Loading...
07-15-2008WS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AGENDA The following agenda will be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Las Cruces, New Mexico, at a work session to be held on Tuesday, July 15, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. in Room 101 at the City Office Center, 575 S. Alameda, Las Cruces, New Mexico. The City of Las Cruces does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, color, ancestry, serious medical condition, national origin, age, or disability in the provision of services. The City of Las Cruces will make reasonable accommodation for a qualified individual who wishes to attend this meeting. Please notify the City Community Development Department at least 48 hours before the meeting by calling 528-3043 (voice) or 528-3016 (TTY) if accommodation is necessary. This document can be made available in alternative formats by calling the same numbers listed above. I. CALL TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF WORK SESSION MINUTES August 21, 2007 III. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING PROJECTS AND PRIORITIZATION IV. VISION 2040 UPDATE V. DISCUSSION OF OTHER ITEMS VI. ADJOURNMENT 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 WORK SESSION 3 FOR THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES 4 CITY OFFICE CENTER 5 July 15, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. 6 7 8 *There are several places in the minutes that were unclear and inaudible due 9 to technical difficulties. 10 11 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: 12 Charles Scholz, Chairman 13 Shawn Evans, Vice Chair 14 Donald Bustos, Secretary 15 Charles Beard, Member 16 Ray Shipley, Member 17 Godfrey Crane, Member 18 19 STAFF: Vincent Banegas, Planning & MPO Administrator 20 Cheryl Rodriguez, Development Services Administrator 21 Tom Schuster, Senior Planner 22 Gary Hembree, Senior Planner 23 James White, Planner 24 Lora Dunlap, Recording Secretary 25 26 I. CALL TO ORDER (6:00 p.m.) 27 28 Scholz: Ok, I call the meeting to order and I will ask for approval of the worksession 29 minutes, are there any additions or corrections to the worksession minutes? 30 Yes? 31 32 II. APPROVAL OF WORK SESSION MINUTES -August 21, 2007 33 34 Beard: I wasn't there but was... was viewing on page 9, line 16. 35 36 Scholz: We aren't recording this are we? 37 38 Banegas: Yes. 39 40 Scholz: Where's the secret recorder? Over there? 41 42 Inaudible 43 44 Scholz: Page 9, yes, ok. Commissioner Beard. 45 46 Beard: The public process, I do... want, I think, I do want to touch on that. 1 1 2 Scholz: Want to touch on that? Ok. Any other additions or corrections? Ok, all 3 those in favor of approval of the minutes, please say Aye. 4 5 Board: Aye 6 7 Scholz: Those opposed same sign. And abstention. 8 9 Crane: Abstain. 10 11 Scholz: Ok. Thank you. So the vote is 3, 4 and none against and 2 abstain. Ok we 12 will now discuss planning projects and prioritization. Mr. Banegas you're up. 13 14 III. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING PROJECTS AND PRIORITIZATION 15 16 Banegas: Yes, Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, I thought it would be a good idea to kind 17 of, hold this worksession to kind of go over a couple of things, key things, 18 key projects, key changes, etc. One of the changes that you may notice 19 referenced in the memo and certainly at meetings is you probably don't see 20 my face around too much any more. Due to the budget process the 21 department head initiated the Council discussion, etc. The feasibility and the 22 necessity to split if you will what used to be Development and MPO; it's one 23 of several sections in the Community Development Department. The 24 purpose was to pull the development or current planning function away from 25 the long range planning function, long range planning technically is not only 26 the comprehensive plan type issues neighborhood plan type issues but also 27 it would be combined and kept with the MPO function which is the 28 Metropolitan Planning Organization which they themselves do long term long 29 range planning tasks so it made sense to group Planning and MPO together 30 and then pull aside Development. That said we still work very closely with 31 one another and we discuss issues routinely so we're not sacrificing that 32 type of organization but nonetheless many of you know and if you don't 33 Cheryl Rodriguez is now the Administrator for the development function, I am 34 the Administrator for the long range planning function, Planning and MPO 35 and again we have several members of staff here to listen in on what were 36 trying to bring forward on the table and that's a work plan if you will. Dave 37 Weir could not be here this evening however he has talked with all the 38 administrators and he feels that it's a very good idea, which I agree with him 39 on, is for each of the sections to develop a work plan. Basically there's a lot 40 of projects that have been in queue for a while we may not have been able to 41 get to them because of case load etc. but now that some of the things are 42 slowing down, a lot of those projects that have either been in the works or in 43 the queue, if you will, are coming to fruition are coming up to speed and 44 we're now able devote some resources to them. One of the things that I'm 45 bringing this evening is the planning section work plan that identifies various 46 projects that we have ongoing and several that have been discussed but 2 1 may not have been prioritized or given any official nod at this point in time. 2 The issues, I attached in your worksession packet a copy of the schedule if 3 you will, a listing of all the projects that we have on the table. Some of these 4 projects are well under way and have a significant priority arrangement in 5 that you have various entities who are very much eager to get their hands on 6 them and work on them and hopefully approve them. One of which is as an 7 example is the Vision 2040 Regional Comprehensive Plan effort, which not 8 only goes with long range planning from a regional perspective but also 9 coupled with that task will be an update to the City's comprehensive plan and 10 to the county's comprehensive plan. So that is one that you have various 11 entities participating in the process. We're well under way; we've got a 12 couple of rounds of public input meetings already under our belt and that 13 obviously have a significant priority. Tom Schuster is taking lead on that 14 project and is very much a critical component of keeping that on task. He's 15 here to answer any questions when we get to that segment of the agenda 16 related to Vision 2040. I'll start that conversation when the time comes but 17 aside from that you will have identified in that spreadsheet, various 18 neighborhood plans and a lot of those that were newly created or proposed 19 to be created, you'll have an overlay zone that affects the zoning code, 20 affects Cheryl's section, ultimately. They're listed because the planning 21 section is charged with not only with the creation of plans and the 22 amendment of plans but also projects of the nature where we will take the 23 next step and actually look into implementation of those documents. The 24 Alameda Depot Neighborhood Plan itself is one that has been underway for 25 several years, it started literally as an effort to amend a rather small section 26 of the comprehensive plan that was on the books. From that effort it just 27 blossomed, or exploded however you want to view it, into the effort it 28 currently is and that is to try and get the neighborhoods, the segments of the 29 neighborhood to kind of come together and participate in the process and 30 deal with land use issues ultimately that will help guide the developmental or 31 redevelopment of the neighborhood in question. We're close, we're really 32 close; we have a proposed meeting with the neighborhood scheduled for the 33 23rd of July, we're keeping our fingers and toes crossed that everyone is truly 34 on the same page with that effort and that they don't have any significant 35 difficulties with the language that we have proposed in the plan. If we get 36 good feedback from the neighborhood we are fully prepared to take 37 whatever comments that they provide us with and massage those into the 38 document and ultimately bring that document to you all at a worksession. 39 First, to kind of give you a flavor for what is involved and then follow that up 40 with a regular meeting and hopefully bundle those in the same month. We 41 think it's feasible to do that, we are fully prepared to discuss the nuances of 42 that plan and the effort and hopefully get that thing up to City Council as 43 quickly as we can. Surely if we're successful in doing that then of course the 44 next step, which is the implementation or creation of an overlay zone, will be 45 necessary and that will be another effort that we will have to engage and 46 work out the nuances with the neighborhood and prepare and get with you 3 C 1 all once again and go through that same process all the way up to City 2 Council. 3 4 Scholz: Mr. Banegas, do you want questions from us at each of these? 5 6 Banegas: Yes, yes. 7 8 Scholz: Ok. I'm curious, what is the, what's the goal of the Alameda Depot project? 9 10 Banegas: The... 11 12 Scholz: Or is there an overriding, over-arching concern? 13 14 Schuster: It kind of started out, well, it started out as more of a preservation oriented 15 plan. 16 17 Scholz: Ok. 18 19 Schuster: Now and I think that's still kind of the major motivating factor, it deals with 20 well, let me put it this way, it initially was going to create a local historic 21 district. 22 23 Scholz: Oh. 24 25 Schuster: But, it turned out that there were a lot of neighbors who were very 26 uncomfortable with {design standards where they would be subject to review 27 by a design review committee)' they felt that it didn't end up really fitting the 28 way the eclectic nature of the neighborhood, it would be very difficult to apply 29 an overall architectural standard when there are so many different styles, so 30 it's turned into more of a land use document where it attempts to direct 31 certain land uses to certain corridors or areas within the neighborhood and to 32 try and to preserve residential uses in other areas, provide a guide for zone 33 change requests. 34 35 Scholz: Well, the reason I ask is because we ran into this in Delaware many years 36 ago and they imposed an historic district by the town of New Castle and then 37 it turned out that people couldn't change their aluminum storm doors or they 38 couldn't use aluminum storm doors or something like that. 39 40 Schuster: That's exactly the kind of concern that they had. 41 42 Scholz: Right, I can understand that. 43 44 Banegas: But that said, just to kind of footnote that if some of the home rehabilitation 45 projects that are also handled by David Dollahon in Neighborhood Services 46 Section of the department when they hit the remodel efforts or rehabilitation G 4 1 efforts of the home that is on the federal register or is a significant structure 2 in terms of historic district nomenclature then there are standards that they 3 have to abide by issues such as windows and the pipes that... 4 5 Scholz: Right, no I can understand that, they have some of those in Mesilla I know, 6 ok. 7 8 Banegas: Any, any other questions regarding Alameda at this point? Yes sir. 9 10 Beard: The people outside of the community, Alameda area, get to participate on 11 what's going to happen there? 12 13 Banegas: At this point, it's been pretty much isolated to the group of, there's a couple 14 of neighborhood associations that have been active in this process and for 15 the most part to my knowledge, someone correct me if I'm wrong, it's been 16 those members of those associations and the affected property owners 17 within the boundaries that are prescribed by that plan. 18 19 Schuster: Once it gets to the P&Z and City Council level obviously it will be open to 20 comment from anyone. 21 22 Banegas: Sure, that's right. 23 24 Schuster: In terms of the actual grunt work of developing the plan staff will be working 25 with the property owners. 26 27 Banegas: The next project that's identified is the University Avenue Corridor Overlay 28 plan update. Once that is undertaken obviously the next step would be to 29 update our zoning code as it relates to that overlay ordinance, that is 30 identified therein. Some of the issues with this obviously you've already 31 dealt with, one aspect of an update and that was in relation to the public 32 annexation for the city center, if you will, there is also consideration for a 33 proposed hotel site. Those matters went before you all and you gave it the 34 recommendation of approval. We have not taken it to City Council because 35 there was an agreement that until such time the City entered into a contract 36 with a contractor for the hotel, that we could not take it or move it forward, so 37 there's a little bit of a delay, we're getting close and pretty soon we're going 38 launch it and take up to Council for consideration. 39 40 Scholz: Ok, you think that project, the hotel project, is going to go? 41 42 Banegas: We hear a lot about it, we, you know, all indications are it's going to a green 43 light, so. 44 45 Scholz: The reason I ask is because the, with changing administration at the 46 University, I'm wondering what is going to go ahead and what's not. 5 t 1 2 Banegas: Right, right. That's a very good point. 3 4 Shipley: You said hotel but the convention center is the first step right, then the hotel 5 second. 6 7 Banegas: Right 8 9 Scholz: The convention is already a go. I know there are engineering drawings and 10 so on for that. 11 12 Schuster: I think the plan is actually to have them built almost simultaneously and I 13 think the hotel, from what hear from the University architect, they won't 14 actually open the hotel first so that they can work out all the bugs that come 15 with a new convention center and hotel and before they actually go live. 16 17 Banegas: Yeah, it's just part of the, I guess the agreement between NMSU and the 18 City as to the manner in which it would progress through the process. 19 Everything states everything's ready it's some of the last detail once we hit 20 those thresholds we're going forward so. But that marks and updates in 21 essence to the University Avenue Corridor plan what this one is really 22 identifying is a much broader amendment or we're looking at reexamining all 23 things related to University Avenue, some of the traffic flows that impact the 24 area, some of the attendance of students, where they come from, how they 25 traverse through the area that kind of thing, some of the boundaries might 26 change, some of the land use issues might change, we need to reexamine 27 the whole corridor in its entirety and then determine what and how things are 28 going to be manipulated inaudible. 29 30 Scholz: One of the things we passed, was that last fall? We passed that amendment 31 which allowed people to build right to the front of the property. 32 33 Banegas: Right. 34 35 Scholz: Was this enforced when this new development went up at the corner of 36 Espina and University? 37 38 Banegas: If I'm not mistaken that's specifically for a variance to allow that to happen 39 which we're in support of and that's, those are the types of inaudible 40 41 Scholz: There's going to be a Starbucks there, I figured that would be a big 42 attraction. 43 44 Schuster: The amendment that you're speaking of applies only in Area One which is 45 essentially the Pan Am Plaza area. 46 6 1 Scholz: Oh, oh that's right. 2 3 Schuster: But one of... 4 5 Scholz: But also one across the street as I recall. 6 7 Schuster: Yeah, yeah one parcel is across the street but one of the things that we're 8 gonna look at is, if that is the type of thing we want to apply universally 9 across the border, so, there seems to be quite a bit of support, at least in 10 certain circles for that, we've had some proposals, people coming in wanting 11 to do developments that actually are prohibited from doing that right now. 12 13 Scholz: You've talked about traffic flow, was there anything said about, it seems to 14 me the University was talking about asking for a median? Is that still in play? 15 16 Schuster: As part of the master plan for the University that and actually it would shift 17 the, the lane just a bit, it would take that bike path from the south side and 18 instead of having that path, put two in-road bike lanes which would require 19 shifting the lanes over somewhat and then putting either a median or 20 strategically located islands for crossing refuges up and down so that people 21 aren't just wandering in the middle of road. 22 23 Scholz: Did you ever go into the engineering building and see the, one of the projects 24 that the students did four or five years ago? It's a senior project thing; they 25 did a bridge across University Avenue. 26 27 Schuster: I didn't see it but you know... 28 29 Scholz: You should take a look at it sometime; it's really a brilliant idea. I don't know 30 why anyone didn't think of it or perhaps and thought of it and discarded it. It 31 certainly improved with the transfer of students across particularly in that 32 long stretch between the stop lights there. 33 34 Banegas: A lot of the concern that I heard in regards to that is simply trying to control 35 the pedestrian activity to take full advantage of that it would be, the concern 36 would be that they'd stop inaudible 37 38 Scholz: Inaudible obviously can't use it. 39 40 Schuster: If there were medians throughout the whole thing that had you know that had 41 cactus and thorny things that they didn't want to walk through then that might 42 work. 43 44 Scholz: And then what would happen of course, things would hide behind those and 45 then jump out in front of you that is my concern. 46 7 1 Crane: Maybe the Sociology Department can study how close a bridge has to be 2 before a student will actually elect to walk over a bridge before he J-walks. 3 4 Scholz: Yeah, you could use pens you know like you do for cattle inaudible. 5 6 Crane: inaudible 7 8 Scholz: Ok, no, I see your point about you've been talking about looking at the whole 9 thing again inaudible. 10 11 Banegas: That's correct. And we don't know what type of reception we'll get. I know 12 that the community has voiced support for reexamination of the entire 13 corridor, so I think that inaudible. We've started data collection, we've held 14 at least a few if not three or so meetings with NMSU staff in an effort to 15 collect data from them. I know their, I don't know their official title, but the 16 GIS function over their department has even manipulated some of the data 17 and provided us with some of the maps and so forth that will be very useful. 18 So, we're working closely with them. 19 20 Schuster: And I think that the key thing about this is that when you look at the NMSU 21 master plan because about a hundred and sixty million dollars worth of 22 projects where they want to put along University Avenue. There's about five 23 or six major projects. 24 25 Scholz: Right, fine arts center, for instance. 26 27 Schuster: Yeah, and the Domenici Center and things like that so they're going to really 28 change the look of that whole corridor. 29 30 Banegas: The Arroyo Plan and Design Standards, there's been a lot of interest in that. 31 Carol McCall has worked quite a bit on that, I think Susan and you all have 32 reviewed documents at one stage or another. There is a rough draft on this 33 Arroyo Plan purpose of which is to investigate how development is to occur 34 adjacent to arroyos, you know, looking at the usefulness of those arroyos in 35 terms of recreational opportunities, open space and obviously its intended 36 use which the flow of water between properties etc. in a safe and efficient 37 manner. The idea at this point and time and again a draft that has been 38 completed be we know there are some significant changes that will be going 39 into effect before we kind of release it broadly for review and consideration 40 and public meetings but the idea was to create kind of a general document 41 that set out some, some policy, some vision etc. and then we would go back 42 in at least the thinking at this point in time is create some new master plan 43 for each of the major arroyos that are traversing through City limits and, and 44 beyond, because this isn't something we can control within or boundaries, so 45 there's going to be a lot of efforts to work with Dona Ana County and some of 46 the other agencies that ultimately affected but to work out ways in which we 8 1 can take better advantage of those features, natural features and coexist, if 2 you will adjacent to them in a sound fashion, if you will. We're looking to kind 3 of clear out some of the queue here and then hit that again, I haven't called 4 the current inaudible to reexamine that more carefully but the days for 5 consideration of that, we're still shooting for an 09 completion date and again 6 if we include some of the master plans that examine some of the specific 7 arroyos I think that they probably would be a little lot longer. I do know that 8 there's a strong advocacy, if you will, for equestrian trails to take full 9 advantage of that opportunity throughout the East Mesa arroyos and to 10 develop specific design standards to help not only pedestrians but use of 11 those facilities ultimately from a recreational perspective to utilize them 12 safely in context to some of the road networks that traverse or span both 13 boundaries so, any questions on that? 14 15 Scholz: Well are we talking about flood control when it comes to the Sandhill Arroyo? 16 17 Banegas: We, I think it's important to maintain that as a focus on the purpose of the 18 arroyos as a conveyance to storm water, we need to be sensitive to that and 19 keep that in kind of the forefront and then determine how the best practices 20 and how we can take either utilization efforts to incorporate recreation and 21 other, you know maybe it's just open space maybe it's more active 22 recreational opportunities that kind of thing. So we're going to re-examine 23 all that but conveyance of storm water's still our primary function. We don't 24 want to align them, we, you know, we want to keep them in their natural state 25 and those types of things. 26 27 Scholz: Ok. 28 29 Banegas: The next one on the list, Fiscal Impact Analysis tool, for lack of a better word, 30 we're launching that, this kind of comes at the request of our City Council 31 with all the annexations that we've seen and that we're likely to see once 32 again, we do see a lot of master plans come in for properties already in the 33 City limits, that kind of thing. The question has always been what are the 34 fiscal impacts to the City? If we master plan property already in the City in a 35 certain way, what does that mean, dollar wise within a set time horizon, that 36 type of thing? You're going to have to provide services, you're going to 37 maintain infrastructure, those type of things, so if we approve this, what does 38 it mean to the City bottom line, tax payers, bottom line, that kind of thing. In 39 terms of annexations we have always considered that, that has been on a 40 twenty year time horizon, there have been a lot of differences in terms of 41 how developers plug in the numbers into their cost benefit analysis, you may 42 have heard that dealing with annexation requests, certainly at the Council 43 level, where it hits most that's a comment or a statement or term that is used 44 repeatedly and again there's no template that is used that ties developers 45 hands and tells them they have to plug in values for x, y and z and this is the 46 way it's done and if everyone's consistent and so forth, there's a lot of 9 1 latitude they have to use, you see differences in how that cost benefit 2 analysis form is used in terms what has been done previously, so we're 3 trying to take a look at ways inaudible that brings together those type of 4 issues in a format that everyone can use, that it would be consistent across 5 the board and gives everyone a reasonable expectation of what the true 6 impact is for certain developments. 7 8 Scholz: Is there software for this? I mean isn't there a, you know, it seems to me 1 9 remember talking to people back when I lived in Iowa, who are on the 10 Planning and Zoning Commission and they talked about relatively crude 11 ways of doing this and it involved a lot of computation. Is there software... ? 12 13 Schuster: Yeah, there is and there's actually some free software available. However it 14 generally has to be calibrated to a local area because there's so many data 15 inputs and that essentially is what this RFP is doing is asking for a tool to be 16 recommended, calibrated, and staff to be trained on its use. 17 18 Scholz: Ok. 19 20 Banegas: In fact, Tom, you and staff often had meetings to try and, you know, 21 determine what the variables are, we thought that maybe it would be a 22 matter of allowing us an opportunity to create spreadsheets or some type of 23 template ourselves and after many meetings it became very clear that some 24 of the variables that are a little difficult to fine tune and calibrate and... 25 26 Schuster: And we would always be questioned about what we included and what we 27 didn't include, and so better to get someone who deals with this 28 professionally. 29 30 Shipley: But I mean you can quantify what it costs for a policeman or a fireman or 31 what a new school costs what, you know, how much a sewer costs to run 32 inaudible exactly and then how much per foot or whatever. I mean it's, that's 33 what, once that's done that takes 90% of the stuff out of the equation and the 34 people can, they can quibble about the other 10%, but you know, it's really 35 reasonable. 36 37 Banegas: And you just fear they're going to quibble about the 10% ninety percent of 38 the time. Which they will! 39 40 Scholz: I remember my, I had a class with multi-variant analysis and the professor 41 put this enormous equation on the board and said that demonstrates 42 probably 24%. But he said I haven't included all the variables. Now, if you 43 can find some software to do this, I think that would be very helpful because 44 everyone can use it then. We all start from the same place. 45 10 1 Banegas: Public Improvement or Involvement Plan, rather. Another issue that has 2 been floating out there for some time, a great deal of our cases, the big 3 question is how do we handle public participation on all our case load, all our 4 projects, that kind of thing. It appears to me that the kind of status quo which 5 is quickly changing but the status quo of you know the notice to the paper 6 the agenda the letters that go out to the property owners within a set radius 7 from the subject property obviously that's not reaching enough of the 8 intended audience, particularly on big plans, on big developments as we saw 9 with the Vistas at Presidios as an example that drew a lot of criticism from 10 folks all over the place, it wasn't just those immediately surrounding the 11 subject property, so the issue is what can we do to generate a plan that 12 illustrates or outlines the steps in the process for zone changes, for special 13 use permits, annexations, master plans things of that nature, a plan 14 amendment, you know, what are we going to do, how are we going to handle 15 it. Hopefully we come up with something, get something approved, people 16 are still going to perhaps be upset that maybe they felt things were 17 streamlined too fast but at least we can prove and show that what thought 18 went into a process, a 100% of the folks might not like it but at least it 19 captures the intent of the vast majority who are involved with inaudible. 20 21 Shipley: Question, regarding the signs, who's responsible now for the little signs that 22 go up, the little yellow signs? 23 24 Banegas: Our internal staff; whoever's got the case. 25 26 Shipley: Why isn't the developer responsible for that? 27 28 Banegas: That's how it's handled in many communities. 29 30 Shipley: And why aren't they, in other words what I get is people told me that they go 31 down they don't see them, they're gone or they're there when a meeting is 32 postponed, they don't renew it still says the old date. I've had a half dozen 33 people stop me and say, you know, why don't they change this? That's 34 happened, the sign's still up a month later or two months later. I say well it's 35 postponed and they say well why don't they change the date because it still 36 says 30th of May and we're now into July. 37 38 Banegas: That's a good point. I know that County, I believe they do that, they give the 39 sign over to the developer, I know other communities do and inaudible 40 41 Shipley: Well, and we had a bigger sign in other words it had to be four feet by so big 42 and had to be on a wooden frame so it couldn't blow down and you know, if it 43 didn't go up and then they didn't get to go to the meeting, didn't get you know 44 the public had to be notified. The other thing, I think the one is on the wrong 45 side of the street, whoever put it in put in on the south side and property is 11 Oft 1 actually on the north side of the street, this is out towards off of 70 1 don't 2 remember the address. 3 4 Inaudible 5 6 Shipley: No, inaudible when I did my site visit, 1 come to look at the property and 7 said but the sign is across the street and I didn't know who put it there so I 8 didn't move it. Inaudible. No, no, it was on the wrong side of the street. 9 10 Crane: Is there any rule about how many signs have to go up on a particular size 11 piece of property? 12 13 Banegas: No. 14 15 Crane: Because we got something on Cortez Avenue, off 70 that's a quarter mile 16 square roughly. I didn't notice a sign but I didn't look for it they could have 17 made only one all when there was all that mesquite I'm not sure anyone 18 could have seen it. 19 20 Banegas: We have to at least post one obviously but on larger parcels and especially 21 hills that are difficult to get to we try to at least locate while we assume the 22 best approach if you will to the property so that people will see it. I think 23 that's the intent, it's not always successful. We did look at larger signs at 24 one point of course the City, keep it in mind that the City puts them up, larger 25 signs, more money, staff now to go and dig and set and remove and that 26 kind of thing but a bigger issue was it even feasible especially on developed 27 property, the fear of breaking drip irrigation or sprinkler, you know things of 28 that, you know, but I think if you do look at having them post the signs we get 29 out of that situation. 30 31 Evans: Inaudible 32 33 Scholz: It's not just the developer it's the home owner if it's a rezone or inaudible. 34 35 Evans: Whoever is doing it, it would, and I mean that would be part of the fee that 36 they pay you know inaudible. 37 38 Scholz: Right and you could give them the sign and they post it, you know. 39 40 Evans: What if it's, they may incur additional costs and certain fees inaudible, well 41 mean you may get some negative feedback in that process. 42 43 Scholz: I think it is a sensible idea. The other thing I'm thinking is that we really have 44 to use the website more creatively here and announce these things, a lot of 45 people look things up on the web and I realize there is that long list of 46 projects on the web but difficult for me to, I mean I can navigate through it 12 1 but it's difficult for me to figure out which is high priority, which is the past, 2 which is in process, if we would separate those a bit and say this is the 3 meeting agenda these are the things that are being acted on by City Council, 4 these are the things that have been approved or whatever, you know, step 5 people through the process, I think they would be a little better 6 understanding inaudible. You know, I think you will always have people who 7 protest change, that's a given, you know, and it's always, you know, I was 8 told by the developer that they would never build across the street inaudible. 9 1 know people who live on Solano who told me that you know when they built 10 apartments across the street, there were never going to build anything there; 11 you know it took away their view of the mountains, well hello? You're living 12 in the city; you know it's a developer, well anyway. But yes, if we can 13 improve the process of getting those out I don't know how many people read 14 the newspaper but I do know that people look at the, I want to say the... 15 16 Bustos: Sound off? 17 18 Scholz: Well, the Sound off, yes let's put it in the Sound off column inaudible. In the 19 real estate press section which comes out on Sunday with the Sun News 20 anyway, could we post in that, or would it cost too much money? I'm 21 curious, you know. 22 23 Banegas: We could take a look at it, yeah; I don't know what it would run, actually. 24 25 Scholz: Because people read that, you know they look for bargains and houses and 26 look at what other people are getting for their houses, asking for their houses 27 anyway. 28 29 Banegas: Right, true, ok. Any other comments? 30 31 Scholz: Well, the other comment I have is when we do public participation it seems 32 to me that the only place the public can actually respond is at the Planning 33 and Zoning Commission Meeting and that's pretty scary for people who have 34 never done this before in fact I have been much more aware of that than 1 35 have been sharing with the Commission because you know people will get 36 up there and just kind of, you know, they don't want to get close to the 37 microphone and they don't know exactly what to say and I'm not sure if 38 there's a way of facilitating that process of making people more comfortable 39 with it, the problem involved more hearings and for me as well. 40 41 Crane: And now you have it on TV, they could end up on You-Tube. 42 43 Beard: I think the key is to notify as many people as possible I think that is the 44 number one objective and then go from there as far as how they get the 45 information. 46 13 D 1 Crane: It requires some activity some action by the citizens who wants to stay 2 informed, it it's out there inaudible. You say yes it's appropriate that they, 3 some people always oppose development and that's fair enough, at least 4 came out to oppose it. But to complain after the event that there was no 5 public in consultation when in fact there was leaves them with a 6 disadvantage. 7 8 Scholz: No, having worked in politics, you know, people will always ask how will you 9 get these uncommitted voters to come out and vote? You announce an 10 election, you know. You can canvas them, go door to door and deal with the 11 candidates but you can't drag them to the ballot box, they don't want to vote, 12 they don't vote. 13 14 Shipley: One of the things, I don't know if there is any requirement for the developer 15 to go to meetings, local meetings, prior and then with people that are 16 affected in that area. That was something that we did before was had people 17 and when they would come in we would say the developer held a meeting, 18 did you attend the meeting? And they would say, well I didn't know about it, 19 some of them would say that some would say yes, but I couldn't and I knew 20 about it but I couldn't, have you made any effort to meet with him then? You 21 ask these questions and when they know that's going to happen it pretty 22 much, it gives them an opportunity to so that they're really well prepared. It 23 depends on kind of a thing that they do too because if you're doing an 24 annexation or you're doing a redevelopment or you're doing something new 25 people are more in tune to go to that. You're doing a rezone for, you know, 26 C2 to C3 most people say I don't care about that. 27 28 Banegas: We have taken a couple of master plans there was even a few infill cases 29 probably in the past several years where we knew it was going to draw a lot 30 of fire and one of the things that we do tell them is we strongly advise you to 31 hold a neighborhood meeting and then get the feedback, try and work with 32 them soothe things over before you go to our regular meeting (P&Z). 33 34 Scholz: We did that with an infill project that was last fall, was that not...? 35 36 Evans: I think there have been a lot of cases where you know, the City inaudible big 37 developers to avoid some litigation and some of the fire that they are going 38 to get is going to be at these meetings. They take those steps in order to 39 avoid cancelled meetings. Some of your other smaller developers try to just, 40 well, we're just going to follow the rules and we're going to it, period and then 41 of course you get all these people that protest and I think a lot of the time we 42 make a recommendation and they go ahead and table this decision until the 43 next meeting and let them get together but I guess the question is whether or 44 not there should actually some guidelines to drive them to have that meeting 45 before coming to the P&Z and having us telling them saying you know 46 maybe you guys ought to have it. You know I mean it's a tough thing 14 1 because you don't know if you're have a lot opposition until you show up 2 there and so why have a meeting if there's not opposition? 3 4 Shipley: The staff is going to be more informed generally because there are going to 5 be a lot of people to call the staff in advance and say 1 didn't know about this. 6 7 Evans: I like the idea, I don't how you could weed it out and say ok, this one we're 8 going to do, this one we're not, I don't want to single him out because he... 9 inaudible and I don't know, I don't know how you would have inaudible 10 11 Scholz: Well, it might be that those would be the kind of cases that you recommend. 12 Charles, you also had a point I think the last time we met which would have 13 been what, two months ago? We were talking about the problem that people 14 ask their developer or people ask their realtor whether they can add on or 15 make modifications to their structure. And you were suggesting I think that 16 we create some guidelines for realtors and developers but particularly for 17 realtors who are selling people property. 18 19 Crane: I think it might be me inaudible. 20 21 Scholz: Ok, it was inaudible, I can't remember inaudible to you, but what were you 22 suggesting? 23 24 Crane: That some basic training for realtors who vary from highly experienced to 25 really newbie's as to what the local zoning is, the zoning across the city or 26 where ever it is they are going to be showing houses so there won't be 27 misleading purchasers. Sometimes they may be doing so innocently, 28 sometimes the purchaser may have just misunderstood, and sometimes the 29 purchaser may be simply covering his butt by saying that you told me this 30 but.. I assume that zoning is a big issue and I don't know if realtors are as 31 up on it as they might be. 32 33 Shipley: 1 think the problem was, is that there are developers or their builders that are 34 building up to the end of the property line, they got a 20 foot rear-yard 35 setback, there's nothing that really can go in there like a porch or enclosure 36 on the back and no one is telling them that they are on a setback and that 37 they either need to request a variance or whatever, so what they are looking 38 at is they are buying a box and they want to add to that box to make it more 39 livable but they can't but they're not being told that and so what really ought 40 to be the guidance is that for a developer to build on the property line maybe 41 he has to disclose that there can't any be any of these items in there or that 42 only these certain kinds of items can go in there and that ought to be part of 43 the code because then if it's part of the code then it's got to be, they've got to 44 be told that and inaudible, yeah that will make them say well do I then want 45 to buy this house and if I can't put a deck on the back of my house because 46 it's inaudible maybe it's just not the house for me. 15 F 1 2 Banegas: What we have been seeing regards to busted setbacks and so forth is 3 maybe there is a concrete pad and in certain instances not at all but folks 4 lately have just been building the dog gone thing then coming in, getting 5 caught and then asking for forgiveness. 6 7 Shipley: No, I understand we've had several but I mean one thing is good the little 8 pad is just a little you know, 4 foot by 4 foot square and they are putting in a 9 10 by 30 foot across the back of the house. 10 11 Evans: How do you inaudible whose responsibility is it to communicate the setbacks 12 to the intended buyer? 13 14 Shipley: Well, I kind of think that the inaudible. 15 16 Evans: How do you do that? I mean is that the realtors inaudible 17 18 Shipley: No, I think you do it when someone looks at plans for development then they 19 look at the house plans, if they see that they are building to very yard 20 setback and there is nothing in there that that has a south facing view sign 21 those off and says hey, Mr. Builder look here's what you're doing and this is 22 what you can't do you know you're not really doing this why don't step this 23 back 10 feet and put something across the back as a shade structure to 24 make your house better as long as you catch that in the planning stages 25 before he starts building you can do that and to my way of looking at things 26 like that from a planning stand point, that's what planning ought to be doing. 27 They ought to be looking for the problems not just looking at the plans to see 28 if they meet the code because it's going to a problem with the temperatures 29 we have here and the orientations to get, because I look at, you know just 30 like looking at plans I always look to see north, south, east and west, where 31 are views, those kind of things and when I totally started inaudible we looked 32 at golf courses and we told the developer as a planning commission that we 33 didn't want them to build, they wanted just to put up a pad and let the home 34 owner build on to the back of it and then I said but you're going to have more 35 people look at the back of your house than drive down the front of your 36 house during the day so you should design the back of your house just as 37 thoroughly, treatments around the windows, decks, those kind of things, 38 build them on right from scratch and then they all look nice, they're all within 39 the code. They said well it's going to cost us more money and we said ok, 40 then don't build here, your choice, you know, so sell your property to 41 somebody else, and they said no, ok we'll do it. Well they did it, well it 42 improved the value of their homes and then everybody wanted to be there 43 and it's just the thing is if you can catch that in the planning stage before they 44 go to start building you've eliminated that problem. 45 16 W 0 1 Crane: Are the builders that are building out to the limit in the back also building out 2 to the limit in the front? 3 4 Banegas: Yes. inaudible 5 6 Evans: They are trying to increase square footage on the minimum inaudible. 7 8 Crane: If we say don't go out to the 20 foot line you'll have 30 feet by taking 10 by 9 30 square feet out of the house inaudible 10 11 Evans: But a lot of the lots now, I mean, go back to 20 years ago they were Y2 acre, 12 3/ of an acre, now the developers really reduce the size of the lot and then 13 they sell the lot then the guy comes in and says well, if I sell corner to corner 14 I'm only going to get 1700 square feet out of this so is it the builder, you 15 almost have go all the way back into the development to ensure even lot 16 size. 17 18 Shipley: But that's what you layout when say, maybe the lot size can't be below 2/10 19 of an acre, you know unless you're going to build like an infill or whatever. 20 21 Evans: I don't know how you inaudible the problem of it is that, the end product, is it 22 there yet? You know if he's just at the beginning and the end guy is over 23 here and all inaudible has to be developed and nodding to the players, you 24 know the end players so I don't, unless you, actually how do you tell people 25 you have to have a back porch on your subdivision? 26 27 Scholz: No, I don't think you can tell people, I think you can dictate how the structure 28 is arrived at. But I think you have to have a, some kind of warning process to 29 the end, the purchaser. 30 31 Evans: That's what I would say there should be some, there has to be some 32 disclosure to the purchaser that, Hey, you're all the way on the property line, 33 you know, where the set back and you are not going to be able to extend 34 that, but then how do you make the, who's job is that? Inaudible 35 36 Scholz: inaudible I recall having friends a couple of years ago in one of The Pines 37 developments that he told all of the purchasers that they had a 15 foot 38 setback and they couldn't do anything in their back yard. Now, I don't know 39 if he actually did that but I suspect he did, I think he wanted to sell the 40 properties and get people out there. 41 42 Beard: Two points, with the existing problem I think it's the contractor has to 43 disclose it, either with a sign and make sure that the realtors that are selling 44 the property know that that is there, I mean I think it should be their 45 responsibility. The other thing is I think that the City should increase the size 46 of their lots so that we get away from these types of problems. I know in 17 1 cities that I have lived in before there was a lot size criteria either 7,000 or 2 10,000 square feet and you couldn't go below that and I think on the 7,000 3 was a two story house and on a 10,000 square foot it was a single story 4 house. 5 6 Shipley: Could you do a ratio, in other words if you were going to build a 1700 square 7 foot house... 8 9 Banegas: Floor area ratio, that kind of thing? 10 11 Shipley: Exactly. 12 13 Banegas: We have that provision in one area of town and that's High Range PUD has 14 it in certain planning cells beyond that it's... 15 16 Shipley: Sonoma Ranch does it to certain inaudible 17 18 Scholz: It wasn't in my area many years ago. 19 20 Crane: I think a lot of it has to be the home owner's responsibility to comply with 21 code but yet recognize practically speaking somebody moving from town is 22 not going sit down with a big code book and thumb through it so we have to 23 have a way of getting the people who is going to be in touch with which may 24 be the builder, but certainly going to be the realtor. Have them to take the b 25 responsibility to find out to what the limitations are. I like the idea of forcing 26 the increase in lot size or let's say having a ratio to lot size and the size of 27 house although that the builder insists he don't do anything less that 2000 28 square feet knows what he's got to do for a lot and then he can make a 2000 29 square foot house and if wants to leave space for a porch he can. 30 31 Evans: Inaudible ought not to do that. 32 33 Crane: Inaudible. 34 35 Evans: At some point it has to be you know, some of the responsibility to be placed 36 on the purchaser. Inaudible we're aware of the porch issue but what about 37 the type of inaudible versus inaudible. There are a lot issues that go into 38 purchasing your home and I think it's up to the responsibility of the home 39 owner to do his research and invest in a large portion of the inaudible. I 40 don't know if it's our responsibility to protect people from themselves. 41 42 Scholz: I don't think it is but I also think inaudible. Well, I'm in favor of disclosure, 43 and disclosure would be this house is good for the limits of this property. 44 45 Evans: Well, they could come into the city and get the setbacks. 46 f r 18 0 1 Beard: Yeah, but young people are buying these first time homes, they're just 2 looking to buy a home and move in, they're not looking to do any research, 3 it's strictly if they can afford it. 4 5 Evans: Next time they inaudible. Smart guy. 6 7 Scholz: He is actually, he's an engineer. 8 9 Evans: You know, some people confuse responsibility inaudible a large portion 10 inaudible 11 12 Beard: But I think disclosure also should be there too. 13 14 Evans: Inaudible 15 16 Scholz: I talked to one of those today as a matter of fact. Ok, thank you Mr. 17 Banegas. 18 19 Banegas: We'll move on, technically that will be on Cheryl's work program. 20 21 Scholz: I saw her taking careful notes. 22 23 Banegas: I do know staff has discussed, in fact I talked about it with James just the 24 other day and he has looked into certain issues and that's definitely 25 something we will be addressing at some point but... 26 27 Rodriguez: I know one of our quick fixes right now is try to put some kind of public 28 service announcement like Community Connection that comes out quarterly 29 that goes out to everybody in the City telling them that if you're are going to 30 construct a porch or whatever you may need a permit and there are 31 regulations for setbacks, something we can communicate to the layman but 32 inaudible out there inaudible. 33 34 Scholz: Ok, tell us about the NMSU annexation. 35 36 Banegas: Ok, that one I've touched on already, as part of the University Corridor plan 37 amendment, that kind of was an early launch, if you will, on at least a portion 38 of that we've touched on, the City Center and the hotel site so again that's 39 going to be released up to Council here relatively soon, we're hoping that to 40 kind of bring closure to that real quick. The next one, the critical area level 41 three sub area plan, the last page in your packet which represents a map, it's 42 stamped draft, it just staffs first attempt, if you will to just kind of formulate 43 ideas on how to approach something like this. The idea is to identify here is, 44 key issues in the City and try to identify some key goals, if you will, broader 45 goals, in terms of how to deal with land use related issues that might be 46 pertinent to the best specific area, as an example you have one that is a 19 1 perfect circle over in the Presidio area, the relatively recently annexed area 2 we have a huge amount of arroyos that traverse the property and again, we 3 are already working on an arroyo plan but some of the bullets that you see 4 there and I apologize for the size, but some of the key bullets there are just 5 simply identifying some of the issues that we might want to flush out, if you 6 will, as it relates to that critical area. Others recently Las Cruces Country 7 Club which was all part of that huge discussion part of the MPO's effort to 8 examine transportation related issues from Madrid over to Sonoma Springs, 9 Sonora Springs, Sonoma Springs? 10 11 Scholz: Sonora Springs 12 13 Banegas: They look at the feasibility of a road that would basically fly over the 14 interstate, over the dam and when we looked into that obviously issues in 15 terms of traffic patterns as it relates to potential development, the Las Cruces 16 Country Club area was brought up, a lot of people are interested in what that 17 might come to be, the developer, the land owner of that property has 18 indicated that at some point is may very well be developed, he has no 19 immediate plans but it's out there, so one of the issues is what would it do to 20 that area, what are the types of things that we need to look at, encourage 21 some mixed use, that type of thing, help reduce traffic flows etc. etc. Other 22 areas are identified here; I won't go through all of them. We've always 23 wanted to touch on Las Cruces Dam; it's already identified as a recreational 24 area on the master plan, inaudible of the master plan, so how do we 25 increase safety through the use of that facility, those type of issues, can we 26 utilize adjacent properties (i.e. the portion of the BLM property that used to 27 be the landfill for Las Cruces, it's right on the corner of Roadrunner and 28 Lohman) can we utilize that property to an extent for a public purpose, take a 29 look at those type of issues, 1 know BLM is very interested in getting rid of 30 that. It comes with some environmental issues, maybe we don't want to 31 touch it but again, this type of approach, planning approach would help 32 identify some key issues in the City, key areas and allow us to at least 33 formulate some goals and objectives in terms of land use related matters, 34 that type of thing. 35 36 Scholz: How are you prioritizing things? 37 38 Banegas: At this point they're dots on a map, so to speak and we're sure there's others 39 so if you have any input or if you have any priorities suggestions related to 40 these we're open. Keep in mind that these, this effort is likely to generate 41 substantially more work because we are going to generate some broad goals 42 but ultimately we're going to want to flush them out and get some clear 43 guidance in terms of policy and direction, so easily these can turn into a 44 more detailed effort. Any questions on that? 45 20 Aft 1 Scholz: No, I think it's a good idea to, you know kind of inaudible out here and say ok 2 where are the problem areas, or the potential problem areas or the areas 3 that you can, you know bring development in. I'm particularly interested in 4 the connection between Madrid and Triviz if that's a possibility. I was looking 5 at driving down Triviz the other day which by the way needs resurfacing and 6 very heavily traveled too and I can see where Madrid would be a good 7 connector there. I recall there are a couple of city streets that are kind of 8 unfinished on the other side of the dam. 9 10 Banegas: Yes. Inaudible 11 12 Scholz: Has it ever been dedicated? 13 14 Banegas: I know there are dedication issues on some of those, I don't know about that 15 particular one. 16 17 Bustos: inaudible 18 19 Scholz: Clearly we have a problem with east/west crossings because they built the 20 dam to keep the water out of downtown and they built the freeway on the 21 west side, east side of town at the time before there was one and now we're 22 essentially stuck with it. When did they inaudible by the way? 23 24 Banegas: The City? 25 26 Scholz: Yeah. 27 28 Banegas: Oh, about, I want to say they closed it about three months ago, two months 29 ago something like that but it took place for several months prior to that, 30 several public hearings held at Camino Real and Loma Heights Elementary 31 so, quite a process. The MPO does a real good of public involvement in the 32 efforts of, ultimately the City pulled back the proposal. The City was the one 33 that pitched the proposal and it's because there could have been federal 34 funds associated with that effort, they have to launch this MPO process. 35 36 Shipley: Couldn't there be a flyover all the way up to Roadrunner? 37 38 Banegas: It was the idea, at the time, was to connect Madrid and go over and connect 39 to Sonora Springs up there. 40 41 Shipley: That's where Binns is doing his development. But that's arroyo through 42 there isn't it? 43 44 Banegas: There's the old, what's the dam up in there, there's the inaudible dam that is 45 adjacent to Triviz and the interstate and then obviously you'll hit the major 46 Las Cruces dam and then there are some arroyos up in inaudible... 21 1 2 Shipley: Is there a way to go over that, that you could put pilings and inaudible and 3 stuff that, I mean you would have to do it so that it's really decorative and 4 pleasing but one thing is to make it so that could be a core of a transition. 5 6 Banegas: We examined, at the stage that we were at there was no formal design 7 obviously I wasn't concerned, I was how, you know, we were to accomplish 8 that if we did proceed with it design wise etc. 9 10 Shipley: How would go to the public and say we want to do this if you didn't have 11 some kind design that says inaudible. Oh that's not going to be too bad you 12 know, and inaudible, but if you go over there, they're going to think of you 13 know, round pilings go up on a bridge and it's hard to believe inaudible. 14 15 Scholz: I thought of a tunnel. 16 17 Shipley: Well, I think if you are using an arroyo for a dam why not bring it the same 18 height of the dam and dig it up so the water still could go down there and not 19 have a problem. 20 21 Scholz: I was being silly. 22 23 Schuster: I think that two major reasons why the City kind of withdrew, one is the Army 24 Corp of Engineers really didn't like it, they hated the idea of crossing the dam 25 because they felt it would compromise the structure, it was also determined 26 to be not cost effective because, I think they estimated about $25 million for 27 the project but the traffic modeling that the MPO did showed a minor change 28 in congestion on Lohman and U.S. 70, it was something like a 3% change. 29 The capacity of that roadway wasn't going to be all that great considering 30 that most of it on either end was already built out around it and just that the 31 size inaudible and so just $25 million for a couple percentage points they just 32 decided not to inaudible. 33 34 Scholz: That's why I can't see it. It makes much more sense to me to extend Triviz, 35 which is a minor extension admittedly going through a inaudible. 36 37 Banegas: That and federal dollars, shrinking, yeah, there were a lot of huge priorities 38 statewide. The next four items there in pairs basically. You have recent 39 discussions with staff on the next level which was the Sonoma Ranch 40 Corridor study area for lack of a better of title. In essence you have inaudible 41 in the Sonoma Ranch area particularly along the intersection of Sonoma 42 Springs and Sonoma Ranch Boulevard. There are several commercial 43 parcels in that vicinity some of which run through a relatively recent zone 44 change and the concern among the residents, what's going to be built on 45 them and how is it going to look. They understand because information has 46 been conveyed to them that there is a lot commercial zoning in place, there's 22 0 1 some multi-family zoning in place. I think at this point if I had to glean what 2 they were talking about, what they were concerned with and what they 3 wanted to achieve is try to investigate ways to improve some of the smart 4 growth principles, try to bring some of the buildings well number one, make 5 them attractive but bring them closer where, to the roadway where 6 pedestrians can have greater access to them, that kind of thing, complete 7 street concepts, those types of things. Try to involve that planning process 8 so that those parcels can be developed in conformance to those guidelines. 9 That's kind of what I glean from the discussion, Councillor Thomas was 10 involved in that effort; she sat down with not only staff but the residents, to 11 discuss this issue. We talked about the possibility of launching not only a 12 study area but ultimately like an overlay similar to Avenida de Mesilla, if you 13 will, wherein you still have the underlying zone but you seek certain aesthetic 14 controls and do landscape and whatever signage controls you can even talk 15 about bringing, you know, reducing setbacks for front setback issues, those 16 type of things. I think they were looking at any and all options at the time but 17 obviously this effort will be a significant effort and introduce yet another 18 planning project to the list that we have already gone through so this kind of 19 triggered the issue that not only a) we want to involve you all in the planning 20 process in terms our work load but b) hopefully have you kind of weigh in on 21 some of the priorities so that we can be better able to say, you know we've 22 got twenty projects already and here's kind of the work flow that we're talking 23 about in priority ranking because obviously with limited staff we're going to 24 have a difficult time meeting tight time constraints in getting some of these 25 projects out so that was the issue on the Sonoma Ranch Corridor study 26 area. 27 28 Shipley: That's going to be a problem in that if the commercial had been built before 29 the residential went up around it there wouldn't be a problem and the 30 developer has waited till the end to do the commercial and he's got a senior 31 community on one side of the street that's going to inaudible that whole 32 commercial area and he's going to have to convince them out of opposition. 33 34 Banegas: As it stands now if he develops in accordance with our current zoning 35 provisions, technically legally he's good. 36 37 Shipley: Well, he's legal but he's still going to have a problem. 38 39 Banegas: Absolutely, he's going to be inaudible. I do know that, I think one of those 40 parcels, if I'm not mistaken, has been sold off. I don't know if his intent is to 41 develop them to sell but it could very well, or he is just marketing the 42 property and ultimately, you know hopefully somebody buys it and develops 43 it inaudible vacant. 44 45 Scholz: I've heard from some residents up there that they really would like to have 46 access to a supermarket and not have to drive you know all the way to 23 1 Albertson's inaudible and I think the new Wal-Mart the superstore that is 2 going at Rinconada and Northrise is going to incorporate a supermarket 3 inaudible super center, so that might be helpful. I've heard people inaudible 4 and really makes sense for not just because of the gas but because they 5 would like to walk somewhere, walk to a store and obviously they can't do 6 that right now. 7 8 Banegas: With the creation of a plan comes the overlay which would follow and so both 9 of those things are in tandem, they represent a huge effort. The last two are 10 also in tandem, the Avenida de Mesilla plan amendment. Tom and I heard 11 about that, I think it was the late afternoon after our meeting with the 12 Sonoma Ranch folks, if not the next day, I can't remember but at this point in 13 time we are aware of a request and I don't know whether it came from 14 property owners, residents or in conjunction with Councillor Small. He had 15 asked that we consider an amendment to the Avenida de Mesilla Gateway 16 plan. We don't know what the issues are at this point in time, we don't know 17 whether its land use related or what, so we're still kind of waiting for more 18 information and guidance as to what the concern it so yet again another 19 project on the table and that represents kind of our work load. There are 20 other ancillary tasks that are being conducted, Census 2010, that is fact 21 approaching, I know the Census Bureau has already touched base with staff 22 with City Administration, they are looking to create a committee, complete 23 count committee. From a staff perspective it usually doesn't involve a huge 24 amount of time but it is time nonetheless that is pulled away from other 25 projects so Tom has already done several steps in preparation for that 26 census effort. 27 28 Scholz: What would be the Community Development's involvement in this? 29 30 Schuster: The recent project that we completed was an address update so they'll give 31 us data from their previous census which we've added some, 4000 or 5000 32 households since then so they need all that new information but it requires a 33 lot of field verification and things like that. 34 35 Scholz: Do you simply give them a data set? 36 37 Schuster: Yeah, but we have to give it to them in their format following their protocols, it 38 was actually, I coordinated it, I had help from an intern part time and it ended 39 up taking about two months. 40 41 Scholz: Well, Commissioners do you have any other questions of these fine folks? 42 43 Evans: I have a question. I guess there looks like a time and effort put into doing a 44 plan and then I can also inaudible putting together all the variances and 45 inaudible. I'm walking down the halls and I see that the offices and stuff and, 46 are you guys fully staffed now? 24 Aft Aoft 1 2 Banegas: We are, with one exception. Cheryl has one planner position that she is 3 trying to fill but this is the closest we've been to being fully staffed at least 4 under Development. 5 6 Evans: Based off of what historically inaudible I don't know I mean in government 7 you're given so many slots and then you have what is called inaudible where 8 you know, sort of what the City has done, it's grown and grown and grown, 9 and I'm wondering as the City's grown has there been more, we talked, 10 inaudible well in my mind inaudible and so I'm curious that as the City has 11 grown as the developing smarter ergonomic areas kind of come to the 12 forefront then you guys have grown also or have you just met your staffing 13 requirements that was established ten years ago or twelve years ago that 14 hasn't changed. 15 16 Banegas: I guess to answer that I think have been keeping up with the growth and the 17 explosion of all the development and so forth I lean to a no. I will say that 18 through the budget process which is where we get all our position approvals 19 etc we were allowed to create, if I just guessitimate probably three or four 20 positions in the past several years I should say. That to me is a coup 21 because I know it's tough to get positions but one of the things quite frankly 22 is this type of documentation in our progress and working with them and 23 keeping a time line and a time frame in terms of the effort will hopefully in the 24 future endeavor bunches of endeavors allow us to make to make a pitch that 25 justifies all of the need for additional staff and I think that's where Dave is 26 going with that, is everyone generates a work listing, a work plan and then 27 keeps it up to date and identifies the work load and obviously that will help 28 justify future positions. This go around, as you know the city operates and 29 relies heavily on GRT the gross receipts, and there of course at the very end 30 of the last fiscal year things tightened up quite a bit. We're ok but we weren't 31 expecting inaudible so word was try to keep it as flat as possible. 32 33 Evans: I would kind of expect that because of the increase in growth and population 34 and your tax base inaudible. I'm just curious because you know this is a lot 35 of work, what you guys do is a lot of work. 36 37 Banegas: In fact, from a long range planning, you know we've got Susan Lowell, we've 38 got Carol McCall, we've got Tom, myself, am I missing anyone and we have 39 a coop, Paola and so that's it from a long range, all that said we do share a 40 lot of ideas, information among the Development side and MPO and so forth 41 but everyone else has their own area that they work on so it's not like we're 42 adding staff to the effort, we're just kind of trying to balance it. 43 44 Scholz: Cheryl, how close are you to hiring? 45 25 D 1 Rodriguez: We just advertised the position. We filled the Senior Planner position and 2 then now with Gary is now our Senior Planner and with that inaudible 3 planner and advertise that. I'm anticipating that I can have that position filled 4 hopefully by the end of August. 5 6 Scholz: Oh good, good, ok. I do appreciate the work you're doing and I appreciate 7 the updates, I think having one of these every other month or something 8 would be very sensible so we inaudible you can keep us abreast of what's 9 going on. It will save us asking uninformed questions to the inaudible. 10 11 Shipley: What's the prognosis on the last position on the Commission? 12 13 Scholz: Well, I've been pressing our Councilman Silva to do that and I've gotten 14 some reassurances, well I haven't gotten any people, so I've talked to some 15 friends of his who are more informed with him than I am and hopefully that 16 will accomplish something. I really would like to see someone on the board 17 by August because in effect the first Council District hasn't been represented 18 for almost two years now. Mr. Sanchez showed up to one meeting I think 19 last year and that was it and he vanished or whatever. And we had a 20 change Council positions in November and inaudible. I don't know, you don't 21 know any more, do you? 22 23 Banegas: No, no we've tried, I know Cheryl's tried a lot to try and push the issue and it 24 is what it is. 25 26 Evans: Inaudible 27 28 Bustos: Actually I think he does, I thought Mayor Miyagishima; the Mayor even asked 29 if I knew anybody. 30 31 Scholz: Right and I had talked to a couple of other, you know, sort of inaudible 32 organizations and asked them if they could suggest candidates and I think 33 they have suggested some people and two of the people they suggested 34 were on other commissions and well you don't want to burden them, if they 35 are volunteering for one thing they probably don't won't have time to 36 volunteer for something else. Any other questions or comments? Ok, I will 37 say this worksession is over at seven inaudible. 38 39 IV. VISION 2040 UPDATE 40 41 Banegas: Just one moment, I'm sorry. The Vision 2040 update, just real quick, I'll keep 42 it brief. I just want to indicate to you that it's still very much in full swing. We 43 are literally working hard to get some of the modeling efforts not only on the 44 staff side, we're looking at the software that will be used to help guide that 45 effort but the consultant is looking at some of their, to model the software to 46 help examine some land us scenarios etc that we've been trying to generate Y 26 ANAL 1 as part of this overall endeavor but some of the scenarios that they are going 2 to build on, I'm sure there's going to be a multitude of scenarios. I've 3 identified three in your packet obviously with the population growth and the 4 population that is being proposed for the region we have to allocate if you will 5 that population somewhere so the question then is where do we put the folks 6 given certain constraints what does that mean? If we're looking to protect 7 arroyos to a degree, how did that impact the population distribution, land use 8 distribution, if we project slopes, escarpment areas etc, what does that 9 mean, how does this impact the scenarios as well as if we look at some 10 issues in relationship to what they call suitability factors if there's a parcel of 11 land and it's farther away from any infrastructure road, utilities, that kind of 12 thing, how does that play a role in the overall development scheme. Do we 13 want to encourage development in areas that are at a certain threshold to 14 that type of infrastructure, those type of scenarios are going to be examined 15 and Tom, you can probably talk to us in a greater detail but I think it warrants 16 discussion in the sense that we are examining any and all opportunities to 17 model this type of development possibility and then of course distribute it in 18 accordance to the intended plan update. It terms of other areas that are 19 involved in the 2040 update it was a big push to get some of the survey 20 results. As a part of the overall effort, there was always an intended 21 distribution of the survey to gauge public reaction to certain things, land use 22 and otherwise. The consultants had launched that survey effort, got so 23 many responses, it wasn't enough in terms of what they were hoping to 24 satisfy the viability of the survey but in so doing we received a lot of criticism 25 that perhaps that type of survey or the method in which we initiated was 26 perhaps self selecting unintentionally but nonetheless I know staff and the 27 consultants at least considered various issues with intent to reduce that very 28 concern however with the public kind of keeping an eye on this we decided 29 to with administrations approval to investigate, pulling in a, some assistance 30 to help us generate a new survey that will be kind of a companion, if you will, 31 to one already in process by the consultants. To that end we were given the 32 resources from NMSU's Arrowhead Research Center, they have assisted us 33 in trying to generate a new survey, a telephonic survey which I think we've, 34 we sat down and discussed with all the parties and have come up with a 35 rough draft that we feel fairly confident will fit the bill. It's our intention that 36 we finalize all those issues and get that launched. That assistance through 37 Arrowhead as quickly as possible so that we can kind of bring that issue to 38 rest and move on so the intent is to kind of convey the results of the 39 telephonic survey just as an addendum, if you will to man some credence 40 hopefully to whatever other efforts were already in place. 41 42 Scholz: Was the concern expressed that we weren't reaching the populations we 43 should be reaching? 44 45 Banegas: Distribution inaudible 46 27 1 Schuster: Well, the initial survey was a mail survey and there were, I think the concern 2 was that because it was just a single shot mailing that people who were 3 already aware of the project were more than likely to respond and so there 4 was a feeling that perhaps those might be people that have an axe to grind. 5 Our opinion was that you are asking questions about income levels, family 6 status and things like that so you can try and match up the demographics of 7 the respondents to the demographics of the community as a whole, we 8 thought initially that would be sufficient but others felt it wasn't so the phone 9 survey that we're working on now, the sampling program is a bit more robust 10 in terms of random inaudible things like that so hopefully that will satisfy the 11 critics. 12 13 Scholz: Well, I've dealt with surveying and I don't think there is anyway to reach all 14 audiences in fact the phone survey, interestingly enough is losing is power 15 because you've got people are on cells and they don't have land lines 16 anymore. This is becoming more common. 17 18 Schuster: Hopefully having both will mean they are covering bases. 19 20 Scholz: Is the phone survey just for Las Cruces or is county wide? 21 22 Schuster: County wide. We are including some cell numbers in the sample and we're 23 disqualifying people whose cell number who also have a land line. That's 24 one of the screening questions. 25 26 Crane: Was the mail survey to everyone or randomly...? 27 28 Schuster: Inaudible randomly generated a number of points, there were over 1200 29 addresses. 30 31 Scholz: And what was the return? Less than 300 inaudible 32 33 Schuster: I believe right now we're about at 300; we want to get more than that though. 34 We're going to send out another round. 35 36 Scholz: Yeah, I think statistically you need to. 37 38 Schuster: We need to get about 400. 39 40 Scholz: The reason I ask is because I've done mail, you know random mail surveys 41 and that's a normal return. In fact that's pretty good return. 42 43 Banegas: I think it should be noted that whole purpose of the first one in my opinion 44 and I think staffs opinion to glean attitudes on various issues, not to 45 necessarily say 14% of the population feels strongly, I think it was to try to 46 get or drudge up attitudes, feelings toward certain issues, land use or other 28 1 wise and that type of thing. So I think the perspective of that effort kind of 2 shifted. 3 4 Crane: The virtue of this, although it may not be a random return it is a return 5 indicative from people that are going to interest themselves in the future and 6 so and they will be practical purposes more reliable. If 300 are sent back 7 inaudible. 8 9 Scholz: Ok, any other questions for Tom? 10 11 Schuster: I just want to comment before we adjourn inaudible next month we'll be 12 presenting the Alameda Depot Neighborhood plan in detail at your next P&Z 13 Worksession. 14 15 V. DISCUSSION OF OTHER ITEMS 16 17 Scholz: Ok, so we'll have a worksession on the... 18 19 Rodriguez: It will be August 19th, inaudible your packets beforehand and that meeting 20 will be held at Council Chambers so there will be power point access. 21 22 Schuster: We felt like we might have some public attendance and they wouldn't really 23 fit in this room. 24 25 Crane: That's a worksession? 26 27 Scholz: Correct, that's the worksession and the P&Z session then will be the 26tH 28 29 VI. ADJOURNMENT 30 31 Scholz: Ok, now we are going to adjourn at 7:29 p.m. 32 33 34 r 35 Chair 36 37 ' Paraphrased by Tom Schuster because it wasn't completely audible. 29