Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive January 14, 2021 - 3:00 p.m. This meeting will be held virtually using Zoom at: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86060354302 Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the December 10, 2020 P&Z Meeting 4 Petition No. PP 20-56 (Discussion/Possible Action) - a request from Joe & Stan, LLC represented by Cheney-Walters-Echols for Preliminary Plan approval for a Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII, a 13-lot subdivision of a 24.17-acre parcel in west Farmington, north of Little Eagle Ct. and Piedras St. Parcel No: 2080172214410. Zoning is SF-7, Single-family Residential. (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, January 26, 2021. 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 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 2020 The Planning and Zoning Commission met in a regular session on December 10, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico and via Zoom at https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87869783161. P&Z Members Present: Chair Joyce Cardon Vice Chair Clint Freeman Shay Davis Mitch Sewell Gary Smouse via Zoom Cody Waldroup P&Z Members Absent: Ryan Brown Elizabeth Lockmiller Wayne Mangum Cheryl Ragsdale Staff Present: Andrea Jones Beth Escobar Elizabeth Sandoval Others Who Addressed the Commission (Via Zoom Virtual Platform): Glorie Mae Quintana Aprille Diaz 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. Approval of the Agenda There were no changes to the agenda. A motion was made by Vice Chair Freeman and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup. A roll call vote was taken and this motion was approved unanimously by a 6-0 vote. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Sewell and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the minutes of the November 12, 2020 P&Z Meeting. A roll call vote was taken and this motion was approved unanimously by a 6-0 vote. Swearing in of Witnesses There were no witnesses, discussion item only on the agenda. Draft UDC Updates (B. Escobar) Beth Escobar, Planning Manager, presented Draft UDC updates. The Unified Development Code The UDC is the regulatory document for public and private development in the City. The current version of the UDC was adopted in 2007 and contains regulations regarding zoning, land use, development standards and subdivisions, provides authority for review and decision making and outlines administration and procedures. Revisions Revisions for the UDC began review in 2019. Update specific sections of the code to remove impediments for property owners. Revise sections are based on identified conflicts in implementation. Incorporate sustainability practices for drainage design, landscaping, street design and lighting are included in the revision. The draft revisions have been reviewed by the City Attorney with no identified flaws or conflicts. Council will begin review in January 2021 and the target adoption date is February 2021. Planning and Zoning Commission Review The Planning and Zoning Commission first reviewed the draft UDC updates August 3, 2020, with subsequent discussions on September 10, 2020 (published public hearing), October 15, 2020, October 29, 2020 and November 12, 2020. Highlights of the Draft UDC Updates: Article 2 – Use Regulations • Adopt regulations regarding fowl o Administrative review required if issues arise o No maximum allowable number • Allow retention of existing setbacks for replacement manufactured homes • Adopt regulations for small cell wireless in historic district • Add regulations for mobile food units to align with Municipal Code • Allow separate electric meters for apartments and guest houses • Clarify regulations regarding Accessory Structures o Maximum allowance based on lot coverage Article 5 – Development Standards • Allow for reduction in parking requirements based on Director’s review • Requires Planning Review for resurfacing of parking areas • Allow for gravel driveways with a 10-foot concrete apron for replacement of mobile and manufactured homes • Increase requirements for landscaping in parking areas • Require incorporation of irrigation best practices • Require first flush capture for new construction • Encourage rainwater harvesting to supplement landscape irrigation • Update regulations for construction in flood zone to align with new FEMA regulations • Adopt new street classification and design standards Article 5.8 – Signage  Entire Section 5.8 has been revised to align with recent court rulings  Temporary sign category addresses all non-permanent signs  No temporary signs in public right-of-way  Allow portable signs  Adopts regulations for murals Section 5.10 – Outdoor Lighting  Applies lighting code to all new development, not just those adjacent to residential uses (Staff will work with existing businesses to encourage compliance)  Update allowed lighting sources to include LED  Establish a range for light color temperature Article 6 – Subdivisions • Add language regarding what constitutes a lot-of-record o Remove requirement for Summary Plat Article 8 – Administration and Procedures  Remove the requirement for title report except in certain cases  Add acceptance of lot consolidation through warranty deed or recorded legal survey  Make SUP’s transferable for residential uses  Allow time limit for SUP’s to be set through conditions of approval Article 11 – Definitions  Add definition for Loan Companies: Companies offering same day, ‘over the counter’ loans to customers based on collateral such as tax refunds and auto  titles. Loans are issued at an interest rate regulated by the state and significantly, higher that federally set interest rates. Summary • P & Z has reviewed changes • Areas where there was not consensus by the Commission will be reported to Council • Staff is asking the Commission to recommend moving the draft revisions forward to Council for consideration • Public comment is encouraged o Redline and draft on the website o Social media announcement o Redline version will be published 30 days before Council action Planning Manager Escobar concluded her presentation. Commission Discussion Chair Cardon asked why the additional changes were not discussed previously. Planning Manager Escobar stated that they are new items that were just brought forth, had to be reviewed by the City Attorney, and could be discussed today. Chair Cardon stated that she just needed to ask to clarify for the record. Vice Chair Freeman asked if the non-conforming had been discussed. Planning Manager Escobar stated that was a new item. Vice Chair Freeman asked for discussion of the non-conforming. Planning Manager Escobar stated that three ARB applications were heard recently for properties located north of Main St., south of Apache St. and west of Butler Ave., all zoned Commercial, most of that area being residential in use. Chair Cardon asked if some of the property boarders the Historical District. Planning Manager Escobar stated that was correct, and also part of the MRA. The whole block on Apache St. is zoned Commercial and under the current financial requirements, banks will not refinance. If the homes are destroyed more than 50%, the home cannot be rebuilt. This is an outdated goal. Currently we are not allowing people to maintain their investments. Through the Comp Plan update the goal is shifting the area being discussed to a mixed use zone. . Commissioner Sewell asked what the change was to solve this issue. Planning Manager Escobar stated the change would be to delete the requirement or prohibition of not allowing home owners to rebuild if destroyed more than 50%. Commissioner Sewell asked if the banks go through our code to see if the current zoning is allowed before they refinance. Planning Manager Escobar stated banks and finance companies usually request a zoning verification from the Planning Division. The three cases that were brought forth to the ARB Commission were all in the process of getting financing. The mortgage company or the bank contacted the City and asked for a zoning verification and on the zoning verification the area was identified as legal non-conforming use and if destroyed more than 50% it cannot be reestablished. What we are proposing in this new change is to remove that prohibition so the homeowner can rebuild their single family house even if it is not zoned that way. It is a protection for the current property owner. Commissioner Waldroup stated the code change might benefit some areas, but are there areas where you would want to have the existing zoning to apply. Planning Manager Escobar asked if Commissioner Waldroup if he could give an example of an area where the current code should be in place. Commissioner Waldroup stated that he could not. Vice Chair Freeman stated that with the current times we seem to be moving back to a mixed use zoning. Any applications that have come forward have never been denied and zoning was usually changed. Commissioner Waldroup stated that in an industrial area you probably wouldn’t want residential uses. Planning Manager Escobar stated that an area to look at would be Southside River Road where a majority of the zoning is industrial and there is a lot of residential use, considered legal non-conforming. This area of residential use is an area of affordable housing and in Farmington we are already challenged with affordable housing options. Planning Manager Escobar asked for consideration if we want to lose this and let the property owner lose their rights to rebuild. Commissioner Sewell stated that an example he knew of was a friend who has the issue of a residential property in a commercial zoning area who went through the ARB process and did not go through a zone change. Commissioner Sewell asked why the City is not intervening and changing the zoning for this type of application. Commissioner Waldroup asked if it is more complicated to rezone property. Planning Manger Escobar stated that she thinks that direction from the Comprehensive Plan will lead to the rezoning of these areas and City lead rezoning is not that complicated. For individual parcels it’s really hard from a planning perspective to rezone one at a time. Vice Chair Freeman stated that the City did a mass zone changes and brought it forth to the Planning and Zoning Commission at no charge to the property owners. Letters were sent to property owners. Planning Manager Escobar stated that a rezone involves public comment and for the example that was given, if neighbors were opposed to the rezone that is something the Commission would have to take into consideration. At the staff level, I felt that having the possibility his neighbors could have stepped up and said that did not want his property to be rezoned. If the Commission is not comfortable with this we can continue this discussion at Council. Commissioner Waldroup asked where the property of Commissioner Sewell’s friend was located. Planning Manager Escobar stated that the property was at 953 Glade Lane. Commissioner Waldroup stated that Commissioner Sewell’s friend could probably rezone his property as mixed use. Vice Chair Freeman asked why Commissioner Sewell’s friend did not apply for a rezoning. Commissioner Sewell stated that was his question and he was waiting for this application to come forward to Planning and Zoning. Planning Manager Escobar stated that the Commissioner Sewell’s friend did get his variance and the two sections of the code are waived for the property. Commissioner Waldroup asked how the process works moving forward. Planning Manager Escobar stated that at a staff level staff has been integrating updates with the Comp Plan. The Comp Plan draft is about 85% complete; however we have not had the opportunity to take the Comp Plan out to the public, which needs to be done. The Comp Plan process has been suspended by Council until we can go and do public outreach. At the last P&Z meeting we talked about having the P&Z Commission participate in implementation of some of the changes recommended by the Comp Plan. Vice Chair Freeman stated that he would like to talk about the SUP change. Chair Cardon stated that the Commission had a long discussion previously about the SUP process. . Vice Chair Freeman stated that since the Commission talked about the SUP change he did not feel they need to go over it again. Planning Manager Escobar stated that in 2018 the City adopted an ordinance that prohibited the transfer of Special Use Permits for residential zoned properties. It is not a balanced approach since we do allow transfers of commercial special use permits. The change that we are suggesting is the reversal of that prohibition. Commissioner Waldroup asked Vice Chair Freeman if he was on the board in 2018 when the ordinance was adopted and what was the reasoning behind the ordinance. Vice Chair Freeman stated that he was on the board and on the residential special use permits, the permits were being granted to specific horses and not to the property specifically. Commissioner Sewell stated that if a property owner sees a coral and a barn, they might not understand that they will need to get a special use permit. Commissioner Waldroup stated that is where Code Compliance would come in. Commissioner Sewell asked how we can transfer the knowledge of needing to get a special use permit to tenets and property buyers. Commissioner Davis stated that landlords and property owners do need to do their due diligence and we need to be careful and not take away peoples liberties and accountability to themselves. Vice Chair Freeman stated that he is good with how the ordinance was written in 2018. Planning Manager Escobar stated that she anticipates that the last two discussion items will be extensively discussed by Council also. Commissioner Davis stated that he liked that there is 5 year term on special use permits and that provisions is there to have a recommended time. Vice Chair Freeman stated that there was one SUP that the Council has revoked and that was a big deal and it should be taken seriously. Commissioner Sewell asked if there is a way to inform buyers of property that there is a special use permit for the property. Chair Cardon stated that she had asked this question before and it is not in the documentation, it is at the will of the realtor and is the due diligence of the consumer. Commissioner Waldroup stated that when you do a search of a property as a realtor not all the information shows up for a property. A realtor would have to go to the City to get property information. Planning Manager Escobar stated that most brokers and realtors already do that as part of their process. Planning Manager Escobar asked Commissioner Smouse if he had any comments. Commissioner Smouse stated that he did not have any comments. Commissioner Sewell asked Planning Manager Escobar for more information on the Street Name Classification. Planning Manager Escobar stated that the street name classifications are not retroactive classifications and are an attempt to be consistent with design standards which will help the City get funding. Chair Cardon opened the floor to public comment. Andrea Jones, City Clerk, stated that Gloriemae Quintana did not have an icon and could not be unmuted. Glorie Mae did send a chat and said she is here for the sign code update. Planning Manager Escobar stated that Gloriemae is with a local sign companies and can call or email any comments she may have. Commissioner Sewell asked for clarification on temporary signs and if a sandwich sign is considered a temporary sign. Planning Manager Escobar stated that a sandwich sign is considered a portable sign, which are currently not allowed, which we currently also do not enforce that they are not allowed. They can be very effective for businesses. We are updating the code to allow portable signs. The other big change is for temporary signs; a temporary sign is considered a piece of cardboard on a stake. The major change for temporary signs is that they can no longer be in public right of way, only on private property. A portable sign can go on the sidewalk with a permit. Chair Cardon asked if flag signs, the wavy ones, are considered temporary or permanent. Planning Manager Escobar stated that we currently do not permit flag signs and that will be a discussion for Council to direct if we want to actively enforce this prohibition. Commissioner Waldroup asked why flag signs are not allowed. Planning Manager Escobar stated that she thinks the reason is more esthetic. Allowing the flag signs would make it possible for every business from West Main to East Main to have flag signs. City Clerk Jones stated that Gloriemae asked when the permitting for temporary signs would go into effect and if there would be a fee. Planning Manager Escobar state the regulations would not go into place until they are approved and adopted by City Council. There will be no fees for temporary signs and no planning permit required. The only time a permit would be issued is for a permanent sign on the wall or pole or a monument sign. Commissioner Waldroup asked if you have a sign outside of your business that you put in and out every day, you would need to have a permit. Planning Manager Escobar stated that was correct and the reason being business put their signs right in the middle of the sidewalk, possibly causing issues for ADA access. If a permit is issued the business owner can be informed that the sign cannot conflict with ADA sidewalk regulations. Aprille Diaz stated that she is with a sign company and the company she works for does advise customers that some signs are not allowed by the COF. The general sign code seems the same. I do have questions on murals, will they require a permit? Planning Manager Escobar stated we will be looking for direction on murals from Council. We might consider a design review board, requiring review on some locations. The answer to this cannot be addressed until after the discussion with Council. Ms. Escobar encouraged everyone with interest plan to attend the City Council meeting or submit comments directly so they can be sent so they become part of the public record. Commissioner Sewell asked if murals were considered advertising and if there are any current regulations regarding murals. Planning Manager Escobar stated that they are considered art and we do not have any regulations in regards to murals. Vice Chair Freeman asked if the mural on the building on 20th Street was considered signage. Planning Manager Escobar stated that it is signage, was not permitted and is currently being investigated under Code Enforcement. Chair Cardon asked if anyone else would like to speak. There were no other persons requesting to speak. Planning Manger Escobar stated that we will need a motion to move this forward to Council with the understanding that they will be apprised of all the discussion of these recommendations. Commissioner Waldroup made a motion to recommend moving the draft revisions to the UDC and seconded by Commissioner Sewell. A roll call vote was taken and this motion was approved unanimously by a 6-0 vote. Chair Cardon stated to let the record show that the motion has passed and will go to City Council January 19, 2021. Business from the Floor: There was no business from the Floor. Business from the Chair: Chair Cardon wished everyone a safe and Merry Christmas Business from the Members: There was no business from Members. Business from Staff: Planning Manager Escobar stated that Council approved the wireless facility petition with a lease option agreement being sent to the contractor and is currently in negotiations. The lease option is not public until it is recorded. Planning Manager Escobar stated that two preliminary plans had been submitted to the Planning Division, Mesa Vista and Little Creek 7t. Lastly, Planning Manager Escobar announced Francisco Alvarado’s last day with the Planning Division would be December 18, 2020. Adjournment: With no further business and a motion by Vice Chair Freeman and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup, the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting of December 10, 2020 was adjourned at 4:11 p.m. A roll call vote was taken and the motion was approved by a 5-1 vote. ____________________________ _____________________________ Joyce Cardon Elizabeth Sandoval Chair Administrative Assistant  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Petition No. PP 20-56 A. STAFF REPORT, January 14, 2021 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Joe and Stan, LLC (Joe Kozimor, Manager) Representative Robert Echols of Cheney-Walters-Echols Date of Application November 11, 2020 Requested Action Preliminary Plan Approval Location Parcel No. 2080172214410, located at the north terminus of Sparrowhawk Dr. and Soaring Eagle Drive Existing Zoning SF-7 Single Family Residential Surrounding Zoning North: Unincorporated San Juan County/Residential South: SF-7 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 2 and Land Use East: SF-MH Undeveloped West: SF-7 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VI Subdivision Class Class 1 Notice Preliminary Plans do not require notice Staff Planner Beth Escobar, Planning Manager SUBDIVISION INFORMATION Number of Lots 13 Lots (2 unbuildable) Acres of Land 24.15 Acres Minimum Lot Size 7,000 square feet Utilities Water: Per City Standards Sewer: Per City Standards Electric: Per FEUS Engineering Access & Per City Standards Circulation Street Lights Per City Standards Street Sign Per City Standards Fire Hydrants Per City Standards Drainage Per City Standards P & R’s Fees Per City Standards NBU Mail Box Coordinate with USPS 1  Staff Report PP 20-56 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Page 2 GENERAL INFORMATION The petitioner is requesting preliminary plan approval for the Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII, Class 1, a 13-lot subdivision on a 24.15-acre undeveloped parcel located north of the terminus of Sparrowhawk Drive in West Farmington. Lot sizes for Phase VII range from 1.23 acres to 2.31 acres. The proposed subdivision is an addition to previous Little Creek Subdivisions developed on properties to the south. Phase VII includes two non-buildable lots, numbers 11 and 12. Lot 12 has an existing gas well and supporting infrastructure as well as a solar array. The topography of Lot 11 is too challenging to support development. Lot numbers 3, 4 & 6 are impacted by and existing gas line. Buildings must be set back 30 feet from the gas line easement. ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING INITIAL REVIEW Building Official – Derrick Childers 599-1305 dchilders@fmtn.org • The Plat indicates a Sparrowhawk Drive and Court. Should we have street names so similar to each other? The Fire Department has had issues before. Fire Department – Kipp Rix: (505) 566-2361 and krix@firenet.org • Add fire hydrant in cul-de-sac between lot 6 and lot 7. • Roads not allowed to have similar names ie. Sparrowhawk Dr and Sparrowhawk Ct. o This has proven to become confusing to emergency response crews adding to the response times. o Change name from Sparrowhawk to Vega Gull. o The undeveloped end of Soaring Eagle Dr will require an approved turn around for fire apparatus constructed of an approved all weather road base for vehicles of that weight. Engineering Staff –Toni Sitta: 599-1399 and tsitta@fmtn.org • Please include the General Drainage Report for this Preliminary Plan per COF UDC 13.2.12.L. • Please check Lots 13 and 4 for closure and submit a closure report. • Please provide temporary turnarounds with an outside road diameter of 80 feet for the dead ends on Sparrowhawk and Soaring Eagle Dr. (UDC 6.4.7.E) Water/Wastewater-Manuel Tso 599-1315 and mtso@fmtn.org • Need Utility Plan sheets showing plan and profile of utilities (water/waste water). • Include a construction detail sheet. • Need to include water pressure values for each lot to show they have sufficient pressure. 2  Staff Report PP 20-56 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Page 3 • Updated Comments (11/19) Include water pressure values for each lot to show they have sufficient pressure. Staff Comment: These issues have been addressed through submittal of a revised plat. Per Section 8.8.4 of the Unified Development Code, all subdivisions shall comply with the following minimum standards: A. Design and improvement standards. All subdivisions shall be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable requirements of: (1) Article 5, development standards; and (2) Article 6, subdivision design and improvements. Staff Comments: Through staff review, the plat as presented meets, or will be required to meet through stipulations of approval, development standards and design and improvement requirements. B. Waivers. The commission may recommend and the council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny waivers of the standards in section 6.4, subdivision design standards, during the platting process. Staff Comments: No waivers are requested for this application. C. Zoning consistency. All subdivisions and the resulting lots shall be consistent with the requirements of the applicable underlying zone district. Staff Comments: All lots conform to the minimum standards of the SF 7: Single-family residential zoning district. 3  Staff Report PP 20-56 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Page 4 D. Comprehensive plan consistency. All subdivisions shall be reviewed for consistency with the comprehensive plan, and every plat approved by the city shall constitute an amendment, addition or a detail of the comprehensive plan or part thereof adopted by the commission. Staff Comments: The proposed single-family use is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use map which designates this area as Light Industrial. However, the areas adjacent to this proposed subdivision have been developed as single- family residential lots, effectively abrogating the Community Plan designation. 4 Aerial Map of Surrounding Area Subject Property 5 Preliminary Plat 6 Preliminary Plat without topo lines 7  Staff Report PP 20-56 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Page 8 STAFF CONCLUSION Staff concludes approval of Petition 20-56, Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII is appropriate, subject to technical and corrective changes as enumerated in this report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition 20-56, a request from Joe and Stan, LLC (Joe Kozimor, Manager) represented by Robert Echols of Cheney-Walters-Echols, Inc. for a preliminary plan of a Class 1, 13-lot subdivision on a 24.15- acre undeveloped parcel located north of the terminus of Sparrowhawk Drive in West Farmington. The lot sizes for Phase VII range from 7,000 square feet to 2.53 acres. • All technical corrections to the plat and construction drawings will be finalized and approved prior to submittal of the final plat, including noted issues in this report. 8 Staff Report PP 20-56 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Page 9 9  Staff Report PP 20-56 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Page 10 PLANNING MEMO COMMENTS SUMMARY PP 20-56 – LITTLE CREEK SD PHASE VII Deadline: 11/19/2020 City of Farmington Departments CW Planning Manager – B. Escobar CW Addressing – Planning Division The Plat indicates a Sparrowhawk Drive and CW Chief Building Official – D. Childers Court. Should we have street names so similar to each other. CW Long Range Planner CW MPO CW Oil & Gas Inspector CITY City Manager’s Office – J. Baird No Comment Customer Care Manager – L. ELEC Richardson Electrical Engineering – L Aligarbes / ELEC Roberto Ga ELEC T & D – Field Op – L. Lugenbeel FIRE Fire Captain – K. Rix FIRE Fire Marshall – B. Vega LEGAL City Attorney – J. Breakell LEGAL Deputy City Attorney – E. Wayne No Comment POLICE Code Compliance – M. Romero No Comment POLICE Sergeant – S. Goodsell PRCA S. Reeves / R. Crosby No Comment PRCA ORII – W. Unsicker CW City Engineer – N. Westerling Please include the General Drainage Report for this Preliminary Plan per COF UDC 13.2.12.L. Please check Lots 13 and 4 for closure and Engineering – T. Sitta CW submit a closure report. Please provide temporary turnarounds with an outside road diameter of 80 feet for the dead ends on Sparrowhawk and Soaring 10  Staff Report PP 20-56 Little Creek Subdivision Phase VII Page 11 Eagle Dr. (UDC 6.4.7.E) CW Streets Superintendent – C. Fuller CW Traffic Engineer – I. BlueEyes 1) Need Utility Plan sheets showing plan and profile of utilities (water/waste water). 2) Include a construction detail sheet. 3) Need to include water pressure values for each lot to show they have sufficient CW Water/Waste Water – M. Tso pressure. Updated Comments (11/19) Include water pressure values for each lot to show they have sufficient pressure. Other Entities New Mexico Gas Company – R. Castillo No Comment CenturyLink – D. Willato No Comment Enterprise Field Services – M. Waszut Comcast Cable – M. Johnson JACOBS CH2MHILL OMI Surface Land Negotiator for BP – M. Venzara Farmington School District – C. Lyons 11