►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 030223
Description
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 030223
A
A
C
C
A
I'm
going
to
open
up
the
public
hearing
and
move
on
to
consideration
of
the
following
preliminary
class
item:
6A,
it's
put
in
reconsideration
the
replay
of
all
of
lot
five
block,
two
people
by
subdivision
phase
one
and
trackable,
and
convey
by
D
to
PG
Alpha
LLC
and
PG
Omega
LLC
PJ
Indigo
and
501
Imperial
Partners
LP
interlock,
5A
block
2
Beta
via
subdivision
phase,
one.
The
intent
is
commercial.
G
I
A
A
All
in
favor,
aye
aye
against
motion
carries
going
on
to
item
6B
preliminary
consideration,
the
file
of
101
U.S
Highway
83
subdivision,
and
the
granting
of
the
variance
the
front
setback
from
25
feet
to
20
feet.
A
side
set
back
from
10
feet
to
5
feet
east
side
and
reduce
the
minimum
wage
for
the
primary
axis.
Eastman
and
Paving
section
from
50
feet
wide
to
20
feet
wide.
For
both
the
attention
is
commercial.
G
A
K
A
B
So
if
I
may
so,
the
engineer
had
submitted
a
request
for
variances
in
a
certain
configuration
we
looked
at
it
and
it's
based.
We
did
some
tweaks
to
those
variances
and
those
are
based
on
the
items
that
are
actually
under
the
Authority
for
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission.
Those
are
identified
in
planning
comment
number
one
and
two.
So
if
you
were
to
Grant
a
variance,
it
would
have
to
be
under
that
criteria.
Under
those
criteria
there.
L
K
You
know
if
anything,
if
I
could
have
the
view
very
much
what
what's
out
there,
there's
there's
actually
no
no
access
easement,
so
we're
trying
to
provide
one
pretty
much
for
the
residents
on
on
the
back,
and
so
that's
one
of
the
purpose
of
this
Cloud.
Also
one
one
of
the
sizes
trying
to
make
this
slot
plotted
itself,
but
also
to
Define
that
access
to
the
Lots
right
behind
it
just
to
make
a
long
story
short
those
tracks.
K
Pretty
much
have
that
issue
where
it's
it's
kind
of
more
by
by
oath,
where
there's
there's
a
track.
That
goes
to
the
other
lots
of
technique
of
on
paper.
There's
there's
none,
but
on
this
pad
we're
looking
to
add
that
access
to
formalize
that
axis
to
those
lots
to
Incorporated
within
the
line,
that's
correct.
Okay,.
N
C
B
O
A
E
Good
evening
Mr
chairman
Ricardo
Villarreal,
with
topside
civil
group
representing
the
client,
we
do
have
just
a
couple
of
exceptions
to
a
couple
of
comments
on
here.
The
first
one
would
be
plaque
note,
number,
four
and
I
think
that's
kind
of
an
open-ended
comment.
Every
time
we
apply
for
driveway
permits
at
that
point,
we're
giving
specific
parameters
to
follow.
Either
we
get
it
approved.
We
don't
get
it
approved.
E
If
it's
right
in
right
out
I
know,
TxDOT
has
been
putting
medians
down
the
center
of
359
and
59
to
eliminate
left
turn
Lanes
in
this
area.
After
speaking
with
TxDOT,
they
have
held
off
on
putting
in
a
median.
So
the
purpose
of
the
center
turn
lane
stays.
What
it
is
is
access
to
going
to
these
properties.
Now
the
comment
is,
if
deemed
necessary,
so
I
kind
of
want
to
leave
it
for
the
I
guess,
building
permit
in
and
the
application
in
for
denim
approved.
They
can
deny
us
driveways
as
well.
E
E
So
that's
on
planning
note
number
four
playing
normal
number:
five
I
guess
we
can
take
both
of
them
at
the
same
time
provide
a
platinum
that
prohibits
access
to
existing
side
streets,
see
comments
provided
by
uisd.
We
understand
that
there's
some
streets
behind
this
development
that
are
within
the
sac
complex.
You
have
a
elementary
school.
There
are
a
couple
of
schools,
as
well
as
our
Sac
development,
a
little
bit
of
history
with
this
track.
E
If
you
include
this
corner
lot
and
this
lot
that's
in
question
right
now,
the
preliminary
plot
that's
in
play
that
total
is
roughly
about
99
Acres.
My
client
had
partially
donated
turned
over
land
to
uisd
to
build
the
sac
within
that
agreement
that
warranty
deed.
The
agreement
was
to
allow
access
to
a
.77
acre
track,
allow
access
for
utilities,
construction,
Ingress
and
egress,
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
That
is
delineated
in
the
green
and
I.
E
E
So
I
think
this
comment
is
more
of
a
a
comment
that
is
probably
going
to
be
taking
care
of
between
two
parties:
the
owner
and
uisd.
To
put
a
plot
note
specifically
stating
that
we
can
access
it
and
I
know
UIC
I
know,
there's
representatives
from
UIC
here
that
that
are
going
to
come
up,
but
the
purpose
of
the
planning
process
and
when
we
go
through
the
trb
or
the
city
goes
through
the
trb.
You
kind
of
get
comments
from
every
department.
E
They
do
invite
the
school
districts
as
well
as
Tech
stock,
at
some
points,
the
railroads
depending
on
on
who's
in
the
vicinity,
and
those
comments
are
usually
if
you're
planning
your
school
make
sure
you
abide
by
the
correct
signage.
You
know
school
zones
so
on
and
so
forth.
In
this
case,
it
is
our
opinion
that
this
is
basically
coming.
A
F
Good
evening,
Mr
chairman
members
of
commission
Jeff,
quick
KCI
Technologies,
representing
United
Independent,
School
District
and,
like
Rick,
said,
the
objection
comes
from
the
district
with
regards
to
it
being
private
streets.
I,
don't
believe
this
is
the
proper
form
to
identify
whether
it's
titled,
true
title
to
access
to
the
private
streets
that
they
have
and
we
do
not
have,
and
we
grant
that
so
I
believe
that
we
respectively
request
that
you
all
consider
delaying
or
tabling
this
item
so
that
items
like
that
can
be
worked
out.
F
Q
Involves
on
behalf
of
uisd
I
would
just
like
to
to
put
the
Planning
and
Zoning
Commission
on
notice
that
the
the
access
to
the
streets
right
now
is
subject
to
litigation,
and
so
that
uisd
is
requesting
that
this
item
be
tabled,
so
that
these
matters
can
be
resolved
in
a
orderly
fashion
within
the
judicial
system,
as
opposed
to
putting
titled
questions
and
questions
of
the
legal
right
to
use
this
property
before
the
finding
and
Zoning
commission.
Thank.
E
Oh
just
to
add
on
on
the
comment,
I
think
we
might
be
opening
up
a
new
can
of
worms
here
and
the
reason
is
when
we
talk
see
we're
not
against
whatever
a
judgment
is
ruled.
If
the
judgment
is
ruled
that
we
can
access
it,
we
can
access
the
judge,
rules
that
we
can't.
We
can't
we
still
have
access
off
of
us-59.
But
what
happens
here
is
once
you
put
a
plot
note
on
a
plat
that
gives
that
teeth.
E
So
whether
a
judge
rules
hey
you
can
access
it,
but
the
flat
note
stays
the
Platinum
takes
precedence
now,
because
now
it's
on
a
plat,
a
recorded
plat,
so
I
think
we
need
to
separate
certain
things
here,
because
Nate.
If
a
neighbor
comes
in
on
another
plot
and
says,
hey
I,
don't
want
them
to
do
something
here,
because
I'm
about
to
Sue
or
I'm
about
to
do
this.
You
start
getting
different
entities
and
what
really
the
planning
process
is
responsible
for
right?
You
can
only
control
so
many
things.
E
You
come
and
there's
litigation,
and
then
everything
gets
put
on
hold
like
we
said
we're
not
against
the
judicial
process
by
all
means,
that's
what's
going
to
take
a
place
here,
but
what
we
want
is
whatever
happens,
happens
and,
and
that
gets
taken
care
of
there.
Your
note
here
isn't
going
to
stop
the
judicial
process.
If
we
get
to
access
it
and
they
agree.
Yes,
if
we
don't
don't
right,
we'll
figure
out
another
Avenue
through
59,
something
else,
but
to
put
it
on
the
plat
and
bringing
in
in
our.
E
In
our
opinion,
private
note
per
se
on
here,
I,
don't
understand
how
the
city's
gonna
enforce
that
you
know,
then
this
it
puts
the
city
as
mediators.
So
again,
you
know:
tabolina
can
take
a
long
long
time,
but
I
think
we
all
are
in
agreement
that,
whichever
way
the
judicial
system
goes,
we
have
to
abide
by
it
whether
the
plot
node
is
there
or
not.
E
E
We
don't
know
yet
it's
being
prepped
for
commercial
development,
I
think
the
track
is
5.27.
Acres
they've
been
trying
to
to
convey
it,
but
it
might
be
a
little
bit
too
big
for
it,
so
they
want
to
plant
it
into
two
separate
plots.
A
plot
I
mean
lots
and
make
it
a
little
bit
more
marketable.
But
at
this
point
we
don't
have
an
end
user
yet,
but
it
is
going
to
be
commercial
use.
C
And
and
staff
is
an
agreement
we
could.
We
could
take
out
four
and
five
we're
very
familiar
with
the
case,
and
we
know
that
you
know
if
if
he
were
to
come
forward
in
the
future,
we
asked
for
documentation
to
verify
that
it
could.
You
know
he
has
access
or
he
doesn't
have
access,
so
we
can
stay
on
top
of
it
and
and
wait
for
the
results.
So
we
don't
have
a
problem
with
removing
or.
M
F
I,
it
does
concern
me
that
that
the
board
would
take
the
Precedence
of
of
not
placing
a
plan
note
that
can
be
removed
at
a
later
date.
You
have
preliminary
plant,
you
have
final
plot
to
go
through,
so
our
objection
right
now
can
be
looked
at
initially
and
placed
as
a
plot
note,
or
you
can
table
the
item
till
it
gets
resolved.
Moving
and
setting
that,
like
you,
said,
the
Precedence
of
of
planning,
the
property
gives
it
to
another
jurisdiction.
F
It
sends
it
to
a
different
you
all
you
all
no
longer
have
to
deal
with
it,
because
you
said
it's
okay
to
to
plant
the
property.
So
at
this
point,
if
there's
concerns
with
with
respect
to
legal
issues,
I
as
an
engineer,
I
would
say
that
having
access
I,
don't
like
to
touch
that,
it's
not
my
my
forte,
but
as
well
as
you
all
looking
at
it
from
the
planning
standpoint.
I
think
either
tabling
it
or
putting
the
plot
note
and
then
removing
it
at
final
plant.
If
that
it
doesn't
require
it.
Q
The
the
petition's
been
filed
by
the
landowner,
the
City
of
Laredo,
has
filed
an
answer
because
City
of
Laredo
was
also
sued
and
United
Independent
School
District
was
sued.
It
is
filed
a
plea
to
the
jurisdiction
in
its
answer.
The
city
of
laredo's
raised
several
affirmative
defenses,
including
updated
the
jurisdiction,
and
so
USD
has
filed
a
fleet
of
jurisdiction
and
an
answer
so
that
the
litigation
is.
Is
you
know
at
its?
Q
You
know
at
its
infancy,
but
the
concern
is
that
something
will
happen
here
that
will
be
used
by
a
party
in
the
litigation,
and
so
the
idea
is
for
the
parties
to
keep
the
position
that
they're
in
right
now,
as
opposed
to
going
down
the
planning
process.
While
the
litigation
is
going,
and
so
that's
you
know,
that's
the
current
the
concern
of
the
district
that
if,
if
that
Platinum
is
not
placed
on
there,
then
that
would
be
used
in
the
litigation
as
a
as
a
tool
to.
Q
Q
But
there
is
a
question:
uisd
is
taking
the
firm
position
that
that
this
is
part
of
their
plot.
If
you
can
go
back
to
the
screen,
the
the
recorded
plot,
let
me
do
this
if
you
this
is,
this
is
what
they
filed
in
order
to
present
to
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission
tonight,
and
if
you
notice,
there's
no
there's
no
public
streets
reflected
there
and
there's
no
streets
reflected
there.
So
the
plaque
as
it
exists
right
now
doesn't
have
streets
there,
because
those
are
private
streets.
Q
Uisd
does
not
seek
to
gain
an
advantage
through
the
Planning
and
Zoning
commission,
and
so
our
recommendation
or
request
is
that
the
matter
be
tabled
until
this
issue
can
be
resolved
so
that
whoever
comes
before
you
can
say,
here's
a
Judicial
determination,
there's
no
question
discrete.
These
are
streets.
They
belong
to
the
landowner.
These
are
streets
that
belong
to
USD.
These
are
streets
that
belong
to
the
City
of
Laredo.
E
E
So
the
issue
is
not
whether
it's
a
private
Street.
We
don't.
The
issue
here
is
there's
an
agreement
that
we
can
access
their
private
streets,
so
the
street
is
going
to
stay
private.
The
issue
here
is
I
have
an
agreement
that
I
can
use
your
private
street
now.
What
is
that
has
nothing
to
do
with
this
process?
Absolutely
nothing
to
do
with
this
process.
That's
A,
Private
Matter,
that
that
is
a
matter
between
two
private
entities.
I
have
Public
Access
right.
What
happens
between
the
owner
and
uisd
is
a
private
matter
now.
E
I
know
it's.
It's
been
stated
that
that
they're
not
shown
as
public
streets
or
private
streets.
We
don't
show
access
agreements.
We
don't
show
accident
between
private
parties
because
you
just
show
public
improvements
on
a
plaque.
So
this
whole
litigation
agreement
judgment
is
only
based
off
of
whether
we
can
access
their
private
streets
or
not.
It's
not
going
to
change
anything
on
the
plat.
It's
we're
not
going
to
show
oh
private
easement.
Only
we
can
use
this
easement.
No,
because
that's
not
a
public
Improvement,
that's
required
by
the
city
of
rate
on
the
plot.
E
The
other
thing
is
on
this.
On
this
deed,
the
easement
exists
up
into
the
point
where
the
roads
get
dedicated
and
accepted
over
to
the
city.
If
they
haven't
been
dedicated
or
accepted
over
to
the
city,
the
easement
still
exists,
which
that
obviously
has
not
happened.
Correct.
So
that's
that's
where
we
stand
it's
it's
mainly
it's
something
that
yes,
there's
a
disagreement
on
the
private
end.
That
has
nothing
to
do
with
this
process.
Nothing
it
it's
It's,
A,
Private,
Matter,
like
I,
said.
E
If,
whichever
way
it
goes,
we
have
to
abide
by
it.
There's
no
getting
away
from
it
this,
whatever
decision,
whether
we
table
it
or
we
don't
you
know
we're
not
this
isn't
a
ploy
to
get
a
better
system.
This
is
a
plural.
To
get
this
going
and
we'll
be
back
in
hopefully
a
couple
of
months
to
submit
for
final
one,
so
so
our
timeline
is
probably
significantly
quicker
than
than
what
probably
the
judicial
process
that
we
again
for
the
record
are
still
going
to
abide
by.
E
So
whatever
decision
is
made,
you
know
I,
just
I
I
would
like
to
get
the
planning
directors.
You
know.
I
I
had
never
seen
this
before
in
20
years.
That
I've
been
doing
this,
where
a
private
entity
comes
and
puts
in
a
a
private
note.
I
know
the
School
District's
Public,
but
in
this
case
it's
again
a
civil
Private,
Matter
I,
don't
know.
If
I
can
you
know
we
can
get
the
recliners
opinion
on
this.
C
You
know
this
is
this
came
up
once
before
it's
been
trying
to
be
planted
in
the
past.
There's
always
been
this
question
once
again,
whether
they
have
access
or
not.
That's
that's
going
to
be
they'll
figure
it
out
and
then
they'll.
Let
us
know
so
we
we
are
going
to
make
sure
that
we
double
check
that
when
they
come
through
the
process
before
they
even
get
to
construction
they're,
not
even
going
to
get
to
construction.
If
we
don't
have
Clarity
on
this
now,.
A
K
B
C
O
C
So,
for
you
know
our
concern
with
with
that
one
is
the
left
turn
coming
out
of
that
property.
It's
a
very
busy
street,
so
we
would
like
to
see
some
kind
of
protection
that
we're
not
going
to
get
people
crossing
over
turning
left
right
so
but
that
would
be
on
359,
which
is
a
TxDOT
highway.
So
TxDOT
is
the
ultimate
say
on
that.
You
know
so
he
texts
up
with
determine
what
they
think
based
on
safety
and
whatever
the
engineer,
submits
and
then
text
up
will
tell
him
what
they
would
like
to
see.
C
So
that's.
Why
he's
saying
to
take
that
out?
Because
really
it's
up
to
text
up,
we
would
recommend
a
writing
right
out
simply
because
for
safety
reasons
we
like
that,
but
it
could,
it
could
be
left
in
it
could
be
taken
out
because
at
the
end
of
the
day
it's
Tech
stock.
That
makes
sense
and
then
on
number
five.
C
Prohibits
access
to
physics
inside
streets?
If
we
were
to
take
that
out
that
we're
still
going
to
make
sure
where
we
we
will
want
to
make
sure
that
they
have
permission
if
they
want
to.
If
they
want
to
access,
we
got
to
make
sure
that
they
can
now
I
mean
knowing
that
the
legal
team
is
here
and
stuff
like
that.
So
we're
gonna
have
to
double
check
that
so
I
know
that
that
it
wouldn't
go
through
without
us.
M
Q
N
Thank
you,
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
one
more
time
and
then
for
for
planning.
You
know
I
think,
there's
questions
right
now
that
you're
bringing
up
as
far
as
traffic
impact
traffic
studies,
things
like
that
that
could
potentially
affect
this
area.
So
I
know
that
that's
also
consideration
that
we
have
to
to
consider-
and
the
other
thing
is
I-
know
we've
postponent
items
before
when
it
comes
to
issues
with
litigation.
A
O
O
O
Sort
of
the
disclaimer
that
was
brought
up
earlier
to
add
in
disclaimers
on
both
items
along
the
lines
of
what
you
said:
Mr
Navarro,
about
number
five.
For
example.
It
will
still
have
to
go
through
the
additional
review
and
then
an
item
for
a
disclaimer
of,
if
deemed
necessary
by
the
mitigation
decision.
L
Right
we
can,
we
can
word
it
something
to
the
effect
of
plot.
Note
that
prohibits
access,
it'll,
be
something
like
Platinum
will
be
required
depending
upon
the
outcome
of
the
litigation
that's
pending,
and
then
we
just
have
to
I
mean
we'll
work
on
it
and
clean
it
up,
but
that's
basically
the
gist
of
it
right.
But
your
way
to
just
whichever
way
the
judge
rules
that's
the
way
you
know.
If
they
have
access,
they
have
access
and
they
don't.
They
don't
ask.
A
E
I
just
have
a
question,
so
our
thing
is
more
timing
right.
So,
like
I
said
in
two
months,
we're
coming
final
chances.
Are
the
legal
system
hasn't
taken
effect
yet
so
we'll
be
recording
that
plot
relatively
sooner
than
later?
Probably
a
lot
sooner
so
I?
So
just
I
don't
mind
keeping
note
number
four
on
there.
It
is
open-ended
for
us
if
the
necessary
actually
works.
For
us.
It's
more
of
a
note
that
you
know
it's
kind
of
like
it's
it.
It's
working!
It's
it's
working
both
ways.
E
So
if
if
the
traffic
department
says
we
need
it,
we
need
it.
If
we
don't,
we
don't
so
note
number
four.
That
way,
so
we
can
be
taken
out
of
discussion.
I
think
we
can.
We
can
work
with
that.
One
on
on
Note
number:
five
I,
don't
know
if,
if
we
do
put
a
note
based
on
off
of
litigation
again
we're
on
a
normal
flat
time
frame
which
hopefully,
in
two
months
we
come
in
and
you're
going
to
see
a
final
plat
coming
through
and
chances
are
again.
E
It
also
has
to
be
worded
in
the
sense
that
hey
if
we
come
in
for
final
plot,
the
judicial
system's
still
going
to
take
its
its
course
and
and
a
plot
note
is
not
going
to
change
the
Judgment
in
in
a
way
so
that
that's
what
we're
worried
about
about
just
rewording,
something
that
again
in
two
months,
I
come
and
we're
and
we're
not
ready.
Yet.
D
D
E
In
all
fairness,
I
mean
that's
kind
of
very
unfair.
For
my
client
and-
and
the
sense
is
a
replay
takes
another
three
months
four
months,
just
just
by
following
procedural
processes.
You
know
you
submit
two
weeks
later
is
the
meeting
then
two
weeks,
One,
Stop
Shop,
then
I
have
to
get
comments
for
two
weeks,
then
I
submit
to
planning
another
two
weeks.
So,
just
if
everything
works
perfect
just
to
take
out
a
plant
note,
it
can
go
that
big
route.
E
So
that's
where
I'm
saying
like
and
and
I
hate
that
that
the
commission's
in
this
position,
I,
don't
think
the
commission
should
even
be
in
this
position.
It's
it's.
It's
now
now
we're
starting
to
be
based
our
decisions
off
of
legal
judgments
right
and-
and
that's
that's
also
why
I
wanted
legal
opinion.
I,
don't
know
when's
the
last
time
we
had
a
private
comment
on
here
and
then
wait
for
a
judicial
system.
That
is,
it
doesn't
matter.
We
still
have
to
abide
by
it.
E
That's
that's
my
thing
whether
we
when
we
take
off
the
note
and
if
the
don't
doesn't
exist
in
two
three
years
later,
it
says
a
judge
rules.
We
can't
access
that
private
road.
Then
we
can't
access
it.
There's
nothing.
The
city
has
to
do
in
this
scenario.
If
it
works
our
way,
I
have
to
come
and
it's
a
burden
on
the
property.
If
I
have
sales
and
I
have
to
wait
four
to
five
months
to
replant
it
to
take
out
a
note.
What.
M
E
So
there's
different
aspects
that
we've
looked
at,
there's
different
aspects
that
the
original
landowner
when
he
gave
the
land
looked
at
hey
I'm,
going
to
give
you
this
land,
but
I'm
gonna
get
I'm
gonna
get
to
access.
This
I
mean
that
that's
that's
only
that's
only
fair!
It's
in
indeed
now,
if
somebody's
challenging
it
I
I
I'm.
All
for
that,
like
that's
what
our
judicial
system
is
for,
but
we
are
not
in
a
judicial
system
and
that's
I
think
that's
what
I.
L
L
It
would
just
be
on
there
and
it
would
be,
you
know
basically
pointless
something
to
the
effect
of
access
to
side,
streets,
Santa,
Santa,
Clara
and
Santa
Monica
would
be
contingent
upon
the
pending
litigation,
and
then
you
can
reference
the
cause
number
or
something,
and
then
that
way
everyone
knows
look
you
whatever
the
outcome
of
this
is
that's
whether
he
has
access
or
not,
and
then
that
way
look
come
back
later.
There's
no
need
to
remove
it
or
if
they're
Victorious,
then
they
have
no
access.
Okay,.
R
I
make
a
motion
to
approve
subject
to
the
comments
and
that
the
changes
that
legal
is
recommending
for
item
five
will
lead
number
four
on
the
this
five
will
will
change
it
so
that
we'll
let
the
courts
decide
and
not
us
I
mean
to
me
I.
Think
five
is
a
legal
matter.
Four
is
a
planning
matter
and
so
we'll
leave
that
one
in
the
five
is
definitely
a
legal
matter
that
you
know
you'll
be
resolved
in
the
courts,
not
not
here.
So.
M
J
G
I
I
And
again,
thinking
just
like
my
colleague
said
previously
in
the
time
of
building
permit
things
like
that,
we
still
can,
we
can
get
it
denied.
We've
had
that
in
the
past,
where
we
come
in
with
a
building
permit
and
we've
made
improvements
right
to
to
make
those
to
address
those
concerns
at
that
time.
Can.
I
A
J
A
M
M
D
M
B
A
H
D
B
Yeah,
so
we
received
some
correspondence
from
the
engineer.
Unfortunately,
he
could
not
make
it
to
the
meeting,
which
is
that
he
agreed
you
know
having
it
approved
for
the
final
fight
on
that
one.
That's
the
one
for
eight
sequentos
right.
Okay,
that's
eight
see
is
that
what
it
is
yeah
he
just
couldn't
not
the
table
he's
okay
with
the
approval
he
just
couldn't
make
it
so.
O
D
S
For
the
record,
the
items
approved
is
final:
consideration
of
the
plot
of
North
Webb
Industrial
Park
phase
three
part
A.
The
intent
is
industrial,
eight
B
final
consideration
of
the
plot
of
North
Webb
Industrial,
Park
phase
three
part:
B
Nintendo's,
Industrial,
8C,
final
consideration
of
the
part
of
cuatro
vietos
East
right,
Ranch,
subdivision
phase,
eight
in
the
attendance
eight
D
final
consideration
of
Plato's
son
Raphael
subdivision
phase:
two:
the
intend
is
governmental,
Webb,
County,
Health,
Center.