A portion of one of the land parcels that Los Alamos County Council approved to rezone Aug. 5 during a special session. Photo by Kirsten Laskey/ladailypost.com
By KIRSTEN LASKEY
Los Alamos Daily Post
kirsten@ladailypostcom
Los Alamos County Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that County Council deny an application to rezone two land parcels located on Canyon Road but instead council did the opposite.
Council held special sessions over the span of several days to discuss the rezoning and ultimately, council voted 4-1 on Aug. 5 to approve modifying the text in the official zoning map as well as amending the Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map.
Council Vice Chair Denise Derkacs voted in opposition while Chair Randall Ryti and Councilors Melanee Hand, Sara Scott and Keith Lepsch voted in favor of the rezoning. Councilors David Reagor and David Izraelevitz were absent.
The parcels in question encompass approximately 4.75 acres of land located at 2100 and 2202 Canyon Road, where the former Scout Hut stands.
Transcor, the developer, purchased the land from the Los Alamos Visiting Nurses with plans to build 160 apartment units along with space for commercial use. To do this, it requested the land be rezoned from multiple-family residential, very high density, to mixed-use.
According to the order that was passed Aug. 5 for the rezoning, “Council finds that the request substantially conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and shall not be materially detrimental to the health, safety, and general welfare of the County.”
It is further reported in the order that the Planning and Zoning Commission primarily opposed the rezoning during its April 21 meeting due to testimony given by Phil Gursky on behalf of the Jewish Center. During the Aug. 2 council hearing to possibly appeal the commission’s decision, Gursky admitted that he obtained additional information and knowledge rendering most or all of his testimony provided to the Commission stale. Gursky further testified that the Jewish Center clarified the extent of the commercial operations on the property through reaching a mutual agreement with the developer. As a result, the Jewish Center no longer objects to the proposed zoning map amendment.
Several members of council voiced support for the rezoning during the Aug. 5 meeting.
“I’m happy to support this motion; it promotes additional housing for our community as well as promoting some level of additional commercial space associated with that housing and development and it is something our community expresses a strong need (for),” Scott said.
Hand agreed.
“It supports development of different options for high density of housing that is in much demand,” she said. “A mixed-use zone supports small commercial businesses that are convenient to uses in the proposed housing development. There seems to be no objections to people in the nearby neighborhoods for this mixed-use rezoning and the presence of the types of business suggested in the development could also benefit nearby users of the area. I believe the change of mixed-use development complements the 2016 Comprehensive Plan and future land use map.”
Ryti also offered support.
“The rezone will allow some limited commercial (development) to augment higher density residential use per the testimony and evidence provided at the hearing (and) issues regarding the parking, ingress, egress, traffic, among others … (these) would be addressed through the site plan review process,” he said. “The requirements in the development code are among the changes being considered … (and) those changes need to be carefully evaluated.”
Derkacs voiced her opposition to the rezoning.
“We all know that Los Alamos County needs more housing and I fully support the construction of multi-family use housing on the two lots on Canyon Road; however, I believe the current very high-density residential zoning already meets the goals of the Comprehensive Plan,” she said. “I also am not convinced the zoning change is not detrimental to the general welfare of the community and to the existing neighborhoods. I have serious concerns for the mixed-use zoning, which allows for so many more commercial uses than those permitted in any housing zoning.”
She added she has concerns about the conveyance documents that were drafted and agreed to by the developer and the Jewish Center. The County, Derkacs said, does not have the authority to enforce private conveyance.
“Additionally, the conveyance does not address parking for the proposed development of 160 apartments under current development code standards … minimum requirements call for 1.5 parking spaces per housing unit that equates to 240 parking spaces,” she said. “The conceptual design for the development only seems to include 185 spaces … Mixed use zoning significantly reduces parking requirements (and) the County already has a shortage of parking in older residential sections. The County also does not have adequate public transportation that would allow most residents to live here without owning a vehicle. The County definitely needs to address the shortage of housing, but we need to do so without creating a parking shortage.”