►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 040722
Description
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 040722
B
C
E
D
D
Which
authorizes
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
bar
on
lot
2
block
two
lago
del
mar
unit
number
seven
located
at
2511
east
del
mar
boulevard.
In
order
to
remove
usa,
you
seen
incorporated
ling,
ling,
juan
owner
and
enf
entertainment
incorporator,
ernesto
trevino
and
barbara
del
bosque
application
musabar
replaced
with
usa.
You
sing
incorporated
lingling
one
owner
and
tyson
eight
limited
liability
company
gigi
may
applicant
have
another
sports
bar
as
the
parties
to
underpermit
this
issue.
Who's
gonna.
Do
the
presentation
thank.
C
You,
mr
chairman,
for
the
record:
we
have
the
applicant
living
wang
owner
representative
and
tyson
eight
llc
applicant
property
location.
Then
we
have
it
at
lot.
2A
block
2
lago
de
mar
located
at
2511
east
delmar
boulevard
zone
change.
Request
is
an
amendment.
Transfer
of
a
conditional
use
permit
proposed
use
is
a
bar
letter
sent
16,
and
here
we
have
one
against.
F
G
D
Item
6b
polygon
recommendation
awareness
amending
the
city
of
the
radio
land
development
code,
section
24,
1
3
1
to
adjust
the
rules
governing
the
organization
of
the
zoning
board
of
adjustments
in
order
to
identify
that
that
form
is
formed
by
no
less
than
seven
members
and
seven
concurring.
Votes
of
the
voter
of
the
members
of
the
board
are
required
to
reverse
an
administrative
order
or
grant
a
variance,
as
required
by
the
texas
local
government
code.
Section
211.008.
B
H
H
Okay,
the
purpose
of
the
amendment
is
to
align
the
land
development
code
with
the
texas
local
government
code,
specifically
sections
to
11
0.08
d
and
211.009
c.
Just
as
a
reminder,
the
board
of
adjustment
is
comprised
of
nine
members
next
okay,
this
is
this
is
a
sort
of
a
chart
that
I
try
to
encompass
the.
What
the
current
land
development
code
shows
state
law
requires
and
what
the
proposed
amendment
is
requiring.
H
So
the
land
development
code
currently
identifies
that
quorum
for
the
board
of
adjustment
is
compri
will
be
comprised
of
five
members,
and
the
vote
will
is,
will
encompass.
Three-Fourths
of
the
members
present.
Rounding
up
are
required
to
grant
a
variance
or
to
reverse
an
administrative
order
so
depending
on
attendance,
your
voting
required
will
vary.
However,
if
five
members
attend,
if
the
lowest
amount
that
is
required
under
the
code
attend,
then
four
concurring
votes
would
be
required
in
order
to
grant
the
variance.
H
However,
state
law
requires
that
for
a
board
of
adjustment,
75
percent
of
the
members
are,
must
comprise
a
forum
so
for
our
nine-member
board,
75
would
would
be
seven
members.
So
that's
where
it's
it's
not
an
alignment.
We
have.
We
show
five
really.
It
shows
seven
for
the
vote.
Also,
the
texas
local
government
code
requires
that
75
percent
of
the
members
of
concurring
votes
of
the
members
are
required
to
grant
a
variance
once
again,
seven
concurring
votes
would
be
required
to
grant
a
variance
or
reverse
an
order
for
our
nine-member
board.
H
H
So
whatever
what
I've
put
in
blue
is
the
actual
language
from
the
code,
and
it
shows
what
we're
changing
in
the
language
of
the
land
development
code
and
so
just
a
reminder.
Anything
that's
that
has
a
strikethrough
is
being
removed
and
anything
that's
underlined
is
being
added.
So
the
language
will
now
read
that
a
quorum
is
formed
by
no
less
than
seven
members
and
that
middle
sentence
will
be
removed
and
be
replaced
by
the
quorum
shall
act
by
a
motion
in
which
no
less
than
seven
concurring
votes.
B
I
H
H
In
february
of
2021
they
they
amended
the
code
to
reflect
that
previously
you're
correct.
It
was
a
five-member
board
with
four
alternates,
but
it
seemed
like
the
way
that
the
board
was
running.
You
know
they
were
just
inviting
all
the
members
to
come
and
participate
and
when
they
were
approached,
the
members
stated
that
they
did
all
want
to
participate.
They
didn't
want
to
be
alternates,
so
in
february
2021
the
code
was
amended
to
instead
of
showing
a
five
member
board
with
four
alternates
it'll,
be
a
nine
member
board.
So.
I
H
I'm
not
saying
that
at
all
what
what
would
have
happened
is
if
they
had
gotten
a
variance
in.
I
guess
not
in
compliance
with
state
law.
You
know
that's
what
what
would
have
happened,
because
the
the
the
upgraded
requirements
are
to
grant
the
variance
or
to
reverse
reverse
a
reverse,
an
administrative
decision,
so
they
would
have
simply
got
no
variance
that
they
probably
shouldn't
have
gotten.
D
D
D
Well,
actually
we're
just
sending
a
recommendation
city
council,
it's
up
to
them
correct.
So,
whatever
after
city
council
approves
and
amends
this
ordinance,
then
that's
when
it
starts
actually
applying
to
to
the
to
the
board
previous
to
that
and
let
somebody
come
say
what
I'm
contesting
this:
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
break
it
before
the
state,
that's
when
it
starts,
but
for
what
it
is
right
now
what
whatever
was
approved
was
approved,
and
now
we
know
that
we
need
to
comply
and
that's
what
we're
doing
right
now.
I
D
I
agree
with
you,
commissioner.
I
think
that
we
should
start
by
by
sending
a
a
recommendation
whether
to
approve
or
not,
approve,
and
and
will
let
comments
to
start
working
on
that.
So
what
I'm
doing
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
close
the
public
mirror
er
the
public
hearing
and
and
ask
for
a
motion
to
send
the
recommendation
to
city
council.
Do
I
hear
a
motion
I'll
make
a
motion
to
approve.
E
D
J
D
E
Mr
chairman,
for
the
record
applicant
is
fm
1472
investments,
engineers,
guilt
and
engineering
company
proposed
uses
industrial
and
the
zoning
for
this
80
lot.
Development
is
ag
m1
and
a
portion
is
unzoned
as
it
is
currently
outside
the
city
limits,
location
view
area
view
propose
the
revision
of
the
master
plan
comments
from
planning.
B
B
A
D
D
D
One
two:
three,
four:
five:
the
eyes
have
it:
we
can
table
the
item.
Okay,
good.
Now
we're
going
to
now
we're
going
to
section
eight,
the
preliminary,
the
consideration,
the
following
primary
class
and
primary
flats.
Okay,
it's
eight
a
preliminary
conservation
of
their
plot
of
lot.
Ten
block,
eight
embarcadero
solution,
phase,
10
intellect
10a
blockade,
embarcadero
phase
10.,
then
10
is
industrial.
E
B
D
F
B
F
B
D
D
F
E
D
G
D
D
G
B
I
B
G
It's
located
west
of
I-35
right,
the
location
of
the
of
the
area
is
west
of
I-35
and
it's
just
south
of
the
carrier
strike.
That's
already
been
constructed.
Okay
in
that
area,
so
this
is,
it
doesn't
show
up
in
this
area,
but
now
it's
there's.
It's
been
constructed
with
the
carrier
strike
running
along
the
northern
part
of
this
property.
The
developer.
I
B
As
far
as
the
developer,
putting
in
the
road-
yes,
it's
part
of,
we
have
a
separate
platfor
carrier,
so
that's
coming
in
separately,
you'll
be
seeing
that
separate,
but
that
is
by
the
developer,
and
then
you
also
have
the
street.
The
internal
street
of
this
particular
replant
that'll
be
done
by
the
developer
and
then
north
northway
lane
is
also
part
of
a
plant
that
will
be
constructed
by
the
developer.
L
D
K
D
D
E
M
D
Okay,
anybody
have
a
question
for
mr
nance.
Of
course
I
have
one
and
I'll
make
it
real
quick.
I
noticed
that
it's
gonna
be
the
the
access
road
is
gonna,
be
chair,
and
I
notice
that
it's
it's
along
the
loop.
Twenty
sir,
that's
correct.
Now
on
the
on
the
notes.
You
still
have
to
comply
with
with
certain
text,
but
just
for
information.
M
We'll
probably
have
access
from
the
side
roads
as
well,
okay
and
to
answer
anybody's
concerns
about
access,
though
we've
already
built.
Whenever
we
built
the
first
phase
of
right
ranch,
we
came
out
of
it
on
the
southern
end,
we
did
an
acceleration
line
which
added
an
extra
length
all
right,
and
then
we
came
in
north
of
there
and
we
we
did
another
entrance,
we
had
to
add
a
deceleration
lane
which
essentially
connected
them.
So
now
what
we
have
is
what
txdot
calls
a
full
auxiliary
lane
along
this
entire
frontage.
M
It's
an
extra
lane
in
there
for
these
driveway
motions
very
similar
to
what
you'll
see
up
on
on
heb
plus
on
north
I
mean
when
you
have
so
many
driveways.
You
eventually
have
a
whole
spare
lane
for
that,
so
we're,
but
we're
going
to
do
whatever
texas
tells
us
to
do.
We
always
know
that
any
driveways
and
and
any
interconnections
that
txdot
require
their
concurrence.
So
we're
very
aware
of
that.
Okay,
anybody
else
have
questions
for
mr.
F
E
F
E
L
I'm
daniel
gomez
the
engineer
wrecker
for
this
project
and
we
concur
with
all
of
the
comments.
Okay,
I
just
want
to
make
like
an
additional
comment
that
we
will
be
submitting
the
application
for
the
voluntary
annexation,
probably
either
next
week
or
the
following
week,
but
we're
working
on
it
right
now.
So,
okay,
thank.
D
E
D
D
D
O
I
do
have
just
a
discussion
on
one
of
the
comments
by
planning
and
it's
a
comment
number
two
which
prohibits
the
placement
of
driveways
on
del,
mar
a
little
background
on
this
track.
As
probably
everybody
knows
it
used
to
be
a
r1
designated
zone.
There
was
a
five
lots
there
with
a
private
roadway,
and
so
we
recently
got
rezoned
from
r1
to
b3.
O
So
this
is
what's
existing
out
there
there's
an
existing
home
that
hasn't
been
completed
with
a
internal
private
road
with
a
cul-de-sac.
So
now
the
intent
is
to
replace
the
six
lots
into
one
lot.
I
do
have
a
preliminary
site
plan.
There's
still
be
some
tweaking
on
here,
but
again
the
intent
is
commercial.
O
Let
me
make
sure
yeah
so
north
is
this
way
this
is
del
mar.
So
what
we
want
to
do
is
utilize
an
exit,
a
ride
in
right
out
off
of
del
mar.
I
know
the
original
residential
zoning-
probably
a
good
idea
to
limit
access
off
of
del
mar
you
kind
of
don't
want
to
intertwine
a
private
road
and
six
residential
locks,
but
now
that
the
use
has
changed
from
residential
to
commercial,
we
are
asking
that
we
do
have.
O
You
know
one
driveway
along
del
mar
we
have
pushed
it
furthest
away
from
the
intersection,
so
that
in
case
anybody
wants
to
take
a
right
if
they
don't
queue
back
into
the
intersection.
There
is
an
existing
median
on
del
mar.
That
does
provide
a
write-in
right
out,
so
you
can't
take
a
left
and
kind
of
tangle
yourself
with
westbound
traffic.
So
that's
basically
the
only
thing
that
I
like
to
say.
If
we
can
kind
of
adjust
that
comment
to
limit
one
access
off
a
delmar,
I'm
here
to
answer
any
questions.
I
O
Yes,
sir,
so
you
can
kind
of
see
the
the
the
bus
stop
kind
of
almost
at
the
center
of
the
frontage
along
del
mar.
Our
driveway
is
going
to
be
along
basically
where
the
cul-de-sac
is
going
to
be
so
we
won't
be
impeding
into
the
into
the
bus
stop
based
off
of
this.
As
you
can
see,
we've
pushed
it
as
furthest
east,
as
we
can.
F
F
G
D
It
thank
you,
mr
pena.
I
just
want
to
comment
for
the
record,
mr
rierer,
that
the
entrance
needs
to
be
wide
enough
to
accommodate
whatever
traffic
we're
going
to
have
there,
because
that's
that's
that's
good!
What
what
they're
building
there
is
going
to
be
good,
but
the
biggest
concern
when
when,
when
the
sony
was
approved,
this
is
only
for
the
record,
mr
navarro
and
commissioners
is
that
they,
the
main
access,
was
not
supposed
to
be
from
from
the
alexander
parkway.
B
D
M
J
Yeah
yeah
just
stand
on
what
you're
saying
is
that
I
think
it's
very
important.
You
mentioned
that
the
the
the
driveway
to
del
mar
is
large
enough
for
commercial
to
come
in
and
out
of
because
we
certainly
wouldn't
want
them
coming
from
the
the
alexander
insurance,
because
then
they
don't
have
to
loop
around
to
get
anywhere.
O
Correct,
and-
and
the
last
thing
we
want
also
is
the
eastbound
traffic
on
del,
mar
having
to
turn
into
alexander,
take
the
u-turn
and
get
into
this
commercial
site
now.
One
concern
that
we
did
have
was
with
mr
pena.
That
was
just
up
here.
Is
we
also
don't
want
through
traffic,
to
be
using
this
as
a
bypass
on
the
right
lane?
O
Alexander
parkway,
there
will
be
we're
leaving
the
existing
entrance
for
the
people
that
are
coming
in
from
the
alexander
development
so
that
they
don't
get
on
del
mar
and
you
don't
saturate
del
mar
further.
But
the
people
that
we're
worried
about
is
eastbound
traffic
on
del
mar
and
possibly
I'm
sorry
wrong
way.
Eastbound
traffic
on
del
mar
and
southbound
traffic
on
winfield
yeah,
instead
of
going
through
and
turning
back
around
just
turn
on
del
mar,
which
is
two
lanes
and
then
you're
riding
right
out.
K
O
K
O
O
J
O
D
Real
quick.
Actually,
if
I
remember
well
eric
when
we
spoke
about
about
the
change
of
zoning,
I
think
it
was
mentioned
that
even
the
medium
that
the
developer
was
going
to
work
with
the
medium
and
try
to
eliminate
that
medium
to
have
access
from
del
mar
on
both
sides.
Okay-
and-
and
I
would
like
rafael
on
that-
I
would
like
to
go
back
to
the
comments
when
we
changed
the
zoning
okay,
because
I
understand
that
the
medium
was
going
to
be
impacted
and
the
cost
would
be
absorbed
by
the
developer.