Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

Hello, my name is Elizabeth Cruz, Grants and Special Projects Compliance Officer for the City of Socorro. Thank you for joining today's meeting. Before our meeting begins, we would like to remind our guests to please remove all hats and silence all electronic devices. No disruptive behaviors or outbursts will be tolerated, and violators are subject to rejection or possible prosecution.

Hola, mi nombre es Judy Rodriguez, Planeadora de la Ciudad de Socorro. Gracias por participar en la reunión de hoy. Antes de que comience la reunión, quisiera recordarle a nuestros invitados favor de quitarse los sombreros y silenciar todo dispositivo electrónico. No se tolerará ningún comportamiento perturbador ni exabrupto y los infractores estarán sujetos a expulsión y posible procesamiento.

Good afternoon, everybody. This is a plant zoning commission of the City of Socorro, Texas. This is July 21st, 2026, 533 p.m. We call this meeting to order.

Good afternoon now. Starting with item number two, establishment of quorum. Andrew Arroyos.

Here.

David Estrada.

Here.

Osvaldo Reza. Absent. Yolanda Rodriguez. Here. Rafael Carrillo.

Here.

Isidro Torres, absent. We have quorum with four commissioners present. Moving on to item number three, open quorum. Alfredo, do we have anyone that would like to speak?

Not at the moment.

Thank you, Alfredo. Moving on to item number four.

Make a motion to approve.

I second. I have a motion made by Andrew Arroyos to approve, second by Yolanda Rodriguez. All those in favor of the motion?

Aye.

Any nays? Any abstain? Motion carried. Moving on to item number five, public hearing for the proposed amendment to the City of Socorro's master plan and rezoning of block three, block two, El Campestre, located at 734 Campeche Road, City of Socorro, El Paso County, Texas, from R1, single-family residential, to R2, medium-density residential. to allow for the construction of a triplex on the property. Mr. Arroyos?

Good afternoon, everybody. We will open public hearing at 535.

We don't have anybody.

We will close public hearing at 535.

Thank you. Moving on to item number six, consider and take action on the proposed amendment to the city of Socorro's master plan and rezoning of lot three, block two, El Campestre, located at 734 Campeche Road, city of Socorro, El Paso County, Texas, from R1, single-family residential, to R2, medium-density residential, to allow for the construction of a triplex on the property. Ms. Rodriguez?

Thank you, Yadira. Good evening, Chairman, Commissioner, Judith Rodriguez, planner with the City of Socorro. We'll continue with the next item on the agenda, and this is item number six, and this is a resigning request for the property located at 734 Campeche Road. We'll proceed with the general information beginning with our review of the property. The property address of resolution is 734 Campesia Road. The legal description is Lot 3, Block 2, El Campestre. Property owner is Enrique Ayala, who is represented by EBA Development LLC. The lot size is 10,010 square feet. The zoning, it's an R1 single-family residential. Current land use, vacant. future land use of urban residential SR. Summary of the request, request is for approval of rezoning a property from R1 single family residential to R2 medium density residential to allow for the construction of a triplex. And staff recommendation, staff recommends approval of the rezoning request with the condition that the proposed development be limited to a duplex.

Thank you.

Next is the zoning map where the subject property is outlined in light blue and it's located within the R1 single family residential zoning district shown in yellow. The surrounding area is mostly residential with nearby properties also zoned R1 and some properties zoned R2 medium density residential showing orange. followed by the future land use map. The subject property is aligned in light blue and designated as suburban residential SR, shown in yellow, and the surrounding area is also planned for suburban residential land use. Now this is the subdivision map. The property is outlined in light blue, located within the subdivision named El Campestre, which is outlined in dark blue. This subdivision, El Campestre, was recorded in November 1973, with a total of 229 lots. To date it contains 212 R1 single family residential lots, two R2 medium density residential lots, 15 C1 light commercial lots, one C2 general commercial lot, and 11 vacant lots. This aerial image shows the subject property outlined in light blue. The property is currently undeveloped and is surrounded primarily by residential development with a few vacant lots in the area and access to the property is provided from Campeche Road. This image is a view of the property frontage along Campeche Road. Now this slide shows the public notice map highlighting the area within 200 feet of the property that was notified as required by law regarding the proposed rezoning. followed by the public notice letters that were mailed in both English and Spanish to property owners within 200 feet around of the subject property, and no support or opposition had been received in person by mail, by phone, or via email. This is the site plan submitted by the applicant showing the topography of the subject property. The property has an area of 10,010 square feet of front with 70 feet of frontage along Campeche Road. This is a conceptual plan showing the proposed triplex with each unit containing 954 square feet. This plan also identifies the required setbacks, building location, and the six proposed parking spaces located at the front of the property. Once again, the summary request is for approval of rezoning of property from R1 single family residential to R2 medium density residential to allow for the construction of a tri-place. And at this time, the staff and the applicant, Mr. Ayala, are available to answer any question you might have. Thank you.

I don't have any questions on, I mean, They fall under that 10,000 square foot guideline that we have been asking for for a duplex. So that's good that it's, if they're willing to go down to a duplex instead of a triplex, that's fine. And there was no pushback either. So I don't have any questions.

No ponding is required?

They have a ponding area. They have a ponding area?

Yes, sir. Okay.

So I'm just a little confused, so are we, so did the applicant, has the applicant agreed to a duplex, or is he wanting the triplex?

He's requested a triplex. Okay. The staff is recommending a duplex. Okay.

So it would be to approve, but only with the condition for a duplex.

Right. So to the commission.

Okay.

I agree.

Yes. Yes, because I think we've already set a precedence on a 10,000 square foot limitation for, or a minimum space for a duplex. And so that's, I think that's where we want to go with it. I mean, I was having a flashback on these other two R2s. It's like, we just approved those not too long ago, I believe. Right? Okay. I remember the corner. It's just like a flashback. So yes, I think the concentration in the neighborhood was to make sure that we did not exceed a duplex criteria. So I agree that we should stick with the duplex. And if the gentleman is in agreement with that, We can set it to vote here already.

I'll make a motion to approve with staff recommendations that they keep it down to a duplex instead of a triplex.

And I second.

I have a motion made by Andrew Arroyos to approve with staff recommendation and second by Yolanda Rodriguez. All those in favor of the motion?

Aye.

Any nays? Any abstain? Motion carried. Moving on to item number seven, public hearing for the proposed adoption of amendments to the city of Socorro's code of ordinance to establish a unified development code, UDC. The proposed action would include the repeal replacement amendment and consolidation of existing development related regulations, including, but not limited to, provisions governing zoning, land use, subdivision, platting, development standards, application procedures, review authority enforcement, and other related development regulations, thereby establishing a comprehensive and unified development code for the City of Socorro. Mr. Arroyos?

Definitely everybody will open public hearing at 5.45.

We currently don't have speakers either.

So we will close public hearing at 5.45.

Thank you. Moving on to item number eight, considering take action on the proposed adoption of amendments to the city of Socorro's code of ordinance to establish a unified development code UDC. The proposed action would include the repeal replacement amendment on consolidation of existing development related regulations included but not limited to provision governing zoning, land use, subdivisions, planning, development standards, application procedures, review authority, enforcement, and other related development regulations, thereby establishing a comprehensive and unified development code for the city of Socorro. Ms. Camilo.

Thank you, Yadira. Lorraine Kimito, City Planner. I just want to introduce Victoria Chavez, who's going to give us the final presentation on the UDC. Your recommendation today will be taken to City Council. And thank you, Victoria, for joining us and Able City for being partners in this process. Of course.

We'll get the presentation up and running. So the purpose of tonight's meeting is really to go over the final review of the UDC the major changes with the policy, the zoning, development, and administrative changes, and it's really gonna be incorporated into this final UDC. We wanna confirm any of the revisions, so confirming on how PNZ, city staff, stakeholders, and technical comments really played a part in some of the revisions, and also in how we address this final UDC draft. And then finally, it will be going into recommendations. for you to consider approval for city council regarding the adoption of the UDC. So overall, the UDC, we're looking at a coordinated code, zoning, subdivisions, development standards, procedures, and enforcement. And this really includes different aspects of land use, site designs, subdivisions, procedures, and preservation. And its main purpose is really to incorporate the main goal of the Socorro 2040 Comprehensive Plan and really replace the current code that you guys have now. Again, just looking at that timeline that we've had, I've been here a few times, so you guys are already somewhat aware, but just as a refresher, we started in 2024 with the kickoff, data collection, council workshops, and having a diagnostics of your current code, and then going into 2025 with some stakeholder engagement, along with community engagement, and conducting and drafting draft one and two of the UDC. as well as some review. And then going into the spring of 2026, we came in, started doing workshops with PNZ, drafting the third of the UDC with public review as well, posted it online. We did receive one comment. It was going towards the historic aspect. And then also you guys reviewing it, providing your comments there with those sessions and some stakeholder engagement for review. coming in July 21st, which is today. We have our PNZ final review and recommendation, and then August 6th is City Council adoption. Again, how is this UDC developed? It's developed through the public and stakeholder review and engagement. So co-diagnostics, reviewing what you currently have, the community engagement and stakeholder input, And then three draft cycles. We presented the first draft, we received some comments back, second draft, and then also opening that up to some stakeholder and public review as well as PNZ, and then creating a third draft for that for the final. Keep in mind the UDC is about consolidation, clarity, and usability, and also updating visual standards and modernization. We are trying to consolidate your current code, so bringing in these current structures and chapters and sections that you have into a more concise and clear UDC structure. So you can see chapter one, authority, zoning, it's not gonna be so much all over the place, and it's gonna be really tied to be an easier procedure for everyone using it, either if it's the public, PNZs, city council, or some key stakeholders or developers. One of the big things I really want to emphasize while I'm here in front of you guys since last you seen I know we talked about some of the zoning Districts and some of the modernization so we really wanted the plan to represent this so there has been new code new districts in there along with some of the revisions to existing ones and expansions to a few so you can see we added like that r2a and with that there's some differences. What is, and one of the big things was, what's the difference between R2 and R2A? Well, R2, even though it does have medium density, the lock coverage is about 40% and 35 feet maximum height, whereas the R2A provides a little bit more lock coverage at 75 and 45 foot maximum height here. So it's really to reduce the setbacks and have more of a zero foot attached setback standards and also intended for more urban development patterns, whereas the R2 is intended to preserve a little bit more of that neighborhood character. Other aspects I wanted to emphasize in here is adding some standards for uses that we're talking about, especially uses that you guys are seeing today a lot more. So being a lot more clear, what's the definition? How are these going to be handled? So we incorporated more language about warehousing, distribution wholesale, and large scale logistics facilities, and also some data centers in there. We also wanted to have a very clear plat approval authority. So there's tables and flow charts that really explain who's in charge of what to be approved. So as you can see here, the preliminary plat is approval by city council. The final plat is administrative approved by city manager or their designee as long as they provide the final plat and it confirms approved by a preliminary plat. Minor plat is city manager, their designee, amending plat as well, and then replat and plat vacation is both city council. And with that, I wanna bring it to, for today, we are requesting a recommendation motion that you recommend city council to approve the amendments to the Sokoto Code of Ordinance governing the zoning, land use, subdivision, platting, development standards, application procedures, review authority, enforcement, and related development regulations to establish a unified development code, UDC. Thank you.

Okay, so this is, we have to make a motion to approve.

We recommend approval to city council.

Okay. Have one quick question. I know that a couple of meetings I had I had a couple of comments and I'm gonna be totally honest. I just haven't had the time to go on online and Put this in or whatnot. So if we vote today To approve it, but I still have those questions or whatnot Those are questions that we can that I can still ask before City Council approves it and

We can definitely take those comments and if we have time to address them, we can try. But don't forget that this is still a living document, and if we get to approve this, get approval by city council in August to give Able City enough time to wrap everything up, and we need to go back and make amendments, then we can do that. We can continue to make amendments.

It was pretty much questions, the ones that I had, just because I wasn't clear of them or whatnot, but let's say... like if I wanted to come in on Thursday, is that something I can just walk in here or can I call you and make an appointment with you and then just sit down with them real quick?

And I apologize. We can include Victoria and the Able City staff to answer any last minute questions that you might have.

and i i apologize for that it's a big document it's been crazy we completely understand and just how lauren's saying it is becoming a final document so when we go into city council that's when revisions and all that but i think also a lot of your questions is probably stuff that we can even find and address in there so i think scheduling that meeting would be really helpful okay perfect thank you of course any other questions did you have a question

No.

Okay. So I think my concern would be is if we approve it today, then how can we go back and add something to it?

You recommend an approval today, it goes to city council, and then if something needs to be addressed, we would do an amendment.

Okay. Okay.

David? I understand, I guess, the process. It's just a lot of information to review.

Yeah, exactly.

And so there's a lot of questions crossing my mind right now over the last few weeks that all this has come up. And so I know we had the opportunity to come to you guys and discuss all this. But at this point, where Andy's at, And so, for the most part, I'm sure the new document is well-intentioned and it's good for the city and it moves forward, but I mean, it's gonna go through, right? It'll get approved, maybe some revisions or whatnot, but as far as what we're looking at right now, I feel that it's one of those things where it just needs to go through, right? Or stall it, but in all fairness, it's been on the table since, For a while.

You guys seen me how many times? Two years.

And then going back to make changes, because that's, I mean, once it's there, it's there.

And I will say, and we can make the amendments, but every time I do come in, I know I've been making my notes of our discussions, what's your guys' concerns, and what we really try to highlight is what's going to be coming in front of you. So looking at that subdivision chapter, looking at the planning and zoning, Making sure we're being more clear on some of the language because I know a big thing was warehousing It kind of felt a little vague. I know that was a big thing That was a discussion and also what's the separation so we went back in there and changed it I know staff has reviewed it as well after we make those changes we send it right to staff Lorraine and the city manager has been coming in and submitting any comments or reviews upon that since those

I think the topic of the day, I guess, are the data centers and then warehousing and logistics centers. And you highlighted those three items up there. I see that. The last meeting that was a topic was minimum lot widths that I had brought up. And then I think another thing we had discussed in the past were the width for streets. Right, and so I'm wondering, those are three things right now that I'm thinking, okay, where are they addressed? How are they stated? Do you have access to the document right now? Can you search it and pull up those items?

Yeah, we can put it, I know for sure for the streets, we have it as minimum, but we did end up making a little bit larger upon after discussing with Lorraine and the city manager. So that has been addressed just by a little. And then but again, it's just minimum. So I'm not saying it's required. You have to start here. It's just we're not giving them maximum it's kind of opposite and then for the frontage as our last meeting i believe i actually sent a little snippet of that um aspect is so in the code under the subdivision uh section 5.11 sections 5.03.05 lots Every lot shall have a frontage on the access to the public street and approval of the private street with meeting the applicable right-of-way access and emergency service standards. So we really address directly to where the standards needs to be met. So it's that right-of-way access and the emergency service standards. And then unless greater frontage is required by the Accra Bowl zoning district, plat approval, access standard, or approval provisions of this UDC, each lot shall have a minimum frontage of 50 feet. Lots located within the city ETJ shall have a minimum frontage of 50 feet or greater frontage where required by the Accra Bowl county standards, development agreements, utility provider requirements, or state law. And then of course they can reduce the frontage that may be approved only where expressly authorized by this UDC. And it includes dwelling units of attached cul-de-sacs, curved frontage, common ownership lots, and other approved lot configurations. So we can always highlight that as well and it can send some sections in.

Can you read again the part about the 50 foot width? Does that, what does that encompass? Like all different zoning types or certain zoning types or is there a minimum lot size for that?

It does include all, unless a greater frontage is required. And this is of course in lot frontage. I have to go back into it. Standards and provisions of this UDC. Lots shall have a minimum frontage of 50 feet unless the zoning district requires.

Unless the zoning district what?

Unless a greater frontage is required. So this is the max. And then lot frontage on a public street or an approved private street has to meet the right of way access and emergency service standards. So it has the 50 feet as the maximum, unless it gets a greater frontage per the zoning district, and then the minimums have to meet the standards of the right-of-way access or emergency standards.

What about creating panhandle lots? Is there anything in there?

It does talk about panhandle lots in there. And what's your, because of how the frontage is when it went, I think the big thing is having that emergency access. and preventing people from creating lots like that, correct? If they're already there, legal non-conforming, but the main concern is creating them. So, in the same section, 5.03.05 lots, double frontage lots, through lots, corner lots, reverse corner lots, panhandle lots, and hammerhead lots. Are prohibited where essential to provide separation or residential development from traffic arterials. Double frontage lots shall be permitted. Let me read through real quick. I don't wanna read you everything. Okay, panhandle lots. CONFIGURATIONS CONSISTING OF NARROW ACCESS STRIPS CONNECTED TO A LARGER LOT AREA ARE PROHIBITED EXCEPT WHERE APPROVED BY THE CITY DUE TO EXCEPTIONAL SITE CONSTRAINTS, ACCESS LIMITATIONS, OR OTHER UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. SO IT DOES PROHIBIT CREATING THOSE.

SO THAT'S KIND OF LIKE THE ONE THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO. CORRECT. SO WHAT THAT'S SAYING IS THAT IF ONE COMES THROUGH as long as it meets emergency services, we can make an exception and go ahead and pass it through, right? Correct. Okay.

I know there's a lot, so I do suggest we can maybe even schedule, since it's August 6th is the city council, we can schedule a meeting, or you can email me as well, and we can answer. I can send you snippets of these as what your main concerns are, and I can find it and send you the snippet. Because like I said, it's a 462 document.

How many pages is the entire document?

462. How many? 462. It's a lot. It's a lot.

It's a lot. I think my biggest concern is, yes, you've made a lot of changes, but have we all kept up with the changes that have come through? Because we don't see that report like, We see it here. We don't see it as we're going, so it is difficult to keep up with it. When you brought up the screen for warehouses and data centers, are those unified codes like separate when it goes from agricultural and it goes to now, what is it, MUD, or is there a different code now for somebody wanting to do a data center now? or is it gonna be the same, all those three categorized together? So we don't know what's gonna get built there. That is my biggest concern.

So yeah, can you go back up to that screen, please?

Okay.

So data centers are subject to SU1 approval and standards addressing utility capacity, water and wastewater demand, fire and life safety, fuel storage, noise buffering expansion, and annual compliance reporting. Large scale logistics facilities, which include large scale warehouses, fulfillment centers, freight facilities and truck intensive uses are separately defined and receive additional conditional review and compatibility screening. Warehouse distribution and wholesales are lower impact indoor storage, wholesale and distribution uses are subject to standards for loading, truck circulation, screening and outdoor storage, lighting and noise.

And so your question was?

Right, how do we identify, like up there at the top you say that this is a single category.

No, it's different.

For each one of those?

All three are distinct in description.

Okay.

Our current code didn't really make the distinction between a warehouse and the distribution centers. That's why we always had variances for the parking and we changed that. before getting to the UDC development. Data centers are different. Also, all three are separate, clearly defined. For data centers, there is an additional specific use application process that they need to go through, which will require additional information regarding, as mentioned up there, how they're addressing utility capacity, water, wastewater needs,

And I see what you're saying, but I think that for us as a Planning and Zoning Commission is, I understand the application process, but is there a unified code that could be developed strictly for that particular category so that we are the first line of defense when it comes to zoning and accepting what is getting built in our communities. If we categorize them and you say yes, they're all strictly...

They are, they're distinct uses. They are all applicable in the ICMUD. They can rezone to ICMUD, but the... Data center requires an additional specific use permit that requires additional information so that you have all the information you need to make a decision about whether that is an applicable use there. If the zoning change makes sense, it fits there, it's not gonna cause any detrimental effects to the surrounding land uses. But it's all still the same process for changing a zone from one zone to another.

And I will say, too, in this UDC, for example, like data centers, it talks about into detail of where it's permitted location-wise, what is required for studies to be approved. So it breaks down, hey, we need to know what is the water resource impact study. maybe the cooling methods that go into that. And it tries to really go into detail of what you should be looking for in order to approve a data center, which there's a lot to it. And it breaks it down easy for the developer, but also for you guys to just read through for that. And then of course there's an annual compliance review on there as well, subject to, including the water usage, electrical demand, fuel storage, and operational changes.

I don't know.

Everybody's reluctant, I think.

I don't know. I think maybe we should table and give us more time to really review it again. maybe another week, I mean, could we hold a special meeting just to approve this item and give us more time to look at these items? I mean, I'm asking the rest of the commissioners.

So, okay, so, and with your question, okay, so let me ask you, how many hours have you put into this document since 2024 or since when you started working on it? Like, guesstimate. many man hours just for you by yourself?

Me by myself? No, that's a difficult, not a difficult question to answer. We have the voices to show all the work that has been charged to this project and we are kind of need to bring this to an end, unfortunately. And while we would love to continue working with Able City, staff believes that we are ready to move forward. And if we need to address any lingering items, lingering questions, that we can do so.

I think my question is a fair question. I'm just trying to show our position and our reluctance. And you're not the only one who's worked on this. There's been multiple people. You're up there right now, so that's why I'm asking you, how many hours, not invoiced hours, not just general, 1,000, 100? I have no idea. But looking at what you would answer and looking at how many hours we've looked at it, it's nothing. We have no idea what we're voting on, basically.

Excuse me, but we have shared the drafts and given everyone opportunity to meet with us individually. You have been a part of the process from the very beginning. To say that you have not invested any time is kind of unfair to staff and to Maple City for the time that we've committed to it.

You have. You have. And we have been part of everything, right? No, absolutely no doubt. However, I'll state it, and I've stated it before, you guys are on the clock when you're doing this, right? If you put in 40 hours a week, it's 40 hours a week you get paid. We don't. Andy, do you have 40 hours in your week to look at this at any given time? I don't. I don't think any of us do, right? And so we're being asked to vote on something that we really don't have the time to review, or do we come up here and we do our best and... And it's what it is, right? And so I feel like we're being asked to push it through and we'll figure out what it says after it's passed and we look at the items as they come through in the years to come, right? But that's not fair to me or anyone else that sits here in the future. We really don't know. You guys are well-tuned into what you're doing. We're not, right? But yeah, you're right. It's very difficult on our end to invest the kind of time that you've And I won't say invest, but we do invest the time, right? You get paid for it.

And I do, I understand. I mean, a 462 document is jarring. It's a lot. And that's why I think in the past few weeks, we really try to emphasize to focus on the chapters that really reflect for PNZ as well. So you can get those out of the way. And then when you have more time, you can start looking at the other stuff. So that really includes the zoning chapter, and that includes the legal non-conforming, accessories, and then subdivisions, and then we can go into authorities. In these past few, I would even say past two months of reviewing and going through these workshops, we really try to highlight those, so then, I know you guys, homework is never fun, but you know exactly where to look and dig a little bit deeper. With these type of documents, it's never going to feel like you're going to have enough time to review. I feel we've reviewed it every single time. We're like, well, maybe we can add, because there's always going to be something else that we can find. And I agree. We're here to open the door to answer your questions. And a lot of the stuff that you probably have questions on is probably in there, and we just need time to review and submit for an email or expansion on it. And if it's something that we have to amend, it's probably a minor amendment that we can just expand upon. But we do, in our past sessions, I really did try to incorporate all those big changes. So anything big, I think data centers was a big topic. The zoning districts was a big topic. Subdivisions was a huge topic, not just here, but in the stakeholder meetings with legal and with the staff here at Socorro. So there was a lot of changes and amendments that were happening there. The website has updated versions of the UDC as well. so you're more than welcome to go on the website and review it on there. I do suggest to see that, or if you want Laureen to email, and not the whole document, we can send you just the chapter, because it's, like I said, it's a big document.

Is there a vision statement at the beginning of this document? No, it's just code. It's just code. Okay, is there any reference to FTZ 302 in the document?

What was it, F?

FTZ 302.

No, that's economic development. Nope.

Where is that, like? That's economic development. Economic development, okay.

So out of curiosity.

Why was the question, I'm sorry, just follow up on what was the question for the FTZ?

Well, I'm wondering how many people are aware of what that process was. And earlier in referencing on what it is that we research, what we spend our time on, well, we're part of the community. So there's a lot of the stuff out there that hasn't been brought to our attention at this board. And so I'm wondering how much of what's in the code is directly related to FTZ 302. And I'd venture to ask how many of the board members are familiar with FTZ 302?

I'm not.

Andy, are you familiar with FTZ 302?

Yes.

Okay, so that's a huge one. That's a huge one. I think that should be brought up.

And it's not related to, it's not a part of the code. That is the economic development special projects. Questions for that would be directed to that office. If somebody comes to the planning and zoning department for a pre-development meeting, they're interested in developing some new project in the city of Socorro, there is a process that they go through with us as planning and zoning. We go through the entire development process, talk about planning, talk about zoning, talk about their plan, what their needs are, what their requirements are. that we talk about how there's so many different agencies that they have to coordinate how unique it is to develop and support. We talk about how their project might be impacted by TxDOT since a lot of the major roads are managed by TxDOT. That we have the Water Improvement District and any coordination with the Water Improvement District needs to be coordinated with them if they have water rights, if they need to submit an irrigatable plot. The emergency services district, the city does not have a fire department. Our emergency services are coordinated through El Paso County Emergency Services District number two. And then we talk about economic development, if there are resources that they might be able to take advantage of, programs that the city can offer them. then we direct them to economic development because that is who is the authority on that program. The Federal Trade Zone is what FTZ stands for.

Okay, so FTZ 302 directly affects at least two of these, which is large-scale logistics and warehouse distribution.

All of these, all of these. Anybody who's new, who wants to come and develop something in the city, They are directed to Economic Development Department for the economic development part of their project, but for the urban planning for the development of the project, the location questions, the ordinance questions, they speak to us.

I'm not necessarily opposed to FTZ 302, right? I'm not. but I think it goes in line with what you're asking us to vote on because we're in the dark, right? And so that's what happened with FTZ 302. We were in the dark. We never had a formal presentation as the Planning and Zoning Commission. We never had a presentation of what it entailed, but yet for the last two years and since its inception, we've been asked to vote on zoning for warehouses or whatnot. and we were not aware of, or we haven't been presented with what FTZ 302 actually is. And so, following that same logic, I'm sitting here wondering, well, what the hell is in this 400-page document that we don't know about? Yes, you did a great job, thank you, of presenting what you could in that amount of time, but that's where I'm coming from. That's what I'm looking at. And so I think what you said, yeah, we're not, I'm not here as a save all anything. It doesn't matter, we're here, we're appointed, I get it. But we're a voice.

Right, we're the first line of defense when it comes to our zoning and our community. And I think it's important for us. as commissioners to be able to understand exactly what is it that we're approving. Yes, we get the little spurts here and there, and as you said, you have met with staff, you have met with management, but we're not in that mix. We only get to see you and what you present when you come here to this commission. and that's where we're at. This is the first time I see that up there, the data center that has come up.

But again, this has been posted online, and it's available for you guys to look. I know time is limited, but we are doing what we can to be there for you guys, support and showcase what's happening. I've been here every two weeks, Checking in. Hey, this is the update. These are the changes. These are the things we're focusing on. Here's the code. It's online Please look at it. If you have any questions, here's my email reach out to me and I can we can set up meetings. We kept saying that For how long can we keep postponing and pushing this back if you're not making the time to review the draft? That is my big thing There's only so much we can provide to go and get this UDC adopted. It is for the people and you guys are the first line of defense. Be there for the public, we're there too. And this is why we're doing these workshops. We did consistently reach out and set up these meetings So my big thing is, again, please review the plan. It's been there, it's been updated. Every time there's new updates, when I come back, I show you different stuff because there's been updates as we go along. And again, it is a big plan, so we're not gonna focus on every single thing at once, but the plan has been on there, been online, been available from Laureen to send over, to be reviewed, and anything to expand upon.

Okay. You go, Andy.

Just on my behalf, and again, we're all here, we all have different opinions or whatnot. To me, I think I would probably be in favor to push it, go ahead and push it and stuff, and if I could, and I promise that I will take the time to meet with Lorraine if possible, and with the questions that I had, and I know we still have from here to August 6th, I believe, with city council. Just because I know that I can look at this for, Oh my God, months and months and months and I think I'll still have a whole bunch of questions that you can read it and read it and read it and miss something and then read it again and then get something you missed or whatnot.

We have two meetings in August with city council. So that's August 6th and August 20th. We could reintroduce the item on the 6th for public hearing on the 20th. That doesn't leave Able City a lot of time to finish up anything that needs to be changed or addressed, but that is a possibility. Our next meeting with the Planning and Zoning Commission would be the 4th, so August the 4th.

And then it goes to City Council that following week?

August the 6th, we could reintroduce the item, or if there are not any changes, we could still continue on with the public hearing that we have scheduled for the 6th?

Right, so my question is this, if we go ahead, if I make a motion to approve or not, and it goes through, what I'm asking is I can still meet with you guys and have those questions answered, and if there's something that I don't agree with or whatnot, it can still be brought up at the city council meeting or whatnot, right? At the public hearing. At the public hearing.

That is correct.

Okay, and again, I agree with David and Mrs. Rodriguez, and it's just a whole bunch of information, and I know I don't have the time to look at it like you guys do, and I don't think I will. But I do think it's important that we... have a vote on it and just see where it goes from there with everybody else. And, you know, that was the question that I had. If I could still just put in my two cents in it after we vote. Of course.

Just a few things to add. It might help for the commissioner's benefit if the planning zone department were able so they could tell us. Are there certain... budget or time constraints that you guys are going with or planning on or the implementation of UDC, for instance, is able to be, I know they're all- The end of the contract is the end of August. Is it the end of August, okay.

These are ARPA funds that we're trying to finish up before they expire, but they don't expire till the end of December. But I think we should be fine to finish up what we have allocated by city council for this project.

Was there any particular legal notices or public notices we had to give of the implementation of the UBC? No. Just the public. And is city council waiting on anything in particular? No. Well, I thought that might help. That's a few questions I have.

What was the part about the end of August? Is there a deadline? that needs to be approved by city council by end of August, or was that just a timeline that was set?

Just a timeline for the contract, the end of August.

The contract with? Able City. Able City.

All right. If you guys have any additional questions, let me know. Me and legal counsel, we can go into executive session as well. That's up to you guys, but I'm just letting you know.

Okay, so this is just a comment. Okay, so stuff like this, like it's a survey, right? And this is one of the triplets. It's the previous one. I'm not sure, I'll speak for myself and for Andy. We make a living doing stuff like this and reading stuff like this. We're well aware of what's going on, right? And so Andy brought up a good point. We could look at this for the next year and we could come back to you with red lines for the entire document. of real life experiences that we've come up with in the past, right? And say this isn't gonna work for this reason, this doesn't work in coral, it'll work for this type a lot but not this type a lot, and on and on and on and on and on. It'd be great if we had the time to do that, right? We just don't, right? But then we come every two weeks and we look at stuff that, You know, the public comes in with the items and we're asked to vote on it. And some of these we look at and we're like, well, it doesn't work, but for the sake of passing it, just pass it. You know, it doesn't work in this situation, but it does here. If X, then Y. If not, then no. And it's just all over. It's all over. I'm wondering how many, well, maybe... I was going to go with something else, but I'm going to step back.

Look, seven months ago, almost eight months ago, I came and I asked for a copy of the Unified Code. That was eight, nine months ago. Marion did print me one. Since then, that Unified Code booklet has changed. How would I know which changes have proceeded through those except for when you come and you have this kind of discussion. That is where we are today because we do this as volunteers, we do this when we come here, we're trying to do and make good decisions for our community. And so yes, for us to say we're gonna approve it but still go back and review it again and put forth those changes, I totally understand where Mr. Arroyo's is coming from. But in the logical sense, 452 documents is okay, what changed from this now, right now, to a year ago? We wouldn't be able to tell. only because we bring up things right away, some frontage and the street size, because that's right, they are experts at this stuff. I'm not. I look at this, I read it, and I go and I say, okay, this is what I think is important, and this is why we ask questions. We can go and approve this document, and like you said, go back and say, I have a question here, I have a question about data centers because I've been reading a lot about it because I do not want one in my backyard. I have an empty field in my backyard right now. Okay, I do not want one there. And so I think it's important for us to understand, as commissioners that we go in and we go from an agricultural designation to an industrial, and we're told we cannot ask what they're gonna build there, okay, well, we have a problem, at least I do, okay? Because we've been there already and we were told, no, no, no, you cannot ask what they're gonna build there, okay, because of the state legislator, because of the regulations that they hold over us. So for us, when we're looking at these, codes, we're wanting to identify a particular code for when they come, we know what's gonna go there and not just a guessing game that it's gonna be a warehouse.

So I'm curious and may think that maybe might be misremembering a couple things, just in the most respectful way I can. Okay. We have zoning districts. And for each zoning district, you know that there is a range of uses that are allowed in that zoning district. where the conversations are we can't tell them what they can and can't build there is when zoning, when we are talking about platting things in the ETJ, which is the only authority we have in the ETJ. In the ETJ, we can't dictate what gets built out there. The county does not have any authority to zone property. And that is what that sounds like. but we can't know for sure what will be built in a C1. We know with some good idea of what's gonna be built in ICMUD because we require a lot from an ICMUD. We require a development plan with a great amount of detail, traffic impact analysis, So just in that example of Socorro Logistics, which is one of the first ICMUDs, they laid out a plan for the large logistics centers. They laid out the streets, the ponding areas, and the commercial, the smaller commercial retail along North Loop and Nuevo Hueco Tanks. Then later when manufacturing came back into the mix, they had to adjust. They had to buy additional property to provide the additional parking. So that's been a change that's happened in the ICMUD that has still fit into that framework of what the plan was, what was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission at that time, what was approved by the city council for that area. For a data center, we would not, we would not, give a certificate of occupancy. We would not allow somebody to build a data center without them following all of their requirements for the data center, which is all of these studies to show what their impacts are. And that data center ordinance was approved prior to In between us getting all of this UDC development underway, it was approved by city council and it's being included in this UDC. So that data center ordinance is already a part of our current ordinance. So just to clarify, you do have a sense of what range of things can happen in a zoning district, but if you're very concerned about something like a data center, it has very specific requirements.

Okay, thank you for that.

And land use is another topic. We've already talked about how the land use map is a picture of where we want to see development happen, and we just need to look at that presentation when we talk about what the future land use map dictates for the area, if it's recommending that something stay agricultural or stay rural, that we ask if that's what the real intention is. For the logistics centers, for the land use map, they are pushed out to the edges along the gateway, what's left of the gateway development, Darrington. And again, another thing that we can share If you haven't had a chance to look at it, it's in that comprehensive plan. Can we approve back in July of 2025, 2024?

Okay, thank you for that.

That I did read cover to cover.

Now you do.

But at the same time, so right now- You're going to need the committee for when we have to update that.

In two years. We're going to have to update that in two years. I think that came out- You're going to need the committee, Mr. Estrada.

We received that probably a year ago, I think, or two years. So yeah, I read through it, and okay, cool. Okay, so what year master plan are we following right now?

That one.

Which was what year?

The Coral 2040, which was approved in July of 2025.

It was a comprehensive plan.

I want to say 24.

And the one prior to that was?

Well, 2014. They were long overdue and updated that one.

2014.

2014. And before that was 1988.

And so like right now you mentioned land use and that was based off of maybe 2014. A lot of the stuff that we're doing right now and it was zoned before maybe prior to 2014. And so I look now at all the rezoning that come because we do a lot of rezoning, rezoning, rezoning, rezoning. And so I'm trying to think where the control is and it's land use that's specified on the master plan land use master plan and if it if somebody wants to come in and do something that's not we have to really ask ourselves and then that that has to go through planning and zoning it's a rezoning it's got to be voted on with city council If it's postponed, even if it's postponed a month, I really can't get through. There's certain topics that I have in mind. Maybe I can do my top three, and you have your top three, and your top three, and your top three. But just to get to those 12, it's going to take. it would take six months. And in all fairness, I understand what you're saying. It's like, okay, I've done my job. I'd like to make a... I understand, but to us, it's...

I'd like to make just a suggestion to all the commissions or whatnot. Again, I think that we can be here for another year and we'll still have questions and concerns. If... Again, we're trying to move stuff forward, right? We're trying to move forward in the city and... I think that if each one of us has like our major concerns that we really want to talk about is To me, I would probably, again, like I said earlier, probably make a motion to approve, but I would really, I'd really need to sit down and that's on me because I said about three weeks ago or whatever that I wanted to bring those up and I just, I couldn't or whatnot, but I have to make that time to come in and ask those questions, get them answered or whatnot, but I just feel strong that we have to keep moving forward with it and that's, I asked same thing, right? If you guys have those questions, we need to meet with you and have them answered or whatnot. But just because we vote on it doesn't mean it's gonna pass already, right? It's gotta go through city council. So even if we did pass it.

If at that point you've reviewed and you feel like there's a definite concern, You do have another opportunity to ask City Council to delay, to send it back to you.

Right.

To give us more time to review and address anything that you might be concerned about.

And again, I'm saying that because, like I said, we can be here for a year, and I think that we're still going to have questions. So, Mr. Bud?

Yeah, I've got to finish. My healthy guys have all answered maybe some of your questions as well. you know, the backstop is city council, so it'll go to them. If you're entertaining a motion tonight, you could also make a recommendation that city council review it carefully and take additional time if they need it. And I, cause I think you could, I think even Ms. Lurie could express your reservations that look, it's a long document. There's a lot of things in there. We've looked at it, but we have got questions. you could also leave with the city council that if they need extra time, they can also postpone it if they don't feel like they're ready. But I kind of because I do attend some of the city council presentations, I deal with the contract with the city as well. I do know that because they usually have financial constraints, which is city council authorized contract legal city to hire them because they're the experts in developing these ordinances the udc is a uniform ordinance that's across just a lot of small cities and even larger ones that have to have it and so it's meant to be kind of like a base kind of like overlay of the code i've reviewed it several times and i'm an attorney and my eyes get crossed looking at it every time So I wouldn't blame you guys. It's a lot. And I'm looking at it from a legal point of view, which is, is there something legally incorrect? I'm not looking at every, hey, that's supposed to be 15 feet instead of 20 feet. I'm honestly not gonna catch those things. That's the other point I would bring up is that although this is kind of supposed to be a rewrite of the ordinance to make it easier, because over time what we did was we added ordinance after ordinance and just patched holes each time because we were, oh, we're missing something. And so we kept doing that over many years, and then it became an hodgepodge of the code, and that's why a lot of things don't quite fit. So the purpose of the UDC is to- Fill all those holes, to fill all those holes. And by and large, a lot of the cities, I mean, their ordinances are relatively similar. I look at other cities all the time, and they're very, very close. And in fact, even when we're drafting ordinances for the city, we're actually looking at what other cities are doing while we're doing it to make sure how did Dallas handle that situation? How did Houston handle that situation? Even the things on the data center, at least the more recent ones, we're looking at what's going on in the other cities because they've got some of the same issues. So, you know, also on the legal side, I looked at it. I didn't really have any reservations on it. It's still a lot of information. And the other thing is in the future is that although this is kind of the base and it's meant to be a final base where it's okay, this is good to go. We should be okay in the future. We won't be because there's always things that come up and actually in those circumstances, then we'll go through and rewrite the ordinance again or add to them. Now, hopefully we don't have to do that. I think it's close to there, but there's going to be a lot of circumstance, especially with data centers that that argument is still evolving right now. And even while these guys are working on these ordinances, things were changing in the last few months. If you were watching the news and saw what was going on at City Council, it'll still change. So, you know, I guess if you guys have any hesitation, if any ordinances get passed, they could still be amended in the future. If there's an issue, we've seen it. But at least on my legal side, I had to give my opinion to the city if they were okay to move forward on it. I was okay with that. I didn't have any reservations. There were other recent things, I think some issues with mobile homes and grand-fathering that came up, and I think that was addressed as well. And there's some particular situations for Socorro that needed to be addressed in the code. So it's not my opinion to pass it or not. But I could tell you some legal side, I didn't see any issues with it. And again, they hired the consultants. And yeah, I could guess that they probably spent hundreds of hours or a thousand hours, a couple thousand hours. So I think some of the hesitancy I know is City Council has that budget constraint, which is they approve the contract, they pay money to get this thing done. So anything that gets extended, Able City is going to bill the city overtime for that if they go beyond the contract. That's real funds that come out of City of Socorro, their budget. So that's one thing I know that the City Council is going to look at, the City Manager will look at as aid. Why did we go over this? Why are we again having to re-engage a new contract? That's something to keep in mind because they have a limited budget. That was my best guess. I don't know that for a fact. That's why I asked those questions was, hey, something's nearing the end. That's what it seems like to me. If that helps you govern your hesitations, it's There will always be situations, if you look at it, we may have to amend it in the future, but there's nothing that binds Planning and Zoning Commission from not being able to amend ordinances. You still have that right to do it. And if there were red flags, I mean, that'd be also something that we would let the city know the legal side. Planning and Zoning has looked at it many times. City Manager has looked at it. She knew that there was particular issues that, hey, what happens in this situation? And also, I mean, like I said, you can always recommend to city council too is that, hey, a recommendation is that you also review it carefully and take additional time if they need it. And really it's on them if they decide to pass it or they may postpone it as well. I mean, you just don't know.

Right. Okay. So regarding city council, have they been given the same presentations that you've been giving us or is this the first time they're gonna look at it?

So I haven't gone for the presentation. We have provided an introduction for it and they are aware of what's happening and that it's online, but we wanted to more focus on PNZ since you guys will be making that recommendation. Correct.

So let's, Just assume that it passes tonight, right? And the approval, recommender that goes forward. When does it get presented to city council?

August 6th.

So that's two weeks?

Yes. Correct.

Two weeks. And when do they first get the documents? I know it's available, but they get it three days before?

No, it was introduced at this last meeting. Meeting, which was July 16th.

So from the 16th to the 6th, they'll have about three weeks to review the document and...

Correct.

Okay. Okay, so I won't speak for city council. I don't know. I'm just looking at the time that they have, right? All we do is planning and zoning. They look at planning and zoning and God knows what all other stuff that they look at, right? So I, you know, I'm sitting here wondering, yeah, that's, that's how it works. That's government, that's how it works, right?

Staff recommendation, your recommendation. Yeah. Okay.

You know, if anything, I think that I would make, like if, If there's a motion to approve, I'd probably vote to approve. I understand what's going on. We've gotten into a deeper conversation. And I think I would make the effort to come here and voice my opinion as a citizen on that day for city council. Because I think that tabling at this point, another week, two weeks, I'm going to look at it. It's never going to be enough. Minimal. I think you guys have done your due diligence. Great job. It's not on you guys. I think it's on, you know, I take my responsibility. So I would make that effort to come on that Thursday and express my thoughts to them and tell them, you know, just my opinion at that point.

And again, too, like how we were saying, the door's open for you to express also anything that you're like, I need more information. This is my main concern. Can I have this more information? We can send that to you. in the time being if you have a chance to look at it or you don't want to look at it and you just want to know specifically where that's from. I also want to emphasize too, one of our stakeholder meetings that we had to review it were key developers here in Socorro and they actually went through all the document and how you kind of mentioned with the red line, red lined it and it was a great help in the field where they're coming in and they use the code all the time and I think that was great help and it was outside input that wasn't coming from Able City, that wasn't coming from the city and we were able to catch things that we probably overlooked and so having those set of eyes and that implementation into the draft is another drive that created the UDC that you have today.

So the red line came from the community or from an engineering, someone different? Okay, yeah, I'm sure that was useful.

Yeah, of course.

Okay, I would like to make a motion to approve the proposed adoption of the amendments of the Civil Socorro Code of Ordinances to establish a unified development code.

I second. I have a motion made by Andrew Arroyos to approve. Second by Yolanda Rodriguez. All those in favor of the motion? Aye.

Aye.

Any nays? Any abstain? Motion carried. Moving on to.

Real quick, I'm so sorry. And I don't know if I have to go back to it, but is there a certain date that's better, that works out better for us to come in?

No.

Just let me know when. If you want to focus for next week since the, either in the next two weeks if you want.

I actually wanted to do it this week because next week is going to be bad. Thursday would be good for me and if anybody would like to.

And it can also be later. It doesn't have to be during the day. It can be after hours. Really? Yes.

Oh, okay. That's even better.

For me, I don't have any voluntary Victoria.

I don't mind. And outside of this meeting, we are allowed to talk about this, right? Where it's not, we're not.

Not with each other?

Yeah, it'd be like a walking forum, so yeah, you can't. You can ask questions and discuss it amongst each other outside of a public hearing.

Right, but for example, like opinions or whatnot, just asking an opinion of somebody or...

This is technical stuff. Yeah, I think you can ask the questions back and forth that you do in climate change. That's not wrong.

Not in heat or anything.

You've got to get together and make some decisions outside of it.

No, no, no, no. But what I'm asking is, for example, I've worked with other engineers or whatnot, and sometimes I ask them questions, our developers and stuff like that. It's okay for us to ask that, right?

Yes. We encourage that, actually, yes.

Right, so that's what I'm asking. We can talk about it outside of here. Oh, yeah. Okay.

I thought you meant for you all.

No, no, no, no, no, that's what we hear and stuff, but for, right.

And you guys, can I, like anything else, like you guys are citizens as well, that you can come to city council as well, and if something new pops in your head, find that and bring it up, sign up to speak, let them know, identify yourself, hey, I'm on the, you know, on the commission, and if there was something that we were looking at, that's fine.

Okay.

Okay, sorry about that, thank you.

Thank you moving on to item number 9 considering take action on the proposed approval of a replat for McAdoo Acres replat C being a replat of lot 3 block 11 McAdoo Acres and located at 620 dual drive city of Socorro El Paso County, Texas. Ms. Rodriguez.

Thank you Yadira. Actually for, good evening, Julia Rodriguez, planning with the city of Socorro. Actually for item number nine, we consider it to be deleted. And we add in item number 10 instead.

Okay. So we need to make a motion to delete item nine. To delete item number nine, please.

Delete, okay. So I make a motion to delete item number nine.

I second. I have a motion made by Andrew Arroyos to delete item nine, second by Yolanda Rodriguez. All those in favor of the motion?

Aye.

Aye. Any nays? Any abstain? Aye.

Sorry, aye.

Okay, so motion carried.

Mr. Estrada, do you have? Well, okay, by deleting, it's off the table, so it doesn't come back, or it can come back. Or is there a time restraint?

They amended their application, and it's the next item.

It's the next item.

I'm sorry, right? Yes.

So moving on to item number 10, consider and take action on the proposal approval of a replat for McAdoo Acres replat C with a variance request from section 46-238, area requirements of section 2, minimum yard setback to allow a 10-feet front yard setback and a 10 feet rear yard setback instead of the required 25 front and rear yard setback for a proposed lot being a replat of lot three block 11 McAdoo acres located at 620 dual drives city of Socorro El Paso County Texas Ms. Rodriguez thank you Yadira

Chairman and Commissioners, Jerry Rodriguez, Planning with the City of Socorro. We'll continue with the next item on the agenda. This is number 10, and this is a McAdoo Acres Replace with a variance request. We'll proceed with a general information and overview of the property. The property address is 620 Yule Drive. The legal description is being lot three, block 11, McAdoo Acres. Property owner is YCLLC. Representative is Luis Saucedo from Re-Engineering. Lot size is 21,572 square feet. Sony R1 single family residential. And the current land use is residential. Summary of this request. Requests for approval, repla for McAdoo Acres, repla C, with a variance request from section 46 to 38, area requirements of sections two, minimum yard setbacks to allow a 10 feet front yard setback and a 10-feet rear yard setback instead of the required 25 front and rear yard setbacks for proposed lot two being a replant of lot three block 11 makadu acres located at 620 dual drive city of socorro el paso county texas and staff recommends approval of the replant and variance request for makadu acres replant c Next is the zoning map where the subject property is outlined in light blue, shaded in yellow, representing the R1 single family residential zoning district. And the surrounding area also includes C1 light commercial, C2 general commercial in red, and agriculture in green. This aerial image shows the subject property outlining in light blue. The site has frontage along Yule Drive and is developed with an existing single family dwelling and is surrounded by the established residential neighborhoods. Then we have these pictures of the property, a seafront frontage along Yule Drive. followed by the original plat. This is the McAdoo Acres. This plat was recorded in 1986. And next is the McAdoo Acres Replat C. This is the preliminary replat which shows the proposed layout and topography of the property. This is the preliminary replat, but in large size. The McAdoo Acres Replat C proposes two residential lots. Lot one with about 11,228 square feet, and lot two with about 10,344 square feet. The plat establishes the property boundaries, dimensions, and lot configuration. The applicant is proposing a single family residence on lot two due to the existing lot configuration that require 25 foot front and rear setbacks will limit the buildable area which is why the applicant is requesting a variance for 10 foot setbacks as shown on the plaid. This slide shows the final replat submitted by the applicant. The proposed variance and setbacks will be addressed and incorporated during the construction plan review process following the replat approval. And this is a variant request letter submitted by the applicant which explains the reasons for the request based on the existing lot configuration and the impact of applying the required setbacks. Staff have reviewed the request based on the current code requirements and the specific conditions of the property and the item is now presented for the commission's consideration. And once again, the summary request, requested for approval of a replat for McAdoo Acres Replat C with the variance request from section 46 to 38, area requirements of section two, minimum yard setbacks to allow a 10-foot front yard setbacks and a 10-foot rear yard setbacks instead of the required 25-foot front and rear yard setbacks for the proposed lot two. And at this time, staff and the applicant, Mr. Salcedo, via Zoom, are available for any questions you might have. Thank you.

So this is kind of like what we were talking about with the hammer-shaped lots or whatnot. They're still gonna have the 25 feet, above 25 feet, and with the easements in the front and the back, well, the front setback and the back, irrigation and utility, so there's to have about 40, 41 feet clearance to build a house there, right?

Correct, yes.

Okay. I don't have any questions.

Okay. In the letter from Ray Engineering, it says that the lot frontage question previously raised has been answered and that it's no longer It says that it's been resolved and it's not a part of this request. I'm referencing the 25.87 lot frontage. And so his letter says that it's been resolved. And so I think I caught something earlier in today's meeting about the minimum width and I just want to, it was regarding safety. and access for the minimum lot width for safety is 25 feet. Is that how it got resolved or what is he referring to when he says the lot frontage question previously raised at planning and zoning has been resolved and is not a part of this request? So how was that resolved? And it says that under variance request under the letter by LA Engineering.

Hello, Council. This is Luis Salcedo speaking on behalf of Ray Engineering. We did end up widening that access stem to 25 feet. That's how we resolved the previous comments from this Council.

And because we don't have in our current ordinance any minimum requirement for the lot frontage, we also don't disallow panhandle lots. Okay, in the current? In our current one. In our current one.

And the Soilette 2 is a panhandle lot, and the 25.87 feet may not necessarily be that required street frontage. It's typically considered the axis.

And even in the, again, not to mix things up, but... just to talk on the current code, it's not prohibited. And there are instances where the consideration may need to be taken for the configuration of the lot. So they do have What is the width of the entire lot?

Sorry, can you repeat that? Is that a question for me?

The total front is 115. And that there's already an existing home on the property.

So I want to say that this is a half acre lot approximately. There are a bunch of half acre lots throughout Socorro and especially in older subdivisions with existing structures on them. And so know what you're saying is the current ordinance doesn't address this but i think that panhandle lots should be there should be a minimum on the lot i would personally think that one acre is would be the minimum and so i'm hoping that it's addressed in the udc right uh and then i think it's very important that there should be a minimum frontage not minimum frontage but a minimum width for the lot uh and 25 feet i think is too small but especially for a lot like this um but i imagine a one acre lot owned with a house right and somebody's trying to divide it and get it sold and separated for their children for example well then an axis root of 25 feet i can understand that but in these smaller lots that's not the case This is someone trying to take, and I don't disagree, but they're trying to take advantage of the extra space that's back there. But these smaller half acre lots, if you look at the rest of the subdivision, they're all the same size. And so this opens up a way for people to split these up, mostly, surely for profit, right? You get to build another single family home. On that lot, you have It's a panhandle lot, small half-acre lots. And so I think that that's the issue. So on this one, I don't agree with what they're doing here, based on the size of the lot.

Thank you. Any questions?

No, I don't have any questions.

No questions. OK. So I'd like to make a motion to, there weren't any conditions on it, right?

No.

Sorry. There weren't any specific conditions on it? No. I lost my page, I'm sorry. All right, so I'd like to make a motion to approve.

I'll second that motion.

I have a motion made by Andrew Arroyos to approve, second by Yolanda Rodriguez. All those in favor of the motion?

Aye.

Any nays?

Nay.

Any abstain? Motion carried. Moving on to item number 11, considering to take action on the proposed approval of a preliminary and final plan with a waiver request from section 38-8.2, preliminary plans and data. Subsection C, engineering reports to waive the storm drainage plan and soil analysis requirement for the Reyes Estates, being all of track 4A, block 9, Socorro Grand, located at 336 Brown Road, City of Socorro, El Paso County, Texas. Mr. Ruiz.

Thank you good evening chairman and commissioners Diego Reese with the planner with the city of Socorro Moving on to item number 11 Which raises States preliminary final plan and waiver request I the general info includes uh the property address which is 336 brown road the legal description is olive tract 4a block 9 of socorro grant the property owner is adrian luis garcia and rosa maria g robles the representative enrique ayala with cat consulting the lot size is 1.2550 acres the zoning is a1 agricultural and the current land use is agricultural. Requests for approval of a preliminary and final plot with the waiver request for raised estates. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary and final plot for raised estates. Staff also recommends approval of the waiver request for raised estates on the condition that the soil analysis and storm drainage reports are submitted at the time of applying for building permits. Here is the zoning map. The tract is outlined in red, and it is in a agricultural zone, which is represented with a green color. It is also surrounded with multiple lots of R1 zoning. Here's the aerial image of the property surrounded in a outline of red and already any developed subdivision. Here are the side pictures taken from Brown Road depicting the existing conditions of the property. Here's the preliminary plat for Reyes Estates. Here's the final plat. And here's the waiver request form submitted by CAD Consultants, their representative. Summary of the request, request for approval of the preliminary and final plan for raised estates with a waiver request. And with that, staff and the representative is available for any questions.

So I'm assuming the waiver is because it's a self-ponding lot right now, right? So they're really- Just agricultural lot? It's agricultural, so usually typically those are self-ponding or whatnot, so they really don't need any plan right now or whatnot, right?

Right, and also the applicant stated that the owner's not planning on building anything, so that's why they're just trying to report the loss.

And if they do, they better come forward with what they need at that time. Okay, I don't have any questions.

I don't have questions.

No question.

Okay, so I'd like to make a motion to approve with staff recommendations.

I second.

It's not so long.

Who's gonna take the second? I second. I have a motion made by Andrew Arroyos to approve, second by Rafael Carrillo. All those in favor of the motion?

Aye.

Any nays? Any abstain? Motion carried. Moving on to item 12, planning and zoning commissioners report. Commissioners?

Mr. Roy, I'd like to have a bathroom break. Yes. And then I'd also like to go to executive session.

So make a motion to take a five-minute bathroom break. Second.

Second.

I have a motion made by Andrew Arroyos to take a five-minute break. Second by David Estrada. All those in favor of the motion? Aye. We are back at 7.13. I have a motion made by David Estrada to go into executive session, seconded by Andrea Arroyos. All those in favor of the motion?

Aye.

Any nays? Any abstain? Motion carried. If you'd like to make a motion to end executive session, Mr. Arroyos.

Sorry, I made it too soon. We will end executive session at 8 o'clock.

No, make a motion to end.

Make a motion, I'm sorry, make a motion to end executive session at 8 o'clock.

Do I have a second? I second. I have a motion made by Andrea Arroyos to end executive session, second by Yolanda Rodriguez. Are those in favor of the motion?

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Any nays? Any abstain? Motion carried. We left off on item 12, planning and zoning, commissioner's report. Commissioners?

I don't have anything.

I don't have anything.

Thank you, Commissioner. So moving on to item 13, planning and zoning. Department report, Ms. Camilo.

Thank you, Yadira. I have a couple of items that I wanted to update you all on. The El Paso Transportation Authority, which is the county transportation transit provider, is having a public meeting. They would like to receive feedback from the Socorro community regarding changes to the ETA services. This meeting will either be held August the 5th or August the 6th and we'll share that information via social media. ETA is currently evaluating recommended service changes and committed to providing the public with an opportunity to learn about the proposed changes, ask questions that provide feedback before any final decisions are made. We also have a public meeting for the Border Highway East Corridor Study that will be held August the 4th at Clint High School from 530 to 730. The TxDOT El Paso District is holding an in-person meeting with a virtual public meeting option to review the technically preferred concept for the 20-mile-long extension of the Cesar Chavez Border Highway from Loop 375 Americas Avenue to FM 3380. We hope that staff can attend and that the commissioner can attend as well to provide any feedback you have on that preferred route. What was the date on that again, I'm sorry? Tuesday, August 4th from 5.30 to 7.30 at Clinton High School. Some brief updates on community projects. The Moon Road Complete Streets project, which was the result of a 2025 application to the Build Raise grant program, has been executed. We received the final documents and held a kickoff meeting with our engineer, Camacho Hernandez, to begin work on that project. The Project is very detailed in the public input, so we will have various community meetings to talk about what is needed for the stretch of, to develop a multimodal road, a complete street for our moon from Socorro Road to where it ends right now at Grijalva.

Is it ever gonna connect to the- That would be the plan.

So it would be great to be able to build on this, find a partner who can help add on some funding to help us develop what that could look like the whole way through. Funding the actual construction would be another part of the project, but right now this is just a planning project. Yeah, so 2.17 miles of Moon Road, again, from Socorro to where it currently ends. Another item that we met on this past week was the 60% schematic plans for the Paso del Norte Trail, so also a product of a successful grant application. A meeting was held at TxDOT and it was an opportunity for TxDOT engineers to review and comment on any of the aspects of our 60% design. It included aspects regarding the roadway, coordination with utilities, with the water improvement district, and ongoing discussion, so we still don't have the 100% alignment. There are some property owners that we are still trying to negotiate with to see how to connect the entire stretch of the Paso del Norte Trail. But overall, it was a very successful review with TxDOT. The other item related to transit that we are currently working on is a service expansion agreement with Sun Metro and ETA. The city did provide feedback on this service expansion agreement including city of Socorro in the agreement to share the funding from the federal transit for the expansion of transit within Socorro. So that's very exciting to see. The Socorro Transit-Oriented Development Feasibility Study is currently working through the advanced funding agreement. So this is the first step between TxDOT and the city in coordinating the process for the review and payments of funds from the grant. For that, we anticipate the final closeout documentation to be completed in October of 2028. That's a transit-oriented development feasibility study, along with the purchase of microtransit vehicles. Passmore and Vineyard bridge replacement, the documents, the schematics are done. Currently the legal department is reviewing the bid documents. Right now we're looking at maybe two months to be able to, two and a half months, to be able to process those, process that request for bids, successfully choose a bidder, and then meet the construction season of October of 2026. So if we can build one of the bridges first, during that first construction season, and then the second one in the next construction season, which would begin in October of 2027. So that is currently the plan. And I believe it's to start with Passmore and then Vineyard. Or it's Vineyard and then Passmore because Passmore has more utility relocation and coordination that needs to take place.

And the WID ends in about a month already, I think? Their last irrigations, I think?

Oh, I'm not sure when the last irrigation is, but we have irrigation season ending October 30th of 2026. It may end sooner, but currently that's what the engineers are working with.

And those were all my updates. Is Socorro still holding farmer's market out here on the weekends?

No, the Socorro Sundays, no. No, they discontinued that.

Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Camilo. Moving on to item 14, considering to take action on the adjournment of this meeting, do I have a motion to adjourn?

Make a motion to adjourn.

I have a motion made by Andrea Royals to adjourn meeting, second by Rafael Carrillo. All those in favor of the motion?

Aye. Aye.

Any names? Any abstain? Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8.08. Thank you all for coming.