Administrative Review Board

A G E N D A Administrative Review Board City Council Chambers 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, NM January 3, 2019 at 6:00 p.m. Item Page No. 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes from the December 6, 2018 Meeting 20 4 Petition No. ARB 18-91 – a request from Sean Dugan (DPC Acquisitions LLC), for 1 a variance to reduce the required 20-foot rear yard setback for the IND, Industrial District to 7.5-feet, for property located at 3100 Bloomfield Highway. (Gary Leikness) 5 Business from: Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 6 Adjournment All decisions of the Administrative Review Board are final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk ‘s office within 15 days. 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.  MINUTES ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD December 6, 2018 – 6:00 P.M. The Administrative Review Board met in regular session on Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. Members present Chair-James Dennis Ireke Cooper Jeff Johanson Paul Martin Oliver Roe Members absent: None Staff present: Isaac BlueEyes Derrick Childers Helen Landaverde Gary Leikness Mary Holton Karen Walker Others addressing the Board: Kate Babcock Michelle Barnard Rebecca Hawbecker Wilfred Hawbecker Doug Kinsey Amy Leupold Mary Frances Leupold Wayne Leupold Charles Wilson Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chair Dennis 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 Martin and seconded by Board Member Cooper to approve the agenda. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 5-0. Approval of the Minutes from the November 8, 2018 Regular Meetings Board Member Martin made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 8, 2018 regular meeting. The motion was seconded by Board Member Cooper and passed unanimously by a vote of 5-0. Swearing in of Witnesses All parties that wished to speak on behalf of any agenda item were sworn in by Karen Walker.  Petition No. ARB 18-87 Variance to the height of a freestanding sign NOTE: Board Member Martin left the room due to a possible conflict of interest. Discussion of ARB No. 18-87 on December 6, 2018 Associate Planner Helen Landaverde presented the staff report for ARB 18-87, a request from Leaf Properties, Inc. represented by Doug Kinsey, for a variance to increase the height of a freestanding sign from 10-feet to 20-feet for a new retail store, a Dollar General, for property in the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District located at 4515 Wildflower Parkway. Pursuant to the Unified Development Code Section 5.8.7(b), the maximum allowable height for a freestanding sign in the LNC District is 10 feet. The size of the property is 5.470 acres. There is a 40-foot utility easement, including a 20-foot BP gas pipeline easement, within the required front yard setback on the subject property. The topography of the property varies; the grade elevation in the front yard area is higher than the project’s site grade elevation. BP Oil is requiring the petitioner to place the proposed freestanding sign behind the 20-foot gas pipeline easement. The applicant proposes to place the sign at the entrance of the parking lot area and behind the 40-foot utility easement. Normally a freestanding sign would be allowed to be placed within the required front yard setback; however, the proposed sign cannot be placed within the existing easements found on the property. The applicant is requesting approval to place a 20-foot tall freestanding sign behind the existing easements to provide better visibility for the freestanding sign from the public right-of-way. The sign consists of approximately 50 ft.² of sign area. The surrounding properties are zoned commercial and residential. This area for the most part is currently undeveloped, said Ms. Landaverde. ARB 18-87 meets the variance criteria listed in section 8.12.4 of the UDC, and the Community Development Department recommends approval. Chair Dennis questioned how far the petitioner’s property was from Mesa View Elementary School. Doug Kinsey with Leaf Properties, pointed on the map the distance from the elementary school. Board Member Cooper noted that the properties are quite a distance apart. Mr. Kinsey explained the elevation differences in the area. The petitioner’s property is in a valley and Mr. Kinsey said a sign at the 10-foot height would not have enough visibility in both directions on the road. Administrative Review Board Action of December 6, 2018 A motion was made by Board Member Cooper and seconded by Board Member Roe to approve Petition No. ARB 18-87, a request from Leaf Properties, Inc., represented by Doug Kinsey, for a variance to increase the height of a freestanding sign from 10-feet to 20-feet a new retail store for property in the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District located at 4515 Wildflower Parkway. AYE: Chair Dennis, Board Members Cooper, Johanson, and Roe. NAY: None ABSTAIN: Board Member Martin ABSENT: None APPROVED 4-0 Petition No. ARB 18-84 Appeal of an Administrative Decision on an Encroachment Discussion of ARB No. 18-84 on December 6, 2018 Planning Manager Gary Leikness presented the staff report for ARB 18-84, an Appeal of an Administrative Decision, from Charles and Kim Wilson to allow a gate to fully encroach into a public right-of-way (alley) that abuts the southern parcel line of 1804 Knudsen Avenue in the SF-7, Single-family District. The appellant originally submitted an application in the later part of last year for a Revocable Encroachment Permit to the City requesting that he be allowed to encroach into a City right-of- way (alley), and install cables and posts to block the alley from all vehicular usage. Mr. Leikness presented pictures of the proposed cable and post gate. The Community Development Department made a determination to not allow the blocking of the alley based on the recommendations made by the Traffic Engineering Division. Mr. Leikness noted the Comment Summary on page 42 of the P&Z Agenda Book. The comments from the Fire Marshall, Code Compliance, and Public Works are listed below. • Fire Marshall- “A gate of any type will delay response to the areas affected. If approved, it will require a knox lock for the Fire Department to use.” • Police/Code Compliance- “This alley needs to remain open for constant access to the power lines and utilities. Also, this would limit access for the surrounding properties to the rear of their property if a fences were to block the alley. Additionally, Emergency Services need access at all times to deal with specific emergencies.” • Public Works- “The Public Works Engineering Department has no conflict with this petition request. However, any encroachment permits granted within the alley should have a signed agreement between all the adjacent property owners to the alley (1803 and 1801 Sage Dr. and 1804 and 1704 Knudsen Ave.), as well as the consent of all affected utilities that currently utilize the alley (COF Electric, NM Gas, etc.).” Letters of opposition from two of those adjacent property owners was received. One property owner was neutral, said Mr. Leikness. New Mexico Gas Company has a gas main in this alley and said, “We need access for meter reading, line locating, leak surveys, gas line maintenance & emergency situations.” Tonight, said Mr. Leikness, the major decision is to decide if the Community Development Department followed the correct criteria. Those criteria are listed below from Section 24-4-3(c). 1. The proposed permit would not cause public property to become dangerous or hazardous to the Public when used by the Public for the purpose for which it was intended to be. It was determined by the Traffic Study, performed by the Traffic Engineering Division of the City of Farmington Public Works Department that a gate will force an unsafe pull out onto Knudsen. The Department appropriately addressed this criterion in the decision. 2. The proposed encroachment will not in itself become in a dangerous or defective condition or unreasonably endanger or interfere with Public health, safety, or convenience. The proposed gate will interfere with public convenience by limiting yard access (Traffic Study). In addition, the alley is limited to only a single access lane because of gas meters and other utility fixtures. 3. The encroachment will not become unsightly. The encroachment would not be maintained by the City. 4. The issuance of the permit is otherwise in the interest of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City. As mentioned in the Traffic Study, the alley is on top of a vertical, therefore, promoting good visibility. Whereas the alternative access to Knudsen Avenue is via Yucca Avenue. Yucca is determined to be safe, but better visibility is at the alley. A denial was recommended as well due to precedence to encroach the alleys in the City. The criteria for appeals are from Section 24-4-8. The purpose of the hearing will be to determine if the decision of the Community Development Department, in consultation with other departments, made a proper decision. The Department denied the encroachment application based upon the Traffic Study, performed by the Public Works Department, which included analyses and advisement. The analysis was performed by our own experts and therefore valid and applicable. By relying on this study, the Director made a proper decision to deny the encroachment request The Community Development Department recommends that the Administrative Review Board uphold the decision to deny. Chair Dennis asked what the procedure was to vacate an alley. Mr. Dennis felt that the alley should be usable for everyone in the area. Director Mary Holton said that in the past, when the City has vacated alleys, there is a set process. The Chief Building Inspector oversees the process as the ones that have been successful is where the land surrounding an alley has been under one ownership. Ms. Holton noted that most encroachment permits are issued at a building permit stage. Board Member Martin asked if the person who did the Traffic Study is licensed. Isaac BlueEyes, City Traffic Engineer, said he is not licensed as a Professional Engineer, PE. Charles (Chuck) Wilson, 1804 Knudsen, asked to review some of the statements that were made in the Staff Report. Mr. Wilson said the Staff Report states that he would like to block “all vehicular usage”. He stated that he only wants to block all thru traffic usage in the alley. He does not want to block the alley for people entering their yards or for utility or emergency work. Mr. Wilson said the traffic in the alley is a nuisance because it is loud and dusty. The alley is narrow and is not meant to be used as a thru street. Mr. Wilson said his driveway empties into the alley on the south end. The alley is at the crest of the hill. From Yucca, you cannot see over the top of the hill to the south. From the alley, visibility is limited to the north. That information is not in the Traffic Study, said Mr. Wilson. The Staff Report says the Traffic Study “looked at the clear vision of the alley and found it to be safe and functioning well”. There is no discussion of that in the Traffic Study. Mr. Wilson said he started the encroachment process in August of 2017. We received a lot of help from the City. Mr. Wilson said that he knew about the Fire Marshals comment about an access lock. The design of the gate allows for that. Mr. Wilson said the statement from Code Compliance that a gate “would limit access for the surrounding properties to the rear of their property” would not happen with the position of the proposed gate. Mr. Wilson said the Fire Department told him that they would be able to get to the front and back of houses with a gate at his proposed location. As far as an unsafe pullout onto Knudsen that is stated in the Traffic Study, that is part of the complaint that pulling out from Yucca onto Knudsen is an unsafe intersection and, should the alley be blocked, would force an unsafe pullout at that intersection. The Traffic Study proves that the intersection is not unsafe. Mr. Wilson said another Traffic Study was done in 2016 with a similar complaint. Signs were added after that Traffic Study. Mr. Wilson said the Traffic Study was very thorough, but he thinks things were misapplied in the denial statements. Mr. Wilson said the Traffic Study brings out that neighbors are using the alley as a thru street instead of Yucca. The Traffic Study did measurements and compared it to the safety criteria. The Traffic Study said you can see 190-feet to the south from Yucca, said Mr. Wilson. You cannot see 190-feet to the north from the alley due to the blind spot. The Traffic Study says the intersection at Yucca is safe and suggests adding signs. Mr. Wilson said the alley is properly described in the Traffic Study as a 22-foot wide dirt road for utility use. Part of the City’s reasoning for not allowing the encroachment, said Mr. Wilson, is that during the seven-day Traffic Study period, there was a low volume of traffic. I agree with that, and that matched what the utility design of the alley is for. That volume is what we want to achieve with the encroachment, said Mr. Wilson. In the determination, there are some things that I believe are confused, said Mr. Wilson. That being the purpose of this meeting, to determine if the Traffic Study was properly done, I think the Traffic Study was done well. The City knew a number of things in the denial letter to us. It was directly stated that the gate was to stop thru vehicle traffic, he said. Chair Dennis said his understanding is that Mr. Wilson feels the alley is getting used as a thru street and is causing disruption for Mr. Wilson. The Traffic Study found that it was used primarily by one vehicle a day and Mr. Wilson did not feel the 7-day Traffic Study was a true statement of the actual use. Mr. Wilson said the traffic counter was put in around the 3rd of August. The data is from the week ending on the 28th , he said. The counter was in for 25 days, was vandalized, and reinstalled by the City around the 10th. It then had technical difficulties and it took 3-weeks to get 1-weeks’ worth of data. There is information from other neighbors stating in the complaints that it is used multiple times a day, said Mr. Wilson. Chair Dennis asked Mr. Wilson how much traffic he felt used the alley on a regular basis. Mr. Wilson said there are 6-8 trips a day sometimes. Board Member Martin asked if the proposed gate would be close to Mr. Wilson’s rear property. Mr. Wilson said it would be approximately 10-feet toward the direction of his property. Mr. Martin asked Mr. Wilson if the neighbor to the south used the alley. Mr. Wilson said that neighbor did use the alley. Mr. Martin asked Mr. Wilson why he was proposing to place the gate 10-feet toward his property. Mr. Wilson said that would allow the Fire Department adequate access to the properties. Mr. Martin asked who Mr. Wilson spoke with at the Fire Department. Mr. Wilson said the 10-feet, along with the lock, is what he was told by the City would be necessary. Mr. Martin asked when the problem with the alley began. Mr. Wilson said it has been ongoing for a number of years. He has asked people to stop using the alley without success, and has tried various things to make it quieter inside his home. Mr. Martin asked if it was more prevalent during the summer months when school is out. Mr. Wilson said it is about the same all year. It is people going to work and coming home or going to work and coming home for lunch. Board Member Roe asked if Mr. Wilson thought the neighbors of the 16 homes on the alleyway were the people who were using the alley or if it was outsiders using it to cut through. Mr. Wilson said it was a little of each. He said the four residents attached to the alley between Knudsen and Sage were primarily the people using the alley, but other people were using it too. Wayne Leupold, 1803 Sage Drive, said this issue affects him more than anyone else. He said he bought the home in 1991. It is safer to use the alley than to go to Yucca to access Knudsen. It is ridiculous that Mr. Wilson doesn’t want anyone to use the alley. Since Mr. Wilson has said that no one can use the alley, I haven’t used the alley, said Mr. Leupold. “One-time last summer, I was going up the alley around 3:00 in the afternoon and Mr. Wilson yelled at me to slow down. I looked at my speedometer and I was going only 11 mph”. “I think this is a waste of your time”, said Mr. Leupold. “I work in my backyard a lot and one or two people use the alley a day. The Traffic Study was correct”, said Mr. Leupold. “He got his wish. I don’t use the alley anymore. I don’t know why we are wasting our time here.” Board Member Martin asked Mr. Leupold if he notices other people using the alley. Mr. Leupold said, “Rarely”. Mr. Martin asked if teenagers used the alley. Mr. Leupold said there are not many kids living in the neighborhood. Mr. Leupold said he is the one who uses the alley the most, but he does not use it anymore. “When we moved in, everybody else moved out, said Mr. Leupold. He said Mr. Wilson has a camera focused on the alley, “He can tell you who goes up the alley any time of the day or night,” said Mr. Leupold. “I don’t use it anymore. I was the one who used it the most. He got his wish.” “Who buys a house next to an alley and doesn’t want anybody to use the alley.” “I teach at Heights (Middle School). I rarely use the alley even though I’m going east.” Rebecca Hawbecker, 1804 Sage Dr., said Mr. Wilson has a camera on the alley and he should be able to produce evidence of the 8-10 cars that are using the alley. The police have been called on this situation. Ms. Hawbecker commented on the safety of the intersection of Yucca and Knudsen. She said people are not driving fast or playing loud music when they use the alley. The cul-de-sac at Sage is sometimes crowded and there is not always room to turn around, therefore, the alley is more accommodating. Ms. Hawbecker said people use the alley to pull campers into their backyards. The alley is not being abused, she said. Ms. Hawbecker said she has lived in the neighborhood since 2000 and the alley has never been a problem until the last few years. Wilfred Hawbecker, 1804 Sage Dr., said the alley cannot be blocked. He said his gas meter was struck once and the gas company came down the alley to shut off the gas. He said he has almost been rear ended at Yucca and Knudsen. Amy Leupold, 1803 Sage Dr., said there might be a false reading in the traffic count due to Mr. Wilson’s driveway connecting to the alley where the counter was placed. She said police have been called several times and the situation is stressful. Ms. Leupold said she has not used the alley since June of 2017. Ms. Leupold said the alley is used reasonably. Mary Frances Leupold, 1803 Sage Dr., said she retired in 2008, and can see everybody who uses the alley. It is not being abused. She said her family uses the alley to gain access to their backyard. She said her family has lived in the neighborhood the longest. Ms. Leupold said there are 3 families who bought property in that area because of the alley. She said she would not be able to open the gate to her backyard if the alley was gated, and it would be a hazard if people had to back down the alley. Ms. Leupold said no one except Mr. Wilson has ever complained about the use of the alley. She said no one is using the alley as frequently as Mr. Wilson says they are. Ms. Leupold said Mr. Wilson could tell you who yanked up the traffic counter cables because Mr. Wilson has a camera focused on the alley. We never use the alley, she said. Kate Babcock, 1609 Yucca, said she has a utility trailer and it is easier to come down the alley to Knudsen. People who use the alley are usually neighbors and she doesn’t think the alley use is a problem. The intersection at Yucca and Knudsen is very scary, she said. Charles Wilson said he is not calling the police on people who are walking in the alley. He said there are other problems happening on the block and the police have a record of when he has called them. He said he has called the police and asked for help on how to stop the problem in the alley. Mr. Wilson said he has had the police called on him multiple times by neighbors. The police have suggested mediation. Mr. Wilson said the letter in the ARB Agenda Book from the Leupolds states that they use the alley 3 times a day. Mr. Wilson said that is probably accurate. He said the situation is stressful. Mr. Wilson said he has had problems in the neighborhood, his vehicle has been broken into, and that is why he has cameras. He said the police suggested cameras, lights, and a security system. Chair Dennis asked if Mr. Wilson built the house. Mr. Wilson said he moved into the neighborhood in 2001. He said he made inquiries about the use of the alley and if people would be driving that close to his house all the time. He said he was told the rules for the alley was for it to not be used as a thru street, but for utility access only. I did look up and down the alley and there are neighbors who use the alley to access their garages and they would need to use the alley. I did look at that before we moved in, he said. Board Member Cooper said the job of the ARB Board is to determine if the City did what they are supposed to do. Chapter 24, article 4 says the City may or may not grant encroachments on City property. Section 24-4-1 says no person shall encroach on, in, over, or under any real property owned by the City or any public right-of-way. The criteria for allowing encroachments are in 24-4-3(c). Conditions 1, 2, and 4 are straight forward. Condition 3 would apply only for maintenance if the petitioner were to install the gate. The City has done what they were supposed to do by following the Municipal Code. Board Member Johanson said the City stated that any encroachment to the alley should have a signed agreement by all of the adjoining property owners to the alley. That is not the case here. Board Member Martin said the City staff has gone above and beyond to accommodate the petitioner and the neighbors. Mr. Martin referred to his 40 years as an engineer and 20 years working with the City, he feels that alleys have a distinct use and need to be open for access. Administrative Review Board Action of December 6, 2018 A motion was made by Board Member Martin and seconded by Board Member Cooper to deny Petition No. ARB 18-84, and that the Community Development Director properly made a decision to deny Charles and Kim Wilson to allow a gate to encroach into a public right-of-way (alley) that abuts the southern parcel line of 1804 Knudsen Avenue in the SF-7, single-family district. AYE: Chair Cooper, Board Members Cooper, Dennis, Johanson, Martin, and Roe. NAY: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None DENIED 5-0 Discussion and Approval to reschedule or cancel the ARB meeting of July 4, 2019 A motion was made by Chair Dennis and seconded by Board Member Roe to reschedule the July meeting for July 11, 2019. Business from the Floor: There was no business from the Floor. Business from the Chair: There was no business from the Chair. Business from the Members: Board Member Cooper announced his resignation from the ARB. Business from Staff: There was no business from Staff. Adjournment: The December 6, 2018 meeting of the Administrative Review Board was adjourned at 7:27 p.m. _________________________________ ________________________________ James Dennis-Chair Karen Walker-Administrative Assistant