►
From YouTube: Planning & Zoning Committee Meeting 041819
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
A
A
C
A
D
E
E
It's
a
will
base
their
decisions
on
on
the
ordinances,
material
and
I
feel
that
those
type
of
letters
being
brought
directly
to
us,
instead
of
being
sent
to
legal
for
response
decrease
in
intimidation
on
the
board,
and
even
though
we
have
some
of
the
members
that
are
attorneys,
it's
not
their
duty
to
interpret
something
that
is
beyond
our
our
our
control.
So
the
reason
that
that
I'm,
bringing
this
up
is
that
that
planning
department
be
whatever
comes
from
from
from
an
attorney
I,
feel
that
it
should
be
returned
to
the
attorney.
E
So
the
attorney
can
actually
direct
it
directed
directly
to
the
legal
department
of
the
city
of
Laredo.
We
are
not
experts
on
on
legal
matters
and
on
previous
agendas.
I've
noticed
that
that
some
of
them
were
not
voted
on
or
some
of
them
might
have
been
amended,
whether
we
were
right
or
not,
then
that
that
should
not.
That
is
not
correct.
I
feel
that
whatever
issues
they
have,
it
goes
through
legal
and
then
legal
can
advise
us
as
to
whether
act
or
not
act
on
the
interior
or
the
agenda
on
the
item.
E
D
Chairman
that
correspondence
was
sent
to
the
Planning
Commission
for
the
request
of
the
applicant.
In
the
case,
however,
should
the
Commission
so
desire
to
direct
staff
to
nod
to
forward
set
correspondence.
We
would
need
that
in
the
formal
motion
to
direct
staff
to
rather
than
forward
that
the
Commission
to
well.
A
I
think
at
this
point,
we've
had
a
case
right
now
that,
yes,
we've
got
a
lot
of
information
a
lot
of
times
we're
getting
the
information
at
the
meeting
without
any
chance
to
review.
Okay
then
makes
it
real
hard
for
the
Commission
members
to
try
to
reap
you
know
what's
in
front
of
you
and
try
to
figure
out.
What's
going
on,
that
makes
it
very
very
hard.
A
D
A
Saw
that
yeah
it
was,
it
was
late
in
your
office
arriving,
so
everything
was
late,
but
I
think.
Let's
hope
this
is
an
anomaly
and
then
we'll
just
you
know
if
it
does
happen
again
at
that
point
in
time,
I
think
we'll
both
will
act
on
emotion.
Yes,
sir,
okay,
Thank,
You,
Sherman,
all
right
all
right.
The
next
item
we
have
is
public
hearings.
First
item
we
have
is
a
public
hearing.
A
minion
is
only
an
ordinance
of
the
city
of
the
right.
A
D
A
F
A
A
Motion
and
a
second
all
those
in
favor
aye,
those
opposed
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
Next
item
is
amending
the
zoning
ordinance
of
the
City
of
Laredo
by
authorizing
the
issues
of
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
bar
on
a
lot
six
block,
one
San
Ysidro
monarch,
subdivision
located
at
ten
to
eleven
Golondrina
Drive
building
a.
A
G
G
Yes,
so,
basically,
as
some
of
you
are
aware,
I
think
the
majority
of
you
were
were
on
the
committee
last
year
when
I
came
to
present
the
whole
project,
I
already
had
a
CPA
and
an
SCP
approved
for
this
project.
Last
year
it
was
a
proved
at
the
PNC
level.
It
went
to
council,
it
was
approved,
both
of
them
were
approved
overwhelmingly.
You
know,
I
think
I
appreciate
your
support.
G
Last
year,
and
and
so
this
year
we
are
continuing
to
finish
out
the
the
building,
and
let
me
just
go
ahead
and
show
you
the
this
is.
This
is
the
full
site
plan
you
can
see
here
that
this
section
over
here
that
I'm
scrolling
over
that
says
truck
area
canopy.
This
building,
this
pink
outlined
area
is
the
current
bar
up.
Here
are
the
restrooms
in
the
small
commissary
kitchen.
This
is
already
operational.
This
was
what
was
a
was
able
to
open.
G
First,
it
was
the
first
part
of
the
su
P&C
EP
that
were
approved
last
year.
The
CEP
was
for
this
843
square
feet
of
bar
this
new
CU
p.
Once
I
was
told
that
there's
this
is
110
square
feet.
It's
this
tiny
corner
in
this
building,
because
it
was
exactly
approved
at
843
square
feet
and
not
953
square
feet.
G
I
had
to
come
and
apply
for
an
entirely
new
CU
p,
even
though
it's
the
same
site,
the
TABC
permit
actually
is
for
over
this
whole
property
I'm
not
applying
for
a
new
TABC
permit,
it's
all
fully
fenced.
It's
all
one
address.
It's
just
the
fact
that
specifically,
the
CU
p
doesn't
list
that
additional
square
footage.
This
is
the
3d
view
of
the
food
hall
you
can
see
here.
This
is
already
under
construction.
That
building
permits
had
pooled
will
probably
be
done
in
less
than
a
month.
G
The
CU
p
is
for
again
this
corner
right
here,
it's
110
square
feets,
the
size
of
a
walk-in
closet.
It's
gonna
be
just
a
second
serving
area,
so
the
people
who
are
eating
in
this
building,
whether
it's
raining
or
it's
115
degrees
in
August,
don't
have
to
walk
outside
across
the
property
to
get
the
beer
again,
it's
under
the
same
TABC
permit,
like
I
said,
we're
already
open,
so
I
just
included
some
just
so
you
guys
can
see
how
its
operating
with
the
the
response
has
been
overwhelming.
G
The
public
has
been
everybody
that
comes
up
to
me
tells
me
this
is
what
Laredo
needed
you
know,
as
you
can
see
it's
off
of
the
trail,
you
can
walk
to
it,
which
work
get
a
significant
number
of
people
that
walk
or
bike
or
jog
to
it.
This
is
so,
and
this
is
again
the
trail
from
the
other
side.
This
is
just
more
pet
friendly.
Then
this
is
the
inside
of
the
bar.
This
is
again
the
canopy
area.
G
G
This
is
looking
out
from
the
bar
onto
the
canopy,
and
this
building
back
here
is
the
food
hall
and
going
through
these
doors,
an
immediate
left
that
would
be
the
110
square
foot
second
serving
area
for
the
bar.
This
is
from
the
inside
of
the
bar.
Looking
back,
this
is
the
843
square
feet.
That's
already
been
approved
and
we're
back
to
the
beginning,
and
so
so
what
happened
was
I
approached
this
Cu
P
the
exact
same
way
that
I
approached
the
previous
U
P.
G
As
most
of
you
know,
it
took
me
two
years
back
and
forth
between
health
department
building
department
utilities.
Much
of
that
time
was
with
planning
and
zoning
I
met
with
Nathan,
probably
no
less.
You
know
Nathan
Breton,
the
the
former
director,
no
less
than
that
five
or
six
times
over
a
two-year
period.
Going
over
this,
because
it's
such
a
unique
project.
We
were
looking
at
other
cities.
G
How
did
they
handle
it,
and
we
came
up
with
a
formula
to
which
we
abided
by
for
that
Cu
P,
the
main
difference
as
to
why
this
is
not
being
supported
versus
the
other
one
was
supported,
was
I
worked
with
on
AVL,
who
was
a
planner
too
and
Nathan
Bratton,
and
we
worked
all
this
out
got
it
approved.
This
was
considered
fast
food,
one
per
every
two
hundred
square
feet.
G
The
fact
that
Stefan
supported
because
I
it
took
me
two
years
to
get
this
project
to
get
staff
support
and
and
the
fact
that
I
followed
the
exact
same
formula
that
allowed
me
to
get
the
CEP
the
first
time
around
and
staff
support
that
time
around.
It's
just
unfortunate,
but
I
understand
these
things
happened,
so
I
just
wanted
to
come
and
explain
the
difference.
It's
more
of
a
difference
of
staff
opinion
than
it
is
anything
else.
I
have.
H
A
question
chairman
authority
is
to
accelerate
this
a
little
bit.
So
if
it's
a
parking
sitch,
you
write.
It's
a
proposed
parking
said
parking
situation,
the
the
structure.
That's
that's
already
up
or
going
up
it's
going
to
be
finished
out.
What
is
which
is
for
food
right?
It's
your
food!
If
he
were
to
just
say
well
we're
not
going
to
add
the
little
bar,
then
there's
nothing
to
be
talked
about
here.
No.
D
What
what
is
the
and
it
wouldn't
happen
here?
It
would
happen
probably
at
the
building
department
when
he
would
go
in
to
get
his
building
or
his
his
new
new
business
steel
certificate
of
occupancy.
The
issue
is:
is
that
the
for
the
bar
area?
That's
why
he
needs
to
see
you
pee
in
this
case,
but
we
have
to
consider
all
the
uses
on-site
when
trying
to
determine
whether
the
site
meets
the
parking
requirement.
He.
H
In
other
words,
if
he
wasn't
put
in
a
bar,
the
bar
isn't
going
to
change
the
dynamics
in
particular,
because
if
it's
true
of
the
form
it's
a
small
I
can
answer
yeah
what
we've
said:
100
square
feet.
Yes,
that's!
Obviously
the
teeny
yeah,
that's
not
going
to
impact
another
50
people
that
pull
up
so
I'm
just
curious
about,
because
there's
already
a
bar
there,
the.
A
G
A
G
This
is
this
building
is
not
operational,
but
all
of
this
square
footage
was
included
in
the
scene.
Every
I
have
both
ordinances
here
they
were
signed
in
February
of
last
year.
Do
them
include
the
site
plans
for
the
entire
amount,
the
square
footage
for
the
entire
amount?
It's
just
me
building
this
out
and
as
Miss
Rebecca
hammer
said,
if
I,
if
I
decided
to
leave
that
110
square
feet
as
a
juice
bar
I
wouldn't
be
here.
Oh
here's.
A
A
G
These
kitchens
are
gonna,
be
the
same
as
the
food
trucks
are
operating
as
independent
restaurants,
yeah,
but
all
that
all
of
their
square
footage
is
all
included.
The
entire
building,
all
thirty
six
hundred
and
thirty-two
square
feet
is
included
in
the
first
SUV
and
CU
p
round,
and
we
went
the
only
thing.
That's
changing
is
I'm.
Changing
the
the
use
of
110
square
feet
from
fast
food
to
bar
and
intensified
the
use.
G
It
requires
one
more
space
going
by
the
formula
that
was
already
approved
and
I
mean
in
all
honesty
given
to
me
by
the
Planning
and
Zoning
staff
of
a
previous
administration,
because
we've
worked
this
thing
out
so
thoroughly.
I've
I've
done
absolutely
everything
that
was
asked
of
me
to
the
T
per
the
CP
and
SUV.
So.
A
D
D
G
Yeah,
this
is
taken
straight
out
of
the
ordinance
and
you
can
see
there's
5322
square
feet
at
the
bottom
under
fast-food,
which
requires
a
twenty
six
parking
spaces.
The
entire
building
a
is
included
in
there.
So
I,
don't
know
what
this
I
don't
know.
What
this
point
is
because
it's
all
included
it's
all
right
here.
It's
in
the
ordinance
I
have
it.
This
is
the
actual
signed
ordinance.
J
G
Something
the
sites
already
built
I
mean
this
site
was
built
based
on
the
terms
and
conditions
of
the
previous
pnz
that
supported
its
I,
worked
with
pnz
for
two
years,
so
that
I
didn't
go.
You
know,
go
over
staff,
they
it
so
I
didn't
want
them
to
say
we
don't
want
this
and
then
I
go
to
pansy
and
council
and
try
to
overrule
them.
J
J
Okay,
I
guess
because
I'm
just
sure
I
make
sure,
because
we've
had
this
situation
before,
where
the
proposed.
U
P,
still
brings
into
requirement
that
this
ordinances
requirement
so
I
want
to
make
sure
I
bet.
We
had
this
information
with
that
bar.
That
was,
you
know
that
bar
which
one
was
it,
which
one
am
I
talking
one
during
my
career,
the
one
I
Macpherson
yeah,
where
that,
where
the
CU
p
basically
adopted
the
ordinance,
and
so
they
were,
it
was
gonna,
be
impossible
for
them
to
quote
to
meet
the
requirements.
K
K
K
K
K
D
J
I
just
make
a
comment:
I
think
I've
been
to
the
location.
I
think
it
is
completely
revitalizing
that
area
it's
making
it
a
not
revitalizing.
It
is
adding
to
the
already
great
things
that
are
happening
in
that
part
of
the
city.
I.
Think
to
me
this
is
an
example
of
where
we
want
to
work
with
the
developer
in
to
create
quality
of
life
for
the
larger
community,
as
opposed
to
other
times
when
we've
done
variances
or
we've
been
asked
to
do
variance
in
items
I'm
not
directing
these
comments
to
you
about
us
I'm.
J
Just
directing
these
comments
generally
to
the
rest
of
the
commissioners,
where
the
only
value
is
the
property
owner
or
the
developer
and
there's
minimal
value
to
the
community.
So
to
me,
this
exact
opposite
of
that.
This
is
where
I
think
we
should
approve
the
CP,
assuming
that
it
allows
him
to
continue
to
develop
it
without
the
additional
36
spaces,
because
I
think
it
has
a
larger
community
benefits
from
it,
not
as
opposed
to
just
one
developer.
That's
my
comment.
Thank
Commissioner
that.
C
D
Restaurant
right,
where
you
have
feeding,
is
12
spaces
per
every
100,000
square
feet
and
it
and
then
we
talked
about
fast
food
right
fast
food,
your
typical
Wendy's
McDonald's.
You
have
seating,
but
you
have
a
drive-thru
right
and
that
requires
one
space
for
every
200
square
feet
with
a
drive-thru.
Add
six.
You
know
this
is
not
that
right
and
then
you
have
carryout
restaurants
and
that's
no
custom
receding
or
dining
areas.
So
that's
the
big
difference
and
in
that
case
you
would
require
one
parking
space
for
every
200
square
feet.
D
A
Let
me
just
say
one
thing:
real,
quick,
I
think
when
the
land
development
code
was
written,
it
was
written
with
the
intent
that
what
we
knew
back
then
that
a
restaurant
was
an
enclosed
building.
Okay,
and
that's
where
that
particular
I
think
formula
came
out
of
the
concept
that
we're
dealing
with
now
is
a
totally
new
concept.
A
E
Two
years,
I've
known
that
project
for
the
last
two
years
and
you're
correct
that
we
have
a
new
type
of
development
in
our
hands.
What
it
was
brought
to
us.
Some
of
us
were
against
it.
I
would
want
one
that
was
against
it,
but
I.
Have
this
design
and
I
know
that
the
community
is
asking
to
have
that
additional
I
would
say
commodity
whirring
they
could
actually
buy
the
liquor
or
beer
I
personally
feel
as
a
person
and
as
a
commissioner
that
we
approved
something
is
new.
E
We
brought
the
developer
days,
they
spend
an
X
amount
of
money.
There
is
something
that
is
beautiful,
that
it
that
the
community
likes
it
and
we
could
be
here
all
night
and
at
the
end
either
we
approve
it
or
we
don't
approve
it,
but
I
feel
that
if
the
developer
is
okay
with
the
conditions,
we
should
approve
it
and
get
it
over
with,
because
we're
not
going
to
classroom
closing
down
he's
already
put
so
much
money
it
and
the
good
part
about
it
is
that
the
community
likes.
E
It
I
think
whether
we're
setting
a
good
precedent
that
this
might
happen.
Other
places
India
in
the
area
of
Laredo.
Now,
as
far
as
the
parking
we're
coming
up
that
now
we
can
use
the
streets
for
parking
this
venue,
it's
it's
not
open
all
day.
It's
not
full
all
day
in
that
area
at
night.
You
can
get
on
the
cart
you
want
and
it
will
not
affect
the
area
because
it
it
kind
of
it's
a
it's
sideways
of
the
of
the
walking
trail
and
all
that.
E
E
J
Just
want
to
echo
what
you
said:
Marilla
I
think
that
it's
a
hybrid
and
I
mean
it's
it's
all
of
those
things
and
none
of
those
things.
At
the
same
time,
I
could
walk
to
one
part
of
it
and
I'm
sitting
down.
I
can
walk
to
another
part
and
take
out
and
I
could
take
another
part
and
drive
up
and
pull
up
and
get
something
to
eat.
I
could
just
open
tea
anything
at
all
and
I
just
think.
J
You
know
so
you
know
maybe
what
we
also
need
to
just
come
back
and
look
at
why
it
took
so
long
for
it
to
be
done
so
that
that
way
we
can
help
to
streamline
that
process
moving
forward
with
future
project
and
then,
of
course,
it's
not
a
comment
on
the
planning
department
or
the
building
department,
or
anything
like
that.
I
understand
that
you
know,
as
you
get
new
projects
that
fit
not
perfectly
within
what
we
have
within
the
ordinances.
It's
it's.
J
It
takes
work
to
develop
and
understand
what
is
the
best
way
to
efficiently
and
effectively
promote
these
projects
and
work
with
these
developers.
But
to
me
with
what
you
said:
I
Guth,
what
the
commercial
Amiga
said,
I
think
it
doesn't
fit
specifically
within
it,
because
it's
different
than
its
unique
in
its
scale
and
36:36
parking
lots
as
opposed
to
being
able
to
streamline
the
quality
of
service
within
the
building
for
the
people
that
are
there.
I
mean
it
to
me:
it's
a
no-brainer.
We
should
approve
the
variance
or
this.
K
You
can
set
your
comments
into
piggyback
of
Louisa
said
so,
there's
also
the
type
of
message
that
we're
sending
the
outside
people
for
other
than
people
from
the
radio.
Other
investors
that
are
wishing
to
come
into
Laredo
and
invest
into
something
new
like
this
you're
gonna
hear
the
story
of
having
to
your
process
to
get
this
approved.
They're
gonna
just
pick
up
and
go
to
another
city
for.
I
K
I
L
D
F
D
G
There
there's
well
two
points
that
mr.
Dominguez
made,
which
was
were
off
of
a
private
drive.
It's
actually
called
little
Medina
drug
people
park
on
that
drive
a
private
driver
city
street
that
helps,
and
the
biggest
thing
was
what
mr.
bellar
said,
which
is
we
probably
get
up
to
a
third
of
our
people
at
any
given
time
or
coming
on
foot
on
bike,
pushing
up
the
baby
stroller
coming
with
their
dog
and
at
least
they're
not
coming
in
a
vehicle
they're,
not
using
our
parking
lot
right.
G
L
Then
my
second
one
is
I
mean
I,
know
it's,
you
know,
the
worrying
is
here
is
restaurant
and
then
you
know
the
W
and
the
next
one
is
one
sit-down
restaurants
and
it
has.
It
has
what's
the
requirement,
but
my
question
is
like
well:
what
is
that
definition
to
to
planning
and
going
of
a
sit-down?
Because
that's
what
we're
it's
like.
D
It's
I
mean,
to
my
mind,
it
does
seem
sort
of
obvious
right.
I
mean
there's
only
three
categories:
there's
one:
that's
a
restaurant
and
sit-down
restaurant.
You
know
where
you
can
sit
and
eat
right.
The
fast
food
with
with
or
without
a
drive-thru
McDonald's
Wendy's,
all
those
sorts
of
things
and
then
a
carry-out.
G
Of
course,
I
mean
it's
on
every
site,
planets
and
the
construction
plans.
Every
department
in
the
city
has
these
plans
and
show
seating.
The
key
is
what
she's
saying
it's
at
the
fast-food,
with
or
without
drive-through.
That
was
a
category
that
the
last
administration
of
planning
zoning
department
put
us
in
after
those
two
years
of
negotiating.
There
is
no
drive-through,
but
it
says
with
or
without
drive-through
we
are
like
a
Wendy's.
It's
counter
service.
It's
like
Chipotle,
it's
like
Fuddruckers,
it's
like
taco
pie,
Lincoln.
G
All
of
those
restaurants,
I
just
named,
have
seating,
but
they
don't
have
servers.
So
the
distinguishing
factor
that
the
last
administration
used
in
order
to
put
us
in
a
category
was
are
their
servers
literally.
Do
you
go
in
and
sit
down
and
wait
for
your
food?
That
is
not
what
this
is.
That's
the
technically.
What
a
sit
down
is
sit
down
away
from
your
food.
You
don't
do
that
here.
You
go
to
a
counter.
G
L
L
I
L
A
I
K
J
G
D
The
calculation
would
be
one
for
every
200
square
feet
as
he
so
before
the
restaurant
used
and
if
it
was
considered
to
carry
out
with
no
seating
or
fast-food,
then
it
would
require
one
for
every
200
square
feet
and
so
would
require
18.5
spaces
rather
than
the
42
spaces
right.
So
18.5,
plus
the
two
that
are
already
required.
That
would
be.
G
A
Prove
was
a
42,
yes
and
the
original
one.
That's
that's
the
ordinance
it's
approved.
You
have
42
you're
short,
21,
okay,
so
here's
what
I
want
to
do
hold
on
you're
short
21.
He
has
a
private
drive,
okay,
that
can
be
utilized
for
parking.
So
basically,
if
you've
got
a
thousand
what
more
than
a
thousand
linear
feet
of
park
private
parking
that
should
help
the
situation.
Given
that
we're
dealing
with
the
land
use
code,
that
is
from
the
night,
okay,
marina
sukham
brought
that
way
back
in
the
90s
all
right.
Yes,.
J
Sir,
we
need
to
remove
item
7
item.
7
is
where
it
owners
shall
provide
parking
spaces
and
compliance
with
section.
Twenty
four
point:
seven
eight
and
twenty
four
point:
seven
eight
point:
three
of
the
Laredo
land
development
code:
I
think
that
it
we
provide
that
he
still
has
to
do
the
50
something
parking
spaces
and
it's
okay.
So
that's
what
that's?
Why
I'm
asking
all
right.
I
J
G
A
A
H
I
just
get
clarification,
of
course,
like
the
commissioners
comments.
That
is
the
correct
that
we
took.
You
understand
that
we'd
like
to
approve
this.
It
are
we
tricking
ourselves
that
we
don't
also
strike
number
seven.
When
indicates
twenty
four
point:
seven.
Eight.
Twenty
four
point:
seven
eight
point:
three.
H
Understand
that
we're
not
in
the
final
setting,
we
understand
that
okay,
we're
trying
to
do
our
jobs
appropriately,
because
council
might
call
us
and
say
what
the
hell
happened.
We'd
have
to
be
able
to
answer
intelligently,
not
guess,
which
is
probably
why
we
should
have
committee
meetings
before
the
commissioners
meeting.
Sometimes
so
we
can
educate
ourselves
there
and
not
make
everybody
wait
around.
So
is
that
accurate
we
should?
We
should
make
the
recommendation
to
Council
to
strike
that,
or
else
we
would.
We
would
be
sitting
at
half-baked
putting
on
the
parking
spots.
Yes,
sir.
H
I
A
A
And
a
second
all
those
in
favor
aye,
all
those
against
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
Next
item
is
a
public
hearing
amending
the
zoning
ordinance
of
the
city
Laredo
by
authorizing
the
issuance
of
a
special
use
permit
for
restaurants
selling
alcohol,
a
lot
7a
and
8a
block
once
any
seats
on
monarch
subdivision
unit
six
located
at
24
45
side,
you
see
a
Parkway,
the
staff
comments.
The
staff
supports
the
issuance
of
the
posters
you
get
this
location.
This
is
a
public
hearing.
Anybody
who
wish
to
speak
in
favour
in
favor,
yes,
ma'am.
N
A
A
Right
I
have
a
motion
in
the
second
all
those
in
favor,
aye
aye.
All
those
against
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
The
next
item
is
probably
carried
amending.
The
zoning
map
for
the
city
Lorado
by
rezoning,
approximately
2.8
5
acres
located
south
of
F
in
1472,
from
a
b3
to
an
m1,
the
both
uses,
the
transportation
and
warehouse
the
staff
does
not
support
the
proposed.
Don't
change!
A
D
K
A
And
consideration
of
the
provision
of
erisa
sewer
subdivision
master
plan
in
his
residential
and
commercial,
this
184
acre
tract
and
it
is
located
west
of
quarterly
interest.
Road
and
north
of
Nick
Daman
got
a
road.
The
proposed
action
is
approved,
subject
to
the
following
comments
from
Planning
from
fire
from
water
utilities,
from
traffic
parks
and
leisure
and
a
notice
to
the
developer.
O
Good
evening
wait
Nance
former
science
engineering.
We
agree
with
all
these
comments.
We
wanted
to
note
on
the
fire
comment:
we've
spoken
with
the
fire
department
and
we've
agreed
to
a
to
provide
a
20-foot
access,
easement
that
goes
across
the
cul-de-sac,
so
that
there
would
be
three
points
of
entry.
It's
an
emergency
access
easement
and
we
understand
that
the
fire
department
would
be
fine
with
that
all.
O
Though
we're
going
to
we're
going
to
a
calm,
we
agree
with
all
the
comments
for
the
record
during
the
one-stop-shop
process.
We're
going
to
accommodate
the
fires
comment
by
providing
emergency
access
easement
across
the
cul-de-sac,
so
that
they
have
three
points
of
entry,
so
the
basic
Libyan
over
the
road
or
yes
right
across
that.
So.
F
F
O
P
There
was
a
change
in
the
plat
to
accommodate
that
comes
from
traffic
department
and
that
closed
one
of
our
exits
and
they're
going
to
make
that
adjustment,
so
they
will
have
basically
the
access
we
previously
had
except
being
a
road.
That's
through
all
the
time.
It's
going
to
be
an
emergency
access.
A
Do
we
have
a
second
second
and
second,
all
those
in
favor
aye?
All
those
against
motion
carries.
Thank
you.
Next
item
is
reviewing
reconsideration
of
lisianthus
East
master
plan.
The
antennas,
residential
and
commercial
purpose
of
this
revision
is
to
reconfigure
phase
phases
and
realign
streets.
The
proposed
action
is
approved,
subject
to
the
following
comments
from
planning
from
traffic
parks
and
leisure
and
USD
has
a
question
and
a
notice.
The
developer.
Mr.
A
Right
can
we
have
a
motion
to
table
motion
to
table
yeah
motion
the
second
all
those
in
favor
aye,
carries
next
item.
Is
your
reviewing
week
iteration
and
revision
of
the
dnj
subdivision
master
plan.
The
intent
is
residential
and
commercial.
The
revision
includes
a
reconfiguration
of
phase
12
into
unit
26.
I
D
The
changes
include
number
four.
What
it
is
is
that
there
is
a
hike
and
bike
trail
easement
agreement,
and
there
are
some
changes
being
proposed
in
this
plan
that
may
have
triggered.
You
know
this
being
a
first
in
a
new
series.
However,
what
we're
asking
is
that
the
changes
must
adhere
to
the
terms
of
the
agreement
and,
if
not,
then
it
would
be
considered
the
first
in
a
new
series.
D
Q
Yes,
sir,
would
the
others,
premier
engineering
representing
the
applicant,
we're
in
agreement
with
the
emetic
comments,
except
for
I,
think
it
applies
to
items
four
and
five
for
planning?
Five
is
also
covered
under
the
Eastman
agreement.
It's
number
nine
and
page
four,
and
so
as
long
as
I
guess,
we
can
fly
with
the
terms
of
the
agreement
in.
Q
A
A
I
A
D
A
Q
Simple
I
want
to
exhibit
right
now
at
the
present
time.
This
is
the
access
to
look
20,
I,
guess,
if
Bulldogs
not
available,
then
it
would
be
along
this
route
here,
which
would
be
following
who
Safina
down
and
it
and
it
becomes
Whittier.
It
goes
out
to
customer
and
university
out
to
the
loop
next
year.
We
would
be
building
this
connection
here.
My
yellow.
A
A
I
C
A
Second,
all
those
in
favor
aye.
Those
against
motion
carries
the
next
dentist
preliminary
reconsideration
of
the
plateau,
cuatro
Vientos
or
subdivision
phase
10,
and
the
granting
of
a
variance
to
allow
a
10-foot
front
yard
setback
on
Lots
one
and
two
block
one
and
lost
nine
and
ten
block
to
the
antennas
residential.
A
I
E
O
A
I
A
In
the
second,
all
those
in
favor
aye
aye,
all
those
the
games
watching
carries.
The
next
item
we
have
is
regarding
the
revision
in
civilian
development,
Code,
section,
24,
69,
flood
damage
prevention
by
adding
the
statutory
authority
and
fine
facts
section
provides
in
Section.
Twenty
four
point:
six
nine
point:
four
dash:
a
designation
of
the
floodplain
administrator,
including
the
Texas
Commission
of
Environmental
Quality.
D
Chairman
this
item
was
preliminary
introduced
to
the
Commission
at
the
last
meeting,
I
known
her,
so
the
Commission
had
some
time
to
fully
review
it.
There
has
been
one
change
from
the
from
the
previous
meeting,
and
that
is
the
designation
of
the
floodplain
administrator
during
our
most
recent
certification
review
and
audit
from
FEMA.
There
was
some
discussion
as
the
floodplain
administrator
designation
and
question
the
who
in
other
communities,
is
the
floodplain
administrator.
D
This
the
proposal
is
to
designate
the
building
official
or
the
building
director
as
the
floodplain
administrator.
This
is,
in
essence,
a
construction,
a
permit
and
a
construction
permit.
They
have
the
necessary
know-how
to
review,
building
plans
to
inspect
building,
and
we
have
discussed
it
with
the
you
know
with
the
building
department.
They
are
fully
aware
and
in
concurrence
very.
A
J
D
K
A
Right,
thank
you
in
the
second
all
those
in
favor
aye.
Those
against
motion
carries
next
item
that
we
have
regarding
the
revision
of
the
city,
lloyd,
ylenne,
development,
coach
after
2000
article
4,
&
5,
the
purpose
of
the
amending
of
the
dimensional
standards,
setback
requirements
and
many
other
matters
incident.
D
A
R
R
We've
been
as
a
liaison
for
the
Technical
Review
Board
we've
met
after
direction
from
Council
City
Council
to
look
at
the
set
back
and
look
at
what
can
be
made
to
increase
setbacks.
So
we've
met
five
times
at
least
and
discuss
this
issue
and
there's
basically
three
proposals
here
for
you
tonight
on
the
ordinance
and
I'm
going
to
kind
of
explain
it.
I
know
the
ordinance
is
kind
of
a
little
bit.
R
R
R
Stop
supports
it
because
it's
there's
really
no
safety
issue.
There's
a
lot
of
customers
that
come
in
and
say
how
can
I
build
a
template
carpet
and
they're
like
I'm,
sorry
I'm
tied
to
the
ordinance
you
know
so
there
have
been
some
gone
to
the
Board
of
Adjustment.
We
don't
see
a
safety
factor
in
there,
so
as
long
as
it
stays
on
visible
through
it,
not
digital.
R
R
There's
a
exhibit
here
if
you
look
at
so
this
is
a
currently
that
line
right
here.
This
line,
that's
where
you
could
build,
basically
the
carport,
so
we're
proposing
all
the
way
over
to
this
whole
section
to
allow
for
covered
parking
within
the
property.
You
know
up
to
the
property
line
as
opposed
to
only
10
10
feet
or
50
percent.
Usually
it's
20
feet,
I
kind
of
wanted
to
treat
him
separately
last
time
it
was
introduced.
E
The
on
the
carpet:
let's
take
each
item
right,
so
you
say
that
it's
existing
properties
blocks
and
new
locks.
What
happens
on
assertive,
Asian,
omegas
and
San
Ysidro.
We
have
one
of
the
homeowners
that
decides
to
bring
the
part
where
all
the
way
into
the
property
line
will
that
ordinance
overrule
or
be
over
the
existing.
E
S
If
the
subdivision
does
not
have
any
restrictions
and
it's
an
existing
subdivision,
then
yes
they
can.
They
can
follow
the
the
new
ordinance
that
that
you
all
recommend
and
council
approves,
but
when
there's
C
CNRS
covenants
conditions
and
restrictions,
then
the
Association
will
say
no.
You
can
only
do
this.
E
S
S
It's
the
people
that
are
administering
the
covenants
conditions
and
restrictions.
The
CCR's
like,
for
example,
san
ysidro,
has
a
very
hands-on.
You
know.
Association
lakeside
has
a
very
hands-on
association.
So
if
you
try
to
do
something
it's
outside
of
the
guidelines
of
the
Association
and
you
don't
get
a
variance
here
and
deep
trouble
so.
A
E
Bringing
the
carpel
or
live
to
the
appropriate
language
if
we
approve
it
without
the
proper
wording,
then
some
of
the
tell
me
some
other
property
owners.
You
own
this
property,
there's
an
ordinance
that
you
can
that
you
can
apply,
but
because
certain
factors
previously
before
the
ordinance
to
do
it
would
that
be
some
type
of
discriminatory
practice
for
the
AIA.
A
Or
a
homeowner?
No,
because
most
of
your
covenants
and
homeowners
associations
have
a
provision
where
you
can
amend
them,
I
believe
it
and
they're
all
buried
in
some
cases
is
50%
of
the
owners
in
some
cases
is
70%
some
cases
a
seventy
five
percent,
but
there
is
a
mechanism
in
them
and
the
ones
I've
seen
most
of
them.
That
allows
you
to
change
the
rules
that
were
subject
to
when
you
bought
your
property,
but
it
takes
so.
E
F
S
The
whole
issue
is
that
when
they
first
purchase
at
least
in
some
of
them
more
so
like
more
accessible
housing,
their
real
concern
about
getting
housing
right
and
then
years
passed
passed
by
and
all
of
a
sudden.
It's
like
I
gotta,
take
care
of
my
car
because
I
don't
have
any
anything
covered
and
under
the
car
we
only
permit
the
homeowner
to
build
up
to
50%
of
the
well
that's
half
the
car
from
maker.
S
S
M
That
also
Jerry
pizza
for
the
record.
Most
of
the
good.
The
cases
we
take
to
the
Board
of
adjustments
is
car
parts
that
are
extending
up
to
the
property
line,
and
you
know
we
hear
them
all
the
time
and
it's
basically
protecting
their
investment.
You
know
here,
there's
$50,000
car
that
they
only
have
covered
it
with
a
heater
Marino.
We
were
willing
to
consider
and
that's
why.
R
Thank
you,
there's
rear
yard
setback
and
on
your
communication
it
said
that
we
weren't
in
support
of
that,
but,
let
me
tell
you
proposed,
is
up
to
five
feet
respecting
these
men.
This
is
the
rear.
Now
the
existing
is
20
feet
in
residential,
so
an
additional
15
feet
of
buildable
area.
You
know
this
is
for
this
is
the
proposed
ordinance?
What
it's
in
front
of
you?
Currently,
the
fire
code
does
require
five
feet
clearance.
That's
really
really
what
it
did
requires
at
first
we're
thinking.
You
know
it's
hard
to
even
enforce
the
clearance.
R
A
Me
see
if
I
understand
correctly
you're
proposing
to
go
from
a
20
foot,
toe
5
foot.
That's
correct!
If
you
remember
that
last
everyone
support
this
commission,
we
did
ask
you
to
come
back
with
a
study
on
that
particular
change.
A
study
in
reference
in
reference
to,
however,
in
fact,
social
aspects
of
life.
R
N
A
I
mean
you
have
impact
like
noise
when
you,
when
you
reduce
setbacks
in
this
community,
a
lot
of
people
like
to
barbecue
so
well,
you
got
5
&
5.
You
got
somebody's
window
right
behind
you,
real,
quick,
there's
a
lot
of
areas
there
that
you
know
do.
In
fact.
Now
you
have
higher
densities
per
acre,
more
building
square
footage.
Less
greenery
I
mean
there's.
A
J
J
J
I
have
no
way
of
knowing
if
I'm
wrong
and
that's
what
we
were
asking
for
was
sure
was
if
you're
gonna
do
this
setback
change.
Have
other
cities
done
it
right?
Why
did
they
do
it?
What
was
the
benefit?
What
was
the
feedback
and
that's
what
we
needed
I,
don't
know
were
able
to
to
to
evaluate
whether
it's
a
good
or
bad.
We
don't
know
I,
don't.
R
R
D
A
little
bit
of
research
on
this
and
trying
to
sort
of
weigh
this
new,
this
new
ordinance-
and
we
just
find
we
did
take
note
of
the
Commission's
concern
about
quality
of
life,
and
we
did
look
at
a
study
from
was
it
health,
Vasya,
Omar
and
Rolla
torture.
People
are
normal
health
quality
and
life
population
density,
a
preliminary
study
on
contextualized
quality
of
life,
and
we
can
give
you
the
citation-
and
it's
found
that,
based
on
this
study,
people
living
in
lower
density
places
show
higher
levels
of
psychological,
health,
relational
and
environmental
quality
of
life.
D
D
By
the
surrounding
properties,
we
looked
at
the
comprehensive
plan
to
see
what
we
could
find
in
there
couldn't
really
find
something
that
spoke
directly
to
this
issue,
but
it
did
mention
that
new
buildings
should
create
an
interesting
street
frontage
with
parking
hidden
from
view
typically
located
in
the
rear
or
below
ground.
A
setback
requirements
should
be
changed
such
that
this
is
encouraged.
It
also
talked
about
semi-public
elements,
add
Congeniality
to
the
street
front
and
should
be
encouraged
such
as,
though
such
as
porches
and
balcony
should
be
encouraged
with
in
the
front
yard
setbacks.
D
We
looked
at
Austin
in
other
cities
to
see.
If
we
can
find
examples
of
reduced
that
backs,
we
did
look
at
Austin
and
they
they
don't
have
it
across
the
board
for
all
residential
uses.
It
looks
like
they
have
something
called
a
single-family
for
a
which
is
a
smaller
lot,
similar
to
our
sort
of
r1a,
and
it
is
used
on
minimum
lots
of
2,600
square
feet
and
then
these
Lots
their
minimum
lot
width
is
40
the
minimum
setbacks.
D
M
I
I
N
J
J
I
can
speculate
what
it
means,
what
that
article
means,
but
that's
not
our
job,
we're
the
we're
here
to
approve
it
and
not
approve
it
and
just
give
direction
in
terms
of
the
information
we
need
in
order
to
be
able
to
evaluate
it,
and
it's
not
an
attack
on
you
all.
It's
just
I
want
to
do
the
job
right.
S
S
S
Accessory
is
incident
to
the
primary
use
its.
In
other
words,
it's
not
a
primary
use
and
the
whole
the
whole
deal
here
is
that
we
want
to
be
able
to
give
the
homeowners
an
opportunity
to
decide.
You
know
how
to
what
to
build
in
their
backyards
if
they
need
more
living
area,
that
they
can
have
more
a
living
area,
and
in
doing
so
it
goes
from
a
two
and
a
half
foot
setback
from
the
property
owner
to
five
feet
all
the
way
around.
So,
in
other
words,
you
don't
have.
S
You
know
all
of
a
sudden
that
you
know
that
overhang.
You
know
two
and
a
half.
You
know
two
and
a
half
feet
from
here
from
your
fins
and
also
the
structures
now
get
pushed
back
a
little
bit
more,
but
it
gives
a
homeowner
more
leeway
as
to
how
to
use
their
steady
use
their
backyard
and,
to
give
an
example,
we
have
a
brand
new
community.
S
The
homes
are
selling
in
the
$200,000
range,
which
is
Collini,
Heights
townhomes,
and
you
can
see
in
the
Collini
houses
townhomes
and
you
get
the
Google
Maps
and
you
measure
it
there's
these
areas
here
are
about
five
feet
from
the
from
the
back
from
the
back
yards.
What
happens
to
the
tax
base
Laredo?
S
You
can
see
in
here
the
tax
base
to
the
Center
City
of
the
Radle,
if
you,
if
you
all,
went
to
that
Montini
Mancini's
or
whatever
that
gentleman's
that
came
and
talked
here
some
time
back,
he
says
that
when
you
look
at
like
the
cost
to
the
city,
you
want
to
see
the
land,
so
you
have
like
a
3,000
square
foot
home
a
3,000
square
foot
site,
and
then
you
say:
okay,
how
much
is
the
city?
What's
a
tax
bench
per
square
foot
not
on
the
house,
but
for
sport
foot
of
a
lot?
S
This
is
an
excellent
example
of
what
happens
when
you
have
been
see.
Here's
you've
got
a
typical
you've
got
a
tick
little
home
set.
Well,
this
guy
already
this
guy
already
added,
but
you
have
a
typical
home
site
and
the
value
per
square
foot
on
the
land
is
37
dollars
a
square
foot.
In
other
words,
if
you
take,
they
say
that
a
lot
6,000
square
feet
has
got
a
value
of
200,
some
$1000,
the
taxable
value
per
square
foot,
that
this
taxing
entity
tab.
They
have
37
dollars
a
square
foot.
S
What
I
did
was
I
got
like
about
three
properties
in
here:
random
I
got
three
properties
in
here.
Random
I
got
three
properties
like
in
City
lingo,
random,
in
different
areas
in
different
areas
of
town.
So
once
you
create-
and
you
allow
people
to
have
a
little
bit
more
density,
what
happens
is
a
taxable.
The
taxing
entities
are
able
to
tax
more
dollars
per
square
foot
of
the
land
because,
instead
of
providing
open,
porches
or
open
structures,
now
they
can
add
to
the
to
the
living
area
they
need
to
add
to
the
living
area.
C
A
A
G
A
S
K
E
By
listening
to
this
presentation,
I
kind
of
feel
that
that
you
as
a
developer
good
good,
but
you
are
creating
a
new
situation
where
Commission
arises,
a
state.
It
does
you're
not
given
a
choice
to
see
the
people
that
are
gonna
die.
There
is
because
they
have
no
choice,
whereas
do
if
we
leave
it
the
way
it
is,
then
they
have
a
choice
to
come
to
that
feat.
Mr.
E
Sherman,
you
mentioned
yeah,
so
that's
really
I
feel
that
if,
if,
if
a
project
project
is
brought
before
us
or
in,
we
can
see
like
the
townhomes
at
the
example
that
you
gave
us
I
mean
that's
a
terrible
project.
I
mean
we've
seen
it
many
many
times
here,
nothing
they're
good
projects,
but
as
far
as
our
ones,
I
think
we
should
stick
to
what
we
have.
We
the
reason
that
we
asked
for
that.
Let's
study
mr.
E
Rossano
was
intended
for
us
to
to
educate
ourselves
to
that
feeling
out
of
the
community
how
the
community
feels
about
it.
I
mean
we're
sitting
right
here.
We
probably
only
would
be
housed
in
with
with
large
backyards,
but
how
does
the
community
feel
about
getting
that
type
of
change
it?
That's
that's
what
the
Chairman
that
asked
a
study
that
can
tell
us.
What
are
we
gonna
do?
Are
we
gonna
do?
E
A
And
I
think
Porter
would
Vanessa
read
the
study.
Is
there
some
social
issues
on
that
study?
You
read
and
that's
what
we
were
concerned
about.
Okay,
how
is
this
gonna
pick
health
of
residence
in
the
future
and
based
on
what
that
study
she
read.
There
was
concerns
there
that
it
does
impact
the
health
of
individuals.
We.
R
Didn't
talk,
yes,
go
ahead,
I
think
at
the
committee
and
I
recall
specifically
engineer
mister,
you
know
he's
like
I,
don't
want
exist,
I
don't
want
to
buy
r1
in
our
raw
rebuilt
and
all
of
a
sudden
everybody's
building.
Now
they
might
have
more
people
I,
don't
want
that's
not
what
I
want.
He
wouldn't
be
in
favor
of
that.
As
a
matter
of
fact
he
was
against
and
it
was
a
concern
for
staff.
R
R
A
A
R
A
I,
don't
think
that
that's
an
issue
because
I
mean
you're
gonna
follow
their
international
building
cry
and
that
tells
you
how
to
build
right.
That's
not
a
problem,
but
then
is
there?
Is
standards
in
place?
I
think
this
Commission
is
more
concerned
with
the
impacts
of
what's
existing
and
I
know.
What
you're
saying
is
we're
talking
about
new
subdivisions
and
I'm,
saying
I,
don't
I
mean
I'm,
saying:
okay,
have
we
thought
this
thing
out
totally
because
there's
a
lot
of
land
out
there
that's
already
planted.
R
M
A
H
You
this
is
a
perfect
example
of
why
this
should
be
pulled
out
for
a
committee
or
a
workshop,
mr.
chairman,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
questions
about
it.
We
want
to
respect
the
developer's
ability
to
make
money
with
land
costs
being
so
high
construction
costs
being
described.
We
think
most
of
us
recognize
that,
but
literally
deleting
all
the
green
spaces
or
ability
for
the
children
to
go
outside
at
all,
there's
there's
a
whole
cycle.
Cultural
thing
that
impacts
here.
H
It
just
pushes
everything
I'm
not
trying
to
be
something
on,
or
anything,
I'm
saying
that
this
is
the
workshop
discussion
that
we
want
to
build
our
cities
thoughtful
to
our
our
children's
lives.
Well,
these
each
of
these
subdivisions
have
community
centers
with
outdoor
play,
areas
that
are
significant
enough
to
I
said
to
receive
the
children
to
go
outside
I
mean
get
the
hell
out
side.
You
know
how
difficult
that
is.
H
If
you
don't
have
any
outside,
you
don't
have
any
option
to
go
outside,
there's
no
safe
zone
for
you
same
songs,
a
big
word
we
use
in
the
school
district
block,
which
is
why
comes
to
2002,
to
2012?
We
partnered
with
the
city
so
so
frequently
in
creating
larger
playgrounds
and
and
though
in
the
walkways
around
the
schools
to
have
safe
zones
for
the
people
that
come
outside,
but
I
thought
they
exist
in
these
areas.
Maybe
they
do,
but
they
probably
don't.
H
So
if
it's
allowed
then
do
they
also
have
to
build
a
safe
zone
area
for
the
children.
I'm
not
saying
they
do.
I'm
really
saying
that
it
sounds
like
a
longer
discussion
here
plus
we
know
our
city
very
well,
you
eliminate
the
back
yard.
The
front
yard
begins
the
back
yard.
So
there's
all
this,
the
storage
they've
got
a
mess
out
of
us.
It
all
moves
to
the
front
yard
right.
So
what
happens
to
the
20
foot
setback
neighbor
who's
got
his
thing
tidy
in
the
back,
so
perhaps
you
have
buffer
zones.
H
A
This
one
here
can
we
yeah
take
this
piecemeal
and
just
say
we
can
improve
I.
Think
the
car
for
the
issue.
I
think
you've
made
a
good
explanation
on
that
I
think
I.
Think
most
of
the
commission
members
are
in
agreement
with
that
one
without
a
problem,
but
we
do
have
a
lot
of
concerns
with
reducing
is
set
back
in
the
rear,
a
lot
of
unanswered
questions
and
there's
just
a
lot
of
concern.
I
guess
at
this
point
to
move
forward
with
this
I
mean,
like
I,
think
you
heard
all
of
the
different
members.
L
Then
there's
so
many
questions
that
I
don't
even
know
where
to
begin
and
and
one
of
them
is
like
and
if
I
understood
your
presentation
correctly,
it's
like
the
only
pitch
you
really
pitched
at
us
was
that
you
get
to
tax
people
more
I
mean
as
far
as
like
per
the
that
you
built
more
on
the
land,
and
now
it's
like
you
get
more
tax
to
the
people
that
that's
that's
your
pitch.
If
I
understood
that.
S
The
whole
issue
is
giving
the
homeowner
a
little
bit
more
discretion
on
how
they
can
use
their
their
property,
and
when
you
give
the
homeowner
more
opportunity
to
build
livable
space
in
their
backyard,
then
the
taxable
amount
per
square
foot
of
that
area
increases
and
and
just
to
kind
of
talk
a
little
bit
to
to
the
tax
base.
If
you
look
at
this
little
chart
in
here,
you
would
think
that
some
of
the
properties
in
South
Laredos
are
less
valuable
to
the
city.
S
A
Me,
let
me
stop
you
right
there
is
that
big.
Let
me
recognize
Commissioner
Flores
I'll.
Let
mr.
Reese
finish
this
point.
Yeah.
S
Nobody
like
and
I
explained
this
at
the
very
beginning,
yeah
when
I
build
a
home
I'm,
not
gonna,
build
a
home
without
a
backyard
I.
Just
I'm
not
gonna,
do
that,
but
when
the
homeowner
then
gets
the
home,
then
they
start
adding
accessory
uses
in
the
back,
but
they're
not
permitted
to
use
some
living
area
in
the
back.
All
of
these
all
of
this
all
of
these
areas
there's
the
city
of
Dallas.
You
know
they
have
five
foot
rear
setbacks.
The
city
of
Corpus.
S
And
you
have
some
five
foot,
rear
setbacks
and
then
went
over
the
city
of
they
went
over
the
city
of
and
what
ends
up
happening?
Is
that
not
everybody
wants
to
maximize
our
backyard,
but
there
are
some
that
do
so.
The
whole
objective
is
to
give
families
an
opportunity
to
be
able
to
have
more
discretion
over
the
backyard.
If
you
feel
five
feet
is
too
aggressive,
maybe
go
to
ten
feet,
make
a
recommendation
of
ten
P
but
at
least
give
give
the
families
an
opportunity
to
add
some
square
footage
to
their
backyard.
That's
livable!
So.
J
And
it's
so
based
on
what
you
said
I
mean.
Let
me
tell
you
what
my
concern
is:
I
think
I
think
you're
right,
I
think
it's
a
it's
always
a
balance
between
the
one
homeowner
who
wants
to
do
some
kind
of
improvement
on
his
property,
and
you
know
he
chooses
or
she
chooses
how
they're
gonna
do
that
versus
the
what
will
be
the
cost:
the
impact
of
the
value
of
the
home
surrounding
that
home
once
that
person
uses
that
discretion
right.
J
To
go
through
the
whole
thought
right
so
like
if
someone
is
built,
something
that
is
a
nuisance
and
I,
don't
mean
that
in
a
legal
term,
I
mean
that
just
sort
of
like
in
the
term
of
that
it's
a
nuisance
in
that
it
lowers
the
property
values
of
the
homes
around
it
or
could
potentially
do
that
right
right
now.
What
we
have
is,
we
have
a
way
of
enforcing
it.
We
have
a
way
of
you
know
saying
you
know
you
cannot
build
this
additional.
J
J
Now,
especially
because
from
what
you
all
us
are
saying,
it
sounds
like
and
maybe
I'm
wrong,
but
sounds
like
you
think
this
will
be
done
more
like
in
working-class
neighborhoods
or
like
in
South,
Florida
or
areas
like
that,
where
people
want
to
expand
their
use
of
their
property
and
build
a
slightly
larger
homes.
Okay.
J
Well,
that's
fine,
but
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
take
into
account
is
to
make
sure
that
whatever
the
policy
decision
that
we
make
in
terms
of
the
ordinance
that
it
takes
into
account
overall
property
values
in
those
neighborhoods,
because
you
want
people
to
be
able
to
resell
their
homes
and
not
have
a
value
go
down,
because
my
neighbor
made
some
improvement
that
is
allowed
under
an
ordinance
that
was
approved
and
was
never
studied.
If
that's
the
best
thing
now,
you
showed
us
right
now.
J
These
five
foot
setbacks
right,
that's
the
problem
is,
is
that
we
don't
have
the
value
of
the
rest
of
the
corpus,
Cristi
ordinances
that
may
have
other
types
of
restrictions
on
when
they
can
do
that
or
can't
do
that.
You
see
I'm,
saying
like
I,
can't
just
show
you
hey.
This
is
by
five
feet,
but
not
show
me
this
other
part
with
said,
but
when
you
do
that,
however,
there's
going
to
be
some
restrictions
that
you
have
to
do
in
order
to
be
able
to
go
that
far
back.
J
So
that's
what
we're
just
asking
for
something
comprehensive,
listen!
Maybe
this
is
the
greatest
idea
in
the
world
mr.
place
and
maybe
we're
totally
gonna
vote
unanimously
for
it
and
praise
you
guys
for
this
amazing.
You
know
thing
that
you
guys
did.
We
just
need
to
know
how
to
do
it
to
make
it
either
right
or
workable
or
or
at
least
to
know
like
what
we're
doing
I'm.
S
Saying
well,
basically,
the
the
homeowner
can
use
the
backyard
so
long
as
it's
accessory
use
in
other,
so
they
have
they.
They
can
build
a
bunch
of
stuff,
and
it
seems
to
me,
like
the
ordinance
is
geared
more
towards
an
affluent
ordinance
than
it
is
to
like
a
working
family.
I
just
want
to
add
my
fourth
bedroom
sometimes
are
buying.
You
know
a
three
bedroom
home
and
they
want
to
add
a
fourth
bedroom,
and
now
they
can
add
a
now.
They
can
add
a
fourth
bedroom
in
the
back.
S
I
S
A
S
A
A
workshop
I
mean
Commissioner
Florida's,
it's
got
a
point
and-
and
we
understand
the
land
costs
are
very
expensive.
I
understand
your
point.
People
need
to
add
I
think
we
need
a
workshop
I
think
we
need
a
workshop
to
figure
out
what
is
the
best
mechanism
to
go
for
through
this?
If,
indeed,
that
is
the
wishes
of
the
Commission.
J
A
Think
what
we
need
is
a
workshop
to
discuss
these
issues.
I
think
we
may
want
to
look
at
how
we
can
come
up
with
something
that
may
be
a
way
to
go
forward,
maybe
and
allow
those
people
like
you
said.
As
a
builder,
you
say:
well,
I'm
gonna,
build
your
house,
you
know
and
I'm
gonna
give
you
your
setback,
but
if
you
need
a
fourth
bedroom
or
whatever
that
we
have
a
mechanism
that
allows
you
to
do
something
like
that
within
certain,
maybe
certain
zoning
districts.
M
I
may
add:
yes,
sir,
we're
currently
working
on
the
upgrade
on
the
land
development
code.
Well,.
A
A
It
may
not
be
okay,
it
may
not
be,
but
I
think
we
just
need
more
information
on
a
lot
of
different
issues,
and
that's
why
I'm
saying
I
all
would
be
amenable
if
the
Commission's
are
being
able
to
have
a
workshop
specifically
on
this,
because
rising
costs
are
a
big
issue
and
the
cost
of
the
new
houses
is
up
there
and
if
there's
ways
to
you
know
figure
out,
how
can
we
improve
on
on
home
ownership?
Yeah
I
think
we're
all
for
that.
Yes,.
J
J
J
Yet,
okay
at
some
point,
I
think
we
would
need
to
do
that,
and
I
also
would
like
to
add
that
I
think
that
we
need.
We
have
some
new
commissioners
and
I
think
that
we
should
have
someone
do
a
presentation
on
the
comp
plan,
what
it
is,
what
its
gonna
do
in
the
future,
so
that
because
they
were
not
part,
they
were
not
part
of
the
process
when
we
adopted
it,
we've
reviewed
it,
but
so
I
think
that
would
be
also
a
very
good
thing
and
it's
a
good.
J
A
H
A
H
H
J
Q
R
A
Last
time,
I
think
what
we
need
to
do
is
I
think
we
need
to
take
all
of
these
things
in
that
workshop
into
consideration,
front
yard,
rear
setbacks,
this
carport
issue-
and
this
you
know-
have
a
workshop
on
all
those
pros
and
cons
and-
and
you
know
so-
that
the
Commission
can
have
basically
what
the
Commission
is
asking
for
is
we
need
more
information
to
make
an
intelligent
decision
on
whether
yay
or
nay,
yeah
I
don't
have
enough.
Yet,
okay,.
A
R
A
D
A
You
man,
I,
think
it's
I
think
it's
appropriate
for
this
commission
to
be
able
to
get
well
informed
on
the
issues
and
before
they
can.
You
know,
take
action.
I've
heard
from
all
these
commissioners
here
and
they're,
basically
saying
the
same
thing:
we
need
more
information,
that's
one
we're
asking
for
a
workshop,
so
they
discussed
these
things
and
flush
them
out.
I
mean
a
blanket
approval
of
we're
sent
back
on
all
zoning
districts.
At
this
point,
it's
like
you
know
it's
really
hard
for
us
to
do
something
like
that.
You
know.
S
S
H
A
A
A
J
S
D
A
A
Right
this
is
the
consideration
of
an
extension
of
the
following
preliminary
Platts
and
nary
reflex:
replan
of
lots,
2
3,
&,
4,
Thank,
You,
Seetoh,
Sal,
Acres,
subdivision
Lots
1
through
15
brought
1
lot
1
through
22
block
2
block,
1
block
3
and
lock
one
block
forth
on
casita
South,
Acres,
subdivision
intent
is
residential
and
commercial
and
it's
basically
they're
asking
for
an
extension.
My
understanding
is:
there's
litigation
going
on
here
and
they're,
not
sure
whether
they're
going
to
be
through
before
the
deadline
right
so
they're
asking
for
an
extension
any
which.