EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ZONING AUTHORITY€¦ · 21-08-2013 · Case # V13-007 / PALACIOS SURROUNDING...

Extra-territorial Zoning Authority – August 21, 2013 Page 1 of 20 Case # V13-007 / PALACIOS

MEETING DATE: August 21, 2013 CASE #: V13-007 REQUEST: Variance from 15 ft. to 5 ft. on

the side yard setback standard. PURPOSE: To permit the construction of a

20’ X 40’ attached garage. PROPERTY OWNER/ Elizabeth Palacios APPLICANT: LOCATION: 320 Armstrong Rd. Las Cruces, NM 88007 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A tract located in the Doña Ana Bend Colony Grant and being part of U.S.R.S Tract 5-110A as recorded with Instrument #1215832 on June 26, 2012. EXISTING ZONING: ER2 PROPERTY SIZE: 0.33 acre MAP CODE: 4-006-132-110-366 RECOMMENDATION: Approval CASE MANAGER: Steve Meadows, Planner

EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ZONING AUTHORITY

DOÑA ANA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Doña Ana County Government Complex• 845 North Motel Boulevard

Las Cruces, New Mexico 88007• Office: (575) 647-7237

Report Contents: (1) Cover Page (2) Applicable Policies and Ordinances (3) Staff Analysis (4) Site Plan and Supporting Documents (5) GIS Information and Maps (6) Public Notification


SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES BACKGROUND

Existing Conditions & Land Use/Zoning:

The subject parcel is a 0.33-acre irregular shaped, residentially developed parcel located within an ER2 (Residential, 2-acre minimum new lot size, single family, site-built homes allowed) Zoning District. An approximate 2,576 sq. ft. single family site-built home, constructed in 1973, is located near the front (south) of the property. A 340 sq. ft. (20’ X 17’) covered porch is attached to the residence near the northwest corner. Located in the northeast corner of the property are a 250 sq. ft. greenhouse with a 7’ covered porch extension, a 292 sq. ft. covered pole barn, and a small 100 sq. ft. storage unit. The property is accessed, on the south side, by Armstrong Rd., a County maintained, paved road classified as a principal arterial by the Las Cruces MPO. Doña Ana Mutual Domestic Water Consumers Association provides water to the property. Septic system # LC990863 was installed to replace the previous system in 1999 with leach lines along the northern and western property boundary. The eastern boundary of the property abuts EBID’s Doña Ana Drain.

The Request:

The applicant is requesting a Variance from the ER2 Zoning District minimum side yard setback of fifteen (15) feet to five (5) feet to permit and construct an 800 sq. ft. attached garage on the west side of the existing residence.

APPLICABLE PLANS, POLICIES AND CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL

Las Cruces Extra-territorial Zoning Ordinance No. 88-02, as amended: Section 2.3 Granting Variances

SITE

ZONING

LAND USE

North

ER2 (Residential, 2-acre minimum new lot size, single family site built homes)

Agricultural and residential uses

South

ER4 (Residential, 1/2-acre minimum new lot size, single family site-built homes)

Residential uses

East

ER2 (Residential, 2-acre minimum new lot size, single family site-built homes)

Residential and agricultural uses

West

ER2 (Residential, 2 acre minimum new lot size, single family site built)

Residential and agricultural uses


Section 2.3.A Application

An application for a variance shall be submitted to the Extra-territorial Zoning Authority by filing a copy of the application with the Doña Ana County Planning Director. Application shall be processed in accordance with Subsection 2.1.C of this Article (see 2.6.D, Administrative Variances).

Section 2.3.B Granting Variances

A variance may be granted by the Extra-territorial Authority if it concludes that strict enforcement of the Ordinance would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary physical hardships for the applicant resulting from the size, shape or existing structures thereon, or from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity, and that by granting the variance, the spirit of this Code will be observed, public safety and welfare secured and substantial justice done. Cost and inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with the regulation may be given consideration, but shall not be the sole reason for granting a variance. Variances will be considered in the following cases:

1. Height, yard, setback, lot area, site coverage and gross floor area requirements of this Code;

2. Parking and loading requirements of this Code; 3. Sign and fence requirements of this Code; 4. Limitations stated for minimum distances permitted; 5. Strict application of the terms of this Code relating to the use, construction or

alteration of buildings and/or signs. Section 2.3.C Required Findings

Before recommending or granting a variance, the ETZ Authority shall make the following findings:

1. Granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties with three hundred fifty (350) feet and also in the same land use district.

2. Granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

3. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified performance standard or regulation would result in unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the purposes of this Code.

Section 2.3.D Surrounding Properties

In granting variances, the Extra-territorial Authority may impose such reasonable conditions as will ensure that the use of the property to which the variance applies will be as compatible as practicable and will not adversely affect surrounding properties.

Section 2.3.E Duration of Variance

A variance may be issued for an indefinite duration or for a specified duration only.


Section 2.3.F Nature of Variances Specified

The nature of the variance and any conditions attached to it shall be entered on the face of the zoning permit or the zoning permit may simply note the issuance of the variance and refer to the written record of the variance for further information. All such conditions are enforceable in the same manner as any other applicable requirements of the Code.

Section 2.3.G Hearing Variance Requests

The Extra-territorial Authority shall hear and decide all variance requests as expeditiously as possible. Public notification of the proposed action should be accomplished in accordance with Subsection 2.1.G of this Article.

Section 2.3.H Voting of Variance Requests

Decisions on any requests for variances of this Code shall be approved by simple majority of the total membership of the Extra-territorial Authority.

Section 3.1.B.1 ER2M RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT

3.1.B.1.a PURPOSE The ER2M zoning district is intended as a residential district of single-family site-built homes and mobile homes on large size lots specifically designed for keeping of certain livestock with not more than one (1) dwelling and customary accessory buildings upon one (1) lot. It is intended that the ER2M district meet the demand for those lifestyles that include the raising and keeping of animals in a rural atmosphere in areas where the impact of such activities on those who do not share this lifestyle is negligible.

3.1.B.1.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS Minimum lot size 2 acres (except cluster development) Minimum lot width 120 feet Minimum lot depth 100 feet Minimum front setback 25 feet Minimum side setback 15 feet Minimum rear setback 25 feet Maximum building height 35 feet

3.1.B.1.c PERMITTED USES The permitted uses set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.c of this Article are applicable to the ER2M district.

3.1.B.1.d SPECIAL USE PERMITS The Special Use Permit uses and conditions set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.d of this Ordinance are applicable to the ER2M district.

Section 3.1.B.2 ER2 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT

3.1.B.2.a PURPOSE The ER2 zoning district is intended as a residential district of single-family site-built homes on large size lots specifically designed for keeping certain livestock with not more than one (1) dwelling unit and customary accessory building upon one (1) lot. It is intended that the ER2 district meet the demand for those lifestyles that include the raising


and keeping of animals in a rural atmosphere in areas where the impact of such activities on those who do not share this lifestyle is negligible.

3.1.B.2.b DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The development requirements set for the ER2M district are outlined in Section 3.1.B.1.b of this Article and are applicable to the ER2 district.

3.1.B.2.c ER2 PERMITTED USES

The permitted uses set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.c of this Article are applicable to the ER2 district, EXCEPT that mobile homes are not allowed in the ER2 district.

3.1.B.2.d ER2 SPECIAL USE PERMITS The Special Use Permit uses and conditions set for the ER1M district as outlined in Section 3.1.A.1.d of this Article are applicable to the ER2 district.

AGENCY COMMENTS

DAC Engineering: 1) All storm water runoff from all impervious areas must be contained within lot. Provide ponding calculations. Pond must contain 125% of required volume. 2) Do not place garage on any existing easements or septic systems. 3) When submitting for permits other comments may arise. DAC Flood Commission: 1) The subject property found not to be located within a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area and can be further identified on FIRM No. 35013C0518 F. The flood zone description of the subject property is known as Flood Zone X (Areas determined to be outside the 500-year floodplain). 2) Please be aware that the subject property is still susceptible to localized flooding despite not being identified within a FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area. 3) Additional reviews may warrant additional comments. Applicants Responsibility: 1) Drainage runoff, as a result of increases to impervious area (i.e., construction of a new home, concrete slabs, placement of a Manufactured Home, accessory buildings, etc.), shall be maintained on property. DAC Fire Marshal: No issues with fire code. DAC Building Services: House built approximately 1973. All permits shall be obtained prior to construction. DAC Rural Addressing Coordinator: No comments. DAC Zoning Codes: No visible violations. No open cases. DASO Codes: No violations. 6/18/13 NMED: Wastewater Treatment and Disposal: The applicant has a liquid waste permit (LC #990863) for a 3-bdrm home. NMED has no objection to the variance but the new construction must not be built over the existing liquid waste system. Water Supply/Water Quality: No comment. Solid Waste Disposal: No comment. Surface Drainage/Dust Control: No comment. NMDOT: No significant impact to state’s highway system.


CLC MPO: Armstrong Rd. is a principal arterial. CLC Planning Dept: This property abuts large active agricultural tracts. The garage structure would not impede light and air or privacy of neighbors in this rural area. The garage structure would not be out of character with neighboring lots. EBID: EBID has no objections to Case # V13-007. NM State Engineer’s Office: No comments received.

NOTICE / NOTIFICATION

17 letters of notification mailed. Legal Notification was posted in the Las Cruces Sun-News on Sunday, August 4, 2013. Signs were posted on the property. Agenda was posted on County Web Site. No correspondence in support or opposition was received by staff by August 15, 2013. See pages 18-19 for Area of Notification Map and Notification List.

STAFF ANALYSIS

Variance request V13-007/Palacios was submitted on May 30, 2013 to DAC staff requesting a variance of ten (10) feet to the required fifteen (15) feet resulting in a five (5) foot side yard setback to permit and construct an 800 sq. ft. (20’ X 40’) garage addition on the west side of the existing residence (Page 9). A variance request can be granted if it meets the guidelines set forth in Section 2.3.B (Page 3) which states, “A Variance may be granted by the Extra-territorial Authority (ETA) if it concludes that strict enforcement of the Ordinance would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary physical hardship for the applicant resulting from the size, shape or existing structures thereon, or from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity, and that by granting the variance, the spirit of the Code will be observed, public safety and welfare secured and substantial justice done. Cost and inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with the regulation may be given consideration, but shall not be the sole reason for granting a variance.” Section 2.3.C; Required Findings To grant a Variance the ETA must find that (applicant’s response (Page 13) in bold): A): Granting the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties within three hundred fifty (350) feet and also within the same land use district. This will not grant a special privilege as there have been other variances granted in the area on Armstrong Rd. and B & J Lane. B): Granting the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, welfare or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Building of a garage will not be a health hazard or safety risk to any other persons or properties in the area. C): Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified performance standard or regulation will result in unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the purposes of this


code. To protect vehicles from wind and sun damage as well as from farm vehicles, rocks, dirt and chemicals. Staff analysis of Section 2.3.C applicant responses: A) Staff located eleven (11) approved variances (Page 14) within the area of notification or within the same ER2 Zoning District including five (5) for setbacks (V06-004, V07-005, V08-005, V08-006, & V09-008). Staff concludes that approval of the variance request would not be considered a special privilege. B) The applicant will be required to submit and receive approval of the building plans for the proposed garage upon receiving approval of the variance request. The survey submitted (Page 10) indicates that the proposed addition will not encroach on any easements or R-O-W’s in the area. The application includes a narrative (Page 12) describing the physical impediments to meeting the setback requirement including the relatively small size of the parcel (0.33-acres) and the location of the existing septic system on the north side of the residence. The submitted septic system drawing (Page 11) shows the location of the septic tank and the leach lines along the north and northeast portion of the parcel preventing the applicant from placing the proposed garage within eight (8) feet of any leach lines per NMED requirements. Additionally, no testimony or documents have been submitted to staff claiming that approval of the Variance would be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. C) According to the applicants’ narrative, the purpose of the garage is to protect her investment in her vehicles from the elements and to protect them from the dust and chemicals associated with the farming operation on the north and west side of the property. Staff site inspections and a review of the site plans (Pages 9 & 10) and GIS aerials (Pages 17 & 18) indicate that locating the proposed garage is limited due to the small size of the parcel at 0.33 acres, the placement of the residence, constructed in 1973, near the front (south) of the parcel, and the location of the existing greenhouse and pole barn in the northeast portion of the parcel. Additionally, the existing septic system tank and its accompanying leach fields located along the northern and western property lines restrict the area for placing the garage in the backyard area as any structure must be at least eight (8) feet from those facilities per NMED guidelines. These existing structures and facilities restrict the placement of the garage to the proposed location and if denied by the ETA would be an unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the intent and spirit of the code. PROPOSED FINDINGS

1. The request of this application is consistent with the requirements of the Las Cruces Extra-territorial Zoning Ordinance Article II, Section 2.1.C/Application Procedures and Section 2.1.G/Public Hearing and Notice Requirements.

2. The subject property is located outside the corporate limits of the City of Las Cruces, but within the five-mile Extra-territorial Zone (ETZ) as set forth by 3-19-5(1), NMSA 1978 and the Joint Powers Agreement between Doña Ana County and the City of Las Cruces. Therefore, the Las Cruces ETZ Authority (ETA) has jurisdiction to review this case.

3. The subject parcel is located within an ER2 Residential District.


4. There are eleven (11) approved Variances including five (5) for setbacks within the same ER2 Zoning District as the applicants’ request.

5. The Variance request is warranted under the Extra-territorial Zoning Ordinance Article II, Section 2.3.C/Required Findings, because the applicant has shown that:

a. Granting the Variances will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties within three hundred fifty (350) feet and also within the same land use district. Five (5) variances for setbacks have been granted within the area of notification or within the same ER2 Zoning District.

b. Granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,

welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The requirements to obtain approval for a Variance and to receive approval for a Building Permit and pass the required inspections for the proposed garage will protect the public health, safety and welfare. No testimony or documents were submitted to staff claiming that approval of the Variance would be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

c. Strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified performance

standard or regulation will result in an unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the purposes of this code. Due to the size of the subject property, the placement of the existing structures, the septic system and leach fields, the applicant would be unable to construct the garage to protect her personal vehicles from the elements and the adverse impacts of the surrounding farming operation. This would be considered an unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the intent and spirit of the code.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the proposed findings of fact, staff analysis and the applicants’ request meeting all three requirements of Section 2.3.C Required Findings of the ETZ Ordinance, staff recommends APPROVAL of Variance Request Case # V13-007 / Palacios.


Site Plan


Property Survey


Septic System Drawing


Applicants Narrative


Applicant’s 2.3.C Responses


Area Variance Requests


Area Aerial


Zoning Map


2011 Aerial of Area of Notification


2011 Close-up Aerial View


GIS Area of Notification Map


GIS Area of Notification List

Date post:	20-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times