In Bates v. Tesar, 81 S.W.3d 411, 424-25 (Tex. App.--El Paso 2002, no pet.), the court held that relocation was not, as a matter of law, a material and substantial change in circumstance but that moving a significant distance could support a finding of changed circumstance. Id. The court noted that this is a fact-intensive inquiry and suggested that trial courts consider the following factors: the distance involved; the quality of the relationship between the noncustodial parent and the child; the nature and quantity of the child's contacts with the noncustodial parent, both de jure and de facto; whether the relocation would deprive the noncustodial parent of regular and meaningful access to the children; the impact of the move on the quantity and quality of the child's future contact with the noncustodial parent; the motive for the move; the motive for opposing the move; the feasibility of preserving the relationship between the noncustodial parent and the child through suitable visitation arrangements; and the proximity, availability, and safety of travel arrangements. (Id. at 430.)