Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council holds full hearing, then defers decision on Mesa Film Studio appeal to allow written findings
Summary
After a multi-hour hearing on an appeal of the Environmental Planning Commission(EPC) approval of a site plan for Mesa Film Studio at Double Eagle II Airport, the Albuquerque City Council voted to deny the appeal but deferred adoption of written findings for two weeks to allow staff to draft formal findings supporting the decision.
The Albuquerque City Council on April 7 held a full hearing on an appeal of the Environmental Planning Commission(EPC) approval of a site plan that would allow a film-studio complex at Double Eagle II Airport (the Mesa Film Studio proposal). After receiving testimony from appellants, applicants, planning staff and others, the council voted to deny the appeal but deferred formal written findings for adoption at a later meeting.
Background: the appeal (AC-2501) challenged the EPC decision approving a film-studio site plan in a Nonresidential Sensitive Use (NRSU) zone within the Double Eagle II Airport master-plan area. Appellants contended the film studio uses (light manufacturing, warehousing and similar components) are not permitted either as primary or accessory uses in the NRSU zone under the Integrated Development Ordinance (IDO).
Hearing highlights: the Land Use Hearing Officer (LUHO) recommended granting the appeal and reversing the EPCs decision, concluding the EPC had erred in its interpretation of the IDO and that film-studio uses were inconsistent with the NRSU zones purpose. The EPC respondents and the applicant argued the IDOs NRSU provisions allow the EPC discretion to approve accessory uses that are compatible or complementary to the airport, relying on amendments to the Double Eagle II master plan that identified film studio among potential compatible uses.
Speakers and evidence: appellants presented a 36-page proposed disposition from the land-use hearing officer and argued that the EPCs approval was arbitrary and capricious. The applicant and planning staff urged the council to deny the appeal, citing the IDOs special provisions for NRSU zones and the EPCs authority to set negotiable standards.
Council action: after hearing arguments, councilors voted to deny the appeal and uphold the EPC approval, but they did not adopt the findings on the dais. Instead the council voted to defer adopting formal written findings and related ordinance language to the next council meeting (two-week deferral) so staff could prepare draft findings consistent with the councils decision.
Why this matters: the case centers on the interpretation of the IDOs NRSU provisions and whether film-studio operations can be approved as accessory uses to an airport. The councils action preserves the EPC approval while allowing staff to prepare the formal legal findings that justify the decision on the public record.
Next steps: staff will draft findings for the council to review and approve at the April 21 meeting. The deferral leaves the EPC approval in effect pending the councils formal adoption of findings.
Ending: councilors said the extra time will let staff prepare a concise record that explains the councils legal basis for denying the appeal and upholding the EPC decision.
