Administrative Review Board

A G E N D A City of Farmington Administrative Review Board November 7, 2013  A G E N D A Administrative Review Board November 7, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. Item No. 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes from the October 3, 2013 Meeting 23 4 Petition No. ARB 13-12 – a request from Mark & Sandy McCool, 1 represented by William Anglin, for a variance to the side yard setback for a carport for property located at 907 N. Monterey Avenue in the SF-7 Single- Family Residential District. Petition No. ARB 13-13 – a request from Ed & Jovella Blinzler, requesting a 13 variance to allow a building to encroach into the side yard setback in the LNC Local Neighborhood Commercial district located at 2700 Hutton Road. 5 Business from: Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 6 Adjournment ATTENTION PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES: The meeting room and facilities are fully accessible to persons with mobility disabilities. If you plan to attend a meeting and need an auxiliary aid or service, please contact the City Clerk's office at 599-1101 or 599-1106, prior to the meeting so arrangements can be made.  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB 13-12 Variance to the side yard setback for a carport November 7, 2013 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB 13-12 is a request from Mark and Sandy McCool, represented by Bill Anglin, for a variance to the required 5 foot side yard setback to allow a carport to be constructed three (3) feet from the property line for property located at 907 N. Monterey Avenue in the SF-7 Single-family Residential District. The property is legally described as: Lots Eleven (11), in Block Two (2), of the MONTEREY SUBDIVISION, in the City of Farmington, San Juan County, New Mexico, as shown on the Plat of said Subdivision filed for record August 22, 1950. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant .......................... Mark and Sandy McCool Representative ................ Bill Anglin Property Owner ............... Mark and Sandy McCool Location of Property ....... 907 N. Monterey Avenue Nature of Petition ............ The applicant requests a variance to the required 5 foot side yard setback to build a carport 3 feet from the property line and attached to the home. The roof will overhang the structure by about 1 foot. Applicable Regulations... City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): Pursuant to Section 2.8 Table 2.8.1 the required side yard setback is 5 feet for a single-story structure in the SF-7 Single-family Residential District. Zoning .............................. SF-7 Single-family Residential District Existing Use ..................... Residence Surrounding Zoning/ … ..North, South, East and West: SF-7 Single-family Land Use Residential District/Residential Public Notice……………..Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Sunday, October 20, 2013. Adjoining property owners were sent notice by certified mail on Thursday, October 17, 2013, and a sign was posted on the property on Friday, October 25, 2013. Staff Cynthia Lopez, Senior Planner BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the construction of a carport three (3) feet from the north property line. The roof of the new carport will project about one (1) foot beyond the structure. There is an existing attached garage/shed on the back of the residence within one (1) foot of the north property line. The garage/shed existed prior the adoption of the Unified Development Code (UDC) on January 1, 2008. An aerial 1 from 2007 shows the garage/shed existed at that time. There is an alley to the west of the property but there isn’t a driveway from the alley to the garage/shed. The garage/shed has an overhead door that faces the yard to the south. There is a driveway from Monterey on the north side of the property. The residence is leased to an elderly couple. The tenants park their car on the driveway and in the winter time the driveway gets slippery with snow and ice. A carport will protect the driveway surface making it safer for the tenants. Also there is a door on the north side of the residence which would allow direct access from the carport. ISSUES Chief Building Inspector—Leo Hardie—599-1305 Before a building permit can be issued, plans will need to be submitted which addresses fire-resistance construction for the proposed construction located 3 feet from the side yard property line per Section 302.1, 2009 International Residential Building Code. ANALYSIS Variance Criteria – Section 8.12.4, UDC A variance may be granted only where a literal enforcement of the Code provisions would result in unnecessary hardship for a particular property. In order to grant a variance, the ARB must make a positive finding of fact concerning each of the following or, if a positive finding of fact cannot be made that the ARB specifically describes the circumstance that would outweigh the strict requirement for a positive finding of fact and determine that the variance will not be a public detriment: 1. That special conditions and circumstances exist, which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; and, furthermore, that they are not self-imposed, self-created or otherwise the result of actions by the applicant. There are no special circumstances which exist at the subject property which are not applicable to other properties in the SF-7 Single-family Residential District. The only circumstance that affects this property is that the requested variance will be further from the property line than the existing garage/shed. This criterion IS NOT met. 2. That a literal interpretation of the provisions of the Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the Code. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the UDC would deprive the applicant of some of the rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the surrounding SF-7 Single-family Residential District. Many properties in the neighborhood have additions that are less than 5 feet from the side property line, with some that are on the property line, and the existing garage/shed of this property is only 1 foot from the side property line. This criterion IS met. 2 3. The applicant demonstrates that the request is a minimum easing of the Code requirements, making possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure. The requested variance is a minimum easing of the UDC. The applicant is proposing to construct the carport three feet from the property line with a one foot roof overhang. The UDC allows a building to be five (5) feet from the property line with a two (2) foot roof overhang. The side wall of the carport will be constructed of fire retardant materials and the alley will provide access to the residence in case of fire. This criterion IS met. 4. That the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general interest, the general purpose and intent of the Code, and is not injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The requested variance is in harmony with the general interest, purpose and intent of the UDC. The requested variance will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The side wall of the carport will be constructed of fire retardant materials and will not be closer to the property line than many other additions in the neighborhood. The alley in the back of the residence will offer opportunity for the Fire Department to access all sides of the residence in case of fire. This criterion IS met. 5. That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. Granting this variance will not allow a use not otherwise allowed in the GC district. The UDC requires a five (5) foot setback from the side property line. However, many properties in the area have encroached on the side yard setback and several residences have additions that are built on the property line. This request will not allow a use that is not already present in the underlying district. This criterion IS met. 6. That no nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district and no permitted use of lands, structures or buildings in other districts has been or shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. No non-conforming uses or buildings on other properties are used to justify the requested variance. This criterion IS met. 7. That the applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance requested were denied. The applicant would not suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance were denied. Except that the carport would grant a secure and safe access for the elderly tenants to enter and exit their home during the winter months. This criterion IS NOT met. 3 CONCLUSION The Community Development Department concludes that approval of ARB 13-10, is appropriate. The request is a minimum easing of the code, generally in harmony with the neighborhood and will not be injurious to the neighbors. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ARB 13- 12 from Mark and Sandy McCool, represented by Bill Anglin, for a variance to the required 5 foot side yard setback to allow a carport to be constructed three (3) feet from the property line for property located at 907 N. Monterey Avenue in the SF-7 Single- family Residential District. 4 5 6 7 Aerial of Neighborhood near 907 Monterey N  PETITION NO. ARB 13-12 907 N. MONTEREY –SIDEYARD SETBACKS Deadline: October 15, 2013 City of Farmington Departments CD Director – Mary L. Holton Comments are incorporated in the staff memo. CD Addressing – Planning Division No Comments Before a building permit can be issued, plans will need to be submitted which addresses fire- resistance construction for the proposed CD Chief Building Inspector – Leo Hardie construction located 3 feet from the side yard property per Section 302.1, 2009 International Residential Building Code. CD MPO - Joe Delmagori No MPO comments CD Oil & Gas Inspector No Comments City Manager’s Office – Bob Campbell No objections ELEC Customer Care Manager – Nicki Parks No Response ELEC Engineering - Luwil Aligarbes No electrical/powerline conflict ELEC T & D - Steve Henson No Response Fire Department criteria will be met through the FIRE Fire Marshall – Bob Popa Building Inspection process. LEGAL Deputy City Attorney – Jennifer Breakell No Comments POLICE Code Compliance No Response The Police Department has no opinion as to the POLICE Captain McPheeters merits of this petition. PRCA Roger Drayer No comment on Monterey Property PW Engineering- Virginia King No Response PW Engineering – Nica Westerling No Response PW Streets Superintendent - Jim Couch No Response PW Traffic Engineering Admin – Steve Krest No Issues PW Water/Wastewater Admin – Ruben Salcido No Comments Other Entities CH2MHILL OMI No Response Comcast Cable - Mark Johnson No Response New Mexico Gas Company - Ryan Holden No Response Enterprise Field Services No Response Farmington School District No Response CenturyLink – Laurence Joe No Response U.S. Post Office No Response Williams Field Services - Lloyd Bell No Response 8 9 10 11 12  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB 13-13 Variance to the side yard setback for a Building November 7, 2013 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB 13-13 is a request from Nearly Famous, represented by Edward and Jovella Blinzler, for a variance to the previously approved 5 foot side yard setback to allow a building to be constructed 4.28 feet from the property line on the south corner and 4.65 feet from the property line on the north corner for property located at 2700 Hutton Avenue in the LNC Local Neighborhood Commercial District. The property is legally described as: Tract One (1), Block Nine (9), of the Replat of RIO VISTA SUBDIVISION NO. 2, in the City of Farmington, San Juan County, New Mexico, as shown on the Replat of said Subdivision filed for record January 9, 1986. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant .......................... Nearly Famous Representative ................ Edward and Jovella Blinzler Property Owner ............... Edward and Jovella Blinzler Location of Property ....... 2700 Hutton Avenue Nature of Petition ............ The applicant requests a variance to the previously approved 5 foot side yard setback to allow a building to be constructed 4.28 feet from the property line on the south corner and 4.65 feet from the property line on the north corner. Applicable Regulations... City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): Pursuant to Section 2.8 Table 2.8.1 the required side yard setback is 20 feet in the LNC Local Neighborhood Commercial District. Zoning .............................. LNC Local Neighborhood Commercial District Existing Use ..................... Vacant Land with foundation work Surrounding Zoning/ …...North and East: OP Office Professional South and West: MF-M Multiple-family Medium Density Land Use North and East: Office/Vacant South and West: Residential Public Notice……………..Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Sunday, October 20, 2013. Adjoining property owners were sent notice by certified mail on Thursday, October 17, 2013, and a sign was posted on the property on Friday, October 25, 2013. Staff Cynthia Lopez, Senior Planner 13 BACKGROUND The petitioner is proposing to build a beauty shop at this location. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a 4.65 setback on the east property line for the north corner of their building and a 4.28 setback on the east property line for the south corner of their building (see attached survey). The petitioners received approval of a variance (ARB 09-07) to allow a 5 foot side yard setback on the east property line in 2009. There is a 5 foot utility easement on the east side of the property. When the property was originally staked the petitioner’s believed the property line was down the center of the existing fence and therefore began construction of their foundation. Recently the property was re-staked showing that the foundation sits 4.65 feet from the property line on the north corner and 4.28 feet from the property line on the south corner. This means that the foundation encroaches 7.8 inches and 3.36 inches respectively on the previously approved 5 foot side yard setback. The petitioners are also requesting an abandonment of the 5 foot utility easement along the east property line. The electric utility has been contacted and has no objections to the abandonment of the easement. The electric lines and poles are in the 15 foot utility easement that exists on the property to the east of 2700 Hutton Avenue. ISSUES Chief Building Inspector—Leo Hardie—599-1305 • No comment since there is a 15-foot easement on the west side of the adjacent lot to the east. ANALYSIS Variance Criteria – Section 8.12.4, UDC A variance may be granted only where a literal enforcement of the Code provisions would result in unnecessary hardship for a particular property. In order to grant a variance, the ARB must make a positive finding of fact concerning each of the following or, if a positive finding of fact cannot be made that the ARB specifically describes the circumstance that would outweigh the strict requirement for a positive finding of fact and determine that the variance will not be a public detriment: 1. That special conditions and circumstances exist, which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; and, furthermore, that they are not self-imposed, self-created or otherwise the result of actions by the applicant. There are special circumstances which exist at the subject property which are not applicable to other properties in the LNC Local Neighborhood Commercial District. The property is a triangularly shaped property that has a severe change in elevation from north to south and east to west. The unusual shape of the property and the change in elevation makes it difficult to locate the building in such a way as to meet the setback requirements and accommodate the required off-street parking. This criterion IS met. 14 2. That a literal interpretation of the provisions of the Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the Code. The literal interpretation of the provisions of the UDC would deprive the applicant of the rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the surrounding area. The property drops significantly from the north to the south and from the east to the west. The change in elevation on the property makes it difficult to find enough level ground to accommodate the building and parking. This property is at the crown of the hill and other properties to the north and east are on more level ground. However, the property to the east also has a drop in elevation to the south and that property owner was approved for a variance. This criterion IS met. 3. The applicant demonstrates that the request is a minimum easing of the Code requirements, making possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure. The requested variance is a minimum easing of the UDC. The applicant was approved for a variance to allow a 5 foot side yard setback on the east property line. This request is to allow the building to encroach an additional 7.8 inches at the north corner and 3.36 inches at the south corner. Also the property to the east has a 15 foot utility easement on their west property line which will buffer this building by 15 feet from any construction on the property to the east. This criterion IS met. 4. That the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general interest, the general purpose and intent of the Code, and is not injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The requested variance is in harmony with the general interest, purpose and intent of the UDC. The requested variance will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The property to the east has a 15 foot utility easement on their west property line which will buffer this building by 15 feet from any construction on the property to the east . This criterion IS met. 5. That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. Granting this variance will not allow a use not otherwise allowed in the LNC Local Neighborhood Commercial district. This encroachment is minimal. Also the property to the east was approved for a variance to allow a 5 foot side yard setback on their east property line and a 15 foot side yard setback on their west property line. Further to the east is a Planned Unit Development that has reduced setback requirements. This criterion IS met. 15  6. That no nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district and no permitted use of lands, structures or buildings in other districts has been or shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. No non-conforming uses or buildings on other properties are used to justify the requested variance. The topography of the area are the main consideration for grounds for the issuance of variances in the area. This criterion IS met. 7. That the applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance requested were denied. The applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance were denied. The topography and the shape of the lot make it very difficult to meet the required setback and still place a reasonable building with the required parking on the site. This criterion IS met. CONCLUSION The Community Development Department concludes that approval of ARB 13-13, is appropriate. The request is a minimum easing of the code, generally in harmony with the neighborhood and will not be injurious to the neighbors. The property is unique with topographic difficulties and puts constraints on the construction of the building. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ARB 13- 13 a request from Nearly Famous, represented by Edward and Jovella Blinzler, for a variance to the previously approved 5 foot side yard setback to allow a building to be constructed 4.28 feet from the property line on the south corner and 4.65 feet from the property line on the north corner for property located at 2700 Hutton Avenue in the LNC Local Neighborhood Commercial District. 16 17 2700 Hutton Avenue N 18 19 20  PETITION NO. ARB 13-13 2700 HUTTON – SIDEYARD SETBACKS Deadline: October 23, 2013 City of Farmington Departments CD Director – Mary L. Holton Comments are incorporated in the staff memo. CD Addressing – Planning Division No Comments No Comment since there is a 15-foot easement on CD Chief Building Inspector – Leo Hardie the west side of the adjacent lot to the east. CD MPO - Joe Delmagori No comments from the MPO CD Oil & Gas Inspector No Comments City Manager’s Office – Bob Campbell No objections ELEC Customer Care Manager – Nicki Parks No Comment ELEC Engineering - Luwil Aligarbes No conflict ELEC T & D - Steve Henson No Response Fire Department criteria will be met through the FIRE Fire Marshall – Bob Popa Building Inspection process. No Comment - Jennifer Does the abandonment of this easement have any LEGAL Deputy City Attorney – Jennifer Breakell bearing on the litigation and dispute regarding the ditch lateral? – Jay Burnham POLICE Code Compliance No Response The Police Department has no opinion as to the merits of this petition. There appears to be no POLICE Captain McPheeters known adverse impact to Police Operations or to Public Safety. PRCA Roger Drayer No comments for PRCA PW Engineering- Virginia King No Response PW Engineering – Nica Westerling No Response PW Streets Superintendent - Jim Couch No Response PW Traffic Engineering Admin – Steve Krest No comment PW Water/Wastewater Admin – Ruben Salcido No comments Other Entities CH2MHILL OMI No Response Comcast Cable - Mark Johnson No Response New Mexico Gas Company - Ryan Holden No Response Enterprise Field Services No Response Farmington School District No Response CenturyLink – Laurence Joe No Response U.S. Post Office No Response Williams Field Services - Lloyd Bell No Response 21 22  MINUTES ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD October 3, 2013 - 6:00 P.M. The Administrative Review Board met in regular session on Thursday, October 3, 2013 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. Members Present: Chairman Tom O’Keefe Ireke Cooper Tim Christensen Nick Martin Paul Martin Members Absent: None Staff Present Fran Fillerup Mary Holton Dee Dee Moore Sam Montoia Others Addressing the Board Brett Elliott Melody Preuss Mark Silversmith Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chairman O’Keefe and there being a quorum present the following proceedings were duly had and taken. Approval of the Agenda A motion was made by Board Member Christensen, seconded by Board Member Nick Martin, to approve the agenda. The members were polled and the motion passed unanimously by a vote of 5-0. Approval of the Minutes from the September 5, 2013 Regular Meeting A motion was made by Board Member Paul Martin to approve the minutes from the September 5, 2013, regular meeting. The motion was seconded by Board Member Christensen. The members were polled and the motion passed unanimously by a vote of 5-0. 23  Petition ARB 13-10 Variance to Bay Doors Facing Residential District 1919 W. Apache Discussion of ARB 13-10 on October 3, 2013 Associate Planner Sam Montoia presented the staff report and identified that the representative’s name should be Mark not Mike. Mr. Montoia stated that Automotive Operations were required to be more than 200 feet from a residential district and bay doors cannot open to a residential district. He added that there are not any residents within the 200 feet, just the RE-1 District. Chairman O’Keefe asked for clarification of the parcel that is zoned residential. Mr. Montoia identified that property to the north across Apache Street, Navajo Prep, is the only residential zone. Director Holton added that because of the reoccurrence of this type of petition, staff is reviewing the code to possibly amend the requirement to exempt nonresidential uses in residential districts, as the requirement is intended to protect residential uses in residential districts. Board Member Paul Martin also asked if the only residential district within the required distance was Navajo Prep. Mr. Montoia stated that yes that was correct. Petitioner Mark Silversmith of 1921 W. Apache was asked if he had anything to add to staff’s report. Mr. Silversmith stated that this location had housed a garage in the past that was used for repair purposes. He added that he is making sure that all the rules and requirements are being adhered to as a legitimate business. Ms. Melody Preuss of 1921 W. Apache spoke in favor of this petition. She added that she currently rents the home next door to this building. She stated that she was in favor of small businesses because of they are personable and can serve the community. The mechanic has 36 years of experience including foreign vehicles. Board Member Nick Martin asked her if she was the renter. Ms. Preuss stated she was and didn’t feel that the proposed business would bother her. There was no one present to speak in opposition of this petition. Board Member Cooper was in favor of the petition and added that staff had identified that the regulation may be amended because of the frequency of variances to this requirement. Administrative Review Board Action of October 3, 2013 Board Member Cooper made a motion to approve Petition No. ARB 13-10 as recommended by staff, the motion was seconded by Board Member Christensen. AYE: Chairman O’Keefe, Board Members Cooper, Christensen, Nick Martin and Paul Martin NAY: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None MOTION TO APPROVE PASSED 5-0 24  Petition ARB 13-11 Variance to Front Yard Setback 7211 Tuscany Drive Board Member Paul Martin asked to recuse himself and left the hearing at 6:11pm. Discussion of ARB 13-11 on October 3, 2013 Associate Planner Fran Fillerup presented the staff report, a request from Brad Walls for a wall that would encroach into the required front yard setback. The closest point to the front property line would be 19 feet 10 inches. There is currently a 6-foot wall along the south property line. The property located to the south is vacant. The request is to accommodate a pool, a pool house, and a fire pit with a seating area creating the encroachment into the setback. Mr. Fillerup stated that building code for a swimming pool requires a 6-foot wall around a pool. He stated that this request is not necessarily a minimum easing of the code nor would it create an unnecessary hardship for the petitioner. Mr. Fillerup showed photos that the proposed wall would not be in a safe sight triangle and creates no detriment to the public. Staff recommends approval. Chairman O’Keefe asked if the variance is for the pool house as well. Mr. Fillerup stated that the pool house meets the code requirements as an accessory building and has already been permitted, and that this variance is for the wall only. Mr. Brett Elliott of 6308 Red Rock Court stated that the client is in the middle of an outdoor renovation and the wall will complement the pool project. He added that 95% of the proposed wall is within the setback. He stated that all portions of construction have been permitted and requests permission to continue with the construction of this section of the wall. There was no one present to speak in opposition of this petition. Board Member Cooper asked what the minimum lot size in this cul-de-sac was. Mr. Fillerup stated that they are zoned RE-1 which is a one acre minimum lot. Board Member Cooper stated that he felt that the 35-foot required setback was to keep an open feel down a corridor. Chairman O’Keefe added that this was discussed during the adoption of the code and felt a 6-foot wall on the cul-de-sac was not contrary to the code. Board Member Christensen agreed that it does not impact the open space feel and is a long way from the driveway. Board Member Nick Martin added that this wall would be a good distance behind the property line. Administrative Review Board Action of October 3, 2013 Board Member Nick Martin made a motion to approve Petition No. ARB 13-11 as recommended by staff, the motion was seconded by Board Member Cooper. AYE: Chairman O’Keefe, Board Members Cooper, Christensen and Nick Martin NAY: None RECUSE: Board Member Paul Martin ABSENT: None MOTION TO APPROVE PASSED 4-0 25 Business from the Floor: There was no business from the Floor. Business from the Chair: There was no business from the Chairman. Business from Members: There was no business from the Members. Business from Staff: There was no business from Staff. Adjournment: The October 3, 2013 Meeting of the Administration Review Board was adjourned at 6:20 pm. ___________________________ __________________________ Tom O’Keefe - Chairman Dee Dee Moore, Office Manager 26