Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

one and we have a quorum. So, uh, the first item on the on the agenda is public comment. Issues or concerns not on the regular agenda may be raised by the public at this time. Citizens should speak from the podium, address all comments to the dis. Begin by stating their name and address or single member district and limit their remarks to less than three minutes. Ray, who's first?

Um, we have China Young, I think, is her name. Hi, my name is China Young. I'm a resident of SMD4. I want to thank you planning commissioners for being here uh today and for taking on the incredible task of being a citizen volunteer. It is a thankless position to be in. uh you take time out of your workday to serve as a steward for our community and there's a huge weight of responsibility and accountability on your soul on your shoulders as a decision maker for all of us. As a fellow resident, I share that responsibility with you. And that's why I'm here taking time out of my day, sacrificing opportunity to earn income because it is so incredibly important for all of us as citizens to be engaged in discussions and decisions that will affect our community and our future. Really, the only difference between the two of us is that I only have three minutes to speak and you get to make the decision on whatever you want to make uh that impacts all of us. So last month I was here speaking on my concerns about the data center and water use and encouraging this dis to approve the guidelines and regulations that had been constructed by city staff along with many of my citizen colleagues. Um, since December when I became aware of a potential data center being built, myself and a small group of concerned citizens have been working hard to learn everything we can about the impact it would have on our community and to work with our council members to um and city leaders to put those guidelines to put guidelines into place to protect our community. And although some of us had the initial impulse to say absolutely no to a data center, we began working with each other at the very minimum for the appropriate guidelines to protect our

resources, our land, our water, our energy, and our people. The result of that work was the guidelines that were tabled at the last meeting because they were seen as too restrictive. Comments were made about them being too long to read and too complicated to understand. And as just another average citizen, I completely understand because until the last few months, I would have not understood them either. But I have spent the last several months learning and have been fortunate to have had colleagues along the way that have had more knowledge and understanding and have helped guide me. And I was very disheartened to hear folks uh on the commission choose to table something because they didn't take the time to understand it. even after being told that representatives from the data center itself looked at those guidelines and were in agreement with them. While those guidelines may have seemed overly restrictive from the perspective of a small business owner, they weren't anything out of the ordinary for a multi-million dollar corporation. The size and scope of this project is massive. And if we don't put strict parameters on the use of our resources, they will be exploited and our future generations will suffer for it. So, I urge this commission to not be overwhelmed by the length and density of these regulations, but recognize that they are necessary to protect our community and our future. The most important thing we can do, you can do, is get it right the first time so that our community doesn't have to scramble to fix the problems that are created by getting it wrong. Thank you so much.

Thank you, China. Um Jeff Fischer.

Good morning. Uh Vice Chair Mice and Planning Commissioners Jeff Fischer, single member district 4, uh Pauland neighborhood. Uh I just wanted to give you my thoughts as well on the conditions. First of all, I'd like to say um commend staff and the commission, all of you working together on that. I think there's some really good stuff in here. I think there's probably about 70% of what was in there today is is kind of what the community was uh pushing for since the beginning. So, I'm not here to say the data center is a a good idea or bad idea, but just to focus on the the requirements. I'm going to do that later, but I did have some questions about the Skybox project, and I wanted to use that as as part of the the time that I have here. Um the first question to uh the planning department as well as as you all is will skybox be subject to these new data center regulations. I think that's really important um you know with vested rights and getting the straight zoning with the director's interpretation on that. There's concerns about that um of them actually following those guidelines at all because technically they don't have to. The second thing is um there's been talk about a 380 agreement. We know it's coming. What's in that agreement? um maybe they're not getting a property tax abatement, but are they getting other abatements on their water and sewer and things like that? If that's the case, I would say we should halt on that part of it and have that discussion further and make that information public. Um there's a lot of businesses that create jobs. There's a lot of businesses that do things. There's a lot of mom and pop businesses in town. So, why should this one business um you know get those those tax breaks if they're already going to earn millions of dollars? I think that's a fair question. And then thirdly, are they going to provide any benefits to the citizens of St. Angelo? Um, I've done some research in other communities, and again, this is not necessarily my opinion, just just things that I've looked at. Um, Amazon and Mississippi um had given um um money for community colleges and schools, training programs for uh computers, science, and engineering and things like that. Are

they making a donation to the community? Uh Virginia uh invested in data centers there. they were giving $400,000 uh in community funds. Happy to share those links later to those um localities. And then in Illinois uh in Elkrove, their innovation district, giving financial assistance to uh local school districts and other taxing bodies. So I think before um I know later today we're focusing on the conditions, but I wanted to take the time to share that as well. There's a lot of information floating around out there and I think we just need to make um an informed decision. And if if y'all end up um approving these regulations, it's going to set the tone for other data centers to come to town. So, what are they giving back and what are some adequate or appropriate conditions to be placed? Thank you, Lisa Olivus. Shaman.

Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning. I'm Lisa Lea Shamont. I'm from district 4, Paul. I'm respectfully urging the council for a data center moratorum for the city of St. Angelo and for today for the planning commission to either table this item again or vote to deny uh for the reasons below to council. At this point in time, there are more unknowns in regard to the questions of water consumption and grid overload and how these issues will directly affect citizens of St. Angelo. There are stories in newspapers every day of how these data centers are negatively impacting people that live in data center communities. Neighbors and friends have often commented that we are not seeing any stories where the citizens are speaking positively about these data centers in their cities. So, how is it that these data centers are the answers to our prayers? Why did the city and skybox or emergent embark on this endeavor without presenting their ideas and vision for St. Angelo directly to the people of St. Angelo way back in March of 2025? Instead, we are given an impromptu Q&A on April 22nd after the land has already been reszoned and leased. The lack of transparency by the city and skybox emer has already been reszoned and leased. The lack of transparency by the city and skybox emergent has left us with more questions than answers and has resulted in an air of mistrust among council's constituents. I'm not against progress or economic development. I just wish for our city leaders to negotiate hard to reap the benefits of sensible economic development for all the citizens. That is exactly why this moratorum is imperative. At this point in time, our elected officials and city staff have to make sure they maximize every benefit for St. Angelo residents. We hold the winning hand. We have what they want.

What all the data centers want. Inexpensive land, water, and grid. Fear of missing out seems to be what was driving our elected leaders in the beginning to move quickly and stealthily. Skybox Emergent is pushing hard to maximize profits for their investors and they want the taxpayer to subsidize their project and assume all the risk with so many unanswered questions. Our elected officials have responsibility to push hard to make sure we receive the best return on our investment not just for now but for the future. The Texas GOPled legislature is already planning to address these issues of data centers when they convene in January of 2027. A moratorium would allow our legislators to ensure guidelines, regulations, and protections for communities like ours. Uh, please see articles, Texas legislature sets its sights on data centers and AI, what you need to know. Folin Lardner LLC as well as data centers, Texas lawmakers explore new regulations from Fox 7 Austin. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. I hereby request a moratorum on these data center regulations and any 380 agreement for skybox emergent. Thank you.

THANK YOU STEPH. Is it vodka?

Hello. Thank you for being here and being our commission working as hard as you do. As China said, I appreciate it and I am not against development and moving forward with St. Angelo's future and prosperity. But my name is Steph Bach. I live in the ETJ and respectively would like to make a comment on the data centers and guidelines. Um, just overall generally guidelines are defined as information intended to advise people on how something should be done or what should be done. For all intents and purposes, the guidelines, much like OSHA and ANIE standards, are meant to ensure forms of safety with aspects of accountability in order to protect the value of human life over the cost of work and business interest. The fact that these basic protections are part of industrial work and life is not more mere coincidence correlating to hazards and potential death. The standards and safety regulations exist as a barrier and level of protection that people would not otherwise have if left up to businesses themselves. Therefore, here is where I implore you to put the citizens needs to be protected over monetary gain. It isn't fair for anyone to have to suffer because they don't have the knowledge or understanding of what's coming. Meaning, they aren't able to be at every council meeting or to keep up with what's going on or to be at every um commission meeting um to understand the needs of all the city and their neighborhood. That's why we have local government and committees to entrust these officials to do what is best for the people. and that includes their safety. The guidelines I believe fall short of this trust. I urge the study of Abalene situation from housing to tax hikes to rent hikes to utility hikes. It wasn't fair. They didn't know. But we do, and we can see what's happening to them. If a data center is built in or near St. Angelo, it must protect our water, our air, our neighborhoods, and operate safely and openly to the public. The citizens should not have to pay for the development of infrastructure or bear the burden of higher rates to accomplish it either. The proposed guidelines should be written to safeguard the

community while ensuring any future data center development is responsible, transparent, and accountable. To conclude my comment, I respectfully request a one-year moratorum to fully gather and study the effects that is seen and felt in so many communities around us. It is pertinent to understand all intent all intended and unintended consequences. With data centers rushing into communities so fast, it is undeniable that there have been many regrettable consequences. We want our leadership to be steadfast in the safety and well-being of faithful taxpaying citizens and simply ask to pause for greater contemplation and studies to safeguard the well-being of our present and future generations. I also respectfully request that the data center regulations/guidelines be tabled for further deliberation. Thank you. Jennifer Dendy. Good morning, commission. My name is Jennifer Dendy. I live in district five and I am here to request a moratorum just until the end of this year just to give regular people time to compose their thoughts on this issue. I mean my husband and I just got our 200 foot letter things last week. So I've spent the weekend watching old meetings trying to learn what I could about all of this. It feels rushed. It feels like there's a false sense of urgency over building this data center. And it won't be the only one. There'll be more. If this is good for St. Angelo today, why won't it be good for St. Angelo in December? Let's wait. Give people time to get answers to their questions. And I watch these meetings and they ask questions and they never get answers.

What is the water usage going to be? Will it will it be capped? What is the energy usage going to be? Will it be capped? Will the square footage that these people can build in this spot be capped? We haven't gotten answers to any of that. And I don't understand that. And also, these regulations are supposedly going to be enforced through code compliance. And I I'm confused by that because this is a multi-million dollar job. They're not going to care about little several thousand dollar fines to fix light problems or noise problems. I think we just need a little more time to think about all these issues. Thank you.

And that is it for general public.

Thank you, R. Okay. Next, we'll move into the consent agenda. The commission may request for the consent agenda item to be moved to the regular agenda for presentation and public comment. Otherwise, the consent agenda will be considered in one vote. All items on the consent agenda have been recommended for approval by staff with no opposition received to date. Since some items on the consent agenda may require public hearing, the commission will accept public comment on any item on the consent agenda in one public hearing. Do y'all have any questions or want to pull any of those items? Okay, Brad, do you have any public comment for those? Only if needed if there was questions.

Okay. Uh I don't have any questions. So, uh can we have a motion? Motion to approve it agenda. I'll second that. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All in favor? I I

Motion passes. 6. I had to count there for a second. Okay, next we'll move into the regular agenda. The first item on the regular agenda is signed variances. Planning commission has final authority for approval of signed variances. Appeals may be directed to the city council. We have the first case which is SV26-01 4083 West Loop 306 single member district number six. a request for a sign variance to section 12.04.05 to allow a second freestanding sign fronting West Loop 306 frontage.

Good morning, Ray Linbury, lead planner. So, this is a sign variance request. Um, they are requesting to allow a second freestanding sign within 200 feet of another. The zoning is general commercial. It is in Mary Coffee District 6, the Bonum neighborhood. We mailed out nine notices. We have not received any in favor and zero in oppo in opposition. The zoning is general commercial. The vision plan is commercial. So in the sign ordinance, this monkey, yellow monkey up here on the roof that they have um is considered a freestanding sign. You cannot have more than one freestanding sign within 200 feet facing the same road. So they are trying to they have they currently have this one. They are trying to put this one at the street. So this is pictures of the monkey up there at the moment. And then I took a picture um looking down the road. You can't really see I mean you can see a yellow blob in a way but um so with that staff is recommending approval as the second sign will have their business name phone number. You could probably see it going down the street. You can't really see the monkey. The monkey just says welcome. Um it is the the purpose of the ordinance was to keep clutter from the streets and everything and and this isn't really um causing that. So with that staff is recommending approval. Any questions? There's not too many monkeys on the loop already.

No. Okay. Do y'all have any questions for Ry? Okay. Ray, do we have any public comment on this? Not on this one. Okay, so we'll close public comment there. Um, I think this is pretty straightforward. I mean, uh, I think the monkeyy's a part of the building and they want a second sign that has their name on it. So, I'll make a motion to approve as city has presented. I'll second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor?

I I motion passes. 6. Okay. Next thing we have here is subdivision plats. The planning commission has final authority for approval. Appeals may be directed to the city council. First case is going to be FP26-05 Southland Hills edition section 30 single member district number one. Request a final plat 7.443 443 acres to create 22 lots with the RS1 zoning district located along Valley View Valley View Boulevard between Stone Canyon Trail and College Hills Boulevard. Aaron,

good morning. Uh, planning commission. Aaron Venoy, director of planning development services. On this first case that you just uh read into the record, we have received a request for a waiver of 30 days. Um and staff has accepted this waiver and staff makes a recommendation to table this item uh until the next planning commission. The applicant's representative is here if you wanted to visit with them, but uh we do recommend tableabling the item until the May planning commission at this time. I don't have an issue can an issue. can ask why we're why

I think their their clients are thinking over a few things um particularly some of the comments back from the city staff of maybe some of the requirements and maybe have an opportunity to sit down with city staff to see if those can be worked out. Uh and that would give them the opportunity instead of us uh forcing an action under state law that then we can at least talk with them a little bit in length and see what the best outcome can be and present that at at planning commission in May. Okay. Y'all have any comments or I I'd make a motion to table for 30 days. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? I Motion passes to table 6. Ray, was there any public comment on that one?

I'm sorry.

Just he's shaking his head. He's okay. Okay. Um, here we go. So, the next two, we're going to read two and three together, but then we're going to take two separate votes. So, we have FP26-08 Ellison Estate section 7- C single member district 6, a request of final plat 5.831 acres to create 33 lots in the RS3 zoning district located between Rimrock Circle and Sedona Trail. And then we have FP26-09 Ellison Estate section 7D SMD number six, a request of final plat 5.831 acres to create 33 lots in the RS3 zoning district located between Rimrock Circle and Sedona Trail.

Thank you, Mr. Mai. So, we have two uh plats that are adjacent to each other, and I'll run through both of those. This first one is Ellison Estate section 7C. You can see this area here that's kind of right behind the Lowe's and adjacent to one of the areas of the Red Royal that flows through. Um you can see all the residential subdivision and some with without the overhead image on but there's some storage buildings there to the left side of the screen. But this is the last two sections of this area and it will be completely built out. This is in district number six, Miss Mary Coffee. It's in the bottom neighborhood and this first section is approximately 5.8 8 acres. So, you can see that section there. It has Sedona Trail at the bottom. It has Rimrock Circle at the top and then Ray Creek Trail that goes through the middle. Um, it's just adding to this subdivision. It is an RS3 subdivision. Uh, they are looking to continue some of the zero lot line structures. Uh, and we've already talked with them about the the different lots and how they kind of look and where where things will fall out there. But uh again a needed structure type in our community. Uh and this is an area that has developed that way over the last many many years. You can see the um vision on the plan on the left is neighborhood. It is RS3 zero lot line twin home residential. They plan to continue the zero lot line uh project through that area. The staff does recommend uh approval uh that they would just construct the roads to city standards. uh construct the alleys to city standards, install water main and service connections, install sewer main and service connections, uh have a revised drainage study, uh as well as prior to the plat request um revise the plat including a turnaround or have a uh developers agreement that would install a turnaround and that could be a deferral uh at the end one of

the the end of Rimrock Circle. They're designed to build these kind of together, but in case for some reason something happens, they don't build the other one, they would actually have a turnaround at the end of Rimrock Circle. So that that is the first plat. We'll show how 7D uh works with this. This is Ellison Estate 7D. Again, the same area, just slightly larger. So 6.4 acres again in district 6, Miss Mary Coffee, and the bottom neighborhood. You can see that Willow Circle uh kind of goes there to the I'm just going to say to the north, but maybe not true north, but it's going to go up and then it curves and then it connects into Rimrock Circle. Again, the same style uh development. Uh you can see the alleyway that they have that runs right here and along the backside. Uh in earlier developments, they have that alleyway that continues along the back and they have an access back there as well. So, these most of these will probably be rear entry. I believe that's under one developer, one builder for the most part, unless they choose to start selling some lots off, but u that's kind of the the idea. Again, neighborhood uh for vision plan and RS3 for zoning. Again, very similar con uh in fact, exact same con um conditions except u the street names are different. Um with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Erin. Do y'all have any questions on these? Either one of these for Aaron? No. Thank you. Ray, do we have any public comment for these? Russell Gully, we didn't forget you this time.

Good morning, Russell with SKG. Um, we ask for your approval of of section 7 C and 7D as presented with the exception of of item six um for the turnaround. This was originally planned and approved as one large development. Really just an entirety of section 7C, but just for the timing and and cost, uh the developer to decided to split this up into two separate sections. So, so that's kind of why we had to we split it where we we did. Um, for those lots that are kind of on that segment of of Rimrock Circle on section 7C that that's kind of out there on this temporary deadend segment, it will ultimately be tied in with 7D that the the developer is is already has water and sewer and street plans approved as it was developed going to be developed as one large section. So, they're in the process of installing water and sewer. Uh, trying planning to do it for the entirety of both 7C and 7D and then just come in and and construct the streets and alleys for 7C at this point. And then soon after that, or once they get kind of building houses for 7C, consume a bunch of those lots, then they'll roll in and then pursue filing and finishing up section 7D. So, so those few lots on on kind of that temporary dead end of of Rimrock Circle. Um, we'd like the flexibility to and I think Mr. Venoy mentioned it the ability to work with staff on on you know maybe we just don't we put a moratorum or whatever you want to call it something in the landbased system to where the developer will not be able to get a CO on any structures within that that deadend segment until there is a temporary culde-sac or rimrock circle is is finished out. So, so kind of from a phasing perspective, we just kind of like some flexibility to

work with staff on how we actually accomplish that temporary turnaround and would be happy to answer any questions. You have any questions for Russell? Okay. Thank you, Russell. Thank you. Okay, now we'll open it up to the uh um Rocky Temple. Oh, I'm sorry. My bad. If Rocky No, you're good. Oh, we covered it. Okay.

Okay. We'll we'll close public comment and now we'll open it up uh to conversation here. Do y'all have any comments on either one of these? I guess my comment is maybe more for Aaron, but um about the temporary turnaround uh kind of like Russell what Russell was talking about. Have we done something like that before or have y'all talked about that previously? Well, what we're talking about is this section of Rimrock Circle that goes here. And so, at some point in our in our ordinance and in the International Fire Code, there are distances that you can have for a dead-end street.

Now, as Mr. Gully uh mentioned, as and as Rocky Templin mentioned, this all this was designed all as one and be a continuous build, and that may be the case. Um, however, the reason it's in the ordinance is there are times, whether it's economic downturn or other things that would say, "Okay, well, we don't want the property owner next door to not build theirs, and now you've got a dead-end street that's beyond the purposes for emergency services turnaround." Um, I do think there is an option there to, um, as he mentioned. So, I think you know when you get to maybe these last three lots on this particular plat, that's the three lots that would be probably affected by being past the uh turnaround distance. Um that we would put something in our land file that we would not issue a certificate of occupancy until there's either a temporary turnaround place there or the road is completed all the way through back through Willow Circle back to Sedona Trail so that emergency services can circulate. And it's really the same comment um on the second properties. Um this one happens to be longer than 750 ft. And so anything that's over 750 ft is supposed to have a temporary turnaround. Again, if this is phase B, uh that may be something that we just do in a deferral agreement. And then at that point, if this Rimrock Circle's already built and it's just connecting through, then that would be obsolete at that time. So I think we do have some flexibility within the ordinance. Um I would I you know I think our fire marshall is here if he wanted to speak about the dead end and the and the uh need the reason for the emergency services but uh I think there's some things there that we can figure out um with the applicant to make it continue to move forward.

Okay. Would that hinder us if we approved as presented or could y'all still work with them? we would still be able to work with him. Uh, as the conditions here, um, that's kind of the the short version. Uh, within the ordinance, the there's always the option of a what's called a performance agreement. And within a performance agreement, a deferral agreement can be done and that is working through just the language that we just file with the plat. So, it's there. So, say if the it ever gets sold to somebody um, else that they will have that documentation when they buy that those properties. Gotcha. Thank you, Erin. Do y'all have any comments for him?

So, just confirming what you just said, we don't need to take off number six if we or would it be best to approve with the exception of number six and then allow you all to come to an agreement. Once this council or excuse me once this commission acts on a plat then it would have to be that that is the final say unless someone appeals it to city council. So my recommendation would be to leave number six. That gives staff the flexibility. Now while it's in the ordinance to begin with if it's not listiced as a condition um there are times especially if it happens four or five years down the road the intent of what's going on may have been lost. And if we can do that in a deferral agreement at the beginning that helps preserve that knowledge uh of what was the intent of planning commission and the applicants to move forward. Maybe this development moves much forward much faster than that and which we all hope that um but that that would be our concern of it not being there. Again I think there is something not just the subdivision ordinance but the international fire code which this group doesn't really have a way to there's there's not um variances for that. that would be a different process. And so anytime they get over 150 feet, they're going to say you have to do a very specific thing uh with your turnaround. And so this is kind of that compromise in between there that we would have one at some point if that the adjacent property is not built.

Okay. Thank you. Do you'all have more comments for Aaron or any other comments on either section 7C or 70? Okay. So, this will require two different motions. Yes. Thanks, Aaron. Public comment. I think we already got public comment. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I make a motion to approve um the plat and Ellison estate section 7C.

Okay. Okay, we have a motion for approving as presented and a second for 7C. Any comments, guys? All in favor? I. That passes 6. And then I'll make a motion to approve as presented for Ellison Estate section 7D. Second. We have a motion and a second um to approve section 7D as presented. Any comments on that one? All in favor? I I.

That one passes 6 as well. Okay. Next up, we have rightway abandonment. City council has final authority for approval of all rightway abandonment. So, the first item on the agenda here, I think, yep, I will be recusing myself from this one. So,

thank you, Mitchell. Okay, we have case number RO26-01, block 55, Hatcher edition in front of lots 11, 12, 13, and 14, single member district number two. a request to abandon a portion of Waco Street in block 55 Hatcher Edition in front of lots 11 12 13 and 14 being 0.182 acres thank you sir Aaron Venoy director of planning development services if you recall a few months ago right after Christmas we did a resoning to neighborhood commercial for these lots that are back here uh the applicant wanted to get the reszoning and at that time we talked about the potential future abandonment of Waco here from where it's stopped being uh built over here to the text dot ride ofway. Um so that's this case u today is abandoning that rideway so they can come back and replplat that all into one lot a usable lot that would would face off of Houston hard express frontage road. It's uh.182 acres being about 7900 square ft. It's from the end of the Waco Street improvements uh where there are no improvements. It's in district number two. Mr. Joseph. And surprisingly enough to me, it was in the Bluffs neighborhood. I keep getting surprised by that every time I I see that. Um, again, we sent out our notices to let folks know. We went out and took some site photos. Um, it hasn't been super maintained. It's just been kind of a gravel road for those uh that just kind of use it as a cut through. Um, and so there's no utilities uh third party or city utilities in that rideway. So, there doesn't have to be any easements. And so, they'll be able to utilize the full property. um as they see fit if they choose to purchase it. And just to remind those that are also watching and

sitting, they also do own this small portion of this triangle down here. So, they will be able to bring that and and bring that all the way down there as well. Here's just the image that they uh brought forward. Again, represents the same thing there. Staff does recommend approval of this rideway abandonment. It did go through all the city staff departments to take a look as well as our third party utilities. Uh it has our standard comments of to replplat the abandoned property absorbing it into their property, pay the fees per the assessment form formula for the abandoned street rideway and record the quick claim deed. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions.

You'all have questions for Aaron Ray. Do we have public comment on this? Okay. So, we'll close public comment and open it up for discussion or motion to approve as presented. I'll second. So, we have a motion and a second to approve as presented. Do we have any comments on that? Okay. All in favor? I

I motion passes. 5. Okay. He's ahead of you. Okay. The next case we have here is going to be RO26-02 18th Street bypass single member district number four. a request to abandon 48,423 square feet of rideway beginning being the 18th Street bypass between 18th Street and North Post Street.

Thank you. Austin Reed, senior planner. This request comes to you from the Pauland neighborhood. It is district number four, which is Patrick Healey's district. The vision plan for this area is neighborhood and this measures a little over an acre. Um what it is, as you said, is a request to abandon the 18th Street bypass. Send out 37 notices on this. We received none who were in support. We received one who was opposed over the weekend, as indicated by the red star there. They did not indicate the nature of their opposition. Here is an exhibit of the abandonment itself. Um something that the surveyors worked up. As you can see, their concept plan kind of has it divided into three portions based on who wants to obtain their portion afterwards. on our analysis. Um, this bypass measures, as you said, 48,000 square feet or a little over an acre. It's about 80 ft wide. Um, 80 ft of ride ofway. And the street there itself is paved at 26 ft wide. Of course, all it does is connect 18th Street to North Po Street. Um, if this does get abandoned, you can still go down to that um four-way intersection there at 18th and Poe. There are no city utilities within this ride ofway and houses right there on that kind of triangle with rear access on the bypass will still have street frontage on the 18th and PO and are able to acquire their portion of the abandonment if they choose to. And then finally, we don't think that this would negatively affect traffic patterns and would uh reduce manage requirements. So with that, we are recommending approval subject to our usual three conditions. Number one is for the remittance of payment. Number two is to record a replat. And then number three is for that quick claim deed. You guys have any questions.

Do you have any questions for staff? My only question is u that you made a comment that anyone that has property that abuts that can come at any time. And is that what you said? Correct. They will have so notably these two properties, this one right here and this one right here will have the opportunity to buy kind of their portion of the ride ofway. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Austin. Thank you all. Ray, do we have public comment on this? Russell Gully.

Russell with SKG. Uh, we're doing this request on behalf of Brookner, which is part of the Baptist Memorials Ministries. We've been kind of working with the city looking to kind of replplat that north gate area and part of our discussions uh it kind of the 18th street bypass kind of came up. It was going to be a condition to improve that segment uh as part of the northgate replat and and talking with the city. It's like hey maybe we can just abandon that segment. So so that's kind of what we're looking at. You know life like Austin mentioned over the life cycle of the city it's a it's a segment of street that the city won't have to maintain. So it it could be kind of a a lessening of a of a burden to the city. So um and there again also as Austin mentioned each of the adjacent property owners will have the first right. If they don't exercise their right then the the Baptist memorials ministry Buckner group will acquire that and absorb it into kind of that Northgate development that they're working on there. So would ask for your approval and and happy to answer any questions. And and correct me if I'm wrong, Russell, but I think a lot of this was due to those being separated out and kind of wanting access to that backyard area in order to mow and things if they're sold separately, right?

That's correct. Yes. Okay. Do you have questions for Russell? Thank you very much. Thank you. We'll close or do we have more public comment? Yes. Jamal Shumpert. Shumpert. Jamal, one more time. Maybe not today. Okay. Is that all right? That was it. Okay. So, we'll close public comment and open it up for discussion or a motion. I'll make a motion to approve as presented. Second. We have a motion and a second to approve as presented. Do we have any comments on that? If no comments, we'll take a vote. All in favor?

I. Motion passes. 6. Okay. Next up, we have resonings and comprehensive plan amendments. City council has final authority for approval of resonings and amendments to the comprehensive plan. First case is going to be Z26-04 1212 North Chadurn Street, single member district number three. A request for a zone change from general heavy commercial CGCH to general commercial located at 1212 North Chadurn Street. Ray,

good morning. Ray Linbury, lead planner. So, this is a reszone request um from general heavy commercial to general commercial. It is district 3, Harry Thomas in the Reagan neighborhood. It is about 230 acres. Um the vision plan is neighborhood center and it is currently general commercial heavy commercial. We did mail out 34 notices. We have received zero in support, zero in opposition. This is a site picture. And I did want to mention, so um the reason they're doing this is because they applied for some tiers funding and within the tiers um rules, I guess. Um you have to any zones that are the double general and heavy commercial, you have to get it reszoned. Um, we went with general commercial because the neighborhood center vision plan is a little bit more fitting with general commercial. They also, um, are looking at making that building a, um, burger joint. So, and having extra parking. So, with that, staff is recommending approval of the reszone from general heavy commercial to general commercial. Thank you, Ray. Do you all have comments for Ray on this one?

Okay. Do we have any public comment? We do not. Okay. Thank you. So, we'll open and close public comment and open it up for discussion or a motion. Second. Have a motion and a second. Any comment on that? I guess my I do have comment. My only comment is I I I'm glad to see this. Uh, I hope that it goes through the tiers funding and I hope that uh this property gets uh developed in a makeover. There you go. Good way to put it there. So, we have a motion and a second to approve is presented. If no other comment, well, all in favor I I.

Motion passes. 6. Okay. Next up, we have conditional uses. The planning commission has final authority for approval of conditional uses. Appeals may be directed to the city council. We have case number one, CU26-02 2417 Rainey, single member district number two, a request for approval of a conditional use for a short-term rental located at 2417 Rainey Street with a single family residential RS1 zoning district. Austin,

thank you. Austin Reeds in your planner, this comes to you from the Angelo Heights neighborhood, district number two, Jose District. The vision plan here is neighborhood. The property measures about 0.18 acres and we have a request for approval of a short-term rental. Sent out 37 notifications on this. As far as I'm aware, we did not receive any responses. Here's a look at the zoning and the vision. On the lefth hand side here, we have our zoning, which is entirely single family residential RS1. On the right, we have our vision, which is entirely neighborhood. Here's a photo of the front of the property. You can see they have their required parking and they did pass their safety inspection on February 26th. So, with that, we are recommending approval um subject to our usual one condition to follow the conditions outlined in sections 406 and 804 of the zoning ordinance. I will note we are recommending approval until June 1st of 2027 as opposed to June 1st of 2026 uh when the rest of one would expire.

You guys have any questions? Yes, I do. Uh the 500 feet has been there's not anything within that. Yes, ma'am. We check that after they submit their applications. There's no schools within 500 feet either. Good. All right. Thank you. And it's not currently being used as a STR. Correct. Not that we're aware. Okay. You'all have any other comments or questions for Austin? Thank you. Thank you. Do we have public comment on this one, Ray? We do not. Okay. So, we'll open it up for discussion or a motion. I'd like to make a motion to approve as presented on this one. I I think that there's more STRs needed in that general vicinity of town. So,

I'll second. Have a motion and a second. Any comment on that motion? If no comment, all in favor? I That's 6. Motion passes. Next up, we have case number two, which is going to be CU26-3404 South Monroe Street, single member district number five. A request for approval of a conditional use for a short-term rental at 404 South Monroe Street with a single family residential RS1 zoning district. Ray,

good morning. Ray Lanberry, lead planner. So, this is a request for a conditional use for a short-term rental. It is in the Santa Rita neighborhood. District five, Karen Hessie Smith. Vision plan is neighborhood. We did mail out 19 notices. Um it says eight opposed. We received um I gave you a copy of two over the weekend. Um so it's a total of 10 and then we received one that is not in the notification area. Um it is zoned RS1 and the vision plan is neighborhood. However, um they do have a lawful conditional use. Um as they have a I'm not sure if we can see real well. Um so this is a second dwelling unit as if they were RS2. So the applicants live here and they are requesting the short-term rental is for the whole lot. That is how they've always been. The conditional use is for an entire lot. However, their plan is to rent out the back. This is a picture. Um, they do have the garage here, this driveway. They do have more parking. Um, that is not included in this picture, but is right off to the side on this side over here. So, um I will say the applicant was not able to be here today. His military unit got um called to deploy. Um I spoke with him over the weekend. He did write up a letter. Um I did want to read it in case there are um neighbors in the the audience to hear what he had to say. Um good morning. I am very appreciative that the neighborhood expressed their concerns and dislikes about my request to use my second dwelling as a

short-term rental. And I would love to do my best to go above and beyond to place those concerns at ease so all parties are addressed. I'm not sure if it was mentioned, but the house that is to be rented out as the second dwelling located on the side of the main house. Me and my family will be living full-time in the larger main house as our primary residence. First off, I primarily seek out specific long-term renters who are professionals in nature who not only bring a vital service to St. Angelo and the surrounding areas, but are also law-abiding and responsible citizens of the community. This would not change for my short-term renters. I would only approve professionals to stay at my property, and this can be determined usually by looking over their profiles or I actually have them answer mandatory questions about why are they why they are coming to St. Angelo. This allows me the opportunity to actually see what their intent is. Second, I invest in services that only show me renters who have been verified and have undergone background checks to stay on my property as I currently live in the main house with my wife and child. I do not let just anyone stay there and I have specific selection criteria that is tailored again to a specific group of individuals. Also, most my platforms do not let criminals use their platform as they use multi-layered screening processes to deny and remove these individuals profiles. To one specific concern, sex offenders are not allowed and are specifically checked for. Third, I completely agree and will adhere to the quiet hours requested. In fact, I will go above and beyond and say that my house rules already state quiet hours from 9:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. 7 days a week and no parties are allowed. Fourth, in terms of parking and the maximum amount of people, I have a limited I have limited the number of adults who can stay in this house to four adults. The property has three additional off- streetet parking spaces on top of the two the main house has. So, a total of five parking spaces which fulfills that request. Fifth, I will be doing a better job about making the property look

better and have it live up to the Santaorita charm. And it if it cannot be and if I cannot be there physically, I will hire out caretakers to keep the property looking clean and neat. I will admit it was a little rundown when we moved in a few months ago, but we are slowly making a positive progress toward that standard. Six, if I am ever away, I have set up the property to be able to be managed 100% remote. I will have I will and have ensured all needs and services requests are met within a timely and efficient manner. I have a lawn, plumbing, maintenance, pest and security on call 24/7 and in place so neighbors should have to be should not have to be bothered with unnecessary issues. Lastly, I will do anything and everything I can to address any other concerns that anyone has with this request. I hold no opinion other than to live and thrive in the beautiful city of St. Angelo. So, if I can bring ease and comfort to my ne neighbors while also being able to provide for my family, then I will do whatever it takes. I sincerely appreciate everyone who came out to physically came out physically to today's meeting or simply submitted your concern. I hope you will be willing to see my good faith and allow me the chance to prove my words. Thank you respectfully, Joseph Stall. With that, are there any questions? So,

oh, go ahead. Obviously, he's not here to speak for himself, but if he generally rents out longterm, what's the point of him trying to get the short term? Speaking to him, um, he's having some issues with getting long-term renters recently, and so it's kind of a he wants it as a supplement if he can't find one. And short-term is classified anything under 30 days, right? Correct. So, he could rent it 31 days or 32 days or anything like that. Um, is it current has he currently rented it as a STR or anything to

not as an STR? It was a it I believe it still is currently a long-term rental at the moment. Okay. Looks like it was purchased in January, so he hasn't been there long. Exactly. He has only been there a few months. Correct. Do you all have any other questions or comments for Ray? Do we have any public comment, Ray? Yes, we do. Okay, we'll open up public comment and uh Mr. Reed Fluger.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, thank you. I want to speak out in opposition against this conditional use. Santaorita and particularly its proximity to the school is a familyorientated neighborhood and we'd like to keep it that way. A lot of young families move into the community just so their kids can go to that school. Um, and that alone is we live right across the street from this from this house. And um, every owner that's been there has rented that little cottage out, but it's always been shortterm. No one's ever led rented anything longterm there. Um, and uh, it's my understanding I I came here believing that he wants to rent the whole thing out, both both residences. When I first met Mr. Stall, um, I asked him when they were moving in and he said, "Well, I don't know that we're really going to be living here." Um, so but it's it's my understanding that you guys are in possession of testimonies from the from that well from that map the other residents there. Uh, the majority of the neighborhood does not want this. Um, there's enough of this kind of thing in Santa right now. We don't need any more of it. Um I think there's at least 10 people voted against it and uh which you know makes up a majority and pro and I don't think there's anybody that I haven't talked to any residents who have approved it or want it and I don't think y'all have heard from them either.

So um with that I'll conclude unless you have any questions for me.

Thank you. Miss Barbara Rogers. Thank you. Um, I live at 405 South Madison. My house and the house that they're talking about are just across an alley from one another. This little apartment that the gentleman is wanting to change has been rented. We've lived in our house for over 20 years. And my main concern, of course, is property value and the neighborhood. We're only two blocks from Santaorita school. There are children that walk in our neighborhood to and from school. We have families with small children that are going to be going to the school in the next few years. When we first moved into our house on Madison, the gentleman that owned the house um did have this apartment and there was a gentleman that lived there for at least 10 years. So long-term rental and then um the house was sold and the people that bought it did the same thing. They utilize the apartment but it was rented by you know a person or a couple for long term. So my main concern was of course the value of our property because we are getting to an age where it won't be that many more years before my husband and I will be selling the property and hopefully going to a situation for our age. Um so therefore the value of the property is very

important to us. um safety concerns. If this is turned into a short term, I can see in the future, whether it be the whole house, which I really wouldn't like, or even the small apartment, there would be people coming in and out, they could stay for like a weekend. Uh our trash is picked up every Friday. If they came over the weekend and then moved out, what would happen with the trash? and whatever from Monday to th to Friday. Um the frequency of vehicles coming in and out. I know most of us, you know, go to bed at a decent hour with people moving in and out. They may be packing to leave and come and go. Um I was concerned about the management of the property. As Reed said, I had the understanding that the whole thing was going to be shortterm and if it were, then they could rent out the house as well as the apartment, which would mean more cars. And Monroe Street and Madison Street are very busy, especially during the day with kids going to and from school. So, we are in opposition of this. Thank you. I believe that's all I have for public comment.

I did also want to make sure I did not say that this is a recommending renewal through June 1st of 2027 as we are in the renewal period right now. It would not give them enough time to to have done anything. Okay. So clarify that.

So we are currently in the renewal process. Um, so if this was approved today, they'd have to turn in their application and pay their fee and we would have to process the renewal. Um, where checking on, you know, code complaints, hotel tax payment, um, everything like that, they would not have done anything. Um, and there would be nothing to check on. This this is allowing them to actually get approval and start um u right away.

Right. Um um uh the lady that just spoke said that uh this property was about two blocks from the school. I know we have requirements in the um uh regulations about a school being closed. Is this within any of the feet that is a requirement? It is not. It's 534 feet away from the school. Okay. Thank you. I just want to ask a question and this may be to the for the two individuals that just spoke, but I believe Mr. Fluger, you said it it has been rented long-term or short-term over for because I feel like you both It's been both.

Okay. I I have to to take back one comment I made. I said I think believe I said it's never been rented longterm. Okay. It has been uh it's just been a long time since it has been. Okay. Uh the u the previous owner Mr. Stall uh just rented it out short term and I guess he was there five or six years. And Ray, was there any kind of permit approved for that?

Right. I I think that was noted. I think you had 10 in opposition. Look, on clarification for the public, too. I know that the entire property you're indicating it's just the back apartment, which there was no picture of. Is it for the entire property, the house and the Yeah. So, a conditional use is on the entire lot, right? Um the in owner's intent is just the back property, but the conditional use is for the entire lot. Chairman, I think we need to make sure I I I I think we understand y'all's y'all's comments there. And um

asking about the conditional use, planning commission can put additional conditions on a conditional use, correct? Like using only one of the structures? Yes. Okay. Okay. So again, sorry Ray. Um is the owner currently I know you said he is off on deployment. Is he currently living in the front residence? According to what he sent in on this piece of paper, him and his wife and his daughter are living in the front property. Sir, thank you.

Um, I guess my comments on it are I don't have a problem with STRs in general, but I do have a problem with them when every single neighbor has a problem with them. Um, I agree. I feel like this property and and I know that the owner said that um they haven't had any luck on long-term rentals, but they've only owned the property since January. So, I think, you know, I think if this property might be suited for a long-term rental and

they might have a little, it sounds like they're trying to fix the property up. So, I think it would be better suited for that versus a short-term rental. and tremendously easy to rent something long-term in Sanorita. I mean, I I have I have no doubt that I mean, maybe it's a price issue or something, but I have no doubt that there's multiple families that would love to rent that or couples long term.

And I have my my concern is the way uh the conditional use is right now without putting a condition on that so that the two could not be. I have a problem leaving it like it is written right now. So, um I go along with some of the other comments uh that are being made, but my concern would be that if he's living in one and three months from now he moves out of that and wants to do both, I I have a real problem with that. So, we would have to put a condition on the conditional use

in my opinion. The only problem that I have with denying, which is I guess a side note, is I don't know how this was portrayed when he bought it. You know, I don't know if it was portrayed portrayed as, hey, this can be this was this is a STR or whatnot. I mean, um, so I I do hate that for him if that was portrayed that way. But, uh, I have a motion if y'all don't have any other comments. Well, I I have a few more comments because when you we talk about the the way it's portrayed is I am in real estate, we have to uh do our due diligence as well as the owners or whoever's purchasing that. So, if that was going to be a question in the beginning, then it that is the owner or the new buyers as well as their agents responsibility to clarify that.

I I know it's 534 ft. I will Yes, I do live in this neighborhood. I am close to that school as well. My child walks home. I have had multiple neighbors who are cons concerned just for anyone that's going to be in a short-term rental type thing. I I am in agreement with them. There's way too many children who are walking up and down every one of those streets. Third thing, even with conditional uses, he's military. he could easily be deployed shortly. That entire property can then be utilized for boats even with conditional uses obviously if they're not utilizing it the way it should be currently. I have a question and I have a concern with that and I agree with the other neighbors

and there may not be a local person to answer if he can't. When you say remotely I own multiple properties in this in St. Angelo too and um yeah there's nothing done remotely on Monday mornings for 4 hours. My phone is silenced. Yeah. Every 24 hours a day. So, um you're welcome to make a motion. I I would like to make I would like to make a motion to deny. I will second that. We have a motion and a second. Any comment on that? Okay. All in favor? I I I

Okay. Motion is denied. 6. Okay. Next case, we have CU26-041 1417 Lindell Court, single member district number two, a request for approval of a conditional use for a short-term rental located at 1417 Lindell Court within the single family residential RS1 zoning district. Ray,

good morning. Ray Linbury, lead planner. This is also a conditional use request for a short-term rental. It is at 1417 Lindell Court. It's in Angelo Heights neighborhood district 2 Joseph. The vision plan is neighborhood. We mailed out 42 notices. We have not received any in support and any in opposition. It is zoned RS1. Division plan is neighborhood. A picture of the house. They did pass their safety inspection March 26th. So with that, staff is recommending approval. And again, we are recommending renewal as of June 1st, um, 2027. With that, is there any questions?

You said there were none in opposition. Nope. And nothing within 500 ft. And the parking is approved, correct? Okay. Do we have any public comment on this, Ray or Aaron? No, we do not. Okay. It's not currently being used as an SDR. Not that heard. Not that staff knows about. Do y'all have any other comments or questions for Ry on this one? Okay. Thank you. Open up for discussion or a motion.

I'll second. We have a motion and a second to approve as presented. Do you'all have any comments for that? Okay, we'll take a vote. All in favor? I I I. Motion passes. 6. We're in agreeance today. We have a next case there. Uh, and I think stepping up for this one as well.

Thank you. Okay, case number four here is going to be CU26-052121 Nickerbacher Road, Sweet C, single member district number five. A request for approval of a conditional use to allow retail sales and services at 2121 Nickerbacher Road, Sweet C within the Light Manufacturing LM zoning district. Good morning. Ray Linberry again, lead planner. 2121 Nickerbacher Road is looking for a conditional use to allow retail sales and services. The current zoning is light manufacturing. Um it is in district 5, Karen Hesy Smith in the ASU College Hills neighborhood. We did mail out nine notices. Um it says one in favor. We did receive three more over the weekend in favor. So there's a total of four in favor. Um the zoning is light manufacturing. The vision plan is commercial. It has operated in the past as retail sales and services. Um it was an office before this. So with that, staff is recommending approval for the conditional use to allow retail sales and services with the following three conditions. That they generally conform to general commercial zoning district standards. That all lighting shall be fully shielded um to not create a spillover on the adjacent properties. There is an apartment complex in the back. Um so that's mostly for in the back area. um and that they obtain all required permits including the change of occupancy.

Thank you, Ray. Do we have any public comment for this Aaron? Yes, we do. We have uh Miss Mary Jane Steedman. only if you all have questions. So, I'm Mary Jane Steedman with Alexander Construction Company, the land owner and neighboring land owner as well. And I'm single member district 5 as well as the property. Just if you have questions, I don't think I have any if y'all don't. No, ma'am. Thank you. Thank you,

Mr. Jamal Schumpert. Uh Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. I I don't really have a complaint about this, but I do have a complaint about the process of the planning of how that was done over there. But in SMD3, our light manufacturing isn't being turned to retail. Uh in fact, we're being incentivized to be more industrial light manufacturing. And I know it's a lot of those lined up in that area that was light manufacturing behind that railroad for probably the same reasons ours was. I just would like for planning commission the commission not the staff because the staff does a good job at trying to bring retail in on the east side. But as you see we're actually shipped in towards the east side in the southwest area. Well that's southeast area because of the highway. So now we have all this industrial that that's kind of going to be permanent and you're going to have people needing retail and food services over there when it expands. So I would like y'all to look more into that. I I know y'all doing a comprehensive plan uh and it should add more into that, but I would like y'all to do a lot more because we don't we don't really have a lot of food places or you know retail businesses on the east side. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. That's all our public comment. Okay. So, we'll close public comment. Open it up for discussion or a motion. I'll make a motion to approve as presented. I'll second. So, we have a motion and a second. Any comment on that, guys? Okay, we'll take a vote. All in favor? I. Motion passes. 50. And I think we need to get Mitchell. Oh yes. Oh yes. Can we uh can we take a short break for a bathroom? That is your discretion, sir.

Okay. We're going to take a I don't know a 3minut break Yeah.

Okay, I think we're all back here. So, we'll resume and let's see, we are at ordinance text amendment. City council has final authority for approval of text amendments to the zoning ordinance. We have the case TA26-01 data center. Consider adopting land use regulations for data centers through a conditional use process within the light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing zoning districts and amending section 319 use table in the zoning ordinance. Aaron, thank you sir.

This is a discussion and an action item for us to adopt specific use land rules for data centers within our jurisdiction. Um as you can see on the screen and as we discussed last time there is currently an interpretation um by myself the director um to allow data centers by right on ML and MH properties and we'll talk about that in just a moment. The proposal is to create a conditional use process to allow data centers in the light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing zoning districts as a land use. With that, we're going to have um some definitions to adopt, design guidelines, noise, site plan, site plan, and I left on here water use regulations. As we've been studying this and looking at this, the zoning ordinance is a poor place to regulate water usage. That's what our utility ordinances are for. And so while we re reference our utility ordinances and um our utilities director will be bringing something forward to city council to uh as we might say internally beef up those ordinances for data centers and how they use water and the quantities. That's really for uh the water utilities area and our city council to make a judgment on those things. Same thing as with wastewater and how it's disposed uh through our utilities. So, while it's still discussed here briefly as a requirement as a hey uh those that are looking to do data centers, we want to make sure in our zoning ordinance that there's a reference that goes back to you must follow our utility rules as well if you want to use this land use this way. We want to also add section 430 which is the land use. Amend section 313 which is our land uh our use table. Um adopt

appendix A for landscape species recommendations and officially resend the director's interpretation of the existing ordinance. I think that's very important that we resend that that it's not just hanging out there. So the proposal to create the conditional use means that this gets to come to a public hearing for anyone that wants to come in and do a day data center land use in our community that has a zoning of light manufacturing or heavy manufacturing. Those are the two highest zoning classifications that we have in in our land use documents. Um that also means that they are not allowed in heavy commercial, general commercial, neighborhood commercial, ranch and estate, those zoning districts. They would have to choose one of those two zoning districts and they would have to come for conditional use to the planning commission public notice sent out public newspaper allowing the the citizens to come forward and make some statements of uh for or against or their concerns for that land use. Again, if planning commission does approve a conditional use, it can be appealed to city council and then city council has that final say on that conditional use. So, just like our conditional uses for our um short-term rentals or for the land use uh over there in the light manufacturing, if anyone wanted to appeal those, those would go to city council. So last time we showed you know all these areas that are in blue um whether it be light or darker blue those are manu light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing. The heavy manufacturing is the darker blue. Um particularly here you can kind of see this area right here and there along the railroad is some darker blue and then lighter blue down in this area. And of course over here uh around the junction of our our loop and

67 and uh things that come in through there uh 277 also comes in this way. There's u our industrial park and stuff and then the newly annexed area that comes out here off of 67. Here's kind of the north side. Uh you can see there's a kind of a strip there along North Bryant uh that comes through and then again along the railroad you can see as it comes down uh and the railroad comes into this area with a spur. Uh we know that there's some very heavy industrial u steel manufacturing that goes in there. There's a little bit over on this side just off of um MLK. Uh and then along the Houston Hart Freeway just north of downtown as well. And you can, we heard about the railroad earlier. The railroad is one of those predominant features that um lots of light manufacturing, heavy manufacturing uses used to take place along railroads. Here's the south side of our town. Uh again, you can see the railroad that kind of cuts through. Uh it kind of meanders through from Fort Koncho, south of downtown, comes through, crosses Bryant, crosses Nickerbacher and through there. And then of course across from the base off of South Chadburn off of Dan Hanks and Christoval Road uh there are some areas there and then even the deep uh further south off of Crystalville Road there's some areas in the back and a piece of property over here uh right there and then there are some just to the very very tip south off of 277 that's light manufacturing as well. So, a lot of areas within our community, um, we're talking about a conditional use process for data centers. Data centers come in all shapes and sizes. Um, we have them as accessory uses. We have them as primary uses, and we've have had them for decades in our community. Um, now we're talking about uh very large data centers um that would

come into our community and find places that may work for them. But these uh rules or regulations are to help mitigate the risks. So some of those other standards to help mitigate the risks are definitions. What's a principal use? What's a generator yard? Uh what's the accessory uses for data centers? Um when they go through a planned development, so maybe they annex some property in it comes in as ranch and estate. And instead of them zoning to light manufacturing, heavy manufacturing, they could ask for a planned development. they would be subject to all of these design standards and regulations within the the ordinance as a land use requirement. Um within the conditional use, they're going to be required to submit plans um that show, you know, elevations, site layouts, noise studies, uh materials, signage, all of those things that come forward and would come forward to planning commission with that conditional use packet. Uh so that the public knows exactly this is how they're going to lay it out. this is what it's going to look like. Here's their landscape package. Here's what their noise study says. Here's what their traffic input says. All of those things, if they're really wanting to come in uh and get a conditional use to become a data center within our community, those things would be required upfront and so that planning commission and the public can have comment on those and make an informed decision. So again, here's some of the things that uh we talked about last time. The major thing that is added on this list is a traffic impact analysis or commonly called as the TIA. Um we would we would ask and require of the companies that they would need to do one that's for the construction time as well as once you start operating because it will be different construction time there will be much higher traffic much larger vehicles. What is that impact to our roads, highways, whatever they may be?

And then what is it going to be after that? How do we mitigate those those issues there? Again, fencing, landscaping, screening, lights, phototric, signage, building elevation, sound study, all of those things. So, let's get into some of the setbacks. This was one of the areas that we had discussion or some discussion on uh last time. And just want to remind you that this is a setback for structures. How much of a setback for structures when it comes to a residential zoning or use? So we have front, side, and rear yard. It was discussed last time we had proposed a 300t buffer and then through discussions uh we've come back with a 100 foot buffer for those that are within the city limits that they abut a residential land use or zoning. If you're outside the city limits, say the property is within the city limits under our jurisdiction but the ETJ property is a residential zoning or land use, then it's a 50-ft buffer. And that's from property line to property line. So if their property line, we've got a uh data center land use and their property line, it may be a cotton field, but there's a house that's in that cotton field. Even if it's 300 ft away, they're going to have a 50-ft buffer on the data center side for those that are in the ETJ. Any questions or comments about this slide about what those distances are or what we're recommending today on those?

I know it's in here and I I have notes on it, but what is the setbacks for non residential abuing? That's a great question. Right here we have so if it's against manufacturing uh commercial districts things like that the building setback must be 50 ft. So they couldn't have a 50 ft or the collapse zone. So if they had a 75 ft structure they would have to be further back because the collapse zone for that structure is beyond the 50 ft and that's front rear side. That is correct. Okay.

So, if they have ground equipment, which is generators and all of these other types of uh equipment, one we're saying they need to be within where the big structures are. So, they would be kind of in the centered or not on the opposite side or they have to be 150 ft, which is going to push that structure even further back on any of those types of uh setbacks. if they happen to be adjacent to a right of way that's just a local street um something like that their setback is only 25 feet if the arterial or collector and so like highway 67 is an arterial um they would need to have a 40ft separation before they started doing anything and then uh if they just have regular pavement say if it's just a driveway for someone they would have a buffer an area of 15 feet as a minimum So, if it's just a driveway or something of that nature adjacent to them, again, building height, um, the height is restricted to to three stories or 75 ft in these regulations. If it's greater than 50 feet, then the setback is plus 10 ft per story up to 75 ft. Again, so the higher it goes, the further back they need to set it. Uh, accessory height is 30 feet. Uh, and that's the max between property line and the primary structure. Um, and so we're trying to keep, you know, whether that's exhaust or something like that from a generator, we're keeping those heights limited to keep that. And the re there's a reason for that is to, and we'll get into it a little deeper, is for the landscaping, the proposed landscaping to help us with that. um because they're going to help um remediate some of those things that are happening with generators and things like that. And we'll talk about that in a few minutes.

Question, Erin, sorry. So that accessory height, um what if there's multiple buildings on one parcel? How do you classify what's an accessory building and what's not an accessory building? Well, we would go back to our definitions. What are they using the building for? If it's for data center purposes as far as storage, data storage, that's a primary use. That's a primary building. Okay.

Usually, we're able to tell on the site plan and they label them on the site plan of what they're doing per building. It's one of our requirements. Um we're able to see what they're doing and where they want to place them on the land. Uh so that does come back with the site uh plan review. Uh that is something we would certainly work with the applicants if they're struggling with our ordinance to find out, well, where should I place this type of thing? Maybe they have um you know a um small service building that they're using that's just their office. Well, where would that that would be an accessory structure? So, we would make sure it's located in the right spot and the right setbacks and the right height. Thank you.

Well, let's talk about landscaping. This was a discussion item last time. Um, and I apologize to you planning commission as well as our citizens that I I did not present the landscaping section as well as I could have last time. Um, I I think we've we've come together and started looking at this a little bit more strongly because landscaping is a critical piece of any site. While we don't have a landscape ordinance in our um our current zoning ordinance, landscaping is is very critical to for citizen protections for not just the aesthetics but also what else can they do as landscaping uh that helps mitigate some of the issues that come with large structures, heavy industrial uh types of things. So landscaping shapes how people feel usually when they see or enter a large building. What does it look like? Um we know that landscaping under lots and lots of studies there's called phyto or photo uh remediation where the plants actually can help remediate issues. They take in some of that CO2 that co that's put out and re um regenerates oxygen out of that. So they can improve air quality. They can filter things. They can reduce the heat around buildings and um provide shade uh shade and green space u in areas not only for pedestrians uh but for wildlife. But as you have those things that are emitting out from any type of industrial use but particularly with data centers, it is going to help be softened by the foliage uh by the items that are landscaped around. Landscaping also helps mitigate storm water runoff. It helps prevent u flooding because the more you have areas that are not just a brown or khichi area that it's actually got some kind of landscaping, swailes and things like

that to help mitigate and allow that water to drain down into our water table. Uh and it does support local plant and animal life. Trees and shrubs placed in the right spots can reduce the heating and the cooling cost by blocking wind and providing shade. It also gives as you're driving down the highway, it gives visual breaks to what you see. So if you have a cluster of trees that are there, say there's three or four clustered in and then another 100 feet, there's another three or four clustered and so on, you start seeing that and you start picking up that as opposed to a big major structure that's uh placed behind them. Um again, here's that phyto remediation uh can help remediate the toxins in the soil. There's different species that can do that. uh and they do also function as sound barriers um through absorption and sound deflection. So within our ordinance we have that 40ft buffer. So this is kind of what that would look like. You can see that there's an arterial to the front. They would have a 40ft buffer uh from that that's landscaping. Um as you can see this this is again a very large scale. You can see that we uh set the we've lowered the limit of trees and shrubs, but the idea is to get some of this clustering, clustering some of the small trees together, clustering some of the large trees together. And as you're driving potentially at highway speeds or anywhere between 55 and and 75, you're going to start picking up on the landscape as opposed to just a solid surface behind that. Uh, and that's really the idea is to pick up on the landscape and have that go through 25 ft buffer just a little more narrow and so those trees those trees particularly the large species will be more elongated out separated more linear where the others could still be clustered because of their size. And

then when you get to the 15t buffer, you can see it almost goes to a very linear um large tree um because there's just not a lot of room in there and you don't want to fill up that room. It's just just difficult to do that. Now, one option that we have also provided within an ordinance this time is to maintain what we would call the natural um state or the natural buffers that are out there that exist today. Now, obviously, if that's a cotton field or wheat field, that would have to come in and all right, we need to landscape those areas. But if you've got a mosquite pasture that has mature mosquite trees that's able to satisfy some of this and you just have to fill in a few trees, that is that would be an allowed submission under the ordinance that we're proposing today. Uh, we would say that those buffers would have to be similar to this, but they would have to be at least, I believe, 30t wide is what I believe we put in there. And so, they would have to have at least 30 ft. That would be the natural uh landscape that's out there. So, this is in the Chapperel Park industrial area. This is actually from their parking lot looking back up at some of the new areas of 67 right before it hits Loop 306. You can kind of see the linear thing with the live oaks that are there. Um it's not the greatest picture, but you can start seeing there's some some clumpings of other plantings in through here that you can see that kind of break up the space. Now, they chose to do turf at that time. Um, obviously the applicants here, they could do turf if they chose to, but we are also allowing native grasses and would encourage the native grasses. One, because they're probably not going to need as much watering, and two, they probably won't need as much mowing because they may only have to mow two to three times a summertime whenever the big rains come, but other than that, they may not have to mow those areas.

So, that cuts down on maintenance and those types of things. But, you can see the linear uh shape here with the trees. You can kind of see the power lines that they're just right below the power lines uh there. But as you're driving on the highway and through highway speeds coming in, you start picking up those trees as as the site as you're driving as opposed to the structures that are behind them. This is along a side local street. Again, you see that linear uh definition of those trees that are going through there. Uh these are live oaks been around for about 20 plus 20-ish years right in there. And so they've started to fill in uh fairly nicely. And then along the back side where there's also another street that you can see that they've uh have kind of a linear effect there. Now you can still see the building through these. Um if they chose to do a natural habitat uh barrier with these, that probably even helps better because now you've got some shrubbery and things that are a little lower. And if you have these natural large trees um filling in uh the gaps, if you will. So again, we did uh opt for that natural buffer as an added option. Um they can do a mix and match if they chose to. The goal is to get some landscaping to help cut down on the negative effects that could come from data centers. uh as well as as your your eye while you're driving or passing by, you're picking up the landscaping and not necessarily the large structure behind it. Now, these are very these could be very very large structures. So, I know that can be it may be hard to visualize and I didn't have a way to do a video and hey, let's drive by some of this and see what it looks like. But if you, as you can imagine, as you're driving at higher speeds, the landscaping is going to be more pronounced than at lower speeds. Um, because that's just the way your eye catches thing. Uh, again, we've, uh,

allow the natural prior um, prairie style grasses, stones, boulders, uh, to reduce the water usage and maintenance uh, and requires the, uh, drought resistant species uh, for plants and trees. And that was a thing that the planning commission had mentioned uh last time is make that as a requirement. So other items uh that we discussed last time was the parking making sure that there's enough parking but not overparked. Uh ground equipment again must be screened with masonry. Rooftop equipment is visually screened. Uh there are some fencing options um particularly masonry along the front or rod iron and then some other style fencing along the sides if they choose to fence. Excuse me. And then uh if there's happens to be a parking lot that's over 100 spaces, they've got to have some landscape islands in there. again, keep uh creating some of those islands that reduce the heat as you're walking into and preventing that radiation coming back up from that uh parking lot uh that goes back into the into the um the community. Lighting be shielded pointed downward not to exceed 30 ft and the build the lights on the building be between 10 and 18 ft. So, it's really accenting where people need to walk or look for maintenance things, not just hey, let's have this huge perimeter lighting to light up everything. uh around there. Noise. No noise has been a concern. Um and so we put in things uh for different noise levels. These are uh things that they would have to submit before they came to planning commission. This is what we believe our noise is going to be. Then after they do the construction, they submit another plan that shows this is what our noise actually is. And if there's if they have something, then they've got to come find ways to mitigate that noise. Um, one of the things that is talking about generator testing to be during the daytime, not at night time. If they have something that uh happens and they have

to kick their generators on, they just have to notify the city within 72 hours say, "Hey, our generators had to come on because we were directed by Urkott that power is being deferred from us. It's going to other places. We had to run our own generators or whatever their energy source is. Water again. Um, these are things that will be going into the utility ordinance. I left them here on the slideshow because I want citizens to understand that they may read our zoning ordinance say, "Oh, they took all the water stuff out." We did take it out of the zoning ordinance, but it is going into the utility ordinance and that will be heard at city council coming up in May. the same time that these regulations if there if there's any recommendation today that will go forward handinand so that uh the community can hear both of those things um together. But again in those utility things there are water allowances exemptions and an exceedence protocol um and same with the um wastewater that would come from that. So if they had a coolant discharge, how would they have to clean it? How would they There's certain levels of um industrial uh things within the wastewater portion of the utilities ordinance that they have to meet that that's uh all of our industrial customers have to do that and so they would have to do that for these these data centers. With that I have these recommendations. Um one is to rescend the current director's interpretation and two is to adopt section 430. um being article 4 the the specific land uses. Amend section 313 to add data center as a land use under the industrial category. Amend the use table to add C for conditional use in the columns for light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing and adopt appendix A

as the approved landscape plant list. Now, next steps, I I left on there what we were planning to do, but it would be I believe it's May the 5th, uh, as well as May the 19th would be the next steps at city council for public hearings. First reading public hearing and then second reading and public hearing on May the 19th at city council. With that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. I I think public comment would be good and then we can discuss. Do you all agree? Yes. Okay. Can we open public comment, Ray? Okay. First up, Jeff Fischer.

Before we begin, let me um Oh, hold on. That's okay. I was going to say I have my timer, but I'm going to try to be quick. Um Jeff Fischer, single member, district uh 4, Paula neighborhood. Um, so as a concerned resident, um, I wanted to, uh, bring up some of the the things. I think this is an improvement in in many ways from where we were 3 months ago where we had nothing. So, um, kudos to everybody involved in that process putting these um, together. But unfortunately, because I only have 3 minutes, I'm going to try to stay on topic and cover some of those things. I passed out um, some slide some um, uh, the draft of the ordinance that was presented today. Um the light gray cuz I didn't have a color printer is uh marked up with my comments. So you can kind of follow through on those as well. Um I guess the first the first um part of this is regarding um the data center and the definitions. Um I think it needs to be clear that accessory uses uh I think this this is probably okay hospitals and offices. So, it just needs to be clear that the data centers are are an accessory use couldn't be a new data center that's 300,000 square ft on the same property as a factory that's a million square ft cuz that technically is accessory in the zoning ordinance. So, I think however you guys um clarify that I think that that one should be um looked at. Second thing, I think Mr. Mr. Venoy said it on record and that's great, but I think we just need to have the language under number two that um if a conditional use or a PD is required that not only do you see those um noise studies and lighting studies and but that those are put into the agenda packet and that um you're voting on those things. You're not just seeing them because there is a a site plan and a UDR urban design review process later. Uh, and again, nothing against staff, they do a great job, but um, you guys should be the ones to approve that and the public should be the ones seeing it, not kicked down the road to site plans.

So, I think it could just be a tweak in the language to say not just reviewed, but also decided on at at the meeting. Um, where are we here? So, uh, setbacks, I think the sweet spot could be 200. A lot of cities have I think 100 is is a bit aggressive. you I think we we either have to choose if we want a 75 ft tall building as well as a 25 ft you know mechanical equipment could go up to almost 100 ft then I think we need to increase the setback I would say 200 ft I don't see why the people in Harriet or any other ETJ get any less standard I mean they they chose to buy out there but there's they're the most affected by this a lot of us might be two miles down the street but they're right there so I think 200 should be for both I mean even 150 and then maybe look at the the the height restrictions. Um building configuration, I think, yeah, I I'll skip ahead of that because that relates to the height. Um the fencing materials, um there's already required in the zoning ordinance a 6ft high buffer fence between residential and non-residential. I think that should apply to the ETJ here as well, but here it's saying that they could technically use a coated chain link fence, which is not a solid screen. So, they have to solid screen it. The trade-off would be um amount of time. So, uh last thing I'll say is the noise 55 dB during the day as well. That's the Louden County standard um not 60. Everything else though should be should be clear. Thank you.

Thank you, Jeff. Great. Um Jamal Shumpert.

Um Jamal Shumpert, SMD3. I first had a question uh because I've been hearing people talking about we're going to lease the land and if that's the case would this be necessary because couldn't we write everything into the contract and go further if it was leased but even if we're not going to lease the land I was wondering if maybe you could put in a condition maybe to test the water uh actually test it to see what chemicals we be putting in it cuz if they're going to put it back into our system we might want to know what is what they're putting in there. Um, and if not, um, also when it comes to the buffer, uh, I agree it probably should be bigger. And why don't we require them to build us an orchard? Uh, you say you want to look at stuff off the highway and it it's a nice look and it's aesthetic and helps the nature, helps the animals. The animals will need food and they are in our city everywhere. The raccoons, the foxes, the deers. Um, maybe that'll drive them more towards that. uh with pecan trees and orchards. Uh that's really kind of all I had because once I heard that we was kind of leasing the land, I was like, uh we're going to make a zone for specifically for this data center uh and this everybody else is going to have to follow because it's this data center even though it might not be a data center coming in uh that wants to use this conditional type use. Uh, I was just curious about the lease really. Uh, thank you.

Thank you, Jim. Um, Edward Terry. Okay. Um, Jennifer Dendy.

Hello again. I'm Jennifer Dendy. I live in district 5. A lot of these ordinance changes I think are good, but I have the same concern is that what is the enforcement capabilities? What's the enforcement capability going to be on all of these? If if they build 75 ft and decide they want to add more square footage, where is the limit going to be? What? This is our chance to set the limits because there's going to be more and they're going to be closer in town probably. And this is our chance to really set firm limits on all these things on water usage, energy usage, square footage. When I think about how big the GTE building is on Johnson and you're going to have that only be 50 feet, 30 feet, that's that's a big building to be so close to the edge of the property line. Anyway, I just hope that y'all take the opportunity to make tight rules that are enforcable through something stronger than the code compliance. Thank you.

Thank you. Rocky Templan. Morning. Rocky Templan, single member, District 6. I think y'all were overwhelmed with a lot of stuff a month ago and here it is already a month later. So, I don't know if y'all have all y'all's answer questions answered or not. Um, but some of the ones I still have is the the height and the the distance. We typically annex a portion at a time. We build right up to the annexation. So I may have a 100 houses next to the the RTA and you're saying that they can build within 50 ft of that. And so because they're in the ETJ, sorry, and then my houses are all built right there. And so if anybody lives or had been out to Buffalo Heights, you'll find out if you're in the county and somebody builds a solar farm next to you. Well, that sound carries for a long way. So those decimals, I don't know that you can even see the studies on them without it being built or finished. And so 50 feet from residential to the ETJ is not very far. 100 feet is not that far. And so when it comes to the residential part, I think y'all need to protect it. You need to get it. There's going to be a lot of these. So, I think you need to get it right. I don't think it should just be the burden of the planning commission. I think there should be possibly a resolution where it takes two public meetings that the planning meets on it. Two weeks later, city council meets and two weeks later they have a second reading. Thank you.

Thank you,

Karen McInness. Hi Karen McGinness, 5225 Oak Grove Boulevard here in St. Angelo. I came today to get information. And I have to say that some of the opening statements about a moratorum make sense to me because the further I get into this, the more I realize it's sort of like you get a new job and they say, "Do you have any questions?" And of course, you don't have any questions because you don't even know what to ask. And it seems to me that that's really where we are right now. It also seems to me that we're all pretty much agreed the data centers are coming. Um, so what is the hurry? Are we afraid we're not going to get the first wave and we might miss out on something? I have a lot of questions. Um, the setback for instance. Um, I heard you talk about landscaping, but you know, you can put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. How long for that mature landscaping? I think you said those trees have been in place 25 years. I won't be here in 25 years. My 5-year-old grandson will be middle-aged in 25 years. the closed loop cooling system. Can you enforce that? And that water will be released at some point. So, I think testing is a really good idea because the Texas legislature is going

to put some guidelines hopefully in place in January. That's six months from now. What do we lose by waiting six months to see what those experts come up with? And finally, have you talked to the city planners? Have you talked to the residents and there are many all over the United States who are living with data centers who have been living with data centers and getting their feedback because I think what they have to say is the most important of all. Thank you,

Mary. Is it Darcia? I just came to a post about Good morning. I wasn't expecting this. I didn't say I would would talk or not, but anyway, I'm here and and I'm here to oppose the guest that data center. It would be nice. It would bring a lot of money but in the long run I think it would take a also a lot of effort and a lot of our water that we don't have and uh I may be understanding this wrong. I don't know. I never been to a meeting like this. I just watch all on TV on the news. But um I hope we make we're making the right decision. I think this is something that we all should not only us decide but direct the question to to our Lord to have a a safe city and a safe place for our kids and less problems and um I just hope I reach the right decision. Thank you.

Thank you. That is all of public comment that signed up.

Okay. So, we'll close public comment and open it up for discussion. Erin, what I did was um appreciate some of the changes that we did discuss and uh you made changes uh uh to the ordinance, but I still have some questions uh in comparing the old that we had uh to the new that uh came this last week or so. Um I see that we added um in on u applicability um not only the RS1, two and three but then we added the new four, five and six um in there the the ones that were um added last uh month

are proposed. Yes, proposed. And um I noticed they were added in there. So, we're talking about a lot of residential um areas that these could go in. Uh, one of my questions uh right now would be, see, I wrote it down. Do we have any of these now, small ones that we're not aware of that we know that we have a data center right now?

Yes, we have data centers within our community. They're not within any uh zoned residential areas. They they might be adjacent to residential areas. Two of them uh are on stateowned property and so regulations do not apply to them. Our local regulations do not. Um there's a few others. I mean, city hall has a data center because of what we do, but it's going to be an accessory use because city hall is the primary use and the data center to keep the city running, right, is the accessory use.

Um, these are for commercial style data centers. Um, whether they're for-profit, nonprofit, whatever, we have chosen to say, let's do a conditional use process, but there are some in town. Um, I do think, you know, we we started out with the proposal of 300 ft separation between residential and a data center and that's at the again at the property line. Uh, again, we also added an ETJ. We haven't found an ordinance yet that has a distance for the ETJ because there is no zoning in the ETJ. We we can't control what someone does or doesn't do out there, but we can control what's within. And if that property line is adjacent to the ETJ and they have a residential use there, then they have in this proposal a 50 foot. I think we had mentioned maybe it wasund 100 foot in the previous one. Um and so that

okay

well that was a discussion here at the planning commission. Um there was a discussion about that those were pretty extreme. Um uh the 300 and the 100 and so we limited that back to 15 and within the city limits that has a residential zoning and a resident or residential use or in the ETJ down to 50 if they have a residential use. Do we have any study or uh information from other places that have these uh about the noise? Uh there was something brought up by one of um uh the ladies that uh spoke about noise and my question is um do we know how far uh maybe Rocky might know how far that um noise verberates uh out? Uh is it 50 feet and you can't hear it anymore? Is it 300 feet and you can still hear it? Do we know?

So, our ordinance already limits noise from passing past the property line. Period. For whatever kind of use it is. Okay. Period. This says that that these are the levels that it can be on the property outside of the building. There are tons of studies for noise. I don't have any in front of me that I want to give a quote to. It says this, but on Wednesday evening, there is a town hall meeting that that will probably be discussed. Okay?

Uh and I invite invite all the public to go to that. Um but there are studies that are done. Our consultant that helped us with these um they went straight to their sound guys that do this all the time and these are things that are mimicked in some other ordinances around the country. Um, Virginia is one of those places and Virginia has the highest data center per population and we are putting those NRS here to to try and help mitigate the sound issues for neighbors. Uh, we anticipate this area to be very heavy industrial and of course we know even closer to town could be even very very heavy industrial. Uh, but we also want to mitigate those noise issues by setting an a here's the maximum it can be as well as the landscaping aspect that will help buffer some of that sound that comes from that facil those facilities.

Okay. Um, and of course we talked about the landscaping and I appreciate some of the changes making uh some of that a little more dense uh which would help a little bit more. Um, water is also on the minds of a lot of our uh constituents. Um, several people have asked me, "What about our water? What about the reclaimed water? Will this have um will the reclaimed water when once it's used, will it have um what is the word? uh any contaminants in it that we need to know about? Have you heard any report about um how that water comes out after it's used?

Well, I have I have not talked to any data center specific people

that operate data centers or anyone that's actually coming to our community. I I don't have any of that knowledge, but what I have done is talked to our water utilities director um and they have wal helped walk me through the water utilities ordinance and showed me the sections of where it's already been beefed up uh in our ordinance about industrial uses that are connecting to our wastewater and dis and dispatching wastewater back out. There's a laundry list of items that they must uh the um business must prove up before they can discharge that waste water. Lots of different things in there. There are there are you know minimum levels set that they have to have a a they can't go over this level and have that in the discharge whether that's the coolant water or other discharge from that facility. Uh, so those guys are the experts in that and I'm going to let those experts continue to be the experts. I I'm the lay person um saying, well, here's what it is in the water utilities. But we wanted to ensure in our zoning ordinance that hey, these are also rules. You have to abide by those in the in the utility ordinance so it doesn't get missed. Well, I know we talked about water in in the plan, and I'm glad you moved it or the thought is to move it to uh the utilities. Yes.

Um and let it be an ordinance out of their knowledge of their product that the city provides and and they have much stronger enforcement and supervision of what goes into our water, what comes out of our water. They're looking at that all day, every day. That is their expertise. And so, and I'm assuming uh Wednesday evening as we have the opportunity to um discuss this as a community um they'll be on stage as well as someone from the utilities I'm talking about.

I I believe they will be I know they'll be there for sure and I know that there will be folks that will certainly be talking about water and wastewater and how data centers impact uh communities in that way. And my last question for the moment, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, is there a moving factor for this to be done by May?

For my knowledge, no. Um, we know that we have data centers looking at us. And the longer we delay regulations, we have no regulations. And so if our community wants regulations for data centers specifically, they would we would want to move forward. Now in the state of Texas, the legislature in the last thing did a state bill that limits moratoriums uh whether it's for residential or commercial development. They've limited them that they have to be based on some evidence. There's a lack of resources or lack of something. And it's very specific in those those laws that talk about that. And then it says you can only do it for 180 days period. You can't do anything longer than that. Um Texas is a development state and we like to move forward, but we like to move forward informed. Um I know the folks that have been working on these regulations. We've been working since November um when we decided, hey, we need to start coming up with some regulations for data centers. Uh that applies to all data centers that might want to look at us moving into the city limits. Thank you so much, Aaron.

You bet. I noticed Aaron a lot of questions, concerns, comments is why rush? Why rush? What's the big rush? Um, my main question is is that if we're looking at adopting a and changing a zoning, why not wait until after the city council meeting where everybody can try to understand a little bit more on the certain questions and they don't feel as rushed? Well, that's a good question. The city council town hall,

we we have had two um discussion cases about data centers and data center regulations with city council that were open to the public. Um we know we're having another one on Wednesday night. Um we we have been working on these on the zoning regulations while others have been working on other things uh for data centers in general. Uh and that's what I want to really enforce is this is for data center data centers in general not for a spec specific one that may come in or may not come in. Um again I think the longer we wait the someone could go and buy land today and then they would have a vested right in doing what they wanted to do if they had the right zoning. Uh they would not be subject to these rules. And so

if we change the zoning, well, for those specific,

but they could they could choose to go and move into one of those light manufacturing, heavy manufacturing areas now. Um or they could just go into the ETJ and have no rules. Um and so part of it is is a balance between what is the best overall for our community um and how do we help mitigate some of the risks through zoning. There's other risks uh mitigation in other ways too um being water utilities ordinances and things like that but we're wanting this zoning is the most transparent process that's where you have the public meetings that's where you have those things and so this would be our fourth time to discuss data centers in front of planning commission and trying to move that forward at an appropriate pace um so that other business people can make decisions is I think very important Thank you.

So Erin, my question and this this answer seems maybe counterproductive or too easy, but um you know, I expressed at the last meeting that I would rather see more regulation than not. Um and I'll be honest, the last meeting was the first time that I was looking at those. And I've I've looked at them since then. I've looked at comments from those that have been working on these regulations. Um, I appreciate the time and effort and I I have now more questions just as like Mr. Templan said, you know, the the more you learn, the more the more questions you have. My concern, like you just said, is if we if we don't do something now that someone could put in a data center by right? Is there a way to just now say data centers are not allowed in these areas so that we continue to develop these regulations or maybe not even not allowed but will require a conditional use permit which would then have to come back to us so that they do apply with regulations. Maybe maybe we don't approve these today. We we continue to look at modifying those, but some put something in place so that they're not allowed by right. Right.

Well, the process to do that would be to require a conditional use, which is what we've publicized that we would be doing through this process. Right.

As far as the design guidelines, that's adding the land specific use. So, we have lots of land different specific uses just like short-term rentals, there's a land specific use for that. RV parks, there's a land specific use for that. Uh, frack centers, you know, frack sand haulers, there's a land specific use for that. And so, without having that, you really limit yourself without having any definitions, any guidelines of all right, what can they do and what can they not do. You just have a conditional use. And then one time it may be one thing, one time it may be something different. While y'all have the ability to look at our what is our public comments for this specific area? Similar to a short-term rental case today. You're like there's a reason why x number of people said no. Okay. Well, why they wanted to say no. Why would we say yes? All because they may meet the criteria doesn't mean you have to say yes. Um, and so this is a long answer to your question, but I think my recommendation is to move something forward for city council to hear y'all's recommendation on what we want to do and let them make the decision on do they continue to move forward or do they put the brakes on uh for something. Um, but I I would recommend making a recommendation from planning commission to move forward with something. My our staff's recommendation is to adopt a conditional use process, add the section 430, which is the specific land use under article 4, and then adjust the uh use table to put the conditional uses in the light manufacturing and heavy manufacturing areas. Not sure if that was a great answer, but that's my answer. Thank you. I

I I have a few comments. Um first, thank you Aaron. Thank you city staff, everybody that spent so much time on this and gone back and forth with all of the public comment, all of our comment, all of city councils. Um and thank you public for, you know, coming out and sharing your opinions and thoughts. I mean, super important. You know, if we hadn't have had all this comment, then we wouldn't have even thought that this was a huge issue for anybody. just like any other thing that comes up, you know, if if people don't talk about it, then we don't know. Um, I like the things that you've done. I like moving the water to utilities. I I think that's where it should be. I don't really think it has a place in zoning. I like the um the landscaping stuff that's been changed. Um, I guess kind of where I'm at with this is like we've talked about, if nothing is done, then anything can be done as far as a data center. That that's it, right? And the first step in doing something, whether we like it or not, is planning commission and then city council.

Correct. Like there is no city council does something and then it goes to us. It's always us in this instance and then them. So every time, and I say this in saying the person that I was big on delaying it a month and and pushing it. Um, but the reality is whether we like it or not, they're going to come here. I have some of the same questions as far as, you know, we have multiple 100 degree days. It's going to be harder to cool all the things. You know, we also have a lower population density. We have cheaper land. we have more access to uh utilities or you know power and things. So there's a lot of good, there's a lot of bad. I still have a lot of questions. I don't feel like my questions should stop some regulations. And I I'm a little bit different than Liz. I probably heir on the side of less regulations, which is fine. I think that's great that we all have different opinions up here. Um, but just hearing from residents and hearing from the city staff and everybody, um, I think we need to get something in place. And I know it's always a million times easier to do it right the first time than go back. I don't think a, uh, moratorum is the answer just because I think that there's some legal questions that I don't understand. And what I would hate to do is get the city in some sort of legal mess. I mean, that's the last thing that we need. That would be even worse than water usage and all of the other things. Um, you know, I like what's in here, 90% of it. I feel like y'all really took it to heart when we had so many comments and we had such a long meeting and and all of the things. I feel like y'all really did a deep dive. I I do feel like the first, you know, packet that we got last month was a little rushed. Um, not saying that it was. I feel like it was I

feel like this is a little more put together. Um I feel like it provides enough protection but not overstepping of that protection. I'm sure there's still little things here and there. I mean even the building setbacks and stuff just reading some of the comments and you know listening to some people like Rocky and things and you know looking at old solar farms and um stuff out in Buffalo Heights. Um that is something to think about. I mean the decibel levels I I have no clue about decibel levels and I have no clue to learn about decibel levels. I need somebody that's you know educated in that field to you know present the information. And I do feel like we've had a little bit of a lack of information but I feel like the city staff has has really tried to do a lot better and tried to present us with as much as possible. Um I think there's a lot of rumors, a lot of allegations, a lot of things that are spiraling. Um but the reality is the data centers are going to come to the area whether we like it or not. We with these regulations can decide do we want any say? Do we want them to be here? Do we want their tax dollars? Do we want to push them out? What do we want? And from a very zoomed out overview, I would say that I probably want them here, but I do want some regulations. Um, you know, I I would not be terribly opposed to just saying 100 foot for all residential even in the ETJ. Um, I I don't I wouldn't be super opposed to that, but um I would just like to say to other members here, I think that we need to do something today because I feel like that is for the betterment of the citizens. So that way we can then push it to city council if they determine that a moratorum or if they determine something else. I mean

I'm sure that you know they're probably a little bit more educated than us on this matter. Maybe not. Maybe I'm overstepping by that. But I I think that they may be. I think they've had a lot more information. Uh and I think they get the final say. I think that we need to push something forward even if we don't agree with 100% of it. Um, that's what that's what we're trying to clarify is where we have the questions. Sorry, turn off you're back off.

That's yes, that's where we all need to be educated and understand where where they might have that specific knowledge. That's where I think everyone's frustration is coming from or comments, rumors, so forth. Mainly the questions cuz I still like like Liz said, I had questions. Okay, now I even have a hundred more questions based on just getting some answers today. Yes, I agree. We probably need to do something on 50% of that. I feel like we're rushed.

I don't I don't know. That's I feel rushed making a decision that is going to be presented that I think we should have the public have some say and learn some more information on these specific setbacks and everything else which I do think I mean we're having a town hall and I'll be honest I haven't attended any of the town hall meetings discussing data centers but the one on Wednesday I will absolutely be listening to or be a part of um for knowledge perspective. So, I hate making a determination on this prior to hearing more from the public. Um, I agree.

What's Are there any are there any specifics that um that you're wanting to hear from the public? Is it setbacks? Is it I mean, cuz we have the strongest noise rules in there. Yeah, we have landscaping. We are going to have water, waste water. What additional things?

I think my concern is going to be the noise decibel, the the height of the buildings, the set the specific setbacks. I mean, you can go 50 ft, you can go 100. When people say, "Oh, we might do this or we could end up doing this." Unless it's specifically in an ordinance that says, "Hey, Rocky, you can't build unless you build this many feet back." Well, we might do that. that we might do that. I think by saying that the verbiage, the legal verbiage could be confusing to the public.

I think it's very clear in our ordinance that you must be if you're by residential, it's got to be 100 feet in the in the city limits. If you're in the ETJ, it's got to be 50 feet. It's very clear like you said on Buffalo Heights, you know, you're outside the city limits. 50 ft. You Well, there's no regulation there. They could be right on top of you. And if you're right next to the ETJ today and a data center goes into the ETJ, they can be right there on top of you. There's no separation. I like we can't regulate that. I think what you had 300 and 100 in the last Yes. Um

I I would rather be more restrictive than not. I mean, if it's 200 across across the board, whether it's residential or ETJ, um, I understand the ETJ is not as heavily populated, but if I'm that one land owner that's that we're talking about in the ETGA that's going to be 50 ft from, I mean, I would not be happy. Um, regardless of my house is, you know, set back because I have farmland. I just I think we need to have the same protections for everyone across the board. Okay.

Well, I agree. I I would want the 300 might have been too much when we discussed it last month, but the 100 to me is not enough.

Okay. So, um uh maybe the 150 to 200 inside the city limits and and we do want to protect uh the ET ETJ uh ETJ um as well. Uh I know today they could be on top of them, but 50 just doesn't seem like very much. Those are my comments. I would like to see them raised a little bit. Um, I would I would say at least 150 and 100. I don't know how else the commission feels.

I think another question I had Aaron just as far as more specifics um in the fencing. I see all the recommendations um which I have no problem with, but my question is when is fencing required? That would be up to them if they wanted to do fencing. To me, I think it's not a requirement as of right now because it I mean, you're talking hundreds of acres. Sure. And so, what does that mean? Millions of dollars.

Yeah. So, while there's a high probability that they're going to want security, and if so, then we want to say, well, this is how we want your fence to look. Yeah. I guess I would I would think that there should be required fencing if it abuts residential um development.

Again, you know, this is going to be a controversial opinion, but I just we're talking about this because it's unknown and because we're scared. That's the truth. We're unknown and we're scared as a community. Um, there's so many things that could come in in heavy and light manufacturing. So many things that don't have half of these restrictions that do 10 times more damage. I mean, if somebody wanted to go to the ETJ and create a 500 ft hole and dump toxic waste in it, the city couldn't say anything. Maybe the EPA could or something else, but um I just, you know, la last meeting we talked about a lot of things and um somebody said to some degree we have to trust the city staff and things like that. And you know I mold that over and I really wasn't a fan of of that I guess generic comment at the time but you know the more that I have delved into this you know the more questions I do have right because in the beginning it was like you don't even know what to ask you don't know what you don't know so I don't

and I I feel like such a a big decision and so many regulations and things. I just I worry I worry about delaying. I think it would be nice to have it after the town hall, but my worry is you know then we have a town hall and the town hall creates more questions and then the next month we have more questions. The next month we have more questions and then we do a moratorum for 180 days and then it comes back and then some some data center comes in and says you know what I'm tired of waiting. I want to start making some money. But it's our job too to actually know what we're actually putting in there and agreeing on so we can have questions and it used to be teacher there is no dumb question ever.

I agree. And I am not going to rush something because I don't I mean I I will have a question and I can ask him a question. and it's going to turn into 10 more and then I feel like I'm rushing everyone and I feel rushed and I would prefer to wait until after the town hall and if that turns into more questions all it does is educate us more I I don't disagree Linda I I don't disagree can I speak to the town hall meeting as to how that's going to happen so that is scheduled um uh of course where our public information office Sorry this is Rick Can you introduce yourself?

Yes. Rick W is with the city manager's office. Um, so the town hall meeting is, like you said, coming up and the way they're structuring that is they've uh allowed uh the citizens to submit questions. Those have been submitted to the office. After looking over those, we've got a lot. I I can't say that there's a lot of questions that are outside what you're talking about. It's typically these questions. Um the way that will most likely be structured is that a lot of the questions that pertain to the city which are you know water restrictions you know there's the 15 gallons per square you know it limits it there there's a lot of misinformation about that out there um so it'll it'll answer most of those questions in writing those will be in a question Aaron will do this sort of presentation which talks about this specific guidelines that that answer all those questions about water use noise all those things Um and then the uh the representative from emergent will be there to answer more spec specific questions that pertain to just a data center, how it operates, um things of those nature. So I I don't think you're going to get from what I've seen on the questions more than what you've already seen. Um a lot of that is just putting out the correct information. Um I don't I don't want to get into arguing whether I like a data center or not. This is about um if we're going to have one then how do we protect St. Angelo and how do we encourage them not to just go build outside the city limits and if you take no action continuing that's what you're encouraging. Um so I would rather set the guidelines and get those in place and and start the process. As you said, you may want to change these guidelines were just based on what you guided us from last time. So, if you don't like 100 ft, change it to 150. Change it to

200 and uh send that on. Like you said, council very well may alter those. They may accept it just like you have it, but they may also alter those. Um, but I think that it is time to go ahead and send them something. I guess we could ask council if they want to receive it with no action from the planning commission. Meaning that you weren't willing to make a recommendation. Uh they can also receive thing that that way. But I think y'all have given it already a lot of good guidance from your last meeting. So perfect that up a little more if you want and I would say send it on to council. Rick, before you walk off, um is there any reason if we have a consensus that the meeting on Wednesday that we could as planning commission could we meet Monday again having heard um the presentation?

Call for a special meeting? Yes. Um is there any reason we could not do that? the notice requirements would be the main thing. Okay, let me let Aaron speak to that. Yeah, ju just like last meeting when it was tabled, we'd have to go through the full renotice of the 1,157 properties to know um and go back through the newspaper notice. Have to go through the full process. Full process that what you can do is, you know, you're certainly welcome um after sitting through that to show up at the city council meeting to make comment. Um, so they certainly respect all of y'all's opinion a lot. So you could do that. Okay. Thanks, Rick.

Or contact your council member as well. You all are represented by one and you can tell them your thoughts is so they can reflect those. I I have a question about you know just conditional use and and really I guess more to put it on the record than anything but you know so what we are what we are voting on is a conditional use which is the same thing as you know earlier in the meeting we had a few conditional uses we had them about short-term rentals we had them about uh you know the retail sales and services and light manufacturing so you know what we're saying is any data center would have to come in to get that conditional use in here. There's quite a bit of information that they would have to provide. Now, let's say that we approve something. Let's say that council approves something and then they come in, you know, ABC data center comes in and they apply for a conditional use. you know, um I guess if city staff then approves that conditional use, how much power do we have to say, no, we we want to make some additional changes that we didn't already tell you about or we've learned some additional information, etc., etc., without being, I guess, targeting or without uh without being discriminatory, I guess. How much power do we have in saying those things after this is put in place or those conditional uses?

Well, the conditional use process, the city staff could make a recommendation to the planning commission if they've fulfilled all the criteria that is say approved by city council in the conditional use process. That would come forward to you guys. You all would be able to look at that and have a discretionary decisionmaking on is based on where it is in our community, based on citizens input around that, are there other protections, conditions that need to be added to that, or is this not the appropriate place and your your vote on that specific conditional use is a deny? At that point, the applicant could appeal it to city council and have it heard at city council. So, all conditional uses come to this board. Now, there is a special use process, but it's very similar to a resoning. It comes here and it goes to city council. Um, that is an option. Uh, making them just create a whole new zoning ordinance or zoning classification for them is an option. We think this is the best option because the volume of land that we have that's dedicated to light manufacturing, heavy manufacturing, and looking at other cities even within the state of Texas that allow them in light manufacturing or what they call heavy industrial areas, some of them require them are forced into planned development. Some of them require a conditional use. Some of them are allowed by right because it's it's literally storage of data. And if you look at our ordinance, that's where that fits. We've chosen to say we want some more protections or we think we want more protections. We hear that from our citizens. We're bringing that forward saying here's the what we think are reasonable protections for the citizens around where one of these might be. Um the details of well it needs to be 200, it needs to be seven trees, it needs to

be that's the hard stuff. That's the stuff that you get into the minutia of those things and what makes sense. But I echo many of what y'all y'all say. I mean, everything comes up with another question. Um, part of it too is like others have alluded to, the city staff and others have done their due diligence in trying to do the very very best for the city of St. Angelo. Uh, we're not going to agree 100% on all of it. I don't believe. Uh, and I that's okay, but I think we should move forward with a recommendation to city council, whatever recommendation that is from the planning commission members that are here.

Just echo what Erin said. The reason we set this up too is because we were hearing citizens say we want another chance. It's not just staff deciding. So that's this process gives that chance for them to come to this board and make comment and then to council again. So we're setting it up, we think, how people are wanting to do that. And Erin, that doesn't mean that once once say we approve this, the council approves it or makes a change and then it's done and six months from now we come back with public comment with problems and we can come back and say that 150 ft is not enough. Um, and we can make an amendment to this uh conditional use.

Yes, we could. And even in the conditional use process, you can do uh you could modify that distance because of the situation, maybe where it's located, you have some discretion of saying, "All right, well, our standard is 200 feet. Well, maybe in this case, we really need to be 300 feet." Now, you have to kind of be consistent of why that is and where, but yes. And then as far as the um Goodness, I just lost my thought. Hang on. Um, hang on. Somebody else totally just my brain.

Rick, you might you kind of spoke to this, but as far as the discussion topics on Wednesday, are people asking specific questions relating to these proposed restrictions or is it more just general we don't want data centers? No, it was it was sort of all over the place, but um a lot of them were these, you know, what how are we controlling water use? A lot of the things you've discussed today. And so I think those are are spelled out well in this document, especially as they've altered it um with the the water and so forth, but a lot of them are are city questions about these uh guidelines. And so, you know, this will be I think it's it's timed well. Well, I mean, yes, if it could have been before or not, but it's timed well in the fact that, you know, these are these are what we think is is is good and we're presenting those, they'll they'll be made public again during that meeting. Um, but then it gives council a chance to hear that as well. And so, if they choose to alter those slightly based on some comment, it's not like that's not doable. We're going to have two readings at council. So, I mean, there's still multiple opportunities to tweak that in areas that that may need to. I mean, it's seldom that, you know, this board ever has the luxury of getting things something so perfect when it goes to council because there's always more comment that's coming in. So, y'all really get to to do the due diligence on the front end and get it going. And so, that was a long answer.

What are the two reading? It's the 5th and the 19th. Yes. that the council. I remembered my thought. Okay. Uh and I wrote it down. Um just to confirm, Erin, what exactly in this that y'all proposed? What exactly would they have to provide in that conditional use? They would have to provide a site plan. Would they have to provide the uh noise studies and all of that stuff to us? or what in here would they not have to provide to us?

So, they would have to provide all of those items and we're able to put a clause in there if that needs to be very specifically spread spelled out. That's that's not a major issue to do that, but it's really where are the buildings and locations, where's that ground mounted equipment, parking, driving, circulation, sidewalks, what's the traffic impact analysis and and what does it mean? the fencing landscaping screening, the lights and phototric studies, the sound study, and now the sound study is going to be probably pretty generic saying yes, we're going to be able to meet this sound with this. The real sound study is once it's built and it's turned back in and then what does it really does it match what they said um building uh excuse me, elevations and materials and signage. And so there is an element of things that are kind of left up to staff, but that's the responsibility of staff saying our citizens care about this. We want to make sure we're doing it right for the citizens so that when we go and we evaluate those things, we bring them forward to you guys. This is a lot of work to get to a conditional use. Um it's it's a it's a heavy lift for them. Now, I think they're all going to be very interested and willing to do it. and we've talked, you know, the ones that we've heard from, this is not out of the ordinary. And so, we think they're going to come forward, do these things, give the transparency and the protection to the citizens so they can see that in the background information uh that a conditional use is coming forward. Um, and it's probably going to take us a couple of months to work with them to get all this as a finalized application before it comes forward to the planning commission.

And that conditional use when it's brought forward as an action item, right? We can approve it. We can or we can table it and ask them to bring back more information. Correct. That is correct. Okay. Would I be able to ask one of the individuals a question that spoke earlier? I think you just check with the chairman to see if you want to open up public comment for that. I think that's fine. Specific person. Mr. Fischer, can I ask you a question?

Um, I know you've done a lot of work on looking at these and have suggestions and comments and I know you also would like a moratorum. But my question is, do you feel that I mean, do you have the same concern that if we don't pass something now that I guess I'm I'm wavering on a moratorum or passing something now so that later if the conditional use application does come through and we need to rework some of those like what what's the lesser of two evils?

Yeah, this is this is tough. I I would say as a as a with a someone with a planning background and and but also as a resident that this is a tough situation and I think I appreciate all of you today, you know, trying to weigh the the different factors. Um, another option is you you could in theory if if if it's on since it's on the table, you could rescend the director's interpretation. That would be a legal question, but then Sky wouldn't stop Skybox. Of course, this if they're because of vested rights, I believe they wouldn't have to follow this anyway. They volunteered to, that's great. But that by rescending the director's interpretation, I believe would actually essentially stop all the new ones and leave it kind of in a gray area. I think if we're going forward though, um jeez, I I would say, you know, put something in here with the conditions. Um I wasn't I didn't mention moratorum myself. I know some of the other members are. I think initially just because we live in Paula, we're this is what triggered all this and we we only found out when it got to second reading. So I I think to to the staff's defense having or and what Shane said, having no conditions could be a problem and it could open the door for more of them. So I understand that. And to Candi's point, you could always make amendments to those conditions later. Even though I'm a fan of the greater setback, I think 200 was the sweet spot instead of maybe not 300 and maybe not 100, but even that too, somebody could come into the zoning board of adjustment and apply for a variance later to some of those setbacks. And so that would be reasonable. Um, so I think it's all up to you how you want to do it. I would be more in favor of the conditions. Um, but I don't wouldn't hold anybody, you know, none of you would be doing a bad job to say, "Hey, we're not comfortable with this either." I think the concern is the longer it goes on, the more of them could be coming to town. And so having something in place and then as a as a the other advantage is once it's there

and it's in writing, hopefully we can try to push Skybox to follow those on on Wednesday. So that would be my thought. Thank you for letting me speak again. Thank you, Jeff. Yep. Mr. Chair, um I would like to just go ahead based on even what Mr. Fiser just said. Um, I'm in the belief that we need to do something rather than sit and be open

uh to things happening that we're not going to like even more than we don't like the push that this has brought. But under setbacks for residential, um I would make a motion uh to our uh commission uh that the residential minimum from building setback instead of 100 ft to the nearest property line be uh 200 ft and residential

uh yes residential uh adequacy and that uh the property line of residential zone property in 50 uh 100 ft to the nearest property line of a residential occupied property. Okay. So, ju just to just to clarify. Yeah. So, like the front yard would be um the front side and rear would be the 200 for inside the city limits. Yes. And outside the city limits would be 100. And then is your motion is it a motion or just a comment? No, it's a motion. Okay. Is it a motion to do that and approve everything else as presented?

No, just making a little change tweak to this um u before we decide to Okay. I'm not making a whole motion. I'm making an adjustment motion. Okay. But we can consider that then. Okay. In the hole. But no one may approve it. I I would be I I would be in favor of that. I would rather see it just 200 across the board. I mean, I understand the reasoning for doing less outside the city limits, but to me, I think we should give the same protections to those that are in the ETJ as we are residential.

As maker of the motion, I have no problem with 200 and 200 uh based on the comment. So, she said that she didn't have an issue that it' make it very simple to be 200 f feet from residential whether it's inside the city limits or outside the city city limit and I would agree that that's not a hill I'm willing to die on. So uh all of the other things in this packet. Do y'all have any other You have a motion and a second. Can we vote on just that one thing? Yes. Or can we do we have to vote on the whole?

Yeah. It's kind of messy if you do it that way. I It would be more of a denial as presented and then Okay. It's It's kind of messy. Um I would kind of Well, this is presented to us as a hole and I'm making a motion to make a change in the hole. A recommendation maybe not a motion. Okay. Okay. That's how I see it.

So, we have the recommendation for 200 ft across the board for any data center conditional use of budding residential zoning in or outside of the city limits. Of all the other stuff in the packet, do y'all have any other recommendations for maybe a future motion from one of us in the near future?

I don't know how anybody else feels on this. I I I like the idea of requiring fencing when it abuts residential properties. Um because right now I mean I know there's suggestions on what what fencing materials may consist of and and all of that but there's no requirement for fencing.

So in saying that I have a question. Residential properties let's say you're outside of the city limits and you have a 500 acre farm. Is it split up by parcels or you have 500 acres and the house is on the same parcel but it's you know 483 acres away. Is that still residential use there because there's a house so far away or no? That is a challenge of trying to implement something with the ETJ. So with this image here, say you're on they chose to do something on this property

and this property here, say they have a residence over here off of this road. If that's all one parcel, that would be the property line that you're talking about. So it's by parcel according to the Tom Green County Appraisal District.

That is correct. Okay. And so if that parcel happens to be, say if it's 2500 linear feet, that's 2500 linear feet, they would need to they'd be required to place a fence. If we chose to apply it to the ETJ now, if this happens, say this dark happened to be a residential area, then it would be along that residential property line by the residential area. I I think that they will put a fence because they're building a multi-million dollar facility, but I don't like the idea of requiring one. And if they choose to um I guess not protect their asset uh by not putting a fence around it, I think that's their own discretion.

I would rather have more regulations and then come back and ask for something than not to like ask for a variance of it. And then you can always ask for not to have something instead of us adding more stuff to it. It just covers us, I think, a little bit more safely legally, too. Well, and that would be something you could look at easier as at a at a variance. I mean, look at the proximity or where it's located. That would not qualify for variance. Fencing fencing does not qualify for varian. It has to be a numerical number and there has to be a hardship. I mean they're okay.

Yeah. But I do think if your recommendation is well let's require fencing. I think that we can put that in the ordinance as a recommendation to city council. Let them make a decision on whether they want that or not. And the recommendation is fencing only abing residential area or residential used areas or is it perimeter fencing or is it Sorry, I just want to make sure that we're clear.

No, I see what you're saying. I mean I guess I mean I would say abuing residential areas I guess I don't know how much their interpretation there can be or subjectivity to that I think that's maybe what you're getting at. Um, and then I guess in my question of that, I I don't I don't hate the idea because my opinion is we have to move something forward, but um, are we talking about fencing on the perimeter or could they have fencing just closer to the property, the building? you know, let's say they have a a 300 acre parcel and it's, I don't know, 1,000 ft wide or something like that and their building is only 300 ft wide. You know, would we require perimeter fencing or could we require fencing just along the, you know, maybe 100 foot off of the uh building

because I feel like perimeter fencing could be very a great cost if it's a 300 acre parcel and there's thousands of linear feet. That that's my only comment is instead of doing something like that and having requiring them to spend money on something like that, you know, give and take, you know, if we give them, hey, you don't have to put in 20,000 linear feet of fencing, but maybe you should donate to here or maybe you should do this instead. I would like that more than saying, "Hey, you have to put in all this fencing." Comm Commissioner Albert, I just want to understand. So fencing, say if it was 8 foot or 10 feet tall, right?

What are we what are we accomplishing by the fencing that this broader band, not that we wouldn't have the broader band of landscaping, but what would we not accomplish with the broader band of landscaping as opposed to a perimeter fence that may be six or eight feet tall?

I don't know. So, I guess I'm just thinking I would rather have a if it were me, I would rather have a fence dividing separating myself from one of these facilities. It may may not accomplish anything. I don't know. I'm just I'm just thinking as a land owner that might be living next to one of these facilities, that would be my preference. And maybe I mean if it's not perimeter fencing, if it's somehow separating my property from the building itself or from the the structures themselves,

well, 200 ft is going to if we approve that, 200 feet is going to be quite a ways. There's going to be uh then the landscaping is required. Um you're going to have quite a bit of separation. I understand your thought about um a fence, but um do you want an 8ft fence uh in you know squarely in front of your face? You're going to because these buildings can be up to 75 stories. Yes, you're going to see the building anyway. That 8 foot fence or six foot fence

might not make much of a difference. Um I I think the 200 feet maybe helps a little bit more than But that's just a comment. When they come for the conditional use and they give us their site plan, could we then say, "Hey, you know what? We want you to put a fence here." Could we say that? You could add the condition of requiring a fence and where the location would be. I think the question is, do we require the fence up front? Okay. Or do we not require the fence up front? But if we require it up front, we can't take it away, right? because it's not a variancable item. You can't word it is now the word if you say it nonvariable. Yeah.

I mean I I would be I get I get what you're saying and that's if that's the way to potentially further restrict them is it has if it has to be on the back end then I would be okay with that. I guess you could always add the condition of a fence. Now, I think you could require the fence and at the conditional use say we really want the fence at the perimeter or we based on your

the way you have it laid out doing a right around the buildings is sufficient. Um I think you would have that option within the conditional use. That way you could still put it as a required fences are required. Uh part of this is really fences off the the a roadway of what is as you're driving by what do you see? Um but I do understand the property separation if it's residential. Um we're hoping most of these are going to be very adjacent to other industrial uses. That doesn't mean they would be, but that's that's kind of our hope of limiting to certain zoning districts within the city limits that we have control over.

I mean, I would hope so. If I was putting in a data center, I would want it to be far away from people who could complain. So far away from residential. Yeah. I Well, if you look at Flugerville, Huau, Round Rock, all of those have data centers now and they they're right across from apartment complexes and you talk to the city governments there. They don't have complaints. They don't have issues. I mean, they just work simultaneously and they're right up against industrial parks. So

could we word something to say um could we word something to say maybe not fencing is required but maybe not leave it open but say you know fencing is up to the discretion of the planning commission when you go for the conditional use. Can can we word it some way like that to so it's discretionary? Yeah we we will put in something in there about fencing will be considered at the conditional use in front of planning commission. Okay. Something like something like that. So they know that fencing is a requirement where and what maybe Yeah. And we'll still have kind of hey, if you're wanting to do it this way, here's some options.

Okay. So, in a in a motion, correct me if I'm wrong, what what Candy was implying is if we made a motion to approve this with an acceptance of two, what did you say? 200 200 feet for the reset inside city limits and 100 ft setbacks outside city limits. and also to include verbiage regarding fencing and planning commission in the future. Is that I do think they went 200 across the board. Is that right?

So 200 separation for residential across the board require fencing that will be um considered at planning commission at the Yeah. Are there any other Sorry, I'm talking I'm just thinking how you how we verb. Do y'all have any other comments on setbacks, building height, building regulations, parking, screening? I'm just naming off things. Sorry. Uh landscaping

under noise. I had a question. under number 11 under noise u down um noise B number five the way that reads I don't know who's paying for this within 60 days of insure is issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each phase or development and at any time the planning and development services director requests it a Post development sound study must be submitted. The study must be conducted at a time generally known for peak data center cooling operations. In the event the study shows that the use exceeds maximum allowable decibel levels, the operator must immediately undertake all necessary efforts to comply. My question is who's paying for this noise um sound study?

Is that for them to pay for them being the applicant? Yes, ma'am. They would they would do that initially. They would do the the pre-development and the post-development within 60 days. And then as it moves forward, if we request another sound study, it would be a split cost between the city and the developer to ask for that. That's correct.

Thank you. And for the public, let's say that you do abut one of these data centers and you do have issues with sound. How would they go about telling the city, I would like you to com, you know, to do a study because this is very loud or whatever that looks like, right? They would need to go through the normal complaints for any kind of zoning violations. So, code compian,

uh, code compliance would go and investigate, look at things, take some of their meters out there to see if they can determine anything. If we have, and there's nothing that says it takes one or 20 complaints at some point, if we're got uh consistent complaints, then we could ask for that of the applicant, say, "We need a sound study. we're getting complaints specifically in this area, uh, you know, adjacent to the property, whatever that is, and say we need to evaluate that and see if we need to have some mitigating risks. And could people outside of the city limit still submit complaints? No. Okay.

This may be getting too specific, but um, the maximum sound levels during the daytime and the night time, what's considered daytime? Is that 8 to 5? I think generally and and Holly might recommend usually it's 30 days be 30 days 30 minutes after dawn and 30 minutes before dusk is daytime and then it goes into night time. That's a pretty standard thing that um is measured by what's daylight and nighttime. So during the summer daytime could be longer. It would be extended. Yes. Okay. I don't know. Again, this may be too picky, but I would rather just that be between kind of like your testing hours here.

9 to 4. 9 to 4. I mean, I don't know if anyone else has an opinion about that. Well, that's that's to test during the daytime instead of testing at 2 2:00 a.m. in the morning. Yeah. Well, it it als it also says testing at normal times, right? So, if they're running at peak time during 2 a.m., then you probably want to test during then, right? As far as sound testing to see what they're they're emitting for sound. Yes, for sure.

Did you have a recommendation, Liz, that you want to change that or I mean, I don't know if anyone else has any. I just I don't know what the difference in five dB is. I think it could pot to me it would it would be like during working hours is the the higher level and then when everybody's at home that would just be my re recommendation if you just use the same or 8 to five or again I don't know if anybody has a strong opinion on that or not but guess we could have opin we could pick this apart and everybody could have opinions you know so

it's just a comment So would you would you sorry would you want to say 60 dB during working hours or do you want to put a time to it? Well, these are 24-hour facilities. Yeah. Yeah,

but we know our citizens for the most part, not universally, are asleep at nighttime and are awake during the daytime. And so that's the difference between them. So at night time, we want it to be a little quieter because you don't have birds singing. You usually don't have as much high wind that's during the day. You have some truck traffic at night, but not near as much vehicular traffic, and so you're going to hear other noises during the daytime. What is the difference between five decross the board at all times? To me, that seems we we can um Yeah,

that seems like that would be a lot easier to to have one. Again, I don't know anything about what this actually means, but So 55 is a whisper in this room. Okay. But I just feel like it would be easier to control. You're always at a 55 decel level. So 55 is whispering. Yes. So like this right here is 55. Yes. Okay. It needs to It needs to be 60. But again, these are at those property lines. Mhm.

We've already established there are some setbacks whether it's 50 ft against commercial and industrial or 200 feet against residential. That sound transference. Hopefully there's some landscaping there that has caught a lot of that and that it's not bleeding over. Now the proof is in the studies. What do those studies say? I agree. Is there much difference between controlling it at 55 or 60 daytime or night time? I'm not sure there is. Um,

and I have another question. Again, I I I hope that you don't think that we're just dragging this out for stuff, but um you know, they're going to submit studies before things are built, of course. And we can do a lot of things on the computer nowadays, but then when the building is actually built, we'll then do a study and say, does this actually comply? Yes. If it does not comply, they have to do everything to make it comply before they get a CO. Not necessarily. Uh they would get that within 60 days of their CO. They have to submit a study. Mhm.

Uh showing what they've done and then they have to mitigate those those issues because they have to be up and running for us to even tell. Yes. And they can't be up and running without a co. It's difficult to do. So then if they, you know, this is not me talking, this is me talking probably on behalf of other citizens or people that like more regulation. Um, you know, what is the process of revoking that co in a time frame of how long they have before they have to uh fix the problem?

Well, we'd go through the standard notification processes that we have for any zoning ordinance violation. If it's a zoning ordinance violation, we would move through those items. That could simply be issuing a citation. It could be that we need to come back and revoke the conditional use. It could be that we do other actions at some point. There could be a request for the city to ask a court for a cease and desist to say, "All right, you have to stop operating and we stop supplying water, power, whatever it is that can happen through the laws." But everything is just through the legal process at that point. Um,

or they could never comply and nobody could ever complain like all the other code violations, right? I I would say that everybody has um has the right to defend what they're doing um and come through the right channels and and present that evidence. The city could present their evidence and have the courts decide what's going on. Um, so fortunately I don't think we'll ever get to that point. I think we have actors that want to be very good and I think we're putting in place an zoning ordinance as well as other ordinances that will help mitigate these risks the best we can. Um, that that's that's our goal and our hope for our community.

Okay, any other comments? If not, I would like to make a motion. Okay. I would like to make a motion to accept, let me figure out how to word this, to accept the recommendations in this packet with the exceptions of a 200 ft setback for any abuing if the data center abuts any residential zoned property or used parcel. Okay.

In or outside of the city limits. So, 200 foot. Otherwise, it would follow the as presented, which I believe is whatever is presented. I'm not going to mess that up. Uh, and then that we change the wording in here for fencing to say that it is maybe at the discretion of the planning commission in the conditional user or however legal needs to, you know, word that. So everything is the same except for changing the setback to 200 f feet of budding residential and then the fencing that we may require fencing dependent on the site plan to be determined in the conditional use. That's my motion and I won't say it again.

Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. Do y'all have any comment on the motion? Okay, we'll take a vote. All in favor say I. I. I. Motion passes. 6. Now it's up to the city council. Okay. Uh with that, we'll go into the planning director's report. So Aaron, yes. I have uh 27 items to go over. And yeah, he's provided lunch.

No, no. I just want to remind just as we mentioned briefly that Wednesday evening there will be a town hall at the MC Mc MCNE Convention Center starting I believe at 5:30. Uh that will talk about data centers. There will be a data center representative there. Uh there will be city staff there and it's an official meeting of city council that will be hearing those items. Um there's no actions being taken, but it is a town hall and um listening and and hearing what people have to say. Okay. And when can people when is the cut off for comments on that? Aaron, you know,

I am not sure, but I would get on our city website um sangelo.gov uh and take a look at that uh and see if um where and how to there is a data center link right on the very front page that has lots of information. And I believe you go there. That's where you can uh look at submitting a question uh for consideration. Um go from there. It was over Friday. Okay. It was over Friday. Is over Friday. Okay. They can sign up for public comment. Uh you can still sign up for public comment. Okay. So you still can go and do public comment. Thank you'all for that clarification. I was not aware of that. So other than that, I don't have anything else to present this morning.

Um I do have one thing. Um we do not have the joint meeting tomorrow. So, do not show up tomorrow. Um, but you still can. I mean, you can still show up at city council. Um, we are requesting the joint meeting be moved to May 19th.

Yes. Okay. So, if that's all Aaron has there followup and administrative issues, the next regular meeting of the planning commission is scheduled to begin on Monday, May 18th, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in the East Mezzanine of the city hall at 72 West College Avenue, as well as the special meeting the day after on the 19th. And with that, do we have a motion to adjurnn? Make a motion to second. All in favor? I