Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Code topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council postpones TZ zoning text amendments after developer raises setback concerns

Rio Rancho Governing Body · August 8, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Second reading of O16 (clarifying facade definitions, side-setback footnote, and adding TZ table entries) was discussed; a developer asked for corrections on TZ setbacks and frontage thresholds and council voted to postpone the item for review to a date-certain.

Director Amy Rincon presented O16 (second reading), describing text amendments to chapters 150 and 154 that add a definition of "façade," correct side-setback footnote applications, and add missing TZ lot-size and setback entries that were omitted in earlier table conversions. "We're just asking to make that change, to clarify that," Rincon said when explaining the side-setback correction.

Jared Lecker, representing AMREF Southwest, testified at the meeting raising concerns that the TZ table shown in staff materials uses E1 setbacks (35 front, 10 side, 25 rear) and a 60-foot frontage minimum that could render many existing 50-foot lots nonconforming. He urged the council to restore a 50-foot frontage minimum and add the 20%/5-foot-side-footnote to the TZ table to avoid widespread variances. Rincon replied that the 2013 TZ language contained an "except as below" statement and that the proposed standards reflect 2013 conditions; she offered to provide the 2013 code language for council review.

Councilors asked for time to read the original 2013 text before voting. Councilor Weimer moved to postpone the item to a date-certain (the 22nd); the motion was seconded, a roll call was taken that recorded a mix of yes and no votes, and the mayor announced the item was postponed. The council directed staff to return the 2013 code language and related clarifications at the rescheduled hearing so members can confirm whether the present table aligns with the original provisions.