[00:00:17]
[1. ANNOUNCEMENT/REMINDERS Live Public Access is available on TV15]
>> HERE. > >> THANK YOU. REMINDER TONIGHT'S MEETING IS BEING SIMULCAST ON TV15. DO WE HAVE ANY CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK ONLY TO ITEMS NOT LISTED FOR A PUBLIC HEARING? SEEING NONE WE WILL MOVE ON. OUR FIRST ITEM,
[1. Variance Requests for Minimum Lot Size and Minimum Lot Width. - City P...]
BUSINESS IS A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR RURAL DETACHED SINGLE FAMILY MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND WIDTH FOR THE SUBDIVISION AT 882 GUADALUPE ROAD. MAY WE HAVE THE STAFF REPORT PLEASE?>> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. THE SUBDIVISION IS PRODOSED FINAL PLATT OF 1.55 ACRES. IT'S AT 882 GUADALUPE ROAD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS WITH IN THE CITY'S JURISDICTION. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY NOT PLATTED BUT IS SLEEPED A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH AN EXISTING WATER WELL AND EXISTING SEPTIC SYSTEM. THE OWNER WISHES TO SUBDIVIDE IS IT INTO A SINGLE LOT. THE PROPOSED LOT DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM TOTAL AREA AND DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH. THE PROPOSED LOT WILL BE 1.158 THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS RESTRICTED IN SIZE BASED ON EXISTING STRUCTURES CURRENTLY LOCATED ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY AND THE EXISTING PROPERTY LINE CONFIGURATION.
IT'LL HAVE APPROXIMATELY 30 FEET OF FRONTAGE BELOW THE MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENT. ACCESS HAS COME FROM AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY LOCATED ON GUADALUPE ROAD WHICH IS THE ONLY WAY THE PROPOSED LOT CAN BE ACCESSED DUE TO THE FACT THAT ALL OTHER PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY DO NOT HAVE ROADWAY FRONTAGE. IT'LL ADHERE TO ALL OTHER GUIDELINES REQUIRED OF A RURAL DETACHED FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT. IT'S A PROPOSED FINAL PLOT OF 1.15 ACRES CONTAINING ONE RURAL DETACHED LOT CONTAINED WITH IN BLOCK ONE, LOT ONE. NO RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION IS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED FINAL PLATT. ACCESS WILL BE FROM GUADALUPE ROAD. THE FINAL PLATT WILL MEET ALL ORDINANCE WAS THE APPROVAL THE VARIANCES. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL TO ALLOW THE PROPERTY OWNER TO PLAT THE PROPERTY INTO ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT WITH THE LOT BELOW THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE AND BE ROW THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH. STAFF HAS CONSULTED VICTORIA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REGARDING LOT ONE AND BOTH DEPARTMENTS HAVE REVIEWED THE PROPOSED PLATT AND SUPPORT THE APPROVAL AS LOT ONE WILL BE ABLE TO MEET THE STATE REQUIREMENTS FOR SEPTIC TANK. APPROVING THE VARIANCE WON'T HAVE A BAD IMPACT ON THE AREA. STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLOT FOR THE SUBDIVISION FINDING IT MEETS ALL ORDINANCES AND REGULATIONS CONDITIONED ON THE APPROVAL OF
THE VARIANCES. >> THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM PLEASE COME FORWARD AT THIS TIME. CITIZENS WILL HAVE -- WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.
>> HELLO. EXCUSE ME. HELLO. MY NAME IS TIM. I LIVE AT 900 GUADALUPE ROAD ON THE MAP I WOULD GUESS IS PROBABLY THAT BIG BLOCK IMMEDIATELY BELOW THE PROPOSSESSIONAL THERE. SO WHAT I SEE IS -- THERE ARE ACTUALLY NOT ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOME. THERE ARE THREE RESIDENCES CURRENTLY ON THIS PROPERTY WHICH, IF YOU DO THE MATH, COMES OUT TO ABOUT A 4TH OF THE SIZE PER RESIDENCE REQUIRED BY YOUR OWN STATUTES. IN ADDITION, THERE'S ALREADY -- I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE WELL. THERE'S A SEPTIC IN PLACE THAT WAS INSTALLED THE LAST FEW YEARS. I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT WHETHER IT MET SPEC TO BE -- CONNECTED TO HE THREE BUILDINGS BUT THE COUNTY HAS NO REPORT OF ANY APPLICATION OR ANY OF THE PROCEDURES WHICH ARE TO BE FOLLOWED FOR INSTALLATION OF A
[00:05:04]
SEPTIC IN RURAL. SO I QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THIS ACTION HERE TO CHANGE THE ZONING WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE ISSUES INVOLVED WITH THE LOT SIZE AND THE QUESTIONABLE SEPTIC.>> WAIT. WAIT. WAIT. WAIST. EXCUSE ME.
>> ACTUALLY. >> HOLD ON. FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. YOU ALL CAN ASK QUESTIONS TO HIM IS HE HERE TO SPEAK. ONCE WE CLOSE THEN YOU CAN GO INTO DISCUSSION.
>> OKAY. SHOULD I ANSWER THAT LATER? SHOULD I ANSWER IT NOW?
>> YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY?
>> NO, THAT'S JUST IT. I THINK THAT QUADRUPLING THE DENSITY OF THE HOUSING AND HAVING IT ATTACHED TO AN UNREGULATED SEPTIC IS JUST BAD GOVERNMENT. IT'S CERTAINLY -- DOESN'T DO ANYTHING TO ENHANCE THE VALUE OF MY PROPERTY.
>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER CITIZENS WISHING TO SPEAK?
>> GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. I AM MONICA WITH URBAN ENGINEERING. I REPRESENT THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THIS.
WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A PLATT WITH IN THE ETJ FOR THE CITY OF VICTORIA. HOW THIS WORKS IS THE CITY IS ALLOWED TO PLATT WITH IN THE EXTRA TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION WHICH IS THREE AND A HALF MILES OUTSIDE THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF VICTORIA. ANYTHING OUTSIDE OF THAT THE REGULATION AUTHORITY FALL WAS IN THE COUNTY. I DID SPEAK TO THE COUNTY ENGINEER REGARDING THE STRUCTURES THAT ARE ON THE SITE AND ALL OF THAT HAS TO GO THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO REGULATE THE AUTHORIZATION OR ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE WITH IN THAT. ALL WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO IS PLATT AND LOOK AT THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, MINIMUM LOT WIDTH, VARIANCES AND ALL WE HAVE IS PLATTING AUTHORITY WITH IN THE CORPORATE LIMITS AND OUTSIDE WITH IN THE E TJ OF THE CITY OF VICTORIA. SO, WE CANNOT SOLVE THESE ISSUES. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY IS A WARE OF. I DID SPEAK WITH THEM REGARDING THAT TODAY. SO I DID SPEAK WITH COUNTY ENGINEER REGARDING THESE ISSUES TODAY. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS SEPARATE AND IS OUTSIDE OF PLATTING. SO, WHAT WE HAVE IS A PLATT FOR VARIANCES TO THE PLATT. THANK YOU.
ANYBODY ELSE IN SEEING NONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
>> I SPOKE WITH JOHN JOHNSON TODAY. THE FIRST TIME I CALLED THEY WERE IN A MEETING. I CALLED AND I ASKED WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS AN RV SUPPOSEDLY THAT IS HOOKED UP TO A SEPTIC SYSTEM WITH IN THE CITY OF VICTORIA AND IT WOULD NOT BE LEGAL FOR AN RV TO BE HOOKED UP TO THE CITY OF VICTORIA SEWAR SYSTEM THAT WOULD BE ILLEGAL. I ASKED WOULD THAT BE ALLOWED WITH IN THE COUNTY AND I WHAT ASKED IS THAT THE ONLY OPERATIONAL STRUCTURE OUT THERE. I SAID I DON'T KNOW. I WAS TOLD THIS IS SOMETHING THAT REALLY NEEDS TO GO THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES. IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY NEED TO REGULATE AND THEY NEED TO LOOK INTO AND LOOK AT IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE COUNTY
[00:10:04]
ENGINEER WORKS WITH. IT IS SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO WORK THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SO IT'S THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT THAT NEEDS TO LOOK AT AND REGULATE THESE THINGS. SO THAT IS THE AVENUE -- THE CORRECT AVENUE TO GO THROUGH TO FIND A RESOLUTION FOR WHATEVER IT IS THAT IS HAPPENING AND THAT IS GOING ON OUT THERE IN ORDER TO GET WHATEVER IS HAPPENING INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE COUNTY REGULATIONS. THEY ARE AWARE THAT THERE IS SOMETHING NOW HAPPENING THAT IS HOW IT'S GOING TO COME BACK INTO COMPLIANCE IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE. WE DID SPEAK WITH THEM. THANK YOU.>> FOR A REFRESHER. TEXAS LAW PROHIBITS ANY ZONING OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS AND EVEN WITH IN THE CITY OF VICTORIA WE HAVE ELECTED NO THE TO ESTABLISH A ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS. THE POINT OF SUBDIVISION PLATTS IN THE COUNTY AND IN THE CITY IS TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE DEVELOPABLE LOTS AND THERE IS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY THAT PROPERTY HAS ACCESS TO -- IN THIS CASE IT'S GUADALUPE AND WILL SUFFICIENT LAND FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND A SEPTIC TANK. IT APPEAR THERE'S ARE VIOLATIONS ON HOW MANY STRUCTURES IN THE SEPTIC TANK -- CONNECTED TO THE TANK BUT THE LOT SIZE IS LARGE ENOUGH TO ACCOMMODATE BOTH THE WATER WELL AND A SEPTIC TANK. SO ALL OF THE OTHER OPERATIONAL ISSUES THAT MAY BE EXISTING ON THIS SITE WOULD BE UNDER THE PER VIEW OF THE VICTORIA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT FOR THE PLATTING PURPOSES MAKING SURE THIS LOT IS OF SUFFICIENT SIZE TO HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IT NEEDS TO ACTUALLY BE DEVELOPABLE. CLEARLY IT'S OVER DEVELOPED AND STILL WORKING SO, IT DOES MEET ALL OF THE INTENT OF THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE EVEN THROUGH THERE DOES SEEM TO BE SOME ISSUES WITH THE CURRENT SEPTIC SYSTEM OUT THERE AND THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE PER VIEW OF THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT WHO ISSUES PERMITS FOR SEPTIC TANKS AND THEN ALSO INVESTIGATES ILLEGAL CONNECTIONS.
>> SO WE CAN'T EVEN ADDRESS THAT PORTION?
>> WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY. >> WE HAVE NO AUTHORITY.
YEAH. THE VICTORIA COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT WOULD NEED TO INVESTIGATE THAT AND HAVE CONTROL OVER -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE REMEDY IS IF THEY FILE CITATIONS TO DISTRICT COURT OR WHAT THEIR REMEDIES OR IF THEY HAVE FINES. THAT'S NOT -- THAT'S NOT WITH IN THE PURVIEW OF WHAT WE CAN DO.
THEY SAID IT HAS ENOUGH ROOM TO INSTALL BOTH THE SEPTIC TANK AND A WATER WELL.
THEY DIDN'T COMMENT ON THE OTHER ACTIVITY. FOR THE PURPOSES OF A PLATT, IT'S NOT REALLY GERMAN TO THAT.
THEY ARE DIFFERENT SUBJECTS OF CHAPTERRER STATE LAW OF REGULATIONS. I KNOW THAT CAN SOUND VERY RED TAPE AND IT IS.
THINGS GET THROWN OUT OF COURTS ALL THE TIME BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, LOWER COURT MAYBE DIDN'T HAVE -- WASN'T CONSIDERING SOMETHING UNDER THE CORRECT STATUTE OR WHAT NOT.
>> FOR ME IT SEPARATES THE ISSUES AND THE CLEARLY WERE -- THEY PUT THEIR TWO CENTS ON IT. MAKES SENSE TO ME.
>> IN A NUT SHELL THE QUESTION BEING RAISED ARE OUTSIDE OF THE
SCOPE OF THIS COMMISSION? >> CORRECT.
>> WE CAN DEFINITELY FOLLOW UP WITH THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ARE AWARE THERE ARE
POTENTIAL VIOLATIONS FOR THEM E >> VIOLATING RIGHT NOW. WHAT IF
[00:15:01]
WE GRANT OR DON'T GRANT IT WE STILL HAVE PROBLEMS. I DON'T>> YEAH. RIGHT. MAY BE A PROBLEM.
>> PLATTS HAVE TO BE APPROVED OR DENIED WITH IN 30 DAYS. YOU WOULD NEED TO OFFER A REASON FOR DENIAL WHICH, OF COURSE, THE VARIANCE COULD BE. THIS IS TO SET UP THE LAND TO MAKE SURE THAT IT -- IT'S A -- IT COULD BE DEVELOPABLE AND IT DOES HAVE ENOUGH LAND FOR A WATER WELL AND SEPTIC THANK AND TANK. I THINK WHAT PROMPTED THIS IS THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER SOLD OFF THE REST OF HIS LAND SO IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANY EXISTING CONDITIONS. NOW, IF THERE IS A VIOLATION AND -- BRINGING THAT TO THE VICTOR WHY COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT'S ATTENTION AND THEY INVESTIGATE AND FIND VIOLATIONS THAT COULD CHANGE THE CONDITIONS OUT THERE. THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY SEPARATE IF YOU APPROVE THE PLATT OR NOT.
THEY ARE SEPARATE. >> IF THE PLATT IS APPROVED OR DENIED. IF THERE IS A VIOLATION THE COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT STILL CAN GO PER SUE THAT VIOLATION. WHATEVER ACTION IS
TAKEN TONIGHT. >> SO ESSENTIALLY THINK IS IT THEY DID FIND A VIOLATION, SOLD OFF THAT LOT. THIS LOT WOULD BE DEVELOPABLE BUT A NEW HOME TO BE BUILT . IT WOULD HAVE THE WATER WELL AND SEPTIC. THINK IT AS THAT WAY THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING. WILL THE LOT BE BUILDABLE IN THE FUTURE.
>> AND SHE ANSWERED THAT QUESTION IT SOUNDS LIKE.
>> AND EVEN IF THERE ARE MULTIPLE CONNECTIONS TO THIS -- TO A SEPTIC TANK THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED. MAYBE THEY JUST AREN'T PERMITTED. OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS IN THE COUNTY THERE IS NO ZONING REGULATIONS OR LAND USE REGULATIONS IT'S PROHINTED BY THE TEXAS CONSTITUTION.
SOMEONE COULD PUT ENOUGH, MULTIPLE HOMES AS LONG AS THE SEPTIC TANK IS SIZED APPROPRIATELY. THAT'S WHERE YOU DO GET INTO SIZE LIMITATIONS ON A LOT. YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A LARGE ENOUGH -- THERE ARE GOING TO BE LIMITATIONS ON WHAT CAN BE PERMITTED BUT THOSE -- ALL THOSE PERMITS AND REGULATIONS FALL UNDER THE VICTORIA HEALTH COUNTY'S PURVIEW.
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? IF NOT -- YES. THIS IS THE FIRST I HAVE HEARD OF IT.
>> THAT COULD BE ADDRESSED. >> MY OPINION.
IS THAT AN OPTION TO TABLE IT? >> IF ACTION IS NOT TAKEN IN 30 DAYS WOULD BE AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED. IF YOU RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OR DENIAL THEY WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO FORWARD THAT REQUEST TO COUNSEL WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL SO IT WOULD END UP IN COUNSEL'S PURVIEW.
>> LET'S GO BACK TO -- THE PLATTING OF THIS. I MEAN THAT THERE COULD BE A THOUSAND OTHER VIOLATION THAT WE CAN'T ADDRESS. WE DON'T KNOW. THERE'S GROUP THAT WILL GET INVOLVED WITH THAT. OKAY. YOU CAN -- YOU CAN -- I'M NOT SAYING -- I'M NOT TRYING TAKE CHANGE TRYING TO CHANGE YOUR
[00:20:06]
VOTE.>> SURE. I GIVE YOU MY WORD. WE'LL CALL THE COUNTY TOMORROW.
WE HAVE A GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. WE CAN EASILY CALL THEM AND SAY ARE YOU SPECIFICALLY AWARE OF THIS
ISSUE? >> OKAY. I WILL GO HEAD AND CALL THE QUESTION. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVING THE VARIANCE? ALL IN FAVOR?
>> SECOND. >> SORRY. WAS THAT DAN THAT MADE
>> YOU'RE RIGHT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A
>> OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE.
>> ALL OPPOSED. THANK YOU, SIR. OKAY. MOTION PASSES.
[2. Amendments to the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO)]
THE NEXT ITEM IS -- THE AMENDMENTS TO THE UDO.>> YES. GOOD EVENING. I THINK THERE ARE SOME NEW FACE FACES THAT I HAVEN'T INDIVIDUALLY MET. IF YOU HAVE HEARD OUR UDO WAS DEVELOPED IN 204 AND AS SUCH WE ARE KEEPING IT KIND OF A LIVING, BREATHING DOCUMENT AS WE ARE DOING IT ON EVERY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION THAT COMES THROUGH. IF WE FIND ERRORS, OR IN THIS CASE, TONIGHT, IF STATE LAW CHANGES AND FORCES US TO CHANGE OUR ORDINANCE WE WANT TO STAY ON TOP OF THE ORDINANCE AND MAKE SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT STAYS RELEVANT. I DO HAVE A LIST OF AMENDMENTS. WE DID PROVIDE WU PRINTED OUT COPIES IN THE PACKETS IT'S JUST THE PAGES THAT ACTUALLY HAD AMENDMENTS THAT WE PUT OUT. WE DID PROVIDE A LINK TO THE FULL DOCUMENT I WILL GO THROUGH THESE. NOT TO QUICKLY BUT FAIRLY QUICKLY TO HIGHLIGHT THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
AS YOU WILL SEE A THEME THROUGHOUT MOST OF IT'S REALLY JUST KIND OF HOUSE KEEPING. FIRST PAGE WHICH I DON'T HAVE A SLIDE FOR IS JUST -- WE ADDED AN S FOR PROPER GRAMMAR SO THE FIRST REAL CHANGE IS ON PAGE 12 AND THAT STATES THAT A SITE PERMIT IS ONLY ALLOWED ONCE PER TWO YEARS OR A FULL SITE PLAN WILL BE REQUIRED. THE SITE PLANS ARE ACTUALLY GOOD FOR TWO YEARS.
AS YOU KNOW A NONCONFORMING SITE PERMIT IS WHEN A PROPERTY IS BEING CHANGED LESS THAN 30%. THEY CAN DO A SITE MODIFICATION.
WE DECIDED TO MATCH THAT PERMIT TIME FRAME WITH THE SAME AS A SITE PLAN PERMIT TIME FRAME. THE IDEA OF A SITE PERMIT OF COURSE IS TO GET THOSE SMALL IMPROVEMENTS F YOU ARE MODIFYING YOUR SITE THROUGH A PERMIT AND THEN SIX MONTHS LATER MODIFYING IT AGAIN AND THEN AGAIN YOU SHOULD GO THROUGH A FULL SITE PLAN. THEN WE ALSO UNDER THIS NONCONFORMING SECTION ON NONCONFORMING LOTS IT GAVE ME THE THEIR TO HAVE A 15% VARIATION BUT ELSEWHERE UNDER THE ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES IT'S ACTUALLY ONLY GRANTED -- GRANTED A 10% SO WE WANTED TO MATCH THOSE UP AND THERE'S A FEW OTHER REGULATION THAT WE'RE CHANGING TO MAKE CONSISTENT SO NUMBERS CONSISTENT THOUGH THEY MAY BE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT PROCESSES BUT SIMILAR ENOUGH.
THE NEXT CHANGE IS ON PAGE 13 OF THE BIG ORDINANCE. THIS IS SOMETHING SIMILAR ALONG THE SAME LINES OF THE SITE MODIFYING PERMITS. OUR RULES -- THE NEW RULES STATE THAT BILLBOARDS THAT AREN'T IN CONFORM ANESTHESIA ANCE, NEED TO COME DOWN AND THESE ARE FOR NONCONFORMING SIGNS ONLY. IF THE SIGN MEET MEETS ALL THE RULES NO PROBLEMS. THE ONES OUT OF COMPLIANCE BECAUSE ORDINANCES CHANGED OR WHAT NOT, IF THEY HAVE TO BE REPAIRED OVER 50% THEN THEY NEED TO COME DOWN. WE RECENTLY HAD AN APPLICATION OR THE COMPANY WAS TRYING TO PHASE A BIG REPAIR IN THAT IT WAS ABOUT 75% OF THE VALUE. WE DENIED THE APPLICATION
[00:25:02]
BECAUSE THE REPAIRS WERE DEPENDING ON EACH A YOU COULDN'T DO PART ONE WITHOUT 2 BUT THEY WERE TRYING TO SPECIFICALLY GO AROUND THIS PROVISION THAT SAID FOR THE 50%.SO, THINKING IN LINE OF IF WE HAVE OTHER FOLK THAT TRY TO DO THAT WHERE THE REPAIRS ARE NOT DEPENDING ON EACH OTHER WE ADDED A FIVE YEAR TIME FRAME IN THAT TO TRY -- BECAUSE THE GOAL IS FOR NONCONFORMING BILLBOARDS TO COME DOWN. SO, IN THE PRINTED PACKET THERE ARE MANY, MANY PAGES RELATED TO ARTICLE 3. IN CHAPTER 2 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES IT IS WHAT -- THAT'S THE CHAPTER THAT CREATES ALL OF OUR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS.
THAT'S WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS CREATED. THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEAL IS ALSO CREATED IN CHAPTER 2. IN THAT CHAPTER IT GRANTS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS COMPLETE AUTHORITY PRETTY MUCH OVERALL OF OUR BUILDING CODES. WHEN WE UNIFIED THE BUILDING CODE WE DIDN'T MAKE THAT CLEAR THAT THERE IS THAT CHAPTER 2 SITTING OUT THERE FOR THE BUILDING -- BOARD OF APPEALS -- BOARD ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS HAVING AUTHORITY OVER AND SO I'M GOING TO SKIP OVER ARTICLE 3 BECAUSE THEY HAVE HAD MANY, MANY, MANY WORKSHOPS AND MEETINGS ON ALL OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE BEING RECOMMENDED AND THEN I WILL CLARIFY THAT A LITTLE LATER WHERE WE SAY THAT ARTICLE 3 IS UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND THAT'S A BOARD THAT HAS THE MAKE UP IS REQUIRED TO BE A LICENSED PLUMBER, LICENSED ELECTRICIAN, YOU KNOW ALL OF THE EXPERTS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. I'M GOING TO SKIP OVER THESE. THAT WILL TAKE YOU TO PAGE 82 IN THE PACKET. ACTUALLY THE -- THE 78 IS ON THE BACK SIDE RIGHT BEFORE 82. THAT IS THIS ONE OUT OF THIS LAND USE TABLE. THERE'S JUST A SMALL CHANGE ON THE DAYCARE SECTION WHERE IT SAYS WE ADDED THAT YOU MUST COMPLY WITH THE OTHER SECTIONS THOSE SECTIONS RELATED TO HOME BASED BUSINESS WHERE WE SAY YOU CAN HAVE A HOME BASED BUSINESS PROVIDED THE HOME BASED BUSINESS IS SECONDARY TO THE PRIMARY USE OF IT BEING SOMEONE'S HOME. THERE IS OPERATIONAL -- THERE'S SOME REQUIREMENTS ABOUT NOT USING OUT BUILDINGS, NOT HAVING OUTDOOR STORAGE, THINGS LIKE THAT. THE STATE OF TEXAS, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY PROTECTIVESERVICES, THEY ARE LICENSED DAYCARES USED TO HAVE A CHILD BASED HOME DAYCARE PERMIT. IT'S OUR UNDERSTANDING THEY WENT AWAY. SO WE ARE STILL FINE WITH CHILD DAYCARES. HOME BASED DAYCARES AS LONG AS THEY COMPLY WITH THE HOME BASED BUSINESS SECTIONS WHICH SAYS YOU CANNOT USE OUT BUILDINGS AND THE PRIMARY USE OF A HOME MUST BE A HOME AND THE BUSINESS IS SECONDARY. SO WE JUST CLARIFIED IT IN THAT TABLE BY SAYING, YES, THESE SECTIONS CAN BE RESIDENTIAL BUT THEY ALSO -- YOU MUST COMPLY WITH -- YOU CAN HAVE A HOME BASED CHILD CARE BUSINESS BUT IT MUST COMPLY WITH THE HOME BASED SECTION. THE NEXT IS IN SPECIFIC LAND USE SECTIONS.
STATE LAW OUTLINES WHAT A MANUFACTURERRED HOME IS. IT'S A HUDD HOME. IT IS BUILT TO A DIFFERENT BUILDING CODE AND IS PRETTY SELF EXPLAINED THAT IT'S IN STATE LAW THAT THEY ARE FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE. IT'S REALLY REDUNDANT TO PUT IT HERE BUT WHEN YOU ARE IN FRONT OF A CITIZEN WHO WANTS TO USE MANUFACTURED HOME FOR A BUSINESS, DIG UPSTATE LAW IS NOT ALWAYS SO EASY SO THEY JUST PUT IT HERE TO MAKE IT EASY FOR PLANNERS TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT MANUFACTURERRED HOMES ARE FOR RESIDENTIAL USE. THERE ARE SOME MODULE BUILDING THAT ARE BUILT TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD AND THAT'S WHY -- SCHOOL USES A LOT OF PORTABLE BUILDINGS. THOSE HAVE THE INDUSTRIAL CODE STANDARD THAT REBUILT TO SO THEY AREN'T THE SAME. THAT CAN SOMETIMES CONFUSE FOLKS. FOR TRUE MANUFACTURED HOME THEY ARE FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL USE ONLY. WHEN WE CREATED THE UDL WE ELIMINATED CHAPTER 12 AND PUT IT IN AS DIVISION 17 AND THIS JUST DIDN'T GET CORRECTED WHEN WE FIRST WROTE THE UDO.
THAT'S A CORRECTION TO THAT DIVISION 17. THEN THE STATE IN THE LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION CHANGED REGULATION OF FOOD TRUCK
[00:30:03]
INSPECTIONS AND THEY SAID THAT LOCAL INSPECTION AUTHORITY IS NOT ALLOWED ANYMORE FROM -- FOR FOOD TRUCKS. SO THIS SECTION -- THESE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE FOOD TRUCK PARK ALIGN WITH THE STATE LAW CHANGES. THEN ON NUMBER 14, WE HAVE BEEN VERY CLEAR THAT FOOD TRUCKS MUST OPERATE ON -- BUT WE DID HAVE SOME PUSH BACK EVEN THOUGH IT'S IN THE PARKING SECTION AND THE DRIVE AISLE SECTION THE DRIVEWAYS AND PARKING LOTS AND EVERYTHING MUST BE PAVED. WE STILL HAD A LOT OF PUSH BACK SO WE JUST CLARIFIED IT HERE. A LOT OF OUR RECOMMENDED CHANGES COME BACK FROM ACTUALLY WORKING WITH THE ORDINANCE AND SOMETIMES YOU FEEL LIKE I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE SO VERY EXPLICIT BUT IT MAKES ALL OF OUR LIFE EASIER WHEN WE ARE. THIS NEXT SECTION. UNDER SHOPPING CENTERS, PLANNED SHOPPING CENTERS THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS THE COMPLETE CONTROL TO SET STANDARDS LIKE SET BACKS AND LOT SIZE WHEN IT MAKES SENSE. WE WANTED TO EXPAND THAT POWER OR THAT CONTROL TO PLANNING COMMISSION FOR LOTS IN THE DOWNTOWN BUSINESS AND HISTORIC DISTRICT. IT'S SUCH A UNIQUE AREA OF TOWN AND SO WHEN YOU HAVE SOME AREAS OF DOWNTOWN THAT ARE VERY COMMERCIAL SOME AREA THAT ARE VERY RESIDENTIAL SO WE WANTED TO, YOU NO HE, MAKE CERTAIN THAT DEVELOPMENT IN THE DIFFERENT AREAS KIND OF MATCHED THE CHARACTER OF WHAT'S HAPPENING OR IN THAT AREA OR DIRECTION WE WANT IT TO GO. WE ARE RECOMMENDING TOUCANS ILL TO AMEND THIS ORDINANCE TO GIVE PLANNING COMMISSION THE CONTROL OF SETTING WHAT THOSE LOT SIZE SET BACKS SHOULD BE.THIS JUST GOT COPIED FROM THE OTHER OLD ORDINANCE THAT CANOPIES COULD BE LOCATED IN A SET BACK SO LONG AS THEY WEREN'T CLOSER THAN 12 FEET WITH IN THE PROPERTY LINE AND IT ALLOWED A LOT OF GAS STATION CANOPIES TO BE REBUILT. A GAS STATION WITHOUT GAS PUMPS AND A GAS CANOPY IS A DYING GAS STATION. I LIKE THAT IT REALLY HELPED GET SOME OF THOSE CANOPIES REBUILT AFTER THE HURRICANE SO WE LIKE THAT REGULATION. WE ARE FINDING THERE'S A LOT MORE THAN JUST FUEL CANOPY OVER HANGS. IT'S ALSO ORDER BOARDS AND PAY STATIONS THAT ARE SMALLER KIND OF INCIDENTAL USES TO THE PRIMARY USE. WE WANTED TO ALLOW THOSE WITH IN SET BACKS BUT AT NO TIME CAN THEY BE WITH IN LESS THAN 12 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. SO WE ESTABLISHED THE ESTABLISHED BUILDING LINE WITH THE UDO AND THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF AREAS IN TOWN THAT DON'T HAVE A PLATTED SET BACK. THERE'S NOT UNIFORMITY ALONG A LOCK FACE BECAUSE THERE HASN'T BEEN PLATTED SET BACKS. IN SOME NEIGHBORHOODS EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NOT A PLATTED SET BACK THERE'S UNIFORMITY AND -- SOMEONE WANTED TO PUT A CARPORT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE, YOU KNOW, IT JUST STICKS OUT LIKE A SORE THUMB. WE CREATED THIS ESTABLISHED BUILDING LINE THIS IS REALLY THE INTENT ISN'T CHANGING. IT'S JUST WORD SMITHING TO MAKE IT CLEAR, HOPEFULLY FOR OUR INTENT.
FOR EVERYBODY TO READ AND UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. SO THE BLOCK FACE MEASURE FROM SECTION TO INTERSECTION WHERE THERE'S 30% OR MORE HAVING THE ESTABLISHED BUILDING LINE AND THAT'S WHAT THE ESTABLISHED BUILDING LINE IS. WHEN THERE'S ANY -- YOU CAN TAKE THE AVERAGE FOR ESTABLISHING WHAT THAT BUILDING LINE SHOULD BE. SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE. THIS WAS JUST AN ERROR. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE CURVE LINE. THERE ARE SOME -- THIS IS MAINLY FOR LIKE LANDSCAPING. JUST KEEP IN MIND MOST LOTS HAVE A BUILDING SET BACK. THERE'S A SIGN SET BACK AND SO LOT THAT HAVE A REALLY LONG -- REALLY LARGE RIGHT OF WAY IN FRONT OF THEM CAN SEEM LIKE THEY ARE SET BACK, A LOT BUT IT'S JUST RIGHT OF WAY. SO LANDSCAPING DOES APPLY TO THE SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGL, BUT IT'S NEED FROM THE CURB LINE, NOT THE PROPERTY LINE F YOU DO PROPERTY LINE AND YOU DO HAVE A VERY, VERY LARGE RIGHT OF WAY THEN YOU -- IT'S KIND OF EXCESSIVE. THESE MINIMUM
[00:35:03]
DISTANCE TO INTERSECTIONS ARE ELSEWHERE IN THE ORDINANCE. THEY WERE IN CONFLICT SO WE JUST DELETED THESE BECAUSE THEY ARE IN ANOTHER SECTION. SO THE LANDSCAPING WE HAVE HAD A RUN OF PEOPLE REMOVING ALL OF THEIR LANDSCAPING THAT'S IN AND WE CAN'T NECESSARILY FIND THE OLD SITE PLAN THOUGH WE KNOW IT WAS DEVELOPED WITH A SITE PLAN BUT IT'S OLD ENOUGH THAT RECORDS AREN'T ROBUST ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO FIND THAT SITE PLAN. THE SECTION DIDN'T REALLY COVER THAT WE DON'T WANT YOU REMOVING ALL OF YOUR LANDSCAPING. SO, WE ARE SAYING IF YOU ARE GOING TO -- REMOVE OVER 30% OF YOUR LANDSCAPING WE NEED A NEW PLAN OR THEY -- IF WE CAN FIND THE OLD PLAN WE WILL FOLLOW THAT TOO. A MAJOR CHANGE TO OVER 30% WHICH, AGAIN THE 30% IS A THEME THROUGHOUT THE RECOMMEND NANCE. THE NONCONFORMING SITE PERMITS.A LOT OF THINGS ARE TRIGGERED AT 30%. WE HAVE ALSO HAD A RUN OF ZERO SCAPING BUT -- THE INTENT IS NOT TO HAVE COMPLETE ROCK BEDS ALONG OUR CORRIDORS AND IN FRONT YARDS. SO WE ARE LIMITING NONLIVE MATERIALS TO BE NO MORE THAN 25% OF THE FRONT -- REQUIRED FRONT LANDSCAPING. THEN A LONG PRACTICE, FOR ZERO SCAPING THAT WAS DONE, I THINK TWO DIRECTORS AGO THAT IF YOU ARE GOING TO PUT IN A ZERO SCAPE IT'S UNDER TH ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE WHERE THEY MAY REVIEW ANDAPPROACH. THAT'S CODIFYING WHAT'S LONG BEEN PRACTICED. ON OUR -- AGAIN KIND OF CLARIFYING THAT PARKING FACILITIES TO BE USED FOR STORAGE AND GOODS, TERMS, WILL MEET THE SURFACE AND DRAINING REQUIREMENTS UNLESS IT'S SCREENED. IT'S IN THE SCREENING SECTION SO IT'S -- WE THOUGHT THE INTENT WAS THERE BUT WE GET PUSH BACK AND PEOPLEREQUESTING CLARITY AND THEN ALL SCREENED OUTDOOR WILL BE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE REQUIRED MINIMUM SET BACKS. SAME WITH THE RESIDENTIAL WALLS. IT'S FOR -- EXPENSES AND THEN ALSO ADDING THAT MESH IS A PROHIBITED MATERIAL TO BE USED WHEN THE ORDINANCE WAS FIRST WRITTEN AND THIS WAS A SECTION WE JUST COPY AND PASTED FROM THE 1992 ORDINANCE. I DON'T THINK MESH WAS A COMMON MATERIAL USED. THIS IS A CHANGE THAT WE PUT IN WITH THE UDO TO TRY TO ELIMINATE DUMPSTERS WITHOUT ENCLOSURES. WE WROTE THAT A NEW SOLID WASTE PROVIDER ACCOUNREQUESTED A DUMPSTER MUST BE CLOSED IN. ONE PERSON HAD THE ACCOUNT BUT WANTED THE ADDITIONAL DUMPSTER AND THE NEW ONE WAS SAT WITHOUT A ECNLOSURE AND THAT WASN'T OUR INTENT. HAVE TO -- WORK WITH OUR ATTORNEYS AND GET THE LANGUAGE JUST SO BECAUSE THE WASTE MANAGEMENT LIKES TO PUSH BACK ON THIS. WE ARE VERY CLEAR. NO NEW DUMPSTERS WILL BE SAT OUTSIDE OF A CONTAINER. THAT IS JUST FOR LOOKS. DUMPSTERS AREN'T PRETTY AND PREVENTS WIND BLOWN TRASH AND HELP WAS LITTER ISSUES IN TOWN. SHIELDING CUT OFF STANDARDS FOR LIGHTING TO BE AGAIN CLEAR THE LIGHTS WILL BE DIRECTED AWAY FROM RESIDENTIAL USES. WE HAD SOME SECURITY LIGHTS THAT WHY JUST SHINING DIRECTLY RIGHT BACK INTO SOME BACKYARD RESIDENTIAL HOMES AND SO, CAN'T JUST BEING VERY CLEAR WHEN WE CAN. SO THIS IS WHEN THE PLATTING REQUIRED FOR BUILDING PERMITS. WE ARE INCREASE THAT FROM 25 TO 30 BECAUSE, AGAIN, THAT 30% IS REALLY THE BIG THRESHOLD WHERE A LOT OFREGULATIONS ARE TRIGGERED THEN WE HAD A 25% TRIGGER OVER HERE IN THE PLATTING SECTION. IT'S JUST A LOT EASIER FOR STAFF TO ALWAYS REMEMBER AND DO 30%. THIS IS ON THE PROCEDURES FOR SUBMITTING PLANS. WE HAVE THAT YOU REQUIRED TO SUBMIT SIX PLANS
[00:40:01]
IN THE ORDINANCE AND THIS IS LONG BEEN A PRACTICE. CURRENT CURRENTLY -- DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ACTS AS THE CHAIR OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW TEAM. THOSE SIX SETS GO TO A LOT OF OTHER STORES BESIDES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. WE GIVE THEM TO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC WORKS, ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT THAT HAVE A HAND IN REVIEWS. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW. ONE OF THE DEPARTMENTS DOES NOT WANT THEIR SET ANY MORE SO WE -- BUT THAT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CURRENT HEAD OF THAT DEPARTMENT SO WE TRIED TO MAKE IT MORE LOOSE IN THAT WE ARE SAYING UP TO SIX SETS CAN BE REQUIRE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT -- FROM THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES AND SO WE WILL SET THAT NUMBER AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL. IF WE GET A NEW DIRECTOR THAT WANT THAT COPY BACK WE HAVE IT IN THE ORDINANCE THAT IT'S SIX SETS.SO THIS IS REALLY KIND OF WHAT PROMPTED US TO -- THIS AND THE BUILDING CODE UPGRADES THAT WERE REQUIRED TO DO IS IN THAT ARTICLE 3. EVERY FEW YEARS WE HAVE TO UPDATE TO A NEW SET OF BUILDING CODES BECAUSE ISO AND THE CITY INSURANCE RATING THAT KIND OF FORCES US TO STAY ON TOP OF CURRENT BUILDING CODES. THAT PROMPTED THIS REVIEW OF THE UDO. WE REALIZED WHEN WE MOVED THE BUILDING CODE WHICH USED TO BE CHAPTER 5 INTO CHAPTER 21 EVEN THOUGH OUT IN CHAPTER 2 WE HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS WE DIDN'T REALLY CLARIFY ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE CHAPTER 21 THE NEW UDO OF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS RULES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. SO, HERE IN THE PROCEDURES WE HAVE STATED THAT BASICALLY EVERYTHING IN CHAPTER 21 BUT FOR ARTICLE 3 COMES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR RELIEF AND THEN ADDED A NEW SECTION THAT SAID ANYTHING IN ARTICLE 3 WILL GO TO BUILDING CODES -- WILL GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS. THAT'S LIKE -- HOW WE -- HAVE LONG ALWAYS HANDLED TAKING BUILDING CODE VARIANCE. SAY YOU DON'T WANT TO DO A THREE HOUR FIRE WALL. YOU WANT A TWO HOUR FIRE WALL. THAT KIND OF VARIANCE HAS ALWAYS GONE TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND APPEALS BECAUSE IT HAS THOSE TRADEEXPERTS ON THAT BOARD. SO, THIS LAST SECTION AND THIS SECTION FIXED THAT TO CLARIFY THAT. THEN WE CORRECTED SOME DEFINITIONS.
AGAIN STATE LAW, WE MADE SOME CHANGES TO FOOD TRUCKS AND CENTRAL PREPARATION FACILITY RULES AND EVERYTHING AND SO, WE WANTED TO CODIFY THAT AND REFERENCE THE SECTION OF CITY CODE THAT CHANGED ON THAT. THEN ON COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT WE HAD A VERY SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR MUSIC VENUES AND IT MEETS -- YOU KNOW THE -- IT'S THE SAME -- IT'S A SIMILAR USE TO THE COMMERCIAL AMUSEMENT. THE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES WILL ASSIGN IT A USE AND THEN PLANNING COMMISSION CAN APPEAL THAT TO PLANNING COMMISSION BUT, AGAIN, WE GET A LOT OF CALLS AND REQUESTS FOR OUTDOOR MUSIC VENUES. SO, JUST THOUGHT WE NEED TO JUST FIX THIS DEFINITION. THOSE ARE ALL OF THE APPLES THAT WE ARE SEEKING A RECOMMENDATION ON TONIGHT. AS I SAID MOST OF IT
THEY HELPED US WRITE THE ORIGINAL AND WHEN I SAID THEY HELPED US WRITE IT THEY HELPED US ORGANIZE THE ORIGINAL UNDER THE STATE LAW BUT A LOT OF THE ORIGINAL UDO WAS ACTUALLY CONSOLIDATING EXISTING ORDINANCES AND CHAPTER 5 AND CHAPTER 21 AND MOVING ALL INTO PLACE SO THEY REALLY WROTE THE FIRST COUPLE OF CHAPTERS WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION AND THE STATE LAW AND ALL OF THAT ADMINISTRATIVE STUFF AND THEN WE COPY AND PASTED IT IN A LOT OF THE 1992 REGULATIONS AND JUST CHANGED THE ONES WE KNEW WERE A PROBLEM. A LOT OF OUR CHAPTER 21 IS SIMILAR OR THE SAME. THERE'S ALSO A LOT THAT'S VERY DIFFERENT. BREES AND NICKELS HELPED US WITH THE ORIGINAL -- OUR ICONA DON'TED AND THEN WE HAVE BEEN KEEPING UP THEAMENDMENTS FOR THING THAT NEED TO BE CLARIFIED OR WE JUST
[00:45:04]
FIND ERRORS OR WHAT NOT. >> THANK YOU.
>> WE WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME PLEASE COME FORWARD. CITIZENS WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES. SEEING NONE WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
YOU HAVE HEARD DISCUSSIONS. COMMISSIONERS.
DO WITH HAVE A MOTION TO GO HEAD AND ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS TO UPDATE THE UDO AS PRESENTED THIS EVENING?
>> OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR. >> AYE.
>> ALL OPPOSED. MOTION PASSES. MOVING ON THERE'S TWO ITEMS ON
[D. Consent Agenda:]
THE CONSENT AGENDA WHICH ARE THE MINUTES FOR THE OCTOBER 16, 2025 AND THE FINAL PLATT FOR -- SUBDIVISION. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT ITEMS AND A SECOND?>> I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. >> DAN.
[E. Other Business:]
MOTION PASSES. MAY WE HAVE THE MONTHLY DEVELOPMENT REPORT PLEASE?>> GOOD EVENING COMMISSIONERS. SO, IN NOVEMBER OF 2025 THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 105 BUILDING PERMITS WHICH IS LESS THAN LAST YEAR'S TOTAL OF 252 FOR MEP PERMITS ISSUED IN NOVEMBER OF 2025, THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 128 WHICH IS LESS THAN LAST YEAR'S TOTAL OF 132. AND FOR PERMIT FEES COLLECTED THERE WAS A TOTAL OF $39,031.50 WHICH IS ALSO LESS THAN LAST YEAR'S TOTAL OF $43,928. OVERALL NOVEMBER, 2025 NUMBERS WERE ALL LESS THAN LAST YEAR.
OUR FISCAL YEAR STARTS IN OCTOBER SO NOVEMBER IS THE SECOND MONTH OF OUR FISCAL YEAR. YES, SIR.
>> THANK YOU SIR. >> AND FOR THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MONTHLY DEVELOPMENT REPORT IN TOTAL WE HAVE FOUR MINOR PLATTS AND ONE MEDIUM PLAT. ONE SITE PLAN AND ONE SIDE
MOD AND NO CITY COUNCIL ACTION. >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
>> ANY ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS TO DISCUSS? SEEING NO OTHER BUSINESS WISH EVERYBODY A MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY NEW YEAR WE'LL CATCH YOU NEXT MONTH AND ADJOURN
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.