Council OKs Willow Creek zoning change

By Eric Maddy
The SCORE

The Rio Rancho Governing Body approved the controversial rezoning of property at NM528 and Willow Creek Road on Wednesday night in its last meeting before the council membership could change with the coming city election.

The rezoning issue has been delayed while the city changed its zoning law for commercial/special use designations so that at site plan is not required as part of a rezoning proposal. The council changed the ordinance and had its first hearing on the Willow Creek proposal and during its Feb. 13 meeting

Residents said they may sue the city in an attempt to block the rezoning.

“We are not going to stop here,” said resident Ron Blood, one of the more vocal critics of the process. “We have tried until tonight to go through the process.”

Added resident Marchell Schuman:  “I think we need to get together and talk about where we’re going. We do have 31 days to appeal.”

Councilor Marilyn Salzman, who represents the district where the rezoning will take place, was absent due to illness. But one of the four challengers for her position, Alonzo F. Clayton, sided with the residents.

“We realize that you changed the ordinance at the last council meeting so it would be easier for you to make this zoning change,” Clayton said. “You have emasculated this ordinance so it will now be easier for any developer to get special zoning without a site plan up front. This decision will haunt this city going forward.”

Clayton urged the council to consider delaying action and actually asking the city to purchase the land and build a “badly-needed park,” a plan he proposed while serving on the council in 2003-04.

Six other residents also spoke against the zoning change.

“This is a quiet, peaceful, crime-free neighborhood,” said Ron Crafts, who lives near the rezoned land. “I think it unconscionable to put in some sort of commercial strip along here. The least that can be done is to limit the light pollution, the noise pollution, the traffic pollution and the crime that is inevitably going to result from this. I don’t know who’s benefitting from this, but it certainly is not the people who have to live this community.

“We have protested and protested this. It is ridiculous.”

Resident Stan Crider noted a petition of more than 500 area residents had been submitted to the city, and that the Planning and Zoning board had voted 4-2 to recommend denial of the rezoning in October. Another resident, Joe Shields, noted that P&Z had denied the rezoning request for the first time on a date previous to October.

“I’m not sure how you can justify going against the will of the majority of people who live in this area as well as two planning and zoning boards who have listened to this case and thought it really isn’t a good idea to change this zoning,” Shields said.

Added Crider: “We understand the desires of the current owners to make a profit from this beautiful property, and we don’t begrudge him that. What we do ask is that you keep the neighborhood just that – a neighborhood full of family and friends.”

Crider noted there were other commercial sites relatively close, including a new Wal-Mart being built near Enchanted Hills and the existing Target/Albertsons shopping complex in the High Resort area. That statement prompted a response from Councilor Howard Balmer, who represents the latter area.

“The Wal-Mart, and what’s going on at the Wal-Mart site, is not in the city of Rio Rancho. That is in the town of Bernalillo,” he said. “That’s going to cost this city approximately $1 million a year in gross receipts tax. We could have had that in Rio Rancho except for the fact that some people didn’t want something in their back yard.

“And I ask the same people who brought it up: We have this over there and this over there, (but) how many of you drive to Enchanted Hills and are backed up on Enchanted Hills Boulevard trying to make a left or a right (turn) coming out of that residential area? How many of you are at Ridgecrest and NM 528 and are backed up trying to make a left on 528 to go to Rivers Edge?

“You are impacting my neighborhood when you shop there (by) doing your neighborhood shopping in someone else’s neighborhood. I find it inherently unfair for people to come here and say publicly at a meeting, ‘It’s O.K. to drive somewhere else and impact those folks, but I don’ want it right here next to my neighborhood.’

“A community means we share in everything. We share in the good and share in the bad. From what I can see, from Ridgecrest Drive all the way up to Enchanted Hills, there’s nothing in between for gross receipts tax. Everybody else is sharing the bad part about he traffic and other ills you bring forward to us as a council. We have all the bad part at Ridgecrest and 528.”

The council actually approved the rezoning of two separate properties in the same general area by two different applicants, Shillelagh LLC and City Center Industries LLC.  The final vote was 4-1, with councilor Larry Naranjo voting against the measure after noting there had been limited development on the east side of 528 and that the council has allowed several acres of commercial rezoning on the west side of the highway.

Most of he same speakers passed on a chance to address the council on the second vote, but Shields responded to Balmer, saying the councilor’s High Resort example was not the same.

“It would be unfortunate for someone to think that this is commercial development across the street from someone, when it’s actually in the neighborhood,” Shields said. “That’s a big difference from Target sitting adjacent to a neighborhood and Target inside a neighborhood.”

Neighborhood resident Francine Ball also addressed the council again, saying the shopping centers are “buffers to the neighborhood. The land does not come through their neighborhood. This is blatant spot zoning.”

Development Services Department Director Rob Anderson told the council that even with the rezoning, any property owner would have to clear several steps before building could begin on the property.

“Before anything is developed, it will be thoroughly scrutinized,” he said. “There will be a great deal of information that is provided to the staff and ultimately P&Z and the city council (for) every element of it.”

Among the requirements will be plans or studies on drainage, traffic and a final site plan, Anderson said.

The special use designation also allows the city to restrict uses on property. On he first property, restricted uses agreed to by the owner include bars and lounges, excluding full-service liquor in association with a restaurant; undertaking establishments; clubhouses, buildings for fraternal organizations and non-profit public service organizations; hospitals; drive-in or drive-through restaurants, excluding carry-out service; bowling alleys; adult bookstores; message parlors and saunas; recycling collection centers; self-storage facilities; nursing homes; automotive dealerships; and gasoline service stations.

City manager Jim Payne and Anderson also made a lengthy presentation regarding factors the council needs to consider when it begins to take up budget discussions in the coming months.

In other business, the council:

• Approved a third zoning changes from residential to commercial/special use along Northern Boulevard between 10th and 13th streets.

• Approved the designation of 31 lots of unzoned property on the east side of 35th Street between Inca Road and 19th Avenue as R-4 single family residential and C-1 retail commercial.

• Denied a zoning appeal that would have allowed a U-Haul truck rental operation at the mini-mart at 1504 Cherry Road.

• Approved an $850,000 budget adjustment for repairs in the Lisbon, Sugar/Bali and Montoyas flood control channels.

• Approved a $150,000 budget adjustment to create a reserve fund for repairs in the Vista Hills area where there have been several water main breaks.

• Changed the name to Rio Rancho Police Department from Rio Rancho Department of Public Safety, a name change overlooked when DPS was split into distinct fire and police departments.

Two other items were postponed: a proposed zoning change and an ordinance amendment that would increase the amount of small purchase limits.