Planning & Zoning Commission

PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes to the July 30, 2013 Meeting Members Present: Mr. Ralph Brown-------------------------------------------------------------Chair Mr. Chris Cortez----------------------------------------------------------Member Mr. Bruce Gwartney-----------------------------------------------------Member Mr. Riley Armstrong------------------------------------------------------Member Mrs. Shirley Childress---------------------------------------------------Member Mr. Eddie Carrillo---------------------------------------------------------Member Mr. Toby Gross-----------------------------------------------------------Member Members Absent: None Council Present: None Staff Present: Mr. Louis Najar-----------------------------------------------------City Engineer Barbara Patterson--------------------------------------------------City Attorney Mr. Louis Jaramillo--------------------------------------Zoning Administrator Ms. Amber Copeland--------------------------------------Zoning Technician Others Present: None CALL TO ORDER Chair Brown called the meeting to order and asked those who wished to speak to sign in. MINUTES Chair Brown called for approval of the minutes of the June 25, 2013 minutes. Mr. Armstrong made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Gwartney made the second. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. SWEARING IN Chair Brown swore in the audience and Staff. INFORMATION ITEMS None. Mrs. Childress made a motion to waive the reading of the ‘Land Use and Zoning Considerations’ and ‘Finding of Facts’ for the following case. Mr. Carrillo made the second. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. CASE 13-012: Designate a Residential Zoning District for an Existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) Lots 1-20 of Rio Bonito Subdivision, Joel and Aidali Ramirez, Reading Trust, Christine Reading, Rio Bonito Homeowners Association, Shakeel Rehman, Jahan Ara, Barron Revocable Living Trust, Mary Barron, Carol Smith, Janice Bennet, Pedro and Socorro Blanco, Aonan Tang, Yang Yang, Rita Camacho, Leonard and Bettie Lou Cheney, David and Holly Culberson, M. Julynn Jones, Richard and Grace Jungers, Keck Trust, James, Carolyn, and Phil Kennedy, Stephen and Debra Mark, Robert and Robyn Mccrea/Owners. Mr. Jaramillo spoke in favor of the request. He stated Staff had met with the property owners affected and that they had expressed a preference for R-1 District to maintain low-density residential development. He stated the area has single-family homes with covenants enforced by a homeowners association. He stated a park is located in the center of the development and that the lots are at least 6,000 square feet. Mr. Najar stated support had been unanimous for R-1 District. MOTION  Mr. Armstrong made a motion to approve Case 13-012 based on Findings of Facts. Mrs. Childress made the second. Mr. Jaramillo stated the Commission must designate a zoning district. Mr. Armstrong amended his motion to include a recommendation of R-1 Residential District. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. Mrs. Childress made a motion to waive the reading of the ‘Land Use and Zoning Considerations’ and ‘Finding of Facts’ for the following case. Mr. Gross made the second. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. CASE 13-013: A Zone Change from C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District to R-3 Residential District, Lot 9 of Linda Estado North Subdivision, located at the southwest corner of Berrendo Road and Atkinson Avenue, Jim and Jennifer Campbell/Owners Jim Campbell, applicant, spoke in favor of the request. He stated that when he'd purchased his property, it was zoned C-1 District which had allowed multi-family residential at that time. He stated the amendments to Zoning Ordinance No. 10-02: Amended, done in April 2013, no longer allowed that use in that district. He stated he planned to build a sixteen unit apartment complex consisting of four, two-story quadplexes. He stated the R-3 District would allow more leniency regarding setbacks. Mr. Campbell stated he had spoken with the Roswell Fire Department and had been told the R-3 District would allow more room for fire lanes and parking. Teresa Kyser, 1207 Madrid Street, spoke against the request. She stated she felt the lot is too small for a sixteen unit complex. She stated the increased traffic and lighting would be detrimental to the quality of life for surrounding residents. She stated one duplex has been built on EC Tucker Court but that none others were in the area. She stated the development does not fit in with the character of the neighborhood which is primarily single-family and that apartments would bring an increase in crime. She stated she felt duplexes with garages would be more reasonable and that the current plan offered no secure parking. Mrs. Kyser stated she had lived in the neighborhood for nine years and that she had moved into the area with the understanding that it was single-family residential. Mr. Cortez asked if Mrs. Kyser knew the property is currently zoned C-1 District and listed uses allowed under that zoning. She stated that just because zoning currently allows a use doesn't make it appropriate for a neighborhood and asked what oversight the Commission would have to limit the impact a development would have on the neighborhood. Skip Gooch, 1204 Madrid Street, spoke against the request. He stated was looking for information on the request. He stated he was concerned about the number of possible future residents and asked if the target market would be low income, which he felt would negatively impact his property values. He asked if Mr. Campbell would reimburse him for a $50,000.00 loss on his home's value. He stated the neighborhood has been developed well and asked if four duplex apartments could be considered. He asked what recourse neighbors would have in deciding what could be built if the zone change were to be approved. Mr. Cortez stated Atkinson Avenue and Berrendo Road are both arterial streets and that single-family residential lots cannot access onto arterial streets. He stated the Comprehensive Master Plan could eventually call for all four corners of the intersection to go commercial and that the Chaves County Master Plan called for commercial development. He stated that as cities grow, changes are made to allow for new types of development. Mr. Vickers stated that once something is given a zoning designation, it is prohibited by State Statute to require a public hearing of any kind in order to develop the property according to that designation. He stated developments go through a Staff plan review process and that they must meet International and City Building Codes. He stated no plans had been received for the proposed request and discussed the required plans. Mr. Campbell stated he had worked with Wagener Engineering prior to purchasing the property to ensure he could develop it as he'd planned. He stated his plans met the requirements of City Ordinances and he provided the Commission with drawings of his proposed plan. He stated he would be targeting a higher income demographic and would be charging rents of $1,000.00 to $1,300.00 a month. He stated it would be a source of retirement income for himself and his wife, and that it would be a high end development. Mr. Armstrong asked if single-story duplexes would be acceptable. Mr. Campbell stated single-story duplexes would not recoup the cost of the project in a reasonable amount of time. Mr. Armstrong asked if a professional office would be an option. Mr. Campbell stated he did not build commercial buildings and that he specialized in residential buildings. He 2 stated apartments are needed on the north side of the City and that it would not be a detriment to the neighborhood. He stated a commercial development would also increase traffic. Mrs. Kyser asked how he would limit tenants to two per unit so that parking would not overflow the two spaces each unit would be allotted. Mr. Campbell stated the tenants would be limited to two cars per unit and would be responsible for finding parking beyond that number. He stated they would primarily be employees of local hospitals. Mrs. Kyser asked who the residents would be if enough hospital employees could not be found and asked if the legality of the tenants' incomes would be verified. She asked if drug dealers would be able to rent the units. Mr. Campbell stated Century 21 would be managing the complex and screening applicants. Victoria Perea, 1203 Madrid Street, spoke against the request. She stated her backyard would abut the proposed development. She stated children live in her neighborhood and that drug dealers would be able to pay the rent Mr. Campbell would charge. She stated the park across the street and that drug deals could take place there. She stated needles could be left behind in the park. She stated the complex would invite problems. She stated the City needs apartments but not on that corner and that any member of the Commission would be against it if they lived in her home. Mr. Cortez disagreed and stated the worst thing for property values is a vacant lot. Mrs. Perea asked if Mr. Cortez had a vested interest in Mr. Campbell's development. Mr. Cortez stated he had never met Mr. Campbell before. Mr. Cortez asked if Mrs. Perea was aware of what a HUD development is and that a city cannot prevent a HUD development from being built. Mrs. Perea stated she was not aware of that. She stated the neighbors did not oppose development but that the apartments would be too much. Mr. Cortez asked what would be agreeable. Mrs. Perea stated duplexes would be fine. Mr. Gooch asked what would happen if only eight of the sixteen units could be rented. He stated it would not be enough to pay the loan. He stated it would be detrimental to surrounding property values. Stan Codgill, 1301 East Berrendo Road, spoke in opposition to the request. He stated he had an emotional investment in his property and that he'd been born and raised there. He stated change is not necessarily progress and that his life would change. He stated he'd planned to retire in his home. He stated he had to reconsider how he would develop his property. Mr. Cortez stated Mr. Codgill's property is still residential but that the Chaves County Comprehensive Master Plan designates it as possible future commercial. Mr. Codgill stated the proposed number of units would increase traffic at the intersection. He asked who would enforce the two-cars-per-unit regulation. Cory Codgill, also of 1301 East Berrendo Road, stated he operated a home occupation at that address and had gone before a commission to ask permission to do so. He stated it had been understood that the business could grow. Mr. Cortez stated the ETZ Commission had likely been the one to make that decision and questions on the matter should be referred to them. Mr. Vickers stated the Land Use Plan recommends future commercial for that area. Mr. Codgill stated his family does have a vested interest in the request. Mrs. Kyser stated the park would be full of children during sports seasons with lots of traffic in the area. Mr. Brown asked how many property owners within 100' opposed the request. Carl Cooper, 1205 Madrid Street, stated he opposed the request. Mr. Jaramillo stated at least 20% of owners within 100' opposed the request. Mr. Cortez stated R-3 District already exists on Madrid Street and that several of the lots are vacant. Mr. Jaramillo stated the lots are approximately 40' by 100' and that six lots are vacant. Mr. Cortez asked if they could possibly be multi-family. Mr. Jaramillo stated that if a summary plat were done to combine the lots, a building permit could be approved for a multi-family complex without a public hearing. He stated R-3 District exists from Mission Arch Drive to Atkinson Avenue. He stated the original development plan for the area had called for a mixed-use PUD, with apartments, commercial uses, and single-family homes. He stated Staff was seeing the drawings for the apartments for the first time. Mr. Vickers stated adequate findings must be given in the motion. He stated an update to the Comprehensive Master Plan was coming up and that it is reviewed every ten years to take into account changes to neighborhoods. He stated the zoning could revert to high-density residential from commercial. Mr. Cortex asked for details on R-3 District square footage requirements. Mr. Jaramillo stated 24 units are permitted per square acre for a two-story complex. He stated parking per resident and required landscaping would decrease the buildable area. He stated a screen fence would be 3 required along lot lines which abut residential areas. He stated this property would allow 11for a one-story or 21 units for a two-story. Mr. Armstrong asked Mr. Campbell about other options he had considered and that he felt neighbors objected to the two-story development. Mrs. Patterson stated that a use can't be specified within a zone and that conditions cannot be placed on a zone change. Mr. Cortez asked how single-family development could be constructed on that lot. Mr. Jaramillo stated a loop road would have to be built. Mr. Armstrong stated he would like to see Mr. Campbell reconsider duplexes or to have the property stay C-1 Commercial. Mr. Campbell asked if he could do two-story duplexes. Mr. Vickers stated the maximum height requirements in Residential and Commercial Districts is 35'. Mr. Gross stated he would like to see some compromise between the parties involved. Mr. Gwartney stated he felt ten duplexes could be agreeable and that the amount of opposition was unusual. Mr. Cortez stated the property could have been developed as multi-family when Mr. Campbell purchased it. Mrs. Childress asked if both parties had the option to appeal. Mr. Jaramillo stated they could. He stated Findings of Facts were important because City Council would only look at the existing record. Mrs. Patterson stated testimony taken at the meeting would be included in the written documentation presented at Council. Mr. Brown asked how many units would be allowed in C-1 District. Mr. Jaramillo stated residential development is no longer allowed in commercial districts. Mr. Cortez asked those opposing the request to state their names on the record. Mr. Cooper of 1205 Madrid Street, Mr. Codgill of 1301 East Berrendo Road, Mrs. Kyser of 1207 Madrid Street, and Mrs. Perea of 1203 Madrid Street opposed the request. Mr. Brown asked those in opposition if they felt a Walgreens would be less obtrusive than an apartment complex. Mrs. Kyser stated she had not received enough information to decide and asked how an appeal would proceed. Mr. Brown stated an appeal would have to be received by noon the Thursday following the hearing. MOTION Mr. Cortez made a motion to approve Case 13-013 based on Findings of Facts with the following amendments: that Finding of Fact #8 state "buildings in excess of 35' and two-stories" and that Finding of Fact #12 reflect that 20% of owners within 100' had protested at the hearing. Mr. Cortez asked Mrs. Patterson how the City proceeds when a property is affected by a zoning change to his or her property. Mrs. Patterson discussed the process of notifying residents of a zone change and the process of amending the Zoning Ordinance. She discussed the legislative and adjudicatory processes. She stated the applicant has the burden of establishing proof that the request is in the public interest, is not solely in the interest of the applicant, and that it conforms to the City's Land Use Plan. Mr. Cortez asked Staff if the request would conform to the City's Land Use Plan. Mr. Vickers stated he believed so. Mrs. Patterson stated it would take five affirmative votes to allow the zone change due to the number of protestors. Mr. Cortez withdrew his motion. Mr. Armstrong made a motion to deny Case 13-013 based on Findings of Facts #2, #7, #8, and #12 with the following amendments: that Finding of Fact #8 state "buildings in excess of 35' and two-stories" and that Finding of Fact #12 reflect that 20% of owners within 100' had protested at the hearing. Mr. Carrillo made the second. The motion passed by a vote of five to two. Mrs. Childress made a motion to waive the reading of the ‘Land Use and Zoning Considerations’ and ‘Finding of Facts’ for the following case. Mr. Gross made the second. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. CASE 13-014: Designate an R-1 Residential District to a Planned Unit Development, Lot 1 of Valley Christian Academy Summary Plat, located on the south side of the 2100 block of West College Boulevard, City of Roswell/Owners Mr. Jaramillo stated Staff is in the process of assigning zoning districts to PUDs in the City. He stated it would revert to its original R-1 District zoning and that it was vacant land. MOTION 4  Mr. Cortez made a motion to approve Case 13-014 based on Findings of Facts. Mrs. Childress made the second. There was no further discussion. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. Mrs. Childress made a motion to waive the reading of the ‘Land Use and Zoning Considerations’ and ‘Finding of Facts’ for the following case. Mr. Armstrong made the second. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. CASE 13-015: Abandon a Planned Unit Development (PUD), Valley Christian Academy Summary Plat, Lot 1 of VCA Summary Plat, located on the south side of the 2800 block of West College Boulevard, City of Roswell/Owners. Mr. Jaramillo stated Staff wished to abandon the PUD and that there was no possibility of development at that time. MOTION Mr. Cortez made a motion to recommend approval by City Council of Case 13-014 based on Findings of Facts. Mrs. Childress made the second. There was no further discussion. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. Mrs. Childress made a motion to waive the reading of the ‘Land Use and Zoning Considerations’ and ‘Finding of Facts’ for the following case. Mr. Gross made the second. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. CASE 13-016: A Special Use Permit for a Riding Academy in the RS Rural Suburban District, known as 300 Huskey Road, Tract 1 and 2 of Slape Boundary Survey, Hayley J. Slape/Owner. Hayley Slape, applicant, stated the idea for a riding academy had come from therapy for her granddaughter, who had come from a home with drug use. She stated she wished to offer the therapy for children with similar backgrounds. She stated she had helped to draft New Mexico House Bill 117 regarding methamphetamine use near children and that had worked with experts in the field. She stated her granddaughter had learned to interact well with the horses and that it had been beneficial for her. She stated she currently had two mini horses, a mare, and a twelve year old gelding. She stated she was not sure how many children would be present at the academy. Mr. Cortez asked if the future mixed residential and commercial development would create future lending issues. Mrs. Slape stated she has spoken with her banker and that she had commercial and liability insurance. Mr. Vickers a summary plat could be done in the future to separate the uses. Mr. Jaramillo stated another public hearing would be held regarding a change to the Special Use. MOTION Mr. Armstrong made a motion to approve Case 13-016 based on Findings of Facts with the following amendments: Finding of Facts #8 and #9 to state that the development plan would be reviewed in five years and Finding of Fact #11 to state that abandoning the Special Use would require a public hearing. Mr. Gwartney made the second. There was no further discussion. The motion passed by a vote of seven to zero. Other Business: Mr. Brown stated he will miss the August meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 7:12 p.m. _________________________________ ______________________________ Ralph Brown- Chair Shirley Childress- Vice Chair 5