Loading...
01-25-2011 YM City of las Cruces,- P E O P L E N E L P I N O P E O P L E PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA The following agenda will be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Las Cruces, New Mexico, at a public hearing held on Tuesday, January 25, 2011 beginning at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 700 N. Main Street, 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 1-800-659-8331 (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 11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — December 14, 2010; December 28, 2010 III. POSTPONEMENTS IV. WITHDRAWALS V. CONSENT AGENDA Those items on the consent agenda will be voted by one motion with the acceptance of the agenda. Any Planning and Zoning Commissioner, Staff or member of the public may remove an item from the consent agenda for discussion by the commission. 1. Case Z2824: Application of the City of Las Cruces Economic Development Department to rezone from A-2C (Rural Agriculture w/Condition) to WMIP (West Mesa Industrial Park) on a 120.14± acre tract located generally south of Interstate 10, west of Mountain Vista Parkway and east of Crawford Boulevard; a.k.a. 0 Crawford Blvd.; Parcel ID# 02-24501; Proposed Use: Unspecified light industrial uses. Council District 4. 2. Case Z2826: Application of DVI on behalf of Mesilla Valley Commercial Tire, Inc. to rezone from C-2 (Commercial Medium Intensity) to C-3 (Commercial High Intensity) on a 1.377+/- acre tract located on the north side of Bataan Memorial West, 495 +/- feet north of its intersection with Bixler Drive; a.k.a. 3425 Bataan Memorial West; Parcel ID# 02-07934; Proposed Use: To bring property into compliance with the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended. Council District 5. 3. Case Z2827: Application of Jim Mattocks on behalf of Christian Ricky Sr. et al to rezone from C-2 (Commercial Medium Intensity) to C-3 (Commercial High Intensity) on a 1.55± acre tract located on the north side of US 70/Bataan Memorial West at the intersection of Saturn Circle of Saturn Circle; a.k.a. 0 Bataan Memorial West; Parcel ID# 02-08159. Proposed Use: To bring property into compliance with the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended. Council District 5. 4. Case Z2829: Application of Kary Bulsterbaum on behalf of Mesilla Capital Investment, LLC to rezone from R-4 (Multi-Dwelling high Density & Limited Retail and Office) to 0-2 (Office, Professional-Limited Retail Service) on a 0.31+/- acre tract located on the west side of Walnut Street, 490 +/- feet south of its intersection with Lohman Avenue; a.k.a. 780 S. Walnut Street; Tax Parcel 02-22886; Proposed Use: To bring property into compliance with the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended. Council District 3. 5. Case S-10-044: Application of Beehive Homes on behalf of Paul D. G. Miller for a preliminary plat known as the Beehive Village of Las Cruces on a 2.79± acre tract located on the south side of Mars Avenue at the intersection of Valverde Loop; a.k.a. 0 Mars Avenue; Parcel ID# 02-25909. Proposed Use: Assisted- living facilities. Council District 5. VI. NEW BUSINESS 1. Adoption of Statement of Reasonable Notice as required by Section 10-15-1(B) of the Open Meetings Act, Section 10-15-1 to 10-15-4, New Mexico Statutes Annotated (1978), as amended. 2. Election of Officers 3. Appointment of Primary Member and Alternate Member to the City's Affordable Housing Land Bank and Trust Fund Advisory Committee 4. Case IDP-44: Application of Xtreme Design Plans, LLC on behalf of Michael and Janet Cruz for an infill development proposal requesting the following development standards: 15 ft. front yard setback, 20 ft. secondary front yard setback, 5 ft. side yard setback, 5 ft. rear yard setback and 20' garage setback on a 0.129± acre tract located on the south side of East Picacho Avenue at the intersection of Manzanita Street; a.k.a. 640 East Picacho Avenue; Parcel ID# 02-04949. Proposed Use: New construction of a single-family residence. Council District 1. 5. Case Z2822: Application of Jake Redford on behalf of Mactimski, LLC to rezone from O-2C (Office, Professional-Limited Retail Service-Conditional) to C-2C (Commercial Medium Intensity-Conditional) on a 0.6+/- acre tract located on the east side of Telshor Boulevard, 655 +/- feet south of its intersection with Foothills Road; a.k.a. 775 S. Telshor Boulevard; Parcel ID# 02-40360; Proposed Use: Construction of a restaurant/cafe. Council District 6. 6. Case Z2825: Application of ASA Architects on behalf of the Las Cruces Housing Authority to rezone from R-1 a/C-2 (Single-Family Medium Density/Commercial Medium Intensity) to C-2 (Commercial Medium Intensity) on a 0.68+/- acre tract located on the northwest corner of Oak Street and Union Avenue; a.k.a. 3350 Oak Street; Parcel ID# 02-13094; Proposed Use: Transitional living and counseling facility for Veterans. Council District 2. VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Vlll. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Work Session on February 8, 2011 at 6pm in Council Chambers IX. ADJOURNMENT 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 FOR THE 3 CITY OF LAS CRUCES 4 City Council Chambers 5 January 25, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. 6 7 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: 8 Charles Scholz, Chairman 9 Godfrey Crane, Vice Chair 10 Ray Shipley, Member 11 William Stowe, Member 12 Shawn Evans, Member 13 Charles Beard, Member 14 Donald Bustos, Member 15 16 BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: 17 18 None 19 20 STAFF PRESENT: 21 Cheryl Rodriguez, Development Services Administrator 22 Ellie Cain, Senior Planner 23 Jennifer Robertson, Planner 24 Helen Revels, Planner 25 Adam Ochoa, Planner 26 Mark Dubbin, Fire Department 27 Jared Abrams, CLC Legal Staff 28 Bonnie Ennis, Recording 29 30 I. CALL TO ORDER (6:00 pm) 31 32 Scholz: Good evening and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission for 33 January 25, 2011. 1 want to introduce the members of the Zoning 34 Commission before we begin and then we will do the approval of the 35 minutes and all of our regular business. On my far right is Commissioner 36 Shipley. Commissioner Shipley is the Mayor's appointment. Next to him 37 is Commissioner Crane. Commissioner Crane represents Council District 38 4. Next to him is Commissioner Stowe. He represents Council District 1. 39 Next to him is Commissioner Evans, Council District 5; then 40 Commissioner Bustos, Council District 3. Next to me is Commissioner 41 Beard, Council District 2 and I represent Council District 6. 42 43 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — December 14, 2010; December 28, 2010 44 45 Scholz: The first order of business is the approval of minutes, gentlemen. We 46 actually have two sets of minutes to approve. The first one is from 1 1 December 14th when we had a truncated meeting. That was because of a 2 construction emergency and you all probably recall that. So are there any 3 additions or corrections to the minutes of December 14th? Hearing none 1 4 will entertain a motion to approve. 5 6 Shipley: I move to approve the minutes as recorded. 7 8 Scholz: Thank you, Commissioner Shipley. Is there a second? 9 10 Crane: I second it. 11 12 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Crane seconds. All those in favor say aye. 13 14 Some Commissioners: Aye. 15 16 Scholz: Those opposed same sign. All right, the minutes for the December 14th 17 meeting are approved. 18 19 Evans: And one abstention. 20 21 Scholz: I'm sorry. One abstention. Thank you. So it's 5-1-1. Okay, now, the 22 minutes for December 28th. Any additions or corrections? Commissioner 23 Shipley. 24 25 Shipley: I have several: on page 16, line 21 ... 26 27 Scholz: Okay. 28 29 Shipley: Where it says "cleaver" I think that was supposed to have been clever. 30 31 Scholz: Clever, I caught that, too, yes. It's not a reference to Beaver or anything 32 like that. 33 34 Shipley: That is correct. On page 27, line 24 change "out," o-u-t, to "our," o-u-r. 35 36 Scholz: Ah, when we want to expand our bank, right? Okay. 37 38 Shipley: Page 46, line 26. 1 believe that is supposed to say "you also generate 39 our"... 40 41 Scholz: Okay, "you also"... 42 43 Shipley: ...."you also generate power," correct. Okay, line 30, the "economies of 44 scale," and "economies is with an "i-e-s," not an "apostrophe-s." 45 46 Scholz: Economies of scale? 2 1 2 Shipley: Correct. 3 4 Scholz: Not "stale." 5 6 Shipley: That's correct. Line 31 on page 46 where it says, "it will".... 7 8 Scholz: All right. 9 10 Shipley: On page 47, line 23; you need to strike one of the two words "the 11 people"... 12 13 Scholz: Yes. 14 15 Shipley: There's a duplicate. 16 17 Scholz: Right. Okay. 18 19 Shipley: on line 30, it is to "their"... and I need to look at that because... 20 21 Scholz: I don't see that... "as I'm looking I'm trying to foresee what kind of 22 problems it's going to have on the neighborhood?" Oh, on their 23 neighborhood? 24 25 Shipley: Let me look at line 30 ... that was 47.... Just a second .... I think you need 26 to change "it's" to "they're"... "problems they're going to have" instead of"it 27 is going to have." 28 29 Scholz: Okay. 30 31 Shipley: Okay? And then on line 37 on page 47 and it's got "do they put 32 Dumpsters." Let's add the word "they." 33 34 Scholz: "where do they..." Right. 35 36 Shipley: Okay, page 48, line 44 you need to strike "it" between "car" and "was." 37 38 Scholz: All right. 39 40 Shipley: "What color the car was and what kind of car it was;" and then page 52 41 line 16 the first word should be "You". 42 43 Scholz: Right, that's a typo. 44 45 Shipley: Um-hmm, and also on page 53 line 43 the first word is "Your," y-o-u-r, they 46 left off the "Y." 3 1 2 Scholz: There you go. 3 4 Crane: (inaudible) 5 6 Shipley: 53 line 43. 7 8 Scholz: Right, "does your plan address curbside recycling?" 9 10 Shipley: And on page 55, line 32 there was .... Let's see ... I just wanted to make a 11 comment. You said something about golf courses don't really generate a 12 lot of traffic but they generate about 28 to 35 cars per hour from sunrise 13 until maybe an hour or two before sunset. 14 15 Scholz: Yes, but is this what Denton said? 16 17 Shipley: No, that wasn't said there... 18 19 Scholz: Oh, okay. 20 21 Shipley: I thought it should have been added. 22 23 Scholz: Well, I want to keep the text to what the person said. 24 25 Shipley: All right. 26 27 Scholz: Is that it? 28 29 Shipley: That's it. 30 31 Scholz: Okay, anyone else? Yes, Commissioner Crane. 32 33 Crane: On page 18, line 32 1 said, "the big green place, the old Hayner, H-a-y-n-e- 34 r, Hayner residence." 35 36 Scholz: Okay. 37 38 Crane: Page 21, line 4 the word "if' needs to come out: "the speed limit is 30 39 miles-an-hour on Melendrez." 40 41 Scholz: Okay, just a strike there. 42 43 Crane: Yes, strike the "if' and on page 47 about half the page there's three 44 "Dentons" in a row quoted. You have Shipley, Denton, Denton, Denton 45 and I think the "Denton" on line 28 should be Shipley. 46 4 1 Scholz: No, actually I think the second "Denton" after... the Denton after "Right" 2 should be Shipley. 3 4 Crane: Yes. 5 6 Scholz: That's what you mean. Okay. 7 8 Crane: I'm guessing. You said that, right? 9 10 Scholz: Yes. I'm petty sure. 11 12 Crane: That's all I have. 13 14 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 15 16 Stowe: On page 54, line 23.... 17 18 Scholz: You do realize you're driving the secretary crazy now? (all laughing) 19 20 Stowe: Page 54, line 23... 21 22 Scholz: Yes. 23 24 Stowe: I believe it should be 220 volt "battery" chargers. 25 26 Scholz: There we go. Okay? 27 28 Stowe: And also toward the bottom, line 44, 1 believe, the intention of Mr. Denton 29 was to say, "I'm not sure I can give you a textbook definition, but to me..." 30 31 Scholz: Right, and then he defines sustainability. Okay. 32 33 Stowe: The word "not" was omitted. 34 35 Scholz: All right. 36 37 Stowe: That's it. 38 39 Scholz: That's it? Okay, I have two.... (to Ms. Ennis: Is your hand cramped yet? 40 No? Okay.) Page 9 — excuse me, page 18, line 9.... Or did we catch that 41 already? Let's see... oh, I'm sorry. I'm reading it backwards. It's page 9 42 line 18. There we go... No. Never mind. Okay, I'll entertain a motion to 43 approve the minutes of December 28th as amended. 44 45 Stowe: So moved. 46 5 1 Scholz: Thank you, Mr. Stowe, and do I hear a second? 2 3 Shipley: Second. 4 5 Scholz: And a second from Shipley. All right, all those in favor say aye. 6 7 Some members: Aye 8 9 Scholz: All those opposed same sign... and abstentions. Okay, three abstentions. 10 So it's four "yes" and three "abstentions." All right, that takes care of that 11 business. 12 13 111. POSTPONEMENTS - NONE 14 15 Scholz: Mr. Ochoa, I see you're chomping at the bit there. I'll look at my agenda. 16 Are there any postponements, sir? 17 18 Ochoa: No, sir, not tonight. 19 20 IV. WITHDRAWALS - NONE 21 22 Scholz: Glad to hear that. How about withdrawals? 23 24 Ochoa: No, sir, none. 25 26 V. CONSENT AGENDA 27 28 Scholz: Okay, so that moves us right to the Consent Agenda. Now here's how the 29 Consent Agenda works, folks. What we do is we have... let's see: one, 30 two, three, four, five... five items on the Consent Agenda and if there's no 31 one that wishes to speak to any of these items from the audience or from 32 the staff or from the Commissioners then we'll simply take one vote and 33 approve all of them. Okay? 34 35 36 Those items on the consent agenda will be voted by one motion with the 37 acceptance of the agenda. Any Planning and Zoning Commissioner, Staff or 38 member of the public may remove an item from the consent agenda for 39 discussion by the commission. 40 41 1. Case Z2824: Application of the City of Las Cruces Economic Development 42 Department to rezone from A-2C (Rural Agriculture w/Condition) to WMIP 43 (West Mesa Industrial Park) on a 120.14± acre tract located generally south of 44 Interstate 10, west of Mountain Vista Parkway and east of Crawford Boulevard; 45 a.k.a. 0 Crawford Blvd.; Parcel ID# 02-24501; Proposed Use: Unspecified light 46 industrial uses. Council District 4. 6 1 2 Scholz: So the first one is case Z2824: Application of the City of Las Cruces 3 Economic Development Department. That's the City itself. Do you wish 4 to speak to this, Ms. Revels? 5 6 Revels: I was just informing you that I did receive an e-mail from a property owner 7 in the vicinity with comments for this case. 8 9 Scholz: Okay, so you want us to pull it and ... 10 11 Revels: No, I'm just letting you know that I'm going to check with the audience. 12 You can check with the audience to see if there's anyone to pull ... but 13 did provide you guys a copy. 14 15 Scholz: Okay, and that's this first case. 16 17 Revels: Yes, sir. 18 19 Scholz: Anyone from the audience who wishes to speak to case Z2824? No? 20 Any Commissioners? Okay, we'll leave that on the Consent. 21 22 2. Case Z2826: Application of DVI on behalf of Mesilla Valley Commercial Tire, 23 Inc. to rezone from C-2 (Commercial Medium Intensity) to C-3 (Commercial 24 High Intensity) on a 1.377+/- acre tract located on the north side of Bataan 25 Memorial West, 495 +/- feet north of its intersection with Bixler Drive; a.k.a. 26 3425 Bataan Memorial West; Parcel ID# 02-07934; Proposed Use: To bring 27 property into compliance with the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended. Council 28 District 5. 29 30 Scholz: All right, the second one is case Z2826. Anyone wish to speak to this? 31 32 3. Case Z2827: Application of Jim Mattocks on behalf of Christian Ricky Sr. et al 33 to rezone from C-2 (Commercial Medium Intensity) to C-3 (Commercial High 34 Intensity) on a 1.55± acre tract located on the north side of US 70/Bataan 35 Memorial West at the intersection of Saturn Circle of Saturn Circle; a.k.a. 0 36 Bataan Memorial West; Parcel ID# 02-08159. Proposed Use: To bring property 37 into compliance with the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended. Council District 5. 38 39 Scholz: Okay, then it's case Z2827. We are doing them sequentially here. 40 Anyone wish to speak to this one? 41 42 4. Case Z2829: Application of Kary Bulsterbaum on behalf of Mesilla Capital 43 Investment, LLC to rezone from R-4 (Multi-Dwelling high Density & Limited 44 Retail and Office) to 0-2 (Office, Professional-Limited Retail Service) on a 45 0.31+/- acre tract located on the west side of Walnut Street, 490 +/- feet south 46 of its intersection with Lohman Avenue; a.k.a. 780 S. Walnut Street; Tax Parcel 7 1 02-22886; Proposed Use: To bring property into compliance with the 2001 2 Zoning Code, as amended. Council District 3. 3 4 Scholz: Okay, how about Z2829? No? 5 6 Evans: Mr. Chairman? 7 8 Shipley: Yes, Commissioner Evans. 9 10 Evans: I'm interested in hearing this case; however, I'm not really interested....I 11 understand the reasons for the change to bring it into compliance. 12 However, I'd like to hear from the applicant what his intentions are for that 13 particular piece of property. 14 15 Shipley: Okay, so we'll take that off Consent and put it into New Business. 16 17 Evans: I'm not sure... so were you on case... and I'm speaking about case 18 Z2827. 19 20 Scholz: Oh, okay. I was already on 2829. 21 22 Evans: Okay, I'm sorry. 23 24 Scholz: 2827? 25 26 Evans: Yes. 27 28 Scholz: Okay, I'll pull that and that'll be our first item under new business. 29 30 5. Case S-10-044: Application of Beehive Homes on behalf of Paul D. G. Miller for 31 a preliminary plat known as the Beehive Village of Las Cruces on a 2.79± acre 32 tract located on the south side of Mars Avenue at the intersection of Valverde 33 Loop; a.k.a. 0 Mars Avenue; Parcel ID# 02-25909. Proposed Use: Assisted- 34 living facilities. Council District 5. MOVED TO NEW BUSINESS APPROVED 35 7-0 36 37 Scholz: How about..., Let's see... 2829? There was no objection to that? No one 38 to speak to that? Okay. I have a concern about case S-10-044, which is 39 a preliminary plat and what I need to do, probably, is hear from... 1 think... 40 Ms. Robertson, are you dealing with that? Okay, so I'll put that as our 41 second item of New Business and it'll be just a short question, I think. 42 43 Shipley: I want to pull it also. 44 45 Scholz: You want to pull it also? Okay, good. So we'll move that to the second 46 order of New Business. Now, under New Business we have actually the 8 1 adoption of the Statement of Reasonable Notice and that's something we 2 have to read every January to inform people that we're not trying to pull 3 something, pull wool over their eyes or whatever. So what I'm going to 4 ask everyone to do is pull their... yes, Commissioner Shipley? 5 6 Shipley: We have the Consent Agenda... the ones that are... will we deal with that 7 first? 8 9 Scholz: Pardon me? 10 11 Shipley: Don't we deal with the Consent Agenda before the ones that are... 12 13 Scholz: No, I want to deal with this first. I want to get this off our plate. Okay? 14 And then we'll deal with the other two pieces of new business. 15 16 (Inaudible discussion among other Commissioners) 17 18 Scholz: Oh, I'm sorry. I'm getting ahead of myself here. Yes, we have to do the 19 Consent Agenda then. Thank you, Commissioner Shipley. Okay, I'll 20 entertain a motion to accept the Consent Agenda and that's items one, 21 two and four. Okay? 22 23 Shipley: I so move. 24 25 Scholz: Is there a second? 26 27 Beard: Second. 28 29 Scholz: Okay, so Shipley moved and Beard seconded. All those in favor say aye. 30 31 All: Aye. 32 33 Scholz: Those opposed same sign. All right, the Consent Agenda; items one, two 34 and four are adopted. Now, you're right, Commissioner Shipley. We 35 should actually go to case Z2827 first and then go to case S-10-044 36 before we do the adoption of Statement of Reasonable Notice; but before 37 we do that I want to amend the agenda because right now as our second 38 item we have Election of Officers and as our third item we have the 39 Appointment of a Member to the City's Affordable Housing Land Bank. I 40 really would like to put those at the end of the meeting. So, I'll entertain a 41 motion to move to amend the agenda by moving Election of Officers and 42 Appointment of a Member to the Affordable Housing Land Bank to the end 43 of New Business. 44 45 Beard: So moved. 46 9 1 Scholz: Okay, is there a second? 2 3 Shipley: Second. 4 5 Scholz: All those in favor say aye. 6 7 All: Aye. 8 9 Scholz: Those opposed same sign? All right, we've moved those. Thank you, 10 gentlemen. Okay, let's take a look at case Z2826. 11 12 VI. NEW BUSINESS 13 14 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman? Staff would recommend that you do the Statement of 15 Reasonable Notice since this is your first business meeting of the year. 16 17 Scholz: Okay. 18 19 Rodriguez: So we can take care of that item before we actually go into the conducting 20 of official business. 21 22 1. Adoption of Statement of Reasonable Notice as required by Section 10-15-1(B) 23 of the Open Meetings Act, Section 10-15-1 to 10-15-4, New Mexico Statutes 24 Annotated (1978), as amended. 25 26 Scholz: Thank you, Ms. Rodriguez. That was my intention but somebody called 27 me on it. Okay. What I'd like to do, gentlemen, would you pull your 28 Statement of Reasonable Notice? We're not going to do a choral reading 29 of this but what we're going to do is a sequential reading of it and so I'll 30 read... let's see... we have several things. I'll read the first... yeah, the 31 first page, right, and then, Commissioner Beard, if you'll start with one and 32 two; and Commissioner Bustos, if you'd read three and four; and 33 Commissioner Evans if you'd read five and six and; Commissioner Stowe, 34 if you would read seven and eight. All right? 35 36 Crane: Point of order, Mr. Chairman. 37 38 Scholz: Yes, Commissioner Crane. 39 40 Crane: On my copy there are two 'As." 41 42 Scholz: There are two 'As?" That's eight, isn't it? 43 44 Crane: Yep. Three, four, four and five. 45 10 1 Scholz: Isn't that interesting? There are two 'As." Well, whoever I asked to read 2 four will read both, obviously; and the gentlemen on the end can critique 3 our delivery. Are you ready, guys? 4 5 Crane: I'm behind now. What's my assignment so if anything happens? (all 6 laughing) 7 8 Scholz: You're a critic. 9 10 Crane: I'm what? 11 12 Scholz: You're a critic. 13 14 Crane: Yes, I know that. 15 16 Scholz: Not a cricket but a critic. Never mind. 17 18 Crane: Seriously, though, I think that this numbering should be corrected before 19 we proceed. We can't have this... 20 21 Scholz: Ms. Rodriguez, I'll ask for your legal opinion before I go to Legal on this. 22 23 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, you can go ahead and just enter a motion for staff to 24 amend the numbering system. It's a typographical error. We can fix it and 25 then what we'll do is we'll have you sign the last page and we'll fix the 26 other pages. It's no big deal. 27 28 Scholz: Okay, I'll do that after we meet. The Planning and Zoning Commission is 29 informed that: 30 Whereas, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Las 31 Cruces met in a public hearing at 6:00 p.m. on January 25, 2011. 32 Whereas, Section 10-15-1 (D) of the Open Meetings Act, Section 10-15-1 33 to 10-15-4, New Mexico Statutes Annotated (1978), as amended, stated 34 that, except as may be otherwise provided in the Constitution or the 35 provision of the Open Meetings Act, all meetings of a quorum of members 36 of any board, council, commission, administrative adjudicatory body or 37 other policy making body of a local public agency held for the purpose of 38 formulating public policy, discussing public business or for the purpose of 39 taking any action within the authority of or the delegated authority of such 40 body, are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times; 41 and 42 Whereas, any meetings subject to the Open Meetings Act at which 43 the discussion or adoption of any proposed resolution, rule, regulation or 44 formal action occurs shall be held only after reasonable notice to the 45 public; and 11 1 Whereas, Section 10-15-1 (D) of the Open Meetings Act, as 2 amended, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of 3 Las Cruces to determine annually what constitutes reasonable notice of its 4 public meetings. 5 Now, therefore, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of 6 Las Cruces, New Mexico states: 7 8 Beard: That for regular public hearings and special meetings, the Planning and 9 Zoning Commission of the City of Las Cruces generally meets the fourth 10 Tuesday of every month at 6:00 p.m. for the regular public hearing, and 11 the issuance of an agenda in accordance with this statement shall be 12 issued and circulated to the press, radio, and other public information 13 media and posted on bulletin boards of the City of Las Cruces, City Hall. 14 That a public hearing is required for requests for Zoning code 15 amendments, Sign Code amendments, zone changes, annexations, initial 16 zonings, Planned Unit Developments, infill development proposals, special 17 use permits (as defined in Section 38-10 of the 2001 Zoning Code, as 18 amended). Notice of the public hearing shall be sent by regular mail to all 19 property owners, as shown by the records of the County Assessor, within 20 at least two hundred (200) feet of the proposed case, excluding streets, 21 alleys, channels, canals, railroads, and all other public rights-of-way. 22 Notice shall be mailed at least ten (10) days prior to the required hearing. 23 Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be published at 24 least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general 25 circulation in the City. 26 27 Bustos: That a public hearing is required for requests for Subdivision Code 28 amendments, master plans, preliminary plats, and final plats (as defined in 29 Chapter 37 of the Las Cruces Municipal Code). Notice of the public 30 hearing shall be sent by regular mail to all property owners, as shown by 31 the records of the County Assessor, within at least two hundred (200) feet 32 of the proposed case, excluding streets, alleys, channels, canals, 33 railroads, and all other public rights-of-way. Notice shall be mailed at least 34 nine (9) days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in 35 the City. 36 That a public hearing is required is required for all appeals to the 37 Zoning code, Design Standards interpretations, and Subdivision Code 38 interpretations. Notice of the time and place of the meeting shall be 39 published at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of 40 general circulation in the City. 41 42 Evans: That the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that, reasonable 43 notice shall include the issuance and posting of an agenda for regular 44 meetings by 4:00 p.m., on Friday preceding the regular Tuesday meeting. 45 That reasonable notice for special meetings shall require the issuance and 46 posting of an agenda within 24 hours of the time of the special meeting. 12 1 All other meetings which may be called for informational purposes at 2 which no action is to be taken shall be held only after written notice issued 3 to the news media no later than 12:00 noon of the day of such meeting, or 4 four (4) hours before such meeting, whichever is greater. 5 That in an emergency, wherein it is necessary for the public peace, 6 health, safety and welfare, a meeting may be called with as much notice 7 as may be possible under the conditions. 8 9 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe? 10 11 Stowe: I have seven? 12 13 Scholz: Yes. You have six and seven. 14 15 Stowe: Six and seven. Seven... that substantial compliance with any one of the 16 appropriate foregoing methods of giving notice shall constitute compliance 17 with this statement and Section 10-15-1 to 10-15-4, N.M.S.A. (1978), as 18 amended. Nothing herein shall prevent the use of additional means or 19 methods of giving notice of regular or special meetings. Nothing herein 20 shall require new notice of any public meeting for which notice has been 21 given and which is recessed or adjourned. However, in recessing the 22 meeting, the presiding officer shall announce the meeting, the time and 23 place the meeting shall resume. 24 Number seven: That all such meetings are and shall be open to 25 the public as set forth in Section 10-15-1 to 10-15-4, N.M.S.A. (1978), as 26 amended. 27 28 Scholz: Commissioner Crane, would you read the last paragraph, please? 29 30 Crane: That if any section, paragraph, clause, or provision of this statement shall 31 be for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or 32 unenforceability of such section, paragraph or clause or provision shall not 33 affect any of the remaining provisions of this statement or its application to 34 other situations. 35 36 Scholz: Thank you, gentlemen. Commissioner Shipley, would you move to amend 37 the .... 38 39 Shipley: I have a question before.... 40 41 Scholz: You have a question. Go ahead. 42 43 Shipley: In the Code it states... there are several questions. When I went through 44 this I looked at it and I said, "You know, we've got days; obviously, ten 45 days, nine days, six days, four days...." 46 13 1 Scholz: Yes. 2 3 Shipley: It's very... you know, you can't get a straight answer on what you're trying 4 to do. So I tried to look at it; but also in the Code it says, and I looked at 5 the 200-foot radius, and in the Code it says: "That in the event there are 6 not fifteen people in the 200-foot radius a minimum of fifteen notices will 7 be mailed out." Nowhere in here does it say that. So are we changing 8 from... this is changing what's in the Code? 9 10 Scholz: I don't think so but Ms. Rodriguez is going to enlighten us. 11 12 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Shipley, no. The Zoning Code's been 13 adopted by Ordinance so it's law so staff will always go with what is 14 codified in the Subdivision Code and Zoning Code for Notification. 15 16 Shipley: What I was getting at, basically, is: you know, if everything was set ten 17 days out or seven days out it would be more reasonable because then we 18 wouldn't be looking for something, you know, to be posted, something has 19 to be in the paper at "such and such" a time. We get our packets seven 20 days in advance. We get them on Wednesday for the Tuesday meeting 21 so the agenda's set. So why can't it be published and put out at the same 22 time that happens? 23 24 Scholz: I don't know. 25 26 Shipley: The other thing is: 200-feet is not very large and most other places that 27 I've checked, and I've checked Albuquerque, I've checked three or four 28 other places and the minimum was 300-feet and, because they do get a 29 wider... the neighborhood gets a chance to be notified so they have a 30 chance to participate and that's the whole purpose of what we're trying to 31 do is to make sure that people get notified so that if they need to 32 participate they can be here to do that. 33 34 Scholz: Okay. My experience with open zoning is that they would talk about 35 contiguous properties and that would include...you know, they would have 36 a radius; but they would always talk about contiguous properties because 37 if there were no people within, like 15-feet, or excuse me, 200-feet then, 38 obviously it could be the next neighbor, you know, who might object to 39 this. I don't think we can change that this at this point. I think we have to 40 accept what we've got. 41 42 Shipley: We can make a recommendation. We can.... 43 44 Scholz: We can certainly make a recommendation and if you'd like to propose 45 that... but what I'm asking you, as a Commission, to do right now is move 14 1 to have the staff amend the numbering of these items since that was a 2 typo here. Could I hear a motion to that effect? 3 4 Evans: So moved. 5 6 Scholz: Okay, it's been moved. Is there a second? 7 8 Crane: Seconded. 9 10 Scholz: Okay, Evans moved and Crane seconded it. All those in favor of telling 11 the staff to correct the numbering say aye. 12 13 All: Aye. 14 15 Scholz: And those opposed same sign. Thank you, gentlemen. 16 17 PRESENTED, DISCUSSED AND VOTED AS NEW BUSINESS (SEE NEW BUSINESS 18 BELOW): 19 20 6. Case Z2827: Application of Jim Mattocks on behalf of Christian Ricky Sr. et al 21 to rezone from C-2 (Commercial Medium Intensity) to C-3 (Commercial High 22 Intensity) on a 1.55± acre tract located on the north side of US 70/Bataan 23 Memorial West at the intersection of Saturn Circle of Saturn Circle; a.k.a. 0 24 Bataan Memorial West; Parcel ID# 02-08159. Proposed Use: To bring property 25 into compliance with the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended. Council District 5. 26 MOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA TO NEW BUSINESS —APPROVED 7-0 27 28 Scholz: All right, our first order of new business then is going to be Z2827. 29 Commissioner Evans, you had a problem with that? 30 31 Evans: No. In fact, I support bringing the zoning into compliance and I just want 32 to and... I am a resident on Saturn Circle and I would just like to hear from 33 the applicant what his plans are for that.... 34 35 Scholz: Okay. Would you come down and address us, please, sir? 36 37 Mattocks: Jim Mattocks; and our main goal is just to bring it into compliance so if we 38 do decide to do something with it then we will be in compliance. 39 40 Evans: So there's no... so, I mean, I understand that the property's up for sale 41 and there's no ... you don't have really any intentions of developing that? 42 By the way I am, you know, pro-development. I'd like to see that area 43 developed and, just being a resident, I'm just curious as to what type of 44 plans you have for that piece of property. 45 15 1 Mattocks: I mean, like I said; we're just trying to get into compliance so there will be 2 some interest or it could be developed down the road. Right now, if 3 somebody goes to apply for a permit they're going to be denied because 4 it's not into compliance. 5 6 Evans: Sure. I understand. 7 8 (Several people speaking at the same time— cannot transcribe) 9 10 Mattocks: Thank you. 11 12 Evans: Thank you. 13 14 Shipley: Good. Is there anyone else from the audience who wishes to speak to 15 this? Okay, thank you very much, sir. I'm sorry. There was a gentleman 16 who was starting to rise. 17 18 Bulsterbaum: My name's Kary Bulsterbaum. I'm a TCME realtor in town. We've had 19 that property... 20 21 Scholz: You'll have to stay close to the microphone, sir. 22 23 Bulsterbaum: Sorry. 24 25 Scholz: Can you raise up the microphone or raise up the podium there? There we 26 go: the magic podium. 27 28 Bulsterbaum: My name's Kary Bulsterbaum. I'm.... once again, I'm a commercial 29 realtor here in town with Steinborn TCME. We're actually the listing agent 30 on that property. There is nothing I can really add to what Mr. Mattocks 31 said and then, obviously, it sounds like you are aware of the zoning 32 compliances. I can just tell you on that property we've had multi-family 33 references, churches, building service organizations, counseling services, 34 all sorts of organizations that have had interest in that land. The problem 35 is, as you know, is because even if they applied for a business permit 36 tomorrow what's going to be the biggest marketing detractor against that 37 property is that when they apply for a business permit. In effect, until the 38 zone change happens it just really affects the marketability of that. It's 39 hard to tell at this time what that use could be ultimately used for. I just 40 hope by giving you a flavor for what that could be.... I just wanted to 41 elaborate on that. That's it. 42 43 Evans: That's fine. I appreciate it. 44 45 Scholz: Thank you very much. All right, I'm going to close this to public discussion 46 then and ask for a vote by the Commissioners. 16 1 2 Shipley: Move to approve case number Z2827. 3 4 Evans and Bustos: Second. 5 6 Scholz: And it was seconded by a tie, I think, between Evans and Bustos. All 7 right, I'll call the role. Commissioner Shipley. 8 9 Shipley: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 10 11 Scholz: Commissioner Crane. 12 13 Crane: Aye, findings and discussion. 14 15 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 16 17 Stowe: Aye, findings and discussion. 18 19 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 20 21 Evans: Aye, findings and discussion. 22 23 Scholz: Commissioner Bustos. 24 25 Bustos: Aye, findings and discussion. 26 27 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 28 29 Beard: Aye, findings and discussion. 30 31 Scholz: And the Chair votes aye, findings, discussion and site visit. All right, so 32 that's approved. 33 34 Case S-10-044: Application of Beehive Homes on behalf of Paul D. G. Miller for a 35 preliminary plat known as the Beehive Village of Las Cruces on a 2.79± acre tract 36 located on the south side of Mars Avenue at the intersection of Valverde Loop; 37 a.k.a. 0 Mars Avenue; Parcel ID# 02-25909. Proposed Use: Assisted-living 38 facilities. Council District 5. MOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA AS ITEM 39 NUMBER 2 UNDER NEW BUSINESS APPROVED 7-0 40 41 Scholz: Okay, that brings us to the second order of new business which was case 42 S-10-044 and, Ms. Robertson, I had a question about this and the 43 question was about... and I'll get to your question in just a moment, 44 Commissioner Shipley. My question was about the plat. Frankly, 1 45 couldn't figure it out. This is ... it's right ahead of attachment 2. It says: 46 "Preliminary Plat Beehive Village" and I don't know if it's a matter of my 17 1 not understanding this... I've been to this site on Mars just off of Del Rey 2 and, you know, all it was, was empty land, of course; but I couldn't figure 3 out exactly how the lot lines went. So could you illuminate or "elucidate" 4 or enlighten me? 5 6 Robertson: Okay. Chair, Commission, you do have five lots shown here and, no, 7 there are not four lot lines for every lot. It's not a perfect square lot; that is 8 the lot that is shown here. So essentially, I can go through and call out the 9 lots one through five: this is one, this is two, this is three, this is four and 10 this is five. 11 12 Scholz: Okay, now I can't see anything on my screen. It must be turned off. 13 Excuse me a moment. It's warming up. All right, say again. 14 15 Robertson: Sir, we don't have a perfectly square lot. 16 17 Scholz: No. 18 19 Robertson: And there are five lots in here. 20 21 Scholz: Okay. 22 23 Robertson: Lot one is right here starting in the corner. 24 25 Scholz: I see. Okay. 26 27 Robertson: Lot two comes.... 28 29 Scholz: Lot two is really like a flag lot? 30 31 Robertson: That would be considered a flag lot, yes. Actually, technically speaking, it 32 looks kind of like a flag lot and the dimensions do meet those under the 33 requirements for R-4 zoning. It's actually the two lots just next to it.... 34 35 Scholz: Um-hmm. 36 37 Robertson" ....three and four that would be considered technically a flag lot. 38 39 Scholz: Oh, I see. Okay. And five is on the end. 40 41 Robertson: Yes. 42 43 Scholz: Okay. Well, that was my concern. I couldn't figure out the plat and I was 44 trying to see how there were actually five. I think the print that we got is 45 not as dark as the thing that you are showing on the screen so that may 46 have led to my confusion. 18 1 2 Robertson: My apologies. 3 4 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Shipley, you had a concern about this. 5 6 Shipley: Yes. In the Development Review Committee agenda it says in there 7 under New Business: "A request for approval of three flag lots; 83', 59.74' 8 and 27.28' flag pole widths for proposed lots 2, 3 and 4, respectively." So 9 do we have three flag lots or two flag lots? 10 11 Robertson: Chair, Commissioner Shipley, we actually just have two. Staff was... 1 12 would say personally, but I had misrepresented the width and depth. I had 13 actually reversed them and so at DRC it was established that lot number 14 two was technically not a flag lot. 15 16 Shipley: So it's only three and four. 17 18 Robertson: Yes, sir. 19 20 Scholz: All right, does that answer your question, Commissioner Shipley? Okay. 1 21 think that's all we need to do. I'll entertain a motion to accept. 22 23 Shipley: Move to approve case S-10-044. 24 25 Scholz: Is there a second? 26 27 Evans: I second it. 28 29 Scholz: And seconded by Evans. All right, I'll call the role. Commissioner Shipley. 30 31 Shipley: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 32 33 Scholz: Commissioner Crane. 34 35 Crane: Aye, findings and discussion. 36 37 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 38 39 Stowe: Aye, findings and discussion. 40 41 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 42 43 Evans: Aye, findings and discussion. 44 45 Scholz: Commissioner Bustos. 46 19 1 Bustos: Aye, findings and discussion. 2 3 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 4 5 Beard: Aye, findings and discussions. 6 7 Scholz: And the Chair votes aye for, findings, discussion and site visit. So that's 8 approved also.... And I just lost my agenda here.... 9 10 11 2. Election of Officers MOVED TO END OF AGENDA 12 13 3. Appointment of Primary Member and Alternate Member to the City's Affordable 14 Housing Land Bank and Trust Fund Advisory Committee MOVED TO END OF 15 AGENDA 16 17 4. Case IDP-44: Application of Xtreme Design Plans, LLC on behalf of Michael 18 and Janet Cruz for an infill development proposal requesting the following 19 development standards: 15 ft. front yard setback, 20 ft. secondary front yard 20 setback, 5 ft. side yard setback, 5 ft. rear yard setback and 20' garage setback 21 on a 0.129± acre tract located on the south side of East Picacho Avenue at the 22 intersection of Manzanita Street; a.k.a. 640 East Picacho Avenue; Parcel ID# 23 02-04949. Proposed Use: New construction of a single-family residence. 24 Council District 1. APPROVED 5-2 25 26 Scholz: Here we go. Okay, the next one is case IDP-44: Application of Xtreme 27 Design.... I'm looking for my copy... where did it go? Are you up on this, 28 too, Ms. Robertson? 29 30 Robertson: Yes, I am. 31 32 Scholz: Yes, you are. Great! 33 34 Robertson: Here's a vicinity map of the subject property. This is case IDP-44, 640 35 East Picacho Avenue. Excuse me. I'll stand on my toes a little bit 36 (adjusting podium height) I apologize. 37 38 Scholz: There's someone at your elbow there. 39 40 Robertson: This is the applicant. 41 42 Scholz: Ah, okay. 43 44 Robertson: After my presentation they have some pictures that they'd like to give you 45 and make a short little presentation; not necessarily a PowerPoint 46 presentation, but to kind of discuss with you their proposal. 20 1 2 Scholz: Great! 3 4 Robertson: Case specifics for IDP-44: the applicant proposes to construct a single- 5 family residence on 5619 square feet of undeveloped land located at 6 605... excuse me, 605 East Picacho. 7 The proposed Development Standards are for the front yard 8 setback, a 15-foot setback; secondary front yard, a 20-foot setback; side 9 yard and rear yard, both 5-foot setback; and a garage setback of 20- 10 feet.... And here are the actual requirements for R-2 Single-Family. The 11 front yard, which is.... this property is zoned R-2. The R-2 Single-Family 12 Standards are for the front yard, 20-feet; secondary front yard, 15, and 1 13 think the applicant has switched those around in the request; the side yard 14 setback is 5-feet; and the rear yard setback is 20-feet. The 20-foot 15 setback in the proposal is actually going to be a 5-foot, is requested to be 16 a 5-foot setback; and the garage setback is normally 25-feet, but as the 17 applicant has requested... excuse me, they have requested the 20-foot 18 garage setback. Excuse me. 19 The Infill Development Proposal is consistent with the Goals, 20 Objectives and Policies of our Comprehensive Plan and the approval of 21 this request would allow the property to be developed for single-family use 22 with the requested deviations from the setbacks that I just discussed and 23 I'll show you a picture of the site plan to kind of illustrate those setbacks 24 and what the building profile would look like in the setbacks. Here we 25 have the rear yard. This is Picacho Avenue so if you could imagine 26 yourself upside down a little bit, this is actually north. 27 We'll see in the actual aerial photo what I'm talking about. Picacho 28 Avenue would be looked at as the front yard and Manzanita would be 29 looked at as the secondary front yard. The garage is located right here, 30 coming out of the driveway and the access through the garage is on 31 Manzanita Street. The rear yard setback here is set at 5-feet. It is 32 required to be 20 but the applicant is requesting that deviation. I would 33 like to mention, as well, that North and South Mesquite Overlays are very 34 close, just to the west here of the subject property and, in addition, the 35 Zoning Code does allow for a deviation to the 25-foot required garage 36 setback if certain requirements are met in terms of the garage: placement, 37 what it looks like, how it's oriented towards the street, what fagade 38 elements are there. Are there windows? Does the garage look like an 39 integral part of the house or does it look like a garage? These are some 40 of the conditions associated with this exception and the applicant has met 41 those requirements. 42 This is a Thoroughfare map of the property. As you can see 43 there're no Thoroughfares within surrounding or adjacent to this property. 44 The staff recommendation is to approve the Infill Development Proposal. 45 Staff has reviewed this proposal and there're significant outstanding 46 issues that exist. 21 1 The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final authority on Infill 2 Proposals and their decision can be appealed to City Council. I just 3 wanted to let you know that no public comment has been received, not 4 even a call or inquiry about this particular case as of about 5:00 o'clock 5 this afternoon. Staff does stand for any questions that you may have. 1 6 would also like to let the applicant come up and make a short presentation 7 to you as well. 8 9 Scholz: Okay. Any questions for this woman? So... microphones are on but I 10 don't see any.... Commissioner Beard, go ahead. Ms. Robertson, 11 Commissioner Beard has a question. 12 13 Robertson: Yes, Commissioner Beard. 14 15 Beard: How many residents in the proximity, close proximity, of that home have 16 variations in the setbacks....I don't want to use "violations," but "setback 17 changes?" 18 19 Robertson: It could be non-conforming. You could say that. That's very true. 20 21 Beard: Non-conforming. 22 23 Robertson: It's hard to say how many houses are non-conforming at this point 24 because we haven't necessarily analyzed the houses in this area; but 25 there is a mix of single-family and multi-family and just to the west, the 26 North and South Mesquite Overlays already allow for a 5-foot rear and 27 side yard setback. So just to the west the development and the North and 28 South Mesquite neighborhoods are allowing for that reduced setback. So 29 1 would say, to the west the neighborhood looks probably very much like 30 they're planning to do in terms of setbacks. 31 32 Scholz: All right, any other questions? Okay, we'll hear from the applicant. 33 34 Cruz: Hi. My name's Michael Cruz. I live at 1745 Lester. To answer your 35 question that you just asked: the family that lives on Manzanita to the right 36 of the property, I have photos here showing that they have a house that 37 has been there for many years but they did construct a foyer or a 38 vestibule, if you will, that isn't in compliance. May I show you those 39 pictures? 40 41 Scholz: Sure. Okay, this is the house next door? 42 43 Cruz: Yes, it is. In fact, they were the individuals... they are friends of our 44 family, Mr. and Mrs. Salas. They are friends of my grandmother. They 45 are in their 80s. They've lived in that house for probably, I would say, forty 46 years. 22 1 2 Scholz: Um-hmm. 3 4 Cruz: The house is adobe. It's, you know, of course the house is grandfathered 5 but they did construct that, I believe, after 2006 when they had created the 6 Mesquite Historical District Overlay; but that house is probably 3-feet from 7 the sidewalk so I wanted to show that. 8 9 Scholz: Okay. 10 11 Cruz: So our house, as Jennifer was saying, our front .... There is a lot of.... 12 Well, since it is an older area that house, Mr. and Mrs. Salas' house, one 13 of their front windows they did close it up and stucco it because there has 14 been a lot of vandalism so we've opted to put our front door on Manzanita 15 instead of, you know, Picacho. 16 17 Scholz: Um-hmm. 18 19 Cruz: Okay. My wife and I, we are building a new house. We do want to have a 20 garage, you know, for the new construction because we've lived in a 21 house where we've had carports and, you know, all your items get full of 22 dust whenever there is a dust storm. So we do want a garage. We don't 23 think that 5-feet from the other neighbor is too much to ask. I did bring 24 photos of the property that's on the other side, which is on Picacho. Their 25 carport is actually the property adjacent to ours and, well, I can show you 26 that how there wouldn't be any potential fire risks. Let me show you those 27 pictures. 28 29 Scholz: Okay. 30 31 Cruz: Those railroad ties that are there, that shows were our property line 32 actually is... 33 34 Scholz: Um-hmm. 35 36 Cruz: So if you look at that house next to it; that would be on Picacho. They 37 have their, you know, carport is there so that it's more than 25-feet so I 38 don't think there would be any risk of fire. 39 40 Scholz: Okay. 41 42 Cruz: And like Jennifer said, I don't think that, you know, it would be 43 unreasonable for the 5-feet since we are literally three houses down from, 44 what...Tornillo, where it becomes the Historical District and I know the 45 Overlay is a little bit flexible. I really believe in keeping with the 23 1 architecture we have, you know, southwest, you know... stucco and in the 2 designs, tile roof. 3 4 Scholz: Okay, questions for this gentleman? Yes, Commissioner Beard. 5 6 Beard: Where are the doors on this house now? 7 8 Cruz: It's going to be on Manzanita....on Manzanita. It's like you see the 9 driveway... because initially our garage door was going to be facing 10 Picacho but since they want to keep it, you know, with historical it would 11 be ending the property on the driveway on Manzanita and so where you 12 see the word "driveway" on the drawing, that little small square it would 13 actually be the entry door....that little line...that little square box right 14 there? 15 16 Beard: Gottcha, yeah. 17 18 Cruz: That's the actual... that would be like a portal.... 19 20 Beard: Porch. And where are the other doors? 21 22 Cruz: Well, the driveway would be like (inaudible) 23 24 Beard: You don't have a side door or back door? 25 26 Cruz: No, no, we don't because, like I said, we don't want to have that many... 27 any for safety, you know, like I said, my neighbor that's on Manzanita, the 28 one that had that little foyer added.... they had to close windows because 29 their windows were literally getting broken more than ten times. 30 31 Beard: But you only have one door access other than the garage? 32 33 Cruz: We would be having a garage door like a utility door, maybe on this side... 34 the plans haven't been finalized. It's just the imprint of the floor plan but 35 maybe possibly right here... just like to access the garage. 36 37 Beard: So there's two doors to the driveway? 38 39 Cruz: Well, we would maybe have like a fire door or something to get to access 40 the garage but the front door would be where that little box is. That's 41 where the proposed front door would be. 42 43 Beard: Okay, I understand that door but I don't understand the other door. 44 45 Cruz: Okay, the other one hasn't been finalized. We have the driveway door, 46 the garage door but the other door we haven't really finalized where the 24 1 placement is due to the fact that, you know, since we're coming to you to 2 get permission to finalize the plan. 3 4 Scholz: Good point. Someone else? Commissioner Shipley. 5 6 Shipley: The question is: if the address is going to be on Picacho... 7 8 Cruz: Yeah, the address is 640 East Picacho. 9 10 Shipley: But doesn't the door... doesn't there have to be a front door on the front of 11 the house...? 12 13 Cruz: No, it doesn't have to. 14 15 Shipley: .....to qualify? No? Nothing there? 16 17 Cruz: No. 18 19 Shipley: More or less a question for staff? 20 21 Scholz: No, they're shaking their heads. 22 23 Shipley: I see. The other question I had is: how many two-story buildings are 24 there within, say, ten blocks of your house? 25 26 Cruz: Actually, across the street there's on Picacho.... 27 28 Shipley: The apartment. 29 30 Cruz: The apartments, correct. 31 32 Shipley: Is that the only one? 33 34 Cruz: There is one... they do exist and I don't know the specific addresses of 35 them but they do. Across the street the apartment complex and 703 and 36 then there is a couple of new houses that have been constructed that are 37 two-story. I don't have the specific addresses for those. 38 39 Shipley: My thought initially was that this is the first two-story house. As I drove 40 around I found the apartment across the street and then there's one to the 41 south of you about a block-and-a-half away and that's the only two I could 42 find in that area. 43 44 Cruz: There's actually a white two-story house. I don't have that address but it 45 is new, not just the story itself, like the one you were talking about where 25 1 you just drove around, the brown one that was added later. The entire 2 structure is two-story. 3 4 Scholz: Okay, anything else? 5 6 Cruz: The lot, just to let you know, it is seventy-five by seventy-five and that's 7 what we're opting to go off of because the house would be very, very 8 small, limited square footage . 9 10 Scholz: Okay, any other questions? Yes, Commissioner Shipley. 11 12 Shipley: I guess there's one word of caution is that, you know, what I see here on 13 your floor plan and that everything looks very good except if you want to 14 do anything outside; do you want to put in a carport or do you want to put 15 in a covered patio, you already got a variance on your building inside that 16 and you're not going to be allowed to do that. So when you're designing 17 your house you need to make sure that you've allowed for that because 18 you are getting a variance now and you're not going to come back and get 19 another variance. 20 21 Cruz: Yes, sir. The gentleman that's designing our property, he's from Xtreme 22 Design, he has taken all that into account and, I mean, he's a professional 23 designer and he explained that to us, to my wife and I. We understand. 24 25 Scholz: Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. 26 27 Cruz: Thank you. 28 29 Scholz: Did he get his pictures back? Great! Okay, anyone from the public wish 30 to speak to this? All right, I'll close it for public discussion. Gentlemen, 31 what's your pleasure? I'll entertain a motion to approve. 32 33 Shipley: I think we ought to have a little discussion. I don't know if... 34 35 Scholz: Go ahead. 36 37 Shipley: I just wanted to say that when I first got this and looked at ... I mean, we're 38 really giving a large amount of variances for that. 39 40 Scholz: Um-hmm. 41 42 Shipley: So when I went to the neighborhood I actually got out and walked the 43 neighborhoods and looked over fences and looked in back yards and did 44 that kind of stuff to just...to verify. I think it's okay; but then when I noticed 45 it was a two-story and I wanted to see the neighborhood and see if there 46 were other two-stories, this house is going to stand out and you can make 26 1 it look southwestern style using stucco and tile roofs but it's going to stick 2 out like a beacon in that area because, basically, there are only two 3 houses within a quarter-mile in that area that are. Everything else is one- 4 story and they are much smaller houses and this is going to be close to 5 three thousand square feet altogether and the houses in that area are 6 probably twelve-hundred square feet or less so it's almost three times as 7 big. 8 So I think it's... you know, we want to see that developed and we 9 want to see that built but we've also got to look at; what is that going to do 10 to that neighborhood? And it's right on the edge of the Mesquite Overlay 11 and that was one of the things that I wanted to point out was there any 12 restrictions and staff advised me that they're just outside of that so that 13 doesn't apply. 14 15 Scholz: Right 16 17 Shipley: So, I just applaud; but I also think that the key thing here is they're getting 18 the max thing right now and we just don't want to see it coming back for a 19 variance or something that they didn't plan for. 20 21 Scholz: Right, and I think that he explained that the architect he's working with or 22 the designer he's working with understands that. That's good because, 23 obviously, we've got some problems in Legends West with that very thing. 24 People built to the property limits and then would want to add on. Any 25 other discussion, gentlemen? Yes, Commissioner Beard. 26 27 Beard: All right, I have the same feelings. That's putting a very large structure on 28 a very small piece of property and the two 5-foot setbacks... I mean, 1 29 could consider one 5-foot setback variation but two, I think that's pushing it 30 too much; and it's not just... it might be okay with him but when he goes 31 ready to sell this house any buyer that buys the house has no options on 32 where to put anything: the carport, a porch... and I'm still concerned about 33 the second door. 34 35 Scholz: Okay. Commissioner Evans. 36 37 Evans: Yes. I'm actually very supportive of the Infill Development Process and 38 actually support the applicant in this endeavor. One of the reasons why 39 the housing was so small back in the days when they were being built, is 40 that they didn't have garages and today, you know, it's almost a necessity, 41 in my assessment, to have a garage and so I understand that you're trying 42 to keep that community to have a certain flavor and to keep the Design 43 Standards but I also think that, as we've matured as a society, that we 44 need to, you know, make allowances for those luxuries of having a garage 45 and if we've got to go up to, you know, make the structure to allow to 27 1 support a moderately-sized family I think that's a reasonable thing to do. 2 Thank you. 3 4 Scholz: All right. Commissioner Crane. 5 6 Crane: I support Commissioner Evans in this. I think that there are drawbacks 7 from the viewpoint of the Cruz family who's going to live in the house and 8 also might at some point want to sell it but that is really their lookout and, 9 obviously, they're happy with what they're planning. And, as for the 10 impact on the neighborhood: I'm a little "iffy" about the two-story being up 11 there but I did something rather similar when I bought a house on Brown 12 Road. We put on a two-story addition that did not cover the whole floor 13 plan but just half of it and there's only a scattering of other two-stories 14 around the area and I'd like to believe that we didn't ruin it; but almost 15 anything is better than a vacant lot from the community's viewpoint, I feel, 16 and so I'm going to support this. 17 18 Scholz: All right, any other comments, gentlemen? Okay, I'll entertain a motion to 19 approve.... 20 21 Crane: So moved. 22 23 Scholz: ....case IDP-044. 24 25 Crane: So moved. 26 27 Bustos: Second. 28 29 Scholz: That's okay... Crane moves and Bustos seconds. All right, I'll call the role. 30 Commissioner Shipley. 31 32 Shipley: Nay, findings, discussion and site visit. 33 34 Scholz: You said, "nay." 35 36 Shipley: Correct. 37 38 Scholz: Thank you. Commissioner Crane. 39 40 Crane: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 41 42 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 43 44 Stowe: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 45 46 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 28 1 2 Evans: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 3 4 Scholz: Commissioner Bustos. 5 6 Bustos: Aye, findings. 7 8 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 9 10 Beard: No, findings and discussions and site visit. 11 12 Scholz: And the Chair votes aye, findings and discussion. All right, so it's 13 approved 5-2. Thank you very much. 14 15 5. Case Z2822: Application of Jake Redford on behalf of Mactimski, LLC to 16 rezone from O-2C (Office, Professional-Limited Retail Service-Conditional) to 17 C-2C (Commercial Medium Intensity-Conditional) on a 0.6+/- acre tract located 18 on the east side of Telshor Boulevard, 655 +/- feet south of its intersection with 19 Foothills Road; a.k.a. 775 S. Telshor Boulevard; Parcel ID# 02-40360; 20 Proposed Use: Construction of a restaurant/cafe. Council District 6. 21 APPROVED 7-0 22 23 Scholz: Okay, that brings us to our next one and, Mr. Ochoa, you are up. This is 24 Z2822. 25 26 Ochoa: Good evening, gentlemen. For the record, Adam Ochoa, Development 27 Services. My first case tonight is a zone change request. It's Z2822. It's 28 a request for a zone change from O-2c, which is Office, Professional- 29 Limited Retail Service-Conditional to C-2c, Commercial Medium-Intensity 30 Conditional, for property located at 775 South Telshor Boulevard. 31 On the first slide there you can see the vicinity map. The subject 32 property's highlighted in the light bluish-stripes running through it. You 33 can see the area around it off of Telshor is heavily commercial, office uses 34 all over with some single-family, multi-family to the southeast. The 35 property is located approximately 665-feet south of the intersection of 36 Telshor Boulevard and Foothills Road. Currently it encompasses 37 approximately 0.6 acres and is currently undeveloped. 38 The applicant has come forward for the zone change for a 39 proposed use on the subject property of a restaurant/cafe. This use is 40 actually not permitted in the 0-2 Zoning District, requiring a minimum C-2 41 designation for the subject property. Excuse me... just a little history on 42 this property. It is currently zoned, like I said, O-2c. A condition actually 43 placed on this property puts a limit on building height to 35-feet. This was 44 part of a larger zone change... this massive zone change that happened 45 in the area where this property and the properties around it and another 46 large chunk of properties in the area were placed conditions on limiting the 29 1 height of the actual buildings themselves. Because of that staff is 2 recommending to keep that same condition on this proposed zoning 3 designation of C-2 zoning. 4 The proposed use of a restaurant/cafe will require one parking 5 space for every two to five seats in the establishment. It will also require 6 one bicycle parking space for every one thousand square feet of GFA. 7 Both will be verified during the building permitting process when those 8 drawings do come in. Staff will review them and confirm that those 9 standards are met. They will also be required to landscape a minimum of 10 15% of the total parking area and they will also be required to install a 11 bufferyard along the eastern property lines of the subject property 12 adjacent to the R-3 zoned properties. A minimum of either a 10-foot 13 opaque bufferyard or a 15-foot semi-opaque bufferyard will be required 14 along that eastern property line. All remaining C-2 Development 15 Standards will be required to follow for a development on the property. As 16 you can see, gentlemen, there are a couple of letters... yeah, one letter in 17 your packet and you see three more letters. Two letters of support, two 18 letters protesting the proposed zone change were received by staff. 19 Here is an aerial of the subject property highlighted in the slight 20 "lime-green" here. It is the vacant property here; bank across the street; 21 single-family, it looks like, attached townhomes to the rear; office complex 22 to the north of it and, of course, the Mesilla Valley Mall across the street 23 on Telshor. 24 Here is the proposed improvement plan of the subject property 25 showing the proposed building layout, pondings, driveway and parking 26 and, of course, this is just a proposed improvement plan. They will be 27 required to bring in full-scale drawings for everything that will be 28 constructed on the subject property for the restaurant/cafe. 29 Staff has reviewed this zone change and recommends approval 30 with conditions based on the preceding findings. The first condition we 31 would like to place on this is the one that currently exists on the zoning. It 32 is the maximum building height allowed for the zoning designation. It's 35- 33 feet and we'll be adding a second condition stating that all utilities shall be 34 placed underground. The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning 35 Commission will be forwarded to City Council for final consideration. 36 Your options tonight, gentlemen: 1) to vote "yes" to approve the 37 request as recommended by staff for case Z2822; 2) to vote "yes" to 38 approve the request to approve the request with additional conditions as 39 deemed appropriate by the Commission; 3) to vote "no" to deny the 40 request, or; 4) table/postpone and advise staff accordingly. That is the 41 conclusion of my presentation. The applicant is here if you have any 42 questions for him and I stand for questions, as well. 43 44 Scholz: All right, questions for this gentleman? Commissioners? No? Oh, excuse 45 me, Commissioner Stowe. 46 30 1 Stowe: Yes. If I remember from the site visit the east and north edge of the 2 property there's a wall. 3 4 Ochoa: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Stowe, correct. I believe there is an actual 5 elevation change there and there is a wall along there as well but they will 6 still be required to put some type of bufferyard against that eastern wall. 7 That is a requirement for the C-2 zoning on the property, proposed C-2 8 zoning on the property. 9 10 Stowe: My question is: how tall is either of those walls? They seemed to be 11 approximately 30-feet but I didn't note that exactly when I took a look. 12 13 Ochoa: The applicant is present and he can answer those questions for you, sir. 14 15 Scholz: Okay. 16 17 Redford: I'm Jake Redford and I work as a commercial real estate broker for NEI 18 First Valley. To answer your question, I don't have an exact height. It's 19 right around between 25 and 30-feet, as you mentioned. I didn't get a 20 chance to get out there and measure it, both the east and north wall that 21 you're referring to. 22 23 Scholz: Okay, other questions for Mr. Ochoa? Okay, Mr. Redford, do you want to 24 add anything to the presentation? 25 26 Redford: No, I think he covered it all. I was just here to answer any questions that 27 you guys might have. I was gonna also add a little tidbit: my father-in-law 28 lives two blocks from this location and is actually part of the ownership 29 group and I just wanted you to put in a word that they enjoy what the 30 Edmund and McAllister's and Buffalo Wild Wings and also some of the 31 other restaurants that have moved into that corridor in the past couple of 32 years. He's really happy to have the ability to walk to restaurants, grab 33 lunch, grab breakfast or whatever-have-you. The intended use of it right 34 now, as they said: we have a lease signed conditioned to approval of a 35 zoning change for a National Bagel restaurant there and so any of the 36 height restrictions would be, you know, no problem to us on the 35-feet. 37 38 Scholz: All right, and the time of day of that restaurant is, I think, is like 5:00 am to 39 5:00 pm? 40 41 Redford: I put 5:00 am to 5:00 pm. I got clarification: it's actually 6:00 am to 5:00 42 pm is the corporate standards. They can't be open any more hours than 43 that. On Sunday they close at 3:00. 44 45 Scholz: Okay, so it's a day-time operation, right. We're not talking about night- 46 time. 31 1 2 Redford: Yes, sir. 3 4 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Shipley. Oh, I'm sorry, Commissioner Beard. Your 5 light is still on. He's shutting it off. Go ahead. 6 7 Shipley: In here... it's a question for the applicant: it states that there is a possibility 8 that there is going to be another restaurant in there? 9 10 Redford: What they've proposed, the ownership group, is that they're going to 11 construct about a forty-five hundred square foot building there to try and 12 comply with all of the parking, obviously, and everything. The twenty-five 13 hundred to three thousand square feet will be taken up by this bagel chain 14 and then another thousand to fifteen hundred square feet... right now 15 preliminary for a haircutter, possibly like a StyleAmerica-style haircutter. 16 17 Shipley: There's not going to be a drive-through? 18 19 Redford: Yes, there will be a drive-through with the bagel. Yes, sir. 20 21 Shipley: Is that going to be at the back of the building? 22 23 Redford: No, it's going to be on the northern side of the building. That site plan that 24 you guys have was something that they had sketched out for an 25 Eyemasters that was permitted to go there some years back. The 26 National Bagel chain hasn't submitted their exact site plan but the 27 preliminary discussions have put the drive-through at the northern end of 28 the building. 29 30 Shipley: So there'll be a wall built between the bank....? 31 32 Redford: No, there's an easement. There's an easement agreement with the bank, 33 the Bank of the West there, and there actually is a small chain link fence 34 that's there now. That's already taken out. There's a joint agreement. 35 36 Shipley: Access agreement. 37 38 Redford: Correct. 39 40 Shipley: But that's where the drive-through is going to go: on that side of the 41 building? 42 43 Redford: On the north... so towards the office... 44 45 Shipley: That would be the back of the building. 46 32 1 Redford: As you're looking at the building, facing the wall, it would be on the left 2 side. 3 4 Shipley: So it'd be over here? 5 6 (Several Commissioners speaking quietly— inaudible) 7 8 Redford: I guess I would refer to the back of the building as the east but I'm talking 9 it would be on the north side, if that's what you are referring to, where 10 Adam is ....(inaudible) 11 12 Shipley: So they would drive all the way around the building and be facing the 13 street? 14 15 Redford: Correct. 16 17 Scholz: Yeah, in order to have access to the driver's side of the car, obviously. 18 19 Shipley: Well, I understand that, but in this it didn't show one and that was the 20 question. 21 22 Redford: Yeah, I apologize for that. 23 24 Shipley: Right. 25 26 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Crane. 27 28 Crane: Remind me, again, please, how tall the building is likely to be, not what the 29 limit is. 30 31 Redford: 18 to 22 feet. 32 33 Crane: Do you have a view on whether this couple on Sundown is going to have a 34 problem with it blocking their view of the mountains? I didn't have that in 35 mind when I went and looked at it. 36 37 Redford: I don't foresee that as an issue being that the wall is 25-feet and so they'll 38 be sitting up around 30 to 35-feet. 39 40 Crane: So they are going to look way over the top of it anyway. 41 42 Redford: They should, yeah, I don't see.... It's going to be similar to a McAllister's- 43 type, probably, be with a fagade and height. It'll be very similar to a 44 McAllister-type building. 45 46 Crane: Thank you. 33 1 2 Scholz: Okay, any other questions for the applicant. Okay, anyone from the public 3 wish to speak to this? Yes, please come to the microphone. Tell us your 4 name. 5 6 Miller: My name's Jennie Miller. My mother, Catherine Berger, is right back here 7 and her home does not abut the property; it's more adjacent to it. We feel 8 that there's considerable issues about changing this zoning. There's a 9 congested traffic already and it doesn't seem clear if they take this fence 10 down whether the traffic will come behind the bank and into the property, 11 whether they'll be allowed to do that or just from the front. 12 Food odors: that's been an issue with fans and exhausting, you 13 know, food odors over the neighborhood. It's an attractive nuisance for 14 rodents and, you know, the garbage will be right behind people's entrance 15 to the residence there. There's also... I guess there wouldn't be.... 16 Probably they do have sufficient parking so it won't spill over into the bank 17 parking lot, I wouldn't think. But I do think these residents that built their 18 homes there built thinking that their properties would be, you know, 19 restricted from this kind of commercial activity behind them. 20 1 would think that the employees will get there at maybe five o'clock 21 to start their work, or four-o'clock, which would make some early morning 22 noise. Even if they didn't start it running until six o'clock it, it would still be 23 more noise for the people that live there. 24 1 just think this will devalue their property. Several of the homes are 25 in the, I'd say, two-hundred, to two-hundred and seventy-five thousand 26 dollars area. The neighborhood is single-family. It is not multiple-family 27 and I just think the residents deserve to have their property values kept 28 up, not let this change. There are no other restaurants on this side of 29 Telshor and in that area. There on the other side they have better access 30 than this one does so we're not in favor of it. I really do think it will make 31 my mother's property values go down. 32 33 Scholz: Okay, questions for this lady? Commissioner Beard? 34 35 Beard: Could you bring up on the map so we could see where she lives? 36 37 Miller: Okay, I don't know but I can tell from that one, I can tell from.... 38 39 Scholz: Okay, here's the vicinity map. Can you pick it out on that? Actually, I like 40 the aerial view better because it shows the property better but.... 41 42 Miller: Okay, the road that shows Sundown Road and then you start up on 43 Sundown Circle, it's the third lot in on this side that backs up to the bank. 44 34 1 Scholz: No, ma'am, I think that's Sundown Court you're talking about. Sundown 2 Circle is the next road. It's the U-shaped road. Yeah, and your property is 3 where? 4 5 Miller: If you see where it says "Sundown Road" right there... 6 7 Scholz: Um-hmm. 8 9 Miller: And the third lot is her lot, right there. 10 11 Scholz: I see, okay. 12 13 Miller: Um-hmm. Right there. 14 15 Scholz: Could you go back to the aerial view? Wasn't there a pizza place back 16 here at the end of this courtyard? 17 18 Shipley: There's a Greek restaurant up there. 19 20 Scholz: A Greek restaurant. Yes, that's what I was thinking of. I'm sorry. 21 22 Shipley: Tiffany's. 23 24 Scholz: Tiffany's... yeah, it's been there for years, hasn't it? 25 26 Miller: It's way up there. 27 28 Scholz: Right, but it backs up against those other properties. Okay. I just thought 29 there was a restaurant in that area. Yeah, I thought so. Other questions 30 for this lady? Okay. 31 32 Shipley: I was just going to say that when I walked that property that wall is 25-feet 33 or more. It's for a grade change: it's a retention wall and if you're 34 standing in your back yard to look down you would be able to look down 35 on the back of the building. Yeah. But I couldn't understand the reference 36 to the view of the mountains because the mountains are not that direction 37 unless you're looking at the mountains out to the west of town. 38 39 Scholz: Yeah, I think this is what this lady is talking about... 40 41 Miller: Yeah. 42 43 (Several people speaking at the same time — inaudible) 44 35 1 Miller: This would be more noise, more.... You know, we thought it would always 2 be more of an office or a limited retail area that would not have so much 3 noise and action there, I guess you could say. 4 5 Scholz: Okay. 6 7 Miller: You know, my mother spends a lot of time in her back yard. A bank is not 8 very offensive and she knew it was there when she bought the property 9 but she thought she was protected by the zoning to build the home that 10 she did there. 11 12 Shipley: Well, the third lot up from there still backs up to the bank.... 13 14 Miller: Right! 15 16 Shipley: And you have to go to the sixth or seventh lot before you get to that 17 property line. So, I'm just looking... one, two, three, four, five, six 18 properties... six... so it's not really backing up to you at all. 19 20 Miller: Like, I say, her property does not really abut it but it's adjacent to it. I do 21 think the noise, light pollution, things like that.... 22 23 Shipley: There shouldn't be. That shouldn't. 24 25 Scholz: Um-hmm. Okay, thank you, ma'am. Anyone else from the public want to 26 speak to this? Yes, sir. Come up and identify yourself, please. 27 28 Smith: Yes. Good evening. My name is Paul Gayle Smith and I actually live a 29 little bit closer to the vacant lot and I'd like to echo the words of the 30 previous speaker. She did an excellent job. I have to tell you that some of 31 the things that she said perhaps need to be emphasized because I live.... 32 I'd like to point out where I live on that map, if I can... 33 34 Scholz: Sure. 35 36 Smith: I'm behind the bank but my next door neighbor, their house is connected 37 to mine.... They are directly behind this vacant lot, okay? Okay... so, I'm 38 there. Yeah, that's my home. Yeah. And this one that's next.... You had 39 some burglaries right there.... 40 41 Scholz: Okay. 42 43 Smith: ....at that and these are two of the houses, are probably two of the larger 44 houses on this part of the circle. Okay? I bought my home in 2005. 1 45 would not have purchased my home if there was a National Bagel place. 46 Now I have to say for the record that I lived in New York for many years. I 36 1 love bagels. Bagels are great food items. They're wonderful. But 1 2 cannot emphasize it enough: if there had been.... and I'm really sad to 3 say it but...a bagel place....I'm guessing that he's described it properly...it 4 would really devalue, as Ms. Miller was saying, this neighborhood and it's 5 one thing to have a bank, but that bank is well-situated. It's got adequate 6 parking... more than adequate parking. Because it's a bank you have a 7 certain kind of customer. They come in a certain manner and I can tell 8 you, as a fact, okay, I can hear people making transactions at this bank 9 from my house. Okay? From my house and I'm not even directly 10 behind... well, I am directly behind them but I'm not outside. I'm inside. 11 Okay? So they have those.... The real reason I can hear them is because 12 when they go to the drive-up... I guess you can walk up, too; they have 13 some kind of mechanized system for the person inside so it's on a bit of a 14 speaker... but I can hear it, that side of it....and.... 15 1 think Ms. Miller mentioned the noise. When they come to clear 16 the garbage there my house shakes. That's not an exaggeration. Okay? 17 1 sometimes have to apologize to people on the phone when I'm working 18 from my home because it sounds like my house is falling down because 19 they're emptying the garbage and it's really strange. I'm not an architect 20 or an engineer but if when you look at the site what you see is this huge... 21 you know, you see about 10-feet difference so the garbage... the big, we 22 call them "skips" in England, but the big... I forget the word now, but the 23 big garbage container that they change; it's as though they are knocking 24 down the bank. That's how much noise there is so noise is one thing. 25 Ms. Miller mentioned also vermin. Okay? She's being a bit polite. 26 There's a rat problem there in that neighborhood which the City should 27 take care of. I see rats all the time. It's disgusting so I can only imagine if 28 the people who would be potentially eating in this restaurant knew about 29 the rat problem they probably wouldn't go. I've actually had an interesting 30 issue, but I don't know what to make of it, but I'll mention it. I sometimes 31 see wild animals in my yard and I'm mentioning that...it's kind of a....I'm 32 not sure if I should mention it because it depends how you look at it; my 33 concern is for the wild animals, too, because I'm afraid that since they're 34 so used to coming in that direction for whatever reason... I don't know 35 why... but literally, my yard, as you can see, I don't see the desert 36 anywhere near here on this map and yet they come into my yard. There 37 have been skunks... nobody really likes skunks but, you know, they're 38 God's animals. I'm concerned that they're going to be attracted to the 39 food source and they're probably going to be killed. Okay? They're not 40 bothering anybody. Once in a blue moon the skunk, just for whatever 41 reason, makes a stink. I have actual pictures of the fox if anybody wants 42 to see them... in my yard. I'm assuming it's the same fox. But my 43 concern is that the rat problem will just be exacerbated. 44 The noise problem... I mean, five o'clock... I mean, I'm an early 45 riser but I don't want to have to hear noise at five o'clock. It's bad enough 46 with the bank. You know what happens early in the morning with the 37 1 bank? They have the people who do their lawn and I can hear them in my 2 house when they come in, in the morning, and with the blowers and with 3 whatever else they're doing. So, I can only imagine that no matter how 4 workers would try to be quiet in the morning... at five o'clock, when it's 5 relatively quiet even though we're off Telshor. That's, as somebody 6 mentioned, they're probably coming in at four o'clock. Bagel places are 7 supposed to start early: that's not my concern. But this is really a 8 residential area in a way that, I think, the map really doesn't show because 9 all of these houses here there are no restaurants that you can actually 10 see. So the Greek restaurant, which I go to, it's wonderful... it's so high 11 up that you don't see it. You don't hear it. You don't get any of the smells, 12 maybe because it's higher up and the wind. But this restaurant would be 13 lower down. I am sure that if there's anything to be smelled I am going to 14 be smelling it. I sometimes smell things in my neighborhood.... we all 15 know happens... so my concern is there will be a constant smell, which 16 will again attract rodents. 17 I'm concerned about also what I saw on the map that was there and 18 there was talk of an easement. There's a fence there now between the 19 bank and this vacant property. If they're saying that they are going to take 20 down this fence it looks as though they are going to allow parking so I'm 21 going to be concerned that there's going to be parking all over the place, 22 you know, starting early in the morning because, see, if the bagels are 23 good people are going to be coming in at five o'clock in the morning and 24 I'm not going to be getting any sleep and probably the other people aren't 25 either and my bedroom is a little bit raised up. I'm on the second floor. 1 26 have a two-story house so I've been listening intently to the talk about two- 27 story houses. Most of the people on this side, they don't, so they're even 28 closer to this source. There are a number of people who, I'm hoping, have 29 sent you letters who are those people who spend a lot of time outside here 30 that I know are not happy because we know you can absolutely hear right 31 over there. 32 My other concern is, too, this is not a vacant lot that looks like a 33 broken window in the city. I've lived in the city; I'm a city boy. I've lived in 34 the city in a couple of countries and a few states. This vacant lot is kept 35 up by somebody. I don't know by who by; maybe by the owners. It looks 36 fine. I actually think it would look better than anything being on it. It's a 37 terrible spot for a restaurant, in other words. It's a small area. It's going to 38 be a mistake to really put anything other than, maybe, another bank, 39 another small office, a little gallery. It just would spoil the entire character 40 of what I'm sure the City wants to maintain, which is an area of safe 41 neighborhood of residential housing. I don't want anybody to be distracted 42 by the fact that the Mall's across the street. If you can see from my house 43 what you look out at, at the Mall, it's done very well. You don't see, you 44 know, it's a nice view and my view would be spoiled as well even though 1 45 would be able, hopefully.... I'm assuming that this structure would be no 46 higher than the bank. That's something else.... 38 1 2 Scholz: What they're saying, Mr. Smith, was 18 to 22-feet. Yes, so that's about 3 the same height as the bank. Listen, I think we've heard all of your 4 concerns and I'm sure we appreciate them. Do you have a question of 5 Mr. Smith? 6 7 Beard: Yes. I do have a question. It is a vacant lot and zoned for Office. 8 9 Smith: Um-hmm. 10 11 Beard: Do you think putting a three-story office building in there is going to be any 12 quieter than putting in a bagel shop? 13 14 Smith: Well, that was my concern, sir. I was always concerned about... 15 16 Beard: I mean, speaking as "yes" or "no." 17 18 Smith: Well, let me answer your question, if I may. I can tell you what I would 19 have done: if I had had any suspicion that there was going to be a three- 20 story office building as opposed to something that's not much higher than 21 the bank I wouldn't have purchased that house. But if there was 22 something, a small office building, maybe a little bit higher than the bank, 23 that kind of thing I probably might still have purchased the property. But 24 the fact that it's a restaurant....and this sounds like it's a chain. It's not 25 even something that somebody could say, "This is a boutique, up-end, 26 higher-end, a little restaurant." 27 28 Beard: No. No, it's not. No, it's a chain. Right. 29 30 Scholz: I don't want to cut you off but... another question? I thought I saw another 31 question down here. Do you still have another question? Commissioner 32 Beard, go ahead. 33 34 Beard: I'd just like to make a comment. 35 36 Scholz: Go ahead. 37 38 Beard: It's vacant land. The owner has a right to put in there whatever it is. 1 39 mean...it's zoned. It's zoned, isn't it? 40 41 Scholz: It's zoned. 42 43 Beard: It's zoned. That's why we're here and all we're doing is changing the zone 44 to put in the bagel store but it could be a three-story building and then the 45 neighbors have no say-so on that particular item because it is already 46 zoned that way and I think you would face as much, if not more, noise. 39 1 2 (Several people speaking at the same time— inaudible) 3 4 Scholz: I think that's a matter of opinion. Is there anyone else from the audience 5 who wishes to speak to this? 6 7 Smith: Thank you. 8 9 Scholz: Thank you, Mr. Smith. All right, I'll close it for public participation. 10 Gentlemen, what's your pleasure? Commissioner Crane? 11 12 Crane: I find I agree with Commissioner Beard that the difference between the 13 impact of Office, Professional-Limited Retail Service-Conditional, the 14 current zoning, and Commercial Medium Intensity-Conditional will 15 probably be very hard to distinguish from over the walls. The concerns 16 have some legitimacy but it is a lot that is zoned for development and 1 17 don't feel, personally, that given that the building is relatively low that the 18 impact on the neighborhood will be particularly negative. 19 I'm surprised that taking out the bank's garbage makes so much 20 noise and there will be an increase in that respect, but I venture that the 21 drive-in of the bagel is going to be less noisy than the drive-in at the bank. 22 They seem to have about six or eight lanes and there's really a lot more 23 talking goes back and forth. I'm going to support the applicant in this. 24 25 Scholz: Okay, any other discussion? Okay, I'm going to take a motion to approve. 26 27 Shipley: I move to approve case number Z2822. 28 29 Scholz: Okay, is there a second? 30 31 Shipley: With conditions... I think there were two conditions. 32 33 Scholz: With conditions, yes, there are at least two conditions. 34 35 Shipley: I believe there's a condition on the height on.... 36 37 Scholz: Page seven, right. 38 39 Shipley: It restricts it to a maximum building height of 35-feet and .... 40 41 Scholz: And all new utilities placed underground. 42 43 Shipley: ....placed underground. That's correct. 44 45 Scholz: All right, is there a second. 46 40 1 Stowe: I second it. 2 3 Scholz: Okay, Shipley moved and Stowe seconded. I'm going to call the role. 4 Commissioner Shipley. 5 6 Shipley: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 7 8 Scholz: Commissioner Crane. 9 10 Crane: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 11 12 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 13 14 Stowe: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 15 16 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 17 18 Evans: Aye, findings and discussion. 19 20 Scholz: Commissioner Bustos. 21 22 Bustos: Aye, findings and discussion. 23 24 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 25 26 Beard: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 27 28 Scholz: And the Chair votes aye for findings and discussion. Thank you, 29 gentlemen. 30 31 6. Case Z2825: Application of ASA Architects on behalf of the Las Cruces 32 Housing Authority to rezone from R-1a/C-2 (Single-Family Medium 33 Density/Commercial Medium Intensity) to C-2 (Commercial Medium Intensity) 34 on a 0.68+/- acre tract located on the northwest corner of Oak Street and Union 35 Avenue; a.k.a. 3350 Oak Street; Parcel ID# 02-13094; Proposed Use: 36 Transitional living and counseling facility for Veterans. Council District 2. 37 38 Scholz: Our last case is Z2825 and, Mr. Ochoa, you are up again. 39 40 Ochoa: Yes, sir. The final case for tonight is another zone change application, 41 Z2825. it is a request for a zone change from R-1 a/C-2, Single-Family 42 Medium Density/Commercial Medium Intensity to C-2, which is 43 Commercial Medium Intensity-Conditional for property located at 3350 44 Oak Street. 45 The property is located on the northwest corner of Oak Street and 46 Union Avenue. It currently encompasses approximately 0.68 acres and 41 1 contains an existing apartment complex. The applicant is proposing to 2 expand the existing structures, or add to the existing structures on site, 3 and develop a transitional living and counseling facility. The zone change 4 is required to remove the R-1a zoning component that is located on the 5 top one-third of the subject property, making the entire property zoned C-2 6 instead and the C-2 zoning designation for the district would allow both of 7 these uses by right. 8 For the zone change the development would require two variances 9 along with this. First there would be a variance to the minimum required 10 number of parking stalls from 32 stalls to 27, a variance of 5 parking stalls; 11 and they would also require a variance to the minimum required bufferyard 12 from 10-foot opaque bufferyard to a zero-foot opaque bufferyard. 13 Here is an existing site plan with the two existing apartment 14 buildings. You can see parking in the front and the parking in the rear, all 15 currently existing to the existing R-1 a homes. Where the buffer is required 16 would be along this northern property line where the parking is currently 17 existing and you can see it's extremely restrictive. With the new 18 development they are proposing installing, as I said, 27 parking stalls. The 19 proposed expansion would result in the loss of parking stalls. The site will 20 be able to support the total number of parking stalls of 27. Some 21 landscaping currently exists on the subject property but a minimum of 15% 22 of the total parking area shall have to be landscaped. The applicant is 23 also proposing to install a 6-foot wall in lieu of providing a 10-foot wide 24 opaque bufferyard. Parking area that currently exists on site along the 25 northern property line will allow no room to add a 10-foot opaque 26 bufferyard, which staff feels. The existing buildings and layout of the 27 property also limits any possible room for any 10-foot bufferyard. There 28 are currently underlying lot lines on the subject property that will have to 29 be vacated prior to any construction. They have to be vacated by the 30 applicant with a replat prior to any construction on the property. 31 Here's kind of a proposed site plan of what this site would look like. 32 The front parking stalls along Union would basically be removed, adding 33 the two ADA-accessible units and a counseling area. Counseling will be 34 for people on-site. People from outside will not be coming there so there 35 will not be that added traffic coming into the property and, as you can see 36 there, it looks like they are proposing 29 parking stalls but they do need an 37 extra loading area for the ADA parking so that would actually bring them to 38 a total number of parking stalls to about 27. 39 Here is an aerial of the subject property. Like I said, this is the front 40 along Union and Oak Street right here. Here is that rear parking area that 41 is in question. You can see there is the property line there running along 42 that wall of the R-1a zoned properties with the restricted area for any type 43 of buffering and additional parking. 44 Staff has reviewed this zone change and recommends approval 45 with conditions based on preceding findings: the property owner will be 46 required to replat the subject property to dissolve all underlying lot lines. 42 1 The replat must be filed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy 2 for any new construction. The second condition is: the property owner 3 will be required to install the six (6) foot opaque wall along the northern 4 property line adjacent to the R-1a zoned properties. 5 Staff has also reviewed the proposed variance to the minimum 6 number of parking stalls and the proposed variance to the minimum 7 required bufferyard and recommends approval for these two, as well, 8 along with the zone change. The recommendation of the Planning and 9 Zoning Commission will be forwarded to City Council for final 10 consideration. 11 Your options tonight, gentlemen, are: 1) vote "yes" to approve the 12 zone change and variances request as recommended by staff for case 13 Z2825; 2) to vote "yes" to approve the zone change and variance request 14 with additional conditions; 3) to vote "no" to deny the zone change and 15 variance request; 4) to table/postpone and direct staff accordingly. That is 16 the end of my presentation. The applicant is here to answer any 17 questions and possibly add more to my presentation. I also stand for 18 questions. 19 20 Scholz: Questions for this gentleman? Commissioner Crane. 21 22 Crane: I'd like to bring up two points: one is I don't understand the first paragraph 23 of Summary and Conclusions, the part that says... about the middle, 24 "...that due to incorrect surveying the bottom two-thirds (2/3) of the subject 25 property was rezoned C-2 while the top one-third (1/3) remained zoned R- 26 1 a. What's our point of reference here? Are we talking vertically?.... the 27 top 10-feet of the building one zone and the bottom 20-feet another? 28 29 Scholz: I think he's talking about north/south. Aren't you? 30 31 Crane: Okay, so does top mean "north?" 32 33 Ochoa: Correct. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Crane, to clarify: I mean the actual 34 subject property itself, the top or northern one-third of the subject property 35 is zoned R-1 a while the bottom or southern portion of the subject property, 36 two-thirds of the subject property is zoned C-2. That was kind of a 37 correction done by staff with, I believe, of Ordinance 11... 38 39 Scholz: 69 40 41 Ochoa: Thank you very much. 1169... that basically cleaned that up but due to a 42 surveying error that top portion or the northern portion, excuse me, of the 43 subject property was left R-1 a. 44 45 Crane: My question was that if the applicant were to put in a 10-foot opaque 46 barrier that's required by Code the people to the north would be looking at 43 1 the existing 3-foot wall and then, perhaps, a row of trees. Wouldn't that 2 constitute an opaque barrier, the way we've often heard presented? 3 4 Ochoa: The 10-foot opaque barrier that would be required is basically from the 5 property line into the subject property by 10-feet. They would have to 6 have an up to 6-feet of opaque screening, so like a wall or something that 7 you can't see, and then scattered landscaping and an intermittent visual 8 opening up to 20-feet. Of course, also by doing that, that would basically 9 cut their parking area in half. 10 11 Crane: So from the viewpoint of the neighbors to the north things will look about 12 the same as they would have if the variance were not granted? 13 14 Ochoa: Correct, sir, but the condition that we are proposing though, they would be 15 required to put a 6-foot... 16 17 Crane: Yeah. 18 19 Ochoa: ....tall wall (inaudible) 20 21 Crane: So the only people really affected are the ones that are in the apartment 22 complex. They're the ones who don't get to see the pretty landscaping, 23 right? 24 25 Ochoa: Correct, sir. 26 27 Crane: Okay, thank you. 28 29 Scholz: I have a question: who did the ... who ran spell check on this? I found at 30 least half-a dozen errors. Just curious, you know. 31 32 Ochoa: Mr. Chairman, my apologies. This is a new format we're trying to work on. 33 There're templates that we're trying to fix and change and so forth. It just 34 fell through, unfortunately. I apologize. I'll take the blame for that, 35 actually. 36 37 Scholz: All right. Any other questions for Mr. Ochoa? Okay, may the applicant 38 present her case? 39 40 Boyd: Good evening, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. My name is Colleen 41 Boyd. I'm the architect that is the applicant for the Housing Authority for 42 the City of Las Cruces. This is a transitional living facility for homeless 43 veterans here in this community and in an effort to serve our veterans the 44 Community of Hope, in cooperation with the Housing Authority of Las 45 Cruces, has determined that the addition of two handicap-accessible units 46 and a multi-purpose room where counseling services and meetings can 44 1 take place on site would better serve those who have served us. And 2 that's all. Thank you for your consideration this evening. 3 4 Scholz: Okay, questions for this lady? Yes, Commissioner Beard. 5 6 Beard: I'm .... Where's the alley? Is the alley disappearing now? 7 8 Boyd: No, sir, it is not. 9 10 Scholz: The plan says the alley's vacated? Is that official or is that just a...? 11 12 Boyd: You know, this particular project does not affect the alley at all. Our 13 property lines are just on the inside of the alley so as far as we're 14 concerned it has no effect. 15 16 Beard: Okay, I'm looking on page...I don't know what that is.... oh, attachment 17 number 3...and it looks like this building actually attaches to the other 18 building or to the existing apartment. 19 20 Boyd: Is this the sheet that you're looking at, Commissioner? So, again, the 21 alley runs north and south, right here.... 22 23 Beard: U-m-m-m... that's my problem...oh, I'm sorry. There's an alley on the 24 north side. 25 26 Boyd: it's on the west side. 27 28 Scholz: Okay, we actually have two drawings here and the original plat, which is 29 dated 1991, shows a vacated alley in the parking lot of the north side. Is 30 that what's confusing you, Commissioner Beard? 31 32 Beard: Yeah, that confused me. 33 34 Scholz: That confused me as well but I realized it's a parking lot. It's not an alley. 35 36 Beard: Okay, I want to go back to the...now that I know that one. 37 38 Scholz: Okay. 39 40 Beard: But it still looked like on attachment number 3 that the new structure is 41 actually attaching to the existing apartment. That's what it looked like to 42 me. 43 44 Boyd: That is correct and for Code reasons we decided to handle it that way. It 45 has to do with the fact that the apartment structure can be a certain 46 number of square feet before we exceed the maximum and, therefore, we 45 1 don't have to address Fire Code separation between these two structures 2 if we actually attach it. 3 4 Scholz: Okay 5 6 Beard: So, what about the windows in that building? 7 8 Boyd: You know, where you are seeing this attachment we have already 9 addressed that. This unit right here has an egress window on the west 10 side that they would be able to go out of; because you're absolutely 11 correct. There are bedroom windows all along that south side but we 12 have taken that into consideration. 13 14 Beard: But if you put a building right up next to it doesn't that block the window? 15 16 Boyd: Well, what I'm saying is: we would eliminate one window in that unit but 17 the bedroom for egress requirements would still be there. 18 19 Beard: Do you own that property? 20 21 Boyd: No, sir. The City of Las Cruces, the Housing Authority does. 22 23 Beard: Oh, okay. 24 25 Scholz: All right, anything else? 26 27 Boyd: That's a very good question. 28 29 Beard: Well, I'm starting to understand. 30 31 Scholz: Commissioner Shipley. 32 33 Shipley: I do have several questions: number one, all the handicapped parking is 34 up on the northeast corner of the building and all of the handicapped 35 facilities are on the southwest corner of the building. So that means that 36 during inclement weather or any time high winds, whatever, whoever is 37 using it wheelchair-wise, has got to wheel themselves all the way around 38 the building, two buildings, to get to their apartment....and I think you, 39 maybe....I just want to say: I don't think that's acceptable. 40 The other thing is: I would think that you would be better suited to 41 put on the end of the building, to put everything along there, along the 42 alley and then you could make your handicapped parking up there where 43 your Dumpster is now and move that; because you have access along the 44 alley. The way I see this right now, your layout right now, is destroying 45 parking. You're going from 32 to 27 and making it harder for the 46 handicapped people to get to their handicapped units, which I think are 46 1 needed, but you could "T" that up here and maybe lose a couple spaces 2 and still save spaces down here. The residents that live in this southern 3 building are going to be upset because their parking spaces where they 4 park now are going away. 5 So, the ponding area is also....as I walked this property today and, 6 you know, there's two areas on the east side that they have a couple 7 areas with picnic tables, two trees and then the same thing on the back 8 with a picnic table and trees. There's no real area, except between the two 9 buildings, for any kids to play whatsoever. I would just think that....I don't 10 know if you could do something in that same area, you know, it would be 11 longer; but then the bottom line is you would be able to get your 12 handicapped parking closer to the units and adjust there accordingly. 13 14 Boyd: Commissioner Shipley, your points are very well taken and I will say that 15 on the initial design of this we put the handicapped parking right up front 16 next to the multi-purpose room and the offices. Due to the fact that it is in 17 close proximity to the intersection there was some input from the Traffic 18 Engineer here that indicated they did not want the parking up front. Now 19 that doesn't mean that we can't revisit this issue and look at the possibility, 20 of maybe, providing one or two spaces up front so that we can maybe 21 adjust this curb cut so that we do come in the 30-feet required away from 22 the intersection. 23 You know, at this point we really need the variance before we can 24 proceed any further with any more design and, of course, again your point 25 is well-taken about this area back here. 26 1 do want to say the say the nature of the residents for this 27 community, again, homeless veterans in transition; very, very few of them 28 even own vehicles so parking is not an issue. You probably noticed when 29 you went over there the facility is full. There are very few cars in the lots 30 and what we could consider the priority is that we really provide space up 31 front for the handicapped units first and foremost in the event that those 32 folks would have vehicles. 33 34 Shipley: I was just concerned that you're going to end up with people that are to try 35 to do on-street parking. There's no parking along that street so that 36 means they've got to park on the side street here....and I don't think 37 there's any room to park anyplace there because there's basically two 38 entrances into the back portion of the driveway....and I pulled out, there's 39 a curb cut on this corner, too. 40 41 Boyd: Yeah, you're right. Again, I would like to revisit this with the Traffic 42 Engineer, Dan Soriano, just to look at the possibility of putting one or two 43 spaces up front there. I think there might be a solution that we just haven't 44 found yet. 45 47 1 Scholz: I would hope so because I share the same concern. You really want your 2 handicapped parking close to.... 3 4 Boyd: Absolutely, I understand. 5 6 Scholz: Commissioner Beard, you had a question or a comment? 7 8 Beard: Yes. I don't know whether it's a concern or a question. With the setback 9 now 5-feet isn't there a high-voltage power supply back there? 10 11 Boyd: There very well....yes. 12 13 Beard: Are you infringing on getting too close to that? 14 15 Boyd: No, sir. No, again, we would take a much closer look at all of those issues 16 once we got into this a little bit further with the design. Of course we 17 would hire on our engineers to take a look at all of this. 18 19 Beard: So, with this 5-foot setback you are within Code of being away from that 20 power unit? 21 22 Boyd: Yes, sir. 23 24 Beard: Okay. 25 26 Scholz: All right. Commissioner Shipley. 27 28 Shipley: What about moving this thing to the other end, to the northern end? 29 30 Boyd: U-m-m-m-m.... 31 32 Shipley: Just flip-flop it. 33 34 Boyd: Um-hmm. There was some desire on the part of the Housing Authority 35 and Community of Hope of giving us some visibility, you know.... 36 37 Shipley: I mean, you've got all that traffic on the highway. If I was a handicapped 38 person living there and didn't have mobility and had to listen to silence and 39 all that.... 40 41 Boyd: Um-hmmm. 42 43 Shipley: I don't think that's appropriate. If you can step it back and do the same 44 thing on the opposite end of the building you've accomplished something 45 where you've got plenty of parking. If it's needed, if it's not going to be 46 used, that's fine, too. 48 1 2 Boyd: Well, that's, certainly, a consideration that we could look at. 3 4 Shipley: Well, I think that's a better solution than the way it is now because I just 5 don't like the fact that people have to walk all the way around the building 6 or wheel themselves all the way around or come on crutches all the way 7 around the building to get there. If we can't do the handicapped mixed 8 with the housing I'm not going to support it. 9 10 Boyd: Yes, sir. I would like Mr. Hassell to speak to that point. 11 12 Hassell: Mr. Chairman, Commissioners, Tom Hassell, Director of the City Housing 13 Authority. Yeah, I think those are all excellent points. I think the original 14 design that we discussed had the handicapped parking in the lower right- 15 hand corner of this design. Absolutely, we want the parking next to the 16 application where it'll be required. 17 A couple of things, though, that might have some bearing on this: 18 the funding that's being used to build this is capital outlay money. It's 19 currently under the knife, so to speak, and we have some time constraints 20 to get it spent and this zoning change happened to be a hiccup in the 21 whole issue. 22 So I have absolutely no concerns about moving the unit to the north 23 parking lot. From my point of view I don't see it as a problem. One of the 24 things that we're trying to do, though, with this particular population, it 25 being a homeless transient population, in essence, we have concerns 26 about traffic coming from....and when I say traffic, I mean other people, 27 other homeless people, coming on site....and our intention is to....we've 28 applied for a Veteran's Grant that allows for some subsidy. It also allows 29 for additional money to help us do capital improvements like fire, safety 30 and that sort of thing. 31 One of the things we want to do is to turn this into more of a gated 32 community so that the people that access the living area and offices have 33 electronic card access and that way we could keep that transient traffic off 34 of the property. 35 Again, the other issue here, really the idea here is that since these 36 people are here transitionally we want to give them the services to go out 37 and get jobs, get trained, get help, care, whatever is required and we don't 38 want to have to transport them off site. That's why we want the offices in 39 the main meeting area. Two handicapped units....initially we had had 40 funding to afford to actually do that. I don't think we're going to be able to 41 reach far enough with our monies to do that now but we want to allow for 42 them in the design because eventually we do want to put them in there. 43 So we're definitely not averse to moving this design, flip-flopping it on the 44 other side. We were trying somewhat to respect the residential properties 45 to the north of us and so we thought it would be better to keep that buffer 46 between our building and the residences. 49 1 We also felt that even though we would have these two 2 handicapped units there we felt that maybe the multi-purpose buildings 3 and the offices would act as a buffer to our main living area, which is the 4 two existing apartment complexes. So if you can envision this as being 5 somewhat enclosed, a little recreational area in the back, the courtyard in 6 between the buildings and all of the walls, so to speak, so that it becomes 7 more of a private community for the people that are actually living there 8 and as a buffer to those people that are living around it. 9 10 Scholz: So, you're saying, Mr. Hassell, that we want to move on this because 11 otherwise the money will evaporate? 12 13 Hassell: Well, we're in a position right now that if we can't get the money under 14 contract there's a very good likelihood that....we have roughly a quarter- 15 of-a million dollars outstanding. If we can't get it under contract we'll lose 16 it. It'll be recaptured. We lost half of....roughly had close to seven 17 hundred thousand and we're down to that quarter-million now because it's 18 been recaptured. So, that's a separate issue but still, I think very definite 19 time constraints on using the funding. 20 21 Scholz: I understand that as a condition, yes. Commissioner Shipley. 22 23 Shipley: But I think if you flip-flopped that and....it's all paper right now, a spade 24 hasn't been turned so if you do that I think we have no problem. We can 25 make that conditional, if that's all right with you all? 26 27 Evans: I don't have any problem with that. Absolutely. 28 29 Shipley: Then that could be approved by staff. Is that correct, sir? 30 31 Scholz: Staff is going to go into a huddle on this. 32 33 Evans: Mr. Chairman. 34 35 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 36 37 Evans: What are the issues with flipping it? I like the project. I'm in support of it. 38 You give some good rationale for why you did things. In trying to give 39 some guidance on redesigning that you would have to, I believe, go back 40 and repetition this because now you really are encroaching upon the back 41 yards of those folks and, you know, you're adding additional time and, at 42 the end of the day, you know, there may be some substantial resistance 43 from those homeowner to building a structure right on that property line. 44 So, I guess I'm not sure what we're.... 45 46 Scholz: I think the architect wants to talk to this. 50 1 2 Boyd: The only other disadvantage I see of flipping this is that we will not 3 ultimately have as many parking spaces as indicated right now because 4 this is not a double-loaded lot currently. There's only one row of parking 5 up against the building on this side. Again, not a huge concern in the 6 scheme of things as far as the current use, but definitely something that 7 we might want to keep in mind. 8 9 Scholz: Thank you. Okay, I'm open to....I think staff may have a word for us. 10 Tom, something else? 11 12 Hassell: Well, Cheryl just made it clear that if we just summarily flip the design that 13 she's going to request that you table this and that means it comes back 14 later. That's not really too acceptable for us because we're time 15 constrained so I'm not averse to looking at redesigning this and I think 16 there's a way we can meet the requirement to get the parking next to the 17 handicapped unit somehow. 18 19 Scholz: Which seems to be our main concern, yes. 20 21 Hassell: And, you know, I'll just point this out, too, I think in the original design 22 where the two handicapped units are facing the ponding area, the intent 23 was that they would access those parking lots that direction not out and 24 around and the reason for that is that it's not an open, totally exposed 25 courtyard so they wouldn't be under protection of the weather if they come 26 through that courtyard and we might even be able to move the 27 handicapped parking spaces down to the west end of that so that we can 28 cut that distance, basically, in half. I'm sure we can come up with a design 29 that would probably work. 30 Another option that we've looked at, too, is the possibility of not 31 even building the two handicapped units. We still need the offices and the 32 multi-purpose building but possibly retrofitting a couple of the units that are 33 existing on the ground floor, maybe on the north side; although that 34 alternative, I don't think....it's a little less acceptable just because you're 35 stuck with what you have in terms of the sizes of the units but that's also 36 another option. But I would really very much like to get the zone change 37 taken care so we could go forward with the design and work on something 38 that allow those fixes. 39 40 Scholz: All right. Mr. Ochoa, you had another comment? 41 42 Ochoa: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I just want to remind the Commission....tonight is just 43 a recommendation so the actual....what we're voting tonight is a 44 recommendation to the City Council for a zone change and the two 45 variances themselves. The design of the property can be manipulated in 46 the future and they will just have to work with the restrictions of the actual 51 1 variances that they had, I guess, given to them when everything is 2 finalized and everything and so forth like that. Again, tonight's just a 3 recommendation and design can be taken care of later as well. 4 5 Scholz: Okay. I haven't heard from anyone in the public. Sir, do you want to 6 comment on this? No? Okay. I'll close for public comment then and I'll 7 entertain a motion to approve. 8 9 Crane: So moved. 10 11 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Crane moved.... 12 13 Crane: Z2825.... 14 15 Scholz: With....would you read the conditions, too, please? 16 17 Crane: It will take a moment. 18 19 Scholz: They are on page 10, 1 think....or page 9. 20 21 Crane: Page 9.... 22 23 Scholz: It's under Staff Recommendation. 24 25 Crane: There it is....with the conditions that: the property owner will be required 26 to replat the subject property to dissolve all underlying lot lines. The replat 27 must be filed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any 28 new construction. And, two, the property owner will be required to install a 29 six (6) foot opaque wall along the northern property line adjacent to the R- 30 la zoned properties. 31 32 Scholz: All right, and is there a second to this? 33 34 Beard: Second. 35 36 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Beard seconds. I'll call the role. Commissioner 37 Shipley. Commissioner Shipley? 38 39 Shipley: (inaudible) I'll be last. 40 41 Scholz: Commissioner Crane. 42 43 Crane: I can't believe Mr. Shipley wants to hear what all the other votes are. (all 44 laughing) 45 46 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Crane. 52 1 2 Crane: I vote aye, based on findings, discussion and site visit. 3 4 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 5 6 Stowe: Aye, based on findings, discussion and site visit. 7 8 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 9 10 Evans: Aye, findings, discussion. 11 12 Scholz: Commissioner Bustos. 13 14 Bustos: Aye, findings, discussion. 15 16 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 17 18 Beard: Aye, findings, discussion and site visit. 19 20 Scholz: And the Chair votes aye, findings, discussion. Commissioner Shipley? 21 22 Shipley: I vote nay because of the fact that I don't think this design is appropriate 23 for this piece of property and I don't think it's good for the veterans to have 24 to walk too far and I think that if we turn our back on this when we do 25 these kinds of things we're doing disservice to the vein. We need to do 26 this right the first time and spend the dollars correctly. We don't need to 27 spend our money because you've got a time frame and waste money to 28 make a bad decision and that's why I'm voting nay. 29 30 Scholz: Thank you, Commissioner Shipley. So it passes 6 to 1. 31 32 VII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 33 34 Scholz: All right, if there's no other public participation... 35 36 VIII. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS 37 38 Scholz: Staff announcements? You want to make a staff announcement, Ms. 39 Rodriguez? 40 41 1. Work Session on February 8, 2011 at 6pm in Council Chambers 42 43 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, are we going to do election of officers in a....? 44 45 Scholz: Ah, yes we have! Sorry about that. Since I had this out of order on my 46 agenda we do have to do that. We have to Election of Officers and we 53 1 have to appoint a Primary Member and an Alternate Member to the City's 2 Affordable Housing Land Bank and Trust Fund Advisory Committee. 3 Okay, the way we usually do the election of officers is that we ask for 4 nominations, initially, for the Secretary. All right, any nominations for the 5 Secretary? 6 7 Crane: I nominate Commissioner Beard. 8 9 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Beard has been nominated for Secretary. Any other 10 nominations? Okay, would somebody move that the nominations be 11 closed? 12 13 Shipley: I so move the nominations be closed. 14 15 Scholz: Okay, Shipley has moved the nominations be closed. All those in favor 16 say aye. 17 18 All: Aye. 19 20 Scholz: Those opposed same sign? Okay the nominations are closed and, 21 Commissioner Beard, you are the Secretary for the next year. Would you 22 please take over? Oh, wait a minute! We have to do Vice-Chair, don't 23 we? Yes. There we go! Now we do nominations for Vice-Chair. Go 24 ahead. Commissioner Evans. 25 26 Evans: Thank you, Chairman, I nominate Commissioner Crane. 27 28 Scholz: You nominate Commissioner Crane. All right. 29 30 Shipley: I move that the nominations cease. 31 32 Scholz: Okay, and it's been moved the nominations cease. All those in favor say 33 aye. 34 35 All: Aye. 36 37 Scholz: Opposed same sign? Okay, Commissioner Crane, you are the Vice- 38 Chair. Now, Commissioner Crane, you can conduct the election for Chair. 39 40 Crane: Thank you. The nominations are open for the position of Chair of the 41 Planning and Zoning Commission. Do I hear a nomination? 42 43 Shipley: I nominate Commissioner Scholz. 44 45 Crane: Commissioner Scholz is nominated. Are there any other nominations? 46 Then I'll entertain a motion that nominations be closed. 54 1 2 Shipley: So moved. 3 4 Crane: It's been moved that the nominations be closed. All in favor, aye. 5 6 All: Aye. 7 8 Crane: Any opposed? Commissioner Scholz, congratulations. 9 10 Scholz: Thank you very much. I'm shocked...or surprised and delighted. I'm not 11 sure which it is. One of the two, anyway. 12 13 Beard: You know, I'd like to make a recommendation. 14 15 Scholz: Yes, go ahead, Commissioner Beard. 16 17 Beard: This is to the City: when.... in the old office or auditorium we were able to 18 see, both the audience, the presenter and us, were able to see the same 19 map and we could actually use a pointer and we knew where everybody 20 was by looking at that map on either side of the room. We don't have that 21 here now and I think that we're guessing is to where they're pointing when 22 they're pointing on their monitor. We can't see where they're pointing and 23 when we want to point we can't....we don't have any way of telling you 24 where we're looking at on this monitor. What my suggestion would be to 25 put a monitor over here on the side, a large TV screen, so that everybody 26 can see the same thing and we can use a pointer to point at it. 27 28 Scholz: I think we were using projectors before, weren't we? 29 30 Ochoa: Yes, sir, we had two projectors in the.... 31 32 Scholz: Projectors. 33 34 Ochoa: Just a question for you, sir: when I actually do a mouse moving on the 35 screen could you see the mouse moving on the screen? 36 37 Beard: That's true but I can't convey that my location up here to you.... 38 39 Crane: In the old system we were able to use a laser pointer to point at the 40 screen. I did use it a couple of times but there's no point in my bringing it 41 now. 42 43 Shipley: I went out and bought a pointer and I can't use it now. (all laughing) 44 45 Scholz: You need to go to the airport and use it. 46 55 1 Crane: You can shine it at airplanes. That's fun. 2 3 Scholz: There we go: that's the latest thing. All right, we do have to appoint a 4 Primary Member and an Alternate Member to the City's Affordable 5 Housing, Land Bank and Trust Fund Advisory Committee. Who did this 6 last year....or recently? Anyone? 7 8 Crane: I've never heard.... 9 10 Scholz: Commissioner Shipley, you were.... What are the chores involved or what 11 is the chore involved? What do you have to do, to do this? 12 13 Shipley: Just to attend the meetings when they're called but they haven't been 14 having any meetings for several months since they redid the Housing 15 Ordinance. 16 17 Scholz: Okay, and so that was your primary task? 18 19 Shipley: And that was dissolved, I mean, that committee was dissolved probably a 20 year ago. 21 22 Scholz: All right, well, I'm open to volunteers for the Primary Member and 23 Alternate Member to the City's Affordable Housing Land Bank. Volunteer? 24 25 Stowe: Question? 26 27 Scholz: Yes. 28 29 Stowe: How often were the meetings....when there were meetings? 30 31 Shipley: They were doing the Ordinance and there was a meeting, probably, about 32 every three weeks to four weeks and that went on for about ten months 33 and then they developed the Ordinance and revised the Ordinance and 34 then they stopped. 35 36 Stowe: Does staff have any other indications of what is involved? 37 38 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Stowe, I don't know the specifics of how this 39 committee will function. David Dollahon is the Section Administrator who 40 will be overseeing this. But I could gather that the committee may be 41 meeting once a month. Maybe, as they get started, maybe twice a month 42 but as it gets established and there's more consistency I would assume 43 that you're just meeting once a month. 44 45 Scholz: All right, does that change the volunteer picture? The reason....we have a 46 deadline on this. This has to be in by the 28th and I hesitate to just appoint 56 1 someone but if nobody is volunteering I am probably going to have to do 2 that. 3 4 Stowe: I'm willing to volunteer. I do have a short term problem that I will be out of 5 the city for most of February, March, and April 6 7 Scholz: Ah. 8 9 Stowe: It's about ninety days or less. I don't want to sign up for something and 10 then be absent. 11 12 Scholz: I understand. Would you be willing to be the Alternate Member? 13 14 Stowe: Yes. 15 16 Scholz: Okay. So, Commissioner Stowe says he would be willing to be the 17 Alternate Member. Now we still need a regular Member. I'm looking at 18 our working men here and they're all shaking their heads. (all laughing) 19 So I might look at someone who is retired. Commissioner? 20 21 Crane: I'd love to volunteer, Mr. Chairman. My volunteer platter is full. (inaudible) 22 1 couldn't take on anything else and still do a job. Sorry to say no but.... 23 24 Scholz: I understand. 25 26 Crane: .....so that I have to. 27 28 Scholz: Commissioner Beard, how about you? 29 30 Beard: I think we ought to get the people who've had the experience, Mr. Shipley 31 down there. 32 33 Shipley: I'm in the same situation that I've got a volunteer job that starts now for tax 34 season up until April 15th and so, you know, I'm pushed to that plus I do 35 two other volunteer jobs so I did it once and I'd like to decline this time. 36 37 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Beard, will you accept? 38 39 Beard: Okay. 40 41 Scholz: Okay, so Commissioner Beard will be our Primary Member and 42 Commissioner Stowe our Alternate Member. Will you convey that to Mr. 43 Dollahon? 44 45 Rodriguez: I sure will. 46 57 1 Scholz: Thank you very much. Okay, anything else? 2 3 Shipley: I have a question. 4 5 Scholz: Yes, certainly. 6 7 Shipley: In the packet we got today....or the handout we got today right before the 8 meeting started, this top letter is dated December the 16t 2010. Why 9 wasn't that included in our packet so we could see it instead of at the last 10 minute? It really troubles me to get something at the last minute when 11 we're trying to make a decision. 12 13 Ochoa: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Shipley that was letter was actually just 14 barely received by staff today by the applicant. I don't know what 15 happened with their communication with the person who turned in that 16 letter but I just barely received that e-mail today with that as an 17 attachment. The other two letters were received by mail prior to....oh, 18 after we sent out our packets for you all. 19 20 Shipley: Can you not e-mail some of this stuff to us? In other words, most of us 21 have....when something like that comes in why can't it be scanned and e 22 —mailed to us as an update? Then you don't have to send a car out and 23 you don't have to do that. We all have computers and.... 24 25 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Shipley, as we receive public notice, 26 whether it's after you've received your staff reports, we can forward them 27 to you electronically but we also need to ensure that everybody's receiving 28 their e-mails so that everybody's getting a copy. 29 30 Shipley: (inaudible— microphone tumed off) 31 32 Scholz: Are you on mike? 33 34 Shipley: Yeah, I just turned it on. Sorry. I was just saying: if you did that....it 35 doesn't happen often but if that happens you need somebody to call us 36 and just leave a voice mail message and say, "We e-mailed you an 37 addition to your packet," and that would be fine. 38 39 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, I can't guarantee the consistency of the phone calls 40 happening from staff on a case by case basis but what we can do is post 41 delivery of the staff reports. Any public notices that come in from the 42 public we can forward them to you by e-mail or scan them and send them 43 to you electronically. If they come in the same day of the meeting then we 44 will hand deliver them here at the meeting. 45 46 Scholz: Okay, thank you very much. Anything else? Well, thank you, gentlemen, 1 58 1 declare this.... 2 3 Rodriguez: Just a reminder, February 8th is a work session. It's the second Tuesday 4 night. 5 6 Scholz: Yes. All right. 7 8 Rodriguez: It's the second Tuesday not your third Tuesday and there are two items on 9 there: the City's Consolidated Plan for our CDBG and Home Funds that 10 we have to do a five-year consolidated plan so BBC Consulting will be 11 here providing you a presentation on that about the Affordable Housing 12 Initiatives and other low income redevelopment projects that our Home 13 and CDBG funds work toward. And then also we are unveiling a new 14 community blueprint. I gave you a brief description of that in an e-mail 15 and you'll be receiving a staff report, a packet of material, on or near 16 February 1St or 2"d. (inaudible) Okay? 17 18 Scholz: Okay. Thank you very much. 19 20 IX. ADJOURNMENT (8:10 PM) 21 22 Scholz: So I declare us adjourned then at.... Can we do this... Commissioner 23 Shipley? 24 25 Shipley: I was just going to ask: so we're not going to talk about changing the 26 distance with 300-feet and the dates and all that stuff? That's just been.... 27 28 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, what we can do is I can schedule that for a work session. It 29 may not be on your February 8th work session because those other two 30 items are going to take a lot of time so maybe in March we can bring that 31 to a work session and you can talk about the Development Review 32 Process at that time. 33 34 Scholz: Thank you for bringing that up. I appreciate it. 35 36 Shipley: Then I had two other thing: number one, I wanted to say the format for the 37 reports is very well done with the one exception is: I ask that they also ask 38 that they put the square footages on when they do acreage so you've got 39 an idea because some of the regulations are written under square 40 footage, like at a half-acre or so many square feet. That was one thing but 41 it has been done very nicely and it's very helpful. 42 43 Rodriguez: Thank you. 44 45 Scholz: Commissioner Crane. 46 59 1 Crane: Referring to the giving notice document Commissioner Shipley's talking 2 about: one of the things that I was going to ask about was why there's 3 such a disparity or mix of numbers of days of notice to be given to various 4 kinds of business that come before the Commission so I'd just ask why the 5 rationale for that is and; secondly, it seems that, I believe you said, that 6 the Zoning Ordinances trump anything in that document and I agree with 7 Commissioner Shipley that there should not be any conflicts so I'd like to 8 make sure that that gets adjusted if there is a revision of the document. 9 Oh, also, we were wondering whether that document is the same as the 10 previous one that we read. Okay, thank you. 11 12 13 Scholz: Thank you, gentlemen. We are adjourned at 8:10. 14 15 16 17 ,,ll 18 U 2 19 20 Chairman 21 22 60 City of las Cruces THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STATEMENT OF REASONABLE NOTICE FOR MEETINGS The Planning and Zoning Commission is informed that: WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Las Cruces met in a public hearing at 6:00 p.m. on January 25, 2011. WHEREAS, Section 10-15-1 (D) of the Open Meetings Act, Section 10-15-1 to 10-15-4, New Mexico Statutes Annotated (1978), as amended, states that, except as may be otherwise provided in the Constitution or the provision of the Open Meetings Act, all meetings of a quorum of members of any board, council, commission, administrative adjudicatory body or other policy making body of a local public agency held for the purpose of formulating public policy, discussing public business or for the purpose of taking any action within the authority of or the delegated authority of such body, are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times; and WHEREAS, any meetings subject to the Open Meetings Act at which the discussion or adoption of any proposed resolution, rule, regulation or formal action occurs shall be held only after reasonable notice to the public; and WHEREAS, Section 10-15-1(D) of the Open Meetings Act, as amended, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Las Cruces to determine annually what constitutes reasonable notice of its public meetings. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Las Cruces, New Mexico states: (I) THAT for regular public hearings and special meetings, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Las Cruces generally meets the fourth Tuesday of every month at 6:00 p.m. for the regular public hearing, and the issuance of an agenda in accordance with this statement shall be issued and circulated to the press, radio, and other public information media and posted on bulletin boards of the City of Las Cruces City Hall. P.O. BOX 20000 . LAS CRUCES . NEW MEXICO . 88004-9002 1575.541.2000 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER (II) THAT a public hearing is required for requests for Zoning Code amendments, Sign Code amendments, zone changes, annexations, initial zonings, Planned Unit Developments, infill development proposals, special use permits (as defined in Section 38-10 of the 2001 Zoning Code, as amended). Notice of the public hearing shall be sent by regular mail to all property owners, as shown by the records of the County Assessor, within at least two hundred (200) feet of the proposed case, excluding streets, alleys, channels, canals, railroads, and all other public rights-of-way. Notice shall be mailed at least ten (10) days prior to the required hearing. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be published at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. (III) THAT a public hearing is required for requests for Subdivision Code amendments, master plans, preliminary plats, and final plats (as defined in Chapter 37 of the Las Cruces Municipal Code). Notice of the public hearing shall be sent by regular mail to all property owners, as shown by the records of the County Assessor, within at least two hundred (200) feet of the proposed case, excluding streets, alleys, channels, canals, railroads, and all other public rights-of-way. Notice shall be mailed at least nine (9) days prior to the required hearing. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing shall be published at least nine (9) days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. (IV) THAT a public hearing is required for all appeals to the Zoning Code, Design Standards interpretations, and Subdivision Code interpretations. Notice of the time and place of the meeting shall be published at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. (V) THAT the Planning and Zoning Commission determines that, reasonable notice shall include the issuance and posting of an agenda for regular meetings by 4:00 p.m., on Friday preceding the regular Tuesday meeting. That reasonable notice for special meetings shall require the issuance and posting of an agenda within 24 hours of the time of the special meeting. All other meetings which may be called for informational purposes at which no action is to be taken shall be held only after written notice issued to the news media no later than 12:00 noon of the day of such meeting, or four (4) hours before such meeting, whichever is greater. (Vi) THAT in an emergency, wherein it is necessary for the public peace, health, safety and welfare, a meeting may be called with as much notice as may be possible under the conditions. (VI I) THAT substantial compliance with any one of the appropriate foregoing methods of giving notice shall constitute compliance with this statement and Section 10-15-1 to 10-15-4, N.M.S.A. (1978), as amended. Nothing herein shall prevent the use of additional means or methods of giving notice of regular or special meetings. Nothing herein shall require new notice of any public meeting for which notice has been given and which is recessed or adjourned. However, in recessing the meeting, the presiding officer shall announce the meeting, the time and place the meeting shall resume. (VII 1) THAT all such meetings are and shall be open to the public as set forth in Section 10- 15-1 to 10-15-4, N.M.S.A. (1978), as amended. (I)U THAT if any section, paragraph, clause, or provision of this statement shall be for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of such section, paragraph or clause or provision shall not affect any of the remaining provisions of this statement or its application to other situations. Chair, Planning and Z60g Commission Date Secretary, Planning and Zoning Commission /is //1 Date