Loading...
08-23-2011 mew 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 "AMENDED" 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, August 23, 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 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —July 26, 2011 III. POSTPONEMENTS 1. "Case S-11-006: Application of Borderland Engineers and Surveyors, LLC on behalf of Troy & Cecilia Pitcher, property owners, to approve a final plat for 5.203 ± acres known as the Mesa Grande Addition Subdivision, Plat No.1, Replat No.1. The final plat proposes to replat one (1) existing tract of land into two (2) new parcels. The subject property is located on the north side of Bataan Memorial West, 0.165 ± miles east of its intersection with Mesa Grande Avenue; a.k.a. 5195 Bataan Memorial West; Parcel ID# 02-19666; Proposed Use: Existing single-family residence and undetermined commercial high intensity uses; Council District 5. (POSTPONED TO SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 SPECIAL MEETING) 2. "Case S-11-017: Application of Prestige Development Group Inc. on behalf of ALPS LLC, property owner, to approve a master plan for 5.351 ± acres known as the Valley Vista Plaza Master Plan. The master plan will allow for the phasing and alternate summary for the commercial development. The subject properties are located on the southeast corner of Valley Drive and Avenida de Mesilla; a.k.a. 1305 S. Valley Drive and 1450 S. Valley Drive; Parcel IDs 02-07035 and 16810; Proposed Use: Shopping/business center; Council District 4. (POSTPONED TO SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 SPECIAL MEETING) Page 1 of 3 IV. 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 PUD-11-01: Application of DVI on behalf of Sierra Norte Land Holdings, LLC and Barbra W. Johnson for a Concept Plan for a Planned Unit Development known as Metro Verde Amendment No. 1 PUD. The subject properties encompasses 695 ± acres and are located in the Sierra Norte area north of the future expansion of Arroyo Road and south of the City Limits; Parcel IDs 02-36419, 02-36420, 02-36421, 02- 36422, 02-37650, 02-38810, 02-38811. Proposed Use: A mixed-use development with single-family/multi-family residential, commercial, office, retail, and manufacturing land uses with a golf course; Council District 5. 2. Case PUD-11-02: Application of DVI on behalf of Sierra Norte Land Holdings, LLC and Barbra W. Johnson for a Final Site Plan for a Planned Unit Development known as Metro Verde Amendment #1 PUD. The subject properties encompasses 695 ± acres and are located in the Sierra Norte area north of the future expansion of Arroyo Road and south of the City Limits; Parcel IDs 02-36419, 02-36420, 02-36421, 02- 36422, 02-37650, 02-38810, 02-38811. Proposed Use: A mixed-use development with single-family/multi-family residential, commercial, office, retail, and manufacturing land uses with a golf course; Council District 5. V. OLD BUSINESS 1. Case Z2840: Application of Susan J. Frary to rezone from R-2 (Multi-Dwelling Low Density) to C-2C (Commercial Medium Intensity-Conditional) and to numerically deviate from the required ten (10) foot opaque bufferyard to a zero (0) foot opaque bufferyard on a 0.17 ± acre lot located on the north side of Willoughby Avenue 150± feet west of its intersection with Main Street in Area 3 of the Alameda Depot Neighborhood Overlay; a.k.a. 132 W. Willoughby Avenue; Parcel ID# 02-04369. Proposed Use: A single-family residence and a commercial art studio with a sculpture garden; Council District 1. (POSTPONED FROM JULY 26, 2011 REGULAR P&Z MEETING) VI. NEW BUSINESS 1. Case S-09-053: Application of Underwood Engineering on behalf of Eddie Binns for a master plan amendment for 279.438 + acres known as the Rancho Del Rey Master Planned Area. The master plan identifies 23 planning parcels with a range of 2,877 to 3,941 dwelling units. The amendment proposes to align planning parcel boundaries with zoning boundaries, create a new planning parcel for open space recreation purposes, and establish land uses consistent with the 2001 Zoning Code for properties on and adjacent to the Sandhill Arroyo. The property is located generally east of Roadrunner Parkway, north and south of Settlers Pass; a.k.a. Rancho Del Rey; Parcel ID# 02-38952 and 02-07938; Proposed Use: Single- family/multi-family residential, neighborhood commercial, light industrial, and open space recreation; Council District 5. Page 2 of 3 2. Case Z2814: Application of Underwood Engineering on behalf of Eddie Binns for multiple zone changes for 120.535 + acres located generally east of Roadrunner Parkway, north and south of Settlers Pass; a.k.a. Rancho Del Rey; Parcel ID# 02- 38952; Proposed Use: Single-family/multi-family residential, neighborhood commercial, and open-space recreation; Council District 5. • Tract A, 0.229 ± acres, from R-1 a (Single-Family Medium Density) to R-3 (Multi-Dwelling Medium Density) • Tract B, 1.002 ± acres, from R-3 (Multi-Dwelling Medium Density) to R-1 a (Single-Family Medium Density) • Tract C, 1.006 + acres, from C-1 (Commercial Low Intensity) to R-3 (Multi- Dwelling Medium Density) • Tract D, 1.277 + acres, from C-1 (Commercial Low Intensity) to R-1a (Single- Family Medium Density) • Tract E, 4.797 + acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-1a (Single-Family Medium Density) • Tract F, 8.669 + acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to OS-R (Open Space- Recreation)/FC (Flood Control) • Tract G, 12.029 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to FC (Flood Control) • Tract K, 7.487 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to C-1 (Commercial Low Intensity) • Tract L, 21.488 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-4 (Multi-Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office) • Tract M, 2.980 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-4 (Multi-Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office) • Tract N, 51.711 + acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-4 (Multi-Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office) • Tract Q, 0.054 + acres, from R-3 (Multi-Dwelling Medium Density) to C-1 (Commercial Low Intensity) • Tract R, 7.806 + acres, from A-1 (Flood Control) to R-4 (Multi-Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office). VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IX. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS X. ADJOURNMENT Page 3 of 3 I 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 FOR THE 3 CITY OF LAS CRUCES 4 City Council Chambers 5 August 23, 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 William Stowe, Member 12 Shawn Evans, Member 13 14 BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE 15 Ray Shipley, Member 16 Donald Bustos, Member 17 18 STAFF PRESENT: 19 David Weir, Director, Community Development 20 Adam Ochoa, Acting Senior Planner 21 Helen Revels, Planner 22 Lorenzo Vigil, Acting Assistant Planner 23 Srijana Basayat, Planner 24 Mark Dubbin, CLC Fire Department 25 Jared Abrams, CLC Legal Staff 26 Bonnie Ennis, Recording Secretary 27 28 I. CALL TO ORDER (6:00 pm) 29 30 Scholz: Good evening and welcome to the Planning and Zoning Commission 31 meeting for Tuesday, August 23, 2011. I'm Charlie Scholz, the Chair 32 of the Commission. Before we begin our proceedings I want to identify 33 the members of the Commission who are here tonight. On my far right 34 is Commissioner Crane. He represents Council District 4. Next to him 35 is Commissioner Stowe. He represents Council District 1. On my 36 immediate right is Commissioner Beard. He represents Council 37 District 2 and I represent Council District 6. 38 39 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — July 26, 2011 40 41 Scholz: The first order of business is always the approval of the minutes and I 42 see an errant member coming in the door. It's Commissioner Evans 43 who represents District 5. So we'll wait until he sits down and then 44 we'll go for the approval of the minutes. Welcome, Commissioner 45 Evans. All right, are there any additions or corrections to the minutes? 46 1 1 Crane: I have a few, Mr. Chairman. 2 3 Scholz: Commissioner Crane. 4 5 Crane: Page 21, line 19 the end of Ms. Rodriguez's remarks she was, as it 6 were, quoting the City Council so we need to close quotation marks at 7 the end of her paragraph. 8 9 Scholz: At the end of the word "this Body," right? 10 11 Crane: Right. 12 13 Scholz: Okay. 14 15 Crane: And on page 46, line 44... 16 17 Scholz: Go ahead. 18 19 Crane: "lightening" should have the "e" taken out of it. 20 21 Scholz: Okay. Thank you. Anything else? 22 23 Crane: And page 49, line 36, 1 think I said "practicable." Please don't ask me 24 to define the difference between "practical" and "practicable." There's 25 something from my distant past tells me there's a difference. 26 27 Scholz: What was that line again, please? 28 29 Crane: 36 30 31 Scholz: Thank you. I'm on the wrong page. Here we go. 32 33 Crane: Page 49. 34 35 Scholz: Thank you. All right, Commissioner Beard. 36 37 Beard: I noticed that you were incognito. 38 39 Scholz: Yes, I conducted the meeting but I didn't appear the (inaudible — three 40 people speaking) show of the Board members present so that's 41 obviously an oversight. I like transparent government but I don't think 42 that applies here. Anything else? Well, I have four: page 49, line 6, 43 my name is misspelled. Tsk, tsk. That also happens on page 48, line 44 39, and page 70, line 34, 1 think the word should be "masts," m-a-s-t-s, 45 not "masks." And then page 77, line 1, 1 was going to say it "sounded 46 like something out of Saturday Night Live." Old joke. All right, any 2 1 other additions or corrections? Okay, I'll entertain a motion to approve 2 as amended. 3 4 Crane: So moved. 5 6 Scholz: Okay, Crane moves. Is there a second? 7 8 Beard: Second. 9 10 Scholz: And Beard seconds. All those in favor say aye. 11 12 All: Aye. 13 14 Scholz: Those opposed same sign. All right. The minutes are approved. 15 16 III. POSTPONEMENTS 17 18 Scholz: That brings us to postponements and, Mr. Ochoa, I understand there 19 are two postponements we have to deal with. 20 21 Ochoa: That is correct, Mr. Chair. Case S-11-006 and case S-11-017 will be 22 postponed to the September 8th Special Planning and Zoning 23 Commission meeting. 24 25 Scholz: Okay. 26 27 Ochoa: That's Thursday, September 8th 28 29 1. "Case S-11-006: Application of Borderland Engineers and Surveyors, 30 LLC on behalf of Troy & Cecilia Pitcher, property owners, to approve a 31 final plat for 5.203 ± acres known as the Mesa Grande Addition 32 Subdivision, Plat No.1, Replat No.1. The final plat proposes to replat one 33 (1) existing tract of land into two (2) new parcels. The subject property is 34 located on the north side of Bataan Memorial West, 0.165 ± miles east of 35 its intersection with Mesa Grande Avenue; a.k.a. 5195 Bataan Memorial 36 West; Parcel ID# 02-19666; Proposed Use: Existing single-family 37 residence and undetermined commercial high intensity uses; Council 38 District 5. 39 (POSTPONED TO SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 SPECIAL MEETING) 40 41 Scholz: Okay, I'll entertain a motion to postpone case S-11-006 to the Special 42 Meeting on September 8th 43 44 Crane: So Moved. 45 46 Scholz: Okay, is there a second. 3 1 2 Beard: I second. 3 4 Scholz: All those in favor say aye. 5 6 All: Aye. 7 8 Scholz: Those opposed same sign. All right, that's postponed. 9 10 2. "Case S-11-017: Application of Prestige Development Group Inc. on 11 behalf of ALPS LLC, property owner, to approve a master plan for 5.351 12 ± acres known as the Valley Vista Plaza Master Plan. The master plan 13 will allow for the phasing and alternate summary for the commercial 14 development. The subject properties are located on the southeast corner 15 of Valley Drive and Avenida de Mesilla; a.k.a. 1305 S. Valley Drive and 16 1450 S. Valley Drive; Parcel IDs 02-07035 and 16810; Proposed Use: 17 Shopping/business center; Council District 4. 18 (POSTPONED TO SEPTEMBER 8, 2011 SPECIAL MEETING) 19 20 Scholz: Then I'll entertain a motion to postpone case S-11-017 to the Special 21 Meeting on September 8th 22 23 Beard: So moved. 24 25 Scholz: Okay, Beard moves. Is there a second? 26 27 Stowe: Second. 28 29 Scholz: And Stowe seconds. All those in favor say aye. 30 31 All: Aye. 32 33 Scholz: Those opposed same sign. All right, those two postponements are 34 taken care of. 35 36 IV. CONSENT AGENDA 37 38 Scholz: Then we have a consent agenda. Folks, this is how the consent 39 agenda works. The Community Development Department has 40 recommended that these be approved. If there's no one from the 41 audience that wishes to speak to them or no one from the Commission 42 that wishes to speak to them then we will approve them in one motion. 43 44 Those items on the consent agenda will be voted by one motion with the 45 acceptance of the agenda. Any Planning and Zoning Commissioner, Staff or 4 1 member of the public may remove an item from the consent agenda for 2 discussion by the commission. 3 4 1. Case PUD-11-01: Application of DVI on behalf of Sierra Norte Land 5 Holdings, LLC and Barbra W. Johnson for a Concept Plan for a Planned 6 Unit Development known as Metro Verde Amendment No. 1 PUD. The 7 subject properties encompasses 695 ± acres and are located in the 8 Sierra Norte area north of the future expansion of Arroyo Road and 9 south of the City Limits; Parcel IDs 02-36419, 02-36420, 02-36421, 02- 10 36422, 02-37650, 02-38810, 02-38811. Proposed Use: A mixed-use 11 development with single-family/multi-family residential, commercial, 12 office, retail, and manufacturing land uses with a golf course; Council 13 District 5. 14 15 Scholz: Is there anyone who cares to speak to case PUD-11-01? 16 17 2. Case PUD-11-02: Application of DVI on behalf of Sierra Norte Land 18 Holdings, LLC and Barbra W. Johnson for a Final Site Plan for a 19 Planned Unit Development known as Metro Verde Amendment #1 PUD. 20 The subject properties encompasses 695 ± acres and are located in the 21 Sierra Norte area north of the future expansion of Arroyo Road and 22 south of the City Limits; Parcel IDs 02-36419, 02-36420, 02-36421, 02- 23 36422, 02-37650, 02-38810, 02-38811. Proposed Use: A mixed-use 24 development with single-family/multi-family residential, commercial, 25 office, retail, and manufacturing land uses with a golf course; Council 26 District 5. 27 28 Scholz: All right, how about PUD-11-02? Okay, I'll entertain a motion to accept 29 the consent agenda. 30 31 Evans: So moved. 32 33 Scholz: Evans moved. 34 35 Beard: Second. 36 37 Scholz: And Beard seconds. All those in favor say aye. 38 39 AII: Aye. 40 41 Scholz: All those opposed same sign. All right, the consent agenda is passed. 42 43 V. OLD BUSINESS 44 45 1. Case Z2840: Application of Susan J. Frary to rezone from R-2 (Multi- 46 Dwelling Low Density) to C-2C (Commercial Medium Intensity- 5 1 Conditional) and to numerically deviate from the required ten (10) foot 2 opaque bufferyard to a zero (0) foot opaque bufferyard on a 0.17 ± acre 3 lot located on the north side of Willoughby Avenue 150± feet west of its 4 intersection with Main Street in Area 3 of the Alameda Depot 5 Neighborhood Overlay; a.k.a. 132 W. Willoughby Avenue; Parcel ID# 02- 6 04369. Proposed Use: A single-family residence and a commercial art 7 studio with a sculpture garden; Council District 1. 8 (POSTPONED FROM JULY 26, 2011 REGULAR P&Z MEETING) 9 APPROVED 4-1 10 11 Scholz: All right, then we are on to our next item which is old business and this 12 is case Z2840. Now the way this works, for those of you who haven't 13 been here before, is the City presents its case and the applicant 14 presents his or her case and then we open it for public discussion and 15 then when we're through with that we close it. Then the 16 Commissioners discuss among themselves and then we vote. All 17 right? So, Mr. Ochoa, you're up. I take it we're waiting on the 18 computer to... 19 20 Ochoa: Yes, sir. 21 22 Scholz: Okay. It always increases the tension. 23 24 Ochoa: For the record, Adam Ochoa, Development Services. The first case 25 tonight, gentlemen, is old business. This was postponed from the July 26 26, 2011 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. This is a zone 27 change Case Z2840. It is a request for a zone change from R-2, which 28 is Multi-Dwelling Low-Density, to C-2C, which is Commercial Medium 29 Intensity-Conditional, for approximately 0.17 acres of land located at 30 132 West Willoughby Avenue. In front of you, you will see a vicinity 31 map of the subject property is highlighted in the light green box with 32 stripes through it, as you can see, located here along basically a 33 residential area and adjacent directly or just about one lot west of 34 North Main Street. 35 Some case specifics: like I said the subject property is located 36 on the north side of Willoughby Avenue approximately 150-feet west of 37 its intersection with Main Street. The subject property is located in 38 Area 3 of the recently approved Alameda Depot Neighborhood Overly. 39 Like I said, the subject property does encompass approximately 0.17 40 acres and there is currently an existing single-family dwelling unit on 41 the subject property. 42 The applicant tonight is seeking a zone change to facilitate the 43 use of a single-family home as it is existing now on the property along 44 with a commercial art studio with a sculpture garden or outdoor display 45 on the subject property. Essentially what will happen with this zone 46 change is yard studio and sculpture garden will become the primary 6 1 use on the property while the single-family home will be kind of a 2 secondary or tertiary use on the subject property. The applicant is 3 proposing further conditions with the zone change basically limiting the 4 permitted uses on the subject property to an art studio, private lessons 5 and outdoor display of merchandise for sale, which would be the 6 sculpture garden that is being proposed. The applicant has submitted 7 information and it is in your staff report, showing how the subject 8 property would be able to follow most requirements of the 2001 Zoning 9 Code, as amended. 10 With the zone change the applicant is requesting a variance 11 from the required ten-foot opaque bufferyard requirement to a zero-foot 12 bufferyard requirement. The applicant, in place of the 10-foot opaque 13 bufferyard requirement is proposing to install an eight-foot-tall semi- 14 opaque wall on the front portion of the subject property along the 15 western property line, which is where she would be required a buffer. 16 We'll go back to the vicinity map to kind of dictate where that would be. 17 And then an opaque eight-foot-wall would be located along the rear 18 portion of the subject property along the western property line. Just to 19 go back to the vicinity map that...the buffer requirement would be 20 along here adjacent to the residential property to the west so this is 21 what she's proposing the variation in the bufferyard requirement, which 22 would be required with the zone change to C-2C on the property. 23 Here's an aerial of the subject property with the home and 24 existing accessory structures to the rear, like I said, located along 25 Willoughby, which is just an existing Local road in the City of Las 26 Cruces and about one property west of Main Street, which is an 27 existing Principal Arterial as described on the Metropolitan Planning 28 Organization in the City of Las Cruces. 29 Here's a site plan of the subject property showing the dwelling 30 unit and one of the storage units that are on the property and a 16-foot 31 alley along the east of the property and a 15-foot alley to the north of 32 the property. 33 Here is a proposed site plan and improvement plan, if you will, 34 that the applicant has proposed: still having the single-family home 35 here with the art studio in the rear utilizing an outdoor sculpture garden 36 to the east of the home, the east side of the property; the front part of 37 the subject property being used for a commercial parking area with, 1 38 believe, up to four off-street parking stalls with one of them being ADA 39 required and with three on-street parking spaces as well. 40 Now we get to findings: Policy 3.4 of the Alameda Depot 41 Neighborhood Plan actually calls out Area 3 as the residential core 42 where a low-density residential character is desired and low-intensity, 43 neighborhood commercial uses are encouraged; essentially kind of a 44 home-occupation is what would be encouraged in this area. 45 Furthermore, Land Use Element, Goal 1, Policy 1.5.2b of the 1999 46 Comprehensive Plan calls out Medium Intensity, Commercial uses, 7 1 which is what the subject property is trying to be zoned, are 2 encouraged to be located along streets designated as Collector or 3 higher. In this case Willoughby Avenue is designated as a regular 4 Local street. From staff's perspective a hardship does not exist on the 5 subject property to justify the proposed variance to the required 10-foot 6 opaque buffer yard. It is staffs belief that the subject's property is 7 simply not large enough to support the development standards for the 8 proposed zoning designation for C-2C. 9 With that staff has reviewed the zone change request and 10 recommends denial based on the preceding finding. Staff has also 11 reviewed the variance request and recommends denial based on the 12 preceding findings, as well. The recommendation of the Planning and 13 Zoning Commission tonight for this case will be forwarded to City 14 Council for final consideration. 15 With that, gentlemen, your options tonight are to: 1) to vote 16 "yes" to approve the zone change request and variance; 2) to vote 17 "yes" to approve the zone change and variance request with conditions 18 as seen fit by the P & Z; 3) vote "no" to deny the zone change and 19 variance request at recommended by staff for case Z2840 and; 4) to 20 table or postpone the proposed zone change. That is the conclusion of 21 my presentation. The applicant is here as well if you have any 22 questions for her and I stand for questions as well. 23 24 Scholz: All right, questions for this gentleman? Commissioner Crane. 25 26 Crane: Do I understand you to say, Mr. Ochoa, that it was not a hardship? It 27 says in the previous page that there was a hardship. The third 28 bullet...a hardship does exist. 29 30 Ochoa: I apologize about that. That is a misprint, sir. A hardship does not 31 exist on the subject property. Like I said, staff just simply feels that the 32 property is not large enough to be able to support a Commercial use 33 on the property. 34 35 Scholz: All right, other questions? Commissioner Beard. 36 37 Beard: That was my question also. 38 39 Scholz: Okay. 40 41 Crane: Thank you. 42 43 Scholz: Commissioner Beard, another question. 44 8 1 Beard: I'm not fully sure why it has to be Commercial other than the parking. 2 Is the parking the main thing for changing it from Residential to 3 Commercial? 4 5 Ochoa: Mr. Chair, Commissioner Beard, the zone change is requested by the 6 applicant in order to use the subject property as a commercial art 7 studio with an outdoor display area. Essentially that is the key here. 8 The C2 zoning designation is the least intense, if you will, of all zoning 9 designations in the City of Las Cruces that allows outdoor display of 10 items for sale so C2 is the minimum zoning designation required in 11 order to do so, in order to do the sculpture garden that the applicant is 12 requesting. 13 14 Beard: Thank you. Another question: the metal shed that's in the back...isn't 15 that a variance to a setback requirement. Was there a variance 16 granted for that already? 17 18 Ochoa: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Beard, since the subject property is 19 located in the Alameda Depot Overlay there are some more lenient 20 Development Standards in that area not only allowing for zero 21 setbacks for properties in the Alameda Depot area; but the C2 zoning 22 designation also allows for a zero-foot setback, as well, along the rear 23 and side property lines as well. 24 25 Scholz: All right, I have two questions: when I looked at that property...oh, it's 26 probably a month-and-a-half ago now...I didn't see any alley on the 27 north. Is there actually an alley there? 28 29 Ochoa: Mr. Chairman, there is an actual platted alley in the rear although the 30 applicant may be able to speak on this a little bit better. Basically the 31 whole neighborhood along that alley has utilized the alley as their 32 property, if you will, with walls in the alley and so forth. 33 34 Scholz: Right, that's the impression I got and I think that's true of the side alley 35 as well, the one that runs parallel to Main Street. Isn't it? I noticed it 36 was closed off at the north end at the next street. 37 38 Ochoa: Yes, sir. 39 40 Scholz: Yeah, okay. So would that affect the setbacks? 41 42 Ochoa: Setbacks? No, sir. 43 44 Scholz: It wouldn't. 45 46 Ochoa: No, sir. 9 1 2 Scholz: Okay. All right, any other questions, gentlemen? Okay, may we hear 3 from the applicant, please? 4 5 Frary: Hello, my name's Susan Frary and I'm it. I'm she. 6 7 Scholz: You want to stay on mike, please, Ms. Frary. 8 9 Frary: Okay. 10 11 Scholz: There we go. 12 13 Frary: Okay. To answer some of your questions the alley as shown platted 14 by the City has got buildings and walls that have been in it so long the 15 old rockwalls and buildings are falling down; many of the properties 16 along that alley...not my property, but on that alley, which is shown as 17 a "T-shaped" alley. The only place on that alley that still exists is on 18 the east side of my property and it ends at the end of my property. 19 That alley as shown, platted as a fifteen-foot alley, is the bufferyard 20 that my property has from the neighbor behind me and if we vacate 21 that alley, which I already have five notarized statements from my 22 immediate neighbors wanting to vacate that; then my fence line would 23 not move back, even though everyone else on the block would move 24 their fence line back into that alley and that compensates for the 25 bufferyard on the north side. Because the properties all along the Main 26 Street side are already C2 zoned I would not have to have a bufferyard 27 separating me from the used car lot beside me. 28 The size: if, in fact, we vacate the alley, the "T-shaped" alley, 29 which is on two sides of my property then my property does reach the 30 minimum size for a commercial property. Right now it doesn't by 10%, 31 1 believe, 12%...I'm smaller than the required size for a C-2 property 32 and the question of whether to progress... 33 34 Ochoa: A point of correction, Mr. Chair. Since the subject property is located 35 in the Alameda Depot area a non-residential property, which is what 36 the zone change would be for, is only required a 3500 square food lot. 37 So you are in compliance for lot size for the C2 zoning designation in 38 the Alameda Depot Overlay; just a point of clarification for that. 39 40 Scholz: Oh. Thank you. All right. 41 42 Frary: That's one problem taken care of. As of right now my property has no 43 off-street parking on it and has never had off-street parking since 1 44 bought it in 1997. In order to meet the requirements for off-street 45 parking for a commercial property I'm taking out the entire front yard, 46 putting in four parking spots and a circular driveway so that people can 10 1 ingress and egress in a forward direction. I'll have the only circular 2 driveway in quite a distance in either direction but it'll be real nice. The 3 front lawn, because I knew I was planning on putting in parking, I quite 4 kind of maintaining the lawn, because that's a lot of water to keep the 5 grass. So I apologize for the in-between weed status that we have 6 right now. 7 So the Alameda Overlay AD-03 area that I'm in requires us to 8 go with our underlying zoning and, as of right now, my property is 9 shown as R-2. The property behind me is R-1. The property beside 10 me is R-2. The one across the street is C-2. It's a very mixed up 11 zoning neighborhood. I'm not trying to move a residential property in 12 the middle of a residential property into commercial. I'm abutted on 13 commercial on two sides so I don't feel like I'm trying to totally change 14 the flavor of the neighborhood. 15 The neighborhood, for those of you who don't spend a lot of 16 time over there on Willoughby Street, the used car lot beside me 17 unloads their big semi-trucks full of cars on those big car haulers out in 18 the street either on Willoughby or Greening, the next street over in 19 front of the R-1 neighborhood behind me and they normally do that 20 about 2:00 am. They used to do it in the middle of the day but the big 21 trucks parked out there were a problem so now they do it in the middle 22 of the night. It doesn't interrupt traffic any more. It just wakes us all up 23 in the middle of the night. The Harbor Freight and Dollar Store that are 24 in the big shopping center at the corner of Main and Picacho have their 25 big delivery trucks come in between 2:00 and 5:00 am; all of them 26 unrolling their doors and putting out their ramps and slamming the 27 boxes in and out are normal noises in our neighborhood. This is not a 28 cute, quiet little residential neighborhood. The sirens from the police 29 station and the fire station half a block away go off, especially in the 30 middle of the night, more so than in the day time; the big semi-trucks 31 all braking to a stop at Picacho and Main. 32 That's all part of that "urban flavor" that we have Downtown and 33 1 knew about all of that when I bought this property. I knew that I was a 34 metal sculptor when I bought this property in 1997. They had just 35 published the "RUDOT," I believe it's pronounced, planning for bringing 36 the Downtown into the new development stages and it was going to be 37 an arts and culture district and artists were being encouraged to move 38 into the Downtown area...and I bought in November 1997 next door to 39 a used car lot, a property that had sat there unpurchased for a long 40 time thinking that that was a good neighborhood for metal sculptor to 41 move into. 42 Mr. Ochoa and I have had a lot of discussions over the last 43 year-and-a-half, quite a few meetings, and I have done everything I 44 can to try to design this layout so that it meets all the rules and all the 45 regulations and all the codes, which have changed during that time 46 frame. I feel pretty comfortable with what I'm proposing; not being a 11 1 problem for my neighbors or my neighborhood. I'm not trying to make 2 it a primarily commercial property. We had it listed as 55% commercial 3 and 45% residential because that's the minimum requirement that they 4 will allow me to list it at. I'm still going to continue to live there. I'm not 5 really trying to run a big commercial operation there. I want to be able 6 to work in the studio in the back, which is a nice, separate building. 1 7 want to be able to display my metal sculptures, which are large. They 8 need to be outdoors; they're yard sculptures. And I would like to be 9 able to be open Saturday morning during the Farmers Market. I want 10 to be open during special studio openings. I do not want people 11 walking in and out. I'm not planning on being open six days a week. 12 When I'm working that's not a good time to have people come in and 13 talk and interrupt me. It's not that kind of work. 14 Up until now 80-90% of my business has been commission 15 work. People usually see my work and say, "Oh, gee. That's really 16 nice but I'd like it bigger," or, "I'd like it blue," or, "Can you make one 17 like this instead of like that?" And that's pretty much what I expect to 18 be doing in the future so what is going to be out in the yard is samples. 19 It is ideas; it's conceptions of things that I like to do. Questions? 20 21 Scholz: Gentlemen, questions for this lady? Commissioner Crane. 22 23 Crane: Ms. Frary, if your work is primarily commission tell me again why you 24 need a display or at least a large display. Right now it seems that 25 most of the space around your house is occupied by your sculptures. 26 If it's commission work why do you need the driveway, the parking 27 spaces and the large display area? 28 29 Frary: The driveway and parking is one of the minimum requirements for 30 going to a C-2 space. The Commercial designation instead of Home 31 Occupation is because I have outdoor display and the Codes do not 32 allow outdoor display for anything less than a C-2. The reason that 33 they need to be outdoors is because they are so large and I would 34 have to enclose my entire property in order to have them be under a 35 roof instead of outside. Did I answer your question? 36 37 Crane: Yes...in part. Okay, I understand what you're saying about the parking 38 and the driveway. The visual impact would be reduced if you had less 39 display, it seems to me or the display was more discretely in the back. 40 Does the C-2 zoning require you to...it doesn't require you to fill up 41 your lot with displayed items, does it? 42 43 Frary: Some of what is in the yard is not ever meant for display. My mother 44 and my sister both passed a couple years back and I brought a lot of 45 our family stuff down from the place in Alamogordo. If, in fact, I do not 46 get this zoning change done and I cannot be a sculptor and live in 12 1 Downtown Las Cruces, I do own another property over in Alamogordo 2 and another one in Silver City so I am going to have to sell one of them 3 in order to pay for all these changes; but I haven't listed them for sale 4 because I need to find out if I'm going to be able to stay or not. So I 5 brought a lot of personal objects in that will be over on the residential 6 side as my personal property and not for sale. 7 8 Crane: Thank you. 9 10 Scholz: Other questions? All right, thank you very much, Ms. Frary. 11 12 Frary: Also...audience people including my neighbor and people from the 13 Downtown Development...should we bring them up? 14 15 Scholz: Yeah, we'll have public comment in just a moment. 16 17 Frary: Okay, thank you. 18 19 Scholz: All right, anybody from the public wishes to speak to this? I see 20 several hands...the gentleman in the back with the hat. 21 22 Sarvo: I'm Monty Sarvo. I'm on the Alameda Depot Neighborhood 23 Association, the Civic Association, and I'm one of the chief architects 24 of the Plan and Overlay for the Alameda Depot District, as most of you 25 may well know. 26 I'd like to address this from the angle of: let's get back to what 27 our Plan says and what our Overlay says. One of the main goals in it 28 was to recreate an environment of mixed use in our neighborhood that 29 has kept that neighborhood intact for many, many, many years. One 30 of the parts of that Plan that point that out is it discusses mixed use; it 31 discusses corridors and that area there, obviously being surrounded by 32 commercial and...if you want to talk about lot size the little... (inaudible 33 — moved away from the microphone)...is a much smaller lot and is 34 commercial lot and it's been a restaurant on and off for years. 35 The nature of the Alameda Depot Neighborhood is that people 36 would have Joe's Plumbing in a house for twenty years and then it 37 because Joe's mother's house. The whole idea in our Plan, if you read 38 it, was to create an environment in which we wouldn't be doing what 39 we're doing here. You would be able to go, "Oh, well the Plan says we 40 can do mixed use." People don't have to change their zoning if they 41 want to have Joe's Barbershop and then next year grandma's living in 42 the house. That was a main goal and it's central throughout the 43 document, I assure you. 44 So I believe what Susan was saying, and I'll be brief, is that she 45 was trying to do all of that and fit into that and she basically got 46 railroaded into going for C-2 because staff was just "No, no, no." Well, 13 1 this started before the Overlay was final. The Overlay is now final and 2 1 think it's time to invest in the purpose of the Overlay to save ya'll, the 3 City and the citizens a lot of time. Susan presented this to our 4 neighborhood group. Everybody thinks it's a grand idea that she does 5 this. She's put a lot of time and thought into it. Let's look at the 6 purpose of the Overlay is to let people like her have businesses like 7 that there. Period. 8 So I'm asking you to look beyond...obviously the staff is still 9 learning what the Overlay is about evidenced by the fact that, you 10 know, they had to present to you as an afterthought that their main 11 reason, as he presented earlier, for resisting this becoming C-2 was, 12 "The lot isn't big enough." But yet they came up afterwards and very 13 nicely admitted, "Hey, we made a mistake." So if the main reason is 14 gone I think we should just move forward and approve this. I'd 15 appreciate it if you give that thought and I'm open to any questions you 16 might have. 17 18 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 19 20 Beard: Does the Overlay encourage the mixed use within the residential 21 areas, though? 22 23 Sarvo: On the edges of the residential areas mixed use is encouraged. They 24 have corridors that are stated such as the Picacho Avenue Corridor. 25 We discussed adding a Main Street Corridor. The only reason we 26 didn't add it was because they didn't want to do one more corridor. 27 Don't ask me why; but they said that's obvious. Anybody along Main 28 Street is going to be able to convert to C-2 if they are a border house 29 without any problem just like they could in a non-Overlay neighborhood 30 'cause the underlying zoning still remains in principal what the City 31 decides on as they go. And very often people take homes like that that 32 are next to commercial properties that are the first house in from the 33 commercial and turn them into C-2 all the time. Every attorney along 34 Alameda's gotten away with it; nobody said "no" to them. They said 35 you have to keep the look and feel of it as a residential primarily and 36 they've done that. Now I believe that's what she's done. 37 38 Scholz: All right, Commissioner Evans. 39 40 Evans: Yes, Chairman Scholz. So it appears to me you are substantially 41 changing the look from residential to commercial with the addition of 42 the driveway and the parking lot. Is that...and maybe this is a question 43 for the applicant: is that something that, I guess: number one, that the 44 Alameda Depot Overlay Commission, is that something that they're 45 looking to do or is that something that was... 46 14 1 Sarvo: I can tell you that the reason that she was asking to do that is because 2 she was being refused, what I feel, and the meaning of the Overlay 3 should have been allowed to begin with... 4 5 Evans: Right. 6 7 Sarvo: ...without that change and she introduced that to our group. Our group 8 met and said, "If that's what it takes, since you're on the edge of C-2; 9 it's no different than anywhere in town if you're next to a big 10 commercial property and you want to turn it into a lawyer's office, it's 11 pretty rudimentary to get that done these days." So should we deny it 12 here? 13 14 Scholz: Monty, can we hear from the applicant? 15 16 Sarvo: Yes, sir. I thought you were asking me. 17 18 Frary: I was pretty resistant to taking my entire front yard out and turning it 19 into 1500 square feet of parking. I will admit that was kind of a hard 20 one for me to get over but I sat out in front one evening when I pulled 21 up and I looked at it and I realized that a circular driveway and all this 22 nice off-street parking would actually be a big improvement for my 23 property. We have a parking problem on that street anyway because 24 of the restaurants and the apartment across the street that's 25 grandfathered in with half the required amount of parking and the 26 senior center two doors down that only has two parking spots for 27 twelve beds and parking is a problem. So if me taking part of the 28 street side and turning it into off-street parking helps this, that's okay. 29 I'm not planning on putting in blacktop or asphalt. I'm actually going to 30 be spending a whole lot more and going for the modular, semi- 31 permeable, it's kind of a faux flagstone-looking stuff. It's about $5.00 a 32 square foot, very pricy, and it will look nice. So even though I don't 33 understand how that became such a sticking point but if that's what it 34 takes to get over it I can do this. 35 36 Evans: So going back to my original concern was that if the Overlay was 37 intended to allow that flexibility and now that somebody wants to come 38 in and utilize that flexibility staff is requiring them go to C-2 which, all of 39 a sudden, drives all the parking requirements and some of these other 40 things; which isn't what the real intent of the Overlay was really driving 41 to, to keep the flavor and the feel for the neighborhood of what it is. So 42 there seems to be a conflict between what the Overlay's intention was 43 and then going to C-2 and driving all these other things which is 44 changing the appearance of the community. Am I missing something? 45 1 mean, is that kind of what the problem is? 46 15 1 Frary: It's what it feels like. Because, like I say; I sat out front and I really 2 looked at it and I thought, "You know, this makes it look like a large 3 estate-type home with this circular driveway. I'll have the fanciest 4 driveway in the neighborhood..." 5 6 Evans: Right. 7 8 Frary: Because I'm not doing solid fences; because I am doing them on an 9 ornamental iron fence and all the sculptures, to answer your question, 10 will be behind the fence. Once the fences are built the sculptures are 11 going behind the fences so driving by you're going to see what looks 12 like a large house. My property being triangular-wedge shaped like it 13 is, is much wider at the front on the street side so it appears to be a 14 large property from the front and it's going to look like a big, fancy 15 house, I hope. 16 17 Scholz: All right, anyone else from the public wants to speak to this? Okay, 1 18 see a gentleman over here. I'm sorry; a lady over here. Sorry about 19 that. The lighting's very poor in that area, you know. 20 21 Foster: (not at microphone for first name - inaudible)... Foster. I live at 140 22 West Willoughby, which is directly to the west of Susan Frary. I bought 23 the house in 1998 and, when she used to be on the artists tours studio 24 where they would come through on weekends is more of what she 25 plans to do than a 24/7 business. I have no problems with it. It was 26 great to see people in there looking at art and appreciating art. 27 1 do agree there's a parking problem already. When I come 28 home on my lunch break my street is lined with cars from the Rib 29 Shack, which I'm not sure how much off-street parking they are 30 supposed to have; but from what it looks like they don't have enough. 31 Every day I come home and it's a one-way road now. We have cars 32 lining the streets both ways Monday through Saturday. I don't see how 33 Susan putting in the art studio with or without the parking is going to 34 change that at all 35 36 Scholz: Okay. 37 38 Foster: Thank you. 39 40 Scholz: Thank you very much and I saw another hand over here. Yes, ma'am, 41 come on down. 42 43 Bonneau White: Good evening. My name is Pat Bonneau White. I happen to be on 44 the Board of Downtown Las Cruces Partnership and I just wanted to 45 say that one of the biggest jobs that we have is trying to get people to 46 move their businesses Downtown. It consumes a great deal of our 16 1 time and, although we've done some good advertising and some good 2 promotions, we don't have as much success as we would like and, in 3 this particular case, we have someone who wants a business 4 Downtown. It sure would be nice if we could say, "Come on ahead. 5 We'd like you to be part of us." The other thing is the Arts and Culture 6 District that Las Cruces will be asked to take a look at with regard to 7 Downtown needs artists in it to fulfill the arts and culture portion of the 8 request from the state and if we have artists Downtown, Ms. Frary, her 9 business can be used as an example so that we can achieve this 10 status. So I'm voting for her. 11 12 Scholz: Thank you. Yes, sir. 13 14 Binns: My name is Eddie Binns and I have a hard time sitting there and not 15 expressing an opinion so that you gentlemen can see part of the 16 bureaucracy problem that Las Crucens face every time they want to try 17 to do something. The rules and regulations that evolved were through 18 a series of hearings, through many of the City staff people, and since 19 then the staff has changed many times and they have forgotten what 20 took place at many of the public hearings and what the interpretation 21 and intent was-, and our current zoning has gotten to point that the staff 22 looks at it by the hard numbers of what we're trying to live with, with a 23 planning and zoning package; and it's darn near impossible for the 24 public to sort through it and even the staff has a hard time sorting 25 through our planning and zoning trying to figure out what we can do, 26 what we can't do, what's permitted with the various ones; but it is 27 something that I recommend you gentlemen take a hard look at and 28 thing about trying to do some clean up on our current planning and 29 zoning. 30 With this particular case we've got a young lady that wants to 31 try to invest some money, try to make a living, do something positive, 32 and here we've got staff that has no choice other than to recommend 33 against it because of the bureaucratic regulations that we have 34 saddled ourselves with. This one: I strongly recommend you give this 35 young lady an opportunity to make a living at her level and encourage 36 those types of things to take place because that's what America's 37 about. Thank you. (Applause from audience) 38 39 Scholz: Thank you. Please hold your applause. Thank you. Oh, I was asking 40 people to hold their applause, Eddie, until we're finished tonight. I'm 41 sure there'll be a round of applause at the end of this relatively long 42 meeting. Anyway, I'm glad I heard from the public on this. I'm going to 43 close it to public discussion now and, Commissioners, what is your 44 wish? 45 46 Crane: Mr. Chairman? 17 1 2 Scholz: Yes. 3 4 Crane: I have one question for the staff. If Ms. Frary is unable to get this 5 rezoning will she be able to continue what she is doing now, which is 6 primarily commission art work with metal? 7 8 Ochoa: Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Crane, she would be allowed to pull a 9 home occupation license for her home and still do the art work, if you 10 will, but she will not be allowed to do the outdoor display as she 11 currently has. That is basically the point for the zone change is for the 12 outdoor display of items for sale which is the sculptured art work. 13 14 Crane: Thank you. May I ask Ms. Frary a question? 15 16 Scholz: Most certainly. 17 18 Crane: How bad an impact would it be on your life if you could not have the 19 outdoor display? 20 21 Frary: I'm a metal sculptor and I make big metal sculptures so I would have to 22 pay for a storage area off-site and haul them, which usually involves 23 several people, over there to store them and then if people want to see 24 them I have to make an appointment with them to go to that other area. 25 26 Crane: Thank you. 27 28 Scholz: All right, any other discussion, gentleman? I'm sorry, it's closed to 29 public discussion, ma'am. Commissioner Beard. 30 31 Beard: My big problem is: I don't want to discourage business. I don't think 32 anybody wants to discourage business. But my problem is trying to 33 determine where we stop changing Residential to Commercial. Let's 34 say that we go ahead and make this a commercial site how do we 35 know that that person two houses on down or three houses down 36 wants to do the same thing; if they want to make it commercial? They 37 can always come back and say, "Well, we've make this exception. 38 Why can't we make another exception and little bit further into the 39 residential area?" Where do we start and where do we stop? And 40 that's my big concern is: where do we stop? We do have a Code and 41 1 think that we should abide by the Code. If the Code isn't correct then 42 we should change the Code. 43 44 Scholz: Thank you. Anyone else? Commissioner Evans. 45 18 1 Evans: Yes, Chairman Scholz. I second what Commissioner Beard just said. 2 I'm not sure that going to C-2...so I support the effort and I really like 3 what you're doing and I think it falls in line what the Overlay, you know, 4 what your intent was. However, just like Commissioner Beard just 5 said, are we going to start advocating and promoting C-2 throughout 6 the whole neighborhood? Because if one individual changes the 7 zoning and they sell the property and someone else comes in that's C- 8 2, you know, it may not be the pretty sculpture that we once thought 9 was going to be there forever it may be something else. 10 So we went into this Overlay to preserve and in the process, 11 when we convert all this stuff to C-2 you're doing the exact opposite of 12 not preserving it. I mean, to me there just seems to be a fundamental 13 problem with advocating for C-2 and in an Overlay which was intended 14 to preserve the area as it stands; because C-2, you know, if it's 15 allowed to propagate through that area it's going to change it. So 1 16 support the idea but going to C-2 doesn't seem to be the avenue to 17 meet your needs and the intent of the Alameda Depot Neighborhood 18 Overlay, which we spent how many years doing...? A long time...six 19 years; I mean, before I was on the Board...well, maybe it was about 20 that time. So I guess I don't know what the answer is and I would 21 actually like to postpone this and have staff go back and meet with the 22 Overlay guys, you know, the Commission, which is still out there and 23 come up with something that's going to preserve the intent of the 24 Overlay; at the same time giving the flexibility of the owners to be more 25 flexible than they would in R-1, R-2. 26 27 Scholz: All right, thank you, Commissioner Evans. Commissioner Crane, you 28 have a question or a comment? 29 30 Crane: I'm sympathetic to what Commissioners Beard and Evans have said 31 about not ignoring Code simply because it's convenient and because it 32 has nasty implications for the future; but this case is a little bit different 33 from somebody further down the street wanting to establish a 34 business. This one is already established and, from the look of the 35 sculptures, they've been there several years. We're looking at 36 regularizing here something which is consistent (amended from 37 "consummate') with the Alameda Neighborhood Overlay simply 38 because it currently exists. If somebody further down the street were 39 to ask for a similar change to make a radical conversion of a residential 40 lot to commercial, to C-2, I would oppose that; but this is a going 41 concern. I would hate to see it closed down. I admire anybody who 42 tries to make a living from art and I'm pretty much with the Downtown 43 lady who said, "This is exactly the kind of thing we want to get 44 clustered down there." Downtown Las Cruces is never going to come 45 back as a commercial center but it is definitely an art center at present 46 and I am personally happy to live in the area. So I'm inclined to 47 support Ms. Frary's application. 19 1 2 Scholz: Thank you, Commissioner Crane. I am, too, frankly. I think this is a 3 good deal and having been a party to the Alameda Overlay and 4 listening to your presentations over the last several years I think this 5 was the intent so I certainly would support it. Anyway, I'll entertain a 6 motion to approve. 7 8 Crane: So moved. 9 10 Scholz: Crane moves and... 11 12 Stowe: Second. 13 14 Scholz: Stowe seconds. 15 16 Ochoa: If I may interject, Mr. Chair. The applicant has stated that she would 17 like to further the conditions of the zone change from C-2 and it would 18 be to C-2C with the conditions limiting the uses on the subject property 19 to an art studio, private lessons and outdoor display of items for sale. 20 21 Scholz: All right, is that listed somewhere in our packet? Okay, I didn't find it. 22 23 Ochoa: That was a condition set forth by the applicant that she has stated in 24 her documents and so forth and I would like to ask if she is still 25 comfortable with those conditions so that's a condition that you might 26 want to put with this zone change whichever way you would vote, or 27 with what you recommend or with what you take forward for a vote. 28 29 Scholz: All right. So what we're voting on is this with the conditions. I'm sorry; 30 1 don't find them in my packet. I'm probably looking at the wrong page. 31 32 Ochoa: You see your screen there, sir. On the third row there's a dictation 33 from the applicant stating, again, her conditions with the zoning 34 designation by limiting the permitted uses to an art studio, private 35 lessons... 36 37 Scholz: Here we go. I got it. 38 39 Ochoa: ...and outdoor display of merchandise for sale. 40 41 Scholz: Thank you. Commissioner Crane, would you read that, please? 42 43 Crane: Yeah, I'm going to try to modify the motion: that the application be 44 approved with the further conditions that the uses are limited to an art 45 studio, private lessons and outdoor display of merchandise for sale. 46 20 1 Scholz: All right. Fine. I'll call the role. Commissioner Crane. 2 3 Crane: Aye findings, discussion and site visit. 4 5 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 6 7 Stowe: Aye findings, discussion and site visit. 8 9 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 10 11 Evans: Aye findings, discussion. 12 13 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 14 15 Beard: No. 16 17 Scholz: Would you give us your reasons, please? 18 19 Beard: Findings, site visit and discussions. 20 21 Scholz: And the Chair votes aye findings, site visit and discussions. All right, 22 so it passes 4-1. (Applause from audience) Lively audience tonight, 23 isn't it? 24 25 Crane: I've never heard applause before...hissing, booing. 26 27 Scholz: I beg your pardon, Commissioner Crane. 28 29 Crane: I've never heard applause before. 30 31 Scholz: Well, sometimes people favor us, I guess. We used to say, "Don't 32 applaud: just throw money," but that's probably too crass. 33 34 VI. NEW BUSINESS 35 36 1. Case S-09-053: Application of Underwood Engineering on behalf of 37 Eddie Binns for a master plan amendment for 279.438 ± acres known as 38 the Rancho Del Rey Master Planned Area. The master plan identifies 23 39 planning parcels with a range of 2,877 to 3,941 dwelling units. The 40 amendment proposes to align planning parcel boundaries with zoning 41 boundaries, create a new planning parcel for open space recreation 42 purposes, and establish land uses consistent with the 2001 Zoning Code 43 for properties on and adjacent to the Sandhill Arroyo. The property is 44 located generally east of Roadrunner Parkway, north and south of 45 Settlers Pass; a.k.a. Rancho Del Rey; Parcel ID# 02-38952 and 02- 46 07938; Proposed Use: Single-family/multi-family residential, 21 1 neighborhood commercial, light industrial, and open space recreation; 2 Council District 5. 3 4 Scholz: All right, our next item is new business and this is case S-09-053 and 5 Ms. Revels, I see you are presenting. 6 7 2. Case Z2814: Application of Underwood Engineering on behalf of Eddie 8 Binns for multiple zone changes for 120.535 ± acres located generally 9 east of Roadrunner Parkway, north and south of Settlers Pass; a.k.a. 10 Rancho Del Rey; Parcel ID# 02-38952; Proposed Use: Single- 11 family/multi-family residential, neighborhood commercial, and open- 12 space recreation; Council District 5. 13 14 • Tract A, 0.229 ± acres, from R-1a (Single-Family Medium 15 Density) to R-3 (Multi-Dwelling Medium Density) 16 • Tract B, 1.002 ± acres, from R-3 (Multi-Dwelling Medium Density) 17 to R-1a (Single-Family Medium Density) 18 • Tract C, 1.006 ± acres, from C-1 (Commercial Low Intensity) to 19 R-3 (Multi-Dwelling Medium Density) 20 • Tract D, 1.277 ± acres, from C-1 (Commercial Low Intensity) to 21 R-1 a (Single-Family Medium Density) 22 • Tract E, 4.797 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-1a 23 (Single-Family Medium Density) 24 • Tract F, 8.669 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to OS-R 25 (Open Space-Recreation)/FC (Flood Control) 26 • Tract G, 12.029 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to FC 27 (Flood Control) 28 • Tract K, 7.487 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to C-1 29 (Commercial Low Intensity) 30 • Tract L, 21.488 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-4 31 (Multi-Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office) 32 • Tract M, 2.980 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-4 (Multi- 33 Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office) 34 • Tract N, 51.711 ± acres, from A-2 (Rural Agricultural) to R-4 35 (Multi-Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office) 36 • Tract Q, 0.054 ± acres, from R-3 (Multi-Dwelling Medium Density) 37 to C-1 (Commercial Low Intensity) 38 & Tract R, 7.806 ± acres, from A-1 (Flood Control) to R-4 (Multi- 39 Dwelling High Density & Limited Retail and Office). 40 41 Revels: That's correct. Good evening, everyone. Today we have the Rancho 42 Del Rey Master Plan amendment number 2 and zone change request. 43 The master plan is S-09-053. The zone change request is Z2814. 44 That property is located generally east of Roadrunner Parkway and 45 north and south of Settlers Pass a.k.a. Rancho Del Rey Master Plan 46 area. In encompasses 279 acres and it's parcel number 02-38952 and 22 1 02-07938, which the larger parcel is this piece here and the smaller 2 piece here encompasses the Rancho Del Rey area. 3 The purpose of the master plan amendment and zone change is 4 to adjust existing planning parcel boundaries to be in concert with the 5 existing zoning and proposed zone changes north of Settlers Pass. 6 The second item is to create a planning parcel for open space and 7 recreation purposes, which they're creating a park, and also there's 8 proposed a 40-foot wide walking path and also preserving the Sandhill 9 Arroyo is called out as a planning parcel also and this is all on this 10 south side of South Settlers Pass. 11 Next we are going to be establishing land uses that are 12 consistent with the 2001 Zoning Code for the land on and adjacent to 13 the Sandhill Arroyo. We're going to be creating zoning tracts to be in 14 concert with those proposed planning parcels. We are going to be 15 creating a true multi-family product with 30 to 40 dwelling units per 16 acre around the Sandhill Arroyo. This amendment will increase the 17 multi-family uses and decrease the single-family uses. There is a 18 proposed increase of 863 to 1,906 dwelling units from the 2004 Master 19 Plan Amendment to the proposed 2011 amendment. 20 Here are some case specifics for the 2011 proposed 21 amendment and the 2004 approved amendment. The 2011 proposed 22 amendment has 23 planning parcels. It calls out 2,877 to 3,982 23 dwelling units: the range of 455 to 752 single-family units and 2,422 to 24 3,230 multi-family units. They're proposing to have a true multi-family 25 product, which I have already mentioned that it's going to south of 26 Settlers Pass on and adjacent to the Sandhill Arroyo. There're 30 to 27 40 dwelling units proposed per acre. The breakdown of the acreage 28 from the 279 acres is: 231 acres of residential uses; 26 acres of 29 commercial-office uses; 7.9 acres of open space flood control; and 30 11.6 acres for the Sandhill Arroyo. The 2004 approved Amendment 31 had 22 planning parcels, called out for 2,014 dwelling units. Of those 32 2,014 dwelling units, 1,640 were single-family and 374 were multi- 33 family. There were 26.4 acres of commercial-office use and 253 acres 34 for residential uses. I also wanted to point out: of the 23 planning 35 parcels called out in the 2011 proposed amendment one of the 36 planning parcels is called out for acreage for the right-of-way for the 37 roads to be built. 38 Here is a map of the master planned area. This is the north 39 side of Settlers Pass where the zoning is already in place and land 40 uses are already in place. Mr. Binns already has, I believe, preliminary 41 plat approval right now for The Eagles 1, which is in this area here, and 42 Pine Summit in this area here and he's working on Stonegate II in this 43 area here. The south side of Settlers Pass Mr. Binns had planning 44 parcels already approved in the 2004 master plan but he never 45 adjusted the zoning to have the zoning in concert with the proposed 46 planning parcels. 23 1 Case specifics for the zone change tonight: North of Settlers 2 Pass the property is currently zoned R-1 a, R-3 and C-1. South of 3 Settlers Pass the property is currently zoned as follows: we have C- 4 3C, M-2, A-1, which is Flood Control from the 1981 Zoning Designation 5 from the 1981 Zoning Code, and A-2, which is Rural Agricultural from 6 the 1981 Zoning Code. The proposed zoning change request tonight 7 will consist of changing 12 zoning tracts encompassing 120.5 acres to 8 bring those into compliance with the...well, not into compliance but to 9 set land uses and zoning to those land uses for the south part of 10 Settlers Pass. Here's a table. I don't know if you guys want me to 11 read off the table. Would you like me to read off the table of all these 12 zone changes? 13 14 Scholz: I don't think that's necessary. We all have copies of that. 15 16 Revels: Okay. As you can see there are some things that have no change and 17 some that have very minimal changes because of the adjustment of 18 the planning parcels on the left side where it encompasses some of the 19 smaller changes here; but then your larger changes that were on the 20 south side of Settlers Pass, which is actually establishing zoning that's 21 current with the 2001 Zoning Code because A-2 and A-1 do not exist in 22 the 2001 Zoning Code. 23 Here is a zoning plat showing the entire area here and there's 24 the parcel that's called out for the Sandhill Arroyo and I know that a lot 25 of concerned people that I've talked to are concerned about this 26 triangular piece here that is adjacent but is indicated to be outside of 27 the arroyo area and also abuts up to the Four Hills neighborhood there. 28 Here's an aerial map showing...this is Stonegate Phase I that's 29 already out there. I believe it has 30 units. I know on the north side of 30 Settlers Pass where Mr. Binns has proposals that are in the preliminary 31 process and have been approved they also have this schedule of when 32 he is supposed to construct Roadrunner Parkway and also Settlers 33 Pass and that was also in your packet. I'm assuming when he goes to 34 submit any proposals on this site if he gets the master plan and zone 35 change approved he will have to comply to some type of schedule of 36 what needs to be in place when he starts to develop on this south side 37 of Settlers Pass. 38 Here's a zoning map. You can see here...there's the majority of 39 the R-1a here, the C-1 and this is R-3 here and this is all you're A-2 40 and you see the Arroyo coming through here and this is the A-1 in this 41 area right here. 42 Findings: the findings are the subject property is generally 43 located east of Roadrunner and north and south of Settlers Pass. The 44 property currently consists of single-family residential use, commercial 45 and office use and vacant/undeveloped land. 24 1 The zone change request consists of multiple zone changes on 2 12 zoning tracts and contains 120.5 acres and this area is known as 3 the Rancho Del Rey Master Plan area. The master plan amendment 4 includes 23 planning parcels and contains 279 acres. The proposed 5 amendment will range from 2,877 to 3,982 dwelling units and the 6 master plan amendment will adjust existing planning parcel boundaries 7 to be in concert with the proposed zone changes and create a true 8 multi-family product with 30 to 40 dwelling units per acre around the 9 Sandhill Arroyo. 10 Staff recommends an additional 40-feet of Open Space-Natural/ 11 Conservation linear strip on the south side to complement the 40-foot 12 linear path that they were proposing on the north side. Staff also 13 recommends that that path start at Roadrunner Parkway and continue 14 to the eastern boundary of his master planned area to provide 15 connectivity from Rinconada Avenue down to Roadrunner Parkway 16 and offer some open space recreation area. 17 The remaining half of Roadrunner Parkway from Parkhill 18 Estates to the intersection with Settlers Pass shall be constructed as 19 follows: the portion that fronts Eagles 1 Subdivision (Planning Parcel 20 1) shall be constructed when the Eagles 1 Subdivision is constructed; 21 the portion that fonts Pine Summit Subdivision (Planning Parcel 22 number 5) which is directly adjacent to Eagles 1 shall be constructed 23 when Pine Summit Subdivision is constructed; the portion that fronts 24 the commercial Planning Parcel 6 shall be constructed when either 25 Eagles 2 or Stonegate II Subdivisions are constructed and; the 26 remaining portion of Settlers Pass from the eastern boundary of 27 Stonegate I to the eastern boundary of Rancho Del Rey Master 28 Planned Area will be completed prior to any lots being sold in 29 Stonegate II Subdivision, which is Planning Parcel 8. The Zone 30 Change and Master Plan Amendment are consistent with the Goals, 31 Objectives and Policies of the City of Las Cruces Comprehensive Plan. 32 Staff recommendation tonight: DRC made a recommendation 33 to approve the master plan amendment and zone change on May 25th 34 with the following conditions: park and impact fees will be assessed 35 until such time the park is built and may be reimbursed to the 36 developer by the City of Las Cruces; final design of the park must be 37 submitted and approved by the Facilities Director and/or official 38 designee proper to any development plans being submitted for 39 planning parcels 9 through 22, excluding existing approved 40 development as of November 2010 and any other development 41 beyond Stonegate II; upon completion of 50-75% of the Rancho Del 42 Rey Master Plan area the park identified as Planning Parcel P13 and 43 the 40-foot-wide walking path facility will need to be constructed in its 44 entirety, based on the overall dwelling units the requirements for the 45 park acreage could change substantially from seven acres all the way 46 up to twelve to thirteen acres; number five, the City of Las Cruces 25 1 Utility Department and the developer will work together for the 2 easement acquisition of the proposed sewer interceptor and the 3 access to the existing proposed sewer interceptors; there will no 4 further approval of development in the Rancho Del Rey Master Plan 5 area from the Utility Department until the easement acquisition is 6 completed, and; number six, it is understood that there is an existing 7 sewer line in Proposed Parcel 13. The location of the park/dual use 8 facility must not negatively affect the sewer line or vice versa. Be 9 advised that this is only a conceptual plan. It must be demonstrated 10 that the location of the park/dual use facility and the sewer line is 11 feasible. Per CLC Design Standards the increased post-development 12 volume must be retained and the post-development peak flow must not 13 exceed historic flow. 14 Your options here tonight...normally a master plan has final 15 approval with the Planning and Zoning Commission and zone change 16 recommendations are made P & Z and goes forward to City Council 17 So I'm saying tonight, if you'd like to make another condition to have 18 the master plan go in concert with the zone change to City Council you 19 can condition the master plan also to have it go in with the zone 20 change to Council 21 So your options here tonight are: to approve the master plan 22 amendment as recommended by staff with the conditions that I read to 23 you; approve the master plan amendment request with the conditions 24 deemed appropriate by this Body; deny the master plan amendment 25 request, or; table or postpone the Master Plan Amendment request. 26 The options tonight for the zone change request are: to 27 approve the zone change request as recommended by staff; approve 28 the zone change request with conditions deemed appropriate by this 29 Body; deny the zone change request or; table or postpone the zone 30 change request. That is the end of my presentation. I'll stand for any 31 questions and the owner and his representative are here also. 32 33 Scholz: All right, gentlemen, questions for Ms. Revels? Commissioner Crane. 34 35 Crane: So we have to suspend the rules to discuss these two items? 36 37 Scholz: Yes, we will. 38 39 Crane: Okay. I've two questions. Ms. Revels, in the comments from the 40 public they seem to be in two categories. One is concerns about 41 adequate highway access as the development is proceeding. Do you 42 feel that the schedule for highway building that you gave us a few 43 minutes ago meets those public concerns? 44 45 Revels: Highway? Are you talking of the Roadrunner Parkway in Settlers 46 Pass? 26 1 2 Crane: Yes, the major roads. 3 4 Revels: Okay, like I stated before on the north side of Settlers Pass he was put 5 on a schedule as when development was to occur, when the roads had 6 to be built in line with his planning parcels. So as Mr. Binns submits 7 preliminary plats on the southern portion of Settlers Pass I am 8 assuming that that schedule will continue, that he will have to meet 9 certain standards in order to build the rest of Roadrunner Parkway all 10 the way out. 11 12 Crane: Okay. But you're assuming he will. 13 14 Revels: Well, I'm going to say that most likely staff will recommend that it be 15 conditioned like it was because I know that the conditions that I read to 16 you about the build out of Roadrunner Parkway and Settlers Pass were 17 a part of, I believe, it was Pine Summit Subdivision and so these were 18 conditions that were read into record that he had to build the road as 19 these developments came in. 20 21 Crane: Okay. The other thing was a concern expressed by the public about 22 this section R that was devoted to flood control and is now known to be 23 a residential and retail, I think. How's that transition being handled? 1 24 mean, is there a... 25 26 Revels: Are we talking this piece here or are we talking right in here? 27 28 Crane: Show me again. 29 30 Revels: We have the A-1 piece here. 31 32 Crane: I think A-1 is now R, isn't it? 33 34 Revels: They're calling out for R-4. 35 36 Crane: Okay. 37 38 Revels: They're proposing R-4. 39 40 Crane: That's the one which we are told accumulates a lot of water. 41 42 Revels: I'm assuming when he does submit a development application to do 43 any type of development there, their engineering will...there will be 44 drainage, things that he will have to address. I was told that I should 45 just defer that to the applicant or to his engineer but there will be a 27 1 design that would have to be done when he goes to develop that 2 property. 3 4 Crane: Thank you. 5 6 Scholz: All right, other questions? Commissioner Evans. 7 8 Evans: Yes...and maybe you mentioned this but I didn't catch it. The 9 Roadrunner Parkway from Highway 70 to the proposed change...when 10 does that get developed? Are we talking about the applicant 11 developing the portion that runs alongside the area of his proposal and 12 that's the plan; but when does it continue on all the way to Highway 70; 13 because that's a long stretch of road and my question is: that if we 14 develop all this and we don't develop that and we push all the traffic 15 down to Del Rey or we push all the traffic up to Rinconada when we're 16 totally ignoring this other access from Highway 79. 17 18 Revels: Mr. Binns would be required to build out Roadrunner Parkway adjacent 19 to his property. Development of roadways are based on development, 20 1 mean, roadways are built with development of property so as things 21 are built out then the roads are built. 22 23 Evans: Right. It's exactly my point and I understand how that works and so 24 there's no intention currently, right now, either from the developer or 25 from staff as they know it today toward the person who owns this 26 parcel to build out that portion from Highway 70 which connects up to 27 the parcel in question that we are discussing now. 28 29 Revels: That's correct. As far as I know, no. 30 31 Scholz: Okay. Just to clarify: what you said about the extension of Settlers 32 Pass over to the neighborhood of Rinconada; that would be done after 33 Stonegate II is platted? Was that the idea? 34 35 Revels: No lots can be sold in this subdivision. It can be built but no lots can 36 be sold until the Settlers Pass is built out to the eastern boundary of his 37 property. 38 39 Scholz: Okay. All right, that was my question. May we hear from the 40 applicant, please? 41 42 Binns: Good evening. My name is Eddie Binns and we really don't have a 43 situation as complicated as it appears. Number one, to set people's 44 minds at ease the, I believe, it's tract number R, which is the triangle 45 piece down here at the bottom. Number one, this is not in a flood 46 plain. It is above the flood plain on the FEMA maps so it does not 28 1 require any special handling to be able to utilize it. It is a tract of land 2 that I'd proposed to a number of the people with the City staff to put in 3 a park there but I did not get any support for it. 4 In meeting with some of my neighbors and some of the people 5 that I've sold homes to for the last several days I have discussed with 6 them and understand their concerns about a high-density multi-family 7 in this little triangle. They have concerns of the problems that they'd 8 happen to live with from a Section 8 across the arroyo and the things 9 that go along with it and I've assured them that I do not want to put 10 them in a position where that is a concern. So, number one, I would 11 be modifying any request that we have tonight to take this triangle and, 12 1 believe, that is Tract number R...double check to be sure. 13 14 Scholz: Yes, it is. 15 16 Binns: Tract number R to an R-2 zoning. This would be a zoning which would 17 be much more compatible to the neighborhood and the people across 18 the way rather than an R-4 with the higher density and a rare 19 possibility that it might some apartments that would be not compatible 20 with what I like to do or would want to be involved in. 21 The real reason I'm here tonight is because I want to build a 22 park. I have deposited money, these people's money, in building 23 permits for over 300...600...approaching 800 housing units that I have 24 charged all of these people park fees for and we don't have a park and 25 in the process of developing this back in 1975 when I started the 26 original concept they said, "We don't need any parks in here, Mr. 27 Binns, so don't put any there because we want your money so we can 28 get land from the BLM and build parks on that." Well, that didn't take 29 place. But the money still was collected and put in reserve and is 30 supposed to be used only in this unit of town. Well, the City found that 31 if they made the town all one unit instead of four or five units then they 32 could take the money that was collected here and build it in a park 33 somewhere else. So we don't have a park nor do we have the money 34 now, probably, to build a park. 35 So in the process of building out...where's my arrow 36 here...across this area across here is the Eagle Subdivision, probably 37 a couple hundred houses in the 250 to 300 some-odd dollar price 38 range so that they would be higher priced homes on that ridge. The 39 Stonegate Subdivision would be a couple of hundred houses in this 40 general area. In the process of developing that and working it out 41 there is drainage that needed to be taken care of and I find myself with 42 400-and-some odd houses going in there and no park. So we says, 43 "Let's come in and put a park in this immediate area that is a 44 combination park, hundred-year flood plain, stormwater to catch on the 45 two or three days out of year that you may have it." When I proposed 46 the park, why our City regulations says, "Hey, you just can't do that: 29 1 you got to change your Master Plan." So I'm back trying to sort 2 through our current planning and zoning and says, "Well, if I want to 3 set aside a piece of land for a park and for drainage, why can't I do it?" 4 Well, you can when you master plan the whole thing. So that's why 5 we're here today master planning so that I can set aside some land for 6 drainage and a park. 7 So, when you say, "Okay, let's look at master planning this thing 8 and try to think about what's going to happen tomorrow." Obviously, 1 9 can't give a house away today if I wanted to, if I offered people to have 10 it for the mortgage so housing is in the doldrums right now. It's in bad 11 shape, no question about it, and when it comes back it's still going to 12 be questionable because a lot of things are changing in the shelter 13 business. You are going to find more people living in apartments so if 14 they have the ability with job transfers to pick up and move tomorrow. 15 You're going to find many people that can't collect and accumulate the 16 money for the big down payments that are required now and I think 17 they're going to be required in the future. So it means that we're going 18 to need more places to shelter people and multi-family is one way to 19 accomplish that. People kid me sometimes, says, "Eddie, why do you 20 keep playing this game?" I says, "Well, because people keep getting 21 married and having babies and as long as that happens they're going 22 to need a roof over their head because there's a limit how long they 23 can live with mom and dad." So they do need some type of shelter 24 and the multi-family is one of the ways that we can assist that and help 25 people in the area. 26 There was a question about the construction of Roadrunner 27 between my boundary and Highway 70. If everything goes as planned 28 the City Council's impact fees are going to provide the money to build 29 that. I've been assured of it because I figured I've been contributing 30 pretty heavy to that fund and that's how that is proposed to be taken 31 care of in the future; not only the construction of Roadrunner there but 32 also the bridge across the arroyo and those are the things that have 33 been promised our industry in the process of this new impact fee. 34 These impact fees aren't going to happen tomorrow. This 35 development's not going to happen tomorrow. Stuff that takes place 36 here is going to happen over the next ten or fifteen years. Things don't 37 move as fast as sometimes people would like and me, in particular, 38 and others, it's quite slow. 39 But now's the time to do your planning; now's the time to do 40 some thinking ahead. Thinking ahead, this subdivision, this 41 neighborhood, was conceived around 1975. There was a conceptual 42 plan that was generated over the entire 600 acres of land. What has 43 evolved today is on the same track as what was designed with the 44 Comprehensive Plan in 1975. It was modified in the 80s and modified 45 again in the late 90s. Each time it was modified or any changes took 46 place or identifications I have generated maps of the region and I have 30 1 required that any sales that I am involved or participate in a disclosure 2 takes place with that map and disclosure of the zoning that is going on 3 around there. I don't want to be in a position where I have people that 4 are buying sites that say, "Well, no one told me there was going to be 5 apartments there. No one told me this was going to be a C for a 6 church and/or offices or whatever," and I do require that that be placed 7 in all contracts for disclosure. It is a practice I have learned a long time 8 ago that has proved to do. I'd rather lose a sale than have someone 9 come back and say, "You didn't tell me that you're going to build 10 apartments in my back yard." And the people that live back up there, 11 they're going to stand and tell you today that I told them there would be 12 apartments in there some day. They are going to say that I said, "It 13 might not be in your lifetime but it is in the long—range plan and that will 14 take place." 15 The zoning that we're really concerned with is the lower south 16 portion. The north portion is already basically zoned and any zoning 17 that is in the maps and plats there are the cleaning up of boundaries. 18 When you take a large tract of land and you get a pencil and mark out 19 there and say, "Okay, this is going to be R-1, R-2, R-3 or whatever." 20 Then you come in and you put the subdivisions together and in the 21 process of laying out streets and lots there can be overlays and 22 overlaps that take place between those zonings and Helen's got a plat 23 here and...let's see if I can go to it...okay. This is a good example. Up 24 here in this area you can see a small wedge that is a clean up zoning. 25 There's a little triangle over here that's clean up zoning. This is an 26 overlap here. This tract currently today carries a commercial zoning 27 but it has houses sitting on it and it is single-family. So we are 28 cleaning up the zoning boundaries on several tracts in the north portion 29 of that so that they have the correct zoning in the correct subdivision 30 that is there. 31 This particular map does give you a view of the proposed park 32 that is in this general area here. You'll notice that there is a little ribbon 33 in the north side of the arroyo. There's a sewer line that was built in 34 this area back about 25 years ago, maybe 30 years ago. It wasn't paid 35 for by the City. It was paid for by me and Steve Gary when he was 36 taking a sewer line up to Las Colinas. That sewer line was a 12-inch 37 sewer line and it is the only sewer line that is going to the East Mesa 38 that is taking sewage north of Highway 70. You stop and think: the 39 Onate High School, Las Colinas, the Ranchers...all of those 40 subdivisions are draining into that sewer line and it's running pretty full. 41 The City has approached me requesting me to try to work with them on 42 easement down the Sandhill Arroyo so that they could put in a 16-18 43 inch interceptor line to feed the growth taking place on that side of 44 town. They are looking for another 30-foot-wide strip of right-of-way 45 from the Interstater 25 all the way up to the Las Palomas Subdivision 46 on this upper side. It is something I told them I would with them on and 31 1 1 do have some requirements that I want it to be done so that there is 2 erosion control on the north side of the arroyo. Once this was 3 identified then several members with the City staff, the Parks and 4 Recreation says, "Eddie, that's a natural for a path for people to walk 5 their dogs from Las Palomas all the way to the Interstate and you've 6 got a 40-foot right-of-way through there;" 10-feet existing plus a new 7 30-foot that the City wants to put in. And being good natured and such 8 1 said, "Okay, no big deal; but make it a path. They'll include it with the 9 park tied together." But in visiting with the existing neighbors that I 10 sold houses to downstream they wondered if I'd lost my mind. They 11 says, "Eddie, what do you mean opening up a path that's going to run 12 down the back of our fences? We've enjoyed the privacy for a long 13 time and we can understand the need for a sewer line but we don't get 14 very excited about putting a path back there so that people walking 15 their dogs looking in our back window." Anyway, I'm caught in a 16 quandary in that one. I don't have a solution. I'm going to have to 17 work with City for the sewer line and, in the process we can try to 18 pursue the moving of any paths down that 40-foot strip as far away 19 from the property owners as possible so people aren't looking in their 20 back yard. 21 With that thought in mind I am not at all in agreement of placing 22 a 40-foot ribbon on the south side of the Sandhill Arroyo to do the 23 same thing. It's not necessary. It's an area that has not been 24 discussed between me and the planning staff and it is something that 25 I'm totally against because the people that live over there are not going 26 to want it and I am not endorsing and proposing to put one over there. 27 Today land values out there are relatively low but there may 28 come a time in the future when land values are worth more and it may 29 be feasible to do tighter control, maybe in the form of some form of 30 channelization just as is taking place on the Las Cruces Arroyo to try to 31 confine and control the erosion and the flow that's going up that arroyo 32 so that a location for something on the south side is not at all feasible 33 at this time and I am not in favor of that at all. 34 The industry at this time is basically dead. Now is not the time 35 to develop land and kick'er but now may be the time to do some 36 intelligent planning and look ahead because we've seen cycles come 37 and we've seen cycles go and if we have our house in order and clean 38 up some of the overlapped things at this time, now's a prudent time to 39 do that. 40 Basically, I've tried to touch on a number of things that people 41 are concerned with, some of the questions that you may have and I'd 42 be glad to try to respond to any thought you might have on this 43 particular action. Thank you. 44 45 Scholz: All right, questions for this gentleman? Commissioner Beard. 46 32 1 Beard: Mr. Binns, that 30-foot strip that you're talking about, are you 2 requesting that we put in another recommendation if we approve 3 this...that that not be included or...because I don't see it in here as a 4 recommendation. 5 6 Binns: The recommendation was a 40-foot strip on the south side of the 7 arroyo, if I remember seeing it while ago. (Referring to slide in the 8 presentation) 9 10 Revels: See, these are the conditions. 11 12 Binns: Those are staff recommendation conditions and that hit me cold. 13 That's the first time I've seen it. 14 15 Revels: Those are findings. They were provided those decisions...but they're 16 findings; what the staff is recommending and that's planning staff is 17 recommending but it's not in the conditions. 18 19 Binns: Okay. I read it so I don't know how it's interpreted but it was on the 20 screen. 21 22 Scholz: It's not a condition then. 23 24 Beard: Yeah, it was a finding but not a recommendation. 25 26 Scholz: Not a condition. 27 28 Beard: I mean a condition. 29 30 Scholz: That's right. 31 32 Binns: I don't know the difference between one or the other. 33 34 Beard: if we approve it then it would not be included. Thank you. 35 36 Scholz: Other questions for this gentleman? Okay, Mr. Binns, you talked about 37 the Sandhill Arroyo. Are you required to bridge the Sandhill Arroyo? 38 39 Binns: Today I'm not required to bridge the Sandhill Arroyo because I have 40 not brought any development packages to you which require the 41 crossing of the Sandhill Arroyo to the other side. Right now we are 42 talking about zoning tracts of land not subdividing tracts of land so that 43 at the time subdivision would take place that would be the time that 44 negotiations in some form or fashion would take place for the crossing 45 of the arroyo. And that's why I alluded that the new impact fees will 33 1 probably do that for me. By the time we get ready to do it we should 2 have money in the impact fee to cover it. 3 4 Scholz: All right, what section is the proposed park? What tract is that? Is that 5 Tract F? 6 7 Binns: Let's go back... 8 9 Revels: It's Parcel 13, 1 believe. It's Parcel 13. 10 11 Binns: I need a magnifying glass for it, but... 12 13 Scholz: Okay, ours are done in alphabetical letters here so I say it's... 14 15 Revels: The zoning tract? 16 17 Scholz: Let's see...this is the zone map we're talking about, yeah. I have Tract 18 F. Is that correct? 19 20 Revels: That's correct. It's Tract F on the Zoning Plat 21 22 Scholz: Thank you. 23 24 Revels: Planning Parcel 13 on the Master Plan. 25 26 Scholz: All right, any other questions for Mr. Binns? Yes, Commissioner 27 Evans. 28 29 Evans: Well, just for the sake of the public and to make sure that we're all 30 clear...Helen, we're looking at a zone change and we're looking at a 31 master planning change and then all of the parcels that will go through 32 a subdivision will come before this Board again and at that time is 33 where the traffic study analysis will be done as to whether or not the 34 existing roadways can support that development. 35 36 Revels: Any development on the residential planning parcels will have to go 37 through the preliminary plat, final plat process and any development on 38 any of the commercial parcels can be divided through the alternate 39 summary process. 40 41 Binns: To expand that thought and clarify it I have made commitments for the 42 build out of Roadrunner through the properties as various stages of 43 development takes place. I've made commitments to extend Settlers 44 Pass when I do Stonegate Unit number 2 so that those traffic patterns 45 are addressed as development takes place north of Settlers Pass and 46 that's what would be on the table the soonest. 34 1 2 Scholz: All right, any other questions. Before we open this to public discussion 3 1 am going to suggest a 10 minute break. We'll reconvene here at a 4 quarter to eight. We are in recess. 5 6 TEN MINUTE BREAK 7 8 Scholz: All right, our next session would be public comment on this zone 9 change and the master plan. Now, how many people would like to 10 speak to this? Can I see hands? Okay, I see a number of people, 11 probably a dozen. What I'm going to ask is that you limit yourself to 12 three minutes and I'm going to ask our Secretary to keep the timer 13 here. I'm not using the formal timer, which is sitting over here, 14 because we haven't had much experience with it. But I would ask you 15 to limit yourself to three minutes and Commissioner Beard will wave at 16 you when you get down to thirty seconds. Pardon me? 17 18 Beard: The red light. 19 20 Scholz: Oh, yeah. Right! He will turn his red light on and then you'll know you 21 have thirty seconds left. So would you come up and identify yourself 22 first, please. Let's start on this side in the back. Yes, ma'am. 23 24 Poore: My name is Jennifer Poore and I am a resident in Four Hills area. I am 25 concerned about a few things that were said by Mr. Binns today. First 26 of all I think this is a very serious situation because I think some issues 27 were brought up that were inaccurate. First and foremost is the 28 flooding situation in what on one map says A-1 and on another map is 29 Tract R and on another map is P18. So if we could all get on the same 30 page...it's that pie-shaped piece. 31 32 Scholz: I believe we're calling it Tract R. 33 34 Poore: Okay. And you can see, even on the map that's up right now, there 35 are two different areas of streets that drain directly across Tract R into 36 that arroyo so I don't know where Mr. Binns is getting his information 37 as far as there's no water there, there's no flooding there; because 1 38 have pictures to prove it that I took just this past week in a very mild 39 rainstorm that shows that tons and tons of water flows all the way 40 down from Mars to all the streets of those neighborhoods down to 41 Luna Ridge and empties across Tract R into the arroyo. That is indeed 42 a flood zone area. All I can think is he is getting his information from 43 maybe an old report way back in the 80s where this may not have 44 been true but it is true today. Any of you could go out there during any 45 rainstorm and see it. This is a serious issue. It is such an issue 46 because the new apartments, which again aren't shown on this map, 35 1 which are up behind High Ridge, they're the Four Hills 2 Apartments...they were built...and I can't even point but it's...High 3 Ridge is the street to the far right of that Tract R and apartments were 4 built in there and they have a collection pond for water which failed, 5 which wasn't enough, because there's too much flooding in our area. 6 So a spillway, which does not show on this map, was built coming 7 down across High Ridge down Columbia and goes into Luna Ridge 8 and into the arroyo; again, across Tract R. So not only is it all of our 9 homes that water drains into there but those new apartments, the Four 10 Hills Apartments, they all drain into there, too. So my concern is not 11 the rest of what he's talking about. My concern is that he's trying to 12 build in an area that I guarantee you floods every time it rains. Thank 13 you. 14 15 Scholz: Thank you. Someone else from this side...Yes, Ma'am 16 17 Krueger: My name is Connie Krueger and I reside at 2479 Columbia Avenue. 18 I'm opposed to the proposed rezoning for the following reasons. 1 19 would echo the lady who spoke previously. Not enough information 20 has been provided to the people to prove that the area for rezoning 21 should be removed from the flood zone. This affects the safety of the 22 residents in this area. Regarding the map you can see...I say across 23 the arroyo...how close Mr. Binns has built to the Sandhill Arroyo. The 24 homes are right in the flood zone. 25 Number two; I am also opposed to the destruction of the habitat 26 for the great horned owls, the marsh hawks, the toads, the newly 27 migrating birds who are misplaced because of urban development. 28 1 don't believe, number three; that the area needs to be 29 commercialized or any more homes need to be built there since we do 30 live in that hundred-year flood plain. I think it would be an excellent 31 opportunity for Mr. Binns to provide the area as a place for people to 32 live in harmony with the desert and it is already a park and people use 33 it as such and it would preserve the wildness of the desert landscape 34 and this would also preserve water for a park. 35 Lastly, I am concerned about the devaluation of my property. 36 The view is priceless and it's a selling point; it's a living point and that 37 would be greatly altered for me. I ask you to preserve the peace, quiet 38 and beauty of the natural landscape and I ask you to preserve the 39 safety of the residents. Thank you. 40 41 Scholz: Thank you. Someone else from this side. Yes, sir. I'm sorry. I should 42 have identified...the maroon shirt. Yes. 43 44 Toland: My name is Jack Toland. I live at 2499 Columbia adjacent to Tract R. 45 1 echo some of the statements as far as we have a water issue. I don't 46 envy the engineer who has to try to design a structure that will survive 36 I that area. We enjoy our wildlife. Mr. Binns has stated that he's willing 2 to move that from R-4 to R-2. I think that's a small victory. It's obvious 3 that based on what the City has for funding...I was in part of the 4 process for rebuilding the Del Rey area so it's going to be a while 5 before we get across Roadrunner so I think traffic concerns, as far as 6 being able to populate that area aren't necessarily my problem right 7 now. 8 But something that you guys said earlier: when you guys zone 9 this it's zoned forever. You made the same statement earlier: what is 10 the impact of doing this? It's great that Mr. Binns is willing to keep his 11 development to a minimum at this point and it doesn't impact our 12 house prices as they stand right now but it changes the character of 13 the neighborhood. To paraphrase something that you said, Mr. Evans, 14 "Once it's rezoned, it's rezoned." That's just how it goes. We talked 15 about the bureaucracy and sometimes in the bureaucracy the 16 intentions get overlooked. It's something you said about in the last 17 case that we had. That's great that we want to rezone it and what's his 18 intention is now. What's the intention twenty years down the road? Is 19 the bureaucracy going to overlook what his intentions were once that 20 area is sold? I'd like you guys to think about that. Obviously, we have 21 concerns with home values and we're all trying to get the most for 22 houses as possible but I think if we had a little foresight and make sure 23 that our intentions for this space are going to be the same for the long 24 haul and not just necessarily what Mr. Binns plans to use it for until that 25 area gets sold. Thank you. 26 27 Scholz: All right, the gentleman with the striped shirt. And you have some 28 pictures for us. Thank you. 29 30 McKibben: Good evening. My name's Tom McKibben. I live on Wagon Mound 31 Trail. I'm an employee of the Bureau of Land Management. I'm the 32 Assistant Fire Management Officer for them. In other words, I'm the 33 Deputy Fire Chief for about 10,000,000 acres in southwest New 34 Mexico, responsible for the suppression of all wild land fires there. I'm 35 also on a National Incident Management Team. I'm in the Operations 36 section. My specialty there is Structure Protection Specialist. We 37 respond to natural disasters nationwide. My local claim to fame.. I was 38 the Incident Commander of the Augustine Fire on the other side there 39 by White Sands and I was the guy that shut down Highway 70 there for 40 a while so we wouldn't burn anybody up. 41 But I'm not here representing the government nor the Bureau of 42 Land Management. I'm a resident on Wagon Mound Trail. I've 43 reviewed a lot of what Binns is proposing and I have some serious 44 concerns. I'm not a hydrologist by any stretch of the imagination but 1 45 was lead instructor in the Wild Land Academy and in the fire academy 46 in Florida where I was a Fire Chief and I taught water hydraulics and I 37 1 know when you take a large area like this and you start compressing 2 the water flow you increase the velocity and if you look at the pictures 3 of Sandhill Arroyo already we have significant erosion problems, 4 including the new bridge on Del Rey is already experiencing damage 5 and erosion difficulties there. 6 So my concerns are for the homes plus the infrastructure. We 7 already have a retention pond there at the end of Roadrunner that's 8 already being destroyed due to the velocity of the water coming 9 through the arroyo. So while I wholeheartedly support Mr. Binns in 10 cleaning up the zoning issues that are north of Settlers Pass and I 11 actually support and appreciate and admire his wanting to create a 12 park on the south side of Settlers Pass; due to the significant erosion 13 and what could really turn into a major disaster due to additional 14 erosion due to the velocity of the water what I would suggest is 15 everything that is south of Settlers Pass through the Sandhill Arroyo let 16 him turn that whole thing into a park, leave it natural as it is and that 17 would probably solve that problem. 18 That being impossible, then I would suggest a three-to-five year 19 hydrology study to actually track the actual water flow through the 20 arroyo and track the damage that's being done to the Del Rey Bridge 21 already. He mentioned that in 1975 this was laid out and I can 22 appreciate that because a couple years before that is when I started 23 my service in emergency services. Do you have any questions? 24 25 Scholz: Any questions for this gentleman? Okay, thank you very much. Yes, 26 the lady in green back there. We'll get to this side in a moment. 27 28 Williams: Good evening, gentlemen. I'm Susan Williams and I also live on 29 Columbia Avenue. Yeah, we're all concerned with that little triangle of 30 land. I've known Mr. Binns actually for a number of years and I 31 appreciate his willingness, again, to look at putting that park on that 32 north side... at a minimum...R-2; but I gotta tell you... that parcel, you 33 wouldn't believe the runoff and it's busted through every single thing 34 they've put. It's dug 12-foot, 15-foot furrows over the years and not too 35 very many years out of those apartments that are right there. If you 36 really want to put a park, put a park there. You really want to know 37 where people walk and they walk their dogs and the animals and the 38 drainage? It's going to be so expensive to build there. I know that a 39 lot of us are here because when we heard that Mr. Binns was 40 considering putting high-density multi-family right in back of R-1, right 41 on top of the arroyo, we were appalled and I applaud and appreciate 42 the fact that you realize that that was, perhaps, a little over-ambitious. 43 But I'd really love to see that be a park or, at a minimum, a good 44 boundary of it a park. I think that would help with the drainage as well. 45 Thank you very much. 46 38 1 Scholz: Thank you. Someone else from this side. Yes, this gentleman here. 2 3 Gross: Good evening. My name's Ron Gross. I also live back up to that 4 arroyo on the north side and when I bought that piece of property I 5 asked Eddie several times was anything...I felt very fortunate to get in 6 this area early enough to be probably one of three houses along that 7 arroyo. Nothing had developed any more than that at the time. So my 8 wife and I, we got out back, you know, and at night we'd look down and 9 we could see the city lights going to the west of us and daytime we 10 could see the mountains to the east of us and that has been a serenity, 11 1 think, to everybody that arroyo...on both sides of that arroyo are 12 houses. You know, Eddie and I kind of went back and forth that there 13 was a big misunderstanding, that that much property the width of that 14 property from our rockwall on our back yard to the rockwall on the 15 other side of the arroyo was just, you know, too much property to 16 assume that it's an arroyo. Well, we've seen water across it a foot 17 deep in '05, 1 think, when we got the really big heavy rains and also 1 18 asked Eddie to the point of where I was really expecting him to say, 19 "Ron, how many times do I have to tell you? Nothing's going to be built 20 on that arroyo." 21 Now, what he's telling me now, what we've talked about is he's 22 talking about the flood plain. I was talking about, in purchasing my 23 home, what my view would be to the east and to the west and, 24 assumably, that's what I understood was why I bought that property, 25 that nothing would be built in that area. It's grown up nice. There's a 26 lot of foliage there which also helps restrict some of the erosion that 27 comes through there because of the trees and everything in there now, 28 some desert Willows...and also to echo another thought, too, it does, 29 we feel, that it will devalue our properties because of the view, 30 restricted views. As Eddie pointed out before Eagle Ridge with the 31 $200,000 to $350,000 homes are up on the ridge and the less 32 expensive ones will be below that ridge and that is exactly the reason: 33 for the views. Everybody that has been in this area any length of time 34 knows profit value really shoots up for the view of these Organ 35 Mountains and that's exactly why we bought the properties on that 36 arroyo. So we're just hoping that you'll consider and leaving that as an 37 A-1 zone. Thank you. 38 39 Scholz: Thank you. All right, anyone else from this side? Yes, the gentleman 40 in green over there. 41 42 Schroeder: Thank you for taking your time out to listen to us tonight. My name is 43 Steve Schroeder. My wife and I bought a place at 2070 Wagon Mound 44 next to Ron. When we had our meeting with Mr. Binns last Friday he 45 was very congenial and open to discussion about land use on this 39 1 triangular piece of property and that then evolved into the R-2 2 designation rather than the R-4 that is being proposed. 3 Along with that I wanted to remind Mr. Binns that we also talked 4 about a one-story height limit and maybe he'll want to respond to that 5 so we also want not only density but limitations on building heights. 6 One of the things that's unrelated to the zoning but will cause the 7 neighborhood additional concern is the pedestrian system that the City 8 wants to put down this arroyo. As a homeowner on the north side of 9 the arroyo I'm not interested in four, five or six or ten thousand people 10 walking past my back yard. So we're going to have to deal with the 11 pedestrian system in this area as it evolves on this sewer line. 12 Anyway, thank you very much. 13 14 Scholz: All right, thank you. Let's start on this side in the back. Let's do the 15 last row first. Thank you. 16 17 Beatty: Good evening. My name is Lee Beatty and I live on Pine Needle Way 18 off from Settlers Pass. I just wanted to make several comments. One 19 is that we have people who walk their dogs up and down Settlers Pass 20 and along Roadrunner right now and I can assure there's not a 21 thousand people using it. The people that do use the arroyo for their 22 dogs, usually there's not more than a few at a time so that doesn't 23 seem to be a major concern. 24 One of the concerns that we do have, though, is that Mr. Binns 25 has not been particularly forthcoming in finishing some of the projects 26 that he has already started and we are concerned that if he decides to 27 build in an area and scrape it down and then let it sit for three years, as 28 he's done down at the Pine Estates, I believe it is. There's a whole 29 area there that has streets and areas for buildings to go on and nothing 30 has been built in four years. 31 There's a water retention pond at the corner of Roadrunner and 32 Settlers Pass that has become a dump. There's construction waste 33 dumped there. The channels going into the water retention pond have 34 backed up and now there's dirt all over the sidewalks and when a 35 place looks like a dump people use it like a dump. All along the 36 rockwalls around this water retention pond people have dumped their 37 yard waste from the winter kill so it looks trashy and the weeds are 38 growing. All of the good plants were scraped out of it when the water 39 retention pond was formed and now just noxious weeds are growing in 40 it. You can't even walk across it without getting your feet and your 41 clothes full of the burrs and the goat heads. 42 So we are just concerned that these grandiose plans are going 43 to end up being eyesores and not finished and when the time comes 44 the whole areas will be denuded and scraped and everyone will lose 45 their views, everyone will lose their walking places and everyone will 46 lose the nice things that we have there. We don't have a park but we 40 1 do have the desert and that's nice to be able to walk through. It's also 2 good for water retention and it's also good for the animals and for the 3 birds and we hope that it would be preserved. Thank you. 4 5 Scholz: Thank you. Yes, the lady on the end. More pictures, all righty! Thank 6 you. 7 8 Talamantes: My name is Patricia Talamantes and I also live on Columbia. One of 9 my main concerns, as the gentleman said, when he said when you 10 change the zone it's changed forever. In his previous zoning or master 11 plan he's looking at 800 to a 1000-some-odd house; in this new one 12 he's either doubling or tripling the capacity of the people that there. My 13 concern is with Las Cruces being on restricted water we always have 14 to watch. I understand that Las Cruces has to grow but I'm asking you 15 guys to be reasonable. 2,000-to-3,000 people or homes in that area 16 and that 278 acres, I believe, is just too much. Leave it a single-family 17 R-1 for some of the bigger areas and it'll help Las Cruces conserve the 18 water and stuff because every summer, you guys know, we are always 19 on water restriction so how much can Las Cruces grow before we are 20 going to get ourselves in trouble? Thank you. 21 22 Scholz: Thank you very much. Yes, the lady in the next row here. Come on 23 up. I haven't seen your hand, actually... 24 25 Swansbrough: Hello, my name is Bonnie Swansbrough and I've lived in the Pines 26 off Settlers Pass for ten years now and I made a point of learning what 27 the master plan was. I made a point of finding out if I was in any kind 28 of danger of flooding because I have been flooded out by the 100-year 29 flood...and I made sure of all this things before I would sign papers. 1 30 want to go from there and say the first I heard of this was two weeks 31 ago, I think, I got a notice in the mail and am I correct, Helen Revels 32 works for the City and advises you? 33 34 Scholz: Yes, she's sifting right there at the table as a matter of fact. 35 36 Swansbrough: Okay, well, at the time I got the first one I had a ton of questions and 37 didn't know how to go about getting answers. I phoned her and left a 38 message to please call me. I never got a reply. Now today she is 39 advising you and three times during the conversation of presenting this 40 package she answered your questions with the word, "assume, 41 assume, assuming." Those words are not to me advice to you as 42 Commissioners. If she's assuming it means that she doesn't know for 43 sure and can't answer a question to you five who have to make this 44 decision that affects so many of us here in this town for both the water 45 conservation, for the shelter to the animals. In my particular case, I'm 46 on Sugar Pine Way one house away from that retention center wall 41 1 that is clogging...and that is one of the ways I got to let it out; because 2 of clogged, improper drainage that they let overgrow and flood. 3 The second part of my comment is to do with the high-density 4 movement of all of this. I did not want to live in a high-dense area. 1 5 came from a very high dense...I came from Westminster, California 6 and that is now known as Little Saigon. It went from homes that had 7 two people or four, a family, normal American family, to 12-to-15 8 people per house; where they paved over all their lawns to park cars; 9 where people could no longer get around the streets are so packed. 10 The city impact on infrastructure was enormous. 11 What I see in this, if I read it rightly, because, frankly, the last 12 two pages of our maps are completely illegible. They're so small a 13 print and I'm nearsighted and can read lawyers' print and could not 14 read a thing on the maps. Without at least this much I wouldn't have 15 known quite what he was talking about that he wanted to do other than 16 he's rezoning to make it high-density. 17 And from my personal feeling is with the water issues and the 18 risk of flooding we have and having been locked out of my home 19 because of flooding on Del Rey in 2005, 1 have a vested interest in not 20 rerouting more and more water down to and creating the erosion. So, 1 21 would ask that until these roads are in and we have seriously looked...1 22 don't care if it's just rezoning. We gotta live with it. It isn't what 1 23 agreed to when I bought my property and I want you think about that 24 before you change it all over to a completely different environment. 25 Thank you. 26 27 Scholz: Thank you. Okay, the gentleman in the blue shirt? 28 29 Foster: Hello. My name is Bill Foster. I am a resident at Stonegate and, as 30 was mentioned earlier, along with the clearing of the property on 31 Roadrunner and Settlers Pass it was mentioned that there was thirty 32 units at the Stonegate. I believe there's actually nine. I'm one of them 33 so we have all that land that's up there vacated and also starting to 34 erode because there's no building on there or very little to stop the 35 wind and the dust from collecting. 36 Along with that, the lighting in the neighborhood that we were 37 told was that we were going to have some lighting up there...there's 38 very little light up there on that road and the proposed park that he 39 wants to put in...I actually talked to Mr. Binns and I was really glad to 40 hear about the park; but then coming here tonight and hearing that you 41 are going to do a lot of developing and then after the development we 42 are going to put the roads in. 43 Well, the traffic between Rinconada now and where Stonegate 44 is cars go through there at 50-60-miles-an-hour and you can hear them 45 losing control, get lost off in the desert. I personally help people get 46 out of there real close that were stuck in the desert...and to have a 42 1 park on there and think about the road construction following any kind 2 of construction, you know, what does that look like along of that road 3 with children or anyone else at that's down there at the park? So, you 4 know, it's already vacated and said that it was going to happen. I think 5 we need to start focusing on that a little bit and just making sure that 6 that park area is going to be a safe place for families and kids. Thank 7 you. 8 9 Scholz: Thank you. Someone else? Yes, ma'am. 10 11 Reynolds: Good evening, Commissioners. My name is Carol Reynolds. I live at 12 2048 Pine Needle Way and I'm concerned about the situation that has 13 occurred in the city already where I don't feel we've had adequate 14 planning for the development that's occurred. We're talking here about 15 3,000 to 4,000 units, I understand? This plan talks about in the case 16 Z2814 you're actually converting about 80% of 120 acres from Rural 17 Agriculture to Commercial, Low-Intensity or R-4 Multi-Dwelling. 18 There're tremendous changes in the zoning that are being considered 19 here without adequate consideration in advance of this of roads, 20 sewer, drainage and we have been the victims of this kind of 21 piecemeal planning in the past. It took an Obama fund for us to get 22 proper road on Del Rey so that we would not be flooded. What is 23 being talked about here is what we hoped wouldn't be happening in the 24 future where a section of property is scraped, partially developed and 25 then there's a piece of road and then, maybe, there'll be another piece 26 of road. What I think we would like to see is a comprehensive analysis 27 of what all of this would mean for the traffic, how this is actually going 28 to be, in a systematic way, developed to manage the traffic, the 29 drainage, the sewer issues. These are very serious concerns. 30 1 came from a city called Denver which, when I first moved 31 there, was a town that was going through some of these vast changes 32 and we had a motto: Imagine a great city. And I think we need a 33 motto for Las Cruces: Imagine a terrific town; because we have got to 34 be more thoughtful about how we develop and plan the city and this 35 presentation (inaudible- away from microphone) confirms our the worst 36 fears in this regard because there is a presentation that is presented 37 up here and then there are comments, "Well, we'll probably do this; 38 we'll probably do that." We want to know what is going to happen to 39 our neighborhoods. Thank you. 40 41 Scholz: Thank you. Okay, anyone else from the public wish to speak to this? 42 Yes, sir. Go ahead. 43 44 Gordonairre: Good evening. My name is Richard R. Gordonairre. I live up at the 45 end here of Settlers Pass. I think listening to all the people back here 43 1 and the comments made I think that more study has to be done before 2 a decision is made tonight. 3 4 Scholz: Okay. That's all you have to say? 5 6 Gordonairre: Well, like I say; I was here last month, the meeting was cancelled. I'm 7 here again so I think before you take a vote... 8 9 Scholz: Okay, thank you very much. 10 11 Gordonairre: Thank you. 12 13 Scholz: All right, I am going to close it to public input and we'll discuss among 14 our selves here. Commissioner Beard? 15 16 Beard: It seems that erosion and the high-density increase of population are 17 the two main factors that are being voiced tonight and I wonder why 18 the arroyo, which is now A-2, wasn't zoned something differently by the 19 City when this was all plotted out and now that we do want to change 20 it. At the very minimum I would like to see a Flood Control Map. 21 FEMA made some changes about a year ago and I would really like to 22 see that map of what is a flood control and what isn't. That A-2, what 23 is A-2 right now, seems to be the heart of most of the problems here 24 tonight. First, it's the erosion and then secondly there's a high-density 25 residential proposed development and that area, to me, is really quite a 26 concern: why we really want to change that from A-2. Without, 1 27 guess, further investigation I would be opposed to changing A-2. 28 29 Scholz: Okay... 30 31 Beard: Well, I'm looking at A-2 also. 32 33 (inaudible voices from the audience) 34 35 Scholz: You're talking about Tract N on the zoning map...the south side of the 36 central arroyo. 37 38 Beard: What's on the monitor right now is in green. 39 40 Revels: Commissioner Beard, the triangular-shaped portion here is A-1 and the 41 larger portion here is all A-2. 42 43 Beard: A-2? Well, I definitely have a problem with A-1; but A-2 seems to be a 44 problem, too. 45 46 Scholz: All right, some additional discussion. Commissioner Crane. 44 1 2 Crane: Three points: the people who've spoken and also written to the City 3 about this, as I mentioned before, seem mostly concerned about the 4 flood situation and the building out of the major highways around this 5 development. I see the flood problems but I can't believe Mr. Binns 6 would be so foolish as to build anything and try to sell it if the 7 infrastructure and, in fact, the whole topography of the lots wasn't 8 adjusted in some such way as to avoid the possibility of flooding. It 9 just wouldn't be a sensible thing for him to do and he seems to be a 10 sensible man, though I've never met him personally. Surely the City 11 can require structures to be built in flood zones in such a way that they 12 will not be washed out. 13 Regarding the road access, surely the City can require that the 14 roads be built, that Roadrunner be completed and there's two sections 15 to cover the space between the A-1 and the A-2 zoning and Settlers 16 Pass can be run across before there's further development. 17 Finally, I'm very puzzled by the fact that this proposed 18 development which, I'll take a guess, is about a mile square, more 19 really about a half-mile square, is surrounded by other developments. 20 At least 50% of the land around there seems to be developed as 21 housing or commercial. Yet virtually everybody who spoke leaves me 22 with the impression that they don't want to see this half-mile square 23 developed at all. The concerns haven't been confined to flooding 24 concerns and highway access concerns. The people seem to want Mr. 25 Binns to basically give up the right to develop the land that he bought. 26 1 am not sure we can ask him to do that. Thank you. 27 28 Stowe: All right. Commissioner Evans. 29 30 Evans: Yes, Chairman Scholz. So I think that there may be some 31 misunderstanding and I'm not actually clear on this also so maybe staff 32 or the developer could help me understand this and could help the 33 folks out there in the audience understand it also. But there's an official 34 copy of the flood plain and that flood plain, to me, restricts you from 35 building in that flood plain. I know we've talked a lot about this but 36 there's a process that Mr. Binns is going to have to comply to, and 37 those aren't just his standards and what he would like to do but those 38 are...I'm sure there're City and State, you know, regulations that are 39 going to force him into compliance. I don't think we've really talked 40 about that process and that there is a process that Mr. Binns is going 41 to have to comply to in the development of that piece of property. 42 43 Revels: There is what is called a CLOMR and a LOMR process through FEMA. 44 45 Evans: Right. 46 45 I Revels: It's a Conditional Letter of Map Revision and a Letter of Map Revision 2 and those documents would perhaps be required when he goes to 3 develop it. That is determined by the Public Works Department. The 4 items that they're really talking about like the Drainage Report and the 5 TIA, those are documents that are required when you are in the 6 development stage, when you are trying to subdivide the piece of 7 property actually into development. What we are doing today is we are 8 asking to put zoning in place for a proposed plan to develop in the 9 future. 10 11 Evans: Okay. So I caught that. I don't know if everybody else caught that. So 12 we're gonna...what they're asking us to do is rezone it and then, given 13 that zoning, go back during the planning portion of it, do the analysis 14 and comply with the other regulatory requirements for building in that 15 area. 16 17 Revels: That's correct. When an application is submitted for a preliminary plat 18 process Public Works is going to require a Drainage Report, Traffic's 19 going to require a TIA, there're going to be certain documents that are 20 going to be required through that process and staff will review it. It will 21 have to come back to Planning and Zoning for approval. 22 23 Evans: Right. Okay. One other issue: so looking at this map and I see a 24 large development, obviously, there's some R-4 and a mishmash, but 25 at the end of the day to gain access to those areas there has to be at 26 least...I'm not sure...we'll have to see what the plan comes out to and 27 what the traffic engineers say once those parcels are proposed to be 28 developed. But Roadrunner...some portion needs to be...I mean, 29 there's not any roads there. There's not any infrastructure there, 1 30 mean, to say that there's any way that they're going to be able to 31 develop this in the near future...I mean, it's just not going to happen 32 unless there is some substantial improvement in the infrastructure so 1 33 don't believe that Mr. Binns is going to be able to develop this portion 34 which is the further south of this parcel just because there're no roads 35 or anything going to it. 36 To get approval to do that it would have to come before this 37 Committee again on two additional times to get approval for that and in 38 which in the process there would be notifications and you all could 39 come back and restate your positions. So anyway, I just wanted to 40 clarify that to make sure that we all...just because we approve the 41 zoning change and we approve the master plan doesn't mean that the 42 development's going to happen tomorrow because there's a long 43 process associated with the planning. 44 45 Scholz: All right. Commissioner Stowe, do you have a comment? 46 46 1 Stowe: No. 2 3 Scholz: I wanted to make comment on that in terms of the planning of the city. 4 Several people mentioned this that we have had some problems in the 5 past. One of the things that the Community Development people have 6 tried to do was encourage development within the boundaries of the 7 city instead of having land annexed outside the city and further 8 extending the city limits and I think you mentioned, Mr. Evans, that this 9 is an area that is surrounded by development. Is that right? 10 11 Evans: That was Commissioner Crane. 12 13 Scholz: I'm sorry. Commissioner Crane, you mentioned that. Yeah, that's 14 true. So I would think of this as...well, I wouldn't call this Infill, but 15 that's essentially what we're doing. We are talking about rezoning an 16 area that is within the city that already is surrounded by residential and, 17 in some cases, a small amount of commercial development and I think 18 that makes more sense than, you know, people building or people 19 suggesting that we build outside the city limits and then asking for 20 annexing. Anyway, that's my opinion on this. All right, is there any 21 additional discussion? Commissioner Beard, you're raring to go here. 22 23 Beard: Well, I'm not necessarily wanting to develop every piece of acre in the 24 city limits. I think there should be some wild acreage and maybe this is 25 one of them where we just leave it the way it is, at least the Agricultural 26 A-1...and I just think it's like having a park down in New York City. 27 They're not going to build there. This is a place where people can go 28 within the city. I'm not saying that all of it would have to stay A-1 but 29 right now, based on the data that I have...A-2, I think it is. Excuse me. 30 31 Scholz: A-2, yes. 32 33 Beard: That A-2 may just stay A-2 until we see some further flood maps that 34 we can make a better decision or maybe another design layout for how 35 the housing is done. Now I do notice that as you go to the east, that 36 arroyo...I mean, it came from the east...it's going the other direction 37 and it's fairly narrow after you get out of this area here as you go east 38 so they have somehow taken care of that problem. Maybe they are 39 not taking care of the problem but at they have built up to the arroyo. 40 Yeah, it's F-C and A-1 in the blue area and maybe that's all the area 41 that you need. I don't know. But having some undeveloped areas in 42 the city is not a bad thing. 43 44 Scholz: Um-hmm. Okay, thank you. All right, any additional discussion, 45 gentlemen? 46 47 1 Evans: I have one other question. You know, we talked about converting the 2 7.168 acres that butted up against the existing R-1 and I guess there is 3 a parcel there that's R-4; but there was a discussion of assuring that it 4 doesn't go to R-4 but to R-2. Has that change already been made in 5 our package in the way... 6 7 Scholz: Mr. Ochoa is shaking his head there. Would you restate the question 8 for Ms. Revels, please? 9 10 Evans: Is the R-4 to R-1 already stated in the package in the way we would be 11 voting tonight or does that need to be a condition? 12 13 Revels: Are you talking about the A-1 here? 14 15 Evans: Yes. Yes, I am. 16 17 (several people speaking— cannot transcribe) 18 19 Scholz: And our zoning map and so (inaudible) 20 21 Revels: The A-1 to R-2 that Mr. Binns proposed? 22 23 Evans: Yes. 24 25 Revels: No, it's not in our packet. We would have to add that as a condition. 26 27 Evans: And there was some discussion of a meeting that took place where we 28 were going to add another condition of one-story height limit. Was that 29 discussed and agreed upon in the.... 30 31 Revels: I will defer to Mr. Binns because I was not at that neighborhood 32 meeting. 33 34 Binns: My name's Eddie Binns and there was discussion at the neighborhood 35 meeting of trying to hold that in height to some given number, i.e. a 36 single-story, but you can have single-stories with some high ceilings 37 which are just as high as a two-story. So I didn't want to leave 38 someone to say, "Hey, we're going to have a single story but they're 39 going to be as high as two-stories." So that I was very careful in trying 40 to say, "Fix a height in there of 10-foot, 12-foot, 20-feet, or whatever." 1 41 am flexible on that tract from day one and since you asked me to stand 42 up I put that tract back on the map and once you look at this map you 43 can see that this tract is totally out of the flood plain; elevation—wise, 44 drainage-wise and everything else. It is not in the flood plain. But in 45 order to appease the neighbors to the fourth side I told them that I 46 would consider and agree to a single-story on that with an R-2 zoning 48 1 which would let me do something similar to what I did in the Pines 2 Subdivision. 3 4 Scholz: Okay, and we can make that a condition. 5 6 Evans: So that needs to be a condition and so I agree with you. If we limit it to 7 a single-story that opens the door for 40-foot ceilings so do you have a 8 maximum height limitation that you're proposing. 9 10 Binns: I haven't given one under consideration. You can reach up in the air 11 and say, "20-feet." It's an arbitrary number. 12 13 Evans: Well, I mean, if we're going to make a condition we need to stipulate 14 that and so I would advocate to add an additional recommendation or 15 condition of a single-story height limit to include a 20-foot maximum 16 building height and a conversion from R-4 to R-2. 17 18 Scholz: Okay, and you want to make that a condition? Okay, so you are 19 amending the conditions. 20 21 Evans: Yes. 22 23 Scholz: Okay, can I have Legal's opinion on this? How do we handle it? 24 25 Binns: You asked me to come up there...can I add one more comment, 26 gentlemen? 27 28 Scholz: Sure. 29 30 Binns: In your packet there is a map I don't know whether you have seen but 31 this plat shows... 32 33 Scholz: Yes, we have that. 34 35 Binns: ...the flood plain over the area you are concerned with. This is an 36 overlay of the FEMA map showing the 100-year, 500-year flood plain 37 and so it is identified on the documents that we furnished you so that it 38 is very obvious where the flood plain is relative to the various pieces 39 we're having zoned. 40 41 Scholz: Okay. Thank you. 42 43 Abrams: Jared Abrams, City Legal. I just think it's cleaner to make a motion to 44 modify the main motion first but since Mr. Binns has indicated that he 45 obviously doesn't object then it's probably, strictly speaking, not 46 necessary. 49 1 2 Scholz: Okay, so we can simply add it as a condition. 3 4 Abrams: (inaudible) 5 6 Scholz: Okay, thanks. 7 8 Crane: Which zoning tract is that? 9 10 Scholz: The zoning tract is Tract R. 11 12 Revels: It's zoning Tract R, Planning Parcel Piece 16 and instead of rezoning 13 from A-1 to R-4 we are going to be rezoning from A-1 to R-2; and R-2 14 is Multi-Family Low-Density allowing fifteen dwelling units per acre and 15 we're conditioning that to a single-story product with a maximum height 16 of 20-feet. 17 18 Scholz: Yes. 19 20 Revels: Also, I need to know if you're going to add the condition: are we going 21 to decide final action on the master plan or are we going to decide that 22 they need to go forward to City Council with the zone change? 23 24 Scholz: Well, that's up to the Commissioners. Commissioners, what do you 25 think? If we pass this we can approve the master plan and then all 26 City Council would have to do would be approve the zone change or 27 deny the zone change. We can't do that on the zone change. We can 28 only do that on the master plan; that's within our parameters. Or we 29 can send the whole package with the master plan and the zone 30 change to City Council and have them decide, make the final decision. 31 We've done it both ways different times. 32 33 Crane: It seems (inaudible- several people speaking) to package them. Isn't 34 that what we've done most of the time before? 35 36 Scholz: I'm sorry sir, I didn't hear you. 37 38 Crane: We generally have sent them up together, suspended the rules and... 39 40 Scholz: I think we did in the most recent instance, yes. 41 42 Crane: So I suggest we do that. 43 44 Scholz: All right. Is that agreeable with the rest of the Commissioners? Any 45 problems with that? No, everyone is nodding their head. So, yes, as a 50 1 final condition we will send the master plan to City Council for approval 2 along with the zone changes, if in fact, we approve it tonight. 3 4 Revels: Chairman Scholz, just go ahead and add that as one of the conditions 5 for the approval of the master plan and zone change request and also, 6 before you guys make a motion we go ahead and suspend the rules so 7 that you can vote on these items separately. 8 9 Scholz: Yes. I was intending to do that. Okay, I'll entertain a motion to 10 suspend the rules. 11 12 Crane: So moved. 13 14 Scholz: Is there a second? 15 16 Stowe: Second. 17 18 Scholz: That was Crane moved and Stowe seconded. All those in favor of us 19 suspending the rules say aye. 20 21 All: Aye. 22 23 Scholz: Those opposed same sign. All right, the rules are suspended. Now we 24 can vote on these separately. I'll entertain a motion to approve case 25 S-09-053? 26 27 Crane: So moved. 28 29 Scholz: Okay, Crane moves. Is there a second? 30 31 Evans: I second. 32 33 Scholz: And Evans seconds. 34 35 Weir: Mr. Chairman, could I ask a point of order? 36 37 Scholz: Yes. 38 39 Weir: David Weir, Community Development Department. If you are going to 40 bring those cases forward to City Council together I would recommend 41 that you make that as a recommendation on the master plan, whether 42 you are recommending approval or denial. The way you have the 43 motion stated right now is you would be approving the master plan and 44 the master plan would be approved tonight if you had the four votes 45 and then the zone change would just go to Council. So I think you 46 need to change your motion to recommend approval of the master plan 51 I and have it decided by City Council if you want both these cases 2 handled that direction. 3 4 Scholz: Thank you, sir. All right, let's re-do that. Commissioner Crane. 5 6 Crane: I will withdraw my original motion and reword it that ... 7 8 Scholz: Move to recommend... 9 10 Crane: ...that we recommend to the City Council approval of case S-09-053, 11 the master plan for Rancho Del Rey. 12 13 Scholz: Okay, is there a second for that? 14 15 Evans: I second. 16 17 Scholz: So again Crane moved and Evans seconded that we recommend this 18 to City Council for approval. All right, I'll call the role. Commissioner 19 Crane. 20 21 Crane: Aye findings and discussion. 22 23 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 24 25 Stowe: Aye findings, discussion and site visit. 26 27 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 28 29 Evans: Aye findings, discussion. 30 31 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 32 33 Beard: Aye findings and discussions. 34 35 Scholz: And the Chair votes aye findings, discussion and site visit. The second 36 item then is case Z2814... 37 38 Revels: Commissioner Scholz, could I interrupt a second? I just wanted to 39 clarify that we are recommending approval with the six conditions that 1 40 read into the record earlier plus the additional condition for the Tract R. 41 42 Scholz: Yes. 43 44 Revels: Okay. 45 52 1 Scholz: Yes, that was understood. All right, for the zone changes...I'll entertain 2 a motion to approve. 3 4 Beard: So moved. 5 6 Scholz: All right, Beard moves. Is there a second? 7 8 Evans: Just for clarification do we need to add the R-4 to R-1 with the height 9 limitations? 10 11 Revels: R-4 to R-2. 12 13 Evans: R-4 to R-2 with ... 14 15 Revels: Well, it's actually A-1 to R-2 because we were proposing A-1 to R-4. 16 17 Evans: That's true. So, can we just say I seconded with... 18 19 Revels: An additional condition... 20 21 Evans: ...the conditions as stated from A-1 to R-2 ... 22 23 (several people speaking) 24 25 Revels: Yeah, identifying Tract R, Planning Parcel P16 from A-1 to R-2 with the 26 height limitation of 20-feet and single-story product. 27 28 Evans: ...20-feet...single-story... 29 30 Scholz: Mr. Weir, is there a problem there? 31 32 Weir: I believe the original "motioner" needs to amend the motion and then it 33 be seconded. 34 35 Scholz: Okay, Commissioner Beard, would you amend the motion? 36 37 Beard: So moved? (all laughing) 38 39 Scholz: No. 40 41 Evans: Chairman Scholz, I move that we approve Z2814 with the following 42 conditions that it be the zoning for Parcel A-1 go from A-1 zoning to R- 43 2... 44 45 Scholz: R-4 zoning to R-2. 46 53 1 Revels: For zoning Tract R. 2 3 Evans: For zoning Tract R with a maximum building height of 20-foot and 4 single-story. 5 6 Revels: And along with the six conditions that I read into the record. 7 8 Scholz: Yes, along with the six conditions... 9 10 Evans: Along with the six conditions, right. 11 12 Scholz: ...that have been previously read into the record. All right, is there a 13 second for that? 14 15 Beard: Second. 16 17 Scholz: That you, Commissioner Beard. All right, I'll call the role. 18 Commissioner Crane. 19 20 Crane: Aye findings and discussion. 21 22 Scholz: Commissioner Stowe. 23 24 Stowe: Aye findings, discussion and site visit. 25 26 Scholz: Commissioner Evans. 27 28 Evans: Aye findings and discussion. 29 30 Scholz: Commissioner Beard. 31 32 Beard: Aye findings and discussions. 33 34 Scholz: And I vote aye findings, discussion and site visit. All right. So that's 35 sent to City Council with our recommendation for approval. 36 37 VII. OTHER BUSINESS 38 39 Scholz: Our last piece of business is other business. Do we have any other 40 business? Mr. Ochoa. 41 42 Ochoa: No, Mr. Chair, nothing tonight. 43 44 Scholz: We are going to have a Special Meeting of Planning and Zoning on the 45 8th of September. Is that correct? 46 54 1 Ochoa: That is correct, sir. Just as a reminder: Special Planning and Zoning 2 Meeting will be September 8th at the regular time, 6:00 pm, as we 3 typically have our Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. But 4 that'll be Thursday, September 8th 5 6 Scholz: Okay, and that was to give us time to handle the antenna situation? 7 8 Ochoa: Yes, sir, to revisit the previous two Special Use Permit and zone 9 change for the communications structure and the two items that were 10 postponed. 11 12 Scholz: The two items that were postponed from today. Okay, fine. 13 14 VIII. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 15 16 Scholz: And then we have any other public participation? No, I see public is 17 leaving. 18 IX. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS 19 20 Scholz: Staff announcements? 21 22 Ochoa: Nothing else at all, sir. 23 24 X. ADJOURNMENT (8:50 pm) 25 26 Scholz: Okay, I think we're adjourned. It is about 8:45. Thank you very much 27 everyone. 28 29 30 Chairman Date 55