►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting 041521
Description
Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting 041521
A
B
A
A
A
All
right,
I
do
know
that
commissioner
called
me.
He
was
having
trouble
getting
into
the
meeting.
Commissioner
dominguez
called
me
that
he
was
going
to
be
not
able
to
attend
the
meeting.
He
had
a
something
that
he
had
to
get
done
a
medical
procedure
in
his
eyes.
So
I
would
like
to
have
a
motion
to
excuse
the
commissioners
that
are
not
here,
which
is
dominguez.
A
D
D
Well,
as
you
know,
we
have
a
lag
in
the
broadcast,
so
if
you
can
pause
here
for
just
a
minute
and
give
the
public
an
opportunity
to
see
the
opponent,
we
will
alert
you
if
anyone
does
call
in
at
this
point,
it's
a
good
time
to
remind
everybody
to
please
keep
your
mic
smooth.
We've
asked
the
applicants,
who
are
here
today
or
representatives
who
are
here
today
to
stay
unmuted
and
to
suspend
their
video
until
not
not
when
their
item
comes
up.
D
But
when
you
chairman,
bial,
ask
for
their
their
comment
at
that
point,
then
they
can
unmute
and
share
their
video.
That
way,
it
keeps
it
a
lot
easier
for
us
to
manage
from
from
this
end
and
we'd
also
ask
the
commissioners
if
you
can
also
stay
muted
until
it's
it's,
and
so
you
have
a
comment
that
helps
with
the
feedback.
D
E
Ms
guerra
good
evening,
vanessa
guerra
for
the
record,
the
applicant
is
alberto
flores
owner
the
property
is
described
as
lots.
One
two
and
three
block
82
eastern
division
located
at
602
corpus,
christi
street.
The
zone
change
request
is
from
b1
limited
commercial
district
to
b4
highway
commercial
district.
E
E
The
future
land
use
designates
this
area
as
neighborhood
mixed
use
with
high
density
residential
to
the
north
staff
does
not
support
the
proposed
zone
change.
It
is
not
in
conformance
with
the
neighborhood
mixed
use,
designation.
It
does
not
meet
the
location
requirements
for
b4
districts
that
they
be
located
along
major
arterials
or
freeways.
Corpus
christi
is
not
identified
on
the
third
floor
plan
and
the
proposed
use
is
dissimilar
to
the
primarily
residential
and
light
commercial
uses
in
the
area,
and
that
is
the
proposed
motion.
Either
approval
or
not
that's
the
phone.
A
A
F
F
A
F
H
I
J
I
K
D
K
A
H
L
A
A
E
I
I
will
sir
okay,
the
applicant
is
fm
1472
investments
in
kurt
krause
managing
partner
and
representative.
The
property
is
a
55.9260
acre
track
located
south
of
the
fm
1472
and
northwest
of
mikado
road.
The
request
is
from
b4
highway
commercial
district
to
m1
light
manufacturing
district
proposed
use
is
like
commercial,
the
owner
when
queried
mentioned,
that,
although
there
were
no
specific
uses
identified
at
this
time,
this
the
prospective
uses
will
be
light
industrial
in
nature.
E
E
This
is
zoning,
as
you
can
see
it's
zoned
m1
with
m1
to
the
west,
south
and
east
of
it,
with
some
ag
also
to
the
north
and
east.
It's
designated
as
medium.
I'm
sorry,
it's
designated
as
neighborhood
mixed
use
with
agricultural
world
with
some
medium
density
residential
to
the
south
and
light
industrial
to
the
east
and
staff
supports
the
proposed
zone,
change
the
property,
abuts
m1
zoning
to
the
west
and
south,
and,
although
not
in
conformance
the
comprehensive
plan,
the
zone
is
generally
compatible
with
the
surrounding
uses
and
zones.
E
A
M
A
All
right,
thank
you.
Does
anybody
in
the
commission
have
any
questions
for
mr
jed
gilpin?
I
I
have
some
questions
all
right
there.
There
is
a
lighting
system
that
is
in
front
of
that
location
on
the
south
part
of
1472,
which
is
not
lit
it
is
that
because
that's
part
of
your
project
or
will
you
have
additional
lighting
related
to
that.
M
A
A
We
don't
have
anybody
else
on
the
line,
all
right.
What
are
the
wishes
of
the
commission
motion
to
recommend,
as
presented
by
staff?
Okay
by
mr
lavalina?
Do
we
have
a
second
second
seconds
it
all.
Those
who
are
not
in
favor
of
the
motion
signify
by
saying
aye,
with
none
heard
motion
carries
the
next
item
amending
the
zoning
ordinance
of
the
city
of
laredo
by
rezoning
lots
one
two:
seven
and
eight
block
21-11
eastern
division
located
at
3100
state
highway,
359
from
b3
to
m1
all
right
vanessa,.
E
E
E
It's
zoned
b3,
with
r3
to
the
north,
with
some
b4
to
the
east
and
it's
designated
neighborhood
mixed
used
with
high
density
residential
to
the
north
staff
does
support
the
proposed
zone
change
it's
located
along
an
expressway
and
a
truck
route.
There
are
no
residential
uses
of
budding
the
site
and,
although
not
in
conformance
with
the
neighborhood
mixed
use,
designation,
which
excludes
m1
zoning,
it
is
compatible
with
the
mix
of
light
industrial
uses
along
the
corridor.
A
E
E
N
O
B
A
D
D
The
what
you
see
here
in
the
grid
pattern-
those
are
paper
streets.
The
city
owns
that
right
of
way
and
where
the
city
owns
that
property
is
right
of
way.
So
what
you're,
seeing
in
hashed
red
is
the
only
property
that
could
be
developed.
So
there
is
a
buffer
between
that
and
the
trail,
as
you
can
see
on
the
area.
A
D
A
I
thought
there
was
a
big
investment
coming
in
to
redo
that
whole
area
like
billions
of
dollars.
Yes,
not
explaining
what
I
was
aware
of.
There's
millions
of
dollars
coming
into
that
area
to
redo,
not
only
the
channel
coming
in
right
behind
that
subdivision,
that's
there,
but
also
to
enhance
this
particular
trail
system.
You.
A
A
there
was
a
number
like
50
million
or
somewhere
in
there
yeah.
This
is
a
bigger
plan
that
wasn't
it
started
when
it
was
during
our
administration
in
erasmus.
I
think
you
purchased
the
property
when
you
were
at
cd,
yeah
and
and
the
intent
is
to
go
all
the
way
up
to
casablanca,
or
at
least
that's
what
the
intent
was
previously.
I
don't
know
if
it's
changed
now.
No.
D
A
O
B
A
I
G
A
Map
that
we're
currently
looking
at
and
david
killam
donated
that
that
lake
to
us
and
we
ended
up
taking
all
the
tires
out
of
it,
yeah
and
and
at
some
point
the
land-
that's
north
of
clark
that
you
see
there
in
the
background
this
is
walmart.
That's
there
was
also
promised
to
us
by
david
killam
many
years
ago
and
I'm
sure
that
the
intent
is
still
to
do
that.
A
O
O
A
O
A
Yeah,
the
other
thing
oscar
is
it's
pretty
close
to
the
brick
to
the
bridge
there,
the
property,
excellent
for
entrance
or
exit
that
may
be
compiling,
especially
if
you're
going
to
go
to
manufacturing
or-
and
you
have
trucks
going
in
and
out
of
there
that
becomes
tight,
real
tight,
okay,
all
right!
Anybody.
A
E
E
E
E
It's
designated
as
low
density
residential
along
that
that
portion
of
the
highway
with
light
industrial
designated
north
of
it
staff
supports
a
proposed
zone
change
all
the
it's
appropriate
at
this
location,
despite
its
non-conformity
with
the
comprehensive
plans
designation
as
low
density
residential
as
it
meets
the
b4
location
requirements
that
it
be
located
along
the
principal
arterial
or
expressway
it.
Of
course
it
meets
the
the
minimum
lot
size
requirements
and
it
will
allow
uses
that
are
compatible
with
the
existing
surrounding
area.
F
D
A
O
A
I
just
have
a
comment.
This
is
the
ugliest
highway
coming
into
the
city
laredo,
with
all
the
junkyards
that
are
all
up
and
down
the
highway
nobody's
done
an
effort
to
clean
it
up.
You
know:
we've
just
approved
one
project
without
a
specified
use.
Who
knows
who
knows
if
it's
another
junkyard,
this
property
is
basically
again
coming
to
us
with
no
proposed
use.
A
H
A
D
O
A
A
A
R
S
On
this
item,
is
I
actually
have
a
house
right
next
to
it,
I
am
west
of
it,
so
I
would
like
before
lends
itself
to
a
wide
range
of
businesses.
I'm
not
saying
I'm
against
any
type
of
this
is
there,
but
it
does
affect
our
homes.
That's
right!
Next
to
it.
I
know
they
said
that
there
was
a
low
residential.
O
What
I
can
say
is
that
this
is
gonna,
be
a
a
master
plan
with
a
lot
of
residential,
so
the
even
though
right
now
we
those
are
just
going
to
be
developed
to
a
smaller
right.
Now
we
have
a
plan
that
will
be
presented
to
the
staff
for
three
three
commercial
odds,
and
but
most
of
the
master
plan
is
residential.
So
we'll
you
know,
it'll
it'll
be
a
nice
development.
P
P
It's
going
to
be
a
master
plan,
development
with
commercial
up
front,
and
this
specific
tract
here
represents
three
lots
and
our
target
market.
We're
going
to
have
a
large
right-of-way
going
right
adjacent
to
this.
So
we're
we're
going
to
be
targeting
retail,
primarily
like
a
dollar
store,
a
restaurant.
Perhaps
a
convenience
store
in
the
corner.
D
P
P
This
is
just
the
first
phase
at
the
master
planner,
the
first
phase
with
the
commercial
in
the
residential
it's
coming
in,
but
the
goal
there
is
to
develop
the
entire
frontage
with
retail
and
perhaps
a
multi-family
type
uses.
So
it's
in
our
best
interest.
We
think
to
to
make
it
look
nice
and
complement
the
rest
of
the
development.
S
It
does.
I
was
just
concerned
that
with
a
b4,
it
would
be
like
a
bar
or
a
heavy
machinery
type
area
like
I
said
my
house
is
right
there
next
to
it,
and
I
I
kind
of
like
that
it
was.
It
is
kind
of
a
secluded,
but
I
do
know
that
things
do
have
to
change
a
little
bit.
I
just
didn't
want
that.
Next
to
our
home,.
A
A
E
Consulting
engineer,
it's
a
5.94
acre
track
located
west
of
escondido
drive
and
north
of
u.s
highway
59
zone
change.
Request
is
from
b3
community
business
district
to
b3
pud
planned
unit
development.
The
proposed
use
is
town
homes,
applicant
proposes
32
structures
on
64
lots.
Each
structure
will
contain
two
single
family
dwellings.
Structures
will
be
located,
such
as
the
shared
wall
is
located
along
the
property
line.
Each
lot
will
therefore
contain
one
single
family
unit.
Five
letters
were
sent
out.
None
who
received
four
against.
D
I'm
going
to
take
this
opportunity
to
remind
you
all
about
buds,
because
we
have
not
seen
these
in
quite
a
while
in
the
city.
However,
as
you
recall,
we
did
recommend
changing
the
rules.
City
council
agreed
on
puds,
and
so
I
want
to
remind
you
about
puds
about
the
changes
we
made
like.
I
said
we
recently
changed
the
pud
overlay
zone
now.
D
First
thing
to
remind
you
is
that
this
is
we're
not
changing
the
zone,
we're
adding
an
overlay
on
top
of
the
zone,
I'll
speak
to
that
in
a
second,
but
the
changes
that
we
made.
We
eliminated
the
area
requirements,
the
area
requirements
for
puds
were
quite
large
before
and
that
you
know
what
we
really
want
to
get
out
with
these
puds.
D
We
clarified
the
rules
that
can
be
adjusted
with
the
overlay
zone,
which
rules
can
be
adjusted.
We
clarified
the
site
plan
approval
process,
because
this
is
just
the
first
step.
The
zone
changes
the
first
step.
They
have
to
come
back
to
the
planning
commission.
If
they
get
the
pud
overlay,
they
have
to
come
back
for
a
site
plan,
approval
of
which
you
are
the
final
authority
on
and
then
we
eliminated.
D
The
special
use
permit
option
for
town
homes
was
never
actually
a
legal
option,
but
somehow
it
got
finagled
in
there
as
a
way
that
we
did
townhomes
and
the
problem
with
that.
Is
they
end
up
taking
conditions,
basically
a
design
to
the
city
council?
And
then
it's
the
city
council,
designing
or
having
approval
authority
design
authority
over
town
homes,
which
that
is,
you
know
we
it's
not
ideal
to
have
a
political
body
being
the
ones
that
are
interpreting
the
rules
or
adjusting
the
rules.
D
We
it's
more
ideal,
which
is
why
side
plan
approval
process
is
the
norm
in
most
cities,
where
you
have
a
non-political
body,
the
planning
commission,
which
is
appointed,
looks
at
the
rules,
there's
a
little
understanding
of
the
rules
and
they're
the
ones
that
are
approving
the
site,
so
we're
bringing
us
more
in
line
with
how
other
cities
do
it
a
little
more
on
puds,
like
I
said,
pd
zones
are
not
replacing
the
existing
the
the
zone.
That's
there
they're
just
an
overlay,
so
the
underlying
zone
requirements
still
apply.
D
Now,
typically,
the
developer
is
not
going
to
come
in
and
say
you
know,
you
know
they
may
not
have
a
vision
for
what
they
want
to
do.
But
but
these
are
not
only
are
these
requirements
that
the
applicant
can
can
suggest,
but
it's
also
condition
or
or
requirements
that
the
city
clinic
commission,
the
city
staff
can
suggest
as
well
and-
and
I
say
that,
because
with
a
what
happens,
a
lot
is
with
higher
density
development.
We
might
say
okay,
that
is
pretty
dense,
but
you
know
for
that
neighborhood
to
do
something
that
dense.
D
D
So
that's
very
important
and
again
I
want
to
reiterate
that
the
pud,
the
zone
change
for
a
pud
is
right
now
and
while
we
encourage
them
to
submit
something
preliminary,
just
to
show
us
what
they're
thinking
it
is
in
no
way
being
approved
at
this
point,
and
while
we
preliminary
provide
some
comments
back,
those
are
not
the
limit
to
our
comments
and
you
may
see
a
total
different
design
from
what
they're
submitting
here
either
because
we're
requesting
it
or
they
change
their
mind
and
that's
perfectly
okay.
All
we're
saying
here
is
at
this
location.
E
D
E
This
is
a
future
land
use.
You
see.
It's
designated
high
density,
residential
with
neighborhood
mixed
use
just
to
the
south
and
west
and
parks
designated
to
the
north
and
agricultural
world.
Farther
north
staff
supports
a
proposed
zone
change
it's
in
conformance
with
the
comprehensive
plan's
designation
for
this
area's
high-density
residential
and
it's
compatible
with
existing
surrounding
uses
and
zones.
E
This
is
a
preliminary
layout,
as
we
mentioned
previously
they're,
proposing
64
lots
and
they
did
not
notice
or
did
not
indicate
the
structures,
but
they
related
to
us
that
they're
planning
to
do
two
unit
structures
that
would
the
the
shared
wall
would
be
located
at
the
property
line,
so
that
every
lot
would
have
one
single
family
unit
located
within
a
two
structure.
Two
unit
structure.
D
Now,
just
to
reiterate-
and
we
might
do
this
with
the
first
pd's
that
come
across
just
so
you're
familiar
as
you
get
accustomed
to
the
seeing
these-
this
is
not
a
site
plan.
This
is
just
a
layout,
a
site
plan.
The
the
requirements
of
the
psi
plan
are
spelled
out
in
the
ordinance
and
they'll
typically
come
in
multiple
pages,
because
you
can't
put
it
all
on
one
page
but
they're.
They
need
to
show
landscaping.
They
need
to
show
the
buildings
they
need
to
show
the
parking
they
need
to
show
a
lot
of
utilities.
D
S
D
But
I
want
you
to
keep
something
in
mind.
The
purpose
and
the
reason
that
we,
as
staff
initiated
the
changes
to
the
pud
zone,
is
because
we
agree
with
developers
that
we
need.
We
need
creativity
for
affordable
housing
solutions.
We
need
to
be
more
permissive
and
we
need
to
allow
for
smaller
lot
development
we
need
to.
We
need
to
be
a
little
more
flexible
in
how
we're
thinking
so,
yes
to
all
that,
we
want
to
see
more
affordable
housing,
but
it's
a
two-way
street.
D
These
developments
affordable,
but
we
also
want
them
to
be
functional
and
we
want
them
to
be
nice
for
the
people
that
end
up
buying
and
moving
and
living
here,
and
when
you
put
a
lot
in
a
little
space,
it's
complicated.
It
gets
difficult,
so
we're
trying
to
address
those
concerns
based
on
our
experience
in
other
similar
developments
around
the
city
with
that
vanessa
I'll
leave
it
to
you
to
read
through
the
preliminary
comments.
E
Sure,
as
kirby
mentioned,
we
asked
our
trb
committee
to
review
the
the
proposed
layout
or
the
preliminary
layout,
and
we
had
some
preliminary
comments.
Those
comments
included
that,
of
course,
the
site
plan
when
it
does
come
in,
should
include
all
the
information,
as
required
by
the
land
development
code,
which
includes
the
requirement
to
include
parking
layout
street
layout,
all
the
things
that
we
want
to
see
in
a
re
the
final
site
plan.
E
We
noted
that
three
parking
spaces
per
dwelling
may
be
needed,
given
that
the
lot
width
there's
no
room
for
for
street
parking,
a
communal
bus
stop
at
the
front
of
the
development
may
be
required
to
facilitate
a
child.
School
drop
pick
up
and
drop
off.
A
master
meter
may
also
be
required,
given
in
the
lot
with
some
possible
complex
with
on-street
parking
locations,
camino
trash
location
may
be
required
to
facilitate
trash
pickup.
A
secondary
fire
access
south
of
lot.
E
D
Now,
if
I
can't
we
add
to
that
that
commissioners,
this
really
is
not
the
time
to
go
through
the
conditions
and
look
at
that
layout,
because
it's
just
preliminary
that
will
be
at
the
site
plan
process
and
I
don't
think
it
can
zipity
quick,
come
in
in
two
weeks,
it's
going
to
be
they're
going
to
have
to
create
a
a
cycling
from
multiple
pages.
It
may
take
a
couple
meetings
where
they
come
to
you
and
you
ask
first
and
change
the
revisions.
D
It
goes
back,
it'll
be
a
process,
but
for
right
now
what
you
should
just
focus
on
with
your
recommendation
is:
is
this
a
site
where
you
feel
comfortable
with
higher
density
townhome
developments
on
smaller
lots
than
what's
typical?
You
know,
that's
the
question
you
should
be
considering,
as
you
think,
through
the
recommendation.
Is
this
appropriate
for
higher
density
development
at
this
location.
A
M
A
Commission,
commissioner
seconds
all
those
who
are
not
in
favor
of
this
motion
signify
by
saying
aye,
I
am
saying
we
have
one
abstention,
all
those
nobody
else
sustaining
or
so.
The
motion
carries
the
next
item.
Many
of
the
zoning
ordinance
of
the
city
of
radio
by
rezoning,
0.4935
acres
out
of
block
five
colton
garden
subdivision
located
at
515
west
hillside
road
from
b1
to
b3.
E
Yes,
the
owner
is
roberto
and
silva
martinez.
Edward
is
the
engineer.
This
is
a
4.4935
acre
tract
load
out
of
block
5,
carlton
garden
subdivision
located
at
515
west
hillside
road.
The
proposal
changes
from
b1
limited
business
centric
to
b3
community
business
district.
The
proposed
use
is
a
quick
loop
inspection,
business
and
customer
parking
letter
sent
12
and
none
will
receive
another
four
against
this
is
location
map.
E
This
is
the
future
land
use.
That's
designated
as
neighborhood
mix
used
with
institutional.
Just
north
of
this
location
staff
supports
a
proposed
zone
change.
It
is
in
conformance
with
the
comprehensive
plan's
designation
of
neighborhood
mixed
use,
which
includes
b3
zoning
for
this
this
area.
It
complies
with
the
dimensional
requirements
for
v3
zones,
and
it
is
compatible
with
the
mix
of
commercial
users
in
the
area.
N
Good
evening,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
commission,
edward
garza,
with
crane
engineering
here
on
behalf
of
the
owners.
This
this
request
is
to
allow
the
landowners
to
eventually
develop
a
a
quick
loop
inspection
business.
They
do
have
the
plan
to
develop
a
customer
parking
area
for
their
their
business.
This
is
the
former
site
of
the
michael's,
locking
key
and
they
plan
to
convert
that
location
into
a
quick
lube
it's
in
their
in
their
phasing
and
discussion
of
their
phasing
plan.
N
Definitely,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
commissioner
dolina,
when
I
first
looked
at
this
application
working
with
the
landowner,
that's
the
first
thing.
I
told
him
actually
that
we
needed
to
start
a
program
to
eliminate
and
organize
and
clean
up
the
property,
and
I
spoke
to
him
again
this
monday
and
he
told
me
that
they
do
have
that
that
ongoing
and
they
will
continue
to
do
so
until
they
have
it
properly
cleaned
up.
A
D
A
E
The
applicant
is
george
and
cesar
martinez
and
martinez.
Caving
company
is
the
engineer.
This
is
a
13.61
acre
track
located
north
of
u.s,
highway,
359
and
east
of
blue
20..
It
is
the
zone.
Change
request
is
from
aj
agricultural
district,
r1a
single
family,
reduced
area
district
and
the
provost
used
as
residential
letter
sent
out
were
10.
None
were
received
either
or
against.
E
E
This
is
the
zoning
and
you
see
that
it's
zoned
ag
and
with
r1
to
the
south,
and
it
is
designated
light
industrial
for
the
most
part,
with
low-density
residential
to
the
south
staff,
supports
the
zone
change,
although
it's
not
in
conformance
with
the
comprehensive
plan
designation
of
light
industrial
for
this
area,
the
proposed
zone
change
will
allow
users
already
present
in
the
surrounding
area.
It's
compatible
with
these,
the
existing
surrounding
zones
and
it
meets
the
dimensional
requirements
for
our
one
zones.
A
P
Yes,
sir,
this
is
mr
chairman,
commissioners
and
staff.
This
is
juan
salinas
also
speaking
in
favor
of
it,
and
I
just
wanted
to
mention,
as
as
miss
gaona
had
had
called
before.
Sheila
is
right
next
door
to
this
site
and
right
adjacent
to
her
house
is
where
we're
planning
to
do
r1a,
single-family,
residential.
A
A
A
You
want
a
motion
for
approval.
We
have
a
motion.
Do
we
have
a
second
second
advice?
Second
advice:
all
those
who
are
not
in
favor
of
the
motion
signify
by
saying
aye,
with
none
heard
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
The
next
item
review
and
reconsideration
of
porgy
on
the
subdivision
master
plan.
The
intent
is
industrial.
B
Yes,
mr
chairman,
for
the
record:
rafael
vidali,
the
applicant,
majestic
laredo
logistics
center
llc,
the
engineer
of
record
crane
engineering,
approximately
2,
000
acres,
located
east
of
is-35
and
mile
marker
13,
which
is
part
of
the
former
universal
test
track.
The
zoning
for
the
seven
phase
development
is
m2
and
the
proposed
use
is
industrial,
general
location,
aerial
view
street
view.
A
B
N
Yeah,
I
can
hear
you
fine,
so,
okay,
here
we
go.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
so
good
evening,
mr
chairman
and
members
of
the
commission,
edward
garcia,
with
crane
engineering
we're
here
on
behalf
of
majestic
realty.
We
are
just
making
some
slight
revisions
to
the
original
master
plan
that
we
had
developed
back
in
2015..
N
Majestic
realty
does
stand
behind
the
approach
to
do
its
part
as
a
developer
for
this
area,
we've
had
some
very
good
meetings
with
the
city
planning
department,
traffic
department
and
the
fire
department
regarding
some
of
the
bigger
bigger
pictures
of
things.
We
are
aware
that
txdot
is
an
enhancing
i35,
where
we
know
that
there's
a
lot
of
planning
and
work
being
done
by
the
mpo,
the
rma
txdot.
N
And
so
we
understand
all
that's
happening
in
that
area
and,
as
this
master
plan
is
developing
into
the
next
item
for
the
preliminary
plat.
One
of
the
big
topics
of
discussion
has
been
the
the
beginning
of
a
of
an
additional
route
to
the
north
you'll
see
on
the
preliminary
plat
in
the
next
item
that
we
are
starting
that
process
with
north
to
south
arterial.
N
So
from
a
from
from
a
poor
grandday
standpoint
and
the
fact
that
majestic
realty
is
a
stakeholder,
we
do
agree
with
the
comments
on
the
master
plan
based
on
the
needs
to
do
a
more
comprehensive
approach
and
majestic
does
stand
ready
to
do
its
part
as
a
stakeholder
in
working
with
the
city
and
with
the
rma
and
the
mpo
to
get
this
area
properly
programmed
for
a
better
transportation
network.
So
with
that,
mr
commissioner,
we
do
agree
with
the
with
comments
on
the
master
plan.
A
N
Yeah,
I
think
we
do
in
our
master
plan.
We
do
have
multiple
roadways
proposed
in
the
long
term.
I
have
my
engineers
involved
in
the
meeting
tonight
and
they're
prepared
to
show
any
exhibits
if,
if
we
could
share
our
screen,
if
not,
I
could
speak
to
it.
We
are
proposing
to
extend,
like
I
said,
met
earlier
port
grande
boulevard,
which
is
a
100
foot
right
away.
It'll
be
a
five
lane,
major
industrial
type
roadway.
Q
N
N
A
N
A
Now
we
understand
okay,
very
good.
Thank
you.
Does
anybody
in
the
commission
have
any
questions
for
mr
garza
all
right
and
nobody
has
any
questions
for
mr
garcia?
What
are
the
wishes
of
the
commission
ocean
to
approve
the
consideration
of
the
master
plan?
We
have
a
motion
for
mr
the
walina.
Do
we
have
a
second
check
on
all
those
who
are
not
in
favor
of
the
motion
signify
by
saying
aye,
with
none
heard
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
A
A
N
Yes,
sir,
mr
chairman,
edward
garza,
for
the
record.
These
are,
these
are
pretty
substantial
size
lots.
These
type
of
warehouses
that
the
majestic
realty
produces
are
larger
than
average
that,
but
they
have
a
different
market
share,
and
so,
for
you
know,
I
don't
want
to
reiterate
what
I
just
said
on
the
master
plan.
I
think
the
comments
pretty
much
are
similar
in
scope.
N
We
do
agree
with
them
in
the
sense
that
we
will
continue
to
work,
to
develop
a
solutions
for
not
only
traffic
safety
but
for
utilities
and
drainage
as
such,
that
all
correlate
with
that,
if
you
notice
on
the
preliminary
plat
there's
even
a
flood
plain
already
shown
on
there
what's
existing
but
majestic,
we've
already
completed
a
clomer
with
fema
to
already
get
our
an
approval
from
fema
and
all
environmental
work
has
been
completed
to
that
way.
Address
that
during
the
design
phase.
N
A
We
have
a
motion
from
commissioner,
the
wallini
in
a
second
from
commissioner
lugo,
all
those
who
are
not
in
favor
of
the
motion
to
approve
signify
by
saying
aye
with
none
hurt.
The
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
The
next
item,
preliminary
consideration
of
the
replan
of
lock,
128
and
lot
121,
a
block
three
of
san
ysidro
southwest
antler
crossing
subdivision
phase,
one
into
san
isidro
southwest
standard
crossing
subdivision
phase.
Four.
B
For
the
record,
the
applicant
tdb
land
holdings
limited
the
engineer
of
record
howling
engineering
and
surveying
company
approximately
24,
and
a
quarter
acre
tract
located
south
of
sunny,
theater,
parkway
and
west
of
springfield
avenue.
The
zoning
for
this
141
law
development
is
r1a
and
the
proposed
use
is
residential,
general
location,
aerial
view
street
view.
A
B
A
B
G
T
A
G
A
B
For
the
record,
the
applicant
is
killam
ranch
properties.
The
engineer
of
record
is
seca
engineering,
approximately
12
acres
located
west
of
international
and
north
of
hillcroft
road
portion
of
this
one
law.
Development
is
r1
with
the
remainder
being
unzoned,
since
it
is
outside
the
current
city
limits.
The
proposed
use
is
in
elementary
school
general
location,
aerial
view
street
view.
A
T
T
U
U
I
want
to
thank
kirby
for
working
with
us
on
that.
What
I,
what
I'm
questioning
is
in
our
annexation
ordinance
already
requires
a
tia,
so
it's
pretty
redundant
to
have
in
this
comment:
annexation
agreement
and
tia
I'd
like
the
the
word
tia
removed
prior
to
approval,
and
then
the
traffic
safety
department
calls
for
to
present
a
tia
and,
as
you
all
well
know,
there's
no
requirement
in
the
local
government
code
or
the
city
ordinance
to
provide
tias
for
preliminary
flats.
So
we'd
like
to
remove
that.
We
agree
with
everything
else.
D
Yes,
I
do
right,
just
as
the
planning
commission
has
the
authority
to
waive
some
of
the
requirements
that
are
in
the
land
development
code.
They
also
have
the
ability
to
add
requirements,
and
this
process
of
having
engineers
and
applicants
bring
designs
also
entails
that
the
planning
commission
listen
to
the
comments
of
staff
and
make
a
judgment
of
whether
or
not
what
staff
is
suggesting
is
needed.
D
So,
while
there
is
no
explicit
requirement
at
this
time
for
a
ti
every
time
a
development
is
made,
it
is
not
outside
the
authority
of
city
staff
to
recommend
one
and
it's
not
definitely
not
outside
the
authority
of
the
planning
commission
to
require
one.
Should
you
decide
that
city
is
isn't
judging
right
in
this
condition
that
a
cia
is
necessary,
the
tiaa
is
being
rep
is
being
produced
as
part
of
the
annexation,
and
so
I
don't
think
it's
necessarily
redundant
it.
D
U
A
C
C
D
A
U
So
you
know
we
understand
that
it's
part
of
the
annexation
agreement
to
me,
it
just
seems
like
a
blatant
attempt
to
try
and
reiterate
this
tia
into
the
formal
preliminary
plaques
and-
and
I
see
it
in
all
of
them
and
everybody-
I
guess-
is
just
doing
them,
but
it's
not
required
by
the
city
ordinance.
In
fact,
the
land
development
code,
section
212.103.
U
Doesn't
allow
development
of
property
to
be
subject
to
traffic
or
traffic
operations
that
would
result
from
the
proposed
use
of
the
development,
and
I
mean
it
just
it's
it's
just
it's
kind
of
like
this
defeating
purpose
right
and
it
just
it's
not
in
the
ordinance,
and
we
would
just
like
to
see
it
removed
from
these
comments,
and
they
shouldn't
be
on
anybody's
comments.
To
be
honest
with
you,
commissioner,
if
I
could.
D
We've
our
experience
in
the
experience
of
our
traffic
director
is
that
many
of
these
schools
have
created
traffic
issues
and
in
the
past
it
really
hasn't
been
assessed
and
what,
when
we
do,
a
traffic,
a
tia,
a
traffic
impact
analysis?
What
that
is?
That's
actually
a
traffic
engineer.
That's
calculating
the
impact
that
this
development
will
have
to
the
surrounding
street
network.
D
It's
not
a
tia
doesn't
in
itself
require
anything.
It
just
says:
here's
the
possible
impact,
here's
the
likely
impact
and
what
are
the
mitigations
that
should
be
required
in
order
for
those
impacts
to
be
mitigated
and
in
the
case
of
schools.
What
we
find
is
that
and
you've
seen
this
around
laredo,
where
they
don't
have
staging
of
the
vehicles
that
pick
up
and
drop
off
students
where
they
haven't
done,
that
on
site
or
haven't
planned
for
it
or
accounted
for
it.
D
What
you
see
is
during
the
times
when
kids
are
dropped
off
for
pickup
at
school.
It
creates
traffic
congestion
issues.
Many
of
you
may
have
experienced
that
firsthand.
So
those
are
the
kind
of
situations
we're
trying
to
avoid
that
tia
does
not
in
itself
require
anything
of
the
applicant.
What
it
does
is
has
them
demonstrate
that
they
say:
hey,
it's
not
going
to
be
a
problem.
Okay,
if
it's
not,
the
tia
will
demonstrate
that
and
if
they're
and
and
that's
all
it
does,
and
so,
if
they're
right
and
there's
no
there's
no
issue
here.
D
Nothing
to
see
here
well
great,
the
tiaa
will
back
that
up.
However,
if
there
is
the
traffic
impact,
analysis
will
show
that
yeah
there
is
going
to
be
some
issues
and
it
needs
to
be
mitigated
fairly
and
again.
I'll.
Just
reiterate,
line
development
code
gives
the
planet
commission
authority
to
do
many
things
to
to
lessen
the
requirements
and
also
to
strengthen
the
requirements
where
necessary,
and
so
this
is
fully
within
the
right
of
the
planning
commission
to.
A
A
K
A
A
A
Does
that
come
from
commissioner
advice?
All
those
who
are
not
in
favor
of
the
motion
signified
by
saying
aye,
none
heard
motion
carries
item
eight
reconsideration
of
the
following
final
plats
and
final
replats
we
got
8a.
Does
anybody
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
final
pledge
and
replay
got
a
made
a.
A
Favor
of
the
motion
signify
by
saying
aye,
none
heard
motion
carries
next
item.
Consideration
of
the
model
subdivision
compliance
consideration
of
the
model
subdivision
rules,
compliance
for
the
plan
of
lot;
a
block,
10
crown
ridge,
subdivision
phase
one
and
point
zero:
four
acre
track
of
land
into
lots.
Eight,
a
a
b,
h,
c
block,
10
crown
right
subdivision
phase
one
and
the
purpose
of
this
replant
is
to
incorporate
1.04
acres
and
subdivide
one
lot
into
three.
The
intent
is
residential.
Yes,
sir
who's
going
to
make
the
presentation.
B
Mr
chairman,
this
this
item
has
already
gotten
preliminary
final
approval.
The
applicant
is
global
realty.
The
engineer
record
is
tec
engineers,
approximately
half
an
acre
of
land
located
east
of
mali
drive
and
north
of
north
star
road.
The
zoning
for
the
street
lot
development
is
r-1
residential.
This
is
a
general
location,
aerial
view
street
view.
A
A
A
Do
we
have
a
second
second
advice
about
seconds?
All
those
who
are
not
in
favor
of
the
motion
signify
by
saying
aye,
not
heard
motion,
carries
item
number
10,
discussion
and
recommendation
regarding
an
amendment
to
section
24.6
6.4
of
the
laredo
land
development
code,
to
clarify
the
scope
of
improvements
that
require
historical
district.
Landmark
board
approval.
Yes,
sir.
A
D
D
D
Both
of
these,
as
I
read
them,
and
I
already
brought
the
I
brought
this
to
the
historic
district
landmark
board
many
months
ago
and
said
the
problem
with
this
is,
as
I
read
it,
I
interpret
what
this
says
is
that
we're
only
dealing
with
permanent
activity?
There's
nothing
here
that
says
what
is
this
is
saying.
Is
the
city
can't
issue
building
permits,
can't
issue
permits
for
someone
to
do
something
unless
it
has
historic
approval,
but
what
about
activity
that
doesn't
require
historic
approval?
What
about
sorry,
what
about
activate
doesn't
require
a
building
permit?
D
What,
if
you
want
to
put
up
a
dog
house?
What,
if
you
want
to
put
up
a
a
bird
bath?
What
if
you
want
to
plant
a
tree?
What,
if
you
want
to
hang
something,
hang
a
an
address
sign
on
your
on
your
house?
What,
if
you
want
to
get
cable
and
the
cable
people
or
the
internet,
people
have
to
install
a
box
on
the
side
of
your
house?
D
D
Let
me
get
that,
and
so
what
we're
trying
to
draw
in
distinction
here
is
that
these
activities
clearly
require
historic
approval
and
these
ones
don't
and
what
we're
trying
to
say
is
the
little
things
the
little
things
that
can
be
easily
changed
and
also
changed
back
those
we
don't
care
about.
What
we
do
care
about
is
preserving
the
historic
structure
so
that
it
lasts
for
our
for
generations.
For
our
posterity.
D
So
number
three
will
say
the
following:
activities
are
exempt
from
historic
district
landmark
review.
Now
this
is
already
in
the
code,
it's
just
in
another
section,
but
I
want
it
to
be
clean.
I
want
it
all
in
one
place,
because
what
section
24.66.4
is
these
are
provisions
relating
to
historic
districts
and
locally
significant
historic
landmarks,
specifically
talking
about
what
can
what
needs
approval
and
what
doesn't?
So,
let's
add
to
this
section
three
and
four
which
make
it
very
clear:
these
following
activities
are
exempt
the
proposed
use
interior
arrangement
and
interior
design
of
any
structure.
D
That's
that's
already
in
the
code,
but
I
want
to
put
it
here:
b,
repairs
and
renovations
to
existing
buildings
which
not
alter
the
exterior
appearance.
Again,
that's
already
in
the
code
just
want
to
move
it
here.
So
it's
clear
c
and
d
activity
which
does
not
require
building
permit.
Let's
make
it
explicit.
G
D
Four,
we
want
to
add
an
administrative
approval
process
where
the
historic
district
lambert
board
may
authorize
staff
to
administratively
approve
activities
which
do
require
board
approval
so
in
other
words
those
things
which
do
require
approval.
They
don't
all
have
to
go
to
the
board
if
the
board
decides.
D
Just
to
give
you
some
examples
of
what's
permitted
and
what's
unpermitted
permitted
work
on
the
left.
Column
is
structural.
It's
tall
side
of
screen,
fences,
electrical
fixtures,
roofing,
stucco,
siding
work,
utility
work,
pools,
blopas,
building
additions,
windows,
ingress,
egress
driveways,
it's
basically
big
permanent
things
that
are
costly.
What's
unpermitted
are
the
opposite:
they're
non-permanent
things
that
well
typically
that
don't
require
a
lot
of
money
and
are
easy
to
change,
landscaping,
short
see-through
fences,
non-electrical
fixtures
doors
and
painting.
D
Now
we
presented
this
motion
to
the
historic
landmark
board
and
they
recommended
approval,
but
they
also
they
wanted
to
retain
control.
Over
a
few
things,
I
would
recommend
our
recommendation
as
staff
is
to
recommend
approval
as
it's
written,
because
we
do
need
a
clear
definition
which
the
historic
board
agreed
with,
but
we
also
want
to
give
back
more
control
to
the
property
owners
to
allow
them
to
make
decisions,
especially
over
the
small
things
that
the
activities
that
don't
require
building
permit.
D
A
D
A
D
A
D
Letter
d,
most
the
time
you
know
almost
all
these
properties
are
already
plotted
lots
that
have
utilities
right,
but
we
had
this
example
come
up
just
the
other,
the
other.
You
know
day
where
somebody
wanted
to
get
internet
that
didn't
have
it,
and
so
they
thought
well.
I
gotta
wait
six
weeks
to
get
approval
to
stick
a
communications
box
on
the
side
of
the
home,
and
you
know
that
that's.
That
is
the
question.
D
D
We
don't
want
to
make
it
even
harder
for
them
to
renovate
to
improve
their
properties.
We
don't
want
to
put
barriers
in
the
way,
so
we're
trying
to
be
cognizant
of
that,
giving
them
control
trusting
them
with
some
of
these
little
things
that
they
don't
need
to
come
to
the
board
for
approval,
but
most
most
importantly,
making
it
a
clear
line
with
the
with
the
code
so
that
it's
not
confusing
for
the
public
or
for
staff.
What
does
and
doesn't
require
approval,
saying,
building
permit
activity
requires
approval
and
non-billing,
you
know.
Actually
it
doesn't
require.
A
J
A
D
Sir,
thank
you
very
much
for
bearing
with
us
with
the
technical
difficulties
we
had.
I
think
we'll
go
with
zoom
from
now
on,
but
hopefully,
like
commissioner
virial
said
we
will
be
meeting
in
person
soon
I'll
know
more.
On
monday,
when
the
council
meets
and
I'll
be
working
with
commissioner
villarreal
to
schedule
the
venue
and
again
my
recommendation
would
be
to
wait
until
we
can
meet
100,
where
we
can
invite
the
public
in.
D
If
we
can't
invite
the
public
in
and
we've
got
to
do
an
in-person
meeting,
but
also
manage
it's
going
to
be
very
difficult.
Because
because
there's
cameras
and
stuff
I
mean
the
council,
does
it
because
they
have
a
lot
of
staff
support
staff
there.
But
for
us
it's
just
the
planning
staff
and
then
pac
that's
recording
this,
but
it
would
be.
It
would
be
difficult,
not
impossible,
but
it'd
be
really
difficult,
and
this
is
working.
D
So
my
recommendation
be
to
wait
till
we
can
get
the
public
in
too,
but
I'll
it'll
ultimately
be
commissioner
viral's
decision
the
venue
where
we
go
so
I'll
be
communicating
with
him
on
that
and
then.
Finally,
I
just
want
to
say,
as
I
always
do,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
service
for
the
public
that
may
be
watching
you
don't
get
paid
for
what
you
do
here.
Your
volunteers
and
your
service
means
a
lot
to
your
city.
We
couldn't
do
this
without
you.