Loading...
03-15-2011WS On of las Cruces PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WORK SESSION AGENDA The following work session 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, March 15, 2011 beginning at 6:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers located in City Hall at 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 II. APPROVAL OF WORK SESSION MINUTES — February 8, 2011 Ill. NEW BUSINESS 1. Overview and update on Vision 2040 2. Overview on the Community Planning Blueprint process 3. Overview of the City's development review process IV. ADJOURNMENT I WORK SESSION OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 FOR THE 3 CITY OF LAS CRUCES 4 City Council Chambers 5 March 15, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. 6 7 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: 8 Charles Scholz, Chairman 9 Godfrey Crane, Vice Chair 10 Charles Beard, Secretary 11 Shawn Evans, Member 12 Ray Shipley, Member 13 14 BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: 15 Donald Bustos, Member 16 William Stowe, Member 17 18 STAFF PRESENT: 19 David Weir, AICP, Community Development Director 20 Cheryl Rodriguez, Develoment Services Administrator 21 Paul Michaud, Senior Planner 22 Ellie Cain, Senior Planner 23 Lora Dunlap, Recording Secretary 24 25 1. CALL TO ORDER (6:01 PM) 26 27 Scholz: Good evening and welcome to the work session of the Planning and 28 Zoning Commission for Tuesday, March 15th; it's the Ides of March. 29 30 II. APPROVAL OF WORK SESSION MINUTES — February 8, 2011 31 32 Scholz: Okay, first thing we need is the approval of the work session minutes of 33 February 8, 2011; any additions or corrections to the minutes? Okay, 34 hearing none, I'll ask for a motion to approve. 35 36 Shipley: Move to approve the minutes. 37 38 Beard: Second. 39 40 Scholz: Okay, it's been moved by Shipley and seconded by Beard to approve the 41 minutes; all those in favor, say aye 42 43 COMMISSIONERS -AYE. 44 45 Scholz: Those opposed same sign; and any abstentions. Alright the minutes are 46 approved. 47 48 III. NEW BUSINESS 1 1 2 1. Overview and update on Vision 2040 3 4 Scholz: Okay, our next order is New Business and Mr. Michaud you're going to 5 give us an overview and update on Vision 2040. 6 7 Paul Michaud presented the Overview and Update on Vision 2040. Following are 8 questions/comments from the Commissioners. 9 10 Scholz: Okay, I have two; one about the census data. Did we anticipate the county 11 would grow more than this? 12 13 Michaud: I just pulled these numbers like five minutes ago. No, I think we were 14 assuming... we assumed that the county was about 200, 202 and that 15 we'd add another 125,000 people which is our midrange projection for 16 2040. The county projection is pretty much in line with where we're at; 17 maybe a little bit higher than what people were expecting but not higher 18 than some of the higher projections from some of the models that we're 19 looking at. 20 21 Scholz: So the 2040 projections you think, are in line with where we're going? 22 23 Michaud: Yeah, because again we're using the midpoint projections and they still 24 think, for that level of plan you're not getting precisely where people... 25 you're just trying to get generally, where you want people to kind of go to. 26 27 2. Overview on the Community Planning Blueprint process 28 29 David Weir presented the overview of the Community Planning Blueprints. Following 30 are questions/comments from the Commissioners. 31 32 Shipley: David, just to... under the blueprints, you've got areas recognized as 33 appropriate for community planning blueprints and again, they're just 34 general areas; EI Paseo Corridor, the Gateway, Picacho Avenue Corridor, 35 Las Cruces Country Club. You know we asked before, what are we talking 36 about. Are we talking about from one end to the other? 37 38 Weir: Mr. Chairman and Commissioner Shipley, I think what we as staff were 39 kind of looking at was, is this the general framework that you'd like to go 40 into those areas and then when for example the county club, if the country 41 club were to sell it and it were to go into private development, it's 42 something that we could identify the boundaries. It would be the 43 boundaries of the existing country club and we could say we need to do... 44 in essence you'd be doing a master plan activity for that parcel of land and 45 so we could set those boundaries at staff and then we could contact the 46 property owners and do our public notice and could then go forward and 47 draw up the schematics for that. 2 I EI Paseo, since we are doing the EPA Smart Growth, we kind of have 2 some rough boundaries on that, that we could utilize. Probably what would 3 happen is we'd break it down. Maybe a segment would be from University 4 to Boutz and then we'd go from probably Espina to Valley. Just areas that 5 have some similar issues where there's a topic that's important but people 6 down at the south end of El Paseo are gonna have the same issues as 7 those that are up by the downtown, by the bank tower or something so it 8 would be broken down. 9 We've also been directed to look at Picacho Avenue and from a staff 10 level, we see the same thing. A full corridor is more than what this 11 instrument could probably bite off so what we were looking at was it may 12 be more reasonable from the railroad tracks to like Valley and then what 13 would be the next streets that the... they still are impacted by the traffic 14 and the businesses around Picacho but they're similar enough in 15 neighborhoods so we were looking at probably Hadley on one side, Griggs 16 on the other. Things that wouldn't be of a level where we'd have to really 17 do a lot of research and we'd have to have a lot of efforts that I think the 18 intent is more even almost sub-neighborhoods that people could really 19 come in and look at what the particular issue might be and to address that. 20 We really would like this to be as flexible as possible so that you know, for 21 one I guess portion of the town, it might be where there's... we have a lot 22 of property that's zoned say C-2 but all of the parcels are greater than an 23 acre so you have conflict between the zoning code and the land use in 24 that area so you could go in there, you could address that type of issue. 25 Another one might be where they know that there's a lot of tagging with 26 the graffiti and stuff like that so we could go in, we could call a boundary 27 that's being hit by that. We could get their input, their ideas, maybe 28 bringing the police department in, neighborhood watch and then you could 29 come up with recommendations. We'll contact the Weed & Seed Program 30 as soon as we'll see if there are businesses in the area that would donate 31 paint and we'll volunteer our time as a community to go out and paint the 32 walls and make sure that that doesn't take place. 33 There's a lot of things that we could do for that and that's the flexibility 34 but to get back to your initial question on boundaries; we kind of wanted to 35 leave that to what issue comes up and what takes place in regards to that. 36 The ideas that are on the list today are EI Paseo; we just know that since 37 we've got this Smart Growth grant we wanted to make sure that there was 38 some way we could implement whatever recommendations were made 39 from the EPA and their visioning type of statements that we'd have a 40 further way to do public input. 41 U.S. 70; the gateway, that's something that came right out of your 42 existing Comp Plan. It was identified as a gateway and again that may not 43 be the best area but there may be like an intersection where somebody or 44 a neighborhood says you know "we want a distinct theme or we want to do 45 some signage in here to kind of like you have on the Mesquite area." 46 Picacho area, kind of talked about one of the Councilors is really 47 interested in getting involved but we realize we need to break that down a 48 little bit. 3 I Las Cruces Country Club, just the interest that we've seen lately and 2 the potential for that to be released and the use to change so we know 3 that's an area that needs to go forward. 4 North Telshor Corridor, that's another one that was identified in the 5 Comprehensive Plan. 6 Villa Mora Dam is a vacant parcel of land off of Triviz where we had 7 Madrid punched through so if the City were ever to release that for land, 8 we know that that neighborhood would be very involved. There's was a lot 9 of public outreach and input on just punching the road through so we 10 wanted to give them an instrument to if we were to release that, we 11 wouldn't just come in and say we're gonna put an affordable housing 12 project in there; they'd have some input into that area. 13 Las Cruces Dam, the Corp of Engineers has done a lot of planning to 14 make that a recreational area and so we just wanted to provide an 15 additional I guess venue to flush out those ideas further. 16 The West Mesa we know that, well this was the property that was 17 know as the Outlook. We know that there was a lot of public input there. 18 Maybe it would have been better to have a method for the residents in the 19 ETZ to come in and make their comments known or have a little better 20 idea of what the City had planned but we already had plans for the airport 21 and industrial park so it's really those residential areas that we're taking in 22 with the Kennon Annexation. 23 Lohman and Roadrunner, we just anticipate that whole area continuing 24 to develop and may even stretch that on down to Sonoma Ranch 25 Boulevard with the school going in and I think it's just a matter of time until 26 that road, that segment of road will go in. So that whole area we anticipate 27 development taking place and probably of a commercial nature and it 28 seems like as we get those commercial developments and they transition 29 into residential areas, that there's a need for some type of public input and 30 buy-in. 31 The Railroad Corridor, that goes through the entire community and a 32 lot of times you'll see conflicts between that type of use in the 33 neighborhoods, etc. and so that's really just putting that down there. We 34 haven't been approached that I'm aware of but I know that they're 35 potentially like Avenida de Mesilla and the railroad and Main Street, 36 there's some vacant property there so that might be an opportunity to do 37 this type of planning. Avenida de Mesilla, Valley and Main that's the area 38 we're talking about. 39 Immaculate Heart; again the City Council brought up the importance of 40 making sure that we incorporate the school and the church facility into that 41 neighborhood, some vacant parcels. So that was an area that we could 42 deal with. 43 South Main Street, we're already starting to see inquiries into 44 redeveloping that little node. I think a lot of that's spurred by the opening 45 of the new convention center so we have some I guess older trailer parks 46 and mobile home parks and older hotels so there's an opportunity to have 47 reinvestment there. 4 I Mesilla Park, the residents that live around the former Mesilla Park 2 Elementary School have already expressed an interest in doing some type 3 of planning in that neighborhood. 4 Same thing with South Hacienda Acres; a few months ago you had a 5 zone change where the people that are interested in the equestrian 6 development, they wanted to make sure that that would be honored and 7 so this would be if there were a plan in that neighborhood then that was 8 specifically stated that accommodations would be made for horses and 9 equestrian trails, etc. They could have a policy plan for that so that's 10 where those ideas have come from. 11 Internally, staff has kind of talked about after you have this initial list, 12 how do you get a new one on the list again and that's something I think 13 that I'd be interested to see what the Commissioners feel. It's kind of a 14 difficult one and what I kind of envisioned was yearly that that list would be 15 reviewed throughout the year. We could either develop a form or post on 16 our website if you're interested in a planning, you submit it. We would 17 consolidate that and maybe some type of you why this is important, why 18 you want to do that. We would bring that to you at a designated time 19 whether it's the beginning of the year or the spring or some time that we 20 would establish a date that it would come to you. We could review those 21 lists, we provide them to you, we could probably even do a staff's some 22 preliminary rankings and have you make a suggestion and then we could 23 send a resolution based on your recommendations, to City Council and 24 they could say these are the community blueprints that we want the 25 Community Development Department to work on this year. That was a 26 long answer for a short question. 27 28 Shipley: It was a good answer though, thank you. The other thing I was just going 29 to ask and I didn't know how this would relate to that you know, here in the 30 city we drive around and there are places that have had medians that 31 haven't been touched since they've been installed; Lohman all the way up 32 to Roadrunner is a good example. It's a huge place, lots of traffic, lots of 33 people go by there every day. Wouldn't that be a good project for 34 something like this, or is that too specific? 35 36 Weir: Commissioner Shipley, I think that's a good project but I think the City 37 would probably do that through their CIP project. There's a couple of 38 ways that the City could address that one; make it go out and just budget 39 for it as a project through the Capital Improvement Project type of 40 planning. The other thing that the City has done, they've adopted an 41 ordinance as commercial developments in front of those medians take 42 place, they're now responsible to do some of the landscape median. 43 44 Shipley: I guess the bottom line is that those medians have been there for years 45 and there's commercial on both sides and there's not been one stone 46 deposited so the bottom line is how do we get past that because you know 47 you're not gonna put it on the next shopping center to open and have 48 them pay for it all. You're gonna have to levy money from them or 5 I everybody that's there or you could maybe get a community project and 2 you could get people to donate you know rock, or donate some things for 3 the betterment and then let this group come together, this blueprint group 4 and design it and implement it. 5 6 Weir: I agree with that statement. In that case the Blueprint, that would be an 7 actionable item you know as a group, we're gonna solicit the businesses 8 here to help do that type of project, get buy-in by the Facilities and Street 9 Department, so yeah this would be a good avenue to pursue that type of 10 project. 11 12 Scholz: I thought it was well written and I'm particularly pleased you were talking 13 about how to you know, in a sense defining neighborhoods or areas to do 14 for development. It seems to me that some of these like the Mesilla Park 15 one, is in a sense initiated by the individuals and I almost think that people 16 will in a sense define their own neighborhoods by the boundaries that they 17 see or by the type of housing or the type of development, whatever and 18 that would be an aid to you or to us in determining blueprints. 19 20 Weir: The way that the process was laid out it was that there would be a public 21 input meeting to begin with before anything was put on paper and so that 22 would give an opportunity if the area was too large or too small, it could be 23 expanded and it would be based, it wouldn't be staff or the Planning and 24 Zoning Commission saying this is the boundary it has to be. It would be a 25 little more organic and they'd say no we feel that this is a part of our 26 community and we want it included and so then we could again get the 27 information on it and bring it back to the groups. 28 29 Scholz: I just had one other comment and that was a... it's page, well let's see... 30 it's the second page of the report, not including the cover and in the 31 paragraph under Intent, I think it's supposed to read city staff and the 32 public to manage quality of life initiatives and the to is missing (inaudible) 33 doubted me, I was reading this yesterday. I appreciate the fact that you 34 also point out what it's not to do and I think whenever we create a 35 document like this, I know we have this problem on the 2040 Commission 36 too, people always say "well, well but we don't want you know this and you 37 know this is good" and I think one of the ways to diffuse that of course, is 38 to say" okay this is what we will do or this is what we can do with it and 39 this is what we will not do with it." 40 41 Weir: We definitely don't want to get into the game of raising expectations that 42 we can't deliver on and then the other thing that we want, we get caught 43 cross-ways a lot of times, is the property rights issue and so we wanted to 44 make it very clear that if you have zoning and you have a project that 45 meets the zoning that this does not preclude it so we wanted to be very 46 clear. 47 6 I Scholz: Yeah, and there are other processes for obviously modifying zoning and 2 things like that. 3 4 Weir: I have one more question for you; so would you like staff to continue to 5 refine this and then are you comfortable us bringing that to one of your 6 meetings for a recommendation to City Council? 7 8 Scholz: Sure, I think so. 9 10 3. Overview of the City's development review process 11 12 Ellie Cain presented the overview of the City's development review process. Following 13 are questions/comments from the Commissioners. 14 15 Beard: A couple of things; on the very first thing and this probably doesn't pertain 16 to what you're presenting. I mean the very, very first viewgraph where 17 annexation; we've annexed a lot of things and we didn't even know why it 18 was being annexed and I think there should be something there that says 19 this is why we're annexing, this is why we want to do the annexation. 20 21 Cain: So, I'm sorry Commissioner, you're referring to some type of plan, 22 annexation plan, maybe? 23 24 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Beard, what you're referring to, within the 25 State Statute, the State Statute identifies three types of annexation 26 methods that property owners can utilize. The one that you commonly see 27 that the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council have actually 28 seen is the petition method. So if a property owner petitions annexation, 29 anybody who lives outside of the city limits can go ahead and put together 30 a petition and request to be annexed into the city limits. It will go through a 31 review and everything for a recommendation up to the appropriate bodies 32 but that's the petition method. Another method that's available is the 33 municipal boundary method; it's not a method that's ever been utilized 34 within the city limits and the third method... it's never used. We always 35 use the petition method so I can't recall the third method right off the top of 36 my head but that's why if a property owner comes in and says "I want to 37 come into the city limits," that's the petition, so they fill out a form to 38 petition. They'll submit the fee, the plat and we'll require them to master 39 plan the area and zone it, etc. but that's the one method that you have 40 always seen. 41 42 Beard: Well, there have been things where we have annexed things and we didn't 43 know why. Just for instance when we did the high school annexation not 44 too long ago, we also did an annexation that was belonging to the 45 university and made it part of the city; the Farm and Ranch Museum? 46 47 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Beard all that land was controlled by New 48 Mexico State University; they were the petitioner. 7 1 2 Beard: Yeah, but we didn't know why. 3 4 Rodriguez: But the petitioner, New Mexico State University, asked to bring that land 5 into the city limits for the purpose of bringing the high school site into the 6 city limits for reasons that the school district had asked for and then 7 because of adjacent properties and the way that that property was 8 configured, the Farm and Ranch site which was land controlled by New 9 Mexico State University, that also came in. 10 11 Beard: Okay, it probably went right over my head when that was mentioned. I 12 have another item. On the boundary; I know that we have talked about 13 boundaries before like maybe 200-feet but what I would like to include in 14 the boundary, is anyone that would be directly affected by the construction 15 or even the completion of a project. We have seen times when, especially 16 on the West Mesa which didn't get approved, but the trucks that were 17 gonna be going in to build up that development, trucks would be using a 18 dirt road that was way past the 100-foot boundary and these people were 19 all gonna be affected and I think they should have been given notice so 20 that they could participate in that concern. 21 22 Cain: Okay. Commissioner, well the State requires us to go out 100-feet and we 23 just standard go out 200-feet. We can discuss it as staff to see. I think that 24 1 could see how it could be a little bit subjective if we did it for one and not 25 another potentially, so we would have to do it for all of them probably 400- 26 feet or 500-feet or 300-feet. 27 28 Beard: If it had been a good road for trucks to haul in material or haul material 29 out, then the persons probably would not be affected and in most cases 30 that's probably the case but in this one particular case there was several 31 people that were blocks away that were going to be affected. 32 33 Cain: Okay, we will definitely look into and discuss different notification options 34 and see how maybe we could address getting everyone notified. Again, 35 we do go out the 200-feet, we do publish in the newspaper and there is a 36 sign posted on the property as well. 37 38 Shipley: Also in the codes the way they exist today, there is a requirement that 39 says that if there aren't sufficient people within a distance, there has to be 40 at least 15 people notified and that's not in your recommendation today so 41 are we changing the current City Code? 42 43 Cain: No, I'm sorry, I didn't put that in there but that is correct. 44 45 Shipley: Okay, so there's a minimum of 15 people so that would fit your bill right 46 there Commissioner Beard in that if there was somebody adjacent to that 47 property and they only notified within the 200-feet, there was only one or 48 two residents then they would have to go out farther around until they got 8 1 at least 15 people notified; isn't that the way that's written? Okay, so it is 2 covered, it's just not covered here. 3 4 Beard: It probably would cover most cases but not all cases necessarily. 5 6 Shipley: Well it doesn't' say how far they would have to go out. It says they would 7 have to go out until they have notified 15 people that lived around there so 8 that could be a half mile or two miles if there were... 9 10 Beard: That's true, what if there were 15 people right next to the boundary of the 11 construction site and the people that were gonna be affected on the dirt 12 road that were beyond that though? 13 14 Shipley: Again, I think that what would happen is that they'd see the sign and they 15 could come to the public meeting and participate. 16 17 Scholz: Yeah, I would hope the same thing. I think because we have open public 18 meetings and announcements of the agendas, there's no reason why 19 people can't come in and give us their concerns. 20 21 Shipley: Or they can even go to staff and ask in advance of the meeting you know, 22 what's going on to find out. 23 24 Crane: I have a couple of points regarding the people who live too far away from 25 the area in question to be automatically included within the mailing 26 boundary. They wouldn't necessarily see the posted sign if it were further 27 up the street, away from the city and they don't go up there. It might come 28 as quite a shock to them when they start having a lot of heavy traffic 29 coming by and I think Commissioner Beard had a legitimate point about 30 the city planners having to being a little bit more imaginative about who 31 they should include depending on the kind of approach to the area that's 32 going to be worked on, the kind of work, how much work, how many 33 access roads there are and so on. My second point; I'm curious to know 34 how you measure or where you measure the mailing boundary distance 35 from. Is it from the outside perimeter of the property in question? Okay, 36 thank you. 37 38 Shipley: There's always been one issue that comes up especially on notification is 39 that if the owner of a parcel of land lives outside the city and this is an 40 investment and then they have people who lease that property and those 41 people don't get notified. Is there any, and the attorney's not here, but you 42 know we understand that the owner has to be notified but there also ought 43 to be something for the occupant so that they at least have a chance to 44 voice if they're the ones that are gonna be either operating the business 45 living in the building or living in the home, there needs to be some other 46 mechanism from that and the sign doesn't always get noticed again and 47 so that's tough. It's something that we probably need to look at in greater 48 depth and detail. 9 1 2 Scholz: Alright, any other questions or comments? Well, thank you very much for 3 this illuminating presentation. Do we have anything else on the agenda; 1 4 don't think so. We do have a couple of... two commission members came 5 to me today and said "Do we really have to print out 25 pages of the 6 minutes of the previous meeting"; and I said, "Well I didn't, I read it online 7 knowing that there would be a copy of the minutes here" and generally 8 you don't ask us to that. You know, you provide us with a packet and the 9 information. Was there some reason for us printing that out this time? 10 11 Rodriguez: Mr. Chairman, no, there was no reason. Usually for work session because 12 the material's not as lengthy as your staff reports would be, we were trying 13 to email those to you electronically but we did hear some concerns about 14 printing out the packet material so from here on out we'll just hand deliver 15 paper packets to everybody for work session regardless of the size. 16 17 Crane: A third commission member would like to thank you for that; I was too shy 18 to say anything. 19 20 IV. ADJOURNMENT (6:49 PM) 21 22 Scholz: Alright, if there's no other business before us, I will declare this adjourned 23 at, I have let's see oh it's six isn't it? Yes, 6:48? 24 25 Someone away 26 from microphone: Forty-nine 27 28 Scholz: Forty-nine, okay, thank you gentlemen. 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Chairperson 36 10