Metropolitan Redevelopment Agency Commission

A G E N D A Tuesday, July 16, 2019 - 4:00 p.m. HQ, 119 W. Main Street Farmington, NM 1. Call to Order 2. Approval of the June 11, 2019 Minutes 40 3. Discussion: Vacant Building Ordinance White Paper 1 4. Brownfield Workshop Discussion – Jill Tanis 19 5. Main Street Complete Streets Update – Sherry Roach 30 a. Right-of-Way Dedications on Downtown Main St. 6. Downtown Farmington Update – Michael Bulloch 7. Business From: a. Floor b. Chair c. Members d. Staff 8. Adjournment ATTENTION PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES: The meeting room and facilities are fully accessible to persons with mobility disabilities. If you plan to attend a meeting and need an auxiliary aid or service, please contact the City Clerk's office at 599-1101 or 599-1106, prior to the meeting so arrangements can be made Vacant Building Ordinance White Paper New Mexico MainStreet New Mexico Economic Development Department www.nmmainstreet.org April 2019 1 Rhea L. Serna Revitalization Specialist Property Redevelopment New Mexico MainStreet 415-519-5659 rheaserna@gmail.com Problem............................................................................................................................. 4 Needs and Challenges................................................................................................... 5 Solutions: Registration, Tracking, and Penalties.................................................... 7 Progressive Fees for Vacant Commercial Buildings............................................... 9 Metropolitan Redevelopment Area - MRA.............................................................. 10 Tax Assessment............................................................................................................ 10 Case Studies................................................................................................................... 11 Conclusion and Recommendations........................................................................... 12 Appendix A: Vacant Building Ordinance Comparison........................................ 14 Appendix B: Sample Vacant Property Registration Form................................... 17  Problem Vacant commercial buildings once housed vibrant storefront commercial businesses that at one point generated a profit. Examples of these commercial or retail uses include “five and dime” stores, offices, and restaurants. Now vacant, many of these commercial buildings are either historic, architecturally significant, or located within designated historic districts. These buildings contribute to a MainStreet’s unique character and its potential to revitalize. The challenge for potential property developers is that these vacant commercial buildings, which were once banks, hotels, department stores, churches, and theaters, may be costly to adapt, rehabilitate and repurpose for other uses. When commercial buildings stay vacant, their declining status leads to blight, discourages economic development, diminishes property values, and can act as fire hazards and magnets for crime. Some vacant commercial property owners use their buildings for storage, in the same way a residential neighbor might use their broken car or RV for storage. In many cases, the building is “under-utilized,” in that it does not economically perform as a commercial structure would in generating income for the business/property owner and gross receipts tax (GRT) for the local government . Unmaintained vacant commercial buildings “Blight has a negative effect in New Mexico MainStreets’ commercial on surrounding property values, corridors create a negative and unwelcoming impression. Property owners of vacant 4 which not only hurts adjacent commercial buildings and properties need property owners but reduces local to be held accountable for maintaining their buildings and properties, however motivating property tax revenue.” them to either lease their spaces or seek buyers Rich Williams to purchase their buildings is a complicated Co-Director of New Mexico MainStreet challenge for municipalities. Additionally, many property owners live outside the community, or even in other states. Some property owners may also purposely maintain the vacant status of their buildings by inflating the lease rates beyond what the market can support to report lost revenue and decrease their personal tax liabilities. Properties that are vacant over time become the victims of deferred maintenance, leading to problems with the building’s roof, foundation, electrical, plumbing, and HVAC systems. Under such conditions, buildings become dilapidated and irreparable and can be declared a public nuisance, or even demolished, further burdening taxpayers with the demolition and vacant lot remediation costs. In fact, “vacant lots can remain undeveloped for decades.”1 Local governments are forced to prioritize whether to undertake the costs associated with removal of these abandoned buildings, and remediation of derelict properties or providing for the community’s basic needs, such as sanitation, water, street repairs, fire and police protection. Without oversight from local governments in partnership with a local revitalization organization, 1 Rich Williams, Co-Director of New Mexico MainStreet vacant buildings and properties’ diminish economic opportunities and can affect a community’s economic health and opportunity, safety, and general welfare. Need and Challenges Local governments have options when it comes to motivating property owners to “do something” with their vacant buildings. Numerous municipalities throughout the United States have implemented ordinances2 that require owners to register their vacant buildings and properties as well as maintain them.3 The primary objective of a “vacant building ordinance” is to control the proliferation of vacant buildings and lots. Protection of a community’s health, safety, and welfare provide the legal defense for local municipalities to enact strong anti-neglect ordinances. Passing such ordinances, however, requires dedicated resources for both pulling stakeholders together to create the ordinance and then redirecting staff time or adding additional staff to enforce it. According to Sheila Hudman, Clerk/Treasurer of the Village of Santa Clara, approval of the Santa Clara’s vacant building ordinance required eight public meetings and overall took considerable time to pass. The village wanted to include a hardship exemption in the ordinance to appease public resistance. Community members were concerned that elderly property owners of vacant buildings would be unnecessarily penalized. Despite this intent, the village did not include the exemption in the final approved ordinance. Most municipalities with ordinances regulate all vacant properties, including residential, commercial, 5 and industrial buildings. Only a small number of municipalities have focused their regulatory remedies on explicitly reducing the number of vacant commercial buildings. The City of Albuquerque’s proposed “Vacant Commercial Building Ordinance”4 would have adopted a new article in the city’s zoning code, requiring all vacant commercial property owners to register their properties, and apply minimum aesthetic standards.5 Boarded-up windows and doors would only be allowed for up to 18 0 days. Owners that violated the ordinance would be subject to a daily $50 0 fine and other penalties. Vacant commercial properties that remained unmaintained within a year would be subject to demolition. City staff raised concerns regarding enforcement (hiring new personnel) and material costs (estimated at $ 9 0 0,0 0 0 for demolitions). The outcry from the real estate industry led to the proposed ordinance never making it to a vote before the city council, and it died on expiration. Instead of the proposed ordinance, the Albuquerque City Council approved the “Dilapidated Commercial Buildings and Properties Pilot Project”6 in late 2 017. Since July 2 018, the City had 2 Despite the risk of lawsuits from real estate lobbyists and private commercial property owners. 3 See Appendix B, Sample Vacant Building/Property Registration Form 4 O-16-11, sponsored by City Councilors Pat Davis (District 6) and Don Harris (District 9) was proposed in early 2017. The bill’s sponsors wanted to deter the proliferation of vacant buildings that were deteriorating, becoming blighted, and negatively affecting surrounding properties and property values. 5 Removal of weeds and trash, posting "no trespassing" signs, fixing holes in exterior walls, and cleaning up graffiti. 6 The pilot project regulated dilapidated commercial buildings and properties in District 6 (Albuquerque's Southeast Heights, including UNM, Nob Hill, and the International District) and District 9 (the far Southeast Heights and Foothills). District 2 which covers Downtown and Barelas was not included in the pilot.  identified 3 0 dilapidated commercial structures, issued warnings, and attempted to negotiate solutions with property owners. The city issued 60-day notices to property owners that failed to respond to the warnings. If the property owner failed to take action after the issuance of the warning, the city attorney had the authority to file a complaint in district court and issue penalties as high as $50 0 a day. The city allocated $425,0 0 0 for the pilot’s annual budget, which included $3 0 0,0 0 0 for securing or demolishing neglected structures. Despite the pilot program’s success in targeting vacant commercial buildings in the two districts, the city council instead chose to amend the city’s Uniform Housing Code with its “Vacant Building Maintenance” ordinance.7 Under this version of the ordinance, owners of any vacant building must obtain a vacant building maintenance license and arrange an inspection with Albuquerque Code Enforcement to ensure the building is secure, structurally safe, free from nuisance, and in good order. If repairs or upkeep are needed, the building owner has 45 days to bring their building into compliance. While the ordinance requires the maintenance and upkeep of all vacant structures, it does allow buildings to remain empty as long as they are maintained and licensed. Enforcement of a vacant building ordinance is another challenge municipalities face. The Town of Silver City, NM has deemed its “Regulation of Unattended Vacant Buildings Ordinance”8 as “unenforceable.” The ordinance requires vacant buildings owners, within its historic downtown district, to register their properties with the town, secure their buildings’ openings (windows and doors), and remove weeds, trash, and graffiti. Some of the ordinance’s shortcomings include: 6 • No requirement for out of town owners to assign a local agent; • No section on either “appearance standards” or “external appearance” which would require owners to paint, maintain landscaping, and weatherproof their buildings;9 • No provision allowing the town manager to determine whether the vacant building is “detrimental to property values or the character of the neighborhood.”10 Vacant building ordinances should be structured to discourage property owners from continually maintaining their buildings as vacant. The Silver City ordinance’s fee schedule is relatively low with only a $35 deposit required for the building’s initial inspection, and a penalty fee of only $ 10 0 for failing to register their vacant building or property. Finally, it is the owner’s responsibility to register their property and file status reports every 3 0 days, without the town’s enforcement. It is not only small towns like Silver City that struggle to enact an enforceable ordinance, but even a large city/county like San Francisco is challenged with how to deter the proliferation of vacant buildings and properties. In 2 0 0 9 San Francisco adopted its first Vacant or Abandoned Building 7 Enacted in December 2018 8 Enacted in in October 2012 9 Village of Santa Clara's "Registration, and Maintenance of Neglected Vacant Residential and Commercial Structures" ordinance 10 “Vacant building maintenance license; maintenance standards for vacant buildings”, City of Tucumcari, NM and City of Las Vegas, NM Ordinance (VABO)11. The law required owners to register their vacant or abandoned buildings, pay registration fees, secure their properties to deny access to would-be trespassers, and provide proof of liability insurance coverage. VABO initially exempted buildings with a vacant commercial storefront and an occupied second floor from the ordinance. The city/county amended the ordinance in 2 014 to remove this loophole, resulting in any property containing vacant or abandoned commercial storefronts to comply with the following:12 • Rent their retail or office storefronts to tenants who occupy the premises in compliance with all state and local laws; or • Pay a fee of $765 . 0 0 to include their commercial storefronts in the Registry of Vacant or Abandoned Commercial Storefronts.13 The amended ordinance allowed owners of commercial storefronts to demonstrate that they were making a good faith effort to rent, lease, or sell their commercial storefronts, or obtain a building permit to bring their commercial storefronts into compliance with the law. This exemption inadvertently created another loophole for property owners, who would perpetually place a “for lease” sign in their building’s storefront and/or list the property’s availability online. As of March 2 019, the Board of Supervisors is once again amending the VABO with the following requirements: • Required registration of a vacant or abandoned commercial storefront, regardless of whether it is actively being offered for rent or lease; 7 • Payment of the annual registration fee, with a refund up to one half for storefronts occupied before their registration’s expiration; • Annual registration renewal must include an inspection report from a licensed professional (at the owner’s expense) verifying the storefront remains in compliance with the VABO’s maintenance requirements; • A penalty fee for failure to register a vacant commercial storefront equal to four times the annual registration fee ($3 , 0 6 0). These amendments are intended to create an enforceable ordinance that will reduce the number of vacant storefronts throughout San Francisco’s numerous commercial corridors.14 Solutions: Registration, Tracking, and Penalties The two municipalities highlighted below have both sought to reduce the number of vacant buildings 11 Building Code Section 103A.4 et. seq., 12 Within 270 days of their commercial storefronts becoming vacant or abandoned 13 This fee shall be assessed on an annual basis for each year that a commercial storefront remains vacant or abandoned. 14 Changes in San Francisco’s retail environment may also contribute to the ongoing vacancies, including: “the internet, rapidly changing consumer habits, code issues, e.g., Formal Retail restrictions, burdensome regulatory requirements on both the building owner and the possible tenants that lease space,” John Bozeman, Building Owners and Managers Association of San Francisco  in their jurisdictions through their regulatory powers. Willits, CA and the Village of Santa Clara, NM are small cities15 founded during the same period (the 1860s). In 2 018, the City of Willits enacted an ordinance which penalizes vacant commercial building owners who both ignore the upkeep of their properties as well as delay the sale or lease of these properties. The Village of Santa Clara, in Grants County, New Mexico enacted its “Registration, and Maintenance of Neglected Vacant Residential and Commercial Structures” ordinance in September 2 016.16 Santa Clara’s ordinance ensures the “appropriate maintenance of vacant residential and commercial structures so that unsanitary conditions, unsafe deterioration, and unauthorized entry will be prevented and do not become a public nuisance.” The village started to enforce the ordinance in the downtown district, then phased in its enforcement throughout the entire village. Specific provisions of the Santa Clara ordinance include: • Certification from either the Village Police Chief or the Fire Chief that the property is a “neglected vacant structure;”17 • Notification to the property owner of their responsibility to register their vacant building within thirty days18 and initiate repairs to minimize the appearance of neglect, and secure their structure from unauthorized entry. As long as the vacant building is registered, maintained, and secured, the owner has met the intent of the ordinance and the Village of Santa Clara will consider waiving ongoing registration fees. Property 8 owners that fail to register their buildings could face court imposed fines.19 Continuous neglect of a structure may also lead to the village declaring the neglected vacant structure a public nuisance.20 Legally, the village has the power to place liens on properties and enact foreclosures, but officials contend that they prefer to work out an improvement plan with property owners and avoid legal actions. Since the ordinance’s approval, several property owners have fixed up their buildings and in some cases rented them. Moreover, because Santa Clara’s ordinance also regulates fire damaged vacant buildings, four property owners have demolished their structures. The Willits “Vacant Commercial Building Ordinance,” focuses solely on vacant commercial properties, and goes beyond requiring property owners to maintain and secure their buildings through the following two provisions: • “Out of area” commercial property owners 21 are required to hire a property manager; 15 Both Willits (population 4875) and Santa Clara (population 1800) have seen a continual decrease in their populations since the 2000 census (4% and 7% respectively). 16 An amendment to their existing Health, Sanitation, and Environment Code (Title 4). 17 Defined by the ordinance as a structure or building (including a mobile home) that is vacant and not maintained. 18 The annual registration fee of $300 is prorated and can be paid in installments of $25/month. As long as the premises continue to be designated as a “neglected vacant structure", the fee will continue and will increase each calendar year an additional $100, for a maximum fee of $500 annually. 19 Court imposed penalties could include a maximum fine of $500 or ninety days imprisonment. 20 Such a declaration occurs when the owner fails to maintain their vacant structure in accordance with the State of NM sanitary codes, building codes, and fire codes. 21 A vacant commercial building owner who lives more than 50 miles from Willits. • All owners must prove to the city that they are actively offering their buildings for sale, lease, or rent. While these requirements are meant to counteract a property owner’s practice of maintaining the empty status of the building, proving to the city that vacant buildings are “actively being offered for sale, lease, or rent” may allow too many owners to maintain their properties as vacant, as was the case in San Francisco. Another loophole that the Willits ordinance may have created rests in making the property owner responsible for registering their buildings after 9 0 days of vacancy. In comparison, Santa Clara’s ordinance requires a certification of the building’s status from the police or fire chief. Finally a best practice that both Willits and Santa Clara have undertaken is the offsetting of the costs to enforce their respective ordinances through the collection of registration and penalty fees. And both municipalities also require property owners to secure their buildings against squatters and maintain their physical condition. For a detailed comparison of the Santa Clara and Willits ordinances, see Appendix A. Progressive Fees for Vacant Commercial Properties The City of Tucumcari’s “Vacant building maintenance license; maintenance standards for vacant buildings”22 requires vacant property owners that do not live or work in Quay County to designate a local authorized agent as part of the licensing process. The local agent becomes responsible for receiving and acting upon all notices related to code violations and court proceedings affecting the vacant building. 9 The Tucumcari ordinance also requires vacant building owners to obtain a certificate of insurance for commercial liability. The City of Las Vegas, NM also passed a “Vacant buildings maintenance license; maintenance standards for vacant buildings” ordinance (Chapter 148 -5) that except for the fee schedule is almost identical to the Tucumcari ordinance. The fees for licensing and renewals of vacant commercial buildings in Las Vegas are considerably less, in comparison to Tucumcari: Vacant Commercial Building License Fees City of Tucumcari City of Las Vegas Processing $50 $50 License $350 $3 0 0 First Year Renewal $50 0 $ 150 Subsequent Renewals $ 10 0 0 $150 Whereas the license and registration fees for vacant residential buildings are considerably less in both municipalities: Vacant Residential Building License Fees City of Tucumcari City of Las Vegas Processing $ 25 $ 25 License $200 $ 150 First Year and Subsequent Renewals $200 $ 150 22 Ord. No. 1124; 7.10.040, 2015  Both Tucumcari and Las Vegas state that multiple year renewals of the vacant building maintenance license are discouraged with few exceptions.23 The City of Tucumcari’s progressive renewal fee for licensing vacant commercial buildings starts at $50 0 for the first year and then doubles to $ 10 0 0 for subsequent renewals. These fees are substantial and can significantly increase a property owner’s costs of maintaining their commercial property as vacant. Metropolitan Redevelopment Area (MRA) The recently updated Metropolitan Redevelopment Area Plan of Las Vegas, NM (2 018) addresses the city’s concern about its vacant, abandoned and unsafe buildings within its downtown and MRA. The plan inventories vacant lots and buildings and encourages property owners to maintain, rehabilitate and occupy their buildings for productive purposes. The plan recommends that the city establish the following incentives and disincentives: • Establish a “Clean & Lien” ordinance;24 • Require annual inspections of vacant buildings; • Identify funding sources for property owners to rehabilitate buildings; • Connect property owners with nonprofit organizations, entrepreneurs, and other potential tenants; 10 • Research methods to streamline or fast-track the permitting process for restoring vacant historic properties; • Prioritize adaptive reuse over demolition when possible. Tax Assessment The State of New Mexico’s Property Tax Code does not allow jurisdictions to assess vacant properties to penalize abandonment.25 26 States that enable municipalities to assess an additional tax on a vacant property27 generally work well in areas with high land values.28 An additional tax increases a 23 Exceptions to multiple year renewals include: historical buildings, landmarks, buildings in redevelopment areas, and other properties that are subject to unique factors or conditions that require special consideration. 24 Would provide the city with the legal remedyto demolish unsafe buildings in the MRAand encourage new private construction to replace demolished buildings. 25 Information is from Randy Kincaid, Assessor and Mark Willard, Chief Appraiser of Chaves County via NM Counties Listserve 26 “County assessors neither impose nor collect taxes. Assessors only value property that may be subject to property tax. Property taxes are collected by the county treasurer and taxes are imposed by numerous taxing entities, such as municipalities, counties, schools, universities/colleges, the state, water districts, etc. So, if a county or municipality can legally impose a property tax on vacant property, that additional tax will appear on the tax rolls sent to treasurer who, in turn, will send the tax bill to the property owner.” (Ken Milder, Los Alamos County Assessor via NM Counties Listserve) 27 Ball Ground, GA and San Francisco, CA are considering the use of tax assessments on vacant buildings. 28 In Washington, D.C. and Pittsburgh, “land value tax” assessments on vacant properties are used to improve blight areas and raise revenue. landowner’s cost of holding on to an unused property and can motivate an owner to either develop or sell their properties. Some municipalities tax land and structures separately.29 In Pittsburgh, a land value tax only applies to vacant properties within the city’s Business Improvement District (BID).30 In Oakland, voters approved the state’s first tax on privately owned vacant properties in November 2 018.31 The City of Oakland estimates that the parcel tax32 could raise as much as $ 10 million annually for homeless services, blight remediation, and new affordable housing.33 34 Nonprofits and low-income owners are exempt from the tax, as well as others who can prove financial hardship. The measure also exempts owners who can demonstrate that specific circumstances prevent the use or development of their land. Case Studies The following examples of public-private partnerships, inter-agency coordination, and technological innovations are helping municipalities to register and track vacant properties: • The Downtown Memphis Anti-Neglect Initiative 35 requires an owner to either improve, rent, or sell a vacant property, otherwise the court can take possession and appoint a third party receiver to handle the property. Once the City of Memphis identifies a high-priority property, the Downtown Memphis Commission (DMC)36, initiates a development plan in coordination with the property owner. If conditions do not improve over four years, the City of Memphis files a nuisance lawsuit against the neglectful property owner. 11 • In 2 0 14 New Orleans’ Mayor Mitch Landrieu streamlined the process for remediating blighted properties by implementing a new computerized system to track code enforcement and permitting. To coordinate the blight-reduction efforts of various city agencies, the Landrieu administration created “BlightSTAT,” a process in which representatives from the Department of Code Enforcement, the Office of Community Development, the Office of Information Technology and Innovation, the Law Department, and the New Orleans Redevelopment Authority meet to set goals and report on progress. • The Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kansas worked in 29 According to the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, administering such a system can be difficult to implement. 30 The taxing of vacant properties has led to many owners not paying their taxes and letting the city seize their property. Use of a land bank would allow the municipality to acquire vacant properties and then work with developers (for-profit and nonprofit) to develop the properties for uses such as affordable housing or green spaces (https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/ blogs/stateline/2017/03/07/can-extra-taxes-on-vacant-land-cure-city-blight) 31 https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/networth/article/Oakland-s-vacant-property-tax-takes-effect-13563273.php 32 The parcel tax is a flat amount since California law does not allow cities to tie a parcel tax to market values. 33 http://www.capradio.org/122091 34 Owners of properties in use fewer than 50 days per year are taxed $6,000 per parcel annually. 35 The Downtown Memphis Anti-Neglect Initiative developed and implemented the Tennessee Neighborhood Preservation Act. The Initiative's mission is to eliminate blight, improve or stabilize long-term neglected properties, and/or move owners of problem downtown vacant properties towards proper maintenance and full use or eventually demolition or sale. 36 A local public-private partnership  partnership to implement an online registry 37 to track negligent property owners and their vacant properties. Previously, Wyandotte County would send code enforcement to investigate complaints and issue orders to secure properties. Under the new registry guidelines, vacant property owners are required to register their properties, pay a $ 2 0 0 registration fee 38, and submit a detailed plan for improving the property.39 Owners that do not improve their buildings risk having the properties declared a public nuisance and possibly even condemned through the courts. Condemned properties either get sold at a public auction or transferred to Kansas City’s land bank. If a property has too many structural issues, the city will demolish it. In 2 0 17 the Kansas legislature introduced a bill that that would have improved the process for local governments and nonprofits to obtain abandoned properties. The bill died in committee in early 2 0 1 8.40 Conclusion and Recommendations Most of New Mexico MainStreet’s commercial corridors contain vacant and abandoned commercial properties. Owners that neglect their properties place stress on the communities where they are located and deter downtown revitalization efforts. Several Mayors across the state have expressed interest in addressing vacant property issues. Enacting and implementing an effective vacant commercial building ordinance can help local governments and MainStreet organizations halt and reverse the negative impacts of vacant and abandoned buildings. 12 For a municipality to create an effective and enforceable vacant building ordinance, the following provisions should be included: 1. Enforced registration of vacant buildings through interagency coordination; 2. Required annual inspections of vacant buildings; 3. Maintain a registry of vacant buildings; 4. Include minimum aesthetic requirements; 5. Negotiate with property owners to provide an improvement plan before assessing penalty fees or taking action through the court system; 6. Require out of town owners to assign a local agent; 7. Penalty and registration renewal fees should be progressive and increase over time; 8. Owners need to provide proof of liability insurance upon registration; 37 PROCHAMPS partners with communities to combat neighborhood blight through property registration. https://prochamps.com/ HomePage.aspx?CommunityId=0 38 The fee is split between Wyandotte County and the on-line registry provider, ProChamps. 39 The registry is part of Kansas City's SOAR program (Stabilization, Occupation and Revitalization), a five-year plan to address blighted residential buildings. 40 https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/kansas-city-kansas-rolling-out-new-registry-to-track-down-negligent-property-owners 9. Phase in implementation of the ordinance, starting with the MainStreet district or principal downtown corridors. Finally, aside from distributing this white paper to MainStreet organizations and local government officials, New Mexico MainStreet will assist in promoting the implementation of vacant building ordinances through the following activities: • Presentations, in coordination with the almost 3 0 affiliated MainStreet districts, at both the local level and at the following annual conferences: New Mexico Municipal League, New Mexico Infrastructure Finance, and New Mexico Association of Counties; • Convening a working group of local leaders, in coordination with New Mexico MainStreet/ Economic Development Department, to develop policy recommendations to address the issue better. 13 14 15 16 17 18  ENGAGE PEOPLE, REBUILD PLACES, REVITALIZE ECONOMIES New Mexico MainStreet Economic Development Department Joseph M. Montoya Building 110 0 South St. Francis Dr. Santa Fe, NM 87505-4147 505- 827- 0168 www.nmmainstreet.org DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 PLANNING MEMORANDUM City of Farmington DATE: July 8, 2019 TO: All Development Reviewers FROM: Helen Landaverde, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Petition SP 19-65 Plat Amendment - Four Corners Bank Subdivision Community Development has received a request from Sherry Roach with the City of Farmington, represented by Alex Johnson of Johnson Mapping and Surveying, LLC for a plat amendment of a right-of-way dedication of Lot 2 in the Locke’s Addition Subdivision. The proposed right-of-way dedication is located at 500 West Main Street (R0023724). If waivers are requested, this petition will be scheduled for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of August 15, 2019. NARRATIVE OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY A. PETITIONER: Sherry Roach with the City of Farmington, represented by Alex Johnson of Johnson Mapping and Surveying, LLC. B. LOCATION: Lot 2 in the Locke’s Addition Subdivision, 500 West Main Street. C. PRESENT SITUATION: San Juan County Tax Assessor’s records show that the size of parcel R0023724 is 1.169 acres. The parcel consists of Lots 2, 3, and 4 in Block 4 of the Locke’s Addition Subdivision. The property owner is Four Corners Community Bank c/o Daniel Schmitt. The City of Farmington is renovating the downtown area and acquiring right-of-way dedications for the Complete Streets Project. D. PROPOSED CHANGE OR REQUEST: The property owner is proposing to dedicate 14.22 ft.² of Lot 2 of the Locke’s Addition Subdivision for right-of-way width to existing Streets Auburn Street and West Main Street. ISSUES: • Please show lot lines of Lots 2, 3, and 4 in Block 4 of the Locke’s Addition Subdivision. • Please change subdivision title to reflect Plat Amendment to Locke’s Addition Subdivision. SP 19-65 Plat Amendment - Four Corners Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-65 Plat Amendment - Four Corners Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-65 Plat Amendment - Four Corners Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-65 Plat Amendment - Four Corners Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-65 Plat Amendment - Four Corners Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 PLANNING MEMORANDUM City of Farmington DATE: July 8, 2019 TO: All Development Reviewers FROM: Helen Landaverde, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Petition SP 19-66 Plat Amendment - Citizens Bank Subdivision Community Development has received a request from Sherry Roach with the City of Farmington, represented by Alex Johnson of Johnson Mapping and Surveying, LLC for a plat amendment of a right-of-way dedication of Lot 1 in Citizens Bank Subdivision. The proposed right-of-way dedication is located at 500 West Broadway (R0021980). If waivers are requested, this petition will be scheduled for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of August 15, 2019. NARRATIVE OF PROPOSED ACTIVITY A. PETITIONER: Sherry Roach with the City of Farmington, represented by Alex Johnson of Johnson Mapping and Surveying, LLC. B. LOCATION: Lot 1 in Citizens Bank Subdivision, 500 West Broadway. C. PRESENT SITUATION: San Juan County Tax Assessor’s records show that the size of parcel R0021980 is 1.242 acres. The property owner is Citizens Bank. The City of Farmington is renovating the downtown area and acquiring right-of-way dedications for the Complete Streets Project. D. PROPOSED CHANGE OR REQUEST: The property owner is proposing to dedicate 0.003 acres of Lot 1 in Citizens Bank Subdivision for right-of-way width to existing streets West Main Street and Auburn Street. ISSUES: • Please change subdivision title to reflect Plat Amendment to Citizens Bank Subdivision. SP 19-66 Plat Amendment - Citizens Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-66 Plat Amendment - Citizens Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-66 Plat Amendment - Citizens Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-66 Plat Amendment - Citizens Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES. DEADLINE DATE: July 15, 2019 SP 19-66 Plat Amendment - Citizens Bank Subdivision Please review the attachments and return your comments and recommendations to this office by the above-stated deadline date; however, if your department has no comments to offer on the proposed changes, please sign the copy and return to this office. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ATTACHMENTS ARE FOR YOUR FILES.  MINUTES Metropolitan Redevelopment Agency Board of Commissioners – June 11, 2019 Commissioners Present John McNeill, D.D.S. - Chair Jill Tanis – Vice-Chair Doug Dykeman Elizabeth McNally Greg Mills Commissioners Absent None Staff Present Michael Bulloch Sherry Roach Karen Walker Warren Unsicker Others Present Karla McWilliams-Via phone 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chair John McNeill, and there being a quorum, the following proceedings were duly had and taken. 2. Approval of the May 14, 2019 Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Tanis and seconded by Commissioner Dykeman to approve the minutes of the May 14, 2019 meeting. The motion passed unanimously 5-0. 3. Discussion and Recommendation on pursuing a Certified Local Government, CLG Warren Unsicker discussed the advantages and responsibilities involved with a Certified Local Government, CLG. He said the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in Santa Fe has a CLG coordinator that can help with the certification process. Karla McWilliams, CLG Program Coordinator, answered several questions asked by the Commissioners. Chair McNeill asked if there is a benefit for property owners to have a historically designated building, and if there is funding assistance if the building is remodeled. Ms. McWilliams said designation results in improved property values in historic districts. She said most CLGs use funding for planning projects such as façade improvements. She said the owner could also loose an historic designation if the remodeling does not follow guidelines. 1 Chair McNeill said after speaking with the director in another community, he was told that it is difficult to maintain historic designation information for properties when the property changes ownership. Dr. McNeill asked if there was a way to track properties when they are sold so new owners can be given information regarding the historic designation. Ms. McWilliams said other communities have developed systems through the county assessor’s office. Commissioner McNally asked if there was any evidence that the designation motivates people to purchase property in that district. Ms. McWilliams said historic properties tend to attract certain types of people. Most of those people want to preserve the historic character. Education people and working with realtors can help with understanding of what a historic designation entails. She said it helps to incentivize the designation and let people know about the advantages and resources available. Commissioner Dykeman asked if a condition or clause could be written into the ordinance dealing with the demolition of historic property. Ms. McWilliams said she has seen some ordinances with such a clause. Commissioner Tanis asked if a notification could be included in the sale of an historic property when it is sold to show that the property is listed. Ms. McWilliams said she has seen that done by the county so information was included during the sale. Commissioner McNally questioned whether a notification could be included through a title company, as some properties are not sold through a realtor. Ms. McWilliams said that would be a question to ask the local title company. Chair McNeill asked if properties in an historic district should be handled differently if they chose not to participate or contribute to the historic designation. Ms. McWilliams said the guidelines would be different for contributing and noncontributing property owners. Ms. McWilliams said she and/or Jeff Pappas would be happy to come to Farmington for further discussion. Commissioner Dykeman had an example of an ordinance written by Los Alamos, NM. The documentation was given to Warren Unsicker. Chair McNeill requested Mr. Unsicker to let City Administration know the MRA Commission would like to pursue a CLG. A motion was made by Commissioner Dykeman to have Mr. Unsicker discuss Certified Local Government designation with City Administration and to let them know the MRA Commissioners support an application for Certified Local Government. Commissioner McNally seconded the motion. The vote was 5-0. 4. Main Street Complete Streets Update-Sherry Roach Sherry Roach presented an update on the offsite signage and paving projects for the downtown area. The Main Street Complete Streets construction project is proceeding 2 on stormwater, grading, and traffic control plans. The electrical department upgrades are progressing. 5. Downtown Farmington Updates Michael Bulloch said the Arts and Cultural Team meeting is scheduled for June 12, 2019 and the Economic Transformation Strategy Planning meeting is scheduled for June 17, 2019. Two new business have opened downtown. Academy Mortgage opened on Orchard and New to You opened on Main Street. The New Mexico Resiliency Alliance grant was turned in for the Secret Garden project. Mr. Bulloch discussed a Community Visioning meeting held on May 30, 2019 that discuss the Harvest Food Hub and commercial kitchen incubator, The Downtown Maker’s Market began June 6, 2019. There are new and old vendors and turnout went well. New directional signs have been purchased to help people navigate to the parking lots. The Summer Art Walk will be held June 14, 2019. There are 24 business participating. The Art Walk will include food vendors and a Paint Jam in the alley behind ArrowSoul Trading. The Four Corners Hot Rod Run will be July 20, 2019. Mr. Bulloch said he and Christa Chapman are working to get things ready for this event. Mr. Bulloch said he created an event guide for downtown merchants that gives ideas on how to participate and make the most of events. Commissioner McNally asked if businesses on Broadway participate in the Art Walks. Mr. Bulloch said there are few businesses on Broadway that have participated and noted that people rarely want to walk further than Main Street during these events. 6. Business from: a. Floor – There was no business from the Floor. b. Chair – Chair McNeill asked that Commissioners and Staff have all MRA meeting documents to Karen Walker one week prior to each meeting. Dr. McNeill said the City Council is discussing using The Roof as a building for the Food Hub. He said he is meeting with the Parks and Recreation Department in July to discuss various topics of the Complete Streets Project. c. Members – Commissioner McNally mentioned a conference in Ruidoso, NM on June 25, 2019. Commissioner Dykeman asked why the City has moved the Friday TGIF events to the Civic Center. He said he would like to keep events in the downtown Main Street area. 3 Michael Bulloch said the City decided to move the event to the Civic Center in anticipation of the Complete Streets construction that was to begin this summer. Advertising for the event began before the City decided to postpone the construction. Mr. Bulloch said he would discuss with the Parks and Recreation Department about bringing the event back to Orchard Park. Chair McNeill asked the Commissioners to read the Vacant Building Ordinance handout so it can be discussed at the next MRA meeting in July. d. Staff – There was no business from Staff. 7. Adjournment: A motion was made by Commissioner Dykeman and seconded by Commissioner Mills to adjourn. The Metropolitan Redevelopment Agency Board of Commissioners meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. ___________________________________ ____________________________________ John McNeill, Chair Karen Walker, Administrative Assistant 4