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