Okay, so it's 5:30 and I'll call the Planning Commission meeting to order. Um for uh March the 18th, 2026. Ms. Martinez, will you call roll, please? Yes ma'am. Um Madam Chair Salazar Garza Here. Uh Vice Chairman Muñoces is absent at the moment. Commissioner Miller Here. Commissioner Hedrick Commissioner [snorts] Budd Here. Commissioner Cantu Here. Commissioner Tykelman Here. Commissioner Esparza Here. We Our mics are >> Yeah, they're having difficulty with them. >> I'm here. Yeah, so we can just talk loud. Um and Commissioner Jackson Here. 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 Ms. Martinez, will you call roll? Yes ma'am. So we have Uh Vice Chairman Muñoces is still absent at the moment. Commissioner Miller Here. Commissioner Hedrick Here. Commissioner Budd Here. Commissioner Cantu Here. Commissioner Tykelman 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 3 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 other than 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 pub 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 aye. Aye. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to the uh 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 aye. >> Aye. 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 be speaking louder as well. So on tonight's agenda we have two items starting with item two, which is case number BD9109 by the City of Corpus Christi as the applicant. The request is for a Beach Dune Construction Certificate for the construction construction of a new beach access road. And what I have for you on the screen is just a quick presentation to go through it. Uh for the sake of new members on the commission, the purpose of the Beach Dune Committee, one of the few times that this board or prospect 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 as [snorts] the municipal code, as you hit certain thresholds on the seaward of about 500 Let's say Gulf of Mexico. Uh 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 regarding access management. As you approach further, you hit a 1,000 ft line and that is where dune protection as we're Nueces County will meet with their Beach Management Access Committee and determine is there a negative impact Okay, 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 Beach Dune Construction Certificate. Because this uh section is going all the way to almost to the shoreline, that is why it is being heard tonight by the Beach Dune Committee hat of your three hats as Planning Commission. So again, moving forward if this will There we go. Construction activities are within 1,000 ft landward of mean high tide line or seaward 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 GLO and how that how that comes into play uh because this is a city project, so we want to keep it as most expedited as possible. So the concurrent Beach Dune Committee, which is this board uh is going to hear cases that are seaward of the erosion line area, that magic 200 ft line as on bullet point four, 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 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're compliant with our code. Fortunately, as part of the dune protection permit, the GLO 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 go around, which means that A, the plans have not changed since the dune protection permit was offered or exchanged, and two, that the plans are consistent with access management standards that are listed in the 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 go around of the BCC, and that those comments will be satisfied prior to the city issuing the beach front construction certificate. And if there 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, Commissioners, do you have any questions for uh staff on uh number two? >> [clears throat] >> If not, then I'll go ahead and uh 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 Samara Lineberger, 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 that's protecting our home right now. And so, this has 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 in talking to Michelle Leslie at GLO, 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 GLO looking at this particular site. There's never been an analysis of where is the best place for Corpus Christi for this beach 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 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 purchased 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 sca- it's it's a bit scary. So, um you know, I'm not going to I understand there's only a 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 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 uh 40-plus years, flooding is is is always big concern of 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 we'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 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 uh if we need to get into the technicals, but uh 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 road on the UTP or is this just one that's wanting to add? 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 uh 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 on the I know that 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 re-survey the the line of vegetation, especially after Harvey, um and most recently Hannah and and the latest uh hurricane event where we were just barely brushed, where it 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-survey to determine if the dune lines have moved. Okay. Um any other questions for staff? If not, then I'll uh entertain a motion. I'll make a motion to approve. >> [clears throat] >> I 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 beach front construction certificate for a property located at or near 7213 State Highway 36. Andrew. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is case BD 8951, Mustang Island LLC, which is located indeed along State Highway 361 at 7213. This is also a large-scale beach front construction certificate uh beach front construction certificate request for a dune walkover. Uh 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. Uh, so, here 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 cul-de-sac that will be adjacent to residential units, meander through the dunes, and to access that line of vegetation uh with a dune walkover. Uh, of the 42 notices mailed out, we received 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 Nueces County, received a dune protection permit, and is now being heard by this board for its uh corresponding beach run construction certificate. Staff recommends approval. And if there are any questions, I'll 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 >> on the same page. Great question. Uh, but thank you for bringing it up. So, to go back to those maps, uh 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 run construction certificates. How this board will see potential BCCs that it 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 that came through this board also for the 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 beach run 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 200-ft line, which fortunately not. If they're within the 1,000 ft uh for future residences, that will have to go to Nueces County for what we call the BMAC, the Beach Management Advisory Committee. So, as each development phase occurs, there will be a corresponding beach run construction certificate. No different than pulling 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 it's 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 >> access for the dune 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 my I can't don't have my 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? Is the width just going to be a golf cart width or is it going to be the >> roughly, I believe, 8 ft wide was it the last plan set that I that I personally reviewed. Uh, that is where the GLO 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 a >> Depending on the dunes that are impacted, the GLO signs off at times narrowing at certain points to where you allow 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 restricting access. >> Okay. Thank you, Andrew. Any other questions for staff? Okay. Um, if not then I'll entertain a motion. Uh, public hearing. >> Public hearing. 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. I move we approve approve this motion here I'll second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. >> Aye. Aye. 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 side. Okay, then I'll go ahead and adjourn. I'll adjourn the Beach Dune Committee and uh reconvene the Planning Commission meeting. And um ask Ms. 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 from March 4th, 2026. Make a motion that we approve the minutes from March 4th, 2026. I'll second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed say no. >> Motion passes. Moving on to consent public hearing discussion possible actions for item C and D. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, to read into tonight uh for the record, Andrew Deems with Development Services reading into tonight's consent agenda beginning with item five under plats. Uh, so, we have item five, a replat for Garden Dale Subdivision. Item six, a replat for Padre Island Corpus Christi Section Four. Item seven, a final plat for London Village Section One. And [clears throat] item eight, a replat of Bent Tree Unit Two. Uh, staff and the Technical Review Committee have reviewed the listed plats 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 Three. Staff has reviewed the request for the time extension and recommended denial of those time extensions. If there are any questions, I'll be happy to address them. Okay. Uh, commissioners, do we have any questions for staff on items five 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 extension request. 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 are 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'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 the 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 and the city for record. All right. Uh Mike Mustigasi, good afternoon council members. I'm talking about the Shannon Estates and the uh 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 2 weeks. I did speak with Andrew earlier and 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 he 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 prepare 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 uh 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 five through eight. All [clears throat] those in favor say I. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Now, we'll go ahead and put the discussion um on um items nine 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? >> Right. >> So, right now we'll [clears throat] 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 item number nine um I'd like to make a motion that we approve item number nine in contradiction to staff's recommendation. Is that the one that's 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 how you can do. Understood. Yeah, there's no way to cap in it. >> So, item number nine has This is its third extension. Sorry, this will be this is the third request. >> The third request. >> To granted, this will be the third Okay, the third request. Got it. Okay. Okay, so that's okay. So, this is the third request. Yeah, 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 Cuz 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. So, this one right now expires May 14th. >> But 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 cuz that's the way the code measure is that as long as the plat 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 stall. We need to start over again. Plats submitted, PIs submitted up to the most current code. And this one, nine, already has PIs. Both have approved PIs. 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. All those opposed say no. Motion passes. Moving on to item number 10. Commissioners, do we have any questions for staff on this? Cuz we already had um open comment. >> 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. Which one is that one? I'm sorry. We 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 as staff's recommendation. Sorry. [laughter] As presented by staff. >> As presented by staff. Okay, so I have a motion and a second. All those in favor say 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] >> Good evening. Do I put it up or >> it should be coming up soon. >> [clears throat] >> Ready to go. Good Um good evening planning commission members. My name is [clears throat] Jorge 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 roadway master plan that was developed with the help of consultant Pape-Dawson. The roadway master plan, RMP, identified the proposed beach access road as a C1 collector, project designation 18V. And I'll provide a 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-ft right-of-way 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 right-of-way master plan, project 18V is classified as a C1 collector and requires a 60-ft right-of-way dedication with curbing, gutter, sidewalk, and a and a 40-ft 40-ft roadway um to be constructed. At the time, staff recommendation um was removal, again, deletion. However, Planning Commission voted on keeping the C1 collector. After that presentation on February 19th, 2025, and the recommendation of keeping the C1 collector, the the developer intended to design accordingly and keep 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 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 plan beach access road, beach access road three. And just for a little bit information regarding the beach access road, it's approved it's 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 uh as I mentioned to reiterate and to summarize, the developer's requesting deletion of a C1 collector, project 18V highlighted in red. The orange is the developer's 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. Bond 2020 project beach access road three is in blue, and as you can see it's very it's far to the right. It's also designated as project 18AA. And and the current existing beach access road two is to the far left uh on the image there. Um [snorts] uh I spoke we spoke into engineering services and got information regarding the beach access road three. Uh construction contract was approved in December of 2025. It's authorized by council. And um uh just for a little bit more information, it improves access for emergency services and just pedestrian access to the beach. Um our recommendation city city city staff recommendation is amending the roadway master plan and agreeing with the removal of project 18V. Oh, they took away my slides. I stand by for any questions. Okay. >> And 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 planned development? I'm not entirely sure. I didn't um Is it Is it more Is it closer to Port Aransas or is it closer to, you know, what we call like Padre Island proper? I think it's closer to Padre Island proper, if I'm correct. >> So, this would allow emergency services to access this new development quicker to the beach a quarter mile quicker. Correct, by a quarter mile. Uh right now currently beach if I have the opportunity to put the presentation back. There you go, perfect. So, access road two, that's Corpus Christi roadway, to if we were to provide 18 project 18V, that's 2 and 1/2 miles. Um but the the bond project uh beach access three, that's 3 miles over. So, um and then from beach access road three to Port Aransas beach access 1A is 4 miles. So, right now with no projects in between beach access road two and beach access road 1A in Port Aransas, it's approximately 7 and 1/2 miles of no access. Uh I hope that provides some context. Yes. Any other questions? Just to be clear, so beach access road three is a quarter mile from uh 18V? Correct. Approximately about 2,706 ft. Almost a half mile. Almost, yeah. Approximately. Yeah. Looks longer, but 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. Mhm. Um at the time whenever we were hearing this item, uh 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 [clears throat] [clears throat] for neighboring properties, >> was because of because of the vegetation there. Uh yes, according to the engineer's assessment, they have provided information regarding those wetlands. Um that poses to be an issue and additionally 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 is this is very early on. I I don't know if planning and development services has any additional information. So, this would be a minimal 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 it it's The other plan >> The other one is just going to happen anyway. It's going to happen anyway. So, the question is do you want to 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 Yeah, if 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. Did Go ahead. Um Good evening, uh Commissioner. My name is Steven Grunwald and I'm with uh DCCM. We are the developer's engineer. Um To build that road would cause approximately 0.8 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'd be huge impacts to existing wetlands, which I know is on the minds of everyone. Uh in addition, the other half of the road, [snorts] which extends to the beach, would have to breach the ridge dunes, which provide protection from storm surge. I think that was brought up 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, provides some protection from storm surge, but it would never be as high as the existing dunes, so there'd be a greater chance of flooding from storm surge, particularly to the development directly to our north, um 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 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 could like an opportunity to to speak on this as well. >> Um So, yeah, there were some pretty big uh environmental hurdles to cover uh to to build this. So, that's another reason for for not including it or 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 uh 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 removing this 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 still have two access roads within a mile of each other. Okay. Uh 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. Um 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 Aransas. Uh for 31 years, we've been the managing agent of Sandpiper 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 Ma- Madam Chair and and commissioners, just want to say thank you guys for all your time and efforts and works that the y'all guys put in this process, cuz 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 Christi. As been mentioned in February of 2025, this came came about and as the commissioner stated, in in in 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 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 Demas and his team, cuz it through this process since December, I've emailed him on several occasions just to follow up. And and there's times that I've not had to, and he follows up with us, and I appreciate that, cuz that's opened that communication up greatly. And so, we're just here today in support of you guys, and and 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 Port Aransas just had their access road 1B just opened up once they got the signage for TxDOT. So, that's open now, and I believe that's probably about 3 miles away from uh the Sandpiper and Seagull entryways. So, I just wanted to share that with you guys. >> 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 access road, y'all take that in consideration. Thank y'all. 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 to take place, and so a road, especially for Sandpiper Condominium homeowners, directly there would create a larger uh opportunity for any storm surge to create immediate damage to their property uh in that area. So, we appreciate the commissioners' 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 three, located approximately 2,700 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 approve 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 Got one more thing. Oh, one more, I'm sorry. Got to be quick. >> [clears throat] >> Sorry. My name is uh Mike Broker, B 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'll keep it short, though. I only wanted to add, obviously, I support um the wha- 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 on in it. Uh only thing I'll add is grandchildren, oddly enough. Um had boys and we'd come down here and and mostly stay at the Sandpiper, but uh and now I have grandchildren, and Casey touched on it. The other th- 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 in 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 2 weeks, it is. And there are then in the summertime, it gets like that, too. It becomes a dangerous situation for to 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 I don't I I want that to be emphasized, too. Everything else is important that's to add in, too. Appreciate what y'all are doing. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else like to come and speak? If not, then I'll go ahead and close the public comment and um move on for more discussion or 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 CIAC 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 master plan, right? Correct? I'm not sure I follow. One more time from the When the when the CIAC Didn't the CIAC weren't wasn't that the body that reviewed all of the master plans as part of moving towards impact fees and everything else was to create the master plan with the master CIP and everything else, right? Didn't y'all look at um roadway dedication and and parts of the urban transportation plan? I think that might have been before my time. Okay. >> Personally. Maybe Renee knows. Yeah, I mean that was looked at. Um sorry, Renee Caturano, assistant director for traffic. Um I think I know where you're going with the question, but to your point, yes. Yeah. >> We did look at it. Um did we have eyes on everything like we should? Right. >> Probably not as Ernie has said before in some of these discussions, right? Um and I wasn't I wasn't calling y'all out or anything. I was just curious to see if y'all discussed these 18 Bs and 19 Bs. >> these things like I said, it it just management oversight. Um some of the low-hanging fruit we were 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. >> Groovy. Appreciate it. Sorry, Ed. I have one more question before we >> [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? Cuz it's been a long time coming. Before anybody changes their mind or anything. So, before anybody changes their mind >> [laughter] >> Here you go. I'd like to make a motion that we remove the beach access road project 18B. Second. Okay, I have a motion and a second to remove the of the removal of of the of a proposed C1 collector project 18B. 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. Uh 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 to first and second reading. For you to approve. >> 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. >> Mhm. Great. Uh anything else, Mr. Andrew? Uh so, for director's report, two items just to quickly bring up. Speaking of painful amendments uh we have the development services technical advisory group to restart UDC, our favorite topic, UDC amendment process. >> No. I make a motion that we do not do that. [laughter] I'm happy to join you in a lot of that. So, we're we're calling for members. 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 We're right now we have four engineers. Nothing wrong against engineers, but it's a little type specific right now and and uh the review process. So, we want a diverse [laughter] group. When do When do they need to When do you need to have this because I was thinking maybe you you can email it to us so that maybe Well, we'll get you set up with an application. Uh also, hopefully not too many here cuz we don't want to get into a quorum issues. Uh we're focused on meeting the third the third week of the 13th of April. 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 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 luckily approved the trust directions with the trust fund yesterday, we can now get to the rest of the business of article 8. Uh that's all I have for tonight. >> How many 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, commercial developer, residential developer, an architect, an engineer, and three members at large that are hopefully not related to the development industry at all. We want to get that outside perspective. Mhm. Okay. Everybody heard that. All right. So, anything else? If not, meeting's adjourned. And I'll make a final motion.