February 2, 2000 Meeting

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

REGULAR MEETING

FEBRUARY 2, 2000

MEMBERS PRESENT:

Mr. Michael O'Hara, Chairman.

Ms. Ginna Sanders, First Vice-Chairman.

Mr. Daniel Schwebke, Second Vice-Chairman.

Mr. Preciliano J. Martin, Member.

Mr. Robert J. Jaramillo, Ex-Officio Member.

MEMBERS ABSENT:

Ms. Paula J. Dardin, Member.

STAFF PRESENT:

Ms. Sharon L. Few, City Planner.

Ms. Armida Rodriguez, Recording Secretary.

OTHERS PRESENT:

Mr. Klad Zimmerle, R.L.S.; Mr. Paul J. Pompeo, Jr., P.E.; and other unidentified persons.

1. CALL TO ORDER. Chairman O’Hara called the regularly scheduled February 2, 2000, meeting to order at approximately 1:30 p.m. Chairman O’Hara noted that a total of three (3) items were to be considered. Recommendations to the City Commission are to be made by the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval or denial of the requests. The City Commission will consider these requests at its meeting of February 22, 2000, to render final decisions.

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA. Commissioner Sanders made a motion "TO APPROVE THE AGENDA, AS WRITTEN". Seconded by Commissioner Schwebke. All voted "AYE", passing the motion by a vote of 4-0-0.

3. MINUTES OF JANUARY 5TH REGULAR MEETING, AND JANUARY 30TH INSPECTION TOUR, 2000. Commissioner Schwebke made a motion "TO APPROVE THE MINUTES, AS WRITTEN". Seconded by Commissioner Sanders. All voted "AYE", approving the motion by a vote of 4-0-0.

4. SUBDIVISIONS.

A. CASE: S-00-0651(A). PETITIONER: Tays Investment Corp., owner, by Klad Zimmerle, R.L.S., agent. REQUEST: Approval of the final plat of HEIGHTS ADDITION, UNITS A, B, C, AND D, BLOCK 11, REPLAT C, for one (1) lot; with variances on the construction and installation of streets (curb, gutter, paving), on the installation of utilities (water or sewer), on the dedication of public land, and from Section 22-01-0140(a)(19) relating to drainage plans; with public access; located within the City of Alamogordo. TOTAL AREA: ± 0.364 acre. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Mesa Lane extended and Crescent Drive extended. CURRENT LEGAL: Lots 1 and 2, Block 11, Unit D, Heights Addition, Units A, B, C and D, as amended. CURRENT ZONE: District "C" (Multi-Family Dwelling).

Ms. Few said that staff had several problems with the subdivision, however most of the problems were worked out in a meeting held on February 1, 2000. The legal description of the property included in the subdivision was not provided on the plat, the full legal description to include the width of the easement needed to be included on the plat. The proposed use of the variable width utility easement was not specified and it appears that the easement would remain a private utility easement between the holding of other property owners. Ms. Few said that the easement in question, east of Crescent Drive and west of Scenic was in separate ownership. At the time that the City vacated and abandoned the original alley it was suppose to revert in equal portions to the adjacent properties. Instead, the way the documents were drafted the alley went as a separate property and was deeded back to Melvin Tays or Melvin Tays Investment. Ms. Few said that the City was requesting that the easement either be dedicated as a public alley, combined with the adjacent lots and left as an easement, or some other transfer be made. With an easement in private holding, it would be difficult for city maintenance and upkeep, of the land and with tying on. Since property would not be fee simple to the City, the wording must be worked out. Ms. Few said that minimum setback lines were required and there had been a request for a variance from the drainage design calculations, and no public land was included. There were no plans for the installation of street improvements or other utilities to Lot 1C. Ms. Few said in the meeting on the first, it was agreed that since neither Crescent Drive nor Mesa Lane had been developed, that the isolated installation of the utilities would not be appropriate. The only reason that Lot 1C was included on the plat (a consolidation of Lots 1 and 2 of Block 11) was to provide for the utility easement on the south-side of the property for the continuation of the sewer line that would go in the previously discussed utility easement. The utility easement would come from Scenic, west to Crescent, north on Crescent and west into the alley that paralleled Mesa Lane. Ms. Few said that in lieu of a subdivider's contract the City would develop and request execution of a Waiver of Protest Agreement. Ms. Few said that the City had not recommend approval of the final plat, although they could live with a recommendation of approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission with the condition that the alley easement situation be resolved to the satisfaction of the City Attorney prior to presentation to the City Commission.

Mr. Zimmerle said that the legal description and the plat were being modified to reflect the correct legal and the building setback lines. Mr. Zimmerle offered that the easement, parallel to Indian Wells and parallel to Scenic, be dedicated as a public alley. Mr. Zimmerle said that in lieu of the contract they would execute A Waiver of Protest.

Commissioner Sanders asked if that would take away the City’s concern? Ms. Few said, yes it would.

Mr. Zimmerle said that they were asking for a variance for the installation of curb, gutter, paving and water lines and they would be installing sewer lines.

Commissioner Sanders made a motion "TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CASE S-00-0651(A), WITH THE MODIFICATIONS THAT MR. ZIMMERLE HAD INDICATED WOULD BE MADE AS FAR AS THE EASEMENTS FOR THE ALLEY AND THAT THERE WOULD BE A WAIVER OF PROTEST RATHER THAN THE SUBDIVIDER'S CONTRACT". Seconded by Commissioner Martin. All voted "AYE", passing the motion by a vote of 4-0-0.

B. CASE: S-00-0652(A). PETITIONER: Christ Community Church, owner, by Charles R. Herrell, agent. REQUEST: Approval of the preliminary and final plat of MISSION SANTA FE SUBDIVISION, for nineteen (19) lots; without alleys, without the construction of streets (curb, gutter, paving) to City standards, without the dedication of public land, and without compliance with Section 22-01-0140(a)(19) relating to drainage plans, with public access, with the public water; located outside the City of Alamogordo but within its extra-territorial planning and platting jurisdiction. TOTAL AREA: ± 17.38 acres. LOCATION: North Scenic Drive. CURRENT LEGAL: A tract of land in Section 5, Township 16 South, Range 10 East, NMPM, described by metes and bounds as follows: Being 17.38 acres of land, more or less, in Section 5, Township 16 South, Range 10 East, NMPM, Alamogordo, Otero County, New Mexico, and being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of the tract herein described, marked by a found brass cap, being the Southwest corner of the above mentioned Section 5, Township 16 South, Range 10 East; thence from the point of beginning North 00 degrees 02 minutes 28 seconds West along the Section line common to Sections 5 and 6, Township 16 South, Range 10 East a distance of 1317.96 feet to the Northwest corner of the tract herein described, marked by a bound brass cap, also being the Northwest corner of the Southwest one-quarter Southeast one-quarter Section 5, Township 16 South, Range 10 East; thence North 89 degrees 50 minutes 28 seconds East a distance of 57.43 feet to the Northeast corner of the tract herein described, marked by a set one-half inch iron rod, also being a point on the West right-of-way line of Scenic Drive; thence along the west right-of-way line of Scenic Drive, 687.89 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, with a radius of 1382.89 feet and whose long chord bears South 42 degrees 12 degrees 17 minutes East a distance of 680.81 feet to a point of tangency of the tract herein described, marked by a set one-half inch iron rod; thence continuing along the wet right-of-way line of Scenic Drive, South 27 degrees 56 minutes 57 seconds East a distance of 807.90 feet to a point of curvature of the tract herein described, marked by a set one-half inch iron rod; thence continuing along the West right-of-way line of Scenic Drive, 111.68 feet along the arc of a curve to the right, with a radius of 5779.58 feet and whose long chord bears South 28 degrees 06 minutes 06 seconds East a distance of 111.68 feet to the southeast corner of the tract herein described, marked by a set one-half inch iron rod; thence leaving the West right-of-way line of Scenic Drive, South 89 degrees 54 minutes 06 seconds West a distance of 945.10 feet to the point of beginning. CURRENT ZONE: Outside City, no zoning.

Ms. Few said that Christ Community Church owned over 17 acres just south and west of North Scenic Drive on the curve by the new church. Although the property was outside the City, the Church is proposing to plat the property into nineteen (19) lots, all at least ¾ of an acre. The plat had been provided, concerns included in the comments are noted including a need for a variance on the requirements of alleys. Design for develop flows for flood information would be required. No request was made but no public land was shown on the plat and a variance to that affect would be needed. Ms. Few said that in the subdivision design details, water connections and fire hydrants were included, the City does not normally allow connection of water to outside city subdivisions. No documentation has been provided to show that the City has given permission for such connection. There is no detail on the level of improvements for the interior streets. As the subdivision was within the City’s utility extension area, twenty-four feet (24’) of hot mix pavement with base coarse shoulders would be required. Ms. Few said that a cross section would be needed. A Waiver of Protest Agreement had been prepared for the improvements on North Scenic Drive. Ms. Few said that she would need the details on who would be signing any contracts and agreements for the Church. The subdivision was scheduled for consideration by the Otero County Planning Commission and while the staff was recommending approval of the preliminary plat, continuation of the final plat was recommended pending receipt of the required details. Mr. Pompeo said that he agreed with Ms. Few and the issues that were brought up they were working on or agreed that have to be worked on prior to final approval of the subdivision and they do not have any problems with the issues that were brought up.

Commissioner Schwebke said that one of the street names had already been used.

Mr. Pompeo said that if any street names had been used they would be modifying it to another appropriate name.

Commissioner Schwebke asked if there was going to be water going into the subdivision as far as fire protection or was it for domestic use.

Mr. Pompeo said that their proposal was to try and get the City’s approval to water the subdivision from a City source and if that is not approved then they would have to go to individual wells running to the sites and therefore, they would not have fire protection.

Commissioner Schwebke asked if they were installing individual wells and septic tanks because, the lots were at there minimum. Commissioner Schwebke asked if they could put in their disclosure statement that some places were limited to a three (3) bedroom house on the small lots.

Mr. Pompeo said that on the disclosure statement and per E.D. requirements that would have to limit the amount of waste water that could be discharged on any one lot because of the ¾ acre size and on the final plans and the disclosure statement there would have to be proper notice, as far as individual wells and septic tanks. Mr. Pompeo said that if there were a limitation placed on the size of the lot based on the waste water flow, then it would be in the liquid waste discharge portion of the disclosure statement limiting the amount of liquid waste that could be produced on the lot and therefore, the size of the homes would have to be limited by that amount.

Ms. Few said that state law requires that subdivisions within a specified radius of a municipality go through both the city and the county planning commissions for approval and because the subdivision is within the utility extension area of the City; the city request and require a higher development standards then does the county because the subdivisions would probably be coming into the City within a life time and the city would then be responsible for maintenance and keeping of the roads. Ms. Few said that the city requires at a minimum twenty-four feet (24’) of hot mix paving and base coarse constructed shoulders. Whereas, if it were a general county subdivision it could be simply a gravel road and would not have to be a dedicated right-of-way, it could be an easement, but within our jurisdiction the city requires that it be a dedicated. Ms. Few said that unless there has been an agreement with the church with the pipeline easement in crossing church property and return for providing city water. That would be the only way that they could obtain city water.

Mr. Pompeo said that if they were going to ask if that was possible for the city to allow the service of the lots from a city source. Mr. Pompeo said that it was a question to be posed to the City Commission for a resolution or ordinance to allow for individual to be served outside of the city limits. If that did not happen then they would go back to individual wells, they would prefer use city water because, then the developer could put in water mains and fire protection and be able to service domestic water for each of the lots. Ms. Few said that she did not believe that the subdivision was tangent to the City boundaries. Chairman O’Hara said that a request by the developer to be incorporated into the city limits does not mean that the city has to provide services. Ms. Few said that the services had to be there and the city would not have to install the lines.

Commissioner Sanders made a motion to "APPROVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CASE S-00-652(A), MISSION SANTA FE SUBDIVISION, WITH THE STIPULATION THAT BEFORE CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL PLAT THAT THE DEVELOPER AND THE CITY WORK OUT ANY CONCERNS". Seconded by Commissioner Schwebke. All voted "AYE", passing the motion by a vote of 4-0-0.

C. CASE: S-00-0653(A). PETITIONER: William Henry Nutting, Alicia M. Nutting, Robert M. Ruiz, Hilda C. Ruiz, Linda G. Scott, Jo Anne Satterfield and Bette M. Kimbell, and the City of Alamogordo, a New Mexico Municipal Corporation, owners, by George P. Light, R.L.S., agent. REQUEST: Approval of the final plat of ALAMO BLOCKS, BLOCK 107, REPLAT A, for the re-configuration of three (3) lots and the relocation and dedication of an alley; with all utilities, and public access; located within the City of Alamogordo. TOTAL AREA: ± 0.536 acre. LOCATION: 1204 and 1206 Fourteenth Street and 1311 Filipino Avenue. CURRENT LEGAL: A tract of land comprising Lots 30, 16 and 17, and a part of the alley between said lots, all in the Resubdivision of Block 107, Alamogordo, Otero County, New Mexico, as filed for record in the office of the Otero county Clerk and ex-officio Recorder on the 27th day of May, 1957, being more particularly described by metes and bounds as follows: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Lot 16 and going south along the East line of said Lots 16 and 17 a distance of 190.00 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 17; thence West along the South line of said Lot 17 and said South lot line extended a distance of 123.62 feet to the west right-of-way lane of the alley; thence North along said West right-of-way line of the alley; thence North along said West right-of-way line a distance of 65.00 feet; thence East continuing along said right-of-way line a distance of 1.24 feet to the southwest corner of said Lot 30; thence North along the West line of said Lot 30 a distance of 125.00 feet to the Northwest corner of said Lot 30; thence East along the North lines of said Lots 30 and 16 a distance of 122.38 feet to the place of beginning. CURRENT ZONE: District "A" (Single Family Dwelling).

Ms. Few said that Mr. Paul Light had a conflict and could not be at the meeting. The City was doing the subdivision. Block 107 of Alamo Blocks was platted years ago and over time the developed traveled alley and the platted alley ended up in two (2) different places. The traveled alley actually encroached on Lots 16 and 30, and the platted alley was incorporated behind the fence of Lot 17. Ms. Few said that it had created several problems and had created a neighborhood feud, sewer easements and access to sewer lines, traveling of sanitation trucks and other utilities. The City had taken the responsibility of working with the property owners to get it replatted. The basic issue was relocation and rededication of the alley. As such the City was a party to the subdivision. No drainage plans were submitted but, the lots were already developed. There will be no park land because it was a previously approved subdivision. Ms. Few said that the City was recommending approval of the final plat and with minor corrections to include addresses and front setback lines.

Commissioner Sanders made a motion "TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CASE S-00-0653(A), WITH THE MINOR CORRECTIONS THAT MS. FEW TALKED ABOUT". Seconded by Commissioner Martin. All voted "AYE", passing the motion by a vote of 4-0-0.

5. REPORTS.

A. City Planner.

(1) March Agenda – Ms. Few said that there were three (3) items on the agenda. A variance, subdivision and a resolution on a street name.

(2) May NMLZO training session – Ms. Few said that the League of Zoning Officials which was a sub-section of the New Mexico Municipal League was endeavoring to put their spring conference in May in Albuquerque a workshop for Planning and Zoning Commissioners. Ms. Few said that she had requested if there was any way to offset costs to Planning Commission members that wanted to go. Ms. Few said that she could not guarantee full compensation of registration and travel expenses.

(3) Other – Ms. Few said that she was sorry for the tardiness of the packets. Ms. Few said that there was a new membership roster. She stated that she had a request for a copy, but all phone numbers, e-mail, cell phone and work phone and fax numbers; the mailing address, names and titles were left. Ms. Few said that on the comprehensive plan the city had more comments that they had anticipated and also had a response from the German Air Force, and are now on the mailing list. Ms. Few said that she had meeting with the Forest Service for the trail systems and their projections for trails and connections to trail heads. Ms. Few said that with Holloman AFB, there was a discussion of them putting trails from Holloman to Alamogordo.

B. CHAIRMAN.

C. COMMISSIONERS.

6. PERSONS TO BE HEARD - None.

7. ADJOURNMENT - There being no further business to come before the Commission, Commissioner Sanders made a motion "TO ADJOURN". Seconded by Commissioner Schwebke. All voted "AYE", passing the motion by a vote of 4-0-0. The meeting adjourned at approximately 2:20 p.m.

 

Approved: ____________________

_____________________________

Michael M. O’Hara, Chairman

 

ATTEST:

 

_________________________________

Armida Rodriguez, Recording Secretary

 

Approved at the Planning & Zoning Commission Regular Meeting of March 1, 2000.