Village of Los Lunas Planning & Zoning Agendas

MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING MEETING April 6, 2016 The Village of Los Lunas Planning & Zoning Commission met in their regular session on Wednesday, April 6, 2016 at 6:00 pm in the Village Council Chambers. Members present were as follows: Commissioners David Crawford, Terry Ulibarri, Stephanie Williams & Frank Vigil. Commissioner Walter Baca was absent. Staff members present were Christina Ainsworth, Community Development Director, Erin Callahan, Special Project Planner & Marie Marquez, Recording Secretary. Members of the public present were as follows: T. Scott Edeal, Bricena Aragon, Zoe Ann Masingale, Jim Rickey, Tony Williams, Alvin Garcia, Larry Atwell, Robert Hill & Charles Apodaca. The Meeting was called to order by: Chairman Stephanie Williams APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chairman S. Williams called for a motion to approve the agenda. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion to approve the agenda, Commissioner D. Crawford seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes, motion carried. SWEARING OF PARTICIPANTS AGENDA ITEMS: DESIGNATED USE Robert Hills - REPLAT Anthony J. Williams — ITEM 1- DESIGNATED USE - Robert Hills Chairman S. Williams introduced Item 1- The purpose of this commission is to have a public hearing and recommend to Council approval or disapproval of this application for designated use submitted by Robert Hills. Erin Callahan was called up to present the item. She told the Commissioners that Robert Hills had submitted an application for a designated use to operate a storage facility. The location is 3509 Main St. NE. This is in the land of Johnny Apodaca it is in Council District 4. Currently it is a C-2 zoning. The property owner at the time of application was Mr. Charles Apodaca with the representative of Mr. Hills, who submitted the application. Mr. Hills was in the process of purchasing the property, however, based on new documents that have been received as of this afternoon and looks like that purchase may be complete. The surrounding zoning and land use to the north is C-i commercial, to the south is C-2 commercial to the east is outside the Village Limits in the town of Peralta. Their zoning C-i Neighborhood Commercial is residential area, and to the west is R-1 residential. The notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 300 ft. of this proposed application on March 14, 2016. No letters or phone calls have been received in opposition of this request until the beginning of this meeting. A legal document was just received in opposition. The future land use is in compliance with our future land use plan. Erin Callahan pointed out the existing drainage easement on the property. This easement is for the property adjacent to the north and there was a statement submitted and signed by that property owner that they are willing to vacate that easement, since it’s not in use at this time. Community Development Department has reviewed this application and it’s currently zoned correctly to get a designated use permit in a C-2 zone for a storage facility. Staff has recommended approval of this application based on the findings. Erin was open for any questions from the Commissioners. Erin was asked by Commissioner F. Vigil, if she had read the statement just received. Chairman S. Williams asked Erin. if she would take a few moments to read the statement received. Christina Ainsworth intervened by stating that Moizen Corbin engineers have no objections and they have already set an indepth preliminary review for future developments. Mr. Robert Hills was called up to give a summary of his proposed plan. He said, he’s been in the construction business for years and currently has a girl working in this area and would like to have this type of business closer. He has experience in running this type of business and has been for 12 years. He plans to have 140 units on the property. No further questions were asked of Mr. Hill. Chairman S. Williams called for anyone who wished to speak for or against this request. Alvin Garcia, Attorney came up and spoke on behalf of Larry Atwell acting as trustee of the Atwell Family Trust, which is the owner of the adjacent tract 94A1 1A, Outback Storage located on that property. Mr. Atwell owners of that property have some serious concerns about the authority on the plan that is proposed for development. He has some points that are in opposition. The application was done on behalf of the current owner, by a prior owner by the current owner. Is this application valid?, or should a new application be submitted under his own name rather than under the name of Charles Apodaca, especially because Charles Apodaca was not the actual owner at the time the application was submitted. The actual owner was a corporate entity not in good standing. The owner at the time of the application was Reliable Waste Disposable, Inc. Other concerns are the incomplete description lands of Johnny Apodaca, which is not a complete legal description. That is only a portion of a description which is not a complete package as per requirements of the Village. Other concerns were the drainage easement which would take care of the water run off that would cause damage to adjacent business with no buffer for water run off. There was no documentation from an engineer of preliminary approval attached to this application, they would like a copy of engineer report. This Easement has a significant affect on the down hill owners, which is Mr. Atwell & Atwell Family Trust & cannot be abandoned. A U-Haul rental office is not a permissible use in this table of permissive uses for this zone. He asked the Commissioners to consider not approving this recommendation. Mr. Larry Atwell came up. He spoke on behalf of his wife who owns Outback Storage. He was really concerned about the water issue. He has done some research on the internet regarding the acre feet of water. He said, if we have 1” of rain, it will create 2.61 inches of volume of water on the roadway itself. That amount of water would come off into our property, this is a lot of water. On the disputed plat they had an area allocated for drainage. If there is no way for that water to go, it has to have a large enough pit to absorb all that water that is put out on that property. The plan that has been turned in has not been approved by a hydrologist. If it has been approved by a hydrologist then it would not be such a concern, but until it is, it is a big concern because a big pit would have to be dug to accommodate that volume of water. He said, we are responsible for the water getting into our storage units. He said, he would have a big law suit if water got into his storage units. Charles Apodaca, is the owner of property on the north and owner of the proposed storage shed property. He said, he just heard about this quarrel between Mr. Hill and Mr. Atwell. Mr. Atwell is requesting permission to intercede for him because at one point Mr. Atwell and Mr. Hill were talking about Mr. Hill buying Mr. Atwell’s property and they were happy with what was going on, and now all of a sudden don’t know what happened. Now Mr. Atwell is against Mr. Hill’s building this storage shed and he doesn’t think this is right. I feel that now I’m left here holding the bag and don’t know what’s happening. He is for the project since there is already one next door. Mr. Hill doesn’t see anything wrong with it. He said, an engineer and code enforcement have checked it, the roads on the property are going to be 12 inches lower than the buildings and automatically become a water containment area. I didn’t think this would create any problems. There will be a ditch between his building and my building that’s 12 inches deep. He doesn’t want Mr. Atwell to be worried about it. Commissioner T. Ulibarri asked Mr. Hill if he had a hydrologist report? Mr. Hill said, he had an engineer that lives here in town check it out. He calculated the requirements for a 100 year flood. Mr. Hill said, the engineer said, that the vacant pond was not needed because the water would run to the opposite side of the property, so they wouldn’t need anything there. The surface of the roads will be gravel. Commissioner D. Crawford asked Mr. Hill if he had a copy of the engineers report. He said, yes and he I will bring it in. Mr. Alvin Garcia came back up. He said, it would be good to research old records to see why that pond was placed there to begin with. There must have been a reason for it. If this site is developed and unless the Commission has some documentation from a hydrologist or an engineer showing how that situation changes where that water goes, there is very serious concern. Chairman S. Williams checked with the commission for any questions from staff. Christina was asked by Commissioner T. Ulibarri if staff was ok with this application. Christina said, yes, it has been reviewed by Molzen Corbin. Christina said, the designated use permit does require that the applicant submit a site plan to the extent possible, and any technical information that will go with this application. However, prior to issuing a building permit, it does go through a much more vigorous review where, he does have to submit a drainage plan that has to be reviewed by our Village engineer. The policy standard is to retain all of the drainage on site, and so he will be held for that standard, not just for this property, but for the property that was to make use for this drainage easement. They have to show that the property is able to hold all of its drainage on site without affecting the neighboring properties, and that will be reviewed before any future developments. Commissioner D. Crawford did have a concern that the only way to handle water between storage units, that there would not be some containment other than the gravel path. Chairman S. Williams did have a question that on the application it did not state the U-Haul rental, it was for storage units, she wasn’t sure if it stated that on the notice of public hearing. Christina said, there was a letter submitted that initially talked about a U-Haul rental, but it wasn’t part of the application itself. The applicant can come back in after and apply for an amendment. She also clarified the fact that it was part of the permissible table on section 17.40.30 addresses that issue. If it is not classified, we are required to submit it in writing. Commissioner F. Vigil had several questions: He asked Christina if Molzen Corbin had done a preliminary review of the drainage plan, and are understanding that, if the easement is vacated that there would be no issue? Christina said, they had not done a full review of the drainage but it is feasible to vacate that drainage as long as they are containing all their drainage on site. Is there anything against village code for having two types of businesses next door to each other? Christina said, no. He also asked the types of reports required when a building permit is applied for? Christina said, the first thing required before a building permit is issued is a grading & drainage report & plan and that is what our engineers check for. Does this go for recommendation to Council? Christina said, yes. Commissioner F. Vigil also questioned the distance of 27 ft. away from each other? Is that a matter of courtesy? He also questioned the 12 inch ditch. which he thought would address the water issue. Commissioners also asked if the Village had any issues as to the ownership as the time of the application. Christina answered yes, what we require is the signature of the owner of the property which was provided. Commissioner F. Vigil also had a question for Attorney Garcia regarding the ownership. He said, there was some wrong information Mr. Hills said, he was the current owner and yet, Mr. Apodaca said, he was the owner. Mr. Garcia said, you can’t sign off on a legal document because Reliable Waste Inc. was the owner, and no description of property was provided, and when a legal document is signed it should have all that information. Mr. Garcia said, he felt like there was insufficient & lack of information. Christina said, what we need on the application was submitted and that is sufficient information we require. Commissioner F. Vigil also asked if there were any code enforcement issues such as the number of vehicles on the property? Christina said, if there are, they have to come back and submit an amendment. There were no further questions. Chairman S. Williams called for a motion to recommend to Council approval of disapproval of this designated use. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion for a recommendation to Council to approve the land of Johnny Apodaca. Tract 93A l.3OAC, Map 70 2001 Rev B-5-23 326/1071 with a thorough review from Molzen Corbin for the drainage, because these people should not have water, they - should have their water contained and that’s the main issue also to include staff comments, that the community development department has reviewed this application and property is zoned C-2, and it does allow for a storage facility and a designated use. It is appropriate for that area. Commissioner F. Vigil seconded the motion based on staff comments. Everyone voted yes, motion carried.  ITEM 2 —REPLAT - Anthony J. Williams Chairman S. Williams said, the action of this com mission is to have a public hearing and approve or disapprove of this replat with street dedication. Chairman S. Williams recused herself from this item since she works in the law office with her husband and familiar with the projects. She turned over the Chair to Commissioner F. Vigi l. Commissioner F. Vigil called on Erin to give the background and rational of this request. Erin Callahan approached the podium and prese nted the request submitted for a Replat for the property located in the Desert Sky Subdivision, Tract A, Lots 75-A, 80-A, 91-A, 96-A, 106-A, 111-A, 119-A, 124-A & 127, Parcels C,D,E,F, & G and streets Fire Wheel Ave. SW, Fire Wheel Loop, SW, Red Sky St. SW, Sunset View St. SW & Desert Sky St. SW. This is located in Council District I the request before the Commiss ion is to replat certain lots in the Desert Sky subdivision to modify boundaries and by eliminati ng certain public areas increase lot sizes as well as to provide for the dedication of streets to the Village of Los Lunas for public streets for purposes, including street maintenance. This is a residential subdivision, the proposed use is continuing as a residential subdivision. The prop erty owners are CZ & Valle Vista LLC, Mathew Martinez & Melissa Salazar-Martinez. They are being represented by Anthony Williams, Attorney at Law. The surrounding zoning and land use are SU single family residential to the north, Special Use as vacant to the south, to the East R-1 Single Family Residential and to the West SU-vacant. Notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners abutting the Desert Sky Subdivision as well as all property owners owning lots within area of this proposed application for replat on Marc the h 15, 2016. The community development department has received no letters or phone calls in opposition of this request. She went over the area on the screen. She pointed out the futur e land use for the areas that will continue to be single family residential. The applicant is requesting the approval of a repla t for the purpose of eliminating the certain public areas and increasing the lot sizes with the Desert Sky Subdivision. The public areas are currently under HOA maintenance, and by repla tting it will eliminate the HOA maintenance duties, and they are also proposing to dedicate the streets to the Village of Los Lunas for all purposes including street maintenance. The subd ivision was originally designed for a gated community with private streets. The replats are usually done administratively by the Community Development director, but in this case because of the street dedication, this is a matter that needs to come before public hearing as well as before Village Council. The engineers comments for this application submitted with the staff report to the commissioners were just received on April s1t after the packet had been sent out. The engineer’s comments received find that there are items in the subdivision that still need to be addressed. The Community Development Department has requ ested of the applicant based on the statement from Molzen Corbin that the items either be addr essed prior to the Council hearing on April th 14 , or that they are able to issue a financial guarantee that the items will be addressed as they move along with development of the subdivisi on. The applicant has expressed that they would prefer to provide a financial guarantee, beca use there is still residential development pending in the subdivision. They would prefer to address them as road maintenance issues after other construction has been done in order to get the best possible results from the road maintenance, so it not damaged in any other resid ential construction. Erin was open for any questions. Commissioner F. Vigil asked if notice had been given that some HOA commenaries would be removed and lots be made larger. Erin didn’t know if this was in the notice but she will check. He did give Commissioner S. Williams an option to speak since this is necessary with the knowledge of this project. She said, the legal notice modified certain public areas and eliminating certain public areas. Commissioner F. Vigil called on Mr. Anthony Williams Mr. Williams came up and told the commissioners that Charter set up Wild Flower as a gated community, of course as a gated community the streets are not accessible to the general public, and they are private streets. To accommodate that, a separate HOA called the Wild Flower Home Owners Association was set up and the purpose of that Homeowners Association was to maintain those streets creating a reserved account so that when the streets needed to be resurfaced. Charter then decided they were going to use the same model for Desert Sky and expand the Home Owners Association to cover Desert Sky, and the same concept was to apply gates which are in fact installed. They will be private streets and the HOA will be responsible for those streets and for some common areas. Attorney Williams said, on the replat, only those lots adjoining the walkways would get bigger. Charter changed it’s corporate mind to eliminate the gated community and dedicate the streets to the Village of LL. Charter discontinued it’s development in 2008-09 and Mr. Scott Edeal purchased all the undeveloped lots in Wild Flower and Desert Sky. Mr. Edeal formed a limited liability company CZ and transferred the title to CZ acting as the developer. The effort is to continue with the plan that Charter had already placed in motion before it stopped development as a result in the economy crisis. This plan was developed before Mr. Edeal got involved. The objective is to dedicate the streets to the Village of Los Lunas, and they will become public streets, the gates will disappear. They will be removed and the need for the Wild Flower Home Owners Association to overlay the jurisdiction over Desert Sky will go away. This will give those homeowners the relief of not having to pay duplicate HOA fees. The Huning Association covers this by removing these common areas. They are asking from this commission to recommend to Council this replat approval. There are homes going in there, and welcome everyone to drive over there. Commissioner F. Vigil asked if there were any plans to subdivide and expand the larger lots to have two houses there. He said, NO. The lots will be sold with no restriction. Commissioner D. Crawford asked about the monies already there. Mr. Williams said, what little money there is will remain with Wild Flower. They have $40,000 which will be used for street repairs. Some will be getting bigger lots. There were no further questions. Mr. Edeal said, we use all local contractors and we will develop all 119 lots. Currently we have 46 lots in Wild Flower. Commissioner T. Ulibarri asked if there were any issues with the dedication of streets. Christina said, no. The Village will accept those as long as they meet our standards. The code does allow for conditional approval by the Council, so they can go ahead and file the plat. Commissioner F. Vigil asked if all the property owners were aware that the gates would be removed. Ms. Bricena Aragon, Real Estate Agent who works for Scott Edeal stated that everyone that has moved in there is aware. They all signed a document and understood that this could happen. They are all excited to see a more clean area. There were no further questions. Commissioner F. Vigil called for a motion. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion based on the fact that the surrounding zoning and existing land use and the desire future land use, he recommended to Council approval of the Replat for property located in Desert Sky Subdivision Tracts A, Lots 75A80-A, 91-A, 96-A, 106- A, 111-A, 119-A, 124-A & 127, Parcels C,D,E,F, & G and streets Fire wheel Ave. SW, Fire Wheel Loop, SW, Red Sky St. SW, Sunset View St. SW & Desert Sky St. SW for the purpose of modifying certain lot boundaries, and eliminating certain public areas, and for providing the dedication of the above streets to the Village of Los Lunas public streets for all purposes including street maintenance. Commissioner D. Crawford seconded the motion. Commissioner F. Vigil voted yes as well motion carried. , ITEM 3— APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes of 1/20/16 Chairman S. Williams called for a motion to approve the minutes for 1/20/16, tabled at the last meeting held on 3/2/16 due to a couple of corrections. Commissioner F. Vigil made a motion to approve the minutes as presented with those two corrections made. Commissioner D. Crawford seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes. Motion carried. ITEM 4- APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Minutes of 3/2/16 Chairman S. Williams called for a motion to approve the minutes of 3/2/16. Chairman S. Williams had two minor corrections. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a motion to approve the minutes with two amendments. Commissioner D. Crawford seconded the motion. Everyone voted yes, motion carried. ITEM 5- DISCUSSION Community Development Activity Report Christina Ainsworth presented a certificate of — appreciation to Commissioner D. Crawford and thanked him for his services. Code Enforcement —None ITEM 6- ADJOURNMENT Chairman Williams called for a motion to adjourn. Commissioner T. Ulibarri made a . djou ChnS, Williams seconded the motion. Everyone . th ie Williams, Chaiinan David Crawford Terry Commissioner Walter Baca El fl