Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive June 10, 2021 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the April 29, 2021 P&Z Meeting 4 Discussion and possible action regarding proposed changes to the Unified Development Code, Sections 2.4.7 - Animals or Fowl and Article 11 - Definitions limiting the number of fowl to be allowed on properties in the RA, Rural Agriculture District, within the City of Farmington. (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, June 22, 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 April 29, 2021 The Planning and Zoning Commission met in a regular session on April 29, 2021 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. P&Z Members Present: Chair-Joyce Cardon Vice Chair-Clint Freeman Ryan Brown Cheryl Ragsdale Gary Smouse P&Z Members Absent: Elizabeth Lockmiller Mitch Sewell Shay Davis Wayne Mangum Cody Waldroup Staff Present: Beth Escobar Elizabeth Sandoval Others Who Addressed the Commission: Orthon Cruz Boots Putman Henry Putman, Father Henry Putman, Son Call to Order Chair Joyce Cardon called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. There being a quorum present the following proceedings were duly had and taken. Approval of the Agenda The motion was made by Vice Chair Freeman and seconded by Commissioner Brown to approve the agenda of the April 29, 2021 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 5-0 vote. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Brown and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to approve the minutes of the February 11, 2021 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion was approved unanimously by a 5-0 vote. Swearing in of Witnesses Elizabeth Sandoval, Administrative Assistant, swore in all parties that wished to speak on behalf of the listed agenda items. Adoption of a resolution setting and establishing a regular meeting day, time and place for the Planning & Zoning Commission Beth Escobar, Planning Manager, presented the resolution to the Planning & Zoning Commission. A motion was made by Commissioner Smouse and seconded by Vice Chair Freeman to approve and adopt the resolution setting and establishing a regular meeting day, time and place for the Planning & Zoning Commission. This motion was approved unanimously by a 5-0 vote. Petition ZC 21-27 1312 Smith Lane Planning Manger Escobar presented a presentation regarding the zone change request for 1312 Smith Lane, a request from Orthon Cruz, property owner, to rezone a 0.47- acre parcel from SF-7, Single-family residential, to MF-L, Multi-family Low Density, to allow for placement of a manufactured home. There is an existing single-family residence on the property that serves as a rental. The property is located in the Special Mobile Home Overlay District. After discussion began regarding the petition, it was made known that the property at 1312 Smith Lane was in escrow and the property owner of 1312 Smith Lane, Mr. Henry Putman, son of Boots Putman and Henry Putman, was not in favor of Petition ZC 21-27. A motion was made by Vice Chair Freeman and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to deny/pull from the agenda Petition ZC 21-27 due to dual ownership of the property at 1312 Smith Lane and both property owners not being in favor of the proposed zone change. AYE: Chair Cardon, Vice Chair Freeman, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Ragsdale, Commissioner Smouse NAY: None Abstained: None Absent: Commissioner Davis, Commissioner Lockmiller, Commissioner Sewell, Commissioner Waldroup Motion passed 5-0 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: Ms. Escobar stated that there are no applications for the May 13, 2021 meeting. A hard copy of the updated UDC will be provided to the Commission as soon as it is published to the City of Farmington website. Adjournment: With no further business and a motion by Commissioner Smouse and seconded by Commissioner Brown, the Planning & Zoning Commission meeting of April 29, 2021 was adjourned at 3:59 p.m. ____________________________ _____________________________ Joyce Cardon Elizabeth Sandoval Chair Administrative Assistant  Memo To: Farmington Planning & Zoning Commission From: Beth Escobar, Planning Manager Date: June 10, 2021 Subject: Possible changes to Rural Agriculture District regulations Background Staff has been directed by City Council to propose revisions to the regulations pertaining to the keeping of fowl on property zoned Rural Agriculture. This is in response to a property within the City generating complaints based on having an excess of roosters. After researching zoning regulations for similar municipalities in New Mexico and Arizona, there is little consistency in regulations related to the keeping of chickens specifically and urban agriculture generally in these communities. However, two themes are prevalent; roosters are not permitted in residential zones other than those with some sort of rural agricultural designation; and the keeping of fowl appears to be the most problematic animal when it comes to neighborhood complaints. USDA Recommendations For agricultural uses, the recommended ratio of roosters to hens is 1 to 10. Roosters tend to fight amongst themselves more if the number of hens falls below 10. It takes chickens six weeks to mature, either for hens to produce eggs or there being enough meat on the bird to slaughter. People, and dogs, can consume 1 – 2 chickens a week on average. Staff Analysis The Rural Agricultural District is intended to protect agricultural uses within an urbanized area. Crops and livestock are permitted to be produced to be sold, however no sales are allowed on the property. People may choose to raise fowl for the eggs, as a source of food, or to market off site. The allowance for all fowl in the Rural Agricultural District is based on a ratio of 0.02 to the size of the property. A two acre property would be permitted to have 100 fowl. This is a generous number, and as proven recently, can lead to conflict with the neighbors. To determine a fair maximum, staff reviewed the USDA standards and tried to balance the number allowed with a reasonable use. It would seem reasonable that a family of four may consume six chickens a week. With the six- week lag in maturity, a limit of 44 fowl (40 hens and 4 roosters) should provide a continuous stream of birds. Note the recommended limit discussed above is no longer based on parcel size. Another alternative is to allow 11 fowl per acre (10 hens and 1 rooster). A two-acre parcel would be allowed 22 birds. Alternative numbers and calculations may be considered. Draft revisions are attached with this report. If changes are adopted to the UDC, properties not in conformance would receive legal, non- conforming status. These properties could be brought into compliance with the new code through attrition. For example, if a property has 100 chickens, and the allowance is 44 chickens, 66 chickens would need to be consumed, sold or relocated to bring the property into compliance. Typically, there is not a timeline for requiring properties to come into compliance. For the example above, if we estimate the consumption of four fowl a week, it would be 16.5 weeks for the property to lower the amount of fowl to 44. Public Input There are 233 parcels within the City Of Farmington with the RA – Rural Agriculture zoning designation. Twenty-six of these parcels are owned by the City, two are owned by the Farmington School District, and 10 are owned by State or Federal entities. Privately held parcels total 195. Since any changes in the Unified Development Code (UDC) for the RA District would affect all of these property owners, staff has sent letters regarding proposed changes to each impacted property owner. Action Staff is asking the Commission to provide input and possible direction to Council, on the proposed zone change scenarios.  DEFINITIONS TERMS Term Definition each species by the appropriate equivalency factor from the following list and summing the resulting totals for all animal species contained in the operation. Animal species equivalency factor Alpaca or Llama 0.20 Bison, buffalo (under two years old) 0.50 Bison, buffalo—Cow with calf 1.00 Bison, buffalo 1.00 Burro, donkey 1.00 Burro, donkey—Miniature 0.05 Cattle, beef—Slaughter and feed (under 2 years) 0.50 Cattle, beef—Slaughter and feed 1.00 Cattle, beef—Cow with calf 1.00 Cattle, dairy (bulls or cows) 1.40 Fowl: Chickens, broiler or layer 0.02 Geese, ducks, swans, turkeys, peafowl Maximum allowed – not more than 22 per property with a ratio of 1 male to 10 females. Elk, domestic (under two years old) 0.50 Elk, domestic 1.00 Elk, domestic—Cow with calf 1.00 Emu, less than 100 pounds 0.10 Emu, more than 100 pounds 0.20 Geese, ducks, swans, turkeys, peafowl 0.03 Goat, feeder (less than 80 pounds) 0.05 11-3  DEFINITIONS TERMS Term Definition each species by the appropriate equivalency factor from the following list and summing the resulting totals for all animal species contained in the operation. Animal species equivalency factor Alpaca or Llama 0.20 Bison, buffalo (under two years old) 0.50 Bison, buffalo—Cow with calf 1.00 Bison, buffalo 1.00 Burro, donkey 1.00 Burro, donkey—Miniature 0.05 Cattle, beef—Slaughter and feed (under 2 years) 0.50 Cattle, beef—Slaughter and feed 1.00 Cattle, beef—Cow with calf 1.00 Cattle, dairy (bulls or cows) 1.40 Fowl: Chickens, broiler or layer 0.02 Geese, ducks, swans, turkeys, peafowl Maximum allowed – not more than 44 per property with a ratio of 1 male to 10 females. Elk, domestic (under two years old) 0.50 Elk, domestic 1.00 Elk, domestic—Cow with calf 1.00 Emu, less than 100 pounds 0.10 Emu, more than 100 pounds 0.20 Geese, ducks, swans, turkeys, peafowl 0.03 Goat, feeder (less than 80 pounds) 0.05 11-3  DEFINITIONS TERMS Term Definition each species by the appropriate equivalency factor from the following list and summing the resulting totals for all animal species contained in the operation. Animal species equivalency factor Alpaca or Llama 0.20 Bison, buffalo (under two years old) 0.50 Bison, buffalo—Cow with calf 1.00 Bison, buffalo 1.00 Burro, donkey 1.00 Burro, donkey—Miniature 0.05 Cattle, beef—Slaughter and feed (under 2 years) 0.50 Cattle, beef—Slaughter and feed 1.00 Cattle, beef—Cow with calf 1.00 Cattle, dairy (bulls or cows) 1.40 Fowl: Chickens, broiler or layer 0.02 Geese, ducks, swans, turkeys, peafowl Maximum allowed – not more than 22 per acre with a ratio of 1 male to 10 females. Elk, domestic (under two years old) 0.50 Elk, domestic 1.00 Elk, domestic—Cow with calf 1.00 Emu, less than 100 pounds 0.10 Emu, more than 100 pounds 0.20 Geese, ducks, swans, turkeys, peafowl 0.03 Goat, feeder (less than 80 pounds) 0.05 11-3 2.4.7 Animals or fowl. (Other use categories, agriculture use). Keeping or raising animals or fowl shall comply with the standards of this section. A. Within the residential agricultural (RA) district, the keeping of animals or fowl in accordance with the recommended animal unit capacity per acre is permitted by right. B. The number of animal units allowed per acre/property in the residential agricultural (RA) district shall be determined by using the recommended animal unit capacity provided in the definition of animal unit in Article 11, definitions. C. In the RA district, all fowl shall be contained within shelters which mitigate sound transference to adjacent properties. D. Additional numbers of fowl may be permitted through a Special Use Permit. May 28, 2021 RE: Proposed changes to number of fowl/chickens allowed in the RA-Residential Agriculture Zone Dear Property Owner: The City of Farmington is considering revisions to Article 2, Section 2.4.7 and Article 11 of the 2021 Uniform Development Code to reduce the number of fowl allowed on properties in this district. Fowl include geese, ducks, swans, turkeys, peafowl and similar species. Currently the number of fowl allowed on a property in the Residential Agricultural district is calculated based on the acreage of the property. Changes being considered are to adopt a ratio of male to female fowl and reduce the overall maximum of fowl allowed on a property. The Rural Agricultural District is intended to protect agricultural uses within an urbanized area. Crops and livestock are permitted to be produced to be sold, however no sales are allowed on the property. The modifications being considered are an attempt to integrate the raising of fowl with the abutting residential properties. The Farmington Planning & Zoning Commission will review the proposed changes at their June 10th meeting at 3:00 in City Hall. You are welcome to attend the meeting and participate in the discussion. Any comments submitted to me directly (see email below) will be presented to the Commission. 1 of 2 Feel free to contact me with any questions. Respectfully, Beth Escobar Planning Manager Community Works Department (505)599-1285 bescobar@fmtn.org 2 of 2