City of Laredo, Texas Planning & Zoning Commission, 9 Dec 2018

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting 120618

Description

Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting 120618

A

First, item on the agenda is called to order roll call. Yes,.

B

Mr. chairman, a task movie I'll present will say it is tableau flows. Have you a compund person, lu, lu, lu LD, you joining advise present Jovie ahead and yellow peas, coffee Domingues present for the record mentor. Sure you do have form like.

A

You do we have any Commission to call there to be excused just come to share tales. Anybody else we're motion.

C

A

Second, and the second tell those in favor aye motion carries thank you. The next set up. Could everybody please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

A

We have is the approval of the minutes.

D

There was roll call, Commissioner theist motion to excuse, and he was the chairman at the time.

E

A

So what he wants to do that and.

D

You can go ahead and redo the motion. He.

A

Was a chairman right, yeah, okay, who wants to reduce motion to excuse, commissioner, and that rise in Commissioner Joe VI? Yet from the last view, we have motion in a second. No that's! Second, all those in favor aye motion carries all right. Give you all those a few minutes to just go over the minutes.

F

Make a motion to approve the minutes dated November 15 2018. We.

G

Have a second second.

A

And a second all those in favor, aye aye motion carries thank you. Do we have any citizens comments at this point? Thank you that it was public hearings all right.

A

The public here we have is amending the land development code is Senator Idol by revising the dimensional standards, article 5 section, twenty four point: seven seven and the special use permit article 6, section, 24, 93 and then the other matters Mason temple here all right. This is a public jury who will be making this presentation.

H

Good evening, Jerry Pizan acting a building official and will tast by City Council to review for the national standards to see, as it was worded, the best possible use for the land use for the property owner. We took this task to the TRB and we met the last four months three months and we came up with some.

H

Setback proposals.

D

What was submitted before is not what we're revising today's work. Yes,.

H

How do we switch to this yeah so essentially, what we're trying? What was proposed to changed for the other residential and what's going to happen, is pretty much have a five foot setback all around and in those sites in the back and then in the front. The carport currently stands only.

H

So what you have is currently you have yours or your house, and you can actually have a structure not attached in the back as long as you have a flat foot, stop back setback, okay, and so that's as you have it currently, okay, now this is not included. If you have a utility eastman, you have to respect that. That does not affect the utility easements, whether it be 12 7 whatever they you spin. Is it support when you don't have a setback.

H

Okay and currently, your carport can only go 10, foot or half of the 20 foot setback in the front, okay, whether you're in the corner or on the side. So the committee got together.

H

Okay, so now, if you get rid of the the that you connect your cardboard in the back or a cut board you're a lot box, you can have that five foot back yard sit back and the only thing and in the front you can go all the way up to the property line. Okay, and whether your order, okay or on the site.

H

One of the observations that we made was that, currently, if you you know whatever your property stands up to or your slab, you could pretty much put our other a side corridor and the current ordinance allows you to go within half of that foot setback so for a total of five between your neighbor to neighbor. So what we're? With this?

H

My foot setback you want to allow you you have to maintain that five foot setback on the sides to give you enough space to go through the back, and so it's gonna, there's no longer half you'll be five honor I.

A

Don't think I follow your what.

I

You're trying to tell me.

I

Like this somebody bills, somebody builds the structures they can do. In other words, they can go 20 feet from the back 20 feet from the, but from.

J

I

5 feet from the sides and then maintain your 20 foot parking two-car parking right.

E

I

Particular ones have two car garages which sometimes they enclose them and when they do enclose them well, you still have a two-car key to parking to be. You can park two cars in the front, but when somebody after they owned a home, they can come and apply for a permit and the maximum that they can do is they can put an accessory building in the back.

I

That's two and a half feet from the proper in the neighbor on all sides. They can put an open covered. Porch like you'll, see this in the older neighborhoods, where in here there's like a tandem tandem garages, so that conceivably they can get two and a half feet from their neighbor in the bank. Two and a half feet from the neighbor on the side, two and a half feet from the neighbor on the on the side, two and a half neighbor two and a half.

I

So what it does is it reduces the access to get to the back and they can come in and pull a permit for a covered patio on the front.

I

So the proposed from the committee is they're, proposing that in lieu of having the two and a half foot setbacks that those go away, then half of setbacks is no longer no longer applying, but that you can attach your structure all the way to the so basically, what's happening is you're flipping the areas the area in between the structures gets pushed to the back, and now you have a clean line all around the perimeter of your of your property, with the exception of added now adding the covered patio here with open, but with a vertical, with a vertical set back up to the proper length up to the property line, so it cleans up around the perimeter and we really are not adding any anymore impervious cover.

I

If somebody gets aggressive, they get. If somebody gets aggressive on their home site, they can do this in the future if they get aggressive. They can do that. However, on the, if you look at the table that he put up via sleep, if you want to get aggressive with your property, if you want to do this on an existing on an existing flat, then they're gonna have to provide a survey to the building department and that survey is going to read it's going to list all the existing east myths that are on the plat bless.

I

The surveyor is going to have to look at the deed records to make sure that there's not any easements that are not recorded on the on the plat that got reported. They got placed after the they got placed after the fact, and it allows the homeowner. You know more more flexibility and how they can use, how they can use their property and it cleans up the area around the around the around the perimeter. So this would be that's the the ordinance or the proposed ordinance on existing on existing subdivisions on.

A

Existing subdivisions that are already built out and.

I

Are already built out right if you have a because you know they can do this today, existing subdivisions, they can do this yeah.

A

You can add an accessory structure or you're a building, cheddar or maid's quarters, or whatever I understand that, but now what you're proposing is that they can build all the way out to within five feet on an existing subdivision, which everybody has 20 foot setbacks right.

I

A

So how would that work? Well,.

I

They can do this today. Yes,.

A

You can but that's an accessory structure. It's not you know. I mean very few. People build right now, mate quarters, which is really a living quarter. They mostly are you know, either a palapa or a utility shed that kind of stuff. Well,.

I

There there's a lot of instances where you have access to like the Google Maps, there's a lot of instances for families build or pick my feet that stuff that yeah.

B

I

A recommendation: it was a recommendation when, when we heard talking to to the council people there saying we want families to be able to use much, you know to have more discretion on the use of their other property. So this proposal, basically it's not it's kind of rearranging where they can Builder their structure and it can attach to it to the back where in the past, they couldn't what. If.

C

I may go ahead, so what's gonna happen with new subdivision, okay.

I

C

Wheel is right now mr. Reese I know that there's there may be an issue of people, personals people residents, trying to build a palapa and what they do. They built it overnight on the weekends right in, according to mr ihsan, what they're trying to avoid it's, a that the bad or the the poor structures being built on the other language.

C

So I think one of the reasons that the councilmen contacted the building department was to assure that that the resident will be able to build in the back yard, provided they would get the permit and that the structure is yeah, so they don't be inspected and I agree with that. As far as moving the setbacks, I feel that twenty, what the twenty feet that we have right now I think it's something that we are providing for the residents to enjoy.

C

I think it would be up to on a single basis or on each person that approaches the building department do to decide whether how much they want to build in the build the department to provide a guideline that will will provide that type of structure. On.

H

Existing, but not necessarily the new yes.

C

H

It goes once you build it, and you come back and yessir.

C

Because what I understand is that counts? Oh man, they they said well, they there'd be some complain that they can't build their little structure on the back, so I think twenty feet will stay to stay. The same sir comes mr. Sherman, because we have to allow the the people to make a decision as to how they want to use their backyard. The 20.

K

Feet if they want to.

C

Build up an apple, that's fine, you! They want to have a little swim pool or they want to have carne asada whatever it is their choice. If we bring the ordinance, then we are allowing for for the setbacks to be smaller and people to to actually be moving into constructions or residences that are provided by by developers. That might not dignify that the lifestyle I.

A

Guess one of the questions that I have to for you guys is have you what cities have these kind of setbacks if any other cities? Yes, have you all research that no Johnny's.

I

A

Right, you haven't research that now, let me ask you: have you all done any kind of research as to the more cluster that you get per acre? What are the social effects of humans?

A

Do you all have a study on that, because I know that normally, when you cluster more people together, there's impacts on you know on people and I'll tell you where I'm coming from most people here. What do most people here like to do in their backyards? Cookout right, so we started reducing setbacks. I got five and I got five. I got ten feet in between residents, so this guy's cooking down and his smokes going into somebody's house could be right. So how do we address those things most people when they cook out? What do they?

A

Do? You got the music on. You know what I'm saying. Have you guys studied those things? Yeah I mean I, you know, I, don't disagree with trying to try to utilize more land but by the same token, I think. We also need to look at the human aspect of things and and how it would impact them, and- and you know what I'm saying those I mean when you buy your house- it's like okay. This is like my castle.

A

You know this is I'm good here, but if you get one we're like and let's assume that we were to recommend, let's go forth or whatever five feet and five feet now and one neighbor is one of those guys that you know he doesn't really hit total disregard for everybody else, so you potentially could have you know some social issues that could come up and that's why I'm asking if you guys have studied that aspect of things.

I

The whole whole thought process, and this is that today.

I

In this blue section and I'm sure you look at all the older sections and some of the existing subdivisions, you can have the accessory structures to be right next to right next to each other. So today mm-hmm you can have it two and a half feet two and a half feet. I can tell you that, as a builder I'm planning my homes today, I'm gonna build a home.

I

Back yard, I'm gonna give them their their their their side yards and others don't build it like this, but what's happening right now is that people on the weekends are going out there and building the structures or building it all the way up to the fence, they're doing all kinds of stuff that and they're not applying for the permits, because they don't have, in other words, the likelihood that they're gonna get their permit is slim to slim to none so by allowing them the opportunity to when they go and do their their construction to allow them to utilize to attach to the building.

I

It's not it's not gonna be rampant, in other words, it's kind of like. If you look at some of the some of the subdivisions and the aerials you'll see this today that they've done it without a permit and its existing. So, but that sounds more like an.

A

Enforcement issue.

I

A

Really what we're talking about there I mean you know, that's really. What we're talking about we're doing is.

H

We tag them, you know we give them a stop or we send them to for the court court and that's when they started. That's what started. Having this conversation.

I

I made sure is that today they can do this.

I

And the structures are two and a half feet from each other right, just like back here, mm-hmm.

J

I

You have in certain areas.

A

Yeah but let's, let's, let's put things in perspective, how many housing units that we haven't right right now: 77,000 I, hope you somewhere in there. So what percentage of housing units have this situation far less than 1%? So you put things in perspective. You talk about 1% of the population. Okay and I. Agree I mean yes, there are gonna, be residents where you do have. You know axillary structures back to back, but, like I said it's probably 1% you're gonna have another percentage. It has palapas they're also probably are encroaching in right away.

A

There's gonna be a lot of areas that you're gonna have situations like you just mentioned these people just add it and nobody knew about it and they'll get caught when the appraisal district runs the aerials again and what that becomes a tax issue. There are issues there I agree now. The question is that I really have my concern. Raka said is more like yeah, the social aspect of this thing, allowing a residence to be there with very minimal backyard space for either kids to play dogs back there.

A

You know what I'm saying: there's all kinds of things that come into play: well, that okay.

B

A

Me recognize a couple of the commissioners right now, because I know that they have some comment.

F

What so, at this point, under the current ordinance and on the.

G

Disagreement on.

F

An additional editing structure: how many feet are you supposed to be from the from the from the wall or the line property that two and a half.

I

Feet two and a half so today somebody in other words it starts like this because that's you know: there's no Builders gonna gonna they're young families and their their children and all that other stuff is there they get older. They say: I, don't need to want that backyard. You know all 100% concrete going on, so somebody wants to add to their property and then they can do this. So when they do this they're two and a half feet from their property line, five feet away from there from there from there from their neighbor.

I

The accessory building in the back is two and a half feet, potentially two and a half feet from the from the neighborhood. They do that the.

E

I

Proposed ordinance cleans it up by saying you can no longer get to two and a half feet now: you're you're in so you're automatically ten feet away from your from your from your neighbor, and if you're gonna do this on an existing subdivision, then you have to pull a survey, a more detailed survey and if you have power lines in the back and that kind of stuff they're not even going to be able to get that close and it becomes when they apply for their building permit and they bring their survey.

I

This element, you got a powerful, you gotta, say 12 feet away. You know, there's all those all those things will come into play at the building permit stage and it gives the homeowners more opportunity to work with their with their land by attaching to their existing to their existing structure where they didn't have that possibility in the past. So.

F

Under this new ordinance, could they attach from the existing structure to the far back living quarters and.

J

B

F

Which would then alleviate the new I? Guess the amount of backyard space right.

I

Which they're limiting the backyard space here well.

F

Yeah but one lucky, that's gonna be used as a social moreso of open space, but now, when you're cutting down the actual backyard space, that's where I think you're gonna have more of a noise issue. You're gonna be very close to your backyard. You do kind of sort of the privacy of what your whole aspect of having a backyard is I mean you're literally. You know that coasts, your neighbor I mean you think about the side. Access I mean it's minimum five feet.

F

I mean you're, literally kissing your neighbor on the side now to have that same amount of space on the backyard I think you know in a spec, it's just it's just too close for comfort am I in my opinion, to tell now that I think he is a proper buffer. Even at that not everybody's going to do a structure such as.

I

Over so you structures, but we're.

F

Sort of conforming to those who are breaking or breaking the rules, you know, so why make it accessible for everybody? Basically I.

L

Guess my question is: where did this? Where did this need come from to make these changes.

H

Basically, what was going on is is a testing enforcement that we're talking about will go attack them they, you know they're already built it. We're asking them to demolish okay and most of the time they'd, rather ask for a variance in them going to the Board of Adjustment. If we're adjustments pretty much, you know, I have you pay.

J

They're looking it.

H

If it's no, no, no, since they accept it, and so then it's tastes like that, and so now we have a situation where this guy has sinned and the other guy doesn't so he wants to build it, and so they come get a permit. No, you can't, because you have a utility screen or you got to abide by the current rules.

H

So what do they do end up doing it at night on the weekend when there's you know I'll be on so then we go by tag in and go through those same process, and so when we started talking to and then they started calling console console to all those well, why can't they build? It is their property. They should be allowed to build it as much as they can so, and the same thing happened with the carports up to the front: they filled the carport.

H

They could only go ten feet, half of the twenty feet and so but then instead, of course stopping at that point, they go out of the forward of the front why they had a cart of car garage. They enclosed it. So now they put the cars, and so they no longer fit because they want to put two cars in there back to back. So.

K

L

H

Up running all the way from the property we catch them same story, so.

L

Did the initial do the initial requests to look at the issue come from a council member or did the initial request look into matter come from the enforcement department? Oh no.

H

No, it didn't come from us. It came from okay.

L

So it wasn't an issue where the enforcement department was overwhelmed with issues and hey city council. Please give us guy tonight at all so now of the city councilman that did this. Was it because there was a particular constituent that wanted this change ourselves.

K

L

Was it okay, so several constituent, okay, well, I, can think of three all right, so we're gonna do is okay, so, okay, but now let me ask this question: how does this work moving forward like in new subdivisions? Does it have an effect on that? Okay,.

B

H

Trp got involved and they started.

I

It was initiated by Vidal and in talking to two guys like Charlie San Miguel, and when the whole issue was being brought up for discussion on the on the ordinance. He send me incited some existing like condominium regimes that are detached. They said yes, in other words, there's it works to have higher density in the in their subdivisions.

I

When you talk to councilmen, like George all guilt, he says I'd like to have, as you know, a few setbacks as possible, so the directions from the council at least those three council people- was that they wanted to give the families more use of their of their property and potentially it increases the tax base for the city. So there was a two-fold controlled deal. So how about moving forward moving forth a new a new plants would be the same thing.

I

Existing plants, the only difference, would be to allowed it to get to ten feet in the front. If you look at the current land development code, its litter, with exceptions to ten feet from the from the property line, there's at least ten or fifteen, even on the on the chart that that mister based on will show you. It's got a lot of areas in some cases where it's eight feet.

I

So basically, the 10-foot setback on the building here in the front is so that people, when they're, trying to do Platts if you're trying to apply for a 10 foot building setback, then they're gonna throw all kinds of other. You know things that you saw. Nobody applies for it. It's kind of like you.

J

Apply for something, but then you.

I

Know you get asked for so many other things that forget it you put okay, I said also on new plants. This would be the only difference between existing and new. Is the ten feet on the in the front and if you notice all corners have a ten foot building setback on the corners. So it's consistent with the visibility down the streets on the corners.

I

You can't get any closer than ten feet so now, when you're looking at the front loads, with the exception of the corners, then you'll have the ten feet on the corners, we're not suggesting to alter any of that stuff other than the back, so that you're always maintaining that visibility triangle. As you're approaching you know as you're approaching the the corner, so even even on the proposed we're not on the on the on the proposed section for existing we're, not altering so that we still maintain that visibility out here so in the owner corner.

I

You can only add to the back so.

L

So you're saying that in menu on the moving forward, what you're gonna do is you're gonna, be able to add more to the house in the front by 10 10 P. Is that right? That's okay! Now! Is that going to result in more expensive homes or will the homes stay the same price well,.

I

What it what it does is, typically, you know more square footage that you have you spread out. You know so, let's say the home site, depending on where you're buying ready by the operator 25 you buy north Laredo 80,000. So if you can build 500 more square feet on that lot, then yes, the cost of acquisition for the home site is going to be less per square foot because you're allocating that fixed cost over more square footage, so you're only that you're doing the marginal cost, for example like if you got a 3-bedroom 2bath home.

I

Well, the two-bath gets, if you, if you only build a thousand square feet and if it's twenty thousand or build a bass, was this twenty dollars a foot just for the best? But if you're building fifteen hundred well now the cost per square foot went down because you're only adding living area, but.

L

So with that, would that without applied into the ten feet or with the ten feet, just be additional expense? No.

H

No you're not able to.

L

Offset the additional what.

I

I'm saying is the marginal cost, no.

L

I know interested.

I

Understood, obviously, if you're Eddington, if you're, adding a hundred square feet more of building area, it's gonna cost more but and now in other words, for example. If somebody comes to me today on one of these Lots I can only build them a 1600 square foot. You know one car a two-car garage home, maybe I can build them, 1,700 square foot or, if they're not so concerned, whether with their backyard and it's somebody that wants less backyard now I can go to 1,700 square foot single-story as opposed to having to go vertical.

I

A lot of people won't want single-story.

L

And will the buyer have that option? Will they have the option to say you know what I wanted to be under the old way.

I

All this does is it gives the designer more opportunity to design and less less restrictions, and it cleans up the perimeter of the property post. You know initial initial home.

M

Okay, I just have a questionnaire on observation, so the the way it is now they can do a building concrete.

I

M

B

Were to disagree, there were to add additional.

M

Structure to the house: yes,.

I

M

That enclosed or is it this.

I

Building is both yeah. This could be enclosed right there so long as they can touch my five feet: yeah, okay and then the I could be open, so the enclosed structure. If somebody has a gazebo in the back there two-and-a-half feet away from there right.

M

So with the proposed with the proposal you're adding two and a half feet more, no well.

B

Because if you.

J

M

This down, yeah we're set back, would be seven and a half. So why not have a seven and a half instead of five? You.

I

All can propose that, because.

M

That way, you have.

I

This is a recommendation from the TR be more space yeah. This is this is a recommendation from the TR be obviously- and that's you know, we set a special meeting for two weeks from today, based on what you all recommend staff.

M

Have an opinion on this: we.

N

Have we have a number of questions? This is the first time that we've seen the the ordinance in in this format we're we were just wondering between the accessory structure in order to be considered an accessory if it's enclosed, our understanding was that there had to be a separation distance between the two structures of ten feet. Is that correct? That's great? It was between an enclosed structure. Well,.

A

I guess let's do this: what is the definition right now, an accessory structure.

I

I

A

Is it defined right now in the land of Le, Coq I mean cuz I. Think that's one of the things that mine.

I

Is not primary use? You know.

A

What I'm saying now? Yes, there is a definition for that.

N

A

Let's, let's see what that definition is because I think that would help the commissioners understand what an accessory structure is.

N

Three structures- normally the we're talking if you, because you all have pointed out that it is normally especially when that mark, would be right, open, I'm, I'm wondering if you know you have an enclosed or attached or part of the principal.

N

Are we limiting the height you know? Are we gonna have two storey houses so that so my neighbor in the back will have a two-story house, five foot behind my black fence, I mean if I want to have a yard? How does how does that affect me that you know it sort of eliminates I.

I

Think, oh, you would have.

N

This, this portion sort of I mean five feet to button behind your back fence. I have a two-story structure or you know three storey. You know sort of a looming structure right behind your back fence. I mean that's and also I'm wondering how do you? How do you opt out if I want to have a yard or live in a neighborhood that, where I'm not I'm, I'm, not yeah, where my neighbor doesn't have the opportunity to to do that right? How.

I

Is that mechanism that the mechanism is in the- and that was part of a lot of some other discussion on that is.

J

I

Typically, subdivisions have deed restrictions which.

N

Oh, don't enforce well.

I

N

Doesn't enforce so.

I

N

Be incumbent upon the private.

I

N

Or the enjoy you know to enforce those.

I

There's activate joys, there's inactive a choice, it's an activate Joey. So if you're, if you're trying to do something, that's outside of the deed restrictions, your active HOA so from from a consumer standpoint as as you mentioned, if.

J

I

Concerned with those things so.

N

You would have to buy a house with it with an active hom pay, HOA fees in order to to not be subject to.

M

The people that do these extensions because they have a you- know, extended family, that you know they need more living space right and there you have a family of five or six living in two bedrooms or three bedrooms. It's not enough. So you keep adding onsen. So I've seen him firsthand.

J

M

Think we should research overcome and compromise it I do believe we do in eight more limits living space and and this form on the space that they have available or not to construct, but I think might or be from satisfied neighborhood neighbors to narrow.

I

Restate what I said in origin is the recommendation from TR be okay and see NZ has their own their own recognition.

M

Like sending it to the seven-and-a-half, you could possibly add one more bedroom back there. Yes,.

B

M

And that's: okay,.

C

Sure, maybe five minutes yeah, yes, I.

E

C

To put that on the screen? Okay, so what I understand is that the councilmen they actually directed building department to try to find a solution for the residence of existing houses to be able to build up a lot, but maybe contemplate the the idea of building a young, a cardboard in the front, the carpet being usually opened. If it's within the 20 feet in in the back section project palapa, so they could could enjoy a carne, asada or so on.

C

Maybe a party in I think the purpose of bringing this for the air for the existing resident. No, it went into into the developers, not not you miss tourism, but somebody.

A

C

O

C

Advantage, oh now we have five titre and that's the type of house are we gonna have because legally, if, if it's approved by City Council, that we have ideas all around, then we're gonna have houses that are going to be legally all the way to the five foot. Five foot, five heat setback now that creates a problem any creates a in, might create a benefit for somebody that that is desperate to buy a house they would buy is five feet. That's fine!

C

That's what I can afford, but if we keep it on 24 and 20 feet setback and we keep the front also on 20 feet. Then we can. We can allow for the resident to go and ask for a permit and built what the councilman actually wanted to be intended a palapa and maybe a cardboard, not a whole subdivision. That is built all the way to the five foot setbacks, because then that create they probably like money as I was mentioning, see increased tension in between you can't fight.

C

You can't even go outside so yeah, so I personally think that we should leave the 20 feet and and and try to integrate the wording. Mr. Pearson, for a palapa that it's that is now permitted and inspected by the city or a doe, but we're given a tool to the developers that they can get a yard instead of 14 how 1400 square feet now they're gonna build in 22,000. What are they gonna do now, if you notice on that, don't take it off.

I

B

C

From that, what we're gonna have now we're gonna have an enclosed garage from the front, no green spaces, because the vehicles are gonna, be pork on the side. So what.

B

C

To do we're going to create a good neighborhood, yeah, good planning, and that's not good planning, see to me that's trying to pull each other's families. You know in a subdivision just because we can make it cheaper. That's.

C

Just went through a certification will try to get it, and this is something that you saw. One of the things that you need, we go to look I say, as a building official see, is to look for the well-being of the resident and if, if you were instructed by City Council to provide the mechanism or for for to get the inspection permits for a palapa, that's not a problem. I mean that's built in all the ways with a five-foot said a we and we.

E

Discuss the whole.

H

Argument that we had through a GRB and with the councilmen that we were targeting as much as it was mostly a cardboard that we were disgusting they're, not necessarily in the back. The back was came about. No I want him to allow to use up their whole property as possible, but we kept it as a detached. Okay,.

C

And I'm gonna interrupt councilman, they move up. We move up in the rules at the wheel and stay in the ones that are affected. Are the residents see so.

F

C

To make quick decision right now, because I might not be here tomorrow and they come swim in that it's God that wants to do the the setbacks or the per million for the Pallavas. He might not be here tomorrow and then we then end up with something for that for the residents that are gonna be attached to the rest of their lives, because these these are not like one more piece of some change should see, so we do very careful what we bring before planning. So, yes,.

I

I understood your comments, then we don't need to change anything. That's correct, sir. In other words, the existing the existing ordinance today allows it more aggressive to be able to go closer to the to the back property line with the structure so long as it's by feet, away from the from the existing property. Actually.

C

What the councilman said we need to allow people to build. It's like when you contaminate your bill, see when you contaminate. This can be a good example, see you are allowed to contaminate with permit every time we built a road we're contaminating that road, but we have permanent, see it was permitted and it was expected. Is it good? It's not good. So what? What he's saying is let's go ahead and get the people to build to use their spaces? My romp is on user spaces appropriately, so they can be.

C

The structures are built, sound, nice pretty so they can enjoy, but with inspection. So we leave the same paksa with you are, but now we're gonna allow the people to come before building department that they can.

I

Do that today, no.

E

I

Day they can do all this so.

C

They can without a permit because they come back and they finally get. They can do all.

I

This stuff, you know with a permit, then.

C

We need to get together with with Councilman and explain them that that the request is not.

I

A big end: they can't have more additional living area back there. So with this proposal, no because it's an accessory building.

M

That wasn't closed.

I

But it's not a living area, it's an accessory building, it's accessory use, but they're.

M

Using it for accessories.

A

Alright, let's, let's did y'all get the definition of.

M

Accessory building.

J

Let's, let's get the definition using.

B

The land development code, this.

I

Makes this this fixes that and it puts the structures now, if you're saying seven and a half feet ever saying ten feet, it's the equivalent of.

M

I

Basically, the equivalent, but well it's more aggressive by two and a half feet as you noted yeah. So maybe, if you push it two and a half feet further back it's it's the same, but at least now they're contained within that you know well.

J

I

Keeping the buffer a little bit more okay, okay,.

A

Let's get the definition, so everybody knows what the.

N

Definition, definition for the appendix and the land development code is an accessory use or structure shall mean a use or structure on the same lot with end of a nature, customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal use or structure.

N

L

Right to think the thing I like about the current system is that there is some accountability as to how the landowner is going to use the property.

L

Whereas what I understand from what you're proposing that they're not, and they would say they, there is not going to be some permit, they have to get there's gonna be a permit. Yes, so there'll be a permit. Okay, okay, so that was the main thing that I was concerned. About second thing is.

L

What is going to be the effect on a neighborhood, where you have some homes that are built up beyond that? You know the additional 10 feet or up to the 5 feet versus others that are not will that have an effect detrimental on the neighborhood in terms of property values, because that's I think to me the concern that the tension is always the needs of an individual versus the needs of everyone else right, and so my thought is.

L

If we think that it's going to depress property values, then then we have to vote against it because I mean that's not that's not smart planning, I.

H

Think the wording that needs to be added that it is a single detached building and not attached, and so that way it continues to be a carport or a laptop and not necessarily a continuation of the living area. And that's how we've been proposed to accept.

P

I

Right now, under the current development, you can have a court that say this is it. This is our order right here.

I

Okay right now you can plan a subdivision and you can have your you've got the 20-foot building set back here. You've got a 10-foot building set back here, so.

J

You can have.

I

Basically, a structure and you'll have five feet from here and then you'll have your year twenty feet.

J

Number one.

I

J

I

Happens in more than one occasion on existing on existing new subdivisions today to where this structure here is, you know 30 feet. Basic viewer you've got a tent. You got a 20 foot, building setback in the in the back and.

L

Then and then my last comment is and I'm gonna vote against the purple to the recommendation, and the last reason is that I really have an issue with the fact that this is not coming from the enforcement department. Saying hey world for one with these things- and this is a real problem versus three constituents of open city, councilmen, saying hey, you do this a favor and you know revised an ordinance so that we can do what we want on our individual properties.

L

So to me, I just think: that's not a reasonable reason or purpose for coming and revise rewriting an entire ordinance reports of an entire ordinance to benefit three people, so I'm gonna vote against it. For those reasons, okay, I.

F

Guess to the concerns I have is I mean we currently have setbacks of Ferguson restructures, which is the main issue here is the fact that people are building structures without getting permits, so we're trying to find ways to alleviate that that issue, however, what's concerning, is the fact that if we do do this ordinance, you now also have the option to extend your current living space called up to five feet or start new subdivisions with these sort of restrictions. Now what is the fire risk? As far as now having less setback in between home fire.

I

Department, my understanding was that chief lending was okay with what, if I beat around the perimeter.

H

F

Like I said, I mean I, guess I guess, with the auxilary, the auxiliary building being entertainment area, you still have the buffer for now having a living space at a comment that actually takes up the whole property, and not only does you birth by feet now that that's just such a limited space and now that little minted space is actually being used for entertainment.

F

So now really they're gonna put their barbecue, but they won't use it very well if I know, but we don't know that the thing is people don't follow, rules as it is now now with limited space. You're gonna have people not following rules and I can just see this being detrimental. I can see. Having issues I just I mean five feet is, is just too small we're gonna have people adding you know to the structure, to the living space or having you know, smaller backyards. I know, I wouldn't want to have a neighbor.

F

That would be that close to me on the backyard end, but I just I. Just can't I can't see the benefit of doing so. I understand that people do need more space, but I think we have ordinances and rules for a reason. If people can't follow that, we need to fix it but to conform to that or to their to their sort of behaviors. Not is not the problem or the solution. Yeah.

A

Okay, anything else you guys would like to add.

I

All these all across the United States higher density, is been the approach to address the housing, the housing calm. So what this does is it allows you to have higher higher density on the on the property. So it's.

H

L

And I and I can appreciate that, and that may be the you may be absolutely nine percent right problem is, can we can we see those studies? Can we see what are that like, for instance, just because one city ops to have higher density doesn't mean that the with that doesn't come certain standards on how the buildings are going to be build things like that?

L

So so it's not just a, and you may be right and I, and maybe we need to bring this back once we have additional information, but I mean we really don't have any information really.

A

Other than a suggestion, yeah really the other thing we don't have is we don't have any data from planning? You know we need to look at this thing. Also from the planning point of view, how do other cities look at this planning communities? Okay, there's.

K

A

Y'all brought on that I did ask the last time that one was here. It is, it said: hey get a study on on. You know how this you know: reduced setback. What impact you know, economic, the, the the know, the the well-being of individuals I said, because you know studies have proven that you know you go to higher densities. You do have.

I

Those are like projects, I, think that, but.

A

It's the same thing that we're talking about here: what's the cuts, gonna differentiate, a housing project or.

I

How are a subdivision? Is it like the.

A

Quality of life differs, you know.

I

What I'm saying it differs from an ownership standpoint when there's no ownership, there's I think.

A

In the house you know ownership.

I

Create social social imbalances well,.

A

But I think that that could be addressed also by management. You know, if you have good management of your properties, you shouldn't not have those problems.

L

I think listen, I, I think that we are, as a commission very open minded to change. Okay, I mean I, think that's! This is not that we're against change. I think it does.

M

L

Change, you know and.

F

L

Well, thought out and and provided with all the information to answer the questions that we have and another offense to you all. It's not I'm, not talking you all I'm, just saying I mean that's a that's a big difference of 10 feet for four people or 20 50. Was it.

A

L

And so I mean without knowing the impact of that I mean it's hard to make a choice. You know yeah I.

J

Can't think I can't take.

L

It on someone's word that that's not gonna have an impact. Yeah I mean how do we know? It's not gonna have an impact what's happening today. I.

I

L

A

Like I said it's based on, you know, if you take the number of units that we have and and and the problems that you've had it's less than 1% so to say you know we have a problem because 1% of the population doesn't follow rules, but 99% now are going to be subjected to new rules yeah that doesn't make a lot of sense at this policy making.

A

You know when you're trying to make I think the key here is: it's like Commissioner floater says we're not against change, but we need to have data that we can, you know, say hey. We have data that can substantiate some of these changes that are being proposed, but right now, I think all of us have doubts on what has been presented and.

M

I'm somewhat for it, but you.

A

Know there's doubts here. There is no real substance in terms of how these things are. Gonna impact quality life.

M

So there's like there was who asked me: why did you vote on that change? What am I gonna tell because they say that three people out there wanted to have one in his basement, because some.

I

People were the communication from Council was that they wanted for people to be able to have more use of their property. There was a consultant that came down here that was brought in by the.

I

My opinion, the architects and what he was what he was proposing was that what's happening is that, as you have your sprawl? In other words, it cost the city a lot more money to be able to manage. You know the the lower density than it is to to have higher density, and he had to get this chart that he proposed in there.

I

Where there's you know where you have you're able that you're able to tax more of the property, basically and by being able, by being able to provide living space in there, that living space gets taxed at a and the property owner has more their property. In other words, it gives them more more options. The likelihood that a hundred percent other people are gonna be able to are gonna. Do this, it's slim to slim, to none. I can tell you, but it gives up, but.

A

It could present a problem for because this is for existing dwellings. So if somebody decides to build- and we assumed this thing got passed and my neighbor decides that he wants to extend to his property all the way to five people, my house I think I'd be a hell of a problem. For me, everybody.

L

A

L

But whether it's a pawn for you should not be, why we do it or don't do it? I agree.

A

The reason that we.

L

Should do it or not do it is because it's been studied, it's been used in another city, it's been the reason there has been the pros and the cons of been discussed and analyzed, and then we make an educated decision on whether or not it should happen or not, not because mr. Haddad doesn't want it to happen or because I want it to happen. It should be because it's been researched, yeah.

I

There's an article, a recent article and the Builder magazine for their certain cities that are providing more additional structures and they're in their backyards and they're, even using them as as as rentals but I, don't know. Maybe those backyards are bigger right, but there's a there's a there's: a move towards higher density. You know everywhere, I think planning statute.

M

J

M

C

Yes, we already have the the ordinances for the condos.

C

Or for small Lots, we have brought logs from 4,000 on the way to 3,000. We are gonna, prove 2200 or 2,400 square feet, Lots yeah, but as far as residences we need to. We need to limit ourselves. We need to let the owner decide what they want to do with its head back.

C

That's what counsel ones see is that pizza. What that comes women want is for the owner to decide how he's gonna use the property. If he finds a property, it's got 20 feet for set by necessary right in front then.

C

So, if they want, is the one a condo they can go to a condo, they want apartment, you can go to apartment there.

A

Is mechanism choice? What you're saying it's? You know four different types of living and that's why the higher densities are like the townhomes exist. That's already there. You know where the condominium projects exist, odds exist, I mean if you want to go to that route. Now, I know what you're coming at what you're saying and like I said, I Commissioner floor said this Commission is not against change, but it has to be something that has been researched. In other words, we all want to make the right decisions.

A

I guess you know, everybody wants to make sure that what we take forth is something that's very workable for everybody and it's been proven somewhere, and you know the planning of this whole thing has been done.

I

M

Go one more question so for apartments in our three I'm going to go from 20 foot setback to a 10-foot setback right.

J

M

I

Then it's 10 feet around the perimeter, so.

M

Our three in the rear I'll have ten feet of this proposal. So why don't you fight people? I could put more apartments because we're well.

I

The issue is this: that we were the council, said residential single-family and there's a directive to TRB and it they asked TRB to make a recommendation to council.

J

I

This is TR B's recommendation, so it has to go through you guys and you guys make your own, but then.

M

It's no longer residential its multi-family. No, this is a single thing. I know, but I mean you're you're you're, making it so dense that why not just build the apartments and you have all the density you want I find.

I

There's no ownership with apartments there's.

J

A big difference between ownership.

I

And and non non non ownership, but I guess so. I just want to ask a question before you guys, like absolutely aside to just scrap the whole, the whole deal, which is something that staff has been I, guess I misunderstood. There was no issue with fire. We had utilities, we had a EPF.

I

There was no issues with with AP. Their concerns were that if you have some existing Eastman's which were address, you know that those get respected so no concerns with fire, no concerns with with with utilities. So the questions that I have for you all is: do you all have an objective on an existing plan. Let's scrap this, which is I, guess that's what I'm feeling that that there's? No, you know there's a lot of discontent for the front porches in the front.

A

Okay, you're saying you give us the opportunity to build a front porch or a carport car.

Q

A

Or a carport, okay, taking a carport all the way up to what the property line the problem hold on. Let me think here now we.

H

We had also looked into not all the way the proper line, I feed before with an overhang so.

A

You basically go to 18 feet or 17 feet and have a two and a half overhang you're, mostly accomplished to have that vehicle covered. So if we would go to 17 yeah, that would give you I mean I know what the problem has been. Ten feet is not gonna. Give you much coverage for.

I

You one of the comments that we heard from one of the committee members was that when you're not allowing that column to go to the to the property line, then like, if you're an interior lot- and you want to do like a like a little circular- that column is in the middle of year.

I

Now that was one of the comments. Just so that's why they, the committee, said, or one of the members that you know said no but I want to call him in the middle of my, but.

A

But the thing is: if you're like I guess, if you allow the build all the way up to the to the property line, then your overhangs gonna go into the.

I

B

No yeah, okay,.

A

So then, basically, either.

P

A

You're gonna be two and a half feet from the property line or 18 inches. Based on what your.

I

Zero-Zero overhang or set your column back with an overhang, you know, there's a vertical there's. A definition said you all have before you there's a there's: a definition for a vertical I'm.

M

Not too sure to scrapping the whole back.

J

L

What I would ask again I have no control over what other people will do right now, but what I would ask is instead of having us vote right now, is providing us more information all so that we can analyze any more completely for.

J

L

If you can provide us others in other cities that have done this, that and see, if there's anything any literature or anything that has been written about how to make what you're proposing to do work so that we can analyze that and then come back and make a more informed decision, because I mean I, don't know how how anyone else is gonna do it, but what they're gonna vote, but I can tell you that it seems like it's just we're not ready. You see I feel like we're not ready to make a decision.

L

It may be the most brilliant idea that it's going to revolutionize Laredo for the next 50 years, but I don't know that right.

J

L

I as I, where I sit right now.

I

Yes and I'll just make one comment today: unless I'm mistaken, you can build your fence all the way up to the work and you build the offense up to in.

P

H

A

Depends on the subdivision, homeowners association.

H

A

Of them will only allow you to build to the edge of the structure which is 20 feet. However, in the older parts of town you're absolutely correct, we.

H

Can also it it has if I just you know, research on the violations that we found. You know 30 years, because this is only in the last six months or so yeah where this started from, and we have actually me. Oh me, all.

L

The one who benefited I think that German made that or maybe it was Minister badly, but I think someone here made the right questions like how am I gonna explain to people why I voted for this and.

I

Well, what happens is this the consumer? In other words it, and maybe it's it's not gonna happen in the affluent you know and the more affluent areas, but when you have the the affordable typically, the home is enclosed up to the 20 feet. Then, once the family gets a little bit more, you know. Typically, the the family's net worth is from their home right, so they go in there they're by their home. They got a two car. They got a two-car pad, they buy what they can. Instead of renting that purchase their home.

I

Then later they say, oh I want to protect my car and because they can only build that covered patio up to ten feet. They can't protect their car, so this allows the family number one to be able to cover and protect their vehicle, which is what they want to, which is what they want to do and that's what's prompted this whole, this whole issue, and it's it's a lot more than three families. I mean. If you do aerial so you'll see it. I mean you've been at the yeah. It's it's I.

A

Mean the court situation is too that's why I asked.

I

Can we can you all consider the front porch issue, because this.

J

Yeah, the carport I'm.

I

Sorry, what did I say? You should work on the carport, yeah porch airport porches.

C

Are allowed honest I think the carport should be should be looked at at the same or were looking at a lamppost on the back as he was intending.

A

On the issue that we've had with carports and I can speak from when I was in building really.

I

A

Is a problem for people because of the ten foot and that's and that's been going on for years years. It.

C

Could be an out mr. chairman, provided that that they can come with a little know.

A

Yeah they have to come in and get a permit. I have to come, get a permit once.

C

We have proved it see, I mean anybody, can build something in the front. It's improve, see the developers they can go. I didn't sell the house with the condition they say we'll come back and build a carport for you on the front C so that allows the developer morally I don't make.

A

A lot of the the of the front carport issue is this one that it's mostly in the inner city, yeah we've seen that in the inner city a lot and.

I

It starts happening after it was once the family has already gotten comfortable their monthly payments. Yeah yes, circle still battle I feel like I want to protect my I've.

A

Seen that it- and you know that gives them an opportunity to do that, there's some things here that have been going on to climate change: we've had a lot more hail, storms and in the past you.

I

A

Your cars outside and it can be problematic.

A

Public hearing at this point, yeah.

L

I need to learn, use.

A

Your presentation: are you guys in.

I

The other one I wanted to see if you all would consider instead of doing the five feet, maybe ten feet, because I know that you mentioned seven and a half seven and a half feet there and there, but still, in other words, I'm still removing the two and a half feet around the around the perimeter.

A

I

In other words, they're gonna have to apply for it. Well,.

A

At this point, this is a public hearing it which before is this. What we're gonna have to, and we've listened to your presentation, if you have nothing else to add, we want to. Thank you very much. Okay. This is a public hearing, anybody else who wishes to speak in favor in favor of this particular item.

A

Anybody who wishes to speak against against this particular item.

A

Okay, all right: well, nobody else wishing to speak. I know it's been several different. You know things discussed at the Commission level. One of them as cool has been more information, is needed.

A

Another one is that was proposed was just let us do the corporate issue, I think the best thing to do and I don't know how the Commission's been think it's is.

A

We do need more information to be able to make a decision on something and I. Think I would be willing to entertain a motion to table this item, to give them a chance to provide and get more information on how either whatever they're proposing might work.

A

But that's just a recommendation for me, it doesn't have to be I will entertain any kind of a motion that the Commission wishes to do. I.

M

Will make a motion to table the item? There's a lot of data information on setbacks and it's more to your favor from what I, researched and I think our comprehensive plan, and you want also talks about eliminating some of the setbacks. You might want to come back with some of those boats and input that, on the plan itself to help your your position have a motional.

A

Circle or do I have a second second I'll. Second, the motion.

L

Okay, we want to table the item, but do we want to provide some instructions on what additional information we need as part of the motion, so that that way, we're clear about what it is that we're asking for? We.

K

Can surface, for instance,.

L

To the suggestion, but bylaw here makes it seem like we'll just get some quotes from an article here and get some quotes from the content in there and then that's why you're going to need what I want what I want is if, if they have, if they've changed the setbacks to be the way they're proposing in another city, right, then to show us what other things they did in order to ensure that it was workable for the community in the neighborhood things like that, no it's not it going to be just enough to cut and paste.

L

Well. Here was this statement. He was that statement. I mean it has to be immediate area. Yeah.

M

L

Not assuming, as.

M

Lotion the only motion Authority together- that's here.

A

L

Not talking about them I'm talking about our mill.

A

It just gives I think part of that would also involve from a planning aspect if.

C

If we take if by tabling this, is from our information, mr. chairman, by tabling the the the motion I typically the item, are they going to be able to bypass us and bring it before City, Council or they're? Gonna have to wait until they bring it back to us and we make the recommendation yeah. That's.

A

The way it normally works I mean the Commission. Yes, it.

C

Is our agent that, before when we don't act on it, if they can go directly to City Council, a little can see but I think council appoint? Well, maybe we can can amend the the motion, whereas that is not being sent to sitting comes on. We are we make a recommendation through.

M

Understanding has to come back here once the.

N

Idea, research yeah: it does need the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

A

N

A

Guess the motion, then, that you have and would you consider that, will bring? What are you suggesting? Would you also entertain motion that, and not only would we look at the cities when we have something like this, but other cities that have planning aspects that might have utilized similar models in plenty of subdivisions. They.

M

Would also need the feedback on the planning staff there well.

A

That's that's part of why I'm adding that has we do it you concurrence with that.

G

A

So we have a second all those in favor keep on. If I are you gonna fight, he modifies.

M

A

Over yeah, okay, all those in favor aye those gains motion carries. Thank you all very much. The next item we have is amending the city of Lloyd Court of ordinance, chapter 25, entitled plumbing by adding a new definition and text which new definition is certification of irrigation contractor and any other matters incident here there. This is a public hearing who will be making this presentation.

H

Can you have anointed that was drafted and again the same thing counsel asked us to what are the TRP for revising the irrigation.

H

Problems that were created by over a watering of the various subdivisions- and so in this case we met with various contractors, irrigate errs and looked at various options that there exist currently and so one of the you know we looked at the method. The watering by different.

H

Devices then, and then also we looked at where to place the your sprinkler systems and so essentially there's the two. The two changes that have been brought about other than making some grammar improvements was that you would one register.

H

The irrigate errs make sure that the register annually and that was corrected, and then the other one is is that the.

H

If you mind going to the there's no pages but it'll, be the section 25-18 ein minimum standards, the design, minimum standards, 25, 90, okay and where we would have 48 inches from the back of curve, where you would install your a sprinkler irrigation system, okay and and that they have to conform to the US EPA WaterSense specifications for low volume, volume, irrigation efficiency by mister devices- and this was proposed by some of the area Gators after we.

H

Drawing on this, one is not here: I, don't think it was improving in your package.

H

To show by allowing this 48 inches from the back curve, you prevent over spraying onto the streets and their work, not deteriorating someone shouldn't. That was the proposal of what it was look like very as we like that, looking at different curves on the the curve, uh though, and the gutters on to the street, but we figure that the most of the deterioration has been caused by me over spraying of the irrigation systems.

A

So, basically, in those forty eight inches or four feet, what you're saying is that the type of system has to be used as sort of like a drill or a low-flow. It.

H

Could be a drip, it could be there one of the at first we were just leading up with a drip irrigation, but then one of the irrigator is proposed that there are some that have heavier drops so prevents from overflow over spraying and overflowing with you know, and so because it's heavier drops quicker into onto the to the lawn.

I

In the current and the existing ordinance, what happens on the existing ordinance? There's two things number one. If you're gonna be within 48 inches of the of the back of the curve, it has to be a drip system. Mm-Hmm.

G

I

So having it to be a drip system, it's not enough! Is it sufficient, but it's not effective for the landscape. That people are using so what's happening. Is that they're putting those sprinkler heads at the and guess, where they're pointing they're, pointing towards the street and when they're pointing towards the street, then you have the overtime the water is jetting over into the street as opposed to the way Tony described it. He says when you want to do an irrigation system. You want to triangulate the water flow. So this the proposed changes to the ordinance.

I

Are that any you, whether you're, ripped if you're retrofitting more than 50%, then you need to conform to the to the more a water efficient system, so 20 feet. The first 20 feet from the back of the curb. A new construction now has to be the efficient systems in those efficient systems, if they're all heavier water, so you don't lose and those it isn't loose. Evaporation and the water is heavier, so it doesn't get pushed off with with the wind.

E

I

That's one: the other thing is that on the islands and that's when you see the medians and and the subdivisions you see the grass all the way up to the curb. So with the current proposed. The recommendations are that the first four feet there's zero vegetation, so it either has to be zero, scape or or or some kind of sidewalk or something so now the so it makes it to where the water is further away from the further away from the street and then the final.

H

Thing that was a recommendation that way yeah.

I

Obviously, you're not.

H

Going to put you're not going to go to water, it so therefore change your skate or no water.

I

What's happening, it's like on the medians, they green, they, it's all green. So now, you're gonna have to have some xeriscape in there before you get any note zero vegetation, so that's one, the other. The other part is there's a requirement now that the irrigator certifying that he did things according to what he submitted, whereas before it was on beat it was kind of like pushing the city to say: hey, you did it, you did it wrong fix it.

I

Now the the the the irrigator says: hey I, did I submitted the plans and I did it according to the to the to the plans, and the city is sitting space that.

A

Was always the case when the ordinance was in place? You have to submit your plans and they had to be approved by the city. huh Yes,.

I

But there was no certification by the by the irrigator that he did it according to plans. It was kind of like go inspect, find out about did something you're.

A

Talking about certifying the the one who's actually that the irrigator.

I

Yeah, the guy didn't work as.

A

That kind of certification he's.

I

Gonna provide assert, but he's gonna be.

A

So state doesn't do it.

I

He who does it well, he has to do it according to the to the :.

A

According to the plans, I get that, but you saying certified and I'm trying to figure out who does a certification of irrigator well.

I

I'm, that sort of a certification by the irrigator, in other words the area Gators as I, did it according to plans the city.

A

Did my plans and the city approved oh and I'm gonna construct it according, but that's always been the case. What's a difference, though, the I.

C

Spoke to some of you Gators, and they they have a little concern that, because that kind of monopolizes, by by bringing a business and he's gonna certify no.

I

There's no certification of the irrigator, so no it's the irrigator says I did it according to whatever.

M

That's like he did it. Of course. That's.

C

That's already that's already on plumbing I spoke to say Guerrero. That question is a well actually. Our main concern is not about the certification. It's about the runoff in in that damage in the streets. So I completely completely agree with everything, of course, as long.

Q

C

We have the city railroad inspector, no, no, that turns back into they go away. Why do we make the certification? If, if we we have the plants the permit in this spectrum by the city of Laredo? Doesn't that impose a little bit more load on the on the educators? That's that's what they the concern they had is on and and I think I just do it. K myself I spoke to you're able he said well, I'm the one expecting that so I. Don't let anything go back.

C

So just that one, but but as far as yeah I know, but I'm telling you whatever so the I agree.

I

With my is granted off, in other words, up I'm making you aware that that was on the on the proposed changes. There was a new definition. Yes, a new definition was that the guys doing the work is certifying that he did it according to the plans or have you modified the plans that he submitted any set of plans? Those of you could be found, but you can scratch it off. That's really.

A

A movie issue to be honest because the plants have to be approved by the city and you have to construct, coordinate planes, you do it from the planes and the inspector you know says: hey. You didn't do according to plans that you just got stopped out there and you have to me. Do I'm.

L

Sorry go ahead. I put some a question on reception on reclaimed, water.

I

What's redlined this.

L

Is you are drafted.

I

A

Is a lay 25 93 yeah.

I

It was, it was misspelled before, but I think when they did the the change that they misspelled, gonna coop it up or I, think it was a word a break.

H

Every corporation yeah, that was the only thing that was a misspelling I.

A

What has this confuses that the whole ordinance ears red line is in reg, which there's a change.

H

I

Old example, and.

A

It should just be wherever your changes.

A

Basically, it's a typo that you're trying to fix in that the whole.

I

More than and here's a red light, maybe.

L

It's the font, the font, size.

I

Yeah, it's probably.

A

Okay, thank y'all. Thank you, I think we've got this is a public hearing. Anybody who wishes to speak in favor in favor of the change in favor.

A

Anybody who wishes to speak against against change and not what are the wishes of the Commission I would.

C

Like to make a motion to approve essentia via the ordinance of the City Council, provided that we risk crushed that certification for the for the irrigator tongue, see any that that's my motion. We.

A

Have motion: do we have a second second and a second all those in favor signify by saying aye? All those against motion carries. Thank you. Next item is a public hearing in consideration of the following Street closure.

A

Is that public hearing a consideration, the street closure of Sherman Street between reality and something that all right and who's making this presentation.

A

R

Good-Evening good-evening patents on commission, my name is Linda the land acquisition manager for the city of Laredo and what we what we do before you is a taste, a permanent street clothes and request from mr. Mike McBain. This is at the 1900 block of Sherman and I'll put that into the map. Okay, mr.

R

Thank you, okay. So there are several elements that must take place in order for a citizen to ask for street clothes, and this is in accordance to the 1984 ordinance, where there is a permanent closing requests made. The neighbor that we're talking about it's in the original land grant area that the city has. So that's the first element that we must meet so I'm, going to point to the property that mr. McBaine owns right now it is a trucking company and the purpose that he is requesting the street closure. It is to secure his Rock.

R

What now he currently uses, Sherman, Street or the is in and out to his business, the abutting property land, its LFT property, and they are an agreement for the street closure. So the ordinance requires that both property owners being agreement to the street closure. At this point, we've taken it up all the way to the point where we've met with all the departments that are affected by this we've done the appraisal, and now we bring it to the planning Zoning Commission for their authorization.

R

In order for this closing to proceed, and it just for your information, it is an m1 industrial zone. Zoning area we did follow the handbook, it pertains to main deception, to section 2.0 to of that handbook, or it is a non thoroughfare and it is a dead-end Street. So this is what one of the criteria is worried. It is allowed for to take place.

R

We've noticed too, there are two easements that need to be taken care of, and it's an ATP easement, and they want to require that there be a pole there and also at an AT&T easement that they do want us to acknowledge. That is in existence.

A

Okay, thank you very much. Your presentation.

R

Mr. Beckman y'all want to ask him any questions. He's traveled in from out of town in case the Commission.

J

A

This is a public hearing. Anybody who wishes to speak in favor of this in favor of this.

Q

Thank you for having me I am mr. McBaine and I do operate, that warehouse won't be Derry Street and, as you know, the west side of Moreno and those blocks has been an industrial park for probably 40 years. I'm gonna say a lot of those buildings from built late, 60s, early 70s and we've been operating transloading in that neighborhood, since 2002 and neighborhood is bordered by the Union Pacific Railroad on two sides.

Q

So just operate in that neighborhood, you know requires you to tolerate a lot of train traffic and in the last I'm going to say four years or five, there have been real estate transactions. That's they've had five sales that that's taken some parking away from from our previous operations. So basically, what we're doing now is parking trailers in Sherman Street, which is dirt.

Q

We bought that warehouse that was in the in the photograph in 2010 and we purchased Burnside Street on the north end in 2011 from the city and we're applying to purchase Sherman Street today on the south south end of the same warehouse, so that we can make an all-weather parking area of about 13,000 square feet for traders.

Q

That's it that's it all!.

A

Right. Thank you very much. This is a public hearing. Anybody who wish to speak in favour in favor anybody who wishes to speak against against it, not what are the wishes of the Commission I'll.

F

Make a motion to close public hearing and approve the screw closure of Sherman Street located between the Doughty and somebody's been second.

A

Yeah, what motion and the second all those in favor aye all right before we move on I'd like to ask for a 5-minute recess. We all take a five-minute recess. Yes,.

A

You all right we're back from recess extender that we have is a review and consideration of the following of vacating Platts. There is a particular plot that we're going to an item we're going to move up. Commissioner.

L

Flores I'm, sorry, it's gonna be I, think item 9c.

L

Yeah, the issue is that we won't have quorum if I step out, and so we need to move the item up now because we have to table it okay, so we have a motion to I. Can.

G

One that the move 9c all right, second and a.

A

Second, all those in favor aye.

M

A

Now we need a motion because we're not gonna have a quorum. I'll make a motion to table Hey.

C

G

E

All those in favor aye, yes, will be moved to the next meeting item. Unfortunately,.

A

Right yeah item 9c, we're gonna have to move in and I'm certain. It's gonna be specifically for the next, maybe 20th.

D

A

Just because we believe we have situation here, we don't have.

L

A forum, let me ask you, but does it affect any timeline for the project I mean because we need or.

P

A

Wanna approach program, a mr. Choi, you.

L

Know we we should've brought up earlier when we had the quorum I apologize for that good.

P

Evening, everyone off with CEC I, don't believe it'll affect our timeline, because we, the preliminary plat, was here last time for Phase three, and we got that approved. So that's been allow us to continue we're we're just talking about that right now. I believe I'll be okay, because that allows me to continue with our one-stop shop and everything I think just kind of getting it approved. So all right um I should um thank you, we're okay with that. Okay! Thank you. Thank you. Sorry about that. All right! All.

A

Right all right, so the next Senate that we have is reviewing consideration of los pacientes east master plan, the antennas residential and commercial.

A

I'm, sorry, I'm, sorry, I'm, tiny, oh hey,.

B

J

A

Sorry, I dropped a mistake. Reviewing consideration of the following consider to vacate the plat of online star at India chart, as recorded in December 19 2016, all right.

A

The proposed action is approval. This is a thirty two point: seven acre tract and we're breaking this plat. Yes, sir, come on up.

O

Good evening, mr. chairman commissioners, on board um um what I, just for the record from boa consulting and I'm here to represent my client to scandal, properties and I. Concur with our comments. Okay,.

A

All right, thank you very much. Thank you all right, which is the Commission motion. Choko taken motion, the second all those in favor aye motion carries. Thank you very much all right. Next now we told the reconsideration of loss present. This east master plan, the antennas residential and commercial. This is 170 acre located west of Concord, Hills development and east of Corinthos Road. The zoning is a hundred others only for this 185 lot. Development is a gr one or one a and before mr.

N

Chairman the opinion is requested. This item view table time certain all.

A

Right, then, can we have emotional table the ice? Second motion of a second all, those in favor aye. All right. Those against motion carries. Thank you item that we have is the review consideration of fair purview, subdivision master plan, the antennas residential and commercial. This is a two hundred forty nine point: twenty nine acre tract located north east of I-35 footage at south of us any Seattle Parkway. This is only for this 406 mm lot: development as before the track is located in the district in district 6 Nellie, the Elma, which is district 5.

A

So that's incorrect, but that's irrelevant where post action is approved, subject to the following comments from planning and traffic safety parts of leisure and they noticed to developer from planning. Yes, sir.

N

Mr. mr. chairman, planning wishes to amend our planning comment, number three to add a comment: I'm sorry, a comma at the end and add the words or other alternative, as recommended by staff.

A

Okay, now let me see if I understand the current comment says there is an existing. There are existing flats on this property yeah.

N

A

Need to vacate the existing plants or the replay, the entire property correct.

N

A

You wish to we.

N

Wish to amend it to include the clause or other alternative, as recommended by staff, did.

L

The first sentence, or a second we'll.

N

Need all right: okay,.

K

Yes, sir, mr. chairman, through cat Olivia Valhalla engineering representing the client, we had discussions with planning so we're okay. With those comments, there's one more, we did speak to traffic safety on their comments. If we can deal with their comments at the one-stop shop, because sometimes they put comments at we're afraid that if they get approved by plans only we have to do that sure, but that gets taken care of at one stop shop.

K

So if there can be some type of closet where we will look into these things and if one tops, if at one-stop shop, they apply we'll go ahead and put them in to the plans if they don't, they kind of get struck out. I'll.

A

Tell you all will do. Let me ask the traffic department to come up here.

A

Good evening, probably in traffic department, I didn't I did speak with mr. B on Yahoo or an agreement with okay, the comments and all round working together that the one stop very good. Thank you.

C

So we're gonna we're gonna, delete all the comments. No.

A

I think he wants language that says that the comments by the traffic department will be addressed at the one-stop shop. Yes, Jack correct. Yes, sir okay.

L

And if they're not resolved dates, they remain yeah.

K

We'll get it done, they're, so technical that that it's yeah. This is probably not the forum that discuss that I agree.

N

A

N

A

Yeah they can be resolved in Moscow.

K

Okay and other than that, we agree with agree with the rest of the comments and, if you all have any questions here to answer any.

A

Questions from the Commission no questions. Thank you very much. What are the wishes of the Commission I'll.

C

Make a motion to approve for your comments and we deleting traffic or.

A

Not deleting and in the language that it will be resolved most options and.

C

In the language there would be a range of the one-stop shop. That's that's the its.

A

Motion second and second, all those in favor aye motion carries thank you. Okay,.

A

Next item is revealed reconsideration at the end of the revision of the new traits and well I'm. Sorry, that's what we tabled after nineteen, that's 90, now review and reconsideration of the Cal ad industrial park. Master plan in ten is industrial.

N

A

Proposed action is a proof subject to the following comments from planning and from engineering.

E

Yes, dr. Martinez engineering and we concur with all the staff comments, one through six to the master plan. One.

A

Through six from planning and also from engineering, they find the faces. Yes, okay notice, the developer. Okay, all.

G

Right, thank you. What are the wishes? The commission I'll make a motion to approve, subject to the following comments: sake, a motion to second.

A

Those in favor aye motion carries. Thank you. The next item is preliminary consideration of the plat of Calais deindustrialization is industrial. Is a 41.0 five acre tract located west of I-35 and north of Bob bulik loop? The proposed action is approved, subject to the following comments from planning and they noticed a developer.

E

Face we can probably the comment wanted to from step: ok, very good. What.

A

Are the wishes of the Commission.

M

A

A motion to second all those in favor aye motion carries. Thank you. The next item is preliminary consideration of the plat of FedEx Freight Laredo, the antennas of distribution facilities at 61 point 4, acre tract located west of I-35 and east of mercury Drive. This is a 3 lot. The zoning for this 3 lakh development is m1 proposed to actually approve, subject to the following comments from Planning from engineering and a notice to developer.

O

You know this again from bill consulting upsetting my client, and we do concur with your comments. Thank you. Any.

A

Questions on the Commissioner: what are the wishes of the Commission.

M

A

Do we have a second second in a second all those in favor aye carries. Thank you the next time he was preliminary consideration of the plat of emt's e. The antennas industrial is a 4.5 acre tract located south of F in 1472 and west of FM 33 38. The proposed action is approved, subject to the following comments from Planning from fire and an oyster developer.

A

O

A minion ago, Mr.

I

Prettiman this project and we concur.

B

M

Of the comments thank.

A

Any questions for the engineer that what are the wishes of the Commission I make.

G

A motion to approve, subject to the following comments in the second.

A

All those in favor aye motion carries. Thank you. The next item is preliminary reconsideration of the planner by the end subdivision unit 11, the intent is residential. This is a 19.8 eight acre tract it's located south of Sierra, Vista, Boulevard and west of weaponry enters Road. The zoning for 120 lot developments are 1a. The proposed action is approved, subject to the following comments and from parks and leisure, and they noticed a developer.

N

Mr. chairman, the engineer emailed us that he did concur with our comment. Okay, so.

G

Then what are the wishes of the Commission.

M

A

We have a second second and a second all those in favor, okay. Those against motion carries. The next item is preliminary reconsideration of the plan of green subdivision phase. 10 B, the antennas residential is a 7.9 acre tract located north of F in 1472 and east of st. people's Boulevard is a 67 lot. Development r1 mhm proposed action is approved, subject to the following comments on planning from traffic safety parks and leisure and a notice to developer. Yes, sir,.

Q

Needham's chen commissioners and staff general fellow consulting and here state.

A

That we concur with our comments, any questions for the engineer and that what are the wishes.

C

Of the Commission I think a motion to approve, subject to comments motion.

A

Do we have a second in a second all those in favor aye motion carries all right. We have a motion. Okay,.

A

Thank you all very much.

A