[Music]
you're on okay well welcome back we're
to our special City Council meeting loss
for City Council today is Monday July 13
20 28 proximately 5:30 p.m. we have just
one item on the agenda which is going to
be basically a an appeal but the first
item of business is I need to ask I need
to do the conflict of interest statement
this where I'll ask if any member of the
City Council city man manager or any
member of the city staff has any known
conflict of interest on any item on the
agenda none seeing none we got yes this
for disclosure purposes I know that I
think I've received a lot of commentary
on this project since it's in my
district I have either I did not respond
which feels terrible or if I did I did
direct the people that I would not be
able to help them out in this instance
so that I would be able to act
appropriately with my role okay great
and that's that's the main thing is that
you remain unbiased so that's good that
you didn't respond so so this is
resolution number 21 - 0:09
which is a resolution appealing the
approval by the Planning and Zoning
Commission on May 26 2020 for an infill
development process application looks
like we're gonna need a motion in a
second please don't move diabeetus do be
okay second it a motion made by
councillor made a studi second by
Calvert Bencomo
okay so what we're gonna have here is it
looks like Lego is gonna go ahead and
start the discussion so I don't know if
that's gonna be Jennifer this is a Larry
Nichols with coeliac David where we'll
begin the opening and legal will be
making comment a little later in the
presentation Thank You Larry thank you
sir
good evening mayor and city council this
is David we're at the community Island
apartment and as you've already stated
that your salt case this evening is an
appeal of a development project that was
approved by the city by the Planning and
Zoning Commission in May the appeal
itself is within the city's infill area
and it proposed that its approval and
the okay to go forward with it using the
city's infill development process this
afternoon or this evening
community develop will provide an
overview of the project and also an
overview and background of the plan
zoning commission action that they took
on the project the representative for
the developer Scott Bannister is
available and it's going to be asked to
provide his input into the project and
then the appellant a group of
individuals that appealed the approval
of this infill development project will
then make their presentation and comment
there were up to 11 individuals that
asked to present on the case but our
understanding is there's probably only
five they're going to speak this evening
but there may be more just to give you a
heads up with that I'm going to turn it
over to planners Sara Gonzales and
she'll provide you the background
information and also an overview of the
infill development process that was used
to review and for the plan Zoning
Commission to act on this case
thank you David well if I had a dollar
for every David that working for the
city right now that'd be rich it was a
popular name um
good evening City Council this is Sara
Gonzales for the record I'm from the
Planning Department I will go ahead and
share my screen with everyone so that
way you can see the presentation
essentially that was provided and give
you some background information for the
Turrentine property and so yes this was
an appeal from the planning and zoning
approval for an infill development plan
located at 22:45 Turrentine Drive as
part of the appeal the output the
appellant are requesting to overturn the
decision of the 12 unit apartment
complex at 22:45 Turrentine
the appeal was submitted by several
property owners that are adjacent to the
subject property and they are contesting
the approval findings for the planning
and zoning approval as well as the
approval process and if it was in
compliance with our public participation
that is allowed at pnz hearings some of
the goals that are identified for an IDP
or an infill development proposal is to
develop active uses compatible with the
surrounding area it's also asking to
promote economic development in the
central part of the city and then
advance the vision of elevate las cruces
the purpose of our infill development
overlay district
is to provide a streamline review
process encourage development of vacant
and underutilized parcels several the
parcels that are located within our
infill development overlay do pose
challenges based on the size their
shapes or sometimes just their
jurisdiction of what they are next to so
we also do incentivize these uses these
parcels that are ready for redevelopment
within the urban core and then allow for
development of parcels regardless of
their zoning designation the process can
be used for zoning variances special use
permits planned JUnit developments
subdivisions building permits time
permits and business registrations the
criterion which P and Z or the Planning
and Zoning Commission can approve an IDP
is based on if it fosters goals
objectives and policies of elevate las
cruces does it advance the purpose of
the zoning code public health public
safety the general offer an orderly
development within jurisdictions there
is also a provision that no infill
development proposal will be postponed
unless it is agreed upon by the
applicant as part of the appeal process
any member of the public or the
community may appeal a decision made by
the Planning and Zoning Commission based
on section 38 - 13 the appeal and must
provide some type of written statement
stating all the issues to be considered
by City Council and only those issues
self shall be considered in this case
City Council by a majority vote may go
ahead and hear the
eating's and afterwards decide to the
reverse or affirm any order or decision
made by an administrative official or
Commission some of the background as far
as the IDP proposal that yes the
property is located at 22:45 Turrentine
Drive it is located approximately 595
feet north of University Avenue it is
owned Darwin a which is single-family
medium density also part of our info
overlay district the parcel is 0.975
acres in size and is currently a vacant
lot there was some concrete and at one
point in time there was a development
proposed however it was not completed or
fully constructed and therefore it has
now been removed and it is just a vacant
lot the request is to allow for twelve
apartment units being two buildings with
six units on each side most of the
development standards were met however
the infill development process was used
in order to fulfill the density within
elevate las cruces this property is
located within the suburban place type
designation north is suburban and then
south is going to be the urban place
types this actually provides multifamily
up to fifteen or thirty dwelling units
per acre is the recommendation by
elevate las cruces if a property were to
come in and want to do multifamily these
are the development standards in which
staff would look at to identify what
deviations they may need as going
through this infill process if they
qualified some of the developments were
parking standards for each multi-family
unit you're required one and a half
stalls which is 18 stalls required for a
twelve unit development the applicant is
compliant the setbacks require 15 foot
front five foot side and a rear in the
rear yard of 20 feet the applicant is
compliant in this area for an AR wa naze
ein designation the maximum height is 35
feet the applicant is proposing 25 feet
which is below the maximum allowance
which means the applicant would be in
compliance the design standards show
that for residential properties there
are no designations of putting in any
scaping however the absent is going to
prune in landscaping as part of its
buffering that will not also be required
as well
fire access is required to have 24 feet
which is a two way driving aisle the
applicant is proposing the 35 feet there
is a dumpster enclosure that will be
outlined within the site to not go to
that as far as when we get to the site
plan it is located on the south side
that is fully enclosed and will have to
be accessible for the utilities
department there is aa ponding required
on the site being that the property is
located within a flood zone so there are
requirements as far as ponding and
drainage that will have to be taken in
place the property will have to go
through essentially a Lamar and a claw
Mar which gets submitted to FEMA for
approval based on those approval the
applicant will then have to provide the
dimensions of what the ponding will have
to be any other restrictions as far as
maintaining the water on the site since
the property is adjacent to residential
districts and is proposing a residential
use buffering is not required however
the applicant did stayed in his previous
presentation that he would be providing
trees adjacent to the property lines the
applicant is not meeting the one
criteria in which the info was proposed
for which is the density 8 dwelling
units per acre is what is permitted by
an Arwen a zoning district being that
the property is 0.975 acres this would
allow for 7.8 units if the property were
to be subdivided they are proposing
eleven point seven units per acre which
means it does not meet the criteria here
is a site plan of the subject property
in which the applicant used to identify
any deviations that would be needed
through the info development process the
access is coming off of turn time Drive
you would then have a 35-foot driving
access lane which would then lead into
the parking lot the applicant is meeting
the parking standards and the parking
requirements for the number of units to
be placed on the property on each side
basically your west and east side is the
six units which are two storey
apartments so you have three units on
the bottom and three units on the top
and that would make your 12 low
here on the south side is the location
of the current dumpster that are the
dumpster that would be placed and
enclosed and whatever utilities to have
access through the parking lot
the remaining portion would be utilized
for any of the drainage or landscaping
within the property that would provide
where you would have additional ponding
so water's coming from any of the site
it would Pond into that area
here's a zoning map of the subject
property as you can see highlighted in
yellow it is owned Darwin a which is our
single family medium density which
permits 8 dwelling units per acre to the
south of the property is our University
overlay district
so this abuts a university area where
you can have multiple uses it can be
mixed use as far as commercial
multifamily or single-family proposed
within those properties to the south
here is an aerial map of the subject
property as you can see there used to be
a concrete slab in this on the subject
property that has now been removed
there are single-family residential
properties located to the north as well
as to the west we then see the apartment
complex there is multiple units on the
south side that is going along
University which are duplex I do believe
this might be a fraternity home you then
see I hop on the corner of Turrentine
and University and then you would have
the Plaza Hotel prior to the PNC hearing
that was held on May 26th all the notice
did go out to the surrounding property
owners within 500 feet meeting the
city's requirement for noticing a
verdict pansies consideration it was to
look at the staff report and the
presentation by staff there were public
comments and input summarized by staff
and discussed by the Planning and Zoning
Commission as well as the applicant
addressing any additional questions that
were posed by the public or the posi
with that pnz commissioners approved the
IDP based on it met their criteria
within elevate las cruces by providing
mixed juice and mix housing it provided
also the infill overlay which would say
that any development in the info overlay
is something that we start to see a
little more often because we're
encouraging development of these
odd-shaped parcels
it means our housing plan as far as
we do have a variety of uses for housing
to apply for the community so that way
they are not limited to just
single-family there can be multi-family
housing as well also staff reports
recommendations staff did at this time
recommend approval based on it also met
all of these criterias when the public
notice was sent out to the prior prior
to the pnz hearing we did receive
several emails and phone calls
requesting that the public hearing be
postponed until such time that this
could take place in person being the
current circumstances and being that an
IDP does have a provision called out
unless the applicant is willing to
postpone it the case would not be
postponed we did take in public input
via email each Panzi member was provided
copies of all the correspondence and
emails that were sent in to staff and
they did confirm that they were received
during the public hearing as part of
that process the pnz chair did a staff
prior to the meeting to discuss the
neighborhood concerns expressed in the
correspondence however not to read each
individual email so they would like us
to go through each comment and then kind
of address them at that time
Commissioner Thomas did provide a list
to staff in order to go through this was
the list in which Commissioner Thomas
provided his staff and said can you
please address these and kind of go
through them as far as how they meet the
current requirements and what's going on
within the city so currently yes the
property is on Darwin II which is
single-family residential however the
infield does allow for proposal of
multiple uses as far as not complying
with the current zoning district we had
addressed the parking stalls which said
that the site met the minimum parking
standards of the city's code of one and
a half parking stalls per unit drainage
was going to be handled through FEMA
which was going to be that low Mark
Lamar since it is already located within
the flood zone the narrow alleyway in
which was discussed in some of the
emails is the entranceway that comes
into a property most commercial
developments have an entranceway of 30
feet this one has 35 feet which also
exceeds what a commercial zoning
designation would be as far as access
the privacy from a two-story building in
this area since the property is owned
Darwin a
does have an allowance of 35 feet so
that means it could go up to three
stories based on the surrounding
neighborhood to the north yes they are
single stories as well as to the two
properties that are located on the west
however with our 1a Stander's being 35
feet they could build a three-story
single family home by right in the
current state we discussed the work crew
behavior there is a time frame in which
construction crews can actually go out
to a site they can begin at 7 o'clock in
the morning and then they have a time
frame in which they have to complete to
where that way they maintain the sites
there are still requirements as far as
cleaning up after properties erosion
control ensuring that the dust is kept
because we do have ordinances in place
the light pollution which is referred to
as basically our la our outdoor lighting
ordinance which is chapter 39 will
regulate the light that is being
reflected onto the surrounding
properties being that the parking lot is
directed into the center of the property
the lighting would be reflected within
the middle of the property as opposed to
the residential neighborhood surrounding
it the increase in noise we do have a
noise ordinance that is regulated
through our coastal farming which is
chapter 19 the increase in traffic I did
verify with our traffic engineer Hector
that us us as far as how much traffic is
generated per the peak hour at the most
time for a 12 unit apartment complex in
his results he did find that during the
weekdays you would have between 6 to 8
during a peak hour and the weekend seems
to be the most and the weekend is at
going to be six exits and six entries
which leaves us to 12 generation trips
per hour at a peak hour the location of
the dumpster has been discussed that is
located on the south side and will have
an opaque fence around it
the landscaping buffer is not required
however the applicant is going to put in
buffering and I will defer to the
applicant when it is just time to speak
the area is not mixed juice as part of
the plan so within this staff recognized
that there is commercial there is
multifamily and then residential so
staff does clarify this as the
a mixed use area the majority of the
property is located to the north our
single family however we justify it as
an area so we're looking at our mix
choose overlay or corridors as far as a
general area in such as far as it is
mixed use because it has multiple uses
within that time and within that area
some of the concerns were new tangent
new tenants infringing on the safety
there were concerns of apartments being
constructed next to single-family and
what that would be doing to the actual
neighboring property owners the overall
characteristic of the neighborhood by
adding in more density it can create
more people more traffic and be more
intrusive there is also the last comment
which was removal of the existing trees
there are some trees that are located
along the entrance of the property which
would be their access aisle and I will
defer to the applicant as far as what
those trees will be doing or if they're
going to try and remove and replace
within the property but with that it
concludes my presentation and I will
stay as far as your options for voting
if you do vote yes this approves the
appeal which would deny or reverse the
decision made by the Planning and Zoning
Commission and if you vote no then you
would be denying the appeal which would
affirm the planning and zoning approval
of the infill development I would have
if there's any questions I'm more than
welcome to ask or we also have the
applicant and then the appeal ins as
well I think Sarah looks like we were
going to I don't know if councillor
Florida's had her hand up it's been up
since since last meeting oh she forgot
to put it down or if she had a question
councillor Flores did you have a
question
okay let me go to Council Bencomo John
spring como yeah question yes Thank You
mayor um thanks for that Sara can you go
back to I am the only sort of um concern
I had was the one thing you said the
applicant did not meet the per acre I'm
wondering if you yeah
yes I'm wondering if you could discuss
more on that density and if it doesn't
meet that requirement how that's not
sort of a deal-breaker like can you
explain to me this piece
yes and Saric and Sara Gonzales with the
record again and counselor Ben coma what
it means in the infill development
overlay is you can essentially propose
items that are not allowed by write in
the code so you can deviate from zoning
standards you can deviate from land uses
and so it gives you that change of
saying maybe the property is very hard
to design so you can put in different
items or different uses in this case the
applicant met all the requirements
should do multifamily but did not meet
the requirement of the density in this
property based on its zoning it would
only allow one single-family home as it
is by right right now so this one acre
parcel could have one home they use the
infill development process in order to
accommodate saying more density can be
developed on the site meeting the
provisions of multifamily but they
needed that infill development deviation
in order to do the apartment complex
okay got it
thank you Sara looks like David where
wanted to make a comment David thank you
mayor Councillor Ben Cohen well the
other thing I wanted to add was one of
the purposes of the infill overlay was
to provide some incentives for those
properties to be developed and so an
increase in density is another reason
someone may choose to to go forward with
development of a property
thank you
that was countable okay coughs our
latest TV yes thank you um on this side
it talks about the maximum height um
does the proposed 25 feet does that
include the kind of raised level that
the buildings would need to sit at to
prevent that the flooding mayor and
councillors juvey at this point in time
the theme I'm Sara Gonzales for the
record the FEMA documents have not been
submitted because if the infill proposal
does not go through then they've spent
that time in that effort submitting in
something that's not going to be
actually developed so until the actual
clamor and Larmour lomar go through to
FEMA to see if the property would either
have to be raised or would have to be
lowered it would be measurement from the
ground floor so wherever that level
would be then it would be an additional
25 feet for that the maximum height okay
so is there a possibility that the items
might go above the maximum height
requirement or do you think that they
would be able to still meet that
requirement no it should be a good mayor
and then counselors to be CEREC and it
would meet the maximum environment
because even wherever the ground level
is there still basing that on the actual
building development and so essentially
just like the neighboring properties
that are around it if they were located
within the the flood zone area and had
to raise their properties if for every
year raised level as measured at is when
you actually begin so it won't change
the actual design of the buildings at 25
feet it may just change their grade
level which is definitely some of the
things that we run into for a lot of our
developments within the city and there
was also talking about the landscape
buffer would that be on the side of the
Lots that backyard is facing the
development
counselors to be am Sarah for the record
I would like to defer to the applicant
as far as how he's going to actually
landscape that property and for more
clarification since by standards and by
right they don't require to put in
landscaping but I would defer to see if
they would be putting in walls if they
were you putting in trees or how their
owns actual landscaping above her
adjacent to those properties will breath
and mr. mayor if I may please
yes I've raised my hand this Larry
Nichols for the record if possible I
think it would be beneficial to the
mayor and council if the applicant could
give you some information on his
proposal and then I think it would help
answer a lot of the questions that may
be coming up at this point
sure no I have no problem with that
let's let's go ahead and have the
applicant do that and then we'll do
public input and then I believe there's
members of the of the neighborhood that
wish to speak come on are you there okay
I'm sorry
can you hear me yes okay Scott banister
developer you know the project I've had
the land for I don't know probably ten
years been kind of waiting for the
market to to be good to develop this and
and it is now there's a demand for four
apartments here in Las Cruces so we went
in there and we evaluated the property
it's it's it's a very odd shaped and you
know the very established neighborhood
so we listened to their concerns I went
over and talked to the neighbor to the
west which you know I felt would be the
most impacted because their their house
runs parallel with the lane that's
that's the entrance for us so got
feedback from them they were concerned
about the the very large mature
established trees that were there and
and you know very valid there's there's
no way that we could get around and not
taking them out but I felt like you know
it
be the right thing to do is go ahead and
just have them removed and then
replanted out on another property
because they are such you know really
really mature healthy trees so that was
that was kind of first thing that we we
talked about the second was where the
property is almost all the the backyards
well all the backyards on the north side
and the one on the west side that I was
referring to their backyards are
surrounded or surround the property so
they they were concerned about privacy
and that kind of thing so what what I
was proposing is to create a buffer with
landscaping I pine quick-growing pine
trees that would give you know a pretty
good vertical growth annually so you
know within probably two three years we
should be able to give them you know the
privacy in their backyard that they're
that they're desiring they all have
chain-link fence so you know they can
you can see through that but the
property itself to the south is is Ben's
property which you know kind of faces
University and I'm certain though
they'll you know utilize it to some type
of commercial applications so really
putting a house in this property you
know being surrounded by all backyards
and then a commercial development it
just it wasn't feasible at all so we're
trying to get the the you know maximum
use out of it that's why we we proposed
the twelve we can meet all the parking
requirements drainage lighting and
everything so I mean I think this is
really the type of property that
whenever you guys introduced elevate las
cruces this is exactly the type of
property that you are identifying and
we're trying to develop so if anybody
has any specific questions I'd be happy
to to answer
Callister Bencomo
Thank You mayor hello again mr.
Bannister hello I'm curious a while
about the when you proposed the about
the trees to the neighbors right there
to the west what was their reaction I'm
curious how folks reacted to that the
only neighbor that I talked to was the
one to the west and actually I talked to
two different ladies maybe it was a
mother and a daughter
two separate times but the first time I
didn't bring it up because I wasn't
aware you know I just told them hey I'm
the developer I'm gonna be doing you
know some some development here yadda
yadda if you have any you know feedback
that kind of thing and so it was really
early in but the and I can't tell you
the gals name but it was the young gal
that lives there
they seemed receptive to the idea of not
just tearing the tree down and getting
rid of it so Elser a bit stupid thank
you thank you mister barrister um it's
clear question regarding that landscape
buffer then can you talk to me about the
decision to go with that instead of
perhaps eight-foot privacy fence i from
reading the materials look like some
people who are concerned about people
being equal to view in the back yard and
so I'm not sure the your thinking was
with going with one way or the other
yeah that the shape of a lot it's really
you know be really challenging to put
you know like a rock wall just not only
from an expense standpoint but I don't
you know I haven't gotten any feedback
on if that's what they would prefer that
oh it just seemed like you know a tree
buffer would be a lot more appealing
than a rock wall so I haven't gotten any
specific feedback on that I'm sorry
thank you
and thank you man so Scott let me just
ask you a couple questions so that those
from from the plant from a look of the
plans you're not going to be able to
enter your project through Turrentine
closest off of near I hop that's not
going to no wait no bins owns that
property oh he's getting to give me an
easement I'd love that
yeah no I I wondered so that's gonna be
it's gonna be blocked off what - what
what port heart does he own that
property mr. mayor if you would like
this is David on for the record I can
work on pulling up a county parcel map
so you can see this I'll work on that
now and I'll let you know when it's done
okay well that answer that one question
because I wonder why is that that's
where that concrete so did you buy from
from bins if you don't mind ask no no it
was uh it was like twelve so my other
question is excuse me my other question
is isn't those areas in the flood zone
correct so you I think you have the
opportunity if and I think it was kind
of alluded to a little bit to actually
get it out of the flood zone by putting
in more film was that correct yes and
and so would then also do you know if
that would be beneficial to the year to
the neighbors as well I don't see a
detriment or a benefit either way
honestly I mean will the benefit to them
would be with our with our draining and
grading plan you know it would it would
improve the draining back there because
you know it's all just dirt so it does
kind of you know get a little sloppy
back there okay I see I see that lot now
okay now that all makes sense because I
can see where why you didn't want to
build on that other
because it looks like from thanks David
actually there was Sarah Gonzalez mr.
mayor and and where what are the words
subject property on the map
that's the parcel that's owned by mister
met bins and it does wrap around a
Turrentine and mr. mayor because I
worked here a long time I was the first
staff in the planning department that
did the infill development plan back in
the early 90s and mr. Bannister mr.
Benzes property has been on that infill
list from from the beginning in the 90s
early 90s it was taken for a long time I
try to buy that road off you know often
okay so what I'm trying to get at is is
if there was a way you know as an added
benefit and I'm just gonna guess here
I'm gonna just throw this out here that
some of those residents if they still
have a mortgage they have to pay flood
insurance but if you were to get it to
the point where you get them out of the
flood zone that saves them probably a
thousand bucks a year if minimum if not
more 1500 or so in flood insurance is
expensive and you know so that that and
then obviously for you it's your benefit
to get out of the flood zone because try
and insure a commercial building with
flood insurance that's a pretty pretty
penny for one of those that's probably
three to five thousand dollars a year in
flood insurance remainder this interest
to get it out yes dip it all on for the
record that's where Sarah is talking
about the Lamar the letter of map
provision and the kumar's
conditional letter of map provision per
the city's ordinance RMS for for storm
water management as part of the FEMA
process mr. Bannister does have to bring
his building pad elevation out of the
flood zone that is required by ordinance
that's where the discussion was raising
the fill to build the house out of the
flood zone that's in addition to any on
lot drainage that he has to address
where he creates impervious material
flood zone on the
the city has in this area essentially
runs from Gomez pond all the way over to
the Courtyard Marriott and the Las
Cruces Convention Center it's a huge
area it is not something that this is
similar this would be similar to El
Molino you which was a multi-year 20
year plus project and required land
acquisition and lowering of the streets
to pull those parcels out of there and
we would need somewhere to put that
flooding in the event of a major storm
event so mr. Bannister will meet his
requirements the the flood zone has
changed over the years and some of his
neighbors especially the single-family
area and IHOP is a good example I hop is
elevated because it is in that flood
zone
so they had to bring the flood elevation
the pace elevation of the building up
some of his neighbors on the other hand
probably have houses that are within the
flood zone and thus have expensive flood
insurance no yeah no well you know I
don't know if he was aware of that but
by force by getting him my ordinance to
get out of the flood zone you're forcing
him to save three to five thousand a
year on Fletcher and it helps the city
because it saves all of our ratepayers
that play flood insurance because
there's fewer of them in there that
doesn't mean the property's not still
within the flood zone his property is it
means that his base elevation of the
buildings be out of the flood zone
that's the the reason to bring in all
that fill and raise the the pad
elevations let me just interrupt for
just a second Adrian are we did we lose
broadcast
not that I see more show on the internet
streaming again because we're a little
behind so it could plug outs okay
because I'm getting comment from the
media that that wanna know if the
medians meeting stopped which it didn't
of course okay
alright so then they're on comcast
channel 20 I'll be darned okay well so
the other the other question is so you
wanted to build 12 six units and six
units right single family are they two
bedrooms three bedroom two bedroom two
bedroom two bath yes really
okay yeah
very familiar with those okay well if
there's no questions let's go to I have
a couple comments read and then we'll
open up to the members of the
neighborhood so the first one is from
from Paul funk dr. funk says I oppose
the proposed variance to allow twelve
apartment units on one lot in the middle
of a large single-family neighborhood
for the following sound reasons the
entrance of the subject property is from
a single-family residential neighborhood
and the streets our children and
grandchildren play are not designed to
safely carry the increased traffic that
will result although we experience
motorists treating Farney Lane or like a
state highway than a street
it has families living on it there are
250 single-family homes in a contiguous
neighborhood close to the university
most are well kept and several are
occupied by the second generation of
families that first owned them using
this neighborhood as an entrance to a
multi-family apartment complex will
negatively impact the entire
neighborhood I present a solid evidence
that this is no mere dire prediction but
the experience of this community in
actual fact as soon as the becks Street
Apartments were occupied frame right
crime rate
and our neighborhood became the scene of
drug deals that even murders who would
want this question mark there are eight
single family homes bordering the
subject property placing an apartment
complex touching their property lines
will be devastating will be devastating
to the property values and their quality
of life a terribly unfair price for
eight families to pave so one
development or make a short-term profit
kindly paw a PhD 390 party
Barney Lane and I got one from Dennis
black but it's it's basically recanting
Paul funks message it just says I wish
to add my name to those who object to
the zoning change I've seen what
happened over on Beck Street and do not
wish see more of the same with this
project Dennis black 1926 Drive so those
are the only two that were delivered to
me so I'm going to go ahead and open it
up and the ones that I was going to
allow to speak or the ones that I have
and I'll just review that list
excuse me we have a Phyllis Koestler ten
minutes
Jillian Rowan ten minutes Sam row in
three minutes
Elaine chera three minutes Robin
Hastings three minutes Mike McGonagall
three minutes Mary
Darren Brock three minutes Rob Hoffman
three minutes and Paul funk three
minutes so if you weren't let's sit on
here I'm sorry I can't let you speak Oh
Robert you have a comment you'd like to
say Robert qabil mayor council this is
Robert kebaya with the City Attorney's
Office I would just ask that if you
could swear in the appellant sand then
of course we're in mr. Bannister when he
responds to them okay I think
Christina's gonna do that I mean I could
I don't know know either way I'm sorry
okay no problem so we'll go ahead and
Robert we can have them swearing right
now so that any time they speak that's
their under oath is that correct
Meteor council that's correct okay so
why don't we start with you Scott since
you're readily available and then we'll
go to the first
speaker yeah so Christine are you there
yes sir I am you want to swear Scott
Bannister and then God I need you to
state your name and address please
Scott Bannister 680 South Ferry kurz
Road Los Cruces eight eight zero zero
five mr. Fenster do you swear or affirm
that the testimony you're about to give
is the truth and nothing but the truth
enter penalty of law yes I do thank you
okay so next is gonna be speaking is
Phyllis Koestler so Phyllis are you on
the on the video or on the phone can you
hear me yes well that's good I'm glad to
hear that yes I am ready to speak as
soon as I'm sworn in thank you yes ma'am
okay so we'll just need you to state
your name and address please my name is
Phyllis Kessler and my address in las
cruces is 5:40 college place and my
address in Oregon is 1350 110th Street
West Linn Oregon 9 7 0 6 8 my son is the
prime the house in Las Cruces is my
son's primary residence may I have your
son's name my son's name is Karl with a
K last name is Pressler hey ok so he's
not on it as we are and second is hot
striker no he is not on there is a with
your med student in Artesia at the
moment ok Christine miss Kessler do you
swear or affirm that the testimony
you're about to give is the truth and
nothing but the truth under penalty of
law I do thank you okay ma'am you have
ten minutes to speak so please go ahead
and start whenever you're ready mayor
City Council thank you very much for the
opportunity to speak and that you heard
our are willing to listen to our appeal
I for one have no objection to a
building being put back there when I
first bought the property three years
ago it was a little dismayed to see the
the weed laden the construction dump lot
and currently the Marriott which shines
its lights on to our houses every night
and so initially I expressed to my
neighbor I'm this is right where you
know if there could be some pluses
however the more I became familiar with
the plan I had to say to myself I really
feel that the proposed structure is
disrespectful to the neighborhood and to
the the words and some of the other
intent of the elevat-- las cruces plan
as a resident of Portland Oregon or just
south of Portland Oregon I really have
to ask the question why do you want an
infill why do you really want to
increase your population density it is
not that great to have more people in a
small area and I say this having watched
Portland grow from the city the size of
Las Cruces when I moved here in 1972 for
this city it now is and what it brings
with it is a lot of other problems
traffic being a major one long lines
huge commute issues inversion layers etc
so I am going to ask you carefully to
consider why it is that you want to fill
this in not why it is that you want to
build in that lot which i think is fine
but why you really really want to
increase the population density to the
extent that you do it is not that great
especially in this era of kovat I have
to question mr. managers Dennis I'm
sorry I always muck up your name mr.
Bannister statement this is a good time
to build I'm a property owner and a
landlord I have several properties and
currently the real estate trend is not
towards city dwelling and apartments
it's actually quite away from that so
please that's really not what it is the
facts aren't in dispute
its vendors are when a its point 97
acres it is part of infill we dispute a
few things one at the hearing that we as
landowners were not given a chance to
properly speak
which means yes our emails and our
letters were accepted but they were
distilled and read and that is not the
same as having a voice heard at that and
we appreciate that those efforts were
made but they were not complete effort
from a land owner perspective I think
that the suggested project of a 12
apartment complex simply places too much
of a burden on the land and on the usage
at my reading of our 1a is that you
could put 8 dwelling units there I could
be wrong and if it's only one then
that's even better the land as it is
because if it's irregular shape is not
completely able to be built on and so
that really minimizes the size that the
the building footprint can occupy and so
if you look at the surrounding
neighborhood what you'll see is that
most of our houses are on about ten
thousand square feet which is a quarter
of an acre and given the size of that we
feel that four units would be much
better to put on that would be
consistent with the overall neighborhood
second is that the the traffic flow for
me and for everybody else along that is
problematic at 610 was it six to twelve
cars an hour those are right in our
backyard this was not the Midwest where
there's alleyways and a buffer this is
literally white in our backyards the
existing streets that are there or in
our front yard the traffic utilization
is minimal the only way for the people
in that apartment complex to get to
their apartment complex is via that
narrow alleyway which again is going to
put a constant stream of traffic behind
our apartment place not just for the
dwellers but for their guests and for
any other vehicles that come in not
simply a huge burden on all of us you
address to a certain extent the the AE
flood zone that were in even if he does
elevate his property and meets
everything else that's not going to
affect my FEMA policy I can tell you
because what FEMA has told me is if any
part of your property touches that
you're you
to be in that no sir wrong and he can
help me with us that's great second I
think that although the findings say it
comports with the elevate las cruces
plan when I took the time to read
through that plan the thing that
impressed me the most and it was
repeated over and over throughout your
your elevate las cruces plan was
consideration must be given to the
compatibility of a proposed development
with pre-existing and proximate
proximate that's me a land owner land
uses in terms of scale they're all
single-family dwellings that are one
level high one-story high form aesthetic
site design trip generation and
environmental operational impacts light
noise odors hours of operations that's
just going to really burden us and then
secondly there was a follow-up statement
which was to promote identical and
identifiable neighborhood character and
form and improve aesthetics and safety I
am Not sure that that traffic which is
going to be going downturn time as soon
as they discover that as a parallel rows
to Main and Valley is going to be any
bit safer
we do have privacy issues if you look at
the footprint of that it is just pushing
on all of our property lines there's
very little setback because of how the
parking lot has to fit in there again if
that were reduced from the 12 the the
two building 12 units saying down to
four in terms of a row house or a patio
houses which is consistent with our 1a
then then it could be made to work in my
opinion drainage issues are again
critical one's privacy issues I very
much appreciate that mr. Bannister is
considering putting in trees I would
also like to see a privacy fence of some
sort because trees have trunks and you
can see through the trunks to what
everything is going on our car is going
to be parking literally up against our
fence line or right there or is that
going to be
actually a fire zone where they can't
park and if they can't park there then
they're going to be parking on
Turrentine and they're going to be
burdening turn times so so there are
issues there that have yet to be
addressed and completely resolved the
height issue they say we're all
single-family dwellings were all one
story that is the entirety of Crescent
Park which is I believe the two hundred
and fifty houses to our to the north of
us and that's the last undeveloped lot
and probably for good reason it's a
difficult one to develop and I
appreciate that and again even though it
was stated that well one house could go
in at 35 feet so this deviation downward
from the 35 foot permissible height is
fine word only one house we wouldn't
have potentially 24 people or more
living there it would be one house one
family like the one actually there's a
very large house just to the east of
that there's a huge compound just to the
east of that but it's a single-family
dwelling and it has virtually no impact
on us so I would like to see a I have no
problem with the housing thing being
approved but I would like to see that it
be amended to conform to some of the
requests that we're making that are I've
outlined in my appeal and that
essentially that they have less of a
burden on us in terms of traffic light
numbers of people and that the
landscaping be done in such a way as to
promote a lot of privacy and that's it
thank you very much for allowing me to
speak hmm thank you mr. Kessler I got a
quick question Scott so the north part
of your proposal north north let's just
say north art does that is that you're
going to be your your pond area
sir you put up the map again
mmm not that map the other one that had
the apartments on there that one so boy
there sure is an odd shaped piece of
property but the one that as you're
looking at it you know right north of
your you have two apartment units the
one on the right hand side just north of
that is that a ponding area that's a
turnaround it looks like a square so
that's that's just that's a turnaround
there so for a fire truck they pull in
they back into it and they can exit oh
okay so it's gonna how wide is that
do you know approximate I believe that's
like 35 feet 35 feet wide or 30 I longer
than that it looks pretty big okay so
it's going to be totally not used I mean
it's just gonna be a I guess up it's
gonna be dirt is gonna be a pavement I
think we're gonna pave it okay so Miss
game miss kestler I looked up your
address and you are at the the end of
your property is at the very corner
where those two intersect that that
where that turnaround is yes so you
can't know how happy that makes me to
know that the trash trucks will be
turning around there once a week and
then service vehicles will be using that
because that literally is in my
neighbor's backyard and is in my wor my
side yard and that's a that's again is a
tremendous invasion if the entire
project we're shrunk to be four and I
think a lot of those things could be
bypassed well I hear you ma'am I'm just
trying to explain because you said you
weren't too sure where you're you said
something about the parking was right
right behind your
your home and or well nope I'm sorry
that was no I I saw this blueprint prior
mr. bellos was nice enough to provide me
a copy
it's along that entire strip there along
what we can find the north property line
what and okay Scott where we've been a
parking yes ma'am Scott where were you
gonna put your dumpster at Yeah right
there okay that's far away from any any
smell so that's good okay
well that was good okay so next we have
Jill Jillian Rowland ten minutes
so is she available I am can you hear me
sorry ma'am I was wondering so where's
my video I could go at the end of
everyone else I would appreciate that so
I have time to cover anything that might
be missed
okay so looks like your husband or I
guess or Sam Rowan is that is my husband
so is he available I am I'm available
and right here okay so Sam I need you to
state your name and address so that the
city clerk can administer the oath to
you please sure it's Samuel Rowan 5:30
college place 5:30 okay
mr. Rowan do you swear or affirm that
the testimony you're about to give is
the truth and nothing but the truth
under penalty of law I do thank you
all right excellent ready to speak yes
sir all right well uh so I kind of
picked one topic out of the many to talk
about that's one of my major concerns on
this and and that's the drainage and
that's one of the ones that's come up
over and over again which I'm sure we're
all looking at this now the the
irregular shape of the of the lot where
yeah if it's okay I'd like to share my
screen and kind of put that up so I can
point out some things with my mouse sure
estimator
mr. Rowan miss Gonzalez has the screen
up of the site plan is it you know if
I'd point with my mouse can you guys see
where I'm pointing
I believe Sarah can give you control
okay
do you know if that's possible Sarah
either was mr. Rowan I think you this is
David all on for the record sorry mr.
Owen I think on the control panel down
at the bottom they think you can request
control hold on let me see no it's up at
the top where it says view options it
says request remote control because it
says you are viewing Sara Gonzales the
screen and then there's a view options
I'm in speaker view okay yeah artist
says stop remote control so can you can
you see my mouse moving right now so I
stopped sharing my screen this is Sara
Gonzales I stopped um if you want to
share your screen that would be fine so
you can actually zoom in I was I had
given you control but it seemed to
accept the control picture screen and
then hit here and minimize the window
there you go all right here we go we'll
get a map of this thing in I'll just go
off of this one Oh hit that there we go
all right mr. mayor and members of the
City Council this is it this is the map
of the development as its proposed I
think as you all saw my this is my yard
right here and then so I sit right up
against the bulk of this where we have I
think the whole thing they said was 0.97
acres so you've got about the half acre
with the bulk of the development you
know the 35 foot driveway and then these
two awkward necks that that are attached
to the property so via this neck right
here if this actually this is a ditch
that extends all the way to El Paseo and
currently when we
when we have heavy rains this acts as a
waterway that flows through the ditch
and it kind of you know kind of flows
through here and it comes right out this
entrance and that you know that
essentially serves as our drainage in my
yard being right here by the corner it
actually drains through the fence onto
this lot which you know then continues
the the water flow out towards the
roadway so one of the concerns that I
have in developing this I know they've
talked about making the plan with a pond
to contain the water and you know if
that's designed to contain the water
from the the runoff of the apartment
then it could very easily be overwhelmed
because this ditch has several
properties I think there's 10 or 12 of
them upstream that are going to have
some runoff they're feeding into that
ditch and then on top of that you see
that my you know my yard where currently
it drains into this vacant lot if this
is built up and then paved you know now
I'm looking at having to regrade my
backyard and put in French drains and
you know do a lot of things at my own
expense that you know when I when I
moved in here I was even advised not to
based on the survey not to build along
this back fence for you know for
drainage purposes so that's where would
this develop and this lot getting built
up out of the floodplain it actually it
wouldn't pull us out of the it wouldn't
pull us out of the flood zone it would
actually just increase our risk of
getting flooded and and so that's that's
one of my big concerns and then he's
meant us excuse me Sam you know your
three minutes are up and I did pause it
I did pause it for you when you were
getting all your okay things done I mean
we can take minutes off your wife if you
like no that that's fine that's
basically the concern is that this is
not going to you know the drainage isn't
gonna work here okay well let me ask a
question and it's not it's not going to
go against your time so Sarah or or
David so is the drainage going to be
that that tip to the east
you know why don't you call it right
there is that gonna be it where the
drainages mayor this is Sara Gonzales
for the record as of right now there
will probably be multiple drainage ponds
designated throughout the site only
because once they've actually developed
this pad and it goes through the low
Mart and komar process depending on the
size of the ponds that will be required
it will show how deep they will have to
be and then their location so it's gonna
have to see how much water is coming in
from the adjacent property owners as
well as what's being maintained on the
property and so with the FEMA drainage
report being reviewed that will
designate the locations of the ponds and
how the water will have to be basically
read read averted into these ponding
areas okay well most likely it'll be
that area to the east maybe a portion
there to the south mm-hmm and then that
funny area this near Benzes property as
well so what I'm trying to get it is
he's gonna have to Scott as mr.
Bannister is gonna have to turn make
that his drainage flow so that it goes
into those three if he if he has to use
three drainages so so theoretically the
the when the rain hits it shouldn't miss
um you know this is just a complete
downpour but it's supposed to flow into
those various drainages isn't that
correct mayor this is Sara Gonzales for
the record that is correct
so as the process moves forward the
drainage would have to be maintained on
site and the report would reflect how
many pumpkins where the water is going
to be going but it would be maintained
within property boundaries I do agree
with you that they will probably be
within the southwest corner and then
towards that north east corner that's
that long kind of triangle shape more
unlikely that's going to have to be some
type of ponding that's designated there
yeah yeah I would think that that would
make sense to put the Pawnee there
because you can't use that piece of
property for anything other than
probably depandi mr. mayor
yes David I would encourage you to ask
mr. van
mr. what his plans are or what his
thoughts are related to that rather than
staff sure I mean Scott do you where
were you thinking that the drainage was
going to be oh you're muted Scott oh
okay I'm sorry I was muted yeah you're
right okay mayor councillors yeah as
soon as we got you know the requirements
from FEMA we would have the engineers
you know design uh ponding and you know
the most common sense would be those
those two angular areas to where we
would you know have our ponding so to me
you know I think the engineers will take
into effect runoff from you know Rowan's
backyard amongst everybody else who
apparently is using using my property as
a drainage pond currently I think it
would actually improve it for everybody
but you know I'm not an engineer either
okay all right well I just was curious
where that was going to be okay so now
we're gonna go to so miss Rowan you want
me to go to Elaine uh that the chair of
the chair the care assignment I beg your
pardon
the Cara Simon and your first name is
Elaine
hello correct Elaine's to Cara Simon
okay I'm sorry that's right okay so I
just need to state your name and address
please
um Elaine's to Cara sign in six hundred
college place and then um Christine all
this Simon do you swear or affirm that
the testimony you're about to give is
the truth and nothing but the truth
under penalty of law I do thank you
honorable mayor mayor Ashima city
councilors thank you for our opportunity
to speak today
my husband Dominick and I wrote one of
the letters that was attached to the
appeal of the zoning change that
accommodates the Bannister's proposed
urban core infill development investment
project I - I'm just going to touch on a
couple of issues in my time first our
neighborhood cannot be justified as
urban and it's the scale of the proposed
12 unit project that is not appropriate
for the area we bought a home in this
neighborhood for the exact
characteristic that miss Kessler
explains in the appeal it's a unique
suburban donut hole
apart from different from but surrounded
by the university area the El Paseo
corridor and highway access mr.
Bannister's property is also located in
on our side not apart from this suburban
donut hole as you know of course it
about several of our homes basic
indicators of the very suburban nature
of our neighborhood mature trees
everywhere the support birdlife I'll ask
your kind indulgence here but
neighborhood bird sightings include
Nashville Warbler acorn woodpecker
Baltimore Oriole prairie falcon castles
myrio
sage Thrasher red breasted nuthatch
dusky flycatcher Hammonds flycatcher
great horned owl western Blue Bird but
not a pigeon too deep before buying our
home we checked the zoning for the
parcels on the other side of the fence
with regard to what it could mean for
the future we were ok with it and we
bought but now the Planning and Zoning
committee is invalidating zoning that we
relied on to make what were for us
enormous financial decisions first to
buy and then to make considerable
improvements on in our home in Las
Cruces homebuyers know they cannot have
any confidence than something is
significant and basic to a home purchase
as surroundings only
it could cause a chilling effect in the
desire to invest in a home in the first
place because nobody likes a surprise
the feel of mr. Bannister's proposed
project is not of the magnitude that is
going to cause any real meaningful
change to affordable housing
availability but for those of us who
have homes and live adjacent to his
proposed rental property investment
those of us who have
long-term interest in living in and
raising families in the neighborhood the
significant effects of this project that
relate to traffic and pollution and
privacy and other issues in our everyday
lives for us this is an issue of great
magnitude therefore my husband Dominick
and I respectfully request that you
overturn the Planning and Zoning
committee's decision and require mr.
Bannister to adhere to the zoning that
was previously in place thank you thank
you
in ma'am so you do know where your home
sits in proximity to them too sir we're
not we're in that pointy little piece
right right okay good okay next is gonna
be Robin
Hastings is she available it is he sorry
hi it's me again um he had trouble and
I'm sorry can you state your name I know
who you are
I'm Jillian Rowan I mean I don't know if
this is okay he was unable to be he
tried connecting to the meeting and was
unable to do so and then the meeting had
said it would be one to five and he had
a class to teach it 5:45 so he's unable
to be here but he did give us a letter I
don't know if we can read that for
consideration or not if there's a way to
to take a picture of that and you can
text it to me and I can read it okay and
let me just give you my cell phone
number it's five seven five five seven
five five seven one five seven one two
four two four or zero four zero yeah I
don't answer it I just take text
messages okay so you can do that okay
how about Mike McGonagall is he here
no an area he's on on the list
unmute Mike I am here can you hear me
okay so you want to speak yes sir okay
so I just need you to state your
and address and then Christine oh
goodness video Mike McGonagall 520
college place Las Cruces New Mexico
eight eight zero zero five Nicole do you
swear or affirm that the testimony
you're about to give is the truth and
nothing but the truth under penalty of
law yes ma'am
thank you all right mayor and council
this is Mike McGonagall again I reside
at 520 College place thank you for
giving us the opportunity to express our
concerns regarding their construction of
the property while I share the same
concerns as those previously stated by
my neighbors I would like to express the
concerns most important to me and my
family my first concern is that crime
will go up in our area if the building
is constructed not so long ago we had a
drug-related shooting and the apartments
next to the lot where mr. banner is
looking to build the victim died more
recently there was a shooting at Casa
bender Apartments okay across El Paseo
it also seems to me that almost every
day there are police at one of the
apartments in the surrounding area those
events have made me wonder if
multi-family housing increases crime how
will building additional multi-family
housing units affect crime in our
neighborhood what actions will mr.
Bannister take to ensure that he
minimizes crime in our community there
are many young families in our
neighborhood including mine I want the
area to feel safe for my kids and for my
kids to live a normal life free of
having to worry about safety my second
concern is that property values on
average will decline in the area and
property tax revenues will result in a
net loss for the city the city may
generate new property tax revenue from
the mr. Bannister's property but the
additional revenue may not be enough to
offset the expected loss in revenue from
the decline in our property values in
the neighborhood my third concern is how
the property will divert
water he's going to build the property
up that water has to flow somewhere
talked about ponds which is great that
would definitely help but also if the
water is ponded what will happen come
summertime when the monsoons come and
fill those ponds up and it becomes a
mosquito breeding ground so I don't know
if there's another potential solution
where we can cook connect a drainage up
to the the city drain so that there's no
pooling issues
my fourth concern is how can the
Planning and Zoning Commission ethically
approve the plan when it violates the
density standard by 50% which is a huge
violation the whole goal of the standard
is to ensure safety of the tenants right
it appears that the Planning and Zoning
Commission is okay putting development
over human safety which I don't agree
with and then I may be wrong on this
next one but I didn't see any pedestrian
access on that layout that was shared am
I correct
if mr. Bannister wants to well go ahead
and finish sure it'll cut into your time
like that's fine
so my last concern was that there's no
pedestrian access to layout how will
tenants safely walk to and from their
apartment I don't have to use the road
or not okay so your time is up exactly
so you want to go ahead and respond to
that Scott as far as any if you have any
way for them to walk or yes Scott
banister mayor councillors yes we've
we've designed on the entryway we've
designed a bike path can we excuse me
Scott can we put that there you go
thanks Sara so at the top of the screen
where you've got the ingress and egress
you can see at the you know the bottom
of the lane that's a bike path walk tap
for that pedestrian traffic and you know
I think we really got to be a little
careful whenever we start characterizing
you know people who live in apartments
as as you know criminals your on saying
that
that's a little irresponsible just out
of curiosity Scott how what size are the
apartments gonna be total square foot uh
about a probably about a thousand yeah
thousand no and there's two bedroom two
bath yeah so so you know primarily the
the Becks that everybody's comparing
this to is you know probably ten or
twelve units of a three-story you know
you know apartments and that kind of
thing so it's like a little community I
think this is a far cry from that and
you know we're typically marketing
towards University grad students and
that type of thing so I you know I think
well okay I'm not alleging that people
that live in apartments are committing
crime I'm just saying it's kind of
obvious here that there's something
going on with what I've observed okay so
let me go ahead and read this letter
from was from okay mister it's from mr.
Hastings him
it says Turrentine appeal I am Robin
Hastings the property owner and perhaps
most affected by mr. Bannister's
proposed development
I've lived in Las Cruces 40 years my
wife and I moved to this neighborhood
after the Adobe I built was impacted by
a high density development on the East
Mesa these proposed apartments will wind
up being only for only wind up only feet
from my back property line they will
loom over my quiet backyard
I recognize the sanctity of the property
rights in our town since I am a ho no
homeowner myself and I cannot dictate
what the lot behind me will become
because I can ask that a development on
it can be done so asked to be respectful
of neighborhood where it goes within the
residential area where my home exists we
have no apartments the closest such
complex is Plaza Suites which is an
extended-stay hotel and fronting onto
University Avenue it is not
the Turrentine neighborhood a complex of
two-story apartments with the attendant
traffic noise and privacy issues would
only would be very much out of character
with what exists ours is a quiet area
full of mature trees and lawns and a mix
of children young families and older
citizens I fear to lose that quiet as
well as the views of the organs and the
sunrises that we have enjoyed crime
might go up as it has over all in Las
Cruces I had my truck stolen right from
my driveway about two months ago mr.
Bannister's plan is that this will be a
high-end development catering to an miss
you grad students and faculty that may
prove that may prove overly optimistic
especially with the economy we now face
if that demographic does not rent from
him who will instead freshen work will
they be good respectful neighbor
residents of our neighborhood I have
concerns too about where water will flow
in a downpour assuming that we ever see
one again there is no specific plan laid
out in the plot that I have seen that
addresses flooding issues if this
project is to be is not to be stopped or
postponed may I ask that it be modified
from the current plan a pair of one
story apartment structures would not be
out of character with our neighborhood
it would be less costly to construct and
would mitigate the traffic and parking
troubles they will be coming I love the
trees that exist on the right-of-way
that would be part of this development
can they preserve
be preserved in some way and can there
be some sort of landscaping to put a
vegetative barrier between my lot and
mr. Bannister's development oh I woke up
in New York City once looked out the
window and stared at the face of another
building just a few feet away I shook my
head closed the curtain and said quietly
I am in the wrong place I don't want to
have that feeling every morning in my
home las cruces depending upon counsels
decision today we may have mr. Bannister
as a neighbor or not if he is to become
one I ask that he listened to my
concerns and be a good one
thanks for your time and attention
you've shown me and my neighbors today
and I didn't get the address me
there was here anyone get his address
Hastings no it's on Turrentine yes
eternally at Rouen here he is the one to
the west of the property the one that
mr. Bannister said that he spoke to he
spoke to his wife and daughter I guess
oh he's right there
okay I got you all right yeah so he's
that one okay so next we'll go to Mary
Mary fair and Brock Brook Brook she
marry
Farren Brook okay how about Rob Hoffman
that would be me
okay mr. Hoffman I just need you to
state your name and address and then
Christine will administer the oath then
you have three Unser my name is Robert
Hoffman I lived at 6:05 college place
for 46 years I know every detail of that
property that's been discussed okay no I
mean let me have sir let me have a
Christine administer that all - yes sir
mr. Hoffman do you swear or affirm that
the testimony you are about to give is
the truth and nothing but the truth
under penalty of law yes thank you okay
sir you've got three minutes go ahead
what I'd like you to address is the
basis of the decision that the Planning
and Zoning Commission made was based on
half Jews when I was a kid my dad told
me and taught me that half-truths are
often worse than lies and let me tell
you how the density that was proposed
for this project is based on the 90 but
brother right around an acre but if
everybody knows how bad the lot is if
you do a Google Maps and subtract out
the driveway
and the pieces which are unbuildable you
have a half on half between five and six
tenths of an acre so what you're really
saying in reality is this is a half acre
plot that he can build them and he's
proposing to put all the apartments on a
half acre person that is simply
untenable
or when a zoning would allow him to put
four dwelling units so I would recommend
that he'd be able to build four
apartments if he wants to one that but
that parcel that's what it that's what
the zoning sort of suggests secondly he
says what we're going to go 25 feet the
fact is this has been touched on too in
order to build that if you look at the
village in or you stand on turn tiny
look at the pile of dirt that's already
there in actual fact it's going to be a
2.5 or more story building it's not a
two-story building it's higher because
he has to raise it above all the rest of
the Lots which were built way back in
the 1950s those houses were built in
about 1954 and they didn't have to have
elevated pads also myself on the street
corner for entomology so that this is
basically almost a three storey building
looking right down into people's private
backyards where they have sanctuary
privacy and places to raise their kid
finally he says that there's 18 cars oh
I can I've owned apartments in Las
Cruces and virtually every one of them
uses two cars and if the kind of
heartless he wants their gonna have two
cars and he said they exit onto turn two
well if you've ever dropped drive them
down turn time between seven and ten
o'clock in the morning when we don't
have a coded lock down you will find
that that is basically a one lane road
because cars parked on both sides of
turn tight and you cannot pass two cars
there and so what he is going to do is
to add 24 cars I claim to the traffic
pattern morning and night morning is the
worst time because that's when people go
to the Village Inn for breakfast so
these these are all so these things say
this is okay are really half-truths if
you look at what is the real situation
going to be when this project is
developed as if it will play I my
neighbors probably don't have problems
with one story apartment units as long
as they're a load s they say four units
which is the zoning the zoning allowance
but to do the project that he suggests
is literally out of bounds hey mr.
Hoffman I'm sorry your time is expired I
appreciate you and the council listening
to to our our statements yes sir
okay next is gonna be Paul funk dr. funk
are you here I know I really ready you
ready letter right okay okay so I guess
that leaves you miss Rowan
oh yes yes mrs. wrong yes Gillian uh-huh
all right
I'm Jillian Rowan I need you to just
state your name and address and then
Christina
Rowan 5:30 college place Rowan swear or
affirm that the testimony you're about
to give is the truth and nothing but the
truth under penalty of law I do thank
you all right so my job in the
organisation of the appeal was to go
around and speak to all the neighbors I
donned a mask in triple-digit Heat and I
walked around our neighborhood and
knocked on their doors and talked to
them and almost a hundred person 99% of
the people I talked to were just so
thankful that I had come by because
they'd seen the sign and they didn't
feel hurt if you look at the appeal
there are hundred signatures on it this
is a very unified voice we have coming
from our neighborhood it is an
incredible neighborhood when we bought
it we were just thrilled to find the
people in there we have such a sense of
community pre-coated we would have
potlucks with I think we had up to 40
people in attendance once just all
coming over hanging out watching a movie
outside there are lots of families my
children ride their bikes we go on walks
um on paper this might look like a great
way to boost revenue or for the city but
when you really look at that map and see
how its bordered by all single-family
homes this is not a transitional
property as stated this is part of our
neighborhood and actually a very
important part of our neighborhood
because all of our backyards back up to
it the one eddie bins property is the
larger one that's vacant and that's
zoned for multifamily so most likely
that's going to be an apartment complex
the property that mr. Bannister is
proposing to develop with 12 units is
right in our backyards it is cramming
way too much on a small property and the
neighbors that I spoke to were all
immigrants they had similar concerns
about the increased traffic flow with
that many people considering that the
only entrance to the property is that
alleyway which I was out there with a
tape measure this morning measuring it
it is 35 feet wall-to-wall and that goes
between two single-family homes and then
the road backs up behind ours with 12
units you're going to have 24 people
living there going in and out and I know
with the traffic survey the high rate
was 12 cars per hour and I would ask if
you would want 12 cars per hour driving
in your backyard when you already have a
road in front of your house I'm with a
lane saying that when we bought this
house we checked the zoning of the empty
lot and seeing that was zoned for
single-family residence we felt safe
buying but changing and allowing a
variance to put 12 units on that oddly
shaped lie
it cuts our property value and it
undermines the sense of confidence we
had in buying our property there's a lot
of homes in our neighborhood that are
getting remodeled and sold and our
property values were on the rise if this
is to go in as proposed that's all down
the drain we it would change the entire
feel of the neighborhood that being said
we are not opposed to development we
don't like having dirt blowing around I
mean certain needs my my 8 year old son
was out there last week mowing the
weed's down behind our fence because
they grow up and they're ridiculous I
would love to see it developed in a way
that allows for good drainage there was
an incident a couple years ago not long
after we bought her a house where mr.
Bannister was putting fill dirt on the
property and just the piling up of that
dirt flooded our entire backyard all the
way to our door and he had to go in and
remove it that's why our concerns about
drainage are and I know he has to get
that whatever the letters are for that
survey done and hopefully that would be
taken into consideration for any
development that would go in um that
being said let's see um the concerns I
think Phyllis was making with the
parking on when she stated that it would
be up on our fence line while that is a
fire lane one of the problems is that
with 12 units
they each have two beds two baths this
close to the University you'll have two
cars per unit and while I understand
that he's meeting the minimum parking
code for 12 units which is one and a
half so he has 18 stalls for 24 cars
that's why we're saying this is too many
he's he doesn't have room for more
parking because the way the lot is
shaped you there's just nowhere else you
could put it and while I understand that
those cars have to go somewhere and if
they are enforced they're either going
to park in the fire lane or they're
going to park on Turrentine which Rob's
mentioned the problems that come up from
that so as a neighborhood we are
recommending that he be limited to four
units and they be one story setback
further from our property lines
Robin Hastings the one with the letter
that you read he has the property to the
west and that house most of the other
houses were built in the 1950s but his
house was built in the 1920s it is one
of the original farmhouses for the area
and he has a hundred-year-old Adobe
structures that used to be the chicken
house in the garage the chicken house
still in excellent condition he's
maintained that Adobe so well it backs
up close to his property line so if
you're going to cram 12 units onto this
property with minimum clearance if you
look Robin Hastings property butts up
with minimum not clearance setback that
sword from his it'll be ten feet from
that old Adobe with a two-story
apartment building that lose even higher
due to having to be built up from the
floodplain so we would request that the
buildings be set back more
maybe oriented towards the south of the
property giving more of a buffer between
the houses privacy the landscaping or
wall or anything has been addressed
those are all our backyards my children
are out there every day
playing and a requirement to have at
least two parking stalls per unit so
that we don't have the problem of
blocking up Turrentine like Rob said I
hop just that entire street everyone
they don't have enough parking for what
it is and I overflows and they park on
either side of turn time and it creates
a one-way street so if you then add the
extra overflow from the apartment
complex that's going to be a mess
especially for the neighbors living
there and I think that's about all I got
Hey well you have a minute three seconds
left so you finished good yeah thank you
okay well I appreciate that so let me
just ask a couple questions of Sarah or
think Sarah's doing this Sarah you there
yes Marianne stirrer here can you put
the map back up again the diagram that
so 12 units but 18 parking spaces is
that the is that the city's minimum
maybe one and a half per unit Sara
Gonzales for the record that is correct
we have one and a half units per
dwelling unit I'm in a single-family
home it's two per unit so that's some
compared to so we it's just a little bit
underneath a single-family home so I got
a quick question to ask you Scott so
first off I would tend to agree with you
if you offer a two-bedroom two-bath
you're probably gonna get you you very
well may get grad students you might get
some professionals that are used to you
know being roommates but they're
probably gonna each have a vehicle so
the okay further let me ask Sara one
more question
Sara so is there a requirement to build
one unit or to you
it's what it used to be 3% of the number
of units have to be ABA accessible or
handicapped Lisa
fully handicapped with a shower and all
that is that is that the case on one of
these on one of these units mayor Sara
Gonzales for the record it is based on
if you do more than 20 apartment units
on a parcel then you are required to
provide I believe it's one for the 20
and then it increases based on the
number of units okay so getting back to
the Thank You Sara so getting back to
the spaces Scott if you have each one
having two parking spaces you're gonna
have six cars that are gonna be without
a parking spot what would you what do
you think where you think that they're
gonna part and believe me they're not a
part I can speak from experience they're
gonna they're gonna they're gonna cause
a hassle and I have to agree in order
for me to support this you're gonna have
to have at least one two parking spaces
per unit trust me trust me on this
please as they will find a place and you
will end up having to tow a vehicle or
two because they're gonna park
everywhere so I don't quite get it I do
I understand you're trying to hit the
minimum but you either need to add some
more Park in someplace in there or take
out a unit or two so that you meet those
those parking space because if for my
support I don't know about the rest of
the council but I'm just telling you
you're gonna have a problem if you just
have one and a half vehicles per unit
because they're they're gonna come in
there with two vehicles each one if
you're gonna want to try to get it in
let's say you run it for 900 a month and
they're gonna split the cost for 50
they're gonna want at their own parking
space mayor city councilors you know
what we did was we went by the
requirements that the the city gave us
as far as what we needed for the parking
we anticipated a blend of college
students grad students who would be
riding bikes and that kind of things
absolutely some people are going to have
two cars you know there's no question
about it
but you know there out of 12 units
there's definitely gonna be somebody who
who you know will have bikes and that
kind of thing so you know I mean we we
kind of you know that's that's what we
anticipated now I'm listening to what
everybody's saying and I'm you know I
try to be fair and reasonable and you
know there's certain things that you you
know justify building a project that you
you know you've got a to meet to make it
a viable project we could go down to ten
would be optimum that would that would
get us you know pretty pretty closely
ten you know five on each side two-story
apartments the absolute lowest we could
go is eight to the story apartments but
they'd have to be two-story then you
know that would give us 16 you know if
you go by the residents math 2 / 2
partment that would be 16 with 2x just
left over you get below 8 2 storeys then
you know then that project is just gonna
be a dirt lot forever or I'll just sell
the dirt lot I mean you know that's
that's the way we have it evaluated so
well what I'm telling you I'm in order
for me to support this you're gonna I'm
gonna need two parking spaces per unit I
mean I'm just telling you flat out and
if you rent to college kids you're
you're if you don't put a you're gonna
have four of them in in a two in those
units and you're gonna have four cars
Scott I'm telling you trust is not gonna
happen well well I would if it does you
have a lease speaking from experience
Scott but you're smart to do two bedroom
two baths and I do believe that you will
get some professionals and some grad
students but only with a parking space
per per unit you you do that I can't
support one and a half so you either
find some more parking spaces or you cut
back on
on the on your units which I would think
you would find parking spaces for me
from my support I don't know let me open
it up to the rest of the council so far
in all honesty well let me ask another
question of Sarah so is that a new
requirement Sarah that they have to have
a walking path like that and and and I
mean at sidewalks sure but I mean but a
walking path like that or is that a
little bit extra that you put in Mayor
this is Sarah with the record um for the
record we did ask that they provide some
type of pedestrian and bicycle access in
order for us to start moving towards our
multimodal transportation and so it's
giving the access from university into
this property and showing that this is
one of the sites that has enough room in
order to provide the access as well as
provide those other amenities and what
is the setback for for the building on
the left to the to the property line is
it 15 feet 10 feet to the to though
there you go right there that area near
the property is set back at a five foot
setback based on the Arwen easily so if
it follows our when a zoning the
building is at five feet from this
property
so okay I guess I'm confused I thought
our 1a was for single-family residence
it's for multi it's for multi-unit like
this is for a family multifamily for
this mayor Sarah for the record and
based on the property zoning it allows
those setbacks as being part of the
development standard so if you were to
construct a single-family home say a 2 3
story single family home by right they
would be allowed to go up to the 5 feet
as well essentially in the zoning of the
property the deviation is not to the
setbacks the deviation is to multifamily
so it's just to allow for the dwelling
units but not to the setback so the
setbacks remain on the property since
its own Darwin a okay but if it had been
let's say it was zoned for for
multifamily what would be the setback
then Mayor encounter the setback for the
side would be 7 feet so an additional 2
feet for multifamily it is a 20 foot
front 7 foot rear and seven foot sides
hmm seems like it's shrunk I thought it
used to be like 10 feet well I mean then
then it needs to be it needs to be one
or the other so basically what you're
telling me it sounds like you're going
you're using the one a setback but he's
getting to build multifamily units right
mayor and city council that is correct
because the deviation is to the dwelling
units well yeah but if he's gonna if
he's gonna be able to build multifamily
then he needs to stick to the
multifamily requirement which I guess in
this case is 7 feet I mean it's 2 feet
is not much but but one of the reasons
for the setback and I don't know if the
chief is here at the fire chief one of
the reasons for the setback is in case
there's a fire
they got be able to get around that
building and and I feed us nothing I am
amazed at its 5 feet but you know
usually its tests they
bring in the fire hose doesn't he do
whatever they need to do someone needs
to jump out they need to get them out of
there five feet isn't that isn't that
much and you pushing the five feet right
Scott I presume you're right at the five
feet
great yeah so you're right
yes don't give dawn for the record you
need to keep in mind under the infill
process it's about deviation from the
standard for that zoning district run
that requires an additional deviation
but if we force the seven-foot side yard
setback then he gets a seven foot wear
yard setback so the that's why staff
always takes the position we get them to
try to comply with the zoning standards
to the extent possible under the NFL
application because then it becomes too
hard to manage in all the deviations we
try to minimize it that's why we allow
them to follow the site setbacks if
that's what they can meet we've had info
applications where they needed a
variance to the setbacks and nothing
else and so because of the odd shape a
lot so we try to keep that the number of
deviations to a minimum well let me ask
and see if this is still the same if
hypothetically Scott had gone to every
neighbor that's that that touches that
property and they all said it's okay he
wouldn't have needed to go to pansies
couldn't have done it administratively
is that still the case
mayor and city council there is still a
flexible development standard music yes
by by going to the neighboring
properties we could have flexed as far
as only up to some of the zoning
standards density is not labeled with in
a flexible development standards so in
this case no that's why we had to go
through the infill flexible development
standards allow for deviations to
setbacks to landscaping to parking it is
not as just on the density so it would
require the IEP since it is not part of
the Flex a little balanced standard
that's why we went this route instead of
doing a flexible development staff
so in this case based on its density we
could not use the flexible development
standards he had to go to PNG mr. mayor
give it on okay well what I'm trying to
get at Scott is if you know the city is
making an accommodation for you
theoretically it's seven feet if it was
if it was multifamily but they're going
under to five feet for the 1a and I
understand that trust me that that has
been vacant for a long time but what I'm
trying to get at is it's just a matter
of if you're gonna want these these
exceptions or these variances then I
think it's important that that we listen
to what your what your neighbors has
asked and I think at the very minimum
two spaces per per unit is not too much
I mean really it's not and I'm telling
you right now I can speak from
experience you you would be wise to do
two you know two parking spaces per unit
because you're gonna have a problem a
few but less because it's gonna it's
going to be more cars then they're going
to start parking they're going to start
parking on on your on your exit to to
the street and then you're getting back
could you get back to that property
again that you just took off
not that I'm right there so Sarah right
there that area that that it's gonna be
the way the in and out of the building
okay is he going to be granting an
easement to the city mayor and city
council as part of the planning process
this is Sara Gonzales for the record
this is already a designated access and
utility and her the plat that was done
back in 1967 I believe so this is
already a designated easement so all
these as well as access will be provided
from the entrance off at Turrentine okay
so if there's cars lined up over there
we're gonna have to send we're gonna
have to have codes or LCPD go in there
and a telling me you gotta clear this
out because you're blocking you're
blocking the opportunity for a firetruck
to come through this meter correct mayor
and city council that is correct yes it
could be
painted as a fire lane and basically
codes would be notified and the whoever
is parking within that area could be
cited it's gonna it's gonna cause a
problem Scott I'm telling you you you
you need to have two parking spaces per
unit so you either add fine six more
parking spaces and it for me
counts make and let me just go to
council FLOTUS because I've been
dominated the whole conversation
councillor Florida's go ahead Thank You
mr. mayor and and Thank You mr.
Bannister and this person she's
everybody
Rowan primarily and Elaine's stuck I
can't pronounce last name sorry but you
know that I think that you know as just
as a homeowner you know I'm looking at
what they did when they bought their
property they look at the zoning they
saw that everything around them was
zoned for residential one you know one
one home residential area and and then
years later
yes I understand infill and I think that
the planning or the community
development department and the Planning
Commission are are applying the infill
properly and the elevate properly I
think that they've met all the elements
but the one the one thing that what what
concerns me and I'm more infill
development and all that sort of stuff
and I think that all the inequities or
inconsistencies have been discussed and
most fully by you mr. mayor but the fact
that you you buy one thing and then
you're expecting the whole area to be
that that one that one dwelling zoning
and then it isn't so much that the
zoning has changed because that's what
the appellant are saying they're saying
that the zoning changes not so much the
zoning has changed it's a variance on
the zoning and
and then there's problems with that as
you pointed out mr. mayor that they're
getting the benefit of the they're
getting the benefits of a variance but
they're not getting the they're not
getting the detriments of the
requirements of the r1a so I you know I
just don't I don't think it's fair at
this point and I and I do think mr.
Bannister or trying to develop this land
but it just looks like it would be maybe
better I I just don't know what it would
be suited for but I just don't think
it's I personally don't think it's fair
to and and again I think that mr.
Gonzalez's presentation goes very
straight forward it's set forth all the
requirements and our elevate las cruces
our infill our desire to do infill
development but I just don't think this
is I don't think it pans out here I
don't think it's it doesn't it just
doesn't it just isn't fair and it just
doesn't seem right and unless unless mr.
Bannister goes back to the drawing board
and comes up with something that is
financially suitable for him and also
financially excuse me and then it was
and also suitable for it for the area I
can't I can't
I would I would tend to agree with the
appellant at this point Thank You mr.
mayor Councillor lead us to be Thank You
mayor um I did have a question with what
type of recourse um could a homeowner
tap if this development does end up what
in their backyard or causing damage to
their house due to this new property
you're asking a legal question probably
something that staff probably can't
answer any of us can
that's something there that if they have
a claim they're gonna probably have to
file an insurance claim and then they're
gonna probably find out what caused it
and because it does seem like this is
already it happened once in the past
that there's been an issue so that does
leave me a bit of a concern now I do
want to say thank you I do agree with
many of your comments that you've had
I'm also an agreement that would this
type of development the way that it's
structured that you're going to see the
parking you're going to have to at least
two people living in the apartment and
so you will need to have more parking
than just a penis I believe the 24
absolutely should be you know if you're
gonna have guests you're gonna need more
parking I think that's mr. barrister you
talked about maybe potentially cutting
back on your apartments to 10 units per
half eight if that happened then you
would be able to make room for the
parking and perhaps any of the other
backs that were described before is that
even good would be potentially agreeable
with you Scott the minister here yes
ma'am go right ahead sir no I I didn't
know if I had done it or not you got my
response yes sir let me clarify that if
I'm a counselor so Scott you you are
amenable to reducing the number of units
correct from 12 to what well I think if
the criteria that everybody's concerned
about is the parking if we got rid of
two units
that would give us you know significant
more area so we could we've got 18
parking spots I think it would be very
easy to get 20 parking spots out of that
if we went to eight that would be you
know the absolute minimal that I could
do is a two-story units you should be
able to get easily 20 22 spots to park
there and that's great let's just
clarify so you're saying that so now
you're changing that dynamics or did I
hear you Ron councillor abate thus to be
asked you if you would go from 12 units
to 10 and I thought you said yes but
then you said so yes then you started me
you made some comment about going to
story no that's been the the whole the
whole time we've been asking for two
story I'm saying I could get down to as
little as eight two story units and
still make it feasible to build and have
additional parking okay but what she had
asked about and what I thought you had
agreed to was ten units one story
so I guess five on five five on one side
five on another or you could do six and
four I don't know however you do it but
is that what you tell what we're talking
about here no I'm talking about two
storey to storey apartments five on each
side or four on each side what whatever
the case would be two story so so you're
saying two story but still have the same
units no instead the twelve units there
would be four units on each side that
would be eight eight units or ten units
whatever for give me the total number of
units well it would be either 8 or 10
whichever you guys are able to I'm well
here is now it sounds like you're
talking on just on one side only no
no just just right now we're set with
six on each side six two story units on
each side so we reduce that by say two
on each side so now we've got four on
one side and four on the other instead
of six
these aren't these are these two still
may be a mistake yet here I thought
these were a single story one story you
know they've always been all two story
yes okay well my mistake I'm sorry Cal
sir go ahead thank you Mary yes um I'm
more inclined to go with an eighth unit
that way that there would be sufficient
space not only for the parking but for
any sort of setback issues I do have
concerns about fencing I personally I
have sockets and so I know that if my
backyard it is right next to a parking
lot if they jumped the fence to grab a
ball there in a parking lot now you know
and so I I personally think if a defense
a divider beyond trees would be
appropriate however my concern is with
the flooding if that will impact or
damage the homes that are already there
if there's a fencing or wall put up and
so I'm open to comment from residents
about that sir
I'm sorry counselor beta what do be what
were you what is your questioning you
know if they're it a wall put back there
well it impact the flooding to the
owners of the homes negativity what kind
of a wall like a retaining wall a
privacy divider layer yes they would
I don't know the composition of though
also I think a couple of the neighbors
have cinderblock walls and don't have
any at all I there was an earlier
statement I think it was made by mr.
Rowan or someone that there drainage
goes on to this property that that's
always concerning for us solid walls do
present difficulties if drainage is
moving normally if you had a great
elevation change you would look at a
retaining wall mr. Bannister may have to
build some retaining walls on his
property when he does the elevation
change to address this flooding his own
flood elevation I don't know mr.
Bannister is required to retain his own
water due to the creation of in and he's
also required to allow flow through
drainage to go through as well which is
essentially pre-development drainage so
solid wall is a is a tough call on on on
this one especially because considering
that his neighbor's of dumping water
onto his lot they're required to retain
their own drainage but you also have to
realize this is an older development an
older subdivision and the standards were
different back in the 60s and 70s so
it's a you could you could achieve it to
a privacy fence through chain-link with
sliding we consider that opaque
screening Sarah don't we still mayor and
confirm this is Sara Gonzales yes we do
he opaque fencing you can do what
fencing
it may have to be raised a little bit
where there's still water that can flow
underneath them so that's still
something that could possibly be used as
far as a privacy fence but being that
the subdivision is within the 1960s and
there already is that original flow yes
we would not want to keep those flows
you know looks like David where has it
hand up let me see if David wanted to
add something cuz I wanted to ask a
question of this David you there kids
we're Aron City Council I just wanted to
add that if mr. Bannister is the one
that greets to build the wall you have
to come up with a design that would
handle the drainage for that area and as
they both said historic flows would have
to be allowed to continue
and then our design standards for
drainage requires any additional that he
creates with his project to be retained
on-site so I guess what I'm saying is
that would have to be evaluated if a
wall was required that it be designed
and would be used to allow that historic
drainage flow to go through the property
homeowners themselves chose to put up a
wall then you know there have there any
drainage issues that they create from
their action so that's what I wanted to
add well David let me ask you this
though or Sarah or David Dolan let me
let me just use a hypothetical if I'm a
councillor a business - because this
kind of is along the lines of your
question so let's just say it comes back
with diploma or the lomar and it says
you need to bring in although it's going
to be hard to believe but it's possible
through three feet of floor can can can
we require that that he has to build a
rock wall fence that it's at least one
foot above the the fill so theoretically
it kind of it would protect the the land
of course just flowing over into the
neighbor's property and it you know kind
of keep that water in his in his area
and hopefully flows to the drainage is
that possible to do under this scenario
here during this appeal layer in City
Council
really is reviewed like a variance there
are there is the ability for you to put
conditions on it that you feel would be
appropriate to protect adjacent Scott do
you understand what I'm trying to get at
if it turns out that you have to build a
three foot three at three feet of fill
you know if you don't if you if you you
know a wood fence a slotted fence any
type of little fence like that is not
going to keep water out but if you have
to build a put a a solid rock wall fence
that's at least a foot above your your
your fill so if you have three foot of
fill compacted you need to build a four
foot fence to keep whatever water that
not to flow into your heart how do you
feel about that mayor councillors so the
way the way that actually works if
you're in a flood zone only the dwelling
that you're building on the pad has to
be raised up all of the other dirt
around it doesn't okay so okay so that's
still going to be low so it's their
properties are draining onto mine so you
know it's we will we will quote direct
it towards the ponding once we see what
is required so I mean by raising the pad
isn't going to send water onto their
property it's still going to be coming
under mine that way then well no because
if if your how your your requirement
unless I'm wrong I mean correct me if
I'm if I'm wrong in this David even
where David Dolan David mayest as any of
them he has to show that that if he
builds when he builds this that even
that roadway that's going in and out or
that turnaround pod he has to show where
that water has to flow into the into the
pond so that means that he it's possible
that he may have to
two or three feet over there as well as
his own his own plot his own pad I mean
you can't just put it on the pad and
then just let the water flow to the side
of it unless you you know that it's
gonna flow into the into the drainage
mr. mayor
actually mr. van David ala for the
record mr. Bannister is correct so
you've got two things going on he does
have to raise the pad the building pad
above the flood zone he also what for
the amount of material that he creates
on the lot as impervious he has to put
that within the drainage area the rest
of the historical flow has to drain out
of the lot what he is allowed through so
he only has to create his ponds big
enough to handle the drainage based on
the calculation for his impervious
material the rest of the drainage can
flow off the lot so he can he can do
that his parking lot if there was a
flood could be under water because the
building had elevations are higher he's
probably gonna have to ramp the entrance
to the buildings from the parking lot
but he can do that why would we allow
that why would we allow him to build it
so that his parking lots are under water
do you ready mr. mayor the reason is is
because the city ordinance which
complies with the federal requirements
for FEMA ours
you're only insuring the buildings for
flood insurance you're not insuring the
rest of the parcel if mr. myiasis can
correct me if I'm wrong but I think I'm
pretty correct okay but but okay so well
David - tiss you wanted to jump in yes
mayor thank you for that thank you David
Dolan I appreciate that follow up
specifically mayor his pad for the
buildings will be hired as parking lot
can be lower but it won't that doesn't
necessarily mean the parking lot will be
underwater he should be able to and his
engineer should design the parking lot
to where the water will flow on a sloped
parking lot it won't be huge you won't
you won't see people parking on an
incline but it'll be enough of a slope
to where that water
it's our cannot will make his way out of
the parking lot into his ponds so
theoretically his entire lot should be
designed to wear his water that is
generated on his property will flow into
those ponds that he battles the historic
flow whatever is coming into his
property from the neighboring Lots can
go through his property and will
probably leave somewhere out at Turton
or somewhere like the usual flow that it
does right now so in summary the main
point the all of the runoff on his
property that he creates
due to the new buildings and do the
parking lots will slope into his pots
yeah I thank you for that i but
theoretically we could could we put a
requirement that if he had to put a pad
two feet or three feet and and you know
to the to the within the boundaries of
his neighbor's that we could require
some type of a rock wall Vincent mr.
mayor I would I would argue based on mr.
Weir's comments yes you could require
that the I would offer the wording a
wall or solid fence one foot taller in
the amount of the height of the fill
that he's required to bring in the only
question is our maximum wall height is 8
feet I I hope he's not ringing in seven
feet or more Phil I don't think so so
the Convention Center we brought in
three feet yeah I mean I can't see him
being more than three feet but okay
thank you for that and I don't mean to
dominate that counselor about this TV
but I just needed to clarify that and
I'm gonna turn it back over to you but I
have to just say any of you who spoke
earlier I'm sorry you've for the most
part II of forfeited your time to ask
any questions unless the counsel
specifically asked for you to question
so back to you at Cal surveyed the
student Thank You mayor and no I
actually really appreciate your comments
during this time um I think just to
circle back I think I would be with the
eight units instead of the twelve and
and I would look for
the setbacks to be able to be at least 7
feet so that emergency vehicles could
pass through because and I also agree
with 13 and says well I'm fencing mr.
mayor and 1/4 the neighborhoods it
sounds like there could potentially be
renters and the older neighbor to as
look towards renters I was a renter very
for a long time and it's it's a very
economical situation for a lot of people
we do have very nice rentals throughout
the city and you know you never know who
your neighbor may be somebody fantastic
and so I think we do need to just be
cautious with how we do pipes come those
that live in rentals versus those that
are homeowners Thank You Nick
thank you else her sword sorry it's just
taking the wall to get to you
Oh mr. mayor thank you I yeah a long
time as a general principle I am your
more density but I'll just simply say
this is taken a step a little too far
and I would confer with counselor Vedas
new movie that the eight units would be
better and I call so agree with her 100%
renters are nice people I was a renter
many times in fact I was a rent for just
12 years ago space rented an apartment
building for a whole year and so yeah I
I would agree with this if we could have
it limited at eight years and you're
going to need that besides the parking
you're going to probably need the extra
space for mr. Bannister just to handle
all the water we're talking about your
ponding may have to be bigger than you
thought
so that would come in handy there if you
didn't have quite as many if you were
talking about a two-story where
five minutes into two blocks apartments
and it's two-story you would have to
have like three on the first floor and
two on the second floor I guess you
could do that couldn't you
but age is better it's more even and I
think you'll have a nice place there to
rent out and do quite well so that's my
two cents worth thank you Thank You
Kelsey ruscus Thank You mayor
and thank you to everybody who
participated in the appeal today I
generally also agreed that we need more
in film especially with you know oddly
shaped properties like this it's it's
going to be hard to find solutions to
get these get these places filled up and
so I also agree with councilor beta subi
I agree with you mayor on the increase
in the parking requirement wasn't too
long ago since I was in college but I
know living in some of the student
housing that you have two or three cars
you know for one bedroom because you
have people visiting and you have
certainly situations where couples are
living together in one room and that
kind of thing and so you you're
definitely going to have a parking
situation there that's just going to
potentially bug the neighbors and and
it's just going to be a constant
perhaps source of confrontation with
wooden tapers it we don't want to have
and so appreciate mr. Bannister thinking
about developing this property and the
neighbors for coming together as well I
think this is a happy medium and support
the units as well as the modifications
on the setbacks to a left for the proper
drainage here thank you I also Bencomo
thanks mayor I am I mostly have a
question for staff probably Sarah I'm
really curious about which you know I
think can definitely be a discussion for
a much longer-term discussion giving
planning and zoning issues for the long
term
um but why it's so interesting to me
that we have a requirement for
one-and-a-half parking spots when no one
drives half a car so I'm really curious
about why that's a regulation mayor and
councillor Bencomo to confirm so our
information hasn't been updated as part
of our zoning code since 2001 we are in
that process of transitioning over and
so with that it will lead to code
modifications that are going to show and
reflect currently what is being utilized
as far as the city several of our
different zoning designations have one
and a half or assisted living facility
was 0.5 so half a parking space and is
very it's it's kind of based on how many
cars you would have maybe someone in
your home would have a bike somebody's
going to have a vehicle and so you would
split that portion as far as the
justification I'm not sure why it has
been limited to one and a half all we
did I believe four years ago was removed
parking maximums but these were design
elements that took place in 2001 and so
that is something we are looking at
moving forward with our zone code change
that's for sure I'm sure it'll lessen
all of our headaches mr. Bannister's
neighbors us so that's how Cole I also
thank you for that Sara extra mayor to
add a little history to it up until the
2001 zone ago mr. mayor David on council
Bencomo we had two parking spaces and
then we had a change in we were looking
at maximums the thought was is not every
unit in an apartment complex has
multiple tenants you you may have
families that are a single parent with
how with children and so forth
so we felt like the 1.5 at the time was
more appropriate because then with two
units you could end up with a third
party saw so it was it's we very we
vacillated over the years the parking
standards have changed since the 60s to
now
parking is still heavily debated amongst
the planning profession how much free
parking is free it's not really free it
costs everybody a little bit of
everything so
is always one of those contentious items
and it will be in that item to be
evaluated in the new development
standards so that's where we were in
2001 we were looking to reduce the
amount of impervious material on
apartment apartment complexes because we
felt like we were over building things
David I and I guess there is there is
also something to be said about
encouraging people to drive less right
to bike more walk more use more
transportation but I guess that's that's
definitely like I said a conversation
for the long run I also just wanted to
know I am very supportive of this of
councillor make this to be suggestion
and and thanks to mr. Bannister for
agreeing to go down to eight units I
think that that makes a lot of sense um
you know I think you know somebody noted
about why would you want until I mean
you know we say this every time we talk
about housing we have a huge housing
crisis in Las Cruces and we have way
more people than we do affordable living
and you know I think it's important when
we have a developer who is willing to do
and fill because not a lot of developers
are to come to the table in good faith
and have a conversation like we've had
today and mr. Bannister it feels like
deja vu I'm sure you would agree that
we've had a similar conversation before
and so I appreciate you coming back to
the table and having this conversation
with us um I don't think it's um I don't
necessarily think this is unfair or too
much like some of my colleagues have
said I think as a homeowner that's sort
of the risk you take when you buy a
house next to an empty lot that you
don't know what's gonna happen in that
lot in the future whether coning zoning
code might change right you just don't
know and I sort of think that that's the
risk you take when you purchase a home
regardless whether it's in an empty look
next to an empty lot or not right that's
just a risk you take anyway and I do you
know I think I keep every time we have a
discussion the second time we've had a
discussion on pnz and zoning issues and
multi-family dwelling and we keep
hearing this narrative about who
apartment living apart folks who live in
apartments are and I just really want to
push back against that because I think
to me it sounds like a dog whistle and I
just you know yes there are certainly
considerations for the whole community
on public safety that are not tied to
apartment complexes so I appreciate
calibrate this to be bringing that up
and I just wanted to also note that
because it landed on me
not very well so thank you mayor for you
to Mayor Pro 1000 Larry did you have a
question or comment Terry Nichols yes
mr. mayor thank you very much and
members of the City Council a Larry
Nichols community development I guess
I'd like to reflect back that this
agenda item is on the appeal and the
appeal was did they was a fair process
granted we've talked a lot tonight about
design features and how could be changed
and what needs to be done and how it
would be treating more fairly but really
we have to address and I like legal
department to to chime in here to say
how do we handle this appeal then the
rest of it I guess can you come forward
okay preciate you bringing that forward
I that's why I asked if we could do that
it's been a while since I've done an
appeal like this and so thank you for
for that question so who's here Jennifer
are you here or Rob Rob DeBell oh you're
both you're both here okay yeah go ahead
Rock mayor council would me me you read
the question Rob the question did it and
it's a good one because I was that's why
I kept asking what we could do here so
so Larry want to know should we just
look on the merits of the appeal whether
or not it was
done properly but you know right now
we're where were the negotiating number
of units setbacks number of spaces per
unit and and about a fence and and is
that something that's germane to doing
what we're doing here today or should we
just do an up or down vote on the appeal
and then mr. Bannister comes back with
something else I discussed this this
morning with City Attorney Vega Brown if
the council's desire is to approve the
development with conditions and you
would need to amend the ordinance sorry
the resolution upholding the Planning
and Zoning Commission and right now it's
denying the Planning and Zoning
Commission but you would have to uphold
the decision of the Planning and Zoning
Commission with conditions and you would
need to enumerate the conditions and I'm
in a position to share my screen at that
point so we can enumerate those
conditions within the resolution we've
got the council's direction so yeah you
can go with an up or down vote yes or no
but you can also uphold it with
conditions got it okay well thanks for
the clarification
Wow you didn't even need to say anything
there Rob and thanks for the question
yeah thanks for that question Larry but
before I get to the airport 1000 author
Mayor Pro Tem done that I wanted to ask
Scott a question on your parking so
Scott so let's just say you have two
parking spaces per unit are you going to
put the unit number there so he's like
unit one these are you to your two
parking spaces unit two these are your
two or are you gonna just leave them
blank whoever gets them he's needed oh I
apologize I was muted um
mayor councillors that seems like the
best thing to do get assign everybody to
spots and then the overflow they can
used for visitor parking and designated
as such well okay that when you say
overflow if you do I'm still good with
two parameters
yeah I'm still good yes you talked about
visitors okay but earlier one of the
David or somebody was talking about how
the history was you know maybe one
person just uses one car I can assure
you that if I if you have a tenant that
has two parking spaces and only has one
car they do not want any one parking on
that other space period okay and they're
gonna call you and they're gonna say hey
someone's parking buddy and you can see
you just have one car so yeah I don't
care
the take might reduce my rent because
you gave me two parking spaces and I
don't want them there what if I have a
friend come you know so um that's I'm
just telling you that I'm for telling
the headaches you will have you don't
have two parking spaces and then if you
don't mark them then they're gonna
complain because all the clothes you
know all the other ones are gonna be
thinking you're not gonna know who
friends they're who's taking it so a lot
of things to think about so we're trying
to save you headaches so I'm trying to
get in okay
thank you you're welcome all right the
counselor mayor put him down there hey
finally
I was waiting patiently patiently thank
you so much
neighbors for coming together and his
front kind of going not door-knocking
and getting people interested right and
first informing but having them
understand that's all really important
and something I know councillor pink
limo and I are really passionate about
right as community organizing and and
that's doing so I'm so glad that you're
here and really speaking to us about
what your concerns are so I heard you
loud and clear
and I want folks to understand that I
would agree with councillor debate this
to be and mayor around the eight units
and the setbacks I think those are very
important as we move but I also want
folks to understand on this
calling the zoom meeting is that we are
in desperate need of affordable housing
like 7,000 plus and every time there is
some developer that comes to the table
and wants to essentially develop we we
always hit those kinds of concerns and
whatnot and I don't want you to forget
this big calling you back because what
we have to do and some urns and the
fears about property crime and crime and
whatnot being on the rise is and things
that have happened in our unity that we
have to address together right and and
so I I just you know we had a few years
back our whole behavioral health system
failed I'm not sure if you're aware of
that mr. dr. funk and I used to work
many many moons together and I'm a
social worker retired from the child
welfare arenas and so those are things
that we really need to address the the
fact that we don't have the problem says
to access to mental health and health
care housing food insecurity all those
things that I think lead to that kind of
crime that we're seeing and not just in
your community I live on juniper Avenue
and once we're seeing that here too and
all the many conversations were having
with our law enforcement officers about
how to address that and so I don't want
to seem like I'm so I don't want to seem
like I'm I'm preaching but we're going
to need each other to really work
through this as we move forward because
in
is something that we want to we want to
use and as a tool and this is one way I
think that we can do that someone said
you don't think that the 12 units really
puts a dent on things but that could be
someone who you know doesn't have a home
it there isn't anything available and
Sara and I have all these conversations
a lot when we talk about these things we
really need to come to a space where we
are working together she can tell you
the numerous times where folks and Sara
and I came to college here right and we
lived in some space in some places that
that we might be questionable so we want
to be able to improve our housing and so
that it's there's more quality and more
of them
for sure so I've known mr. Bannister for
a while because he works in some ways in
in in my field has so I guess I just
want you to know the kind of person that
he that he is
I met him many years ago when I was a
manager at the Child Welfare Department
he came and talked to me about building
sort of an agency around counseling
right and the kinds of services you need
in our community and he was always very
open to what I've had to say and he has
quality services that he provides in
this community and and so I've always
found him to - to do what's right and
and and I don't think today is any
different I think he was able to listen
to everybody and really try to
compromise
so I Sarah and maybe Larry Nichols
someone mentioned Jillian I think it was
you
there's a couple of historic properties
in that area that I'm I'm really
concerned about especially being part of
the historic preservation committee I
under if if anybody in our in our staff
has examined that and understands you
know because when we have more traffic
and there's that kind of development it
lends itself to instability right of
properties that have been there for so
so long especially a little bit
properties and I hear that a lot
specifically in the mesquite and the
especially morsel in the Alameda
historic district with the the numbers
of people traveling and the speeding and
those kinds of things so have we taken
any have there been any assessments
about what might this property cause
some of this historic preservation of
historic properties in the area mayor in
Carrollton and account encounters as
part of the review process it does not
go through the historic preservation
committee to review prior as far as the
infill being that cases are moving
forward and if it were to be approved
and move forward for construction that
is something that we can work with try
Ainsworth within our department to see
if there is any you know concerns as far
as the stability of the existing
structure that is done from nineteen
twenty it is something we can bring
forward as a recommendation some of the
properties that are located within the
area we don't have a registry for we
have one for Alameda we have one for
South mesquite we have one for North
mesquite so it would be something that
we could look forward to in her future
as well as getting those historic
registries may be done for certain areas
where we know buildings are at I
appreciate that Sarah I think it's
something I did definitely want stop to
consider especially as we start moving
and then you know building up in that
episode corridor I think it's because
some of that right development many many
years ago with many professors and I've
heard different stories from different
people that have called and said I'm so
excited that you're looking at that and
that that might be something that you
want to consider is is historic right
have you become an historic site if you
will
and and so I think it getting troy to
really examine that would would be
because would be I think a good a good
thing in my opinion and I don't know
Larry do you have something to add to
that mr. mayor
Mayor Pro Tem David you want to go first
I'll come in as well madam mayor pretend
they've gone for the record you'll need
to remember that our Historic
Preservation designation is voluntary by
the property owner so so if the property
owner is interested and it has a
structure that is 50 years or old or
older they should approach mr. Ainsworth
in the community development department
for that designation they don't have to
be within our historic districts north
or south Mesquite Alameda or Mesilla
Park so based on its age and its
architectural style it could be eligible
that would also if it is considerable
and it is designated locally he could go
after state tax credits or federal tax
credits to help maintain or rehab the
property so but it's right now it's all
on voluntary basis no absolutely I just
I know that that I think in the letter
that was written or maybe mr. Owen some
of your your commentary had to do with
the particular historic structure of the
1920s so I I'm very mindful of that and
and I mean we've developed this whole
committee and or Norman sand all sorts
of things that we definitely need to be
mindful for sure so that that's all that
I have to say Thank You mayor okay so
Scott you're okay with what you've heard
mayor councillors if we're talking eight
store eight two-story units with having
two parking spots for each and having
adequate bonding and and I have no
problem with that whatsoever I'm
confused again you said eight two-story
units I thought we were talking I
thought we talked we're talking eight
units total counselor abate the steuby
can I have you come back on what was it
that you had brought forth so he's doing
the two-story units so it if my thinking
is correct it's four in four then mr.
Bannister yes ma'am
correct we just just like the foot train
is now but instead of having six on each
side will have four on each side okay so
four on each side seven foot setback two
spaces per unit and then and then if you
require a one foot of a solid fence
above what your fill would be to prevent
overflow into to the mr. mayor
yes David if you would allow me to share
my screen I have a draft conditions
written up see where it is we see if I
can share my screen properly
so that was the old resolution under the
new draft one that I created
hopefully it'll behave and work for me I
fixed the title that would be one change
and it says that now therefore be it
resolved by the governing body the city
of Las Cruces movin number one that the
approval decision of the Planning and
Zoning Commission Planning and Zoning
Commission on May 26 2020 is hereby
upheld with the addition of the
following conditions one no more than
eight dwelling units per per the site
requiring a seven foot side yard
setbacks three a 1 foot solid wall or
fence taller than the height of the
amount of fill brought in to the site
not to exceed a total fence height of 8
feet and 4 requiring at least two
parking stalls per unit those are based
on my notes from the discussion with the
council so that's what I had drafted up
I can change any and all of those
conditions
looks pretty good there David okay I
have a question mayor councillors yes
and this would be more of a engineer
question I guess whoever would want to
address this but okay so as as one of
the neighbors said right now they're
there water drains from their property
on mine and it flows okay so if I put up
a you know a wall there that traps that
water you know solid solid wall where is
his water gonna go well Scott if you put
up a fence foot let's say you put up two
foot fence because you probably have to
have one foot as a footing and one foots
a barrier that's not only does that
designate your property line
it keeps your water in your yard in your
area and it just you know takes care of
the flow no I agree but what about the
water of his that comes onto my property
it won't be able to come onto my
property which I mean I'm fine with but
his it'll stop flow from his property on
to mine and and where is it gonna go
it's gonna have to go somewhere to the
sides that's I mean that's my only
concern mr. mayor mr. Bannister I
offered the wording a solid wall or
fence because then you could do a wood
fence that would allow flow in
underneath okay okay I was working rock
wall or you could do chain-link with
opaque screening it disciplines on the
will of the council conditions are
willing to accept got you it does need
to have have water flow to be able to
flow though I think okay that's fine
else our basis to be if you if you like
these you want to make that as an
amendment all right Thank You mayor um I
would like to make and do you need me to
read it verbatim or can I just make the
motion well probably wouldn't hurt oh
wait a minute
before you do looks like councillor
FLOTUS has a quick question if you don't
mind me interrupting yes counselor
Florida's hello
nostra Lotus she doesn't have a
microphone mr. mayor I would also offer
before we make a formal motion for the
amendment we should also change the
title and I have that worded as well but
I would take that as a second Amendment
because I think you need to clarify the
title as well okay go ahead counselor
beta
mr. mayor um I would like to then make
an amendment to change the resolution to
now include that in Section 1 that it
now reads that the approval decision of
the pnz Commission on May 26 2020 is
hereby upheld with the addition of the
following conditions one no more than 8
dwelling units per the site - requiring
seven but yard side yard setbacks 3 1
foot solid wall or fence taller than the
height amount of the fill brought in to
the site not to exceed the total fence
height of 8 feet or 4 and 4 requiring at
least two parking stalls per unit okay
is there a second second wave okay
motion made by a counselor basis to be
second by councillor Yvonne Flores any
questions on the amendment does that
mean we lose the landscaping and the
trees Phyllis Kessler sorry butting in
I'm sorry who's speaking so with Kessler
and I just wanted to make sure that the
landscaping yeah miss Custer I'm sorry
please yeah I can't really take comments
from you right now but did you do bring
up a good point thank you for doing that
so we'll move in a second we can discuss
this who did you have one did you have a
question counselor lotus-eyed no okay no
and your hands up
your blue hand is not what I know it's
just that you know I'm okay there you go
thank you
yeah yeah I think councillor sorg had a
question and then mayor motown done
dinner yes counselor sport to be clear
this just changes those parts the rest
of the resolution is still stays the
same
well we may want to clarify that yes mr.
mayor
I agree with counsel absorbs assessment
that none of the other conditions on his
site plan were changed he had indicated
in his application that he would be
landscaping so I don't see that that is
changed you okay with that mr. brannis
Ascot yes the only thing it doesn't
specify eight two-story dwelling units
does it need to because it in the code
it says I can build up to 25 feet so we
really don't need to designate that
correct I don't believe I don't believe
okay thank you
okay so so getting back to Scott again
you you're good with the landscaping
requirements everything that you would
discussed earlier you're correct
okay good I guess I guess Mayor Pro Tem
siting up that's a question okay so
that's this is on the amendment so it's
been moved in a second Christine this is
on the motion to amend resolution 21-0
zero nine to add section one that the
approval decision of the Planning and
Zoning Commission on May 26 2020 it's
hereby upheld with the addition of the
following conditions one no more than $8
units per the site to requiring seven
seven feet side yard setbacks three one
foot solid wall or fence taller than the
height amount of fill brought unto the
site not to exceed a total fence height
of eight
feet and for requiring at least two
parking stalls per unit so counselor a
bit of studi yes counselor Vasquez yes
counselor Bencomo
yeah counselor sorg yes counselor Flores
yes counselor gun meta yes mayor yes
okay David you said you had a clarify
the title mr. mayor I would recommend
for the council's consideration David on
the record a change to the title I'll
read it for you a resolution upholding
the approval by the Planning and Zoning
Commission on May 26 2024 and infill
development process application with
conditions for a dwelling units on a
vacant parcel located at 22:45
Turrentine Drive the subject property
encompasses 0.975 plus acres in the zone
Darwin a single family medium density
submitted by Phyllis Kessler and Carl
Kinsler starker appellant we can strike
the last sentence on that but I only
changed the first sentence when you say
strike the last sentence you mean strike
were submitted by yes yeah let's do that
okay
zero zero motion in a second for this
two men the this title who made the
first motion
counselor sorry else restore and second
by quell through what is what is okay
okay Christine on the second amendment
clarify any clarifying the title this is
on the motion to amend resolution 21-0
zero nine to change the title to a
resolution upholding the approval by the
Planning and Zoning Commission on May 26
2024 an info
development process application with
conditions for eight dwelling units on a
vacant parcel located at 22:45 turn time
drive councillor a beta steuby and
councillor of us cos yes councillor
Bencomo yeah counter sorg yes councillor
Flores yes answer Gandara
yes there yes okay so now we're on the
main motion this is gonna get tricky so
if we're gonna uphold the Planning and
Zoning decision now with these these
conditions do we still deny the appeal
the Salone no no no mr. mayor in this
instance you would now be voting YES on
the amended resolution so we don't have
to deal with anything with the with the
appeal of them no sir you do not right
Bert
who's an unauthorized person who keeps
talking that you councillor Florida's no
no it's not me I'm sorry it's just that
I can't see they um you know I'm putting
this meeting on my phone I'm sorry my
apologies yeah I know I know you're
hungry okay so think we have I'm sorry
Christine one councillor FLOTUS started
talking so I wasn't sure if she had oh
no sir photos did you have something you
wanted to say well I was there a motion
was er yes and no no we have a started
yet so I just wanted to clarify it so
then basically now one needs to vote yes
to uphold all these amendments that were
just recently passed and I well that's
what I wanted to clarify so okay so we
would be voting YES on this on this
motion here well if you want to uphold
the conditions that were just passed and
move for
with that development okay
is that correct no Christine yes sir
okay all right okay this is on the
motion to approve resolution 2100 nine
as amended counselor beta Snoopy yes
counselor Bencomo yes mr. Sark
yes counselor FLOTUS yes counter Gandara
yes mayor yes
okay that pretty much concludes our
evening tonight so with that I did a
motion to adjourn
so move so move Circuit okay who was the
second by it was Gabe Oscars okay motion
made by councillor Devon Florida second
by counselor gave Ausmus that we adjourn
all those in favor signify by saying aye
aye
8:17 p.m. we're adjourned and then
Christine you want me stay on to do the
agenda setting meeting please okay so we
just need a couple minutes and then
we'll get to that
okay enjoy the rest of your evening
thank you everyone for your
participation
Thank You mr. leer good night everybody
you know I'll be here part of it with
you Morgan
[Music]
so I'm ready whenever you are Kristen
I'm ready okay this is the agenda city
meeting for our July 20th 2020 City
Council meeting number one non consent
one non consent to non consent its you
none consents three non consent very
none consents or consent or consent five
consent
sense fix non consent it's non consent
7 concern 7 consent 8 non-consent 8 9
consents 9 9 consent 9 9 consents Tara
on consent and non consent 11 non
consent
11:9 cancer
twelve consent twelve consents thirteen
consent thirteen consents thank you
thank you have a good night
hey you too Thanks all right we'll see
you there haven't yes we changed that I
didn't realize that there was going to
be a change in the title of that
ordinance we're going to have to hear it
again we're gonna have to go through for
melody because we did not comply with
OMA the title was changed it shouldn't
have been changed I'm sorry and I didn't
realize it until it was too late but if
it's a formality and we'll just we'll
just post it again and we can even put
it on consent or something it's not a
big deal okay we don't need to go
through the entire hearing it's just
it's just more of a posting it to
correct a mistake we just it would just
be correcting the amendment yeah sure
okay that's fine all right did you want
to put that on this agenda okay so item
number 14 will be a resolution
correcting the the title of planning the
zoning appeal that was done on when May
26 2020 I think mayor that Jennifer's
talking about we would just republish
the TUC the correct the change title to
their resolution that was approved
tonight we would just republished the
whole title correct yes and the in the
packet so we don't need to we don't need
to we don't need a separate resolution
we just need the same resolution back on
the agenda yes that's correct
but is it gonna need to vote no I think
you can put it on consent if you like
okay so we'll need a vote so I I don't
mind putting on consent but I mean we'll
need a vote though correct yeah correct
no your vote on it mayor when the
consent agenda is approved okay so we'll
just put it on consent then item number
14 will be the clarification of the
title I'll let you guys put that on
there
and Kristen Christina I copied that
resolution in I compass so if you let me
know we'll work on it together in the
morning I'm good thank you
okay good night now we will sign off
bedroom