This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
A non-profit organization acquired a ten-acre property under the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act to build a short-term youth shelter for non-delinquent, non-adjudicated youth facing family dysfunction, abuse, or neglect. The shelter aimed to provide temporary housing and services to facilitate family reunification. The organization sought annexation and special use zoning for the property, which faced opposition from a neighborhood association citing concerns about zoning legality, procedural errors, and potential bias in the approval process (paras 2-5).
Procedural History
- Bernalillo County Planning Commission, June 4, 1993: Denied the special use zoning request due to neighborhood opposition and concerns about airport noise (para 4).
- Albuquerque Environmental Planning Commission, December 15, 1994: Recommended approval of annexation and special use zoning with conditions, including noise mitigation measures (para 4).
- Albuquerque City Council, November 6, 1995: Approved annexation and special use zoning for the property (para 5).
- District Court, June 26, 1996: Denied the neighborhood association's appeal of the City Council's decision (para 5).
Parties' Submissions
- Appellant (Siesta Hills Neighborhood Association): Argued that the special use zoning was illegal under the Albuquerque Zoning Code, procedural errors invalidated the approval process, and a City Council member's bias denied them a fair hearing (paras 1, 7, 11, 17).
- Respondents (City of Albuquerque and New Day, Inc.): Defended the legality of the zoning under provisions for "use combinations not adequately allowed and controlled in other zones," denied procedural errors, and argued that the City Council member's actions did not demonstrate bias or impropriety (paras 7-9, 11-16, 19-20).
Legal Issues
- Was the special use zoning for the property legal under the Albuquerque Zoning Code?
- Did procedural errors in the zoning approval process invalidate the City Council's decision?
- Did the alleged bias of a City Council member deny the appellant a fair and impartial hearing?
Disposition
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the City Council's decision approving annexation and special use zoning for the property (para 21).
Reasons
Per Donnelly J. (Pickard and Wechsler JJ. concurring):
Special Use Zoning: The Court found that the City Council acted within its authority under Section 14-16-2-22(B)(27) of the Albuquerque Zoning Code, which allows for "use combinations not adequately allowed and controlled in other zones." The proposed shelter's combination of uses, including temporary lodging, recreation, and administrative offices, justified the special use zoning (paras 7-9). The Court also rejected the argument that the zoning violated emergency shelter regulations, as no evidence showed another shelter within 1,500 feet of the property (para 10).
Procedural Errors: The Court held that the zoning approval process substantially complied with the Albuquerque Zoning Code. The Environmental Planning Commission made findings of fact, and the City Council had these findings before it when approving the zoning. The delegation of noise mitigation measures to staff was deemed reasonable and consistent with standard practices (paras 11-16).
Alleged Bias: The Court found no evidence that the City Council member prejudged the case or acted improperly. The member's prior statements and personal connection to the organization did not rise to the level of bias or conflict of interest requiring disqualification (paras 17-20).
The Court concluded that the City Council's decision was supported by substantial evidence and complied with legal requirements.