0 0 0 0 REGULAR MEETING OF THE EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES DONA ANA COUNTY GOVERNMENT OFFICES SEPTEMBER, 0 :00 p.m. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: John Villescas, Chairman Robert Hearn, Member Kenneth Allin, Vice Chairman John S. Townsend, Member Janet Acosta, Secretary (arrived :0) Carlos Coontz, Member BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Tim Sanders, Member STAFF PRESENT: Adam Ochoa, Planner, CLC Robert Cabello, CLC Legal Staff Becky Baum, RC Creations, LLC, Recording Secretary I. CALL TO ORDER (: p.m.) Okay. Without further ado I'll call tonight's ETZC meeting to order. Tonight is September rd, 0. Time is approximately : p.m. Commission Members shall not privately discuss with any interested persons the merit of any case which is pending before this Commission. If there has, if there's been any such discussion, it should be disclosed at this time. Because this Commission acts in a quasijudicial capacity, this hearing tonight follows the procedures mandated by the New Mexico Court of Appeals. Anyone wishing to give testimony on a case must be recognized by the Chair, go to the podium, state his or her name, address, and be sworn in. An applicant s presentation may be limited to four minutes. Neighborhood representatives or representatives of other groups may be limited to three minutes each. A neighborhood spokesperson may be limited to ten minutes. You may speak more than once on a case, but the Chair reserves the right to further limit the time allocated to speak. This meeting will be conducted by a modified form of Robert s Rules of Order. It takes four affirmative votes for passage of a case. Please note that a Commissioner may vote yes on an amendment to a motion, to a main motion, yet vote no on the main motion. Any affected party may appeal the decision made by the Commission to the ETA. Commissioner Hearn would you call roll please?
0 0 0 0 Commissioner Coontz. Coontz: Here. Commissioner Acosta is absent yet. Commissioner Townsend. Townsend: Here. Commissioner Allin. Allin: Here. Commissioner Sanders is absent. Commissioner Hearn is here and Chairman Villescas. I'm here. II. ANNOUNCEMENTS Item number two, announcements. I have one. Commissioner Sanders sent an e-mail to Adam and I. He will be absent tonight. Commissioner Acosta contacted me about :00. She had an unexpected business conflict at :00. She expects to be here and hopefully prior to :0 so if she arrives we'll bring her into the roll for the minutes and then she'll of course take her place and join in the discussion but hopefully it won't be too far into the presentation and she can participate and of course vote on the case. We'll, we'll play that depending on, on what time she arrives. That's all the announcements I have. Anyone else from the Commission? Adam any announcements from staff? No sir. None tonight. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August, 0 Okay then item number three, approval of the minutes. Do I have a motion from the Commission? I so move that the minutes be approved as submitted. Coontz: Second. We have a motion and a second to the approval of the minutes of August th, 0. Any discussion? If there's no discussion, Mr. Hearn would you poll the Commission? And I remind the Commission members you do not have to have been present to vote on the approval of the minutes.
0 0 0 0 Commissioner Coontz. Coontz: Aye. Commissioner Townsend. Townsend: Aye. Commissioner Allin. Allin: Aye. Commissioner Hearn votes aye. Chairman Villescas. I vote aye. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. That is the approval of the minutes. IV. POSTPONEMENTS Item number four on the agenda is postponements. There's none from the Chairman. Any from the Commission? If not, Adam do you have any from staff? No sir. None tonight. That's item number five. Then item, I mean item number four. V. OLD BUSINESS. Case ETZS--00: Vista Rancho Sketch Plan A request for approval of a sketch plan known as Vista Rancho proposing a cluster development of approximately residential lots on three () existing tracts totaling.+/- acres and zoned ER and ER; Parcel ID# 0-00, 0-00, and 0-0. The subject property is located generally west of Elks Road, east of El Camino Real Road, with a portion directly west of Vista Middle School. Submitted by Taylor Road Development, LLC, property owner.. Case ETZS--00W: Vista Rancho Sketch Plan Request A request for approval of a waiver to the required right-of-way dedication and improvements associated with a sketch plan known as Vista Rancho. The applicant is seeking a waive the required right-of-way dedication and
0 0 0 0 improvements to Taylor Road, a Minor Arterial roadway as classified by the Mesilla Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and Lopez Road, a Collector roadway as classified by the MPO. The subject property encompasses. +/- acres, is zoned ER and ER and is located west of Elks Road, east of El Camino Real Road, and with a portion directly west of Vista Middle School. Submitted by Taylor Road Development, LLC, property owner. Item number five, we're going to old business. The first one would be item number one, case ETZS--00: Vista Rancho Sketch Plan. Adam. Do we need to swear him in? Oh yes you do. Excuse me. Commissioner Hearn thank you. Name and address please. Adam Ochoa, Planner, City of Las Cruces, 00 North Main Street. Do you swear that the information you will present is the truth and the whole truth under penalty of law? I do. Thank you. Thank you. Gentlemen, before we start tonight I would like the Chair, Mr. Chairman I would like to see if we could get a, a motion to suspend the rules to allow the hearing of the two cases together as one and then after we hear them and potentially discuss them we could un-suspend the rules if you will or put them back into order, in order to vote on each case separately which is ETZS--00 and ETZS--00W. Okay. Adam you're, you're telling us that these two cases are, are basically joined at the hip. Yes sir. Okay. So you would like for us to suspend the rules, present these two together. After the presentation we'll bring the rules back in and vote on them separately. Is that correct? That is correct sir. Does the person bringing the, or the party bringing this before us have any objection to that?
0 0 0 0 Townsend: No sir. Okay. Therefore can I have a motion from someone on the Commission to that effect? I so move. We have a motion before us to suspend the rules so that we can hear Case ETZS--00 and Case ETZS--00W together and then bring the rules back into effect after the presentation so we can vote on them separately. Do we have a second? Second. Is there any discussion? Mr. Chairman. Yes sir. I wonder if we might ask Mr. Ochoa to just tell us briefly why this is a good idea. Mr. Ochoa. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hearn. Reason this is a good idea is essentially the, both cases are linked together if you will, one being the subdivision, the other one being a waiver request associated with the subdivision itself. It, it's just for presentation right now and possibly and for discussion at the same time. Then eventually we could go ahead and put the, reinstate the rules and then vote on them separately as two separate cases sir. It's so you just don't have to repeat all the lead-in and all the stuff that goes with for each case. Essentially, yes sir. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. So if we, if we kept them separate basically you'd be redundant. Essentially, yes sir. And I would basically have to do my presentation twice cause I actually put, put, put the presentation all into one presentation sir.
0 0 0 0 Okay. Any other questions or discussion from the Commission? If there's no further discussion, Commissioner Hearn would you poll the Commission. Commissioner Coontz. Coontz: Aye. Commissioner Townsend. Townsend: Aye. Commissioner Allin. Allin: Aye. Commissioner Hearn votes aye. Chairman Villescas. I vote aye. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. So Mr. Ochoa. We'll listen to the both cases together and then we'll bring the rules back into the effect. I assume, and somebody bring me into legal grounds here that we will not need a motion to reinstate the rules at the end of discussion. Is that correct? Mr. Chairman. We'll need a, a vote on that, a motion, motion and a second and then a vote on it to reinstate the rules. Okay. Then we'll take care of that after discussion. All right. Mr. Ochoa please go ahead. Thank you very much sir. Adam Ochoa, Planner with the City of Las Cruces for the record one more time. The two cases we're reviewing tonight gentlemen is Case ETZS--00 and ETZS--00W. It is a request for approval of a sketch plan known as Vista Rancho and an associated waiver request to road improvements to two thoroughfares located, basically going through the proposed subdivision which Taylor Road and Lopez Road. Shown here on the vicinity map you can see here kind of, it's hash marked if you will, a very large piece of property located southeast of Interstate, or east of Interstate and Elks Road here, directly, I'm sorry west. My apologies. And east of, this is Dona Ana Road here, El Camino Real, excuse me sir. The subject property encompasses approximately
0 0 0 0 acres in size and is currently made up of three large vacant/undeveloped tracts. All three tracts are zoned ER and ER, ER, the majority of it being zoned ER and just a small portion to the south being zoned ER. The portions of the road we're looking at that are accompanying this proposed sketch plan, there is a portion of Taylor Road which is designated minor arterial roadway, currently exists as 0 feet of right-ofway going through the subdivision and it's a, currently a -foot-wide paved roadway. As for Lopez Road, it's a collect, designated collector roadway by the Mesilla Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization. There's no existing right-of-way or improvements existing in the properties for Lopez Road. Seen here, the aerial map of that area as you can see just a large land of vacant property. Taylor Road being located to the north of there kind of winding down and Lopez Road essentially would be doing the same thing kind of snaking down to the, to El Camino Real as well. Here are some photos from Taylor Road showing that -foot-wide roadway. The one in the top left corner is looking up towards where the proposed subdivision is and the one on the bottom right corner is looking towards El Camino Real on the south end of that proposed subdivision. The proposed sketch plan is proposing roughly single-family residential lots and a park. This development's to be developed in five separate phases. The majority of this proposed sketch planned area is proposed to have sewer and a, a, a small portion of it located to the north of the proposed sketch plan area is to have a, a, septic systems. This sketch plan is being proposed by the applicant as a cluster subdivision. The applicant is essentially proposing lots to vary in size throughout the development with smaller lots located in the center of the, of the actual subdivision area and larger lots located around the outer areas of the subdivision. This is essentially to allow for greater density in the center of the subdivision where the smaller lots are proposed. It's essentially kind of sharing the density throughout the subdivision, the larger lots around the outside and smaller ones in the center. Showing here the sketch plan, those smaller lots being proposed as I stated near the center here, with the larger lots being located to the north and around the, the proposed area where those clustered lots would be. Here's a look at what that sketch plan looks like with the five different phases, Phase being to the north and it kind of just clock, goes clockwise around it to the last phase there. When staff received the sketch plan and it was being proposed as a cluster subdivision staff looked at Section. of the ETZ Subdivision Ordinance which essentially gives all guidelines for cluster subdivisions. Essentially it states a cluster subdivision is a clustering, it allow, its clustering will allow, will permit the size of residential lots to be reduced below the minimum lot size required by the zoning district within which the property is located provided that the average dwelling density of the entire subdivision does not exceed the density permitted by the applicable
0 0 0 0 zoning classification. Reading this and being that City staff and County staff are the essentially caretakers/interpreters of the Code, staff feels that the, the Vista Rancho Sketch Plan as proposed does not meet the parameters of a, of a cluster subdivision. The proposal to develop larger lots in different areas of the subdivision and allow greater density where lots are to be downsized does not follow the requirements for a cluster subdivision. Nowhere in Section. of the ETZ Subdivision Ordinance does it state that a cluster, cluster subdivision can be developed with different lot sizes throughout and allowing the sharing of densities throughout that subdivision. Cluster subdivisions are only for the development of smaller lots than what is permitted by the existing applicable zoning designation in order to preserve adjacent either agricultural areas or natural areas or open space essentially. Staff, stating that staff still believes the proposed design and density, diverse density that the applicant is proposing is good. We do actually like the proposed design of the subdivision but staff feels that there are actually other avenues that the applicant can take in order to achieve what he's trying to do with this proposed subdivision, whether a zone change or a variance for something would achieve, would allow them to essentially allow smaller lots in the center and then still follow regular ER zoning all over the place. This is not a proposed zone change at this time. This is just a sketch plan, essentially a master plan for the subdivision area but a cluster subdivision is not appropriate, an appropriate avenue for what the applicant has intended for the subdivision. Next issue coming up is the waiver request. The ETZ Subdivision Ordinance requires all subdivisions to provide all necessary right-of-way dedication and improvements that are required by the Code. Section.C and.d states that 00% of the required necessary additional right-ofway dedication and improvements of all arterial right-of-way designated by the Mesilla Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization is required to be provided by the subdivider. Following that, Taylor Road is a proposed minor arterial roadway by the, the MPO which requires 00 feet of right-ofway dedication and 00, 00-foot roadway essentially which, improvements which follow City of Las Cruces Design Standards. What the applicant is proposing at this time is to keep the existing 0 feet of right-of-way for Taylor Road and to provide a -foot-wide roadway. This road will, will include two -foot-wide I guess driving lanes, a center - foot-wide turning lane, and two.-foot-wide bike/walking lanes on either side of the road and with that also storm water drainage for the roadway is proposed to be handled with roadside swells just kind of as it is now. The other road, roadway we're looking at for the waiver request is Lopez Road which as I stated before currently nothing exists on the subject property for Lopez Road. This area's, Lopez Road is proposed to be a collector roadway in this area which requires an -foot-wide dedicated right-of-way as well as improvements to that right-of-way of feet which follow City Design Standards. The applicant is essentially
0 0 0 0 proposing the same thing for Lopez Road as they are for Taylor Road which is the 0 feet of right-of-way dedication and a -foot-wide roadway with the same width of driving lanes, turning lanes, and a.-foot-wide pedestrian and bicycle lanes on the side, and with a, as well with the firm drainage being taken care of with the swells on the side of the road. To give you a better idea of that waiver request, these are the two roads that go through the proposed sketch plan area, the green being Taylor Road. Like I said it before it's required to be 00 feet of right-of-way, dedicated and improved and Lopez Road required to be feet of right-of-way, dedicated and improved through the subdivision. Here are some examples of what those roadways should look like if they follow City standards and MPO Thoroughfare Plan requirements. Here you can see this is actually the notification map for this meeting. These were all the people we did, surrounding people required to obtain public notice for this proposed sketch plan and waiver request just to let you know who we sent it out to. The Extraterritorial, Extra-Territorial Zoning Design Review Committee or EDRC met on June th, 0. At that meeting we did review the proposed sketch plan and waiver request. During the meeting there was discussion on the proposed cluster subdivision and really there was just a difference of opinion as to what staff believes a cluster subdivision is and what the applicant believes a cluster subdivision is. There was also a discussion at the meeting about the actual need to provide the required right-of-way dedication and improvements for Taylor Road and Lopez Road. After other minor discussion the EDRC voted to recommend denial for both the proposed sketch plan and waiver request. With that, with staff recommendation for the sketch plan, I don't know if you saw in your staff report or not, there's still some outstanding departments that still have to, have issues with the proposed sketch plan, one being the City of Las Cruces Utilities Department basically just stating that they require an application for sewer service that needs to be, from the applicant that needs to be approved through the City of Las Cruces Utilities Board and the City of Las Cruces City Council before they can approve the sketch plan. And of course Community Development staff as well as Dona Ana County staff disagree with utilizing the cluster subdivision process for this sketch plan. Based on the ETZ Subdivision Ordinance and an unfavorable recommendation from EDRC, staff recommends denial for the proposed sketch plan based on the findings found in your staff report. As for the waiver request, the way staff looks at waiver requests is under Section. of the ETZ Subdivision Ordinance where it states "where strict compliance with the ETZ Subdivision Ordinance would result in a substantial hardship because of exceptional topographic, soil, or other surface or subsurface conditions the ETZC," or you all "may vary, modify, or waive the requirements." Staff feels that this waiver request does not meet those guidelines of Section. of the ETZ Subdivision Ordinance and based on
0 0 0 0 that and an unfavorable recommendation by the EDRC, staff recommends denial for the waiver request based on the findings again found in your staff report. With that gentlemen your options tonight are for, for the, for Case ETZS--00 sketch plan is: ) to vote "yes" to approve the sketch plan; ) to vote "yes" to approve the sketch plan with conditions, those conditions may be potentially removing the cluster subdivision designation of it and seeking other avenues to seek their greater density or smaller lots in the center of the, of the proposed sketch plan; ) to vote "no" and deny the sketch plan as recommended by staff; or ) to table and postpone and direct staff and the applicant accordingly. Your options for Case ETZS--00W, the waiver request is: ) to vote "yes" and approve the waiver request; ) to vote "yes" and approve the waiver request with conditions deemed appropriate by the Commission; or ) to vote "no" to deny the waiver request as recommended by staff; or ) table and postpone and direct staff accordingly. Also for the waiver request if you look in your staff report near the last page of the actual report itself and not the attachments, staff went ahead and kind of listed the four, it's essentially a, one waiver request but there are four different waivers that are outlined there so if the Commission see, deems it appropriate to separate them and vote them as different, on different issues; the right-of-way requirement, the improvement requirements, difference for Taylor Road or Lopez Road, whatever it is you can go ahead and use that as a guideline for your, for your voting purposes. Other than that, that is, that concludes my presentation. The applicant does have a presentation as well, as well as we do have a presentation from a, the neighbor, a neighborhood association, the North Valley Neighborhood Association to be more exact as well, but I stand for questions if you have any for me. Does anyone on the Commission have any questions for Mr. Ochoa? Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hearn. Go ahead. This is not exactly a question but, but particularly because we have so many people here from the public and, and very glad to have you here, could you briefly outline what would happen beyond this point if we were to vote yes, yes or no, if we were to approve the sketch plan tonight? Is there further opportunities for public involvement in the process with the subdivision or is it a done deal? Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hearn. This is not the last time. Since this, they are, if this gets approved as a cluster subdivision the ETZ Subdivision Ordinance actually requires everything that's required of that subdivision 0
0 0 0 0 to come back to you all. So this sketch plan doesn't necessarily outline what roads are going to look like, what lots are going to look like, how it's going to connect and so on and so forth like that. That's essentially would be taken care of with the next step which is the preliminary plat. During preliminary plat, that'll come before you all as well for review, that's where roadways will be shown, where lots are being proposed and sizes and so on and so forth like that. Not only that but typically with other subdivisions final plats and construction drawings are done administratively in-house but since this is a cluster subdivision, final plat and construction drawings does need to come before you again so there will be more opportunity for public input at that time as well. Thank you. Adam. Conversely, if we deny this sketch plan the applicant can go back to the drawing board, come up with another configuration and come back before this Board. Is that not correct? Mr. Chairman. That is correct. That is definitely an option. There are no timelines, like you have to wait a year or two years after, if you get denied a proposal. They can come back with something proposed, essentially the next day really for something else for that area. But again if a, some type of a compromise can happen tonight where we can approve it conditionally removing that option, you know removing some, some things from the sketch plan and adding some things, that's definitely a, a, something staff would be open to do as well sir. Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Ochoa from the Commission? I, I'd like to go one more just, just to Go ahead Mr. Hearn. (Inaudible) on your question, Mr. Chairman. The recommendation from staff is denial based primarily on the fact that this has been applied for as a cluster subdivision and it doesn't meet the requirements for a cluster subdivision. However, the design of the, of the project as it stands under another name and by another measure might be something that you would recommend be approved. Never mind the variances and that sort of thing. Is, is that correct? Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hearn. That, it's something that staff actually could support and I believe we have people here from the County as well who would support that as well. It's just a different avenue that they'd have to go through in order to get that approved.
0 0 0 0 Okay. What, what I'm really looking for is to make sure that the folks who are here from the public understand as much as we can get across of what this situation is and, and in particular if this doesn't pass this evening and the sketch plan is not approved, the design itself can come right back. So there, there needs to be some, some fundamental decisions made about if, if you all don't like the idea there needs to be some, some homework done to figure out what's wrong with it. That is correct, yes sir. Thank you. All right. Thank you Mr. Ochoa. Any other questions? If not, thank you Mr. Ochoa and we invite the applicant to come forward and make his presentation, his or her presentation. Looks like Mr. Ochoa is trying to get you to your presentation and then PERSON IN THE AUDIENCE SPEAKING, NOT AT THE MICROPHONE. Got it? All right. If you could state your name and address for the record, as soon as we get you set up here and Commissioner Hearn will swear you in. Kent T.: Kent Thurston with Ken Thurston Development. Address is 0 East Lohman. Mr. Thurston would you raise your right hand for us and do you swear that the information you will provide is the truth and the whole truth under penalty of law? Kent T.: Yes. Thank you. Please go ahead Mr. Thurston. Kent T.: Okay. The, the reason why we're here today still with the idea of a cluster subdivision was, was based off of just reading the cluster subdivision definition in your.: Cluster Subdivision where it says "the cluster development regulation presents a strategy for allowing continuance of agricultural lands, conservation of natural landforms, and creating open space areas as the urbanization area grows. Clustering will permit the size of residential lots to be reduced below minimum lot size requirement required by the Zoning District within which the property is located, provided that the average dwelling density of the entire subdivision does not exceed the density permitted by the, the applicable zoning
0 0 0 0 classifications." So in, in there my only thing about when they say that we can't have larger lots on a cluster subdivision where we can't go above the, the required zoning, right now in the ER you can do, one-third acre is the minimum so you can go more than that. We, just reading through here on the cluster subdivision we felt that we were meeting, only if we read the rules strictly we thought we were still meeting the subdivision, or the cluster subdivision points in which we were supposed to; on open space there was no percentage of open space. You know, it doesn't say you have to have 0%, doesn't say you have to have 0% open space so that was kind of our idea of doing a cluster. The reason why we did a cluster is if, if I can scroll down one, is to, is to get a concept like this that you see on the screen. Over there on the, if this hand works you'll notice over here where that's kind of pink, our desire is, is to do three-quarter-acre lots or, or lot, you know about three-quarter acres, maybe some half-acres but right now it's all three-quarters. And then right in here we're wanting to go a little bit of the higher density allowing also the open space to come in here and then also do the third-acres right here and then we got some half-acres over here. The, the reason why we wanted to do this is from going to seminars and other things like that in the developing world, they say the best thing is to have mixed use, mixed densities, mixed housing and so we feel that by, by adding mixed density and a variety of it, it'll actually enhance the neighborhood than just going in with just a plain subdivision, all the same size lots and so forth. And so when we were looking at this the only way for us to go to a smaller size in, in our opinion what we thought without having to do many things was to do a cluster subdivision. We feel that this cluster subdivision allows for, you know the multifamily, not multifamily housing but multi, how do you say it, differences in pricing. So you got the, the lower end or the starter homes right next to the park so the, the first-time homebuyers are able to buy into a, a nice location, have a park there and then you got the medium-size houses that if they, you know they just got, now they got four kids, they want the four-bedroom house, they can still do it in an affordable way, and then we also have the larger homes for those that want a, you know,000 square foot house you could fit on the, the three-quarter acres. So we're, we really like the idea of the, the differences in it. We've talked to the City staff. They didn't like just the name of it being called a cluster subdivision. They do like the, the idea of changing the, I guess the concept right here that you see. They do like this a lot, a lot better than, than the, the next one that I'm going to show you. And this would be according to the zoning today without any variances, without doing a cluster subdivision we would get something similar to this. You'll see the third-acres. It's kind of plain. It's the same throughout. It's one-third acres minimums and we just pretty much packed it in there and tried to get it as, as much density as we could with the third-acres. Now me, I personally, I have two, two children. My wife always says, "Hey I wish there was a park here. I wish I had
0 0 0 0 Coontz: Kent T.: Coontz: Kent T.: Coontz: Kent T.: Coontz: something to do." And so my, I guess my point in life is I'd like to, to go outdoors and, and do things and so we're proposing that we are able to give the, the diversity and add parks and green spaces to, to a community and, and make a sense of community versus just another subdivision. I have two neighbors beside me. I, I don't know the one to the right of me but I know the one to the left only because we owned the lot and we sold it to him, and I've lived there for two years. What I'm trying to do is to create a sense of community. That way if we had a park I believe that we would be able to meet our neighbors better and we'd, instead of just coming home at night and you know locking ourselves in, we'd have a park to be able to go to and, and meet with our neighbors and, and get to know one, one another. And so we believe that this is a better community, not necessarily just a subdivision, we, we feel that it's a good one so kind of what we're having on the table we're, we're open to changing the, the name of it being a cluster subdivision only because the County and also City staff would like us to change the name. They don't agree with it being called a cluster subdivision. That's fine by us but we really would like to, if, if there's a different avenue, a variance that they want us to apply for but we really want to just do a concept like this and we've talked to the, to the neighborhood associations. They're very in support of this and they'll speak maybe, I, maybe I shouldn't speak for them. I feel that they are in support of this one versus, versus the third-acres. So we are trying to do a, a, a little bit better job of, of being a developer, adding amenities and, and making a better neighborhood here in the Dona Ana County. And that's, that's pretty much our presentation. Thank you Mr. Thurston. Does anyone on the Commission have any questions at this time for Mr. Thurston? Please go ahead. Mr. Chair, Mr. Thurston. What is the difference in lots from Concept A to Concept B? Mr. Chairman. The total, the total amount of, of parcels? It's going to be the exact same. The exact same. We're going to have lots in this concept right here that you see, and then you'll have lots in the third-acre concept. So we're not increasing density per se as, as lot, lot numbers but we are changing density as in lot sizes to accomplish a better, in our opinion a better subdivision. Thank you.
0 0 0 0 Kent T.: Kent T.: Kent T.: Kent T.: Kent T.: Mr. Chairman. Yes sir. Thanks. It's been so long since we've had a subdivision come before us I've almost forgotten what they are. Nice, nice to see this happening. Are you not required to put park space aside in the development of a subdivision in the City? In a, in the City right now you can either pay, the way I understand it is you can pay a fee or you could put the park in and By putting this park in do you not have to pay the fee? But this is Dona Ana County so I don't think there is a parks fee in Dona Ana County. Oh. I thought you were building according to City regulations. On the, on that part I'm not, it's according to City regulations but I believe since it's in the County there's not City park fees. You don't have to pay impact fees either? That is the way I understand it. I could be wrong. Okay. Daniel is busting to get out of his chair. No? Okay. I, I, I, I would like to understand that just, if, if this were in the City or being done according to all City rules then I could look it up in my book but there would be a requirement for a certain number of acres to be set aside out of the subdivision for park space and I'm just curious how that compares to what you've I don't think so. Chosen to do here. And, and if it's in the County then and it's not, how would this be maintained? Due to it being in the County and the County does not have a Parks Division to maintain it, we are going to do a HOA to be able to cover for the parks and open space. Okay. Thank you Mr. Chair.
0 0 0 0 Okay. And that's something we can ask Mr. Ochoa about specifically after this presentation but we have talked about that before, impact fees that we wish we could collect for other purposes. But any other questions at this time? If not, thank you sir. We might be calling you back. Adam, you want to address that issue real quick? Yes. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Hearn. No, there is no requirement in the ETZ for parks and so forth like that cause there's no way to, to maintain that in the ET, in the ETZ or in the County. When it comes to City standards, what I spoke about having to be developed to City standards, those are the roads sir, the two roads: Taylor Road and Lopez Road only. Everything else in this area will have to follow ETZ or County standards essentially for development, sir. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. And, and, and Mr. Ochoa can, correct me if I'm wrong but we covered this a couple of meetings ago, we're talking about roadway improvements when a person was trying to sell a, a lot and his home. We don't have the mechanism in the ETZ either for them to pay a fee in lieu of those road improvements either do we? We wish we did but we don't. No sir. There is not. Yeah. And I had one more question. Oh. Not a question. A request. For the good people that, that came out tonight who may not know, could you give us a definition of what a cluster subdivision is? Yes sir. That was actually in my presentation, the Oh. Okay. What I actually stated, that is the actual definition of a cluster subdivision in the County essentially or in the ETZ sir. Okay. But I will, I'll go ahead and dig into my book and give you an exact one as it is defined by the ETZ Code if you'd give me a minute. Mr. Thurston read it. Oh, yeah that's right. To open his presentation. Yeah. I believe
0 0 0 0 That's correct. I believe That's correct. We both read that, yes sir. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's defined. Yeah. I, I'm, I apologize. Okay. One of his points along with it was Yeah. It is very loose. Yeah. It's Exactly. It doesn't tie things down real tight. Any other questions at this time before we open it up to the public? Okay. Thank you Mr. Ochoa. Mr., Mr. Chairman. Go ahead. I'd just like to remind you that we do have a, a presenter here from the North, North Valley Neighborhood Association. Oh. Yes. Let's do that first. His presentation is up so he's Yeah. Let's do it. Is that, is that yourself? Please come on up. If you could state your name and address for the record, Commissioner Hearn will swear you in.
0 0 0 0 Mayer: Mayer: Mayer: Mayer: My name is Riley Mayer, 0 Gardenia, Las Cruces, New Mexico. Do you swear that the information you will provide is the truth, the whole truth under penalty of law? I do. Thank you. Please go ahead sir. I'm sorry? Please go ahead. Okay. Like I said I'm Riley Mayer. I'm the current President of the North Valley Neighborhood Association, the NVNA and we, the NVNA are supportive of responsible developing based on current ETZ requirements. And we feel that this plan, the Vista Rancho subdivision submitted by Taylor Road Development meets these requirements. We are in favor of this subdivision with the exception of a couple of the roadways on the west side and this PowerPoint touches on that and I know this is only a conceptual meeting here and the roadways don't really come into effect until the next, in the, the planning, but we'd still like to touch on those and make you aware of our concerns right here. So as you saw on the, the plans that Mr. Thurston presented on the left side of the screen which is going to be to the north, they're proposing that a, let's see here, this is the Mirasol Estates subdivision. You can see all the roads lined out in red. Down here is the proposed Vista Rancho subdivision to the south. Taylor Road Development Subdivision, known as Vista Rancho is proposing connecting the two roads from Mirasol Estates. It's going to be Mirasol Drive in yellow there and Amarillo del Sol to the west which is in green and they're proposing those two to connect to Taylor Road to the south. We have, there's a bunch of issues with this idea. It's a substantial increase in traffic for us, there's less crime deterrence. There is, there will be a deterioration of already poor road conditions and this will present challenges for law enforcement effectiveness in the area. First I'll touch on the traffic concerns. An increase in traffic will present many dangers to residents and school children that walk Mirasol and Amarillo del Sol on a daily basis. You can see here in the picture that there are some kids walking to school in the morning. There's no sidewalks or walkways present in the neighborhood. This makes the school children walk on the roadway to and from school twice a day. Mirasol and Amarillo del Sol are very narrow streets. They average feet wide. There's no street lights. Roadways are not marked. Therefore
0 0 0 0 the lanes are not divided due to the narrow width and no lines on the outside of the roads. Twice a day numerous schoolchildren walk to and from Dona Ana Elementary School and school children of various ages walk to and from the bus stop which is located at the north side of the neighborhood. The crime deterrence, Mirasol Estates is currently a safe neighborhood due to the fact that its layout naturally deters crime. Being that there's a limited number of exits makes it easier for law enforcement to respond to burglaries and prowlers. If proposed roads are open this creates more exits and facilitates an easier route of egress for criminals. Now that not only benefits Mirasol Estates but if we keep it disconnected between the new Vista Rancho subdivision that will also benefit the new proposed development to the south. It's been mentioned that emergency services need these roads to be opened up in order to respond to the new Vista Rancho subdivision. This is an incorrect assumption. The majority of emergency services that will respond to the Vista Rancho subdivision will be arriving from the south, not the north due to the fact that we are located north of Las Cruces. So you can see here the arrows. Most emergency services will be responding from Camino Real or Elks. The only emergency services that will respond from the north is Dona Ana Fire Department. Now let's look at their possible routes to the new proposed subdivision. If Dona Ana Fire, and I went and I spoke to them and talked to them about this. If Dona Ana Fire decides to respond to Vista Rancho through their proposed roadways the distance will be. or one and a quarter miles. This route has a speed limit of miles an hour through the school zone and miles an hour through the neighborhood. They're going to have to go through narrow roadways, poor road conditions, and it's a longer response time as compared to taking Elks or Camino Real Road. This is the response route, you can see in white there with the dots going along through Elks. The total distance is. miles, mile an hour speed limit, better road conditions, not through a school zone or neighborhood, and wider road with divided lanes. Here you have a comparison of Mirasol on the top and then Elks. Mirasol Estates roads average feet wide as I mentioned before, compared for 0 feet for Elks Road. Elks also has sidewalks for foot traffic unlike Mirasol, where the pedestrians have to walk in the roadway. Comparing the distance, I've got all the math drawn out here. I won't go through that just to save time, but basically if they intend to go through Mirasol it's going to take them three minutes and three seconds to respond whereas if they take Elks it'll only be two minutes and two seconds so it'll save them a minute taking Elks. Now let's take the, a look at the roads in Mirasol. You can see here we have several drainage ditches which will pose a problem for emergency services because they have to slow down to about five to ten miles an hour to get through here because it's basically a giant dip in the road and you can see it's not very well maintained. There's a lot of sand
0 0 0 0 Mayer: Mayer: Mayer: Mayer: and gravel and every time it rains through there basically we have to clear out the roads ourselves. It makes no sense. It's a hazard to the public to have emergency services respond through here. You can see right there is the school. I mean there'll be children walking to and from and it's miles an hour. Here you can see those drainage ditches I was talking about. This truck, you know if it's fully loaded with water it wouldn't be able to go through there at full speed responding to an emergency. It has to slow down to a minimal speed so it doesn't bottom out. So in conclusion it's going to affect the quality of life, it's going to increase crime and traffic, it's going to deteriorate the road conditions, and it, it poses a safety for school children and bicyclists and pedestrians in the area. Now I would also like to touch on the City of Las Cruces Design Standards which I'm sure you're all familiar with. If you look at Traffic Section -, the roads going through the subdivision are considered to be local if I'm not mistaken and this calls for the suggested maximum distance for these roads is less than half a mile. Already Mirasol and Amarillo del Sol exceed this distance so if we propose for these to connect to Taylor Road it's going to be a, a, well it's going to go against the guidelines set in place that we're already supposed to follow and you can see on Mr. Ochoa's presentation, he already touched on the City of Las Cruces Design Standards that we're supposed to be following for these roadways, that one waiver. So this chart is taken directly out of that so it goes completely, it conflicts what is set in place, the guidelines if we have these roads connect. So do you have any questions for me or my presentation? I do. The alternative to not having these roads connect would be what? Would be either a loop or two cul-de-sacs and I've already discussed this with Mr. Thurston and we're working it out and I'm, I can't really speak for him right now but he said he could work on those for the next, I guess the planning stage is next and working on whatever plan he submits going with that. And if he does do that then we will support this Vista Rancho subdivision. Okay so two cul-de-sacs and then Instead of having Not the other way. The roads connect through they either Yeah. Loop to themselves or they just end in cul-de-sacs with 0
0 0 0 0 Yeah. Mayer: Roundabouts on them. Do a big U and out the other way. Mayer: Yes sir. I understand. Any other questions? I'd say you've done an excellent job of thinking this through and making a, making a very good presentation. But, but to be clear that, that is your objection and otherwise if, if that can be cleared you're in favor of the project as it stands? Mayer: As I represent the NVNA we're all in agreeance with that. Great. So nice to get a bunch of folks in here that are in favor of something. That was very well presented. Any other questions? Thank you very much. We might be calling you back. Mayer: Thank you for having me. All right. Mr. Ochoa. Is there any other presentations we should be looking for before I open it up to the public? No sir. We have no further so if you'd like to open up to, open it up to public you're free to do so at this time. Okay. I'm about to do so. I would just like to ask one thing of the public. If you would keep a, a keen ear to what is being presented because if you have something you would like to say but the person two in front of you has said the same thing, the one thing that, I mean we want to hear all of you but if the point's already been covered, really it, the point doesn't need to be covered two or three times. If we've heard it you know we've heard it. And I remember too as we said in the, in the opening statement your time is limited to four minutes per presentation. So just keep those two, those two things in time, I mean in mind and Mr. Hearn will act as our, our timer. And Ms. Acosta not being here, surprise. And that's about it. As I, Mr. Ochoa go ahead. Yes sir Mr. Chairman. Just want to clarify, after we have public discussion
0 0 0 0 Zertuche: Zertuche: Zertuche: Then we'll separate back up And questions and so forth like that, before we start taking considerations or anything like that we'll have to Yeah. Reinstate the rules. At the end of public discussion I thought we'd do that. Right. And if I may just interject real quick, this is for the public that's here, I just got handed a, a note here from the security guard here, there's a black, black Volkswagen car in the, in the parking lot with license plate NFA, their lights are on. So, so whoever wants to go off and turn those off. Okay. But you're free to open it up sir. Thank you. Okay. So keeping those two things in mind and the Volkswagen, I open it up to the public. If you'd care to make a statement on this case please come forward and we'll ask you to state your name and address for the record and Commissioner Hearn will swear you in. Again please state your name and address for the record and Commissioner Hearn will swear you in. Hello. My name is Abel Zertuche and I live at Equestrian Drive in Rockwell, Texas. Mr. Zertuche, do you swear that the information you're going to present is the truth and nothing but the truth under penalty of law? I do. Thank you. Please go ahead. I, I would actually like a little help to go and put the developer's presentation back up. I'm not sure what his presentation number was in the PowerPoint. Mr. Ochoa could you help with that?
0 0 0 0 Zertuche: Could you go to the sheet that didn't show the houses, the breakdown of the neighborhood? One, yeah that one right there. Okay. Sorry if we come to this late. I do live in Texas and I was notified that it, one of my pieces of land adjoining this new development was, was being developed and so I have a piece of land and most of my family does that sits right above, north of that entire development that you see in the yellow, so in between Taylor Road and what is called Zertuche Road currently. Looking at this map it looks like Zertuche Road now may be turned into Lopez Road. I'm not sure if it shows it, oh no it does show Lopez Road now joining Zertuche Road. There are four topics that my father wanted to discuss. You know he's, he is of age at this point and so he can't, he sent me up here to discuss them. One of them is drainage so your housing authority that just came up showed the issue of drainage being a problem already in this land mass. So that neighborhood sits above us, right here. My neighbor, or my family land sits in between these two roads right here and currently there already is a very large drainage ditch for an arroyo and it cuts through like a very large swath of our land as well, through that neighborhood. I can't tell exactly where it shows but there's a very large arroyo/ditch that, that they had concreted in in this other neighborhood up here and that cuts through just normal land in my neighborhood and then would fall down here into this development. So looking at this development it doesn't, with, and how densely packed these houses are stacked on each other, my big question is: How is drainage going to be dealt with? Like I said that arroyo produces an immense amount of water. There is also a secondary ditch and that's what was shown in the pictures to you by the neighborhood association that they have to clean out. I just went back to the land today and went and reinspected it. And I said, "Yeah. I did notice that there was that secondary ditch." There's another ditch that falls further, what is this, west on the property that would fall down in here as well. And, and you know that's one of the main concerns that my family has. What's going to be done? When that neighborhood was built, before that neighborhood was built those arroyos actually really didn't interfere with our land much but ever since those, that neighborhood was built it has carved quite a big piece into our family land. Another concern that we have is the traffic on Zertuche Road. So if you're coming up from Lopez Road and you will now hit Zertuche Road which is a very small road. That is a private road and the family granted some extra land there to go and, and, every member of the family allowed land to be used here to make Zertuche Road and then of course right up here is a school. On both sides we have a school and when I went and looked at it today, there were plenty of people parked all up and down Zertuche Road waiting for their children to come out of school. So there's already a good amount of traffic. It's a private road. There's a good amount of traffic. We let people go there. But now it will become a main thoroughfare. Now that neighborhood will be dumping directly onto