Planning and Zoning Meeting - Regular Meeting

depends on the workshop. So much we want to talk about guys. Ready? Well, good evening everyone. It is uh 6 pm and I'll call this meeting to order. This is the July 2nd, 2025 regular meeting of the shirts planning and zoning commission. Item number one was the call to order. Item number two is to seat alternates. Uh we've had a couple of changes up here. Um Miss Goldick is now uh an alternate and she's joining us this evening. Mr. Hughes and Mr. Wallace are now full-timers. So um all right, hearing of residents. Did anybody sign up? Nobody? No. Okay. All righty. Yep. Nobody. Okay.

No emails or anything like that. Okay. All righty. Item number four is our consent agenda. We have one item. Item 4 A is the minutes from the June 4th, 2025 regular meeting. There's no discussion on the consent agenda. Do we need to pull this item for discussion? If not, can I have a motion to approve the consent agenda? Make a motion to approve the consent consent agenda. Second. That was Commissioner Wallace. Eric. Okay. All right. Um, again, there's no discussion on the consent agenda. I have a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda. So, if you would please record your votes. I have six votes. Can you publish that for us, please? Have uh six eyes and none opposed. That motion passes. Item number five, public hearing. Planning and zoning commission will hold a public hearing related to zone change requests, specific use permit requests, and unified development code amendments within this agenda. The public hearing will be open to receive a report from staff, the applicant, the adjoining property owners affected by the applicant's request and any other interested persons. Upon completion, the public hearing will be closed. The commission will discuss and consider the application. It may request additional information from staff or the applicant if required. After deliberation, the commission is asked to consider and act upon the following requests and make a recommendation to the city council if necessary.

Item 5A is PLZC 20250094. Hold the public hearing and make a recommendation on a request to reszone approximately 4.64 64 acres of land from General Business District GB to General Business District 2, GB2, generally known as 36 Masky Road and 40 Masky Road, lots 1 and two, block one of the Masky Road Business Park subdivision, more specifically known as Guadalupe County property identification numbers 19914 and 11, I'm sorry, 1 N115. Five. Sir, good evening. Commission PLZC20250094 proposed zone change to GB2 on Masky Road, William Willingham Planner. So, if you think you may have seen this before, it is because it is a very similar application to the one that came approximately two months ago uh for the lots directly adjacent to this property. Uh they're making the same request. Uh so, this is the aerial view of the property. It's currently undeveloped at this time as well as the adjacent properties except for to the south you see some of that office warehouse development and it's currently zoned as GB at this time. Uh adjacent properties are either GB or GB2. 10 public notices were sent out for this property. Only one response was received in favor of this property. Um a public hearing notice will be placed in the San Antonio Express prior to city council. A notification sign was placed on the property by the applicant and JBSA has been notified and affirmatively recommends approval of this request. Uh so once again this is just another exhibit of the zone change. Uh so we see it's currently GB changing to GB2. The site in context it is currently located within the APZ2. Uh the purpose of the APZ is to ensure that there's compatibility between uh JBSA Randolph

and the city of Shirts. just making sure that there's compatible uses under that area that's below the runway flight line. Uh so the purpose and effect of the APZ so UDC section 2159 special district specifically outlines that JBSA must affirmatively recommend approval of the zone change request before the city can take this application. And so we require that letter there that you see on the top side where the verbiage states JB affirmatively recommends approval of the zone change. If we do not have this letter, we cannot move forward with this application. So the site in context just once again, this is located in a relatively uh undeveloped area at this time. You can see the current conditions. There's nothing there at this moment. Uh neither is there anything uh across the street on Masky Road. Uh but you can see kind of to the south in that aerial view that you know this area is lending itself to office warehouse uses. Zoning district requirements. Um so the dimensional requirements are actually the same from GB to GB2. And of course the primary difference between GB and GB2 is just some more intense uses that we see kind of to allow that office warehouse is the most common requirement that people are looking for when they make this zone change request. And it is the applicant intent to have office warehouse at this development. So UDC section 2154D criteria for approval whether the proposed zone change implements the policies adopted by the comprehensive land plan or any other applicable adopted plans. So the comprehensive land plan is guiding document for the long grade vision of the city. Uh this area is currently designated as industrial hub which is of course intended for manufacturing, processing, distributing and GB2 is intended for similar uses of light industrial developments to serve the entire community which tends to be compatible with industrial hub. two, whether the proposed zone change promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the city. Uh, so as I was discussing before, as part of promoting the health, safety, and welfare, the city should encourage development compatible with surrounding uses, utilizing standards

and transitional uses to alleviate negative impacts. Um, so that is the purpose of the APZ. And as I mentioned before, JBSA has affirmatively recommended approval of this request. whether the uses permitted by the proposed zone change will be consistent and appropriate with the area's existing immediate with the existing uses in the immediate area. So as I mentioned before this area is currently GB lending itself to GB2. We already saw that application come in recently that was making the similar request and we did approve that application. uh so the subject property is located around you know other properties that are zone GB2 and whether other factors are deemed relevant and important in the consideration of this amendment. So all UDC requirements have been met for this proposed zone change request and the shirts fire EMS and police departments have been notified of the zone change request and have provided no objections. Staff recommendation. Due to the character of the surrounding area, the consistency with the comprehensive land plan, and the affirmative recommendation of the proposed zone change from JBSA, staff is recommending approval of PLZC 20250094. I'm available for questions. All right. Thank you. The applicant here tonight? The applicant is not here tonight. No. Okay. All righty. This is a public hearing. It is um stop looking at that clock and look over here. It is uh 6:08 p.m. and I'll open the floor for public comment. Anyone wishing to address the commission on this topic is welcome to step forward. Nobody. Big crowd tonight, right?

All right. Nobody at all. All right. It is uh still 6:08 p.m. and public input is closed. Um before I open it up to commissioners, I'm a little surprised that the applicant didn't care enough to show up this evening and represent themselves. Okay. Do they really think it's that easy? The applicant knows. I informed them. Um, so they have the notification. Go ahead. And I and I would say it's not technically it's not a legal requirement for the to come. And I would say the weather has been kind of rough the last several hours. So that may have played. Um, the property owner has come in several times to talk about the case is very committed. He actually came on the last case, wasn't he? Yes, he was here at the last case for the similar request. I would say the weather is probably playing. Okay. I I I just don't want to get to the point where they take us for granted. Yeah. And I will say when we send the agenda out to the commission, we send emails to every applicant encouraging them to come. All righty. Commissioners, anybody uh have any questions or comments? Nobody has any concerns with going from GB to GB2. Maybe it is that easy. I don't know. Well, thank you for pointing out at that at the beginning of your uh that that we just did the two lots to the Yeah. Yeah. Whatever that site is. Um and I and I certainly think um it fits with what else is going on down there. And um the GB lot to the left on the picture that still has the SUP on it, right? Or a um uh convenience store with gas pumps.

Okay. All right. Well, if nobody has anything, this is a recommendation to city council. We can recommend approval, denial, or approval with conditions. Would anybody like to make a motion? I make a motion to approve PLC 20250094. Second. I have a motion to recommend approval of PLZC 20250094 from Commissioner Goldick, a second from Commissioner Wallace. Any further questions, discussion? Not please record your vote. All right. I see six votes. Would you publish that, please? Have six eyes, none opposed. That motion passes. Thank you. Item number six, items for individual consideration. We have a single item. 6A is a PLV AR 20250144 sign waiver. Consider and act upon a request for a waiver in relation to wall signage for the Home Depot on lot 10 block one of the shirts station subdivision approximately 18.709 acres of land located at 18541 RPS Chrysler Roads Texas 78154 more specifically known as Guadalupi County parcel identification number 68313 sir thank you commissioners this is PLV 202501 144 Samuel Hos senior planner. Little background here. This is our first sign waiver request. So this is a new thing as of June 17th. Um ordinance

25S024 was passed. That was a bunch of changes to our sign code in article 11. Including in those changes was a section 21115 which is waivers. So any any applicant can request a waiver from the requirements and that is decided on here at planning and zoning. So this is not a recommendation. This is an actual decision here. Um if the applicant is not happy with how you've ruled, they can appeal. That does go to city council. But ultimately the final action is still here. So just want to clarify that. So because the changes are so new, just kind of a a refresher here. So the way that we have previously treated wall signs is we gave them, you know, we we permitted a specific wall sign and we measured it and we had the requirements for that. Well, now it's a little different. For wall signs, we look at the entire facade and we give businesses an aotment of square footage. So, for instance, on interstate and farm to market roads, you get 250 square feet for a uh a wall sign. You can use it for one giant wall sign or you can split it up, have little icons or whatever you want to do. It's kind of up to you. So, that's how we that's how it was recently approved and changed. So, you'll see down here at the bottom, there's two little requirements that I included in this. Roadway classification is determined by the address of the building. And then number two, buildings over 100,000 square foot get an additional 100 square feet. So for interstates you get 350, for all other roads get 200. So that brings us to Home Depot. So in this is part of the shirt station subdivision, the large multi-mixeduse subdivision that's going in on Cibilo Valley Drive and I35. This is lot 10 block one. uh they are zone PDD and the

address for Home Depot as uh out commissioner outlaw mentioned is 18541 Rich Chrysler. So and Home Depot is also constructing a 130,000 square foot uh facility. So under the current codes, Home Depot would be a is classified because of that rips Chrysler as an all others. You know, I'll go back to that, right? So it's not an interstate, it's not a farm tomarket road. So they get 100 square feet of signage because they're building a large building over 100,000 square feet. They get an additional 100 square feet. So they're allowed 200 square feet per facade, three out of four facades, however they want to do it. The applicant is requesting a waiver to allow more signage on the front facade. They are requesting 580 square feet. So that's 580 ft for the entire facade. They can split it up how they want to do it. So couple considerations in that 2111B. Kind of like how we do the criteria for approval for a lot of the other things. This is kind of the sign waiverss criteria or the what we're calling the considerations. So number one, the nature of the proposed use of land. So this is a large uh effectively kind of a mixeduse subdivision here. And you'll see this is a graphic from um I believe um from I think it's might be the developers site, but you can see kind of how the anchor tenant, this Home Depot site sits back away from the I35. And so you'll see there's a bunch of pad sites and buildings that are going to be um in front as well. Number two, the location of the property in relation to roadway classifications. It's difficult to see here, but you'll see in the graphic that there are quite a few public roadways that are splitting this subdivision. You'll see uh there's

Pullman Drive, Merit Lane, Station Road, and then Rips Chrysler as well. Also, Civil Valley Drive and IH35. Effectively though, this is a regional destination center on the corner of 35 and Cibilo Valley Drive. So that's how staff is sort of treating it. Number three, the existing uses of land in the vicinity. So as I mentioned, uh you know, there's restaurant retail pad sites, there's multif family housing. This is that proposed Home Depot location and EVO is right next door as well. Some other considerations as well with the granting of the waiver. The the granting of the waiver will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare or so the staff has determined that is not detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare. Uh and that actually Home Depot acting as an anchor tenant could help drive some of the commercial activity in the to the surrounding properties. Number two, strict interpretation of the provision of the section would deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed other nearby properties. So I bring up EVO because it is a similar location and uh through the PDD process they were allowed a 478 foot sign so slightly bigger. They are technically further back and but they did get that approved through the PDD process. At the time there was no waiver process. So, so this comes to staff's recommendation. So, staff does not support the applicant's request for 580 ft. However, staff does support treating the Home Depot as effectively being addressed off of I35. We think that is uh uh more appropriate in this situation. So essentially if they are allowed to have that classification then they would be allowed a wall signage space of 350 square feet total because

250 for the interstate plus the large building so they get an extra 100 ft. Staff feels that that is a more appropriate uh waiver request. So this would be only for the front facade. So the facade facing I35. the other two facades that they are allowed signage on would still be that 200. So staff is recommending approval of the waiver request with a condition that the maximum allowable wall signage for the front facade be increased to 350 rather than 580. And I believe uh the applicant is here. They'd like to Good evening. Um, I'm Aaron Parinsky with Kimley Horn. We're the engineer on the project. So, we've been working on this project and all the projects leading up to this part of uh, Shirt Station. Uh, we're here to speak on behalf of Home Depot. Home Depot would like to stick with their original request. Um, and that's still the request of 580 feet. They're asking for and and that's based on their standard Home Depot sign package that they're used to doing at all the stores. They need um certainly understand we we have a good working relationship with staff. U certainly understand everything Sam presented in his report. Um, that's a codebased that's a codebased recommendation. It's certainly understandable. This is also a big building. So when you apply that square footage limit to a big building like that, I think it's something like 3% of the face. Uh well, as you know, we've all been to Home Depot before. That's that's a big building and a very small amount to provide the signage they

need to show people where to go and where the departments are and you know, standard Home Depot signage. So, a couple other things to consider, you know, where this is located and he pointed out that the addressing difference. This does front all on 35 and it's also buffered on both sides by commercial development. So, it doesn't face any residences. It doesn't face any single family uses. So, that's another reason why we think that's a that's a reasonable request to stick to their to their standard sign package. Um so so just given that the the the limit of what the number is applied to such a big square footage that's tough for them to make work. It faces the the freeway. Um and we don't feel like it's detrimental or um it's going to be even seen by any residences in here. Uh we feel like on behalf of Home Depot that's they would still like that full sign package to to provide their st standard signage to this building too like like they're used to doing. So that's that's what I have. I'm here to answer any questions that I can. U I am the civil engineer so we usually don't answer questions about the building but I can I can do my best. Yeah, I was I was really expecting the regular lady that that comes up whenever Kimley Horn is on the agenda. So, Ashley. Ashley. Yeah. Yeah. Uh didn't call in Ashley for this one, but u um I actually just talked to her a couple days ago. Um but yeah, got me this time. Sorry. All right. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Okay. This is um not a public hearing. Okay, cool. Um, I've got a couple of things. Um, Sam,

first of all, thank you for recognizing that this building who's brilliant idea was to address these things off of Rips's Chrysler instead of 35. Okay. Kind of how the lots are shaped and how the the subdivision is. Yeah. I I always was under the impression that the address was whatever street the building faced and it doesn't face RIP. But anyway, thank you for at least recognizing that. Um and um again for bringing up EVO, I had it on my list here because um if I remember right, the discussion with EVO was how far back from the interstate uh they were located. And that's why um we allowed the increased sign area was to make it visible or more visible from the from the interstate. Um I've got a couple of more things, but anybody else have anything they want to ask questions? Judy, go ahead. Are there other Home Depots with these types of restrictions or would by changing the amount of square footage that we allow in shirts, will it make it uh look different than what we're used to seeing with Home Depot? I mean, is is this like a one-off that this one's going to look different because it doesn't have enough signage? I mean, I know you're not a Home Depot person, but you know. Yeah. I mean, if you don't Yeah. Yeah. Sure. I I think I think when you when you go around to the Home Depots we've whichever ones we've visited, you know, they all pretty much look the at least as far as the signage and and the representation. It all goes into branding. It all goes into making sure the customer knows where they're going into just so everybody

could kind of have the same experience in each one. I think if you if you change that, I think it would be noticeable. I think it would it would look different. um not necessarily in a positive way. Um it's not it wouldn't be it wouldn't be an enhancement for it to look different with less signage. I think it may be more confusing than anything. Um but again, that's civil engineers perspective. I I can't speak to whether other Home Depots have had that restriction or not, but I'm kind of just speaking more from a citizen that goes to Home Depot. You know, it seems like it would look different. I feel like as a consumer when you pull up to a Home Depot, they all look the same. You know where the lumber is, you know where the garden center is, it's all these things. And so why should the city put a restriction on allowing those the same signage that you're used to seeing? And because it's so far off the This is just my opinion. Because it's so far off the highway, I I think it's beneficial to allow them a little bit more square footage so they're more visible. And that's staff definitely understood that and took that into consideration, which is why we think the upsizing to what our code says would be an interstate, right, classification is appropriate. And you know, prior to the article 11 updates that we just did, it was much much smaller. So the way the staff's position was was, well, we just passed these amendments increasing it. You know, if we wanted to give people on the interstate 500 square feet of signage, that's what we would have put the code amendment for. But we we decided, you know, that that was too much. And I think that was, you know, kind of in line with what city council was going with, too. So, you know, we we provided the exception for large buildings for

100 over 100 square foot. You get more. So, we're we're trying to, you know, meet applicants in the middle. And so, you know, that's essentially where staff's position is. This wouldn't count the monument sign, correct? No, just the wall sign. Yeah. So, I I'm agree with Steph on it. I mean, I I I agree you should get a little more um since it is such a big building, but we just passed this. My question also is if we start decreasing their signage, they do have entrance signs for clearance for height. Are we going to decrease that where it's no longer visible and we could have some kind of impact on the building? I mean, where where do they cut the where do they cut their branding off and where do they cut the safety aspect off? Where do they start making those cuts? Yeah. And and that doesn't differentiate, you know, the the request for the standard sign package is it's just and that and that's the the challenge with the way the code is written and and it's intentionally written that way. I mean, shirts has always had a very uh restrictive sign ordinance with the intent that it it sets the standard low so you you can protect the landscape. you can protect the the the scenery along the street. So, that's that's that's all been a benefit to the city. And even with the increase uh the recent increase, it still requires applicants to come to y'all to to individually consider each application, which is good, which is good for the city. Um, but for such a big building like this, limiting it to a number instead of a percentage is that's that's what's unique about this application. You know, if you have if you have a standard retail building or a standard strip center or restaurant and the the limit is 350, you know, that that's a very reasonable request. But when you have a Home Depot that's 100 plus thousand square feet, limiting it to that same number is is

more restrictive than a normal retail building. So that that's what's different. But um specific to your question, it's just the number of signage altogether. It doesn't it doesn't split it up on the types. Yeah. Because my concern would be that if they've got to cut signage out, they've got to reduce size. If they reduce size, you reduce visibility and then we could have other issues down the road. And just to be clear, life safety signage like, you know, exits and stuff like that are not part of our sign permits. Well, they do have the entrance for the clearances. Sure. And the exit. So that's that's my concern if they drop that font size down where it's not readable and somebody goes through there and doesn't realize. So if if we didn't count that they're roughly 30 to 40 square feet. So if if know you go with um with 30 square feet two of them that's that would reduce everything by 60 square feet looking at the diagrams. So, before Judy gets a second show, anybody else? Judy, did you want to talk again or has this been flashing at me and I didn't notice it? No, that's all right. I'll take care of it. I'm not used to looking over here. So, um, yeah, you know, it's a Home Depot and and and in looking at the diagram, the only thing that really stands out with me is is the Home Depot, the lumber, the garden center, those are relatively and and the the the what is it? The rental sign. Shoot, you can barely see it there on the front of the building. Um,

and and I'm not sure, number one, it surprises me that that city council delegated approval authority to this commission rather than retaining it themselves. Um, I'm not really sure, you know, although um, we saw we the the UDC amendment went through us. And I assume we recommended approval to council, but I'm not really sure what problem they're trying to solve. Um, used to be a percentage of the facade, right? A square footage. Is that isn't that what we used to have? So, the old code would be like 15% of the facade or 150 square feet, whichever is less. Okay. So, it was actually much more restrictive the old code. But um you know this is typical of these big box stores. Uh I mean uh you look at Walmart um almost the same kind of thing where you've got the the store name and then you've got uh what what do we got up here? One side I think says grocery and the other side says pharmacy. So, um, but you do have to, um, you do have to keep the word, um, getting too old for this stuff. Where'd that word go? Precedent. Okay. You got to keep that in the back of your mind. um when we consider things like this that if that if we are if we were to approve this one uh what do we do with the next one? Um and uh that was always a big concern when I did code interpretations as the fire marshall. I always wanted to make

sure I had a valid reason that I could articulate as to why I approved this one and not the other one. Um Rodri, you had something? I'm just interested in knowing uh what's what staff's recommendation would be regarding the Home Depot sign itself since that represents the majority of square footage. Yeah, I think staff feels that there is room to decrease signage. I mean, that's essentially what it is. Like, do does I understand like Home Depot, this is probably the same sign package that goes out all over the country when they build a new store. So, and not every municipality has as much uh you know, is as intentional with their sign package or as sign codes as we are. you know, shirts has had stricter standards for signs for a long time. And, you know, as we as you know, our planning manager, Emily, went through several workshops for temporary signs, you know, it's it's been kind of a a lot of debate on how to make it more flexible, make it easier for applicants. And this is the these are the numbers that we landed on. And so, staff feels that it is reasonable to, you know, find out find how to make 350 work. Want to kind of add on to Sam's piece. This isn't just sign specific, right? If you think Home Depot, all the rest of the national chains, you think McDonald's, CVS, they all have building footprints that are their standard. They have lot layouts that are their

standard. But when they come to Shirts, we have site design requirements that sometimes require them to change, add additional landscaping, adding building articulations and elevations. If they want to have that business and building in shirts, they have to meet the city of shirt standards. So, it's not just, you know, Home Depot isn't just being requested to meet City of Shirts sign standards. They also had to meet everything else in the UDC in terms of their building footprint, adding additional articulations that you might not see at another typical Home Depot. um improved or increased, you know, screening around the garden center, doing additional trees in their parking lot. Things that if you go to say the Home Depot in Sigin, you're probably not going to see because it's shirts as Home Depot. So, keep that in the back of your brain, too, of it's not just a differentiation from the standard Home Depot for signs, but it's truly making it incorporated and have that shirts feel. That's that's evidenced by those elevations. I mean, that's a that's a very custom Home Depot elevation design to meet all of the the specific shirts, articulation, and building requirements that she's talking about. So, there are they've already there's already been a lot of coordination with staff and with the architects on meeting all those requirements um that are that are specific to shirts. Can I say something again? Rodri, are you done? Well, in looking at this 350 square feet wouldn't even allow the sign that says Home Depot on the front. I mean, and then to get rid of all the others. I mean, that's very restrictive um to do that. I mean on a 100,000 square foot building 350 ft for a sign that's what 30 35

times a 10 by 35 or I mean it's very small so I would question right back to the commission if we if the commission does decide to move forward with this and allow 580 ft I would say then staff is going to come back with another UDC amendment and if you're on I35 I 10 any of those um I 10 roadways and you're over a 100,000 square feet building, we should allow 580 ft of signage if we think that that is appropriate. So, just keep keep all of these considerations. Don't just think it's just for the Home Depot. It's do we think this caliber this 100 foot plus building should have any regardless of Home Depot, if it's any other business, should they have 580 square feet of signage? I do think it's a unique business that's going to be this large. It could be a warehouse, industrial, something that doesn't require as much signage. I mean, I I do feel like this is very unique. You know, we're not going to have big huge 100,000 square feet buildings coming popping up in shirts every, you know, that often. So, for me, I believe this is a very unique situation and I my opinion again is to allow them an exception, you know, with a waiver to have uh more square footage. That's just my opinion. But again, I don't think they're going to come up that often. And many times when you do see a building this large, it's not the same type of business. It's not retail. It's a warehouse or something like that. You know, that's just my opinion. And I know it's important to have signage to draw people in Clayton. Um, I mean, I don't I I I don't see any reason why Home Depot

shouldn't meet the standard we've already set, considering that we just went through this process. I mean, I get the main sign will probably be smaller, but there's nothing to me that screams that we should immediately get rid of the standards we just set for the first person who asks us to for a Home Depot that's like down the road and in Sigin and in New Bron Falls. I mean it it I I I think the variance that staff has presented, yeah, you should get it should get a little bit more, but again to immediately say, "Oh, yeah, we we set these standards. We've workshopped this." I mean, we made changes at the last PNZ meeting for the sign code and then it went to council and I'm not sure if they made changes or they accepted what we had and so everyone was on the same page and now to immediately say let's just go with something else. I I think it's counterintuitive to the process we just went through. Um I don't see a reason why Home Depot can't meet what we've set if you've already met everything else that we've already stipulated in the EDC. Um, I think there's a lot of room to make things smaller, but at the same time keep the safety signage. I don't think you would shrink your 30 square feet. I think you would take your 437 foot sign and make it smaller. You already have a massive monument sign by the highway. People already know it is a Home Depot. I don't see how losing I mean, what's the difference between five I'm like 150 feet realistically is going to make that big of a difference to your business impact. I don't think we should approve it. I think it would only have the Home Depot sign. There would be nothing left. David, um, consideration question for Apples to Apples, Lowe's, what is their square footage on their signage? Uh, I don't have that number in front of me because their signage is looks like from seeing it is probably a little more

also. And if we're going to compare apples to apples, another big box um, store like that would be be a good comparison. Yeah. you know, Lowe's, Walmart, you know, those big big buildings that are up on 35. Those were also uh built, permitted, constructed long like 2007. It was a and and Walmart also has a signed variance. So, I I was going to point out that uh excuse me um that um there's always every time you come up with something new. Um, you know, you you're always going to find examples uh that came before you had the new rule like Walmart and HB and um Lowe's. So, um, now I'm starting to get behind here. I see David's light flashing, but Rodri, did did you know? Yeah. So I would just say so I understand that we just went through this. I also know that there were no comparatives done during that meeting, right? To even know what 350 square feet would look like on a 100,000 square foot building. So we didn't have that love of discussion. Uh, and for me, you know, I I would simply ask, you know, is and and I get that, you know, we're shirts and we want to be different. Is this the type of relationship we want to have with big box stores, right? Or do we just not even want them if uh

if the signage, which it doesn't looking at it, I mean, it doesn't, you know, look like it's much compared how large the building is. Oh, uh I I I know that, you know, granting an an exception or granting a waiver to something that we just approved. Uh might fly in the face of, you know, standard procedure. Uh but those comparisons weren't made. We didn't have that level of discussion. uh I would have welcomed it. I would welcome it now and even into the future. So, and you know, as Miss Emily articulated, you know, do we want to, you know, make a revision to the UDC to say that, you know, buildings over 100,000 square feet, you know, should have more, then yeah, that's something that we should discuss, right? But I think it all goes back to, you know, what are we willing to fall on our sword over? Uh, and I don't think that this signage uh is is so hideous that uh that we want to do that, but that's just my opinion. Thank you, Clayton. I'll make one last point just on the the topic of continually updating the UDC. I I just as someone who works in planning, I think it's very inappropriate to continuously modify your standard development code for every single project that comes in. Um to add, well, we didn't like how this project

was, so we're going to set it to 300 ft. But then the Home Depot comes and they want 500 feet. Well, then we'll make our standard 500 feet. Well, when the next tour comes and they want 600 feet, do we make the standard 600 feet? Well, the next tour comes, do they want 800 feet and a 40 foot height? Oh, do we make that the standard? I mean, I at the end of the day, I don't think that is a process that we should start or make a habit of continuously making changes to code because then how do you as a developer or as a government set a this is what our rule is. we're gonna follow this rule. So, if I was planning to come, I mean, if you're going to change your rule every meeting just because we're, you know, oh, we didn't like how they handled this. Oh, we didn't like how they handled that. Let's go fix the UDC. Let's go change it. I I just don't think that's a appropriate path to handling things is to continually make those updates. So, that's my bit. Well, I Well, I agree with you. We don't want to be changing the UDC all the time, but we don't have to. that that's what the waiver process is for. Correct. Okay. And and you know, I I appreciate Emily's input, but if the commission chooses to approve this waiver, no, we don't have to go change and give everybody 580 square feet. Judy, you got another comment? I Yeah. Well, my comment is so you have a 100,000 square foot face on I35 or an FM road and you get 350 ft and you're 100,000 square foot building. But a 30,000 foot building or 10,000 foot building gets the same 350 because they're on 35. They would get 250. 250. What was you're allotted an extra 100 square footage for a large building, but you realize it's only like 10 by 10, which is like the size of a nursery.

That's a teeny tiny sign when you look at it as a huge and you know, my opinion. Sorry. I mean, all I'll all say is that is we did bring this to PNZ. We presented all those changes. Yes, we voted and recommended approval for that. We did. I don't think we or I didn't just like Roderick was saying that you know when you see it on a 100,000 square feet and that's not usually who's coming in here you know 100 square thousand square foot business I mean I think we could have an amendment or something that allows for a little bit more on a building over 50,000 or 100,000 square feet. Um but again this is what the waiver process is for to make this allowance for this situation. So I think staff's recommendation to consider it as if it was addressed on 35 is already a significant concession. And in my opinion, we've given them a significant concession, they have to live with what our sign ordinances. Okay. I've got got I've got I've got several things to say here. First of all, yes, I realize that you that we reviewed that UDC requirement. We represent approval. But here's the way you guys come to us with these UDC amendments and they're pages and pages and pages. Okay? And they're red lines and red lines and words and words and words. And I I'll be honest with you, I don't think it's kind of like Congress. I don't think we

really understand what we're voting for sometimes. Okay. But this particular uh change has a waiver process in it and it's there for a reason. Okay. Now that said, could you um put the um you got a diagram of the the um maybe that picture you had with the pad sites and Home Depot in the back. Can you find that one? Um, now the facade, you had a you had a picture showing the actual There you go. that one. Okay. So, um, looking at those pad sites. Um, so let's just take the one on the left. So, there's one, two, three, four. They're they're thinking they might have as many as five tenants in there. Uh does each of those tenants get 250 square feet? Correct. So that total building then would have what? Over what? That'd be 1,250 square feet of signage. Right. And yet the the the the bigger building behind it would only get 350. Okay. Correct. Now here's what else is coming. They've got those big uh as you go north on 35 uh before you get to Schwab, you look over on the on the north side and there's those big office warehouses going in. Okay, those are indiv those are going to be individual tenants. It's not going to be it's not going to be like Amazon in one big building or well I mean it could be but the way they were talking about it the you know they're talking about individual

uh businesses and so you got to think ahead um I'm sorry that yeah 250 square feet for being on on the interstate they wouldn't get the extra hundred because the individual tenants aren't going to be 100,000 square feet, I don't think. But, you know, that's something to think about where I where I was talking about setting precedents. You know, how do you although I I I could clearly articulate why I think Home Depot is okay with 600 square feet uh and uh Dunkin Donuts isn't. Okay. Here's the problem. And and and no offense, sir, but I really wish somebody would have been here to tell us if we limit Home Depot to 350 square feet, what are they going to do? See? Well, and uh but again, um Mr. Wallace pointed out that they already have a monument sign out front, so it's not like we're hiding the business. But some quick math here. If you don't count the overhead clearance signs, got a roughly uh 140 square foot square feet of signage, the the the um excuse me, the smaller signs. So, if we, you know, with 350 square feet and you take that away, that leaves 210 square feet for the main sign. Okay? Although I would assume that they just wouldn't, you know, that they'd make some adjustments to all of them rather than just one. Um, Judy, did you have something else to say? I see your light blinking again. Oh, okay. Um,

when you look at the aesthetics of it also with the signage that they're asking for the um for their marquee sign on the on the building itself, that's going to skew it where it's just it's going to look off and it's not going to look probably what Home Depot wants. And we definitely want to have something where it just looks like we just kind of stencil something on the building that doesn't match the size of what we have. So again, it comes back to looking at others in the area. There have been variances before. This is a waiver. Um it's a one-off because of the size. It's an anchor building that we're looking at. Instead of looking at a bunch of smaller buildings in line, those would probably have a different outlook on them. Then you have something that's this large. and this is and it's going to draw this much in. So, it's just a consideration that look at the the signage that Home Depot is requesting is not overly gaudy. They're not asking for LED flashing lights or anything. It fits their prospects and it fits with the continuity of the area based upon where they're going to be facing facing 35. it won't interact with the homes behind it and it'll be able to draw in probably a little more economic impact over the long term. I have another question. If this waiver came through a year from now, would you have a different opinion? the fact that it came in a month after the approval. Is that skewing your This is just I'm just saying in general, I'm not pointing fingers at anyone, but you know, if this was a proposed waiver in 2026, I don't think we'd really be having this type of uh conversation over this. Excuse me, just a second. Sam, could you go back to the sign um slide, please, just so I can look at it? I'm sorry. Who who who wanted to speak

next? I mean I'll I'll answer. I mean the for me it's when looking at a variance it's what is the hardship on the business and I don't feel like it is a hardship to ask Home Depot to comply with the code and I think I would have the same thought process you know a year from now even of if you came in what is the hardship in meeting this code requirement um so Well, I'm still hung up on the fact that the, you know, the um pad site in the front with with five tenants, although I don't think it's feasible, potentially could have,50 square feet of sign, although I really don't think that's realistic. Okay. What? Confirming confirming what? Share it with us. Sam what? Yeah. Yeah. Each tenant would get 250. the way the code's written is although again I don't think I don't think you could realistically put 250 square foot of sign on each one of those tenants but um I think each tenant would have cost considerations as well and so well and you know I've I I do we have any where does it mention because I remember seeing the this the um the monument sign where it said there were going to be one out Not. Do we have any? Oh, okay.

Because I've always met I Yeah. Yeah. They the intent is to put a monument sign. Yes. Let's see. That's 96. Yeah. Hopefully that's on the right driveway. You know, it drives me crazy to go through the forum, see a sign that says Kohl's, but you're way held out. You're the way the heck down by U Hobby Lobby and Kohl's is at the other end. Yeah, it just that whole place drives me bonkers. Okay. But I've never been, you know, I've always criticized these these um these big u 100 foot freeway signs that you know u like Walmart and and those kinds of places. When I when I've been to many communities and municipalities that don't allow those signs, they're all monument signs that are, you know, maybe five or six feet tall. And yet you still see Walmart and HB and all the other big box places. Okay. Well, I was really hoping this would be a little bit easier. I'll be honest with you. I don't know which way to go. So, there's really three options here. You can approve what the applicant has requested. You can approve with staff's conditions or you can deny it. Yeah. No, I understand that, Sam. But but what I'm saying is part of me wants to just it's or now Clayton, do you have something to add or Well, I was going to offer you a motion so we could hang on a second because according to the city attorney, once a motion is made, you can only

discuss the motion thing. So once you make a motion, you've cut off all the whining and complaining from the chairman. Okay. I would do it right. So sir, sir, before before that, um there there's no critical time frame for this. Um we're still working with staff on site plan approval and building permitting. If we need to table this to the next meeting for further discussion, that that I don't think that's going to cause any heartburn from the developer or Home Depot either. So that's that's a fourth option, you know. Well, it it would help me a lot. I don't know about the other commissioners. Um, I'm really curious of if if we only if they're only allowed 350 square feet, what are they going to do? Of course, there's a good way to find that out is and that's just to deny the waiver and see what see what they come back with. Now, you mentioned that if they don't like our decision, if we only if we only approve 350, they can go to council, right? Yeah. They can appeal the decision of PNZ to city council. So, um, you know, here once again, I think council's put us between a rock and a hard place. I I I really feel that way. We're sitting here trying to make a decision. Um, now what I started to say, Clayton, was I, you know, part of me wants to go with 580 and part of me wants to go with 350. and I just I I I waffle back and forth. Okay, so go ahead. Anybody else have any questions or discussion that we can actually just a real quick if there is if there

could be an alternate rendering of what they would look at versus the 580 versus 350 we're asking for so we can see an rendering of what those images would look like on the proposed building so we could make a better choice what we're looking at. I think that would be helpful. Well, you know, that's uh certainly something we could do. You know, we could um you know, if it's the commission's desire, we can uh postpone this to another meeting. Um and that's the motion would be to postpone. Um when you want to kick it into another meeting, I don't know. I don't know if that would really do anything for us though. You know, Judy, if we were to approve with conditions, could that condition be based on uh maybe I hate to do it, changing the code to based on the size of the building. I mean, like if it's over 5,000, we've done that already. Well, no, that would be a separate kind of action like you you can't you wouldn't be able to condition the approval on changing the code, right? Like that we would have to come back and do the whole process of changing the code. Okay. So, but you can grant a waiver with a condition and you could make make a motion and propose a separate condition if you want P&Z's condition. So, well, I not to give you a fifth option and and muddy it up a bit, but you know, I um Now I forgot where I was going. I I I really think our three options at this point are to approve

um the applicant's request. We can approve um staff's recommendation to to um for 350 square feet or we can just flat out um deny the um the application. I'll make a motion. I'll make a motion to recommend approve or approve POVV 20250144 with staff's recommendation and conditions the 350 ft. Correct. I'll second that. Okay. Any further? I think we kind of beat this one to death, but anybody else got anything? people already voting. I would would I really wish you'd wait till I but that's okay. All right. I'm not hear anything else. So, um, the motion before the commission is to approve ELV 2025144 sign waiver with the limit of 350 square feet as recommended by staff. Is that correct, gentlemen? Yes, sir. Okay. All right. All if you would go ahead and u record your votes. Yeah. I have six votes. Would you publish that, please? I have three eyes, three nazs. Motion fails.

So, [Laughter] do we have another motion? Um, I think the um and and I wish the attorney city attorney was here because I think what we've got here is this motion uh pass or fails and and by default then the waiver is disapproved. That's my opinion. I can't hear you, Emily. I think this specific motion fails and you need to make another motion. But why? Well, we don't follow Robert's rules. All I know is it takes three affirmative votes to move a motion to to approve a motion. And here's what I see. Somebody So now this was to this was to approve with staff's recommendation. So somebody want to make a motion to deny the or approve the applicant's request. We could try that and see what comes up. I make a motion to um accept and approve the applicant's request as stated. Second. Okay, give me just a second here. I'm I'm getting behind. So, all right. So now we got uh Hughes and Goldick and their motion is to approve the applicants request or PLV20250144

sign waiver as requested by the applicant. Does that sound right? Okay. Any discussion? Okay. So, just to be clear, I want to discuss something real quick before we go to vote. You didn't see me. Just real quick. Oh my gosh, now I lost my train of thought. Oh, that these types of waiverss I don't think are going to be common. I think again this is an exception. And it's a huge structure and it is going to draw other businesses to the area. If you have those smaller strips that are allowed 250 for their frontage, it doesn't make sense to not allow Home Depot to have more signage. That's just my discussion. Okay. I'll jump in here and say what what's the point of having rules if you're just going to anyway. All right. So, once again, the current motion before the commission is to approve the sign waiver as requested by the applicant 580 square feet. So, a yes vote is to approve the applicant's request. So, please record your votes. All right, I have six votes. You publish that, please. Three eyes and three nays. That motion fails. So again, I'm going to suggest that what we've just done is disapprove the applicants waiver. Now, here's the problem, folks. without

we disapproved the waiver. So now there which included the staff's recommendation of the extra square footage. So without the waiver they're down to what Sam? 200 square feet. 200 square feet. Yeah. Two 250. Sorry. Or actually 350, I'm sorry. No. No. Because the address is Oh, yeah. I know. Yeah, it's 200 because they would be all others. Right. Because they're addressed off of um Rips's Chrysler. So, it' be 200 square feet because they have 100 and then plus 100 for the the large building. The large building. Okay. I'm sorry, Mr. Outlaw. I was just going to say because this action item is um appealable to the city council, if we could have the three members that voted nay on that last motion, if we could have just a quick this is why I voted nay for the record because city council um if it is appealed, they may want to know the specific reasoning. I know y'all have provided a lot of of communication, but just a quick this is why I voted nay on that last. Well, unfortunately, I've erased the votes, so I don't know. I don't I can't tell you who voted how. I know how I voted. They know. Yeah, we know. So, Wallace, McMaster, and Outlaw if Okay. I voted no. And again, I you know, Butterfly could have knocked me off the fence one way or the other, but I I in the end, I sided with with Commissioner Wallace that what's the what's the problem? Why bother having rules if we're just going to ignore them? So, who else? Commissioner. Yeah. Uh oh. Um, yeah. I I didn't feel like there was a hardship on the part of Home Depot. We'd already given a concession. I agreed with staff's opinion that we

should have interpreted it as a interstate with the extra 100 square feet, but I don't feel that granting a variance right after going through this process to update our code and give people more signage was appropriate. I didn't see any hardship. I agree with staff and that's why I voted the way I voted. Do we do we want uh the reasonings for the nay votes on the first motion as well? Just just in just because. So if you voted nay on the first motion, can you please explain why that nay? Well, you're you know my my thoughts. Do you need me to say it again? Please. I feel like th this situation is not going to be something that comes up often. 100,000 square feet with such a minimal amount of signage, I think, is not going going to um I think it's going to look odd. I just don't think it's going to I just feel like there should be some continuity in the signage that we're used to seeing with a building of that stature. Commissioner Hughes, that's kind of the same way I'm looking at. We need to make sure that we have continuity between what we already have and what we're proposing. And with a building at 130,000 square feet, I think it'll look off and it won't give them the same advertising. Even they'll have they'll have a monument sign out front similar to Lowe's, HV, and Walmart in that area. I think we need to have continuity with those buildings based upon their size and based upon their economic impact. and Commissioner Hector. Yeah, I think the signage would be instructive to uh the members of the

community uh going to uh shop at that location and the main sign uh would look and and feel very restrictive uh just based on the size of the building. and you know, notwithstanding the fact that, you know, we recently uh approved the signage, but I think ultimately is nothing wrong with doing what makes sense. So, that's why. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Before we move on, I don't I don't think we're not done with this one yet. Okay. Okay. I I just want to ask the commission um knowing that where we're where we're at right now with this waiver request, this Home Depot is now limited to 200 square 200 square feet. Does that change any would that change anybody's mind on approving the 350 square feet? Is it worth re relooking at that or do we just let this let this take its course and and I I assume you'll take it to city council. Okay. I mean is this something we can continue? I don't um I mean I'm look can we you don't know we don't know to the chairman. Well, I don't again I mean, if this is something we can do a continuence, obviously the six of us are not going to We're hung here. Would you like to make a motion to post postpone to another meeting? Yeah, I'll make a motion to to to uh for a continuence if we can get more

people for the next one. I'll second that motion. So, just for clarification, that is a postponement to the August at the discretion of the applicant. Perfect. I'd like to understand the why of that like well of the continuence. Well, I I mean for the time out I'm sorry. Time out. Okay. And and the word is postpone. Okay. And no, if we want to postpone it, we postpone it to August. not to some indefinite date or we postpone it till September, but I I think the motion to postpone needs to have um a finite date on it. Okay. So, would you like to amend your motion? I can. Do you have a preferred? Okay. So, I'll make a motion for a postponement to the August planning and zoning meeting. I'll still second that. Okay. Hang on, Roger. Hang on. All right. So, I have a motion and a second to postpone this item to the August meeting. Discussion. Sir, go ahead. What are we postponing? We're postponing the I motioned to postpone it because the six of us I I understand Home Depot side. I understand the code side. Um I think if they want to come back with

the additional exhibits that that others had requested and with other commissioners insight uh maybe we can come to a better answer. Um, but I I don't think that the 200 is appropriate. And so I mean their option is either we can postpone it and revisit it or they could appeal it or be stuck with 200. Yeah. So I I I think one of the one of the um potential advantages, Rodri, to postponing this is that uh we have seven people. So right now we've set ourselves up for a tie vote. with an even number, you just you we we're set up for a tie vote. Whereas, if we have have an odd number, uh maybe if it's not seven, it's five, but you're not going to get a tie vote out of an odd number. Does that make sense? I completely understand that. And I completely understand the process now. And the process has that we voted on it and it was 33 and that allows for and affords the applicant to uh appeal it and it goes to city council. That's the process, right? I guess I'm trying to understand why we would want to overrule that process uh just because it's convenient. We already know. I mean, and no one's wavering on their opinion of what we saw, what we discussed, and the process is in place for a reason. So, just like I heard several times that we just voted on the signage change.

So, for that reason, I don't think we should make or provide any waiverss for it so early on since it was just a month or so ago. Okay, fair, right? But the process is in place for a reason. So, let the process work the way the process is designed to work. That's my opinion. Right. So again, we could postpone this till the next meeting and have an odd number of people and um let's say that uh that that odd number of commissioners um goes with the 350 square feet. Well, Home Depot may want to may may want to appeal that. So, all or we flat out um deny it all together and they appeal that. So, all we've really done by waiting till August to to hash this out again is lengthen the time that they have to go to council. Does that make sense? Yes, that makes perfect sense. Which feeds into my point. Why continue to kick that can down the road when we've already voted? All right. Anybody else want to jump in here? Okay. So, we have a a motion and a second to postpone PLV 2025 0144 sign waiver to the August PNZ meeting. So to be clear, a yes vote is to is to look at this again in August where a no vote would would just leave it where it is and allow Home Depot to

do what they want to do in terms of going to city council. Okay. So um please record your vote. All right. I see six votes. Can you po publish that, please? We have one in favor and five opposed. So, that motion fails. So we will just leave it where it is right now with uh basically effectively what we've what we've done this evening is u in my mind is we've denied this the the applicant's request and it's now up to them if they want to seek uh another audience to appeal it take that to city council. Right. Okay. I really didn't think it would be that hard. Okay. Sure. You want to stand up there right now? Huh? You know you're right. All right. Daisy, go ahead. What do you got for us? I am here to present a workshop on the development process because you requested one after we came back from APA Texas. So, we thought we would take this as an opportunity to present the whole development process to some new commissioners that we have on the board because we know that a lot of them don't have the experience that you had, Mr. Outlaw, with actually being part of the process. So, that's the direction we're going. We're going to take you through the whole development process like if you

were an applicant and you will have the freedom to discuss anything after. So when it comes to the development process, uh we are pretty transparent with these things. We put everything on our development manual which is our website where all applications are listed, flowcharts are listed for non-residential development and residential development. And we can help people all the way from zone change SUP all the way to building permits. So raw land to going vertical and getting a CFO. Um but we also help people in between the process. So if they already have a zone change, we can help them at platting, at site plan, wherever they need, uh we will help them. But uh we can also help them way before that with the free pre-development meeting. Um these are free. Other cities actually do charge per the hour and per department. Uh we have planning, engineering and fire in that room. So if there are any concerns about the nature of a business, um a property they want to you know choose or if they have a different set of properties they want to choose, we can discuss with them any capacity issues uh access issues, location issues depending on their building site. if fire is going to have special requirements due to our fire code um amendments or anything like that, we can sit with them and really hash it out what would be required. And again, um we can help them at any any time through the process. So, if this is before they're purchasing a property, after they have purchased it, um after a zone change, they have their zoning, they come in, they have their site, their site plan, and they want to discuss that with us. um we're here to help them every step of the way. So, when it comes to the zone change in SUP process, uh they submit their documents and staff checks all those submittal items. This is usually planning staff since we're the ones that kind of act as

that project manager. And then from there, if we have all the documents as are listed in our zoning checklist, our SUP checklist and our PDD uh subchecklist that has even more requirements, it'll go um it'll be intaken. We charge that per acre and from those documents, fire engineering planning, JBSA, even as you have seen tonight, when something's in the APC2, we need their affirmative recommendation. uh and we even sent it to the chiefs as well to kind of look at okay what are these documents what effect does it have um in our community and go from there so again this is their TA determination form as you've seen with new policy from council engineering kind of looks at that traffic change making determinations of yes um there is going to be an impact and it is mitigatable um or just going from there but also we look at exhibits the meets and bounds and then letter of intent And then before it comes to the planning and zoning commission, we do have to send mailers 10 days uh before the hearing per state law. So that's when we send out those beautiful letters to everyone within 200 feet and people go, "What is this? What is going on?" Um and we start fielding in those calls, getting those letters back with, you know, objections, neutrals, and in favors. Um we this is also when we have the applicants post your beautiful yellow notice sign that is required per us. Um this is actually the one off of tonight's zone change uh along mask. Uh all active public hearing notices are also posted on our what's developing insurance website. This is updated after planning and zoning commission, before planning and zoning commission, and before council. So people can follow the hearings um as they go through the process and they can see when they're approved or if they're failed. And then um it's also posted on our public notices web page and all documents are

linked there as well. So it's pretty transparent to the public um and everyone. And then we also send it to the chief. So, we send it to the police department, EMS, and fire to see if they have any major concerns. And that's something that we enter in our uh staff report and in our presentation to you all as well. And then um when it comes to you, we present our staff report. You see it condensed into a presentation. This is where we we make those considerations of the master thorapher plan with engineering's guidance, the traffic impact analysis, adjacent land uses and zoning. We look at the comp plan. A lot of our criteria is really honed in on the comprehensive land use plan, the strategic plan, any parks and recreation master plan. That's more for residential. Uh we also look at the protests that are coming in. What are people saying? What are their major concerns? but also the allowed uses that are within that zoning district. And again, as we always reiterate when a zone change comes before us, that it's not just what the applicant is proposing, but it's all those allowed uses within that zoning district. And again, I know a lot of times it's quite difficult because the comprehensive land use, we have to look towards the future. So, we're looking at, okay, after the master plan roads are built out, how is this all going to play together? How are all the puzzle pieces of the city going to fit together? For the SCP, one of the unique uh considerations that is part of the criteria is that character and integrity. And that's just because the SCP is for specific use. So, uh PNC does have that discretion and make that recommendation to city council and then city council has the ultimate discretion to make a decision on allowing that use within that zoning district in that specific parcel. So after the planning and zoning commission makes a recommendation, uh we have to post in the newspaper 15 days

prior per state law. We usually do it about two Fridays before. So it's posted once again and again it's on the newspaper and then it goes to city council and city council will either approve or deny the ordinance that's presented to them. And um you already know that if they're trying to reapply for the same zone change, they have to wait at least six months. But if it's significantly different, then they can do it the next day. So if they have their zoning already or um they get their zoning approved, they go through the plotting process. The preliminary plotting stage is more if they're starting from ground zero. Um it's not a simple type of plat that can be done or if it's multiple parcels that are owned by the same uh people and they only want a final plat portion by portion or unit per unit. And again, we have this online for everyone. All of this is linkable. They're able to go through it. And again, this is um an example of what our website actually looks like. So everything is clickable. People have this at their fingertips. They can see um what the costs are going to be for each step in the process. And it's pretty transparent for them. And throughout the platting process, we have engineering, fire planning, parks, tech, JBSA and easement holders and utility providers being a part of this is this is this is really an interdep departmental uh work that goes to actually getting these plats approved. It isn't just rush. It takes a long time. It it actually takes months. Um just because we have to work with a lot of people. Um, for example, right now text dot their minimum time frame is six to nine months just to get people answers and that's that's a quick turnaround on their part. So plotting um when we look at plat exhibits we're looking at the streets

making sure it meets minimum requirements proposed access points. So this is where we're looking at okay um are the stubouts that they're proposing appropriate um for fire. One of the biggest things that they consider is deadend streets and looking if that dead-end street is too long or if it's short or what's going on, if there's going to be enough turnaround for a firetruck. Uh staff does look at zoning in the minimum lot dimensions. So again, kind of how we mentioned that, you know, someone can come in for R2, but that is just the minimum. If they want to go above and beyond that to sell bigger lots, they're not forced to ask for RA zoning. uh R2 can be their minimum and they can go bigger than that if they'd like. Uh we do look at the platin notes make making sure everything is good. Also open space requirements, making sure that they have their private open space, but also if they're going to dedicate land to us, what's going to be built in those? And also the master parks plan. We do have some larger trail systems. Um and we want to make sure that if there's parcels that are a part of that that that can be included. Um and then engineering has all the fun stuff when it comes to geotechnical report the actual traffic impact analysis. Um this is where they can review okay what are the improvements that uh developers are actually going to have to do where it's you know right turn only where they have to have del lanes. Um how much of the street do they actually have to build out if they only have to do you know the half or if they have to do the full. This is also where they start discussing rough proportionality with this as you know due to um what's happening in the legislature. We're very restricted on what we can actually require people to do or not. So we have to work within those limits. Um but also water and wastewater. So this is where capacity comes into question. Okay, where are you trying to send your wastewater? Where are you going to connect to water? Making sure that what they're proposing

we actually have capacity for that. And we can expect you know that load into our system but also utilities. And then again certification this is where we do all the technical review. It's online once again it has its own checklist so applicants know exactly what we're looking for. We also have the technical checklist which makes it very clear what staff is looking for and they can use this to go through the process. The people that actually use these checklists are the ones that have much less rounds of review and it's and the process is actually much smoother for them and easier for them. And as you know um it can go through multiple cycles before it is certified. It depends on the applicant response and the number of review cycles. Sometimes they resubmit something and they only want us respond to planning's comments and not engineering's comments. So that is something that we do run into. After it's certified, it goes through the formal process. Um, this is where they submit all the documents um come in. They should be certified. It's essentially almost a formality. Uh, we assess the fees. So, no fee is paid during certification, but during formal it is. We receive all the same documents. They can get approval um within two business weeks as I say just because it is administrative approval. But if it does require a waiver for the planning and zoning commission that it's a minimum 30-day review cycle just depend depending on how that lines up. But typically we have it lined up within like 20 days. Um and this is where you all will see uh someone is asking for on-site septic or um someone only has access to frontage through an easement things like that. Um and then after they get their preliminary plot certified and they go through the preliminary platform application, this is where engineer wants their public infrastructure permit, it usually goes this way just because um in the city of Shirts if

you're preliminary plat and you own multiple lots, but you plan to find a plant in pieces. So think of Saddlebrook, it's it's a very large development, but they're going to final plant in units. You know, as the years go on, it's going to take multiple years to finally build out. We want to make sure that all the infrastructure that's required is going to support um the the whole development and not just piece by piece and kind of band-aid each step of the process. So, we want to make sure that's all in place before and then they start the certification process for the final plant. Again, it's the same items. It the documents are only going to look different if they final platinum and pieces. So if they have six units on the preliminary plat and they go unit by unit on the final plat. So again um timing depends on the applicant's response and then they go through formal. This is a lot of times where you see for commercial people come in they ask for on-site septic waiverss just for a temporary uh time period. So think of ID, not IDV, think of STX Frio. They're in that um big agreement with EDC to build the wastewater um over a very long uh distance. So they ask for an on-site septic for a temporary period of time. And again, uh this can be administratively approved and it can go to the planning and zoning commission depending if there's a waiver. Um and again, the time period is the same. And once everything is done, if all their improvements are installed, inspected and accepted by our engineering department, then they have the pleasure to give us all the documents so we can run to the county for them to go record. So there are other different types of plots. We have minor plot, replat, and amending plot. Um it's very specific on what can be done on each one. These processes are much shorter just because they're smaller types of plots. Um less work or much simpler. Um, and if you're doing minor platin, you can do the site plan at the same time. But after plat

recordation for non-residential subdivisions in multif family, they go through the site plan process. Uh, we only see this for residential subdivisions if they're doing an amenity center. So, for example, Saddlebrook, if they're doing an amenity center, uh, they'll submit a site plan for that. So, we can see that, make sure it meets all of our requirements. But for residential subdivisions, um after they go through the platting process and everything's installed, they go straight to residential building permits. Um so they don't have to go through that site plan process for um all the homes. The site plan process is basically the same as preliminary plan where we have the certification where we do all the technical review. Everything is online and available to them. These are the documents that we're all looking at. the site plan exhibit, landscape plan, tree mitigation, exterior architectural elevations, engineering and fire documents. So the site plan is where we get to all the fun stuff. We look at access, we look at all the site design criteria, we reference the plat for easements. Um there's a lot of we are non-accessing easements along like textile rightway. We look at the buffers for zoning. We look at the setbacks for zoning. This is where we go, okay, is it commercial and residential next to each other? we're going to require an additional uh 20 foot building setback. We look at building height. We look at the land use. We look at impervious coverage and we look at screening, but we also look at parking ratios and sizes. And then we also look at landscaping within the site plan. And then we get our landscape plans in. We look at that impervious coverage that's required per zoning. We look at those minimum landscape buffers again, the tree planting and the tree species. We also do look at tree mitigation. Uh we look if they're meeting our minimum preservation requirements, what they're proposing to remove, if there's any way we can uh get the larger trees to be saved instead of you know saving some trash trees. We

look at trash species and although we can't um regulate building material, we do have required articulations just just the shape and feel of the building. So vertical changes, horizontal changes to that building. And then engineering has the pleasure of looking at storm water access and pvious coverage, proposed utilities and reports. So they have the pleasure of working with text dot um a lot of times when it's access. So think of this is um our big league car wash that's coming along I35. They had to work with text on that fire. We see things like fire plans um where they might submit it separately. They show all the FDC locations, the fire lanes, fire hydrant locations. And again, this can go through multiple cycles depending on the applicant's response. And then after it's certified, they submit the formal application, which has its own fee. Um, this is where the fee is assessed. And after they go through that process, um, it is a minimum 30-day per our UDC, but if it's an administrative approval, it's two weeks or less. Um, but we do have the ability to forward uh site plans to the planning and zoning commission and also if a waiver is required. We haven't had that happen recently. Uh, but typically people try to avoid that because they want to expedite the process as much as possible. And uh after they get their site plan approved, they can go straight to building permits. After that, it's the dominoes start just start falling down. Um, and it goes pretty quickly. Um, but that's basically the development process in a quick nutshell. There's much more I could have added, but feel free to discuss. All right. Thank you, Daisy. Um, I'm going to start because I asked for this. Um, and um, certainly I I hope this was

helpful for our newer members that maybe weren't aware of, uh, the process itself. Um really what I wanted to discuss tonight was the fact that um nobody nobody sits in the audience and throws rocks at us at the site plan process. Nobody sits in the audience and throws rocks at us in the planning process. It's all in the zone change requests. Okay. and they ask questions like u you know there the the the three biggies that always come up are traffic, public safety and possible flooding and then I've got one here after traffic I said infrastructure. Now I I'll I'll be honest with you and I apologize. I never noticed that you were doing the preliminary TIA uh until I until last month's agenda. So, is that something relatively new where you've been inserting that in the in your in your um in the memo? So, I would say that is relatively new. we've um taken the feedback because as you say, you all are getting the rocks thrown at you, but right, we're hearing all of that as well. So, that is a change that staff made to start requiring those preliminary TAs. It is a big expense for the applicant um in some situations, but that full preliminary TIA gets reviewed by John Noak and our engineering department and he writes us a formal response that gets put into the staff report. That's a more recent change. And then the other more recent change is um well I wouldn't say recent, it's been a little longer, but sending it to uh EMS police and fire chiefs to get their input to try to tackle some of the emergency services questions as well

that we get a lot. We've sent it to the chiefs. They either have a concern, don't have a concern, and we put those responses in the staff report now, too. So, it is a it they're both more fairly recent. TIA much more recent than the chief's email. Um, but both of those were based off of the questions and and concerns that we have. And I will say if we have a property that we know is in a drainage way that is a hot button topic or is in a flood plane, we're doing the same thing. We're reaching out to engineering and getting a more formal response from them on how those items could be addressed. So, we can talk about it both in our presentation and it's available for PNZ council and the residents and the staff report. Okay. Well, thank you Emily. that that's part of what I was looking for was having some of these answers earlier in the process. Um, of course um want to I need to figure out how to say this so I'm not sounding insensitive. Okay. But well, I understand traffic and I I think I you heard me rant last month about how I'm just fed up with, you know, how it took me an hour to go 35 to Universal City and almost 30 minutes to come back because aviation was all backed up. And and I'm getting to the point where I'm starting to because that's the big concern. uh of a lot of the uh uh the surrounding areas when we're proposing a new a zone change for a new subdivision. Um you know, typically commercial, nobody really, you know, that's they they don't turn out in droves for that. But but the whole what I was really after with this presentation

was is there anything um that we can move into the P&Z process to provide answers earlier in the process and I think you've done that with the uh the preliminary TIA um you know um public safety response time. Well, I sat here and I don't know if you heard them go by earlier in the meeting, but I counted seven police cars, a fire truck, and an ambulance go by. Well, those police cars all must have been sitting over here at the station, not out, you know. Of course, there could have been shift change, too. I I don't know what time they do that, but people's concerns are always um depending on what we're reszoning. They they also like to bring up the more crime. Um so yeah, it's uh I'm glad you get fire, police, and EMS involved. Um you know, maybe if we could get a a better comment, say from the police chief that says, "We don't see this uh you know, we already cover this area. we don't see a problem with increased response times or you know what they say now is they don't you know they don't have any concerns and maybe that should be good enough. Um I actually have spoken to the police chief about essentially how they add more people to the police force when it comes to residential zone changes since I know that is a concern. Um and um after speaking with him, he did let me know that they do it based off uh calls that come in the area. So they won't do it preemptively, but once the houses are built and more calls start coming in, then that's basically what they do to say we need more police officers in this area in the force and that's how they add more people to lower

the response times. Okay. But I would also I I think that's a great point, Chairman Outlaw. We can definitely ask the three chiefs, can you provide a little more? Why don't you have a concern? Why don't you have any objections? Is it because we're already fully staffed? We don't have a lot of calls there. It's x miles from the station, whatever that may be. But to add a little bit more than just we don't have a concern. We can definitely ask and request that. you know, if Yeah, I know they're already all the everybody in the city's overworked, but but I think maybe a little more um substantive comment that you can incorporate into your presentation. I don't know that's going to that's going to change anything because uh other than provide better information. uh you know, a lot of these zone change requests, the the the the surrounding property owners are just it's a very emotional um thing for them. And um I I don't know if there's anything we can do to although you know I remember the one here two or three meetings ago where we were going to reszone that property on um over here in old in central shirts and the couple sat out there and they never said anything and I asked them as they were leaving and say oh no we we didn't realize it was just going to be another house. We thought it might you know so once they had the information they were okay with it. Um, and I think as Daisy mentioned, I think that's why we've kind of gone above and beyond. It's on what's developing. It's we on the public notice, but that ultimately assumes people, you know, use the internet, which I know everybody doesn't, but then we have that bright yellow sign that hopefully people can see to call us. Um, but sometimes people just want to come to the meeting and hear the information to get that fact

rather than call us. We do we try to put ourselves out there as much as we can for people to call so we can answer those questions before they have to come and spend hours with us sometimes. Well, it it sounds to me and and personally um that's the reason I ask you to go through this process and I think you're you're a step or two ahead of me and thank you. I I appreciate that. So, anybody else have any questions or comments? I'll comment. This goes way further than what we do in San Antonio. Like we will accept no comment as sufficient. Like if asked other departments, what do you feel about this? No comment is sufficient. Well, I've seen your agendas, too. So, yeah, it's a little different scale. Rodri, anybody before we move on. All right. Well, thank you all. And again, I I I think you're you're a step or two ahead of me and in what you're doing, I think thank you. It's headed in the right direction. So, thank we um thank you for bringing wanting this presentation. We thought it was a good learning opportunity for everybody, maybe a refresher, but glad we are meeting the goals. Thank you. Okay, so now we have another workshop requested by Commissioner Wallace. So, what do you got for us, Sam? Okay, this is a workshop concerning distance requirements between car washes. Again, as uh chairman outlaw mentioned, this was brought forward by Commissioner Wallace requested workshop related to car washes distance requirements on May 7th. Uh this is often called a dispersal ordinance. It's intended to prevent clustering or overconentrating of the same use. Um we actually have this inserts on Main Street and that is uh

the section in our code right there below it. It prevents uh tattoo parlors to be within 900 ft of each other on Main Street. What it effectively does is prevent more than two for being on Main Street. Main Street's only like 1100 ft long. So if you put one at the end, you really can only put another one at the end. If one's smack dab in the middle, everyone else is kind of out of luck. So we we have this already. It's already a thing. Now for our car washes, we have two categories in the city of shirts. Uh one is automated facility where a customer can have you know a car and uh have it washed in exchange for financial consideration and also our self-service a facility typically corn operated used by the customer to wash motorcycles, automobiles and light load vehicles. Our permitted use table is right here below. Uh our automated car washes are permitted by right in neighborhood services general business general business 2 and M1 our light industrial district and the self-service is the same except it requires a specific use permit in neighborhood services district. So anytime we kind of look at any research for our UDC or anything really we kind of we have our target cities that we look at. These are our target cities that you see here on the left. So, we asked, you know, how do the how do they treat their car washes in these cities? Um, you know, Frisk, a lot of them typically have either permitted by right or specific use permits. There's a lot of variation between commercial and industrial and how they they permit these. Um, no real consistency other than they're mostly permitted in industrial districts. And in the commercial, it varies between permitted by right and specific use permit. However, in our target cities, you see that we have a um dispersal ordinance in McKenna and they have an an ordinance

that says no car wash can be within a half mile radius of another car wash. Now, uh we also looked at um in Texas where there's a dispersal ordinance of a car wash and it seems to be very prevalent in the valley. So you'll see in Edinburg they have a two-mile restriction in Macallen a half mile in Brownsville it is five miles between each other and in Harleen it is two miles. So uh our GIS department put together some some uh graphs for you. You'll see here um the yellow bubbles or really you see the orange outlines are actually our car washes that are currently in the city. So, we have one on 11:03. We've got several clustered here on 39. Although, I should mention that you see these three here that my cursor is over. Those are accessory car washes for like HB or gas stations. So, that little like box off to the side, you know, it's always annoying when the gas pump asks you if you want a car wash. I never do. And then, uh up here there's a a couple more fully automated services. And then uh this is the one that uh Daisy showed in her last presentation that is currently being permitted and under construction. So there's a couple down south as well. So a half mile radius would look something like this. Um you know if it would prevent some clustering on the 39 um and then also down here on this uh uh 78 we did a two-mile. It would look something like this. It does it it covers quite a bit of area. you see there. Um and then if we did five miles like Brownsville, you're basically never going to get a car wash ever again in

the city of Shirts. So um that is really all staff has as this um workshop was um requested by Commissioner Wallace. I will let Wallace have the floor to open up discussion. Thanks. Um yeah, so this uh I've requested this in response to a trend that we're seeing in San Antonio development wise as um a lot of development is really focused on um the car washes with the vacuums very similar to it's not be clean anymore. It's um go that's it. So that essentially what we're what I've seen development wise uh is it's just every intersection has one of these types of automated car wash with vacuums. Um purposefully I the um what I'm hoping to to do with this with the maps it kind of gives a better picture. Um, realistically I it's look having some kind of half mile radius and an SUP similar to McKenna. Um, but the the purpose of this really is to encourage other type of development. Um, it just seems to be car wash after car wash after car wash after car wash. Um and it's it's very similar like the clustering uh at 39 is following a very similar pattern of the clustering of car of gas stations right next to 31 and I35. So um my purpose of this is to to you know hopefully establish some kind of radius I think the half mile um and the additional sup but it is to get ahead of a pattern that I have seen and

hoping to um you know essentially get ahead of out insurance. I think there's a lot of area especially getting closer towards I 10 that is starting to build out um and if you're I it's not to discourage development it is to discourage one type of development that is um uh what's a what's a good word just duplicating at every possible intersection. So look at looking at this too, we have to look at Commissioner How so he doesn't have to get stuck on aviation for three hours. I mean that's what that's part of the thing where they're having with the building construction that's going on near Home Depot is to basically put it back in the city where we we can shop within the city and not have to contend with 35 and contend with that with the nightmare that's there right now with the construction and even afterwards. Um it's a smart move for us to look at other types of businesses to enhance what we have, especially as we start to build and grow with these um especially on the south side with all of the new homes. Where are they going to go shop? Can we stick something in there? Um the only thing I would consider as far as like a car wash or any kind of gas station with something like a destination, a BIE, if a BIES came in, Bies is a destination. They've got YouTube videos where people they actually spend vacation money there. they will pull in. They will sit in a hotel and just go to Bies, whatever. I mean, that's good for them. Um, something on the south side like a Trader Joe's is another destination location. That's one thing where economic development can look out and say, "Hey, let's drop a Trader Joe's in the area." Um, or an Aldine, something that's kind of a oneoff weird thing where people want a destination to go to it. I mean, we I actually went to the Aldines up in Austin just so I could put my nickel so I get the because just to get my cart to walk around. I'm like, "Oh, and I get my nickel back. That's kind of awesome. So, I mean, I think that's what we're

looking at with this is so we're not sitting here where every five feet we either got a gas station or a car wash or a combination. So, I think that's a good idea to look at. Um, half mile radius, I think five miles is a little overkill. I mean, good for them, but I think that's kind of ridiculous. um half mile is probably more appropriate, maybe even three quarters, but anything above that I think would just be hamper would be hamstringing ourselves in long term. So that's my two cents. And just to add to that, a car wash, the what I'm talking about that is being developed is the go car wash. It's going to have two people working. It's a tunnel you drive through with vacuums. Um there's a bunch up and down Pat Booker now. Uh you see them just repeating themselves. It's not a destination. Like you're not going to drive to the other side of San Antonio because someone has blue lights in the tunnel at their car wash versus the green lights at the tunnel of your car wash. Like what you're saying with like a buckies and things like yes, it's not to discourage this type of development overall. It is to allow for additional things to be built um other than the same thing over and over and over and over and over. Um so that's my bit. Uh, I just wanted to add that I think it it also speaks to being a little more intentional about what we want the city ultimately to look like and offer to the citizens of this community. So, because you look at like on like on Short South, they're building homes there, but there's no infrastructure as far as shopping's concerned. They've got to trek all the way to Cibilo. they've got to trick to 35 or go off Kittyhawk to get food or even go to base. I mean, this way we not only attract people into the city, but we maintain it. We increase the quality of life and that's why looking as we continue to build more

houses, I think we need more and more thoughtful on promoting commercial in those areas to give those people a solid backbone. So, it feels like their community. I mean it's with 15 18 and 78 being kind of like a cut off between Shirt South and Shirts North. There could be some development there that could really enhance that area and promote it where we're not just seeing rooftop after rooftop, but we do have something in there that can offer them a a higher quality of life and a better experience where they live in the city. And that could also draw more businesses in and increase property values over long term. I have a question. Does the city go after businesses to try and draw them in or is it business owners coming to you saying, "I'd like to open this type of business." Um because if you buy a piece of property and you have a vision in mind but you're and say it's a car wash and you say well you can't build that there but they bought that land with a purpose. So the idea is you come into the city first and say I'm thinking about buying this land and this is what I want to put there. Uh but what if it's the other way around? They have a piece of property they want to use for a specific reason and then they're being told they can't do that. So that's one question. Then the other question was the first one is do you guys go after businesses and say uh we'd like to put a Trader Joe's here in shirts. I mean what do you what do you think about that? I mean I'm curious. So it is not the function of the city to recruit businesses. We don't go and say we really think this is a good idea. We really think it's a bad idea. We just basically property owner comes in with an idea and we tell them you know we try to help them with their idea. If there's things in the code that says they can't do it, we let them know. You know, if there's a way to change that, we also let them know. But really, what you're describing as you know, um, you know,

going out and looking for businesses is more of the function of the EDC of the Economic Development Corporation. Yeah. I'm just curious because, you know, if we're saying, well, you can't build a car wash within a half mile or whatever because you're wanting other types of businesses there. I understand. But if you have a person that has a piece of property and that's what they want to do there and then we're going to tell them no, you can't. I mean, I say that as a business owner. So, Oh, no. And I and this is not to discourage people from having this type of business. I my experience has been it is a national chain owned by one person and they have like 30 locations across our region. It's not Oh, yeah. Exactly. I mean, it is not a it is not someone I don't want to say it's not someone in your community who is like, "Oh, I'm, you know, I'm I'm grinding it out to to buy this land and start a car wash." It is someone who I've done my analysis and this is our prime location. Where can I put this and make this work as best for me as possible? Um, you know, I I'm not sure next steps what we could do with this besides recommend that staff maybe take this to a UDC amendment or Yeah, I think if uh staff can explore a UDC amendment in regards to a dispersal ordinance for car washes. Okay. I think we can bring forward we can do some re some further research and bring forward some options if that's what the planning and zoning commission would like to do. Do we need to do that as a motion or I for a workshop? No, you don't need to do that. You can just There's no action at on a workshop. Okay. It's it's it's I don't have this marked for actions. Yeah, it's it's just a discussion. Go ahead. Have we have we had uh like a presentation from the economic uh development corporation here in church to talk about what they're doing intentionally?

Uh, not to my knowledge since I've been here, but we could definitely make that happen. I'm sure Scott Wayman would love to come in here and love to hear from them. Okay, so um I'm kind of sad here and and honestly I don't see a problem. Okay. Um, you know, I would ask, do do you have any idea why a automated car wash is permitted by right in neighborhood services but not a self-service? I don't that decision was made long before I got here. And um, but if that's something you would like us to explore as well. No, I it it just it really it's one of those things that I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense other than maybe there's something negative about us about about an self-s serve uh car wash. Can you put your map back up there again? So, um trying to trying to get my bearings here. I think this guy right here is self-s serve. Okay. So, yeah, he's been that's on Main Street, right? That's the one that's down there by the uh storage. Um, right. That's on 15. No, that's on Main Street. Yeah, this on Main Street, right? See, there's another one. As you go down 1518, as you head out of town, there's one there by the storage yard. Um, that might be The reason why that might not be on here is because that might be outside the city. Anyway, I I look at this as a a a a free market uh you know um kind of thing that these folks, you know, the latest one is that Blue

Wave is that the one that they just finished up there next to um up there next to on a discount tire. Yeah. Yeah. big league. Well, you know the history blue wave originally wanted to go where QT is on 39. Okay. Um part of being being on being around too long is you you know things like that and and but that piece of property that they finally built on uh you know in the uh what are we coming up? This is 2020. So that's 36 years I've lived in shirts. The only thing that's ever been on that piece of property is a Christmas tree lot at Christmas time. Okay. And it it's the same rationale that I applied when they wanted to reszone that sliver of land out there on 10 and you know we all decided that that didn't fit with the comp plan that you know no we need this kind of thing. And the fact is, um, you know, it's it's it's been out there for decades with nothing. And along comes somebody that wants to build a car wash and we're going to say, "No, you can't do that." And it'll sit there for a couple more decades before somebody puts something on. Then what do they put on it? A Burger King, you know, um, another chicken place. Um, you know, well, I I I know I'm getting a little um a little sarcastic, but you know, I tell people you can't throw a rock in this city without hitting a Mexican restaurant or a chicken place. So, why aren't we concerned about why don't we want to have dispersal ordinances about uh about chicken restaurants or Mexican restaurants?

Okay. Um I I you know and then you've got typically uh when you look at that cluster up there on 35 only one of those is a tunnel car wash and that what is that the wash tub I think it is. The others are all uh attached to gas stations or something. Uh and I'm really surprised that QT on Rip's Crosser doesn't have a car wash. That's that's one of the things that typically comes with most of those convenience stores is a car wash. And that's a convenience for their customers. Okay. Now, honestly, I haven't used the one up at at the um the Valeron 35 since Go opened. Okay. I use the I I typically use the Go Car Wash. Oh, and do you have the one there at Legacy Oaks and 35? the car wash that's attached to the gas station there. So, and again, I have seen three car washes go out of business. Um, we had uh where um what's the lube place? Uh the five Yeah, whatever it's called there on 39. That little building to the north of it, that two bay building, that was a car wash for years. And uh it went out of business. I think uh between the wash tub and and uh uh whatever the go-kart washer originally was, I think I think they they drove them out of business. And then you go up to Weerstein and and 35 adjacent to that new daycare right there on the corner. That was a car wash. And it seems to me there used to be one down somewhere in the area of uh the VFW that was a self spray wash. Um

so a lot of this, you know, I have to assume that that uh Blue Wave paid a pretty penny for that frontage lot up there. And you know there I I I I like to assume that they did their research and they determined that they could make money by building a car wash there. Um so and and it's not like we're building these things in the middle of neighborhoods. These are off in our you know really they're off in our commercial retail spots. So again, I don't really see a problem. But that's me. There are six of us sitting here tonight. So um it might be we don't I don't think we need a motion, but I think a consensus um as to whether or not we want these folks to um look into this. And then there's there's all these things about is it car washes in general? Is it standalone car washes? Do we include the ones that come with convenience stores with gas pumps? Um the selfs serve versus auto fully automated. A lot of different wrinkles there. So, but anyway, so what's the consensus? I I know you I I think it would be bring an item back and if we go anywhere with it. I my statement was is purely what I've seen in areas that are experiencing rapid development. So rapid growth in population larger supporting services that are going to support your neighborhood. It's car wash car wash. I mean I I I hear you. I keep driving

around and I, you know, I keep hearing about uh gas shortages and the price of gas. I keep driving around seeing these new these new gas stations going in. So, anyway, so I know you'd like to have them do it at home, but Judy, and what what what's your thoughts on like to see what AD EDC has to say? What what is their vision of it? So, are we kind of aligning with them? Um, that's more important than I think if we talk to them, then we can come back to y'all with the thoughtful response instead of just some kind of knee-jerk reaction of half mile or god forbid five miles. I think I would I you know, again, it it's just my opinion. I'm not on EDC, but I don't think they really care what they they're after the bigger fish. And um, you know, I I don't think they're out there recruiting gas stations. They're looking for manufacturing and distribution and uh they don't even want to find a sit-down restaurant for me. That's just not on their radar. But I agree. I think I think if we could get EDC to come give us a presentation uh on their vision, their goals, their priorities, it it might help us. But anyway, getting back to the car wash thing, do do is the consensus we want them to look at it or would we just rather they not spend their time? I mean, honestly, right now, I think once as far as them looking at it and wasting their time, let's see what EDC has and kind of get their vision of what they've got going on and then we can come back to staff and go, this is where they're looking at it. This is how we're looking at it. Where can we meet in the middle? Where can we find a consensus from both sides? So, as we're proposing things, EDC is behind driving this and we can give you guys something thoughtful instead of, well, I don't like it. And your response is, well, that's great,

but whatever. I want I want to be able to give you a thoughtful reason as to why and a thoughtful reason as to why spend your time and effort without we don't have that right now because we need to be aligned with what EDC wants what y'all are y'all are approving and what y'all are are recommending and what we're approving eventually to to send to council for their final approval. So it it's a more of a streamlined effect so we have a clearer vision and we kind of understand more. So, when um homeowners come in and complain about crime, um the idea of having the the chiefs give a better thoughtful answer because it may be one of those things where now it may just be a quick email and and they don't give it a lot of thought long term or it may give them more more pause that we ask them for either instead of just yes or no, a reason as to why yes or why no. It may give them more pause for for clarence and clarity to kind of go well. Okay. Yeah. and and they may look at it a little differently. It's more of a of a complete um holistic approach to things instead of just kind of peacemailing it so we can be thoughtful and the work that y'all are doing, what we're doing, and what everybody else in the city so we can we present it to council. It's more of a complete package and it's more of an alignment so council can see a clearer vision and that's coming to them. I think this be helpful for them in the long term. But I think the car wash for right now, um, for y'all's sake, I wouldn't worry about it until we had a discussion with EDC so we can kind of figure out where they're going and then if we want to bring it back in, we can take a look at it and kind of then we can ask you all that question. I think it's a wait on this thing. All right. And I I will say that it's a very real possibility that EDC does not have an opinion one way or the other about car washes. Judy, what are what are your thoughts? Do do we want to have them do this or No. Okay, Patrick

with Clayton. Clayton. Okay, Roger, do you have a preference one or the other on car wash? Well, whether or not we want we want staff to to go out and start uh uh a proposed UDC. Oh, would you call this a dispersal dispersal ordinance? There's also if if the radius dispersal ordinance is uncomfortable for the commission, there's also potential for staff to explore the permitted use table with specific use permits or something like that. I personally think shirts has enough car washes. That's just my personal opinion. Okay. So, I wouldn't It sounds once again we're kind of split on on, you know, um, we could have another workshop and bring some options in after we've talked to EDC. I I don't know if however, I'm sorry. Go ahead. I do think that we need to hear from the EDC. I am really interested in their vision for sure. Yeah, I think that would be helpful in a lot of other areas as well. I'm wondering if uh if the Chamber of Commerce is another brain we could pick in terms of you know I don't know exactly if they have their ear to the ground in terms of market what's you know what's um what's hot in the in the business community you know maybe a call to I'm not sure what Maggie's function is anymore over there or their executive director ctor, maybe just a phone call to them and see if they have any input. But so I think because we're split on this, um I I I think the request is for you guys to look at it. Yeah. Uh maybe not a

priority. Are you all right with that, Clayton? I mean, this is this is to talking about a longterm vision. Yeah. And I would for the long And you know, and maybe you could do a little more research in terms of uh um what you might see the dispersal ordinance saying, you know, in terms of as I said, do we treat all car washes the name or is a convenience store with gas pumps, car wash, is that different than a u standalone, you know, like uh Blue Wave or go um um so uh before you, you know, rather than come back to I don't know what, however it works out for you guys. Okay. Okay, we good. All right, moving on. Item number eight, requests and announcements. Uh, item A, request by commissioners to place items on a future PNZ agenda. Anybody? Okay. I would I just want to remind staff that elections are on need to be on the August. Okay. Because I need I need a vi uh we need a vice chairman. So, um, all right. 8B announcements. Um, anybody have anything else? Yeah. Um, this is kind of cool. So, uh, over the past, it's July now, so six months, uh, I had studied for the AICP exam and I have recently passed it and now a certified planner. Um, so it's kind of a big deal um, in the planning world. Um, but yeah,

so thank you. Well, congratulations. Anybody else? Announcements by city staff. You all have anything? Nothing. All right. Item number nine, information in your uh current projects and city council status update uh or in your packet. Of course, that doesn't include last night's council meeting, which um I meant to watch this morning, and I have not seen that either. Um but that looks like all the agenda. So, it is um It it is 8:17 and this meeting's adjourned. Emily, I have a quick question for you.