EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ZONING COMMISSION

Transcription

1 MEETING DATE: September 16, 2010 CASE NO: Case # Z10-003, Z10-004, Z10-005, and Z EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ZONING COMMISSION DOÑA ANA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Doña Ana County Government Complex 845 North Motel Boulevard Las Cruces, New Mexico Office: (575) REQUEST: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Zone change from ER3 Residential District to ER7 Residential District on an acre parcel and a proposed 62- acre parcel for a future residential development, and from ER3 to EC3 on a 10-acre parcel and a proposed 10-acre parcel for a planned commercial development. 4B Trust, Julie Ogaz, Dan Lilley, Engineer Picacho Hills Dr. EXISTING ZONING: ER 3 Residential PROPERTY SIZE: acres RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL STAFF CONTACT: Steve Meadows, ETZ Planner SUMMARY Enclosed are Case s # Z10-003, Z10-004, Z10-005, and Z10-006, submitted by the 4B Trust, Julie Ogaz, Agent. The applicant is requesting a Zone Change on 2 parcels totaling approximately 80 acres from ER3 (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single-family site-built homes) to ER7 (Residential, single-family, duplex or apartments, and to EC3 (Planned Commercial District, 3-acre minimum lot size) on two parcels totaling approximately 20 acres for a planned commercial development. Staff will present all four cases in one presentation. The ETZ Commission will make a decision on each case individually. Staff is recommending Approval of Case # Z and Case # Z Staff is recommending Denial of Case # Z and Case # Z These cases were postponed at the August 19, 2010 ETZ Commission Meeting to the September 16, 2010 ETZ Commission Meeting. Attachments: (1) Staff Analysis (2) Site Plan and Supporting Documents (3) Applicable Policies and Ordinances (4) GIS Information & Maps: Aerial, Zoning Map, Notification List. September 16, 2010 Page 1 of 68

2 SURROUNDING ZONING SITE ZONING LAND USE North ER3 Residential, 1 acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes. South Picacho Ave. (US Hwy 70) Principal Arterial Transportation Corridor East West GENERAL ANALYSIS ER3 EC2 & EI1 EC3 & ER7 Residential, 1 acre min. new lot size, single family site built homes. Community Commercial District. Light Industrial District. Planned Commercial District Residential, maximum density- 15 units per acre, single family, duplex or apartment units. CASE # Z10-003, 004, 005, 006/4B Trust The applicant, is requesting a Zone Change on a proposed 4 parcel development from ER3 (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes) to a combination of EC3 (Planned Commercial District, 3-acre minimum lot size, retail and personal services in an integrated design), on 20-acres along Picacho Ave (US Hwy 70) and ER7 (Residential, single-family, duplex or apartments, no septic tanks allowed) District on the remaining 80-acres for future residential development. The EC3 Planned Commercial Development, located on the east and west side of Picacho Hills Dr., will be undertaken initially. The residential developments will be pursued with the requisite subdivision plat approvals and construction requirements in the future. The Planned Commercial District (EC3) development located at the south end of the proposal on the north side of Picacho Ave., will contain approximately 118,000 sq. ft. of building space with a variety of businesses. The proposed 80-acre residential development is to be developed at an overall 6 unit per acre density versus the 15 unit per acre density allowed by the ER7 zoning sought by the applicant. The applicants proposal to rezone the approximate 100 acres is based on the following: 1. The commercial development will be consistent with the EC2, EC3, and EI1 zoning adjacent to the south end of the development. 2. The commercial development will have access to a minor arterial, Picacho Hills Dr. 3. Utility lines, and fire flow with fire hydrants will be extended into the developments and Picacho Hills Utility Co. will provide water and sewer service. The City of Las Cruces or Rio Grande Natural Gas will provide gas service. 4. There are a limited number of commercially developed properties within two miles of the intersection of Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. 5. The current zoning is residential but the surrounding properties to the east, near Picacho Ave. are commercial and industrial. The two properties adjacent to the western boundary of the proposal are zoned ER3 and contain a church. The parcels next to the church further to the west are within another EC3 zoning district. September 16, 2010 Page 2 of 68

3 6. The proposed ER7 residential district is consistent with the adjacent zoning of a large portion of the Picacho Hills residential neighborhood. The proposed residential/commercial development is located within an area that is primarily low density residential zoning (i.e. ER3 1-acre minimum) except along and near Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. There are a combination of EC2 Community Commercial, EC3 Planned Commercial, and EI1 Light Industrial zones located along Picacho Ave. and adjacent to and east of Picacho Hills Dr. All but two of these zones are the original zoning on the properties. The EC2 zone along Picacho Ave was originally EC1 Neighborhood Commercial but was subsequently rezoned to EC2 Community Commercial. An additional 3.64 acres was rezoned to EC3 in 2007 (Z07-007) for the Fairacres Baptist Church. On the south side of Picacho Ave. there are both commercial and industrial zones that were put in place during the establishment of the ETZ. The proposed 20-acre EC3 Zoning District (Z and Z10-005) is consistent with these surrounding uses and zones. The proposed site plan (See page 19) indicates access to Picacho Hills Dr. and Picacho Ave. NMDOT commented (see page 13) that no access points would be allowed along Picacho Ave. The final subdivision and construction plans would have to reflect this comment unless permission is granted, in the future, by NMDOT. The proposed 80-acre residential portion of the development consists of a 62-acre parcel, subdivided from the parent parcel of 72-acres, on the east side of Picacho Hills Dr. and an 18-acre parcel located on the west side of Picacho Hills Dr. Both parcels are located within the ER3 Zoning District with approximately 10 acres of the large parcel zoned as ER7 currently. This ER7 District is the easternmost portion of the larger ER7 District that contains part of the Picacho Hills community/neighborhood. The proposal for the 18 acre parcel contains 114 units (a density of 6.33 units/acre) of primarily single family units and the 62-acre parcel will contain a proposed 370 units (a density of 5.97 units /acre) of a combination of multi-family and single family site built units. Picacho Hills Utility Company will provide water and sewer. The proposed residential and commercial districts will access the properties from Picacho Hills Dr., designated as a minor arterial by the Las Cruces MPO. Potential traffic flows submitted by the applicant indicates that an additional net trips per hour (See pages 20-22) would be generated by the combined development proposal over the twenty year build-out time frame. The applicant states that this would not decrease the Level of Service (LOS) below the current LOS C rating and therefore would not adversely impact the 4-lane road. NMDOT indicated, in their comments, that a Traffic Impact Analysis would be required for the Picacho Ave./Picacho Hills Dr. intersection. The subdivision and construction phase of any part of these four projects will require submittal of those documents for review and approval. Z ANALYSIS Zone Change request # Z (See pages 25-29) pertains to an 18-acre parcel located on the west side of Picacho Hills Dr., currently zoned ER3 (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes) with irrigated farming taking place on the property. It is bounded on the east and north by Picacho Hills Dr. The properties directly northwest of the parcel across Picacho Hills Dr. are zoned ER7 and EC1C and contain single family dwellings (Pueblo Gardens Subdivision) and a small commercial development due west of the residential subdivision. Southwest and adjacent to the parcel is an EC3 (Planned Commercial District) zoning district containing irrigated farmland, a church and a cemetery. A small portion of the western parcel boundary abuts an ER4 zoning district which sits along the down slope of the West Mesa escarpment. The subject parcel lies at the base of the escarpment within the floodplain according to comments from the DAC Flood Commission (See comments page 14 and map page 47). The south boundary of the parcel abuts the proposed EC3 Planned Commercial District which is currently zoned ER3. This proposed residential development will access the minor arterial, Picacho Hills Dr. 114 housing units are proposed which translates into a development density of approximately 6.33 units per acre September 16, 2010 Page 3 of 68

4 versus the 15 units per acre allowed within an ER7 Zoning District. Sewer and water lines will be extended into the development as well as the required fire flow. The Picacho Hills Utility Co. will provide the water and sewer services at the time the developer extends those lines into the development (See pages 23-24). The applicant has provided a traffic analysis indicating the proposed development would add an additional 115 trips per hour to Picacho Hills Dr. over the 20 year build out of the development. The applicants engineer has stated this would not affect the LOS rating of the roadway. NMDOT will require a full traffic study of the intersection of Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. at the construction phase. The DAC Flood Commission does not recommend increasing the density of any residential development within the area of the proposal due to the area being within FEMA designated flood zones (See Map Page 47). It is injudicious floodplain management to increase the number of properties that will be affected by a known flood hazard. We would recommend using a different zoning within the floodplain than the proposed ER7. The proposed residential development will be constructed at a density of 6.33 units per acre and is considered high density. The ETZ Comprehensive Plan does not show any additional high density residential development in this area (See map page 48). Staff recommends Denial of Zone Change Request Case # Z FINDINGS 1. The request of this application is consistent with the requirements of the Las Cruces Extraterritorial Zoning Ordinance Article II, Section 2.1.C/Application Procedures and Section 2.1.G/Public Hearing and Notice Requirements. 2. The subject property is located outside the corporate limits of the City of Las Cruces, but within the five-mile Extra-territorial Zone (ETZ) as set forth by (1), NMSA 1978 and the Joint Powers Agreement between Doña Ana County and the City of Las Cruces. Therefore, the Las Cruces ETZ Commission (ETZC) has jurisdiction to review this case. 3. The property is located within the ER3 Zoning District (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single-family site-built homes). 4. DAC Flood Commission maps place the proposed development within the AO and X Flood Zones and recommends a less dense zoning district than the ER7 proposed and Flood Insurance will be required. 5. Picacho Hills Dr. is designated as a minor arterial per the Las Cruces MPO. Z ANALYSIS Zone Change request Z (See pages 30-35) concerns a proposed 10-acre parcel located on the west side of Picacho Hills Dr., currently zoned ER3 (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes). The request is to rezone the parcel to EC3 (Planned Commercial District, 3- acre minimum lot size) for a commercial development at the southwest corner of the intersection of Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. The parcel is within the Rio Grande valley and irrigation farming is the current use. The north boundary of the proposed parcel abuts the requested ER7 Zoning District in Case # Z Two parcels abutting the southwest corner of the parcel are zoned ER3 and are owned by the Fairacres Baptist Church. EC# zoning abuts the remaining northwestern portion of the parcel and is the location of a cemetery. The southern boundary and eastern boundary abut Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr., respectively. The planned commercial development proposed in this request, anticipates commercial uses such as retail, banking, restaurants, office space, convenience stores and similar businesses to occupy the September 16, 2010 Page 4 of 68

5 property with adequate parking and access. The applicant anticipates approximately half of the total 118,000 sq. ft. envisioned by the two commercial properties (Case # s Z and Z10-005) will be placed on this ten acre parcel. Sewer and water lines will be extended into the commercial development as well as the required fire flow. The Picacho Hills Utility Co. will provide the water and sewer services at the time the developer extends those lines into the development (See pages 23-24). The applicant has provided a traffic analysis indicating the proposed commercial development would add an additional 276 trips per hour to Picacho Hills Dr. over the 20 year build out of the development. The applicants engineer has stated this would not affect the LOS rating of the roadway. NMDOT will require a full traffic study of the intersection of Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. at the construction phase. NMDOT also has stated that no access points will be allowed from Picacho Ave. DAC Flood Commission places the subject parcel within a FEMA defined flood zone, therefore drainage and storm water retention is a factor in the development of the commercial property. The ETZ Comprehensive Plan Policy 8.1.2, prefers commercial activity to be located at major intersections (i.e. intersections of two arterials, two collectors or an arterial road and a collector road), and this development is consistent with that policy. Staff recommends Approval of Zone Change Request Case # Z FINDINGS 1. The request of this application is consistent with the requirements of the Las Cruces Extraterritorial Zoning Ordinance Article II, Section 2.1.C/Application Procedures and Section 2.1.G/Public Hearing and Notice Requirements. 2. The subject property is located outside the corporate limits of the City of Las Cruces, but within the five-mile Extra-territorial Zone (ETZ) as set forth by (1), NMSA 1978 and the Joint Powers Agreement between Doña Ana County and the City of Las Cruces. Therefore, the Las Cruces ETZ Commission (ETZC) has jurisdiction to review this case. 3. The property is located within the ER3 District (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single-family site-built homes). 4. NMDOT will not grant access points to the development from Picacho Ave. (US Hwy 70), only from Picacho Hills Dr. 5. Picacho Ave. is designated as a principal arterial and Picacho Hills Dr. as a minor arterial per the Las Cruces MPO. 6. DAC Flood Commission recommends that due to the property being located within a FEMA designated flood zone, Flood Insurance will be required. Z ANALYSIS Zone Change request Z (See page 30 and pages 36-40) concerns a proposed 10-acre parcel located on the east side of Picacho Hills Dr. which is currently zoned ER3 (1-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes). The request is to rezone the parcel to EC3 (Planned Commercial District, 3-acre minimum lot size) for a commercial development at the southeast corner of the intersection of Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. The parcel is within the Rio Grande valley and irrigation farming is the current ongoing use. The proposed 10-acre parcel will be subdivided from the parent 72-acre parcel. The north boundary of the proposed parcel abuts the requested ER7 Zoning District in Case # Z EI1 zoning abuts the northeastern portion of the proposed parcel, and an EC2 commercial zone abuts the remaining eastern portion of the parcel. Irrigated farming is the primary use on the EC2 property. The west property line abuts Picacho Hills Dr., and the southern boundary is along Picacho Ave. September 16, 2010 Page 5 of 68

6 The planned commercial development proposed in this request, anticipates commercial uses such as retail, banking, restaurants, office space, convenience stores and similar businesses to occupy the property with adequate parking and access. The applicant anticipates approximately half of the total 118,000 sq. ft. envisioned by the two commercial properties (Case # s Z and Z10-005) will be placed on this ten acre parcel. Sewer and water lines will be extended into the commercial development as well as the required fire flow. The Picacho Hills Utility Co. will provide the water and sewer services at the time the developer extends those lines into the development (See pages 23-24). The applicant has provided a traffic analysis indicating the proposed commercial development would add an additional 276 trips per hour to Picacho Hills Dr. over the 20 year build out of the development. The applicants engineer has stated this would not affect the LOS rating of the roadway. NMDOT will require a full traffic study of the intersection of Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. at the construction phase. NMDOT also has stated that no access points will be allowed from Picacho Ave. DAC Flood Commission places the subject parcel within a FEMA defined flood zone, therefore drainage and storm water retention is a factor in the development of the commercial property. The ETZ Comprehensive Plan Policy 8.1.2, prefers commercial activity to be located at major intersections (i.e. intersections of two arterials, two collectors or an arterial road and a collector road), and this development is consistent with that policy. Staff recommends Approval of Zone Change Request Case # Z FINDINGS 1. The request of this application is consistent with the requirements of the Las Cruces Extraterritorial Zoning Ordinance Article II, Section 2.1.C/Application Procedures and Section 2.1.G/Public Hearing and Notice Requirements. 2. The subject property is located outside the corporate limits of the City of Las Cruces, but within the five-mile Extra-territorial Zone (ETZ) as set forth by (1), NMSA 1978 and the Joint Powers Agreement between Doña Ana County and the City of Las Cruces. Therefore, the Las Cruces ETZ Commission (ETZC) has jurisdiction to review this case. 3. The property is located within the ER3 District (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single-family site-built homes). 4. NMDOT will not grant access points to the development from Picacho Ave. (US Hwy 70), only from Picacho Hills Dr. 5. Picacho Ave. is designated as a principal arterial and Picacho Hills Dr. as a minor arterial per the Las Cruces MPO. 6. DAC Flood Commission recommends that due to the property being located within a FEMA designated flood zone, Flood Insurance will be required. Z ANALYSIS Zone Change request Z (See pages 41-45) considers a 62-acre parcel located on the east side of Picacho Hills Dr. currently zoned ER3 (Residential, 1-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes) on approximately 52-acres and ER7 on the remaining 10 acres. The parcel is within the Rio Grande valley and irrigation farming is the current use. The proposed 62-acre parcel will be subdivided from the parent 72-acre parcel. The south boundary of the proposed parcel abuts the EC3 Planned Commercial District in Case # Z Zone change request. EI1 zoning abuts the southeastern portion of the proposed parcel, with irrigated farming as the primary use. The property is abutted by ER3 on the east and north portions. The northwest portion of the property is within the September 16, 2010 Page 6 of 68

7 larger ER7 zone of the Picacho Hills Country Club neighborhood. The west property line abuts Picacho Hills Dr. The Pueblo Gardens Subdivision (ER7 Zoning) is adjacent to the northwest portion of the parcel. The subject parcel lies at the base of the escarpment within the floodplain according to comments from the DAC Flood Commission (See comments page 14 and map page 47). This proposed residential development will access the minor arterial, Picacho Hills Dr. 370 housing units are proposed which translates into a development density of approximately 5.97 units per acre versus the 15 units per acre allowed within an ER7 Zoning District. Sewer and water lines will be extended into the development as well as the required fire flow. The Picacho Hills Utility Co. will provide the water and sewer services at the time the developer extends those lines into the development (See pages 23-24). The applicant has provided a traffic analysis indicating the proposed development would add an additional 335 trips per hour to Picacho Hills Dr. over the 20 year build out of the development. The applicants engineer has stated this would not affect the LOS rating of the roadway. NMDOT will require a full traffic study of the intersection of Picacho Ave. and Picacho Hills Dr. at the construction phase. The DAC Flood Commission does not recommend increasing the density of any residential development within the area of the proposal due to the area being within FEMA designated flood zones (See Map Page 47). It is injudicious floodplain management to increase the number of properties that will be affected by a known flood hazard. We would recommend using a different zoning within the floodplain than the proposed ER7. The proposed residential development will be constructed at a density of 5.97 units per acre, and is considered high density. The ETZ Comprehensive Plan does not show any additional high density residential development in this area (See map page 48). Staff recommends Denial of Zone Change Request Case # Z FINDINGS 1. The request of this application is consistent with the requirements of the Las Cruces Extraterritorial Zoning Ordinance Article II, Section 2.1.C/Application Procedures and Section 2.1.G/Public Hearing and Notice Requirements. 2. The subject property is located outside the corporate limits of the City of Las Cruces, but within the five-mile Extra-territorial Zone (ETZ) as set forth by (1), NMSA 1978 and the Joint Powers Agreement between Doña Ana County and the City of Las Cruces. Therefore, the Las Cruces ETZ Commission (ETZC) has jurisdiction to review this case. 3. The 72 acre parcel has dual zoning of ER3 for approximately 62-acres and ER7 on the remaining 10-acres. 4. DAC Flood Commission maps place the proposed development within the AO and X Flood Zones and recommends a less dense zoning district than ER7 and Flood Insurance will be required. 5. Picacho Hills Dr. is designated as a minor arterial per the Las Cruces MPO. APPLICABLE PLANS, POLICIES AND CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL The primary justification for a Zone Change in the State of New Mexico has been a sufficient change in conditions to warrant a zone change to protect the public, or to cover and perfect previous defective ordinances or to correct mistakes or injustices therein as per the Miller vs. Albuquerque, decision by the New Mexico State Supreme Court on September 9, September 16, 2010 Page 7 of 68

8 DETERMINATION CRITERIA 2.1.D The Planning Director and the ETZ Commission may use the following general criteria when reviewing Special Use Permits and Zoning applications. The ETZ Commission shall have the authority to require additional specific information on any of the following criteria. Unless additional justification is presented, the fact that there is an existing legal nonconforming use shall not be considered sufficient grounds for a zone change in order to bring that use into conformity. 2.1.D D D D D D D D D.9 Determination of potential number of homes, population and population demographics. Determination of potential traffic flows (average daily traffic) and where they will impact the transportation system. Determination of need for new commercial activity. Determination of potential water and sewage needs. Evaluation of existing infrastructure capacities and an analysis of the ability of the existing system to accommodate the new development. The difference between capacity and impact should be stated. Those areas which are appropriate for the developer to underwrite should be negotiated between local government and developer. The ETZ should reserve the right to place appropriate zoning categories on environmentally sensitive areas, areas of historical significance or areas which contain endangered or rare species of animal or plant life. Any analysis required should be undertaken and paid for by the developer and verified by the ETZ Commission. Determination of impact of a proposed zone change on surrounding properties. ETZ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN : Proposal is not consistent with the following: The ETZ Comprehensive Plan Map #1, Future Land Use 2025, does not forecast any high density residential development in the area of the proposed Zone Changes. Policy 5.1.3: Non-farm uses permitted within farm use zones should be minimized to allow for maximum agricultural productivity. Proposal is consistent with the following: Policy 8.1.2: Preference for the development of commercial activity should be located at major intersections (i.e. intersections of two arterials, two collectors or an arterial road and a collector road). CURRENT ZONING DISTRICT Section 3.1.C.2 ER3 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1.C.2.a PURPOSE The purpose of the ER3 zoning district is to establish residential districts of single-family site-built homes on moderate to large size lots, specifically designed to meet the demand for those persons whose lifestyles include raising and keeping of large and small animals in a semi-rural atmosphere. September 16, 2010 Page 8 of 68

9 3.1.C.2.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The development requirements set for the ER3M district as outlined in Section 3.1.C.1.b of this Article are applicable to the ER3 district. 3.1.C.2.c ER3 PERMITTED USES The permitted uses set for the ER3M district as outlined in Section 3.1.C.1.c of this Article are applicable to the ER3 district, EXCEPT that mobile homes are not allowed in the ER3 district. 3.1.C.2.d ER3 SPECIAL USE PERMITS The Special Use Permit uses and conditions set for the ER3M district as outlined in Section 3.1.C.1.d of this Article are applicable to the ER3 district. Section 3.1.C.1 ER3M RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1.C.1.a PURPOSE The purpose of the ER3M zoning district is to establish residential district is to establish residential districts of single-family site-built homes and mobile homes on moderate to large size lots, specifically designed to meet the demand for those persons whose lifestyles include raising and keeping of large and small animals in a semi-rural atmosphere. 3.1.C.1.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size 1 acre (except cluster development) Minimum lot width 100 feet Minimum lot depth 100 feet Minimum front setback 25 feet Minimum side setback 15 feet Minimum rear setback 25 feet Maximum building height 35 feet 3.1.C.1.c ER3M PERMITTED USES The following uses are permitted by right in the ER3M district: 1. All types of agriculture. 2. Barb wire fences. 3. Barns and other structures normally used in connection with farming and ranching. 4. Christmas tree farms. 5. Cluster developments in accordance with Subdivision Regulations adopted by the ETZ Authority. 6. Detached single-family site-built homes and mobile homes. 7. Garage and yard sales or similar uses, limited to three (3) sales in a one (1) year period at a single address, and each sale shall be limited to three (3) consecutive days. 8. Greenhouses (non-commercial) garden and tool sheds. If detached from the main dwelling, the structures are subject to the provisions of Accessory Buildings under Article VII of the Ordinance. 9. Home Occupations subject to Section 3.4 of this Article. 10. Private swimming pools provided the provisions of Article 5 of this ordinance for fencing are met. The pool shall be no closer than five (5) feet from any property line and approval from all utilities is obtained to ensure overhead safety. 11. Raising large and small animals in accordance with Article VIII of the Ordinance. September 16, 2010 Page 9 of 68

10 12. Recreational vehicles such as boats, trailers or similar uses, limited to a maximum of one (1) per dwelling unit in the front and side yard, and no limitations for the rear yard, provided there is at least a distance of five (5) feet from any property line. 13. Residential type satellite dishes, television or receiving antenna, roof mounted, and not exceeding twenty (20) feet in height at the highest point of the roof. 14. Septic tanks in accordance with the regulations of the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Division (EID) and Section 3.02 of this Article. 15. Temporary real estate offices, when used in conjunction with a residential subdivision, provided such use is discontinued upon the completion of the development or within three (3) years form the date the building permit was issued, whichever is sooner. 16. The sale of agricultural and farm products such as nursery stock, poultry, rabbits, chinchillas, fish, frogs, earthworms and bees, if produced or raised on the premises. 17. Windmills built to withstand a 75 MPH wind and meet the Uniform Building Code. 18. Agriculture uses and agriculture related uses not specifically listed under Sections 3.1.A.1.c and 3.1.A.1.d of this Article are permitted by right in the ER3M district. 3.1.C.1.d ER3M SPECIAL USE PERMITS The following uses require a public hearing pursuant to Section 2.1.G of this Ordinance and approval by the ETZ Commission: 1. Boarding houses and rest homes 2. Cemeteries 3. Commercial stable and riding academies 4. Commercial kennels 5. Community and publicly owned recreational centers, clubhouses and similar buildings and structures open to the public 6. Day care center or child care center for five (5) or more children 7. Guest ranches 8. Parks, golf courses, churches, schools and other public or semi-public and open recreational uses 9. Public utility installations, substations and water wells 10. Keeping of wild or exotic animals or fowl 11. Time-rental riding facilities 12. Veterinary clinics and treatment centers PROPOSED ZONING DISTRICT Section 3.1.I.1 ER7 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1.I.1.a PURPOSE The purpose of the ER7 zoning district is to encourage variety in housing types at moderately high densities together with appropriate community facilities. Mobile homes and septic tanks are not allowed in this district. The ER7 district is intended to accommodate an overall maximum density of fifteen (15) dwelling units per acre. This district is intended for single-family, duplex or apartment units in which a medium density residential character is protected and maintained. 3.1.I.1.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The following uses are permitted by right in the ER7 district: September 16, 2010 Page 10 of 68

11 1. Accessory buildings in accordance with Article VII of this Ordinance. 2. Attached and detached single-family dwellings. 3. Garage and yard sales or similar uses, limited to three (3) sales in one (1) year period at a single address, and each sale shall be limited to three (3) consecutive days. 4. Greenhouses (non-commercial), garden and tool sheds. If detached from the main dwelling, the structures are subject to the provisions of Accessory Building under Article VII of this Ordinance. 5. Homes for handicapped, disabled, retarded or retired persons, subject to the requirements of the New Mexico Municipal Code, , Para. C, as amended. There shall be no more than five (5) persons in one (1) home and a minimum of three (3) parking spaces must be provided. 6. Home occupations in accordance with Section 3.4 of this Article. 7. Multi-family dwellings and apartments, including apartments for the elderly and the office of the manager. 8. Private clubs for use of members only, except a club wherein the chief activity is a service customarily carried on as a business 9. Private swimming pools provided the provisions of Article 5 of this ordinance for fencing are met. The pool shall be no closer than five (5) feet from any property line and approval from all utilities is obtained to ensure overhead safety. 10. Public parks, playgrounds or ball fields. 11. Residential type satellite dishes, television or receiving antenna, roof mounted, and not exceeding twenty (20) feet in height at the highest point on the roof. 12. Single-family attached dwellings including townhouses or condominiums, patio houses and atrium houses. 13. Accessory dwelling units as described in Article VIII of this Ordinance. 14. Temporary real estate offices, when used in conjunction with a residential subdivision. 15. Keeping small animals subject to Article VIII of this Ordinance. 16. Multi-family dwellings with a maximum of eight (8) attached units and not to exceed fifteen (15) dwellings units per acre. 3.1.I.1.d ER7 SPECIAL USE PERMITS The following uses require a public hearing pursuant to Section 2.1.G of this Ordinance and approval by the ETZ Commission: 1. Amusement parks. 2. Boarding houses and rest homes. 3. Community and publicly owned recreational centers, clubhouses and similarly used buildings and structures open to the public. 4. Day care center or child care center for five (5) or more children. 5. Flea markets. 6. Halfway houses and quasi-institutional houses. 7. Parks, golf courses, churches, schools and other public or semi-public and open recreational uses. 8. Public utility installations, substations and water wells. 9. Keeping small, wild or exotic animals and fowl. 10. Veterinary facilities. September 16, 2010 Page 11 of 68

12 Section 3.1.L EC3 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (PCD) 3.1.L.1 PURPOSE The EC3 district is intended to provide for attractive and efficient retail shopping and personal service facilities of integrated design in appropriate locations to serve residential neighborhoods. Each district shall be laid out and developed as a unit according to an approved plan so that the purpose of the district may be accomplished. The district is adaptable to shopping centers of various sizes as well as development of general business properties where the use of shared parking and access, together with planning, will produce a stronger commercial area. 3.1.L.2 DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS Minimum district area 3 acres Minimum lot size 5,000 square feet Minimum lot width 60 feet Minimum lot depth 70 feet Minimum front setback 25 feet Minimum side setback 7 feet Minimum rear setback 15 feet Maximum building height 45 feet Residences in the EC3 district shall comply with the development requirements for the ER5 district as outlined in Section 3.1.F.1 of this Article. 3.1.L.3 OWNERSHIP CONTROL The land in the PCD shall be under such unified control as to ensure that the entire district will be developed as a unified whole. All owners shall be included as joint applicants and all approvals shall bind all owners. An applicant for a PCD involving an association, joint venture, partnership or some other legal entity shall submit to the zoning commission the legal documents authorizing the entity and, if applicable, its bylaws. The zoning commission may require any provisions necessary to ensure that the intent of this Ordinance is met. 3.1.L.4 PERMITTED USES A PCD may be allowed on property already having the EC3 designation or property zoned EC1 or EC2 may be rezoned to the EC3 designation. A PCD may include those uses permitted with or without conditions and uses requiring a Special Use Permit in the EC1 or EC2 districts, including residential uses, provided that no use involving outdoor storage of inventory or wholesale uses shall be permitted where it would not otherwise be permitted in the EC1 or EC2 district. 3.1.L.5 GENERAL PROCEDURES - PLANS REQUIRED Establishment of a PCD where a zone change is required must follow the procedures for changes and amendments outlined in Section 2.1.A-C, 2.1.G and 2.6.A of this Ordinance. All applications for a PCD must meet the public hearing and notification requirements stated in Section 2.1.G of this Ordinance. A site development plan must be submitted to the ETZ Commission. If the project is to be accomplished as a series of development units, a detailed site development plan for a proposed unit shall be submitted with a general set plan and a schedule of phasing provided. The proposed development shall follow all applicable procedures, standards and requirements of this Ordinance and the Subdivision Regulations adopted by the ETZ Authority, as well as other applicable regulations. 3.1.L.6 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PCD S In addition to meeting the development requirements stated in Section 3.1.L.2 of this Article, the following minimum general development standards must be complied with: September 16, 2010 Page 12 of 68

13 a. Parking lots must be graded and surfaced with asphalt, concrete or other material that will provide equivalent protection against potholes, erosion and dust b. Any part of the project area not used for buildings or other structures, loading and access ways shall be landscaped in accord with an approved landscaping plan c. The PCD must be separated from adjacent residential areas by a heavily landscaped buffer d. The PCD must be designed to promote harmonious relationships with surrounding adjacent and nearby properties, developed or undeveloped, including location of building orientation, spacing and setback of buildings, location of access points, size and location of signs, open spaces and parking areas, grading, landscaping and screening e. The principle means of access shall be from arterial or collector streets. In no case shall the principle means of access be from a minor residential street. f. The design for internal circulation shall be appropriately related to access points and provide for safe and efficient movement of vehicles and pedestrians with special attention to reduction of crossing conflicts, improvements of visibility, convenience of pickup areas, traffic signs and speed controls. g. Refuse containers or refuse storage areas shall be hidden from general public view, wither from within or outside the center, by means of fences, walls or landscaping. h. The PCD must be adequately served by essential utilities and public services such as water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, police, fire and other similar services. APPLICANT SUBMISSIONS The following information was submitted by 4B Trust: 1) Site Plans/Conceptual Layouts. 2) Narrative for Zone Changes. 3) Evaluation Criteria AGENCY COMMENTS New Mexico Department of Transportation, Deming: A traffic analysis will be required for the intersection of US 70/Picacho Hills. No additional access points will be allowed off of US 70 for the property that is adjacent to US 70. New Mexico Office of State Engineer: No adverse comments. New Mexico Environment Department: 1.) Wastewater Treatment and Disposal The information provided does not indicate the method of waste water disposal. Community sewer must be used. 2.) Water Supply/Water Quality No comment. 3.) Solid Waste Disposal No comment. 4.) Surface Drainage/Land Clearing/Dust Control The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) requires National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit coverage for storm water discharges from construction projects (common plans of development) that will result in the disturbance (or re-disturbance) of one or more acres (as of June 30, 2008), including expansions of total land area. If this project exceeds one acre, it requires appropriate NPDES permit coverage prior September 16, 2010 Page 13 of 68

14 to beginning construction. Among other things, this permit requires that a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be prepared for the site and that appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP s) be installed and maintained both during and after construction to prevent, to the extent practicable, pollutants (primarily sediment, oil & grease and construction materials from construction sites) in storm water runoff from entering waters of the U.S. This permit also requires that permanent stabilization measures (revegetation, paving, etc.), and permanent storm water management measures (storm water detention/retention structures, velocity dissipation devices, etc.) be implemented post construction to minimize, in the long term, pollutants in storm water runoff from entering these waters. You should also be aware that EPA requires that all operators (see Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 128/Monday, July 6, 1998, page 36509) obtain NPDES permit coverage for construction projects. Generally, this means that at least two parties will require permit coverage. The owner/developer of this construction project who has operational control over project specifications (4B Trust in this case), the general contractor who has day-to-day operational control of those activities at the site, which are necessary to ensure compliance with the storm water pollution plan and other permit conditions, and possibly other operators will require appropriate NPDES permit coverage for this project. Based on information presented thus far, we have no opposition to the above stated action. City of Las Cruces MPO: Picacho Ave. is a principal arterial and Picacho Hills Dr. is a minor arterial. City of Las Cruces Planning Department: On the recorded plat, there is a 16 irrigation easement running to Lots 3 & 4. In addition, there is a 50 access/utility easement running to lot #4, this is lot # 4 s legal access. County Engineering Department: 1.) This zone change request will increase the density of potentially flood prone residences & businesses. Submitted information does not indicate at all this area is in a flood zone with depths of 2 feet. 2.) A cooperative agreement with regulatory agencies for adjacent improvements may be required. County Flood Commission: 1.) The subject property is currently located within Flood Zone AO (Depth of 2 and Velocity of 7 FPS), and partially X, as shown on FIRM Map No C0627 E. 2.) In March 2009, the Doña Ana County Flood Commission hired Bohannon Huston to perform a drainage study in the Picacho Hills area. They determined the peak flow of the Nafzinger Arroyo to be 4275 cfs. This development will have to comply with the recommendations of the Picacho Hills Drainage Master Plan. 3.) Due to the unpredictability of AO Flood Zone, FEMA has determined that AO flood zones cannot be removed from the floodplain based on fill. Therefore, areas where proposed homes and businesses are to be located will have the requirement of flood insurance. 4.) It is unclear how the runoff from the Nafzinger Arroyo will be handled within such dense development. 5.) All proposed properties located within the floodplain will have to adhere to all FEMA rules and regulations. 6.) It is injudicious floodplain management to increase the number of properties that will be affected by a known flood hazard. We would recommend using a different zoning within the floodplain than the proposed ER7. DAC Fire Marshals: All fire code and fire flow requirements will be enforced at time of construction. DAC Building Services: Building permits are required for all future buildings and dwellings and must meet all County, State and code requirements. The permit has not been applied for. DAC Environmental Codes: No violations. County Rural Addressing: Address subject to change. Elephant Butte Irrigation District: Being a preliminary review, we have no objections provided that the final plat shows irrigation easements for all lots to receive irrigation water or that the owner leases, transfers or suspends the water rights on these tracts prior to sale of lots. NOTICE / NOTIFICATION Fifty-three (53) letters of notification were sent out. Legal Notification was posted in the Las Cruces Sun News on August 1, Signs were posted on the properties. Agenda was posted on County Web Site. September 16, 2010 Page 14 of 68

15 Ms. Debra Haynie (# 14 on Notification List) called on August 5, to inquire about the zone change and its effects on her property. She did not commit to a position on the proposed zone changes. Thirteen letters/ s were received from property owners within the area of notification and a petition from the Pueblo Gardens Homeowners Association with thirteen (13) signatures attached. All signatories were within the area of notification and a large majority submitted letters or s. The public opposition centered on the increase in density of the residential proposals not being in character with the Picacho Hills neighborhood, an increase in traffic volume having a negative impact to the roadway, severe flooding in area, potential impact to local school, questionable ability of utilities to be utilized, and a loss of their view and potential property value devaluations due to these factors (See Pages 49-64). Zone Change Request Case # s Z10-003, 004, 005, and 006 were postponed to, a date certain, September 16 at the ETZ Commission Meeting of August 19. The cases were advertised in the Las Cruces Sun-News on August 29, signs were posted on the properties, and the Agenda was posted on the County Web Site. One and one letter were received in opposition to the project on September 7 and September 8: Mr. and Mrs. Harvey Kapner of 1000 Tuscany Dr. (outside area of Notification) presented a proposal of their own (See Pages 65-66) for a park on one of the parcels. Mr. and Mrs. Doug Dugan (#47 on Notification List) are opposed because of potential flooding, traffic concerns, and worries about the need and types of businesses that could come in to the proposed EC3 areas (See Pages 67-68). September 16, 2010 Page 15 of 68

16 September 16, 2010 Page 16 of 68

17 September 16, 2010 Page 17 of 68

18 Notification List September 16, 2010 Page 18 of 68

19 Overall Concept Map September 16, 2010 Page 19 of 68

20 Combined Traffic Analysis September 16, 2010 Page 20 of 68

21 Combined Traffic Analysis (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 21 of 68

22 Combined Traffic Analysis (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 22 of 68

23 Picacho Hills Utility Co. Ready, Willing and Able Letter September 16, 2010 Page 23 of 68

24 Picacho Hills Utility Co. Ready, Willing and Able Letter September 16, 2010 Page 24 of 68

25 Z Concept Plan September 16, 2010 Page 25 of 68

26 Z D Evaluation Criteria September 16, 2010 Page 26 of 68

27 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 27 of 68

28 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 28 of 68

29 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 29 of 68

30 Z & Z Concept Plan September 16, 2010 Page 30 of 68

31 Z D Evaluation Criteria September 16, 2010 Page 31 of 68

32 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 32 of 68

33 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 33 of 68

34 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 34 of 68

35 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 35 of 68

36 Z D Evaluation Criteria September 16, 2010 Page 36 of 68

37 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 37 of 68

38 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 38 of 68

39 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 39 of 68

40 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 40 of 68

41 Z Concept Plan September 16, 2010 Page 41 of 68

42 Z D Evaluation Criteria September 16, 2010 Page 42 of 68

43 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 43 of 68

44 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 44 of 68

45 Z D Evaluation Criteria (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 45 of 68

46 Original ETZ Zoning Map 1990 September 16, 2010 Page 46 of 68

47 Nafzinger Arroyo Flood Plain September 16, 2010 Page 47 of 68

48 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map September 16, 2010 Page 48 of 68

49 Pamela Creek September 16, 2010 Page 49 of 68

50 Larry & Beverly Springer September 16, 2010 Page 50 of 68

51 Patricia Barry September 16, 2010 Page 51 of 68

52 Suzanne & Ken Clear September 16, 2010 Page 52 of 68

53 Doug & Lynn Dugan September 16, 2010 Page 53 of 68

54 Elizabeth Kronawetter September 16, 2010 Page 54 of 68

55 Elaine Jeveli Letter September 16, 2010 Page 55 of 68

56 Elaine Jeveli Letter (continued) September 16, 2010 Page 56 of 68

57 Marcia Minuk September 16, 2010 Page 57 of 68

58 Ed Kutzler September 16, 2010 Page 58 of 68

59 Joseph & Pauline Dias Letter September 16, 2010 Page 59 of 68

60 Pastor Chipper Moore September 16, 2010 Page 60 of 68

61 Bill & Wendy French Letter September 16, 2010 Page 61 of 68

62 Darby Whalen & Elaine Reeves September 16, 2010 Page 62 of 68

63 Pueblo Gardens Homeowners Association Petition September 16, 2010 Page 63 of 68

64 Pueblo Gardens Homeowners Association Petition (cont.) September 16, 2010 Page 64 of 68

65 Kapner September 16, 2010 Page 65 of 68

66 Kapner Proposal September 16, 2010 Page 66 of 68

67 Dugan Letter September 16, 2010 Page 67 of 68

68 Dugan Envelope September 16, 2010 Page 68 of 68