hoping to get more members as we move along. We're going to start with article 8. Now that council uh luckily approved the trust directions with the trust fund yesterday, uh we can now get to the rest of the business of article 8. That's all I have for tonight. How many u uh people do you need to on this?

I'm hoping to have nine. Nine of different backgrounds. Have one commercial builder, one residential builder, a commercial developer, a residential developer, a an architect, an engineer, and three members at large that are hopefully not related to the development industry at all. I want to get that outside perspective. Okay, everybody heard that? All right. So, uh, anything else? If not, meetings journed. Okay.