Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

material examination of the application's conformance to all applicable code provisions. The staff report for an agenda item may include conditions, exceptions, or modifications. The commission may approve the item with all staff report conditions, exceptions or modifications, including additional measures regarding the item as imposed by the commission. Otherwise, the staff report with all modifications, exceptions, and conditions is approved, and the applicant shall comply with all provisions of the staff report. Commissioners will consider all agenda items other than subdivision items in the form of a public hearing. The normal process is as follows. First, the commission will hear a staff report followed by a statement from the applicant. Then, members of the public may speak followed by any final statement from the applicant. Finally, the matter will be closed for further discussion or a motion among the commission. The commission shall then make a recommendation that will be forwarded to city council. Thank you, Commissioner. Now, Mr. Garcia, are there any changes to the agenda? Mr. Alejandra will go ahead and inform about any changes. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Mr. Alejandra, good afternoon, Chair. Uh, there are no changes to the agenda. Just one two items on consent agenda including the minutes and one revised staff report. Thank you sir. Okay. Uh can ask the city how do we proceed? It's up to you all. I think if you want to Okay. Welcome. Thank you. Okay. Okay, so now we have the call to the public. Uh, this is for anyone who would like to speak on items that are not on the agenda and they should have signed up. Um, anybody who wants to make a public

statement who has not signed up to speak on an item, now is your time. Okay. So, public comment is now closed. Call to the public is now closed. Now, we'll move on to the consent agenda agenda. Uh commissioners, is there any discussion? A motion to approve the consent agenda. Motion to approve. All in favor? I. All oppose. Motion passes. And now we move on to the regular agenda presentations by staff. We are on item number four. Okay. I'm going to Yes, sir. Salude, I'm going to recuse myself. I have an interest in that. Thank you, sir. We will call you back into the room when the item is decided. No worries. Good afternoon, chair and members of the commission. Jose Ban with planning and inspections. Item four on the agenda is a resoning request for the subject property located on Deubberry Drive. This is located uh north of Trans Mountain Road and east of Wrestler. Here's the aerial image showing the general location. You can see I 10 to the west, loop 375 to the south. Here's a closer look. Uh the property is approximately 6.85 acres in size and it is currently vacant. The property is currently zoned R3A residential and the applicant is requesting to reszone the property from R3A to PR2 plan residential to allow for

the proposed use of town homes. Plan El Paso. The future land use uh map for the northwest planning area designates the property as G4 suburban walkable. Here we have the conceptual site plan showing the proposed development of 44 town homes. At this time, the conceptual plan is not being reviewed for compliance and it is not binding. Prior to development, a detailed site development plan will require CPC approval. Here's an image of the property uh taken from New Deberry Drive looking towards uh to the east. And then taking a look at the surrounding development to the north, east, and south we have properties that are zone R3, R3A, and C4, which are vacant. And to the west, we have property zone R3A, which include single family homes and a pond site. So public notices were sent to property owners within 300 feet on June 4th, 2025. The neighborhood association was also uh contacted of the request. The planning division has received one phone call of inquiry, three phone calls in opposition and one phone call in support. And from uh from what we understand, the applicants have been in contact with some of those that were in opposition. In addition, the applicant has uh conducted three public outreach meetings which were conducted on March 26th, April 29th, and June 11th of the present year. The Open Space Advisory Board did uh recommend unanimous approval of this of this resoning uh on July 2nd, 2025. And with that, staff does recommend approval of the resoning request. And thank you, commissioners. So, I'll be happy to answer any questions. Thank

you, sir. Uh, commissioners, are are there any questions for city staff? I have a question and maybe this is for the applicant, so let me know. Um, can you share more about why uh there was opposition and what came out of the meeting when the applicant met with them? uh to the specifics of the meeting, I'll have I'll defer to the applicant, but the calls that we received uh the nature of the opposition was uh concerns for decreased property values and increased traffic. Thank you. Any more questions for city staff? Seeing none, can we hear from the applicant, please? Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Good afternoon. Thank you all for taking a few minutes to listen to us today. Um, ideally I do have a short presentation I'd like to give, but I prefer to uh wait if I might see if there's any other public uh comment and then offer response. Please state your name for the record. David Ballard, I'm sorry, sir. If that's okay, I'd rather wait till we get some public comment if there's any to get. Can um city advise on on this? Sure. Uh no problem. um if the commission decides to allow that that will not be a problem to hear public comment first and then have the applicant uh provide their comments. Okay. So I think the uh bylaw state that we hear from the applicant we hear from those in opposition and those in support. Can we maintain that structure please? It it's up to the commission. Okay. Any preference to uh stick to the same structure? I agree that it should be that structure. Okay. Let's stick to the same structure. Do you concur with all staff comments on the report sir? I do. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. And now um any questions for the applicants? Oh yeah. Can you discuss what came from the meeting when you met with folks who opposed this? Absolutely. There were three meetings that were held uh which were addressed by Mr. Beltran a moment

ago. And I think the concerns that came up that I think were um most obvious was one the increase in traffic. Uh obviously it's a developing area. It has been for several years. traffic is going to increase. There's not a great deal we can do about that. Um we are looking at extending Deubberry of course until through the end of the uh project. In doing so, uh typically we're only required to do half of that street that fronts the property. Uh one of the things I think we've decided we'd like to do and it might have been on one of the slides that uh you showed a few moments ago. I you could bring up the presentation. Slides. Oh, there you go. was on slide four. The other presentation, that's that's that's good right there. That's that's what we need to show. So, instead of doing the half of Deubberry that we'd be required to do, we're going to do the full width of Deubberry. Uh which I think makes a lot more sense. We'll handle the traffic a lot better. And in addition to that, which was not originally in the plan, um we will go across the road as well and build that heartscape um that goes the full length of the road and ties back into the existing deberry and have a walking path that will tie all of the that back in uh to the existing project. So kind of hoping that that's going to help uh relieve some of the concerns uh about the traffic pattern that will help. Certainly having both lanes of the road in there uh and then adding the landscaping certainly uh creates some attractiveness and gives some more walking areas uh in that area. Um another issue that was brought up to us and this was on slide three if we can go back to slide three for a moment and I might have to point up here in a moment but there was a big concern about construction traffic. You know, you always get a lot of construction cra traffic development uh brings in a lot

of trucks and graders and uh concrete trucks. There's a pipeline road easement just uh to the east of the project and I guess everybody knows that's this line here and that actually ties into the gateway. Uh and what we're doing is uh we intend to have our contractors utilize that area as much as possible to try to cut down on the traffic and uh all of the construction traffic that's going to go through the project itself. Um beyond that, uh the property values. Um I think what we're trying to do is one create some diversity in the community. Um make a little bit better use of the land out there. I think there's always questions about urban sprawl and I think this kind of helps address that issue a little bit. Uh this is a project that we have done in Colorado. Uh I think slides eight, nine and 10 will give you some views of the actual buildings that we have done up in Colorado Springs and we want to bring here. Um each unit in this forplex is sold individually. So you purchase your piece. It's not a co-op. It's not uh you know a condominium, anything like that. You actually have ownership of your own unit. Um, and based on uh what I've uh found from the Federal Reserve Bank, the median list price uh in El Paso for homes right now is $268,500. These start at $267,9. So, we're really trying to address that affordability, attainability issue uh in this area, too. I think the look of the units um again similar product we've done in Colorado Springs. I don't think it takes anything away from the existing property uh values in that area. Does that address your couple questions on the comments?

You brought up the issue of affordability. Um, can you talk to me about how many units you're going to be preserving through affordable housing and what um area median income levels you'll be serving if that's what you were implying? Well, the medium home list price according to the Federal Reserve Bank is 268,500 a list price for homes in El Paso. This unit will start at 2679. They go up to 299. But I think it does provide a more attainable project uh for people at a little bit lower incomes. If you look right now, I took a kind of sampling of 19 different homes that have been sold in that area. And the average sales price is just over $400,000. So, I think this really opens up an avenue for some other people in medium price ranges that can actually get in and um purchase these homes. Does that address your question? Um, thank you. No, it's just the second time uh that I hear in our meetings the word affordability come up. Um, and we're using it a little bit loosely because there are sort of compliance and specific mechanisms to ensure that there is like permanent affordability. There's public sub subsidies involved. There's also special renter protections or home ownership access opportunities that come with it. And I just want to formalize like it's it's a Russell Abelin, assistant city attorney. Yeah, this is a reasonzoning. So those aren't um generally considered or part of the criteria. what the criteria you're looking at is would this type of use be appropriate um and the reasoning from what would be allowed in R3A to uh PR2 planned residential. Um I just want to clarify uh since this is a public meeting. I want to be intentional when we use the word affordable that we're not implying there there's like technical compliant

legal affordable is not a term of art or technical term um it's on a scale I mean maybe I should use the word attainable not affordable these are attainable for a much larger segment of the population I mean I think you're allowed to use whatever word you'd like to use and I appreciate And I just want to clarify that there's layers to that. So, thank you, Commissioner. Thank you. Are there any other questions for the applicants at this minute? Yes, Commissioner. Just a question in regards to the access for this community here. There's two points of access um off Bluff Creek and Enchanted Springs. Are you going to build another access point to this community? There will be in time. not for this project, but there certainly will be in time. Um, I don't know that the pipeline, roadway would ever be used. It may be. Um, it's something we would have to be talking with the gas company about, but there certainly will be future connections. Okay. Thank you. I wanted to ask, we got an elevation, you know, just something like this in in a drawing, but how are you dealing with the specific elevation changes because it's on a mountain? that has nothing to do with like approving reszoning, but I'm curious how you dealt with that. Well, you know, a lot of times when you're dealing with hills, you you'll tend to terrace. Uh, and that may be the case here. This is not a terribly steep elevation on this particular road, and there's no topo to show you if I had it, show that to you. Um, but terracing typically is what we do. We deal with that a lot in Colorado uh, Springs as well. Uh, we wind up having to terrace and put in small garden walls sometimes between the units to to provide for that. Are you doing garden walls in the subdivision? I'm not sure. Uh, as I said, we haven't put the plans together yet to finalize this. We wanted to make sure we could get the zoning before we proceeded further, but

possibly. Okay. Thank you. You bet. Commissioners, any more questions? I have one question about the topological features of this area. Um, so one of plan El Paso's goals, actually plan 4.2 in particular, is for a well-connected network of complete streets. This is one long street and it's not connected to neighborhoods on the western boundary up to uh Enchanted Springs. So, it's harder for people to walk between neighborhoods. Um, are there any topological features that are preventing developments connecting two from the west side? If you could bring the presentation because I do know it's on Royal. So looking at the western boundary, that's a good one right there. Uh what's it done for the record? Was that a question for staff or for the representative? For the representative, are there any topological features preventing connection from the western boundary of this property to I'm sorry the what's moving west towards the existing development. The presentation just clicked on to the chair if I may. I mean that shows the top too. It's it's there's really no issue with with connecting to that. there's nothing that's in the way. And matter of fact, this did go before the uh Aoya Open Space U board yesterday and it was approved uh for them, but there really isn't anything topographically that's preventing that. Is that answering your question? Um maybe I didn't misunderstand you. Can you get back to the the map of the property? So, if you look on the eastern boundary right there where Dary Drive, that culde-sac is there's no connection to Enchanted Springs. That's the right side. There's no connection to Enchanted Spring. So, Dub Newberry is going to be one long street, which goes against the recommended goals of Plan El Paso. So, I'm just running wondering if there's a topological uh boundary. Is that too steep to connect? No. And it will connect in the future. Um we were trying to see if we could get the zoning for this and we may look for doing some more zoning in the areas that would be immediately north of

that that would tie back into Enchanted Springs. Does that make sense? I think so. just that it's hard to see that from the conceptual site plan because there's housing in that in that direction. Right. Okay. To the chair, if I may, just to add to that, uh uh the city has an ongoing project to extend Wrestler as well in this area. So, that's also going to be a feature connection providing that additional access point to to this area. Okay. And you did mention you had a small presentation to present. Um, I wonder if uh the city wants to put a time limit maybe three minutes to Frankly, you've pretty much seen it and what we've done, but I'm happy to do it again if you'd like. Okay, then we can move on to uh discussion. Yes, one more question. Commission. Sorry. Excuse me. You said wrestler will eventually extend to 375 then. Correct. Exactly. You don't have a timeline for that? Uh, not an exact. It is a city project ongoing. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Commissioner. Any more questions? Last questions for the applicant from commissioners. So we now open up. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. We open up to discussion among the commissioners. Can I entertain a motion or discussion? Are we hearing from the public? Absolutely. Right. This is a um uh open item, right? It's we have now time to hear from the public. Is there anybody here to speak on this item from the public or on the phone? If you're on the phone, please press star six to unmute. Hearing from no one, seeing no one, uh, public comment is now closed and we now move on to discussion from commissioners. Thank you. Any discussion or motions from the commission? So the staff of the the city uh recommends approval of this resoning change, right? Correct. Okay. Based on that, no other

question. Motion to approve. Second. Aka. So we have a motion to approve and a second. Uh there any last uh discussion points? Say none. All in favor? I All opposed. Okay, the motion passes unanimously. And we're moving on to the next item. Thank you, commissioners. That's item number five. Uh, can someone please call Commissioner Miss back into the room? Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon, chair and members of the commission. Blanca Perez with planning and inspections. Item number five on the agenda consists of a reszoning application for this subject property located at 7750 Alabama. The subject property is approximately 0.5 acres in size and is currently vacant. The applicant is requesting to reszone the subject property from C1 commercial to AO apartment office to allow for the use of apartments. Plan El Paso future land use map for the northeast planning area designated the property as G3 postwar. The conceptual site plan proposes a two-story building containing 20 efficiency apartments and 20 parking spaces. The proposed AO apartment office zoning district would allow a maximum density of up to 29 units. Vehicular and pedestrian access will be provided from Alabama Street. The conceptual site plan

is not being reviewed for compliance and is not binding. Here we can see a picture of the subject property taken from Alabama Street. Properties to the north are zoned C1 commercial and include a church and a child care facility. While the south there is an office warehouse, also zone C1 commercial. To the west are apartments zoned A3 apartment and to the east are single family dwellings zoned R3 residential. Applicant notified nearby neighborhood associations of the proposed resoning. in this case is Sunrise Civic Group and the El Paso Central Business Association. Public notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet on June 20th, 2025. And the planning division has not received any communications in support or opposition to the request. And with that, staff recommends approval of the resoning request. That concludes my presentation. Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh commissioners, do you have any questions for city staff? Seeing none, can we hear from the applicant, please? Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is TJ Kum. I represent the developer and I concur with staff comments. Thank you, sir. Uh, commissioners, are there any questions for the applicants? Seeing none. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. And this is a public hearing. So, are there any members of the public here to speak in person or over the phone? If you're over the phone, please press star six to unmute. Anybody here in person or on the phone for public comment on item number five? Seeing none, public comment is now closed. Commissioners move to approve. Second. Any discussion on this item?

Seeing none, there is a motion to approve. All in favor? I. I. All opposed. Motion passes unanimously and we're going on to item number six. Good afternoon, chair, members of the commission. Blanca Perez with planning and inspections. Item number six on the agenda consists of a reszoning application for the subject property located at 8172 Load Avenue. The subject property is approximately 38 acres in size and is currently vacant. The applicant is requesting to resone the subject property from ranch and farm to R2 residential to allow for the use of a single family dwelling plan. El Paso future land use map for the Mission Valley planning area designated the property as G3 postwar. The conceptual site plan proposes a 3,680 ft single family residence with access provided from Load Avenue. The conceptual site plan is not being reviewed for compliance and is not binding. Here we can see a picture of the subject property taken from Load Avenue. The surrounding properties include single family dwellings zoned ranch and farm to the north, west, and south, and single family dwellings zoned R4 residential to the east. Applicant notified neighborhood associations about the proposed resoning, in this case, Mission Valley Civic Association, corridor 20 Civic Association, and Save the Valley 21. Public notices were mailed to property owners within 300 feet on June 20th, 2025, and the planning division has not received any communications in support or opposition to the request.

And with that, staff recommends approval. Thank you. And that concludes my presentation. Thank you very much. Uh commissioners, any questions for city staff? No questions. Thank you. Can we please hear from the applicants? Hello everybody. I'm Luis Surrenda. I am representing my parents which are the owners of this property. Um we don't have any comments on the from from the review that you provided to us. Thank you. And do you agree with all do you concur with all staff comments? Yes. Thank you. Uh commissioners, are there any questions for the applicants? No questions. Thank you, sir. And this is a public hearing. So, um, if there's anybody here signed up to speak from the public or on the phone, please press star six to unmute. Star six to unmute for public comment on item number six. Seeing none, public comment is now closed. Commissioners can entertain a motion or uh discussion. Motion to approve. Second. There's a motion to approve. Uh, any last discussion? All in favor item I all opposed. Item passes unanimously. Thank you. And if we move on to item number seven, please. Good afternoon, chair, members of the commission. Andrew Salum with planning inspections. Item number seven on the agenda is a special permit application for the subject property located at 6500 North Mesa Street. The subject property is 0.66 acres in size and it is zoned C1 commercial. It is currently used as an existing

governmental use building as a fire station. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow for the governmental use building in a C1 commercial zone district and according in accordance to the El Paso City Code section 20.04.320 special permit. The detailed site development plan shows the new 2,213 foot addition to the existing 7,065 square foot fire station. The proposed development is in compliance with all density and dimensional standards, including vehicular and bicycle parking spaces. Access to the subject property is provided from North Mesa Street and Fountain Road. These are the elevations and this is the aerial imposed with the site plan. This is the subject property viewed from Mesa. Um, it is currently under construction and this is views of the surrounding properties of the subject property which are currently zoned C1 and C3 with varying uses of apartments, retail, beauty salon, restaurants, financial institutions, and a pawn shop. Public notices were mailed to property owners within 300 ft of the subject property on June 19th of 2025. And as of today, staff has not received any communication in support or opposition from the public for this request.

Staff recommends approval of the special permit and the detailed site development plan request for the use of the governmental use building in a C1 zoning district. And the proposed development meets all the requirements of the El Paso city code section 20.04.320 special permit and section 20.04.150 for detailed site development plan. And this concludes my presentation. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Uh, commissioners, are there any questions for city staff? Is this property still going to be used as a fire department? Yes. Um, it is under construction for the addition. So, that's what's going on. Um, and it's still going to be as a fire station. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. And the addition is a garage, right? It's like a garage for the fire truck. Yes, that is correct. Any further questions? Seeing none, thank you. Can we please hear from the applicant? Yeah, if the applicant is on the phone, plea, please, please press star six to unmute. If the applicant is on the phone, I did notify the applicant of the meeting scheduled today. They didn't inform me if they were going to make it or not. Okay. Carlos Adam with Fire Department. Yes, sir. Uh do you agree with Do you concur with all staff comments? Yes, sir. Concur with all comments. Thank you, sir. Uh, commissioners, are there any questions for the applicants? I have a question. Do you work at this fire station? No, ma'am. You don't? Okay. No. What would be the criteria for using metal

for a building? Cuz I was under the impression it was like a fire thing cuz the whole building is metal. The studs, everything is metal for that garage. It just seems like overkill to me. Well, um that's what the architect uh specified as far as uh using um metal studs instead of of wood. Thank you. Thank you. Any more questions from the commissioners? No. Thank you, sir. Uh this is a public hearing. Uh if you're here to speak on this item in person or on the phone, please press star six to unmute. If you're here to speak on item number seven, please press star six to unmute. Seeing no comments, public com is now closed. Commissioners, can I entertain a motion or discussion on item number seven? Motion to approve. Second. We have a motion to approve. Any last discussion? All in favor? All opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. Can we please move on to item number eight? Good afternoon, chair members of the commission. Blanca Perez with planning and inspections. Item number eight on the agenda is a special permit application for the subject property located at 506 Randolph Drive. The subject property is approximately 30 acres in size, currently zoned A2 with a special contract and a historic overlay and is currently vacant. The applicant is requesting a special permit and detailed site development plan approval for an infill development with reductions to the rear and side street setbacks for the proposed use of apartments.

The detailed site development plan illustrates a proposed two-story building with a maximum height of 26 feet 6 in containing 11 one-bedroom units totaling 6334 square ft of gross floor area. This slide shows a table of the required lot and setback dimensions and requested modifications. The detailed site development plan complies with all other applicable standards. This light shows the elevations of the proposed development again with a maximum height of 26 feet 6 in. This light shows the site plan over and posted on the aerial map. Here we have the subject property taken from Randolph Drive. Properties to the north and south consist of apartments and properties uh to the east and west consist of single family dwellings and are all zoned A2 with a historic overlay. On May 13, 2024, the proposed projects uh received a certificate of appropriateness from the historic landmark commission. In April 2024, the applicant met with the Sunset Heights Neighborhood Association and they expressed their support for the project and public notices were mailed to property owners within 300 ft on June 20th, 2025. And as of today, the planning division has not received any communications in support or opposition to the request. With that, staff recommends approval of the special permit and detail site development plan request as it complies with all requirements of the El Paso City Code. This concludes my presentation. Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh, commissioners, are there any questions for city staff for item number eight?

No questions. Can we please hear from the applicant? Uh, good afternoon. My name is Su Castillo. I'm the developer of the project and I concur with the city staff comments. Thank you, sir. Commissioners, do you have any questions for the applicant? No questions. Thank you, sir. Thank you. This is a public hearing, so if there's anybody here to speak in person or on the phone, uh, now is the time for item number eight. Please press star six to unmute if you're here to speak for item number eight. Seeing none, public comment is now closed. Commissioners, can I entertain a motion or discussion for item number eight? Motion to approve. Second. We have a motion to approve. Is there any last discussion? All in favor of item number eight? I. All opposed. Uh item number eight passes unanimously and we now move on to Other business item number nine to to the chair if I may. Oh yes, sir. Uh considering we don't have a full quorum today, um we'd like to propose the option if the commission wishes to postpone uh the next two items until we have a full quorum to allow every everybody to provide input. A full quorum is that like every single person the full uh body of the commission. So full body we do have quorum but we don't have a full body. Um it's very unlikely that we will have uh full attendance anytime soon. How many people are we missing? I think we're missing two people. And I think we've had a full quorum or full attendance once in two years. But

we're missing our chair. So missing our chair. So that's why I I concur with his suggestion that we postpone. True. So I'd like to put that to the commission. Um what do you think that we're this is discussion on the um can you clarify? Is this for the subcommittee or is this for I'm sorry for both items. the election of officers item number nine and the subcommittee item number item number 10. And the the election of officers, is that for the commission or for the subcommittee? Oh, for the commission. Oh, then yeah, let's put it off. Yeah, definitely. Yes, sir. Great. Uh, we can definitely put off number nine. But as far as action number 10, I don't see any reason to put that one off. That's discussion on an action on a comprehensive plan subcommittee. Seeing how we're now a year and a half into that and we've had maybe two meetings, I think we can still hear that. If there's any opposition to hearing number 10, opposition, can we please proceed with item number 10, please? Wouldn't it be better to wait for the the chair? Uh he's not on the subcommittee and so is there the opposition? How many members of the subcommittee are here? Uh there are two. The other two um one is no longer on the commission. That's what I'm saying. So number nine is kind of tied into number nine is kind of tied into 10. We need to elect some more members to the subcommittee. Number 10 is just for the subcommittee. Number nine is for the committee um itself and the sorry the commission itself and the subcommittee. No, number nine is just for the commission. Number 10 is discussion on the comprehensive plan. subcommittee. That is correct. Um to replace the missing subcommittee members would be on a subsequent item on a subsequent agenda. And so number 10

right now is just for discussion on the comprehensive plan update. Correct. Okay. Correct. So there's no action for number 10. For number nine, I think we will uh move to table that one. But number 10, if the city's prepared, can we please hear number 10? We can. To be clear, are we voting new members into the comprehensive plan subcommittee? No. As the city just stated right now, no, we're not. That's a different item. So, can this can this city please clarify what item number 10 is? So, so it's a discussion amongst the committee members, the the subcommittee members as far as the status or the progression, whatever points they they want to talk about. um that the the subcommittee has has has entertained. Okay. So they were not reached out to though to present anything. It's it's it's it's up to the subcommittee. It's it's a discussion led by the subcommittee. So we can have a small discussion on May question for sure. I mean uh item number nine is to decide on who stays on the committee or who is elected newly to the committee. You're saying one of the people on the committee is no longer on city plan commission. Is he going to still hold his po post? So to clarify, number nine is not subcommittee. Number 10. Oh, number 10. About number 10. Number 10, there's no voting. It's just an update on progress. Update on progress. Yes, sir. Okay. And number nine, if we if we were to table it, you know, like we, you know, like Mr. Aodaka suggesting, are we talking two weeks, four weeks? And and who are the two people that were missing? Mr. Borggo and Mr. Orbee. Those are the two that we were missing. Reyes. Reyes, too. And Reyes. So, three that are not here. Yes, sir. So, I think number nine doesn't make sense. Did you agree with that? I do agree. I still I still think we should table both.

There's only two members of the subcommittee here. And there's there's the whole committee is not here. Well, there's only one missing. The chair Reyes uh Urbe may a presentation is going to be made. It should be made to everybody. So, we need to make it a point for the next meeting that for all of us to be here. I'm okay with that. What do you think? Well, I'm probably will not be here in two weeks, you know, but I again for number nine, I may be missing that, you know. Well, we can give an update now and next time. It's just uh we can postpone it more. I might be able to, you know, be attending and postpone it for I also like to know when's the last time the subcommittee has met. So I can leave about to the city to answer or so last time you met was actually January I think actually December of last year and so we did release one report and the last meeting of December and uh we haven't heard much. The consultant I know that was working with the city filed for bankruptcy um so they're no longer doing outreach um on this project. Um and so the subcommittee we have asked the city to meet and we've talked about it um specifically with Kevin Smith. Um he was going to try and arrange a meeting to talk about it for the last meeting. Um so the progress seems really slow as far as input from the city. Um, I can tell you that the subcommittee has been reaching out to stakeholders in the community from both UTAP, nonprofits um, across the city involved in public health and environment and neighborhood groups to get their informal input. Um, we do know that there were some city meetings this past week in this upcoming four weeks on the future land use map. Uh, the subcommittee is not aware of those. We were not reached out to by the city. We would like to have known so we could do

some outreach. We just want some more involvement. please. Um, and we also did compile a website that analyzes uh about 5,000 agenda items between 2010 to uh this year. Uh noting where it was located, what kind of item it was, and we're analyzing to see if those were in accordance with plan El Paso. Um, that's kind of where we're at right now. Preparing, laying the groundwork for future community outreach. Um, I have a second question. Is there a limitation on the number of subcommittee members we can assign? Yes, there is uh uh stated by by law um to get away from a what's referred to as a walking corn. um it is the the number of of um members is also decided by the CPC the commission as well. So when we meet at CPC right we have to have quorum which is a majority of the members. So and we post the notice and everything for the public that there's going to be a meeting. So the subcommittee you know doesn't post notice and it isn't a public meeting. So we have to have less of than a quorum um for that meeting. So four would be the max. Okay. um on that and currently there are three on the subcommittee. Commissioner Gorski is no longer with the city plan commission so we have space for one more. Could we at minimum just reactivate that and then decide who the next one is either today or next time we meet? I just we've gone since December. Feels irresponsible to keep pausing for sure. And the subcommittee is activated. It's just a matter of uh meeting with the city um within their capacity since the consultants are no longer working on the outreach for the project. Um so that's something I hope we can schedule in

public in our meetings and not like over email. I do want it to be on the record that we're going to have a meeting that we decide to uh hold with the subcommittee and the city staff at some point. Is this appropriate time to set that meeting? Mr. Chair, Philip Peter, planning and inspection. I think there seems to be a lot of confusion on this one item, item 10. My recommendation is to postpone these until we have better understanding of what you need to be doing today. So, I I think you know this back and forth is really not helping anybody and not getting to the point of what we're asking you to do today. Okay. So we can schedule a full report for next week um sorry next meeting in two weeks. Um I know that you won't be here so we might have to um just give you a copy of the report and whoever's missing. Um so we have um fair warning if you can't attend please attend. In two weeks, it will have a full report on the progress of the subcommittee and a full calendar of events coming from the city regarding uh the Envision El Paso project. There are some meetings coming up uh this month. Item number nine. Are we doing that in four weeks? Right. That's what I'm suggesting. Four weeks is fine. I'd take a motion to do that if you want to set it for four weeks. A motion and a second. Second four weeks. So you have a motion to postpone item number nine and 10 for four weeks and 10. So was that your intention? 9 and 10 for four weeks. There's number nine. I'll postpone item 9 and number 10 weeks. That would be July 31st. Okay. There's a motion to

postpone items number nine and 10 for four weeks. Any discussion? Can we have a vote? All in favor motion. All in favor post voting 9 and 10 for four weeks. I nay. All oppose. Nay. There's a So we do have one in opposition and four supporting. Opposition is Would you like for me to do roll call for uh might as well. It was pretty clear, but yeah, please. Thank you. So, all in favor? I I I'm sorry. Can you please do a roll call? I won't at a time. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Massud, hi. Commissioner Hansen, hi. Commissioner um nay. Commissioner Abodaka. Hi. Commissioner Rodriguez. Name. And Commissioner. Hi. So we got three eyes and two Naz. Thank you. The motion does pass. We will postpone items number nine and 10 for four weeks. And we have come to the end of our meeting. I will entertain one more motion. Motion to adjurnn. Second. Any discussion? Seeing none, all are adjourned. Thank you very much.