Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

limited to ministerial examination of the applications 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 application shall comply with all provisions of the staff report. Commissioner will consider all agenda items other than subdivision items in the form of a public hearing. The normal process is as follow. First, the commission will hear a staff report followed by a statement from the applicant. Then members of the public may ask may speak followed by final statement from the applicant. Finally, the matter will be closed for further discussion for a motion among the commission. The commission shall then make a recommendation that will be forwarded to city council.

Thank you, Commissioner Reyes. Mr. Segoia, any changes to the agenda? Chairman, there are no changes. No changes. All right, good. Thank you. At this time, uh going to open up it for public comment if there's anybody here in the public or on the phone that would like to make a comment to us on items that are not on this agenda. I have a list of people that want to speak towards the agenda, but that would like to address this commission that are not on the agenda. If you're on the phone, star six to unmute. One more time, public comment. Star six to unmute. Seeing and hearing none, public comment is closed. And we move to the consent agenda. Commissioners.

Motion to approve. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda. Is there any discussion hearing? None. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Now we move to item number three. And for that we have Mr. Saul Fontes. Good afternoon chair, members of the commission. So fontes with planning and inspections. Item three on the agenda is Francisco to subdivision involving a major combination application. Here's Sorry about that. Having some difficulties. Thank you. Uh, next slide, please. [snorts] Sorry, next slide, please. Here's an aerial view of the development. This development is outside city limits and it is east of Westside Drive and north of Arcraft Road and is within the El Paso's extr territorial jurisdiction. Uh, next slide. Here we have an aerial view showing the subdivision superimposed over the aerial imagery. The applicant is proposing to subdivide 5.66 acres of land into two lots. Lots are 2.666 and 3 acres in size. Drainage will be provided by way of on-site ponding. Access to the subdivision shall be restricted to only Strawberry Lane. There will be no access through Westside Drive to due to a lateral abuing the property. And this application was reviewed under the current subdivision code. Next slide. Here's an image of the

preliminary plat. Next slide. Here an image of the final plat. Next slide. [snorts] The applicant is requesting one exception pursuant to the El Paso city code and that is to wear the construction of 5 ft of sidewalk along Strawberry Lane. Next slide. Here we have the proposed cross-section for Strawberry Lane. The cross-section complies with the required 48 uh 48 ft of rideway but is missing 5 ft of sidewalk. Next slide. Here we have the existing conditions for Strawberry Lane. [snorts] Next slide. And the accepted request meets the criteria under El Paso city code title 19. Next slide. And to conclude, staff recommends approval of Francisco subdivision on a major combination basis and recommends approval of the exception being requested from the CPC. This concludes my presentation. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Fontis. Commissioner's questions for Mr. Fontes. Yes, I have a question. You said that meeting the 03 cross-section requirements. Correct. Yes, it meets the 40 the base minimum rightway for this cross-section would be 48 48 feet uh which it meets. It's providing 60 ft of rightway. However, it's missing 5 ft of sidewalk therefore triggering the exception.

I I don't understand what I'm missing that they don't need like that doesn't show a sidewalk. Is there something in the transportation plan that shows that they need one? Correct. Yes. The minimum requirement for this cross-section would be 5 ft of sidewalk. Thank you. Any other questions, commissioners? See that? I have a couple. There's no sidewalks throughout that whole area. Correct.

Correct. No sidewalks. Okay. My other one is um can in the near future open the can they open up um entrance exit to Westside Road? Um currently there there's a lateral existing through the through that side of West Side. Um there is right there they're they're buting the lateral so there is no access currently. I mean maybe in the near future I mean that would be something that they would need to coordinate with the water improvement district. Um but per the plat um there is a note stating that access will only be through Strawberry Lane.

Okay Mr. Smith. Yeah. So that that was something. So often if there's no notes on a plat, nothing would restrict it. But since there's a note or what we call a restricted access easement, that would prohibit any access. But it sounds like there's a note on the plat. So access would not be allowed onto Westside Drive. Um that would have to be amended if uh proposed in the future.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Any other questions, commissioners? Seeing none. Thank you, Mr. Fontes. Can we hear from the applicant? Uh the representative I think he is on the phone. Mr. Wall star six to unmute. Mr. Wall, do we

Do we have anybody? No. Do we have anybody on the phone, Mr. Smith? Can you tell? Yeah, it looks like just city staff is on the phone. Um I know Mr. Wall was um coordination with city staff this morning to get the link

because I have it here. So Mr. Walls indicated he'd be attending this meeting, correct? Yes, he indicated that he would be attending virtually.

Okay. Um unless there are any questions for the applicant, um we can postpone this item, but if not, I would suggest we um consider action. Uh Commissioner Massud, I mean, uh it's a pretty simple subdivision and everything that is being requested is very common sense, including the exception that he's asking on the sidewalk. There is no sidewalks in that whole area and it would be entirely impossible to connect to Westside Drive now that there's a note on the plat and and of course the cost to cross a lateral is economically unfeasible for a two lot subdivision. So I I would you know I mean we could move to vote on the case. Well, I I understand that, but um staff made u the effort and all [snorts] of us made the effort to be here and um go, I mean, he's the one that called this. He's the one that's representing the owners. He should be on the phone. He should be here present. That's my only concern. I mean, come on. I'm here. You're all here. And he's not here. Um, chair. Yes, he he actually called me directly and uh was asking for the link. Uh, S did forward it to him. He may be having some problems.

Technical difficulties. That's But yeah, he he was telling me that he wanted to speak, so I don't know if he's showing there or not. So, um, uh, Mr. Smith. Yeah. If if if the commission desires, we can uh table this item till later in the agenda. Um so we can make an effort to get Mr. Wall on on the line.

Um but um this does have to be acted on today. Um right. Um commissioners, um item number three is before us. Motion to approve with the sidewalk request. Second. We have a motion and a second to uh approve with a sidewalk exemption.

Yes. Okay. Any discussion? Seeing none. All in favor say I. I. All opposed. Nay. Miss Elsa. Okay.

All right. I will call your name for the vote on [clears throat] item number three. Hi Massud. Hi Wargo. Nay Hansen.

Hi. Um Reyes I and Wolski I have five eyes and one name. Motion carries. Mr. Chair, real quick, um it there is an a uh phone number asked to be admitted

through teams. Okay. Is that Mr. Wall on the line? Yes. Okay. May May I ask that the item be reconsidered? Uh no, let's not. It was approved uh already. Let's just move forward. I just wanted to make a point like we have before that if we're here, we're here. We're here on time and everybody's here on time and you know it's the way it is. But it's a 5 to1 vote so it carries. I don't see us going back to it. Okay. So, we move on to number four. to public hearing and u it'll be four and five sort of together. It's a release of conditions and a reasonzoning application and for that we have Mr. Samura.

Yes. Good afternoon Mr. Chair and commissioners uh L Samura with planning and inspections. So today we're obviously we're requesting to uh act on number four and five together. So here we have the presentation. So item four is a reszoning for portion of well for the subject property located east of Wrestler and north of Simaran Canyon and item five is a condition release uh requesting to release all uh imposed conditions on the subject property. Now it's working. So so the here's the aerial imagery of the subject property shows it is vacant. It's only the portion in outlining in yellow. uh property is located on Resler uh south of Trans Mountain. So the current zoning for the pro subject property is C3 commercial. Uh again, if there's some conditions imposed uh surrounding uh zoning surrounding properties, you have to the north and to the east some uh property zone 3A uh residential to the south across Simaran Canyon. It's on C3 commercial and then to the west we have M1 uh light manufacturing across Wrestler. So right now the request history is on the C3 to the R3A. So they will match the adjacent zoning district. Uh featuring land use map uh designation for this area is G4 uh suburban walkable. So here we have the conceptual plan. Now um on the left the bigger well I guess the the bottom right left shows the kind of some to the subject property and then to the right we have the the entire uh scope of the the project. So again, right now we're the request is to resone and to release all conditions on what's uh uh color red which is online in yellow but

the site plan uh conceptual plan obviously shows the entire development which is a proposed middle school for the canot ISD. So again the the action today the request is only for the red portion um again that resoning and then there's a condition release request. So there's two conditions kind of imposed on the on the property kind of in different portions of it. Uh one of them uh it was imposing back in 2004 which was later amended in 2023. Uh which some of the commissioners may maybe recall going through this. Um so technically it's mostly for asking for landscaping buffers to kind of protect residential properties. Uh so back in uh 2023 we kind of it was amended to kind of align it more with uh what was there and what was the request back then. Uh the other condition was also imposed well actually was an amendment to the existing conditions um back in 2023 again and it's just kind of matching that other one. So again it's mostly just that that buffer landscaping buffer to protect residential properties from commercial activities. So our analysis uh so we looked into it again conditions were there to protect and he proposed again it is zone currently zone as commercial C3 uh so there's some uses we wanted to protect from the neighborhood and we cannot use that uh recommend that condition to separate a little more provide like a screening effect from residential those things. So obviously the request is to resign from C3 to R3A. Uh so all those uh permitted commercial uses then will not be permitted anymore and so we see that then the conditions are no longer necessary for it. So we obviously our recondition is we're we're okay with

releasing those conditions as the resoning gets gets through. So the subject property uh this is along across Simmeran Canyon to the north. So this subject property again it is uh vacant. There's kind of some elevation uh topography going through the site. Uh and again just as a reminder we're only looking at a portion of the entire site. So the subject property kind of covers half of the uh the half western portion of the entire uh school district's property. So really focusing on that. So to the north and to the east technically we have the the remaining property of of the school district which is for that proposed school site which is again still vacant currently zone R3A already. Uh to the south it is still vacant as well and same thing to the west across Wrestler. So with the there's no neighborhood association recognized neighborhood association in the area. So there was no notices to neighborhood associations. Uh we're aware that there's an HOA uh homeowners assoc association, but that's not uh there's no requirement to notify them. Uh we did send letters to all the property owners within 300 ft back in November 21st uh letting them know of the resigning request on the condition release. Uh at this time we have received seven calls, one letter and one email in opposition to the request. Uh all of them is mostly traffic concerns. Uh the access having been there through Simmeran Canyon, the neighborhood uh well the the subdivision having limited access to get out of there and then obviously the proposal of the school impacting all that thing safety for the kids uh and things like that was what they kind of mentioned.

So here's the notice map just to give you an idea who got notified. It is a small property so obviously there's not that much. We did send 12 notices to property owners uh which included 17 properties. So with this uh staff recommendation is approval of the resoning request and approval of the condition release request releasing all conditions and this concludes my presentation.

Thank you Mr. Samura. Mr. Samura, what we have before us is just that commercial uh property, the one that's zoned commercial and the release is also just for that commercial property. Correct. Nothing with a buffer zone on the R R3. Nothing. So our perview our purview is just that corner in red.

Correct. Okay. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Massud. So, just to be clear, it is still going to be a school project and and the school wants to release it from the commercial so they can use the entire site for the school site.

Correct. So, uh, so it's basically a cleanup. Um, they're going through the platting process as well, which requires them to be under the same zoning to avoid split zones. Uh, so it's PL being platted as one entire property. this portion and the rest and so that's they're basically down zoning from the C3 to the R3A to match everything

but isn't schools exempt from having to reszone I mean they can be in any zone right so the the school use is permitted by right already okay uh the thing is we run into or the applicant runs into an issue platting because technically either they carve it out as two separate properties or they match the zoning to have it as one

I see so that's what they're doing they're bringing it all to the R3A. So, it'll be homogeneous and then they're still going to be using it for a school and do away with all the commercials and the restrictions on the commercials. Correct. Thank you. Yeah, it's just like uh Mr. Samoa said to clean it up. We had a case that many years ago a park in South Central wasn't cleaned up in zoning and we had to clean it up uh a month or two ago just to make sure that that doesn't happen in the future. Any other questions, commissioners, for Mr. Samura? Thank you, Mr. Sam. Can we hear from the applicant?

Good afternoon, chair and commissioners. Adrianos with CSA Design Group. For the record, we concur with staff comments and recommendations. I'm here if you have any questions. Commissioners questions. Most of the concerns from people in the neighborhood are about traffic. Where are the drop off pickup locations, the bus areas, things like that?

So, access is going to be actually proposed on both Wrestler and Simmeron Canyon. Um, a TIA has been approved by the appropriate department. Uh, there is going going to be internal circulation and queuing. Uh, so they have accommodated internal to the site for stacking and we're actually going to have dual lanes for stacking. So, um, traffic has been considered. Again, the TIA has been approved. So, um I think the school district has done a good job in in I guess mitigating any traffic concerns the residents may have.

So, both streets, right? But which one is going to be the main entrance? So, primarily I would say Simmeron Canyon. Thank you. Okay. Again, I just like to remind the commissioners that our purview today is just reszoning and release of conditions for that item in red. Any other concerns? I guess goes to the school district and uh um city planning. Correct, Mr. Smith?

Well, well, actually, city planning is is limited on this too because um if it meets all building permits, we have to approve it as well. So, um if there are any concerns, the school district would be the best um course to uh to uh to voice those. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Any other questions?

Yes, I have one. So, you mentioned that the traffic impact study was approved. Yes, sir. What does that mean? I mean, does that mean you're going to have free flow traffic? I mean, is it going to be still a little bit congested? I mean, I mean, what what's going to be the impact to to the the level of service did not change from the nearest intersection, which was Northern Pass and Wrestler. Uh there's some timing there's some retiming considerations that need need to happen as a part of the development but level of service remain the same and again the TIA was approved by streets and maintenance as a part of the the review for the planning.

Level service what the level service right now I think it was a C in the area. Yes. And they didn't change even with all the school traffic. No service according to the to the engineer who performed the study. No just retiming rush hour as schools get out. They didn't didn't add anything. They performed their analysis for AM and PM peak hours. So again, retiming was the only recommendation.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? Commissioners, one question. Where is the closest middle school or the elementary school currently? Brown, but that is EPISD. This is

there. There's a school off Northern Pass for Reyes Elementary School near the corner of Northern Pass and Pel Don Norte. So they'll be redirected to this school. No, that's an elementary school. This one here is a middle school.

Any other questions? You need time to think? No. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Again, this is a public hearing. We're going to take the public hearing for both items number four and number five. And our first speaker will be Ray Whitney.

Whitney. Whitney. Whitney. Okay. Hello. Good evening. Miss Whitney. Before you start, state your name. You have three minutes. And uh Mr. Smith will keep tab of time. Okay. Thank you. My name is Whitley Miles Ray. Um I'm a resident of the Simmerone Canyon area. I'm also speaking on behalf of many concerned neighbors who could not attend today. Many residents have voiced their concerns through our community groups and the Square app. And the truth is we're just regular citizens trying to navigate a process we're not familiar with. But we do recognize when something creates a safety issue for our family. And that's why I'm here. We appreciate the value of a new middle school and we are not opposed to the school itself. However, the current site raises serious concerns that should be addressed before final approval to protect both safety and quality of life surrounding the residents. So, number one, the traffic flow and the daily choke point. We currently only have two entrances in and out of the neighborhood. Uh the proposed layout places the bus loop, parent drop off, and primary parking areas directly on Simone Canyon Drive, uh which is only one of the two entrances we have. Routing that volume of traffic into the residential road not built for it will create a daily choke point daily. Cars will stack, turning movements will conflict and families trying to simply get to their home will have a gridlock. This creates substantial risk for families entering and exiting. Children walking or biking the school, trail runners and cyclists also because there's a major trail right there. Morning and afternoon congestion will be unavoidable and worse it could compromise emergency vehicle access. This is why we are asking the city to reconsider routing the school to a different location or um to reroute the primary interest to wrestler. The other concern is the trail safety. It's a very high traffic area with runners and cyclists. The current design mixes heavy traffic and continuous pedestrian bike flow. And I can tell you now whenever I exit out of this spot on a daily basis, it's also a lot of trees. And it's even hard for me just as a a regular car to see um pedestrians that

are running on that trail. I believe it's called the Bedo Trail. Also, lastly, the impact from the athletic facilities. As you mentioned, it is a middle school. It's not an elementary school. So, that's it has a full track, a field, baseball area, and event spaces. That means activity will extend into the early mornings, afternoon school, after school, in the evenings, and probably on the weekend. This increases the likelihood of overflow parking into our into the neighborhood, late night noises and lighting, which you can see it's pushed up behind like actual residents um and continuous vehicle flow. We're just asking that this can be reconsidered because the project has not yet been approved by the city council. We respectfully request a full review of the traffic plan, consideration of alternate access points, safety improvements for trail crossings, conditions preventing school traffic from using Simone Canyon Drive as a cutthrough, restrictions on event parking within the neighborhood. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anybody else would like to speak on this matter? Please step up to the podium, state your name. You have three minutes and Mr. Smith will keep tab. Good afternoon everybody. Uh my name is Gustavo Mendoza. I'm also a resident on the Simmeron Canyon area. I actually live on Simmeron Canyon Drive. Uh which I was really shocked to hear that's going to be considered the main drop off um road for for the kids. I live right across the park. Uh you can see it right right over there. So, I'm not within the range of the 300 feet, but it's obvious that this project is going to impact the whole community. So, um just like my fellow neighbor just stated, um it's not only about the dropping off or picking up hours, it's just like throughout the whole the whole day. Um, since I live in that intersection, I can see the heavy traffic that we already have because uh that's the only entrance for our community. Um, so and it's like huge community. So what I want to to prove here is that this project is not only going to impact all those residences um within that that range, it's going to impact the whole community. Um we already have uh since I walk the park every day, I already see you know the the different um risks and issues that uh we already have already with kids uh running around. Uh we see a lot of uh security hazards. So I can only imagine how this is going to look whenever we have you know middle a uh school children roaming around um unsupervised. Um, I'd like to quote um really fast uh one of my neighbors uh um concerns. Uh she's a former school uh principal. So I want to I want to read this real fast. Um here's a list of possible reasons on

how it may impact us. Safety only two narrow entrances in and out. Number two, noise and pollution due to increase in traffic and construction crews. Number three, bus routes. Number four, increase property taxes for construction delays. If a Texas school construction project exceeds the bond amount, the school district is responsible for covering the additional costs, usually by using by using its general operating fund for the short term and or by issuing another bond or raising taxes. The district's general operating budget pays for day-to-day expenses, but funds may be relocated for the overage. If the project overruns significantly, a new border approved bond measure may be necessary. How the school district handles the overage using the operating fund. Initially, the school district can use its general operating fund to cover the immediate shortfall. However, this fund is primarily for daily expenses like salaries and utilities. So, it's not sustainable solution for large construction costs.

You reach your three minutes. I'll allow him to finish that quote. I'm I'm I'm one of them. Issuing new bonds or raising taxes. Um if the overage is substantial, the school district's board of directors can propose another bond measure to voters. If approved, this would provide the necessary funds to complete the project, but it requires another vote and commitment to repay the new debt through taxes. Um, yeah, that's the end of the quote. That's the end of the quote.

Thank you, sir. Thank you. Anybody else? Public comment, sir. No public comment. Oh, no. I just Well, can I make one more statement? just to go ahead. So, yes, I I appreciate the concerns brought up by the residents. Of course, we'll reload relay that to the to the district. Again, some of those concerns exceed the purview of today's case, which is simply a reszone case to clean up a split split zone. So, I I would appreciate if you would reconsider that as the final consideration to be heard. Thank you.

All right. Any more public comment? Anybody on the phone? Star six to unmute. One more time, public comment for items number four and five. If you're on the phone, star six to unmute. Seeing and hearing none, the public hearing for items number four and number five is closed. Commissioners will take um four and five, but please state on the reszoning and on the uh condition of the release. If you make a motion. Move to approve item number four and number five as requested.

We have a motion. I need a second. Second. We have a second. We have a motion and a second to approve the reszoning and also the condition release. Questions, commissioners, concerns. Now's the time to do it.

Are we in the discussion? We are in the discussion. Commissioner Hansen, I just amongst us would like to say it's pretty rare for a zoning down to come in front of us to the point where I was until we were told that the reasoning was for replotting that replotting always has to have the same zoning. I was like, why why do they want to go down? I'm happy that they didn't ask to bring everything to C3 rather than just bring this parcel to R3A. As far as traffic concerns in the future, I I understand that right now if it goes forward as planned, it creates its own traffic problem. But meaning because it won't be C3, there will not be certain hightraic uses allowed if this plan doesn't go forward or if it changes in the future. And of course, I'm talking amongst us because that is what I'm allowed to do. And Commissioner Mass,

just to add to what Commissioner Hansen has mentioned, I mean, there's enough land that is already suitable for the school for them to have two entrances, one on Wrestler and one on uh Seamaron. So, having to reszone this smaller portion from C3 to R3A to clean up as they say technical, it does not solve anything of the concerns. All the concerns should really be directed to the school district. This completely out of our preview of what we're approving today.

Commissioner Bad, so if we don't approve the resoning, um, does that force them to make changes to the traffic study? I don't think so. I don't think so because the traffic impact studyy's already been done. Okay. And the city has already basically blessed it that it does not change the level of service on that both roads.

Questions commissioners commissioner Reyes I think there's a lot of valid concerns from the residents. I mean I'll be concerned too. You're going to put a school down the street and a lot of traffic especially in you know in the mornings and the afternoons. I you know I would assume that the school district has had public meetings to get input on all these concerns. There's always ways to mitigate uh problems, traffic problems. I don't know where that that's been done to, you know, at least to to address these concerns. I mean, I I think he mentioned they have an internal circulation. I think that would help a lot. The cars aren't going to be, you know, picked up on the street. Um, but I think it's something that needs to happen through development the project is to take input from the public to address those concerns as they move through the process of designing the the school. So I I don't know if it's been done, but if it's not, it probably should happen and just something that they need to address, you know, before they move forward to to the residents feel comfortable with the the new school and traffic.

But I think if I may, as the city did outreach as they were making moving forward with this plan, the outreach was to like a vacant circle. I mean, it didn't seem like they reached out to very many. No, no. I'm talking the school itself. I mean, the school The school itself should have meetings. I mean, I don't know. They usually have public meetings to to take public input.

My understanding is proceding is basically managing the project as a whole. Can you step up to the mic so we can record Adrianos again for for the record? Um, so yes, my understanding is Procio who's managing the the overall project for the district has reached out to the public and has had at least one community meeting that I'm aware of. So, yes, there has been some public outreach on the district side that that I can speak to.

All right. But, uh, to your concern, Commissioner Vio, the city's only involved in the reszoning and the release of the application, the planning of the school and the decision to buy all that land, that's a school district. I I would also say that um for anybody in public, show me a school, whether it's elementary, high school, middle school, college, where there's no traffic around it. There's always traffic around all the schools. All the schools that I've been involved, the school that I'm involved right now, uh Texas Tech, Jefferson, I mean, it is crazy there. And but it's a good crazy. It's to educate our kids. They need that school there. That's my and they will I think the school district being a former school board member goes beyond to make sure that the kids are safe, that it's done correctly. Maybe not 100%, but again, as a former school board member, that's what I would push for. Any other comments, commissioners? We'll go to the question. All in favor say I.

I. All oppose. Motion carries. We move on to item number six. Just to clarify uh for four and five, right? That's four and five. That's four and five. Correct. And for that we have Miss Pettis.

Good afternoon, SH members of the commission. Blanca Perez with planning and inspections. Item number six on today's agenda is a is a a spatial permit request for the property located at 5000 Stan Roberts Avenue. The subject property consists of two vacant parcels. The eastern parcel is approximately 48 acres and the western parcel is approximately 80 acres. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow the expansion of a solar major utility facility within the ranch and farm zoning district. A solar facility is not permitted by right in this district, which is why a special permit is required. The existing solar farm on the property was previously approved. Parcel one on the east is proposed to contain 15,834 solar panels with direct access from Stan Roberts Avenue. Parcel two on the west is proposed to contain 29,562 solar panels with direct access from Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. No modifications are proposed to the existing facility. This request is strictly for the expansion onto the adjacent parcels and the site plan is being reviewed for compliance and it is binding. This sha this slide shows the proposed panel elevations. And here you can see the um site plan overlaid on the aerial image. These photos show the subject property as viewed from Stan Roberts Avenue and Martin Luther King uh Boulevard. To the north, west, and east, properties are zoned Ranch and Farm and are currently vacant. To the south,

properties are zoned GMU and are also vacant. However, this area is proposed for future solar expansion approved under a master zoning plan. And between the two parcels is property zoned um M2 Heavy Manufacturing where the Newman Power Station operated by El Paso Electric is currently located. The subject property does not lie within any neighborhood associations and public notices were mailed to property owners within 300 ft of the subject property on November 19, 2025. And as of November 26, 2025, the planning division has received two calls of inquiry, but has not received any communication in support or opposition to the request. With that, staff recommends approval of the detail site development plan and the special permit request. And that concludes my presentation. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Pettis. Commissioners, questions for Miss Pettis? No, I didn't. I thought they'll paso water manage water. Now they're into solar. Are they going to start piping in hot water?

Um it is managed by um El Paso Water, but um El Paso Electric is the one um applying because it says here that Huh. I understand it. But it said the property owners, city of El Paso, managed by El Paso water.

Okay. I understand that. I understand that. But what I'm saying is that this is for solar and what's going on here? But somebody clarified it that it's being sold to El Paso Electric. Okay. So, any other questions for Miss Pettis? Thank you, Miss Bettis. Can we hear from the applicant for the representative? Good afternoon. George Hal with Engineering representing El Paso Electric. El Paso Electric is leasing it from El Paso Water to produce to keep up with the demand on the electrical on the northeast side of the city. And I'm here and I agree with all set comments. So what you're saying is that El Paso Electric is going to own those is leasing the land.

Leasing the land so they can operate the solar panels. Yes, sir. Okay, understood. Questions for the applicant? No. Everything hunky dump. I calculated it super quickly and it's going to be 142 megaww.

I'm not an electrical engineer and I I can attest to that. Thank you. You know way more. 142 megawatt. 142 megaww. Megawatt. Yeah. But you just said meta. Met meta. That is they measure in gigawatts. So that keeps their lights on but it doesn't run them. Just curious.

Any other concerns, questions? Thank you. Thank you. This is another public hearing. If there's anybody in the public or on the phone that would like to talk in favor or against this item, now's the time to do so. Star six to unmute. One more time, public comment for item number six. Star six to unmute. Seeing and hearing none, public comment is closed. Commissioners, item number six is before us.

Motion to approve. Second. We have a motion and second to approve item number six. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I. All right. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. We now move to number seven. And for that we have the one and only Kevin Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, good afternoon again, Kevin Smith with plan inspections for the record. So, the last item on the agenda prior to the adjournment is a proposed amendment to title 20, our zoning code. Um, as the body that uh advises council on planning matters, this is within your purview to uh provide a recommendation with this before it goes to city council. Um, this is a new definition in our zoning code for uh short-term rentals. Um a little bit of background on this is um this item actually has been discussed by city council for a number of years. Uh the most recent um item was in late October where uh staff along with the Greater El Paso Association of Realtors as well as the El Paso Short-Term Rental Alliance um provide an update to city council on short-term rentals. Uh, I'd like to thank both of those organizations for their um feedback and they've been great partners throughout this process as we uh try to figure out um short-term rentals here in El Paso. So, at that um meeting, staff presented a recommendation to create a definition for short-term rentals in the zoning code. And I'll go into the reason why here in a moment. And this item before you is the um the definition that we're recommending. and um we'll be uh planning on bringing forward to city council. So currently and these are typically what are are called you know a lot of people associated with um a lot of the platforms Airbnb or Verbbo um and so short-term rentals as current um is not classified or defined in our city code. Um we've been classifying them under the

the definition or the umbrella of bed and breakfast establishments. And so it's not a a perfect fit. It it doesn't fit. And I believe as many of you are aware uh short-term rentals have really uh increased in popularity. Let me just say over the past few years um especially with the pandemic, a lot of them um spiked, you know, around the country. And um the bed and breakfast uh definition, what it requires, it's a special permit. And uh that would require obviously as you've seen before you special permits. It requires notification of 300 ft and hearing by um city council at the end of the day. So the recommend the recommendation is what's before you on the screen to create a new definition in our city code. uh uh it has been pres it has been shown uh provided to you be before but it means any residential use and a lot of the next ones are just the residential uses that would apply which include a single family uh duplex accessory structure a unit in apartment multif family residential building a mixeduse residential building or condominium building or any portion thereof used for lodging um for um to occupants for a period of less than 30 consecutive days and just to clarify too. This is part of the definition that would be in the city code is to clarify the short-term rental is not a bed and breakfast. So, just separating that as well as as there are many different uses there. The the zoning standard for the base residential use shall apply. So, if it's a single family, then the standards for the single family shall apply. If it's a condominium or a apartment complex, the respective standards will apply for those. Um, so that is what's uh before you for consideration today and be happy to answer any questions you

may have. Questions? Commissioner Reyes. So 30 days, I guess that's typically most uh apartments are usually 30 days, right? You know, you you pay monthly for 30 days. So anything less than that, you considered it a what you call short term? Yeah, it again that generally what is accepted along the short-term rental industry across um a lot of the state is that period of 30 days or less. Otherwise then it would bump into the more the long-term rental which would be more of an apartment um or renting of a house. That wouldn't be um apply. This does not apply to hotels, motel. Those are commercial ventures. This is um for the residential use. And how does this benefit a city definition? How would that be used? I mean, in terms of the purpose of having this separated out

um technically short-term rentals have been operating um for improperly for for years. Um technically they they needed the special permit. Um right now this would allow them to operate by right. Um, at that meeting in October, we did analysis too, working with our 311 who uh receives complaints as well as our police department um our code enforcement to see if there are any issues here in El Paso. And generally there there we have not found any uh concerns. Um there have been some one-offs obviously as with any any use, but overall they've been operating pretty um quietly here in the city of El Paso. I I just want to clarify that this does not apply to houses that are rented for parties um for swimming pools. Those are not allowed. Okay? So that does not if if that's being used um or being conducted there, that is not allowed and we as a city need to know about it so that we can uh conduct proper enforcement activities there.

Okay. One last question. I'm sorry. Go ahead. So you have this definition now but very I mean this very short I mean is there any other requirement you're going to have that in order to operate this under this type of you have a list of things they have to you know

as we as we've um looked here in the city of El Paso and then we also conducted research throughout other cities in Texas. Uh there's a whole lot of different um standards I guess that uh that they apply. Again, as I mentioned before, um as a the research that was conducted by some of our fellow departments is we have not found there to be any uh large issues with them being a nuisance or being a uh crime generator uh here in the city. So, we're not recommending any additional requirements.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Massude, turn your mic on. Please speak to it. Okay. So the uh zoning standard for the you know like using the zoning standards for the short term you're saying the base residential use will apply meaning if it's in a say R2 uh zoning all the owner needs to comply with is whatever that zoning requires and then they can operate a short-term Airbnb if it's not restricted by their homeowner association or by their covenants for that matter.

That that is correct. Um the it's not it is not saying that you can do an apartment there because again the base standards would apply. So in in the definition say picking on the R2 uh for for example um the single family is would almost be it.

Yeah. So it can only one house can be just one short term cannot be split into four different rooms. Correct. and rented it separately. I get it. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Dubosi.

Yes. Um, speaking to that same subject, I'm just curious about the or any portion thereof sort of section of the clause because that implies to me that a single family house could sort of be subdivided in a way to create multiple short-term rental units. Is that accurate to say or? So I I I believe that as we look at the in definition, its entirety, it covers

all the residential uses um that the uh the code allows which include items such as apartments, condominiums. So you may have certain in that type of unit where a a portion may be used for short-term rentals, others may be for long-term. Um often like for an accessory structure, you may have a single family on that property. um if an accessory structure is on there that may be rented um there. Well, along the lines of what we just discussed, I have a couple neighbors that have a house divided in two and a basement. So, there's three in one. And you would think it's just a regular house and they're allowed to, right? Yeah. So, it's kind of going along your lines. And there's a family that lives there, but you know, to make extra money, half the house, I'll rent it out. And the basement, I'll also rent it out. That's covered in this. Sorry. Good afternoon, Chair Commissioner. Philip Pet inspection that is not a um short-term rental. So, you can still rent your house. So, that's not covered on the year. So, if you have a property that you renting, you can still do that, but short-term rental is similar. And I'm going to turn over to uh legal department as well. It's akin to just having a um a motel or hotel rented on short-term basis. So, this is this is not preventing you from renting your property as a as a landlord.

Okay. Another concern is uh you talked about um swimming pool parties earlier this year in our district district to u commissioner um representative aso had a meeting and this was talked about uh how a lot of people that have uh pools rented out that evening to have parties and it's a big old distraction for the neighborhood and whatnot. Uh, and um, the way to get around that now, if we defined it here, well, I'll rent uh, shortterm for 24 hours. Not going to have my party all night long in the pool, you know, next day we're out of there. Would that be permissible? I say no. Again, there are certain standards have to be met across all the zoning districts. So if they're being a nuisance such as creating excess noise, um there's a difference I I want to add talking about swimming pools real quick is there are different standards between a commercial swimming pool and a residential swimming pool. Uh the commercial swimming pools um need to be tested for the chemicals. It needs to make sure there's proper safety equipment. Um there needs to be ADA accessibilities, restrooms, and which don't typically apply to residential structures. So again, if that is happening, then the uh the city needs to be made aware so that we can like I mentioned enforce um appropriately on that property.

So rentals of swimming pools is illegal for residential swimming pools. Of residential swimming pools, it is illegal currently in the code. Okay. Any other questions? I have some. Have some. No, I have lots.

Commissioner Hansen, go ahead. Usually under like I was under the impression that usually when definitions of short-term rentals are introduced, it's for restriction purposes because they want to put into the code like you have to pay certain taxes. You can't um have this as your secondary like this can't be an investment opportunity without you having to essentially contribute to the community in a different way. But it sounds like that is the opposite of the intent of this definition.

Well, I I was I would like I mentioned before as we looked at it again, short-term rentals have not posed a have have not created a a nuisance here in the city of El Paso. There are other cities where they have and they have stricter requirements. And um my understanding is if there are if there was a documented problem of short-term rentals, whether them being a nuisance or them creating crime, then the city can then evaluate those. But because there's no documented issues with them right now, we have to do the base requirements.

So why are we not addressing those issues before they happen? Again, I read this I I I went through this as if I was somebody trying to get around taxes, like if I was in California, if I was in LA, and I was trying to be like, but this is not a short-term rental. So, that that like I I wasn't sure why you put bed and breakfast specifically. So, I put it doesn't count if it's a hotel, motel, transitional emergency shelter, medical and assisted living, workhouse, or corporate facility. So, like those are things that specifically don't count because if you're just like, "Oh, they're staying at a hotel." I don't know. I don't know. I I feel like lots of people could get around this and then we have to go through a long process of changing it if it is a problem.

Yeah. Again, the it's only covering the residential uses. Those other uses are addressed through other means, either their commercial ventures um or their medical facilities uh serving the uh population of El Paso. These are are strictly the ones where typically we we know them as the the homes, the single family homes that are being rented out um here in the city. So again, as as the standards range throughout the the state of Texas, I'm only focused on the state of Texas here, um, in terms of the requirements, there has been extremes from one to the other, but again, as I mentioned, there's not been an evidence of crime or being a nuisance here in the city of El Paso. And there approximately 2,000 of these operating in the city of El Paso, and the crime was very minimal.

Russell Aland, assistant city attorney. So, I think, you know, [clears throat] short-term rentals are a really broad issue, and this is something that council has been looking at, as Kevin said, along with the short-term rental alliance and and GEAR and all these interest groups. Um, kind of the main thing after looking at it, everything that council said is like, well, we don't even have a definition for short-term rentals. And so their direction um at the last city council meeting was for staff to come up with a definition for short-term rentals. Um and as Kevin said, you know, there hasn't been one. As we know, short-term rentals have been around for quite a long time. Um they're throughout the city. Um we and we've been haven't had a a classification for them. So basically the the the only thing council directed at this time was come up with a definition and so um you know further regulation or or anything like that um hasn't been directed by council at this time.

Okay. Thank you. Any other questions, concerns? No. Thank you, Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Commissioners, I'll entertain a motion if this is what we want to call it.

Motion to approve. Second. We have a motion and a second to add shortterm rental to the definition. Right. Any more discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say I. I. All opposed. Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Smith.

Thank you, everyone. Commissioners, one more motion, please. Motion to adjourn. We have a motion and a second to adjourn. I'm sure there's no discussion. All in favor say I. I. All oppose. Motion carries. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you all.