Village of Los Lunas Planning & Zoning Agendas

MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING MEETING October15, 2014 The Village of Los Lunas Planning & Zoning Commission met in their regular session on Wednesday, October 15, 2014, at 6:00 pm in the Village Council Chambers. Members present were as follows: Commissioners David Crawford, Terry Ulibarri, Walter Baca & Frank Vigil. Commissioner Stephanie Williams. was absent. Staff members present were Christina Ainsworth, Community Development Director, Nathaniel Feddes, Special Project Planner and Marie Marquez, Recording Secretaiy. Members of the public present were as follows: Mark Villegas, Betty Lovato, Soila Moya. Morris R. Vaisa, Kirk Gilcrea.se, Phillip J. Armijo, Gina Armijo & Maria Gonzales. The Meeting was called to order by: Vice-Chair Frank Vigil APPROVAL OF AGENDA Vice-Chair Frank Vigil called for any changes or additions to the agenda. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Commissioner W. Baca seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes, motion carried, SWEARING IN OF PARTICIPANTS AGENDA ITEMS: ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT- Ordinance #276 ‘ ZONE CHANGE- Kirk Gilcrease DESIGNATED USE Kirk Gilcrease — ITEM 1-ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - Ordinance #276 Vice-chair Frank Vigil introduced Item 1- Zone Ordinance Amendment Community Development Department is seeking - recommendation approval for amendments to Ordinance 276-2014-4. The action requested of this commission is to have a public hearing to recommend approval or disapproval of the request for this Zone Ordinance Amendment. Nathaniel Feddes, Special Project Planner presented the request. Community Development Department is seeking approval for amendments to Ordinance 276. Title 17—Zoning, of the Municipal Code be amended at Chapter 17.08.010 Definitions, 17.36— — Zoning Districts and Zoning Map, 17.36-030 Commercial Districts Established, Subsections B through C, and Chapter 17.40— — Permissible Uses, 17.40.010 The first is the addition of light manufacturing into the definition section and the second is . amending the actual descriptions of C-i and C-2. The third is the table of permissible uses to reflect that there are two sub categories to the use 4.000. One would be for light manufacturing use, the other would be for industrial and business park. Vice- chair Frank Vigil asked if any of these were mentioned or addressed in the Comprehensive Zoning 2.035 that was passed two months ago. Christina Ainsworth stated that they did not specifically include this in the comprehensive plan, but general recommendations were made to update the code as needed, particularly because there are uses that are not classified, and a lot of things have changed since this it was originally adopted. Christina said, this will allow smaller manufacturing businesses to come in, the purpose of this would make it more clear and more functional. Vice-chair called for any further questions for the commissioners from the public. Phillip Armijo came up and was not clear on zone changes. Christina’s reply was right now, our code only allows manufacturing uses in the manufacturing zone, but it doesn’t distinguish between a C- 1 & C-2, heavy commercial use and any other smaller manufacturing uses with approval from P & Z and the Council. Commissioner T. Ulibarri stated that this was not a particular zone change, this is an ordinance change, and if there are any applications for a particular zone change that apply within that area, then they look at the area and make those changes. He said, right now the Village has grown and changes need to be made, we are no longer a small Village. Nathaniel Feddes said, we have the entire GIS zoning maps available if anyone wishes to come by. We will be glad to go over them with you. This meeting was published and no correspondence has been received. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion to accept the amendments to Ordinance #276 as presented. Commissioner D. Crawford seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes, motion carried. ITEM 2- ZONE CHANGE — Kirk Gilcrease Vice-chair F. Vigil introduced and presented the Zone Atlas Amendment requested by Mr. Kirk Gilcrease. He said, this is a public hearing and the action of this commission is to recommend to Council approval or disapproval of the request for a zone change. Mr. Kirk Gilcrease has applied for a zone atlas amendment from SU to C2 for the land with a legal description S:23 T: 7N R: 2E Tract 97A of Map 70 MRGCD consisting of 1.40 acres, located at 3485 Main St. SE for the purpose of operating a small-batch concrete mixing facility. He has also applied for a designated use. Nathaniel Feddes said, as previously stated this case does fall in line with the Ordinance #276 amendment. It is a C-2 with a designated use application. Obviously this will depend on the approval of Ordinance #276 amendments from Council. This case was heard before on July 2 of this year and the case was tabled to allow staff to look at the zoning ordinance for a more appropriate way to go about the case and have a mediation between the land owners and the neighbors. He said, he would do Items 2 & 3 together if it was ok, the commissioners agreed. Nathaniel said, the cases are 14-3-R and 14-4-G respectively to the name of Kirk Gilcrease. The subject site is 3485 Main St. The property is located in district 4. The request here today is to change from SU to C2 and the applicant is concurrently applying for a designated use. The future land use map shows that this area is for commercial purposes and the intent of the applicant to rezone the property for the purpose of expanding the existing landscaping business to include a small batch concrete mixing facility. All public notice requirements were met and to date no commentaries have been received in opposition of the request. In regards to Item 2, it is the recommendation of staff that we make a finding of conformance with the Municipal Code and the Comprehensive Plan and recommend approval of the requested zone atlas amendment from SU to C-2, with regards to Item 3, it is also the recommendation of staff, to make a finding of conformance with the Municipal Code and the Comprehensive Plan, and to recommend the request of the designated use to Council. Christina Ainsworth stated she did meet with the residents and property owner as well as the applicant mainly for everyone to ask questions and express their concerns about the actual mixer he had already located on the property. She believed that there was consensus and everyone felt better about having their questions answered and understanding what the issues were. The main concern was the dust or pollutants that might be expelled by the mixer. The applicant was able to explain how little dust it produces and how it all falls under the EPA guidelines, which he did apply for a permit. It was inspected by EPA and was told he is not required to have that permit since it produces very little dust. The other concern was visual sight of the mixer that was very close to the residence. One of the things that was agreed on was to relocate that concrete mixer to the center of the lot, and behind the garage. The other thing, he volunteered to do is, to screen the back side of the property so it would not be visible from the residence and block any dust that would blow there. Those are the two requirements that will be made to this designated use. To relocate the concrete mixer to the center of the lot behind the earae, and that he provides screening at the rear of the property. The other requirement of the code is that the property is currently legal nonconforming and there’s a residential building on the property. Once that residential building is vacated, it will no longer be allowed to be used as a residential site. It will be complete commercial property. Mr. Kirk Gilcrease approached the podium. He said, there is a landscaping materials business in operation there right now, and now there is a small batch concrete plant he wants to put in. He has agreed to place it behind the garage and put up fencing so it is not visible to the neighbors and there’s been a state environmental check on the dust, and it is all within reasonable limits. He said, it’s kind of a seasonal operation. Mr. Ralph Villegas indicated there might be as much as 20 yds a day of concrete mixed in this small plant. Ralph Villegas from the Monticello landscape materials will be maintaining the plant. Vice-Chair called for anyone wanting to speak in favor to come up and speak. There was no one in favor. He asked if anyone wished to speak against this to come up. Phillip Armijo, a next door neighbor approached the podium. He said, I know we agreed on the plant, but to me the problem will be the same. It is an eye sore even with the nice wall. He said, Mr. Gilcrease is planning to sell the place so it’s not in his hair and the new owner lives in Albuquerque. I’m the resident and to me it’s still a problem. I have family moving in next to my home and have little ones that will be exposed to the dust. Betty Lovato also came up and told the commissioners that, her and her mother and brother live there and are very opposed to this concrete plant. She said, it’s not just regular dust, it’s concrete dust. She said, they have animals and swamp coolers and her mom is elderly. She said, she hates to see that commercial is taking over the residential areas. She said, it’s still residential, we live there and have lived there all our lives and it’s not right for someone to just come in and change it. She said, with the landscaping business we seldom saw any traffic and dust coming in. Mr. Armijo was called up again so the commissioners could ask questions of him. Commissioner W. Baca asked him if the questions he had last time such as heavy traffic coming in and times of operation had been addressed. Mr. Armijo said, the debris being left on the road, and broken windshields is not only my problem but the State of NM. They have not attempted to clean it up either, nor do they spray water to hold the dust down. As far as the hours of operation, they still have the trucks starting up at 5 o’clock in the morning and on Saturdays, they are suppose to close at 12:00. I have evidence showing that they are still working at 5:00 p.m., sometimes later. I live right next door and there are still many issues that have not been taken care of such as generators running. Maria Gonzales also came up and her concern was that if this ordinance is passed to C-2. She fears that a larger machine may be brought in. She lives across the street from the proposed request. Christina Ainsworth said, if their plan changes from what was brought in, they will have to come back before this commission. Nathaniel Feddes stated that if they choose to expand or grow into a full size concrete plant, it will no longer be sufficient under a C- 2 as a designated use. They would have to move into a M Mr. Gilcrease said, he has no part in this, he will be selling the property and will be out of there. That concerned the commissioners, as well as the absence of the owner at tonight’s meeting. Mr. Gilcrease has applied for a review of the application and have found that the request for zone change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Municipal Code. Proposed updates to the Zoning Code allows this use in C-2 with a Designated Use. No correspondence either by phone or letters has been received in opposition to this request, and all requirements for public notification have been met. Vice-Chair F. Vigil said, the decision that will be made here tonight will only be a recommendation to Council. Nathaniel told the Commission that staff recommends approval of this request with the conditions stated. Commissioner W. Baca agreed with Commissioner T. Ulibarri on the concerns brought up and the question brought up about combining Items 2 & 3. He agreed, but he didn’t realize that he doesn’t have a problem in changing it to C-2 to meeting the activity taking place there already. Mr. Gilcrease also told us that he is not the designator user. He is interested in selling the property and mentioned that the person that has the business is not here tonight, so perhaps we shouldn’t combine. Christina said, separate motions could be made. Vice-Chair F Vigil read the staff comments. Community Development staff has reviewed the application and have found that the request for zone change is consistent with Comprehensive Plan and the Municipal Code proposed updates to the zoning allow this use in C-2, with the designated use and meeting with owners and neighbors was held on September 18, 2014 at the Village Hall. A few conditions are being recommended that the concrete facility be placed in the middle of the lot and this site can no longer be used as a parcel residential lot and if approved he would like to add the noise ordinance and that the commission think about establishing time frames. It is the consensus of the commission that perhaps there was some miscommunication about some of the conditions and concerns that were agreed on. Vice Chair F. Vigil called for a motion. Commissioner W. Baca made a motion to recommend to Council to approve the zone change that’s been requested from SU to C-2 with a land legal description S:23 T:7N R:2E Tract 97A of Map 70 MRGCD consisting of 1.40 acres, for the operation of a small concrete mixing facility. Item 3 is not included at this time in this motion. Commissioner T. Ulibarri seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes, motion passed 3-0 recommending approval to Council. ITEM 3—DESIGNATED USE — Kirk Gilcrease Application under action requested of the Commission. Commissioner W. Baca said, the reason I wanted the two items separated is that the person that is going to use that land is not present. Mr. K. Gilcrease who is the owner of the land, and when the land is sold, he will be out of the picture and will have to move because it will no longer be allowed. Christina intervened that his property is not currently zoned for residential, he’s living there and his home is classified legal nonconforming, because his property was rezoned when his home was already there. The only thing that is required now is that, if he vacates the property no other resident can occupy it for residential use, but if Mr. Gilcrease does not wish to move, then he can live there as long as he wishes. Commissioner W. Baca was confused since the zone change was already approved. Christina told the commissioners that it is not allowed unless the designated use is approved. What was approved was what is allowed with a designated use. Without the approval of the designated use, they cannot have the concrete mixer there, even with the C-2 zone. Vice-Chair F. Vigil did state that without the approval of the designated use the concrete mixer cannot be placed there. Christina stated that, at the last meeting. Staff recommended denial, but it was voted on tabling the Item. Christina said, the staff recommendations are exclusively based on policy and guidelines the Village has. That is the comprehensive plan and the proposed change to the ordinance. Staff cannot take into consideration the opposition. Staff has to look at other factors and whether a land use and a zone are appropriate in an area. The commission and council have more authority to take into consideration opposition impacted on residents. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion to recommend to Council denial of this proposal based on the individual running the plant not being at tonight’s meeting, and although they met in September obviously consensus wasn’t reached, and there is still concerns, the residents are 40 ft. away, they’re close. They still have a chance to discuss this and recommends that the person running the facility attend the council meeting. Commissioner D. Crawford seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes for denial. Motion denied. ITEM 4—APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes of 9/17/14 Vice-Chair F. Vigil called for a motion to approve the minutes 9/17/14. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion to approve the minutes for 9/17/14 with 1 minor correction. Commissioner W. Baca seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes, motion passed. ITEM S - DISCUSSION Community Development Activity Report — No new updates Code Enforcement Issues — ITEM 6- ADJOURNMENT Vice-Chair F. Vigil called for a motion to adjourn. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion to adjourn, Commissioner W. Baca second the motion. Everyone voted yes, motion passed. Absent hanie Wi iams, Chairman Frank Vigil, Commissioner drawfd, m ssio rBacCommio Terry U. 1, nmissioner L