Loading...
O 2882COUNCIL BILL NO. 1 9-01 7 ORDINANCE NO. 2832 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 38-58 F 3, MINIMUM NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS, OF THE LAS CRUCES MUNICIPAL CODE TO RECONCILE INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE ADOPTED ZONING AND BUILDING CODES. SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES (ZCA-18-01). The City Council is informed that: WHEREAS, the City of Las Cruces Zoning Code and adopted Building Code have inconsistent standards for the number of required accessible parking stalls; and WHEREAS, the inconsistent accessible disabled parking standards create confusion with the public and design professionals; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission, after conducting a public hearing on August 28, 2018, recommended that said code modification be approved by a vote of 4-0-0 (three Commissioners absent) on the consent agenda based upon the following finding: The proposed modification to the minimum number of required accessible parking stalls complies with the Decision Criteria of the P&Z listed in Section 2-382 and the Purpose and Intent of the Zoning Code outlined in Section 38-2. NOW, THEREFORE, Be it Ordained by the Governing Body of the City of Las Cruces: THAT Section 38-58 F 3, Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Stalls, of the Las Cruces Municipal Code is repealed and replaced by a new Section 38-58 F 3 as shown in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made part of this Ordinance. THAT City staff is hereby authorized to do all deeds as necessary in the accomplishment of the herein above. DONE AND APPROVED this 17 day of December 2018 . ATTEST: City Jerk (SEAL) Moved by: Smith Seconded by: Sorg APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney APPRgV yor VOTE: Mayor Miyagishima: Aye Councillor Gandara: Ave Councillor Smith: Ave Councillor Vasquez: Ave Councillor Eakman: Aye Councillor Sorg: Ave Councillor Flores: EXHIBIT "A" MODIFIED LCMC SECTION 38-58 F 3: 3. Minimum number of accessible parking stalls: The minimum number of designated accessible parking stalls shall be determined by provisions of the adopted building code in effect at the time of permitting. ATTACHMENT "A" LCMC SECTION 38-58 F 3- LEGISTLATIVE FORMAT: 3. Minimum number of accessible parking stalls. 2-35 1 7 36-59 14 5i-iee 1 0 1 ni01 300 1 4$ 5e i-8e$ 1 2e 8 9i i999 1 2-5 OIL -- - - - - • - - -- - •- - -- - The minimum number of designated accessible parking stalls shall be determined by provisions of the adopted building code in effect at the time of permitting_ ATTACHMENT "B" I City of Las Cruces *MOUNTAINS OF OPPORTUNITY Planning & Zoning Commission 0812812018 CASE ZCA 18-01: Zoning Code Amendment STAFF CONTACT: Katherine Harrison -Rogers, (575) 528-3049, krogers@las-cruces.org APPLICANT: N/A rt REPRESENTATIVE: N/A COUNCIL DISTRICT: Citywide SITE ADDRESS: N/A EXISTING ZONING: N/A REQUEST: Zoning Code Amendment to 38-58 F 3 Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Stalls RELATED N/A APPLICATIONS: RECOMMENDATION: Approval - SUMMARY OF REQUEST The City of Las Cruces Zoning Code and adopted Building Code have inconsistent standards for the number of required accessible parking stalls. ' These inconsistencies create confusion with the public and design professionals. The City is requesting the Zoning Code be modified to eliminate its minimums and reference and require the minimums listed in the adopted Building Code. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends APPROVAL based on the following findings: 1. The proposed modification to the minimum number of required accessible parking stalls complies with the Decision Criteria of P&Z listed in Section 2-382 and the Purpose and Intent of the Zoning Code outlined in Section 38-2. PROPOSAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The State of New Mexico has adopted the 2015 International Building Code (IBC) with some modifications. State law requires the City to adopt this code and the City did so early in 2018. The Building Code outlines the minimum number of accessible parking stalls. Section 38-58 F 3 of the City's Zoning Code also lists the minimum number of accessible parking stalls; however, it differs from those listed in the City's adopted Building Code. To add to the confusion, the unmodified IBC and federal government share a differing minimum standard. Section 1106 of the adopted Building Code exceeds the accessible parking minimums listed in both the unmodified IBC and federal guidelines. For consistency and to eliminate confusion caused by the discrepancies, staff is requesting these requirements in the Zoning Code be modified to eliminate the current list and instead reference the Building Code to determine the minimum standards for accessible stalls. EXISTING STANDARDS ZONING CODE SECTION 38-58 F 3: 3. Minimum number of accessible parking stalls. a. The minimum number of designated disabled accessible parking stalls required is as follows: Total Number of Stalls in Parking Lot Minimum Number of Accessible Stalls 1-10 1 11-20 2 21-35 3 36-50 4 51-100 6 101-300 10 301-500 15 501-800 20 801-1000 25 Over 1000 25+2 for each 100 or fraction thereof over 1000 b. One van accessible stall is required for every eight (8) accessible stalls or fraction thereof. If only one (1) accessible stall is required, that stall must be van accessible. C. For medical facilities specializing in the treatment of persons with mobility impairments, 20 percent (20%) of parking stalls provided shall be accessible. d. For occupancies providing outpatient medical care facilities, ten percent (10%) of the parking stalls shall be accessible. e. Any Assisted Living, Independent Living or Retirement Facility shall provide the number of accessible parking stalls in accordance with the table in subparagraph 3.a or five (5) percent of the total parking stalls required, whichever is greater. PROPOSED STANDARDS ZONING CODE SECTION 38-58 F 3: 3. Minimum number of accessible parking stalls. equired is as fella�- T ef-I Number ef Stalls iTT M,mu„ Number e'f eces'hl.Cf-II- PaFking Lot 3 -i9 I 2i 3r3 3 36 S () 4 31 i99 6 i0 i 390 1$ 5n�0 i 8()nv 2-0 ) 2-5n`',..,Y , nn �000 25 7 feF e Eh Inn eF f.-aetwen th.,reef eve - MWA - = - - - - Twoll- WAR • • i • . - - - The minimum number of designated accessible parking stalls shall be determined by provisions of the adopted Building Code. ZONING DECISION CRITERIA AND POLICIES POLICY DOES IT COMPLY? Criteria for Decisions: Section 2-382 Yes Purpose and Intent of the Code: Section 38-2 Yes CRITERIA FOR DECISIONS: SECTION 2-382 • Impairment of adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property; • Unreasonable increase in potential traffic; • Increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety; • Determent of orderly and phased growth; • Impairment of the public health, safety or general welfare of the city; • Establishment of a spot zone; or the • Contradiction of the purpose and intent of the zoning code, sign code, design standards and other companion codes. The proposed code modification does not pose any negative impacts on public health, safety and welfare and it rectifies conflict with other adopted City codes. CONSISTENCY WITH PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE: SECTION 38-2 The relevant purpose and intent statements to the proposed code amendment are: • Ensure that all development is in accordance with this Code and the Las Cruces Comprehensive Plan and its elements, which are designed to o Promote health and the general welfare, o Facilitate adequate provision for transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements, • Regulate or restrict the erection, construction, alteration, repair or use of buildings, structures or land; • Control and abate the unlawful use of structures, buildings, or land by: o Preventing unlawful erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, conversion, maintenance or use, o Restraining, correcting or abating the violation, o Preventing the occupancy of such building, structure or land, or o Preventing any illegal act, conduct, business or use in or about such premises; and • Promote health, safety, and general welfare by regulating and restricting the: o Location and use of buildings, structures and land for trade, industry, residence or other purposes. The proposed modifications to this section of the zoning code do not conflict with any of the purpose or intent statements of the code and assist in creating consistency amongst the City's adopted regulations. STAFF COMMENTS STAFF COMMENTS: Staff did not identify any potential issues related to health, safety, or welfare or violations of any State or Federal regulation with proposed modifications. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Adopted Building Code Chapter 11 Accessibility, Section 1106: Parking and Passenger Loading Facilities 2. U.S. Department of Justice Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Spaces ATTACHMENT 1 SECTION 1106 PARKING AND PASSENGER LOADING FACILITIES 1106.1 Required. Where parking is provided, accessible parking spaces shall be provided in compliance with Table 1106.1, except as required by Sections 1106.2 through 1106.4. Where more than one parking facility is provided on a site, the number of parking spaces required to be accessible shall be calculated separately for each parking facility Exception: This section does not apply to parking spaces used exclusively for buses, trucks, other delivery vehicles, law enforcement vehicles or vehicular impound and motor pools where lots accessed by the public are provided with an accessible passenger loading zone. Table 1106.1 Accessible Parking Spaces Total Parking Spaces Total Required Accessible Parking Spaces Number Required to be Van Accessible 1-25 1 1 26-35 2 1 36-50 3 1 51-100 4 1 101-300 8 2 301-500 12 2 501-800 16 3 801-1000 20 4 1,00 1 and over 20 spaces plus 1 space for every 100 spaces, or fraction thereof; over 1,000 1 of every 6 accessible parking spaces; or fraction thereof 1106.2 Groups 1-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4. Accessible parking spaces shall be provided in Group 1-1, R-1, R-2, R-3 and R4 occupancies in accordance with Items 1 through 4 as applicable. 1. In Group R-2, R-3 and R-4 occupancies that are required to have Accessible, Type A or Type B dwelling units or sleeping units, at least 2 percent, but not less than one, of each type of parking space provided shall be accessible. 2. In Group 1-1 and R-1 occupancies, accessible parking shall be provided in accordance with Table 1106.1. 3. Where at least one parking space is provided for each dwelling unit or sleeping unit, at least one accessible parking space shall be provided for each Accessible and Type A unit. 4. Where parking is provided within or beneath a building, accessible parking spaces shall also be provided within or beneath the building. 1106.3 Hospital outpatient facilities. At least 10 percent, but not less than one, of care recipient and visitor parking spaces provided to serve hospital outpatient facilities shall be accessible. 1106.4 Rehabilitation facilities and outpatient physical therapy facilities. At least 20 percent, but not less than one, of the portion of care recipient and visitor parking spaces serving rehabilitation facilities specializing in treating conditions that affect mobility and outpatient physical therapy facilities shall be accessible 1106.5 Van spaces. For every six or fraction of six accessible parking spaces, at least one shall be a van -accessible parking space. Exception: In Group R-2 and R-3 occupancies, van -accessible spaces located within private garages shall be permitted to have vehicular routes, entrances, parking spaces and access aisles with a minimum vertical clearance of 7 feet (2134 mm). 1106.6 Location. Accessible parking spaces shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible building entrance. In parking facilities that do not serve a particular building, accessible parking spaces shall be located on the shortest route to an accessible pedestrian entrance to the parting facility. Where buildings have multiple accessible entrances with adjacent parking, accessible parking spaces shall be dispersed and located near the accessible entrances. Exceptions: 1 In multilevel parking structures, van -accessible parking spaces are permitted on one level. 2 Accessible parking spaces shall be permitted to be located in different parking facilities if substantially equivalent or greater accessibility is provided in terms of distance from an accessible entrance or entrances, parking fee and user convenience. 1106.7 Passenger loading zones. Passenger loading zones shall be accessible 1106.7.1 Continuous loading zones. Where passenger loading zones are provided, one passenger loading zone in every continuous 100 linear feet (30 4 m) maximum of loading zone space shall be accessible 1106.7.2 Medical facilities. A passenger loading zone shall be provided at an accessible entrance to licensed medical and long-term care facilities where people receive physical or medical treatment or care and where the period of stay exceeds 24 hours 1106.7.3 Valet parking. A passenger loading zone shall be provided at valet parking services. 1106.7.4 Mechanical access parking garages. Mechanical access parking garages shall provide at least one passenger Wading zone at vehicle drop-off and vehicle pickup areas. ATTACHMENT 2 U.S. Department of Justice Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Spaces Miniminn Number of Accessible Palrking Spaces ADA 5tmdx-L for Acce.:able De-. M4.I-2 (5) Total Plumber Total Minimum Van Accessible Accessible of Parking Number of Parking Spaces Parking space, Accessible with min. 96" Spaces with Provided Parking Spaces wide access min. 60" wide (per lot) (60° & 96° arslesl aisle access aisle Column A 1 to 2S 1 1 0 ?6 to 50 1' 1 1 51 to 75 3 1 2 76 to 100 4 1 3 101 to 150 ` 1 4 151 to 200 6 1 5 201 to 300 7 1 6 301 to 400 8 1 7 401 to 500 5 2 7 501 to 1000 2% of total parking provided 118 of Column A' 7f8 of Column A" in each lot 1001 and over ?o plus 1 for each 100 118 of Column A' 7f8 of Column A" over 1 DD0 ' one out of every 8 accessible spaces " 7 out of every 8 accessible parking spaces SOURCE: https://www.ada.gov ATTACHMENT "C" 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 FOR THE 3 CITY OF LAS CRUCES 4 City Council Chambers 5 August 28, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. 6 7 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: 8 Sharon Thomas, Chair 9 Harvey Gordon, Vice Chair 10 Roberta Gran, Member 11 Russ Smith, Member 12 13 BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: 14 LaVonne Muniz, Member 15 Michael Ponce, Member 16 Abraham Sanchez, Member 17 18 STAFF PRESENT: 19 Larry Nichols, Director Community Development Department, CLC 20 Katherine Harrison- Rogers, Senior Planner, CLC 21 Sara Gonzales, Planner, CLC 22 Mark Dubbin, CLC Fire Department 23 Robert Cabello, CLC Legal Staff 24 Becky Baum, Recording Secretary, RC Creations, LLC 25 26 I. CALL TO ORDER (6:00) 27 28 S. Thomas: Good evening and welcome to the August 28th meeting of the Planning 29 and Zoning Commission. We're going to start with a motion to allow one 30 of our Commissioners to participate by phone so I need a motion and a 31 second to allow Commissioner Gordon to participate by phone. 32 33 Smith: Motion to approve that he be on the phone. 34 35 Gran: And I second the motion. 36 37 S. Thomas: And all those in favor say "aye." 38 39 MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. 40 41 S. Thomas: Okay. Commissioner Gordon you're on the line. You're hearing us okay? 42 43 Gordon: Yes I am. I'm just having trouble getting a video of it. I'm trying to click 44 on, if you'd just bear with me for a moment, I know I have to click on 45 "Watch Live" and it just brings up "Upcoming Events." Wait, let me click 46 on "Schedule" and see if that'll do it. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 S. Thomas: Did you click on "Watch Live?" What happened when you did that? Gordon: It shows "Upcoming Events," "Regular City Council Meeting." S. Thomas: Yes. So then click on that if that, you're on the right page. You should see a picture of us up in the corner. Gordon: I don't. S. Thomas: Okay. So I gave you my husband's number. Can you call him? He's getting on too and he can give you directions. Okay. Gordon: I don't have another, I have to get my, hold on a second while he call up. S. Thomas: Yes. Just mute your phone and call him and see if he can help you get the video up. Okay? Gordon: Actually it seems to be frozen. H-Rogers: Chairman Thomas. Gordon: Hold on a second. Let me get into this again. It seems to be frozen. That's the problem. Hold on a minute. Let me go back in. I can't see ... H-Rogers: May I try to instruct Commissioner Gordon? Gordon: Yes. H-Rogers: All right. Commissioner Gordon. If you go to the cictv.com, on the top bar in the middle there should be a "Watch Live" button. If you click on that it should automatically bring up this program. Gordon: There's a button that says "Watch Live." All right, I'm going to click on that. Okay. It got it this time. Okay. S. Thomas: Okay. We're ready to go. For those of you in the audience we need Commissioner Gordon to be on the phone in order for us to have a quorum up here. All right so I want to say that one of our Commissioners has gone to a training in Albuquerque and another one, Commissioner Muniz, her son is in the hospital but I just talked to her and she said he's doing quite well and so they think he's going to recover fine. II. CONFLICT OF INTEREST 2 I At the opening of each meeting, the chairperson shall ask if any member on the 2 Commission or City staff has any known conflict of interest with any item on the 3 agenda. 4 5 S. Thomas: All right. So going on to next item is conflict of interest. Is there anybody 6 on the Commission who has any known conflict with any of the items on 7 the agenda? Just say "no." 8 9 Smith: No. 10 11 Gran: No. 12 13 S. Thomas: Commissioner Gordon. 14 15 Gordon: Yes. 16 17 S. Thomas: Any conflicts? 18 19 Gordon: No. 20 21 S. Thomas: Okay. Thanks. 22 23 III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 22, 2018 24 25 S. Thomas: Okay. Next we're going to approval of the minutes. I need a motion and a 26 second. 27 28 Smith: Motion to approve the minutes as presented. 29 30 Gran: And I second. 31 32 S. Thomas: Okay. The only discussion is that well I'm going to recuse myself to vote 33 on, oh I can't because we don't have a quorum. We can do it next time. 34 And also I'm listed on there as being at the meeting and I was not at the 35 meeting. So bring them the next time and change that part and take me 36 off of the people that were there. Thank you. 37 38 IV. POSTPONEMENTS - NONE 39 40 S. Thomas: Postponements, we don't have any. 41 42 V. CONSENT AGENDA 43 44 1. ZCA 18-01: An amendment to the City of Las Cruces Zoning code, Chapter 45 38, Article VI, Section 38-58 F, Off -Street Parking - Parking for the Disabled, 46 to coincide with adopted building codes. 3 1 2 2. Case 71708: An application of Souder Miller and Associates on behalf of the 3 property owner, Sonoma Ranch North LLC for a preliminary plat known as 4 Sonoma Ranch North Phase 3 for 16.83 +/- acres. The plat includes 65 5 single-family residential lots, zoned R-1 b (Single -Family High Density), and is 6 located on the east side of Sonoma Ranch Boulevard, 1004 +/- feet south of 7 its intersection with Northrise Drive. Council District 6. 8 9 3. Case 71709: An application of Souder Miller and Associates on behalf of the 10 property owner, Sonoma Ranch North LLC for a preliminary plat known as 11 Sonoma Ranch North Phase 4 for 5.26 +/- acres. The plat includes 15 12 single-family residential lots, zoned R-1 b (Single -Family High Density), and is 13 located on the east side of Sonoma Ranch Boulevard, 1004 +/- feet south of 14 its intersection with Northrise Drive. Council District 6. 15 16 S. Thomas: So now we're moving to the consent agenda so what I'd like to do is have 17 a motion to accept the agenda and a second, and then we'll, does 18 anybody, first we need to know on the consent agenda, are there any 19 items anybody wants to pull for discussion? 20 21 Gran: Not I. 22 23 S. Thomas: Okay. So then I need a motion to accept the agenda. 24 25 Gordon: I make a motion that we accept the agenda. 26 27 Smith: Second. 28 29 S. Thomas: Okay. And all those in favor please say "aye." 30 31 MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. 32 33 S. Thomas: Okay. Agenda is accepted. All right. So we're not pulling anything from 34 consent. 35 36 VI. OLD BUSINESS - NONE 37 38 S. Thomas: There's no old business. 39 40 VII. NEW BUSINESS 41 42 1. Case 71726: A variance application by Colliers International on behalf of G. 43 E. Pan American Plaza, LLC., property owner, to deviate 21 feet from the 44 maximum permitted 3-foot height requirement and 98 square feet from the 45 maximum permitted 24 square foot size requirement for a proposed 46 freestanding sign in the University District Overlay for a property In I encompassing 18.36 +/- acres, zoned UD-UAZ (University District -University 2 Avenue Zone) and located on the northeast corner of E. University Avenue 3 and Locust Street; a.k.a. 1701 E. University Avenue. Council District 2. 4 5 S. Thomas: So we're going directly to new business and we're on Case 71726. 6 7 Ochoa: Thank you Madam Chair. First of all Adam Ochoa with Community 8 Development for the record. First case that we have tonight is Case 9 71726. It is a proposed variance to the signage requirements for a 10 property located at 1701 East University Avenue, also known as the Pan 11 Am Plaza. 12 Shown here on the zoning/vicinity map, subject property is this 13 large, this long piece of property here with Locust to the west, Wisconsin 14 bordering it to the north, and then of course University Avenue here to the 15 south, NMSU directly south of it. As you can see property being zoned 16 UD-UAZ. Like I stated before it is located at the northeast corner of 17 Locust Street and East University Avenue. Subject property is located in 18 what's called the University District and it is zoned University District- 19 University Avenue Zone. That is one of the overlays we have here in the 20 City of Las Cruces. Subject property currently encompasses 18.36 acres 21 and is an existing shopping center, the Pan Am Plaza shopping center. 22 The issue we're discussing tonight is freestanding signage for this 23 subject property. The existing freestanding sign for this property currently 24 existing fronting University Avenue. Here's a quick aerial just where you 25 can see that shopping center here, Dublin's being located here, 26 McDonald's here, just to give you a rough area where we're looking at. 27 The proposed sign we are looking at here shown on the aerials is roughly 28 located around this area where my cursor's moving. And here is a picture 29 of that existing Pan Am Plaza sign. That existing sign measures currently 30 24 feet in height and roughly about 139 square feet in size. That sign was 31 constructed circa 1983, back in the day roughly around the time when that 32 shopping center was originally constructed as well. This sign and 33 shopping center have been existing before any type of overlay existed in 34 this area which included the previously existing University Avenue Zone 35 Overlay as well. So it is essentially an existing nonconforming or 36 grandfathered in property and sign and so on and so forth like that. 37 What is being proposed today ladies and gentlemen by the 38 applicant is a replacement freestanding sign. The proposed new sign 39 shall be located roughly in the same location as the current sign is. The 40 proposed new sign will measure the same height as the existing sign, 24 41 feet in height, and will measure roughly 122 square feet in size, so it is 42 actually a smaller sign when it comes to square footage as well. The 43 issue we have is the University District is silent when it comes to existing 44 signage in the University District. That being said, it falls back into the 45 Sign Code. The City of Las Cruces Sign Code states any time a sign is 46 being replaced or modified structurally, it actually has to come into 5 I compliance with all current codes. The current code in the University 2 District Overlay is extremely more restrictive for freestanding signs than 3 what previously was. Currently now under the University District Overlay 4 a freestanding sign is limited to three feet in height and 24 square feet in 5 size so a really small sign, more pedestrian -oriented type of sign than 6 what's currently existing and what's being proposed. And that is what the 7 variance is for tonight, to allow for the larger, taller sign than what's 8 allowed in the University District Overlay. 9 When staff did do their analysis of the proposed variance, staff did 10 see no health, safety, or welfare issues with the proposal. The existing 11 freestanding sign as you see it now, the Pan Am Plaza serves a multi- 12 tenant, more auto -centric type of shopping center and that's what Pan Am 13 Plaza is. If you look up the definition of an auto -centric shopping center, 14 that's what it is. The current UDO freestanding sign requirements 15 unfortunately though are more for smaller pedestrian -centric type of 16 development, so smaller lots, buildings closer to the front, and so forth like 17 that. That being said though, staff does believe that the replacement sign 18 is much more logical for the property considering the way the existing 19 property is nonconforming, auto -centric. The proposed new sign still 1 20 guess is more logical and fits in more with what's existing on the property. 21 Additionally staff does believe that the new sign has the potential to also 22 spur economic development or redevelopment even, because there are 23 some vacant suites and property in the subject property right now. So that 24 new sign could potentially spur economic redevelopment and 25 development on the subject property and at a neighborhood level as well. 26 Staff did send this out for notice to the neighboring properties, 27 following all City requirements for public notification. Staff did receive one 28 phone call in support of the newer freestanding sign, stating that the 29 existing freestanding sign is horrible looking and she's been looking at it 30 for over 20-something years and she wants the new sign that's a much 31 better looking sign. 32 With that, well my apologies. This proposed variance actually had 33 to go before the University District Citizen's Design Review Committee first 34 for the recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission. That 35 did take place on the 13th of August and during that meeting the 36 University District Citizen's Design Review Committee did go ahead and 37 recommend approval for the proposed new sign. With that, staff does 38 recommend approval as well for the proposed variance to the freestanding 39 sign based on the findings found in your staff report which include the sign 40 is more aesthetically pleasing not only for the subject property but for the 41 area as well. Not only that but staff believes it meets one of the hardships 42 as described in Article II Section 38-10-J of the 2001 Zoning Code which 43 essentially it states that it can potentially spur economic development and 44 redevelopment for the subject property and at the neighborhood level as 45 well. I With that ladies and gentlemen your options tonight for this case- 2 1) vote "yes" and approve the proposed variance as recommended by 3 staff and the University District Citizen's Design Review Committee; 2) to 4 vote "no" and deny the proposed variance, just a reminder a vote "no" 5 would require new information or facts, findings for your vote for a "no;" 3) 6 to vote "yes" with additional conditions deemed appropriate by the 7 Planning and Zoning Commission; or 4) to table and postpone and direct 8 staff and the applicant accordingly. That is the conclusion of my 9 presentation. The applicant is here if you have any questions for her and I 10 stand for questions. Thank you. 11 12 S. Thomas: Okay. Thank you Adam. So I would like to do this the same kind of 13 process that we use at the Council which is I would like a motion and a 14 second and then we'll have discussion, first of all up here then we'll ask if 15 there's any public discussion, then we'll come back here and if we have 16 any further comments and vote. 17 18 Smith: I make a motion to approve the application for the new sign. 19 20 Gordon: And I'll second it. 21 22 S. Thomas: Okay we have a motion and a second to approve Case No. 71726 a sign 23 variance, okay. Any questions or comments from Commissioners? 24 Commissioner Smith. 25 26 Smith: Madam Chair. To staff. In general the current code of three-foot limitation 27 for a more pedestrian use and interpretation by the public, is that standard 28 serving well? 29 30 Ochoa: Commissioner Smith, Chairman Thomas. Currently it is, with the new 31 development that we've had in that area it has worked well considering 32 with the new development buildings are actually being built closer to the 33 front: The Chick-fil-A, the IHOP if you will. So those freestanding signs 34 are working fine because again what the City's pushing in the University 35 District Overlay and not only us but also NMSU as well, with their buildings 36 being closer to the front as well, the new Fine Arts Center and the Barnes 37 and Noble and so forth we want more of a pedestrian -friendly kind of thing 38 where you walk by and everything's more to scale from a pedestrian 39 standpoint. It's just that this property, the way it exists now, it's just a 40 nonconforming property. Buildings are all the way in the back, they're 41 nowhere close to the front. All that parking's in the front and as you see, 42 like Chick-fil-A, all your parking's in the back, building's in the front so it's 43 more of a pedestrian -inviting type of feel if you will. So the existing signs 44 that are allowed, freestanding sign regulations in the University District do 45 work just fine the way new development is coming in. 46 7 I Smith: Madam Chair. Thank you. 2 3 S. Thomas: A little history. So an overlay means that that district has its own set of 4 requirements and I don't, anybody know when the date was for that, 2008, 5 nine, something like that? So that district has an overlay, it has its own 6 Design Review Committee and they use their standards and the City and 7 the university work together to try to make that into a more pedestrian- 8 friendly corridor since it's right next to the university. And when you do 9 that as Adam is saying, you want to move the buildings up closer to the 10 sidewalk and put the parking in the back so that it's more the kind of place 11 people who are walking and bicycling want to be. And there are plans to 12 do a lot of changes to University Avenue that will also make it more 13 pedestrian- and bicycle -friendly and connect to the whole loop that goes 14 around the City so it's part of a bigger project as well. So one question 1 15 have is so if somebody decides to do something in this plaza, in this strip 16 mall, do they, they have to come under the new requirements of the 17 Overlay so any new buildings there would be closer to the sidewalk as 18 they are with Starbuck's and Chick-fil-A? 19 20 Ochoa: Chairman Thomas. The University District Overlay does have different 21 triggers if you will. When a certain percentage of gross floor area's being 22 added to the property, a certain money amount is reached if you will, 23 threshold is reached then different aspects of the University District 24 Overlay have to be met. Anywhere from small things like you have to 25 come into compliance with your number of parking stalls to big things to 26 your buildings now all have to be to the front, your property can't be over a 27 block in size, so there's just, like I said there's just a lot of triggers and 28 different tiers that might get triggered eventually. And then eventually 29 whenever something new gets developed they would have to follow the 30 University District Overlay. 31 32 S. Thomas: So we could see some changes to that area in the future and at that point 33 we would revisit the sign issue as well? 34 35 Ochoa: The sign is called out in under one of those triggers as well, yes ma'am. 36 37 S. Thomas: Okay. Thank you very much. Any comments from the public? 38 39 Gordon: Madam Chair. 40 41 S. Thomas: Yes. 42 43 Gordon: I just have to make a comment here. I have to tell you that there is more 44 than a 30-second delay in, I'm still watching a picture of Adam talking and 45 he's long been done. Same with you. So just going to have to sort of bear 46 with me to try to follow what's on the screen and what's being said in the N. I chambers. I can hear you, no problem and we can talk I guess 2 immediately but as far as following Adam visually I'm still seeing Adam 3 talking. He just stopped. Now I'm going to see you and you've already 4 finished. So they have to do something about this if we're going to have to 5 do this in the future. 6 7 S. Thomas: Okay. But you have heard what we said even though you couldn't see it 8 at the same time? 9 10 Gordon: Yes. 12 S. Thomas: Yes. 13 14 Gordon: That's what I say. I can ... 15 16 S. Thomas: Yes. 17 18 Gordon: Hear it but ... 19 20 S. Thomas: Okay. 21 22 Gordon: I tried, especially when he puts something up on the screen, an exhibit or 23 something I'm already waiting 30, 35 seconds or 45 second to be able to 24 see it and he's on to the next one already. But as long as I can hear you 1 25 can follow. 26 27 S. Thomas: Okay. Thank you. And do you have any comments on this sign change? 28 29 Gordon: No. 30 31 S. Thomas: Okay. 32 33 Gordon: No. 34 35 S. Thomas: Okay. And there's, I see nothing from the public. Okay. Coming back to 36 Council, anybody else have any more comments? Okay. Then we'll go to 37 the vote. Becky can you do a roll call. 38 39 Baum: Commissioner Gordon. 40 41 Gordon: Yes. 42 43 Baum: Commissioner Gran. 44 45 Gran: Yes. 46 0 I Baum: Commissioner Smith. 2 3 Smith: Yes. 4 5 Baum: Thank you. And Commissioner Thomas. 6 7 S. Thomas: Yes. So motion passes 4-0. 8 9 MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. 10 11 2. Case 71677: A petition by the Pat Garrett Committee for a Street name 12 change for the entire street currently named Motel Blvd. to the name of Pat 13 Garrett Blvd. Council District 4. 14 15 S. Thomas: Okay. Next item. 16 17 Gonzales: Okay. So this is Case 71677 for a proposed street name change from 18 Motel Boulevard to Pat Garrett Boulevard. Here is kind of the vicinity map 19 of the subject parcels that are adjacent to Motel Boulevard. Motel 20 Boulevard is about six miles long. It runs a little bit, or it stops at about 21 Lakeside Drive and then runs north to south up to, past the school area, 22 up to Bruins Lane by Legends West. 23 The applicant has submitted the petition which does require the 24 applicant to provide 75% of the adjacent property landowners to move 25 forward with the petition to Planning and Zoning Commission which is then 26 a recommending body to City Council per Resolution 80-338 for street 27 name changes. The applicant did provide us signatures from the 75% of 28 the property owners. With that staff did analyze the signatures that came 29 in, identified them into three different categories whether it be business, 30 residences, or vacant lots and then also identified how many were actually 31 fronting on Motel Boulevard so the ones that were directly impacted if the 32 street name change were to take place. As you can see the businesses 33 that did say "yes," there are 15 businesses, ten of which are on Motel 34 Boulevard. And there are 34 residences. Two actually have addresses 35 that are located on Motel Boulevard and then there are vacant lots that ten 36 of them said "yes" and nine of them are located on Motel. With that, they 37 did get approval from at least 59 out of the 92 required signatures. On the 38 other side is those who said "no" to the project being changed or to the 39 street name being changed. We had nine businesses say "no" and five of 40 them are located on Motel which would be directly impacted. There were 41 six residences one located off of Motel, and then two vacant lots where 42 one vacant lot was located there. So with that it's a total of 17 that 43 declined the street name change to take place. There were still some 44 remaining addresses that did not receive any response at all. The 45 applicants did send certified mail, try to contact them. They did work with 46 the County to see if there were any other mailing addresses but they did 10 I not receive any responses. We also eliminated the City- or County -owned 2 properties due to they are government entities and that is why we have 3 City Council for the final action. There were other, two properties; one 4 was a deceased property owner. There was no other owner information 5 on file for that property. The last one was a leased property out and the 6 person who's leasing the property said "yes," but the actual property 7 owner said "no." So we had to count it as a "no" since it is still technically 8 under the legal property owner. 9 With that, staff then did send out to all the relevant agencies to 10 provide any comments or concerns that they may have with the street 11 name change. Everybody remained neutral except for we did have four 12 comments that were provided. One was through the Fire Department 13 saying that there could be a delay for response times during the transition 14 of the name change as it is being proposed; depending on if highway 15 signs or street signs were taking too long to be replaced, there could be 16 an issue with response times. Next we have the Traffic Department. 17 Their only concern is with the replacement of the signs there are fees 18 associated. They gave us a cost estimate of about $13,000 for the fees. 19 Their request is that the petitioners would be the responsible party for 20 those fees. Next is NMDOT which is New Mexico Department of 21 Transportation. Same information was provided. They have overhead 22 signs, they have highway signs that have to be replaced. They provided 23 us a cost estimate of $250,000 which they categorize as either the sign 24 being taken down, being replaced, being redone. A new design may have 25 to go up based on how old the actual signs have been up there, they may 26 have to do a new design. And with that they are requesting that it also be 27 to the applicants' responsibility due to NMDOT will not take part in the 28 funding for the sign change. Last is the Utilities Department. Their main 29 office is located on Motel Boulevard so that means all of their information 30 would also have to be changed as one of the businesses. They do a lot of 31 contract work, they deal with consultants, employees, and also have a lot 32 of information or supplies that are sent to that office that would now have 33 to be changed as far as the mailing address. 34 With that then staff did post signs. You can see one, there was one 35 located right off of the off -ramp on 1-10. We also did hang up another sign 36 at Tashiro, some of the major intersections where we see a lot of traffic. 37 We did also send notice to the affected parties so the same 92 signatures 38 that were required by the applicant, we re -sent them a notification of the 39 public hearing tonight. With that I did receive seven phone calls and one 40 e-mail. All of them were in, not in support of it only because of "Who's 41 going to be responsible for the cost of the sign replacement?" and then 42 two, "How is this impacting businesses and what are the business costs 43 that it's going to impact?" So theirs were more clarification and comments 44 of who's going to be responsible as opposed to it being a taxpayer paying 45 for this. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 So with that staff is recommending that if the name is changed for the street that the entire length of the street be changed, not a portion but the entire six miles so all of the transition points where you have your cross -sections, your intersections with Amador, Picacho, Bruins, all of those street names to be changed so that way it's consistent throughout the City. And I leave you there with your options: To recommend approval if you vote "yes," recommend denial if you vote "no," you can recommend conditions or you can recommend to table and ask staff to provide more information since you are a recommending body to City Council. And the applicant is here as well. They do have a presentation which will be the document that is provided to you this evening up at your chairs. They will be reading through that as well. S. Thomas: Thank you. So let's go ahead and hear from the applicant. Gamboa: Thank you for having us. I'm Bob Gamboa and I'm the Chairman of the Pat Garrett Committee. I'd like to, you've got the list of our members but I'd also like to point them out to you so you can associate a name with a face. Dr. Susan Krueger, okay. H-Rogers: Ms. Chair, just point of order. We do need to swear the speaker in. S. Thomas: So yes, I had a question about that. Since it's not part of an ordinance do we still have to swear them in? Cabello: Yes. We do have to swear them in. S. Thomas: Thank you. Okay. So I need to swear you in. Do you swear and affirm that the testimony you are about give is the truth and nothing but the truth under the penalty of law? Gamboa: Yes. S. Thomas: Fine. Go. Gamboa: Okay. I'm sorry. Your voices are just a little bit blurred because I have a hard time hearing. But anyway I think we can get along here just fine. Okay again what I was trying to say is that I'd like you to, I'd like to put some faces to the names that you have as far as the committee goes. And let me see if there's somebody else, okay. There's one more that showed up. Let's see, do I have the President here? Yes. Okay. Anyway, Dr, Susan Krueger right there. Just wave or something. Okay. Okay, David Thomas. Sally Kading. Frank Parish is out of town so we'll say Karla Steen. Dan Aranda. Dan Crow. And some of the folks, some of this, my committee are, we're all members of the Dona Ana County 12 I Historical Society. Some in my committee are actually officers such as 2 Sally Kading, she's right over here. She's the historian. So anyway, want 3 to get that kind of out of the way. 4 First of all I want to say thank you for having the members of the 5 Pat Garrett Committee here today. We are all associated with the Dona 6 Ana County Historical Society. For over a year and a half, actually almost 7 two years now we have strived to see if we could accomplish changing the 8 name of Motel Boulevard to Pat Garrett Boulevard. We hope you don't 9 think that we are just a bunch of busybodies in wanting to do this. We 10 truly believe that the name of Motel Boulevard should be renamed and by 11 doing so the City might benefit from the change. We chose the name "Pat 12 Garrett Boulevard" because of its historical connection to our area. I will 13 elaborate a little further in this presentation. 14 We knew that it would take a lot of effort and time, and it has. We 15 also knew that the first thing that needed to be done was to get a 16 conceptual approval from the County government. They're the largest 17 organization on Motel Boulevard and they would have incurred the largest 18 expense by having to reprint official documents in their inventory. After 19 hearing our presentation to them at their monthly meeting on December 20 12, 2017 the County Commissioners unanimously approved the resolution 21 to support the change. The second -most important step was to introduce 22 to the City Community Development Department which we did. We met 23 with Mr. David Weir and his staff who gave us the guidelines via a City 24 resolution that outlined the process for doing so. A list of 95 property 25 owners both of Motel Boulevard and adjacent to Boulevard were or 26 provided to us. Our challenge was to get to 75% of all those property 27 owners that we could contact to sign the petition. On May 4, 2018 we 28 turned in our petition that met that criteria. We are here for the next step. 29 The street name "Motel Boulevard" has not served the City very 30 well. In fact if the truth was known, there have been tax dollars lost due to 31 the signage. For many years signs on Interstate 10 have directed tourists 32 seeking lodging accommodations onto Motel Boulevard and when they get 33 off the highway, they can't find lodging and they don't know where to go. 1 34 personally spoke to the manager of the Truck Stops of America and he 35 informed me that his staff gets frequent inquiries about where they can 36 find a motel. That should be unacceptable for those of us who live and 37 work in this fine community, that we may be missing out on keeping these 38 travelers in our community. 39 So why did we pick this name to be renamed from Motel Boulevard 40 to Pat Garrett Boulevard? Las Cruces along with Mesilla has a significant 41 amount of history that resides here. However, it's hard to find much 42 reference to it except maybe for Mesilla. But Las Cruces also has its 43 history and that heritage should be better recognized and reflected 44 somewhere in the City. Many books about the Old West have references 45 to Las Cruces. Books about Billy the Kid, Pat Garrett, and about the 46 Lincoln County Wars all refer to this area. Pat Garrett is one of the most 13 famous lawmen of the Old West. When he retired as Sheriff of Lincoln 2 County after arresting and administering justice to Billy the Kid, Pat was 3 assigned to find the killer of Albert J. Fountain by the Governor of New 4 Mexico. He was given a temporary assignment as Sheriff of Dona Ana 5 County and then reelected. Pat Garrett and his family had two ranches in 6 the Organ Mountains. His children attended school in the community of 7 Organ and his children and grandchildren graduated from Las Cruces 8 High School. His wife and some of his children also lived and worked in 9 businesses in Las Cruces. In 1908 Pat Garrett was killed just a few miles 10 east of Las Cruces but his killer was acquitted. Pat Garrett almost of all 11 his family are buried in Las Cruces at the Masonic Cemetery here in Las 12 Cruces. Visitors from all over the world come here just to see where Pat 13 Garrett worked and raised his family, and wants to visit his gravesite. 14 Members of our Historical Society very frequently give tours just to 15 accommodate these outside visitors. There's not much here in Las 16 Cruces that reflects the history of Pat Garrett except for a small museum 17 at the Dona Ana County Sheriffs Office on the south end of the 18 Government Building. It has artifacts pertaining to Pat Garrett to include 19 the hearse that carried Pat to his gravesite where he was originally buried 20 in the Oddfellows' Cemetery before being moved to the family plot in the 21 Masonic Cemetery. A former President of the Dona Ana County Historical 22 Society, Mr. Cal Traylor purchased the hearse from an individual in Pinos 23 Altos, New Mexico and donated it to the Sheriff's Department where it is 24 now on display. 25 We think it is fitting that the street in front of the Sheriff's 26 Department should honor the man that worked for the Department and 27 was responsible for protecting our community and helped bring law and 28 order to the Wild West. We hope you will approve a change to the name 29 of Motel Boulevard to Pat Garrett. And that's my presentation. I'll take 30 any questions. 31 32 S. Thomas: Thank you very much. So now that we've heard both from staff and from 33 the people who are proposing the change could we have a motion to, how 34 are we going to do this because you didn't, you just said, you didn't say 35 that you wanted us to approve it. You said you left it up to us. 36 37 Gamboa: Yes. I've got the organizations wrong. 38 39 Gonzales: So based on the ordinance it would be to approve it, or based on the staff 40 report it would be to approve it and then you would approve it, vote the 41 same way that you would on any other case. 42 43 S. Thomas: Okay. So we need a motion to approve Case No. 71677, street name 44 change. Okay. 45 46 Smith: I make a motion to approve Case 71677, proposed street name change. 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Gran: I second the motion. S. Thomas: So it's been moved and seconded that we approve changing the street name of Motel Boulevard to Pat Garrett and it's Case No. 71677. So comments first of all from the Commissioners. Gran: I would very much like to hear a lot more about the cost and how that is going to be dealt with. Gamboa: Okay. I have, we're going to, I'm going to give you one statement and then Dr. Krueger will give you a carry -on to that. During the committee's effort to get signatures of our petition we encountered a variety of responses, some highly favorable, some did not respond, and some had no interest, and a few that were derogatory in nature. Fortunately after being persistent we were successful in obtaining the required amount of signatures to have our petition accepted. Going out again to raise money to pay for fabricating new signs for the City and the state would subject the committee members and the City to an adverse reaction and we want to avoid that. And we also want to avoid bad publicity that would surely occur. We want to get this project started on the right foot so everyone will accept this change. Dr. Krueger. Gordon: Madam Chair. S. Thomas: We have one more speaker that's following up and then we'll go to the Commissioners. Krueger: Susan Krueger. Nichols: Excuse me Madam Chair. S. Thomas: Yes. Nichols: Madam Chair. A point of order. She'll need to be sworn in as well. S. Thomas: Susan. Do you swear and affirm that the testimony you are about give is the truth and nothing but the truth under the penalty of law? Krueger: I do. S. Thomas: Thank you. Krueger: I'd like to add that much of what I'm going to say is opinion and thoughts so I don't know if it could be subject 100% to a truth test but let me share it with you. We would like to see the signage on Motel Boulevard changed IL' not only to Pat Garrett Boulevard but we would also like to see signage 2 that properly directs people coming off the highway to motels. It doesn't 3 do that now. So that's another necessary part of our plan. And we would 4 think then that there would be an uptick in tourists coming into the City of 5 Las Cruces. They would know not only where the motels were located but 6 they would recognize, we believe, the name Pat Garrett not for the name 7 itself but because of Billy the Kid. So that might also create a tourist 8 uptick. Billy the Kid is better known than Pat Garrett because of their 9 connection. And the museum at the Sheriffs Department isn't just about 10 Pat Garrett of course. It's all past Sheriffs and it's very interesting. We 11 would hope then that it would add up to gross receipts tax increases. For 12 example, the Town of Mesilla right now credits the Organ Mountains 13 Desert Peaks with an increase in gross receipts taxes. I'm not exactly 14 sure how they track that and possibly it's just through a sign -in sheet that's 15 in the Visitors' Center. But we would hope that this uptick in gross receipts 16 taxes then could be used to pay for the Highway Department signs. And 1 17 might also add that both the Highway Department and the City said that 18 their costs were estimates only. So we really don't know exactly what it is. 19 Thanks. 20 21 S. Thomas: Thank you. Commissioner Gordon you had a comment? Commissioner 22 Gordon are you there? Did we lose him? We're going to hold off for just a 23 minute while we see if we can get Commissioner Gordon back on the line. 24 25 Gordon: Yes. I'd get the phone. Let me just ... 26 27 S. Thomas: You're on. We can hear you now. 28 29 Gordon: Okay. Can you hear me? 30 31 S. Thomas: Yes. You have a comment? 32 33 Gordon: I have some questions. 34 35 S. Thomas: Okay. 36 37 Gordon: Okay. First of all I don't want to belittle any particular company that may 38 be along Motel Boulevard but in getting the "yeses" that were received in 39 getting the required 75%, were there any major businesses there that said 40 "no?" Not like the small little business that might be just a little shop 41 perhaps down where Motel Boulevard first starts, you know where that 42 restaurant is on the corner? Maybe a little business in there, it's not such 43 a financial burden for them to have to just change their advertising or 44 letterhead or whatever. But a major company that might be located along 45 Motel Boulevard would incur tremendous expense. They would have to 46 probably change advertising, letterhead, numerous other forms of 110 I identification that is required. So I'm just wondering whether or not staff 2 can tell me, of those businesses that did say "yes" that was included in the 3 percentage that was required, were there any real big businesses that did 4 say "yes" or were a lot of them that did say "no?" That would be my first 5 question. Then the second question is the $250,000 that I believe that 1 6 think the New Mexico Department of Transportation has to pay, was that 7 what the amount was? I'm not too sure. 8 9 S. Thomas: Yes. That's what it says: $250,000 New Mexico Department of 10 Transportation. 11 12 Gordon: Okay. That's only an estimate and I have to believe, knowing what all 13 these things cost, it has to be much higher. And I just have one last 14 question which I just thought of. Does the applicant have the money? 15 Where is the money coming from to pay for this, that they say that, in the 16 backup, in their documentation that they do have the money to pay some 17 of these costs that they will have to incur? Those are my questions. 18 19 Gonzales: Madam Chair, Commissioner Gordon. I'll start off with the business 20 locations. So the majority of the businesses that are located on Motel 21 Boulevard are small businesses or small offices. The main locations, 22 there is the County building that said "yes," the Utility building that said 23 "no." We do have truck stops and travel agencies that are there. 24 However, some of them are addressed off of Amador. They're not 25 addressed on Motel. Some are addressed on the secondary streets which 26 would be like Picacho. So if you see Walgreen's, if you see that shopping 27 center, if you see Rendez-vous, all of those shopping centers are located 28 off of, an address of Picacho. So the main businesses that we would be 29 discussing would probably be the County building and then City of Las 30 Cruces Utility Department in which, in that case we're kind of split based 31 on the cost of those buildings. The other businesses would be small office 32 buildings, maybe restaurants that would have to change signage, possibly 33 anything within their business, maybe menus, at least papers or just 34 documentation. 35 The second question you had was based on NMDOT's fees. They 36 just gave us an estimate of $250,000 as if they were to have to go out 37 there and replace those signs, that is the estimate that they would be 38 providing. That estimate includes the removal of the existing signs 39 because as you can see on the screen, I don't know if you have the 40 screen still up, one of the signs says Motel, Avenida, and then Main 41 Street. So that's all going to have to be, I don't know that they can just 42 take off the one "Main Street" or if they have to remove the entire sign and 43 redo that. So their cost estimate is based on the signs that they have to 44 redo and then the engineering to put them back up and then the cost to 45 close down those lanes when they're actually replacing those signs. So 17 I that's the cost estimate they gave me based on the signage and the work. 2 If they had to do it, that would be their cost estimate. 3 Your last question was I think pertaining to the applicant based on 4 who would be paying the cost for that which is another question that 5 Commissioner Gran stated. Based on the response that the applicants 6 provided it looks as if, or from what I'm hearing and they can clarify or stop 7 me if I misinterpreted, they're expecting the gross receipts tax from the 8 sign change to help pay for those replacements of those signs. So there 9 is no funding in place at this moment. 10 11 Gordon: Well what happens if, I hope I'm not interrupting but what happens if for 12 example, if they do have a method of tracking gross receipts tax and 13 they're looking for funding, what happens if this falls way below what they 14 can track to say that it would cover these expenses? Who's going to pay 15 then? Not only that, the other thing is that you said that there were some 16 County buildings there that said "no." What's going to happen, if this is 17 changed they're going to have to go along with it. Then who's going to 18 pay for them? 19 20 Gonzales: Madam Chair, Commissioner Gordon. That is the reason why we're here. 21 This is a recommending body to City Council. City Council will have final 22 action as to we will present the same information as far as the cost, what 23 the applicant is proposing, and if it were to be, if it's paid by taxes, if it's 24 paid by the applicant. That would be the decision tonight. You would be 25 the recommending body to City Council for that inquiry. 26 27 S. Thomas: And it's my understanding that the County said "yes." It's the City Utility 28 Department that said "no." What about the big restaurant on the corner of 29 Amador and also the big truck stop place there? What did you hear from 30 those two groups? 31 32 Gamboa: Okay. First of all, all the truck stops said "yes" and many of the other 33 service stations down the street said "yes." But let me bring up one thing 34 that needs to be clarified. When we went out, one of the first things that 35 we were very, very concerned about when we first got this thing started, 36 and that was that we already recognized that each entity on that street, 37 especially the County Government Building were going to have a lot of 38 forms that had to be changed. That was one of the issues we discussed 39 with them even at the meeting that they agreed to. And they have 40 hundreds of forms, lots of tax forms, etc. etc. They confirmed right there 41 with us, with the Commission, with the administration if that was going to 42 be a problem. And they said "no." But let me tell you why they said, "No, 43 it wasn't going to be a problem." And it's really both for all of the other 44 entities on the street, is that we checked with the Postal Service, 45 Postmaster and we said, "How long will you honor the street "Motel 46 Boulevard" while we've already got the street named as "Pat Garrett?" 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 They told us they would honor it 18 to 24 months. They would still honor "Motel Boulevard" until everybody got their documentation, their bank statements, all of the various address changes, they would honor them until, for that length of time. So to get back to the County administrators, the answer from the Chief Administrator, I don't remember what his name was right offhand, he says, "We're not going to have, we're going to be making forms all the time. We won't have those same forms for 18 months. Just we, as frequently as we make forms they're going to be changed immediately." Now we brought that up with every entity, every business owner just so that we would be honest with them to say, "Look. We know you have forms, you have bank accounts, you have anything that needs to be changed addresses." And we said, "We have," and these are people that most of them said "yes," okay. All the ones that said "yes" in particular which are most of the businesses on that street. We gave them the same information, that they had 18 to 24 months to change all that. That seemed to satisfy them and I know that would've been a concern with any businessman there. And again we have all the truck stops, the managers, owners, some of them off Motel Boulevard like the large new one there, what's the name of it, I can't think of the name of it offhand, but anyway those are the things that we put up front. We didn't try to snooker anybody or be, just try to, we didn't want them to think that we're just trying to not give them the correct information, to be dishonest about any of it. So everything was up front and that's why we had such a good response with "yeses." And that's why we're here today. S. Thomas: Thank you. Did you want to add something Sara? No. So anybody, any more comments from Commissioners? Anyone else in the public who wants to come up and comment? Smith: Madam Chair. I do have a couple of comments. S. Thomas: I'm sorry. I didn't see your light. Smith: I think ... S. Thomas: Commissioner Smith. Smith: I'm slow on the draw here. I would like to talk to Mr. Gamboa just a little bit more here if you would come to the microphone. So Mr. Gamboa, you're here as part of the Historical Society and ... Gamboa: Dona Ana County Historical Society, yes sir. Smith: The Pat Garrett Committee. And so you come here with an ambition to deal with historic things in a better way. You are here talking about Pat Garrett and the name and the cachet that it has. I tend to agree with you 19 in the sense that when I moved here 17 years ago it was much about Billy 2 the Kid and much about the Organ Mountains and much about Pat 3 Garrett. It was nothing about Motel Boulevard. So I kind of get it. 4 5 Gamboa: Yes, you're right. 6 7 Smith: I understand that. But can you go back in time just a little bit and give me 8 more of your thought process as the committee found this more and more 9 important to bring this to us? 10 11 Gamboa: I'm sorry. What was that last? 12 13 Smith: Can you go back in time and give me some more of your committee 14 thought process that brought you to this moment? 15 16 Gonzales: Why was it important to bring it? 17 18 Gamboa: Yes. Okay. First of all this came up a couple of years ago by a former 19 President of the Historical Society and this kind of got rolling after he 20 bought the hearse and we brought it, the hearse that took Pat Garrett to 21 his gravesite. And the County Sheriff's Office said, "Yes. We'd like to 22 have it." So he donated it to them. We says, "Hey, we got something 23 going here." Everybody we've talked to has said over and over, a lot of 24 new people in town. I'm a native so I had a little bit of history on this and 25 some of you already know it, and that is that, "Why was it ever named 26 Motel Boulevard in the first place?" And maybe you already know but if 27 you want me just to repeat that, back in the '60s when the interstate was 28 planned to come, actually planned to come around Las Cruces, the 29 business owners had a fit. They said, "You're going to bypass lots of the 30 businesses downtown," because Highway 70 which came from El Paso 31 was the only highway from the east to the west. It came right down Main 32 Street, turned up Picacho, went straight on out. So then they had to 33 address that. But they'd already pretty much knew they were going to 34 have an offramp for the Main Street. But at the time there wasn't, I'm not 35 sure if they had another offramp planned for, what's this say, Avenida de 36 Mesilla. However, the next step was that the motels on Picacho Avenue 37 was the only cluster of motels back then. I think there was a couple on 38 South Main Street but the biggest cluster of motels were on Picacho. 39 That's a lot of the same ones that are there now. See, the idea was to 40 direct the traffic, they didn't say what motel. They just said "Motel 41 Boulevard." There was a truck stop there already but Highway 28 was 42 pretty much just a dirt road at the time. So they had to not only add the 43 offramp, they had to improve the street and they wanted people to go 44 there to where the motels were and the other idea was at that time it 45 wasn't as occupied with other little businesses as it is right now, so they 46 were expecting that more motels would build there but that never 20 happened. So we said, "Okay. Why Pat Garrett?" I'll kind of repeat that 2 one again. Pat Garrett was Sheriff of Dona Ana County. We have the 3 Sheriff's Office on Motel Boulevard, okay. And besides, we weren't 4 pushing Billy the Kid. Other communities already claim Billy the Kid as 5 theirs. No one has ever claimed Pat Garrett, and why should they? He 6 belongs here because he lived here, he worked here, he was killed here, 7 and he's buried here. So that's kind of all the criteria that we used and it 8 could've been Second Street or Third Street but Pat Garrett worked right 9 there in the Sheriff's Department. So that's pretty much the whole story. 10 11 Smith: Mr. Gamboa. We understand that this boulevard would be six miles long. 12 Did I hear that correctly, six miles? And that's six miles of commercial and 13 residential and a continuity of that Pat Garrett world. Is your ambition to 14 say that commercial and that residential area now be on Pat Garrett 15 Boulevard as it is, or is your ambition to see more of a visitors' station 16 thing, some more honor to Pat Garrett, a ... 17 18 Gamboa: No, we wouldn't ... 19 20 Smith: Way stop? 21 22 Gamboa: Want, we wouldn't want to do that. 23 24 Smith: Any of that? 25 26 Gamboa: We don't want to do the same thing that they did with the other end of 27 Motel Boulevard which was to name after Jim Bradley, the Jim Bradley 28 Way. I think that's probably what you're alluding to. No, we decided that, 29 now let me say one thing. As far as residential, the majority of the 30 residential is north of Picacho. 31 32 Smith: Yes. 33 34 Gamboa: There's only about three, I'm going to be just a little off on this, at least 35 three residents on, is that right, three residents on Motel Boulevard from 36 Picacho south. Everything else is businesses or empty lots. So we felt 37 this is a good time, before it gets built up any further and especially, like 1 38 said we wouldn't be here if we didn't get such an overwhelming response 39 from all those very, very big businesses and especially to the County 40 Commission, the County Government Building. So that's why we want to 41 just go all the way instead of just being a Pat Garrett Way or just say, 42 "Dedicated to Pat Garrett" or something like that because we, I think we're 43 going to have an opportunity to help the, in fact we've already talked to the 44 Sheriff and, our current Sheriff right now, he also gave us a good word 45 when we made our presentation at the County Commissioners' Office 46 complex. He says, "If we can get Pat Garrett Boulevard," he says, "I'll 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 expand my museum." That was his words exactly. So you see what I'm saying? If we get some identification for more people to come in off that street we can help other people like the Sheriff's Department expand that similar to what Dr. Krueger just said. There can be other signage the City may want to do later on that can direct people on over to Mesilla, to yes, to Mesilla where Billy the Kid activities are because they come there for that. That's the main attraction. But we didn't have an attraction for Pat Garrett but I'm hoping we will. Smith: Thank you Mr. Gamboa, Gamboa: Yes sir. Thanks a lot. Smith: May I ask staff ... PERSON IN AUDIENCE SPEAKING, NOT ON MICROPHONE. Smith: Yes please. S. Thomas: We'd like to finish this PERSON IN AUDIENCE SPEAKING, NOT ON MICROPHONE. S. Thomas: Conversation first but we will go on to the public, we want to finish his conversation first and then we'll call on other members of the public. Smith: So let's drill down to the idea of the cost of this. We understand that there are cost estimates and we understand that an idea goes forth to change the name. So signs are put up and things happen to make it now, if they go through a Pat Garrett Boulevard. And the cost of that exists. Now hear GIRT, I hear fundraising, I hear ideas about paying for that. Can we go into that discussion a little bit? Where do we start gathering those monies to pay for that? Gonzales: Madam Chair, Commissioner Smith. That is why with staff's recommendation everybody has pursued it to be the applicant's request because there are no safety hazards, there are no dangers with Motel Boulevard currently. This would be the applicant's petition. So with that, that is why staff is putting that the applicant would be responsible for that fee. If the fee is to be altered in any way, that would be to the recommendation of P&Z to recommend that to City Council if the fee were to be the responsibility of someone else. Smith: So the discussion with the Pat Garrett Committee and staff so far is that it's their responsibility, but have they brought forth discussions about what they've done to start honoring that responsibility? 110 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Gonzales: Madam Chair, Commissioner Smith. When we spoke to them, we asked them if they had any fundraising or any monies to put forth towards the cost of the amount when we provided it to them. We were told that they had made an attempt which is the same report that they had read off to you, the same letter that they responded to saying that they didn't get any funding in return from anyone. And so with that they were coming here as if the GIRT was going to cover that cost. That's the same information provided to staff. So they're coming forward with there are no fees at this point in time to be paid forth by the applicant and staff is basically, from NMDOT and the Traffic Department, those two are the two entities that are requesting that they be paid by the applicants since this is not coming forth as a City project. We've had no issues or safety hazards. That's where we stand at least for funding. Smith: And then that puts us with the topic of GIRT. Is there a process under which it's allocated, split away? Gonzales: Unfortunately I don't know that process. We bring this forward. That would be a discussion through City Council to see if there is allotted money to do a name change or to provide any funding for different activities that are not coming forth by the City. We do not allocate any money. We do not have anything for GIRT to say that this could go forth for a street name change at this position in time. S. Thomas: Yes. I don't think that's up to us. That's up to the City to decide. They have control of the budget and we don't. The downtown is a TIDD, a Tax Increment Development District and when you do that then whatever the current revenue is stays that way but any increases go back into that project. But I'm not sure that Motel Boulevard would qualify for that. That would, something the Council would have to direct staff to look into. So I think our discussion here is more about whether or not we agree with the idea but we certainly would have to leave the funding decisions up to the Council because it's not, and we could recommend that they, that we recommend on the condition that the Council sees a way to fund it. But it's not up to us to say how we're going to get the money to do it. Smith: Thank you Madam Chair. S. Thomas: Okay. More people from the audience who want to speak. Can you state your name and then I need to swear you in. D. Thomas: My name is David Thomas. S. Thomas: And do you swear and affirm that the testimony you are about give is the truth and nothing but the truth under the penalty of law? 23 1 2 D. Thomas: Yes I do. 3 4 S. Thomas: Thank you. 5 6 D. Thomas: I am a historian. I've written four books on Mesilla Valley history. The last 7 book I wrote was on Billy the Kid. I'm currently working on one on Pat 8 Garrett. What I'd like to bring to your attention is that we also have a 9 committee where we have met with the people at the Rio Grande Theatre. 10 We have all agreed in principle. In February we're going to have the Pat 11 Garrett Western Heritage Festival and the idea is this is going to be an 12 annual event. It's a two-day event on Friday and Saturday. We 13 essentially have agreement in principle already with the Rio Grande. The 14 very first movie that was ever made about Billy the Kid, the world premiere 15 was held in Las Cruces in the Rio Grande Theatre and we're going to 16 show that movie. That was called "Billy the Kid." It was directed by King 17 Vidor. We're going to show the Peckinpah movie about Billy the Kid. 18 We're going to show another movie. We're going to have a little play that 19 goes through the process where Wayne Brazel was, the courts decided to 20 hold Wayne Brazel for the murder of Pat Garrett. Of course you know he 21 was eventually acquitted. We've got some other presentations. We've got 22 a music presentation that's going to go through a lot of the historical 23 Western music and give the history and the performance of these projects. 24 So this is more or less approved at the moment. This is just the beginning 25 of what you can do to promote Pat Garrett in the City, and no other city 26 can do it. And I'd like to bring up one other point. There's a marker out 27 here off of Highway 70 that is the place where Pat Garrett was killed and 28 we've been working with the City for about eight years now on the idea of 29 turning that into a park. Now currently it's an undeveloped part out there 30 but the City has agreed in principle that this is something that would be 31 worth pursuing. So you have a golden opportunity here. If you pass this 32 up, there's no telling what this could eventually grow into. 33 34 S. Thomas: Thank you very much. I actually was involved in that. Cal took me out 35 there. I've seen the, and I remember the discussions we had to try to 36 make sure that area got preserved. 37 38 D. Thomas: Yes. 39 40 S. Thomas: Thank you. Other people who wish to speak? Anyone else in the 41 audience? Hi Mel. 42 43 Acosta: My name is Mel Acosta. 44 45 S. Thomas: Hi Mel. Do you swear and affirm that the testimony you are about give is 46 the truth and nothing but the truth under the penalty of law? 24 1 2 Acosta: Right. My address is 5045 Moon Shadow Place, Las Cruces, New 3 Mexico. 4 5 S. Thomas: Thank you. 6 7 Acosta: Sorry, I can't speak very well. Madam Chair and Commissioners. I have 8 two questions. Do we have a quorum? 9 10 S. Thomas: Yes, we do have a quorum including the fourth person who's on the 11 phone. 12 13 Acosta: Okay. Thank you. The financial burden imposed on the residents of the 14 City of Las Cruces on GRT, especially the small businesses, we could 15 also say, well we're going to say, we can name it the Lucero Avenue for 16 Sheriff Lucero. Or we can go back as far as the Refugio Colony Grant 17 and go back and say the Fresquez family or, so you can say Fresquez 18 Avenue. I think that the City Utilities has sent a message to the rest of us 19 saying that they said "no." And consequently when, why would the City 20 Utilities say "no?" That would be a good question, wouldn't it? And the 21 cost is going to be passed on to the small business. 22 And the next question is this: Everybody says here that everybody 23 said "yes." Well I'd like to see that in writing to make sure that there's 24 transparency to what the Committee wants to do. It's very admirable that 25 they're trying to do that. I agree with that. The problem with that is that 26 we need to make sure that we take care of the residents of the City of Las 27 Cruces with GRT. And I guess that's about it. Thank you. 28 29 S. Thomas: Thank you very much. Anyone else? Yes. Could you come up please? 30 And could you state your name please? 31 32 Lucero: Ralph Lucero. 33 34 S. Thomas: Do you swear and affirm that the testimony you are about give is the truth 35 and nothing but the truth under the penalty of law? 36 37 Lucero: I do. 38 39 S. Thomas: Thank you. Say your name again, once more. 40 41 Lucero: Ralph Lucero. 42 43 S. Thomas: Ralph Lucero. Okay. 44 45 Lucero: I spoke to Sara Gonzales about this issue before coming to this meeting 46 and the biggest issue that I had with the name change, I'm not opposed to 25 I the name change. But I'm opposed that every entity can come up with an 2 idea and pass it on to the taxpayers or to the businesses. They don't have 3 any funding. Gross receipts tax, oh yes. Gross receipts tax is the answer 4 to everything, right? No it isn't. Mesilla has one of the highest gross 5 receipts tax and they don't get every penny of the gross receipts back to 6 Mesilla. Mesilla right now is operating on grants. They cannot fund the 7 infrastructure and they're having difficulty funding infrastructure in Mesilla. 8 Las Cruces has a bond issue that's taking place for more bikes and 9 trails, walking trails, for the Humane Society, for fire stations. We voted 10 for the fire stations, yes. That's for safety. We voted for the dogs and the 11 cats. The owners don't take care, they don't neuter their, or spay their 12 animals yet you know the taxpayer has to do something with those strays. 13 We voted against the trails. Why? You go out there to the trail on the 14 Llorona Park. We use those occasionally. The percentage of people that 15 use those walk and trails is nothing. It's probably one -tenth of 1% yet 16 we're spending money to construct more trails? We see the City people 17 out there that maintain those trails. What are they doing? They're sitting 18 in the trucks doing nothing. You know that annoys us because we're 19 having to carry that burden, that tax burden. Who is that? It's the 20 businesses and the property owners. It's not those people that rent. They 21 don't pay property taxes. Yes, they pay gross receipts tax on anything 22 that they purchase that's taxable. But again, let's do the right thing. It's a 23 good idea but let them carry the burden, not the taxpayer, not the gross 24 receipts tax. There's so many things right now that the gross receipts tax 25 is having to levy and provide funding for. It's not a bottomless pit. Who's 26 paying those gross receipts tax? The people here in New Mexico and the 27 jobs in New Mexico are nothing compared to the jobs in Texas, Colorado, 28 or California, or Arizona. Our students leave this state after they graduate 29 from the universities. Why? There are no jobs here in New Mexico. And 30 the few jobs that there are, they don't pay what they pay in California, 31 Colorado, or Texas. So let's do the right thing. Yes. You want to change 32 the Motel Boulevard to Pat Garrett? Fine. But let them come up with the 33 funding and don't pass it on to somebody else. Thank you. 34 35 S. Thomas: Thank you. Anyone else from the public who would like to speak? Okay. 36 All right. Want to state your name? 37 38 Steen: My name is Karla Steen. 39 40 S. Thomas: And do you swear and affirm that the testimony you are about give is the 41 truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? 42 43 Steen: Yes I do. 44 45 S. Thomas: Thank you. 46 T I Steen: Thank you. I would like to address something. I would like to say that I'm 2 a taxpayer. I pay property taxes and I pay gross receipts tax and I was 3 educated here and I did come back here. And I provide a lot of services 4 community as do my colleagues who were also educated here. We 5 provide service and that idea that there are no jobs here and that people 6 live here and there's nothing here, I feel that that's a myth and I would like 7 to set that straight this evening. Thank you very much. 8 9 S. Thomas: Thank you. Anyone else from the public who would like to speak? 10 11 Nichols: Madam Chairman. 12 13 S. Thomas: Yes. 14 15 Nichols: May I be recognized? 16 17 S. Thomas: Yes. 18 19 Nichols: For the record, Larry Nichols, Community Development. I would just like 20 to mention a few points of information as to the previous speaker that, well 21 two speakers back that asked, "Well why would the City Utility Department 22 cast a vote the way they did?" I would preface my comments by saying 23 that we are neither, Community Development neither opposes nor 24 supports. We have a neutral position on the name change but we will be 25 required whatever the outcome is, if it were to be changed there will be a 26 number of things that will have to occur in addition to the New Mexico 27 Department of Transportation signage and the City street signage. 28 There's also all of the GIS mapping that will need to be changed so that 29 our Public Safety individuals, the Fire Department, the Police Department, 30 emergency responders will have to have that information and all that will 31 have to be updated in addition to businesses such as UPS, FedEx. A 32 street name change involves all of those entities as much as the signs 33 themselves. Now would the City do that updating? Yes they would. But it 34 would be something that would, people should be aware of that that will 35 have to occur, especially the mapping. 36 37 S. Thomas: Yes. Thank you for that information. That's an important point. Any other 38 comments from Commissioners? Commissioner Gran. 39 40 Gran: Yes. I keep looking at things that we review up here on the Commission. 41 In terms of the growth of the City and how we vision our City in a healthy 42 way and in a development way that creates prosperity, additional tax base 43 for our City, and additional employment for our City, and I think of 44 increasing ways in which to promote tourism, which would cover all of 45 those things. It would promote additional employment. I do favor the 46 notion of a name change and submitting this for possible budget 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 consideration for the City. That is their decision. It is not ours. As a Commissioner, I always look to ways in which we can market our City in a very favorable light. We already have a very good reputation nationally in some aspects; safety, for one. But I always look to our cultural history and the spirit, that spirit of cultural history in our community and how that can influence a new outlook for our City. I see the business possibilities for tourism, especially in conjunction with the new monument that we have that we fought so hard for, and how that is already bringing increasing tourism and how this could play with that. Because out in the monument, on the land, Billy the Kid even signed his name on a rock and so did his fellow gangsters. So all of this can tie in. However, and I look at the Comprehensive Plan and I can see that vision of how we can grow our City in a healthy way, a vibrant way, bringing in new business, starting tourism shops along Motel Boulevard, and so forth. It certainly is something that I see that is very bright and a very beautiful possibility for the City because we do have a lot of history and we need to expand that. I don't think we've marketed that very well. But I am concerned about the fact that this potential additional cost to the City, and who knows where that $250,000 is going to come from, might be better used for more needed services now in our City. So I'm still a little ambivalent about this. So I just wanted to make my thoughts known. It's such a balancing act. It's just like the education problem we have in this state. In order to improve our quality of public school education we are going to have to make sacrifices and that's money. But look at what that would do to the future, how that would really increase the success of our state and keep our graduates here. So this is kind of in line with that. Where do we make the sacrifice and how much of that sacrifice do we make up front? Where do we make those sacrifices? So I just wanted to give you my thoughts Commissioners. S. Thomas: Okay. Gran: Thank you very much Chairwoman. S. Thomas: Thank you. Commissioner Smith. Smith: Madam Chair. Yes, I find myself in the same crossroads: The difficulty between urgencies now and saving money now, marketing opportunities. I think these graphics are a great display of sort of an unforced error on our parts where we are saying, "Motel Boulevard. Stop and get a motel." And they can't claim anything there. So it doesn't serve us well. I wonder if there is a way of having more discussion about vesting on the part of the committee, the Pat Garrett Committee, that instead of just saying, "GIRT, that will solve it," are there other discussions in their committee to try to come up with those funds that solves some of that? Madam Chair, thank you. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Gran: I would like to ask a question. S. Thomas: Yes. Gran: Chairwoman, if you don't mind. S. Thomas: Commissioner Gran. Gran: Have you considered looking for grants for historical development that might tie into that? S. Thomas: Just state your name again. D. Thomas: I think a grant S. Thomas: Could you just state your name again for the record? D. Thomas: My name is David Thomas. I think a grant to pay for the costs to the State are extremely likely, myself. We're not a specialist in anything like that but we've had some discussions with some people that have obtained grants for various types of things and I think that would be the way to pursue funding for the State's costs. Like I say we are hoping to organize an annual Pat Garrett Western Heritage Festival. We've picked that name because it includes Billy the Kid, Albert Fountain. The first year's going to be on Pat Garrett. The second year's going to be on Albert Fountain and we hope this to be an annual event. I mean this is something that can really grow, that you can really build upon. And our position is that we're giving you this gift. There was a sign out there on the highway that was taken down about two months ago that said "There's no hotels on Motel Boulevard." And we saw it and we went out to photograph it, they'd already wiped it clean. So someone in the City put up a sign that said "Motel Boulevard" and underneath that that said "No motels on Motel Boulevard." I mean that is a major problem. That's a problem that it's the City's responsibility to solve. So that's kind of our position on our side of the funding effort. S. Thomas: Thank you. Commissioner Gordon did you have something to say? Are you still with us? Gordon: I'm fine. I'm still here. S. Thomas: We've one more person from the ... Gordon: Before 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 S. Thomas: Do you want to say something, Commissioner Gordon? Gordon: I was just going to say but before we vote I want to make sure that they give us our options again, please. S. Thomas: That they do what? Gordon: Give us our options again. S. Thomas: Thank you. Yes. You have to go to the microphone so we can D. Thomas: Someone in the City put this up, "Motel Boulevard" and underneath it they said, "There are no motels on Motel Boulevard." It was up we don't know exactly how long but then it was wiped clean. S. Thomas: Thank you. There's one more comment from the public and then we'll go forward. Mel, did you want to say one more thing? Just state your name again. Acosta: I don't have to be sworn in again, do I? S. Thomas: No. Just state your name. Acosta: Madam Chair. My name is Mel Acosta. Commissioners. A while back we had a Board of County Commissioner, Paul Curry and he wanted to name Motel Boulevard "Curry Boulevard." Okay? It just didn't happen. The Board of County Commissioners said "no." Okay, we could name this "X Boulevard," "B Boulevard," whatever it is, okay. I think that the, that is a very good idea. However, in lieu of the circumstances regarding finances, a lot of debt encumbrance for the City, and who knows, maybe the small businesses that are there, advertising and so forth. I agree with you Commissioner. The Comprehensive Land Plan and Vision 2040 had that in mind. But the next question I have is this: Whether it's Pat Garrett or whatever, right? We have a real physical issue in that area, okay? And I hate to say this but the truckers out there call this City "Stink City." Why? Because we have the sewer plant there, okay. So when you associate tourism, please tell me. Are we going to bring tourists to smell the sewer? I mean I don't see the correlation between tourism, Pat Garrett Boulevard or whatever, and we have this physical issue there. I don't see that. would think more that we would have a monument for this person and dedicate a monument or a park for this person, or we could have celebrations every year or every other year and now that would be more apropos for tourism and commerce. I just don't see the association between the Comprehensive Land Plan, Vision 2040 and the name change here. It's a big thing to think about. And again I mean we have a question here. City Utilities said "no." I want to know why. The people 30 I here say this. Well they say, "Well Truck Stops of America, Pilot Truck 2 Stop said 'yes'." Well these are corporate entities and I'd like to see 3 something in writing that says, "Yes. They said 'yes'." And I don't see 4 that. And I have an issue with that. 5 6 S. Thomas: And so good suggestions if this goes forward with good suggestions to 7 bring to the Council. So thank you for that. 8 9 Acosta: Okay. Thank you Commissioner. 10 11 Gordon: Madam Chair. 12 13 S. Thomas: Yes. 14 15 Gordon: I do ... 16 17 S. Thomas: Commissioner Gordon. 18 19 Gordon: I just have something I'd like to ask. We've been talking about, for the last 20 hour or so about, "What is the City going to, how is the City going to pay 21 for this and where's the money going to come from?" I just thought in our 22 discussions that I've listened to that the County was really pretty quick to 23 say, "Okay. We're in favor of this. It's no big deal for us just to change our 24 stationery and do whatever forms or whatever we have to do." But have 25 they offered any contribution to this project in terms of funding? 26 27 S. Thomas: I see heads shaking "no." 28 29 Gordon: Well they occupy a pretty big chunk of land right down at the beginning of 30 Motel Boulevard near Picacho. 31 32 S. Thomas: Right. Good point. So I want to add my two cents. Like I say I've worked 33 with this group before when we were working on the site and because it's 34 in District 6 when I was Councilor for District 6. 1 would point out that Mel, 35 1 don't think it's in the Regional Plan but it's in one of the plans from Viva 36 Dona Ana to work on Valley Drive and turn that into El Camino Real and 37 that would be, I think it's 96 miles they're looking at there, all the way down 38 to the Mexican border so that you, there is some emphasis at the County 39 for honoring our history and making that more visible for people. And so 1 40 can understand why the County would support it. It is part of kind of an 41 extension of what they're already trying to do. 42 I'm working with a workforce group now. We're trying to figure out 43 how to get more and better jobs here. Some of the ways you get more 44 and better jobs to your community is for it to be an attractive community, 45 especially for it to be the attractive kind of community that millennials want 46 to come to and that means trails and bicycle lanes and parks and all that 31 I kind of stuff. And so again it's a balancing act. Do you do that first and 2 then get the jobs or you try to get the jobs and do that? So that's where 3 we are and the City's embarking on their Comprehensive Plan now so that 4 will be a good part of the discussion. So I support it. I would like to see if 5 we can send it forth with some kind of condition. And so can you respond 6 to that Sara? What do we do if we want to say, "Yes, we support the idea 7 with the condition that the City Council is able to work out funding with the 8 applicant or other entities?" 9 10 Gonzales: Madam Chair. You would just make a motion to approve with conditions 11 and then list the condition to move forth, and then the Commission would 12 vote. 13 14 S. Thomas: So we have to have a separate motion to amend it? 15 16 Gonzales: Yes. 17 18 S. Thomas: Okay. 19 20 Gonzales: Because you would do a motion, since you already motioned to approve it, 21 you are now motioning to ... 22 23 S. Thomas: Amend it. 24 25 Gonzales: Amend the approval with conditions and then list out your conditions and 26 then the vote would need to be seconded and then taken place. 27 28 S. Thomas: Okay. Am I allowed to make the motion? That's my question, as the 29 Chair? 30 31 Cabrillo: You can make the motion to amend with conditions. However, I'm a little 32 bit confused because we're talking about the record. Was there already a 33 motion on the floor ... 34 35 S. Thomas: Yes. 36 37 Cabrillo: To approve it? 38 39 S. Thomas: Yes. So now we're talking about a motion to amend and then we would 40 go back to the original motion. 41 42 Gonzales: Yes. 43 44 Cabrillo: Okay. You can do the motion to amend. 45 46 S. Thomas: I can do that? 32 1 2 Gonzales: Yes. 3 4 Cabrillo: Yes you can. 5 6 S. Thomas: Okay. So I move that we support this name change with the condition that 7 the City Council work with both the applicant and any other possible 8 entities to cover the funding. 9 10 Gordon: I'll second that. 11 12 S. Thomas: Thank you. Any more discussion before we vote? 13 14 Smith: Do we have to remove the first motion? 15 16 S. Thomas: Well ... 17 18 Gordon: Just need to ... 19 20 S. Thomas: Well we have to vote ... 21 22 Gordon: Just need ... 23 24 S. Thomas: On the amendment ... 25 26 Gordon: Just need ... 27 28 S. Thomas: First and then we have to vote on the motion. So any more discussion on 29 the amendment? No? Becky would you call for the amendment. 30 31 Baum: Commissioner Gordon. 32 33 Gordon: Yes. 34 35 Baum: Commissioner Gran. 36 37 Gran: Yes. 38 39 Baum: Commissioner Smith. 40 41 Smith: Yes. 42 43 Baum: Commissioner Thomas. 44 45 S. Thomas: Yes. 46 33 I MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. 2 3 S. Thomas: Okay. And now we need to vote on the original motion which was to 4 accept the plan and now we're voting on it, that we support this plan to 5 change the name with the conditions that we've put on it. Would you call 6 the roll again? 7 8 Baum: Commissioner Gordon. 9 10 Gordon: Based on discussion and presentation I vote yes. 11 12 Baum: Commissioner Gran. 13 14 Gran: Yes. 15 16 Baum: Commissioner Smith. 17 18 Smith: Point of order. Are we voting to bypass the original motion? 19 20 S. Thomas: No. Now we're voting on the original motion with the amendment. 21 22 Smith: I vote yes. 23 24 Baum: And Commissioner Thomas. 25 26 S. Thomas: I vote yes as well. 27 28 MOTION APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. 29 30 S. Thomas: And I want to add that there are various, the first thing you'd have to would 31 be get this on the CIP list, the projects that the City has if they agree to do 32 it, and then they have the opportunity to try to look for funding. You could, 33 they would, there might even be funding from the Department of 34 Transportation. It could go through the MPO, the Metropolitan Planning 35 Organization. So there are a variety of ways to look at it and I'm sure that 36 Council will be able to do that. 37 38 VIII. OTHER BUSINESS 39 1. Informational presentation and discussion of quasi-judicial vs. legislative 40 proceedings, open -meetings act, and P&Z legal and ethical obligations. 41 42 S. Thomas: Okay. The next thing is other business. We're not, we're going to skip 43 that. We don't have a presentation for that tonight. We'll do it next month. 44 Did you want to say something? 45 46 Ochoa: No ma'am. 34 1 2 S. Thomas: No? 3 4 Ochoa: Just making the agenda up. 5 6 IX. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 7 8 S. Thomas: Next is public participation. Any more public participation about something 9 else? Okay. 10 11 X. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS 12 13 S. Thomas: Okay. Then we come to staff announcements. 14 15 Nichols: Madam Chair. This is an opportunity to recognize the Planning and 16 Zoning Commissioners for your participation in the recently formed 17 Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee. City staff, the City Manager, 18 and the Mayor want to thank you for your participation and we know 19 there's a lot of work ahead of us. But we had a very good first meeting 20 and I felt it was very productive, and that was attributed to your 21 participation. 22 23 S. Thomas: Thank you for that. I think I agree. One of the things for, just for your 24 general information that the consultant said was that they were really 25 pleased and surprised by how willing we were to look at big ideas and 26 moving forward with big changes. They're excited to work with us and so 1 27 think we're all excited to do that as well. Larry can you say anything about 28 the American Planning Association conference? 29 30 Gordon: Madam Chair. Before you say that. 31 32 S. Thomas: Yes. 33 34 Gordon: I just, I'd like to just ask some questions of Mr. Nichols, Unfortunately 1 35 was not able to attend. I am on that committee but I was promised, and 1 36 think if their minutes, if there were minutes taken that I would be able to at 37 least review what was discussed. Is that correct? 38 39 Nichols: Madam Chairman and Commissioner Gordon. That is correct. We'll 40 make certain that you get a copy of the minutes and also any documents 41 that were distributed at the meeting. 42 43 Gordon: Okay. I would very much appreciate that because I want to make sure 44 that I keep current because I definitely will plan to make the next meeting. 45 1 was just out of town and I wasn't able to do it. Thank you. 46 35 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 S. Thomas: Thank you. And Mr. Nichols can you say something about the APA conference and the ability to attend? Nichols: Yes Madam Chairman. I did receive your e-mail inquiring about the American Planning Association upcoming seminar and learning/training. I took that request to the City Manager and the City Manager has agreed that any of the Planning and Zoning Commissioners that would like to attend, that we will pay for the registration fees for that activity. S. Thomas: And do you want us to notify you, or to whom should we send our request for attendance? Nichols: Yes Madam Chairman. If you'll please notify me. S. Thomas: Thank you. Nichols: Either yourself or if any of the Commissioners want to e-mail me at the City e-mail address then I'll make certain that your names are submitted and we get you registered. S. Thomas: Okay. And to all the Commissioners, I have sent information to you about this and a link to the website so you can see the conference is October 10 to 12 and the theme of the conference is "Plan to Play" that's how you move from a plan to the kind of place you want to have which is very appropriate for what we're trying to do with the Comprehensive Plan. Okay. Any more staff announcements? Ochoa: I think that's it for tonight, Madam Chair. XI. ADJOURNMENT (7:38) S. Thomas: Okay. All right. Then I think we're ready to adjourn. I need a motion. Gordon: I make a motion we adjourn. Smith: I second. S. Thomas: Everybody in favor say "aye." Motion approved. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 7 �✓ Chairperson 36 -A City of LaS urucesop MOUNTAINS Of OPPORTUNITY Council Action and Executive Summary Item # 5 Ordinance/Resolution# 2882 For Meeting of December 3, 2018 For Meeting of December 17, 2018 (Ordinance First Reading Date) (Adoption Date) Please check box that applies to this item: ❑QUASI JUDICIAL ®LEGISLATIVE ❑ADMINISTRATIVE TITLE: AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 38-58 F. 3., MINIMUM NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS, OF THE LAS CRUCES MUNICIPAL CODE TO RECONCILE INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE ADOPTED ZONING AND BUILDING CODES. SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES (ZCA-18-01). PURPOSE(S) OF ACTION: Code Amendment. COUNCIL DISTRICT: N/A Drafter/Staff Contact: Katherine Harrison -Rogers Department/Section: Community Development/ Community Planning Phone: 528-3049 City Manager Signature: 4'�t�rV C'Ltil��bwd c, 0 '' Z �vl BACKGROUND / KEY ISSUES / CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: The City Council is required to review and take final action on Zoning Code Amendments per Section 38-10 B. 2. b. and 38-13 A. of the 2001 Zoning Code (aka Las Cruces Municipal Code Chapter 38). The City of Las Cruces Zoning Code and adopted Building Code have inconsistent standards for the number of required accessible disabled parking stalls. These inconsistencies create confusion with the public and design professionals. The City is requesting the Zoning Code be modified to eliminate its minimums and to reference and require the minimums listed in the City's adopted Building Code, as specified at the time of building permit issuance. On August 28, 2018, the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z), per Section 38-10 B. 2. b. of the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended, recommended approval of the proposed code amendment request by a vote of 4-0-0 (three Commissioners absent) on the consent agenda based upon the following finding: • The proposed modification to the minimum number of required accessible parking stalls complies with the Decision Criteria of P&Z listed in Section 2-382 and the Purpose and Intent of the Zoning Code outlined in Section 38-2. Rev. 02/2012 Council Action and Executive Summary Page 2 The case was publicly noticed in accordance with the City's notification provisions; staff received no public input regarding the proposal. The City Council will consider the recommendation of the P&Z and will decide whether the requested zoning code amendment is appropriate. If deemed suitable based upon the evidence presented, the City Council will make a final determination on the request. The City Council may modify the recommendation by removing or adding conditions. Furthermore, City Council can reject the recommendation; however, new evidence and facts (a.k.a. findings) must be articulated if the City Council reverses the P&Z recommendation. SUPPORT INFORMATION: 1. Ordinance. 2. Exhibit "A" -Modified LCMC Section 38-58 F 3. 3. Attachment "A" -Legislative format of modified LCMC Section 38-58 F 3. 4. Attachment "B"-Staff Report to the P&Z for Case ZCA-18-01. 5. Attachment "C"-Minutes from the August 28, 2018 P&Z meeting. SOURCE OF FUNDING: Is this action already budgeted? Yes ❑ See fund summary below No ❑ If No, then check one below: Budget Adjustment ❑ Expense reallocated from: N/A ❑ Proposed funding is from a new revenue Attached source i.e. rant; see details below ❑ Proposed funding is from fund balance in the Fund. Does this action create any Yes ❑ Funds will be deposited into this fund: revenue ? in the amount of $for N/A FY . No E There is no new revenue generated by this action. BUDGET NARRATIVE N/A FUND EXPENDITURE SUMMARY: Fund Name(s) Account Expenditure Available Remaining Purpose for Number(s) Proposed Budgeted Funds Funds Remaining Funds in Current FY N/A I N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Rev. 02/2012 Council Action and Executive Summary Page 3 OPTIONS / ALTERNATIVES: 1. Vote "Yes"; this will approve the Ordinance and affirm the P&Z recommendation for repealing and replacing Section 38-58 F 3 of the LCMC. The LCMC will be amended to reflect these changes. 2. Vote "No"; this will not approve the Ordinance and will reject the recommendation made by the P&Z. The current LCMC will remain unchanged and the discrepancies between the Building Code and Zoning Code will remain. 3. Vote to "Amend"; this allows the City Council to modify the Ordinance as deemed appropriate. 4. Vote to "Table"; this allows the City Council to table/postpone the Ordinance and direct staff accordingly. REFERENCE INFORMATION: The resolution(s) and/or ordinance(s) listed below are only for reference and are not included as attachments or exhibits. N/A Rev. 02/2012 4*0 Ul uf Las urucus� MOUNTAINS OF OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL ACTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PACKET ROUTING SLIP For Meeting of December 3, 2018 TITLE: (Ordinance First Reading Date) For Meeting of December 17, 2018 (Adoption Date) AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REPLACING SECTION 38-58 F. 3., MINIMUM NUMBER OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALLS, OF THE LAS CRUCES MUNICIPAL CODE TO RECONCILE INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE ADOPTED ZONING ' AND BUILDING CODES. SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES (ZCA-18-(J1). Purchasing Manager's Request to Contract (PMRC) (Required?) Yes ❑ No ❑ DEPARTMENT SIGNATURE PHONE NO. DATE Drafter/Staff Contact 3049 Department Director Budget (A Lcju- c�1� I 1 ssistant City Manager /William F. Studer, Jr. Assistant City Manager/David P. Dollahon JC oi,o 7y // 3 City Attorney (/ 4 City Clerk llpi�l� j�-ob'i Rev. 5/2018 f LAS ("ARUCFS SUN-NENN"'S AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT Ad No. The City Council of The 0001269818 City of Las Cruces, New Mexico, Hereby Gives No- tice of Its Intent to Adopt the Following Ordinance(s) at a Regular City Council Meeting to Esther be Held on December 17, CITY OF LAS CRUCES 2018: PO BOX 20000 (1)Council Bill No. 19-017; PURCHASING Ordinance No. 2882: An LAS CRUCES NM 88004 Ordinance Repealing and Replacing Section 38-58 F 3, Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Stalls, of the Las Cruces Munici- I, a legal clerk of the Las Cruces Sun -News, a pal Code to Reconcile In - consistencies Between newspaper ublished daily at the count of Dona P Y Y the Adopted Zoning and Ana, state of New Mexico and of general paid Building Codes. Submit - circulation in said county; that the same is a duly ted by the City of Las Cru- ces (ZCA-18-01). qualified newspaper under the laws of the State Copies Are Available for wherein legal notices and advertisements may Inspection During Work - be published; that the printed notice attached P P ing Hours at the Office of the City Clerk. Witness hereto was published in the regular and entire My Hand and Seal of the edition of said newspaper and not in supplement City of Las Cruces on this thereof on the date as follows, to wit: the 26h day of November, 2018. Linda Lewis, CIVIC 12/02/18 City Clerk Ad No.: 1269818 Despondent further states this newspaper is duly qualified to publish legal notice or advertisements within the meaning of Sec. Chapter 167, Laws of 1937. (i- e al CIerk STA F WISCONSIN SS. County of Brown Subscribed and sworn before me this 3rd of Decomber 2,018. `\\\„ 1 1 1 1 1 1,,,// SSA Rop NOTARY PUBLrC in and for �p�AR y Brown County, Wisconsin PU v-NLP OF W �� My Commission Expires i 1 1 1 1 1 10 Ad#:0001269818 P O : Notice of Intent to Adopt Ord. No. 2878-81 # of Affidavits :0.00 f s DEC — l 2018 1 Lel4al Advertising Affidavit Angel McKellar, who, being duly sworn as the Advertising Assistant of the Las Cruces BULLETIN, a weekly newspaper of general distribution published in the City of Las Cruces, County of Dona Ana, State of New Mexico, disposes and states that the legal advertising for CITY OF LAS CRUCES CITY ATTORNEY In the matter of: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT The City Council of The City of Las Cruces, New Mexico, Hereby Gives Notice of Its Intent to Adopt the Following Ordinance(s) at a Regular City Council Meeting to be Held on December 17, 2018: (1) Council Bill No. 19-017; Ordinance No. 2882: An Ordinance Repealing and Replacing Section 38-58 F 3, In accordance with the laws of the State of New Mexico, the attached was published in its entirety I time(s) in the Las Cruces BULLETIN, the first publication date being 11/30/2018 and subsequent publications being: , , . Sworn to and subscribed before me this day 11/30/2018 in the CITY OF LAS CRUCES COUNTY OF DONA ANA STATE OF NEW MEXICO Notary Public 1 STArFa OFFICIAL SEAL Anita Goins NOTARY PUBLIC Advertising Costs: $39.53 STATE OF NEW MEXICO' r re1z' My Comm. Expires _— Friday, November 30, 2018 Las Cruces Bulletin Legal Notices 125 Las Cruces Bulletin - your legal publication for Las Cruces and Dona Ana County, New Mexico mans Soliciting Ricks or Buxinesa SURE SALE Assessor is real or personal appoin(d Pta,oa l R.Im- TFD BY: property, if any. and xoniae Property, ,o istu , of . nvGE Respectfully submitted, senta,ive of this A.W.estteAll JOSEPH M. HOLMES. P.A. MANUR, 1N THE violations art rming the Council Hill No. 11; PLEASE, TAKE NOTICE "'it. or manufactured /I/ Antonio Carlos Lopez persons having claims PO Box 366 CRY OF LAS CRUCES. if any. Or An Ordinance No. 2881: An thaz the abookiate ptlef home to the land. deactiva- bun Baca against .said esu. arc re- Las Cruces, NM gA(gFM36ti DORA ANA COUNTY,ProPurty' Ordinance Court, having fined me 8 aPPoO of rifle to a mobile or Antonin Carlos Loper. Baca quimd to p otser t their claims (575) 524-0833 NEW MEXICO. AS THE NOTICE IS FURTHER Amending tlx Lrs Gucas Municipal Cook w my designee to Special munuh'actorcd home on the 1032 [-a PI.W Dr. within four (4) months after holmes aWrJanetmm P SAME IS SHOWN AND GIVEN that the purchaser at (LCMCa. 1997, ti Amen- Master in this ,natter with pmpert}•, if any. environ- Las Cmus. NM 88(kY7 the date of the first pnblin- DESIGNATED ON PLAT such sale shall take title m the power to sell, has mental contamination on the 303-895-9691 tion of this Notice w the IV Joseph M. Holmes NO. 1153, THEREOF the abti r described mat tkd- Chaser 2, III m ordeal rem; to sell the real Property' if any, and >aAing claims will be forever bur. Joseph M. Hoinses FILED FOR RECORD IN property subject m a tine (1) . A.c Add Division 6. Actywnta- Property (the "Property") violations caaer,mg the Dams: IIA.O, 12107, 2UIR mi. Claims must be I�%ea- Attorney for the Eule Y THE OFFICE OF THE m[mdt tight of redemption. tY i bili n G"cmmcnL situated in Dana Aim Coun- property, if any. uxl either w the undeni bed 8' COUNTY CLERK OF Cd es Are Available for OP' ty, New Mexiw, corhunOnly NOTICE IS FURTHER STATE, OF NEW MEXICO counsel her Personal Re Dates: II/30, 12h07, 12/I4, SAID COUNTY ON OC• TOBER 3, 1983. AND PROSPECTIVE PUR- [at During Working known As 5125 Apache NM purchaser at GIVClerk of or filed with the Clerk clo the Third Judicial 2018 RECORDED IN BOOK 13, CHASERS AT SALE ARE HoursInspe Hours the Offtde of the Trail. Las Cruces. A8012. and nwrc 5.1, .1tjmllhat such sale shall take title to DORA ANA DORA ANA Uix[ritt Coup, 201 W, STATE OF PAGES PAGES 2117.208, PLAT RE- ADVISED TO MAKE THEIR OWN EXAMWA- l Cit Clerk. WIUICYR M Y Y panicuhuly described su PoRows: the above described real THIRD JUDICIAL Picecho. Lys C}aces, Ncw NEWMF.XICO CORDS. TOGETHER T1ON OF 7FiE TITLE AND Hand ands the City of propertyri subject de LL (I) DISTRICT COURT Mexico 881105. COUNTY OF WITH AN UNDIVIDED THE CONDITION OF THE o this Ls Groove on this the I(hh LOTS SF, SG AND SH, month right of redemption. do UURA ANA INTEREST W AND TO PROPERTY AND TO day of November 2018. BLOCK 12 ELEPHANT NO. C V-„ ^018-2.." MELISSA J. REEVES, P.C. THIRD JUDIGTAL THE COMMON AREAS CONSULT THEIR OWN BUTTE LAND AND PROSPECTIVE PUR- Mami EB r !s/M. J. Reeves -Evans DISTRICT AS SET OUT IN THE ATTORNEY BEFORE Linda l<wis,CMC TRUST COMPANY CHASERS AT SALE ARE Melissa)Rusca-Evans DECLARATION OF COV- BIDDING. Cily Clerk AMENDMENT NO. 2 OF ADVISED TO MAKE IN THE MATTER OF THE NM Sue Bar No. 7629 Case No.: ENANTS, CONDITIONS SU BD IV IS IOK "C". THEIR OWN FXAMINA- PETITION OF307-C.V-201"1067 24(1 W.I,as Cr.—CArc..Ste AND RESTRICTIONS Date: I1(.R), 2UIR BLOCKS NIZ 13.14 AND TON OF THE TITLE AND GAIETY SILVA A AND THE AMENDED rA. ote.Doyle co: Legal Process Network NOTICE OF INTENT TO 15 AS CORRECTED, IN THE CONDITION OF THE FOR CHANGII OF NAME I.ax Croce. NM SRIXIS 4 WELLS FARC.O USA DECLARATION OF SAID P.U. Box 51526 P.O. Bret ADOPT DONA ANA COUNTY, PROPERTY AND TO CONSULT THEIR OWN N(YICfi OF PETITION TO $75-522-50119 322-5031 FAX HOLDINGS, INC. AS SUCCESSOR IN INTER- SUBDJVISON. Albuquerque, NM 97I9I The City Council of The NEW MEXICO. AS SHOWN AND DFSICNA- ATTORNEY BEFORE CHANGE NAME Attorney fw Personal Re Y Pe- Lill' FOR WELLS FAR, isawn0id between '&' 2NM-1(i710840-JUD IUSPab N0145832 City of Lys Cnuxs. New TIED ON THE FIAT BIDDING. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIV- senuitiw C(1 FINANCIAL. NEW MEXICO, INC., PWntfr, the legal the leg and the I—t address, the legal III9201811/I6f20i8 Mexico, Hereby Gives No- THEREOF, FILED IN THE By: Robert Doyle TIN that Curet' Silva, a Does: 11/16„ 1123. IU30, description shall swmml. o' iI/I3RUpg 1113am 18 ,ice of Its Intent to Adopt the Following 0PC'E OF THE COUNTY CLERK OF SAID COUN- do Legal Praees Network resident of tie City of Las 2018 vs. The sale u to begin tit STATE OF Ordinunce!sh at a Regular City Council Meet. TY ON JULY 17. 1967. IN P.O. Box 51526 Albayuenire NM 87161 Cruces. County of "a Ana, Shute of New Mexko. STATE OF OLLIE G. L1INE5; A.M. on January 3, 2019. Third judicial District NEW MEXICO COUNTY OF ing to he Held on December BOOK 10 PAGES ILI.12 OF 2 NM-17-781157-JUD and over the age of fourteen NEW MRXICO UKNOWN SPOUSE OF Courthouse, City of Lys DORA ANA 17, 2018: PLATRF.CORDS. fDSJsub 00146982 yeara, has filed a Pnifion to COUNTY OF OLLIE G. HINES; BEN& Cmees. County of Doi. THIRD JUDICIAL. (1) Council Bill No. 19-01.1; If there is a conflict lexween I I/9f201811/I6(2018 Change N.A. in the Third DORA ANA FICIAL. FINANCIAL. 1, Ana. Suite of New Mexico. DISTRICT Ordinance No. 2982: An the legal descrigian and the 11232018 11/3(1/2018 Judicial District Court, Della THIRD JUDICIAL INC. F/K/A BENEFICIAL ac which time I will sell to Ordinance Repealing and sheet address, the legal STATE OF Ana County. New Mexico, DISTRICT COURT NEW MF.LYICO, INC.; the highest and best bidder Case No.: Replacing Section 38-58 F dearipton shall eunuol. NEW MEXICO wherein he seeks ho change his name fawn Caney Siha No. D-307-PS-2018.00117 BLANCA FL17ABWM HERNANDEZ; UN- for cash, in lawful currency ill the United Suites of D-307-CV-2019-003" 3, Minimum Number of Accessible Parking Stalls, of The sale is to begin at 10:45 um nu on January 3, 2019. COUNTY OF DORA ANA 10 Phillip Cary Silva, 'Ad Judge J.— T. Martin KNOWN SPOUSE OF America the Property inpity NATIONSTAR MORT- the I- CrucesMunicipal Third Judicial District THIRD JUDICIAL that this Petition will be beard before the Honorable IN THE MATTER OF BLANCA ELIZABETH HERNANDEZ; WORLD- expenses of solo. sad to satisfy the fomelosum Judg- GAGE LLC D/R/A CHAMPION MORT- Cdde to Recoaciie ]rrcoasis- Courthouse. City of Las Croces, County of Dona DfSTNL'T COURT Marci E Bcyer. District THE ESTATE OF WIDE ASSET PURCHAS- man granted tin October 11, GAGE COMPANY, Plaln- tancies Between the Adop- Ann. State Judge on the 31d day of STEVEN E. DOWNHAM, ING AKA WORLDWIDE 2018 in the total anwunt of tiff, tad Znrring and Building of New Mexico, NO. CV-2018-1992 January, 2019, at the hour of Deee"ed, ASSET PRUCHASING If. $56,063.51 with interest at Cocks. Submitted by the a1 which time I will sell to MANUEL I. ARRIETA 2:00 Pat a the Third LLC; STATE OF NEW the rate of 1051% Per - City of Las Cruces the highest and best bidder ]udioi.l Diamet Courthouse. NOTICE, TO CRED. MEXICO TAXATION annum fmnn May 24, 2018 (ZCA-18-01). for cath, in lawful currency of the United Starts of IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF 201 W. Pier ho, Lys Cruces. ITORS AND REVENUE DE- thmugh the data of the sale. EDAH FAYE BENGE; Copies Are Available for America, the Fmperty to pay ANTONIO CARLOS LO- NM. NOTICE IS HEREBY PARTMENT; OCCU- PANTS OF THE PROP- The sale is subject to the entry of an Older by this UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY Inspection During Working expenses of sale, and to PEZ BACA Respectfully submitted, GIVEN that the undersigned ERTY, Ddeadana. Court approving the side. AND THROUGH THE SECRE- He.. at the Office of the satisfy the fi rcclosure Judg- FOR CHANGE. OF Al Phillip C. Silva has been appointed the TARY OF HOUSING City Clerk. Witness My Hand J Seal 'noel granted ere October 19. 2018 to the total NAME Phillip C. Silva Personal Represemmise of NOTICE, OF FORECLO- NOTICE 1S FURTHER AND URBAN DEVELOP. a of the City of Las Crum on this to 26h amount of $217.616.95 with interest At AMENDED NOTICE OF 2910 C-undno Castillo this estate. All persons SURE SALE GIVEN that the real proper- MENT; UNKNOWN day of November. 201 A. the rwe of 4.500% Per PETITION TO CHANGE lys Cruces, NM gg005 having claims against this ty and pmprovernets con- HEIRS, DEVISEES AND annum from October 1. 201A NAME 575-571-089U estate arc required to present AMENDED PLEASE 'FAKE timed with herein will be LEGATEES OF WILBUR Linda Lcwis, CMC through the date of in sale. their claims within hour NOTICE that the sold subject to any and all B. BENM DECEASED; City Clerk , The sale is subject to the NOTICE, IS HEREBY Dau:s: 1113U 12107 2018 months after the dale if the first [his ahovelmillod Court, having dexig- poem reservations, ease- CAPITAL ONE BANK entry of ac Order by this GIVEN that Antonin Carlos STATE OF publication of Notice or the claims will be appointed me or my era as Special Master in Ibis menu, and all taxes and utility liens, (USA) NA, Defendants. STATE OF Coun appmving the sale. Lopez Baca, a resident of The NEW MEXICO forever Iuned. Claims most mane with the power to special aasess- meats and aces that may be NOTICE OF FOAF.CLO- NEW MEXICO NOTICE IS FURTHER City of Lys Cnx:u, County of Iona Ana. Sure of New COUNTY OF DORA ANA be presented either to the .11, has entered pro to sell "Prop- due. Wells Fargo USA SURF, SALE COUNTY OF GIVEN that the real proper- Mexico, and over the age of THIRD JUDICIAL undersigned Personal Reprc- in the real property (the Holdings, )tin, As Shreeeswr DONA ANA ty and improvements con- fourteen has filed a DISTRICT COURT sent tiva cam of Joseph M. Holmes, P.A., PO Box eny") siumed in Dun. Ana Mexico, In Imeresl For Wells Fargo PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THIRD JUDICIAL cetned with herein will be ,years, Iklitim to Change Name in 366. 4 Cnees, New County, New com- known as 2(X)7 Financial New Mexico, Ire., its that the above-enttted DISTRICT sold subject to any and all the Third Judicial District No. D-307-PB-21)I8-118 Mexico 88004-0366, or filed monly Stanford Sr. Las C—es, NTH attorneys, and the under- signed Special Master, dis- Court, having appointed me Case No.: patent rCsenalinns, ease- Court. Dona Ana County, Judge: Martin with the Third Judicial 88U01, and more particularly claim all responsibility, fw. or my designee as Special Master in this miner with moms, and .11 macs and utility iienx, special asses- New Mexico, wherein he -its soaks to change his nano• W THE MATTER OF Distrrctt Cnwt, 2U1 W. described follerwx: and flu pwrclutser m the sack die Power to left, I- meats and taxes that may be fmnt Antonio Qukis L-1— TIIE ESTATE. Pieacho. Los cruces, New Mexico 88W5. LOT 7E. BLOCK t, RE- takes the I perry -As it" in its ord tie to : ll the rut "Property") NATIONSTAR MORT- due. NnSonstar, Mortgage B— to .Anthony Chudes OF PLAT NO. 1 OF REPLAT Inewal audition, subject property (the GAGE LLC D/B/A MR. COOPER, PlalntlR, LLC DRi/A Mr. Cooper, its uttmmeys, Baca and that this Petition W A YN E E D W A R D Dated: November 6, 2018 OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1 AND to the valuation of the property by the County sit led to D.A. Ana Can - ty, New Mexico, eummonly and to u,Wer- signed Special Master, dis- will be heard before [he Honorable Manuel Artiew. MILLER, Deceased. LOTS I, 2 3, 4. & 5, Assessor as real or personal known as 1960 Chilton vs. claim All mspunsittifiry for• District Judge on the 24th NOTICE TO CRED- Al Anty L McNulty Amy 1... McNulty, Personal BLOCK 2 COLLEGE MANOR SUBDIVISION, Property, affiixturc of any mobile Drive, Las Cruces, NM DENNIS EWING, .ad the purchaser A, the stidC day of January. 2019. at the ITOES Representative of de AND LOTS I THRU 4 & 6 or nunufaeturcd home to to hod, du iva. lil I. and owe particularly WEN- DY EWING; Wend rakes the pmper[y ,,. is," in ill hour of 9:15 _A. at the Estate of Steven E. Down- THRU 10 BLOCK L LOTS (ion of title fo it mobile or describod as follows: ants. Pre— condition, subjec, to the valuation of the Third Judicial District C..nhoose, 201 W. Pia- NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN font Decensel 6 THRU 12 AND 15 THRU nanufacmred home on the LOT NUMBERED 15 IN NOTICE OF FORECLO- property by the County cho, Lsu Crum, NM. that DEBRA SANDS -MILLER has been PREPARED 17 BLOCK 2 AND LOTS 1, ^_, 3. COL property if any, e-imn- BLOCK NUMBERED N & SUBMIT. & 3 BLOCK mental contamination oA the OF COLLEGE HEIGHTS, LAS CRUC'E SUN -NEWS AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT Ad No. The. City Council of The 0001269818 City of Las Cruces, New Mexico,, .Hereby GivesNo- tice of'lts; Intent to,.Adopt the Following Ordinances) at a Regular Esther City Council Meeting. to be Held on December 17; CITY OF LAS CRUCES 2018" PO BOX 20000 (1)Co.unci[ Bill No: 19-017; PURCHASING Ordinance No. 2882: An LAS CRUCES NM 88004 Ordinance. Repealing and Replacing Section 38-58:F 3,, Minimum Number. of accessible Parking Stalls, of the: Las ;Cruces IUlunici- I, a legal clerk of the Las Cruces_ Sun -News, a pal Code to _Reconcile In= �- news a er ublishe'd daily afthe count of Dona p p p Y Y consistencies Between the Adopted;. Zoning and Ana, state of New Mexico and of general paid Building Codes .Submit- circulation in said county; that the same is a duly ted by°the City of.t_as Cru- ces (2CA 18-01). qualified newspaper under the laws of the State Copies:;,Are "Availabl& for wherein legal notices and advertisements may Inspection During 'Work - be published; that the printed notice attached 1ng Hours at the Offic%e, of the City ,Clerk With hereto was published in the regular and entire My. Hand and seal of the edition of said newspaper and not in supplement Crty of Las Cruces on this thereof on the date as follows, to wit: the 26h day of November, 2019.." Li.nda;,Lewis, CIVIC` 12/02/18 City Clerk, Ad No; 1269818 Despondent further states this newspaper is duly qualified to publish legal notice or advertisements within the meaning of Sec. Chapter 167, Laws of 1937. N4 Legal C STATE OF WI'SCONSIN County of Brown SS. Subscribed and sworn before me this 18th of December 2018. (4A �' NOTA PUBLI in and for Brown ounty, Wisconsin NOTARY _ My Commission Expires F' ••......•• Ad#:0001269818 /i OF W I SC P O : Notice of Intent to Adopt Ord. No. 2878-81 '����iiiiiii�������� # of Affidavits :0.00 LkS CRUCES:- SUNI AEWtS AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION ,NOTICE:OF ADOPTION The .City. Council of the Ad No. City of :Las_ Cruces, New 0001271926 Mexico;'He.eeby Gives ..No- tice of Its Adoption of the: Followirtj:Ordinance(s) at the Regular.. 'City Council Meeting_ ;Held on Decem- ber 17, 201.8:, Esther ICouncil .Bill No. 19-017; CITY OF LAS CRUCES PO BOX 20000 .rdinancP,lo2f3E32:.;:."ri 'and Ordiriar"ice. p.ea,ing PURCHASING Replacing, Section 38'-58 F LAS CRUCES NM 88004 3, Mnirnam. Number .of A.ccessible,.Pa'rking Stalls; of the Las cruces Munict, pal .Co,d'e to, Reconcile In- consistencies Between I, a legal clerk of the Las Cruces Sun -News, a the AiiBuilding CopCd Zoning and Codes. Submit - newspaper published daily at the county of Dona ted by the City of Las Cru- Ana, state of New Mexico and of general paid ces (ZCA-18-01). circulation in said county; that the same is a duly y y Copies Are Available for Inspection During Work - qualified newspaper under the laws of the State ing Hours at the Office of wherein legal notices and advertisements may the City Clerk. Witness be published; that the printed notice attached p p My Hand and seal of the City of Las Cruces on this hereto was published in the regular and entire the 18th day of December edition of said newspaper and not in supplement 2018. thereof on the date as follows, to wit: Linda Lewis, CIVIC City Clerk. Ad No.: 1271926 12123l18 Run: Dec. 23, 2018 Despondent further states this newspaper is duly qualified to publish legal notice or advertisements within the meaning of Sec. Chapter 167, Laws of 1937. e al: lerk 0) STATE . SCONSIN SS. County of Brown Subscribed and sworn before me this 8th of January 2019. NOT PUB LI a or Brown County, Wisconsin My C mm sion Expires = sob.. _ !�' pUBLIG r= Ad#:0001271926 F••.....•• 'fit P 0 : Notice of Intent to Adopt Ord: No. 2878-81 VVI SC�\\\��� # of Affidavits :0.00