Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey. Um, I'd like to call the meeting to order and uh the flag salute will be led by Commissioner Franco. Will you please stand? Eddie salute. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Roll call. Commissioner Corey, Commissioner Franco here, Commissioner Sandridge here, Commissioner Ramirez here. For the record, Commissioner Kesler's absent today. And Garcia, I believe he's going to be upset.

Um, I believe he said he will be attending online. And for the record, Commissioner Garcia is going to have to participate as a member of the public because his wherever he's attending was not publicly noticed for the public to attend. So, Commissioner Garcia, if you have questions, it would be under oral communication, not as part of the planning commission. again due to Brown Act uh noticing requirements at your location. When on the phone, if you wish to address the council during the public comment portion of the agenda, press nine to raise your hand and we will select you from the meeting queue. Press six to unmute and mute yourself. If there's any potential conflicts of interest, any commissioner who has a potential conflict of interest may now identify the item and recuse themselves from discussing and voting on the matter. For for all callers on the line, star nine to raise your mutual hand, star six to unmute yourself. Okay, we now have oral communications. If anybody from the public would like to say anything, please step up. This is your chance.

And for the record, these are items that are not on the agenda. So, anything that's under the purview of the planning commission that the public wishes to comment on, they may speak at this time. for the planning commission. We will take that under adisement and address it at a future meeting. Should I read this?

Anybody from the public? Go ahead. My name is Allison Yang Bower. Um, I actually submitted a letter to the city council went to the planning commission. I think it might be included in your packet already. I did send it to the planning commission and actually I believe her item is the public hearing item. So if um wait yeah if you hold your two or so that item would be um addressed. It's number one on the agenda. Uh right now this is for comments not on the agenda.

Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Then we would move on to um planning commission oath of office. So for our new commission member uh Dennis Hall. Okay. So that oath will be administered by associate planner uh Lupe MSUS.

Yeah. Plan commission. Good evening. Mr. Hall, if you wouldn't mind stepping up to the front. Entering the stage. Yeah. Right in the middle. That's right. So we can see you on camera. Make sure you're on camera there. Yeah. So, what I'll do is I'll read the uh oath of office here to raise your right hand and just respond with uh I do at the end and then we'll welcome you in. Uh please please raise your right hand and respond with I do. Do you sly swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That you will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California. that you take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion and that you will well and faithfully discharge the de uh the duties upon which you are about to enter.

Congratulations. So yeah, you'll take a seat at the dis up there. And now we have the reorganization of commissioners. That

I'd like I'd like to nominate Greg Garcia as chairperson and Betty Stand as vice chair. Are there any other nominations? I think you have a motion on the floor. We're just waiting for a second. Okay. Do we have a Do we have a second on that motion? What? I second that motion.

Commissioner Franco. Yes. Commissioner Stanidge. Yes. Commissioner Corey. Yes. Commissioner Ramirez. Yes. Commissioner Hall and Commissioner Hall. Yes. Motion approved. Congratulations. Um with that, uh Commissioner Standidge, you are still running the meeting tonight. Congratulations. Yeah. Yeah. Hey, you definitely uh staff will reorganize the the seating accordingly. Okay. uh for the next meeting.

The consent calendar. Okay. Um consent calendar. All items listed under consent calendar are considered routine. The complete consent calendar will be enacted by one motion by roll by roll call vote. For purposes of discussion, any commissioner member may have an item removed from the consent calendar and made part of the regular agenda. The commission can then approve the remainder of the consent calendar consideration and necessary action on the minutes of June 23rd, 2025. Is there a vote?

I make a motion to approve minutes. I second it.

Commissioner Franco. Yes. Commissioner Corey. Yes. Commissioner Go Ramirez. Yes. Commissioner Hall. Yes. Motion approved. Okay. So, now we're at the public hearing. Oh, Commissioner Sandridge.

Yes. Thank you. The public hearing uh is about the annexation and prezone to consider a proposal of the Selma North annexation which includes 20 properties of approximately 150 acres within the city sphere of influence to be annexed and prezone to comply with the existing general plan designation. The properties are located north of Dauba Avenue, west of South Delray Avenue, and east of South Thompson Avenue. APN 358-021-16-18 20 21 22 37 47 62 63 787 79 358 361-07 08 09 10 and 358-120-34 for this annexation and prezone does not include any development proposals. A draft notice of exemption has been prepared concerning the proposed project in compliance with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act SQA.

Uh thank you, Vice Chair Standridge. Uh before you is a prezone and annexation application as as you stated for approximately 150 acres uh on the north side of town generally north of Dauba Avenue. Um the proposal as you stated is is a prezone and annexation application consistent with the existing general plan land use designations. Um, under the California Environmental Quality Act, um, projects such as this that are consistent with the densities allotted in the general plan are considered exempt under section 15183. Um, staff has drafted a draft notice of exemption along with a substantiation memorandum that identifies that no new or unidentified impacts are anticipated because it was it it is proposed consistent with the general plan. with that. Um there is also no development proposal at this time filed with uh the city uh for entitlements of any of these properties that are included in this application. Um therefore the proposal before you is simply annexation and pre-desation of the zone districts of what will be allowed as as identified in your existing general plan. So we have a short presentation that we can run through and I probably did most of it with my introduction but uh next slide please. So as we stated it's 150 acres. All 20 parcels are located within the existing sphere of influence which is a prerequisite to being annexed to the city. Um, there are approximately five proposed zone districts identified as part of the pre-zone application because there are more or less five general plan designations proposed in the proposed annexation. So, they're all consistent. Um, this would eventually facilitate development within the city rather than the county. Uh, as we stated, this really just identifies who the service provider is and where it should develop. Um and then again it is exempt under California Environmental Quality Act section 15183 consistency with the

general plan. Next slide please. So um this is a project location map. You can see um that it starts at about Wright Street on on Dauba Avenue to the west and then ends almost at Mill Ditch to the east uh all north of Dauba Avenue. Next slide please. Um this is a a kind of a matrix provided by the applicant along with uh staff's general breakdown of um the existing general plan designations and what the proposed zoning for each designation would be uh consistent with the densities allotted in the general plan. Um one note um the applicant identifies commercial office as one of the prezone uh designations in their application. That zone no longer exists. that zone was um written out of our zoning ordinance and rolled into the C1 zone district. So C1 would be the appropriate pre-zone designation for that for that portion of the project. Next slide please. Um so the purpose and process for this project again um everything's consistent with the general plan. Um so no changes are proposed. You don't have any uh land that's designated for residential being converted to another use. Uh, conversely, you don't have any commercial land being designated for residential or something along those lines. Um, the pre-zoning is a prerequisite of annexation. When you propose an annexation, you have to state what you're going to zone it. If there was a change in any of these designations, it would have been identified in in both the general a general plan amendment is what you would see before you along with a corresponding pre-zone designation. You don't have any general plan amendments because the general plan has already been set for this area, right? So really they're just matching what was adopted in the general plan. Uh the next step would be um the next step actually would be um this this proposal going to the city council which we have noticed for the next council meeting on September 2nd day after Labor Day which is

actually a regular meeting now because we meet on Tuesdays. Um following if this project is approved by the city council, we would forward um the resolution of application to the uh Fresno uh County Local Agency Formation Commission, also known as LAFCO, uh where they would consider the annexation proposal. Um future entitlements such as track maps, conditional use permits, site plan reviews, uh would be processed by the city once it's annexed to the city. Um, however, none of those we have no proposals included within this uh application at this time. So, there's no further environmental review required. However, when there's future entitlement projects, if they propose a change, they would evaluate that in accordance with SQA. Um, one note um also under um the Cortez Knox Herzburg Act uh reorganization act of uh 2000, I believe. um proposals such as this, they're not allowed to reszone property for 2 years after it's annexed to the city to prevent any bait and switch or anything like that. So what what is there will be there for at least a minimum of two years before we could even consider changing the zone after it's annexed. Uh next slide, please. So, as as I stated before, for SQA compliance, we're using the 15183 exemption, which allows projects that are consistent with the densities of a general plan with a certified environmental impact report to be considered exempt under SQA. As I've repeated myself multiple times, uh, this project proposes no changes to the general plan. Um and therefore uh it is not uh there's no new severe impacts identified as already in already identified within the certified EIR but subsequent project proposals would be still subject to SQA in the future. Next slide please. So with that staff is recommending uh that the planning commission recommend approval of this

proposal to the city council uh with the uh conditions of approval provided. Thank you. Are there any comments from the public? Now it is. I'll start over. Um, madam chairperson, members of the commission, I'm Jeff Roberts. I am the designated representative for uh the applicant on or the applicants on this prezoning action before you this evening. Um I'd like to start out by congratulating the new commissioner on on being seated tonight. Welcome. Um my address is PO Box 43 in Fryant, California. I don't live in a PO box, but that's the my mailing address that I use with the city. So for the record, uh, madam chairperson, I'd like to state that we do concur with the staff recommendation for approval. We we concur with all 37 of the conditions that are contained in exhibit C in the staff report. And I'd like to really thank staff for the work that they've and guidance they've given us over the last five or six months or so uh to get this to the point of actually coming to hearing. There's a lot of work. It's not a typical pre-zoning project where you've got one district. You've got multiple districts here, multiple land use designations. So, it took a lot of work. Uh they they prepared obviously the SQA documentation that's before you in exhibit E and we want to thank them very much. Uh I'm going to make a very short presentation because the staff's done a complete job as you've seen here tonight. Um, so this is not your typical pre-zoning application, but it is one that we think

makes a lot of sense because it fills in a gap uh that you see in the northern part of Selma city limits today. The prezoning request as staff has stated is a requirement under the Knox or Port Ortiz Knoxburg Act that you have to pre-zone property in conformity with your plan before you can be annexed. So this is that necessary action. In this case, all the all the uh properties are being prezoned in conformance with the plan. No plan changes. And I can go over these, but staff's got a matrix in their staff report. I don't think I think that would be redundant. Um this is the first public hearing that's required uh for this process. First, it's the planning commission, then it goes to the council, and then the final action takes place at LAFCO, which will be three to six months after the city council um considers the item and if it's approved. So, we hope that's the case. Um we would like to u we will be appearing before LFCO. We've already met with LFCO about the project and we're ready to move forward um if council takes the appropriate action. After LAFCO takes action, there's a recordation of the annexation and then you might see uh development proposals come in in conformance with the plan and the zoning. So, wrapping up my brief presentation, um I would like to just request that you do approve the staff recommendation. I think there's nine findings in the staff report that need to be made. We'd appreciate if you'd make all nine of those findings and approve the resolution that's in your staff report. be happy to answer any questions and we do appreciate your consideration. Thank you.

Is there anyone else that has any comments for or against? Hi, my name is Allison Yang Bower. I submitted a letter to um the city council and also the planning commission and thank for letting me speak today. The um I'm going to go ahead and read the letter that I submitted in case you had not had a chance to see it, but it's the subject is regarding request for annexation of property located at 9791 South McCall Avenue in Selma and the APN is 358-120-35. So it reads, "Dear Selma, city council members and city planning commission, I'm writing to formally request the annexation of my property located at 9791 South McCall, APN 358-120-35 into the city of Selma. I request, respectfully request that it be considered for the inclusion in the Selma North annexation and prezone proposal. As a resident and property owner in northeast Selma, I believe this annexation would offer meaningful benefits to both the city and the broader community, I kindly ask you to consider the following points in support of this request. One, improved access to city services and infrastructure. Annexation would include I'm sorry, annexation would enable access to essential city services such as police and fire protection, public utilities, road maintenance, and waste management. These services are vital for ensuring public safety in maintaining infrastructure reliability and supporting long-term sustainability. Two, economic contribution to the city. Inclusion within the city limits would allow my property to contribute economically through property taxes and utility fees directly supporting infrastructure, schools, and community programs. Three, alignment with city planning and

zoning. My property is adjacent to existing city boundaries and aligns with Selma's long-term planning and development goals. Annexation would promote efficient land use, reduce jurisdictional fragmentation, and support smart growth initiatives. This alignment would also simplify administrative oversight and enhances coordinated development. Four, community engagement and representation. Becoming part of the city would allow me to participate in civil matters, vote in municipal elections, and engage more fully with local initiatives. I value the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to Selma's vision for growth. Five, increased property value and development potential. Properties within city limits often benefit from increased market value and development opportunities due to improved infrastructure and services. Annexation would support responsible investment in urban planning. I respectfully urge the planning commission and city council to initiate the annexation process for my property. I'm committed to working collaboratively with the city and willing to provide supporting documents and intend council meetings or engage with relevant departments to assist with this matter. I am looking forward to potentially becoming a full member of the Selma community and contributing to its continued long-term growth and success. This is the map. This is the zoning map that was submitted. My property is the yellow which is borded on three sides by the annexation process and city limits. So I would strongly encourage you um and we would request that our property also be included in the Selma North annexation proposal.

58120-34. So,

can you show us she highlighted it? Can you show us the slide of the whole all the properties? Yeah. On this one added to the current so it wouldn't be here. of this page. Yeah. I don't know if she attached it. Yeah, that's what I saw.

It's uh on the west side of McCall, the property on the northwest corner of McCall. It's the property directly north that would actually square off the boundary. From a LAPCO perspective, they would probably prefer it and not be opposed to it because it creates a clear and consistent uh end of city boundaries on both sides of the street rather than one one portion being further out. Right. And as a planning commission, we can add that parcel to the current.

You can recommend it be included as part of the proposal that goes to council. staff would update the squa documentation to reflect that. We don't see a material change in the impacts because we would be again be consistent with the general plan. It would just slightly uh alter some of the information within our our report. But uh in terms of meeting timelines for this September 2nd meeting, it's a relatively minor change to our document. No delays. No, no delays. Thank you. Thank you. Excuse me, Allison. Can I ask you a question? Okay. Do you have a house on that property or is it just farmland?

It's farmland. It's 70 acres. Two acres of it has a house on it. My sister currently lives there. I grew up there. It's been there for 60 years. Desperately need city services. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Resa, I have a question. A couple of those um properties have existing houses on them already. How does that affect those houses that are there? Jerome,

as with any prezone that maybe changes the designation on the property, it becomes what we call non-conforming. The general plan may already be in conflict with the houses that are there, but once it's prezone, we don't go and say, "Hey, your house, your residential home is now commercial. Tear it down." Right? We don't do that. Really, what we're saying is we envision that area eventually being commercial. Therefore, what we're doing is designating it was already designated as commercial or residential or what have you. Really, what we're doing is we're putting the development standards on that property and implementing the general plan. Again, if there's an existing house within a commercial uh designated piece of land and then it's pre-zoned to the C to the C1 designation, it simply means, you know, they can continue to have their house there. They can make repairs within what the zoning ordinance allows. However, if it were demolished and to be rebuilt, it would need to be a commercial property, right? And so really what we're saying is this is what we envision this area being, but as with most things, and I

you're not going to force it.

No, we don't. We And our zoning ordinance makes accommodations for what we term non-conforming uses. Um if the zoning changed or was established in conflict with what the use was, there's a period that they're allowed to continue that use, they're allowed to make repairs, they're allowed to do, you know, various maintenance to their property with that existing use. We do not go back and say demo your house today. This is commercial, right? And really what we try to do is, you know, that's why we have these public hearings so that they become aware of the changes to their property, right? As I state, I think on the record most of the time, most of the things that we approve, I may not see. Really, what this is saying and the general plan says is this area is supposed to be commercial, highdensity residential, lowdensity residential when it's developed, right? And so again, it just simply becomes non-conforming. They're allowed to continue with the existing use as it as it sits.

What happens if that I I'm I'm thinking of the one that's right on the corner of Macall and and Dauba and there's an accident and a car hits it and takes out half the house. Can they rebuild their house or do they have to at that point? I mean, if they if the house is not salvageable and then would they not have permission to rebuild their house at that point? That is correct. So, real quickly on that, so that would be a loss for the owner of the home. Of course, you would get probably get reimbured by the insurance, correct?

I mean, I would imagine whatever their insurance policy is for damage of the home, what have you. If the home was destroyed, I think we have provisions for so much being destroyed, 50% or more, um they're not allowed to rebuild it, right? So, if again, the land use policy on that corner is that it's supposed to be commercial. It was developed in the county. The county has different land use policies than the city. The city views that corner as a commercial corner. So, and this is this is not an atypical thing. people um real estate agents submit letters, they call them burndown letters on a regular basis on property to confirm whether or not the home can be rebuilt or not on that piece of property. Routinely, we tell people, you know what, you wouldn't be able to rebuild it here because this home was built on commercial property that was subsequently changed. So if it burned down, you would not be able to rebuild it because the land use policy of the city is it is that this property will eventually be commercial. Maybe not right now because you live in it, but at some point in the future it's supposed to be commercial. So at the end of the day,

it's the land use policy of the city that that corner becomes commercial and so we act accordingly and pre-zone it accordingly. with that zoning change, that property would be um increased in value anyways. I'm not a real estate agent, but I would imagine so. Yeah, it will. Yeah. Stella Stella Maris, California, I have a question. Um and quote me if I'm wrong. It's my understanding that Dauba Avenue, that's county, so it would now become city, right? Is that correct? Okay. So, I'm sorry. Wait, that Jerome answered.

Okay. Northwest northeast corner of Dauba Avenue is in the city, right? And so, there's a portion that is already within the city. Okay. So, when that road gets um fixed, then the city would pay the cost for that. Future development at the time it's, you know, proposes their development would likely be required to improve the street to city standards. I think that's the big difference between city and county. City has certain standards that usually includes curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, whereas the county doesn't. They usually have unpaved shoulder, no gutter, no street lights. And so when future development occurs, they would be responsible for improving their frontage in accordance with city standards.

So the lights that were going to go um are supposed to go on there on McCall and Duba will no longer go on there. Are you talking about the street lights, traffic lights? The traffic light is still under construction. We're still proceeding. We have a grant to do that. We're still working through the process to complete the street light. There is no change to that plan. All right. Thank you. As is Dauba Avenue will be uh in the future broadened. And

Dauba is designated an arterial roadway in the general plan which is I think anywhere from 74 to 82 feet wide which would be about four lanes of traffic. Uh whether or not that includes bike lanes is depend on how much rightaway we have. So as development occurs, you'll see Dauba Avenue widened with the appropriate amount of lanes on the frontage and maybe transition down. I think we've had those discussions with at least one or two prospective developers in that area about what the transitions look like from the intersection, things like that. And I think even the traffic light plan envisions a wider dauba at that area, right? because we have to acquire rightaway at that intersection as well. So, and this is one of the benefits of annexation.

I think there's multiple I I think there's multiple we can get into that maybe um after the public uh comment. I think there's multiple benefits to annexation out in that area. Anyone else? Okay.

Good evening. I'm Glattus Griffith. I live at 9885 East Dauba Avenue. And as I was watching the presentation, I see that it's prezoned mostly for low density, high density. And I know you've heard this before, but traffic is a problem already right now. And there are many times it's backed up a good half mile north of Dauba and all the way down to Wright Street and beyond on top. And if you pre-zone this and it is developed into high density, what happens to the traffic?

Well, I think that's why they're going to fix Duba Avenue and put the traffic light in. So, all of that is kind of planned as part of this as it develops. But as it, you know, right now what we're just talking about is being able to annex all this property into the city of Selmo. developers, if I may answer, developers are required to do their part when it comes to putting curb and gutter and sidewalks and helping improve the streets prior to them getting basically having people move in the homes that they're building or the apartments that they're building. So, one of the benefits of this annex annexation, if it passes tonight, is that Dauba Avenue becomes wider. As um Jerome said, it will be four lanes, so two each direction and a traffic light will go on the intersection of Macall and Dauba. So all those traffic issues that we've all been aware of and I get caught in them because I live not too far from there. Hopefully they'll be resolved as part of this because then the city will have control uh not just the county.

If if I may add, I just like to make a note. The traffic signal is going in regardless of this application, right? Yes,

we are we are working through issues with acquiring rightaway in accordance with the grant funding we received from CALR on the traffic signal at Dauba McCall. That's part of the delay actually is working through those issues, right? And so regardless of that fact of whether it's annexed or not, we're working to resolve the p the not the perceived the obvious traffic issues at that intersection through the construction of the traffic signal. benefit of annexation for, you know, is we have more control over the rightway. Right now, I think the intersection of Dauba, we own or we're responsible for maybe like 68% of the rightway at the intersection. We have to work with the county. If we annex the entire area, the entire intersection will be within the city. Makes it considerably easier to do things when you don't have to talk to the county. No offense to them. We love working with them. But the the more offices that you have to coordinate with, it just makes things uh more comp not to say harder, just more complicated. I don't say harder, I just say more complicated.

And so for us, it just becomes a matter of being able to have more control. I think at that area is a is an ancillary benefit of the annexation. I think um for us, we're aware of the traffic issues as um you know, the planning commission has stated, future development in that area is going to be responsible for their fair share improvements, but in addition, they have to be consistent with what the general plan requires. And so, the rideway for Dauba Avenue is supposed to be expanded, I think, to at least uh anywhere from 72 to 84 feet to um allow for four lanes of traffic. I think part of Dauba might have four lanes and it goes to one or right what have you, right? And so imagine that being consistent throughout the stretch of Dauba, right? So new development will will

they'll be required to facilitate that um as part of their development uh conditions. Another question, if if it's annexed, is the city then responsible to supply water and sewer for the area? Yes. Yes. I think to some extent yes I think um development and the city as well as the utility providers remember the city doesn't provide some of those utilities either um there will be some coordination for extension of services out in that area but basically yeah when they develop it into homes it's supposed to have city water and sewer if that's your question

that's my question I just wonder I know that it's a an issue because there's not proper sewer or water there who would pay for And the last thing I Oh, did you have a Well, I was just going to say I think the sewer lines and the water lines are in process with SK the sewer trunk line. There is a proposed sewer.

There's a proposal for sewer in that north part of town. I think water's a little bit I think simpler in that area to extend because it doesn't have to go to the wastewater treatment plant. And so water could likely be extended from Dauba and Macall to directly adjacent properties. But yeah, those are issues that are being worked out between the appropriate utility companies in the city. Has there been any progress on SKF and the engineers reviewing the size of that sewer trunk line and an estimate of when do we break ground on it?

I don't know if there's an estimate of when we break ground on it because financing still needs to be approved by city council. So, I think really getting it out to bid is really where we're at and we anticipate that in the next uh month or two, I believe. Just as a closing comment, I I just object to the annexation on the idea that taking beautiful farm ground and turning it into housing goes against everything I believe.

Um, thank you. But I think the people that own this property want it to be annexed. Anyone else for or against? Anyone online have any comments? For or against? Okay. If there isn't. But I have a question. Are you bringing it back to staff? Yes. I was kind of waiting for the official bring back to staff. Yes. Yes. Then I will bring it back to staff for our discussions.

So uh quick question. The going back to the resident who wanted their parcel to be part of this. all those stipulations that the gentleman mentioned before the so conditions they would be applicable to her and and yeah I mean if she's in if she's included in the proposal I think there's a couple of the conditions in there um that she could be subject to um one in particular is there are fees associated with annexation the city is in a tax sharing agreement with the um central fire protection district where we have an agreement for uh transition fees to be paid to the district upon annexation to the city. Um I would advise um any property owner that wants to be included that they would be subject to those fees. Um we can get an estimate of what those fees are. Generally they're based on

it's just I just want to make sure that those conditions you're not it seems like this other group did a lot of work for a long time, right? And that uh I don't know. You said adding it wouldn't hinder their efforts

in terms of in terms of processing in terms of identifying who's responsible for conditions of approval. I think there is some discussion on that. I think the city has identified that applicants pay their own way with annexation proposals in terms of paying all the appropriate fees since they're the ones bringing the proposal. Right. When there's an invoice for the fees, typically it comes to the city because we're the party of that agreement. We would simply invoice property owners based on that amount, right? And so I just want all the property owners to be aware of that portion of the fee and whether or not I don't know if there's any discussion about that or what have you or what the city would cover. I don't believe the city is covering those fees due to it being a developer proposal.

So, uh, and then my second thought or the clarification is this is just the first of many steps in order to go through the laugh process of annexation. So, uh, without this resolution, it kind of puts everything back at square one. Correct. Without approval tonight.

Uh, correct. And I wouldn't say necessarily many. You have one more hearing and then it goes to LAFCO. So I mean it is a complicated process and there is paperwork to file that would then be required to be forwarded to LAFCO and then LAFCO has their own process that they go through um which includes again notification of property owners um routing to affected agencies and what have you before they go to hearings. So if you're looking at steps then yeah in terms of hearings you have one more hearing and then the city is Yeah. But what I'm saying is this group of residents or land owners I should say.

I mean I'm my gut is telling me they've been at it for a while. It's just not something like oh hey three months ago let's get together and put this together. So so they've been putting a lot of effort and time into this. So it um it's kind of shows the importance of this this all these next three steps are very critical as far as expanding the growth in our community and and giving the city the ability to grow and bring in some housing eventually sometime in the future. Those are only comments I have

not discussed public. Yeah. Yeah.

Um I have a question about the property at McCall and Dynova. There's that corner there which is prime retail um location and right now it is it is zoned C1 and I would like city staff to consider zoning it broadening that definition of that zone to a retail strip center so that it could include a cafe or a sandwich shop or a coffee shop or an ice cream parlor. um in my discussions earlier uh about that if that is going to be developed that's just like prime retail space and right now I think the idea is to put professional offices there which I don't think is a good use for that prime location as professional offices whether or not it's a doctor's office or something else

T1 doesn't mean offices only well not only I'll stop only but I think that was kind of the plan is to push professional offices there. There's for the record there's no plan to push anything. It's a property owner free market type of deal. I mean a corner property best highest and best use is usually what people do for commercial property, right? And so if the private property owner feels like a strip center is the best use of their property, the zoning ordinance identifies what uses would be allowed in that strip center. professional offices is one of multiple uses that could be allowed if someone were to propose that.

But there's in that classification, in that zone classification, you cannot have a sitdown restaurant of any kind. Doesn't matter if it's 10 seats or 15 seats or a small little place, you can't have a sitdown. And I think that would be a prime location for something like that. But that does not want it to be. Not necessarily. This is a city. This is a city.

The B1 zone district identifies what we call neighborhood commercial uses, which are usually items for like short trips. So, convenience store, gas station I think is allowed. Uh gas stations are not allowed, but usually like short distance retail type uses, right? Um it does allow drive-thru facilities. Um but eating establishment and restaurants is not allowed in the C1 zone, which is I think the point uh Commissioner Standidge is stating. That being said, um we take comments such as these, which I think are separate and apart from the project proposal, right, and we put them in our back pocket when we do um comprehensive zoning updates and look at some of these things that are mentioned at meetings. So what I would state is I think Commissioner Standidge concern is separate and apart from the project and more of a

item to be considered as part of the zoning code. Yes. Well, the other thing to con to consider when you have that many residential homes around it, uh those home owners will probably not want to see a restaurant right there sit down with a potential to have a beer and wine license or alcohol and you know it becomes a nuisance to the peace and quiet of you know so you have to consider both ways and that's why in neighborhoods residential neighborhoods C1 is usually the most recommended. Yeah. And as a matter of how the zoning ordinance is constructed, C1 is usually the lowest intensity commercial zone, right? Um, but to that point, uh, liquor licenses are not allowed in C1.

And so you could have a restaurant that doesn't serve alcohol. In theory, you can't even have an ice cream parlor or a Subway sandwich shop, which would which would benefit all of those people living in that area or a little coffee shop. That would be a benefit. They can't center across the street, but they don't have those things. But I mean there is a need that'll bring I just would like to see it investigated into the broader definition of retail strip center versus the well I think

all this hypothetical talking we're talking about is is true but as I said uh this is just to annex it and those zonings will be in place in two years and I don't think within two years Nobody's going to knock down any property and build in, you know, bring in a steakhouse. And they do have the right to say, I want to bring in a steakhouse. Can I re can I come and reszone that that parcel? Can't can't they?

Yeah. And and the thing that I would also state, I think Commissioner Corey makes a good point. If the planning commission determines that maybe this corner should be higher intensity commercial, we have zones that allow for those types of uses. Generally speaking, the C1 zone again is meant to be a low inensity commercial zone and it may not work at every commercial corner where we have neighbor neighborhood commercial, right? And so we want to be clear, you know, when we update zoning ordinances and we make changes, again, this is separate and apart from the project proposal before you and this is just a general comment. We want to make sure that any changes we make to the zoning ordinance, we're not taking with just one property in mind because it applies to the whole city. And so when we make changes, we have to be mindful, those changes affect other locations in the city. And I think to Commissioner Franco's point, if they would really, really, really like a use that's not identified in the C1 zone, they can petition to have that use allowed by another zone district. at which time you would go through the same public hearing process before your body as well as the planning as well as the city council. And so to that end, I don't necessarily disagree that the zoning ordinance could, you know, be amended, but we always need to be mindful of how those changes affect other properties within the city.

Great. Well, I would like to make a motion to approve the annexation and prezone and recommend approval to city council as well as the staff working with the property owner who asked to add her 20 acres to this annexation to see if she's okay paying her fair share of the fees that the other owners have paid and make it work by the deadline of the next city council meeting. I second that. Okay, before we take I have a quick question. Um, how much is the fee?

Uh, yeah, it's basically the equivalent of 10 years of the assessment that goes to the fire protection district. So, basically the way the transition fee works is it allows the um fire protection district to continue to receive the equivalent of the tax revenue that it would have otherwise received if the property was still in within their district. And so it's I think it's based off of um the assessed value of the property. And so it would be dependent on the the assessed value of each property, but I want to say it's a very incremental percentage. I can I can get that maybe in about two minutes, but you have a motion on the floor right now. and we can update the planning commission with that information so that they're aware and then we'll obviously forward it to the project applicant as well and as well as the adjacent property owner.

Commissioner Corey, yes. Commissioner Franco, yes. Commissioner Sandridge, yes. Commissioner Ramirez, yes. Commissioner Hall, I'm sorry. Yes. Motion approved. Congratulations.

So ask if there's anything else. Is there anything that anybody would like to discuss before

I mean it's not on the agenda. We don't have a second uh public communication. And I think staff has a couple of comments. Um, one, we bid a due to our city planner, Kamar Boi. Uh, what was that? A week and a half ago. Um, was his last day at the city. We're all sorry to see him go. He's obviously on his way to do other things and we know we'll do him well. So, we want to just uh communicate out to him in cyerspace that we appreciate the time he was here. we were talking about it and actually he is the first city planner I think in the history of the city of Selma because we created that position. So wow

uh he did it he held the title um with dignity and uh we just appreciate for the time that we had him here. So um with that I don't I we communicate the same thing as city council with him being gone um and some staff changes that we've had. We get to comments as we get them as quickly as we can. and we have a general policy to try and respond within 24 hours. So bear with us with our staffing uh issues right now, but we will still aim for that 24-hour response period. And sorry question on that. I'm not done.

And so and so um to answer Commissioner um Ramirez's uh question regarding what the tax rate is, it is 0.00009724 00009724 of um the assessed value. So the equivalent is if you had um a property of $500,000, uh the fee is about $486 [Music] uh per year with a 2% increase over that 10-year period, right? And so it's about 500 bucks for $500,000 of assessed value. So, at the end of that, you pay about $5,000 for $500,000 assessed value. So, as you can imagine, the more property you have, the larger the fee will be. So, some of the properties may have a small amount that's invoiced or what have you over that 10-year period. So, anyway,

well, I want Alice Allison, we were uh he was just kind of explaining we can go over it with them. I have it in writing right here, so we'll we'll follow up with All right. He's going to go over the fees with you later. So, my question was based on what you said, does the city have a plan to hire someone else or

we will we will go out for recruitment? I think we're actually going to go out for two positions because they're in the budget. So, we'll um fly city planner and uh I want to congratulate uh Lupe uh for his promotion to associate planner. Um and so and so we will be um applying the assistant planner position as well. All right. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Um okay that the meeting is adjourned at um 6:55. Wow. That's great. It's record.