►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting
Description
Planning and Zoning Committee Meeting
A
A
A
Next
time
is
public
hearings,
but
I
said
it
when
we
had
public
hearing,
especially
undergoing
the
city,
Berlin
development
code,
section
24
at
six
tonight,
plus
them
luck
damage
prevention
by
any
statutory
authorization
from
Biden's
back
sections,
including
the
text
community
of
Environmental
Quality.
In
section
twenty
four
or
six
nine
point:
four
dash
b6
updating
the
elevation
requirements
of
service
equipment
in
Section.
Twenty
four
point:
six:
nine
point:
five:
as
a
pork
and
revising
section
numbers:
ok,
can
you
go
ahead
and
let
me
give
us
a
quick
overview.
D
Just
recently,
we
had
a
certification
review,
a
visit
from
the
Texas
Water
Development
Board,
and
through
that
process
it
was
a
number
of
findings
and
one
of
them
was
that
we
should
include
this
language
and
our
website
ordinance.
This
language
comes
directly
from
there.
You
know,
through
their
recommendations,
with
the
attitude
to
our
ordinance,
a
tiny
bit
of
a
minute,
a
little
bit
of
grammar
and
up
in
the
first
paragraph
using
the
the
I
guess.
D
D
D
If
you
look
at
six
under
that
section,
you'll
see
that
we've
added
and
the
position
on
Environmental
Quality
and
again
we
have
just
a
tiny
bit
of
scene
up
there
in
the
first
line
of
that,
I
would
like
to
remove
the
first
hand
where
two
adjacent
communities
and
right
it
should
read
addition:
communities,
comma,
the
state
coordinating
agency
and
then
comma
Texas
Florida
moment
words
WD,
b,
comma
and
then
the
final
revision
should
be.
The
word
also
would
like
to
remove
that.
E
D
Final
revision
is
in
section
24,
plus
its
nine
point,
seven,
and
what
you're
seeing
away
then
we're
adding
the
words
eighteen
inches
or
more
and
that's
in
order
to
make
sure
that
we
are
elevating
the
air-conditioning
or
painting
mechanical
equipment.
Eighteen
inches
of
the
book
above
base
flood
elevation,
the
internment
of
the
recommended
changes
that
have
come
through
the
findings
of
that
certification
review.
At
this
point,
we
just
brought
it
forward
for
introduction
we're
gonna
review.
It
have
some
time
to
look
at
it,
we'll
bring
it
back
at
the
next
meeting
for
action.
We.
E
F
C
A
C
A
A
A
A
Motion
second
and
all
of
the
labor
I
motion
carries
thank
you,
but
I
said
than
we
have
his
the
review
and
reconsideration
the
Collini
industrial
park.
Master
planning.
Ten
is
industrial
purposes
of
revision
is
to
create
a
billboard
flat,
which
is
proving
to
the
Nestle's
a
lot
in
phase.
One
proposed
actions
approve
centers
to
the
following
collagen
planning.
A
Is
this
if
you're
on
a
master
plan-
and
you
don't
take
that
out-
the
lot
doesn't
take
in
utilities
if
you
leave
it
in
the
master
plan
flat,
they're
gonna
force
you
to
utility
okay.
So
it's
it's
part
of
the
reason
is
you
know
when
you
go
that's
more
a
lot
specifically
for
that
and
you're
gonna
be
exempt
on
certain
criteria:
the
bloody
faucets,
okay,
okay!
So
that's
where
that
comes
in
and
that's
how
that
makes
a
little
bit
more
sense
that
it
can
be
the
master
plan.
A
I
A
Have
it
for
the
married
consideration
of
the
front,
but
the
scene,
a
states
of
the
region,
black
potatoes,
residential?
This
is
a
five-point
III,
a
protractor
okay,
t
south
of
Casa
de
sordid
west
of
aloe
vera.
They
drive
the
zoning
is
every
night
lots
of
double
named.
The
proposed
action
is
approved,
subject
to
the
following
comments
from
planning
engineering.
E
D
A
J
F
F
A
G
E
G
H
J
And
that's
what
you
wouldn't
have
to
do,
that
that
would
be
that's
a
private.
They
would
handle
adding
their
own
litigation.
You
all
have
your
own
duties
to
enforce,
for
the
public
and
pursuant
to
those
you
have
to
you
have
to
their
certain
statutory
authority
that
you
all
have
to
follow,
regardless
of
the
private
restrictions
that
are
not
part
of
the
city.
So
right.
A
D
E
E
G
G
D
G
You
run
into
issues
allowing
them
to
cut
off.
Inez
is
a
taking
of
the
other
person,
the
property
owner
from
behind
who's
come
here
before,
and
that's
a
fertile
land
use
purposes
and
easy
taking
and
by
us
going
through
with
it,
opens
the
door
that
we're
going
to
get
hit
and
because
it's
that
prelim
they're
going
to
move
on
to
the
next
step
of
developing
the
property
that
final,
the
actions
have
already
been
done.
Look.
H
D
E
G
G
C
K
E
G
Which
we
received,
and
it
had
a
volume
number
and
a
page
number-
was
not
contained
in
the
darkness
that
were
to
be
to
be
to
us
a
second
meeting,
not
the
the
last
meeting,
whereas
had
documents
that
were
different
from
the
meaning
that
we
received
before
this
was
the
problem
we
had
one.
We
had
one
party
present
at
one
meeting
and.
E
G
K
E
K
In
the
deep
that
he
provided
with
the
lawsuit
in
the
first
two
that
then
it
refers
to
5960.
The
contract
actually
said.
Where
did
this
student
actually
says
that
the
reasoner
report
is
because
we
didn't
ask
enough
own
permission
for
a
pool
because
they
were
cutting
all
of
these.
But
the
whole
reason
is
that
he
needs
to
prove
their
diseases,
because.
K
G
I
Private
than
him
that
take,
how
do
we
approve
something
already
continues
and
then
from
the
private
sector,
it
is
ruled
opposite
by
a
district
Germany
literally
that
now
there's
a
court
order
and
we
already
gave
a
decision
or
they
already
went
forward
a
certain
amount
of
steps.
How
do
we
now
reverse
that
if
we
allowed
it
to
continue
and
how
there's
a
court
order
saying
well.
D
G
E
G
Advised
what
were
stepping
into
and
the
part
where
I
disagreed
is
that
I?
Don't
the
documents
we
received
and
not
the
last
name
of
the
hearing
before
were
specific
enough,
that
referred
to
class,
that
merged
two
documents
and
they
specifically
relate
to
darkness
that
were
recorded
and
gave
everybody
else
notice
to
do
so,
and
if
it's
not
uncommon
for
people
to
do
title,
searches
that
may
or
may
not,
even
or
that
elicit
more
come
in
early
in
North
America
they'll
get
along
their
lines
and
I'm
telling
you
as
somebody
who
went
to
law
school.
I
Where
they're
presenting
the
properties
at
what
point
you
do
we
now
question?
Do
you
have
legal
authority
to
make
whatever
suggestions
that
you
want
to
do
to
your
property
and
because
there
is
no
mission,
my
question
to
both
parties
is
like.
Do
you
actually
have
people
are
going
to
make
this
presentation
to
the
city
to
cut
off
a
and
then
we
just
approved
it,
and
they
even
have
you
authority
to
actually
move
forward
with
the
property?
Yes,
I.
A
Guess
that's
my
concern,
but
see
the
thing
would
be
they're
all
we
connect
honest
with
the
city
staff
presents
us,
however,
given
the
fact
that
we
have
other
documents
that
were
presented
to
this
commission.
The
comment
that
you
wanted
to
include,
which
I
think
is
just
a
common-sense
approach
to
let
this
thing
go
forward
to
saying,
yeah
and
and
the
language
would
be
something
today
like
that,
all
disputes
or
whatever
you
want
to
use
this
language.
It
result
anyway,.
G
I
mean
would
that
be,
and
it's
not
because
some
of
these
are
not
the
requirements
we've
approved
and
the
staff
has
recommended
us
putting
questions
in
these
comments
before
which
are
not
statute
or
required
by
statute,
so
the
response
I'm
getting
from
staff.
It
is
a
nonsensical
response
that
the
only
comments
we
can
include
here
have
to
be
authorized
by
statute.
I
think
I
think
well.
G
D
And
but
what
they're
trying
to
convey
to
the
to
the
to
the
developer
to
the
applicant
is
this
is
what
we're
looking
at
to
go
ahead
and
check
this,
because,
but
it
is
based
on
their
their
own
they're,
giving
on
the
ordinance
that
the
site
distances
must
be
X,
should
they
have
written
them
in
a
fashion
that
type
distances
shall
be
required.
X,
yes,
I
agree,
you
know,
but
but
their
questions
are
based
on
ordinance,
not
just
their
own
wishes
or
desires,
but.
G
B
A
G
C
G
K
G
C
A
G
E
E
H
Is
I
attend
that,
but
what
we're
saying
that
I
don't
know
that
we're
saying
this
I'm
saying
I'm,
trying
to
think
I'm
trying
to
reconcile
what
everyone's
saying
what
I'm
asking
is.
Is
it
possible
to
include
okay,
I
guess,
because
the
issue
is
I,
don't
know
that
I
fully
understand
but
I'm,
not
child
I
guess
the
issue
is
that
there
is
competing
interpretations
about
the
limitations
on
what
can
be
done
on
that
property
based
on
easements
and
you're,
saying
that's
a
private
matter.
It
doesn't
matter
whether
there
is
or
there
isn't,
that.
E
H
G
A
meeting
meeting
one
yeah
okay,
this
plateaus
comes
in
the
applicant,
says:
there's
no
easements,
meaning
one
landowners.
It
was
a
kind
of
a
hybrid
landowner
from
behind
says.
By
the
way,
there
is
an
easement
I'm
going
to
show
you
I
Warren
County,
with
the
restrictions
and
covenants
which,
in
that
contract,
it
points
out
to
a
lot
that
they
did
when
they
originally
developed
the
line,
and
because
of
that,
this
plant
now
even
forming
in
conformity
with
the
restrictions
and
covenants
that
are
in
so.
G
The
thing
is
where
they're
correct
is
meeting
to
applicants
says:
there's
no
easement
cook
ignores
and
denies
the
existence
of
the
documents
presented
to
us
at
meeting.
What
we're
saying.
No
that
shows
up,
and
so
what
they're
correct
in
saying
is
their
plot
doesn't
recognize
the
document
ever
shown
to
us
in
meeting
one,
and
so
how
do
we
bring
those
into
play?
I
mean
it
when
applicant,
even
or
if
there
is.
H
No
stuff
so
I
think
the
compromise
is
so
that
we
have
a
compromise
and
we
can
move
forward
and
improve.
What
we
have
to
prove
today
is
to
just
modify
that
comment
to
add
some
language
as
to
I
guess
would
be
a
clarification
as
to
the
easements
that
are
on
the
property,
with
existing
easements
they're,
either
in
dispute
or
not
in
dispute
on
the
property,
and
so
we
can
approve
that
with
that.
B
H
A
G
K
H
C
G
On
the
property
or
subject
it's
subject
to
the
cloud
itself,
because
the
way
that
is
packing
the
first
time
mastery
points
out
this
way.
Well
call
this
way:
that's
real
in
South
Italy.
That
is
either
so,
though,
when
they
came
in
they
had
it
in
the
street
going
south,
but
they
still
cut
out
the
street
bromine
right.
That's.
C
D
G
H
E
H
A
H
G
C
C
D
E
H
Exist,
and
and
and
not
compromise
with
rights
are
being
violated.
It's
not
our
some
within
our
scope
to
be
able
to
stop
the
development
of
the
plat
stuff.
Because
of
that,
what
is
simply
asking
for
is
just
to
have
clarity
as
to
this
one
point,
so
that
when
we
do
take
the
book
that
there
isn't
any
doubt
as
to
what
easement
is
there
or
not
there,
but
not
that
he
is
kind
of
either
not
approve
or
approve.
In
order
to
enforce
that
easement
right,
we've
got
outside
of
our
scope
of
our
ability.
E
H
G
And
they're,
productive
and
and
the
protection
of
our
private
by
private
interests
is
not
enough
to
give
less
when
I
give
us
money,
but
we
have
to
do
something
to
protect
work,
we're
doing,
because
we
know
that
we
there's
a
possibility
that
we
are
stepping
on
we
private
interests
and
it's
an
actionable
interest
and
the
landowner
has
already
taken
affirmative
steps
to
protect
their
interest.
So
we
we
have
freedom.
We
can
do
something
to
say
all.