Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive September 12, 2019, at 3:00 p.m. Item Page 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the August 29, 2019 P&Z Meeting 16 4 Petition No. ZC 19‐75 – a request from Donna Brimhall, represented by Sakura 1 Engineering, for a zone change from SF‐10, Single‐family Residential, to GC, General commercial, for vacant property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Country Club Drive and E. Main St. (6610 E. Main St.) (Beth Escobar) 5 Business from: Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 6 Adjournment The recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission is scheduled to be considered at the City Council Meeting on Tuesday, September 24, 2019. 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.  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PETITION REPORT PETITION ZC 19-75 A zone change from the SF-10, Single-family Residential District to GC, General Commercial District for a vacant parcel located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Country Club Drive and E. Main Street. A. STAFF REPORT, September 12, 2019 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicants Donna D. Brimhall Representative Sakura Engineering Date of Application August 13, 2019 A zone change from SF-10, Single-family residential to GC, General Commercial District for a vacant parcel located at Requested Action the northeast corner of the intersection of Country Club Drive and E. Main Street. Location 6610 E. Main Street R0021342 Existing Land Use Vacant and undeveloped Existing Zoning SF-10, Single-family Residential District Surrounding Zoning North: and East SF-10, Single-family Residential and Land Use West: GC, General Commercial, existing Chiropractor Office South: GC, General Commercial and SF-7, Single-family Residential District/Residential Notice Publication of Notice for public hearings of the Planning and Zoning Commission appeared in the Daily Times on Sunday, August 25, 2019. Property owners within 100 feet were sent notice by certified mail on Wednesday, August 21, 2019 and a sign was posted on Friday, August 30, 2019. Staff Planner Beth Escobar, Planning Manager Project Description: The petitioner is requesting a zone change from the SF-10, Single-family Residential District to the GC, General Commercial for a vacant parcel located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Country Club Dr. and E Main Street. The subject property is approximately 1.14 acres. It is adjacent to a 1.10-acre parcel with an existing commercial office that can be accessed from Country Club Drive across the subject property. The intersection of East Main and Country Club Drive has a traffic signal. There is an existing off-site sign in the right-of-way west of the subject property as well as utility infrastructure along the western boundary of the property. 1  Page |2 No specific use is being proposed with this zone change request. Aerial View of Subject Property Farmington Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan’s 2020 Future Land Use Map recommends the subject area as “Commercial”. The request for the zone change therefore complies with the recommendation in the Future Land Use map. In addition, the request is in line with the following Guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan: Chapter 4 Land Use and Development  Action 4.5.1: Concentrate new commercial development in clusters at major intersections and other appropriate locations as opposed to scattered and/or “strip” development.  Action 4.5.5: Revise existing zoning districts and designations in the Unified Development Code to support and encourage viable commercial areas … Chapter 8 Economic Development  Objective 8.2: Assure that there are adequate and appropriate sites for industrial and commercial business locations. 2  Page |3 The zone change request is supported by Chapter 22 of the Municipal Code since it is located on a major commercial thoroughfare and the infrastructure is in place to support commercial development on this property. Figure 3. Farmington Major Thoroughfare Plan The subject property abuts E. Main Street, a principal arterial road as identified in the 2012 Major Thoroughfare Plan STREET VIEW 3  Page |4 STAFF ANALYSIS The UDC states that the City shall consider whether the proposed zoning and land use are compatible with the conforming zoning and land use of nearby properties and with the character of the neighborhood. Section 8.7.4 of the UDC outlines Issues for consideration in determining a proposed zone change as follows: A. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the Farmington Comprehensive Plan? The proposed zone change for the subject property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Chapter 4 Land Use Development, Chapter 8 Economic Development and the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 22 Economic Development Plan. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use(s) compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and the character of the neighborhood? The subject property is located on a busy intersection of Main Street and is adjacent to an existing office use. An additional commercial business on this corner should have minimal impact to the existing residential neighborhoods. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? The proposed zone change to GC-General Commercial should not have an adverse impact on the surrounding area. The subject property is located on a busy intersection along the main commercial road in the City. There is a 40-foot alley access directly to the north of the subject property that is part of the Ellsworth Subdivision. This provides substantial buffering for the existing residential homes to the north. The other nearest residential uses are across Country Club Drive to the east. Country Club Drive is approximately 65 feet in width. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? No specific use is being proposed with this zone change request. The property could support development of another professional office or retail store but is probably too small to be developed as more intense commercial use. The existing driveway from Country Club Drive that provides access to the property to the east would further restrict construction on this site. The General Commercial District is intended to accommodate commercial uses. Permitted uses in the GC District include retail sales and services, professional offices, as well as more intense commercial uses such as gas stations and car washes. 4  Page |5 E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The subject property is 1.14 acres and abuts a major arterial road with an existing traffic signal. F. Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone? If utilities are not available, could they be reasonably extended by the applicant? Is the applicant willing to pay for the extension of public facilities and services necessary to service the proposed development? The subject property is vacant and undeveloped. The petitioner would be responsible to provide all the necessary infrastructure for the property. G. Does the proposed change constitute “spot zoning” as defined in Article 11, definitions? Article 11 defines “spot zoning” as “Where a particular tract within a larger area is specifically zoned so as to impose upon it restrictions not imposed upon the surrounding lands, or grant to it special privileges not granted generally, not done in pursuance of the Comprehensive Plan.” The proposed zone change for the subject property is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Chapter 4 Land Use Development, Chapter 8 Economic Development and the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 22 Economic Development Plan. The requested zone change to GC is compatible with the character of the area along E. Main Street. It is not anticipated that the zone change will be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood nor will it grant special privileges. STAFF COMMENTS Public Works: Tony Sitta  All commercial development requires the construction of 5-foot wide sidewalk along the property boundaries. (COF Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6.4.8 and COF Ordinance Section 7-1-2).  All commercial development must comply with the supplemental drainage requirements of COF UDC Section 5.7.3.  Compliance with any additional non-residential standards set forth by the COF UDC and COF ordinance. City Engineer: N. Westerling  Prior to getting a building permit from the City, the property owner will need to get an updated highway access permit from NMDOT to allow access for a second business at the shared access point. I do not have any concerns with the rezoning. 5  Page |6 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Staff has received an email from the owner of a business at 6600 E. Main St. in support of the zone change request. STAFF CONCLUSION Staff concludes the following is appropriate for ZC 19-75: 1) Approval for the zone change request. The proposal does not constitute spot zoning and would not adversely impact the area. Rezoning to General Commercial is consistent with sections of the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 22 Economic Development Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 19-75, a request from Donna D. Brimhall for a zone change from the SF-10, Single-family Residential District to the GC, General Commercial District for a 1.14-acre property, Assessor’s Parcel ID R0021342, located at 6610 E. Main Street, subject to the following conditions/UDC requirements: 1) Approval for the zone change request, the proposal does not constitute a spot zone and would not adversely impact the area. The proposed zoning for this property is consistent with sections of the Comprehensive Plan and the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 22 Economic Development Plan; 2) Upon development of a commercial use on the property, construction of 5-foot wide sidewalk along the property boundaries shall be required. (COF Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6.4.8 and COF Ordinance Section 7-1-2). 3) All commercial development must comply with the supplemental drainage requirements of COF UDC Section 5.7.3. 4) Compliance with any additional non-residential standards set forth by the COF UDC and COF ordinance. 5) Prior to getting a building permit from the City, the property owner will need to get an updated highway access permit from NMDOT to allow access for a second business at the shared access point. 6 7  PLANNING MEMO COMMENTS SUMMARY City of Farmington Departments CD Director CD Addressing – Planning Division CD Chief Building Official – D. Childers No comment CD Long Range Planner CD MPO CD Oil & Gas Inspector – L. Simms CITY City Manager’s Office – J. Baird ELEC Customer Care Manager – L. Richardson ELEC Electrical Engineering – L Aligarbes ELEC T & D – R. Romero FIRE Fire Captain – K. Rix FIRE Fire Marshall – B. Vega LEGAL City Attorney – J. Breakell No comment LEGAL Deputy City Attorney – E. Wayne POLICE Code Compliance – M. Romero No comment POLICE Sergeant – P. Flores PRCA S. Reeves/ R. Crosby No comment PRCA ORII – C. Styron PW Prior to getting a building permit from the City, the property owner will need to get an updated highway City Engineer – N. Westerling access permit from NMDOT to allow access for a second business at the shared access point. I do not have any concerns with the rezoning. PW - All commercial development requires the construction of 5-foot wide sidewalk along the property boundaries. (COF Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 6.4.8 and COF Ordinance Section 7-1-2). Engineering – T. Sitta - All commercial development must comply with the supplemental drainage requirements of COF UDC Section 5.7.3. - Compliance with any additional non- residential standards set forth by the COF UDC and COF ordinance. PW Streets Superintendent PW Traffic Engineer – I. BlueEyes No comment PW Water/Waste Water – M. Tso No comment 8 Other Entities New Mexico Gas Company – R. Castillo No comment CenturyLink – D. Willato No comment Enterprise Field Services – M. Waszut No comment Comcast Cable – M. Johnson CH2MHILL OMI Surface Land Negotiator for BP – M. Venzara Farmington School District – C. Lyons 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 EMAIL IN SUPPORT 16  MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION August 29, 2019 The Planning and Zoning Commission met in a regular session on August 29, 2019 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. P&Z Members Present: Chair‐Joyce Cardon Ryan Brown Shay Davis Clint Freeman Kristin Langenfeld Wayne Mangum Cheryl Ragsdale Mitch Sewell P&Z Members Absent: Elizabeth Lockmiller Gary Smouse Cody Waldroup Staff Present: Beth Escobar Toni Sitta Karen Walker Others Who Addressed the Commission: Burson Corley Don Corley Juanita Murray Call to Order Chair Joyce Cardon called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. There being a quorum present the following proceedings were duly had and taken. Presentation of the Agenda There were no changes to the agenda. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Brown to approve the minutes of the August 15, 2019 P&Z Meeting. This motion was approved unanimously by an 8‐0 vote. Swearing in of Witnesses Karen Walker swore in all parties that wished to speak on behalf of any agenda items. CONSIDERATION & RECOMMENDATION ABD 19‐74 Abandonment of a City owned street – partial abandonment of Poplar Street right‐of‐way Planning & Zoning Commission Discussion of Petition ABD 19‐74 on August 29, 2019 Planning Manager Beth Escobar presented the staff report for ABD 19‐74, a request from Doug Murray, represented by Paul Martin with Sakura Engineering & Surveying, for the abandonment of a portion of Poplar Street along Lots 9‐11 in Block 8 and Lots 6 and 7 in Block 7. The property is zoned MF‐L SMHAO, Multi‐family Low Density with a Special Mobile Home Area Overlay. The Inez Subdivision was platted in 1957. The portion of the abandonment is a cul‐de‐sac that leads to an alley. Ms. Escobar noted the fire hydrant located in the portion of the road that is to be abandoned. The proposal is to abandon the cul‐de‐sac at the south end and redevelop the area to provide access for emergency vehicles at the north end of the property. The applicant owns all three properties that will be impacted. Access to the private ditch would be from the rear of the properties. The Comprehensive Plan provides the following typical criteria for street and land development, incorporated as a part of the City’s thoroughfare development standards: “Existing streets in adjacent areas should be continued and, when an adjacent area is undeveloped, the street layout should provide for future projection and continuation of streets into the undeveloped area.” Ms. Escobar presented maps showing opportunities for continuation of the streets in other areas. Abandonment of this right‐of‐way will not land lock any future developments. This portion of Poplar Street is not considered in the City’s current Major Thoroughfare Plan and has no impact on the plan. In addition, it is not part of the Red Apple Transit route. Staff concludes approval of Petition ABD 19‐74 with five stipulations. There were several technical comments submitted by the engineering department. The applicant is aware of those comments. The major issue is if the roadway is abandoned, and a new cul‐de‐sac is developed, it will need to be based on city standards and it will need to be dedicated to the City. The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ABD 19‐ 74 with the following conditions: 1. The approval shall be subject to any technical corrective changes, or easements required by the Community Development Department. 2. All technical corrections (including noted issues in the staff report) to the right‐of‐way abandonment and proposed summary plat must be completed and approved by the City prior to submittal of the Mylar for signatures. 3. All conditions of approval are required to be completed before the abandonment can be recorded and finalized. 4. The newly aligned cul‐de‐sac at the end of Poplar Street shall be dedicated to the City. 5. The abandonment will be effective after the execution of the Findings of Fact and after the recordation of the Abandonment/vacation plat, pursuant to UDC 8.8.7. Juanita Murray, 113 W. Apache, said she and her husband bought the lots with the intention of building a house on the property and developing it as one piece of property. She said she understands the conditions. Burson Corley, 120 Albert Place, said he owns the property next to these lots and he had questions as to where the property lines were located. Don Corley, 1105 S. Miller, said he bought the property in the 1960s and he would like to know where the boundary lines are located that border his land. Ms. Escobar noted the original Inez Subdivision plat and stated that the corners match up with the legal description. The abandonment only affects the property of the petitioner. The Commissioners can stipulate that the corners be marked before moving forward to City Council. Burson Corley said he would like the corners to be marked. Chair Cardon asked Mr. Corley if he understood that the evidence does not affect his property. The fire hydrant will be moved and emergency vehicles will need access. Don Corley said the owner of the adjoining property, Mr. Bowden, is 92 years old and does not want his property affected by the abandonment. Ms. Escobar said the cul‐de‐sac does not provide access to anything. The petitioner is not asking to abandon the road that is currently being used. The corner is the legal corner for the Murray’s property, and should not affect any of the neighbors. Commissioner Sewell asked if the alley does not extend into Mr. Bowden’s land. Ms. Escobar commented that access to the ditch would remain the same through the alleyway. The original review was for a replat, which had wider ramifications than the request to abandon the right‐ of‐way. Burson Corley stated that Mr. Bowden did not want the ditch closed even though he has not used it for a while. This proposal, he said, is different from the original plat abandonment. He stated that he does not have any problems with the current proposal in regards to the ditch. Planning & Zoning Commission Action of Petition ABD 19‐74 on August 29, 2019 A motion was made by Commissioner Brown and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve Petition ABD 19‐74, a request from Doug Murray, represented by Sakura Engineering & Surveying, for the abandonment of a portion of Poplar Street along Lots 9‐11 in Block 8 and Lots 6 and 7 in Block 7 with the following conditions: 1. The approval shall be subject to any technical corrective changes, or easements required by the Community Development Department. 2. All technical corrections (including noted issues in the staff report) to the right‐of‐way abandonment and proposed summary plat must be completed and approved by the City prior to submittal of the Mylar for signatures. 3. All conditions of approval are required to be completed before the abandonment can be recorded and finalized. 4. The newly aligned cul‐de‐sac at the end of Poplar Street shall be dedicated to the City. 5. The abandonment will be effective after the execution of the Findings of Fact and after the recordation of the Abandonment/vacation plat, pursuant to UDC 8.8.7. 6. The property will be surveyed and the corners will be marked. AYE: Chair Cardon, Commissioners Brown, Davis, Freeman, Langenfeld, Mangum, Ragsdale, and Sewell. NAY: None Abstained: None Absent: Commissioners Lockmiller, Smouse, and Waldroup. Motion passed 8‐0 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 the Members. Business from Staff: There was no business from Staff. Adjournment: With no further business and a motion by Commissioner Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Davis, the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of August 29, 2019 was adjourned at 3:26 p.m. ____________________________ _____________________________ Joyce Cardon Karen Walker Chair Administrative Assistant