►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting 090320
Description
Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting 090320
A
A
A
A
E
A
F
Mr
chairman,
the
applicant
is
john
garcia.
The
engineer
of
record
is
juan
ludwig
308.66,
acre
tract
of
land
located
north
of
del
mar
boulevard
and
west
of
balboa
glue.
The
zoning
is
r1
and
r3.
The
proposed
uses
for
this
master
plan
is
residential
commercial
institutional.
The
proposed
laws
are
633
general
location,
aerial
view
street
view.
F
A
E
A
With
none
heard,
we
do
have
one
abstention,
which
is
mr
jorge
dominguez.
The
motion
then
carries.
Thank
you.
The
next
item
is
item
b
review
and
reconsideration
of
the
dnj
subdivision
master
plan.
The
intent
is
residential
and
commercial.
The
purpose
of
the
revision
is
to
reduce
the
area
of
unit
13.,
all
right.
B
Good
afternoon,
commissioners,
my
name
is
fernando
morales.
Applicant
is
dnj
alexander
management
engineers,
premier
engineering
and
surveying
property,
description
and
location
is
898.79
acres
located
south
of
del
mar
and
northwest
of
casteveza
road.
The
zoning
for
this
property
is
r1
r2,
b1
b2
is
probably
incorrect.
B
A
I
A
B
Yes,
mr
chairman,
the
applicant,
the
applicant
is
d
j,
my
alexander
management
lp,
the
engineers
premier,
civil
engineering,
the
property,
description
and
location.
It's
6.71,
acre
tract
of
land
located
south
of
del
mar
boulevard
and
west
of
babula
blue.
The
zoning
for
this
property
is
r1,
the
proposed
use
is
residential
and
the
proposed
number
of
lots
is
28..
G
G
G
G
A
Danny
can
you
go
back
to
the
slide?
That's
got
the
the
different
lots
that
are
going
to
be
planted
that
one
yes,
sir,
so
it's
one
two,
three,
four
five
one,
two,
three,
four,
five,
six,
seven,
eight,
nine,
ten,
okay!
Okay,
that's
all
I
needed!
I
just
wanted
to
check
the
size
of
that
block.
This.
Anybody
in
the
commission
have
any
other
questions
for
mr
hadina.
C
E
E
But
zoning
that's
part
of
the
process
when
we,
when
we
go
through
the
planning
process,
we
of
course
look
at
the
zoning
as
well
make
sure
they're,
in
conformance
with
that,
and
one
of
our
comments
would
have
been
that
they
need
to
get
his
own
change
if
that
was
required.
So
it's
definitely
something
we
always
review.
C
No,
that
was
my
question
just
to
make
sure
that
they
come
back
and
because
we've
got
multiple
zones
there,
mr
sherman,
and
it
should
have
been
with
the
with
the
proposal
at
the
preliminary
plat.
He
should
follow
up
with
sony,
so
it
would
approve
a
song
together
with
the
primary
flat,
but
that's
fine.
I
mean
they
can
come
back
and
we'll
go
ahead
and
see
what
they
got.
What
we're
gonna
use
for
what
they
want,
if
you're,
a
v3
or
v4
okay,.
F
E
A
E
J
J
J
E
J
G
C
I
understand
danny
thank
you
for
clarifying
that,
but
I
don't
agree
with
you:
the,
since
they're
becoming
one
block.
Okay,
we
need
to
just
ignite
this
destiny,
either
a
b3
or
a
b4.
So
don't
tell
me
that
b3
and
b4
are
going
to
be
one
right
next
to
the
others
because
they
comply.
I
understand
that,
but
I
still
would
like
to
see
either
a
b3
or
a
b4,
and
I
think
my
request
is
on
order.
A
A
E
Well,
it's
not
an
issue
here,
because
it's
one
building
one
lot
and
one
use.
If
in
the
future
they
were
to
sell
the
building
and
come
back
in
renovate
the
building
put
in
a
commercial
graded
firewall
that
allowed
them
to
parcel
out
the
two
and
if
all
of
that
met
all
the
requirements
of
of
building
code
and
zoning
at
that
point,
they
would
have
to
get
a
rezone
if
they
wanted
to
if
they
wanted
to
do
a
use
that
was
allowed
in
one
and
not
in
the
other.
E
That's
those
are
a
lot
of
ifs
and
it's
certainly
not
something
that
they're
required
to
do
by
code.
So
they
don't
have
they
can.
They
can
go
just
fine
with
two
zones
on
one
property
and
there
are
many
places
in
the
city
where
that's
the
case,
there's
nothing
in
our
code.
That
says
that
is
not
allowed.
A
There's
nothing
in
the
code
that
says
it's
not
allowed
that
you
can
build
over
multiple
zones
as
long
as
you
have
multiples
it's
allowable
in
each
of
the
zones.
Yes
correct,
I
guess
the
ques,
the
problem
that
I
think
a
lot
of
the
commissioners
are
sort
of
having
on
this
idea
is:
where
is
that
invisible
like
going
to
be
on
the
building?
Or
you
know
it
becomes
a
tricky
issue
into
the
future?
E
D
Chairman,
I
have,
I
have
a
comment.
Yes,
I
don't.
I
don't
think
we
should
require
the
apple
applicant
to
come
back
for
a
zone
change
to
just
choose
between
zones.
I
mean
that's
going
to
add
time
and
money
to
the
project
and
I
think
it's.
I
think
it
isn't
fair
for
the
applicant
at
this
time.
There
is
nothing
prohibitive
to
prohibiting
them
to
do
it,
that
we
shouldn't
be
dictating
to
the
applicant
what
he
needs
to
do,
because
we
feel
that
it
requires
a
blanket
zone.
D
C
C
For
me,
it
makes
common
sense
that
that
that
lot
be
under
one
song
with
their
b3
or
v4,
and
I'm
I'm
ready
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
and
we're
not
trying
to
table
it.
Commissioner,
we're
gonna
go
ahead
and
go
with
it.
It's
just
that.
I
think
it's
appropriate
that
one
one
zone
that's
the
way
it
should
be.
J
C
J
A
I
don't
we
cannot,
because
this
is
a
plot
plaque,
there's
two
different
items,
a
plat
and
obviously
a
zoning
matter,
we're
dealing
with
a
plat
issue.
The
commissioner
dominguez.
I
think
what
you
can
your
motion
can
say
it
should
be
a
recommendation
or
a
suggestion,
but
I
think
because
we're
in
a
plant-ish
we
have
to
look
at
a
plant
and
strictly
a
plant
if
it
meets
the
requirements
of
preliminary
planting.
C
A
B
I'm
waiting
for
the
slide
there
you
go
applicant
is
als
laredo
holdings,
llc,
engineer,
sharpie
engineering,
company
property
description,
location,
this
8.61
acre
track
of
land
located
south
of
loma
de
soud
and
east
of
hito
avenue.
The
president.
The
proposal
I
mean,
I'm
sorry,
the
zoning
is
r1a.
The
post
use
is
residential.
The
number
of
loft
is
48,
a
location
map,
aerial
view
street
view.
B
G
A
All
right,
we
have
a
motion.
We
have
a
second
ugandan,
a
second
from
wigalde,
all
those
that
are
not
in
favor
of
the
approval
signified
by
saying
I
right
now
with
none
heard,
the
motion
carries
all
right.
The
next
item
that
we
have
is
the
preliminary
consideration
of
the
replant
of
lots.
Three,
four:
five:
six:
seven:
eight
block
1679
eastern
division
into
light,
8a
block
1679
eastern
division
in
tennis,
commercial.
F
Mr
chairman,
the
applicant
is
newman
family
partnership,
the
engineer
of
record
of
surfing
engineering,
company
1.2,
acre
tract
of
land
located
south
of
highway,
59
and
east
of
arkansas.
The
zoning
is
b3,
the
proposed
use
is
commercial,
and
the
proposed
number
of
lots
is
one
general
area
aerial
view
street
view.
A
C
Just
a
quick
question,
mr
sherman,
there
was
an
issue
with
traffic
as
to
the
the
distance
in
between
the
the
entrance
to
the
to
the
proposed
improvements.
I
just
wanted
to
to
make
sure
that
I
was
clarified.
I
mean
I'm
not
opposing
to
the
to
the
to
the
approval.
I
just
want
to
know
if
everything
was
what's.
Okay
with
that
entrance.
A
C
A
A
Reflex
item
number
seven
item:
7a
is
preliminary
consideration
of
the
flight
of
santa
cecilia
estate
subdivision
and
the
granting
of
a
variance
to
the
subdivision
ordinance
requirement
that
street
jobs
with
center
line
effects
of
less
than
300
feet
shall
be
avoided.
The
intent
is
residential.
All
right.
C
I
think
whatever
decision
we
make
is
going
to
be
a
liability
not
only
for
the
community
for
the
for
the
commission,
but
also
for
the
city
of
laredo.
I
would
expect
that
a
judge
when
this
is
settled
give
us
a
guidance
to
make
a
an
approval
or
a
denial
on
this
item.
That's
that's
my
quit
my
my
my
comment
right
there,
mr
chairman.
F
E
J
E
E
They
understand
that,
from
from
their
point
of
view,
they
have
an
agreement
with
a
a
property
owner
or
a
dispute.
Rather
that
does
not
affect
the
standards
that
we
have
in
place.
In
other
words,
there's
not
there's
not
an
agreement
that
two
property
owners
can
make
that
that
change
the
requirements
that
the
city
has.
So
we
don't
need
you
to
make
any
decision
on
any
on
any
civil
agreement
that
two
parties
have
all
we're
asking
you
to
do
is
to
evaluate
the
requirements
that
city
has
and
the
the
big
one
here.
E
That
is
not
that
it's
not
in
compliance
is
that
the
that
jog,
if
you
see
this
two
streets
going
east
and
west
adenia
loop
turning
into
that
cul-de-sac
and
then
turning
back.
That
creates
a
a
traffic
safety
issue
and
it
wasn't
like
that
in
the
original
design
and
the
original
design,
there
was
enough
room
to
be
able
to
make
that
left
turn
going.
E
K
C
C
G
L
L
Okay,
I'm
sorry
this
is
what
I
was
saying
is
that
the
need
for
this
property
is
master
plan
and
and
that's
what
we
were
trying
to
perform
with
this.
This
request
is
we're
asking
if
we
can
get
that
variant,
so
we
can
basically
match
the
the
designs
that
was
approved
in
in
2000
the
year
2000,
and
so
I
don't
know
if
the
commission
has
the
copy
of
that
original
master
plan.
J
E
M
Okay,
as
you
can
see,
the
street
coming
in
from
adenia,
it
comes
in
from
east
to
west,
and
the
street
also
extends
down
to
the
south,
santa
cecilia
and
the
the
movements
that
we
would
expect
the
traffic
the
traveling
public
to
make
are
just
reasonable.
I
pride
myself
on
trying
to
always
find
a
compromise
to
work
with,
but
this
is
one
one
area
that
if
this
was
to
be
allowed,
commissioners,
I
would
have
no
fix
for
this.
M
You
know
stop
slacks
whatever
you
I
could
do,
the
one
that
would
price
would
be
the
driving
public.
That's
the
reason
we
put
these
job
the
requirement
to
space
streets
apart
is
because
it
gives
us
a
chance
to
have
the
public
come
in
at
the
right
angles.
In
this
case,
there's
just
a
lot
of
driveways
that
would
be
coming
into
the
intersection,
a
lot
of
movements
that
maybe
on
paper
they
might
be
okay,
but
nobody
drives
the
way
that
we
have
to
be
put
on
on
on
a
template
here.
M
E
Now
there
is
a
design
that
could
work,
but
they
would
have
to
lose
a
few
lots
in
order
to
do
that,
and
the
the
original
master
plan
had
the
same
number
of
lots,
and
so
they
they
weren't
able
to
acquire
the
land
they
needed
to
make
that
original
design
work,
but
they
did
not,
even
though
they
lost
that
land
they
did
not
lose
any
lots.
They
still
want
the
same
number
of
lots,
and
this
design
keeps
the
same
number
of
lots.
E
However,
it
does
so
compromising
the
safety
of
the
of
the
traffic
and
that's
why
they're
asking
for
that
variance.
But
I
need
to
point
out
that
a
variance
can
be
graded
by
the
planning
commission
under
certain
conditions.
One
of
those
conditions
is
that
it
does
not.
It
does
not
create
a
a
safety
issue
for
the
residents
that
will
inherit
this
design.
J
E
I
think
the
appropriate
would
be
a
denial
that
would
allow
them
to
come
back
under
a
different
design.
Denying
this
doesn't
mean
this
won't
happen.
It
means
that
this
design
does
not
work
tabling
it.
I'm
not
sure
that
I
mean
that
that
could
we
could
arrive
at
the
same
thing,
but
by
denying
it
you're,
making
it
clear
that
this
design
and
that
variance
that
they're
requesting
is
not
going
to
be
acceptable
and
they'll
have
to
find
another
design
that
works
and
we're
definitely
open
to
working
with
them.
E
A
L
L
F
E
A
A
M
M
K
M
Configuring
the
street
into
with
an
s
curve
or
continuing
it
further
to
the
west,
why?
They
don't
want
to
do
that.
I
understand
because
they
have
their
own
suit
going
on,
but
basically
the
owner
of
this
bought
something
without
knowing
what
the
conditions
were
and
he's
trying
to
get
the
city
to
to
fix
this
problem.
For
him.
L
L
L
L
K
E
So
a
couple
things
here
for
for
you
all
to
consider
as
you
as
you
make
a
decision.
Yes,
you
have
the
option.
Well,
you
have
the
option
of
approving
you
have
the
option
of
denying.
You
also
have
the
option
to
table
this
as
well,
and
you
know
we
we,
of
course
we
always
work
with
the
applicants.
Reach
out
to
them,
share
our
comments
with
them.
So
this
isn't
the
first
time
that
they've
heard
our
concerns
with
the
issue.
E
E
Not
only
is
that
a
safety
issue,
but
it's
also
a
requirement
in
our
code
that
streets
either
align
or
they
have
a
significant
jog,
and
that's
why
the
applicant
is
requesting
a
variance,
because
they're
asking
you
to
ignore
this
rule
now
to
rule
a
variance.
The
planning
commission
has
to
vote
in
a
two-thirds.
E
E
J
A
Well,
I
think
what
kirby
said
was
that
if,
if
we
table
the
item
that
they've
they've
tried
to
work
with,
I
think
the
engineer
as
much
as
they
could
to
to
try
to
get
them
to
fix
the
problem
and
meet
the
the
ordinances
of
the
city
to
deny
it
would
force
the
issue
where
you'd
have
to
come
back
with
a
redesign
that
meets
the
city
standards.
If
I
said
that
correctly,
kirby
correct
me,
if
I
you
know,
didn't
get
something
right,
you're.
E
Correct,
I
just
want
to
add
one
element
to
that,
and
that
is
that
the
applicant
wants
a
decision,
because
if
the
decision
is
denial,
that's
something
that
they
can
that's
something
they've
told
us
they
can
use
to
address
the
issue
that
they
have
with
this
with
their
the
agreement
that
they
have,
because
they
can
say
well,
we
can't
make
this
work
with
the
current.
You
know
how
we're
bound
with
that
agreement.
C
I'm
going
to
make
a
final
comment,
mr
sherman,
real
quick.
I
I
agree
with
kirby
on
certain
items,
but
also
I
this.
This
variance
would
be
appropriate
if
there
were
no
litigation,
and
I
think
the
the
board
or
the
commission
would
make
a
a
good
decision
on
table
and
allowing
staff
to
try
to
work
it
out.
But
on
this
particular
instance,
what
they're
trying
to
get
they're
trying
to
get
a
a
variance
and
an
approval,
so
they
can
bring
before
court
and
say
look.
C
C
A
Okay,
we
have
a
motion.
Do
we
have
a
second
on
the
motion
yeah?
Mr
chairman,
do
we
have
a
second
on
the
motion
by
commissioner
beckleheimer?
Yes,
now,
in
this
case,
I
am
going
to
ask
for
everybody
vote
in
favor
of
the
motion
in
the
affirmative.
Not
like
we've
been
doing
business
in
the
past
affirmative
vote
for
everybody
on
this
one.
So
all
those
that
are
in
favor
of
the
motion
to
deny.
A
A
A
J
E
Well,
actually,
first,
let
me
say:
welcome
back,
commissioner
beckleheimer
we're
glad
to
hear
that
you're
feeling
well
enough
to
participate
and
also,
at
the
same
time,
we
want
to
say
farewell
to
commissioner
beckleheimer,
because
his
replacement
will
be
voted
on
being
appointed
at
the
city
council
meeting
on
tuesday,
and
so
I
want
to
say
a
special
thanks.
I
want
to
say
thanks
to
everybody,
for
your
service,
no
one
on
the
planning
commission
receives
any
reimbursement
for
their
time.
They
do
everyone.
E
J
Thank
you,
kirby,
that's
very
kind
of
you.
I
appreciate
that
and
I
was
an
honor
to
serve
with
everybody
here.
I
think
this
is
a
very
ethical,
intelligent,
caring
group
and
I've
learned
quite
a
bit,
and
I
appreciate
the
leadership
of
that
osmo
chairman
of
yada
yada.
That's
it's
been
great
and
I
missed
you
guys.
C
Before
we
adjourn,
I
want
to
bring
this
up,
some
of
us
have
have
been
probably
having
problem
with
the
equipment
and-
and
I
think
there
should
be
tablets
or
there
should
be
some
type
of
equipment
that
should
be
granted
to
us,
the
commissioners
and
that
we
don't
get
forced
to
buy
equipment
to
be
in
these
meetings.
We're
volunteering
our
time
and
I
think
that
there
might
be
some
savings
that
we're
not
using
some
money
that
we're
not
using
with
food.
C
I
personally
would
like
to
have
a
some
type
of
equipment
that
I
wouldn't
have
a
problem.
Communicating
and
I
think
some
of
the
the
other
committee
members
I
mean
we're.
Not
we
don't
want
it
to.
We
don't
want
to
keep
it,
but
we're
going
to
be
doing
this
for
the
next
three
or
four
months.
I
think
it's
an
order
that
we
have
the
right
equipment
that
we
can
properly
communicate,
not
only
with
the
with
the
applicants
but
with
staff
and
with
the
other
commissioners.
C
E
No,
we
we,
unfortunately,
no
food
has
been
purchased.
We
we
do
have
a
little
bit
of
savings,
but
we
actually
are
in
the
process
of
ordering
tablets,
but
just
a
couple
things
as
you
can
imagine,
everybody
in
the
world
is
ordering
tablets,
so
it's
been
very
difficult,
it's
been
back,
ordered
and
so
we're
working
on
getting
some
tablets
and
we've
been
in
that
process
for
a
few
months
now
and
when
we,
when
we
get
some,
if
somebody
needs
them,
I'm
not
opposed
to
letting
you
borrow
some
equipment
if
you
need
it.