Administrative Review Board

A G E N D A Administrative Review Board City Council Chambers 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, NM April 6, 2023 - 6:00 p.m. 1. Call Meeting to Order 2. Approval of the Agenda 3. Approval of Meeting Minutes from March 9, 2023 4. Petition ARB 23-09 – A request for a variance to Section 2.8.1 of the City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC) requiring a 25-foot setback from the front lot line and 15-foot setback from the street side setback. The applicant is requesting a 15 foot front setback and a 6-foot street side setback to develop a four unit apartment complex. Current zoning is SF-7, which requires a 25-foot front setback and a 15-foot rear setback. 5. Petition ARB 23-17 – Petition ARB 23-17 – A request for a variance of two sections of the City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC) requiring lighting requirements for a new gas station: 1) Section 5.11.2E (1) Illumination levels for gas station canopies. Canopies shall be limited to a maximum of 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy, and 2) Section 5.11.E that total outdoor light output, excluding streetlights used for illumination of pubic rights-of-way, of any development project shall not exceed one hundred thousand (100,000) lumens per net acre. 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 March 9, 2023 The Administrative Review Board met in regular session on Thursday, March 9, 2023 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 Brad Ballard Members Absent: None Staff Present: Mike Safrany Tami Spencer Others Addressing the Board: Ricardo Gomez Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:04 p.m. by Chair James Dennis and there being a quorum present the following proceedings were duly had and taken. Approval of the Agenda Vice Chair Erickson made a motion to approve the agenda, Board Member Ballard seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. Approval of the Minutes from the December 8, 2022 Regular Meetings Board Member Winters made a motion to approve the minutes of the February 9, 2023 regular meeting. Vice Chair Erickson seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 4-0. Swearing in of Witnesses Tami Spencer, Administrative Assistant swore in all parties that wished to speak. ____________________________________________________________________________ Petition ARB 23-06 – 916 Schofield Lane Senior Planner Mike Safrany presented the following: Variance Request • Petitioner is Ricardo Gomez • Request is to waive a required direct access to an arterial street 1  • Variance to Section 2.4.58 (D) of the Unified Development Code (UDC) • Zoning is GC: General Commercial District Applicable Code 2.4.58 (D) Vehicle Sales/Leasing Requires vehicle sales/leasing property have direct access to a major or minor arterial street. ZONING MAP Aerial Map of Subject Property 2  Aerial Map Wide View View of Property Facing North 3  View of Property Facing South Criteria 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. • The majority of Schofield Lane is zoned General Commercial between 20th Street and Main Street. The property is 500 feet north of Main Street which is also zoned commercial and is a major arterial street. There are several auto dealerships, auto repair shops and auto detailing all within 500 feet of the subject property that are addressed on Main St. and are currently in business. This criterion IS met Criteria 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. Currently there is a property on the corner of Schofield Lane and Main Street selling cars because the address is a Main Street address. One block to the East, on Main St. and Farmington Ave, the same condition exists. This criterion IS met 4  Criteria 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 applicant is proposing to use the property in a reasonable manner and this is a minimum easing of the code. The requested variance to the UDC requirement allows the applicant to use the property in a manner that is appropriate for businesses in this area and is 500 feet from an arterial street. This criterion IS met Criteria 4 & 5 • 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 to the arterial street requirement would not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The proposed business is harmonious with other businesses in the area, it provides employment and services to the community. This criterion IS met • That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. • The granting of this variance will not allow any other prohibited uses in the GC: General Commercial District. This criterion IS met Criteria 6 & 7 • 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. • That the applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance requested were denied. 5  • The applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance were to be denied. The strict adherence to UDC, Section 2.4.58 (D) Vehicle Sales/Leasing for the proposed property would deny operation of vehicle sales in this location. This criterion IS met. Public Input • No public input has been received. Recommendation The Planning Division recommends approval of Petition ARB 23-06 from Ricardo Gomez for a variance from Section 2.4.58 (D) of the City of Farmington Uniform Development Code requiring direct access to a major or minor arterial for property located at 916 Schofield Lane, in the GC: General Commercial District. Discussion The Board Asked Staff: 1. This particular code, is it specific for used car sales? Does it state anything to do with car repair? 2. I there any residential property on Schofield Ln from Main St. to 20th St.? 3. If it was to be rezoned, is there a zoning classification that would be acceptable for auto sales? 4. If the property was sold, would the variance still be in effect for this property? 5. The Board was confused with the intent of this condition, they feel these smaller lots on major arterial streets takes away from the look they would like to see. They would prefer to see them on the smaller side streets. 6. The Board feels this issue does not meet all the criteria and was self-imposed. They asked what conversations were had on the Staff level over this variance. Staff Replied: 6  1. It is strictly for auto sales or leasing. Auto repair falls under General Commercial zoning. 2. There is minimal residential properties, and some of those properties are being used for General Commercial businesses. 3. They are in General Commercial zoning, which is the proper zoning for auto sales but they would still have to have access to a minor or major arterial street. 4. Yes, it is just like a Special Use Permit (SUP) it stays with the property unless the Board sets a special condition where it would not stay. 5. Staff feels it has to do with the amount of traffic an auto sale lot could generate. 6. Staff explained that the petitioner was given a permit two years ago to sell automobiles from this location and was not informed about the minor or major arterial requirement. Now that he is renewing her permit with the State we noticed that he is in violation of that particular code. Petitioner Ricardo Gomez, 916 Schofield Ln., Farmington NM Mr. Gomez stated he has been selling used automobiles from that lot for two years now. He was wanting to register this business in his name and the State requires a zoning verification letter from the City. He came to the City and was informed that he needed to get a variance to sell automobiles from that lot. The Board Asked Mr. Gomez: 1. When you went to the City to get a new zoning varification letter, the City noticed that you were in violation of the code? 2. How many cars do you have in inventory? 3. How do you advertise? Mr. Gomez Replied: 1. Yes that is what happened, and we don’t want to have to move from that location. We are established there and have return coustomers. We also have two employees that have worked with us for years and don’t want to see them lose their jobs for months. 2. We have from 15 to 22 cars. 3. We use Facebook and people driving by on Schofield Ln. With no further discussion, Chair Dennis closed the public portion of the meeting. With no Board discussion, Chair Dennis called for a motion. Board Member Ballard made a motion to approve petition ARB 23-06 as presented by staff. Board Member Winters seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 4-0. AYE: Chair Dennis, Vice Chair Erickson, Board Member Winters and Board Member Ballard NAY: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None APPROVED 4-0 7 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: There was no business from Members Business from Staff: There was no business from Staff Adjournment: A motion was made by Vice Chair Erickson to adjourn the March 9, 2023 meeting of the Administrative Review Board; Board Member Ballard seconded the motion. The meeting of March 9, 2023 was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. __________________________________ __________________________________ James Dennis Tami Spencer Chair Administrative Assistant 8  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB 23-09 Variance to the front and side yard setbacks in the SF-7 Residential District For property located at 702 N Allen Avenue March 9, 2023 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB 23-09 is a request from Brandon Ryan, for a variance to allow a 15- foot front yard setback and a 6-foot street-side setback for property located at 702 N Allen Ave. A zone change request has also been submitted (ZC 23-10), to rezone the property to the MF-M, Multi-family Residential District from the current SF-7, Single- family Residential District. Pursuant to Section 2.8, Density and Dimensional Standards, of the Unified Development Code (UDC) the MF-M Residential District requires a 20- foot front yard setback and a 20-ft. street-side yard setback. The property is legally described as: Hays Addition Replat B Lot 1A Block 10 Bk. 1692 Pg. 452 Otherwise located at 702 N Allen Ave. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant .......................... Brandon Ryan, PROS Investments LLC Property Owner ............... Walter Matlock Location of Property ....... 702 N Allen Avenue (.25-Acres) Nature of Petition ............ The applicant requests a variance to allow for a 15-foot front setback and a 6-foot street-side setback. The applicant is also requesting a zone change to multi-family medium density so the existing church building can be converted into two rental units and two additional rental units can be added, creating four rental units on the property total. Applicable Regulations... City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): Pursuant to Section 2.8. Density and Dimensional Standards, in the MF-M District the front yard setback is 20- feet and the street-side yard setback is 20 feet. Zoning .............................. SF-7 Residential, requesting a rezone to MF-M Multi-family residential. Existing Use ..................... Vacant Church on 10,900 sf (.25 acres) Surrounding Zoning/ ….. North: SF-7, Single Family Residential District Land Use South: SF-7, Single Family Residential District East: SF-7, Legal Non-conforming Single Family Residential West: SF-7, Single Family Residential District Public Notice……………. Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Tuesday, March 21, 2023. Property owners within 100 feet were sent notice by certified mail on Monday March 27, 2023. A sign was posted on the property on Friday, March 24, 2023. Staff Mike Safrany, Senior Planner 9  BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a variance to the required 25-foot front yard and 15-foot street-side setback at 702 N Allen Ave, to allow for a 15-foot front setback and a 6-foot street-side setback. The current zoning is in the SF-7, Single-family Residential District. The existing building is currently legal non-conforming due to setback violations at the front setback and the street-side setback. A non-conforming structure shall not be enlarged or extended except in full compliance of the UDC. A 1996 survey shows the front of the building 17.7 feet from the front property line and 11 feet from the south side-street property line. The existing building appears to be angling slightly southward towards the east, further narrowing the distance from the southern property line. The applicant is also requesting a rezone with a separate petition from the SF-7 residential district to a MF-M, multifamily medium density residential district. This would require a 20-foot front setback and a 20-foot street-side setback. The lot size meets the minimum 8,000 sf lot size for a MF-M district. The existing building is 1520 square feet and will be remodeled into two rental units approximately 760 square feet each. Two additional new rental units at 24 ft. x 30 ft. each will be added onto the east end of the existing building, each unit being 720 square feet. This will add an additional 1,440 square feet to the existing 1520 square feet for an approximately 2,960 sf. building total. Off-street parking will be provided for the four units off the alley to the east of the property. Additionally, the safe sight triangle for a driveway/alley and a Local/Collector to a Local/Collector is 20 feet by 20 feet. The proposed site plan showing the new building to the property line 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: No public comment has been received at the time of this report. 10 2040 Future Land Use Plan: 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Medium Density Residential) Medium Density Residential areas primarily contain traditional gridded-street neighborhoods. New neighborhoods, or upgrades to existing neighborhoods, would provide a walkable environment intermixed with public facilities, retail services, housing, and park areas. A mix of housing options supports vibrant and inclusive neighborhoods including townhomes, duplexes, and live/work units, and group care facilities. Limited high-density would also be appropriate in this area. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) or detached apartments are allowed in this area on single-family structures with administrative review. Planning trends show housing opportunities should be available for all income groups with a diverse mix including duplexes, townhouses, apartments, condominiums, workforce housing, and single-family homes ranging in size. A community must guard against an abundance of subdivisions in similar and repetitive densities, appearances, and price ranges. 11  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 4 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. The existing legal, non-conforming building was built before the current zoning regulations. The location of the existing building is not the result of self-imposed actions by the applicant. The proposed floor plan totals 2,960 sf and meets the density requirements for the proposed zoning. 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. The current property is legal non-conforming due to the structure located within the setback and can therefore not be enlarged or extended. 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 code. This variance if approved would allow the applicant to build up to 40% of the property. Other lots in the same district are allowed the same amount of building space. This criterion IS met. 12  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 5 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-M 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 property would remain legal non-conforming preventing the owner from any expansion or alterations of the existing building, and thereby preventing the full maximization of the potential of the site. The community would also be denied an opportunity for infill redevelopment of housing options, a goal promoted by the 2040 City of Farmington Comprehensive Plan. This criterion IS met. 13  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 6 CONCLUSION The Community Development Department concludes that approval of ARB 23-09, 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 23- 09, a request from Brandon Ryan, for a variance to allow a 15-foot front yard setback and a 6-foot street-side setback for property located at 702 N Allen Ave. with the following conditions: 1. The developer must obtain all necessary building permits and must meet the requirements of the UDC Article 5 – Development Standards. 2. A building/fire inspection shall be required. 3. A zone change from SF-7, Single-family Residential to MF-M, Multi-family medium density residential must be approved. 14  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 7 ZONING MAP 15  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 8 EXISTING SITE PLAN PROPOSED SITE PLAN 16  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 9 AERIAL VIEW OF EXISTING SITE PROPOSED SITE PLAN W/ BACKGROUND 17  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 10 PROPOSED BUILDING SECTIONS 18  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 11 19  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 12 20  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 13 21  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 14 22  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 15 23  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 16 24  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 17 25  ARB 23-09 Petition Report Page 18 NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP Tammy Abeyta 706 N Allen Ave. Farmington, NM 87401 Kirk Cross and Tammy Morris 615 N Allen Ave. Farmington, NM 87401 Elouise Dickenman 420 7th Ave. NE Farmington, NM 87124 Earth Properties LLC 2844 E Main St. Ste 106 Farmington, NM 87402 Avalyn Harris 709 N Orchard Ave. Farmington, NM 87401 Dennis and Melody Ivie 201 Taylor Dr. Farmington, NM 87401-6075 Roger and Marcie Loudermilk 6135 Lake Shore Dr. Flora Vista, NM 87415 Sophia Newton 710 N Allen Ave. Farmington, NM 87401 Linda Ritta 616 N Allen Ave. Farmington, NM 87401 Susan Ann Sledge 302 N Loma Linda Farmington, NM 87401 James Robert Tansey 613 N Orchard Ave. Farmington, NM 87401 Matlock Real Estate Holdings 1348 Avenida Del Sol Durango, CO 81301 26  ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB 23-17 1) Variance of the UDC, Section 5.11.2.E (1) Canopies for Gas Stations shall be limited to a maximum of 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy, and 2) Variance of the UDC, Section 5.11.E Total outdoor light output, excluding streetlights used for illumination of public rights-of-way, of any development project shall not exceed one hundred thousand (100,000) lumens per net acre, averaged over the entire property. April 6, 2023 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB 23-17 is a request from Andres Villacres for a variance of the UDC, Section 5.11.2.E (1) Canopies for gas stations shall be limited to 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy. A variance is also requested of the UDC, Section 5.11.E that total outdoor light output, excluding streetlights used for illumination of public rights-of- way, of any development project shall not exceed one hundred thousand (100,000) lumens per net acre, averaged over the property located at 4179 E. Main St., in the GC: General Commercial District. The property is legally described as: FARMINGTON CENTER SUBDIVISION LOT 1 BK. 1674 PG.16. Otherwise located at 4179 E Main St. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant .......................... Andres Villacres Property Owner ............... Tyler Call (CFO) Location of Property ....... 4179 E. Main St. (R6002339) - 1.44 Acres Nature of Petition ............ The applicants request a variance of the UDC requiring gas station canopies be limited to 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy and outdoor light output not exceed one hundred thousand (100,000) lumens per net acre. Applicable Regulations... City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): Pursuant to UDC, Section 5.11.2.E (1) Canopies for gas stations and UDC, Section 5.11.E total outdoor light output. Zoning .............................. GC: General Commercial Existing Use ..................... Vacant lot Surrounding Zoning/ ….. North: GC, Commercial Retail Businesses Land Use South: GC, Commercial Retail Businesses East: GC, Commercial Retail Businesses West: GC, Commercial Retail Businesses Public Notice……………. Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Tuesday, March 21, 2023. Property owners within 100 feet were sent notice by certified mail on Monday March 27, 2023. A sign was posted on the property on Friday, February 24, 2023. Staff Mike Safrany, Senior Planner 27 BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a variance of the UDC, Section 5.11.2.E (1) Canopies for gas stations shall be limited to 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy. A variance is also requested of the UDC, Section 5.11.E that total outdoor light output, excluding streetlights used for illumination of public rights-of-way, of any development project shall not exceed one hundred thousand (100,000) lumens per net acre, averaged over the property. Resources and information provided by darksky.org concludes that lighting up the nighttime environment does not necessarily improve safety or security. This may seem contradictory, but there is no clear scientific evidence that increased outdoor lighting deters crime and increases safety. Effective lighting that helps people be safe, not just feel safe, is a win-win situation for everyone. A safer environment can be created while keeping light natural. Here are a few rules provided by darksky.org to follow: • Use fully shielded, dark sky friendly fixtures. That means lights shine down, not up, and do not create glare and contrasts. • Only use lights where and when needed. Install timers and dimmer switches, and turn off lights when not in use. • Use the right amount of light. Too much light is wasteful and impairs vision. • Use long-wavelength lights with a red or yellow tint to minimize negative health effects. • Good lighting design can mitigate glare. Cities and towns can restrict the use of bright signs and flashing lights near roadways. INPUT FROM NEIGHBORS: One phone call from an effected party was received in support of the variance. 28 Figure 1. Zoning Map 29  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 4 Figure 2. San Juan County Assessor's Map 30  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 5 Figure 3. Proposed Site Plan 31  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 6 Figure 4. View of property facing northeast Figure 5. View of property facing southeast 32  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 7 Figure 6. View of Property Facing West 33  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 8 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. The property is 1.44 acres and is located directly adjacent to E. Main St. There is existing street lighting along the right-of-way and the applicant is allowed 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy. In addition the parking area is allowed up to one hundred thousand (100,000) lumens per net acre, averaged over the entire property. Street lights and non-shielded accent lighting, such as landscape lighting does not count towards the maximum lumens allowable for a project. No special conditions or circumstances have been identified. 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 Community Works Department reviews all developments within this commercial district, and adheres to Section 5.11 Outdoor Lighting requirements of the UDC. The intent of the code is to regulate the brightness and glare for traffic safety and to minimize the impact on neighboring properties; this does not deprive the applicant the right to illuminate the subject property consistent with other businesses along E. Main St. 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 intent of the code is to regulate the brightness and glare for traffic safety and to minimize the impact on neighboring properties. The applicant has not 34  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 9 demonstrated that the proposed lighting will be a minimum easing of the code or the effects of glare will have a minimum impact on traffic and neighbors. This criterion IS NOT 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 business is harmonious with other businesses in the area, and also provides employment and services to the community. However, granting a variance to allow brighter lighting and additional glare to the area could be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. This criterion IS NOT 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 any other prohibited uses in the GC: General Commercial 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 not suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance were to be denied. The strict adherence to Section 5.11.2.E (1) Canopies for gas stations limited to 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy, and Section 5.11.E limiting outdoor light output to 100,000 lumens per net acre for the proposed property would not deny or limit operations of the business in this location. This criterion IS NOT met. 35  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 10 CONCLUSION The Community Works Department concludes that approval of ARB 23-17 is NOT a minimum easing of the code, does NOT meet the intent of the code and that it is NOT a property that has characteristics unique enough to allow for waiver of the outdoor lighting for gas station canopies and the total outdoor light output. RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends denial of Petition ARB 23-17 from Andres Villacres, for a variance of the UDC, Section 5.11.2.E (1) Canopies for gas stations shall be limited to 20 initial lamp lumens per square foot of canopy. The Community Works Department also recommends denial for a variance of the UDC, Section 5.11.E that total outdoor light output, excluding streetlights used for illumination of public rights-of-way, of any development project shall not exceed one hundred thousand (100,000) lumens per net acre, averaged over the property. 36  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 11 37  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 12 38  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 13 39  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 14 40  ARB 23-06 Staff Report Page 15 NOTICE SENT TO PROPERTIES LOCATED WITHIN 100 FEET NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP Carl and Wanda Cordell 5207 Hubbard Rd. Farmington, NM 87402 Henry Martinez 4102 Gila St. Farmington, NM 87401-8732 Malcolm and Helen McClellan PO Box 1159 Deerfield, IL 60015 Real Estate Pros LLC 4100 E Main St. Farmington, NM 87402 Red Shamrock 12 LLC PO Box 92558 Albuquerque, NM 87199 United Laundries Inc. 732 W Arrington St. Farmington, NM 87401 Western Refining Retail LLC PO Box 592809 Tx1-047 San Antonio, TX 78259 41