Loading...
07-22-2014 I PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 FOR THE 3 CITY OF LAS CRUCES 4 City Council Chambers 5 July 22, 2014 at 6:00 p.m. 6 7 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: 8 Godfrey Crane, Chairman 9 William Stowe, Vice-Chair 10 Joanne Ferrary, Member 11 Ruben Alvarado, Member 12 Kirk Clifton, Member 13 14 BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: 15 Charles Beard, Secretary 16 17 STAFF PRESENT: 18 Katherine Harrison- Rogers, Senior Planner, CLC 19 Susana Montana, Planner, CLC 20 Mark Dubbin, CLC Fire Department (departed 9:50) 21 Robert Cabello, CLC Legal Staff 22 Becky Baum, Recording Secretary, RC Creations, LLC 23 24 I. CALL TO ORDER (6:00 p.m.) 25 26 Crane: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the meeting of the 27 Planning and Zoning Commission for Tuesday July 22nd. Let me start as 28 we usually do by introducing my fellow Commissioners; starting at my far 29 right, Commissioner Clifton represents District 6, then Commissioner 30 Stowe who is also our Vice Chairman, District 1, Commissioner Ferrary 31 District 5; Commissioner Alvarado, District 3. I'm Godfrey Crane the Chair 32 and I represent District 4. We presently have one vacancy on the 33 Commission. 34 35 ll. CONFLICT OF INTEREST - At the opening of each meeting, the chairperson 36 shall ask if any member on the Commission or City staff has any known conflict 37 of interest with any item on the agenda. 38 39 Crane: The next thing is to ask if any member of the Commission or any City 40 person present has any conflict of interest of anything on tonight's agenda. 41 Ms. Ferrary. 42 43 Ferrary: Commissioner Crane I have a conflict as I am a member of the Las 44 Cruces Country Club, so I would like to recuse myself when we get to the 45 second item of new business, Case IDP-14-04. 46 1 I Crane: Okay. Thank you. So noted. Anyone else? No one else. Thank you. 2 3 III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4 5 1. June 24, 2014 - Regular Meeting 6 7 Crane: Next we go to the approval of the minutes for the last meeting. 8 Commissioners does anyone have any points to make about them? If not 9 1 have a few, mostly picky. Page 18, line 23, "Ms. Rogers, is this a point of 10 order". And page 20, line 28, that word second from the end of the line is 11 "evidently". Page 21, line 37, "Ms. Harrison-Rogers'. Page 37, Line 30, 12 "But we hear you" H E A R. Finally page 67, line 37, "starting with you Mr. 13 Beard". Any other Commissioner? Commissioner Ferrary. 14 15 Ferrary: On page 10, line 42, there is not a comma between site and visit. 16 And on page 25, line 30 should be "it sounds'. And line 31, they'll instead 17 of just they. And then on page 44, line 5; "the' should be eliminated. And 18 also on line 7, it and then take out would. And line 9, insert "it". 19 PAGES 25, 31, 44 LINE 5 AND LINE 7 ARE CORRECTIONS TO WHAT 20 SHE SAID VERBATIM IN THE JUNE MEETING. 21 22 Crane: Thank you, any other Commissioner have some points to make about the 23 minutes? In that case I'll entertain a motion that the minutes as corrected 24 be agreed to, be accepted. 25 26 Stowe: So moved. 27 28 Crane: Moved by Mr. Stowe. Seconded? 29 30 Ferrary: I'll second. 31 32 Crane: Seconded by Ms. Ferrary. All in favor aye. 33 34 ALL: AYE. 35 36 Crane: Against? Abstentions? Passes five/zero. Thank you. 37 38 IV. CONSENT AGENDA 39 40 1. Case 5-14-020: An application of Raci Management Company, Inc., 41 property owner, for a replat known as Ameriwest Subdivision No. 3, Replat 42 No. 6 on a 5.00 +/- acre commercial lot zoned C-3 (Commercial High 43 Intensity) and located on the east side of Telshor Boulevard, 0.53 +/- miles 44 north of its intersection with Spruce Avenue; Parcel ID# 02-31275. Proposed 45 Use: Two (2) new commercial lots, Council District 6 (Levatino). 46 2 I Crane: Now we pass to the consent agenda. Let me explain for those of you who 2 may not know how we handle this. Items on the consent agenda are put 3 there by the Community Planning Department in the belief that they are 4 not particularly contentious items and therefore there probably will be no 5 need for debate on them. However, if any member of the public, any 6 Commissioner, or any member of Community Development Department 7 actually wants to debate any item on the consent agenda we will remove it 8 from the consent agenda and put it into new business, otherwise we 9 simply take an up or down vote on the whole consent agenda which today 10 includes only one item, Case 5-14-020. So is there anybody who wishes 11 to debate that particular matter? No one so indicates, so we will vote on 12 the consent agenda. May I have a motion to that effect? 13 14 Clifton: So moved. 15 16 Crane: Moved by Mr. Clifton. 17 18 Alvarado: Second. 19 20 Crane: Seconded by Mr. Alvarado. All in favor aye. 21 22 ALL: AYE. 23 24 Crane: Opposed? The case passes five to zero. Thank you. 25 26 V. OLD BUSINESS 27 28 1. Case 5-13-030W: An application of Western Lands Surveying on behalf of 29 Jose A & Martha C. Gamboa, property owners to waive 100% of the road 30 improvement requirements for Saromi Lane and Cortez Drive, a proposed 31 collector roadway. The proposed waiver is associated with improvements 32 required for a proposed alternate summary subdivision known as Gamboa 33 Acres Subdivision on a 5.01 +/- acre tract located on the southwest corner of 34 Cortez Drive and Saromi Lane; 7486 Cortez Drive; ParcelID# 02-25523. 35 Proposed Use: Two (2) new rural single-family residential lots; Council 36 District 6 (Levatino). 37 38 Crane: Now we pass to the regular agenda which is in two sections; old business, 39 we have a couple of items and new business, three items. And the 40 regular agenda is handled this way, a member of the Community 41 Development Department will come up and give us a presentation on 42 each item in turn. The Commission may have questions of that person. 43 When our questions are over we ask the applicant to come up or the 44 applicant's representative speak to us if that person wishes. We may 45 have questions of that person. Finally, we ask interested Members of the 46 public to come up and say their piece. We may have some questions of 3 I them. When the public has had its say, then we close the matter to further 2 debate and we, the Commissioners, will discuss the matter among 3 ourselves and take a vote. Before each of the regular items I will ask for a 4 show of hands on how many Members of the public wish to speak and if 5 it's quite a large number I'll ask our ... I'll ask Mr. Alvarado here to operate 6 our machine for timing people, typically we give three minutes per person. 7 If there's only a scattering of people then we probably will dispense with 8 that. So, Ms. Harrison-Rogers starts off and this is the Case S-13-030W, 9 in old business. Go ahead please. 10 11 H-Rogers: Thank you. Chairman, Members of the Commission. This particular case 12 is associated with the Gamboa Acres subdivision. This is specifically a 13 waiver request to the road improvements. The particular property is 14 located at the corner of Cortez Drive and Saromi Lane. It is zoned EE 15 which is single-family equestrian estate and agriculture. It encompasses a 16 little over five acres and has one existing single-family home. They're 17 proposing to split it into two lots, a little over three acres, a little over one 18 acre for the other. This is part of the alternate summary subdivision 19 process. That particular actual subdivision is administrative and isn't 20 actually a matter before the Commission this evening. It is for reference 21 compliant with the zoning code. The only thing that is a little different is 22 that they are requesting a waiver from the road improvements that are 23 required as part of the regulations. 24 Here's a picture of the plat, you can see the layout of those two 25 lots. You have Cortez and Saromi right here, and of course a flag lot for 26 the smaller of the two parcels, and of course the remaining lot right here. 27 Now Cortez Drive specially is a collector roadway. Currently it's 25-feet, it 28 is paved. They ... as part of the subdivision process they're required to 29 provide a right-of-way dedication for Cortez Drive, that's one-half of a 30 collector which is 85-feet, approximately 42.5 feet in this case. They're 31 also required to construct half of the collector which is also 42.5 feet, that 32 includes sidewalk, curb, gutter, all of those sorts of things that make a city 33 street. They're also required as part of the process to construct a minor 34 local roadway from the edge of the subdivision, that would be the western 35 boundary all the way to the nearest paved road, which is Dunn. The 36 applicant is proposing specifically for Cortez Drive to dedicate the right-of- 37 way, they are going to do that; however, they would like 100% of the 38 required road improvements waived. 39 Now onto Saromi Lane. This is designated as a local roadway. It 40 is currently an unimproved dirt road. Again they're responsible for 41 dedicating half of the required 50-foot segment which is 25-feet, and 42 they're also responsible for constructing that 25-feet to local road 43 standards. The applicant again is requesting a waiver of 100% of those 44 road improvements but will dedicate the additional right-of-way for Saromi 45 Lane. For your reference, here's the minor local road, of course they 46 would be required to construct half of that for Saromi. And then here's the 4 I collector and of course they would be required to build half of that for 2 Cortez, if this waiver were not granted. This is a good idea of what they're 3 supposed to construct. You can see with the red line here, this is a minor 4 local roadway all the way to Dunn and then of course from the edge of the 5 subdivision to this edge of the subdivision they would be required to do 6 that half of a collector along Cortez, and then from this point to this point in 7 the yellow as you can see it'd be half of the road cross section for a local 8 road, that's 25-feet. You can see that this is the paved roadway along 9 Cortez looking west and this is Saromi, you can see again that that's just a 10 dirt road looking south. 11 The applicant's particular rationale, mind you this is ... this is 12 specifically from the applicant, is that the proposed subdivision isn't done 13 to sell off the land, rather it's for family. Additionally it's been designed to 14 prevent additional traffic onto the unimproved Saromi Lane and restrict 15 access to the existing paved Cortez. And the proposed subdivision is 16 within the East Mesa Community Planning Blueprint, where roadway 17 standards and designs are desired to protect the rural environment of the 18 area. And the required road improvements would not accomplish this. 19 And of course that being the applicant's rationale, they can speak more to 20 that and they do have a presentation this evening to talk about that for 21 you. 22 Staff looked at the hardships expressed by the applicant and 23 unfortunately Article 6, section 37-33 of the City of Las Cruces Code 24 states that the hardship must be due to an exceptional topographic, soil, 25 or other surface or subsurface condition and those conditions would result 26 in the inhibiting of the objectives of the code. Upon review of this, there 27 isn't any sort of hardship related to the topography or subsurface 28 conditions of this particular parcel; it's simply a monetary issue. Therefore 29 staff is stating that this particular waiver is not justified. The DRC did look 30 at this particular project on May 21st, they also have recommended denial 31 to this Commission of the waiver citing that there are some concern for 32 just the proliferation of these types of waivers and ultimately what it does 33 to the road system down the line in the future as a number of these occur. 34 Staff recommends denial for the proposed waiver based on the 35 findings outlined in the staff report. And of course the Planning and 36 Zoning Commission is a recommending body for the proposed waiver to 37 City Council. And your options tonight are to vote yes to the waiver, vote 38 yes to approve it with conditions, or vote no to deny the waiver, or table 39 and postpone the request. With that I'm open to any questions or we can 40 go ahead and turn that over to the applicant who has a presentation 41 prepared for this Commission. 42 43 Crane: Commissioners, any questions for Ms. Harrison-Rogers? Commissioner 44 Stowe. 45 46 Stowe: Do you have a cost on the ... how much it would cost the applicant? 5 1 2 H-Rogers: I currently do not have a cost, but the applicant may be able to speak a 3 little bit more to that, however, just knowing the general costs of these 4 things it would be in the several tens of thousands of dollars. 5 6 Stowe: And we're saying that's not a hardship? 7 8 H-Rogers: Unfortunately our code does not site monetary reasons as a hardship. 9 Generally topographic and soil conditions that might prevent it. 10 11 Crane: Commissioner Stowe, are you through? 12 13 Stowe: Thank you. 14 15 Crane: Commissioner Ferrary. 16 17 Ferrary: Is there a timeline when if they ... if we denied this and they were forced to 18 pay for that, it doesn't make much sense for them to have to make those 19 improvements until the rest of the road is ready, is that right? 20 21 H-Rogers: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Ferrary, there is a 22 mechanism by which the City will take a fee in lieu of improvements and 23 generally in situations like this you're correct, the City does not want to 24 see these piecemeal segments of roadway. Rather they would take the 25 fee in lieu and then keep the monies so that when the time comes they 26 can improve the whole segment of roadway in a more logical sequence. 27 28 Ferrary: Is there a time when they would have to have that into the City's hands? 29 30 H-Rogers: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Ferrary, yes, indeed there is ... basically they 31 would have to do that prior to filing the subdivision. The subdivision 32 couldn't be filed until we actually had those fees in place. The other 33 mechanism if they were to build it would be a surety, a financial surety of 34 some sort like a bond or an escrow account or a letter of credit and 35 basically an agreement with the City, a guarantee of improvements; that 36 those improvements would be done within a certain timeframe. That 37 allows them to record the plat but then they have to build that within 1 38 believe its three years. 39 40 Ferrary: Thank you. 41 42 H-Rogers: You're welcome. 43 44 Crane: I think Commissioner Alvarado's light was on first. 45 46 Alvarado: Who paved Cortez? Did the City pave Cortez or was that there before? 6 1 2 H-Rogers: I actually don't know the answer to that question. That's something that 1 3 could look into for you. I'm under the assumption though just knowing that 4 most of those lots are not part of a previously filed subdivision, that that 5 was most likely the City that did that, just based on the area itself. That 6 would've been either a City or county project before it was brought into the 7 city. 8 9 Alvarado: Because alot of those roads were paved by the county before they were 10 annexed into the city. 11 12 H-Rogers: Correct. 13 14 Alvarado: Thank you. 15 16 Crane: Commissioner Clifton. 17 18 Clifton: Mr. Chair, Katherine question, could you go back to the aerial photo for 19 me? Okay, I couldn't ... perhaps I missed it in the packet and I can't read 20 the plat but how much right-of-way did they have to dedicate as part of the 21 subdivision plat for Cortez? 22 23 H-Rogers: So along the entire frontage of the parcels themselves it is going to be a 24 42.5-foot wide strip along those parcels. 25 26 Clifton: So they dedicated ... they're dedicating 42 ... 27 28 H-Rogers: They will dedicate that, yes sir. 29 30 Clifton: Okay. Then across the street is owned by the State of New Mexico, the 31 state land office, did they review this project? 32 33 H-Rogers: The state land office, Members of the Commission, Mr. Chair, the state 34 land office is always given copies of any sort of land use permits or 35 subdivisions that go through on any lands that are adjacent or may be 36 influenced by the development. 37 38 Clifton: And the reason I ask, the state land office just doesn't go out and openly 39 pave roads just to pave roads. It could be a hundred years before they 40 pave Cortez. It just ... it does seem a little bit of a burden on the property 41 owner to have already accumulated 42.5-feet of their property and further 42 assess them road improvements adjacent to that when who knows when 43 Cortez is going to get built. It's already paved. Were there any other 44 negotiations attempted with the applicant in terms of what would you be 45 willing to do? They're giving up a lot of property. 46 7 I H-Rogers: Correct. Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Clifton, 2 during the process we always talk about the ability to fee in lieu or maybe 3 some other alternatives such as development agreement with City Council 4 to do some sort of alternative. In this particular case their preference was 5 to waive 100% of the road improvements. 6 7 Crane: Ms. Harrison-Rogers let me make sure I understand this, they have to 8 dedicate 42.5-feet on Cortez as half of the collector road and put gutter, 9 sidewalk there and curb, and that extends all the way down to Dunn? 10 Why do they have to do all the way down to Dunn? Am I right? 11 12 H-Rogers: Mr. Chair, members of the Commission, it's two part; in front of the 13 subdivision they have to dedicate the 42.5 foot road section and then 14 construct the half section of a collector which is the curb, gutter, sidewalk. 15 And then from the western edge or the end of that particular subdivision to 16 the nearest paved road that's accepted by the City which is Dunn, they 17 would have to improve that to a minor local, the entire length of this 18 roadway, so that means essentially 50-foot cross section. And then the 19 Saromi Lane is a half local improved at this point with 25-foot dedicated 20 along the subdivision boundaries. 21 22 Crane: So they are required to make the red highlighted part of Cortez up to a 23 minor local standards which is a 25-foot, did you say dedication? 24 25 H-Rogers: It's ... they don't have to dedicate, Mr. Chair, Members of the 26 Commission, they don't have to dedicate any land cause of course they 27 don't own, but they do have to improve it. Let me show you what the 28 cross section looks like so you have a good sense. It's actually 50-feet 29 and this is what it looks like. 30 31 Crane: Okay now if you could save me a little trouble digging here, is there any 32 conflict between what they would do as bringing Cortez up to a minor local 33 and what Cortez would look like as a collector? In other words are they 34 doing something that has to be ripped out before Cortez can be brought 35 up to its collector form? 36 37 H-Rogers: Ultimately it ... Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, ultimately that's an 38 engineering call at the time of construction. If it can be used they will use 39 the pavement but often times things may have to be altered significantly, 40 but ultimately that's at the time of construction. So if it was to be 41 constructed as a minor local for a length of the way all the way to Dunn 42 and then it would transition into the 42.5-foot of half a collector, potentially 43 they could utilize this but I'm not certain of that, it's really an engineering 44 question that I'm not capable of answering at this point. 45 8 1 Crane: Well looking a little closer at these diagrams I see that half a minor local is 2 an 11-foot driving lane and a 5.5-foot parking lane. And half a collector is 3 a two-foot C&C, and a 12-foot driving lane and another 12-foot driving 4 lane. These are incompatible. So if this is done as the City requires we 5 will have right outside the north side of this lot half of a collector build to 6 the standards you just showed us and then when we transition from the 7 green arrow to the red arrow we will go to a different standard, which will 8 not be a collector, which is a waste of time and money if anybody had that 9 much time and money. We have a problem here, or am I imaging this? 10 1 t H-Rogers: Chairman Crane and Members of the Commission, indeed there would be 12 a transition. This essentially would be built to a full local, the red segment 13 here and then this would be built to a half collector, this segment here. 14 The little yellow over here would be a half local, it's a bit confusing. But 15 indeed they would be of different standards, there would be a transition 16 point between the two and generally as I explained to Commissioner 17 Ferrary, in circumstances like these the City actually does prefer a fee in 18 lieu as opposed to the actual full construction so that those monies can be 19 set aside so that it can be built in a more uniform way in the future. 20 21 Crane: I make the point that I think when we've had this kind of thing come up 22 before there's been a fee in lieu as an acceptable way all around for 23 getting out of this very strange situation. I mean its unconscionable that 24 put in another house on a flag lot in that block that somebody would have 25 to build half a mile of road, half of half a mile of road, for which the other 26 people benefit. It hardly seems fair and is ... financially I imagine is 27 completely out of reach. Thank you. Any other questions for Ms. 28 Harrison-Rogers? Commissioner Ferrary. 29 30 Ferrary: I was ... Ms. Rogers, I was wondering the fee in lieu, is that for the total 31 amount to take that down to Dunn Road that would be required? 32 33 H-Rogers: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, Commissioner Ferrary, yes 34 indeed. Essentially what would happen is their engineer would have to 35 provide us an estimate and then that's what that fee in lieu would be 36 based upon and it would be for the entire ... all of these improvements 37 that you see up on the screen right now. 38 39 Crane: Anyone else? Mr. Stowe. 40 41 Stowe: It was mentioned of a rural road. How does that impact these standards? 42 43 H-Rogers: So what was mentioned by Members of the Commission, Commissioner 44 Stowe what was mentioned by the applicant and their rationale had to do 45 with the East Mesa Blueprint which was planning initiative that I think you 46 are all familiar with as many of you or most of you sitting on the 9 I Commission tonight did review that and recommend that for approval. In 2 that particular policy document that was formulated essentially by the 3 residents that live out there along with City staff, one of the things that 4 they desired was a rural atmosphere including the possibility of perhaps 5 creating different types of road standards in the future for that particular 6 neighborhood. Currently our road standards don't have ... we do not have 7 a rural category for our road standards. 8 9 Stowe: Why not? 10 11 H-Rogers: Members of the Commission, Commissioner Stowe, that's something that 12 we haven't been directed to do by City Council. We are revising our 13 design standards but we still haven't contemplated a rural road design in 14 those standards as we have not been directed by Council to prioritize that. 15 However, it is a possibility in the future if they so choose. 16 17 Stowe: Thank you. 18 19 H-Rogers: You're welcome. 20 21 Crane: Commissioner Clifton. 22 23 Clifton: Mr. Chair, Katherine, I thought a minor local was 37-feet back of curb, 24 back of curb improved. 25 26 H-Rogers: Members ... 27 28 Clifton: Where I'm going with that is for Saromi cause it indicates a 25-foot road 29 section would be required. 30 31 H-Rogers: Correct. Commissioner ... excuse me, Chairman Crane and Members of 32 the Commission, when we say the 50-feet, it's the full minor local section 33 that we have here. That includes sidewalks as well as any improvements, 34 curb, gutter. The ... I believe that the pavement itself is the 37-feet that 35 you were speaking to, but the full 50-feet is incorporating of course the 36 sidewalks and the curb and gutter and I believe that that's where the 37 discrepancy takes place. 38 39 Clifton: But the sidewalk would not actually be constructed until time of building 40 construction, correct? 41 42 H-Rogers: Generally it is not, you are correct. 43 44 Clifton: So, unless something changed I thought the design standards used to 45 read that there were 100% requirements for minor locals adjacent and to 46 the subject property. 10 1 2 H-Rogers: I believe that the information that we have is with the current standards; 3 one has to do with adjacent to and the other has to do with the closest 4 paved roadway. I may be wrong and we'll have to double-check that, but 5 to the best of my knowledge these are the standards by which we are ... 6 we are working. 7 8 Clifton: I ... I just look across the street and it looks like those properties have 9 been subdivided. I realize it's an EE zone, they're probably two-acre lots 10 roughly, I mean the likelihood of Saromi being further improved is probably 11 as likely as Cortez I would guesstimate based on the current land use 12 situation. 13 14 H-Rogers: Members of the Commission, Commissioner Clifton, these are designated 15 as large lots, you are correct and Saromi Lane is not part of our MPO 16 Thoroughfare Plan for any major type of roadway expansion. It's just 17 considered a local road, so I think you have come to a good assumption. 18 19 Clifton: Thank you. 20 21 Crane: Any other Commissioner? Thank you Ms. Harrison-Rogers. Is the 22 applicant here or the applicant's representative? Are both of you 23 gentlemen going to speak? 24 25 Gutierrez: No. I'm going to be speaking for the applicant. I'm Anthony Gutierrez. 26 27 Crane: Okay sir. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 28 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 29 30 Gutierrez: Yes sir I do. 31 32 Crane: Thank you. Continue. 33 34 Gutierrez: I'm just going to go through a quick presentation and try to shed some 35 light on what our side of this whole thing is. Basically what we had here in 36 the beginning, you've already seen some pictures of the plat, but basically 37 we first submitted this plat with four lots, it was originally a four-lot split out 38 of one. And then we reduced it and the intent just right off is to give this 39 parcel as a gift to his daughter. The only thing I would point out is that 40 Saromi Lane is basically the county boundary, so this is adjacent 41 immediately to the county boundary right now. Some of you were asking 42 about questions of the plat, this might ... this one might be a little more 43 legible, but shows clearly what we're dedicating as far as right-of-way. 44 We took some more pictures and with these pictures up I'd like also 45 to clarify for the Commission and the public that the improvements will not 46 just be adjacent to the property. We'll be improving, if this waiver isn't I granted, all the way down basically to the highway, to Highway 70. And 2 just the ... a quick note on how the land resides adjacent to that property 3 right now. Right now you have the state to the north, we'd have to acquire 4 or have an agreement with them to improve their share of that right-of-way 5 as well as four other parcels to the west. We'd have to acquire that right- 6 of-way which is not acquired at this point. There aren't easements or ... 7 you know there's not dedicated property. It's not in the City's hands right 8 now for us to do those improvements, as well as all the topographical 9 surveying and mapping that would have to be done in order to do the 10 engineering estimate to provide a fee in lieu of. That's one of the reasons 11 why we choose this route first, to try and get a full waiver. 12 And these pictures show I believe a little more detail on what the 13 existing section looks like out there. But just to make that clear that just 14 the half of those improvements adjacent to his property would be cost 15 intensive, improving all of Cortez all the way down to the highway would 16 be even much greater. If you consider all the drainage requirements and 17 all the infrastructure that you'd have to put in. This is the waiver request 18 letter, I'm sure it was included in your packet. This what we want to get to 19 is East Mesa Community Blueprint, now participants in this blueprint were 20 the community like City staff had previously stated, as well as City staff. 21 And with the blueprint like this in place we feel confident that the 22 community surrounding this area is in approval of keeping things the way 23 they are or improving them according to this blueprint. Right now City 24 design standards do not accommodate this blueprint whatsoever. If we 25 were to entertain a fee in lieu of we'd want to conform to this blueprint, and 26 those design standards simply don't exist. When you read through this 27 packet we've got some ... some of these paragraphs highlighted for you. 28 Current City standards are for general application throughout the city and 29 may not be best suited for the context and/or users in the planning area. 30 The fact that many of the roads and trails in this area are not completely 31 developed or not yet built presents the opportunity to establish new rural 32 and equestrian design standards for roadways and trails located here and 33 in similar rural areas in the city. 34 Right here you can see some pictures of what they intend to see. 35 They've got some points under their goals which I think are important to 36 note. Ensure future infrastructure design and development that take into 37 consideration the surroundings and the community's desires as identified 38 by this blueprint. I mean this is just a unique case where we have 39 something that is presented by the community and I believe that this 40 subdivision in no way impacts the goals of this blueprint. And we think 41 that improving the area according to the design standards now that we 42 have in place would definitely be in contradiction to this blueprint. And 43 again just some highlights here, I won't read this one. Well maybe I will, 44 this points to a ... on the next page here what this layout looks like. But 45 one is you can see the location by the red square of where the property is 12 I now and where a proposed park is to be put in place and all of the 2 different trails that they would like to see happen. 3 So basically we'd like a waiver from improving both Cortez Drive 4 and Saromi Lane within the limits of the proposed alternate summary 5 subdivision. We'd like a full waiver from the design standards completely 6 and would like to leave it as is while we still dedicate the property so that 7 in future when these design standards are created and made part of the 8 code that the property's there to use. I think it's ... it's easy to say at this 9 point that we're probably giving more property than will be necessary for 10 those design standards, but that it will be available. It's not available in 11 the four parcels adjacent. We are requesting approval of the flag lot 12 configuration as proposed in the said alternate summary subdivision and 13 the benefits are the City of Las Cruces will be able to honor the wishes of 14 the residents in the East Mesa Community Blueprint area, and the 15 objectives of the community blueprint. Density in this area will remain 16 lower than the current zoning of the parent tract which is true if you look at 17 this on an aerial view it's not increasing the density any more than the 18 surrounding neighborhood. I just want to put emphasis on the fact that 19 this isn't for financial gain. I believe that is something to consider. It may 20 not be in the code but in this hearing we have a large part of the 21 community, I don't think they are here to hear this case, but it's important 22 for people to understand that sometimes these situations are created 23 simply by just overlooking something when we're creating these codes. 24 We don't always anticipate these types of situations and that's why you all 25 are here. So we're asking for your serious consideration of this waiver 26 and that you would grant it so that we can stay in compliance with this 27 blueprint. Thank you. 28 29 Crane: Thank you sir. Commissioners, any questions for Mr. Gutierrez? Mr. 30 Stowe. 31 32 Stowe: Mr. Gutierrez. 33 34 Gutierrez: Yes sir. 35 36 Stowe: About how long would it take in your estimation, in your opinion for 37 development to take place near you at this property? 38 39 Gutierrez: Which development ... are you referring to development of the roadway 40 improvements or just of the lot itself? 41 42 Stowe: The ... is it BLM that's across the way? 43 44 Gutierrez: It's State of New Mexico right now. 45 46 Stowe: State of New Mexico. 13 1 2 Gutierrez: Yes. 3 4 Stowe: In one opinion that might take a century. 5 6 Gutierrez: Yes. Yes I mean in my experience just dealing with ... I was involved with 7 acquisition of right-of-way on Elks Drive when that was improved and that 8 took some serious time. We had to prepare any legal descriptions and 9 deal with property owners, and that process was very intensive. Just 10 dealing with one property, just one, is a serious issue. We'd have to deal I1 with four adjacent to the west and then the State of New Mexico ... 12 13 Stowe: Right. 14 15 Gutierrez: Before we could even approach you know that issue. So it's a big deal. 16 17 Stowe: Ten years might be a feasible estimation. 18 19 Gutierrez: A good estimate. Yes. That's correct. 20 21 Stowe: Thank you. 22 23 Crane: Any other Commissioner have questions? Okay, thank you gentlemen. 24 Please sit down, and any member of the public wish to address this issue? 25 No one so indicates, so we'll close this to further discussion. 26 Commissioners, your wish? 27 28 Clifton: Mr. Chair, members of the Commission. 29 30 Crane: Mr. Clifton. 31 32 Clifton: Although the letter of the law does require these road improvements 1 33 would argue that the applicant is giving up over 30,000 square feet of 34 property to the City through their dedication. That's approximately just 35 under three-quarters of an acre. In an R-1a zoning district you could get 36 on a regular standard street almost 10 lots out of that, that's a lot of dirt 37 they're giving to the City for half of a collector and half of a minor local that 38 probably won't have the traffic on it. And I think there's a reasonable trade 39 for property and improvements and with that I'll vote when we're prepared 40 to. 41 42 Crane: Are you figuring that as running ... that property running all the way down 43 to Dunn Road or just what's on the edges of this lot? 44 45 Clifton: Mr. Chair it was just a rough calculation on the adjacent edges of this lot in 46 particular. 14 1 2 Crane: Okay. 3 4 Clifton: The northern boundary, the 42.5-feet was just under 20,000 square feet 5 and Saromi was about 10,000 square feet. 6 7 Crane: Okay. Thank you. Comments from anyone else? I'm disappointed that 8 while the applicant has every right to bring up the fact to give a flag lot and 9 build a home for a family member is going to cost immense amounts of 10 money because of this road build out that's required, that he has not 11 offered a fee in lieu of this road work or said that he would be glad to sit 12 down with the City and work out something. This is what has been done 13 before in this kind of situation which is even before this Commission, more 14 than once in the six years or so I've been on it. Any other comments by 15 members? 16 17 Ferrary: The representative for the Gamboa family mentioned about Elks Drive 18 being you know kind of a patch work you know long, and I can see how 19 that is going to probably happen with this road even though it's not quite 20 as long to Dunn, but the responsibility of making those improvements in 21 front of other property owners and since this isn't really a development 22 that could share that amongst other you know lots being sold with homes, 23 there isn't a builder that could afford that kind of development, but I agree 24 that probably some type of consideration for partial, like just maybe what 25 the improvements would cost in front and on the side of the lot might be 26 something to consider. 27 28 Crane: Thank you. Anyone else? In that case Mr. Clifton would you like to make 29 a motion, possibly with the condition regarding fee in lieu of, which might 30 make it easier for some of us to vote for the waiver. 31 32 Clifton: Thank you Mr. Chair. I suspect I can craft a motion from that. I would like 33 to make a motion to approve a waiver request for Case 5-13-030W, 34 conditioned that the applicant provide payment in lieu of road 35 improvements equal to the amount required by the City subdivision 36 standards. 37 38 Crane: Thank you, is there a second for that? 39 40 Stowe: Second. 41 42 Crane: Seconded by Mr. Stowe. Any further discussion? Mr. Alvarado. 43 44 Alvarado: Yes I'd like to ... do we have any idea at all how much the in lieu amount 45 is going to be? Does anybody have any ideas, $10, $10,000? 46 15 I Crane: Ms. Harrison-Rogers can you help us, or anyone else with the City? 2 3 H-Rogers: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission as ... as I am not an engineer and 4 1 don't typically do the cost estimates, I'm not certain. We do have a 5 general number that sometimes we can throw out, but it's going to be in 6 the tens of thousands of dollars. I would also like to remind the 7 Commission that a fee in lieu is something ... a waiver's not required if a 8 fee in lieu is paid. Just so that you're aware. That a fee in lieu is 9 something that we will accept in lieu of the road improvements. It does 10 meet our standards and a waiver is not necessarily required as part of that 11 process. 12 13 Crane: Then how would we work that into a motion? 14 15 H-Rogers: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, I did hear from some of the 16 Commission members, that perhaps there was some interest in only 17 applying that fee in lieu to the areas immediately adjacent to the 18 subdivision as opposed to the entire lengthy of the road all the way to 19 Dunn, that of course would be a waiver from the required standards, in 20 which case you could suggest that a fee in lieu for the remainder be a 21 condition. 22 23 Crane: I see, okay, Mr. Clifton does that ... was that intentioned? You had the fee 24 ... we would waive the requirement for the edges of the lot and then take a 25 fee in lieu for the extension down to Dunn, or were you ... had in mind a 26 fee in lieu of any roadwork at all? 27 28 Clifton: Mr. Chair, Commissioners, what I was struggling with was just what was 29 discussed and Ms. Rogers is absolutely correct in that if they did a 30 payment in lieu of road improvements for what was required, they would 31 not need a waiver. But with that said, as I sit here and think about that 1 32 have to worry about how the City staff over time will track that payment 33 and when and how it will be applied. Twenty years from now the time 34 value, monies can be much different than it is now, so I would respectfully 35 rescind my initial request and I would recommend denial of waiver request 36 S-13-030W. 37 38 Crane: While we'll have to have a motion that it be approved and then if 39 necessary vote it down. And you wish to put aside the matter of payment 40 in lieu. 41 42 Clifton: That would be me my motion Mr Chair. 43 44 Crane: All right. So that's moved and Mr. ... who will second this? I will second it 45 if it's ... Ms. Ferrary you do it, it looks better on paper. 46 16 I Ferrary: I'll second that. 2 3 Crane: All right. Thank you. Let's do a roll call vote starting with Mr. Clifton. 4 5 Clifton: Aye. 6 7 Crane: And you should ... 8 9 Clifton: Based on staff presentation and the relevant articles of the subdivision 10 code and design standards. 11 12 Crane: You realize you are voting for the waiver? 13 14 Clifton: I believe I was voting for the motion which was to deny the waiver. 15 16 Crane: We have to have the motion phrased positively, so your motion would be 17 to approve the waiver. 18 19 Clifton: Mr. Chair I vote no. 20 21 Crane: Right. And you have to give your reasons. 22 23 Clifton: Based on staff presentation, applicant's presentation, and the applicable 24 code section from the subdivision regulations and the design standards. 25 26 Crane: Thank you. Mr. Stowe. 27 28 Stowe: I vote aye based on discussions this evening. 29 30 Crane: Ms. Ferrary. 31 32 Ferrary: I vote nay for site visit, discussion, and findings. 33 34 Crane: Mr. Alvarado. 35 36 Alvarado: I vote yes based on discussions, site visit, and presentation. 37 38 Crane: And the Chair votes nay based on findings, discussion, and site visit. So 39 the motion fails two votes to three. Thank you. 40 41 2. Case PUD-14.01: An application of The Arbors at Del Rey located at 3731 42 Del Rey Blvd, Parcel numbers 02-25264 and 02-25265, to rezone 2 lots 43 totalling 4.98 +/- acres from C-2C (Commercial Medium Intensity, 44 Conditional) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) in order to : (1) allow an 45 existing nursing home/assisted living facility as a principal permitted use; (2) 46 allow the raising of small animals as an accessory use to the assisted living 17 I facility use: (3) allow the existing 2.49-acre lot size as-of-right; and (4) allow 2 other 2001 Zoning Code C-2 District development standards and land uses to 3 apply within the PUD. Council District 5 (Sorg). 4 5 Crane: We proceed to the next item of old business, Case PUD-14-01, regarding 6 an application of Arbors of Del Rey to rezone two lots. This is a 7 continuation of discussion we had in our last meeting you may remember. 8 Ms. Montana you have the floor. 9 10 Montana: Thank you Mr. Chair. If you don't mind, I expect some testimony for this 11 case, so could you take the oath? 12 13 Crane: I'm sorry. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 14 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 15 16 Montana: Yes I do. Thank you. 17 18 Crane: Thank you. 19 20 Montana: Commissioners. You have a memo, an update of this case that was 21 heard last month. You asked at that time that the applicant provide more 22 information as to the species of animals that they would like to have at the 23 assisted living facility, the number per species, and generally how they 24 would care for and provide shade for, and enclosures for those animals. 1 25 believe in the staff report they did describe, we did describe how they 26 would address that. I would like to mention that the animals they have 27 requested are two chickens, no roosters, two ducks, and a miniature goat. 28 Now if this Commission ... if you recommend to City Council the approval 29 of the PUD it would allow the nursing home is a principal permitted use 30 because the current C-2 zoning does not. It would allow the larger lot size 31 because C-2 ... current C-2 only allows up to one acre and this is nearly 32 five acres. And it would allow the caring of animals as an accessory use. 33 If the Council approves the PUD, the land uses, the applicant still needs to 34 meet Chapter 7 of the Las Cruces Municipal Code. And Chapter 7 does 35 have a special use permit required for chickens. The special use permit is 36 granted by the director of codes, the police department, and to qualify for 37 the special use permit the facility, the operators would have to participate 38 with ... I'm sorry. Could you ... the applicant would have to participate 39 with Future Farmers of America or 4-H programs to qualify for the 40 chickens, or Chapter 7 would have to be amended very narrowly to allow 41 assisted living facilities as an accessory use to have the chickens. So we 42 recognize that if this goes forward, this PUD goes forward, it does allow 43 for the chickens as a land use but the applicant still needs to meet 44 Chapter 7 with regard to the chickens. So with that I would ... I hope 45 that's clarified. I will move forward. 18 I As you know this is the property location and right now the two 2 parcels are owned by the same company. There is one facility, the 3 assisted living facility and they have an outdoor enclosure. Now the 4 residents of this facility have particular medical and therapeutic needs and 5 they need to have an enclosed outdoor area. The applicant will explain 6 that later when they come up to give their presentation, but they do need 7 ... the residents do need to be in an enclosed area. So the animals would 8 be an extension of that enclosed area, so the fence would be enlarged 9 and the animals would be kept here. The applicant met with our codes 10 department, actually five members of the codes staff did come to the I l facility, took a look at the residence, got an idea of the care that they need 12 and what kinds of species of animals would be compatible with their age 13 and their disability, their level of disability, and the applicant responded to 14 that by redesigning their program, the kinds of animals and the passive 15 kinds of animals that would ... that would work well with this ... this 16 population, and they'll explain that later. Again this is the area where the 17 animals would be located. This would be an extension of the current 18 enclosed area, fenced area here, and this is their proposed design, 19 theoretical design for the animal enclosures, where they would be kept; a 20 little pond for the ducks; the chickens, the goats. These are just examples 21 of some of the enclosures they could provide for the chickens, the goat, 22 and the ducks with the pond. Again codes did meet with the applicant, 23 took a look at the facility, the proposed enclosure area, did some ... made 24 some recommendations for the kinds of animals that would work well with 25 their population, and then how to protect the animals from the wildlife that 26 surrounds the property. And the applicant is aware that they would still 27 have to meet Chapter 7 requirements for the enclosures, for the care, for 28 the sanitation, and the medical care of the animals. 29 Staff does not believe that any noise or odor or pests generated by 30 these animals will affect any off-site properties, would not affect the 31 hospital immediately north of the property or any of the housing across the 32 street or a minimum 300-feet south and west of this site. So with that staff 33 is recommending approval of the PUD based on the findings and the staff 34 report and reiterated in the memo to you, and the limitation of the animals 35 to two chickens, no rooster, two ducks, and one miniature goat. Your 36 options of course are, to vote yes to recommend approval of the PUD to 37 the City Council, to vote no to deny it, vote to modify it by recommending 38 new conditions of approval or conditions of approval to Council, or to 39 postpone as you did last month. I wanted to go quickly though this. I'm 40 happy to answer any questions you have, but the applicant is here with a 41 slide show that he would like to present. 42 43 Crane: Thank you Ms. Montana. Any questions? Commissioner Alvarado your 44 light's on. 45 46 Alvarado: Sorry. 19 1 2 Crane: Any questions Commissioners? Then thank you. We'll hear from the 3 applicant. 4 5 Spradlin: Yes, my name is Gregory Spradlin. 6 7 Crane: And ...? You going to speak too sir? 8 9 Trevizo: Yes sir. I'm Tony Trevizo. 10 11 Crane: Okay. Gentlemen do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about 12 to give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 13 14 Spradlin: Yes we do. 15 16 Trevizo: Yes sir. 17 18 Crane: I remember you two gentlemen from a month ago and I imagine my fellow 19 Commissioners do, so if you could tell us new things that might speed 20 things up rather than repeat what you told us before. I think we're all 21 convinced that it's a great idea to have this therapeutic purposes for your 22 clients, but tell us what's new. 23 24 Spradlin: Tell you what's new? 25 26 Crane: Yes. 27 28 Spradlin: Well this presentation, basically we put together just to enhance the 29 information that you already have, give you an idea of what we do at the 30 Arbors of Del Rey and why we want to accomplish what we're trying to 31 take care of here tonight. So here we have the Arbors of Del Rey is a 24- 32 bed, it's just a dementia/Alzheimer's assisted living facility. And we have a 33 portion of the staff and family members present. Up in Santa Fe our sister 34 unit, Sierra Vista community is also an Eden Alternative facility. And here 35 we have, you can see in their back portion of their facility one of the elders 36 and one of the miniature goats and it's Billy and Bill. To give you an idea 37 of a couple of miniature goats that they have and the elders they do 38 interact with the animals and their farming area. Prior to placement of the 39 animals there at Sierra Vista the elders did work with the staff in building 40 the appropriate housing for them and also the areas that they would be 41 housed in. Here we have one of the roaming little creatures for the elders, 42 her name is Laverne and it's ... she kind of roams around in one of the 43 yards for the elders when they're out back. They have actually Polish 44 hens at Sierra Vista and that's what we would like to have here at the 45 Arbors. 20 I Here at the Arbors our motto is "we laugh, we cook, we dance'. 2 Here we have one of the elders, we actually have an art studio and 3 several of them actually participate in doing their own paintings, and to the 4 right bottom corner is actually the finished product of the painting that he 5 created. We also play music. We have piped in music throughout the 6 facility, ongoing throughout the day and also here we have Randy 7 Granger, he comes in from time to time to play his Indian flute music for 8 the elders. 9 10 Trevizo: He volunteers his time. 11 12 Spradlin: Yes, he does volunteer when he comes in to play. We did bring in a 13 couple of ducklings and here we have a son of one of the staff members 14 to see the interactions that the elders would have with these baby 15 ducklings and they were met with such love and compassion by the elders 16 and with them. They now reside at Tony's house. 17 We cook is another one of our mottos. We do have granite counter 18 tops around our kitchen and it's low enough for the elders that can sit and 19 participate in preparing some of the meals, cutting up the vegetables, and 20 those that may even be in wheelchairs are easily accessible to the counter 21 tops as well. We dance. We do have folks that come in and participate 22 with dancing. We do have groups, as you see there on the left and also 23 on the right. They actually come in and dance with the elders that are 24 able to get up and participate. And they seem to really enjoy themselves 25 playing the music that they dance to. Therapaws comes in from time to 26 time throughout the week and the interactions with the elders are just 27 outstanding. 28 Dr. Schumacher would be the veterinary service clinic that we 29 would use if approved, and to provide our services for the animals. And 30 also I wanted to mention that Pat Howard, the FFA person at Las Cruces 31 High School will be involved with our facility in training of the staff on 32 caring for the animals and working with building the shelters for them and 33 working with us throughout the year in the care of the animals. And then 34 have just photos of elders that have interacted with different types of 35 animals. I want to mention that Dr. Bill Thomas is the founder of the Eden 36 Alternative and I want to play a short little video, three-minute video if 1 37 may, but one comment that he made was companionship is the crucial 38 missing link in long-term care settings and also dementia/Alzheimer's 39 settings. We do have ... he did mention that the elders tend to, with 40 interactions with the animals live longer and require less medications. If 1 41 may play the video? 42 43 Crane: Yes, go ahead. 44 45 VIDEO FROM YOUTUBE PLAYED FOR THE COMMISSION AND AUDIENCE. 46 21 I Trevizo: I would like to ... 2 3 Crane: Mr. Trevizo. 4 5 Trevizo: Yes sir. And what we're trying to do is trying to make that different in our 6 own way as Sierra Vista has done, but I just want to just kind of cap things 7 off by saying that 90% of our management team and 60% of our elders 8 and our owners have also been around and raises animals in our youth or 9 to out adulthood like myself. We are not approaching this quality of life 10 approach for our elders through negligence by not willing to commit to the 11 responsibilities and care of animals including the sanitation of and 12 disposal of the excrement. We are professionals and ... who will not 13 expose our unique pets to disease or illness as Greg has indicated, you 14 know we partner up ... we're partnering with those people specifically for 15 the hens to meet the state guidelines. But nothing will stop us from 16 extending the same compassionate and quality care to their pets. We are 17 pleased to have majority support of our commitment from our residents 18 and their families and the healthcare community at large for how we intend 19 to change the culture of how society cares for their elders. 20 Our opponents the last time we were here implied that we were 21 discussing again to say roosters, pigs, horses, and bison, we are not. We 22 are merely expecting to have no more than six small manageable pets. 23 We also would have not purchased our property had we known someone 24 would not be considerate of how seriously we take our responsibility in 25 caring for the aging and the sick. We are making a public statement that 26 our goal is to deinstitutionalize the institutional model with the Arbors of 27 Del Rey being the catalyst and the journey of change in Southern New 28 Mexico. Land of the aggies where our middle name is agriculture. We 29 want to eliminate hopelessness and boredom and give hope and quality to 30 the quality that's left for our elders. The Winhams in particular, one of our 31 opponents, was accurate, our elders cannot care for themselves or for the 32 animals, but that doesn't mean that their lives don't have meaning. They 33 can still be connecting to living things, great food, great music, excellent 34 nursing care, and fun. The elders are not entirely 100% responsible for 35 the care and the cleanliness of their pets, the staff is. But if we can put a 36 smile on the elders face for that day, that moment, it's worth it for us. If 37 the elder can help or watch them eat, that's worth it for us, especially for 38 them. Unfortunately our opponents and we did send out invitation to come 39 out and visit our place so we can entertain any questions and kind of show 40 them the area of proposed that we do this, and unfortunately no one came 41 to our facility, to our invitation. We already have gardens that our elders 42 and their families and our staff love and enjoy. We are blessed with salsa 43 gardens, grape vines, fruit trees, and yes the elders nourish those. We 44 remain steadfast with this international movement of culture change. 45 What a sad day would be if an elder, an ill elder is denied part or is denied 46 a pet while the rest of us get to enjoy ours. Thank you. 22 1 2 Crane: Thank you gentlemen. Hold it there a minute. Any Commissioner have 3 questions for these gentlemen? It seems not, so thank you. Any member 4 of the public wish to speak to this? One person, yes sir. Please come up. 5 Give us your name please and I'll swear you in. 6 7 Garza: Yes my name is Ray Garza and I reside at 254 Mule Deer Drive. 8 9 Crane: Mr. Garcia do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 10 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 11 12 Garza: I do. 13 14 Crane: Please carry on. 15 16 Garza: I would like to speak in support of this zoning change proposed by the 17 Arbors at Del Rey, or PUD-14-01. My wife Dorothy resides at the Arbors. 18 She's been there since the first of July, just this month. And I would like to 19 share with the panel, with the council, the reason that I recently relocated 20 my wife from where she was at another in-facility or assisted living facility 21 to the Arbors. Specifically on June 22nd I almost lost my wife due to heat 22 exhaustion. She wandered away from the facility where she was living at 23 the time and she suffered some severe heat exhaustion. Luckily a person 24 that observed her and she was passed out by the street in the sun, a very 25 hot day on that Sunday, and they called the police, they responded, and 26 immediately took her to the emergency room at the Memorial hospital. 27 Her clothes were drenched from perspiration. Her body temperature had 28 reached 104 degrees, so we almost lost her. They informed me that a few 29 more minutes and possibly she would not have recovered. Now, the 30 reason I'm telling you this is because people with dementia, dementia 31 patients as my wife, they need a secure and safe residence in which to 32 live. They also can really appreciate and benefit from any activities that 33 enhances their life, their daily lives. This is very important. These people 34 have regressed in age to a time when they were younger and that's the 35 reality, but they also live in the present time. They experience things that 36 are positive to them which is very beneficial and they can also experience 37 negative environments that can be also very detrimental. If they're sitting 38 alone staring at the wall all day long we can imagine what that does to a 39 person. So, they can really benefit from activities that they can interact 40 with. They need things to see, to touch, and to talk with and to interact 41 with. I believe that small animals such are being proposed by this 42 proposal would be of great benefit. And they would experience this on a 43 daily basis continuously because even though they have regressed in age 44 they live at the present moment and in five minutes they lose what they 45 have experienced, so they would be experiencing this over and over again 46 on a daily basis and it could be very positive or it could be also 23 I detrimental, negative. So, I can give you an example as far as the effect 2 that animals can have on these patients, my wife for example she hardly 3 knows me as her husband any more at this stage that she's at, but she 4 lights up when I take her home for a short visit and she experiences our 5 two little dogs and she talks to them and pets them and she laughs and 6 she has a terrific time. And that's why I support this initiative. I think that 7 it's a great thing that the Arbors is proposing. Unselfishly they are willing 8 and committing resources, space to take care of these animals and to 9 simply enhance the life of these residents. I think it's very commendable 10 and I fully support it. Thank you very much. it 12 Crane: Thank you Mr. Garza. Any other member of the public? Then we'll close 13 this to further discussion. Commissioners? Commissioner Ferrary. 14 15 Ferrary: I have a question for Ms. Montana. I'm not sure if you were giving us a 16 hint that if the chickens were to be allowed because they're not a 4-H or 17 group like that, that there would have to be an exception from Chapter 7, 18 is that something we include or they have to go through another process? 19 20 Montana: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Ferrary, when codes did a site visit they 21 suggested that both the zoning go forward to allow the animal use 22 including the chickens but that also Chapter 7 be amended to very 23 narrowly allow the chickens for an assisted living facility caring for 24 Alzheimer's and dementia patients up to two chickens, no rooster. That 25 kind of narrow amendment to Chapter 7, that could go forward either 26 simultaneous with the PUD or a little bit after but codes would feel more 27 comfortable if that were included in Chapter 7. 28 29 Crane: But it's not within our power to do that is it? 30 31 Montana: No. That would be separate. The City Attorney actually is working on 32 some amendments with Ms. Harrison-Rogers and that will go forward as a 33 separate piece of legislation. 34 35 Crane: Thank you. Any other Commissioner have any questions of anyone? All 36 right, I'll entertain a motion that Case PUD-14-01, this application for 37 zoning change be approved. 38 39 Stowe: So moved. 40 41 Crane: Moved by Mr. Stowe. Do I have a second? 42 43 Clifton: Second. 44 45 Crane: Seconded by Mr. Clifton. I'll do a roll call vote starting with Mr. Alvarado. 46 24 1 Alvarado: I vote aye based on findings, discussion, and site visit. 2 3 Crane: Ms. Ferrary. 4 5 Ferrary: I vote aye, discussion, site visit, and discussion. 6 7 Crane: Mr. Stowe. 8 9 Stowe: Aye based on findings and discussion. 10 11 Crane: Mr. Clifton. 12 13 Clifton: Aye based on staff presentation, applicant's presentation, and findings 14 one A-G and number two. 15 16 Crane: And the Chair votes aye based on findings, discussion, and site visit. This 17 motion passes five/nothing. Thank you. 18 19 VI. NEW BUSINESS 20 21 1. Case A1725: A variance application of Jesus J & Crystal M. Tapia, property 22 owners, to reduce the minimum required 15-foot secondary front yard 23 setback by 15-feet, resulting in a 0-foot setback. The applicants constructed 24 an attached, unpermitted open-air porch 0 feet from the property line and 25 seek to keep the porch as it currently exists on the property. The subject 26 property encompasses 0.16 +/- acres, is zoned C-2 (Commercial Medium 27 Intensity) and is located on the northeast corner of Organ Avenue and Santa 28 Fe Street; a.k.a. 1330 E. Organ Avenue; Parcel ID# 02-10105. Council 29 District 1 (Silva). 30 31 Crane: We now proceed to new business, Case A1725, a variance application by 32 Jesus and Crystal Tapia to reduce minimum required 15-foot secondary 33 front yard setback by 15-feet resulting in zero-foot setback. This concerns 34 the property at 1330 East Organ Avenue. Who is going to present? 35 36 H-Rogers: Katherine Harrison-Rogers. 37 38 Crane: You were camouflaged there. You know I didn't ... I didn't swear you in 39 before so we're going to do it now, okay? Do you swear or affirm that the 40 testimony you are about to give is the truth and nothing but the truth under 41 penalty of law? 42 43 H-Rogers: I do. 44 45 Crane: Please carry on. 46 25 I H-Rogers: All right. Let me go back really quick. So this particular case is a request 2 for a variance from the minimum required 15-foot secondary front yard 3 setback for a property that's located at 1330 East Organ Avenue. Here's 4 a zoning map, you can get an idea of the vicinity where Solano Drive is, 5 Ridgetop, and Organ Avenue. This particular property is zoned C-2, so it 6 is nonconforming. The required setbacks for C-2 in the front are 15, the 7 second front because this has two streets fronting it, it's a corner lot, is 8 also 15. The side is five, and the rear is also 15. The property is 0.16 of 9 an acre. Currently there is a single-family residence on the property; it's 10 been there for quite a long time. Again because of the zoning it's I I considered non-confirming, but they're allowed to continue the use of that 12 property as a single-family home and do modifications and alterations and 13 additions to the home. They again are requesting this particular setback 14 due to the construction of an open-air porch. That porch was constructed 15 without a permit. It is attached to the existing dwelling. There was some 16 history behind that and now we're trying to move forward for a solution 17 with the applicant. 18 As you can see the porch actually consists of sort of two 19 components, there is this pergola component as well as the porch; they 20 are attached so they are considered one structure. The porch or the 21 entire structure itself goes all the way to the lot line. As you can see it's ... 22 it's constructed right here. There were several ... people in the 23 neighborhood were in support of this variance. You can see by this map 24 that we have one phone call in support and the stars indicate a petition of 25 support that was given to us by the applicant in regard to the variance for 26 this structure so that it could remain. 27 Now the criteria for decisions on variances is a little bit more strict 28 in terms of hardship, of course the Planning and Zoning Commission does 29 review the goals and objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan 30 and all applicable plans in relation to the request. They also look at the 31 purpose and intent of the code. And of course this Commission for ... 32 specifically for variances looks at the hardship criteria outlined in the code, 33 (1) is it a physical hardship relative to the property, so for example are 34 there some topographic constraints, are there some strange easements, 35 right-of-way takes that create problems in terms of developing it normally. 36 Is there a potential that the variance if granted would spur economic 37 development in a neighborhood or city-wide level? In this case that's not 38 really applicable simply because it's a single-family home and we're not 39 dealing with perhaps a business of some sort that requires a variance to 40 spur economic development. And then very last are monetary 41 considerations, not as a whole, but relative to the options to meet the 42 applicant's objectives under the application of the code provisions. 43 Basically if the code requires something is it just going to be too expensive 44 to do it that way or are there some other alternatives that a variance could 45 assist in accomplishing? 26 I Although staff saw no significant health, safety, or welfare issues 2 associated with the proposed variance, the variance itself does not meet 3 the stated criteria and those hardship criteria listed under the 2001 Zoning 4 Code as amended. Based on that, in particular strict interpretation of that, 5 staff does recommend denial based on the findings that were outlined in 6 the staff report. Of course, the Planning Commission has several options 7 this evening; you are final authority on any sort of vote on this variance. 8 You can approve the variance request, approve the request with 9 conditions, deny the variance request, or table or postpone. And with that to I would be glad to entertain any questions or turn it over to the applicants, 11 they are here tonight. 12 13 Crane: Thank you Ms. Rogers. Ms. Ferrary. 14 15 Ferrary: I do have a question, although I accidentally left my light on. I notice that 16 there was a comment that someone made that the roof or pergola might 17 be close enough to the fence where it might need drain spouts or 18 drainage, I can't really tell from the pictures, did you all notice that? 19 20 H-Rogers: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commissioner, Commissioner Ferrary, our 21 engineering department did review this as did our building department in 22 terms of how the structure drains and I believe that ... and I will have to 23 double check the notes, but I do believe that the issues have been 24 satisfied in regard to that. If you notice, you can see that it's really ... the 25 structure itself isn't completely parallel to the property line, it is at 26 somewhat of an angle and so because of that you know the drainage 27 concerns aren't quite as significant. But they were looked at by our 28 engineering department. 29 30 Crane: Commissioner Clifton. 31 32 Clifton: Mr. Chair, Katherine, the C-2 zoning district, because this is a corner lot 33 has a secondary side setback of 15. 34 35 H-Rogers: Correct. 36 37 Clifton: So I'm looking ... could you go to the aerial for me? 38 39 H-Rogers: Absolutely. Let me do that. 40 41 Clifton: Okay, so Santa Fe Street, are you assuming that to be the front setback, 42 side setback? 43 44 H-Rogers: We're considering East Organ as the front and then I believe this is Santa 45 Fe Street, this is the secondary side setback and the structure is built 46 within this area right here. 27 1 2 Clifton: Okay. And so based on the drawing, only a corner of that structure 3 touches ... actually it may or may not be the property line but at least the 4 fence line. 5 6 H-Rogers: That is correct. 7 8 Clifton: So, were you able to ever obtain an actual survey of this? Cause it may 9 actually be off the property line and not right up against it. 10 11 H-Rogers: Commissioner ... Members of the Commission, Commissioner Clifton, we 12 have not obtained a survey from the applicant but they may be able to 13 speak a little bit more to that. I do know that if I recall our building 14 department has inspected the property and typically as part of that 15 inspection if they can locate the corners they will. I'm not quite sure if that 16 drawing was based on that information or not, but the applicant is here 17 and may be able to speak to that a little bit further, but we have not 18 obtained a survey for reference. 19 20 Clifton: And typically in a commercial zoning district you can have a zero side 21 setback, correct? 22 23 H-Rogers: In some instances yes, that's correct. 24 25 Clifton: Thank you. 26 27 Crane: Commissioner Alvarado. 28 29 Alvarado: When was the porch built, do you know? 30 31 H-Rogers: Commissioner Alvarado, Members of the Commission, that porch was 32 recently built. It was ... it was ... there is some history behind it. The 33 applicant did come in and apply for a building permit for a reroof and 1 34 think there was some misunderstanding as to that and ultimately when it 35 was constructed, when the inspectors did go out they realized that it was 36 an addition of a porch rather than just a reroof and essentially that's what 37 set the ball rolling towards obtaining a variance and being here tonight. 38 39 Alvarado: Did they ever get a permit for the porch or what finally happened? 40 41 H-Rogers: They did submit the appropriate building permit documentation; however, 42 as part of the process a variance is required in order to legitimize the 43 location of that. 44 45 Alvarado: Thank you. 46 28 I Crane: Anyone else? Thank you Ms. Rogers. Is the applicant here? Please 2 come up. Are you both going to speak? 3 4 C. Tapia: Yes sir. 5 6 Crane: Okay, well in that case this is the Tapia family, do you swear or affirm that 7 the testimony you are about to give is the truth and nothing but the truth 8 under penalty of law? 9 10 C. Tapia: Yes sir. 11 12 Crane: Carry on please. 13 14 C. Tapia: As you can see from the pictures, the top, the geographical location of that 15 actual plot and the home structure that we inherited from his father, one is 16 of a concern in regard to the ability to continue building on. So the picture, 17 the angle of the fence you're seeing now, the bottom right picture, it 18 appears to be straight, correct? It is actually with a significant angle. So 19 reason being the angle of the structure of the pergola that you're seeing 20 attached, the smaller pergola, correct? The concern there, that what I'm 21 understanding being is the overhang. The top right picture as you can see 22 appears to be potentially past our property line. It has been clarified that it 23 is not. It is within our property and the area outside of the wall to the 24 sidewalk which is four-feet 11-inches has been discovered to be a 25 parkway. The last 16 years of my residency there I have maintained that 26 area, my husband, lifelong in the home has maintained it. We were 27 unaware at the time that that was not our property and so upon building in 28 October we did begin the structure, we got a notice and we did receive 29 from codes that we needed a permit. The following day we did follow-up 30 down with the permits department and clarify, paid for, and received 31 permit. They came out to look at the structure and saw it was not a reroof, 32 but the permit clearly states a pergola. So my concern being and 33 confusion here is that we are within our property line but we at zero 34 variance and our request being to have the five-foot variance as a side 35 yard. I heard it was stated a few minutes ago, secondary side yard, not a 36 secondary front. I do understand side yards are five-foot variance. We 37 did get permission from the City of Las Cruces utilities to utilize that four- 38 feet 11-inches as a variance. The permits department declined that, so 39 we'd like all of you to please take that into consideration. And our zero 40 variance request. 41 42 Crane: Thank you. Do you have anything to say Mr. Tapia? 43 44 J. Tapia: I just wanted to add that you know this is my home from birth, still today. 45 My father built the home and surrounding homes around this area. And 29 1 this ... this area needs a ... improvements you know and I think we add 2 that to this area. And it does inspire our neighbors. 3 4 Crane: Thank you. Commissioners any questions for the Tapias? I have ... 1 5 have some observations. First, congratulations on the appearance of your 6 property, it's by far the nicest one I've seen around that area. I'm 7 concerned with how a permit was pulled for a roof and got converted into 8 the construction of a porch and pergola. You're saying the City made a 9 mistake? The City, what does the permit say? 10 11 C. Tapia: As I can see here your honor, yes sir, it appears to be a mistake. It states 12 here a reroof and the total amount of what it costs, but the plans that we 13 submitted with this definitely showed as a full pergola. So I think there 14 was confusion maybe from the beginning from the permits department. 15 But since that time when we submitted for permit there's been significant 16 financial and physical changes in our lives which has created many 17 hardships as well that we can discuss as an option. 18 19 Crane: So in the application that you made did you mention the words pergola ... 20 21 C. Tapia: Yes. 22 23 Crane: And porch. 24 25 C. Tapia: Yes. 26 27 Crane: And you did not mention the word roof? 28 29 J. Tapia: No. 30 31 C. Tapia: No mention of roof sir. 32 33 Crane: Okay. Thank you. Any other Commissioner? Thank you. Any members 34 of the public wish to address this? I don't think we need to hear at the 35 moment unless my Commissioners do about hardship. 36 37 C. Tapia: They're fairly significant at this point. I would appreciate all of you to listen 38 briefly. My husband is no longer employed; he's on disability due to 39 multiple accidents at his work. His income has been cut into 1/100th of 40 what it was. I am now supplying all financial means to the home. I also 41 suffer with epilepsy and migraines and therefore the purpose of the 42 savings while my husband was working to build this was so I could enjoy 43 my yard. My husband now cannot lift his right arm and lift over 20 lbs. due 44 to his fused back. So at this point financially and medically we really don't 45 have options to do much further at this time. 46 30 I Crane: Thank you. 2 3 C. Tapia: I hope you appreciate that. 4 5 Crane: Before we ask for members of the public can the City representatives 6 throw any light on how an application with plans for a pergola and porch 7 got approved as a reroof? Are these young people victims of bureaucratic 8 error, if I may use the term? 9 10 H-Rogers: Commissioner Crane, Members of the Commission, although I don't 11 directly review those types of permits, generally the way the permitting 12 system is we have different types of permits for different things so a reroof 13 would be a particular type of permit, and addition to a home would be 14 another type of permit, things of that nature. So, they are separated into 15 permit types. And I'm not certain as to how the error occurred but 16 ultimately my understanding of the history behind this is when it was 17 reviewed at that level it was essentially reviewed as a reroof and that was 18 issued and the mistake was caught when the inspector went out there. It 19 was unknown whether or not it was reroofing and existing pergola or an 20 existing porch, it was just simply a reroof permit and the inspector went to 21 check the roof and ultimately found that there was an entire new structure 22 at the site. There may have just simply been a misunderstanding about 23 how the paperwork needed to be filled out, I'm not entirely certain. I can't 24 speak to that. 25 26 Crane: As it stands the Tapias seem to have been victims of actually no 27 malevolence but, they have been victims. They're doing their best and 28 thought they had permission and found out they didn't. Is that a fair 29 statement? 30 31 H-Rogers: That may be accurate. I ... it may be accurate. 32 33 Crane: Thank you. Thanks Ms. Rogers. Any member of the public wish to 34 address this? Yes sir. Tell us your name please sir. 35 36 Perez: I'm Gilbert Perez. I live on 185 North Virginia, one block from Mr. and 37 Mrs. Tapia. 38 39 Crane: Mr. Perez do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 40 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 41 42 Perez: Yes I do. 43 44 Crane: Please carry on. 45 31 I Perez: I'm here in support of Mr. and Mrs. Tapia. As I mentioned I live one block 2 from them on the corner of Virginia and ... the southwest corner of Virginia 3 and Organ Street. I saw the work that they were doing, I think they've 4 done a beautiful job on their property. The property that ... surrounding 5 property, most of those houses were built in 1959 and earlier and a lot of 6 them don't even have any setbacks, so I see no problem in this house 7 having no setback if that is what is required. I think that they ... they are 8 very good neighbors. We have a good neighborhood where everybody 9 supports each other and so I'm here to support them in their request for a to variance. 11 12 Crane: Thank you sir. Any other member of the public? Yes sir. 13 14 Jimenez: My name is Philip Jimenez. We live on Virginia; we're one block away 15 from them. We live off of Ridgetop. 16 17 Crane: Mr. Jimenez do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 18 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 19 20 Jimenez: I do. 21 22 Crane: Go ahead please. 23 24 Jimenez: Okay, I think the improvements that he's done to the property has been a 25 great asset to the whole surrounding neighborhoods. There's other pieces 26 of properties that are in that area that don't look half as nice as what theirs 27 do. Sorry my voice is squeaky, but I think it did ... 28 29 Crane: So is mine. I'm with you. 30 31 Jimenez: I think it did a big improvement for that area. I think if anything it's going to 32 increase the value of the properties that are in that area because it's 1 33 think enhanced other neighborhoods ... the people around the 34 neighborhoods to do more for their yards to try to keep up with what they 35 did to theirs. But I think that if anything it's increased the value. 36 37 Crane: Thank you sir. 38 39 Jimenez: And we have no objections to that property the way it is. 40 41 Crane: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? In that case I will close this to further 42 public discussion. The lady in red. You're going to talk to us? Tell us 43 who you are please. 44 45 Carbajal: I am in support of the ... 46 32 I Crane: May I have your name? 2 3 Carbajal: Maria Carbajal. 4 5 Crane: Carbajal? 6 7 Carbajal: Maria Carbajal. 8 9 Crane: Carbajal. 10 11 Carbajal: Yes sir. 12 13 Crane: Go ahead. 14 15 Carbajal: And I am in support of this property the way it's been designed. I did a 16 site visit and I wish people would take pride the way this man did. He ... 17 it's beautiful, relaxing, promoting positive. And then I did a site ... I went 18 outside the property to see the corners, if there's any thing that would 19 impair the sight of the cars, nothing. If people would take pride and work 20 on their homes like that and ... wow, the other neighbors what I saw was 21 mostly an eyesore. I did not like it. I wish they would take pride in 22 designing and making their home a real home not just a house. So, I am 23 in support that they get the variance approved. 24 25 Crane: Thank you Ms. Carbajal. 26 27 Carbajal: Thank you. 28 29 Crane: Anyone else? Gentleman on his way down here. Tell us who you are sir. 30 31 Torrez: My name is Angel Torrez. I was brought up ... 32 33 Crane: Mr. Torrez ... I should've done this with Ms. Carbajal. Do you swear or 34 affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth and nothing but 35 the truth under penalty of law? 36 37 Torrez: I do sir. 38 39 Crane: Go ahead please. 40 41 Torrez: I have lived in the east side in the neighboring area where Mr. and Mrs. 42 Tapia live and I have seen their home and I have seen the improvement 43 that they have done to the property and I think this enhances the area, the 44 neighborhood. And I think was their specific goal to help the 45 neighborhood and I think they've accomplished that. Mr. Tapia is disabled 46 right now and he needs an area to ... to decompress, you know after a 33 I day or whatever. Mrs. Tapia has a very stressful job working with 2 veterans and I don't know the exact number of how many veterans she 3 has saved because of her job and it's a highly stressful profession that she 4 has. And I think she needs an area like this to decompress after a very 5 stressful and trying time. And I'm in complete support of what they've 6 done. And as far as I know it doesn't ... there's no obstructions to the 7 public, there's no safety obstructions. They did a beautiful job. 1 8 commend them for that. 9 10 Crane: Thank you Mr. Torrez. As no other members of the public wish to speak 11 to this, I'll close this to further discussion. Commissioners? Mr. Clifton. 12 13 Clifton: Mr. Chair. Thank you. Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, actually 1 14 ... you know, I look at the variance constraints and actually I would argue 15 that to an extent this was even though on a micro scale, it was to an 16 extent economic development. Somebody did the work, somebody got 17 paid, somebody paid taxes on it, it got put back into the economy. Without 18 an actual bona fide survey in front of me, not only do we not know where 19 the property line, staff doesn't know where the property line is. This is part 20 of in or near the original townsite of the City of Las Cruces when it was 21 platted almost over a century ago. Organ was widened at some point. As 22 you can see there's new curb and gutter in the photos here. The wall 23 stops at the edge of an extremely wide parkway, there could be more 24 distance that's actually there that we don't know about. With that said, 1 25 would argue that there is a physical hardship and I would have no support 26 ... no problems supporting this variance request. Thank you. 27 28 Crane: Any other Commissioner? In that case I'll ... Mr. Stowe. 29 30 Stowe: Perhaps I need to direct this to staff. Is this area of the city included in any 31 blueprint where? 32 33 H-Rogers: Members of the Commission, Commissioner Stowe this ... 34 35 Crane: For the record, Ms. Rogers. 36 37 H-Rogers: Yes, this is Ms. Rogers. This particular property is not within a blueprint or 38 with one of the overlays that, it's just outside those historic, a couple of 39 those historic overlays. It's very very close, but it's not actually in it. 40 41 Stowe: The word overlay escaped me. That was ... I thought there was a reason 42 we could back up our decision by referring to an overlay but it's just 43 outside. Thank you. 44 45 Crane: Mr. Clifton. 46 34 I Clifton: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Stowe, were you perhaps thinking of the infill 2 zone, infill area? This would fall within the infill area, correct? 3 4 Crane: Ms. Rogers indicates it does. Okay. 5 6 Stowe: If it works ... I'm of the same mind as you; this seems to be a worthy 7 issue. 8 9 Crane: Ms. Ferrary you're leaning forward, but you weren't going to push your 10 button. Okay. Then I'll entertain a motion that Case A1725 variance 11 application be approved. Do we have a mover? 12 13 Clifton: I'd like to make a motion that Case A1725 be approved. 14 15 Crane: Seconded by Ms. Ferrary I think. 16 17 Ferrary: Yes, I second that. 18 19 Crane: I'll take a roll call starting with Mr. Clifton. 20 21 Clifton: Aye base on ... 22 23 Crane: Based on? 24 25 Clifton: Findings, site photos, applicant and staff discussion. 26 27 Crane: Mr. Stowe. 28 29 Stowe: Aye based on discussions and photos. Thank you. 30 31 Crane: Ms. Ferrary. 32 33 Ferrary: Aye based on discussions, staff comments and discussion. 34 35 Crane: Mr. Alvarado. 36 37 Alvarado: I vote aye based on site visit, discussion, and presentation. 38 39 Crane: The Chair votes aye based on findings, discussion, and site visit. The 40 measure passes five/nothing. Thank you. 41 At this point since we have a couple more items which probably will 42 be fairly lengthy I'm going to call a 10-minute recess until let's make it five 43 minutes to eight so we can all get more comfortable. Thank you. 44 45 RECESS OF APPROXIMATELY 15 MINUTES. 46 35 1 2. Case IDP-14-04: A Final Plat application for the subdivision of a 110 +/- acre 2 parcel (02-03647) located at 2700 N. Main Street which is the former Las 3 Cruces Country Club property. The Final Plat divides the property into 9 lots 4 and 5 Tracts to accommodate development of the Park Ridge Medical Center 5 which would provide a hospital, medical offices, and residential rehabilitation 6 and long-term care facilities and development would occur in 3 phases. The 7 property lies within the Infill Development Overlay District. Submitted by the 8 Las Cruces County Club Inc.; developer is Park Ridge Properties LLC; 9 engineering representative is Zia Engineering. Council District 1 (Silva). 10 11 Crane: Please take your seats ladies and gentlemen. Forgive me for letting our 12 little break go on a couple of minutes. You'll remember that 13 Commissioner Ferrary recused herself from item two of the new business, 14 Case IDP-14-04, a final plat application for subdivision up at the old Las 15 Cruces Country Club. Ms. Ferrary is sitting in the hall right now. She may 16 have to leave if this goes on a little while but there is a quorum of 17 Commissioners here so we can have a legal meeting. Ms. Montana you 18 have the floor, and you're still under oath. 19 20 Montana: Thank you. Yes I am. 21 22 Crane: Okay. 23 24 Montana: Thank you. Mr. Chair, Commission. I want to bring your attention to some 25 handouts that were placed in front of your chair on the dais; one is a 26 packet of public comments that were received since we delivered the staff 27 report to you last week, post packet comments to the commission I called 28 it. And they are comments that were e-mailed to me for you. Second, 29 there is some new information which would constitute a replacement to 30 the attachment seven that was included in your packet and that is a 31 stapled sheet one with an e-mail from Willie Roman, our traffic engineer 32 and it explains the conditions of approval for his approval of the traffic 33 impact analysis and he refers to the mitigation and that is the new 34 attachment seven for your staff report. Copies of this are in the front by 35 the door of the chambers and with that I will begin my presentation. 36 Now I'm doing a very short presentation because the applicant will 37 be presenting slides to you explaining the project in detail and the Country 38 Club Neighborhood Association has asked for time to present two slide 39 shows to you as well if you are in agreement to extending their time. So 40 my time will be very short. Just for the record the property is parcel 02- 41 03647, the address is 2700 North Main Street. This is the former Las 42 Cruces Country Club golf course and clubhouse. On August 19th, 2013 43 the City Council rezoned 30-some-odd acres of the 110-acre parcel for a 44 medical center. They rezoned it from R-1a single-family residential to R- 45 4C limited land uses for assisted living. So the R-4 land uses are limited 46 to rehabilitation, residential rehabilitation, assisted living facilities, and 36 I accessory uses to that use. Part of the property was zoned C-3 high 2 intensity commercial, again limited to hospital, medical offices, and 3 associated or accessory uses to that principal use. One condition of the 4 rezoning was that a traffic impact analysis, we'll call TIA, be approved by 5 the City's traffic engineer prior to the issuance of the first building permit or 6 subdivision application. The traffic engineer did approve that TIA with the 7 conditions the applicant must satisfy the mitigation measures identified in 8 the TIA. And so therefore you are free to consider the final plat application 9 for approval, approval with conditions, or denial tonight. That's why we've 10 calendared the final plat before you tonight. 11 The property lies within the infill development overlay district and 12 there are special provisions in the subdivision code for properties lying 13 within the infill district; one is that a concept plan is submitted for review, 14 and the concept plan will identify the lots to be included within the 15 subdivision and the phasing of those lots. The applicant did submit this 16 concept plan; it was reviewed by the City's Development Review 17 Committee and was recommended ... it was approved by the DRC with 18 the condition that the traffic engineer approve the TIA. So, the applicant 19 submitted the final plat, it can be approved today or approved by the ... 20 approved with conditions and if it is then the applicant will submit cost 21 estimate for the public improvements, the roads, the utilities, the drainage 22 for all the public areas. When the City approves of that cost estimate the 23 applicant can submit a surety, a financial surety, a bond, a letter of credit, 24 for those improvements. At that point once we know the improvements 25 will be made, the applicant can record, can file the final plat with the 26 county deputy clerk or county clerk. Once the final plat is filed or 27 recorded, then the property owner can sell the lots. The applicant tonight 28 will describe to you the phasing of the development of the lots and the 29 phasing of the building of those public improvements, so that will come 30 later on in the applicant's presentation tonight. I just wanted to give you a 31 little overview of tonight's steps and the next steps. 32 This is an image of the concept plan that was approved by the 33 Development Review Committee on June 4th, it shows the nine lots within 34 the medical center rezoning area and there are five tracts. The largest 35 tract is the undeveloped, tract C is the undeveloped area, the 73-acre 36 remaining R-1a land of the 110-acre former County Club site. There is a 37 tract ... excuse me, for open space areas right below the power line right- 38 of-way. There is a tract for cul-de-sac so to speak, it's actually a modified 39 hammerhead turn around and we'll explain the purpose of that. There is a 40 tract for sort of a regional drainage facility for continued stormwater flows 41 from the streets and public areas. The individual lots will have on-lot 42 ponding, so they will take care of their own drainage, but for the public 43 areas there is this drainage facility. 44 The final plat again shows the details and I apologize for the 45 busyness of this slide but you did have ... I did submit with your packet full 46 size sheets of the final plat. Again the nine lots, the five tracts, the first 37 I phase of development will be ... is proposed to be the hospital, the 2 doctors offices associated with that hospital, and a residential 3 rehabilitation or assisted living facility, 32 bed facility here. So with this 4 first phase will be the development of all the public improvements. And 5 again the applicant and his engineers will explain those in detail. The 6 applicant has committed to the mitigation measures that are shown in the 7 new, the revised attachment seven and those mitigation measures are 8 expected to avoid or reduce to a level of insignificance or to ameliorate 9 potential adverse traffic impacts associated with the development, with the 10 phase one subdivision. Again those mitigation measures were identified 11 in the traffic impact analysis. City agency reviewers have approved the 12 final plat including the City's traffic engineer who's approved it based on 13 the applicant's commitment to implement those mitigation measures. This 14 traffic engineer has approved the TIA, again conditioned on the 15 implementation of those mitigation measures. NMDOT has been a 16 partner in the design of this final plat, particularly how the new road, the 17 new main road into the subdivision from North Main connects to North 18 Main and connects to or is not able to connect to Camino Del Rex. 19 Camino Del Rex is too close to the intersection at North Main; the existing 20 intersection does not meet the City's design standards in terms of distance 21 to the intersection and doesn't meet NMDOT's standards as well, so 22 NMDOT and the City's traffic engineer and the applicant agreed on a 23 reconfiguration of that intersection whereby Camino Del Rex would 24 terminate or dead end before it gets to the new intersection and there 25 would be a modified hammerhead turnaround which we'll show you in a 26 later slide. Traffic for residents living on Camino Del Rex would be 27 rerouted and looped into the subdivision, the medical center subdivision 28 and then find the correct lane to either go through the light, turn right, or 29 turn left. And again the engineer has a slide that will show you how that 30 will be accomplished. But with that redesign, NMDOT has agreed that the 31 final plat is acceptable. They will not actually approve the final plat until 32 they review construction drawings, detailed construction drawings of that 33 intersection and those construction drawings cannot be developed until 34 the step ... until the final plat is approved by this Commission, so there's a 35 little Catch-22 so to speak. However, they have no further comments on 36 the TIA and they did participate in the redesign of Main and Camino Del 37 Rex and the new extension of Camino Real. 38 On July 9th the DRC recommended to this Commission approval or 39 conditional approval of the final plat, again the condition being that the 40 City's traffic engineer approve the TIA or conditionally approve the TIA 41 and Mr. Roman has conditionally approved the TIA and you have his 42 memo. 43 Your options tonight commission is to approve the final plat with the 44 conditions recommended by staff and that is that the applicant commit to 45 the mitigation measures; to vote to approve the final plat with some 46 amended conditions that you may choose, to vote to deny the final plat, or 38 1 as always, to postpone this decision pending further information from staff 2 and/or the applicant. With that I'm happy to answer any questions. Again 3 the applicant has a much more detailed slide show with all the mitigation 4 measures and new traffic configurations shown. 5 6 Crane: Thank you Ms. Montana. Any Commissioner have questions of Ms. 7 Montana at this point? Thank you. The applicant present or the 8 applicant's representative? Tell us who you are sir. 9 10 Pofahl: My name is Bob Pofahl. 11 12 Crane: Do you swear or affirm Mr. Pofahl that the testimony you are about to give 13 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 14 15 Pofahl: I do. 16 17 Crane: Carry on please. 18 19 Pofahl: Well Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, thank you for letting us make our 20 presentation this evening. As our planner Ms. Montana stated, we're 21 talking about this 34 acres, it's the orange shaded area that's a portion of 22 the 110-acre County Club property. On the northwest or the west side is 23 U.S. Highway 70 or Main Street as most of us know it, Solano to the 24 south/southwest, and then Madrid over on this side, and the existing 25 neighborhood. The total development that we're talking about now is the 26 34-acre area, again right here in this shaded area. This is the plat map 27 showing the parcels, again we ... the 34 acres subdivision that we're 28 platting tonight includes these nine lots and five tracts. Tract A will be part 29 of a open space park area that will be dedicated to the City as will tract B, 30 and tract C is all of this area, the balance, the 78, 73 acres which will be 31 for future development. Tract D again as was stated earlier is a regional 32 ponding area to handle drainage off of the streets. Tract E is a small area 33 here that's part of the cul-de-sac, hammerhead cul-de-sac that will be at 34 the end of Camino Del Rex. 35 This again talks about the land uses and shows the open space 36 that'll be dedicated to the City here in the green. The medical center/ 37 hospital will be this portion that's in the blue, lot five. The lighter blue 38 areas, lots one, two, six, seven, eight, and nine will all be office buildings, 39 and then the lot three and four are the assisted living and rehab center. 40 Again tract D is that regional pond area and then here is C which is the 41 future ... future development. That future development area has a PUD 42 that is in process that is walking through the process with the City at this 43 time. 44 The phasing of the development is as stated here we'll take this in 45 phases of the hospital, the first medical office building, and the assisted 46 living would be phase one on the nine lots, the 34-acre area. Then the 39 I rehab portion of this would be done at the same time the park areas would 2 be developed and then the third phase would be the office buildings here, 3 ancillary office buildings around that. And then again the future 4 development area and tract D. 5 As it was stated, the traffic impact study was performed and this 6 was to cover the phase one area and an updated one will be done when 7 the additional 77 acres is done. Based on the results of the traffic analysis 8 list of required mitigations was determined in order to maintain acceptable 9 level of service in the roads within the area of influence. This area of 10 influence was determined through discussions with the traffic engineer, 1 t NMDOT, and many meetings in many months of discussions. This list will 12 show you here the items, it's ... I don't want to get in too much detail for 13 you but the first three items here are basically the timing, reengineering of 14 timing of the lights, and we have agreed to pay for the ... either the City or 15 the City's private contractor to retime those lights. The next item has to do 16 with the turn lanes and the improvements on Main Street and Camino 17 Real at the intersection where we're handling the turn lanes coming in and 18 out of the property. These individual costs are lists, the southbound left 19 turns and the westbound right turns, this has to do with curb and gutter, 20 sidewalks. In some cases we're acquiring additional right-of-way in order 21 to create the stacking lanes and I'll have a drawing for that to show you 22 that in just a second. The new traffic signal would be constructed and so 23 that entire intersection would be pretty well redone. The widening of the 24 intersection, additional paving, striping, and a new manhole that the City 25 felt was necessary you know just to maintain the proper service. Again 26 this is additional traffic lights that need to be reprogramed and timed. And 27 this item here, the traffic calming was something that the City engineer 28 wanted us to commit a certain number of funds, there's an additional 29 $28,000 for the future that we've set aside and agreed to should the City 30 engineer think there's additional traffic calming needed in the 31 neighborhood. Then the hammerhead and the cul-de-sac that will be 32 done and I'll show that to you on a drawing. The additional improvements 33 in curb and gutter for that. And then this last item is one of the last off-site 34 items, kind of on the edge of the site, we've agreed to ... the 19 35 townhomes today are on septic service. We've agreed at our cost to 36 remove the septic tanks, put a new sewer line in, and provide a 40-foot 37 landscape easement where that sewer line would run and I'll show you 38 that in just a moment. The requirements according to City standards 39 would be that we would pay the $424,000, we've agreed to expend a total 40 of $939,000, about a million dollars for off-sites to make the necessary 41 improvements. 42 This drawing here shows you the existing townhomes, they're here, 43 that are on Camino Del Rex. This hashed area shows the 40-foot 44 combination landscape, sanitary sewer easement, and ponding drainage 45 area that we've agreed to put in. And again we'll be going down and 46 decommissioning and paying the impact fees to hook up all 19 of these 40 I homes onto sanitary sewer. Again here's this Tract D that's the part of the 2 cul-de-sac hammerhead for the Camino Del Rex Street. This shows it in 3 more detail where both the City engineer along with the New Mexico DOT 4 and the MPO all felt that this was a better solution and a safer solution 5 cause even today the traffic begins to stack up here and we will show you 6 how that traffic will be handled. So this allows this traffic here to have a 7 turnaround area. We would provide an Opticom and siren activated gate 8 here which was request of the fire department that should they need a 9 secondary access to come through. We will pay the cost of that gate. 10 And the owners association for the 34 acres will pay the cost of 11 maintaining that gate. 12 This demonstrates the modified traffic route in and out instead of 13 coming here like this and the turn that was talked about, the traffic 14 engineers felt this was a better more viable way to make this right turn and 15 have stacking lanes for traffic that would be going you know out of the 16 subdivision and turning left as well as the traffic coming in. It would've 17 been difficult even today to turn across this ... you know these ... 18 immediate left turn onto the Camino Del Rex. So this is the new proposed 19 traffic route. 20 This is the new intersection that will be built at Main Street and the 21 entrance to the property on Camino Real. Some of those improvements 22 include the right turn lanes that would be added, left turn lanes as well as 23 additional paved and curb and gutter area expanding this entire 24 intersection to allow traffic to turn right down Camino Real. Additional 25 right-of-way will be purchased along Camino Real which will allow for a 26 right hand turn and additional stacking of cars that are turning right, 27 allowing cars to both come straight or to make the left hand turn here. 28 Eventually the state plans to expand the lanes here so in working with 29 them we created a turn lane here and allowed a paved area that will be 30 striped that would allow for the additional expansion in the future, so the 31 new improvements would not need to be torn up someday when the 32 NMDOT makes their additional improvements. Again, we'll have the ... 33 four lanes were requested here so that we could have the left turn, 34 straight, or right turn here and allow sufficient stacking that was 35 determined from the traffic impact analysis prepared by Zia Engineering. 36 The traffic calming which has been a major request from our traffic 37 ... the City traffic engineer, these are the areas where he would like to 38 take those funds we committed to, to study how they begin to mitigate any 39 potential traffic. The study doesn't say that it's going to be a huge 40 consideration, but they wanted to make sure that they had functions to do 41 anything necessary to make sure that future traffic and flows would be 42 calmed here to keep the speeds down as has been requested by the 43 residents in the neighborhood. That would be on San Acacio, Arlington, 44 Fairfax, Camino Del Rex, and Desert Drive which runs parallel with the 45 east boundary of the property, that street is not ... there's a row of homes 46 that actually back up to the property here. 41 I Again this is the plat and the map, the survey that you were given, 2 pretty detailed but it shows you that it has been completed. That lays out 3 all of the lots, the tracts here and then is the survey all tied off with the City 4 surveyor as far as the balance of the 77 acres. And with that we would 5 entertain any questions if you have any questions for me. 6 7 Crane: Thank you Mr. Pofahl. Commissioners? Apparently not. 8 9 Pofahl: I did want to add just one closing comment, the ... each parcel will have to 10 come back to the City for individual construction permits as well so right 11 now what we're talking about tonight is the plat and the subdivision. Any 12 special requirements by each of the lot owners or the entities that would 13 be building on these lots would still come before the City in the future. 14 Tonight was just the issues on the plat only and on the subdivision. 15 16 Crane: Thank you sir. 17 18 Pofahl: Thank you. 19 20 Crane: Now Mr. Pofahl a couple of Commissioners have thought of things to say. 21 Mr. Clifton. 22 23 Clifton: Thank you Mr. Chair, you should've stopped when you had the 24 opportunity, just don't know actually ... a couple of questions really 25 directed at staff and just to clarify for the Commission and the audience. 26 The zoning is done. At this point we're just here to discuss the platting. 27 The land use, the issues, those have all been resolved. The only issue 28 now is the actual subdivision of the property, is that accurate? 29 30 Montana: Yes Mr. Chair, Commissioners. The zoning is adopted and the conditions 31 of the rezoning are being met; first condition being limiting the uses to the 32 medical center and accessory uses; second being the TIA; and the third 33 being ... here we go ... the second access road which is the new loop 34 road to Camino Del Rex, so that would be accomplished through this final 35 plat. 36 37 Clifton: Okay, so ... thank you. That essentially confirms my point that we're not 38 here to talk about land use, we're not here to talk about the proposed uses 39 on each parcel. At this point it's just the subdivision, the subdivision of the 40 property, and to an extent the layout that may affect or benefit the public 41 interest. The secondary question to staff, wouldn't a final drainage report 42 be required anyway when they submit the construction plans? 43 44 Montana: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Clifton, yes that is correct, so it does not need to 45 be a condition of approval of the final plat, however our Community 46 Development engineer did request that it be placed as a condition. 42 1 2 Clifton: Not speaking for the Commission, but rather than muddying the waters on 3 conditions and when we make motions I think it's a lot cleaner for us if 4 there's already a City requirement. I don't know that we need to reiterate 5 it and tell Mr. Pofahl, you have to submit a drainage report when we all 6 know he has to submit a drainage report, just like to clarify that point. 7 Thank you. 8 9 Crane: Commissioner Stowe. 10 11 Stowe: I was just curious, what conditions do you think will need to be in force for 12 the development of tract C, the bulk of the land? 13 14 Pofahl: The balance of the land? 15 16 Stowe: Balance. The majority of the land. 17 18 Pofahl: Right now that PUD is in process and I think secondary access is being 19 worked on with the City and the state and the design of that is in process 20 at this time. 21 22 Stowe: Okay. Thank you. 23 24 Crane: Any other question for Mr. Pofahl? Thank you sir. 25 26 Pofahl: Thank you. 27 28 Crane: Now I suspect that most of the people in the audience right now are 29 interested in this particular issue. May I see a show of hands as to how 30 many people would like to address the Commission? Okay, please hold 31 them up. I'm seeing one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. 32 Thank you. Now does that include the neighborhood association people 33 who want to speak? Okay. So with that number of people we'll limit the 34 individuals to three minutes each. As to the neighborhood association 35 people, I understand you've asked for 20 minutes, is that correct? Is that 36 20 minutes give or take a bit or is it a solid 20? How many of you wish to 37 talk? Just one of you? Two people, 20 minutes between you? Do 1 38 understand you represent a large number of people? Can you make that 39 statement? I think we've been here before, that it turned out that you 40 actually had a good deal of opposition in the room and you perhaps didn't 41 represent as many people as you thought you did, in which case come up 42 and make your case please. Tell me why I should give you 10 minutes 43 each when others get three. 44 45 Potter: I'm the founder of the County Club Neighborhood Association. Currently 46 we represent 50 households. We can only count one membership per 43 I household, so that may be multiple people. 2 3 Crane: Okay. Ma'am. Are you representing the same organization? 4 5 Booker: Yes, I'm the president and it is the official registered neighborhood 6 association. We were duly elected, I was duly ... I wasn't duly elected, but 7 1 took the place of the president that was elected when he resigned, I was 8 the secretary membership, treasurer. 9 10 Crane: Are you asking for 10 minutes each? 11 12 Booker: Yes sir. 13 14 Crane: Okay. In the interests, unless any my fellow Commissioners have 15 objections, in the interest of giving everybody a chance to speak, 10 16 minutes each to you folks and three minutes to individual members of the 17 public, one of whom is signaling he doesn't like that. But you represent 18 only one person, right sir? 19 20 RESPONDING BUT NOT AT THE MICROPHONE. 21 22 Crane: Well let's let it stand. I think we will get by. Identify yourself please 23 ma'am. Tell us who you are and then I'll swear you in. 24 25 Booker: Yes, my name is Eva Booker. I'm the president of the Country Club 26 Neighborhood Association, and ... 27 28 Crane: Ms. Booker do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 29 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 30 31 Booker: Yes I do. 32 33 Crane: Please continue. 34 35 Booker: Yes I did want to point out as you mentioned we do have a diversity of 36 membership. Some of our memberships want to see the property remain 37 open space with no development, some of our members support Park 38 Ridge 100%, no qualms of any kind, some members support Park Ridge 39 but do have some concerns, and some members support development of 40 the Country Club property but not the Park Ridge plan itself. 41 The Country Club Neighborhood Association is in favor of 42 development. We don't want an abandoned golf course as the gateway to 43 our neighborhood and our membership voted last June unanimously in 44 favor of sustainable development of the Country Club property that is safe 45 and consistent with the neighborhood character. We've also worked with 46 three developers since 2006 to do that. Just to repeat, Planning and 44 I Zoning conditionally approved the rezoning of the 30 acres on June 25th 2 in a three to two vote. The City Council conditionally approved the 3 rezoning on August 19th in a six to one vote, and one of the conditions of 4 both those bodies was an approval of a traffic impact analysis by the City's 5 traffic engineer with the first building permit or subdivision application 6 which is why we're here. The first TIA was submitted in January which 7 showed this second access and that was not approved initially, there were 8 a number of significant comments. The second TIA was submitted in May 9 and that was also not approved. And this third TIA was approved 10 conditionally today. 11 Okay, the main point I want to make today, I'm going to try to focus 12 on this, is that the TIA actually only covers the first phase of the three 13 phases of development that Mr. Pofahl discussed and that is only three 14 lots, lot three, lot five, and lot nine. So all the traffic information is based 15 on activity resulting from development of only those three lots. The TIA 16 itself admits that the two proposed access points that are currently 17 included in this final plat do not provide sufficient capacity to convey the 18 traffic generated by full build out. When we say full build out they were 19 referring to the medical subdivision of the 30 acres, not the 110 acres, so 20 even just talking about the part that has already been rezoned 21 conditionally based on approval of a traffic impact analysis which should 22 cover the whole 30 acres. 23 The subdivision concept plan for the 110 acres was filed in 24 January. The June 4th Development Review Committee approved the 25 concept plan, again on the condition of an approved TIA, so you can see 26 the theme here. The subdivision final plat was filed in April, again for the 27 total 110 acres which is what you're ruling on today, a total of 110-acre 28 final plat. July 9th the Development Review Committee approved that 29 final plat, again on the condition that the TIA would be approved prior to 30 your consideration. Now the final plat is scheduled for consideration ... 31 was scheduled for consideration even before the TIA was approved. 32 Again the conditional rezoning covered both 30.745 acres that was 33 rezoned. The subdivision concept plan and final plat covered the 110.276 34 acres and the TIA that has been approved today only covers the 35 development of actually 17.052 acres for lots three, five, and nine. The 36 TIA at a minimum should cover the 30.745 acres to meet the conditions of 37 rezoning and ideally for the final plat which is what your consideration 38 which should cover the 110 acres. Cops, sorry about that. 39 I'd also like to point out that section 32-407 requires that a TIA 40 include all future traffic volume on a 10-year forecast horizon. That's all 1 41 have. 42 43 Crane: Thank you Ms. Booker. 44 45 Booker: If you have any questions for mel 46 45 I Crane: Not perhaps at the moment, perhaps later. 2 3 Potter: My name is Connie Potter. And I am with the infrastructure committee of 4 the Country Club Neighborhood Association. 5 6 Crane: Ms. Potter do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 7 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 8 9 Potter: Ido. 10 11 Crane: Carry on please. And you have 10 minutes. 12 13 Potter: The Country Club Neighborhood Association has significant concerns 14 about the traffic plan; the volume, the routing, the intrusion of 15 nonresidents, and I will say the lack of a thorough and approved TIA for 16 the full and complete build out of this property. We're going to have to live 17 with this for as long as I'm breathing and it definitely has some work. 18 Traffic volume, the main ingress and egress is U.S. 70 as you 19 know. This adds currently estimates of 8,000 car trips a day. The 20 healthcare scheduling is not the same as retail peak time so I'm not sure 21 what kind of peak times for staff etc., visitors to come and go, but as you 22 see this is military time, hope you can read it. It goes up to 10:00 to 23 midnight. Emergency vehicles will traverse Country Club streets 24/7. I 24 have been told by Joaquin Graham, that they will not circumvent our 25 neighborhood, if that's the easiest way to get to this hospital. U.S. 70 26 volume is 37,000 which is the same as a very infamous New York ... New 27 Jersey Bridge. When it was blocked down to one lane traffic was blocked 28 for almost eight hours. Avoidance route for all traffic that doesn't want to 29 go on U.S. 70 is through the Country Club streets. Park Ridge adds 22% 30 volume to our surrounding roadways. U.S. 70 is already the deadliest 31 route in the city. Improvements were not planned for this development. 32 We're undergoing improvements right now, but these were planned years 33 ago, before this development was ever considered, so there ... they are 34 absolutely inadequate and will have to be relooked at. Traffic will divert 35 through the Country Club neighborhood particularly during the 36 construction time to exceed allowable local street capacity which is 2,500 37 car trips a day. Requiring Country Club residents to traverse the 38 development adds time, inconvenience, and to a degree some risk. The 39 second entrance location within County Club neighborhood is unsafe. It's 40 within 100-feet of Desert Drive, so you'll be making a left hand turn off of 41 Desert Drive onto Camino Del Rex when another car that can't see you is 42 making a right hand turn to come out of the development. It makes no 43 sense. It adds nonresidential traffic through our local streets, endangers 44 pedestrians, children, pets, and seniors. The County Club already has 45 significant number of nonresidents using streets to bypass U.S. 70, that's 46 well known and has been admitted by traffic engineering. Emergency 46 I vehicles will use our streets. We're already near local street capacity. 2 Camino Del Rex is 1,400, Desert Drive is 1,300, it doesn't take much to 3 push that up to 2,500. The infrastructure is inadequate for that volume 4 increase. And we're going to be the most adversely affected by the 5 development, traffic and noise, home values. There is excellent 6 documentation about residential backing up onto commercial 7 development; on the perimeter particularly and within a half-mile radius, 8 home values decline. Safety and inconvenience; we have virtually no 9 calming measures at this time. Speed bumps were removed from South 10 Desert Drive in June and speeding has occurred since then. Stop sign on 11 Desert Drive and Mariposa is readily ignored. The developers gift of 12 $21,000 for traffic mitigation and calming measures is unrealistic. One 13 serious mitigation effort would cost that much easily. The City plans to 14 study traffic issues instead of being proactive. We're concerned that we're 15 getting into a major development without plans in place and actions in 16 place to mitigate this traffic. There was no study or planning on County 17 Club streets, Desert Drive, or onto Madrid for mitigation. 18 Our input has been routinely ignored. The second road placement 19 for one thing was something that no one really wanted; to have to traverse 20 the development to go to the store. Egress from County Club to U.S. 70, 21 the problems with traffic mitigation measures. And again, there's going to 22 be more than 8,000 car trips out there. The project lacks professional 23 planning and progressive proactive measures to protect our existing 24 neighborhood as required by codes. We recommend that they realign the 25 second entrance with an arterial as required by code. Subdivisions 26 shouldn't be going out into minor residential streets. Where in the city 27 does that happen? Increase the barriers to traversing County Club. Limit 28 fire and EMS traffic to the hospital to arterials. Open Camino Del Rex to 29 U.S. 70 for residential traffic and if you need to use transponders do it. 30 They do such things in gated communities. Invest appropriately in traffic 31 calming measures. 32 33 STARTED SOUND OF HELICOPTER, SEVERELY LIMITED UNDERSTANDING OF 34 SPOKEN WORDS. 35 We are going to have a helipad if the project gets its way. 36 Helicopter and air medical crashes occur 10 times more than fixed wing. 37 We just had one north of us, killed three people. 38 39 HELICOPTER NOISE DISCONTINUED. 40 41 FAA has a final say over pad. The noise from a helicopter is 110 42 decibels, hearing damage occurs at only 80. Structural damage to 43 surrounding homes and buildings is 110 decibels. And this flight path 44 would be over totally unsafe areas; freeway, homes, park, school, trees, 45 high-tension power lines. As a flight nurse I'm telling you it's crazy. There 46 also is evidence that we have protected wildlife on that property. 47 1 Burrowing owls are protected. There's evidence of their existence. It's 2 been reported to officials in the City and to the owners. No study's been 3 done to assure their protection although NMSU has full capacity and 4 expertise in this area. Dr. Desmond is awaiting a call. 5 So, complete the studies before approving massive projects; traffic, 6 wildlife, impact on surrounding neighborhood as required by code and 7 statute. Thank you. 8 9 Crane: Thank you Ms. Potter. Commissioners, questions for Ms. Potter? 10 Commissioner Alvarado. 11 12 Alvarado: I have a question. Where do your numbers come from? How did you 13 arrive at 8,000 cars? 14 15 Potter: They were out of Park Ridge documents. 16 17 Alvarado: Their own documents? 18 19 Potter: Their own documents. 20 21 Alvarado: Okay. 22 23 Potter: I have a box full of them. 24 25 Alvarado: Okay. Thank you. 26 27 Crane: No other questions at present. Thank you Ms. Potter. Let me ask at this 28 point, yes Ms. Montana? Okay. Mr. Pofahl, it might serve everybody's 29 purposes if you had an opportunity to rebut at the moment if you're 30 prepared to, before I call on the public and I don't want to wait until 31 sometime from now and then get you to (inaudible). 32 33 Pofahl: Call on our consulting engineers who worked on that traffic impact study if 34 1 could? 35 36 Crane: There seems to be some pretty substantive issues were brought up. 37 38 Pofahl: Right. 39 40 Crane: In that connections. 41 42 Pofahl: I'd like to introduce Eddie Martinez from Zia Engineering. 43 44 Crane: Mr. Martinez I'm going to swear you in. Do you swear or affirm that the 45 testimony you are about to give is the truth and nothing but the truth under 46 penalty of law? 48 1 2 Martinez: I do. 3 4 Crane: Carry on please. 5 6 Martinez: Okay I didn't get all the issues that were brought up. 7 8 Crane: Well, the thing that sticks in my mind is ... trigger your memory ... is that 9 Ms. Potter and Ms. Booker pointed out that the TIA seems only to cover, 10 and the plat, seems only to cover the currently planned level of 11 development, not the traffic that will be expected in the future when the 12 whole 110 acres is finished, and therefore are we looking at some 13 structure ... some highway arrangements which will have to be redone in 14 the future? Do I have that roughly right Ms. Potter? Yeah, okay, so see 15 what you can do with that. 16 17 Martinez: Okay, regarding the phasing and the status of the project as a whole, the 18 ... in order to create this 30-some acres we have to do a subdivision of the 19 entire 110 acres to parcel out the 30 some acres. The TIA therefore 20 covers the 30-some acres and we do identify the number of vehicles not 21 only associated with the initial phase one of that 30-some acres but the 22 entire 30-some acres as well as include a table of the ... what we 23 understand the potential anticipated level of development will be for the 24 entire 110 acres. The detailed modeling that's been done is specific to the 25 parcels that are anticipated to be developed at this stage which is the 26 assisted living, the hospital, and the medical complex. What we ... we are 27 anticipating a ... as part of the next phase of development a tie to Solano 28 and Madrid of the collector road, which by the way there was a question or 29 a comment about the ... that this should be an arterial. What we are 30 showing is a collector road and the collector road actually is specified by 31 the MPO plan. So what we're putting in is what's specified by MPO for 32 that collector. 33 The reason why we have not done the more detailed analysis of the 34 110 acres or even beyond this phase one is because that would entail 35 needing that tie to Solano/Madrid. The tie to Solano/Madrid requires that 36 we work out agreements with the City of Las Cruces for what we'll be 37 doing is putting that tie through where the entrance to Apodaca Park 38 currently is. We're working with the state land office ... well not the stand 39 land office, but state parks as well as the City in working out that 40 agreement, because funding was provided by state parks for some 41 improvements to Apodaca and so as a result modifications to Apodaca 42 require the agreement with state parks. So that's in process. Until that's 43 worked out, we can't really count on that second access point. So since 44 we can't count on that second access point we are limited to doing just 45 this level of development at this stage. So that's the reason why the TIA is 46 limited only to what we're asking for at this stage. Does that explain? 49 1 2 Crane: I think I see what you're getting at sir. When the rest of it's developed 3 there will be a further egress from the whole 110 acres that will be down 4 towards Solano and Madrid. 5 6 Martinez: Correct. 7 8 Crane: To drain off some of the traffic. 9 10 Martinez: Correct. And that would ... at that stage will be a more detailed analysis 11 of the entire 110 acres. That'll be done as part of the PUD. 12 13 Crane: Okay. Thank you. Any Commissioner have a question for Mr. Martinez? 14 Thank you sir. 15 16 Martinez: If I may, regarding the analysis ... the TIA did cover analysis of the 17 neighborhood roadways. That analysis showed that the roadways are 18 currently not anywhere near capacity and that speed at this stage is not an 19 issue within the Country Club area. It was I think something like 66% or 20 somewhere around there, 66% of the traffic right now is going below 25 21 mile per hour speed limit. Now, in the future, yes, are adding some 22 additional traffic, but even with that additional traffic those roadways are 23 not ... will not be near capacity. 24 25 Crane: Thank you. Ms. Potter, you'd like to have a minute to talk to Mr. Martinez 26 answer, okay. Come up. Stand by sir. 27 28 Potter: I want to specifically address any roadways or any attachments to 29 Apodaca Park. That land is protected under land and water conservation 30 trust funds and anything done to it has to ... even one square foot ... has 31 to be approved up to the Secretary of the Interior. So all this "will happen" 32 is absolute conjecture. 33 34 Crane: Mr. Martinez. 35 36 Martinez: Actually that is incorrect as far as I understand. The approval is actually 37 through the state parks as representatives of whatever their funding 38 source is. So the approval is the state parks, not the Secretary of the 39 Interior. 40 41 Crane: Thank you. Maybe we'll call that a standoff for the moment. Okay, let's 42 get to ... thank you Mr. Martinez. Let's get to members of the public. 43 Okay, if you would all ... you've got three minutes each, just line up in any 44 order you care to. Identify yourselves. Ms. Harrison-Rogers, do I have to 45 swear them in? 46 50 I H-Rogers: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, the answer is yes, you do have to 2 swear everyone in. 3 4 Crane: Okay. So come up sir. And Mr. Alvarado do you know how to operate the 5 magic box here? Does anybody? All right, in that case we'll just keep it 6 simple. I'll ask Mr. Alvarado to keep a rough check on your three-minute 7 limit and maybe to give you a signal at 2:30, something like, okay? He 8 has a modern device to take care of time. Go ahead sir. Your name. 9 10 Stevens: I'm John Stevens. 11 12 Crane: Mr. Stevens, okay, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are 13 about to give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 14 15 Stevens: I do. 16 17 Crane: Go ahead please. 18 19 Stevens: My wife and I live at 820 Camino Del Rex that would be in one of those 20 townhouses that they pointed out before. We bought the property 14 21 years ago. The reasons we bought the property would be the open view 22 out the back and the mountain view. And that's going to change to a view 23 of a 40-foot barrier and then office buildings, two-story office buildings. 24 We're not really happy about that. I'd like to read a short statement here. 25 "Preserve and respect scenic views, sights and corridors in a manner that 26 reasonably compensates, provides incentives, maintains similar existing 27 property rights, or in another similar manner that balances the public and 28 property owner interest." Now I didn't write that. I got that right from the 29 City. And that's what the City said that's how this property should be 30 developed, rezoned, and it's nothing like this at all. We proposed a small 31 park that would be a barrier between the townhouses and the proposed 32 development out there, commercial office buildings. We asked for 33 approximately 2.7 acres and the answer came back from the developer, 34 their investors can't afford to give up 2.7 acres of open space-green 35 space. Very unhappy about that. The traffic's going to be horrendous and 36 in my 81 years I've found that this deal about broadening tax bases and 37 lowering our taxes, that doesn't happen. The bigger the city, the higher 38 the taxes. That's it. Thank you. 39 40 Crane: Thank you Mr. Stevens. Next please. 41 42 King: Richard King. 43 44 Crane: Mr. King do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is 45 the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 46 51 I King: I do. 2 3 Crane: Carry on please. 4 5 King: My basic concern is two at this point; with the TIA study which has 6 somewhat been expressed on North Main Street between Solano and 7 Elks Drive, as currently to get out there on there is ... is quite difficult right 8 now with the traffic flow. Secondly, with the proposed road that is being 9 cut in coming out Camino Del Rex, basically what's going on now is that 10 people are seeking to bypass the intersection at Elks Road and North 11 Main Street and they're coming down San Acacio, dropping down to 12 Camino Del Rex to get back on Highway 70. All you're basically doing 13 with this road is rerouting the traffic to go back into the sub ... into the new 14 development area, but you've still got to get back out on Highway 70. 15 Now that's not considering the fact that during the construction phase of 16 the hospital and this first phase there's going to be a lot of trucks, concrete 17 trucks, and equipment coming in and out of there which is going to 18 influence the traffic flow once again, and so those are my two basic 19 concerns with this. There has to be further development when it comes to 20 access and exiting of this particular, even the first phase of it, that it's a 21 nightmare now and it's only going to get worse, not unless there's a 22 different plan presented. Thank you. 23 24 Crane: Thank you Mr. King. While I'm waiting for the next speaker to come up, 25 Mr. Pofahl could you keep some kind of track of the points that're being 26 made so you can rebut at the end? Okay. Yes, sir. 27 28 Caldwell: My name is Robert Caldwell. I am the president of the Board of Directors 29 for Las Cruces Country Club. 30 31 Crane: Mr. Caldwell do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 32 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 33 34 Caldwell: I do. 35 36 Crane: Carry on please. 37 38 Caldwell: I represent probably about 135, 140, 150 members. We are also 39 neighbors of the Country Club Neighborhood Association. As you can see 40 if you take a look at all this, at one time all the way to Madrid, all the way 41 over to Main Street on ... even to the north side of Main Street where you 42 have the Three Crosses Mall, was at one time all part of Las Cruces 43 Country Club when it was way out there in the boonies. Well we've had 44 people move into our neighborhood and happily so. What we had to do 45 was move out of this neighborhood, try to move to another neighborhood. 46 So we're trying to do that. This Park Ridge Medical Center subdivision, or 52 I Medical Center is a start of trying to get this area to look presentable, to 2 be a nice area for families to enjoy themselves which is what 110 acres 3 did for a hundred ... almost a hundred years, 88 years or something like 4 that, 1928, actually prior to that. It was a center for this community to 5 gather. It was a center for families to enjoy anniversaries, all sorts of 6 things like that, and we as a Country Club if you will, a group of people, 7 that all live here, have worked here, are a part of the community, are a 8 part of the economic value to this community. 9 10 Alvarado: Two minutes. 11 12 Caldwell: Really want to stress that it can't stay like it is. It needs to be developed. 13 And we think Park Ridge is heading in the right direction by starting this. 14 Just want to say that we are in favor of it. We hope that you also are in 15 favor of it. We think it's a great project. Of course we have some 16 advantages and some benefits coming from it, but it also will benefit the 17 community when we purchase another facility where the community can 18 come and join us and play golf, eat at our facility, do community involved 19 things such as putting on tournaments for the Dioceses of Las Cruces for 20 tournaments for the public schools, a facility for the public schools. 21 22 Alvarado: Three minutes. 23 24 Caldwell: To come in and utilize our facility. So there's a lot of advantages that are 25 being missed and have been missed for the last two or three years that we 26 would like to continue. So, thank you for your time Commissioners. 27 Thank you very much. 28 29 Crane: Thank you Mr. Caldwell. Next please. 30 31 Boyd: My name is James Boyd of 2121 Calle de Suenos. 32 33 Crane: Mr. Boyd do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is 34 the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 35 36 Boyd: I so affirm. 37 38 Crane: Go ahead please. 39 40 Boyd: I would like to thank the Commission for hearing from the public. I would 41 like to say that I agree with Ms. Booker and Ms. Potter's assessment. The 42 current Park Ridge Development ... and I mainly would just like to say that 43 1 do hope that if this is approved it is approved with conditions that a TIA is 44 submitted for the additional ... cause right now what's covered is one-fifth 45 of the total amount of the acreage and I hope that it is approved with the 46 condition that a further TIA is submitted for the total tract of the land. And 53 I in addition to that that the protected species of the burrowed owl is 2 considered in that report as well. Thank you for your time. 3 4 Crane: Thank you Mr. Boyd. Next please. 5 6 Colon: My name is Carlos Colon. 7 8 Crane: Mr. Colon do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 9 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 10 11 Colon: I do. 12 13 Crane: Go ahead please. 14 15 Colon: I'm going to refer to the TIA and if this is truth then the gentlemen over 16 there from Zia is incorrect in when he says the TIA is referring to the 30 17 acres, if you go to page eight it mentions phase one, the phasing and time 18 of development, the chart, table one on page five, phased one, lot three, 19 lot five, and lot nine. Not the 30 acres that he refers to that this TIA is 20 about. So you are wrong sir. Thank you. 21 22 Crane: Thank you. I'll get a clarification on that in a minute. Ma'am. 23 24 Haynie: Hi, Billie Haynie. 25 26 Crane: Ms. Haynie do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 27 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 28 29 Haynie: I do. 30 31 Crane: Continue please. 32 33 Haynie: I'd like to thank you all for accepting my comments today. I want to give 34 my full support to Park Ridge. We're talking about 30 acres, mainly today, 35 I'm very ... got a lot of confidence in our City staff, in the engineers that 36 approved the TIA today, and I hope that you all vote to push this forward 37 and approve it. Thank you. 38 39 Crane: Thank you. Next please. 40 41 Larsen: My name is Phil Larsen. 42 43 Crane: Mr. Larsen do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 44 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 45 46 Larsen: I do. 54 1 2 Crane: Please continue. 3 4 Larsen: Well first off I did turn thumbs down on the 10 minutes. The reason being 5 that the management of the Neighborhood Association is totally 6 disassociated with the neighborhood, but that being said I have a home at 7 800 Camino Del Rex, don't live there now, but did. And I think this project 8 is going to be a very positive thing for the community. Okay. Thank you. 9 10 Crane: Thank you Mr. Larsen. 11 12 Aguilar: Hello my Commissioners. My name is Angelica Aguilar. I live at Country 13 ...1423 Country Club and I just ... 14 15 Crane: Ms. Aguilar do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 16 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 17 18 Aguilar: I do. 19 20 Crane: Thank you. Pull the mike a little towards you. Thank you. 21 22 Aguilar: Okay. I really disappoint with this because when I ... when I was little 1 23 grew up around this time ... this area and I always wished to have a house 24 in the County Club you know so I make my dream came true you know. 25 And the first thing that I like to living there is cause it's so ... you know it 26 was a lot of peace around there and I see a lot of grown up people, 27 respectable and all that you know. And like you see I think most of the 28 peoples you know still living in there and I think it's what we ... you know 29 hear about peace and that noise is not that much traffic and that, so 1 30 disappointed about this project. First because it's in the middle ... this 31 Country Club you know is in the middle of our very beautiful city, so why 32 do you guys ruin this you know if we ... for my opinion we should to keep 33 this as a grandfather you know to keep this you know as a beautiful still 34 and it's in the middle of you know everything. We don't need this kind of 35 hospital ... hospital I think ... hospitals I think supposed to be out of city 36 you know like Mountain View and all those (inaudible) you know. What we 37 need and what I think we need in areas like an amusement park or park 38 for families you know to really (inaudible) and keep kids you know ... 39 keeping them from doing a bad things you know. Not for grow up you 40 know in a healthy you know development you know, having reunions in 41 park and all that. So I don't think it's ... it's a good idea to have a hospital 42 in ... around there for my decision you know. We need more things you 43 know in this part you know and ... 44 45 Alvarado: Two minutes. 46 55 I Crane: Thank you ma'am. 2 3 Jensen: Hello. My name is Claudia Jensen. I own one of the townhouses right 4 there on the golf course. 5 6 Crane: Ms. Jensen do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 7 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 8 9 Jensen: Yes sir. 10 11 Crane: Carry on please. 12 13 C. Jensen: I want first let you know that I fully support Park Ridge. I think it'd be a 14 very good thing for the entire community, not just there around the golf 15 course but the entire city. Second, I have lived on that street, Camino Del 16 Rex, and right now I realize that there are a lot of people who live there 17 are very concerned about the traffic there. And that the fact that this new 18 loop won't really change the traffic there. And I don't totally agree with 19 that because the way they come off of Highway 70 right now and they 20 come down Camino Del Rex, it's a straight shot right into the middle of the 21 subdivision. They got like a bat our of "you know", and with the way 22 they're going to have to reroute it that will automatically have to slow them 23 down because they can't go fast and stop and make turns. So I think that 24 will actually slow the traffic down a little bit. Yes, we still probably will have 25 a little more traffic going through but I don't think it's going to be as high 26 impact as some of the people believe and I also think that we're not going 27 to go back into planning and rezoning and make this a park again, so, 1 28 just want to let everybody know that I do approve this and I think that we 29 should give our ... the people who know what they're doing when they're 30 making these studies, to let them finish getting their studies and I realize 31 they're not done with the studies because they're going to have to redo 32 when they do the rest of the subdivision, that is not a question right now 1 33 don't believe, I think that is a given that they're going to have to redo that. 34 What we want to do right now is just that some ... small subdivision that 35 they're starting with those three lots so that they can (inaudible). 36 37 Alvarado: Two minutes. 38 39 C. Jensen: And so I'd like to support that they ... that you approve the plat as they're 40 planning. Thank you. 41 42 Crane: Thank you Ms. Jensen. 43 44 R. Jensen: My name is Rick Jensen and I live at 850 Camino Del Rex, one of the 45 townhouses that's been talked about so much. 46 56 I Crane: Mr. Jensen do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 2 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 3 4 R. Jensen: I do. 5 6 Crane: Go ahead please. 7 8 R. Jensen: Considering that we are approving the plat of the 30-plus acres, I think 9 that's got to be the highest and the best use of this land as presented, as 10 I've seen, in this infill area. I think the idea that a park would have 11 replaced that at some point in time in the past is ludicrous, the City's 12 already said that. And we have to find alternatives and rather than live in 13 that past I suggest that choosing the highest and the best use benefits me 14 as an adjacent landowner. And I can support that by looking at the value 15 assessment of my property over the past few years in the deplorable state 16 of the Country Club. I don't mean to denigrate the Country Club at all, 1 17 am a member and I intend to support it as best I can and we believe this is 18 in that best interest. Furthermore, I believe the choices are very 19 appropriate in any and all of our lives and having a hospital there is a very 20 good choice for me. I would like to see that done. I would like to see the 21 ability to have more than two hospitals in this town and so this is an 22 excellent opportunity. Needless to say I'm in support of passing this plat. 23 Thank you. 24 25 Crane: Thank you Mr. Jensen. 26 27 Rose: Good evening. My name is Nell Rose. 28 29 Crane: Ms. Rose do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 30 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 31 32 Rose: Ido. 33 34 Crane: Go ahead please. 35 36 Rose: Thank you for hearing me tonight. I just want to let you know I am a 37 member of Las Cruces County Club. I moved here in '09 and I live on 38 Country Club Circle which is right off Camino Del Rex, so I know a little bit 39 of what you know everybody's trying to say, but the reason I moved there 40 was because of the Country Club. Well with the condition of it right now 41 it's just kind of an eyesore. I drive by it every day. And it needs to be 42 developed and that's what we're trying to do here. It's for the betterment 43 of the city, it's for ... the location is excellent for this kind of subdivision 44 that they're trying to put in there, the developers that they're trying to put 45 there, and I don't live that far from there. I would love to see a hospital 46 there. I don't ... I'm not sure why people are so against that. You know 57 I the older we get the more we need medical services closer. The other two 2 hospitals are far away from us, far away from that end of town, the north 3 side of town and with that I totally am in support of Park Ridge subdivision. 4 Thank you. 5 6 Crane: Thank you ma'am. 7 8 Mitchener: My name is Becky Mitchener. 9 10 Crane: Ms. Mitchener do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 11 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 12 13 Mitchener: I do sir. 14 15 Crane: Go ahead please. 16 17 Mitchener: My husband and live at 900 Camino Del Rex. We live in one of the 18 townhomes. When we purchased that particular property it very shortly 19 went into this ... the steady decline that we've seen since. Everyday I look 20 out my sliding glass door and see it worse and worse and worse. I think if 21 we don't embrace this very innovative infill project we will all lose as 22 citizens of this community and I know that as a property owner I ... in my 23 opinion I actually have no value in that property at this point with the 24 unknown that's involved, so I would just encourage you to go forward with 25 this. My husband and I are 40-year residents of Las Cruces and we have 26 invested ourselves from young people to where we are now in this 27 community and we feel that this is the highest and best use for this 28 particular parcel. 29 30 Crane: Thank you. Yes sir. 31 32 Robb: My name is Jay Robb. I'm the owner and operator of the Heritage 33 Assistive Living. 34 35 Crane: Mr. Robb do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 36 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 37 38 Robb: Yes Ido. 39 40 Crane: Go ahead please. 41 42 Robb: I happen to be involved in some of the development, at least five of those 43 30 acres which will consist of an assisted living for 50 of the residents that 44 will live in that area. About 12 years ago when I built the Heritage 45 Assisted Living or expanded it in the Heritage Farm subdivision off of 46 Farney and EI Paseo and there was great concern by the local residents 58 I in that area that by adding additional beds or additional homes that was 2 going to significantly affect the traffic that was coming in to a single-family 3 home subdivision. The truth of the matter is the majority of the folks that 4 we care for are no longer driving; they are completely dependent on those 5 that care for them. Since the time there was concern in the neighborhood, 6 I've had multiple neighbors come up and wish that we had more of those 7 homes. Many of the homes have since turned into rental properties with 8 students and so forth which has created much more of a trouble and 9 problem for the neighborhood. Second point is what I am very excited 10 about with this community is not only just with the hospital but with added 11 medical services that this will be a centralized beautiful home-like 12 environment that will give elderly folks that are no longer able to care for 13 themselves a place to live close by to receive medical services and really 14 to truly have a very high and strong quality of life. When you consider the 15 doctors offices, the hospital, the rehab center, and then with the addition 16 of other family type residences there for spouses that want to be close by 17 to their loved ones and retail, you can't ask for a better opportunity and a 18 place for people to plan ... 19 20 Alvarado: Two minutes. 21 22 Robb: To live. And so I hope that you will support this project. Thank you. 23 24 Crane: Thank you Mr. Robb. Thank you. 25 26 Smith: Good evening. My name is Tammy Smith. 27 28 Crane: Ms. Smith do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 29 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 30 31 Smith: Yes I do. 32 33 Crane: Go ahead please. 34 35 Smith: I've lived here since about 1957. I'm here tonight to speak not only on my 36 own behalf but a substantial number of people who I spoke to before the 37 meeting tonight. We were among those who had hoped that we could 38 convince the City the value of saving this property. Huge piece of property 39 as a park for this area a chance we'll never have again as I'm sure you all 40 know. There's probably nothing wrong with this development. I don't see 41 anything wrong from the little bit we know about it, but it is in my opinion a 42 bad location. It's going to generate a lot of traffic on an area which is 43 already heavily trafficked. I realize that the people who live in the area, in 44 the Country Club area are going to be probably the most severely 45 impacted. It might ... as each one of you ... how would you like to have 46 your street closed off after you had lived in a neighborhood for quite a 59 I number of years. That's going to happen if this project goes through. But 2 the majority of Las Crucians will also be impacted by the traffic that this 3 development is going to produce. All of you I'm sure drive North Main on 4 the way to Alamogordo or on the way to Lowe's, or the departments ... the 5 department stores that are building up around there. So traffic is just 6 normally going to increase as more commercial development takes place 7 along Highway 70. We really don't need to add any more to it. I hope you 8 will give serious consideration to the ramifications if this project is 9 approved and I hope that you can maybe encourage the developer to 10 consider building elsewhere. There's a lot of land around Las Cruces you 11 know. Thank you. 12 13 Crane: Thank you. Sir. Tell me your name please. 14 15 Maese: My name is Hector Maese. 16 17 Crane: Mr. Maese do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 18 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 19 20 Maese: I do sir. 21 22 Crane: Go ahead please. Pull the mike up a little. Thank you. 23 24 Maese: I have lived on the north side of the County Club at 920 Camino Del Rex 25 for 20 years. I am a member of Las Cruces Country Club as well. Thank 26 you all for your service to our city. I will be brief. I endorse the proposal of 27 the development. Circumstances and continuing efforts of the Las Cruces 28 Country Club and Park Ridge development have brought us to this 29 moment in time. Most of us, if not all of us can agree that timing is 30 everything. And also agree that there is no progress without change. The 31 Las Cruces Country Club property has sat vacant for almost three years. 1 32 believe that the timing and the possibilities of change favor the Park Ridge 33 proposal that is to move forward with this upscale development that will 34 serve our city and surrounding communities. I hope you support it. Thank 35 you. 36 37 Crane: Thank you sir. 38 39 Boudreau: Good evening Mr. Chairman and fellow Commissioners. My name is 40 Silvia Boudreau and I live ... okay. 41 42 Crane: Ms. Boudreau do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 43 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 44 45 Boudreau: Yes I do. 46 60 I Crane: Go ahead; you were going to tell us where you live, right? 2 3 Boudreau: I live on 1565 San Acacio Street. My house was one of two in 1964 when 4 1 had it built for our family. My kids caught lizards, horny toads, chased 5 rabbits in all that area. I still live there, have very nice neighbors that have 6 lived there too for about that long. I walk two dogs in the mornings. I walk 7 all over the area. There's not a home I couldn't run to if I needed to, it's a 8 very nice friendly neighborhood. You wave to people even if you don't 9 know them, probably like some of the neighborhoods you live in. What 10 you are proposing or what you are contemplating now is a traffic situation I from Triviz on San Acacio it's already a speedway. From Arlington from 12 Triviz it's already a speedway. EMT vehicles are going to use that even 13 though you would prefer they wouldn't, if they're on Triviz they're going to 14 use one of those streets down into the hospital, so I guess the project that 15 Mr. Pofahl is proposing is alright I suppose. It's probably a done deal, but 16 my question is I want you to consider the traffic situation very seriously 17 and also we don't need Medevac helicopters overhead and those power 18 lines in that beautiful neighborhood where you can walk something like 19 probably what you have. Thank you. 20 21 Crane: Thank you ma'am. Sir. You're going to talk? 22 23 Burchiaga: Good evening. My name's Jason Burchiaga. 24 25 Crane: Mr. Burchiaga do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 26 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 27 28 Burchiaga: Ido. 29 30 Crane: Go ahead please. 31 32 Burchiaga: My comment is just a simple comment on the traffic; everybody's 33 concerned for the traffic. I understand the City has already approved the 34 zoning and the planned building, but simply for the traffic if the ... the 35 building of the 33 acres was just moved to that westerly corner where the 36 three crosses currently stand, that would alleviate a lot of the traffic going 37 through the neighborhoods that is going to be made. So that's all I have. 38 39 Crane: Thank you. 40 41 Burchiaga: Thank you. 42 43 Crane: Well I thought it was a bad sign but it was followed immediately by a good 44 sign. Go ahead. 45 46 Jaramillo: My name is Ray Jaramillo. 61 1 2 Crane: Mr. Jaramillo do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 3 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 4 5 Jaramillo: I do sir. 6 7 Crane: Go ahead please. 8 9 Jaramillo: I am the director of Alpha School. It is a childcare center located on 1205 10 East Madrid Avenue. We are ... our property line is adjacent to the Las I l Cruces Country Club near the old hole number seven, par number five, 12 right there we used to be able to look out and see some of that stuff. 1 13 have been the director there for 20 years and so feel a part of this 14 community and although I don't live there it has become a very important 15 part of my life there. I just want to let you guys know that I ... we are in full 16 support of this development and we urge you to this evening ... I would 17 urge you that a lot of the things that have said ... that have been said in 18 opposition to this proposal has nothing to do with what we're here ... what 19 you guys are here to do tonight. I think a lot of it ... I would hope that we 20 don't get caught up in a lot of the helicopter noises, the hooting for owls, 21 and although they are important things to consider, I don't believe that is 22 our job and your job tonight. Ithink that I hope we can stay focused on 23 what we have to do tonight and like I said we stand in full support of this 24 and I have brought this up with our preschoolers, or three, four, and five- 25 year-olds and the majority of them also support this so thank you very 26 much. 27 28 Crane: I'm sure Mr. Pofahl is very encouraged. All right, thank you all. If there's 29 no further input I will close this ... oh I beg your pardon, yes you did have 30 your hand up. Come up please. 31 32 Stevens: Just to correct something said by Mr. Jensen, that's all I want to do. He 33 said he lives at 850 Camino Del Rex, I think he should say the past tense; 34 he used to live at 850. That's all I have to say. 35 36 Crane: Thank you sir. Okay. So we'll close this to further input except I did ask 37 Mr. Pofahl, can you come up and give such rebuttal that you want, 38 extremely briefly please, it's getting late. 39 40 Pofahl: Yes. 41 42 Crane: Okay. Go ahead. 43 44 Pofahl: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners. Regarding the Park Ridge ... the parks 45 and so forth, I want to say we will be donating when we develop the entire 46 plan that we've already discussed with the City, adding over seven and a 62 I half acres to the existing Apodaca Park plus adding substantial 2 improvements to the park. In addition to that additional open space, a 3 linear park will be added along the power lines that varies from 200 to 300 4 feet with walking trails connecting into the existing outfall water channel 5 park area. This is designed as a mixed use development with lots of open 6 space. It's a pedestrian friendly walkable community. We worked with the 7 MPO, trails, and bikeways, groups and so we believe the mix of uses here 8 will be an advantage. The other thing that these mixed use developments 9 do in the urban core where there's dense population, they provide 10 services that keep people from having to go to the outside of the city. This 11 stops urban sprawl when we redevelop these infill sites like this that allow 12 people not to have to leave their neighborhood. This is designed for 13 people to be able to walk into this community for services. 14 In addition, the City and state traffic engineers have spent 15 extensive time with our engineers, hours and days walking through this 16 with very professional groups to look at every angle of this development. 17 They've even had our engineers go back to the drawing board many 18 times. And so the mitigation and the over million dollars that we're 19 spending just in phase one is what was recommended by both the state 20 engineers and the City engineers. And then kind of in closing in addition 21 to what Eddie's going to add would be the project will be a state of the art 22 medical and retirement community. We believe it's going to be with ample 23 open space and again a walkable community. We think it's going to be 24 valuable for this neighborhood. We have an aging city, this is an aging 25 neighborhood and we think this level of service is ... these are ... a small 26 hospital and it's a small community served hospital and retirement village. 27 28 Crane: Thank you sir. Mr. Martinez. 29 30 Martinez: Eddie Martinez. Several of the comments were related to zoning which as 31 Mr. Clifton indicated zoning is not a point of discussion for tonight, this is 32 solely as (inaudible). 33 34 Crane: True. 35 36 Martinez: Anyway, regarding the concerns that the TIA once again only addresses 37 17 acres, specifically on table two on page 10 of the study we identify four 38 phases of the project that includes the daily trips generated and the 39 intensity for the entire 110 acres. Also in appendix A, table one in 40 appendix A we identify once again in detail the generation of the traffic for 41 the entire 110 acres. So therefore it was analyzed ... as I said we did 42 analyze, we did look at that. The modeling as we indicate because at this 43 stage without that second access point the modeling is specific to this 44 phase one. Regarding the burrowing owl, that is something that we Zia, 45 we have people internally that can do those studies. We did that for the 46 Spaceport America project and if it's deemed necessary we can analyze 63 I that and have monitors during construction. 2 In general regarding whether or not this site is appropriate, etc., 1 3 will remind everybody that this is already zoned R-1a, except for the 4 portion that's been rezoned at his point in time. If it was all residential and 5 you went in with you know six to eight lots per acre, the impacts in regards 6 to traffic would actually be worse than what's being generated by this 7 project (inaudible) what's being proposed for the entire 110 acres. So, as 8 1 said, I mean this is actually a lesser impact in regards to traffic than if it 9 was all fully developed as residential. 10 Regarding the Medevac helipad etc., that's not something that's .... 1l we have submitted on or is a point of discussion for tonight. If that is 12 going to be submitted in the future that would require a special use permit 13 from this Board as well as FAA approval. That's all I have. 14 15 Crane: Thank you sir. Now this is closed to further discussion from the ... further 16 input from the public. Commissioners? Mr. Clifton. 17 18 Clifton: Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission. I can appreciate the public's 19 comments and concerns and opposition to this project but as I brought up 20 earlier unfortunately we're here at the subdivision stage. The land use 21 discussion's over. That's been dealt with and I think we've probably 22 beaten that quite enough tonight. Staff, could you go to a zoning map for 23 me on the presentation please? If you recall the majority of the project 24 such as where the hospital and other office type uses are going to be 25 located has been rezoned to C-3 conditional. As many of you know on the 26 Commission under the C-3 zoning district you don't have to subdivide that 27 property to place these uses. As is, the developer could come in, build the 28 pad sites, and simply lease the properties for the use, the end user, the 29 hospital, whoever may be. So the subdivisions a mere formality to clear 30 title, transactions, etc. So whether they subdivide it or not the land use is 31 going to happen. That's not what we're here to vote on again. It's a 32 subdivision. It's gone through the process. You know I've seen 33 opposition in the past actually hire a consulting engineer to do a TIA to 34 possibly counter the TIA of record. It looks like a TIA of record has 35 cleared Mr. Roman's review process as of today. And quite frankly I think 36 at this point really we're left with a subdivision, there's really nothing else 37 to discuss. And the City staff has asked for a Rolls Royce in 38 improvements from Mr. Pofahl and quite frankly he's delivered. And to 39 your credit but also in the future that could also have consequences to 40 other developers that come in with additional applications in the city, so, 41 thank you but you know there ... there could be issues. With that I have 42 no further comments. 43 44 Crane: Thank you. Any other Commissioner have anything to say before we 45 proceed to a vote? Then I'll entertain a motion that the final plat 46 application be accepted. 64 1 2 Montana: Mr. Chair. 3 4 Crane: Ma'am. 5 6 Montana: If I may, Susana right here. 7 8 Crane: Yes Ms. Montana. 9 10 Montana: If the Commission would like to follow the conditions recommended by 11 staff, condition number two references an attachment seven, I would like it 12 to be known that we are referring to the amended attachment seven as of 13 this date. Thank you. 14 15 Crane: Thank you. So do I hear a motion that IDP-14-04 ... go ahead Mr. Clifton. 16 17 Clifton: Mr. Chair I'll make an attempt at this. I would like to recommend approval 18 of Case IDP-14-04 with one condition, the applicant, developer, and/or 19 any subsequent developer as applicable shall satisfy the mitigation 20 measures listed in amended attachment seven as well as any on or off- 21 site mitigation measures deemed by the City to be necessary to mitigate 22 potential adverse impacts of the development to the site and surroundings 23 that may be identified during the review of the public improvement 24 construction drawings. And that would be the end of my conditions, 25 simply because condition one as written in the packet is redundant, I don't 26 believe ... I'm not going to include that in my motion. Thank you. 27 28 Crane: All right. Thank you. Let's have a second. 29 30 Stowe: I second the motion. 31 32 Crane: Mr. Stowe seconds. We'll do a roll call vote. I forget where I started last 33 time so, you remember Mr. Alvarado? I like to take it into alternating 34 directions, you want to go first? Commissioner Alvarado. 35 36 Alvarado: I vote yes based on the presentations here today, the public input, and 37 staff recommendations and my site visit. I frequently drive by the Country 38 Club and it's in a deplorable state. I think something needs to be done 39 with that property. I personally would rather have seen a big park. I have 40 a son that lives in Colorado and they have an awesome park right 41 downtown, but since there was no money for the City to buy the property, 1 42 think we have to go with the development of it rather than see it go to 43 waste like it's doing right now. 44 45 Crane: Commissioner Stowe. 46 65 I Stowe: Aye based on findings and discussion. 2 3 Crane: Commissioner Clifton. 4 5 Clifton: I vote aye based on findings specific to the compliance with the City 6 subdivision regulations and zoning code, staff, and applicant's 7 presentation. 8 9 Crane: Thank you. And the Chair votes aye based on findings, discussion, and l0 site visit. Thank you. Measure passes four/nothing. 11 12 3. Case IDP-14-05: A variance application to (1) reduce the front setback from 13 the required 11 feet to 10 feet, (2) reduce the off-street parking requirement 14 from 2 spaces to 1; (3) reduce the lot depth from 70 feet to 62 feet; and (4) 15 allow a 10 foot setback from the front property line for an attached garage 16 rather than the required 25 feet setback. The property is vacant and is 17 located at 913 N. Tornillo Street (Parcel 02-04853). The Applicant, Steven 18 Klingler, seeks to build a single-family home with an attached garage. 19 Council District 1 (Silva). 20 21 Crane: We conclude this evening with Case IDP-14-04, a variance application 22 concerning some property at 913 North Tornillo Street. Ms. Montana. 23 24 Montana: Yes, thank you Mr. Chair, Commissioners. What you have before you is a 25 request for what we're calling an infill development project. This property 26 lies within the Infill Development Overlay district and they're requesting 27 four variances. Now in the infill development overlay district you can ask 28 for four variances without it becoming automatically a planned unit 29 development. That is why we're bringing this to ... these four variances to 30 you today. The property lies within the North Mesquite Overlay Zoning 31 District; again the Infill Development Overlay District, and it's zoned R-2, 32 medium density residential district. The site is vacant and has been for 33 perhaps 30 years. The applicant seeks to build a 2,755 square foot single 34 family home on a 4,915 square foot lot. Again this shows, this slide shows 35 the property on Tornillo and within the North Mesquite District. Again it's a 36 vacant lot ... 37 38 Crane: Excuse me that was an infill district? 39 40 Montana: It's in the Infill Development Overlay District. 41 42 Crane: Thank you. 43 44 Montana: And the North Mesquite Overlay District. Of course because it's vacant 45 and it's not designated as significant or contributory to the historic district, 46 but there are older adobe buildings to the north and the south and in the 66 I area in the neighborhood, so this block does have historic abode 2 structures. Across the street is a community center, it's called the Weed & 3 Seed Community Center that focuses on activities for youth, particularly 4 teenagers. There are apartments here, attached duplex, triplex, 5 apartments, apartments, and single-family homes here and here. Right on 6 this corner is the Dona Ana County Community College satellite campus 7 which provides classrooms, computer education programs there. 8 There are four variance requests; one is to reduce the front setback 9 from 11-feet to 10-feet. The second is to reduce the off street parking 10 requirement from two for a single-family home to one. The third is to 11 reduce the lot depth from the required 70-feet in the North Mesquite 12 District to 65 feet. And lastly to reduce the garage setback from 25-feet 13 from the front property line to 10-feet. 14 This is a site plan. It's a little odd shaped. It's not entirely square. 15 This property was subject or is part of the original townsite subdivision in 16 1853 and at that time it was platted this way, a little odd shaped. The 17 applicant wishes to build the home with a 10-foot changed setback rather 18 than the 11-foot. The 11-foot setback was calculated based on the 19 average of the existing setbacks for the older adobe homes to ... on the 20 same side of the street on the same block, so those on the north and the 21 south. So the average of those produced the 11-foot required setback. 22 The garage setback is shown as 10-feet but it's supposed to be 25-feet 23 and this is a city-wide standard. The North Mesquite Overlay does not 24 have its own garage setback requirement so it defers to the city-wide 25 requirement of 25-feet. The property boasts this larger house on this ... 26 4,900 square foot lot and there'd be a large garage although it's a one-car 27 garage, or one-truck garage as you can see from the site plan, from the 28 floor plan. The applicant wants this rear porch and for that reason the 29 garage, he choose not to extend the garage back to allow the 25-foot 30 driveway here. You can see this single truck garage and storage area, 31 may be a laundry area and the front fagade here. 32 Based on the staff report as you can see we describe the variance 33 criteria for each of the requested variances and based on that criteria staff 34 is recommending approval of the reduced lot depth, again because the 35 subdivision or the lot was platted in 1853. No fault of the current owner 36 and so we find that it does meet the hardship requirement and the criteria 37 of the section 38-10.K of the zoning code and so staff is recommending 38 approval of that variance request. However, reducing the setback from 11 39 to 10 we feel is not necessary because the rear setback requirement is 40 only five feet and they're providing six feet, so if he moves the house back 41 to satisfy that five-foot rear setback, he's got his 11-feet in the front, so 42 staff is recommending denial. 43 Third, to reduce the off-street parking requirement from two to one, 44 the applicant we believe has sufficient room on the lot to provide the two- 45 car garage, he choses not to do that. There is a substantial on-street 46 parking congestion on his street because of the Weed & Seed operation 67 I across the street and the Dona Ana County's satellite campus. People 2 during the day and in the evening park on the street and there's really not 3 ... can't guarantee that a second car owned by the family or the owner 4 would be able to park on the street. So staff is recommending denial. 5 Third the garage setback from the property line. We believe this is 6 a serious safety hazard because of the significant pedestrian traffic. A 7 vehicle has to swing into the driveway because of the cars that are parked 8 on the street, has to swing into the driveway and the applicant insists on a 9 garage with a garage door rather than a carport, so while the garage door 10 is opening he has to block the sidewalk. He just ... you know, a 10-foot 11 driveway cannot accommodate even the subcompact vehicle which we 12 measured to be at least 16-feet, so a truck would have to block the 13 sidewalk and we just ... we can't recommend, so we recommend denial of 14 that. 15 Your options tonight Commission is to approve all four variance 16 requests; to approve one or more; to deny all four; or to deny one or more. 17 And in your staff report I've outlined several options for you if you choose 18 to vote individually for the variance requests or if you want to either 19 approve all or deny all. And that can be found on page 14 of the staff 20 report. And with that I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. 21 22 Crane: Thank you. 23 24 Montana: The applicant is here with a presentation if you like. 25 26 Crane: Thank you Ms. Montana. Any questions for Ms. Montana? Mr. Clifton. 27 28 Clifton: Mr. Chair, quick question, did you discuss with staff whether they were 29 willing to move, shift that over a foot so that would eliminate the need for 30 that variance at all, was that on the table during this process? 31 32 Montana: If who would move ... 33 34 Clifton: If the applicant. 35 36 Montana: We ... yes. We asked the applicant to submit an application for a flexible 37 development standard waiver which is administrative waiver that we could 38 grant. The applicant insisted he wanted this design on this part of the 39 property and he didn't want to go for flexible development standard 40 waiver. He didn't want to reduce the size of the house. He didn't want to 41 have an open carport or an open garage. He wanted to move forward to 42 your ... to this Commission with this request. He said if he is not granted 43 these variances that he would either sell the property and go somewhere 44 else, or he would build a two-story house, which he could meet all the 45 requirements if he built up rather than out. 46 68 I Clifton: Well I think that simply trying to make this easier than the level of 2 complexity that it has reached. I mean, it's a foot, I don't ... you know, 1 3 don't know that it's that big of a problem considering the other issues and 4 it is a dwelling they have designed specific to this lot. I do find it 5 interesting versus the last variance case, you stated the subdivision was 6 platted in 1853 so that is in essence a topographical constraint or falls in 7 that hardship, but you know that was the point I made on the other ... the 8 previous variance cases, it's an old subdivision, you know and Weed & 9 Seed, they weren't there in 1853, 1 think they probably encumbered this 10 gentleman's parking, so that probably needs to be taken into 11 consideration. 12 13 Montana: Again the applicant is here if you would like to ... and see the 14 presentation. 15 16 Crane: Any further questions for Ms. Montana? Okay, let's hear from the 17 applicant or his representative. 18 19 Pompeo: Good evening Mr. Chairman, Paul Pompeo. 20 21 Crane: Mr. Pompeo do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to 22 give is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 23 24 Pompeo: Yes I do. 25 26 Crane: Go ahead please. 27 28 Pompeo: Good evening Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. Before I get started 29 with my presentation after discussing it with the project contractor and 30 reference Mr. Clifton to your point, it looks like we can just move that 31 building one foot to the back, making the rear setback five-feet, so for the 32 purposes of this discussion, we're going to take that variance request off 33 the table. So we'll be limited to just the three variance requests. 34 35 Crane: Let me make sure we all know which one that is of the four; that's the 36 number one, reduce the front setback from the required 11 to 10-feet. 37 38 Pompeo: Yes Mr. Chairman, so the final site plan would show an 11-foot setback in 39 conformance with staffs measurements. 40 41 Crane: Okay, so you're dropping the number one. Okay. All right, please go 42 ahead. 43 44 Pompeo: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Once again here's a vicinity map showing the 45 location of the project at 913 Tornillo Street. Here's more of a close up 46 view. Once again the property now sits vacant in its current condition. 69 I Once again here's the proposed site plan, the garage located here, the 2 subject of the variance from 10-foot to 25-foot with the dwelling once again 3 shown as an odd shaped lot there fronting Tornillo. Once again there's ... 4 1 want to make sure we're correct on the square footages, there's ... the 5 total structure size is 2,975 square feet of total structure foot print, of that 6 2,016 is heated space, so that doesn't include the garage, and obviously 7 the porch. It is a single story building, and from the elevations that we 8 provided which I believe staff provided to you in the staff report, is the 9 intent to do adobe construction consistent with the other buildings in this 10 neighborhood. 11 Once again variance number one on my presentation has to do 12 with the lot depth. Now this first point Mr. Chairman and Commissioners 13 is a point I'm going to reiterate in all of my variance ... the justification for 14 our variance requests, that is the property lies within the City of Las 15 Cruces infill zone. This concept seeks to take vacant underutilized land 16 tracks, promote development via flexible standards to the zoning code. 17 The lot has existed in its current shape or size for decades. And once 18 again from the aerial photography you'll notice that there's development all 19 the way around this property, so expanding the tract is not possible. 20 Reduction of the (inaudible), we've already taken that one off the 21 table. Reduction of the required off-street parking. Skipping over the infill 22 zone which is ... we've already spoken of, allows property owner to build a 23 single-story residential home with applicable square footage meeting 24 modern home standards of heated space. What we're trying to say by 25 that is, sure you can take a building and shove it on this property and 26 make it conform to the shape and the size but we are trying to meet 27 modern standards of the appropriateness of room size, the number of 28 rooms, and the you know kitchens and dining rooms and bedrooms and 29 baths and things of that nature that you would find more in a modern type 30 floor plan for a home. Single-car garage matches numerous home sites 31 ... or single-car garage matches numerous home sites in the surrounding 32 neighborhood and I have photographs to show of that. There is only one 33 single individual that's going to be occupying this house with one single 34 vehicle at this time, so once again that goes to not needing that second 35 space. 36 Now the garage setback, once again the infill zone, the flexibility. 37 Once again by allowing the setback, moving the garage forward that 38 allows more square footage for a modern type footprint of a home of which 39 the applicant desires. The setbacks of garages once again meets 40 numerous home sites in the surrounding neighborhood with limited garage 41 setback. And I think this is an important point, we're not advocating that 42 this 10-foot setback for a garage in anyway, shape, or form is going to 43 serve as a driveway. This is just the pathway from the street into the 44 garage, and the issues of cars parking on the street or pedestrians on the 45 sidewalk is immaterial when we compare it whether it's 10-foot long, or 25- 46 foot long, it's a pathway into the garage. So in either case those issues ... 70 I if you believe that those issues exist, they exist in either case. Once again 2 here's a shot of Tornillo Street, you'll notice the buildings that are very 3 close to the front setback lines. But one of the things I want you to notice 4 from these pictures and I'll go the second one of Tornillo Street, you do not 5 see two-story structures in this neighborhood, although they would be 6 allowed. We believe that granting these variances, allowing the property 7 to stay at one-story rather than two more fits into the character of this 8 neighborhood, which is something that the property owner is trying to 9 achieve. And once again this is a typical garage but there's others in this 10 neighborhood, you can see that this garage is approximately six-foot back 11 off the property line and it's also a one-car garage. These type of 12 buildings exist in this neighborhood. We believe by our application based 13 on architecture, based on the layout, based on the choice of adobe 14 construction, that this building by granting this variance it's very well within 15 this neighborhood. 16 The last point that I would like to make Mr. Chairman and 17 Commissioners goes to the issue of flexible standards. On page three of 18 16 of your packet, in paragraph two it says "since the North Mesquite 19 Overlay District does not specify a garage setback then basically the 20 garage setback is set to that that's city-wide'. You've been shown 21 numerous pictures of the architecture, the front setbacks, all the other 22 structures in this neighborhood and not allowing that flexibility to get down 23 to these smaller setbacks does not allow structures without this variance 24 request to meet the character of the neighborhood. So with that we are 25 respectively submitting these variance requests. And I'd be happy to 26 answer any questions that you might have. 27 28 Crane: Thank you Mr. Pompeo. Excuse me. Commissioners, any question for 29 Mr. Pompeo? Ms. Ferrary. 30 31 Ferrary: My concern is for just having that 10-foot setback and as Ms. Montana 32 pointed out going in and out of the driveway even though you're calling it a 33 pathway, also blocking the sidewalks you get into that pathway to park in 34 the garage. I'm concerned about safety and even with some of the other 35 buildings that you're showing, how do they you know avoid pedestrians or 36 even other vehicles? 37 38 Pompeo: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, what we're ... the builder's here to answer 39 any specific questions you might have about the building, but you know 40 we're fully intent on installing a garage door opener in this garage. It's our 41 intent, just like I do when I drive home, when you drive down the street as 42 you're approaching your house to get the garage door open, the garage 43 door goes up, you drive into your driveway. That's why we don't believe 44 that there is a difference between having the setback at 10, at having the 45 setback at 25. You still have to traverse through the parked cars on the 46 street. You still have to traverse over the sidewalk as you make your way 71 I into the garage. The issues with conflicts of pedestrians or parked cars 2 exists in either condition and we don't see a difference in either one. 3 Although they may be of concerns, they exist whether the garage is at 10- 4 feet or the garage is at 25-feet. 5 6 Ferrary: Well except that you have more area to you know make your way from the 7 turn into the driveway and wait for the garage door to open or to pull out 8 and see people. I think that's probably the intent of having it longer. 9 10 Pompeo: Yes, Commissioner, but once again in our practical analysis of this we just 11 don't see a tangible difference between the two. The developers are 12 ahead of me and this is from the South Mesquite, by the way, so we're not 13 in the South Mesquite. On page V-224 "to assure the primary structure's 14 maintained principal focus attached and detached garages or carports 15 shall be setback at a minimum of 10-feet back from the primary structure 16 and primary street site fagade". So, if this project or if this property had 17 been located in the South Mesquite District which you saw from staffs 18 presentation is only a block away, it's allowed in there, pursuant to the 19 South Overlay Zone. So, the City has contemplated this and the City 20 allows it in some areas of the city. So once again we just ... we don't see 21 that ... although we recognize that there may be some concerns we don't 22 believe that ... we believe we've overcome the burden of those. 23 24 Crane: Mr. Clifton. 25 26 Clifton: Yeah, I'm not too sure about the garage door opening issue. I mean it's a 27 garage door, it opens, it closes, you pull in, I don't know that many people 28 pull right up to the front of the door to wait for it to open, so I don't know 29 that cueing would necessarily be a problem. And eventually it's going to 30 get full of stuff anyways and you will be parking on the street so. Just a 31 speculation not a fact. You know with that said, I ... the zoning code 32 under R-1a allows a setback of 15-feet for garages in just a typical 33 residential neighborhood that are side loaded, so you know there is to an 34 extent precedents on a shorter, narrower setback and I really think this is 35 in the character of the neighborhood. I mean if you drive around this 36 neighborhood just about every house has these minimal setbacks, these 37 minimal entrances into their garages and anything other than what's being 38 constructed here would be out of character such as the newer uses that 39 are institutional in the neighborhood. Those are out of character and they 40 have thusly created a parking situation for the people that actually live 41 there. So I don't know that we should be penalizing the property owner for 42 the parking situation and that probably shouldn't even be discussed at this 43 point because they are institutional issues. And in favor of the variances, 1 44 do see an economic impact here, the City will collect gross receipts taxes, 45 people will be employed to construct this house, City fees, impact fees, 46 building permit fees, park fees, they've gone up as we all know quite 72 I extensively over the last two years, three years, so there will be a lot of 2 positive economic impact, with this just one house. So, I think the return 3 on the variance is well worth the request. The only question I do have Mr. 4 Pompeo is do you have adequate ponding on the site? 5 6 Pompeo: Yes. 7 8 Clifton: Thank you. 9 10 Crane: Any other questions for Mr. Pompeo? 11 12 Montana: Mr. Chair may I make a clarification? 13 14 Crane: Ms. Montana. 15 16 Montana: Section 38-62 of the zoning code does require for single-family R-1a 17 districts, does require the 25-foot setback for garages, with the exception 18 of the side loaded garage, then it may be only 20-feet, but I think you're 19 referring to a side ... a secondary frontage setback of 15-feet, but for a 20 garage it would have to be 25-feet. That's city-wide. 21 22 Clifton: Or a side loaded garage can be in the reduced setback? 23 24 Montana: Yes, 20. 25 26 Crane: Can someone explain to me what a side loaded garage is? 27 28 Montana: If you enter the driveway and then turn into the garage so that the side of 29 the garage faces the front street, that would be side loaded. 30 31 Crane: Okay. Thank you. Any questions for Mr. Pompeo? Ms. Ferrary. 32 33 Ferrary: I think there was brought up a need for a second parking. Is there a way 34 to accommodate that? 35 36 Pompeo: Based on the floor plan that we have and the desired use of the property, 37 we've basically maxed out that ... with the building footprint that we have 38 and there's just no way to add an additional parking space to the garage 39 without eating up the heated floor space that's in the house and then that 40 would take away ... it's kind of a rolling ball, if we add for the garage, then 41 we take away from the bottom ... from the first floor and then we'd have to 42 go to a second floor which then puts the house out of character for the 43 neighborhood. So working backwards on that three step process, we 44 believe that granting the variance, having the one car spot, and leaving 45 the footprint as it is as a single-story building more has the structure meet 73 I and fit into the neighborhood rather than to create that second space but 2 then have to go to a two-story building. 3 4 Crane: All right. Thank you Mr. Pompeo. Does ... you are presenting the 5 applicant, so we are through with you. Is there any input from the public? 6 Ma'am. 7 8 Ayres: My name is Diana Ayres. 9 10 Crane: Ms. Ayres do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give 11 is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 12 13 Ayres: It is. 14 15 Crane: Carry on please. 16 17 Ayres: I have an art studio on ... at 922 North Mesquite which does not back onto 18 this property but we can see it from the studio. We intend to live in this 19 house within the next few years. It's now a studio but we will live there. 20 This is the very sort of development that we want in that neighborhood. 21 He's designed it well and I think you'll find that in the next few years there 22 will be many more people our age who are interested in moving into the 23 city rather than out. And I think this is a very good idea, it's well designed, 24 it looks good. I think the garage entryway is a quibble because there 25 aren't mobs of people walking up and down the street. It's not a problem. 26 I think ... I fully support it. Thank you. 27 28 Crane: Thank you ma'am. So since there's virtually nobody left and Mr. Ayres is 29 not going to speak, we'll close this to further discussion and 30 Commissioners, we have to ... let's make up our minds how we're going 31 to handle this. It seems to me that it's almost essential to take this item by 32 item, voting on each one separately, otherwise we're going to get in a 33 massive tangle if we try to permutate them various ways and item number 34 one, reduce the front setback from the required 11 to 10-feet, Mr. Pompeo 35 has told us that that's taken care of by simply shifting the house by a foot. 36 So, may I hear a motion that the variance to reduce the off-site parking 37 requirement from two spaces to one be approved? This is for IDP-14-05 38 for the record. Somebody has to move it or we can't go anywhere. 39 40 Clifton: I make a motion the Planning and Zoning Commission approve IDP-14-05 41 variance request, reduce the off-street parking requirement from two 42 spaces to one. 43 44 Crane: Do I have a second? 45 46 Alvarado: Second. 74 1 2 Crane: Seconded by Mr. Alvarado. Discussion. Let's keep it simple and proceed 3 to the vote. Mr. Clifton you go first. 4 5 Clifton: Aye. 6 7 Crane: Aye. Mr. Stowe. 8 9 Stowe: Aye. 10 t 1 Crane: Ms. Ferrary. 12 13 Ferrary: Aye. 14 15 Crane: Mr. Alvarado. 16 17 Alvarado: Aye. 18 19 Crane: And the Chair votes aye. So that passes five/none, that's item number 20 two, the off-street parking requirement. Item number three is to reduce 21 the lot depth from 70 to 62 feet. Let me hear a motion to that effect. Mr. 22 Clifton, it's all falling on your shoulders, but you're younger than the rest of 23 us perhaps. Go ahead, say your thing. 24 25 Clifton: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commissioner, I make a motion to approve 26 the reduction of the lot depth from 70 to 62-feet for Case IDP-14-05. 27 28 Crane: Thank you. A seconder? 29 30 Stowe: Second. 31 32 Crane: Seconded by Mr. Stowe. Mr. Alvarado how do you vote? 33 34 Alvarado: Aye. 35 36 Crane: Ms. Ferrary. 37 38 Ferrary: Aye. 39 40 Crane: Mr. Stowe. 41 42 Stowe: Aye. 43 44 Crane: Mr Clifton. 45 46 Clifton: Aye. 75 1 2 Crane: The chair votes aye. Passes five/nothing. And finally item number four to 3 allow a 10-foot setback from the front property line for an attached garage 4 rather than the required 20-feet setback. Do I hear a motion to that effect? 5 Let's give somebody else ... oh go ahead. 6 7 Clifton: Sure. Mr. Chair, Members of the Commission, I motion that we approve 8 variance request to allow a 10-foot setback from the front property line for 9 an attached garage rather then the required 25-foot setback for Case IDP- 10 14-05. 11 12 Crane: Seconded by Ms. Ferrary. 13 14 Ferrary: I second it. 15 16 Crane: And we'll start ... where'd I start last time? Mr. Alvarado, all right. 17 18 Alvarado: Aye. 19 20 Crane: Ms. Ferrary. 21 22 Ferrary: I vote aye. 23 24 Crane: Mr. Stowe. 25 26 Stowe: Aye. 27 28 Crane: Mr. Clifton. 29 30 Clifton: Aye. 31 32 Crane: The Chair votes aye. Then all three of the remaining requested variances 33 are approved by votes of five to nothing. Thank you. 34 35 VII. OTHER BUSINESS - NONE 36 37 Crane: Any other business Ms. Montana. 38 39 Montana: No Mr. Chair. 40 41 VIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 42 43 Crane: Okay. Public participation, virtually no public, therefore probably no 44 participation. 45 46 76 I IX. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS 2 3 Crane: Staff announcements? None. 4 5 X. ADJOURNMENT 6 7 Crane: In that case we are adjourned at the hour of 10:10 p.m.. Thank you. S 9 ]0 11 k, 12 Chairperson ,/ 13 14 77