ZONE CHANGE EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ZONING COMMISSION DOÑA ANA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Doña Ana County Government Complex 845 N. Motel Blvd. Las Cruces, New Mexico 88007 Office: (575) 647-7350 MEETING DATE: August 20, 2015 CASE #: REQUEST: PURPOSE: PROPERTY OWNER/ APPLICANT/AGENT: LOCATION: Z15-004 / Verizon Zone Change Zone Change from ER4 to ER2 to consolidate two lots and construct a 70 cell tower. Resources for Children & Youth, Inc., Verizon Wireless, Justin Owen, Agent 2211 & 2215 N. Valley Dr. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Part of U.S.R.S Tract 7-28D & 9B-23 recorded in the Doña Ana County Clerks Office on 8/2/96, Instrument # 9617625 and 10/11/95, Instrument #9522200 PROPERTY SIZE: 2.17 & 0.75-acres (2.92-total) PARCEL ID NO.: 03-20208 & 03-0209 RECOMMENDATION: CASE MANAGER: Conditional Approval Steve Meadows, Planner REPORT CONTENTS: (1) Cover Page (2) Case Analysis and Staff Recommendation, (3) GIS Information & Maps (4) Application and Supporting Documents (5) Public Notification Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 1 of 27
SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE SITE ZONING LAND USE North South East West BACKGROUND ER4 - Residential, ½-acre minimum new lot size, single family site-built homes. City of Las Cruces City of Las Cruces ER2 - Residential, 2-acre minimum new lot size, single family site-built homes. Residential uses Institutional uses Residential uses Agricultural and residential uses Existing Conditions and Zoning: The subject properties encompass 2.17-acres and 0.75-acres, are irregularly shaped island between 3 EBID features and are located within an ER4 Zoning District. The subject parcels are currently the subject of an ETZ Subdivision (ETZS15-016) to consolidate the two properties into one 2.92-acre parcel to meet the proposed ER2 Zoning District s 2.0 acre minimum lot size requirement. The smaller (0.75-acre) parcel contains a 3,217 sq. ft. residence constructed in 1963. The 2.17-acre parcel contains three structures totaling approximately 4,325 sq. ft. utilized by the property owner, Resources for Children & Youth Inc. There are two existing Special Use Permits (SU98-026 &SU09-006) on the properties for the group home operated by the property owner. Access to the properties is from N. Valley Dr., considered a principal arterial (120 ft. R-O-W) by the Mesilla Valley MPO. EBID s Doña Ana Drain is located along the northern property lines of the two subject properties, the Quesenberry Lateral is located along the southern boundary of the larger (2.17-acre) parcel, and the Mesilla Drain abuts the southwestern corner of the 2.17 acre parcel. Currently, a 50 wide private road easement (Page 14) is located along the shared boundary (25 each) for access to the interior of the two parcels. The Request: The applicant is requesting a Zone Change from an ER4 (Residential, ½-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes) Zoning District to an ER2 (Residential, 2- acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes) Zoning District to receive approval for a Special Use Permit (SU15-011) to construct a 70 ft. cell tower for Verizon Wireless. Cell towers are not allowed within the ER4 Zoning District. APPLICABLE PLANS, POLICIES, AND CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL 1. Las Cruces Extra-territorial Zoning Ordinance No. 88-02, as Amended Section 1.6 Definitions Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 2 of 27
Spot Zoning: An amendment to a zoning ordinance that is not compatible with a comprehensive scheme of zoning, whether one lot, several lots or a large area. Spot zoning can also be created through variances, which are granted without regard for impact on the surrounding area. Section 2.1.B Zoning District Changes: Rezoning A zoning district change or rezoning is a change in classification of the zoning district map and shall be recorded and shown on the Official Zoning District Map. Zoning district changes shall not include initial zoning whenever ETZ boundaries are realigned. Conditional Zoning 2.1.B.1 2.1.B.2 2.1.B.3 2.1.B.4 2.1.B.5 2.1.B.6 Conditional Zoning may be initiated by the Planning Director, the Zoning Commission or by the applicant and shall limit and/or restrict those uses within the zoning district which would otherwise be permitted by right. A rezoning subject to condition is appropriate to allow certain uses that are compatible with the surrounding uses and environment. A condition attached to a zoning district may: a. limit the use of property affected so that one or more of the uses which would otherwise be permitted in the district being adopted shall not be permitted in the specific district as conditioned. b. require traditional design standards, time limitations relating to the construction of buildings, landscaping, streets, roadways, pathways, utilities, drainage ways and other site design features as may be necessary to protect the community or the environment from the impact of development. It shall be unlawful to utilize, sell or lease property rezoned with conditions without first providing to any prospective buyer or lessee a disclosure statement stipulating the conditions of the rezone, and without filing a copy of said disclosure with the County Planning Division. A conditional zoning shall be revoked and revert to the previous zoning district if the property within said district is not used or developed in accordance with the new district regulations within two (2) years from the date of the ETZ Authority. Any use or structure allowed by a Special Use Permit under the specified zoning district shall not be permitted by Conditional Zoning. Zone change procedures prescribed by this Code shall be applicable to Conditional Zoning. 2.1.B.7 Amendments to the Official Zoning Map shall be reflected by the lowercase c following the zone designation. 2.1.D Evaluation Criteria The Planning Director and the ETZ Commission may use the following general criteria when reviewing Special Use Permits and Zoning applications. The ETZ Commission Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 3 of 27
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.1 2.1.D.2 2.1.D.3 2.1.D.4 2.1.D.5 2.1.D.6 2.1.D.7 2.1.D.8 2.1.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. Current Zoning District: Section 3.1.E.2 ER4 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1.E.2.a PURPOSE The purpose of the ER4 district is to provide for single-family site-built homes in low densities together with such recreational facilities, public uses and accessory uses as may be necessary or are normally compatible with residential surroundings. 3.1.E.2.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The development requirements set for the ER4M district as outlined in Section 3.1.E.1.b of this Article are applicable to the ER4 district. 3.1.E.2.c ER4 PERMITTED USES The permitted uses set for the ER4M district as outlined in Section 3.1.E.1.c of this Article are applicable to the ER4 district, EXCEPT that mobile homes are not allowed in the ER4 district. 3.1.E.2.d ER4 SPECIAL USE PERMITS The Special Use Permit uses and conditions set for the ER4M district as outlined in Section 3.1.E.1.d of this Article are applicable to the ER4 district. Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 4 of 27
Section 3.1.E.1 ER4M RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1.E.1.a PURPOSE The purpose of the ER4M district is to provide for single-family site-built and mobile homes in low densities together with such recreational facilities, public uses and accessory uses as may be necessary or are normally compatible with residential surroundings. 3.1.E.1.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size 1/2 acre (except cluster development) Minimum lot width 100 feet Minimum lot depth 100 feet Minimum front setback 25 feet Minimum side setback 10 feet Minimum rear setback 25 feet Minimum building height 35 feet 3.1.E.1.c ER4M PERMITTED USES The following uses are permitted by right in the ER4M district: 1. Cluster developments in accordance with the Subdivision Regulations adopted by the ETZ Authority 2. Detached single-family site-built homes and mobile homes 3. 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 4. 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 this Ordinance. 5. Home occupations subject to Section 3.4 of this Article 6. 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. 7. Recreational vehicles such as boats, trailers or similar uses, limited to a maximum of one (1) per dwelling unit in the front or side yard, and no limitations for the rear yard, provided there is at least a distance of five (5) feet from any property line 8. 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 9. Septic tanks in accordance with the regulations of the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Division (EID) and Section 3.02 of this Article 10. Temporary real estate offices, when used in conjunction with a residential subdivision, provided such use is discontinued Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 5 of 27
upon the completion of the development or within three (3) years from the date the building permit is issued, whichever is sooner 11. Keeping small animals subject to Article VIII of this Ordinance 12. Keeping large animals on lots of one (1) acre or greater size subject to Article VIII of this Ordinance 3.1.E.1.d ER4M 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. All types of agriculture 2. Boarding houses and rest homes 3. Cemeteries 4. Community and publicly owned recreational centers, clubhouses and similarly used buildings and structures open to the public 5. Day care center or child care center for seven (7) or more children 6. Guest ranches 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 large animals and fowl on lots of less than one (1) acre in size 10. Keeping wild or exotic animals and fowl 11. Sale of farm produce provided it is raised on the premises 12. Veterinary facilities 13. Wineries and/or wine tasting rooms Proposed Zoning District: Section 3.1.B.2 ER2 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1.B.2.a PURPOSE The ER2 zoning district is intended as a residential district of single-family site-built homes on large size lots specifically designed for keeping certain livestock with not more than one (1) dwelling unit and customary accessory building upon one (1) lot. It is intended that the ER2 district meet the demand for those lifestyles that include the raising and keeping of animals in a rural atmosphere in areas where the impact of such activities on those who do not share this lifestyle is negligible. 3.1.B.2.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The development requirements set for the ER2M district are outlined in Section 3.1.B.1.b of this Article and are applicable to the ER2 district. Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 6 of 27
3.1.B.2.c ER2 PERMITTED USES The permitted uses set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.c of this Article are applicable to the ER2 district, EXCEPT that mobile homes are not allowed in the ER2 district. 3.1.B.2.d ER2 SPECIAL USE PERMITS The Special Use Permit uses and conditions set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.d of this Article are applicable to the ER2 district. Section 3.1.B.1 ER2M RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 3.1.B.1.a PURPOSE The ER2M zoning district is intended as a residential district of single-family site-built homes and mobile homes on large size lots specifically designed for keeping of certain livestock with not more than one (1) dwelling and customary accessory buildings upon one (1) lot. It is intended that the ER2M district meet the demand for those lifestyles that include the raising and keeping of animals in a rural atmosphere in areas where the impact of such activities on those who do not share this lifestyle is negligible. 3.1.B.1.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size Minimum lot width Minimum lot depth Minimum front setback Minimum side setback Minimum rear setback Maximum building height 2 acres (except cluster development) 120 feet 100 feet 25 feet 15 feet 25 feet 35 feet 3.1.B.1.c PERMITTED USES The permitted uses set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.c of this Article are applicable to the ER2M district. 3.1.B.1.d SPECIAL USE PERMITS The Special Use Permit uses and conditions set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.d of this Ordinance are applicable to the ER2M district. 2. ETZ Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 The proposed Zone Change Request does meet the Goals, Policies, and Objectives of the ETZ Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020: 3. Miller Criteria The Supreme Court of New Mexico, Miller versus Albuquerque, September 9, 1976, stated: The fundamental justification for an amendatory or repealing zoning ordinance is a change of conditions making the amendment or repeal reasonably necessary to protect the public interest. Also, a zoning amendment may cover and perfect previous defective ordinances or correct mistakes or injustices therein. Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 7 of 27
4. Spot Zone Spot Zoning (Bennett v. City Council For City of Las Cruces, 1999-NMCA-15, 126 N.M. 619) is determined on an ad hoc basis, considering: 1) the disharmony with the surrounding area; 2) the size of the area rezoned; and 3) the benefit of the rezoning to the community or the owner of the parcel. AGENCY COMMENTS DAC Engineering: 1) An NMDOT Driveway Permit may be required. 2) No Evaluation Criteria submitted. 3) Follow all required setbacks for the proposed zoning. 4) Adhere to all subdivision regulations and requirements. 5) Adhere to all regulatory agency comments, some agencies may require certain permits or licenses to be obtained. 6) Further submittals would warrant further comments. 7) A Grading Permit will be required at the time of construction. DAC Flood Commission: 1) Pursuant to FIRM No. 35013C0518 E, the subject property is currently located within Flood Zone X. areas determined to be outside the 500-year floodplain. There is a neighboring Special Flood Hazard Area Zone A directly north of the lot. Please be aware that the lot is susceptible to flooding despite not being located directly in a Special Flood Hazard Area. 2) Any new addition to impervious area will require runoff to be maintained on site via on-lot ponding. DAC Fire Marshal: Any future structures will be required to meet all fire code requirements. DAC Building Services: All permits shall be obtained prior to construction. DAC Rural Addressing Coordinator: No comments. DAC Zoning Codes: No open case. ACO Codes: No codes violations. NMED: Wastewater Treatment and Disposal-The applicant must submit a liquid waste application for proposed business. Water Supply/Water Quality. Solid Waste Disposal No comment. /Surface Drainage/Land Clearing/Dust Control No comment. NMDOT: Where is the proposed access off of Valley Dr.? Valley Dr. is a state road. Is there an existing driveway permit? If not, property owner needs to obtain one from NMDOT s Deming office. Mesilla Valley MPO: Valley Drive is a principal arterial requiring 120 R-O-W. CLC Planning Dept: No issues EBID: No objections to case # Z15-004. Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 8 of 27
Office of the State Engineer: No comments received. NOTICE / NOTIFICATION 30 letters of notification were sent on August 5, 2015, to the Area of Notification. Legal Ad was placed in the Las Cruces Sun-News on August 2, 2015. Signs placed on the property in a timely manner. Agenda placed on the DAC Web site. STAFF ANALYSIS The applicant is requesting a Zone Change on two parcels totaling 2.92-acres from ER4 (Residential, ½-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes) zoning to ER2 (Residential, 2-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes) zoning to facilitate the approval of a Special Use Permit (SU15-011) to construct a 70 ft. Verizon Wireless cell tower on the 2.92-acre consolidated parcels. 1) 2.1.D Evaluation Criteria and Analysis (Applicant s responses - Pages 16-17), Staff analysis in bold. 2.1.D.1: Determination of the number of homes, population, and population demographics. No new homes proposed. 2.1.D.2: Determination of potential traffic flows (average daily traffic) and where they will impact the transportation system. Agency comments indicate that N. Valley Dr. is designated as a principal arterial, and an access permit from the NMDOT District Office in Deming, NM (Page 8) is required. After construction of the cell tower, traffic will return to the current normal traffic pattern except for monthly monitoring and maintenance by cell tower personnel. 2.1.D.3: Determination of need for new commercial activity. New cell tower facility is needed to keep up with demand for high speed data services in the area. Surrounding cell tower facilities are near capacity. No other property in area would allow cell tower. 2.1.D.4: Determination of potential water and sewage needs. There will be no impact to water and sewage facilities currently in place on the two properties. Water and sewer will not be required for the cell tower. Temporary facilities will be provided by contractor during construction phase. 2.1.D.5: Evaluation of existing infrastructure capacities and an analysis of the ability of the existing system to accommodate the new development. NMDOT requires an access permit but all other infrastructure is adequate and will not be impacted. 2.1.D.6: The difference between capacity and impact should be stated. Those areas that are appropriate for the developer to underwrite should be negotiated between local government and developer. Infrastructure capacity is adequate and no new systems or improvements will be required per agency comments. Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 9 of 27
2.1.D.7: The ETZ should reserve the right to place appropriate zoning categories on environmentally sensitive areas, areas of historical significance, or areas on which contain endangered or rare species of animal or plant life. There has been no evidence submitted of any areas of historical significance, or areas containing endangered species. DAC Flood Commission comments (Page 8) indicate no areas of concern on the parcels. The DAC Engineering Dept will require a Grading and Drainage Plan at the time of construction to be submitted for approval. 2.1.D.8: Any analysis required should be undertaken and paid for by the developer and verified by the ETZ Commission. All fees have been paid by applicant. 2.1.D.9: Determination of impact of a proposed zone change on surrounding properties. Impact to the surrounding properties will be minimal as the proposed zone change is limited to a 2.92-acre area lying between three EBID features (Page 14) and N. Valley Dr. The proposed down zoning request will not allow any opportunity to build at a higher density which will ensure less impact to the residential neighborhoods. The proposed SUP (SU15-011) to construct the cell tower, if approved, will improve area emergency service communications and promote the safety and general welfare of the public. In staff s opinion, the zone change would have no adverse impacts to the surrounding properties, and would meet the 2.1.D Decisional Criteria. 2) ETZ Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 Comparing the proposed ER4 to ER2 Zone Change request with the Goals, Policies and objectives of the ETZ Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020, reveals the following that are met by this request: The proposed Zone Change Request does meet the following Goals, Policies, and Objectives of the ETZ Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020: Goal 11: Provide for the protection of life and property through efficient and effective police, fire, safety, health/medical care and hazardous material control. This request and subsequent approval and installation of a new telecommunications tower, will enhance the public s ability to communicate with emergency services, fire protection and law enforcement and enhance the safety of the citizenry of Doña Ana County with improved communication capabilities. 3) Miller Criteria In New Mexico, the primary justification for a zone change is spelled out in the Miller vs. City of Albuquerque ruling of 1976 which says the The fundamental justification for an amendatory or repealing zoning ordinance is a change of conditions making the amendment or repeal reasonably necessary to protect the public interest. Also, a zoning amendment may cover and perfect previous defective ordinances or correct mistakes or injustices therein. This is commonly known as the change or mistake rule which is widely interpreted as there has been a change in the conditions in the area of the subject property sufficient to warrant a need to protect the public, or that there was a mistake in the original zoning. The applicant is proposing to rezone two properties that will be consolidated through the ETZ Subdivision process (ETZS15-016) to construct a new cell tower on the site with approval of Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 10 of 27
Special Use Permit #SU15-011. Telecommunication facilities are not allowed within an ER4 Zoning District, hence the request for ER2 Zoning and the consolidation of the two properties into one 2.92-acre parcel. The consolidated parcels will meet the minimum lot size requirement (Page 6) of Section 3.1.B.2.b referencing Section 3.1.B.1.b of the ETZ Ordinance. The City of Las Cruces Community Development Department is currently reviewing the Applicant s request for an ETZ Subdivision (ETZS15-016) that will vacate the lot line between the two subject parcels and consolidate them into one parcel. The two parcels lie between N. Valley Dr. on the east, the Doña Ana Drain on the north, the Quesenbury Lateral on the south, and the Mesilla Drain to the west. These physical features isolate the 2.92 acres and support including them in the 2-acre minimum ER2 Zoning District adjacent to the parcels to the west and southwest versus the 1/2 acre minimum ER4 Zoning District that the parcels are currently located in (Page 22). Staff believes this was a mistake in the original zoning that would be corrected with the approval of this Zone Change request. The applicant states (Page 15) that current cell tower sites in the area are close to capacity and with the increased demand for additional high speed data to accommodate more smart devices, a facility is needed in this vicinity as shown on the two coverage maps (Page 17-18). They also state that no other sites that were contacted within the proposed area would agree to lease space to the carrier, and changing the zone on these two parcels would allow the system to be upgraded to maintain adequate coverage to the surrounding area. The change in population, the increase in demand for more high speed data services, and the current cell tower facilities being at or near capacity demonstrate a change of conditions has occurred and make it necessary to protect the public with the approval of this Zone Change request per the Miller Criteria. The applicant has overcome the presumption that the current zoning is the most appropriate, as these changes in conditions, and the two parcels are out of place with the ½ acre minimum ER4 Zoning District. The adjacent ER2 Zoning District, with a 2-acre minimum lot size is more appropriate and illustrates that the current zoning is not the most appropriate. Staff s analysis supports the conclusion that the original zone designation of ER4 was not the appropriate zoning therefore, the Zone Change to ER2 does meet the Miller Criteria and would be justified. 4) Spot Zone The applicants request for ER2 zoning would be in harmony with the ER2 residentially zoned properties to the west (Page 22) as it would be included in this large zoning district. The 2.92- acres would not be out of character with the properties within that ER2 Zoning District as it would conform to the acreage requirements of the district, with the current request (ETZS15-016) to consolidate the two properties into one, and be in sync with the larger lots of the ER2 Zoning District. The consolidated parcel bounded by the three EBID features referenced above, is an isolated parcel that is consistent with the ER2 Zoning District to the west versus the smaller lot (1/2-acre minimum) ER4 Zoning District to the north. Although it appears that the zone change only benefits the property owner and applicant, the proposed telecommunications facility on the site will enhance the voice and data coverage for the surrounding residents and benefit the general public, not just the applicant. These findings Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 11 of 27
provide the basis to conclude that the proposed Zone Change would not be considered a spot zone per the 1999 Bennett ruling. STAFF FINDINGS If the Extra-territorial Zoning Commission wishes to follow staff s recommendation of Approval of Case # Z15-004 / Verizon, staff recommends the following findings: 1. The request of this application is consistent with the requirements of the Las Cruces Extra-territorial 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 3-19-5(1), NMSA 1978 and the Joint Powers Agreement between Doña Ana County and the City of Las Cruces. Therefore, the Las Cruces ETZ Commission (ETZ-C) has jurisdiction to review this case. 3. The proposed Zone Change Request does meet Goal 11 of the Goals, Policies, and Objectives of the ETZ Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020. 4. The Zone Change request does satisfy the 2.1.D Evaluation Criteria of the ETZ Ordinance. 5. The subject parcels would be in harmony with the adjacent ER2 Zoning District. 6. The zone change would benefit the public as this proposed use will increase the safety and welfare of the area inhabitants by increasing the communication capacity in the area for emergency services. 7. The 2.92-acre parcel is large enough of an area and abuts an ER2 Residential Zoning District so it would not be considered a spot zone. 8. Per the Miller Criteria, the ER2 Zone Change request does meet the change of conditions criteria, as the increase in population, increase in data demands, and the need to upgrade the system to continue adequate services in the area requires additional cell tower sites. 9. The applicant has overcome the presumption that the existing zoning is the most appropriate and the Zone Change is necessary to protect the public. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on staff analysis and findings, the request meeting the Miller criteria, the 2.1.D Evaluation Criteria, the Goals, Policies and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020, and not being considered a spot zone, staff recommends Conditional Approval of Zone Change Request Case # Z15-004 / Verizon with the following condition: 1. A driveway permit shall be obtained from the NMDOT District Office in Deming, NM. Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 12 of 27
Site Plan Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 13 of 27
Detailed Survey Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 14 of 27
Narrative Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 15 of 27
Projected Growth Graph Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 16 of 27
Existing Area Coverage Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 17 of 27
Area Coverage With New Cell Tower Existing LTE coverage with Doolittle Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 18 of 27
Applicants 2.1.D Responses Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 19 of 27
Applicants 2.1.D Responses (continued) Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 20 of 27
Proposed Zoning Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 21 of 27
Zoning Map Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 22 of 27
Area Land Use Aerial Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 23 of 27
Close-up Aerial of Parcels Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 24 of 27
Area of Notification Map Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 25 of 27
Area of Notification Aerial Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 26 of 27
Area of Notification List Extra-territorial Zoning Commission August 20, 2015 Page 27 of 27