Planning and Zoning - Regular Meeting

Very good. Good. Okay. Is 7 o' and I will call the meeting to order. We can have roll call. Chairperson Hefner here. Associate Chairperson Wagner McGee here. Commissioner Davis here. Commissioner Wford excused. Commissioner Willoughby here. Commissioner Villery absent. And Commissioner Mills is excused. We have a quorum.

Okay. Dear Lord, thank you for letting us gather here tonight to discuss the business of the city. Please guide us as we make decisions that do affect these citizens and probably the surrounding communities as well. Um please watch over us as we travel home. Help us get there safely. In Jesus name I pray. Amen. Amen. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to the Texas one state and indivisible. Do you have an update for us?

I do. The report that is given to city council is in your packet and it just outlines what the community services department did for the month of September. We had 247 total permits. Three of those permits were new residential homes. We collected $80,64926 cents in fees. We completed 231 inspections and we approved one final plat which was the Santa Fe villages plat and one plat and that was blessed acres which was four lots and one block one block and that was our major activity for the month of September.

It it's off of 28th Street.

Okay. It's going to be on a private road. There was a old well site that they're doing a family compound on. Question. Thank you for the update. So, we'll move on to citizen comments. Any person with city related business not on this agenda may speak to the commission. Time is limited to three minutes. In compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act, the Planning and Zoning Commission may not deliberate on the comments. Personal attacks will not be allowed and personal matters should be addressed with the city manager during normal business hours.

We have no citizen comments.

Okay. Move on to approval of minutes for the March 31st, 2025 special joint meeting, July 1st, 2025 regular meeting and September 9th, 2025 regular meeting. I move that we approve the minutes uh from the March 31st uh 25 to July 1st 25 and the regular meeting on September 9th.

Second roll call or just Yes. One second. Okay. Uh, chairperson Heapner. Yes. Associate. Chairperson Wagner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Davis, yes. Commissioner Willoughby, yes. Commissioner Villery, yes. On to the next item of business, which is old business. Discussion and direction. Review of proposed RFQ for changes to the unified development code once for take care.

We'll just do item one. Okay. Okay. Got it.

I only got through a part of it. I'm sure Maybe he has some comments. Well, I think we've we've already discussed them. Um for page, we're talking about the Iowa the Iowa. Yeah. Um yeah, other than what was in there, we had already discussed them. The items on page five and six. Hit us with all your purple marks. Go ahead. [Music] Tell us what page you need both question. So introduction.

Okay. So where is it where the like the second sentence or the second line where it says specifically including the update to and incorporation of the subdivision ordinance and zoning ordinance. I mean we're not going to update they're not going to update the subdivision or No, we're just doing we're going to update it. They're going to incorporate it into ours. Right. So theirs operates under one chapter altogether. Ours operates completely separately. So the only thing that they will be doing is just the zoning ordinance and then we're handling our subdivision ordinance on our own. So that just needs to be removed there. And y'all may have already taken that out. Yes.

Okay. So where appropriate it's being amended to comply with what we're doing. Correct.

Okay. Um the next same paragraph I was asking it talks about a zoning district and use regulations, site development. I was wondering if we should include things like uh including sidewalks, parking, lighting requirements, or if the site development and design standards if that language is encompassing or not. Should we specifically spell out sidewalks, parking, lighting? Just a question. We can make it encompass whatever you guys want to. So, if you feel like it would be better for us to break it down and say that design standards are going to encompass sidewalks, lighting, and all of the things that the corridor development standards cover. We can absolutely do that so that they fully understand what we're expecting from them.

It's a good idea. Yeah, because otherwise it's like you have a certain standard then it stops as soon as Iowa Colony starts. It seems like there would be that's better to do it how she said because then we would have there wouldn't be any questions. If if we don't do it how she's suggesting, would it increase the probability that they would show up here repeatedly to try to get things or or that we wouldn't be able to, you know, say if they say if the sidewalk was a requirement or whatever, but we didn't put it in specifics for them.

But this is an RFQ for someone to take a look at our zoning ordinance and review it. I just want to make sure that they know we want to review certain. This is not for like the public to come in and request sidewalks or No, no, no, no, no. Yeah. No, I'm not. Okay. Yeah. I don't know where they'd get the funding for all that, but No.

Yeah, we can we can break it down. And then the next paragraph I would like to add um past the semicolon where it says are easily understood by administrators are easily communicated and understood. I want to make sure that we're able to communicate that or they're able to communicate it to us. And then I'm assuming you're going to take out all the subdivision stuff after that.

Yes. And then additional background. Do we have a um on page four, do we have a proposed paragraph on that? I haven't tweaked any of our stuff in it yet.

Okay, I'll just send you I mean I can Well, let me just read what I have that we currently have an estimated population of and I put 13,238. That's from 2022 because I don't know what it is today. With an estimated growth of 0.7%, this all came out of the comprehensive plan. I was just trying to summarize it. Um, Santa Fe is located in Galveston County is currently owner dominant 75%. Um, with the current median age of 41.9, Santa Fe is an older, less diverse city with a median home value of 191,600. And then I thought maybe we could include the vision page from the comprehensive plan because that basically tells us that we don't intend to become the fastest growing city. We want to be careful with our growth and blah blah blah. So I just thought we could incorporate that vision as part of it. I know it's in the comprehensive plan but kind of want to reiterate it helping us. They need to understand what

right we're not planning to you know win the long you know slow and steady right um the diagnosis of the UDC unified development code the current link that we have on our website says final draft is there a link that has the comprehensive plan on it there is one however when you try to click on it for whatever reason, it fails. I don't know if it's because of where it's trying to link it to because it goes to something that Rudy had it linked to. I don't know if the link is so large that it dies when it tries to go there.

I can open the comprehensive plan, but it says final draft. So, I don't draft threw me off. I mean, no, that's what we would I think it wouldn't it take too long to load the comprehensive plan. I thought it was adopted. It was. Oh, final draft. It means that's the final version. Okay. I I guess I see draft and I'm like we're still temporary. Yeah. When I when we're doing legal documents back and forth when it's the final thing, we say call it the final draft, but it means final version. Okay. Yeah. I I did not take it that way. That's how we use that going back and forth. But you could open it. Yeah, I opened it.

Okay. because it sounds like it's not the actual I mean it's not like if it was a legal document. I it's draft just threw me off. That's why I was asking. But no, I I opened it. I was able to look through it. Yeah, because it's it's at several different points. I tried to send the link to somebody and the link failed, but I'm glad to know it got fixed. Well, now I don't know if you sent it to me if I could open it. I went to the city's website and pulled it from there. And I had people where I was directing them were saying it was failing, but it must be something they could be blocked on their side. Like when I try to say like if I was opening it for work, it would be blocked. I couldn't do it. Okay. So, okay. Something in whatever they're on is blocking.

Is it is it on our like is it stored on our server, whatever website hosting or is it like I don't want to start lying to you. I'm not sure. Okay. I was just making sure that it wasn't still with the company that did that. It's linking over. It's on there. It's on their server. Yeah. Yeah. If it's being blocked, it's something to do with the person's opening it. The person that's opening it, their PC or whatever system. Okay.

Okay. I did not like the entire paragraph where it says comprehensive plan and associated long range plans. Um I don't know. I'm neither here nor there on that. Um, page six, permitting coordinator. I don't know if we have one of those, but we probably have you, community services director.

Page seven, um, second paragraph. Uh I just changed city engineer to city staff and PNZ commissioners. So the consultant team selected um to prepare the updated UDC is expected to work in a coordinated and collaborative manner with city staff and P&Z commissioners. I wasn't sure. I guess to me city staff encompasses like a contracted engineer. That's what we're still doing, right? Yes, ma'am. Contracting with an engineer. So, I don't know. Neither here nor there really. Where you said six? Are you on seven? Seven.

That was page seven. Sorry about that. Um, just a question. We're not going to allow submittals via email or facts. Is that correct? Correct. That's what this says. Yes.

Okay. Um, and then on page eight, the final document adoption. I was wondering if in the first paragraph if we should include the SFEDC. Um, says the adoption process will include both the planning and zoning commission and city council and potentially other boards and commission such as the parks and recreation board, the zoning board of adjustment. I was wondering if we should include SFEDC, if we were going to try to include WCID and DD1. I don't know if you know they're a separate entity, so I'm not sure how to We still need to work with them though.

Well, any consultant teams will be working with them. Correct. That's what this is for though, for a consultant to Right. So wouldn't it I think it would make sense to list them. I would I would hope we would they would know that we need to work with them because we don't provide water and sewer. We don't do drainage and they may not know that because some cities provide

their own water and sewer. So on the submission response and deadline. This is just a a question. It says submit one original and three hard copies, but we're requiring eight over here. I don't care how many they get. Just make it the same.

Pick one. Make it the same. [Applause] I prefer less paper. Yeah. Yeah. I think the days of more paper. So

So why are we not accepting it via email? Um, in the past people have not sent a hard copy and when the bids are sent there is a question of whether something was sent ahead of time and there was knowledge of what the price was going to be and then that was shared and someone submitted a lower bid because of what was sent ahead of time. So if everything's sent sealed, all the bids are opened at the same time and there's not any question as to what was bid when and who saw it when. Yeah,

I've actually disqualified bids for sending them via email. Well, now that you say that, whenever we submit bids, there's a system that you will submit them to to keep that from happening. I wasn't thinking just Yeah. regular roll. I'm going to email this to Georgia. I was thinking there would be a system, but then we would have to pay for that. It would be an additional expense. Yeah. Okay. Okay. On page 18, it's just a question about um a withdrawal notice that's received after the deadline shall not be considered. We're not going to let them withdraw if they want to. Is that what it meant? Or did they mean it says if you submit your

withdrawal of responses, any response may be withdrawn prior to the scheduling time for opening. Notice to withdraw the response must be in writing and submitted to the city prior to the scheduled time for opening responses. Any response withdrawal notice which is received after the deadline for receiving responses shall not be considered. Seriously, if they withdraw, bye. I mean, I don't want somebody working with us that doesn't want to work with us. I don't Is it is it because it disqualifies them for some sort of later thing or I would what if they were trying to withdraw and then resubmit a different bit? Yeah, that's Don't you think that's the purpose of that? Something to

Well, you wouldn't be able to resubmit if it was already the deadline. I don't know. I just thought that was a little humorous. There must have been a reason that's there must have been. But I'm I'm you know I don't like you said they would would draw to bed then afterwards Okay, here's one. What if you had your friend buddy that submitted a response um to for an amount that was and then you drew it and yours became the highest bit. Yeah. I mean there's that has to do with some kind of Yeah, you can finagle. Yeah, it's some kind of finagling. My brain doesn't work that way, so I can't. It has to do with somebody.

It's too complicated if somebody cheated the system and you got this in there. But if somebody's going to cheat, like I mean, I don't really want to work with them anyway. Yeah. But you wouldn't be working with them. You'd be working with the buddy. They got the buddy to do it. Well, they're both cheaters, right? But you know that has something to do with somebody cheating. It happened somewhere. I'm sure if there was a reason for it, I'm just like it's like that notice on the coat hangers that say do not swallow. Yeah. Yeah. Coffee hot. Okay.

Very good at this day and time. That's I think um the gist of what I had other than you know just Galveastston County, not Harris County and things like that, you know, normal stuff. Anybody else have anything different? Oh, is the city attorney going to review that proposed agreement, the the actual contract? I mean, I don't know all that legal stuff. They need the city attorney needs to review that. I looked at it and went, "Nope."

After they review it, will he present it to or give it to us to review? and then we okay it or how does that work? So, I'll put everything together. Um, have you guys double check it just to be sure I didn't miss anything that we've gone over. Then we'll send it over to him and then we'll put it out for for bid. See what we get back and go from there. Oh, well. So, we're going to put in the WC. This one took me a little bit. I think she could get her her marked up copies, right? Oh, well, not all those probably. But and just a little funny note on page 23. Janet, don't.

If y'all look at number three, city responsibilities, I had to look up that word and then I determined that it meant possession. First paragraph under a was like what? Do you see what I'm talking about? Three cities responsibilities. A you said page 23. Page 23. Not isn't it's not three city responsibilities. Uhuh. My page 23 doesn't look like that. So what document are you reviewing? They deleted the word. Go in the back. Half all the way to the back. I was like there's another page 23.

Oh the document that we were sent last time. Yeah. There's my page right look like that either. She's talking about the Iowa. This is I was looking at Oh, well, okay. So, it was a little confusing in what I had copied and what I got off the off the electronic version. Here's my Oh, cuz remember when I printed it didn't That was weird. So, anyway, it's under number three, city responsibilities on attachment after attachment C. Oh, okay. I don't know if you'll have that. Yeah, it's page 22. 22. The top part. Anyway, so

I actually looked up that word because I'm like, "What the heck does that mean?" And it's supposed to be possession. I think it was just kind of funny. Yeah, it does. He's like, "Nope, don't go there." Wait, what? I'm missing it. I'm always slow to get the joke, so I Well, I don't know. I just didn't know what the word was. Can I see what you're looking at? She's talking. No, I've just got enough. Okay, come on. Pass it over here. We don't have to say I'm like I mean, you know, I have to I have to Google a lot of words because I'm like I'm not real, you know, familiar. But that one just

Oh, there it is. They must have corrected it by the time we got it. Ours don't look like that. It doesn't. NO. WHERE DID THAT COME FROM THEN? I got it off the electronic off the I think somebody sneezed and hit the wrong page. That's so weird. Auto correct. So where did I get I got it off the electronic one that you sent last time. Maybe that's when I tried to convert it over for I don't know either. I don't know why I reviewed them. We go now. Okay, moving on. That makes me wonder like what else is in there. Well, George will fix it.

Just She's just testing you to see if you're paying attention what you're reading. Yeah. Oh, goodness. Okay. We ready to move on to number second item? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Discussion and direction. Review of chapter 8, subdivisions of the city of Santa Fe, code of ordinances in accordance with chapter 8, subdivisions, section 3.4. 4 amendments. We going over sections one through three. Send it guys. So,

do you have Yes, I have it. I was just going over your highlights of that. Yeah. So, do you want us to go by like paragraph by paragraph or we going to go person by person? What do you want us to do first? I go parag paragraph by paragraph. Okay. If anybody's got something in that. Okay. So, for the um 1.1.2 2 at the end where it says orderly growth and development. Can we add the vision statement what she was just talking about from the comprehensive plan so we have a better understanding that makes three places that we have this vision statement.

Where's the second one? The comprehensive plan. Comprehensive plan. The place where you said earlier and then here. Yes. And then here that'll be three. Okay. I'm tracking that. Yeah. where it says orderly growth. Just have the vision statement added somewhere in there. Okay. Anybody have anything for three? I just have a question for urban means high density. Is that what we want in there? No. It says under 1.2 purpose, it uses the word urban. What? Three different times.

1.2. Some division of land is the first step in the process of urban development. Oh, so we're on to a different paragraph. Oh, I'm sorry, Wendy. Thought we were on that page. We are. We're right here. Say your says something different again. Okay. Yeah. 1.1.2. Sorry. That's okay. Hold on. We'll let you do that section. Get there. Okay. Okay. So, if anybody doesn't have anything additional, we'll go skip down to 1.2 purpose. Section 1.2 purpose. Do you have anything else? Any what? Anything else? Um just that part about what you had talked about where you have written the water company and Yeah.

Um that's under 1.14. No, that's okay. Go ahead. Um Okay. So, Jenna, you didn't got me all mixed up. I'm sorry. 1.2 the purpose. The part about Yes. Okay.

And the part where she said at the bottom about how it talks about urban area, the conditions of health, safety, economy, and amenity that prevail in the urban area. Do we still want to use the language rural? What what would that is there a legal implication in I guess not

well a lot of the city is urban. Can we put urban slash what would qualify as suburban? Like suburban is what's outside of the city limits. Okay. So it's not a suburb. It's not based on like population or urban is when you have I think I just want to be in denial that we're well this you know part of it is rural and part of it is urban urban. Can I do quick urban? No, I don't think you can do

I wouldn't do both. It was just a question that I wanted to to throw out there because I wanted to make sure that maybe we should choose a different word or when it says in the very beginning of this 1.2 purpose, it says the subdivision of land is the first step in the process of urban development. So anytime you're taking your land and subdividing it, you're turning it into something different. Yeah, I think urban is a pro and maybe urban is not meant to be taken offense to just because we live here and we like it the way that it is. Okay, just checking.

I think that's appropriate. Next.

No, I was just reading that that what the purpose is to implement goals. It It's the same thing. It's listed in the same twice. See this right now. I just got done telling these regulations provided by the city's orderly growth and then it says the same orderly growth. It's just kind of

but I don't I don't know if that's why it's written like that. I didn't have any issues with any of the vocabulary because that's just I have lots of them. Do you go for it? We're at All right. Let me see. I'm still on page five. My five. This one's the same.

Um I got Okay. Only thing I'm um the base uh base flood you know if the flood is having 1% chance of being uh equaled or exceed ex exceeded in any given year we're having more of those. Mhm. True. So but that's a topic bigger than our sub division or you change the definition. Yeah. So we can't change that. It's fedally regulated as identified.

When when was this was this done? When did they redo the FEMA thing? Uh 2021 19 19. Okay. So the definition doesn't change. The map will change. Right. They don't they don't change right what it means. We draw the map based on new information, right? So we go from the 500 year to the 100 year or whatever. What's the next step after I guess is there one is 500 year then 100 year and then I think it's once a year. I don't know.

Okay.

Okay. Um, so mine I'm still in the first paragraph and after in the fourth sentence where it says natural resources. So we're going to protect protection of its human and natural resources. And then I was wondering if we could put something in there about natural features such as large trees, water courses, historical spots, similar community assets which will add attractiveness and value to the property shall be preserved unless such preservation results and an economic penalty of such magnitude that the development of the land is unfeasible. Just trying to preserve

preserve the character the natural features and the character of Santa Fe. Yeah, I like that. So like a tree like a separate tree but not trees. Well, but it's not something that's definitive. Give you the give you an example. Um the trees on forget what street it is over there in uh Robert Rangi Park on that one street down where you've got street and all those the canopy and all like that

those streets have been here for centuries and I think you know I'd hate to have somebody come down and cut them down you know just for the sake of cutting them down but that's not going to be subdivided more more than likely because it's already That's true. Yeah. Okay. So, this would have to be larger lots that

So, I think there is something that can be put in place where if you do take something down like that, then there's some kind of penalty that can be put into place. If you don't either a go around it, b relocate it, or c if you pay the penalty, then that tree can either then be relocated or the fee can be paid to plant that tree somewhere else. I think city does it. They have one, I do think. I don't know exactly how it reads, but it would be worth looking into. Yeah. So, that would be a separate regulation. Then

I I'll look at their subdivision ordinance and see if it works into that. But I do think that there is a whole separate tree preservation ordinance and it may just be specific to the historic sorry the historical area.

So I guess would we have to specify if that needs to be certain areas? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You just have to put some parameters on what what did the part that you say about economic impact? Well, I just said natural features such as large trees. Da da da da. Did you get that from the conversation? Will add attractiveness and value to the property or we want to keep that right unless such preservation results in an economic penalty of such magnitude the development of the land is unfeasible.

Right. But who gets to determine who gets to determine what the penalty is? Like if I if I'm developing this property of course as a developer that does it have I think it's specific. Okay. Yeah. And I don't think this part being purpose is more like enforcing it. I think it's providing guidance like hey try to try to keep the trees and all that kind of stuff that you know is character to Santa Fe. This is what we we like. I don't know that it's necessarily requirement until we put it in something else.

I'm just going to close with a couple development deals and there have I'm pretty sure it's leak city and they've got something pretty specific. If the developer is going to they've got to pay a penalty, it's got to be relocated. There's there's some specific things in there that makes it to their advantage to either pay the penalty or move the tree or correct, you know, something like that. Yeah, that would be the enforceable part of it. This is more like guidance. and not not hardcore. You know, you have to do this. Yeah. And I'm kind of like the developer will run all over you if you don't put something specific something specific in there. Absolutely. I Right. And I'm not I appreciate that you want to guide them, but you have to say this is the first piece of it. Okay.

This is guiding them. Then you would put the enforcement teeth into it. Okay. Wherever else it needs to be. Okay. So when when a development whether it's separate or part of this. Okay. do whatever to I just say we just look at what they have and see how they put it and where they put it and it could be no reason to create recreate the comprehensive plan and address that hunt down the dealerships right there in Lake City I think what they're saying if I'm not mistaken on the right hand side they cut down some trees they weren't supposed to cut down and they had to cut up

and so then that's the responsibility of whoever the plan the engineer or the it was one of those deal it was one of those dealerships read through all well big horn cut down some trees I didn't yeah when somebody comes in for was it from before that in like specific cut all the trees down then they get information. They get the development requirements, any subdivision requirements that go with it. So, they get an entire packet of information and like um then they do the drawings and bring them to us for approve or not.

Yeah. So, I I give them the entire packet and say, "Here's all of the information that you're going to need. You have to do your homework. Now, this is on you going forward." So they're respons I give them all of the tools and then they're responsible for getting it all together and bringing it back to us. Kind of encourages people to be use local people because the local people are going to be more familiar with not have to keep reinventing the wheel. Yeah. Okay.

Next. Um then I was wondering if we could add this is probably redundant but in the general definitions that first paragraph um just terms not defined herein shall be construed in accordance with their customary usage and meaning in municipal planning and engineering practices. I don't know if we need to say that, but I mean there's going to be terms that we don't put in here that we're going to have to because we're going to overlook some, okay,

that are going to need a definition. [Music] I can I go on? Mhm. Okay. Then I was wondering if we should define certificate of occupancy. What it is? What? Certificate of occupancy. What age?

That's defined under the construction. The permits like under the regular ordinances portion. The certificate of occupancy is defined because it's also got the um temporary certificate occupation. It's not on there. That's what I was saying. Should we add it in there? So, you're saying it's in the regular code of ordinances. Uh I think it's like chapter 3 under construction. So, it's not going to be in this section that's printed out, but in our

but we didn't say that the articles except the zoning ordinance are included. We didn't say any other definitions would be that says it should be noted that the definitions contained in article two of the Santa Fe zoning ordinance are incorporated as a part of this ordinance by this reference there too. It doesn't talk about any other code being adopted. Maybe that's what we should do is go back to the other one then because I mean it's not in the zoning definitions. I don't think unless I've overlooked it.

No, I mean in the like under our code of ordinances. The building code. Yeah, our building code. It's under our construction definitions. It's got the certificate of occupancy and temporary certificate occupancy listed there.

Okay. But we haven't adopted that in this subdivision ordinance. So I wonder I mean does it still apply because we're giving definitions here in the subdivision ordinance. We are adopting the zoning definitions by reference but we haven't said we're using any other definitions. I don't care. Wouldn't it just be easier to just say for any other definitions included just reference XYZ? Okay. Then I was wondering if we should define an amended plat, a development meeting, a culde-sac, if we should go into detail about easements, if they're access easements, aerial easements, utility easements. I don't know if there's a need for that or if that just encompasses everything. If that's good enough. Um, [Music] what about any stuff that's typically kind of more rural? that needs to cover everything. Okay. They were defined in um other subdivision ordinances. So that's why I was asking the access I think would be good to add in there. Um because I have come across several where we've had access to landlock

properties, but then we've also had access strictly to pipeline. So that just a couple different things that I've run across that probably Yeah. There's just several types of easements and so I didn't know if it would and I think we may have to revisit this after we get completely through the ordinance because I don't remember what all is in the ordinance and maybe we have it right. Yeah. No, absolutely. And that's absolutely why I started out at the beginning with this is going to be a process that we will

go through with a labor of love. I have no idea what this note means. Tracked. I think we need to There's several places where track is mentioned. T R Act C. Is that not a word? It's a word. It is a word. That's att tract of land, but we don't have it. Oh, means a parcel of land. Yeah. Do you think I mean are you supposed to be defining every word or just the words that are specific to like in this particular case um where did I just see it? Um

you can't define every you can't define everything. But I mean seriously a sidewalk we're defining a sidewalk. Oh I see what you're saying. We're defining a sidewalk, but we're not going to attract land. So, either we need to get rid of some of these definitions. I'm just trying to come up with the ones that are used most often that you know, like I know what a certificate of occupancy is. Most people probably do, but I think you can look up some of it. I mean it just

that's why I want to put that note in there about terms that aren't included here or the normal municipal planning and engineering terms. Mhm. That way if it's not covered,

would it maybe just kind of be terms that are considered like if a a Yankee was to come down here or something or a northerner person come down here and be like, "What is that?" You know, because we have quirky terms. I mean, I guess they do, too, but I don't know. I mean, most of them are pretty I don't know. I didn't know what a stream channel was, but um and in subdivision, it's kind of vague. Division of any lot, track, parcel of land into two or more parts. So,

I think that term gets everybody shook up when you use it because they think subdivision means a 50. Yeah. Mhm. But I mean, what if it's just a division of ownership? What if they're not going to sell it or develop it? What if they just want to transfer it to a kid? It's still a subdivision, though. But it doesn't say that. It could be. What do you mean it doesn't say? Division of any lot, tract, or parcel of land into two or more parts for the purpose of sale or building development. M yeah. Does it say anything about just

renting, leasing, division of ownership? Yeah, my neighbor did that. Um I don't know. I just think that could be more clear. Or even for tax purposes. I mean there's a million reasons why you I think the division of any lot for any reason into two or more parts but it says it it doesn't need to say purpose but that's what it says for the purpose of sale or building development. That's what it says. I think that's what gets everybody shook up because they see the where it says subdivision and then they don't realize that you could be doing something different with it.

Yeah. It's like I wanted to subdivide it and give this one to my kid and this one to my kid. So then say delete two or more parts. Uh yeah, and then stop it there. But you're giving it to a kid and later it's going to be sold. I mean it just the it becomes a separate it becomes a separate lot that can be sold later. It can be you know whatever. So it's just because you're giving it to your kid doesn't mean it's going to stay that way. No, it's not going to stay that way. But you're still going to need to subdivide it if you're going to put it in somebody else's name. But that's not what this says.

I have seen the further definition that explains by meets and bounds for designation to another individual or for sale or even if you have it as a larger lot, you can split it into two lots. So we may look at something. I just think it needs to be broadened because it when for purpose of sale or building, you know, and that's it. No, it it's more encompassing. It's just division of land and I I think it's for building development or division of land tax without anything to do with about sale my neighbor. But you got to leave it for development, I think. And well, it is for building development. It is for sale.

Yeah. But it's for other things as well. But I don't think you need to put necessarily have sale in it.

One one that I ran across that would the people had built on one piece and they had done a meats and bounds division and the people had been using it for the last 40 years just for hay. And that's the only way that anybody that's been alive has ever known that was that it had been divided for hay. So when they got ready to sell it, they were like, "Oh yeah, it's been divided." Well, it was a big fight when they got ready to sell it because it was all one parcel and needed to be platted, but they had only ever known it as two parcels of land. And so, it shook everybody up when we had to plat it because it had been two separate par parcels of land and had only ever been a mess and bound subdivision. So, that is very confusing for people when we have to go through that process. I'm not anybody's favorite person when we have to have that conversation,

but it is something that we have to do to be compliant. So, I think we either need to expand on this or take out for the purpose. Yeah, it's just the dividing lots, whatever. I think you could just Yeah, because my my neighbor did it for tax reasons. Um and then the man who was on the other part, uh he died and he had a trust. So, Yeah, they did it for tax reasons, not for they didn't sell it. They didn't do anything with it. It just sits there kind of a way.

And that's fine if they want to come do it. But when people come in and we tell them they have to do it and they're like, "Well, I'm not going to sell it or build on it. I just want to give it to my kid." Like or he just like in his case, he just didn't want to be taxed at the rate for the two different things when you're talking about the tax office and doing a plat. I mean, I have four acres and when we bought it, it was three different tracks. Well, when we turned 65, we turned it into one. So, I can get the 65 on all three of them at the tax office. But I don't have to change anything on the plat if I wanted to develop it that way or sell it off in different pieces. That'd be different. Oh, so you didn't you didn't have to re uh not to do the taxes. Okay. You just go to the tax office.

But did you have to come in here? No. Oh, no. You know, if I was going to sell it, I'd have to like that. I'd have to do something. But Oh, well, he came in here. I just You can change your tax office account numbers for tax purposes without changing. Well, so then maybe he was doing it to sell it. Okay. I don't know. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Would it would it help you in what you're doing to remove for the purpose of to where people don't get the, you know, all work. Think that it's tied only to a sale. Yeah, not necessarily. Um it's such a

seems like it make it less confusing, but it it's confusing anyways because it's such a touchy thing because platting is such an extensive and expensive process that a lot of people don't understand. So there is no way that I'm ever going to be the good guy in that process when I tell somebody they have to do it when they're not expecting it. So it doesn't matter how we change it. It's always going to be a shock factor when you're not expecting it, right? But there are things that we could do to take some of that shock factor away and help expand it. That would be great. Yeah, we can we can help a little bit.

That's all for definition. slacker. That's all. That's all. And I only went through three. I knew so much for reading four. It was wrong. We said three. Good. Because I barely got through three. So, what page are we getting to now? Page eight of 56. Oh my gosh. You're right. 56 is not all the way. So, yeah. Janet, can I scan your stuff before you leave? Sure, you can have it. I'm not going to sleep with it.

I mean, I've just got a lot of got a mess, but some of it's just when I was reading it, I was It's like medication for insomnia. Yeah. I decided to dust my living room and be done with this. That's how I didn't want to read it. I hate to dust. Anything on page eight? Okay. So, oh yeah, article three is responsibility. Wait, where are you? Um, article middle of the page. Yeah, article three. Where are we done here? Are we on page eight or seven?

Yeah, it starts here and goes through to your Whoops. 3.1 goes over my job. Anyone have any questions, concerns? Yeah. Who's the development officer? Is that you? I'm kind of confused with where things were in here. It's me by proxy. And then if I don't want to make a call on something, then it's Mr. Collins back there. They share that.

We do. You know, if the development officer is examining the building permits, why are we paying for third party review? That's a sticking factor for me when it comes to paying for a building permit. That can even be a rhetorical question

because it's frustrating that you pay for a stamped set of drawings. You bring them here to get a building permit where it says the building officer shall examine all building permits applications and then we now pay for an additional plan review. You don't even have to answer it because we've gone over it before. But as a

I want to hear the answer. Well, I know that it's it's all everybody working together. I get that. But if I'm going to do that, don't force me to go get a windstorm stamped drawing. And I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about the city of Santa Fe says you have to have this. You go and you get it and then now we're going to charge you for plan review. That's in my opinion, you're just double dipping. Not you. I have to quit saying you. People think you and I like go. The city of Santa Fe is charging you for something that you already have.

I think it's different. And the reason I think it's different is because you're looking for different things. An engineer or a stamped set of drawings are looking for certain things. We're making sure that it's in compliance with our regulations. They're not making sure it's in compliance with our regulations. I can I can kind of agree with that except for the fee of what you're charging, okay,

is significantly more than a person who has an engineer stamp what they're charging. So if you have if if you're looking for code, why are we paying so much for third party review for these handful of items to make sure it's in line with the city's specs when an engineer from the state of Texas isn't even charging. So it's the fee that mostly is the problem and not necessarily the process. Sure. So, we could address that because fees aren't really addressed in here. We could address that.

My my question comes from do we need to change the way this reads and what it is that we're looking for? When it says the development officer shall examine all building permits, what is it that you're looking for? Because to me, when I see that, that's what that means. They're they're examining all building permit applications. Well, then why am I getting charged for third party review? So, we either need to adjust this, adjust the fees. What is it that we're doing here? So, not everybody gets a third party review. Is that correct?

So, when as the development officer, when I get it, I make sure you're compliant with all of your zoning. I make sure your corridor development is good to go. I make sure your setbacks are good to go. I don't look at your building plans. It either goes to the building official or the planer viewer, which this is Miss Belinda. She's our new in-house planner viewer. Um, but those are the people that are looking at it. Um, I'm not going to look you in the face and tell you that I can look at your building plans and tell you if they're 100% compliant or not. I try my best, but I don't know for sure off the top of my head. The other stuff, I can do that all day long. I do that in my sleep. But that's what I look at. I make sure you're good with this stuff. The other stuff, I trust that she's got that and that she knows what she's doing on that part of it to be compliant with every single bit of that code, but I'm not certified in that part of it. That's what she

When does it get sent to a third party review? So, if it's a house that's coming in, I make sure you're good and that you're in your box that you're supposed to be in and that you can put everything in that box that you're supposed to be in. And then she makes sure that everything that's going in that box is going to be safe for people to inhabit. And if she can't, then it goes to third party review. So the third party reviewer was because we didn't have anybody to do residential. So now I'm I do them. So they shouldn't go to third party anymore. So what about commercial? Is that Wait a minute. Wait a minute. What about those of us who paid a third party fee? Was it for commercial or residential?

No, it was residential. So the the fee is still the same. What we had talked about when we did our agenda setting, we're going to discuss the plan review fee about adjusting that going forward because we do have somebody in house now. Okay.

That's a council call. So can we put some sort of verbiage in here to explain what we just talked about? However you want to write that up. so that we know what the difference is because the way this reads it is as if my plans come to your desk and it says shall examine all building permits. So do we need to expand on what's happening so that way it's more clear? No. But then it goes and says that the propo you're certifying the proposed construction moving alteration and use complies with the provisions of this ordinance. You think that should be expanded more?

I think the the the part where it says the building permit applications, but it then it's telling you what they're looking for in those applications that they comply with this ordinance. So, this section B is not talking about the actual construction part of your building permits. Well, this is for the subdivision.

That's what she's saying is that this what this section right here is talking about is that it you're going over these drawings. So, when it says building permits, you don't need a building permit, but you've got for your actual subdivision. So when I bring it so somebody come and filled out a subdivision application is what you're talking about.

Yeah. When I bring it to you guys, if we like with the final subdivision plat that we just got, if they would have had infrastructure, then by the time I get it to you guys, you have to trust that I've got our engineer signed off on it, that all of their zoning is good, that we've had WCID, DD1, that all of our boxes are checked before I ever get it to you. That's all the permits that I have to look at and check off. So, I guess more of what I'm asking about is going to be later in the construction part. Yes. Of the ordinance. So, you're talking about when the actual walls go up and that kind of stuff. Yeah. That part.

Yeah. And that's not the content of what this B was written in. It's talking about specifically to the subdivision. Subdivision. Okay. Well, we'll put a pin in that and we'll discuss it at a later time. Yeah. Yeah. I think we'll use for that one later on. No, there's no no need for tickets. We're breaking it in sections. Okay. Where's the next break? Um, we're going to 3.4. Okay. Stomach cannot tolerate.

We can call it whenever y'all are ready. Um, I'm ready. Are you ready to move on? No, I'm ready to call it. We're going home. Yeah. Okay.

Do have one question and I don't know if we want to do it tonight. What? It's own. Uh, 3.7 B building permits. Uh, D. It says a permit for the place placement of a manufactured home or other structures. What is the other structures? Because you know, like we talked about the other day, you know, we've got tiny homes out there. We've got RVs and there are different classification than motor homes.

So, is that what this is covering or is that something else? like a shed or Well, what you're talking about is a building permit for an unplatted something that's unplatted.

So, this provision only applies to the filing classifications of building permits. So, that's what you're talking about then. Yeah. Didn't Didn't we vote on something a few month several months ago about manufactured homes? Something, but I don't remember. Yeah.

No, I'm just I'm just trying to figure out since we got more than manufactured homes, you know, because that's one classification. You got trailers, motor, you know, the oldfashioned trailers, that's another classification. You got these new tiny homes. That's really different classification. And RVs, each one's got a different classification. So if um do we need a permit to put put an RV? I don't think they're allowed. They're not allowed.

You know, a tiny hole. You know, I'm saying, you know, we need to expand this or say except except for or something like that to get these other different types of homes put in there because, you know, if somebody wants to, you know, uh, put on a trailer, they need a permit. But I think this is not addressing that. No, it's not. This is talking about unplatted land. And if someone who makes an application for a building permit on an unplatted lot, then you're making them platted. I got you. Unless

I got you. I forgot. I didn't I forgot the unplatted part. Yeah. So I Sorry about that. That's okay. Yeah. I mean, that's the way I read it. I'm getting tired. I guess I was running it all in together and so this is one part and that's ABC D. Yeah. But I would say we would either need to either further define other structure or remove other structure probably same there as the earlier part. Yeah. Yeah. Because that could be too willy-nilly. Yeah. And it could create a lot of room for argument. I mean, you've got accessory structure already up there. So, maybe you could just remove other structure. I can't that would be right now.

Now, that would be something that I would say would need to be defined, too. What would it what would it apply to? That gray area does leave a lot of room for argument. Yeah. What a greenhouse. Yeah. We don't have accessory structure defined on here. That's like like a greenhouse for your house when you put your plants in. Yeah. Or I mean somebody could even argue that like our garden shed is a structure or one of our chicken houses. That's a really pain but I think that's an accessory structure. Yeah. Yeah. But then what would define it? Because two of them are on. Yes. So we'll stop at 3.2.

Yes. Yes. Do we have a plan on where we want to get through next time? We take it to the two hour mark and see how far we get. So I think we need to finish three. Finish three. or until Miss Janet starts dusting. I'll start what? Until starts dusting again. When I used to have cats, it was cleaning the litter box. Okay. So, we'll finish three. That'll be our goal for the next time. Is that just Is that all we're going to do? Three. That'll be our four is not that big.

I would say till like two hours and see how far we get. But I want to review it before I get there. You want me to just keep going? Yeah. Well, four is not that much. So, I want to know where I have to get to. Say two hours or this. So, maybe three and four until we get to two hours. Whatever comes first. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I'm not going to five. Four is kind of hefty. Is it? It is a little hefty. Four is a little hefty. We'll give ourselves a Thanksgiving treat. Slowly but surely. Do we need a Oh, what is the farms part?

Do we need a motion to adjourn? I'll make a motion. Well, there was Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? All in favor? I 808. Okay. If anybody has notes, can I scan them?