[Neighbors] Larger neon sign for the Carlisle Condos.

Fri Mar 23 13:07:44 MDT 2018

With much appreciation to all the neighbors, their vigilance and,
yes, to Jim's details as well. 

In an earlier neighbor group mail, I
was able to contact the individual whose grammar I wanted to
inform/correct, but I don't see a way in this strand to send a note
individually. 

So .... 

Here's hoping my neighbors en mass will accept
this former teacher's comments: 

"not filed timely" is an incorrect
usage that I have seen, now, a few times. "Timely" is an adjective, so
it cannot be used to describe a verb. The correct usage would be, "Not
filed in a timely manner". Variations of this exist, just take care to
describe a noun. 

I'm betting someone out there can spot my own
grammatical errors ~ go for it! Please just show me the proper way :)

Best to all, and wishing you amusements, 

Karen 

On Mar 23 2018
10:31 AM, Eliza Peralta via Neighbors_nobhill-nm wrote: 

> Frankly, I
am appalled. This is not a minor change. Plus, giving special treatment
to these two establishments only sets precedents for other businesses to
claim they want/need the same treatment .I definitely stand with
Veronica Salinas and I second Dave Dixon's statements. I ask that Pat
Davis, Sean Foran and Tim Keller stand with us as well and not just
quote statements from the planning department who are not capable of
following their own guidelines. 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 6:22 PM,
Dave Dixon via Neighbors_nobhill-nm
<neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:
> 
>> Isn't that a
distinction without a difference. If two deviations in a row are
approved, there might as well not be a standard, since every applicant
afterward will use these two as precedents. 
>> 
>> On 03/22/2018 08:49
AM, Jim Strozier via Neighbors_nobhill-nm wrote: 
>> 
>>> Veronica, 
>>>

>>> I am sorry, but your email is not accurate on several points: 
>>>

>>> The minor amendment regarding the Carlisle Sign is specific to that
property and that property only. If a text amendment had been proposed
(it was not), then the change would apply to the entire Sector Plan.
There are two separate processes. The application and the approval was
specific to the signs for The Carlisle. I am happy to share the
specifics if people are interested. The approval letter you attached
very clearly states that the amendment is for this property and project
only. 
>>> 
>>> The City Council's rejection of the NHNA's appeal on the
Copper Aliso did not change the height allowed in the zone. It confirmed
the City staff's interpretation of the height and the allowable
decorative parapet provision. Once again, it did not change the height
allowed in the CCR-2 zone. This appeal was also rejected because it was
not filed timely, however the LUHO's analysis also rejected the NHNA's
appeal on the merits. 
>>> 
>>> The rejection of the appeal for the self
storage project was solely based on the fact that the appeal was not
filed timely. It was determined to have been filed late. The LUHO
actually agreed with the NHNA that the storage use should have been done
as a Conditional Use, but since the appeal was not filed in time, the
project is allowed to continue. 
>>> 
>>> Once again the minor change
approved for The Carlisle do not affect any other properties within the
CCR-2 zone, only this one. The request and the justification for that
was specific to that project and property only. 
>>> 
>>> I personally
worked on both the Copper Aliso Appeal and the signage request for The
Carlisle. I did not work on the self storage project, but did review the
LUHO recommendation. 
>>> 
>>> I think it is important for the
neighborhood to have accurate information on these matters. 
>>> 
>>>
Jim Strozier 
>>> 
>>> FROM: Neighbors_nobhill-nm
[mailto:neighbors_nobhill-nm-bounces at mailman.swcp.com] ON BEHALF OF
Veronica Salinas via Neighbors_nobhill-nm
>>> SENT: Thursday, March 22,
2018 6:27 AM
>>> TO: TheBoard NobHill-NM <theboard at nobhill-nm.com>; Greg
Weirs <vgweirs at gmail.com>
>>> CC: Nob Hill <neighbors at nobhill-nm.com>;
Elizabeth Vencill <e at esvlawfirm.com>
>>> SUBJECT: Re: [Neighbors] Larger
neon sign for the Carlisle Condos. 
>>> 
>>> Dear Neighbors: 
>>> 
>>>
The new Planning Director, David S. Campbell, just approved another
"minor change" to the Nob Hill Highland Sector Development Plan (see
attached). 
>>> 
>>> As the Land Use Hearing Officer (LUHO) pointed out
during the Copper/Aliso appeal, a "minor change" cannot apply to one
property, it must apply to the entire sector plan (see note below). This
means that with the approval of this "minor change", the size limit on
signage is no longer 18", it is now 30" for SU-2/CCR-2 in Nob Hill. 
>>>

>>> (Note: Section 14-16-4-3(D)(2) of the Comprehensive Zoning Code
states "The Planning Director may approve minor changes to an approved
_Sector Development Plan_..." By definition the "minor change" is made
to a sector plan _not _a property. Therefore, point (9) does not apply.
The Planning Director, David S. Campbell, must know this since he is a
very experienced Land Use Attorney with over 35 years of experience. See
https://www.cabq.gov/planning/code-enforcement/comprehensive-city-zoning-code
[2].) 
>>> 
>>> Same with the Copper/Aliso appeal. The 3-story, 39-foot
maximum building height limits no longer apply in CCR-2. City Council's
decision to reject our appeal increased the maximum building height to
4-stories, 42 feet in CCR-2 because, by definition, the "minor change"
must apply to the entire sector plan, not just one property. 
>>> 
>>>
Ditto self-storage units. City Council's decision to reject our appeal
means self-storage units no longer require a conditional use permit
through a public hearing process. Self-storage units are now a
permissive use in CCR-2 in Nob Hill. 
>>> 
>>> Further, I don't see why
any of these "minor changes" should be limited to CCR-2. If the "minor
change" is (1) consistent with other written requirements (2) the
building is of the same general size (3) vehicular circulation is
similar or not affected and (4) the community is not substantially
aggrieved, then the "minor change" could apply to CCR-1 in lower Nob
Hill or CCR-3 in Highland, too. 
>>> 
>>> I do not think this is going
to stop with the implementation of the new IDO. If the "minor change"
provision makes it in to the new IDO, the new Planning Director just
demonstrated a willingness to continue using it. 
>>> 
>>> -Veronica

>>> 
>>> On Wednesday, March 21, 2018, 11:17:03 PM MDT, Greg Weirs
<vgweirs at gmail.com> wrote: 
>>> 
>>> I don't get those letters. 
>>>

>>> Changing the signage requires a conditional use, I think; if not,
then a variance. When staples went into the Daskalos they needed a
special exception for their larger (30") letters, as did IMEC on
Amherst. 
>>> 
>>> Greg 
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 2:04 PM,
Timothy Jack Ross <ross at unm.edu> wrote: 
>>> 
>>>> All, 
>>>> 
>>>> I am
in receipt of a letter from the City's Planning Department, approving a
request by the Carlisle Condominiums LLC, to increase the height of
their neon signage letters from 18 inches to 30 inches. A copy of the
letter was sent to the Nob Hill NA and the SE Heights NA. I expect
Adrian also got this letter and, perhaps, Greg. 
>>>> 
>>>> I don't
recall this matter being first considered by our Board prior to city
action. Does such a "minor change to the Sector Plan" have to go before
our Board? In case this is a surprise to us, I would ask that this
matter be placed on our April meeting agenda. 
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks. 
>>>>

>>>> Tim
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> 
>>> Greg Weirs
>>> 505 265 9995 [3]
>>>
vgweirs at gmail.com 
>>> 
>>>
_______________________________________________
>>> Neighbors_nobhill-nm
mailing list
>>> Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>>>
https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
[1]
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
>>
Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>>
https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
[1]
> 
> -- 
> 
> _Eliza Peralta, RN BSN_ 
> 
>
_______________________________________________
> Neighbors_nobhill-nm
mailing list
> Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>
https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
[1]

Links:
------
[1]
https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
[2]
https://www.cabq.gov/planning/code-enforcement/comprehensive-city-zoning-code
[3]
tel:(505)%20265-9995
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20180323/3907a50c/attachment.html>