Loading...
07/27/2004_+ ~. _ r 1 REGULAR MEETING 2 OF THE 3 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 4 FOR THE 5 CITY OF LAS CRUCES g City Council Chambers 7 July 27, 2004 g 6:00 pm 9 10 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: 11 Bruce Buchman, Chair 12 Nancy Binneweg, Vice-Chair 13 Elizabeth Camur~ez, Secretary 14 Harry Sanchez 15 STAFF PRESENT: 1 B Lani Ruth McCarson, Planner 17 Kirk Clifton, Planner 1$ Brian Harper, Assistant Planner 19 Vince Banegas, Planning and MPO Administrator 20 Dan Soriano, Traffic Engineering 21 Carmen Alicia Lucero, Recording Secretary 2z 23 BRUCE BUCHMAN: It's six o'clock, I'd like to call to order the July 27t" Planning and Zoning 24 Commission. I want to thank everybody for coming; it's nice to see all these faces in here. We'll give you 25 a chance to say your thing. We'll explain how it's being run, so bear with us, there's a couple of things we have to do first. -1- t • 1 On the agenda tonight we have 13 items. There are three zone conversions, six zone changes, 2 two preliminary plat approvals, one special use permit, and one master plan approval. 3 The first thing that we have to do is the minutes from the June 22"d meeting. Everybody got a 4 copy of the minutes. Do I have any additions or corrections to those minutes? OK, I'll accept a motion to 5 approve the minutes. 6 NANCY BINNEWEG: So moved. 7 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And a second? 8 HARRY SANCHEZ: I want to second that. 9 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, I'll call the roll. 10 Commissioner Sanchez? 11 SANCHEZ: Here, Aye. 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Binneweg? 13 BINNEWEG: Aye. 14 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camunez? 15 ELIZABETH CAMUNEZ: Aye. 16 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And the Chair votes Aye. So, the minutes will stand approved as presented. 17 We have on the agenda one listed postponement and one other postponement. So, the first thing 18 to let you know, if you came here to hear Case PUD-04-03, which is an amendment to the North 19 Business, or Northrise Business Park, it's approximately 29 acres of land known as Las Haciendas de 20 Las Cruces. If you came to hear that, we will not be discussing it; it's been postponed until August 24th 21 which is our next meeting. 22 If you came to hear Case 22561, that's listed as number one under New Business, that's a 23 request for a zone change at 329 La Colonic; that has also been postponed until the August 24th meeting. 24 So, if anybody came for those twa, they will not be heard this evening. 25 -2~ . • • 1 To explain a little bit to you about the next part, which is the Consent Agenda; now on the board 2 here we have the seven items that are listed on the Consent Agenda. This agenda allows us to pass 3 items without any discussion, because these items have been reviewed by the staff and we have no 4 unfavorable comments on them, but the Consent Agenda cases can be taken off consent and they can 5 be heard, if anybody in the public wants to discuss it further. So as we go through these Consent Agenda 6 cases, you want it off consent, you want us to discuss it, you have some input, all you have to do is raise 7 your hand, state your name, we'll take it off consent. OK? 8 All right. The first item on the Consent Agenda is Case 22546. And, that is a multiple zoning 9 conversion for property located along South Triviz just north of Wisconsin Avenue. Is there anybody in 10 the audience that wishes this case to be taken off the Consent Agenda? All right. 11 Commissioners, I ask you the same question. Do you wish this case to be taken off the Consent 12 Agenda? All right. So, Case 22546 will stay on the Consent Agenda. 13 Next we have Case 22558. Again, this is a request for multiple zoning conversions. It's on the 14 property located along Roundtree Plaza, West Amador Avenue, and South Valley. Is there anybody that 15 wishes this case to come off the Consent Agenda, anybody in the public? OK, commissioners? Yes? 1F BINNEWEG: No, that was Roundtree Place, not Plaza. 17 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, thank you. Then Case 22558 will also stay on the Consent Agenda. 18 The next case on the Consent Agenda is 22565; it's a request for a zone change for 3.2 acres located on 19 the southeast corner of Cochoa... 20 SANCHE2: Cholla. 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Cholla...? Road and Las Alturas Drive. Is there anybody that wishes this...? Sir, 22 would you please state your name? 23 JIM ANDRES: Jim Andres. 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Jim Andres? OK. Case number 22565 will now become New Business case 25 number six. (22565) OK. -3- . ~ • 1 Now in case number four. This is also a request for a zone change; the property located at 4030 2 Tellbrook Road. Is there anybody that wishes this to come off the Consent Agenda? Commissioners. 3 SANCHEZ: By the way, Commissioner, the only thing I want to add to this is, just far retard. Noticing the 4 person that submitted this is a Mr. Dan Liley. Dan Liley has done work forme in the past and I'm able to 5 make a fair and impartial judgment on this. 6 CHAIR BUCHMAN: So you wish to be excused from this case? 7 SANCHEZ: No, I can hear it. $ CHAIR 6UCHMAN: You can hear it. OK, (understand. 9 SANCHEZ: Fair and impartial. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. 11 SANCHEZ: I just wanted you to know that we had a working relationship. 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, very good, thank you. But you're not asking it to be removed. 13 SANCHEZ: No. 14 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. So, Case 22565 will also remain on the Consent Agenda. 15 BINNEWEG: No, 2567. 16 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, thank you. 2567 stays on there. 17 All right, Case number five is Case 22572; this is also a zoning conversion for the property at the 18 intersection of Jarnada Road and Bataan Memorial West. Is there anybody in the audience that wishes 19 this to be removed? All right. Commissioners? All right. Case 22572 will stay on the Consent Agenda. 20 Case 5-04-028, to request for a Master Plan approval of Memorial Medical Subdivision. It's the 21 property along East University Avenue. It's bounded on one side by South Telshor, the other side by the 22 west of Interstate 25; it's bounded on the west by Interstate 25. Is there anybody in the audience that 23 wishes this come off the Consent Agenda? Can you turn that back on again for us, please? 24 OK, Commissioners. This stays on the Consent Agenda S-04-028 also. 25 And the last item on the Consent Agenda is S-Q4-074. It is a Preliminary Plat approval on Mission Nueo, Nueo... apartments... -4- ~. r M1 _ ~ '~ 1 CAMUNEZ: Nuevo... 2 BINNEWEG: Nuevo... 3 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Say that again. 4 SANCHEZ: Nuevo. 5 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Isn't that what I said? Nue... OK. And it is along Roadrunner Parkway at the 6 extension of Sonoma Springs Avenue. Anybody in the audience wishes this come off the Consent 7 Agenda? Commissioners? All right, so Case S-04»074 stays on the Consent Agenda. 8 Before we vote on the agenda, I'd like to make one notation. Old Business; we have a Case 9 SUP-04-01, and the technicality of this, Commissioners; I don't think it was Old Business because we 10 never discussed it. It was postponed like everything else. So, what I'm recommending is we make Case 11 SUP-04-D1, New Business number one. And the Case one, we make two, two we make three, three four, 12 four five, five six, and then the one that came off the Consent Agenda would be number seven. Is that 13 satisfactory with you? 14 BINNEWEG: Mh hm. 15 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. So, Case number two has been postponed on New Business. We have 16 number seven is off the Consent. Is there any other corrections to the Agenda? I need a motion to 17 approve the agenda as changed. 18 CAMUNEZ: I make a motion to approve the agenda as changed. 19 BINNEWEG: Second. 20 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. I will call the roll. Commissioner Sanchez? 21 SANCHEZ: Aye. 22 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Binneweg? 23 BINNEWEG: Aye. 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camuriez? 25 CAMUNEZ: Aye. -5- • • 1 quality child care in centers in Las Cruces and family day care homes as well as group homes. We're 2 going to be working with Mayra whether she is approved for the 12, you know, for the group home or not 3 because right now she is licensed for six. But, we are working with her to provide her education, 4 technical assistance, and making sure that the children that she is providing care far have quality care 5 and are in a safe and healthy learning environment. And, we just thank you for giving us the opportunity 6 for being here and we just hope everything works out for us. Thank you. 7 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. 8 GUERRERO: Thank you. 9 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And if we have any questions, we'll get back to you later on. 10 NAVARRO: OK. 11 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And before we go any further, I want to apologize for butchering a few names. I'll 12 try my best but I won't butcher them too bad; the rest of the Commissioners will take care of me. 13 Staff, go ahead and present your case please. 14 BRIAN HARPER: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, thank you; for the record, Brian Harper, Community 15 Development. This is case SUP-04-01, a Special Use Permit request to allow for the operation of a 16 Group Child Care Home. On the vicinity map above, this is the property in questions zoned R-1a. I 17 apologize, your packet maps do not have the street names on them, and I apologize in advance for that. 18 But, here's McCoy Drive here, where the house is located. This is Lavender Road, Elks Drive is off the 19 map a little bit to the east, and that's the turn off is a little south over here onto Lavender. 20 Case specifics: This is single family home with an accessary building. It is currently operating a 21 family child care home for up to six children. Family child care homes are allowed by right in R-1a zoning 22 districts. 23 The applicant is looking to increase the amount of children cared for in the home to anywhere 24 between seven and twelve, which is classified as a group child care home under the zoning regulations 25 requiring an SIJp. -7- • • 1 quality child care in centers in Las Cruces and family day care homes as well as group homes. We're 2 going to be working with Mayra whether she is approved for the 12, you know, for the group home or not 3 because right now she is licensed for six. But, we are working with her to provide her education, 4 technical assistance, and making sure that the children that she is providing care for have quality care 5 and are in a safe and healthy learning environment. And, we just thank you for giving us the opportunity 6 for being here and we just hope everything works out for us. Thank you. 7 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. $ GUERRERO: Thank you. 9 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And if we have any questions, we'll get back to you later on. 10 NAVARRO: OK. 11 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And before we go any further, I want to apologize for butchering a few names. I'll 12 try my best but I won't butcher them too bad; the rest of the Commissioners will take care of me. 13 Staff, go ahead and present your case please. 14 BRIAN HARPER: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, thank you; for the record, Brian Harper, Community 15 Development. This is case SUP-d4-t)1, a Special Use Permit request to allow for the operation of a 16 Graup Child Care Wome. On the vicinity map above, this is the property in questions zoned R-1a. I 17 apologize, your packet maps do not have the street names on them, and I apologize in advance for that. 1$ But, here's McCoy Drive here, where the house is located. This is Lavender Road, Elks Drive is off the 19 map a little bit to the east, and that's the turn off is a little south over here onto Lavender. 20 Case specifics: This is single family home with an accessory building. It is currently operating a 21 family child care home for up to six children. Family child care homes are allowed by right in R-1a zoning 22 districts. 23 The applicant is looking to increase the amount of children cared for in the home to anywhere 24 between seven and twelve, which is classified as a group child care home under the zoning regulations 25 requiring an SUP. -7- • ~ 1 This is a site photo of the praperky. You can see here on the left, this is the accessory building. It 2 is roughly 630 square feet. This structure does contain a separate kitchen from the main house and that 3 does serve the day care exclusively. 4 This is another photo showing the accessary structure used far day care. You can see the 5 separation here between the main building. 6 The site photo above shows the day care here, the property is 2.16 acres in size, it's fairly large. 7 There's a play area behind the home here for the children, and I believe a covered area here as well. 8 Through support of the Comprehensive Plan, staff is recommending approval of this Special Use 9 Permit with the following condition: If the accessory structure is no longer used as a day care facility or 10 the SUP expires, the kitchen in the day care must be removed. The kitchen is specifically for the day 11 care, but as such time as that day care is no longer in business, the zoning code would not allow for a 12 kitchen in that accessory structure. That is why we're attaching that condition to the Special Use Permit. 13 That concludes my presentation, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. 14 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Mr. Harper. 15 Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to comment one way or another on this particular case? 16 OK, nobody in the audience has any comments or questions. I'll turn to the Commissioners. 17 Commissioners, any questions, comments? Commissioner Sanchez, no? 1$ All right. In that case seeing there's no questions I will accept a motion to hear the case...to vote on the 19 case. 20 SANCHEZ: I want to make that motion to vote on this case. 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And read the recommendation on page through the bottom bullet to include... 22 BINNEWEG: Condition... 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: The condition... 24 SANCHEZ: The condition... 25 BINNEWEG: Are you moving to approve the case? CHAIR BUCHMAN: Yes. -8- ~ • 1 2 BINNEWEG: Yeah. 3 SANCHEZ: I want to go ahead and approve the case based on... 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Oh, that's right, we...OK. 5 BINNEWEG: Moved (inaudible). 6 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I think we have to add that recommendation at this time, don't we? 7 BINNEWEG: ...with the recommendation. 8 CAMUNEZ: With the recommendation. 9 BINNEWEG: It's the one that had a flash up here that if the.... 10 SANCHEZ: Yeah. 11 CHAIR BUCHMAN: The Special Use. 12 SANCHEZ: Special Use. 13 BINNEWEG: ...day care no longer uses the second kitchen, they have to remove it. That's condition. 14 SANCHEZ: Yes, I move to approve with the condition set forth by staff's recommendation and removing 15 the kitchen after the day care becomes non existent. 16 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. Is there a second? 17 CAMUNEZ; I second. 18 CHAIR BUCHMAN: All right, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Sanchez? 19 SANCHEZ: Aye. 20 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Based on... 21 SANCHEZ: Based on findings and site visit. 22 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Commissioner Binneweg? 23 BINNEWEG: Aye, based on findings, site visit, and discussion. 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camunez? 25 CAMUNEZ: Aye, based on findings, and discussion. -9- • ~ 1 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And the Chairman votes Aye, based on findings, discussion, and site visits. So 2 Case SUP-p4-01 is approved 4-0. 3 OK, now we're on Case 225 (Case 22561) that has been postponed. So the next hearing is 4 going to be PUD-04-04. Is the applicant ready, please? This is submitted by John Carmody, for Sonoma 5 Ranch Subdivision, LTD, Company. Mr. Gunaji, are you the representative? 6 NAREN GUNAJI: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman; I'm Naren Gunaji, Gunaji, Klemen, and Associates, Consulting 7 Engineers for Sonoma Ranch Development. We are here for conceptual approval of the newest 8 subdivision at the Sonoma Ranch Development, Del Prado Subdivision. 9 This particular development is little different than what we have been doing. We are bringing to 10 Las Cruces newer ideas and newer concepts. The partners at Sonoma Ranch present their newest multi- 11 use community. The comprehensive plan deals with haw our city should be built based upon amulti-use 12 community. This particular subdivision set in the heart of Sonoma Ranch East, and we have a new 13 standards for centralized neighborhood living. We offer a variety of dwelling choices surrounded by a 14 lavish activity center, which can be used by the residents of that particular development. 15 The location of this particular development in the map of Sonoma Ranch is right here. Right 16 here. This is the South Sonoma Ranch, this is the East Sonoma Ranch, and this portion is where we are 17 looking for the present development. 18 This is to inform you that occasionally we get commendations from other activities about...other 19 agencies that... how a Master Plan Community stacks with other communities in the country, and we 20 have received several awards for various efforts that we have been put forward in the Sonoma Ranch for 21 the last several years. This is just to show that our efforts are well recognized internationally and nation- 22 wide. The present community that we are recommending is in two phases; Del Prado Phase I, which is 23 this particular portion, and Del Prado II is this particular portion. 24 Del Prado Phase I consists of basically what we call townhouses and we are calling a new 25 terminology, rear loaded lots. It's basically a concept that the garages would be in the back of the lot -10- • ~ 1 instead of the in the front. And, on Phase II, we are presenting acondominium-type combination of this 2 particular development. 3 4 In planning this particular development we met with the staff and looked at various variations that 5 we may have to undergo and we dealt with some and come up with this particular approved set backs 6 that the staff has recommended. Side street is 12 feet; garage is 20 feet and the Phase 11, the side 7 street's 12 feet. 8 Basically, this does not change any particular densities, we are going to get the same number of 9 lots that were originally planned. 10 We have requested 16$ lot preplanning to put and right now in these two combinations we have 11 about 167 and 168 lots, 101 in the townhouses and about 67 in the other Phase II development. 12 This is what we are proposing in this area - 317 dwelling units and what our targeted density 13 before was 324, but what we are proposing to use 317, so it's just seven lots off. The seven lots are 14 made up in open space that we are providing in the development. 15 This particular development has several benefits. There are public benefits; the homes have 16 private rear loaded access as opposed to traditional front loaded lots, where the garages are in the front. 17 The garages will be located in the back of the house in this community, and, a large area of open space 18 totaling about 3.6 acres in Phase I. 19 Public benefits that we envision in this particular development are: The building roadways, 20 planned parking, and landscaped open areas have been arranged to provide the maximum land use 21 benefit to a condominium style. 22 The City of Las Cruces will avoid a parking lot comprising acres of black top surrounding tall 23 unappealing apartment buildings, beautifully comfortable homes are adjacent to other subdivisions in a 24 horizontal rather than a vertical area that minimizes the impact on view. The height of the building in 25 Phase II is limited to 35 feet, regulation allows for 100 feet buildings but we are not even reaching -11- 1 minimum there. This decrease in height will protect the views for home around the Phase II and large 2 areas of open space totaling about 4.8 acres. 3 Common benefits that we envision in the City are: Landscape open areas totaling about 8.4 4 acres. The overall planning and development of Del Prado Subdivision will be provided optimal benefits 5 to the public by offering continuous flow of traffic throughout the community by providing several 6 entrances eliminating high volume concentrated traffic, optimizing parking areas thus providing an 7 increased area open and landscape and decreased area for maintenance, and providing community 8 residence the benefit of a comfortable setting in a scenic view from the surrounding development and 9 natural landscaping. 10 The multi-use path with a landscaped parkway connecting other multi-use paths in Sedona Hills 11 Parkway and Quatro Jitas will be provided. 12 Common pathways will connect units within Del Prado Subdivision to a Community Recreation 13 Center, The residents of Del Prado Subdivision will share the park-like areas, not to mention the 14 spacious recreation areas which include a swimming pool, this helps reduce the load on an already 15 overloaded and under funded swimming pools system. 16 An additional 10 feet of landscaping tract adjacent to Sedona Hills Parkway will be provided and 17 maintained by the owners association. 18 This is the site that is for the club house, or the Central Activities Center, and its architectural 19 rendering will look like something in the north part entrance to this community. 20 This concludes my presentation, and 1'll be delighted to answer any questions you have. Thank 21 you Mr. Chair. 22 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Dr. Gunaji. Staff? 23 BRIAN HARPER: Mr. Chairman, thank you. I'll try and be brief, Dr. Gunaji did cover quite a few aspects 24 of this development. This is Case PUD-04-04, Del Prado Subdivision zone change request from R-1 a 25 and R-4 to PUD. -12- • • 1 The vicinity map here shows the... R-4 is basically Phase II of the proposed development, the R- 2 1 a is Phase I. 3 This aerial photo shows you what you actually saw on Dr. Gunaji's overhead as well as Sedona 4 Hills Parkway here, Quatro Jitas Avenue above, Sonoma Ranch Boulevard to the west accessing the 5 property here. 6 This is Sedona Hills Phases 1 and II, and Sonoma Ranch Fstates Phases I and II right here to 7 the south. This is Sam Graff Park right here. 8 A couple of corrections, proposed deviations outlined here. For Phase I the requirements for 9 secondary front setbacks is 15 feet in R-1 a, they're asking fora 12 foot setback. The garage setback in 10 R-1a would be 25, they're asking fora 20 foot. 11 In Phase II, the front setback in an R-4 would be 20, this proposal is asking for 12 feet. The 12 secondary front setback would be 15 and, they're again asking for 12 feet. And, as part of the design 13 standard deviation, 50 foot right-of-way for interior roads in Phase I I, they're asking fora 37 foot right-of- 14 way, back of curb to back of curb. 15 You should have a road cross-section in your packet as part of their submittal. It shows that 16 minor local road, 37 feet of right-of-way, and it is to be constructed asphalt back of curb to back of curb 17 with no sidewalks. 18 Staff is recommending approval of this project based on elements of the comprehensive plan. If 19 you have any questions specifically for staff, I'd be happy to answer them. 20 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Mr. Harper. Now is there anybody in the audience that wishes to 21 address this case? OK. I'll close it to the audience participation. Commissioners, comments. 22 Ms. Binneweg? 23 BINNEWEG: Frankly, I'm looking forward to seeing a variation in setbacks and the offsetting 24 compensation is the fact that the garages will be around the back. I visited a project like this up in Santa 25 Fe and, of course the trees aren't...haven't grown yet. I have a question for the developer, when you have your lots with their rock walls, how tall are your rack walls around the back, in the back yards, -13- • • 1 because it made a difference in this development I was driving through because the rock walls were only 2 like four feet tall. 3 GUNAJI: Ms. Binneweg, Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Binneweg, the individual dwellings are not going 4 to have rock walls; this is going to be a community as a whole. Let me... 5 JOHN CARMODY: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, my name is John Carmody, I've been involved with 6 this from the get go, so let me help you along with your question with the rock wall. 7 The lots in the Del Prado Phase I will have smaller walls defining their patios, but our intention is 8 to keep it open. 9 BINNEWEG: Mh. 1p CARMODY: You won't see rock walls down the property lines at all. We want it to have a nice open feel 11 around it. 12 BINNEWEG: Even down the alley, huh? 13 CARMODY: No, ma'am, the alley is for access. 14 GUNAJI: These are the alleys. 15 BINNEWEG: Uh huh. 1 fi CARMODY: To the garages, it won't have rock walls there. 17 BINNEWEG: So, you won't have apull-in to the garage and then a wall defining, like a... 18 CARMODY: I said, the only rock walls that we have planned around the (unintelligible) will be around the 19 parches to give just a little privacy... 2Q BINNEWEG: Mh... 21 CARMODY: ...on these porches. We want it to feel open. 22 BINNt=WEG: So, you're not encouraging people to have dogs and everything else in their hack yard, 23 huh? 24 CARMODY: I wouldn't say that we weren't encouraging them to have dogs in their back yards, but they 25 would be limited to their porches, I mean, they can have a nice little...) don't know whether there would be a rock wall. I don't think we're that far, there's a couple of different materials; you can put up a little -14- • • 1 decorative fence of some sort around that patio where you can have an animal, but like I said before, it's 2 meant to be open. 3 BINNEWEG: Even on the alley? 4 CARMODY: Even on the alley, and.. 5 BINNEWEG: Wow. 6 7 CARMODY: ...and we prefer to call them more of a drive-way rather than an alley. 8 81NNEWEG: I love alleys. 9 GUNAJI: The pets are going to be lap dogs, small pets, rather than large pets. 10 BINNEWEG: It's just a different visual... 11 CAMUNEZ: Mh hm. 12 BINNEWEG: ...than I had from the development up in Santa Fe where you drove down...l'm going to 13 call it an alley because I'm partial to alleys. We drove down the alley and there was a four foot high rock 14 walls and dogs bouncing up an down barking at you, and...but I like the view on the street because you're 15 lacking just, you know, double matching SUVs in the parking stalls, and that's all you see up and down 1 Ej the whole street. It'll just be...your vision will be more of the open space, rather than just a big parking 17 lot. Thanks, that was just... 18 GUNAJI: (unintelligible) recreation center to develop open spaces down there. 19 CHAIR BUCHMAN: All right, thank you. Commissioner Camunez? 20 CAMUNEZ: Being that the garages are going to be in the back, does that mean that there will be no 21 drive-up parking like we have at homes now, that front driveway? 22 GUNAJI: The cars will be parked by the owners in the garages in the back, in their garages. 23 CAMUNEZ: I understand... 24 GUANAJI: There is a parking, a temporary parking on the street for visitors and all that, but I don't 25 envision that there will be parking on the streets. BINNEWEG: So, there'll be no parking paths in their parking... -15- • • 1 CAMUNEZ: They'll be no drive way pass. like there is on home now? 2 GUNAJI: You see, the front does not have a garage, it would not have adrive-way. 3 CARMODY: These are standard city streets and they have a parking lane of both sides of the street so 4 that guests could park in the street, yes. These...we're not asking for... in Del Prado I our main streets 5 are all 50 foot right-of-way, which is a full street section in any neighborhood in town. You can park on 6 both sides and then there's still two 12 foot lanes...? 7 GUNAJI: Mh. 8 CARMODY: ...for driving. 9 CAMUNEZ: OK, that brings up another question. Aright-of-way now is required is 50 feet, this new thing 10 you're trying to come up with calls for 37 feet. Now, you say, if the people, the owners have guests, let's 11 say there's an overflow of vehicles, you park them on both sides of the street, how much space is...being 12 that it's only 37 feet, and two...a vehicle on each side, how much is that going to leave for cars going 13 through there, and what if for some reason or other an emergency vehicle has to come through there, is 14 there going to be enough area far that emergency vehicle to come through? 15 CARMODY: Ina 50 foot right-of-way there is a four foot sidewalk on both sides, and there's a 2 '/~ foot 16 parkway on both sides. You have a 37 foot back of curb to back of curb template for your roadway, OK? 17 All we've done in Del Prado Phase II is, we've removed the parkway and the sidewalk and we've 18 relocated the sidewalks to go around the buildings. You still have exactly the same back of curb to back 19 of curb that you do in any City of Las Cruces street. That is not changed from where you park. Back of 20 curb will have room for two cars and two driving lanes on all of our streets. We're not asking for a 21 variance in the template from back of curb to back of curb. Does that answer your question? 22 BINNEWEG: Mh hm. 23 CAMUNEZ: Yeah. More or less. 24 BINNEWEG: Yes. 25 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Any other questions? -16- • • 1 SANCHEZ: One question. You've allotted parking garages for one car, two cars.... what is going to be 2 the standard design for the garages? 3 CARMODY: All of our buildings show two car garages. 4 BINNEWEG: OK. 5 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Any other questions? 6 ROBERT GONZALEZ: How long are your driveways going to be? 7 CARMODY: They all meet the City Fire Code. We did sit dawn with Adolph Zubia, the Fire Chief, and 8 Travis Brown. We sat a couple of times and we talked about all of the safety concerns as far as the Fire 9 Department goes. None of our lanes exceed...is it 150 feet? None of them exceed that, we measured 10 each one of them. But, we did spend an afternoon going aver this whole plan with the Fire Department. 11 GONZALEZ: Thank you. 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Any other questions? I have a little problem with a test case and staff is 13 recommending this variance, making everything smaller for the purpose of a test case. A couple of 14 difficult things that I have is one, there's a lot of people in the audience right now on other cases, there 15 are not neighbors here, there's nobody to come and say, "Hey, we think this is too small." It's not fitting 16 in the criteria that we have established. If we make this a test case, and it's not acceptable, what do we 17 do then? 18 CAMUNEZ: Exactly. 19 CHAIR BUCHMAN: How long will it take to get some results on this? How many others will be 20 approved in between that period of time? So, with those thoughts in mind, I had some difficulty on this 21 particular one, accepting it as a test case. With that said, I will call for a motion to hear case PUD-q4-04. 22 And, you had questions, Commissioner Binneweg? 23 BINNEWEG: The test case I think it's mainly with the setbacks that they're... 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: That's correct, yes... 25 BINNEWEG: Yeah. CHAIR BUCHMAN: Yeah. -17- • • 1 BINNEWEG: And I, for one, can see the validity of adjusting setbacks because you're not building 2 homes for your typical family with 2.3 kids. They don't have the front yard needs that are standards were 3 built on before in subdivisions... 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I understand, I was strictly expressing my opinion on this case. 5 BINNEWEG: Yeah, OK. 6 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK? 7 BINNNEWEG: Are you looking for... 8 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Yes, I'm looking for a motion to... 9 81NNEWEG: OK. Mr. Chair, I move that we approve Case PUD-04-04. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Is there a second? 11 SANCHEZ: Igo on and second that. 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. I'll call the roll. 13 Commissioner Sanchez? 14 SANCHEZ: Aye. 15 CHAIR BUCHMAN: On what grounds? Ira SANCHEZ: Based on findings and discussion. 17 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, Commissioner Binneweg? 18 BINNEWEG: Aye, based on findings and discussion 19 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camunez? 20 CAMUNEZ: I'm going to say NAY. I went out and looked at it and I don't see how it's going to work. 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And the Chair votes no, based on the fact that I don't think this is something that 22 should be allowed as a test case. I think they should meet the normal requirements. 23 Legal, we have a four to four vote. 24 RICHARD JAQUEZ: Two to two. 25 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Two to two vote, I'm sorry. JAQUEZ: The motion fails. -18- • • 1 CHAIR BUCHMAN: The motion fails, OK, thank you. I'm sure staff will inform you what your options are. 2 OK. 3 OK. Now we have Case 5-04-044; it's a request for Preliminary Plat approval at Legends West 4 Subdivision. It is submitted by Zia Developming...Develop...Zia Engineering and Environmental 5 Consultants Incorporated for Bill Cupit, Blue Morse Development, property owner and 6 development...developer. Is the applicant ready? 7 MARTY PILLAR: Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commission members, my name is Marty Pillar, I work for Zia 8 Engineering, and we're here tonight to get Preliminary Plat approval for Phase 1, 2, and 5 of the Legends 9 West Subdivision. The Legends West Subdivision is located west of Motel Boulevard, which is adjacent 10 to the Field of Dreams Football Field. Currently we have Master Plan approval on 99+ acres of property. 11 Phase 1, and Phase 2 is going to be the parcel property adjacent to Motel Boulevard and it will go dawn 12 to the boundary of the Picacho Middle School. Phase 5 is here, located north of the Field of Dreams 13 Football Stadium. 14 OK, Phase 1 of the Preliminary Plat subdivision is 24.483 acres, it's currently zoned R-1 a; we are 15 looking at developing this into 131 lots, approximately 5.35 dwelling units per acre. 16 The property will be accessed through Tashiro Drive, a collector, and Motel Boulevard, a principal 17 arterial. 18 Along Tashiro Drive we're having a landscaped multi-use path which will tie in with the multi-use 19 path along Motel Boulevard that the City of Las Cruces has planned. 20 Phase 2 is directly south of Phase 1; it's a 22.101 acre, it is currently zoned R-1a, and R-3. 21 They're looking at developing this into 114 lots and this would have an approximate dwelling density of 22 5.4 dwelling units per acre. 23 Phase 5, located just north of the Field of Dreams Football Stadium, is a 14.028 acre parcel. At 24 this time we're looking at splitting this into two tracts, one be a 2'/x acre parcel here, which will be used 25 for drainage for the subdivisions. -19- • • 1 The remaining part of the Phase 5 subdivision will be used as building material. There's a thick 2 layer of sand underneath the clay here and that is going to be used in building the roadways and the 3 paths within the subdivision's, Phase 1 and Phase 2. And, currently that's what use of Phase 5 will be. 4 Ultimately, you're looking at Phase 5 being developed into amulti-use park area that will also 5 have the drainage function with it. And the developer is working in conjunction with the City of Las 6 Cruces, Las Cruces Public Schools to come up with a plan far that area. 7 The use of this are for construction material will probably be...take place for a couple of years 8 because we have Phase 1 and Phase 2, which are located...this is Phase 1, this is Phase 2, and 9 ultimately we'll come in with Phase 3 and 4 here to the west, and this Phase 5 will be used as 10 construction material for all of those phases. 11 That is the presentation, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer any of your questions. 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Staff? 13 McCARSON: Chairman, Commissioners, I'll try not to repeat any of the information Mr. Pillar presented. 14 This is Case 5-04-044; Ihave atype-o on my overhead there. This is the Preliminary Plat approval 15 request for Phases 1, 2, and 5 of Legends West Subdivision. The Preliminary Plat area contains 16 approximately 60 acres and proposed 245 lots, you did already see where the vicinity of the Preliminary 17 Plat areas. Again, Picacho Avenue to the south, the property runs along Motel Boulevard and Tashiro 18 Drive will be extended through the proposed Preliminary Plat areas. 19 On the aerial photo you can tell that the property is currently being farmed and areas to the north 20 also being farmed. Las Cruces Public Schools to the south of the proposed as well as to the east, and 21 residential development to the south and west of the property. 22 On the existing zoning of the property, I cut and paste overlaid on the zoning, but the property is 23 currently zoned R-1 a, Single Family Residential along with R-3, which is aMulti-Family zoning. The 24 applicant is proposing to develop the preliminary plat areas, Phase 1 and 2 as all Single Family 25 development, and this does comply with the Zoning Code requirements, currently. -20- • • 1 Preliminary Plat, again, what Mr. Pillar just showed you; Phase 1 to the north, Phase 2 on the 2 south, and Phase 5 is the Open Space drainage area. 3 The DRC did recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat with no conditions. The Preliminary 4 Plat does comply with the recently approved Master Plan that you did see, I believe two months ago for 5 Legends West. The Preliminary Plats do comply with the zoning Code, the Design Standards and all 6 other applicable regulations. 7 Staff has been contacted by several property owners in the vicinity and there was a letter handed 8 out to you prior to the meeting, a letter of protest. 9 And, with that, I can answer any question you might have. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Before I open this to the public, I'd like to make you aware of ane thing 11 that came up in the May 25th meeting, and there was a great deal of discussion about where the future 12 alignment of, is it Tashiro? Road will go. And when we had the meeting for the Master Plan in May; I'm 13 going to read from the minutes: "Chairman, Commissioner Ludtke...it was Commissioner Ludtke that 14 brought this up...the future alignment of Tashiro will be decided when "they," being Mr. Cupit and Blue 15 Horse Development, when they came in with the Preliminary Plats," which we have to approve. So, for 16 example, they could come in with Phase 1 and Phase 2, and not have decided the exact alignment, but 17 as soon as they come in with Phase 3 and Phase 4, that will have to be decided. So, the alignment of 18 that road is still up for discussion, and we can't discuss it to nigh, there's nothing we can do about it, until 19 they come in with plats 3 and plats 4. So, anybody who wanted to discuss that, we're going to have to 20 put it on hold until they come in later on in time with plats 3 and 4. 21 Is there anybody in the audience now that wishes to comment on this case? Yes sir, please 22 come to the podium and...or yes Ma'am, come to the podium and state your name. 23 COLLEN SHAMAN: Good evening Commissioners, my name is Colleen Shaman. My letter is not 24 necessarily protest, it's just comments and concerns or thoughts. 25 Basically, I don't have a whole lot to add to what's been presented here, other than I found Mr. Gunaji's presentation quite interesting. I've heard previous meetings on commissioners or ETA members -21- • • 1 speak of something, cluster development, or an alternative type of development incorporating maybe 2 different types of housing units; and I was very impressed with Mr. Gunaji's presentation. Some of their 3 ideas may not be fully ironed put but I believe it gives us a alternative to how many lots are possible to get 4 plotted out of X many acres, and in fact, I also Viked the open space ideas. And, I believe that's 5 essentially all of my comments, except for one minor thing, which...was, I had not realized, there is a 6 parcel of City land immediately north of this proposed subdivision. I was a little bit mistaken about that. 7 Immediately north of that one parcel is where the ETZ begins, and that's where the zoning is presently 8 different fram urban development. OK, 1 appreciate your time. 9 CHAIR BUCHMAN: One question, just to clarify in my mind. You said you were impressed with Dr. 10 Gunaji. Now, Dr. Gunaji presented the one before... 11 BINNEWEG: Sonoma Ranch. 12 SHEMAN: Correct, but his... 13 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. 14 SHEMAN: ...his new way of thinking, I guess... 15 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. 16 SHEMAN: ...as far as, you know, maybe that isn't the perfect type of development, but it's definitely new 17 and different and something that possibly could be considered in this case ar other similar developments, 18 and that's why I'm saying I was impressed that somebody's got some forward thinking or different 19 thinking, you know, garages in the back, open spaces, et cetera. 20 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. OK. Anybody else who would like to make a comment? No other 21 comments at this time, I will close it to the public input and ask for comments from Commissioners. 22 No comments? 23 BINNEWEG: Nope. 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: In that case, I will accept a motion to approve Case 5-04-044. 25 BINNEWEG: So moved. CHAIR BUCHMAN: Second? -22- i a 1 SANCHEZ: I'll go ahead and second that. 2 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. I'll call the roll. 3 Commissioner Sanchez? 4 SANCHEZ: Aye, based an the recommendations by the DRC, and discussion here. 5 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Binneweg? 6 BINNEWEG: Aye, based on site visit, and discussion. 7 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camunez? 8 CAMUNEZ: Aye, based on site visit, finding, and discussion. 9 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And the Chair votes Aye, based on findings, and discussion. 10 Case 5-04-044 passes 4-0. 11 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. Here we go, Case S or Z., Case 22568 is a request for a zone change from 12 A2, Rural Agricultural, to C-3, Commercial High Density. It is submitted by Dan Liley, DL Engineering for 13 Janice Neleigh, property owner, and Robert Ayoub, applicant, President of Mimco, Incorporated. Is the 14 applicant ready? 15 DAN LILEY: Mr. Chairman, yes I am, Dan Liley, for the record. Location of this property is on Valley 16 Drive, just a little south of Mayfield High School, at the intersection of McClure and Valley Drive. The 17 existing...well, let me show you a copy of the layout. 18 The property is located on the west side...on the east side of Valley Drive in a vacant parcel of 19 land. Right now there is agricultural uses farm. It's one of the...one of the areas along this section of 20 North Valley Drive; it still has some fam~land in there. The McClure Road traversing...or crossing the 21 property along the south boundary is currently not a platted road although it's used, and developed, and 22 paved. It's currently owned by the owners of this property. The owners are...there's a case...the next 23 case I have, basically, they're splitting this property on the frontage portion of it. They would like to 24 maintain as commercial, which is consistent with the rest of the property along Valley Drive, and the 25 remaining of the property, the east, would be a residential portion. -23- • • 1 And, if I may go back; the existing zoning being A-2, actually agricultural use. We're requesting a 2 C-3 Commercial High Density. This property is in the Infill Development Overlay, and 1 pulled a 3 paragraph out of the Overlay, but basically, 1 believe we conform or conform to the intent of the Infill policy 4 for redevelopment inside the urban core, and our development...l'll leave that on there for a while, but 5 essentially, our development will be consistent with adjacent properties along Valley Drive. It'll be some 6 new life into that particular location along north side of Valley Drive. 7 The specifics, McClure is an 85 foot collector, we would be required to dedicate additional right- 8 of-way along McClure. We're also going to be required to dedicate right-of-way along Valley Drive. 9 There is...this particular portion has 240 foot of frontage along McClure Road, which would 10 require our development at time of the actual site development, we'd had to do improvements to McClure 11 Road. 12 620 foot of frontage along Valley Drive, which is a State highway, we would conform to whatever 13 requirements, during site development that the State Highway, New Mexico Department of 14 Transportation, would impose upon actual drive way permit in that location. We are 1,000 feet from the 15 stop light at Hoagland that's where the Mayfield entrance is. 16 And, I believe, I'll leave this one on. I would respond to any questions as far as the use of the 1 T property, the owners will develop it proportionately starting on the north end with a smaller parcel...a 18 smaller portion of it would be retail space and as the...in a commercial development, the commercial 19 property...it's hard to specify exactly what's going to be put in there until something is there originally. 20 You find a client or a tenant that would like to go in there; you develop a portion of it. Staff has 21 recommended and I'll let them go over that, but certain recommendations that we agreed to as far as the 22 staff is concerned. And, I'll address comments later on when you have questions. 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Mr. Liley. Staff? 24 McCARSON: Chairman, Commissioners, as you stated, this is Case 22568, a zone change request from 25 A2 to C-3. You can see on the overhead the vicinity map; the property is located at the northeast corner of Valley and McClure. The property is currently zoned A-2, which is a zoning district that was removed, -24- • ~ 1 or replaced, when the 2001 Zoning Code was adopted. The A-2 zoning district was reserved primarily for 2 agricultural purposes and at this date, it no longer exists in the 2001 Zoning Cade. 3 The approximate acreage shown on here on the request to commercial is approximately 3.4 4 acres. 5 You can see on the aerial photo the current use of the property along with this acreage, along 6 with acreage to the east, it's currently being farmed. You can tell from the aerial photo that the 7 surrounding properties to the north, south, and well, pretty much surrounding the property, consists of 8 Single Family Residential development. There is a small pocket of Open Space Development in the form 9 of the Benavidez Center to the south of this property, and you do have commercial uses to the north and 10 south along Valley Drive. 11 Staff is recommending approval of the C-3 zoning district request through support of the 12 Comprehensive Plan and the findings found in your packets. The property is located along a major 13 arterial and does comply with the land use distribution suggestions found in the Comprehensive Plan. 14 Staff is recommending a condition, though, to be placed on the C-3 zoning district. The condition 15 being that buildings on the property must comply with the urban design provisions of the 2001 Zoning 16 Code, and must be constructed in a matter that does not construe strip development. The 17 Comprehensive Plan does not support strip commercial development and that is why staff is suggesting 18 that condition to be placed on the C-3 zoning. 19 Staff has received numerous phone calls, questions, and concerns, protests, and there was a 20 written letter handed out too prior to the meeting. It's hard to tell if that goes with this case of the following 21 case, but it is in support of the request. And, I can answer any more questions you might have. 22 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak? Yes, the lady in 23 back, please come forward, state your name. 24 TAMMY SMITH: My name is Tammy Smith, and I live in that general area even though I was not among 25 those notified for the zone change. I wanted to speak on both issues, but you're going to take them separately, right? -25- • • 1 CHAIR BUCHMAN: That's correct, yes... 2 SMITH: OK... 3 CHAIR BUCHMAN: ...so just stick to the commercial. 4 SMITH: All right. I do have concerns; can you bring back the over head view again, the aerial view? As 5 was pointed out, that piece of land, in the middle, is agricultural land; it is very pretty farm land, and the 6 farmer has rotated each year different crops. If you'll notice, most of the development around there is 7 quite dense. That's really our only open space, it's really a nice open space, and many of us are 8 concerned about further loss of farm land, not just losing open space, but once farm land is gone and 9 paved over, it can't be recouped. 10 The other thing I'd like to mention is, there is quite a bit of very high speed traffic on Valley. If 11 you're going to be coming down McClure headed west, and you want to turn left on Valley, it's a very 12 hazardous situation; it's really difficult to do that. Usually, what I'll do is I'll turn right and go up and go up 13 to the middle lane and hang a left into some place over there and then come back to do it, because it's 14 not too safe to do it the other way. 15 I would like to know something; are there plans to widen Valley, because not only is there this 16 subdivision, but I know that there's supposed one around Mayfield behind, or something like that. And, I 17 had been told also that there was going to be another subdivision around San Andres and that the total 18 number of houses then would be something between five and 700 houses which is an awful lot on that 19 road. You happen to know what plans there are for widening Valley, if there are any? 20 CHAIR BUCHMAN: At this time that has no bearing on the hearing here tonight. We don't know for 21 sure, that comes from a different department. You have to understand, we're just here for the hearing of 22 changing this particular strip of land... 23 SMITH: I under... 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: ...from agricultural to commercial, so that's all we know about it. 25 -26- • ~ 1 SMITH: OK, I understand, but I just want to make sure that there have been no indication given to this 2 Board as to what might be done in terms of widening, because I see...it seams to me that that is 3 something that would have to be considered if you're going to be putting a lot of traffic... 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Right. 5 SMITH: ...onto not only Valley, but McClure. I think those are serious things to consider, and I would like fi to ask you about... 7 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Those are thing that have to be considered by other departments rather than the 8 Planning and Zoning. That's what we're saying here, we're just concerned with the zoning of it, so if you 9 have concerns about traffic, they go to.... where? MPO. Which is another department of the City, so 10 that...see, I...we can appreciate your concerns, but as far as the widening, the speed of the traffic on 11 Valley, those are things that we have no concern over and no right to vote on them. 12 SMITH: I...I...I understand that that's not in your purview right now; I am merely asking that you consider 13 those things, because, for example, we need to be told right now, from someone on staff, no, there is no 14 intention or plan to widen either that or McClure. That could conceivably change your vote. 15 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Yes. 16 SMITH: See what I'm saying? 17 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I see what you're saying, yes. 18 SMITH: All right, thank you. 19 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you very much. 20 BINNEWEG: Staff is... 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Yes, staff, did you want to make a comment on that? Thank you. 22 DAN SORIANO: Yes sir. 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, let' see, staff had a comment first. 24 SORIANO: Commissioners, I'm... 25 BINNEWEG: He is staff. CHAIR BUCHMAN: Oh, you are... -27- • • 1 SORIANO: I am staff. I'm Dan Soriano, Traffic Engineer for the City of Las Cruces. 2 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Oh, OK, sorry Dan; I didn't recognize you. 3 SORIANO: OK. That's fine. 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you for helping out. 5 SORIANO: Just to clarify, there is a project on line that the New Mexico DOT with the City of Las Cruces 6 to widen Valley Drive, just to answer some of those questions from Ms. Smith. And, along with that, 7 there'll be signalization at the Valley and Tashiro intersection, so, to answer that specific question, there 8 is plans to widen Valley from Picacho, more or less the Picacho area, north through to the City limits. 9 CHAIR BUCHMAN: All right, thank you very much. Yes sir, in the front row here. 10 MIKE HAMILTON: My name is Mike Hamilton and Louise and I live on 411 McClure Road, we've lived 11 there since 1959. I think it's a wonderful neighborhood and of course, we'd like to keep it that way. I 12 have personally no objections, first of all, I'm not speaking for any group, I'm just talking for myself. 13 I have no objections to the developer, or the owner developing this property. There is a concern, 14 I guess, that if you develop it with shopping centers all across that west end, there'll be no egress or 15 ingress to allow us, which I believe you're going to discuss next. 16 And, I would like to request, in the interest of public safety and health, that a 40 foot, or maybe it's 17 50 foot now, of dedicated right-of-way be provided through the shopping area so the traffic can get 18 through those lots out to Valley Drive; where Valley Drive will be able to handle the excess traffic. 19 McClure Road cannot do it, and as they've had a recent City study and I think they determined 20 that McClure Road is pretty much maxed out, and so I would like to ask that you do approve this with a 21 provision that a 50 foot right-of-way be provided through the shopping center to Valley Drive. OK? That's 22 my request, thank you. 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Mr. Hamilton. Anyone else? Yes sir? 24 LILEY: Mr. Chairman, if I may respond to a couple of the comments made by the public... 25 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Certainly, now is a good time. -28- • • 1 LILEY: 1 was kind of waiting for everybody to finish up, but essentially, with any kind of project, road 2 widening project, there's acquisition of right-of-way. I know that we're dealing with a zone change here, 3 but without the zone change, we don't do the develop....the subdivision. Without the subdivision, we 4 won't...the land owner would not be dedicating, or the new land owner would not be dedicating additional 5 right-of-way towards both Valley Drive and McClure. That is a requirement or a stipulation that when it 6 comes time for a development of property through a subdivision process, there is dedication of right-of- 7 way involved. For example, McClure Road, which I stated earlier is basically owned by these property 8 owners, would end up having an 85 foot wide dedicated right-of-way, which would be collector status. 9 The improvements of which, during the subdivision process, would involve widening or basically having 10 an adequate street through there that would equate to a standard cross-section that we were talking 11 about, that Commissioner Camunez was talking about earlier, about a 37 foot wide back of curb to back 12 of curb. 13 An 85 foot road section essentially has two of those 37 foot wide roads, with a median in between 14 the two. The developer and staff can correct me if I'm wrong, but the developer is responsible for half the 15 improvements of an 85 foot road section, which would mean, they'd have a good 37 foot wide road 16 through there with curb... back curb and gutters on both sides with sidewalk on one side, on the 17 subdivision side. 18 There's also traffic conditions that would...the reason I'm addressing them now that, basically, 19 more or less apply to the residential development, but I would like to address them now because (...there 20 are concerns about McClure Road, and I don't want the two to be attached to each other, although they 21 are; they are right next to each other. 22 Development of McClure Road would be consistent with, between both the owners, it would 23 behoove the commercial property because they're going to have to develop McClure Raad when it comes 24 time for their development in that area; their impact on McClure Road and they would interact with the 25 subdivision who is responsible for 1,500 feet of development of McClure Road. -29- • • 1 Right now it's a narrow road, there's a traffic problem exist now. Development of this property 2 would impose road improvements on the developers, not on the City, not on the public; no...they will be 3 responsible for development of that road. if this remains green farmland, or brown in the winter, whatever 4 you want to call it, farm land, the only means of improvement of this area would be by...through public 5 funds. That's the nature of development and how an infrastructure is extended within the City Limits and 6 beyond. 7 As far as Valley Drive is concerned, there's also requirement for additional right-of-way that we 8 have to give it up during the subdivision process to Valley Drive. So, during the widening process, 9 acquisition, at least on our part, is going to be there, it's going to be on the plat, it's already going to be 10 granted to the City or to the signators on the plat. 11 So, those, hopefully, that at least eases the mind about what the improvements are going to be in 12 the area. There all going to be stipulated through the subdivision process, but I wanted to make sure that 13 without the zone change, the subdivision process doesn't progress and go to the next level. 14 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Mr. Liley. Another question on the back here. Please come forward, 15 state your name. 16 RICHARD VON WOLFF: Richard Von Wolff, I'm here primarily...l'm aresident of Chateau Drive, and I 17 love to see new businesses come into the community, it's a great thing. We've always knows that land 18 was going to be developed at some point, but listening to how they're proposing to develop McClure 19 Road into a rather large Hoagland, you can see what happened to Hoagland when it went over the 20 railroad track; it goes from a very large lane to a very small residential street. 21 Right now, McClure is in the same boat, they make it a very large lane, it goes down to a very 22 small street, and toward the end of it, towards Alameda and you have speed humps because of the 23 speeding students that we have every afternoon and every morning. 24 What Mr. Hamilton brought up is something that really needs to be looked at, if some kind of 25 access through the commercial property into the proposed residential subdivision that's the next one.... That's the primary concern with most of the neighborhoods; it's going to be the traffic coming in and out of -30- e • • 1 there. We have a high traffic with the Mayfield High School every afternoon; you guys aught to go down 2 there and see the speedway, it's more entertaining than the Mesilla Valley Raceway sometimes. 3 So, think about that, we need a different avenue of getting in and out of that new subdivision and 4 you're going to have to do it through that commercial property. So, and I'll be back up here for the next 5 one, so... 6 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Mr. Von Wolff. Yes Ma'am. Is this something new? 7 SMITH: I have a quick question I'd like to ask. 8 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. 9 SMITH: Tammy Smith again. Could you give us an idea of at least a partial list of the types of 10 commercial establishments that would be allowed...'cause this is a relatively new commercial zoning 11 now, the C-3, compared to what we've had. Could you give us an idea of the kind of establishments that 12 could be built in a high density C-3? 13 CHAIR BUCHMAN: We can do that very quickly, yes. 14 SMITH: Thanks. 15 McCARSON: Chairman, Commissioners, members of the audience, do you want me to go through the 16 whole list, or...? 17 CHAIR BUCHMAN: No, I think if you...that would take quite a bit of time. Could you kind of highlight it? 18 I think... Ms. Smith, are you kind of asking what can't go in, or...because there's a wide variety of uses 19 that could be done under C-3. 20 SMITH: So it's notjust a little neighborhood shopping area? 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: That's correct. 22 McCARSON: Well, I'll hit some of the general uses, I guess, and then we can go from there. You've got 23 veterinarian, community building, bowling alley, skating rink, offices, business offices, that kind of thing. 24 Retail, restaurants, gas station, furniture store, food stores, theatre, and there's a couple of other minor 25 things, but the list is kind of...lt's pretty long, but I hit same of the general items. -31- • • 1 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. I guess I would go back then to Mr. Lily and say, are there any immediate 2 plans for a bowling alley, or anything of that nature to go in there? Have you determined anything yet, to 3 make these people feel a little bit more at ease? 4 LILEY: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, if I may, the developer representative would like to answer those 5 questions far you. 6 DAN FITZHUGH: Good evening. John Fitzhugh with Mimco. I can tell you that there will not be a 7 bowling alley that would go on the side, or a skating rink, simply because of the size of the site. We 8 primarily are retail developers. We have a lat of national contacts that we use...there's nothing that we 9 have singed up at this time, but a typical subdivision that we, I mean, retail subdivision that we might have 10 would be something like an Auto Zane, Checker Auto. Something along that size, those are 6,000, 7,000 11 square foot buildings. The new craze across the country is the Dollar Store. Those range anywhere 12 from, you know, 8,000 square foot to a 10,000 square foot store. That's what we envision, but again, this 13 is all preliminary because we're early in the stages of developing the property. 14 The corner could turn into, you know, a number of different things. I really don't even know, I'm 15 not that familiar with the zoning to know, but something similar to a like a fast food type thing on the 16 corner, that appears that's needed on that street. And, then, you know, you kind of go off from there with 17 maybe some smaller units. But, it's all sort of a crystal ball, I mean, you're just kind of guessing what you 18 think you may do with it. 19 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. 20 FITZWUGH: But, it's only...by the time we're all finish with this, it's probably going to be about 2.8 acres, 21 with the give and take of the land, for the roads et cetera, so we're dealing with, you know, probably 25 to 22 30,000 max square foot of buildings. 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: All right. Mrs. McCarson, just to correct me here, this is just a zone change, when 24 they come in with the plats, then each building, does it have to come before us to be approved, to what 25 they put in there? -32- • • 1 McCARSON: No, Chairman, Commissioners, no, it wouldn't work like that necessarily. What you're 2 going to see is the platting documents when they come in and divide the property, if that even occurs. If 3 they further subdivide the property into, even to...even if it's one mare split, you would see those 4 documents, if it's in more than one split, two or three or more than that, you would see each split that 5 occurs, but you will not see building permits, unless a subdivision occurs, then you will see those 6 documents. 7 CHAIR BUCHMAN» All right, thank you. OK, yes, Mr. Lily? 8 LILEY: Mr. Chairman, a couple of questions were raised again about traffic that I don't think I fully 9 addressed the last time. 10 The State Highway Department has jurisdiction on Valley Drive. They are very thorough in their 11 process of allowing driveway permits along the...along any section of the State roads. From my 12 experience with them over the last eight or ten years, by putting a 50 foot easement in the middle of this 13 commercial property, they would not want. For one thing, when you talk about traffic, and you have the 14 City Traffic engineer that can elaborate, but when you talk about traffic, you want to limit your access 15 points #o a place like...in a location like this, you want to limit access paints. The State Highway 16 Department would not want three access points in a 620 foot stretch. On a street like this, we have 17 similar situations on Las Alturas that they do not want to give me a driveway permit if I've got 500 feet to 18 the next driveway. It's a restrictive process that they would try to limit the vehicles coming in and out of 19 this section and we'd end up, possibly depending on the magnitude of the development, putting in an 20 acceleration-deceleration lane along Valley Drive. 21 Internal properties, internal to the subdivision, since we're in the same vicinity, subdivision traffic 22 might add them...the commercial development property might get an access to McClure to allow 23 subdivision traffic to not have to cross or go anywhere else. They can reach their trip in, sort of speak, by 24 going to this commercial property instead of continuing on somewhere north or south along Valley Drive. 25 So, traffic...routing traffic from the subdivisions through this, I would stand up and say I would not recommend it. I know the Highway Department would sit here and they would deny me a permit for a -33- • 1 driveway through there. If it meant that I'd be bringing the subdivision traffic through there, they would 2 say the same thing, go to McClure. And, that's what we're trying to do with that. 3 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Mr. Liley. Is there anybody else in the audience that wishes to bring up 4 anew point? OK, with nobody else, I'm going to close it now to public comment and I'm going to turn to 5 the Board. Commissioners? Commissioners, questions? 6 SANCHEZ: Mr. Chairman, I think this is my major concern that's shared with the concerns that were ~' brought up about the traffic flow in the area, but I do have to understand that the Highway Department is 8 just not going to let any project go...be completed without a good traffic survey completed. So, (think 9 that Mr. Liley did address those issues, and therefore, as fang as any further development is here after 10 the zoning change, I think it will be adequately addressed to make them feel comfortable about that. 11 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. Anybody else? In that case, may I have a motion on Case 22568? 12 BINNEWEG: Mr. Chair, 1 move we approve Case 22568 with the condition stated by staff that buildings 13 on the property must comply with the urban design provisions of the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended, 14 and, must be constructed in a manner that it does not construe strip development. 15 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Is there a second? 16 CAMUNEZ: Second it. 17 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I'll call the roll. 18 Commissioner Sanchez? 19 SANCHEZ: Aye, based on discussion, and findings, and site visit. 20 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Binneweg7 21 BINNEWEG: Aye, based on discussion, site visit, findings. 22 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camuriez? 23 CAMUNFZ: Aye, based on site visit, findings, and discussion. 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And the Chair votes Aye, based on findings, site visits, and discussion this evening. 25 So, Case 22568 passes 4-0. -34- ~ • 1 Now going on to Case 22569, this is a request for a zone change from Rural Agricultural to R-1 Single 2 Family Medium Density, for the property right in back of the ones we just discussed. And, this is 3 submitted by Dan Liley, DL Engineering for Janice Neleigh, property owner and Ed Dorbandt, applicant. 4 Is the applicant ready? 5 LILEY: Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Dan Liley, for the record again. Basically, I'll run through this, we've 6 discussed it enough to where introduction may be superfluous, but essentially, we have the same 7 scenario; we are in the Infill Overlay District, the McClure Road...the improvements to McClure Road, I 8 think are key to this residential zone change. There are traffic control measures that the owner of the 9 developer has discussed at length with the traffic engineer. 10 There is concern in the community in this area and improvements to McClure are the end goal of 11 many people in this area. The result of development would achieve that and again, I say, if the zone 12 change doesn't go through, the development doesn't go through. So, those improvements end up being 13 the private burden as opposed to private sector. 14 With that, I don't know that I can go over anything else except for...to respond to questions again 15 that, you know, after staff and public address. 16 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Staff? 17 McCARSON: Chairman, Commissioners, again Case 22569, this is a zone change request from A-2 to 18 R-1a, similar in the vicinity of the last case. This property, though, is further down McClure and is 19 bounded by the railroad tracks on the east side. Currently it's zoned A-2 and does contain approximately 20 25 acres. 21 Again, the aerial, the same photo; the property is currently being farmed and it is surrounded by 22 residential developments and commercial development along Valley Drive. 23 On this proposed site layout you just saw from Dan Liley, the developer has been working with 24 Traffic Operations' staff on the right-of-way alignments within the development as well as the McClure 25 Road improvement that will be required via the subdivision process. -35- • • 1 Staff is recommending approval of the zone change request to R-1 a through support of the 2 Comprehensive Plan and based on findings in your packet. The proposal does comply with the land use 3 distribution suggestions in the Comprehensive Plan, and staff is recommending a condition to be placed 4 on the R-1a zoning district. The condition being that traffic calming measures must be incorporated into 5 the McClure Road improvements; keeping in mind that the traffic calming measures that are placed may 6 not be in the form of speed humps, but maybe in the form of a raised median or a narrowing roadway or 7 something along those lines. 8 Staff, again, did receive several calls of concern, or protest and did receive that letter as I 9 mentioned in the last case. And, I can answer any questions you might have. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Is there anyone in the public that wishes to comment on this case, 11 please raise your hand. Yes sir, come forward again please. 12 VON WOLFF: Richard Von Wolff. I've got one comment and a couple of questions for the developer. 13 The first comment, this is just a zoning change, correct? This is not a plat approval? 14 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Correct. 15 VON WOLFF: So, what they have proposed up here is not necessarily the roadway that could end up, 16 and my concern is the alignment...the logical alignment of Chateau all the way through to Hoagland and 17 on to Second Street. It reduces some of the flow, kind of like Carlyle does between Hoagland and... 18 UNKNOWN PERSON: McClure. 19 VON WOLFF: McClure, excuse me, and, that is a concern. We have a lot of kids that come through our 20 neighborhood at high speeds thinking that they can get around the roadblock at Hoagland-Alameda by 21 going down or street. Unfortunately, my daughter is one that's getting ready to be added to those 22 maniacs on the street, I hope that I can curtail that for a couple of more years. 23 But, what happens is they hit the end of our street, they find out it is a cul-de-sac, they turn 24 around and at break-neck speeds get back there to beat whoever they were trying to beat to Alameda, to 25 begin with. If this truly becomes an alignment, and they get to go all the way through, heaven help us. -36- • • 1 There are a lot of young families moving into our neighborhood, little kids, bicycles, really no 2 sidewalks with curbs, so they're kind of meandering on or off the street, we have a large elderly 3 community that loves to walk and they're always out there at all times of the day. Unfortunately, 4 sometimes when they're out there coincides with the traffic jams. So, that is one concern. 5 The next concern is, I guess this is not probably the place to bring it up. I don't see any open 6 spaces, parks, recommendations. But since this is only a zoning change and not a plat approval, it 7 probably won't be addressed. 8 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Correct. 9 VON WOLFF: I reserve the right to came back up and finish my time if I don't get an answer that meets 10 my needs. 11 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. Quick question and we're a little bit concerned. Your last name, is it VAN 12 WOLF, or... 13 VON WOLFF: Von Wolff -VICTOR, OSCAR, NOVEMBER, space, W O L F F. 14 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. 15 McCARSON: Chairman, Commissioners, and members of the audience, just for clarification; this is a 16 zone change only from the A-2 to the R-1 a. And, actually the site plan maybe shouldn't have been 17 shown, and maybe it was a bad idea, but the gentleman's correct, this road...the conceptual layout is not 18 set in stone. What will happen, if the zone change is actually approved, as the developer will come in 19 with preliminary plat documents and those will be heard before the Commission, and those will be 20 advertised in the same manner that this case was. Sa, the mailings will go out again, there will be a sign 21 posted on the property and the case will be advertised in the newspaper. 22 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Mrs. McCarron, I kind of agree with Mr. Von Wolff. Your recommendations; traffic 23 calming measures, besides the speed bumps, what other options did you say we have for traffic calming? 24 McCARSON: I can refer to the Traffic Engineer with his suggestion to do those, but the suggestion that 25 he related to me was a raised median. -37- • • 1 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. 2 SORIANO: Commissioners, again, Dan Soriano, Traffic Engineer for the City of Las Cruces. We've 3 spent recently a lot of time with the McClure area, looking at different types ofi traffic calming. Ultimately, 4 we have put a couple of speed tables in on the east end of McClure, but we tried a variety of things. 5 There are different...other ideas out there that we're looking at that are just as effective as speed humps 6 and speed tables. 7 One problem with speed humps and speed tables, particularly, are the emergency vehicles. 8 They don't particularly care for them because it's hard for them to negotiate over them with...especially 9 with longer trucks and they're pretty rough to ride over, and they deter those types of vehicles to get into 10 emergency calls in a timely manner. So, we're exploring other ideas, and those such as narrowing the 11 roadway. 12 You know, our typical collector shows these large, I think 12, 14 foot wide lanes, and the idea is 13 that if you can narrow those driving lanes down to somewhere in the order of ten, 11, 12 feet, effectively, 14 you can control speeds. And, we can do that in a variety of ways such as islands, medians, but which 15 actually serve a dual purpose, actually help also with pedestrian refuge as they try to cross the street. 16 So, there's actually a dual benefit to that sorts of things. 17 So, we...l have been talking already with Mr. Dorbant with some ideas there on what we can do 18 on McClure, and he's agreed to work with us closely on this. He's even been with me to a couple of 19 neighborhood meetings where we've talked with some of the area residents, most of them are sitting right 20 behind me. 21 And, we've talked about the concerns and how we need to try to keep McClure kind of in a stand 22 sill here and just take care of the traffic that's on it now without adding to the problem. So, he's willing to 23 work with us and we're already started putting things in motion to address the first concern by Mr. Wolff. 24 The...l know this isn't part of the case, but the road alignment that are being shown were carefully 25 thought out. This is probably the second or third attempt that the developer made at laying out the -38- • • 1 roadways, and his number one concern, of course, was cut through traffic, north and south through the 2 neighborhood streets. 3 So, that's why you see the alignment that you do, even though, again, it didn't necessarily have to 4 be shown, but it was careful consideration of that, so ultimately, he devised these layouts, which we all 5 agreed, was going to be the best situation for this development. 6 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, thank you Mr. Soriano. Mr. Von Wolff, is that kind of answer a little bit of your 7 question? You asked for a chance to come back up. 8 VON WOLFF: Yes it does, there is one problem with this, you see, I did not get notification of this 9 because I do not reside within the 500 foot radius of the affected property. Basically, I was looking at a 10 camper at the used car lot on the corner of McClure and Valley and noticed it, and we stopped over to 11 see what it was about, and that's why I'm here. So, I don't know when the plat will come forward. I will 12 not get notification in normal routing, so, I hope this is the way it's going to stand. Thank you. 13 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Yes Ma'am. 14 SMITH: Tammy Smith again. Like the previous speaker, I was not notified either, and I do want to bring 15 that up to your attention and to the staff s attention but, there are several streets in the area where the 16 residents, I think are going to be quite impacted. I don't know who was notified; I did several calls on my 17 street and I spoke with several people on McClure and I haven't found anyone who was contacted. The 18 reason I knew is because coming down that street there was a yellow sign posted in the cotton field that 19 said there was going to be a zone change, otherwise I would never have known about it. 20 Now, I did write some notes so that I could present them quickly. I'm speaking loosely for the 21 people with whom I have spoken about this development, and told them what my feelings were and got 22 general agreement, this is no organized group of people, but I'm mentioning this so that you know it's not 23 just...l'm just not the only one who has these feelings. 24 1 did want to ask and make one clarification, if McClure is going to be widened to 85 feet, I don't 25 know how familiar you are with the area, but all of the area from Alameda at least to the railroad tracks of single family homes, isn't that going to mean that you're going to have to condemn property? No? -39- • • 1 But, how are you going to get it? It's private pro...the people's front yards go out to the edge of the 2 existing street. 3 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I'll let staff come back to that one, that's a good point, OK. 4 SM17H: OK. OK, now, just let me ga fast. Valley Drive has not only a lot of traffic, it is high speed traffic. 5 It's very difficult some at some times of the day to turn left, or south, onto Valley from McClure. Even now 6 it is often difficult to turn left, or north, onto Alameda Boulevard from McClure. Cars idling at intersections 7 not only consume gasoline, but the auto emissions pollute the air, as especially bad when it's an $ intersection where there are residences close by. 9 A subdivision of 106 houses will most likely have at least two cars per home, that's 212 cars on 10 McClure each morning and evening, if you assume that all of these residents drive to work. But, let's say 11 only half of those drivers are employed outside the home, that's 106 cars daily on a two lane residential 12 road already handling quite a lot of high speed traffic; not only from the residents in the area but from 13 drivers who use McClure as well as Hoagland to drive between Valley Drive and Alameda Boulevard. 14 When drivers are headed east on Hoagland to Alameda and they see that the cars are backed up 15 at the intersection of Hoagland and Alameda, what they often do is cut through my street, which is 16 Highland Avenue, at very high speeds `cause they're thinking that they can get over to McClure and then 17 go down McClure to get onto Alameda because it isn't sometimes not as heavily traveled as Hoagland 1$ because Hoagland comes directly from the high school. So, the density of development on McClure is 19 less than the density on Hoagland, that's why that occurs. 20 Back to the shopping center, I think that that would increase the traffic. Now, I had some 21 questions, and I want to know what studies have been done on McClure for traffic; what is the projection 22 for the increase in cars, I mean, they should be able to tell you there's X number of cars; and again, the 23 plans for widening the street, but you said that you would address that afterwards. 24 Now, I understand that there are two other subdivisions planned, and I'm really, really concerned 25 about what's going to happen to all of this traffic that's going to be headed our way. And, most everything is going to be coming over to get onto Alameda, because most of the shopping, you know, the main -40- • • 1 shopping, that's downtown an EI Paseo and sa forth, so not too many people go down Valley Drive. 2 don't know if you've traveled Valley Drive recently, but ever since Wal-Mart went in, it's, it's really heavy, 3 heavy traffic. 4 Now, I hope that this Board can have some input in terms of open space and open land. Are you 5 sure you wouldn't want to vote on this for our neighborhood? If you lived there and you had some of that 6 nice open space, would you support this proposal. I'd like to ask for something, I'd like to recommend 7 that there be a public hearing conducted, and a serious attempt to be made to notify all of the residents $ who'd be notified, not just the people who are immediately around that piece of farm land that's going to 9 be developed, but I think all of us need to know, and I think maybe we can provide some helpful input to 10 all of you, because it's not just a road within a subdivision and just a little bit of what's going on, it really 11 affects a substantial amount of the North Alameda area. Thanks. 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you Ms. Smith. The one question that I think should be addressed by staff 13 right away was the question on notification. Would you please explain how the notification is done on 14 this? 15 McCARSON: Chairman, Commissioners, members of the public, the required notification is 200 feet 16 from property line of subject property, excluding right-of-way. So, in this case, because this case along 17 with the case that was heard previously were combined, the notification was actually larger than it 18 normally would be and then you're taking out North Valley, and you're taking out the right-of-way for the 19 railroad to the east, and so the notification boundary was expanded even larger to approximately, I can 20 tell from my notes, about an 800 foot radius. The 123 people on the list that were sent mailings, they... 21 let me see if I can show on the...on this maybe. The notification goes up approximately four or five 22 properties to the north and the same an the south, excluding McClure. On the other side of the railroad 23 tracks, the east side of the railroad tracks, the notification went two properties deep and same an the west 24 side of Valley. 25 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And this is standard to all zoning changes, isn't it? -41- • • 1 McCARSON: This is actually a conservative approach to notification in my mind, and if we were doing it 2 technically, letter of the law; it would have been substantially less. But the way our notification program 3 works, when you draw a radius, it includes all properties to the north and south, essentially it makes a 4 radius around the property. So, again, if you were to do it technically, letter of the law, it would have been 5 substantially less. 6 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. Yes, Commissioner Camufiez? 7 CAMUNBZ: Mrs. McCarson, I have a question for you. I know, like you say, you notified the people 8 within 200 feet, or so, is that what you said? 9 McCARSON: Well, it's approximately 800. 10 CAMUIVEZ: My question to you is, for other people that live in the immediate vicinity that don't get 11 notification and would like to attend these meetings, do you publicize it in any newspaper? 12 McCARSON: Right, we do run advertising, 15 days. It's in the Sunday paper in the Legal Section, and 13 it's 15 days before this meetings, so it would have been approximately two weeks ago, two plus weeks 14 ago that was in the Las Cruces Sun-News. Additionally, we do post a yellow sign on the property that 15 does have a brief, I mean, all it essentially says is that there's a zone change hearing to take place 16 regarding that property and what the request is, from A-2 to R-1 a, and the date and place of hearing. 17 CAMUNEZ: OK, I was just wondering if there was some way that you gave public notice to other people. 18 McCARSON: Right... 19 CAMUNEZ: Yeah, mh hm. 20 McCARSON: ...these are the three ways that we do it, by mailing, and public circulation, newspaper and 21 posting on the property. 22 CAMUNEZ: OK, thank you. 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I think Mr. Liley, there's still the question, and I think it's...Ms. Smith brought it up a 24 couple of times about the turning, that has to be worked out later. Let's see the speed from the schools, 25 is there anything more that you'll need to add to it Mr. Liley? Or you want to add to it? -42- • • 1 LILEY: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, we're basically through with, I think we're still debating, or 2 discussing the traffic issues. I believe the City of Las Cruces Traffic Engineer identified his...he's been 3 involved in this area for several months, the duration I don't know, but extensively analyzed the traffic in 4 this area. To give you an idea, generically, traffic from a subdivision of 100 lots will have 10 times that 5 number of trips in one day, will have 1000 trips in one day. That would equate to a peak hour, which 6 would be seven to eight o'clock in the morning, you'd have 100 vehicles from this particular parcel on the 7 road network...impact to the road network. Now, where they would go is, you know, left turn, directional 8 flows vary, and, but essentially that's a number that will give you an idea. 9 Now, when we discussed traffic... I've been in front of the Commission several times discussing 10 the same issue. Numbers get thrown left and right. There are criteria for determining the capacity of 11 roads and street, and the width and Mr. Soriano came up with the idea of traffic calming. I know that the 12 County and the road (lived on, the County had a problem with that. The traffic...the road was wide, you 13 wanted a nice wide road, they built a nice wide road. The wider the road is, the faster traffic goes. 14 It's...they even determine speed limits by what they call the "85`h percentile." They figure out how 15 fast traffic is going there, and then they reduce it by $5%, and that's the speed limit they put on roads a lot 16 of times. 17 What the County did in this particular road is they striped the road and narrowed it; they narrowed 18 the traffic, which now a 35 mph traffic is now down to 25, it's just a method of reducing the speed through 19 an area. There again, you reduce the speed, you reduce the amount of traffic that'll go through there 20 because people don't want to take a road that's 25 mph or has narrowing streets. 21 Right now, we have, in my...just laymen...) drive through there, I drive down McClure Road and 22 I've got nothing but farm land on the left and, you know, visual...) can see everything around me for that 23 stretch of McClure, so I'm a lot more comfortable going at faster speed. When you start 24 reducing...restricting your flow, it's the tendency, the human tendency is that dictate a lot of the 25 convention for traffic measures, traffic control devices that would handle certain conditions. In this particular area, that's something that would come up within the designs of the subdivision streets, and it -43- • • 1 would...as Mr. Dorbrandt and Mr. Soriano have been working closely together what the design will be. 2 And, I think that's something that it give an overall benefit once it drops down. 3 So, if there's...any more issues about traffic or not, I don't think there's any more I can explain 4 with the exception of...that we're willing to work with the City and the Traffic Engineer. 5 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you very much for your help. Is there any new items to be brought forward? 6 Yes sir. Please come and state your name. 7 ROBERT JAMES: (inaudible) and I'm back to traffic. Robert James. 8 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Very briefly, Mr. James. 9 JAMES: The little loops on the corner; my opinion is that Chateau and Embassy, 1 think it is, should be 10 extended through the subdivision when it gets there. Not that one, not that one, there, yeah. The eastern 11 street goes...it lines up almost perfectly with Chateau that would provide a second exit from the 12 subdivision, and the same thing with Embassy on the other end. Those streets were originally intended 13 to go through; they're built that way. They dead-end at a ditch. There's no abutment there or anything, 14 and so, I'm curious, what's going to happen to that well? Does that become City property? 15 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I think those are items to be brought up at other meetings. I don't think they're 16 germane to this meeting. 17 JAMES: Oh, I didn't think so but... 18 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Yeah. 19 BINNEWEG: Staff? 20 JAMES: ...a well is a well, we need every one of them. 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. Thank you, thank you Mr. James. 22 Anyone else? All right, at this time I'm going to close the discussion to the public and turn to the 23 commissioners. Questions, Commissioner Sanchez? 24 SANCHEZ: Yes, a question for Mr. Soriano. It seems like the majority of the discussion tonight is traffic, 25 concerns with traffic. Having grown up in the area, I'm familiar with Mayfield; I was probably one of them maniacs, at one point or another, f lived on Amis. But McClure is kind of...kind of troublesome to make a -44- • • 1 left turn, or right turn off of McClure onto Valley. What is the possibility in the future maybe looking at 2 proposing a speed...street light there? Some time of... 3 BINNEWEG: Stap light. 4 SANCHEZ: ...street light control device there? 5 SORIANO: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Sanchez, that actually would not work in harmony, I guess, with 6 what we're trying to do here. What happens is when you put a signal at an intersection, it will attract 7 traffic to it, and that's really what we're not to do here. Now, one benefit is, as I mentioned earlier, or one $ goad thing, I guess, with what I mentioned earlier is with the North Valley work that's going to happen, 9 Tashiro, just to the south, is going to be signalized. 1D You don't necessarily have to be at the traffic signal to get the benefits of the traffic signal. Right 11 now, our next traffic signal isn't `till Picacho. We're going to add one at Tashiro, which is going to help 12 considerably with this intersection. You use, basically, the shadow of the signal to be able to get in and 13 out off of McClure. So, McClure traffic will see a benefit, they then will have the signal, of course, that 14 remains at Hoagland, so the addition of the signal at Tashiro will help this intersection as well byjust 15 basically using gaps afforded by the signal to the south, getting in and off of Valley Drive. 1 fi SANCHEZ: Thank you. 17 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Any other questions? At this time, I would take a motion on Case 22569. 1$ CAMUWEZ: I make a motion that we approve Case 22569 with the following conditions of incorporating 19 traffic calming measures... 2A CHAIR BUCHMAN: Read the whole thing. 21 CAMUNEZ: ...and to McClure Road improvement due to concerns from area residents, and one 22 example discussed with the applicant was raised: Medians along McClure Road. 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you, is there a second? 24 BINNEWEG: Second. 25 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I'll call the roll. Commissioner Sanchez? -45- • • 1 SANCHEZ: Aye, based on findings, site visit, and discussion. 2 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Binneweg? 3 BINNEWEG: Aye, based on site visit, findings, and discussion. 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camunez? 5 CAMUINEZ: Aye, based on site visit, discussion, and findings. 6 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And the chair votes Aye, based on site visit, discussion tonight, and findings. 7 Thank you, that passes 4-0. 8 Now, we're going back to Case 22565, which was taken off the Consent Agenda. This is a zone change 9 from A-2 to R-E Single Family Residence, for 2.3 acres, submitted by Eddie Chavez. Is the applicant 10 ready? 11 DAN LILEY: Mr. Chairman, yes I am. Dan Liley, representing Mr. Chavez. Briefly, I don't know if you're 12 familiar with the area, but Las Alturas is the road...the frontage road that heads south from New Mexico 13 State University Golf Course. Cholla being the intersecting road that goes underneath the highway, 14 underneath both Interstate 10 and Interstate 25. It's kind of the connector between the Stern Drive 15 frontage road and Las Alturas frontage road. 16 This particular location is, between Soto and Cholla, is currently just a desert situa...desert land 17 that was previously...the time frame, I'm nat real familiar with, but previously zoned R-1 a conditional, 18 however, the development didn't go through, so it reverted back to the original zoning of A-2 which, as 19 Ms. Ruth...Ms. McCarson said earlier, we're not...we no longer have an A-2 in the 2001 Zoning Code. 20 Mr. Chavez would like to develop this property into four parcels of, essentially the R-4 zoning 21 requested...) mean, I'm sorry, R-E zoning, which is an estate-type zoning. 22 Because there is no sewer in this property, so there are no facilities for sewer, it'd be septic, so 23 he'll be limited to his septic system, according to the New Mexico Environmental permitting process. 24 The zoning would be consistent with surrounding properties; the parcels in this area range from 25 one...some of the ones along Las Alturas are actually two to 10 acre parcels that have been there for -46- • 1 many years. If you go deeper into the streets a little bit ways off, there are one or two acre parcels. This 2 whole area is developed similar to this. 3 And, I believe, it's basically, it's about all I had on here, I know that staff has something, but I'd be 4 glad to answer any questions when you're through. 5 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank you. 6 HARPER: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, this is Case 22565, a zone change request from A-2 to R-E. 7 As previously stated, the A-2 zoning designation no longer exists in the 2001 Zoning Code. The applicant 8 is seeking to rezone the property to R-E, which is a residential...or Single Family Residential Estate. 9 This vicinity map shows you Cholla Road, this is the underpass here, underneath !-25. This is 10 Las Alturas Drive here. This is the property in blue. 11 An aerial photograph here also shows you the road network and you can see the surrounding 12 properties in residential use on larger lots, as Mr. Liley indicated. Properties here, outlined in red. 13 Based on elements of the Comprehensive Plan, staff is recommending approval of the zone 14 change request. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. 15 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Thank yau. Yes, I know there is someone in the audience that wishes to speak; 16 come forward sir. Please state your name. 17 JIM ANDRES: Yeah, I'm Jim Andres. When this was submitted about three years ago, it was my 18 understanding it was turned down by the City Engineer because there was no drainage plan submitted, or 19 at least, if it was, it was not approved. 20 I guess I have a questions at this point, has this drainage issue been resolved to satisfaction of 21 the City Engineer? 22 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. Is that the only questions that you had, Mr. Andres? 23 ANDRES: I had one other one. 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, why don't you state them both then, go ahead. 25 ANDRES: OK. The submission that was sent out showed this property that it was not subdivided, and it was my understanding, by reading what was sent out, that this was just one lot, which would be -47- • • 1 converted...the zone would be converted. And, according to the agenda then, it shows being subdivided 2 into four lots, And again, there's no City sewage system there, so it's my understanding that you'd have 3 to use septic tanks, which is there not a requirement far minimum lot size of three...you need'/4 of an 4 acre to accommodate a septic tank, and the three acres would just allow that. 5 And then, my other concern, the restrictive covenants calls for a minimum of .9 acres per lot, and 6 3.9 would just sit in there, four would not. '~ But again, this was the restrictive covenants for the home owners that established that, so that would be $ drainage, the number of lots, not shown on the submission, and the...there's this .9 requirement from the 9 home owners. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. All right, staff? 11 HARPER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 1'd be happy to answer those questions. 12 I'll start with the question about the subdivision. The applicant is getting...or trying to obtain a 13 zone change for a future subdivision of the property; that is not...they have not submitted a subdivision 14 yet, they have not determined whether they're going...how they`re going to split the lots at this point; 15 they're merely seeking a zone change so they can further subdivide the property. I was merely indicating 1 fi on the notice the intent of the applicant per the zone change request. That was made known to staff, so 17 we make it known to the public what their intent was. 18 Second of all, 1 believe that there is enough lot size on this property to meet the 3/. acre 19 requirement for NMED, for four lots, I believe. I believe that is what is proposed, four lots. There 20 shouldn't be a problem with that, they being able to handle the...or get an NMED permit far a septic tank 21 on this property. 22 And, I believe the third question was the restrictive covenants. Staff does not...or the City does 23 not get involved with the restrictive covenants as they are private agreement between...or they're a 24 private matter between property owners within a subdivision that reside there. It could well be there is 25 restrictive covenants on this property but that's not something staff really gets...looks into, it's between the property owners. -48- • y ~ • 1 Oh, I'm sorry, drainage, I apologize. Drainage has not been addressed, it will be addressed at 2 the subdivision level; a Master and Final Drainage Study would have to be submitted with a subdivision of 3 this property to the City Engineering Department for approval. 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: All right, thank you. 5 Yes, sir? 6 SAMMY SILVA: Sammy Silva, I got the same concerns. And, on this now, when you subdivide the 7 property, are you going to send out notifications again? 8 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Mh hm. 9 SILVA: You will? OK, thank you. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Is it something new, Mr. Andres? 11 ANDRES: I need to clarify... 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Go ahead. 13 ANDRES: I'd like to clarify on this number of lots, would there be re-submission, will there have to be in 14 order to subdivide this current three acres and then to the four, or maybe three areas? 15 BINNEWEG: Mh hm. 16 CHAIR BUCHMAN: I think the answer to that is yes, all they're asking for now, is a zone change. 17 ANDRES: (inaudible) zone change. 18 BINNEWEG: On the whole parcel. 19 CHAIR BUCHMAN: On the whole parcel, so they're going to have to come back again... 20 BINNEWEG: To get a subdivision. 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Ta get a subdivision, and say haw many acres, how many parcels, and what will fit 22 within the requirements. 23 ANDRES: And this presumably will cover this drainage issue then also? 24 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Yes. They will tell you where the ponding has to be, and how that will be handled. 25 ANDRES: Very well, thank you. -49- • • 1 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, thank you. Any other comments, anybody else in the audience wishes to 2 speak on this matter? Hearing no one else, I'll close it to public participation. Commissioners? 3 CAMUNEZ: No. 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, 1 will accept a motion on Case 22565. 5 BINNEWEG: Mr. Chair, I move we approve Case 22565. ti CAMUNEZ: I second it. 7 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Any other discussion? I'll call the roll. 8 Commissioner Sanchez? 9 SANCHEZ: Aye, approved on discussion, findings, and site visit. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Binneweg? 11 BINNEWEG: Aye, based on site visit, findings, discussion, 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: Commissioner Camur~ez? 13 CAMUNEZ: Aye, based on findings, and discussion. 14 CHAIR BUCHMAN: And the Chair votes Aye, based on findings, discussion, and site visits. 15 That concludes the regular part of our meeting. Is there any other business to be brought before the 16 Planning and Zoning Commission? Yes, Mr. Banegas; the bearer of bad tidings. 17 VINCENT BANEGAS: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Vince Banegas, Administrator for the 18 Development and MPO Section. I thought I'd come here today and give you an update. As you know, 19 during an earlier work session, staff was able to present some information regarding some proposed 20 Zoning Code Amendments that span the sections of residential uses, through to non-residential issues 21 and this all comes from an effort wherein staff participated in the review of the Zoning Code with an 22 outside committee interested in seeking some amendment opportunities. 23 So, at this point in time, staff has prepared, in legislative format, the residential portion of that 24 amendment package, and so you will be seeing that at your August Work Session followed up by your 25 August regular meeting, so it will be a double whammy, You'll get to see it upfront and then hopefully take a vote on it later on in the month. -5p- a y r 1 The commercial or non_residential will be forthcoming thereafter. Potentially, other issues may 2 also be coming. As a result of that effort, staff found a section of the Zoning Code which required an 3 emergency amendment. And, the reason...one of the reasons why I am here tonight is just to apprise the 4 Commission of the fact that staff had to push forward through to City Council an amendment seeking...an 5 amendment to Section 38-10 which talks about a particular date wherein the City's efforts to convert the 6 zoning must be completed. 7 Conversion of the `81 zoning, the old zones over to the new zones, theoretically was to be 8 completed by atime-certain date, which is fast approaching. We found that due to the time frame of 9 coming before this body and then going before Council for adoption, the time frame was too tight and so 10 we are pushing forward an emergency situation straight to City Council for consideration of a year 11 extension. 12 So, I come here tonight to kind of apprise you of that, I don't want to hide anything from you all; 13 typically, you would be the normal body that we'd bring items such as that forward to first; however, given 14 the situation, we have no alternative but try and keep ahouse-clean situation from getting a little bit out of 15 control and going straight to City Council. 16 CHAIR BUCHMAN: You're open to questions? 17 BANEGAS: Mh hm. 18 CHAIR BUCHMAN: When this first came about, I think we discussed time frames, and I'm wondering by 19 granting a year, are we giving the procrastinators more time? 20 BANEGAS: Actually, Mr. Chairman, it's not so much an issue of procrastinators, procrastination per se, 21 what staff has found is in carrying out the process of converting the '81 zoning districts aver to the new 22 districts, there were some procedural changes that kind of pushed staff back, you know, put more time on 23 the clock, so to speak, in order to process your typical case. 24 Some of the conversion cases that you see coming before you are a result of that particular 25 section of the Code where it talks about the conversion process. And, what you see in terms of the procedures is what has ultimately been ironed out throughout the months, and the application of the 2001 -51- 1 Zoning Code. So, I wouldn't necessarily call it procrastination, Ithink it's just the reality of taking 2 conversionary cases through the process and then those cases reaching City Council and hearing some 3 concerns of the citizens, concerns of Councillors and that kind of thing, and making those necessary 4 adjustments. That has added to the process and slowed staff down to an extent. Ithink it gives staff 5 enough room to finish what it's well into without, you know, the risk of running out of additional time. 6 I should note that the amendments that are forthcoming, the proposed amendments, if they do 7 get passed, could substantially clean up what staff has to push forward in terms of the conversionary 8 process. So, that too is another reason why we held off taking several more cases before this body and 9 ultimately to City Council. We want to see what the impact actually would be. 10 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. 11 BANEGAS: OK. 12 81NNEWEG: Mh hm. 13 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK, thank you Mr. Banegas. Under Old Business, I have a comment I'd like to 14 make also. On June 22nd, the last meeting, the minutes were prepared by digital recorder, which 15 thankfully was available because of our legal department's cell phone option. I want to thank him for 16 making that available to us, we would have been in a bind if he hadn't had it. 17 We had to use his digital recorder as the secretary was absent. We have the regular recording 1$ machine avail...we had the regular recording machine available, but no one knew how to use it, and there 19 were no tapes available. 20 Along that same line, our May meeting proved to be a very uncomfortable experience, as the air 21 conditioner had been turned off in the room. And, it was uncomfortable far us and the public. 22 My question to the staff is, what has been done to implicate, to prevent the possible 23 postponement of other meetings because of lack of recorder or lack of facilities, and can something be 24 done before the meetings to have some one come in here and check to see that the air conditioning is 25 still working. -52- a -~ 1 So, there's two questions, what's. been done about the recorder, and can something be done to 2 make sure the meeting room is presentable. 3 BANEGAS: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I think the instance that you're referring to has certainly shed 4 some light on same loop holes, perhaps, in the process. But, I think staff does a pretty good job of 5 making sure that there's adequate coverage. I think the instance that you were referring to was an fi anomaly. I mean, we don't typically have situations like that. We do go out of our way to make sure that 7 the setting is reserved and well in advance, 1 should say. And, that the staff...adequate staff are here to 8 make sure that the air conditioning is on, and that all the facilities are in operation, including the computer, 9 et cetera. 10 I think in this particular instance it was just miscommunication and we tried to resolve that and 11 make sure that better communication exists to ensure that there's no lack of coverage. 12 CHAIR BUCHMAN: My concern is taking it one step further. Suppose the recorder coming to the 13 meeting is involved in a car accident? No way to get to a telephone to express what happened. 14 Can't...shouldn't there be somebody else trained to where the tapes are, how to turn it on, how to turn it 15 off. Should it be, you know, somebody else from staff, I think should be able to run this machine in case 16 of an emergency, that's what I'm trying to get across. 17 BANEGAS: What I can do is double check; we do have various clerical positions in the department that 1$ all are familiar with the equipment, and what I can do is go back to the department and, basically, put 19 them on notice that in those events, as rare as they may be, you know, they may be called upon to come 20 and operate the equipment and sit in during an emergency situation. 21 CHAIR BUCHMAN: OK. And, I know in my two years, first time it has ever happened. 22 BANEGAS: Right. 23 CHAIR BUCHMAN: But, could you imagine with a full house like this... 24 BANEGAS: Right. 25 CHAIR BUCHMAN: ...that's what I'm concerned about. So, if you could do that... -53- a ++ x • 1 BANEGAS: Sure. 2 CHAIR BUCHMAN: ...personally, I would appreciate it. 3 BANEGAS: You bet. 4 CHAIR BUCHMAN: This is going to be fun, is there any other public comment? 5 Any staff comments? Anybody from the Board want to make a comment? Can I have a comment to 6 adjourn please? 7 BINNEWEG: So moved. $ CHAIR BUCHMAN: The meeting is adjourned at 8:07. 1 1 1 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 -54