Planning and Zoning - Regular Meeting

Heavenly Father, we ask for your blessings tonight on the meeting that we're about to have. Please provide us with information and ability to make right decisions. We ask this in the name of Jesus. Amen.

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. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state, under God, one and indivisible.

Approval of minutes from the July 14th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission Special Meeting. Y'all have a chance to read those. Any changes need to be made? I'll entertain a motion.

I make a motion to approve the meeting so as Okay.

Motion to approve and second.

Chairperson Davis? Yes. Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? Yes. Commissioner Willoughby? Yes. Commissioner Brian Walford? Yes. Commissioner Shannon Walford? Yes. Commissioner Estep?

Yes.

All right. Next is the Community Services Director update.

um so for the month of july we had a total of 213 permits um last year was 157 permits Four were new residential construction compared to last year of nine. Total fees were $87,919.35. Last year was $62,687.09. Inspections completed, 114. Last year, we had 260. For our projects, we have the Mulberry gas station. Nothing has changed with that one yet. CenterPoint is still on track to complete on time, and then the Victorious Assistant Living received their permits, so they should be breaking ground. And then for July, there were no approved plats.

Okay, thank you. Next we have citizens' comments. Any person with city related business, not on this agenda may speak to the commission. Time is limited to three minutes and compliance with the Texas open meetings act planning and zoning commission may not deliberate on the comments. Personal attacks will not be allowed and personnel matters should be addressed to the city manager during normal business hours. So at this time, does anyone have anything to say about things that are not on this agenda? Would you come to the podium, please? State your name and address.

Hi, my name is Kansas Burns. My address is 1510 Avenue J, Santa Fe, Texas, 77510. The question I have that I was looking for in the zoning thing that I didn't see on here, so I'm assuming it doesn't have to do with this, is this has to do with the setting up for the burning The place where they're trying to do like a learning.

Oh, training facility? Yes, training facility. That is on this agenda. It is the very last item. Very last one. Well, number nine, I believe. No.

Ten. No, yes.

Nine is public hearing. And ten. So it doesn't have an address there because there is no address. Okay.

Then never mind. It is on here. Sorry about that. That's okay. Thank you for the clarification. Thank you.

Is there anyone else that would like to speak on things that are not on the agenda? Okay, then we'll move on. Old business. Discussion and direction. Update on temporary occupancy permit for just dogs athletic training. Located at 6525 FM 646 South Santa Fe, Texas. Legally described as abstract 48 L Crawford survey part of Outlot 196, Altaloma Outlots.

OK, so last meeting, it was asked if we could get an update on this. The owner reached out to me by email. So they're in the process still with the finance part at the bank for the septic. And then they reached out about the requirements for the restroom to build on it. So as far as I know, I don't believe they have installed or started the install of the septic. And I believe September is their 90-day cap for that to be done.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- The end of September or the beginning?

CHRISTIE WOODARD- The end.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- So they have two months.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- Yeah. So it's going to be close.

CHRISTIE WOODARD- OK. Any comments? What do we do if they don't?

CHRISTIE WOODARD- I believe when we came to the zoning and we made these stipulations for them that if they didn't comply, they had to come back and we're gonna figure out what y'all decide then.

So maybe in October?

Mm-hmm. Okay, sounds good.

Next item, discussion and direction update on RFQ for updating zoning ordinance manual.

So we went through and we've seen that there are two bids on this. We're going to be going over those, unfortunately. I know you all don't want to hear it, but we had some staff changes, so we haven't had the time to go through them, but we will get those going, and hopefully next meeting we can have a better update. Great.

Yeah, the next one is just too important for us to just kind of rush through. And so we've established the committee that is going to go through the RFQs, but we don't want to give a rush proposal to you guys. We want to make sure that we're making the right selections. And unfortunately, we just haven't had the bandwidth to do so.

All right. Thank you. Anything else on that, Wendy? No.

Discussion and direction update on FEMA map Loma for Patel subdivision So this is another thing that I believe we were working with Travis on this one or Georgia was working with Travis on this one and I believe there was a timeline in there But it looked like it was the end of the month I mean the end of the year before there was going to be an update on that as far as changing the FEMA map

For the zones, I mean for the map change Do you want to do that you want to Do a program that basically allows for homeowners that are currently in a floodplain or flood zone according to FEMA to be changed to a lesser of a flood zone, and I might be saying that incorrectly, so Wendy, I'll let you pop in on that if I am, but it's to say that you're going from a V to an X. I know I'm being extreme when I say that, but it's just to show that their flood rate should go down, so I think everybody in that subdivision, which is this slide, there's the Patel subdivision, but it's Jana and, I can't remember.

It's the Center Park subdivision that's off of 7th Street. And there's 21 property owners that live in that subdivision. But if you guys would get with the city and create a group of you property owners, if you live in that subdivision, there is paperwork on file that the city of Santa Fe had originally talked to the city engineer when we had one. And then Georgia had talked to an engineer from FEMA, and there was a 60-day window to get approved for this to pull that subdivision out of the floodplain so that you would not be required to have flood insurance if you lived here. During that 60-day time frame, the person who worked for FEMA quit their job, so we had to start all over again. So if you live in that subdivision, The Center Park, I think is what it's called, get with the city and give them your name and phone number, and as a group collectively, y'all work on a LOMA together to see if you can get your subdivision taken out of the floodplain.

Thank you. All right, moving on to number four, consideration and possible action request for approval of a corridor development zoning permit application for top notch auto sales LLC located at 3 7 0 1 FM 6 46 road North Santa Fe, Texas 7 7 5 1 0 legally described as Linda subdivision 2001 abstract one track one

0.3642 acres so i don't know well i'm sure you all recall he came last meeting he didn't have all the proper documentation on what his plan was for this property this is going to be the used auto sale place um kind of diagonal from the police department So he is proposing to have three employees there with an online-based sale to the property for the auto. However, he's only going to have four to five employees. vehicles on the property. So I went back and looked for the parking requirements for here and he's only required to have five. So he did put in and I put it in there his parking proposed parking on what he's going to do and he does have the parking that's required even with the auto display area. So ultimately it's up to y'all how y'all want to address it.

But he does meet all the requirements.

He does.

Is he here?

Yep.

Good evening. How are you? All right.

And you?

Kind of tell us a little bit about what you're planning for that.

As we discussed last time, it was an issue with whether or not it was a chain of use. We use it as a sales office. Most of our sales are internet-based. We have a five-car display area that faces the name of that street. I can't think of the name of it.

Lamar.

Lamar, right. It faces Lamar. the area in front of the building is for customer parking and we have employee parking in the rear because it's a change of use. It was also, they, uh, the city suggested landscaping. So we'll put, um, three deciduous trees in the median. One at each driveway and then small bushes. I think the high requirement is 24 inches. We have six bushes that'll go there to make it look presentable.

So when someone wants to purchase a vehicle, do you go get it and bring it back?

No, we advertise the ones that we have for sale. But if someone wants a specific vehicle, then we take a deposit and then we'll shop around for it and we'll find it for them.

They choose where you basically got a storage lot for the vehicles that for the majority of the vehicles that you have that you're selling on your own my sales department That's how I understand it is that you guys have another location. That's not in Santa Fe No

The way the auction works, they do have a seller's lot for us, but I don't have a particular storage aside from the vehicles that will be at the location.

Okay, so you only have those four vehicles there, or five vehicles there, excuse me, but at all times that will just be the fact that you won't go above that five?

Any questions for him?

Are we happy with this site plan? He's only having a site plan?

So that's all that's required for him because the building's already there. He's not doing anything to the building. Eventually, I believe he's going to put a sign up, but that would come later and he would have to submit the required documentation for that.

CHRIS RODGERS. Signage, excuse me, but signage is going to be handled by Apollo Signs, which is the building that we occupy. The owner, Fred Zeller, he talked to the planning person that handles signage and got the approval. So he got a permit, what he's requesting a permit for the sign. I'm assuming he said Monday or Tuesday. I don't know whether he came in today or not. But it's going to be a two-foot standalone sign that's mounted on the ground that's similar to those that are out, that are on the street already. But that's a science.

So these parking space dimensions on here, eight and a half feet by 18 feet, is that the proper requirement?

Yeah, the standard parking.

I'm reading here where it's suggested 10 feet by 19 feet in length with 24 feet to the building that's behind it and that measurement's not in there do you know if those measurements are actually meeting where did you see that 6.01.06 says 90 degree angle parking. Each parking space shall be not less than 10 feet wide, not less than 19 feet in length. Maneuvering space is additional to parking space and shall be no less than 24 feet perpendicular to the building or parking lot. And we're unclear on the 24 feet measurement.

A minute ago, you said it's suggested. And just now, you said it's required.

6.01.02. Not suggested.

Oh, you said it earlier. Not read it, said it. That's why I was asking.

Can I see that?

Mm-hmm.

I don't know. What code is that from, Brian?

I've seen them online. Like where though? In the articles.

so i believe this is for um off street parking okay so this is going to be inside his um parking lot does that make sense okay that's what i was asking

So what's the pleasure of the commission?

I'll make a motion that we approve the corridor development zoning permit application for this site.

I second. Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve the corridor development zoning permit.

Chairperson Davis? Yes. Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? Yes. Commissioner Willoughby? Yes. Commissioner Brian Wilford? Yes. Commissioner Shannon Wofford? Yes. Commissioner Estep? Yes.

OK.

Thank you.

Good luck.

Thank you. Good luck. All right.

We'll move on to new business now. Election of chairperson for the 26-27 year.

Go ahead and nominate Shannon, chairperson.

That's it? Wendy. I'm just kidding, Shannon.

I'm just kidding.

Okay, we have a motion. I'll second it.

Chairperson Davis?

Yes.

Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGean? Yes. Commissioner Willoughby? Yes. Commissioner Brian Wofford? Yes. Commissioner Shannon Wofford? Yes. Commissioner Estep?

Yes.

Okay, number two, election of vice chairperson for the 26-27 year.

I make a motion to elect Tom Estep as the vice chair.

I turn that down, please.

Okay, somebody don't leave me out there by myself.

I make a motion for Ron Willoughby to be the vice chair for the coming year.

I'll second. Do we have a roll call?

Chairperson Davis? Yes. Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? Yes. Commissioner Wilby? Yes.

Yes.

Commissioner Brian Walford?

Yes.

Commissioner Shannon Walford?

Yes.

And Commissioner Estep? Yes.

Okay. Thank you, Ron.

Thank you, Wendy. I just don't have time for this.

Okay, number three, public hearing, ZC260604, requesting a conditional use permit to allow low-impact use of office-based space of the existing structure and to lease office space for administrative use only, located at 5330 Avenue N, Santa Fe, Texas, 77510, legally described as abstract 47, L. Crawford survey part of Outlaws 287, Alta Loma Outlaws. Okay, so this public hearing today is being held to give all interested persons the opportunity to express their views regarding the subject of the public hearing. Anyone desiring to be part of today's public hearing should have signed in under the applicable item as you entered the chambers.

Do we have a list?

Okay.

We'll just keep going.

Each person wishing to speak should give their full name and address in order to keep a proper record of these proceedings. The rules allow each person three minutes to speak. However, I encourage each speaker to be as brief and to the point as possible. If you're a group of persons wishing to address the commission on the same subject, please select a single spokesperson to present the information. If any speaker has any questions, please direct them to me. Um, the commission will not answer questions right now. This is a public hearing for you guys to let us know your concerns. Um, the discussion will take place on the next agenda item after the public hearing has concluded. So it is now seven 25 and I called to order the public hearing. for case 260604, requesting a conditional use permit for 5330 Avenue N. These look like all, anyone here to speak about Avenue N? No one? Okay, well we'll close that public hearing then. And then we'll move, let's see, it's 726. And then we'll move on to the action item. Consideration of possible action, ZC260604, requesting a conditional use permit to allow low impact use of office space space of the existing structure and to lease office space for administrative use only located at 5330 Avenue N, Santa Fe, Texas, 77510. Legally described as abstract 47 Elcroft survey part of Outlocks 287 out to Loma Outlocks.

Okay, so this property was brought here already for a zone change that did not pass. It was sent to City Council for the zone change and that was denied and was told to come back to Planning and Zoning to request a conditional use permit to run the business that he's wanting to do. So the owner reached out to me and stated he did not want to go through with the zone change. So he was just going to do the conditional use permit. However, he cannot do the realty company that he's wanting to do, use it as an office, and then rent out for tenants under AR. So Here we are.

Conditional use, that's not allowed in that zone. Correct.

It has to be rezoned.

OK. So why is it here then? Yeah.

Yes, so because it's zoned currently to agricultural residential, it cannot have a royalty company run from it. Right now it would have to be zoned to neighborhood commercial in order to be able to do that.

Okay.

So during city council meeting, it was brought up that the office was not abandoned, and so he should be able to continue using the business as he was. until the office goes abandoned, then that would revert it back to AR. So I don't know if that's the route you all want to go with that or if we're going to require him to do the zone change to do neighborhood commercial and then do the conditional use permit on top of that.

What's the rule?

Well, all the documentation we previously had was that it was vacant and not operating for more than six months.

Right. And in city council, um, it was brought, the verbiage was brought that vacant would mean that nothing was inside the building, no furniture, no, none of his supplies would be vacant. Um, and they mentioned because he still had his items in that building that it was not technically vacant.

So there was no point of sale from that business, but there was furniture. I went there to the property myself and looked in the windows. I mean, it was furniture and stuff still in there, um, as a, you know, business would have, but they just didn't have a point of sale or, um, let's say they weren't using it as a business for that point in time. But the business, um, fundamentals were still there.

But it's still zoned AR. Correct. That's correct. I mean, we're still limited. We're not able to do a conditional use.

Correct. It would have to be zoned to a neighborhood commercial in order and then have a conditional use permit.

Okay. So since we can't do this, do we just table it, postpone it?

Are those two separate motions? Are you doing the... conditional use separate from the zone change?

Yes, and he did not apply for a zone change for a neighborhood commercial zone change. He did not apply.

Why did he get turned down for the first one, the commercial?

From City Council. Well, from you guys, it was a split vote, and that's why it went to City Council. It was a three-to-three vote. I know you guys weren't on here. But it went before him because it's in the middle of a neighborhood. A business was ran there for years, and then they had a six-month stop, if you will. And so he had to come back to request a zone change because he was – running a business and he was on that before the city incorporated that property so it's on the south end of town and that's kind of where it's just I've seen the property across the street mm-hmm yes yes trash company correct I'm not disagreeing with you yeah there's one down to begin with it was a tad though they were trying to come up with a solution

And there was neighbors. So I have a question on, again, in the articles on 3.03.01. It talks about correcting errors in the zoning map. This property, to me, is obviously an error. I feel like it should be a commercial property. Six is across the street, as what you said from the, I mean, just drive by there and look. The property was... annexed or brought into the city when the city was incorporated in 1978. The building was already there. The building has always been a commercial building. That's what it was built as for 53 years. It's set there in use as a commercial building. GCAD has it listed as a commercial property. In my opinion, it's a commercial property. And the zone officer, from what I read, has the authority to correct the error if we say that it's an error in the regulations and map, the zoning map. So if that's true, I don't think there's even any discussion. I mean, I think that staff can correct that error in the map

I guess as a as a point of order it's on the agenda specifically as a commercial use permit so therefore I think you need to deny it because you don't have the ability to grant it and therefore if you want to correct or Something on a zoning map and something we need to come back at a later meeting in order to correct the map But that's not but it's only on here tonight as a commercial use permit So you can't do something other than you can't do a zoning change.

You just can rule on the commercial use permit I would motion to deny the conditional use and authorize staff to Correct the error in the regulations on that I

So we can't do a zone change on a property unless it goes for public hearing. Notices are sent out. So it's not something we can just do in the office.

So the first part of your motion is great. The second part is what you can't do because it's not on the agenda. So you can't direct staff to do that because it's not on the agenda for staff to consider that. And so someone with respect to that property would need to bring an application for zoning change, which it sounds like you may entertain if they do that. But that would require public hearing and going through all the notices that we normally go through for a zoning change. At this point, I would advise you to just deny it and move on.

What do we do with the person that they turned down in the first place? He did all this public hearing stuff, right? We turned him down. So we need to reach out to him? Let him know to put it back in again? I'm shocked he's not here.

That's up to you. I'm just saying you can't really act unless you have an application.

Deny that and reach out and let's...

look at at least trying to accommodate it and he might have to go through the process he may decide not to so brian do you want to uh i'll motion to deny the uh conditional use permit and have mr butcher come back and

Do we have a second?

Just deny right now. Second.

Okay. We have a motion and a second to deny the request. Please permit a roll call, please.

Chairperson Davis?

Yes.

Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? Yes. Commissioner Willoughby? Yes. Commissioner Brian Wolford? Yes. Commissioner Shannon Wolford? Yes. And Commissioner Estep? Yes.

Okay. Number five, public hearing. ZC 260601. Request to change zoning classification at 1, 2, 3, 3, 5, 2nd Street, Dickinson, Texas, 77539, legally described as Abstract 1, Austin Survey, Potter Flats 119, from agricultural residential to neighborhood commercial. Basically, the same rules apply. If you wish to speak on this, please come to the podium and state your name and address.

Let me state the time.

Yes. It is now 735.

Hello. My name is Christina Finley. My address is 1415 Norman Hill, Lake City, Texas, 77573. I'm a broker with Bay Area Elite Properties. I represent my clients, Curtis and Nancy Shufflebarter, that currently have a residential contract on this property. It was not brought to our attention until after our contract got signed that there was an application for it to be rezoned to commercial. which obviously doesn't fit their contract needs. I had a question that was just going to be if it's approved today, if the seller still has the option to remove the application before the next hearing on the 20th. I understand you can't answer questions So if you're unable to answer that, if the seller is not able to remove the application before the next hearing, then we would request that it not get passed today because it doesn't fit my client's contract needs.

Are you talking about number five on the agenda? Yes. Okay, so under number six? We can talk back with you. Okay. Is there anybody else that wants to discuss? Hold on, hold on, hold on. Is there anybody else that wants to discuss this address under the public hearing? Yes.

I'm Katherine Dudley Scott. I live at 14415 Olio in San Fe. The Shuffleburgers are long friends. They're up in Michigan. They're moving down here, back, yay, finally. Um, commercial is not what this property needs to be. It needs to be at residential. So please deny this.

Anyone else want to speak on this? Yes, ma'am.

Hello, my name is Colleen Etheridge, and I'm the real estate broker for this property, acting on behalf of Laura Weston, who is the owner and who's moved out of town with her mother and her horses. And we are requesting that it be changed. We were advised that the application could be withdrawn up until the next city council meeting on the 20th. And so we are under contract, gratefully, thank you. And so we are gonna go through option period. Once we get out of option period, we have an amendment saying that the seller is required to remove the application should we not get further down the line. So we are requesting that we move forward with that in case that doesn't happen. We're very confident that it will. It's a great property. She's loved it for 25 years. But her and her mother needed to move. I'm out of town. So we Would like for this to move forward to the next step unless of course we have to terminate it, which we're hoping to do Thank you, okay, thank you Anyone else want to speak on this topic I'll close the public hearing 738

Move on to number six consideration on possible actions. DC two six zero six zero one request to change zoning classification at one, two, three, three, five second street, Dickinson, Texas seven, seven, five, three, nine legally described as abstract one. Very Austin survey part of lots one 19 from agricultural residential to neighborhood commercial.

Um, so like Colleen mentioned. She just listed this so it can be a selling point to open the door for more buyers. And so that's why she's wanting to change it to neighborhood commercial. There's no initial plan on what would go there.

would like to point out that there was some discussion obviously about withdrawing the application three point zero three point zero seven of your zoning ordinance talks about withdrawal of an application and since if it's before if there's a written request to withdraw the application before the public hearing is published then it can be withdrawn. But after the public hearing has been published, which it clearly has because tonight's the public hearing, then it does require the consent of city council in order to allow the withdrawal of that particular application. So it can't be done right now unless city council does it, but then you've got this item that you're actually dealing with. So I just wanted to point that out that the application is not really feasible since council would have to do that prior to tonight.

Was the application to withdraw the request to change the zone or the sale of the property?

So her application to rezone was put in before our contract got signed off on. Our contract was just signed off on last Friday. So we're in our 10-day option period right now. The seller's request was that we get through our option period before she withdraw the commercial application in case my buyer backs out, then she still wants that ability to be able to market it that way if it were approved. We're in contract, and if it can't be removed and ends up getting rezoned to commercial while we're in contract, then that puts my buyer in a place where they really have to terminate because they plan to live there with their family and horses.

No, Wendy was just asking if you could have horses in neighborhood commercials.

And there's no clear requested use for the property other than just to change the zone. That's correct. I move to deny the request for a zone change.

I second it.

I have a motion and a second to deny. Roll call.

Chairperson Davis? Yes. Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? Commissioner Willoughby? Yes. Commissioner Brian Walpert?

Yes.

Commissioner Shannon Walpert? Yes. Commissioner Estep? Yes.

Okay, number seven, public hearing, ZC260602, request to change zoning classification at 2529 FM6161. NFA Texas 77510. Legally described as Abstract 1, M. Austin Survey Lot 56, F.H. Thamen Subdivision. 9.43 acres from neighborhood commercial NC to highway commercial HC. It is 743. And the same basic rules apply to the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak, please come to the podium, state your name and address. Anyone wishing to speak on this particular topic?

Hi, good evening, my name is Ben Miyago. I am the engineer that's working on the preliminary design for this project. As Summary mentioned, it's nine and a half acres. What we're wanting to do is put in about nine multi-tenant office buildings. It's gonna be used as flex spaces mainly. We're gonna follow all of Santa Fe requirements. And yeah, we were just wanting to get the zoning approved for it.

So it's going to be used as what?

I'm sorry. Multi-tenant flex spaces, you know, tax offices, you know, bookkeepers. Yeah. So thank you.

Anyone else want to speak on this item under the public hearing? If not, we'll close the public hearing at 745. Move on to consideration of possible actions, EC 260602. Request to change zoning classification at 2529 FM 646 Road North, Santa Fe, Texas, 77510. Legally described as abstract Y&M Austin survey lot 56, FH Thayman subdivision, 9.43 acres, from neighborhood commercial to highway commercial. Go on.

So this property is already neighborhood commercial. He's wanting to do the multi-tenant property and it's on a highway, so I don't, he's wanting to do the, sorry, the multi-tenant. So in neighborhood commercial, he could do that as a conditional use, but in highway commercial, he can allow, it's allowed without having a conditional use permit. So he has more options on what he can put in there for highway commercial versus neighborhood commercial.

And this is the property adjoining all the wages for anybody that doesn't know in our audience. So it's a very highway commercial space.

He did submit his plans on that. He does have a thorough plan on what he's wanting to do over there as far as detentions and whatnot. The only thing that wasn't provided was water and septic. So that was something that he was still working on when he submitted this.

I have to follow all rules on that. It's just not in here.

That's correct.

It's a bunch of highway, right? It's not behind? It is on the highway, yeah.

Yes.

I motion to approve it.

I have a motion and second to approve.

Roll call. Chairperson Davis? Yes. Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? Yes. Commissioner Willoughby? Yes. Commissioner Brian Wilford?

Yes.

Commissioner Shannon Wilford? Yes. And Commissioner Estep?

Yes.

Okay, number nine. Public hearing, ZC260701. Request to change zoning classification at property ID 191606, legally described as abstract 149, East Mitchell Survey, part of Outlot 150, Altaluma Outlots, from agricultural residential to neighborhood commercial. It is now 747. And the same rules apply that I read earlier. Please come to the podium, state your name and address for the record. If you have any questions, please direct them to me. We will address those if we can, staff or legal or this commission at the next agenda item. But for now.

Let's get started.

1 minute. I think there's a housekeeping matter on this. Was there someone that was actually going to recuse themselves that had some kind of a family member that owned this particular property?

So I'm supposed to fill out this affidavit.

Correct.

But I don't know which one because none of them apply to me. Because it says, I have a substantial interest in a business entity or a real property that may receive special economic effect. I didn't receive any compensation. It says the business entity or the real property which I have substantial interest in, I don't have any substantial interest in this. and then when it says i were a person that is related to me within the first degree by blood right and it lists four options five options here none of them i can pick and still be telling the truth so how am i supposed to sign the affidavit to swear to it but none of these options apply to me can i see the affidavit that you're talking about

Then you don't have to recuse yourself. If you can't sign the affidavit, then...

When I'm asking for clarification, if I'm supposed to sign it, I will, because I'll follow the rules, but I don't see where this applies to me.

I don't see the wording on there. Well, I agree, because that makes it sound like it's currently that you have either ownership or... Correct. Someone in your family has ownership of it, which apparently was sold, correct? And then, okay.

And I did not receive any compensation during that transaction.

Okay. If that's what you're, okay.

But it is sold. It's done. I'm not going to receive any compensation or have any interest in whether this goes one way or the other. I personally am not going to gain from this. She owned the property prior to this. No, I didn't own the property.

Well, I'm sorry.

Family. My brothers owned the property prior to this sale. And I did the contract for the fire station and received no compensation.

If that's what you're asserting, I don't see how the wording on that particular affidavit is something that you can sign according to the facts as you've presented them right now. Okay. Okay? But there was another issue also about a petition being filed. So are you all aware that a petition was filed about this particular item? Okay. All right. So with it, when there's a 70, there's 75% that's required in order to approve, um, because this particular petition was, uh, filed. So it's actually a protest and it's under section 3.0309. So. Just a housekeeping matter that in order for this particular item to pass once it comes up, it will require 75% of the entire board. The entire board is seven. That means six out of seven would have to vote yes in order for it to pass, to be clear. And I've also noticed that there are quite a few council members that are present here. And I didn't see anything about posting of a notice of a quorum that were here. I would strongly advise that none of the council members actually speak so that you're not deliberating outside of a posted meeting. I mean, you're certainly welcome to watch, but I would not participate or deliberate at all on that on this particular item. There you go. So you can proceed.

All right, so I just wanted to start out that I'm sympathetic to the fire department on the burn house. I have gone through fire training at a plant and so I've gone through that training. But our burn facility was out in the middle of nowhere where there were no residents next to it. which my concerns is what are the, what process is going to be in place to monitor pollution from it, particularly small diameter particulate pollution? It's interesting that OSHA says firefighters that are fighting a wildfire or a haystack fire have to wear self-contained breathing apparatus or the certified respirators, yet they're going to be releasing that same smoke into a residential area with houses and kids and older adults who are more susceptible to particulate pollution and they're gonna be breathing that with no protection. When OSHA says that there were a firefighter there, they would have to wear protection. So it's like why is that going to be in a residential area And I can bring you, if you would like, the scientific articles on small particulate matter and fungal spore and bacterial aeration and hay fire. So if the hay has any fungus in it, any mold, any bacteria, it will go aerosol and anybody that inhales that can be inoculated with fungal or bacterial infections. I personally treated patients with some of those conditions. And so it's not fun. One of my friends got it and it's a multi-drug resistant fungal infection that she will be on treatment the rest of her life with it in her lung, her spine and her foot with no chance of ever curing it. Yet we're going to be exposed to those same fungal spores in the air that's coming out of the facility. And so that's my big concern. Are you gonna have a mechanical scrubber that you're going to scrub out the particulate and the fungal spores and the bacterial spores out of the smoke before it's exhausted? I'd be happy if, You can guarantee me it's going to be monitored. So I know that the hay going into it has been tested. There's no chemicals. What guarantee do we have that the hay they're putting in there doesn't have any of the weed killer, any of the pesticides? And so that will not be broken down by the fire. That will only be aerosol by the fire. So we will be possibly exposed to weed killers, which like Roundup, you see all the lymphoma, it's a very nasty, once it's in your body, it's impossible to get it out. And you have pesticides coming out that there's no way of knowing what pesticides are in there. A question I also have is there will be, will there be foam used or just water? And you know, if they're using firefighting foam, is there gonna be a concreted area with concreted ditches? And really, you should have that for the runoff, even with the, from hay, because like I said, you don't know what's in that hay, and you're gonna have water running off into the drainage ditch, into the bio, into the bay, with no filtration of the water.

Let's spend three minutes. So thank you for your comments. All right.

I'm sorry, what was your name again?

Laurie Pate, P-A-T-E. Thank you.

My name's Dalton Bradley, James Bradley. I live at 11811 23rd Street, Santa Fe, Texas, 77510. I just got a few questions that wasn't answered. Originally, I want y'all to know I signed the letter saying it was okay until I found out all this other stuff. First of all, I'd like to know, have y'all done a stormwater management plan over there? You know, I flooded on that street, 23rd Street. I was the only house that flooded. Are you gonna make it worse on me? That's one question I'd like to have answered. Second. How much is gonna be concreted? What's the retention pond size? Is it the same size as in Synergy? You know, good question. Second. What's the entire region? Reasonably, I signed it saying Santa Fe and some college of the mainland students. Now I found out it's a region. Where's the region? Texas City? Galveston? Freeport? You know, I can't even use their Bible spirit, Texas City. Do I want Texas City to come over here and use the fire training ground? You know, come on, guys. Third, how many training days a year? One, 10, 100, 300? We don't know. Now, I'm not against a fire department. I've never used them. But last year, my mother-in-law, thank God we've got a fantastic EMT crew here in Santa Fe. They were at my mother-in-law's house two or three times a month, it seemed like. So don't think I'm against training at all. Third, like he said, has there been an environmental impact study done on this? If you do anything like that in the plants or anywhere else, you've got to have an environmental impact study. Does that open Santa Fe up to a lawsuit? Have y'all looked into that? These are questions that need to be answered. Finally, every one of y'all sitting on that board don't live on 23rd Street. Do you want it 200 feet from your house? That's the question you've got to answer. That's the question you've got to answer. Thank you.

Amy Miller, I'm at 11810 23rd Street. So I'm at the very end. I will actually be the closest property next to this training facility. I'm all in support of it. And I, if it were, you know... My family that needed to train, I would want them to be on their A game and have their training. A couple of concerns is, and I'm thankful for them sacrificing their lives for the public. A couple of concerns is when they're putting out these fires or they're doing these fires, am I gonna be able to run my washing machine, run my dishwasher as normal, take a shower, all those things? Is my water gonna be changed, the pressure or the flow? Is there going to be any impact to that? And also, as a mom taking my son to school in the mornings, that traffic on 646 is usually backed up all the way down to 23rd, and I'm usually, to beat that light, I'm cutting over to Avenue M and coming up. I could imagine if there's more traffic during, like, morning hours or coming home, that that road's going to be backed up even more, which is going to just have a domino effect and kind of cause more traffic and backup on Avenue M is there any plans to do anything about this traffic and I know I can't ask questions but those are some things that I'm concerned about thank you thank you

Hello, good to be back, y'all. Kansas, Burns, 1510 Avenue J, Santa Fe, Texas, 77510. Basically, thank y'all for all your service and everything for the fire, and I do agree that training should be done in an appropriate, safe environment for all who live nearby. The only thing that I'm concerned of is with With the burning in a area that is nearly probably around 200 feet from civilization, other people that live in the neighborhood, where they be affected by carcinogenetics. And by carcinogenetics, I mean the definition, having the power to cause cancer. A carcinogenetic is any substance, type of radiation, or organism that damages cell DNA and triggers abnormal cell growth. 10 million people die from cancer worldwide each year, with over 600,000 deaths occurring annually in the United States. The carcinogenic spread can be anywhere between 500 to 1,000 feet. can actually cause the dangerous effects of the health issues that can develop into cancer. I just wanted to make sure that everyone is aware of the effects that can be caused by the cars of genetics and to make sure that it is properly contained for safety for everyone in the neighborhood, especially all the seniors that live nearby and the child care that is nearby the area as well. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank all y'all for being here tonight.

Is there some reason the PA is not working? I mean, we all came here to hear what's going on.

I can't hardly hear anything.

Try it now.

Thank you, Robert.

Hi, I'm Sandra Bradley. My address is 11811 23rd Street. First of all, I'd like to say I'd be willing to bet there's not one person in this room that is against firefighter training. We all want that. We want our firefighters to be safe. But we also are against placing the facility in a regional live fire training facility in the wrong location. Our concerns include incompatible zoning, the impact on established agricultural residential neighborhood, increased noise and smoke, drainage and infrastructure issues, potential effects on nearby residents, livestock, local agriculture, property values, and the lack of transparency and meaningful community engagement throughout this process. And by that, I want to say that we had farmers come by and it sounded like a good idea until we started learning more about it and finding out more facts. We believe that firefighting training is essential, but it should be located in a place that minimizes impact on an existing neighborhood. We respectfully ask that this facility be moved to a more appropriate location where it can serve the firefighters while protecting the health, safety, and quality of life of the residents who already call this community our home. Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Anthony Devona. I live at 11816 Highway 6, Santa Fe, Texas. My whole family lives here and I grew up here in this town. My mother lives over on 22nd Street and that's pretty much why I'm here is talking for her today. She doesn't have a lot of really good breathing conditions. her neighbor that she's really good friends with and got that great of breathing conditions either i was a firefighter for a handful of years out in central texas i was also on the fire training squad and uh for 10 years in the plants i know about the firefighters i love them to death man i think that's great i think the training is awesome i think it's wonderful But I agree with everybody out here. I think it could be an appropriate spot. And I just don't feel like that's the best spot to have the training facility. I think we need it. We do. And I think give them whatever they want, whatever they need. I just think a different location. You know, my mother is elderly, so I take care of her a lot, and I bounce back and forth with my pop and my father, you know, and been in this town for, I don't even know, seven years. So, I mean, I grew up in this town. I love this town. This is my home. But I am a concerned citizen, and I don't have nothing to go on wrong with my mom, you know. So, that's pretty much all I got to say.

Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you.

Hello, my name's Alicia Erickson. I reside at 11812 22nd Street. My house is actually right next to the land as well. I know a lot of people talking about the smoke. I've watched the League City training videos and the smoke's really not that bad. If you look at the land too, sorry, I get nervous. But if you look at the property, there's also trees all around that I think would help that smoke not be so strong as well in the area. I've done the research and from what I've seen, it can help property values and it can also help lower home insurance premiums. As for, I've seen about noise, trains make more noise right there in that neighborhood as we have the train right by us. So I don't think the noise of the men hollering at each other would really be that bothering. They also have already mentioned that they wouldn't use sirens, so sirens we wouldn't have to worry about. And for the traffic, if the training's once or twice a month, maybe once a week, it would only be that timeframe. I believe that the fire department would work, would try to find another area for the traffic to enter. And then we've also had fire trucks and ambulance down our road, and they were never a disrupt. I would never know they were there until my cameras went off. And for toxins that everyone's talking about, with them burning the hay and possibly pallets, they have to have restrictions and regulations already. So, and I believe the fire department will make sure that all that's taken care of.

And that's all I have. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Crystal Whaley. I'm from Santa Fe. I do not live in the area that's being spoken about, but I do live in the community, just like a lot of other people do. I'm at 4504 Avenue L, Apartment 1. I have lived on both side of the tracks. My question is have you given thought to placing a fire station on the south side of the tracks? I bet you would have gotten a lot more community support if you had proposed that versus a training facility. I have a lot of different notes but my biggest concern is do any of you live on the south side of the tracks? Okay, would it benefit you if there was a fire station on that side? Maybe. What about in the post that was brought out on Facebook about an ISO or PPC rating? That was going to lower our homeowner's insurance if we had this near our home. So I looked it up. and that initial and rating actually stood for how close was a fire station to your home then the homeowners insurance did benefit from that they said that public protection classification is dependent upon local water supply equipment and staffing Hence, a fire station nearby. Could lower your insurance. Could lower yours. Or some of those that are out there, because this training facility is not going to lower the insurance. We are into training all about it. I'm grateful that we have it within our community. I'm grateful we have how many on the north side? How many fire stations are on the north side of Highway 6?

Three.

Three? How many are on the south side? Zero? Okay, I see that as a problem. You would have gotten much more community support from both side of these tracks if you had proposed the fire station. That's my opinion. A lot of us have one. A lot of us are worried about the smoke, the traffic, the problems, health-wise. i agree with that also my concern mostly is the community support we seem to be divided again we're divided between the fire staff that is here supporting their cause we're divided with the abundance the abundance of people that are here in the community supporting their cause i've seen a lot of meetings here where there's what 10 10 people There was a lot of advertisement about this, and now you see what's come out. So once again, I ask, rethink what you want to put on the south side of the tracks. Rethink what you want to put next to your home or your family's home. That's all I have.

Thank you.

Ahem.

Hi, and good evening. My name is Monica Wagner, no relation. I moved to Santa Fe in 2004, and I live at 14221 Park Street in 77517. I have a bachelor's degree in chemical engineering, and I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of Texas. I've worked in the petrochemical industry here for, not here, petrochemical industry for over 30 years, and I've used industrial fire extinguishers to put out industrial training fires. I'm against the College of the Mainland fire training facility and against the rezoning. I believe it will damage the health of our entire community, not just the neighborhood, and reduce the property values throughout the city. To be an effective training facility, I imagine one to three house-sized structures engulfed in fire. Imagine the smoke and particulate that will be emitted every time such a facility will be used. What are they going to burn there? Industrial chemicals? The plastics and chemicals we find in our homes, even if it's just simply a wood structure or wooden hay, a simple Google search will let you know that these fires produce PM2.5, a small two and a half micrometer particle that travels for miles, impacting our entire city and beyond. It's small enough to enter our blood and our organs, but it's too big to get out. This particulate, along with other toxins, will cause health issues for our families, our pets, and our livestock. Industries such as we find in Texas City and Pasadena are regulated by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, TCEQ, to capture and limit their PM2.5 emissions. Nothing, and I mean nothing, will protect us our entire city from the emissions generated at this proposed training facility. Homebuyers will sense the poor air quality without realizing it and look elsewhere. We should not be leaning in to take deep breaths of this smoke. It will choke us and turn Santa Fe into smelly Fay. Thank you.

Shh.

Good evening.

My name is Chris Anderson. I'm the fire chief here in Santa Fe. Tonight I am representing the ESD and College of the Mainland plus Santa Fe Fire and Rescue. So we do have a zoning change. before tonight for a training facility. So I want to kind of go over some of the things that we're going to do with this facility. So this is the proposed facility as of right now. So one thing that we are looking to do is we're going to try to move that entrance off of Avenue F because we do realize that the traffic coming down 22nd Street is a little tight. So we are going to pursue getting that entrance moved. So we would come off Avenue F, turn right there next to the railroad tracks, come down and enter our property right there at the corner of it. So this is the building that is being proposed. It is a two-story building with an attic access. We do only burn hay in this facility. So we will buy the hay from Tavalo's feed store. We will do that for, you know, buy local, shop local. Anytime the kids from the college come over to train, they're coming over, they're going to be buying gas, they're going to be going to McDonald's, to the stores. They're going to be putting money back into the city for that. This is what the inside of the building will look like. So we'll have metal racks, no furniture, no carcinogens other than what the hay puts off. And it's just hay smoke. Like I said, we'll buy the same hay that y'all feed all the cattle, friends of all those. So this is what the Leak City facility looks like. Our facility will look the exact same, but just cut off that tower. We will not have that three or four story tower a part of our building.

There should be a... Is there a play button? Can you hit the play?

Cannot play video. So the smoke that's coming out of that window is the amount of smoke that will be coming out of that building. Right now, there's three rooms in that building burning. NFPA says we cannot burn more than two rooms per floor. So at the most, we could have one more room burning in that building at that size. This is some of the stuff that's going around citizens' concerns. This is definitely not what we will have. We will not have any black smoke. It'll all be that light gray smoke. Some of the concerns that are coming through with the heavy populated area, the health and safety concerns, the property values, increased traffic, environmental impacts, So health and safety concerns, declaimers, smoke, toxins, noise, air quality impacts for our families, pets, and livestock at risk. Like I said, no plastics, no rubber, no treated wood, no household garbage, no hazardous materials. Hay produces smoke similar to from agricultural burns common throughout Texas. Training follows Texas Commission on Environmental Quality guidelines, so we have to follow the same quality controls as what the plants in Texas City do. They'll actually come out and check us periodically to make sure that we're following all those safety guidelines. Property values. There's no factual information that this will make your property values go down. I own property at 11, 911 24th Street. I'm not worried about my property values going down. The insurance rating that we talked about before, the ISO rating, part of that grading process is if you get a training building, your ISO rate will go down. This is Lake City's building. Around the neighborhood, Friendswood's in a heavy populated area. Houston's, they do multiple academies all day long. 106 stations come in there to train and they're backed up right into a neighborhood. We have emails where they said Friendswood and Pearland, Link City, have not had any complaints from their citizens. They actually enjoy the fire field being across the street. They take their kids over, they watch what's going on and do that.

Thank you.

We need to have a rebuttal to what he presented. Is that where you wanted to talk?

They also got cut off when they were talking, and their three minutes was up.

So we're still under the public hearing section. I thought when you came up, you were going to address those questions. So if you can hold your section until the next day.

Yeah, because nobody told me where to go. Okay.

All right. Thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

Yes.

I just wanted to ask them a question.

Directly next to where this fire training facility will be. my whole my family my uncle myself my mom and my aunt live on those properties and we are all in agreeance with this training facility we have no issues with it we've done our research to make sure everybody's talking about the smoke Most of the people in that neighborhood burn limbs on a regular basis. They talk about the noise. They ride four-wheelers up and down the streets and on the drainage ditch nonstop. So, I mean, all of these things are issues that really aren't issues. So, thank you all.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Anthony Capadona. I live at 11754 25th Street. I'd like to talk on behalf of the people that can't speak for themselves or community members that can't speak for themselves. This issue is not just about the zoning, it's about the health and welfare of our livestock, our horses, pets, wildlife, our pollinators that surround this proposed site. Agricultural and residential areas are intentionally separated from industrial activities for a reason. Live fire training facilities introduce repeated noise, smoke, traffic, and training exercises that can create stress on nearby animals. Chronic stress in livestock is well documented to affect reproduction, growth, immune function, and overall health. Horses are especially sensitive to sudden loud noises such as sirens, which they say they're not going to have, explosions, and repeated emergency vehicle activity. Frightened animals can injure themselves, damaging fencing or escape onto nearby roads, creating safety risks for both animals and the public. Pollinated, particularly honeybees, are another concern. These are essential to agriculture, gardens, and local ecosystems. Smoke, airborne particulates, and repeated disturbances have the potential to disrupt normal foraging behavior and colony health. While more research may be needed regarding long-term impacts near a live fire training facility, the uncertainty alone should encourage caution when selecting a location immediately adjacent to agricultural properties. There are also legitimate concerns regarding the runoff. The fire training exercises generate water mixed with combustible byproducts or other contaminants. Even with modern best management practices, any failure, overflow, or unexpected storm event could allow pollutants to enter nearby drainage systems. That runoff could ultimately affect livestock, wildlife, and the environment that depend on it. Protecting water quality is one of the most important responsibilities we have in agricultural communities. I want to be very clear. I do support firefighter training. Well-trained firefighters save lives, protect property, and serve our communities with dedication. This is not an argument against fire training. It is an argument against placing the train so that our location is compatible with its intended use. When there are alternative sites that are better suited, locations further from established neighborhoods, livestock and agricultural operations, it simply makes good planning sense to use them. Choosing the right location protects both public safety and animal welfare. And I also would like to point out that he said that, Mr. Anderson said that those places in League City are fine, you know, it's fine with it. If you can go back and look at the historical maps, that facility is on city property, water treatment facility, and the majority of the homes were built after. So they literally moved next to it. So they really can't say, you know, it's like they're living next to the train tracks complaining about the train. Thank you all.

Thank you.

My name is Cole Dixon. I live at 11933 22nd Street. I've been a resident since about 2005. I want to start this out by saying I am all for the fire department. My dad's been a fireman for over 20 years, 25 years now. This isn't a matter of if we're against the fire department, that has nothing to do with why we're here. We're here because, one, after he put his little, I guess, presentation up, I'm coming in off of Avenue F. Recently, we had a tropical storm that dropped little between three to four inches of rain overnight. Yes, that is a substantial amount of rain in that short period of time. However, with just a tropical storm, I know this because we ride next to the train tracks and whatnot. ditches typically stay between three to four inches of flowing water through there day in day out i rode down there recently after this tropical storm and there was about three to four foot of water so much to the point that it was backing up where it chokes at the railroad track if they come in down avenue f what's that going to do we're adding in more culverts which are blockages to allow water to drain out that entire area flooded during harvey there was very few houses that didn't flood My home was, thankfully I wasn't in it at the time, was one of the few that didn't. Next thing is traffic. He comes back to say they're proposing to come down Avenue F. You come down 22nd Street, I work for the light company. I work for Centerpoint Energy. I have had nights where I'm soaked in water, I've got to stop by my house and get a change of clothes so I can continue on with my night. I have a very large bucket truck. You park that truck directly on the curb so I can go into my home, you can't get another vehicle past my truck. You do that with a lot of the elderly residents that are trying to maybe leave the area at that time, you're gonna push them off in the ditch. That's not feasible. along with you bringing in 50 to maybe 60 people to this training facility while you've got kids that are out in the street, these people aren't from this area. They don't care. They're going to haul ass down this road, excuse my language. They're going to do, they're not from here. They're not going to respect it. We don't want this. You've sat here and had 20 people before me sit here and tell you how much they can't stand it and they don't want it. It's not a good idea. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Bob White. I live on 29th Street. I went to school with most of y'all grown adult kids in the same neighborhood. How many bonfires? How many parties? Your four-wheelers riding through the ditches leaving contaminants, oils. You're complaining about the hay burning. What all have y'all burned in those pastures that y'all buried in the backyard? Y'all are complaining about hay smoke, but you burn all kinds of stuff in your backyards. Some of y'all got neighbors that paint in their front yard. Or y'all complaining about the paint going everywhere in the livestock. You know, everybody's so against something that's good for the community when it's not in the middle of the neighborhood, it's on the outside of the neighborhood. It's pasture land. You know, anything can go out there. It's not. There's no loud noises. There's no sirens. Act like it's a big deal. And it's not. I put it in my backyard. I've had room in my backyard. It's not that big a deal. Kids love going and watching firefighters. If I had the room, I would. If I was in the water district, I would.

It is in my backyard, and I'm perfectly fine with it.

Mr. White, could you address the board? Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Carlos Catone, born and raised here. I live at 4415 Avenue L. I was a firefighter for Atalama for four years before I went in the service. 10 years with BP Amoco. Been to A&M schools, training and stuff. I'm all for the firemen and I understand the training. But this facility is not just gonna be for Santa Fe's benefit. College of Maryland's gonna run it. If they get the approval and they put it in there, there's no telling what they're gonna do and what they're gonna change. If they add to it, we're gonna have another A&M here. and that they're talking about that's not in a dangerous place the wind blows predominantly from the south right where that field is going to be and all that fallout is going to come back on this city right here it's going to stink and the other thing there's no limit who's going to use it it's going to be santa santa fe no not just santa fe's benefit it's going to be you said regional what does regional mean is that how many how many uh counties is that you know there's no restrictions And fire stinks. I don't want to be smelling it, neither does any of the people that live on this side of town, because it's going to be coming right that way, right across this city right here. I'm against it.

Thank you. OK, I think there's Mike Shoup. Oh, go ahead.

Hello, my name's Andrew Blaisdell. I live at 11751 25th Street. I'll be speaking on behalf of my family, myself, my wife, and my two children. She's unable to attend. She's got coaching obligations for sports. I am a concerned resident. I'm concerned about the proposed location of the facility in our neighborhood. I want to be clear that I have the utmost respect and appreciation for our firefighters and first responders. They provide an invaluable service to our community, and I understand the importance of quality training. I work offshore. I understand training can save lives. It absolutely will. My concerns are not with the need for training itself, but with the proposed location and the potential impact it may have on the residents and my family in that neighborhood. Our streets are already in less than ideal condition. They had been redone, but they made them worse than they already were. The addition of heavy emergency vehicles and regular training traffic raises legitimate questions about the accelerated wear and tear on the infrastructure that already requires attention because it's already falling apart. I hope the committee has considered who's gonna have to pay for all that when that does fall apart, because it will happen if we put increased traffic on there. I'm also concerned about the potential effects of the air quality. We've heard a lot of that already, so I won't bore you with that, but that is an issue. It's totally an issue. Like many homeowners, I'm concerned about my property values. Purchasing a home is one of the largest financial investments most families in this community will make. The introduction of a fire training facility into an established residential neighborhood has a potential to affect both the marketability and the value of my home and all my neighbors' homes. This concern deserves to be acknowledged rather than just ignored and dismissed. That's kind of ridiculous that it's a non-issue. Another issue that weighs heavy on my mind is the safety of our neighborhood kids. You've heard there are a lot of kids in that neighborhood. Who's going to be monitoring an unmanned facility when these kids are running around the neighborhood in the summertime? Are you guys gonna have a fence? Are you gonna have a security officer? Is there gonna be barbed wire? What's gonna keep the kids out of that facility? Because everybody knows little kids are gonna get into that facility because they're gonna wanna know what's in there. Basically, my biggest concern with all of it is a lack of transparency. All this has been real secretive. The way it's gone down has left a really, really bad taste in all of our mouths. It's definitely sounding like a real small-town political type thing, and that's not what it used to mean. You guys used to be able to do business on a handshake. We're not doing that anymore. We're doing backdoor deals, and it just stinks. Thank you.

President I'm just I don't know what I could say more than what's already said. It's been an address, please I'm sorry 56 17 Avenue G and a half Santa Fe in your name Michael shout.

Thank you.

I'm sorry. Excuse me There's not much more that I could say everyone is just about take to you know touched everything about the situation There was my questions were were a lot of questions not many answers ahead of time this has only been going on for as i know for about five or six weeks that i knew about it and now things are where we're at now um i just don't i just don't know why we uh we couldn't find a better the neighborhood 2004 has lots of property that direction the blimp base is out there I mean that's a possibility my goodness what's out there you could use so those things are available yeah I think they could be found pretty quickly if you wanted to that would be better for the people in this neighborhood right here and that's all I really have say about Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Andrew Stovitch. Basically I own all the property that you're thinking about maybe making a road in front of. I've been in Santa Fe since 1975, graduated high school here. It's always been a small town community. I love this place. I'm a first responder myself in Houston, 33 years as a cop in Houston. I have nothing against first responders. I just want you to think about the kind of properties you have and to think about something industrial being put close to where you live. I don't know about the fire stuff. I mean, most of these people correct. You know, you have a bonfire, the smell of this, four-wheeler gas. I don't know. The point is that my concern is where's the land plat? What's the design? How is this going to do? Because I stand to lose a lot in reference to you guys talking about making a road down in front of my property. That's already a drainage ditch that I've seen over there. My house has been flooded in Harvey. I live right next to this property you're talking about. That flooded. All that stuff flooded during the course of this last few storms. The Drainage Commission, you know, they keep up with it. They keep up the learning, I guess, to the best of their ability. But the key is, to me, is I'm looking at the property and I'm seeing, and ever since I've learned about this subject, I've looked at my property, looked at what we have out there. I don't know if all of you ever actually physically walked out there. How are you going to build a road from Avenue F or think about building a road from Avenue F to this facility? You'd have to build a road, and then after the road, you'd have to build a bridge over to the facility other than coming down 22nd or 23rd. That's, as far as I'm concerned, that's absolutely ridiculous to spend that kind of money on a new road and a bridge considering you could improve other ways to get there if that would be the case. But that's one of the reasons why I'm not for this project, only because I live there. I live close to it. I don't know what kind of noise it's going to create or what's going to happen. All I know is I've lived there since 2002, and it's been a peaceful place. And on Avenue F, I'm worried when we change these things to agricultural... NC neighborhood commercial that there's other people that are going to come in and start making other businesses. On Avenue F, if anybody's here driven up Avenue F, There's actually 18 wheelers parked in there. They sold most of the property there from there. There was an oil field out there. They sold most of those properties out there. There's businesses out there now. Is that going to be allowed now? Because I asked earlier and they said that that was a non-commercial area, but yet we still have 18 wheelers and things like that out there parked in their road, in their driveways. All I'm concerned about is my values and my property as well. I spent a lot of time here. I built a life here, built a house, raised kids here. This is my love. I love Santa Fe and there's not a damn thing I wouldn't say good about it. I love Santa Fe. But I don't want to get to that point where I feel like I have to leave Santa Fe or move because it's not the same place it was when I understand about progress and I understand that we need facilities for our farm and our growing community. Think about it. It's just as far as economic rise. Is it a better location? I understand that you need to put this facility in an area where you have water, access to city water, so you can use it. So you can't have it out in 2004. I understand that. It has to be within the facility. And I can't believe there's nothing on Highway 6 that was purchased or anything close to that. Granted, I understand that there's not a lot of land movement there. I can't believe this is where we're going to end up with this facility. I feel like there would be a lot more better places within the water area district. That's all I'm saying. I appreciate you all listening to me. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, good evening. I'm Prudence Ginsburg. I live in 928 22nd Street. I didn't know if I'd say anything tonight or not, but what I think is important to reiterate is a lack of transparency with this. I appreciate that there's someone on the planning committee who speaks up and says that they did not financially benefit from this. However, the property was already sold and here tonight it was mentioned that they represented the fire department in that piece. So I do think that there is a conflict of interest here. We've been here about three years. We love being here. We love being a part. We say it often as we're driving home how much we enjoy being a part of this community. I'm hearing that the road might be moved is great, but I know that there's, as was spoken, there's bridges or there's fire tracks that have to be adjusted, moved, changed, et cetera, et cetera. The lack of transparency, a lot of this information, why was it not presented before? Why is it just now we're seeing this? And maybe I just haven't been invited to those conversations. As a matter of fact, I was under the impression a few weeks ago that there was a conversation to be had at the fire department, which then at the last minute was potentially canceled. So again, just speaking up on the lack of transparency, the lack of information as a new citizen and as somebody who sees Santa Fe as where we potentially really retire, we love it that much. I am a little saddened by the lack of transparency. Thank you.

Anybody else want to speak on this topic?

Yes. Hello. My name is Taylor Wolfe. I live at 11914 25th Street. So one of my issues that I have is that when I look through this interlocal agreement emergency services that you have, College of the Mainland and Galveston County Emergency Services, when I look at the limitations and appropriations and the terms of termination, one of my issues is that the term is for 25 years. So after 25 years, College of the Mainland can no longer, they don't have to assume responsibility and liability for this building. So I signed a 30-year mortgage. What does that mean for me and my residents? Does the building become an eyesore? Can College of the Mainland do whatever they want with it? I need to understand better what this agreement happens, what the terms of it are, and how it affects me as a resident after 25 years, because I plan to stay there. And y'all are talking about making changes to the roads. Are you gonna do it for just 25 years? And also, when I voted to approve the bond for Calm, it had Calm bond money was approved to purchase the building. not purchase land. So I assumed as a voter that this bond, this building would be built on already established College of the Mainland property. I did not assume as a resident that this bond would pass a building that would pop up in my residence. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, anybody else want to speak on this topic? All right, if not, I'll close the public hearing. It is 8.45. We haven't made it through yet.

Just a second. Thank you. Consideration of possible action, ZC260701.

Request to change zoning classification at property ID 191606, legally described as abstract 149 East Mitchell Survey, part of Outlot 150, Alta Loma Outlots, from agricultural residential to neighborhood commercial.

I make a motion to deny.

I first would like to respond to Prudence Gunsman. I didn't say I represented the fire station. I said I wrote the contract between the two parties. I didn't represent either one of them or receive compensation.

We have a motion on the floor. I second it. Do we have any discussion?

my biggest thing about it and i can understand both people but we're only here not to discuss the buildings anything other than changing the zone that's it Once this happens, if it does, then the paperwork starts coming in, the building flats, everything else starts coming in. That's when we can decide whether or not we want to deny the buildings, whatever. But the only thing we are here tonight to do is to

change the zone that's it and unless the city tells me that they don't meet the requirements as of right now so once this once the zone chain is approved they will have a use by right and they will be allowed to put the facility on that property

Without coming to us for the claps and everything else. Oh, you know, like they, like they went on a regular, somebody building a building.

So they will still have to get all that approved, but we cannot tell them that they can't have that facility there because being zoned as neighborhood commercial will allow them to have that there.

Okay.

Okay, we have a motion and second on the floor. Is there any other discussion? Motion to deny. I have a roll call.

Chairperson Davis? Yes. Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? No. Commissioner Willoughby?

No.

Commissioner Bryan-Wolford?

No.

Commissioner Shannon-Wolford?

Not correct.

I'm sorry. Motions to deny. Yes.

And Commissioner Estep.

Yes.

The vote failed because it didn't hit the 75% that we would acquire.

Well, but it's to deny. It's to deny.

Yes. Oh, I'm sorry.

But it's still a tie vote.

Correct.

So is that to deny? I mean, has that failed?

Correct. Well, if you did, it would be cleaner if you did a motion to approve and then voted it down. That would be cleaner. Okay.

But it's already... Y'all got to speak up. We might need to be included in the conversations. It denies it.

What I was saying is that it would be cleaner if it was denied by doing a motion to approve and then vote it now. Because it requires a six out of seven to do it. So it would require all six of y'all to be in agreement to do it. So it sounds like it's going to fail anyway. But whether you want to do a motion to approve and deny it or it's up to you. Do you want to?

You made the motion. Well, that one. Didn't pass. Either way.

So the motion to deny didn't pass. Motion to approve.

Okay. Does anybody want to second that motion to approve?

Second.

Okay. So now we have a motion to approve.

Chairperson Davis? No. Vice Chairperson Wagner-McGee? Yes. Commissioner Willoughby?

To approve it, yes.

Commissioner Brian Wofford?

Yes.

Commissioner Shannon Wofford? No. And Commissioner Estep?

No.

Okay.

No, we did it right.

So now it fails.

Yep. All right.

Summary of action from this agenda. I think we beat it to that. Right. Request for future agenda items.

I guess just still the update.

He did not.

Yeah, so The baseball plays the zoning ordinance RFQ and the Patel subdivision will probably do updates on all of those And then I'm not sure what else will pop up I'll entertain a motion to adjourn

Can I make an announcement real quick? I want to thank everybody for coming tonight and making your voices heard. I know that one side always loses, but tonight we just want to thank each and every one of you for coming out. This is one of the biggest crowds I've had in my term as city manager. I guess if y'all want to restate how that last vote went, because I don't think that they heard, but the

So the second motion was to approve the zone change, and the vote was three to three. It needed six votes to pass, so the motion failed. So the zone change was not approved. Now, it will go to city council.

No, it does not go to city council. It has to have 75% of you, so it would have took six votes to go to city council.

Am I wrong?

We haven't posted for that one.

Okay. I'm sorry. Okay. So it's failed. So can I entertain a motion to adjourn?