Administrative Review Board

A G E N D A Administrative Review Board City Council Chambers 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, NM October 6, 2022 - 6:00 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order 2. Approval of the Agenda 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes from July 7, 2022 4. Petition ARB 22-71 – a request for a variance of 5 feet to allow a 25- foot front setback for a single family home currently under construction. Current zoning is SF-10 which requires a 30-foot setback. Parcel No.R4006639. Located at 4127 Rayos Del Sol. 5. Petition ARB 22-72 – a request for a variance of 10 feet to allow a 10- foot front setback and 13 feet to allow for a 12-foot rear setback. This would allow for a double wide manufactured home on the site with a two car carport. Current zoning is MF-L which requires a 20-foot front setback and a 25-foot rear setback. Parcel No. R0031157. Located at 600-604 W. La Plata St. 6. Business from: Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 7. 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 July 7, 2022 The Administrative Review Board met in regular session on Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. in the Executive Conference Room, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. Members Present: Chair James Dennis Vice Chair Brian Erickson Carl Winters Members Absent: Shorty Rogers Staff Present: Beth Escobar Mike Safrany Tami Spencer Others Addressing the Board: David Sypher Jason Johnson Daniel Hallum Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chair James Dennis and there being a quorum present the following proceedings were duly had and taken. Approval of the Agenda Planning Manager Escobar informed the Board petition ARB 22-49 has been withdrawn from the agenda. Board Member Winters made a motion to approve the Agenda, Vice Chair Erickson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 3-0. Approval of the Minutes from the May 5, 2022 Regular Meetings Vice Chair Erickson made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 5, 2022 regular meeting. Board Member Winters seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 3-0. Swearing in of Witnesses Tami Spencer, Administrative Assistant swore in all parties that wished to speak. Open Meetings Resolution - 2022 1 A motion to approve the Open Meetings Resolution – 2022 was made by Vice Chair Erickson and seconded by Board Member Winters ____________________________________________________________________________ Petition ARB 22-45 – 606 Glade Rd. Planning Manager Beth Escobar presented the following: Variance Request • The petitioner is David Sypher, property owner and resident • Location: 606 Glade Road • Request: • The property owner is requesting a variance to 3-foot height maximum for a solid fence in the front setback. The front yard setback for the SF-10 zoning district is 30 feet. • The petitioner wishes to install a 6-foot high, solid wood fence along the property line adjacent to Glade Road to prevent trespassing from transients and animals onto his property. The fence will be setback approximately 8 feet from the back of curb along Glade Road. Applicable Code • City of Farmington Unified Development Code Section 5.4.4 Fence and wall location and height. Fence and wall locations and heights shall be as follows unless otherwise specified in this UDC: A. Residential districts. (1) Fences and walls located in required front yards (setback) shall be limited to a height of three feet at the front right-of-way line, rising evenly to a maximum of 54 inches at setback line, and thereafter a maximum of six feet; provided, however that properties approved for horses in the RA, RE-2 and RE-1 districts may have front yard fences up to four feet in height. This provision shall not apply to open wrought iron fencing with low opacity. Aerial View 2  Zoning Map Driveway Entrance from Glade Road 3  Intersection of Glade Rd. and Linden Dr. Staff Analysis 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. • This 0.80-acre lot has an unusual shape, with the residential structure being placed in the rear. The intersection of Linden Drive and Glade Road creates an oblique corner at the northeast property line. • The elevation of the property drops off towards the east and is heavily vegetated between the street and proposed location of the fence. This criterion IS 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. • A literal interpretation of the code would prohibit the petitioner from placing a 6-foot fence in the front yard setback. Because of the placement of the existing residential unit close to the rear property line, the front area of the subject property provides the space for fruit trees and a garden, uses normally allocated to the back yard. Having this area visible from the street has encouraged trespassing by people and animals. This criterion IS met 4 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 neighborhood surrounding the subject property is heavily vegetated with mature pine trees and has a rural feel. A 6-six foot high solid fence along Glade Road is a request for a minimum easing of the code allowing for a reasonable use of the land. 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 proposed variance is not injurious to the neighborhood, especially with the visibility triangle setback required for the corner intersection at Glade and Linden. • The driveway for the property to the east is approximately 200 feet from the shared property line and would not be impacted by the fence. This criterion IS met Public Notice 5  Staff Recommendation The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ARB 22-45 from David Sypher for a variance from Section 2.4.41 of the City of Farmington Unified Development Code to allow for a 6-foot high solid wood fence in the front setback with the following recommended conditions: 1. A building permit shall be required. 2. The visibility triangle for vehicle traffic at the corner of Linden and Glade Roads shall be maintained. This will be verified at the time of building permit review. Discussion: Board Member Winters asked Planning Manager Escobar where the proposed fence would be placed in relation to Glade Rd. Ms. Escobar replied in the front of the house it would be placed approximately eight ft. from the back of the curb. A discussion was started regarding the visibility triangle at the intersection of Linden Dr. and Glade Rd. Planning Manager Escobar explained the visibility triangle requires a 20 ft. set back from the road, and that the proposed fence will be approximately another eight feet back from that. She added this requirement would be verified when the building permit is obtained. Chair Dennis asked Planning Manager Escobar if the fence would be solid. She responded yes. Normally it could be a solid fence up to three ft. and the next three ft. would need to be open and be able to seen through, this is the reason for the variance request. Board Member Winters wanted to know why Mr. Sypher needed a six ft. solid fence on the front of his property. Planning Manager Escobar replied Mr. Sypher has had problems with people trespassing, people throwing the small liquor bottles on the property, and he also has a large dog which he would like to be able to let out front. David Sypher, 606 Glade Rd., Farmington, NM 87401 – Mr. Sypher stated he would like to secure his property and be able to enjoy the privacy. He also has a large deer herd that likes to eat the fruit off his fruit trees, and the trees are in peril. He also stated a lot of little shot bottles and trash are thrown on his property by vagrants/transients who are trespassing. He has had bicycles and other items stolen. Mr. Sypher also stated his concern for the visibility triangle at Linden Dr. and Glade Rd. and he has assured the Commission there would be a clear view from that intersection. Mr. Sypher used the diagram below to explain the visibility triangle, its measurements and setbacks. 6 Chair Dennis asked Mr. Sypher if he would fence in the entire property. Mr. Sypher answered there is already a six ft. solid fence around portions of his property, and he would like to finish fencing the property with the six ft. cedar slat fence, which would keep the deer and transients out. Vice Chair Erickson wanted to verify the fence would be built approximately eight ft. from the front property line. Mr. Sypher replied yes it would be. Vice Chair Erickson also wanted to confirm Mr. Sypher would have no sight obstruction pulling out of his driveway. Mr. Sypher confirmed there is no obstruction. Interested party Jason Johnson discussed with the Board setback requirements and property rights. Chair Dennis closed the public portion of the meeting. Board Discussion Board Member Winters questioned why Mr. Sypher could not use chain link rather than the cedar slat fence. Planning Manager Escobar replied a chain link fence does not provide the security or privacy Mr. Sypher is looking for. Chair Dennis feels a six ft. fence on this property, with the vegetation and trees; would not be contrary to the intent of the code. Chair called for a motion. Motion Board Member Winters made a motion to approve petition ARB 22-45 as recommended by staff. Vice Chair Erickson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 3-0. AYE: Chair Dennis, Vice Chair Erickson, and Board Member Winters NAY: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Board Member Rogers APPROVED 3-0 Petition ARB 22-49– 4601 English Rd – this petition has been withdrawn from the agenda Petition ARB 22-50 – 4200 College Blvd. Senior Planner Mike Safrany presented the following: Variance Request • Petitioner is Daniel Hallum 7  • Request is for a variance to section 5.8.7.a.(1) of the unified development code (UDC) to allow for a 96 sf free-standing sign, 12 ft. in height in a single family residential zoned area. • Zoning is SF-10: single family residential Applicable Code 5.8.7.a.(1) Principal free-standing signs: a. Allowable area. One square foot in sign area shall be allowed for each linear foot of street frontage up to a maximum of 200 square feet and limited as follows: (1) The MF, OP MU AND LNC districts are limited to a maximum of 50 square feet. (2) The CB, GC, PIP and I districts are limited to a maximum of 200 square feet. Vicinity/Zoning Map 8  AERIAL VIEW Street Front of 4200 College Blvd. 9 View from the North and South Proposed Signage 10  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 Administrative Review Board (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: Staff Analysis 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. Although the site is zoned single family residential, the site is located on a minor arterial street with several religious institutions, one elementary school, one middle school, San Juan College and Local Neighborhood Commercial zoning along the street. This criterion IS 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. A literal interpretation of the code would prohibit both a free-standing and digital sign at the subject property while other locations on the same arterial street are zoned local neighborhood commercial and office/professional and are allowed such signage. 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. This request is a minimum easing of the Unified Development Code and would allow the property owner to have the appropriate sign visibility allowed for other businesses in the area and appropriate for a minor arterial street. 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 proposed variance is not injurious to the neighborhood. The location is on a minor arterial street along with other commercial businesses, schools and religious institutions. This criterion IS met. 11  5. That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. Granting of this variance would not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the Single Family Residential Zoning 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 nonconforming uses, structures or buildings in the same district have been considered as grounds for this variance request. This criterion IS met. 7. That the applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance requested were denied. Not allowing the signage may negatively affect the applicant’s business. This criterion IS met. Public Input English Land Co. 15648 Road 250 Durango, CO 81301-8695 SJ College Attn: Business Office 4601 College Blvd. Farmington, NM 87402-4609 Socuno Limited Partnership 4800 College Blvd. Ste. 204 Farmington, NM 87402-4708 The Door of Farmington Inc. PO Box 1912 Farmington, NM 87499 TMK Montessori Trust 6650 Chamisa Ln Farmington, NM 87402 No comments have been received from the neighbors at the time of this report. CONCLUSION The Community Works Department concludes that approval of ARB 22-50 is a minimum easing of the code meets the intent of the code and is a property that has characteristics unique enough to allow for waiver of the free-standing sign restrictions. RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ARB 22-50 from Daniel Hallum for a variance from Section 5.8.7A (1) of the City of Farmington Unified Development Code to allow for a 96 square foot freestanding sign with approximately 10 square feet of digital programming area, 12 feet in height, in a single-family residential zoned area. 12  Discussion Chair Dennis asked if this sign would be allowed in General Commercial Zoning District, Senior Planner Safrany replied that is correct, he also added churches are allowed in the Single-Family Zoning District. Chair Dennis wanted the size of the sign clarified. Mr. Safrany clarified the sign will be twelve feet. tall and eight feet. wide. Chair Dennis also asked about how often the message can change and how bright the LED can be. Mr. Safrany replied the requirements for the LED are the image (pictures, as opposed to words) cannot change more frequently than once every three seconds, with the exception of time and temperature, which can change every second. Signs shall be programmed so that the lighting output temperature falls between 4,000 and 6,000 Kelvin. He also added programmable signs should be oriented to the closest street to prevent light trespass on residential areas. That is in the Unified Development Code Section 5.8.7.A (8). Board Member Winters asked Senior Planner Safrany what the other areas on the street are zoned. Mr. Safrany answered Office Professional, Local Neighborhood Commercial, San Juan College, Rural Agricultural for the golf course, and there are several religious institutions in the area that have signs. Board Member Winters also asked if there were areas zoned around this location where the sign would be allowed. Mr. Safrany replied it would be allowed in Multi Family, Office Professional, Mixed Use, LNC, Central Business, General Commercial and Industrial. Daniel Hallum, 4200 College Blvd, Farmington NM, 87402 – Mr. Hallum is wanting a sign that will go with the design of the church, he added all the residential houses are behind the church so the light from the sign should not affect them. Mr. Hallum showed a rendering of the sign to the Board: 13 Chair Dennis feels the sign is proportionate to the size of the building. Chair Dennis closed the public portion of the meeting. Board Discussion Vice Chair Erickson commented, he knows that this is zoned Single Family, but that whole area is all businesses and there is no family housing next to the church. He does not see any issues with this petition. Chair Dennis agrees and he wanted to add that in general there are a couple of these signs around town that from above would appear bright. This would not affect the houses around the church; it would affect the houses on the bluff that would to look down into town. Chair Dennis does not think this sign would be a problem; he just needed to make the Board aware of that as technology increases. There is a night sky ordinance that tries to protect the night sky. Board Member Winters added he feels Potter’s House Church did an extremely nice job with the design of the church. He feels it is very attractive, and if the sign is done in the same manner it would be appropriate to have the sign match the church. Motion Vice Chair Erickson made a motion to approve petition ARB 22-50 as recommended by staff. Board Member Winters seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 3-0. AYE: Chair Dennis, Vice Chair Erickson, and Board Member Winters NAY: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Board Member Rogers APPROVED 3-0 Business from the Floor: There was no business from the Floor. Business from the Chair: Chair Dennis complemented the Planning Division and stated he appreciates all the hard work that goes into these meetings. Vice Chair Erickson seconded what Chair Dennis said. Business from the Members: There was no business from the Board Members. Business from Staff: Planning Manager Escobar stated at the June 28th meeting, City Council directed Staff to proceed with an amendment to the Cannabis Ordinance which is Section 2.4.67 of the UDC. Council wants to change the variance and waiver procedure, for cannabis businesses to go the Planning & Zoning Commission in a public hearing then to City Council. The Council has a sensitivity about this particular business, being it has only been allowed since January and we have more activity in this business segment than anyone anticipated. The change to the ordinance has been published, and if it moves forward, it will be affective around August 1, 2022. The City Council also directed Staff to look at the hours for cannabis retailers. Currently it is from 14 8:00 am to 8:00 pm. Other cannabis retailers would also like longer hours. Their cliental tends to be shift workers that would benefit from longer hours. There will be discussions at Council for the next 30 days. There will be two additional public meetings. We will keep the Board posted. Adjournment: A motion was made by Board Member Winters to adjourn the July 7, 2022 meeting of the Administrative Review Board; Vice Chair Erickson seconded the motion. The meeting of July 7, 2022 was adjourned at 7:05 p.m. __________________________________ __________________________________ James Dennis Tami Spencer Chair Administrative Assistant 15  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB 22-71 Variance to the front setback in the SF-10, Single-family Residential District 4127 Rayos Del Sol October 6, 2022 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB 22-71 is a request from Kyle Stowell, property owner, for a variance to allow a 25-foot front yard setback from the front of the residence to the front property line. The property is located in the Vista Pinon Subdivision No. 2 in the SF-10: Single- family Residential District. Pursuant to Section 2.8, Density and Dimensional Standards, of the Unified Development Code (UDC) the SF-10 District requires a 30-foot front yard setback. The property is legally described as: Vista Pinon Subdivision No. 2 Lot 2 Bk. 1662 Pg. 366 Otherwise located at 4127 Rayos Del Sol GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant .......................... Kyle Stowell Property Owner ............... Kyle and Nichole Stowell Location of Property ....... 4127 Rayos Del Sol (1.35-Acres) Nature of Petition ............ The applicant requests a variance to the required 30-foot front yard setback to allow for a 25-foot setback for the front of the residential structure to the front property line of the subject property. Applicable Regulations ... City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): Pursuant to Section 2.8. Density and Dimensional Standards the front yard setback in the SF-10 District is 30 feet. Zoning .............................. SF-10: Single Family Residential Existing Use ..................... Vacant Surrounding Zoning/ ….. North, SF-10 and SF-7: Single Family Residential Land Use South, SF-10: Single Family Residential East, SF-10: Single Family Residential West: SF-10: Single Family Residential Public Notice……………. Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Wednesday, September 21, 2022. A sign was posted on the property on Friday, September 23, 2022. Staff Mike Safrany, Senior Planner 16  BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a variance to the required 30-foot front setback at 4127 Rayos Del Sol, in the Vista Pinon Subdivision No. 2 in the SF: Single Family Residential District. The applicant is proposing a 25-foot front yard setback from the front of the residence to the front property line. The residence is currently under construction. The setback error was discovered by the building inspector after framing had begun. The garage is to the south of the entrance and is set back approximately 50 feet from the front property line. The garage and driveway provides safe and adequate off-street parking which meets the driveway to local/collector street safe-sight triangle criteria of a 20 ft. by 20 ft. clear vision triangle found in Section 5.3.6.D of the UDC. Granting this variance will not impede the safe- sight triangle. RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL SCHEDULE STANDARD RA RE-2 RE-1 RE-20 SF-10 SF-7 SF-5 SF- SF-A MF-L MF-M MF-H MH Minimum lot area (square feet) Single-family 43,560 87,120 43,560 20,000 10,000 7,000 5,000 6,000 5,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Single-family — — — — — — — — 3,000 — — — Attached Two-family — — — — — — — — — 8,000 8,000 7,000 Multifamily — — — — — — — — — 10,500 8,000 8,000 Minimum setbacks, all uses (feet) Front 50 35 35 35 30 25 15** 15** 15** 20 20 20 Side Interior 15 15 15 15 8* 8* 5 5 5*** 8 8 8 Street 50 35 25 25 15 15 15 15 15 20 20 20 Rear 50 30 30 30 15 15 15 15 15 25 25 25 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. 17  This lot size is of 1.35-acres (58,800 sf) in an SF-10: Residential District which requires a minimum lot area of 10,000 sf. However, the rear of the lot rises significantly in elevation and extensive grading and dirt work was required including the removal of difficult sandstone to develop the property. This criterion IS 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 not deprive the applicant of the rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the surrounding area. Other developed sites on the same street adhere to the 30-foot setback. This criterion IS NOT 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 code. The variance request for a 25-foot front yard setback still meets the safe triangle sight distances for driveways and local/collector streets. Only a minor portion of the residence will protrude into the setback, the majority of the remaining building is well beyond the setback. 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 applicant has demonstrated that 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. This criterion IS met. 5. That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. The granting of this variance will not allow a use that is not otherwise allowed in the SF-10 District. 18  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 nonconforming uses, structures or buildings in the same district have been considered as grounds for this variance request. 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 intent of the setback is to prevent fire spread through the separation of buildings and principal structures of adjacent property owners. The greater front setbacks are intended in part to create a safe sight distance for vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The strict adherence to the code would restrict the reasonable use of the land and create unnecessary and substantial costs to the applicant. This criterion IS met. CONCLUSION The Community Development Department concludes that approval of ARB 22-71 is appropriate. The request is a minimum easing of the code, is in harmony with the neighborhood, and will not be injurious to the neighbors. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ARB 22- 71, a request from Kyle Stowell, for a variance to allow a 25-foot front yard setback from the front of the residence to the property line for property located at 4127 Rayos Del Sol in the Vista Pinon Subdivision No. 2 in the SF-10: Single-family Residential District and subject to the following condition(s):  The remainder of the front yard will comply with the required 30-foot setback as indicated in the UDC and in the recorded plat. 19 ZONING MAP 20 21 STREET VIEW 22 PLANNING MEMO COMMENTS SUMMARY ARB 22-71 Deadline: August 29, 2022 23 24 25 26 27 NOTIFICATION LETTERS NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP Mike Castelli and Chris 2323 San Juan Blvd Farmington, NM 87401 Leseur Jerry and Jalene Collins 4106 Old Mission Rd Farmington, NM 87401 Jack and Terri Fortner 4110 Old Mission Rd Farmington, NM 87401-2346 Wendy Sue Hageman 4220 N Buena Vista Ave Farmington, NM 87401-0812 Mois A Johnson 4220 N Buena Vista Ave Farmington, NM 87401 Spellbring Construction PO Box 1972 Farmington, NM 87499 Myron and Revis Taylor Trust 5939 E Kenwood St Mesa, AZ 85215 WEL 4108 Old Mission Rd Farmington, NM 87401-2346 INPUT FROM NEIGHBORS: No formal comments have been submitted at the time of this report. 28 29  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB 22-72 Variance to the front and rear yard setbacks in the MF-L Residential District 600-604 La Plata Street October 6, 2022 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB 22-72 is a request from Michael Smith, for a variance to allow a 10- foot front yard setback and a 12-foot rear setback for property located at 600-604 La Plata St. in Ross’s 2nd Addition Subdivision in the MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential District. Pursuant to Section 2.8, Density and Dimensional Standards, of the Unified Development Code (UDC) the MF-L Residential District requires a 20-foot front yard setback and a 25-ft. rear yard setback. The property is legally described as: Lot one (1), Block three (3) of the ROSS 2ND ADDITION SUBDIVISION; as shown on the Plat of said Subdivision. Otherwise located at 600-604 La Plata St. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant .......................... Michael Smith Property Owner ............... Michael and Jessie Smith Trust Location of Property ....... 600-604 La Plata St. (.15-Acres) Nature of Petition ............ The applicant requests a variance to the required 20-foot front setback and the 25-foot rear yard setback to allow for a 10-foot front setback and a 12-foot rear setback. The intent is to place a double-wide mobile home with a carport on the subject property. Applicable Regulations ... City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): Pursuant to Section 2.8. Density and Dimensional Standards, in the MF-L District the front yard setback is 20- feet and the rear yard setback is 25 feet. Zoning .............................. MF-L Multi-Family Residential, Low Density Existing Use ..................... Vacant Surrounding Zoning/ ….. North: MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential District Land Use South: MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential District East: MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential District West: MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential District Public Notice……………. Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Wednesday, September 21, 2022. A sign was posted on the property on Friday, September 23, 2022. Staff Mike Safrany, Senior Planner 30  BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a variance to the required 20-foot front yard and 25-foot rear yard setbacks at 600-604 La Plata Street, Lot 1, Block 3, in the Ross 2ND Addition Subdivision in the MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential District. The applicant is proposing a 10-foot front yard setback to the south property line and a 12-foot rear yard setback to the north property line on the subject property. This would allow for a 28’ x 56’ double-wide mobile home with a 25’ x 25’ carport on the site. According to the applicant, the existing building currently encroaches upon the property to the north. The existing building is a boarded up triplex which has had issues with vagrants occupying the building on numerous occasions. The property from the north property line to the south property line is 50 feet. The front of the property is on La Plata Street so a front yard setback of 20 feet and a rear yard setback of 25 feet would allow the applicant 5 feet of buildable space on the property. The minimum lot size in the MF-L District is 6,000 square feet for a single family use. The size of Lot 1, Block 3 is 6,195 square feet. A 28’ x 56’ double-wide mobile would be a total of 1,568 sf, plus a 25’ x 25’ carport would add another 625 sf for a total of 2,193 sf of buildings on the lot. The UBC Section 2.8.3.c.3.c states that the total square footage of all structures may not exceed 40% of the lot size. 40% of the 6,195 sf of lot space totals 2,478 square feet. The 2,193 square feet for the mobile home and carport meets this condition. Additionally, the safe sight triangle for a driveway to a Local/Collector street is 20 feet by 20 feet. The 10 ft. setback plus the 10 feet from the property line to the curb meets the safe sight triangle requirements. RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL SCHEDULE STANDARD RA RE-2 RE-1 RE-20 SF-10 SF-7 SF-5 SF- SF-A MF-L MF-M MF-H MH Minimum lot area (square feet) Single-family 43,560 87,120 43,560 20,000 10,000 7,000 5,000 6,000 5,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 Single-family — — — — — — — — 3,000 — — — Attached Two-family — — — — — — — — — 8,000 8,000 7,000 Multifamily — — — — — — — — — 10,500 8,000 8,000 Minimum setbacks, all uses (feet) Front 50 35 35 35 30 25 15** 15** 15** 20 20 20 Side Interior 15 15 15 15 8* 8* 5 5 5*** 8 8 8 Street 50 35 25 25 15 15 15 15 15 20 20 20 Rear 50 30 30 30 15 15 15 15 15 25 25 25 INPUT FROM NEIGHBORS: One phone call was received by staff from an effected party at 612 La Plata Street in support of the project. 31 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. Typical lots within Block 3 of this subdivision are 50 feet by 123 feet. The lots are addressed off Lorena Ave. and each lot has 50 feet of frontage along Lorena Ave. with 123 feet of depth. The subject property is the corner lot and is addressed to the south off La Plata St. and has 123 feet of frontage along La Plata St. and only 50 feet of depth. The required front and back setbacks add up to 45 feet total, allowing 5 feet of buildable area. The Ross Subdivision was platted in 1905 and did not consider enlarged corner lots to allow for setbacks. This criterion IS 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 the rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the surrounding area. Lot 1 is the corner lot in a Block of this subdivision and measures approximately 6,150 square feet, the same as the other lots on the block. Due to the front of the property being on La Plata Ave. and not on Lorena Ave. the applicant is not allowed the same buildable space within the setbacks as other identical lots of the same size on the same block. 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. 32  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 4 The requested variance is a minimum easing of the code. This variance if approved would allow the applicant to build up to 40% of the lot, this is the same amount of building space that the other lots are allowed on the same block. 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 applicant has demonstrated that 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. This criterion IS met. 5. That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. The granting of this variance will not allow a use that is not otherwise allowed in the MF-L 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 nonconforming uses, structures or buildings in the same district have been considered as grounds for this variance request. 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 intent of the setback is to prevent fire spread through the separation of buildings and principal structures of adjacent property owners. The strict adherence to the code would restrict the reasonable use of the land and/or potential improvements to the property. The proposed variance would increase the separation distance compared to the existing building which encroaches the north property line. This criterion IS met. 33  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 5 CONCLUSION The Community Development Department concludes that approval of ARB 22-72, is appropriate. The request is a minimum easing of the code, is in harmony with the neighborhood, and will not be injurious to the neighbors. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ARB 22- 72, a request from Mike Smith, for a variance to allow a 10-foot front yard setback and a 12-foot rear setback for property located at 660-604 La Plata St. in Ross’s 2nd Addition Subdivision in the MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential District. Property Line to Back of Curb 34  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 6 ZONING MAP 35  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 7 Proposed Site Plan 36  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 8 PLANNING MEMO COMMENTS SUMMARY ARB 22-72 Deadline: 9/6/22 37  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 9 38  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 10 39  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 11 40  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 12 41  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 13 42  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 14 43  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 15 44  ARB 22-72 Petition Report Page 16 NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP Wilfred C JR Billey 612 La Plata Drive Farmington, NM 87401-5543 Julio and Delores Borunda 605 W La Plata Drive Farmington, NM 87401-5542 Felix Jr and Viola Briones Trust 1017 Crestview Circle Farmington, NM 87401-9142 MJA Property LLC 2213 Camino Rio Farmington, NM 87401 Craig and Bonnie Neal Trust 2844 E Main St. Ste. 106 Farmington, NM 87402 Myron Voorhis 22 Road 2980 Aztec, NM 87410 45