Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive January 12, 2023 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the December 15, 2022 P&Z Meeting 4 PETITION No. ZC 22-79 – A request for a ZC: Zone Change from IND – Industrial District to GC: General Commercial and SF-MH: Single-Family Mobile Home for a 40- acre property (Parcel No. R4005457) located on the east side of Troy King Rd. – Tabled from December 15, 2022 meeting. Presented by Senior Planner Safrany 5 PETITION No. SUP 22-99 – A request for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to allow for Development of a new mobile home park at 812 N. Vine. Current zoning is MF:L Multi-family Low Density – Tabled from the December 15, 2022 meeting. Presented by Planning Manager Escobar 6 PETITION No. CV 22-101 – A request to waive the 300-foot distance requirement from a religious institution for a cannabis retail facility located at 1930 San Juan Blvd. Units A&B. This petition was originally scheduled to be heard on December 29, 2022 meeting but was rescheduled due to the lack of a quorum. Presented by Long Range Assoc. Planner Colby Gibson 7 PETITION No. FP-22-106 - A request from Joe & Stan, LLC represented by Bob Echols of Cheney-Walters-Echols for final plat approval of a 48-lot residential subdivision. Parcel R6002200. Presented by Planning Manager Escobar 8 Presentation of the 2023 Planning & Zoning Meeting Schedule 9 Business From Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 10 Adjournment Petition items on this agenda will be scheduled for the next City Council meeting – January 24, 2023 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 15, 2022 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on December 15, 2022 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. P&Z Members Present: Chair Joyce Cardon Gary Hanson Ryan Brown Shay Davis Clete Berens Cody Waldroup Cheryl Ragsdale (Telephonically for Petition No. SUP 22-89 only) P&Z Members Absent: Vice Chair Clint Freeman Cody Waldroup Staff Present: Beth Escobar Mike Safrany Tami Spencer Others Who Addressed the Commission Courtney Barton Zach Spencer James Dennis Steve Ellison Kenneth Hallum Dave Rakita Douglas O. Kinsey Mike Bashore Stephen Smith Logan Myers Ben Hazelwood Katie Hunter Mike Smith Mitch Burns Andrew Murray Call to Order Chair 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 A motion was made by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to approve the agenda of the December 15, 2022 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 7-0 vote. 1 Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Berens to approve the minutes of the October 27, 2022 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 7-0 vote. Swearing of Witnesses There were no witnesses to swear in. PETITION NO. SUP 22-89 Discussion & possible action regarding a request for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to allow for a 66’-4” high spire on the new LDS Stake Center to be constructed at 4410 College Blvd. Chair Cardon and Commissioner Davis recused themselves, due to a conflict of interest, from hearing this petition. Commissioner Ragsdale appeared telephonically for this petition only. Commissioner Brown was Acting Chair for this petition only. Senior Planner Safrany presented the following Petition • Applicant: Barton Architecture • Representative: Courtney Barton, Barton Architecture • Location: 4400/4410 College Blvd. • Existing Zoning: SF:10 – Single Family Residential • Request: Approval of a Special Use Permit to allow for a 66’-4” high spire on the new Stake House • Measurement is from the ground. Background • The petitioner is requesting a Special Use Permit (SUP) to allow for a 66’-4” spire on top of the soon to be constructed Farmington New Mexico Temple. • On September 28, 2021 City Council approved SUP 21-49 which allowed for a religious institution in a single family residential zoning district. This approval included an 88-foot high spire on the temple. On May 10th, 2022 City Council approved SUP 22-24 which revised the 88-foot high spire to a 128-foot spire from the ground. The 66’-4” high spire for the LDS Stake Center located on the same site was omitted from any previous SUP approvals. The 66’-4” Stake Center spire will be in addition to the 128-foot high Temple spire previously approved for the same site. 2 Zoning Map Site Plan 3 Elevation Rendering 4  Site Section – From East Facing College Blvd. UDC 8.9.A Special Use Permits • The purpose of a Special Use Permit is to allow for discretionary approval of uses with unique operating characteristics. • Section 2.8.3.5.D (2) a of the Unified Development Code states that public, semi-public or public service buildings, hospitals, institutions, or schools, when permitted in a district, may be erected to a height not exceeding 60 feet. • The LDS Stake House spire will be 66’-4” high from the ground. • Special Use Permit Criteria Effect on environment: The location, size, design, and operation characteristics of the proposed use shall not be detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of the surrounding neighborhood or its occupants and shall not be substantially or permanently injurious to the neighboring property. The 66’-4” high spire will not have a detrimental effect on the surrounding properties. The location of the proposed spire is approx. 200 ft. from the north property line and approx. 130 ft. from the residential properties to the east. Per Section 2.8.3.5.D (2) of the UDC, a religious institution may erect a building up to 60’-0” in height. The additional 6’-4” for a spire is a minimum easing of the code. Compatible with surrounding area: The proposed site plan, circulation plan, and schematic architectural designs shall be harmonious with the character of the surrounding area with relationship to scale, height, landscaping and screening and density. The project is compatible with the surrounding area. San Juan College is located directly across College Blvd. from the LDS Compound with larger scale buildings. Along the College Blvd. corridor are several Places of Worship north and south of the project. 5 External impacts minimized: The proposed use shall not have negative impacts on existing uses in the area and in the city. The spire height should have no negative impacts. Infrastructure Impacts minimized. The proposed use shall not have negative impacts on public infrastructure such as roads, parking facilities and the ability of existing infrastructure and services to provide services adequately. The spire height should have no negative impact on infrastructure. The proposal was sent to City Engineering departments for review and no comments were received. Consistent with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use will be consistent with purposes of this UDC, the Comprehensive Plan, and any other statutes, ordinances or policies that may be applicable. The 2040 Future Land Use Plan designates this corner as Medium Density Residential. Per the UDC, religious institutions are allowed in residential zoning districts with a Special Use Permit. A SUP for the Farmington New Mexico Temple (SUP 21-49) was approved in 2021. Public Notice • Letters were sent to 24 surrounding neighbors and the property was posted with a sign. • At the time of this report no public input has been received. • Staff Recommendation: The spire height for the new Stake House seems appropriate for the use and is in scale with the temple spire. Staff concludes approval of Petition SUP 22-89 for a spire height of 66’-4” from the ground for the new LDS Stake House. Staff is recommending no expiration date be attached with this SUP, as with the original approval for the new temple. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition SUP 22-89, a request for a 66’-4” high spire at the Stake House. Discussion Commissioner Brown asked Senor Planner Safrany if this Special Use Permit (SUP), if approved, would be in addition to the SUP granted for the first spire. Senior Planner Safrany replied that was correct. Petitioner, Courtney Barton, Barton Architecture, 319 N. Kinsley Ave, Winslow, AZ Ms. Barton stated there might have been an oversight in the height of the spire; we are allowed the 60-foot spire. The LDS temple is custom built and was designed especially for Farmington. The meetinghouse is a standard plan, was developed by the church, and has been built in multiple 6 areas. She added the 66 foot four inch tall spire is a standard height. That is why they are asking for the SUP for the additional six foot four inch height of the spire. Commissioner Brown asked Ms. Barton if there was a reason for that specific height for a spire. Ms. Barton replied it might be the manufactures standard height and if the client wanted a custom size, it would be at an extra cost to the client. With no further public input, Acting Chair Brown closed the public portion of the meeting. There was no discussion from the Commission. Acting Chair Brown called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to approve SUP 22-89 as presented by staff. The motion carried 5-0. Planning Manager Escobar wanted to note for the record that there would be three SUP’s on this property. The first one is for the Temple itself, which requires an SUP in Single Family zoning, the second one is for the height for the spire on the Temple and the third is for this SUP for the Meeting House spire. PETITION NO. SUP 22-99 Discussion & possible action regarding a request for a Special Use Permit (SUP) to allow for Development of a new mobile home park at 812 N. Vine. Current zoning is MF:L Multi-family Low Density Planning Manager Escobar presented the following: Petition • Applicant: Sage Creek Homes • Representative: Jim Dennis • Location: 812 N Vine • Parcel # R0028494 • Existing Zoning MF:L – Multifamily, low density • Requesting approval of a Special Use Permit for a manufactured home park • Parcel Size: 3.69 acres 7  Zoning Request • The petitioner has provided two layouts, each including 24 sites for a singlewide mobile/manufactured home. Each site is 40-feet wide by 100-feet long to accommodate a 12 foot by 80 foot manufactured unit. Each unit will be individually addressed and metered. • No subdivision of the property is proposed. Lots will be rented for placement of the homes. • Access will be off Vine Road with a central private roadway ending in a cul-de-sac. The road will be paved, and include curb, gutters and sidewalks on both sides. • A storm water detention area is proposed in the southeast corner. Approximately 15,000 square feet, or eleven percent of the entire parcel, of the southwest corner will remain open space. • The existing residence will remain. • A City of Farmington wastewater line transects the property. Development will have to accommodate providing access to this existing infrastructure. Aerial Map 8  Street View Conceptual Site Plan 9  Public Input • Notices were mailed to 15 surrounding property owners. • Staff has received a series of emails from one resident in opposition to the use of this property as a manufactured home park. These emails included an objection to the unattractive look of many local parks. Staff has included recommended conditions of approval to address these concerns. Staff Recommendation • Staff concludes the Special Use Permit request to develop a 24-unit singlewide mobile home park conforms to UDC requirements with the suggested conditions. The project will provide much-needed low-to-moderate income housing. Conditions of Approval 1. A fully dimensioned site plan, showing all setbacks and easements and fire hydrant location shall be submitted prior to development of the site. Site will be developed in general conformance to the site plan and drawings submitted. 2. A landscape plan, including a specific plan for the open space that includes a community area, bar-b-ques, bike stands and a playground, shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. Screening landscaping shall be installed along both sides of the access road. In addition, the front yards of each unit shall be finished with gravel or some other alternative. 3. Perimeter fencing, not including chain link fencing, shall be installed on the north, east and south perimeters of the property. 10 4. The developer shall record deed restrictions for the project prohibiting outdoor storage on the property. 5. A fire hydrant shall be installed within the project. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner shall record dedication of an easement for the existing sewer line. 7. All necessary building permits shall be obtained. 8. All new lighting shall be fully shielded and any existing lighting shall be converted to fully shielded. 9. All units shall be fully skirted per UDC 2.4.31.D.j. 10. Each unit shall have individual water and electric meters Discussion Commissioner Waldroup asked Planning Manager Escobar if all the people who opposed this petition were all in Multi-Family zoning and if the Comp Plan were not in place, would a Special Use Permit (SUP) still be required. Planning Manager Escobar replied that they are all Multi- Family and the SUP requirement is in the Unified Development Code (UDC), which is for the purpose of bringing a site plan forward for review. It is not necessarily for the use, it is how the property is developed. Chair Cardon clarified “development” means how the property looks and that the upkeep standards are met, so the mobile home park does not deteriorate. Planning Manager Escobar added that that is one of the criteria for an SUP approval, is that it does not have a negative impact on either the environment or the neighbors. Ms. Escobar also stated we added conditions of approval to address some of the issues we have heard from the public. Chair Cardon added that an SUP is added protection that is monitored by the City and adds an extra layer of protection to the residents and neighbors that are close by. Planning Manager Escobar explained that if this is recommended to the City Council for approval and is approved by Council with those conditions, staff monitors on an annual basis to make sure that those conditions are continued to be met. If there are violations, they can lose their SUP. Commissioner Davis asked Planning Manager Escobar about condition #2 regarding the landscaping, to ensure that happens, is that part of the building permit. Ms. Escobar replied that was correct, the landscape plan is part of the building permit and a certificate of occupancy cannot be issued until the Planning Dept. signs off on the landscaping. 11 Commissioner Waldroup asked regarding the sewer line being recorded as an easement, is that why there are two development plans so there is no development over the sewer line? Planning Manager Escobar noted she asked for an amendment to the original submittal, the only change was showing the sewer line on the top conceptual site plan, but the architect, James Dennis is here and he will clarify that for you. Commissioner Hanson noted some of the concerned comments referred to other existing mobile home parks and their state of disrepair, are you aware of any of those parks having SUP’s on them regarding special conditions. Ms. Escobar replied that most of the parks in the City are at least 20 years old. We do some code enforcements, when complaints are received. We have no ability to impose or additional design or landscaping in those parks. Commissioner Berens asked Planning Manager Escobar if the lots would be rented or owned by the property owner. Ms. Escobar replied the lots will be for rent and it will be up the tenant whether they lease their unit from someone else or they purchase one and place it there. Commissioner Brown asked if the City has a position for controlling the unit that is moved in. Ms. Escobar replied the City issues a parking permit to make sure the mobile home is placed in the correct spot; it has the right setbacks, the correct distance from both the sewer easement and other units and they need to be post 1976, which is both State and Federal requirements. Petitioner, Zach Spencer, 620 24th St, Suite C, Ogden, UT Mr. Spencer informed the Commission that his first idea was to build some sort of apartments on that lot, but after talking to some the local real estate professionals and found Farmington has a need for affordable housing. Something that can be nice and easily maintained by renters. He decided a mobile home park would be fitting and would fit in with the surrounding mobile home parks. He wants to build something nice with easily maintained landscaping and have an onsite manager to make sure that it is well maintained and to keep an eye on things around the park. Commissioner Waldroup asked Mr. Spencer if he was ok with the conditions Staff has asked for in the development of this property. Mr. Spencer replied that he is fine with the conditions. Commissioner Davis asked Mr. Spencer if he would be open to limiting the age of units that can be placed in the lot. Mr. Spencer replied he has never done that with any of his other parks he has been involved with; they follow the National Mobile Home code which is 1976. Commissioner Davis added it was just a thought to try to address some of the concerns that had been brought up. Mr. Spencer added he would think about it but wanted to make sure he would not be committing any Fair Housing Act violations. Commissioner Hanson asked Mr. Spencer if the residents would be moving in their own mobile homes or would be leasing or selling homes to those residents. Mr. Spencer replied it is his intention to have a mixture of those options. Commissioner Hanson also asked if Mr. Spencer is involved in the ownership or management of other mobile home parks in Farmington. Mr. Spencer replied that he is not involved with any mobile home parks in other states but not in Farmington, he added that he is involved with other rentals here in Farmington. 12 Petitioner Representative, James Dennis, 120 E. 28th St. Farmington, NM Mr. Dennis replied to Commissioner Waldroup’s question regarding the two different layouts of the conceptual site plan. He explained the difference was in the cul-de-sac, one has the cul-de- sac moved forward and those lots would not be rectangular which might make the development more open. Mr. Dennis wants to develop an attractive mobile home park. It will be orderly; it will have wider internal streets, curb and gutter. It will be uniform and fresh. He added they are trying to keep it economical which he feels will help address the conditions of approval. He would like to set an example for future developments. Affected Parties Steve Ellison, 333 Canyon View Dr, Farmington, NM Mr. Ellison hates to see another mobile home park in the core of Farmington, where there is world- class facilities right across the street. He is worried about how the parks will look in 10 – 15 years. He feels that Farmington does not need diverse housing and feels there will adverse impacts. As a landlord he vets his applicants and is worried this new park will rent to just anybody and that’s an invitation to problems. Mr. Ellison would like to see sidewalks along Vine Ave. He does not agree with changing the zoning for that location. Mr. Ellison agrees with the need for low-income housing, but feels it should be on the south side of town to fit in with that neighborhood. Kenneth Hallum, 4909 Sandalwood Dr, Farmington, NM Mr. Hallum owns apartments on Vine Ave. and he is worried how the proposed mobile home park will affect the property values along Vine Ave. He is also worried what the park will look like after 15-20 years, he wants to be sure that the City is going to police it for violations. With no further public input, Chair Cardon closed this public portion of the meeting. Petitioner Zach Spencer added he would be willing to meet with the public to be able answer any questions they might have. Planning Manager Escobar wanted to provide some clarification, specifically to Mr. Ellison’s questions. She pointed out on page 26 of the agenda book, where the density and dimension requirements are for mobile manufactured home parks. She stated the proposal does meet all of those requirements. This is not a zone change request it is an SUP so the spot zoning limitation does not apply. However, what staff looks for is what the general feel of the neighborhood is and it is a multi-family area, except across Vine Ave. Commissioner Brown inquired about the age of mobile homes and wants to know if there are any other standards or inspections that can be done. Ms. Escobar replied the 1976 threshold is when HUD created building requirements for the units. Now they have to meet certain requirements as a manufactured home whether they are mobile or not. It is her understanding that just like cars, you can have a nice 1982 unit and 2008 unit that is not nice. What Planning Manager Escobar suggests is working with the property owner to find a better way than the age of the unit, which could mean inspecting them all before, they are allowed to rent a space. She feels that meets the 13 concerns of the neighbors more than the year. The City issues a parking permit; the State issues the permit to place the unit and the unit has to pass the State requirements, which are the Federal requirements. Commissioner Waldroup asked if what Commissioner Davis proposed, as a thought, on the unit having to be a certain year, is that something that can be done as a recommending body, or would it violate the Fair Housing Act. Planning Manager Escobar replied she does not believe it would violate the Fair Housing Act, because they are providing a mix of rentals and personally owned units. She added the Commission, because this is an entitlement, could condition the requirements. Commissioner Waldroup asked if a better condition would be that the City would inspect these units before they go in. Ms. Escobar added that before this goes to City Council to have a list of criteria they would be looking for. Commissioner Davis asked whom that inspection fall upon. Ms. Escobar stated it would fall on Building Inspection or the Planning Division. The inspectors would already be onsite before the utilities are connected. Petitioner Spencer wanted to know if the City already had a code or checklist that would apply to mobile homes; he also wanted to add he agrees that the look/condition of the mobile home is more important than the age of it. Planning Manager Escobar replied there is not a code or checklist, but there is a seal that has to be printed that it has been inspected. She added they could come up with a checklist that would be proactive that the unit is complete, as it would come off the assembly line. Commissioner Hanson asked if this would be an opportunity to create a template that could be used as a standard going forward pertaining to the development of new mobile home parks. Planning Manager Escobar replied that could apply generally to mobile home parks moving forward. She added that the petitioner was supportive of that kind of control to protect his investment and with the Special Use Permit entitlement that allows us to closely monitor the property as this moves forward. Petitioner Spencer added he would like to have a Code of Conduct, which would have bi-laws that would need to abide by. Commissioner Berens asked if there is any kind of skirting was allowed. Planning Manager Escobar replied that it could not be anything that can be seen through, like chain link or chicken wire. Some use the corrugated metal skirting or an upgraded skirting that looks like some kind of stone. She added the Commission could make a condition or a standard if you have a preference. Commissioner Waldroup asked what the best process would be to create a template of the stipulations for future mobile home parks. Planning Manager Escobar replied that it would require an update to the UDC with the input from the Planning & Zoning Commission. She added if the Commission wanted to create specific conditions for this SUP. Then the Commission could create a template and the UDC would need to be updated. Commissioner Waldroup wanted to hear from the affected parties to see if these discussions eased their minds. 14  Recall of Affected Parties Mr. Ellison replied some of the discussions have eased his mind and he is encouraged that the developer would have an on-site manager along with a code of conduct with bi-laws. Mr. Hallum was concerned what would happen if the current developer/owner decided to sell the park. Planning Manager Escobar replied the SUP transfers with the sale of the property and so do the conditions. If the park changed owners, the City would monitor that the conditions are being met. Commissioner Hanson would like Staff and the property owner to collaborate on the checklist for the condition of the mobile home and the code of conduct. Planning Manager Escobar gave choices for the Commission to choose. 1) You can move it forward with the specific conditions. 2) You can discharge it to Staff to come back to the next meeting with conditions in agreement with the property owner. Commissioner Waldroup stated he would not feel comfortable listing specific conditions; he would like to table this petition until Staff and the owner could work out the checklist and the code of conduct. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Hanson to table SUP 22-99 to the January 12, 2023 so Staff and Mr. Spencer could collaborate on the checklist and code of conduct. The motion carried 6-0 PETITION NO. ZC 22-97 Discussion & possible action regarding a request for a ZC: Zone Change from MF:M – Multi Family Medium Density to GC: General Commercial to allow for development of a Dollar General Retail store. Parcel No. R0023726, located between E 38th Street and N Mesa Verde Ave. Planning Manager Escobar presented the following: Petition • Applicant: Leaf Properties, Inc. • Representative: Doug Kinsey • Location: N Butler, between E 38th Street and N Mesa Verde Ave • Parcel # R0023726 • Existing Zoning MF:M – Multifamily, multi-density • Requested zone change to LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial for a proposed Dollar General 15 • Parcel Size: 2.04 acres Zoning Request • The applicant is requesting a zone change from MF:M Multifamily medium density to LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial to allow for development of a Dollar General retail store on a 1.28-acre portion of a 2.04-acre parcel. • The new store is proposed to be 10,640 square feet, with 8,526 square feet of retail and 2,114 square feet of office space and storage. Access to the project will be from N Butler Avenue. • The remaining acreage will be reserved for future local neighborhood commercial development and will need to conform to the standards of the Local Neighborhood Commercial District. • Aerial Map 16 Google Earth Aerial Street View Conceptual Site Plan 17  Elevation Sage Center Professional Suites to the South 18  2040 Comprehensive Plan Public Input • Notices were mailed to 28 surrounding property owners. • One letter in opposition from resident at 3804 N Butler, directly across the street. Expressed concerns about traffic, noise and lighting. 19  Analysis – Local Neighborhood Commercial • The subject property will have driveway access directly onto N. Butler Ave. It is located between two local streets providing easy access to single-family residential areas to the west and multi-family residential to the east. In staff’s opinion, this fulfills the intent of the locational requirement in the LNC section of the UDC. • The proposed use of a retail store meets the requirements of Section 3.12.3 and the density and dimensional standards of Section 3.12.5. • The building elevation submitted complies with Section 3.12.5.A, providing a break in the visual representation of the wall every 100 feet. The exterior building color complements the office professional development to the south. • The area along N. Butler Avenue is a mix of multi-family and office professional in the area. A small retail store is compatible with these uses and adds an important component to the Mixed Use Village land use category. Analysis – UDC Requirements • Staff has requested that a looping internal circulation be examined • Parking will need to be redesigned to meet the front setback • Parking as shown is insufficient. Per the UDC, 45 parking spaces are required for this project. The site plan shows 35 parking spaces. The developer is asking for a reduction of this requirement. Staff supports this request. The Dollar General store located on 20th Street received administrative approval for a reduction in parking and there have been no issues noted at this location. • Staff suggests installation of additional ADA parking spaces along the front of the building. • N. Butler is classified as a minor arterial. It is a four lane road, two lanes each way and a center turn lane. • Under the existing zoning, 44 apartments/townhomes could be developed on this property. Butler, looking North 20  Staff Analysis • A rezone to LNC is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designation of Mixed Use Village. • The developer will be required to install sidewalk along Butler and N. Mesa Verde Avenue. • Per traffic engineering standards, a small retail store generates approximately 578 trips per day plus truck traffic. Apartments and condominiums generate an average of 500 trips per day per unit. • The project as proposed conforms with the density and dimension standards of the UDC. Staff Recommendation • The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 22-97, a request from Doug Kinsey for a zone change from MF:M Multifamily Medium Density to LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial to develop a Dollar General retail store with the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval 1. A final, fully developed site plan with dimensions shall be submitted to staff for approval. 2. Site will be developed in general conformance to the site plan and drawings submitted: • The eastern parking area shall be relocated to meet the required 30-foot front setback. • The site plan shall be reviewed to determine if a circular truck route is possible. • Truck entrance from N. Butler shall be limited to left-turn only. • Exit for all vehicles shall be limited to right-turn only. 3. A lighting plan shall be submitted with the building permit showing fully shielded exterior lighting. Fully shielded, low height bollards shall be used for the parking lot lighting. 4. Signage shall not be illuminated outside business hours. 5. A Site Traffic Analysis, as required by the Traffic Engineer, shall be submitted prior to submittal of a building permit. 6. All conditions of the City UDC 5.6 Floodplains and City Ordinance Section 14 Floods must be met. A Letter of Map Revision base on Fill (LOMR-F) must be approved by FEMA prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 7. Sidewalks and ADA ramps shall be installed along the frontage of N. Butler Avenue and N. Mesa Verde Avenue. 8. All necessary building permits shall be obtained. 9. A separate site plan shall be required for the remaining portion of the parcel. Discussion Commissioner Waldroup asked how they would control the trucks entering and exiting the property correctly. Planning Manager Escobar replied the control would be by signage and any violations would have to be observed to be cited. She added the police department is gearing up 21 to have more officers on the street to issue more traffic citations. Ms. Escobar noted they could specify in the conditions for more than just the signage needs to happen before the building permit is approved. Commissioner Berens asked are there were other businesses on that stretch of Butler Ave. that have semi-truck deliveries. Ms. Escobar replied that she does not think so. About half a mile down the road there is the planned commercial development at 30th St. and Butler Ave. She believes they have enough room for the delivery trucks to circle the buildings. Ms. Escobar added her main concern is having a large truck backing up in a parking lot that already has vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The Commission discussed different ideas on how to ensure the delivery trucks are entering or exiting the property properly, any additional engineering would be at the developers cost. Property Owner, David Rakita, 317 Albrecht Lane, Durango CO Mr. Rakita informed the Commission that they had plans to develop this property in 2007, but the contractor had disappeared so nothing was developed. Petitioner, Douglas O. Kinsey, P.O. Box 1224, Hellen, GA Mr. Kinsey informed the Commission that he and Mr. Rakita have a contract for Mr. Kinsey to purchase this property. Mr. Kinsey feels he can handle the traffic issues properly. Commissioner Waldroup asked Mr. Kinsey if the lot was big enough to have the delivery trucks circle around the store to make deliveries instead of backing into the lot. Mr. Kinsey replied that with the front set back they could not move the store forward on the lot. The only way this would work is if we cut into the bank and utilize retaining walls. There was a discussion regarding the different times of the day deliveries would be made and the different sizes of lots Mr. Kinsey has built Dollar General’s on. Mr. Kinsey noted this property was 1.2 acres, and it is a little shallower than they like to see. He added that with the exit being right turn only, they would have to create a three-lane entrance/exit to make sure people are entering and exiting properly. He added if they developed the other half of the property they could create a common space to allow the delivery trucks to turn around. Commissioner Hanson asked Mr. Kinsey why the rendition of this store looks different from other Dollar General’s around town. Mr. Kinsey replied that they were trying to complement the other building along that part of Butler Ave. Mr. Kinsey stated that the land would eventually be developed whether it is apartments, another retail store. There will be lights and traffic; and we feel this would be the best use for part of town and it will compliment what is already there. Commissioner Berens asked how close this would be to the store on 20th St. Planning Manger Escobar replied that it would be just under one mile. Mr. Kinsey and the Commission had a conversation regarding lighting, and he assured the lighting would be shielded and if they had a pylon sign, the sign would be turned off when the business was closed. 22  Affected Parties Mike Bashore, 3804 San Medina Ave. Farmington, NM Mr. Bashore stated he lives directly west and above the proposed development. He also stated that traffic has always been a big concern; he has filed many complaints with the Farmington Police Department and has spoken with the detective in charge of the street racing. He feels that a delivery truck may have to sit on Butler Ave. before it can get across traffic to back into the lot, which is a safety hazard. Mr. Bashore is also worried about a yellow glowing Dollar General sign. He also asked why they want to put a Dollar General in the middle of a residential area when just a few miles away there is a perfect commercial spot for one. He does appreciate that they want to make this Dollar General look like the surrounding strip malls. Commissioner Davis asked Mr. Kinsey if there was a condition to the zone change that there could be no pylon sign, would that ease some of his apprehension. Mr. Kinsey replied that on that one point, yes it would help. Stephen Smith, 3904 N. Mesa Verde Ave. Farmington, NM Mr. Smith stated he lives at the first house on the right as you come up Mesa Verde Ave. off Butler Ave. Mr. Smith feels Mr. Bashore covered the traffic problems correctly. He wanted to add when there is rain or snow with cold weather; the water drains from Veterans Park onto Butler Ave. and it turns into a sheet of ice. He does not agree that if apartments were put on that lot that it is going to create more traffic than a Dollar General would, and why do they need another one that is less than a mile away from the one on 20th St. Mr. Smith thinks there will be other issues for that area that would need to be considered. Logan Myers, 3902 San Median Ave. Farmington, NM Mr. Logan just purchased his home two weeks ago. He feels the traffic issues is spot on and feels the Dollar General would have a negative impact on the neighborhood. He also feels that affordable housing would go in nicely there. He stated with the park, there would be safety concerns with a retail store that stays open until 10:00 pm, that would bring loitering to the area. Mr. Myers would like these issues to be considered. Interested Parties Ben Hazelwood, 4794 Sundown Rd. Farmington, NM Mr. Hazelwood stated that there was an accident on Butler Ave. the day before the meeting and two weeks ago, there was a two-car accident, these things happen with you adding more traffic to Butler Ave. The traffic on Butler Ave. is all day long. Mr. Hazelwood wanted to echo the concerns of the previous neighbors. Katie Hunter, 614 Diamond St. Farmington, NM Ms. Hunter stated her first thought when she heard a Dollar General wanted to go into that property at the base of the hill, was the traffic issues they already have, this will only make it 23 worse. She pointed out her thoughts about Farmington and its desire to attract outside businesses, vacationers, retirees and location neutral workers made her trepidation grow. Ms. Hunter did some research about Dollar General and their target market is households making $40,000 or less per year. With first impressions being a driving force, please tell me how a business attracting households in the $40,000 range is going to enhance my neighbor’s property value and mine in the area surrounding that store. Then you have the houses on top of ‘F’ hill looking down on a Dollar General. Ms. Hunter feels Farmington is in dire need of affordable high- density housing. The City will be losing that area to solve our affordable housing availability. You want to attract viable businesses and businesses need workers so where will the influx of these workers live. Ms. Hunter is also worried that the two Dollar Generals, , will over saturate the area, and if one of the stores does not turn a profit, will they leave another vacant storefront. We all want Farmington to grow and prosper to bring in new businesses that attract new visitors, vacationers, retirees and neutral density workers, but has anyone given thought what message we are sending by having a dollar store on every corner, is this really the message we want to send. With no further public input, Chair Cardon closed the public portion of the meeting. Planning Manager Escobar noted that if the zone change is approved, they have 12 months to begin construction, if it has not begun in the 12 months the zone change is vacated. Commissioner Waldroup asked if Ms. Escobar could speak to what is allow in LNC zoning. She replied LNC is designed to be local neighborhood commercial to increase walkability. It does not allow big box, it does allow restaurants, coffee shops and cafes, services that are focused toward the residential area. It would not allow for cannabis retail. Commissioner Hanson asked Planning Manager Escobar if they could attach certain conditions as they could with a SUP. Planning Manager Escobar explained they have all the freedom to make the conditions you require, because it is an entitlement request. There was no discussion from the Commission. Chair Cardon called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup to deny ZC 22-97 because he agrees with the neighborhood and their reasons for not wanting a Dollar General. For that reason, he cannot recommend approval for the zone change. The motions was seconded by Commissioner Brown. The motion carried 6-0 PETITION NO. ZC 22-79 Discussion & possible action regarding a request for a ZC: Zone Change from IND – Industrial District to GC: General Commercial and SF-MH: Single- Family Mobile Home for a 40-acre property (Parcel No. R4005457) located on the east side of Troy King Rd. 24 Commissioner Berens recused himself, due to a conflict of interest, from hearing this petition. Senior Planner Safrany presented the following: Petition • Applicant: Michael Smith • Representative: Michael Smith • Location: 2200 Troy King Road • Parcel # R4005457 • Existing Zoning: IND: – Industrial • Requested zone change to GC: General Commercial (5 Acres) and to SF-MH: Single- Family Mobile Home (35 Acres) • Parcel Size: 40 acres Request • Petitioner is requesting a Zone Change from IND: Industrial to GC: General Commercial (5 acres) and SF-MH: Single-Family Mobile Home (35 acres). The 35 acres would contain approximately 22.3 acres of single-wide mobile home lots, 7.2 acres of double-wide mobile home lots, 2.8 acres of open space, and 2.7 acres with a community center and open space. • Residential mobile home lots are proposed to have a 20-foot front setback to include off- street parking for two vehicles. Single-wide lots must have a minimum of 40 feet of frontage on a minimum of 3,600 sf lots. Double-wide lots must have a minimum of 50 feet of frontage on a minimum of 5,-000 sf lots. • The 5 acre commercial lot is proposed to include four commercial retail buildings with lease spaces ranging from approximately 5,400 sf up to 12,000 sf. A six foot high CMU wall will separate the commercial lot from the mobile home park with convenient pedestrian walkways providing access. • The office/community center will be centrally located and cover approximately 2.7 acres including a shared space with trees, seating/tables and playground equipment. • There are approximately 2.7 acres of open space to be left in its natural state but may be enjoyed for purposes of informal and unstructured recreation and relaxation. Parts of this area can also be used as drainage retention space. 25  Zoning Map Project Details • The 2040 Comprehensive Plan shows the west side of Troy King Road zoned as Medium Density Residential and the east side of Troy King Road zoned as Industrial. • The current zoning map shows a cluster of General Commercial lots directly north of the subject property and continuing north up to Twin Peaks Blvd. • The current zoning map show SF-MH zoning directly west of the subject property on the west side of Troy King Road. The Mesa mobile home park is located in this area with approximately 300 mobile homes currently residing. • There is an active sand and gravel mining pit directly north of the subject property. The actual pit is approximately 500 feet from the north property line of the subject property at its current location • The mobile homes at the Mesa mobile home park closest to the sand and gravel pit (Northeast corner of lot) are approximately 1200 feet from the mining pit at its current location. 26  Aerial Map Actual Distances from Sand and Gravel Pit 27 Proposed Site Plan 28  Breakdown of Proposed Uses and Area Typical Single-wide and double-wide mobile home lots 29  2040 Comprehensive Plan Public Input • Letters were sent to 6 surrounding property owners. • One letter was received opposing the change in zoning and proposed land use: • Concerns about exposing residents and visitors, including especially children, to the hazards which naturally exist in mining by locating residences immediately adjacent to the land and operations of the existing sand and gravel pit. • Concerns about children being drawn to see and touch heavy equipment operating, such as loaders excavating earth and placing earth into crushers and through screens. This work produces large quantities of sand and gravel stockpiles which children can be tempted to climb and play on. • Concerns of being denied permits, licenses and insurance policies (such as liability) when it becomes necessary for renewal due to the close proximity of a 30  large housing area. This could also greatly increase the cost of producing the materials. • As an industrial activity it is now properly separated from residential and commercial activities by zoning and land use regulations. Staff Analysis 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 proposed zoning, SF-MH: Single-Family Mobile Home District, is compatible with the present zoning of the area and the existing uses of the neighborhood. The existing land use across Troy King Road is currently a mobile home park and is zoned SF-MH. The proposed GC: General Commercial District is compatible with the current IND: Industrial zoning such that many retail and commercial uses are also allowed within Industrial zoning. The current zoning map shows a cluster of General Commercial lots directly north of the subject property and continuing north up to Twin Peaks Blvd. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? There should be no anticipated adverse impacts. However, the applicant is required to mitigate any existing and/or future adverse impacts. A Site Threshold Assessment in regards to traffic will be required for this project. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Yes, the zone change request is SF-MH: Single-Family Mobile Home. The proposed design meets the maximum density requirements for a mobile home park of seven units per acre and six percent of open space. The GC: General Commercial District must meet all established requirements of the zone district and off-street parking regulations, and is allowed to develop 60% of the area for buildings. 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 serve the proposed development? Any future development will need to meet established requirements of the district. The applicant is willing to pay for the extension of utilities to the area and provide the necessary public facilities and services. Does the proposed change constitute "spot zoning" as defined in Article 11, definitions? 31 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 40 acres of parcel R4005457 is consistent with the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The existing land use along the west side of Troy King Road in this area is Single-Family Mobile Home. The east side of Troy King Road is mostly Industrial which allows many commercial and retail uses. The current zoning map shows a cluster of General Commercial lots directly north of the subject property and continuing north up to Twin Peaks Blvd. Rezoning 5 acres to General Commercial will provide more retail oriented businesses for the adjacent mobile home parks while minimizing industrial type uses thereby making the area more pedestrian friendly to the neighborhood. The requested zone change will not be detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed zone change will not be a spot zone. Staff Recommendation The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 22-79, a request from Michael Smith, for a zone change for a portion of parcel R4005457, 40 acres, from IND: Industrial District to GC: General Commercial District (5 acres) and to SF-MH: Single-family Mobile Home District (35 acres) for property located on the east side of Troy King Rd. Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: • Staff recommends the following conditions of approval: • The site will be developed in general conformance to the site plan and drawings submitted. • A landscape plan, including a specific plan for the open space at the office/community center, that includes a shared area, bar-b-ques, bike stands and a playground, shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. In addition, the front yards of each unit shall be finished with gravel or some other alternative. • Provide a 50 ft. wide paved access street, built to City of Farmington local street standards, from Troy King Road at the office/community center to the east side of the development. Site plan currently shows a 36 ft. street. • Provide minimum 4 ft. high fencing between back to back lots to prohibit vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic through private space. • Move the street furthest east of the development west between the back to back double-wide lots so one strip abuts the open space to the east and there are no longer back to back double-wide spaces. 32  • All necessary building permits shall be obtained. All General Commercial developments must meet the requirements of UDC Article 5 – Development Standards including landscaping, parking, loading and dumpsters. No drive-thru service shall be provided in this development. • All units shall be fully skirted per UDC 2.4.31.D.j • All units shall have individual water and electric meters. • Developer must complete a Site Threshold Assessment (STH) and meet all traffic requirements. • The developer shall record deed restrictions for the project prohibiting outdoor storage on the property. • Notice should be provided to tenants of the existing gravel pit to the north either at the time of lease or within the lease Discussion Commissioner Waldroup asked for clarification on the quarter mile distance. Is that a State or City requirement? Senior Planner Safrany replied that is a State requirement, it is measured from the mining pit to the closest habitable building. The pit has to be a quarter mile away. Commissioner Waldroup asked how that would affect ABC Concrete in the future. Mr. Safrany replied that was a concern, this could limit their ability to expand. Mr. Safrany added a suggested contingency to make the mobile home park applicants aware there is a gravel pit next door. Commissioner Waldroup asked if there could be a code of conduct with by laws (similar to what was addressed earlier in the SUP 22-99 petition) for this park too. Planning Manager Escobar explained that the zone change is an entitlement and the Commission can condition it as you choose or can table this petition until we come back with a specific requirement. The Commission and Senior Planner Safrany had a conversation regarding the General Commercial District strip mall parking and the landscaping between the backs of the buildings and the street. Commissioner Hanson asked if this would be a lot split. Mr. Safrany replied yes, specifically a zone change from 40 acres to the five acres General Commercial and the 35 acres to Single Family Mobile Home. Planning Manager Escobar replied the petitioner would subdivide if the Zone Change were approved. Commissioner Hanson noted the large mobile home park to the west and asked how those residents would cross Troy King Rd. to get to the strip mall. Because of the traffic on Troy King Rd. Planning Manager Escobar stated the Traffic Department has requested a site assessment, which would lead to a traffic impact analysis where they would address pedestrian and vehicular access, which may lead to a possible stop sign or round- a- bout. Petitioner, Mike Smith, 46 A Road 5455, Farmington, NM Mr. Smith is a co-owner of this property, he has a party interested in purchasing this land, and this is the development plan. 33 Commissioner Waldroup asked Mr. Smith if he would be opposed to tabling this petition until the January 12, 2023 meeting to give Staff time to come up with a list of criteria and code of conduct for these two new proposed mobile home parks. Mr. Smith referred this questions to the Petitioner Representative. Petitioner Representative, James Dennis, 120 E. 28th St. Farmington, NM Mr. Dennis feels that putting a covenant or code of conduct together is desirable. He knows the current owner and the buyers are anxious to get this going, but he agrees with taking the time to get things right. Mr. Smith is indifferent to the time frame. Mr. Dennis tried to conceive a design that would meet the multitude of constraints and opportunities that property offers. He feels it is appropriate to have an open space for children to play in. Mr. Dennis talked about the use of landscaping as a buffer to hide the utilities on the back of the strip mall and the street. Mr. Dennis and Mr. Smith talked about the gravel pit and its impact of the proposed mobile home park. The gravel pit already has to meet several requirements, which have been met. They don’t feel the gravel pit is a concern to them. Affected Parties Mitch Burns, Burns Law Group, 100 W. Apache St. Farmington, NM Mr. Burns is representing Doug and Juanita Murray and ABC Concrete. Mr. Burns provided handouts to the Commission, and he stated the Murray’s are opposed to the granting of the petition. The biggest reason is they feel this would put them out of business because of their gravel pit. They were approved by the City in 2017 to operate the gravel pit and were also approved to run an additional gravel pit in 2019. Mr. Burns provided an Air Quality General Permit issued by the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED). The State regulation for mining pit reads, “Any repositioning will maintain at least a 0.25-mile (1320 feet, 440 yards, 402 meters) setback between the area of operation and any occupied structures.” This affects their ability to get a permit and insurance. If this change is allowed, they will not be permitable or insurable. The Construction Permit issued by NMED reads, “Minimum distance from the perimeter of the Area of Operations to any existing state park, recreation area, schoolyard, private residence, office building, or other occupied structure.” Mr. Burns explained that the .25-mile radius is because the emissions are dangerous to be inhaled. He also stated that if there is any kind of change to any equipment or processes used has to be reported to NMED. Mr. Burns stated the Murray’s are not opposed to the mobile home park, they are opposed to the location of the park, because it falls in that .25-mile radius. If this petition is granted, they will be put out of business. 34 Mr. Burns added it was concerning how the Commission spent an hour hearing the petition for the Dollar General, but nothing was said what will be going into the strip mall. He added the potential new owners of this property are in the business of operating smoke shops and Asian message parlor. Mr. Burns finished by saying 1) the attractive nuisance to children, 2) pollutants going up in the air, 3) the inability to get permits and insurance, which will put the Murray’s out of business 4) and the unknown businesses going into the strip mall. Mr. Burns feels this petition needs to be denied. Commissioner Waldroup asked Mr. Burns how ABC Concrete could operate with the existing mobile home park closer that the 1320 feet. Mr. Burns replied the actual mining pit has to be the 1320 feet away from the park, which it is. Commissioner Davis asked how this .25 mile would affect ABC Concrete if another office building went in on the proposed property. Mr. Burns replied that ABC Concrete would have the same problem, unless it was and industrial business, because they would have all the OSHA equipment and would be aware of the present dangers. Commissioner Hanson asked if areas of operation of a quarry are static and how would ABC Concrete control and maintain that .25-mile separation if you do not own that land. What do you do to keep exactly what is being referred to as someone coming in under current zoning, building something that falls within that zoning and starting to operate. Mr. Burns referred these questions to Douglas Murray. Douglas Murray, 125 Poplar St. Farmington, NM Mr. Murray replied the crusher would have to move. Which takes equipment, more workers and it would have to be filed with NMED. That adds more paperwork and fees that would fall on ABC Concrete. Mr. Murray does not want his business shut down, it is a family business and he would like to pass it down to his son. He explained they had a gentleman’s agreement to buy the property that is in question, then Covid happened and they got worried. They would like to expand so they can supply their own materials and supply the public with its needs. Patti Kochevar, 2011 Troy King Rd. Farmington, NM Ms. Kochevar is opposed to this development because they just completed an infrastructure upgrade for gas and electric. Since then anytime a new home is put in we have to go through an upgrade for the electric because the transformers cannot handle any more homes. They also have issues with water pressure, and the traffic on Troy King Rd. Mr. Kochevar is also worried about the quality of homes that will be allowed to move into the proposed park. With no further public input, Chair Cardon closed the public portion of the meeting. Planning Manager Escobar wanted to clarify some of the points brought up in the public comments portion. One of the requirements is to improve the water lines, because the commercial portion of the development would need to be sprinkled. They will be required to bring up the wastewater 35 line approximately 300 feet, which is a costly investment. Ms. Escobar also wanted to clarify a point Mr. Burns quoted from his handout regarding the occupied structures. How the City defines, an occupied structure is any building that has received a Certificate of Occupancy for habitation. That would be an office building, a warehouse or a residence, anything that people are in. If you look at it that way, at least 75 percent of Mr. Smith’s property is unusable. She stated we feel Mr. Smith has the right to develop his property. The question before you on this application is this the right way to develop it. Commission Discussion Commissioner Brown stated that a gravel pit should be a .25-mile from its own property line, so they would never have this issue. Commissioner Waldroup agrees. Commissioner Waldroup stated the Commission does not want to impede any property owner in developing their property. He added this almost a lose-lose scenario for both of the property owners. Commission Waldroup made a motion to table this to the January 12, 2023 meeting to allow Staff to do some research to get answers on issues they are unclear on, a clarification from the Legal Department, and to bring back requirements for the development standards. Commissioner Hanson seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. Business from the Floor: There was no business from the floor. Business from the Chair: Chair Cardon wished everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Business from the Members: There was no business from Members Business from Staff: Planning Manager Escobar asked the Commission if there would be a quorum for the December 29, 2022 meeting. The Commission replied that there would not be. She also added we have been granted an additional position for a Long Range Associate Planner, which has been filled by Colby Gibson. We have a new CDBG Planner starting on December 19, 2022. Adjournment: With no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Hanson. The motion carried unanimously 6-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 6:54 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Joyce Cardon Tami Spencer Chair Administrative Assistant 36 To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Beth Escobar, Planning Manager Date: January 12, 2023 Subject: Development standards for Mobile/Manufactured Home Parks At the December 15, 2022 Public Hearing, the Planning Commission directed staff to draft standards for the proposed Mobile/Manufactured Home Park at 812 N. Vine, SUP 22-99. The attached standards have been reviewed and accepted by the petitioner. These standards will be incorporated into the lease agreement if the SUP petition is approved. As part of their review, the Commission may amend or accept the draft standards as presented. 37  Sage Creek Homes Mobile/Manufactured Home Park Minimum Development Standards Appearance Peeling, fading, rusted or damaged exterior surfaces must be restored to like new condition prior to the issuance of a parking permit from the City Of Farmington. Broken windows, peeling paint, dirt, grime, rust and mildew must be removed or repaired prior to the issuance of a parking permit from the City of Farmington. Window coverings visible from the street shall be limited to blinds, shutters, drapes, or curtains. Bed sheets, blankets, aluminum foil, wood, paper and cardboard are not permitted. Skirting of each unit is required and must be maintained. Trash receptacles shall be kept behind the front of the residential unit. Storage One accessory structure, a maximum of 400 square feet, per lot is allowed. A City of Farmington building permit is required for placement of an accessory structure. Yards, lawns, patios, decks, and carports shall not be used for storage. Play equipment, barbeques, bicycles and similar materials shall be placed behind the front of the unit. Any stored firewood shall be kept in an approved storage shed or stored from view by an aesthetically pleasing screen acceptable to Management. Vehicles On street parking in excess of 24-hours is prohibited. All vehicles parked on a lot must be fully operable and have a current registration. Violations of Standards A parking permit for a residential unit shall not be issued by the City of Farmington for units not in compliance with these standards. Violation of any standards shall be material and irreparable violation and breach of the Lease. 38  COMMUNITY WORKS PETITION REPORT Petition CV – Kannabis Klub – Cannabis Sales 300-foot distance requirement waiver 1930 San Juan Blvd Units A&B STAFF REPORT, January 12, 2023 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Kannabis Klub Representative Benjamin and Marlyn Nunez Date of Application November 22, 2022 Waiver of the 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis Requested Action facility to a religious institution. Location 1930 San Juan Blvd Units A&B Existing Land Use Commercial / Retail Sales Existing Zoning IND: Industrial 2040 Future Land Use Commercial Mixed Use Designation North: GC: General Commercial. Church and Restaurant Surrounding Zoning & South: IND: Industrial. Commercial / Industrial Services Land Use East: IND: Industrial. Commercial sales and services West: IND: Industrial. Commercial sales and services Publication of Notice: December 7, 2022, Farmington Daily Times Notice Requirements Property owners letter: December 7, 2022 Sign posted: December 30, 2022 Staff Planner Colby Gibson, Long Range Planner 39 STAFF ANALYSIS Background Kannabis Klub is currently leasing two units located at 1930 San Juan Blvd (Units A & B), occupying approximately 1750 SQFT of the 19,080 SQFT building. The San Juan County Assessor’s Office states that the building was built in 1996 and that the property is 1.92 acres in size. Kannabis Klub, represented by Benjamin and Marlyn Nunez is requesting a waiver of the 300- foot distance requirement from a religious institution, Desert Heights Church which is located at 1835 E. Main Street in Farmington. Per Section 2.4.67.C of the Unified Development Code, cannabis retail sales shall not be permitted within 300 feet of any school (public and private), religious institution, registered daycare center or from another dispensary. Distance is measured by a straight line from the closest property line of the retail business to the closest property line of a religious institution, school, registered daycare or dispensary exclusive of public right-of-way. The subject property and Desert Heights Church share rear property boundary lines, putting the religious institution within 300 feet. The petitioner has invested approximately $40,000 in interior remodeling and upgrades. Additionally, the petitioner has received their cannabis retailer license from the State of New Mexico. This petition was originally scheduled for the December 29, 2022 Planning and Zoning Meeting, however was rescheduled due to lack of a quorum. 40 Zoning 41 Aerial Map 42 Property Lines Adjacent 43 Street View of Subject Property 44 Subject Property Rear 45 Church Parking Lot Facing Subject Property 46 Church Parking Lot Facing Subject Property 47 Consistency with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Section 2.4.67 of the Unified Development Code states: A. Retailers of recreational cannabis shall be licensed by the State of New Mexico Cannabis Control Division. The petitioner was issued its cannabis sales license from the State of New Mexico Cannabis Control Division on 6/30/22 B. Retail sales are permitted in the Central Business, General Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts only. The subject property meets this requirement, as it is located within the Industrial Zoning District. C. Such uses shall not be permitted within 300 feet of any school (public and private), religious institution, registered daycare center or from another dispensary. Distance is measured by a straight line from the closest property line of the retail business to the closest property line of a religious institution, school, registered daycare or dispensary exclusive of public right-of-way. The subject property’s closest property line is adjacent with the religious institution’s south property line, therefore within 300 feet. D. Sales and consumption is not permitted on public property or in public places as defined in Farmington City Code 18-5-14. E. Business hours shall be daily from 7 in the morning till 11 in the evening. Kannabis Klub proposes business hours of 8am to 9pm daily. This conforms with Ordinance 2022-1336 amending operating hours for cannabis facilities to 7am to 11pm. On July 26, 2022 City Council adopted an ordinance requiring that the Planning & Zoning Commission review all variance and waiver requests related to cannabis. The Commission will make a recommendation to City Council. Previously, per the Unified Development Code, all waiver and variance requests were heard by the Administrative Review Board. 48 Consistency with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan: The 2040 Future Land Use Plan designates this location as ‘Commercial Mixed Use. Commercial Mixed Use hosts a variety of retail and services such as shopping areas, large malls, commercial centers, gyms, hospitality and entertainment services, and places of worship. The proposed use of cannabis retail sales conforms to the retail shopping use. 49 PUBLIC INPUT Letters were sent to 15 surrounding neighbors and the property was posted with a sign. Four letters have been received supporting the variance by surrounding property owners and tenants, including one from Desert Heights Church. No additional input has been received from the community. No concerns or opposition was noted by review agencies. STAFF CONCLUSION The subject property is in an industrial and commercial area, which is fitting for the use. The subject property and Desert Heights Church face two separate streets (Main St. and San Juan Blvd.) and the actual walking distance from the front door of Desert Height Church is more than 1,200 feet. Additionally the subject property is not visible from Desert Heights Church as it sits approximately 20-foot lower in elevation than the church and the properties are separated by a 50-foot natural buffer. Staff concludes approval of Petition CV 22-101 for a retail sales facility at 1930 San Juan Blvd Units A&B is appropriate. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition CV 22-101, a request from Benjamin and Marlyn Nunez of Kannabis Klub, a retail cannabis dispensary, for a waiver of the 300-foot distance requirement from a religious institution. 1. A City of Farmington business registration will be required. 2. A building/fire inspection shall be required. 3. A building permit shall be required for the existing remodeling. 4. The marking and installation of one Van Accessible parking stall shall be required per UDC Sec. 5.2.10 50 Petitioner’s Application 51 Site Plan of Subject Property 52 Petitioner’s Justification of Variance 53 54 55 56 Letters of Support 57 58 59 60 Interior Remodel: Before 61 Interior Remodel: After 62  View from subject property looking towards Desert Heights Church (north). View from Desert Heights Church looking towards subject property (south). 63  Mailing List: Properties within 100-feet. NAME ADDRESS CITYSTATEZIP ALBUQUERQUE, NM 1802 SAN JUAN LLC 3009 AZTEC RD NE 87107 1931 INVESTMENTS LLC 2201 RIVER RD FARMINGTON, NM 87401 FARMINGTON, NM 87401- BBT MANAGEMENT 3109 N MESA DR 2029 COTTONWOOD CENTER LLC 99 ROAD 5295 FARMINGTON, NM 87401 DAVIS DAVID AND MARTHA 1142 NM 516 AZTEC, NM 87410-2829 DESERT HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CHURCH OF FARMI PO BOX 3752 FARMINGTON, NM 87499 ELKE KNECHT TRUST ET AL 4220 SEDONA CT FARMINGTON, NM 87401 FARMINGTON CITY OF 800 MUNICIPAL DR FARMINGTON, NM 87401 FOUTZ D DECKER TRUST 2873 E ELGIN ST CHANDLER , AZ 85225 MALONE JAMES E AND DEBORAH A 301 MC DONALD RD FARMINGTON, NM 87401 FARMINGTON, NM 87401- MONCLOVA MARTIN AND RUBY A 1855 SAN JUAN BLVD 0000 FARMINGTON, NM 87499- SANCHEZ CHRIS O BOX 2053 2053 FARMINGTON, NM SANDEFER DOUGLAS M PO BOX 2119 874992119 10000 N 31ST AVE SHIPROCK INVESTMENTS STE D315 PHOENIX, AZ 85051 FARMINGTON, NM ZIEMS FORD CORNERS INC PO BOX 5070 874995070 64 65  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT Little Creek Subdivision VIII, Replat A Petition No. FP 22-106 A. STAFF REPORT, January 12, 2023 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Joe & Stan, LLC Representative Stan Kozimor Date of Application 12/14/2022 Requested Action Final Plat Approval Location Parcel No. R6002200 Existing Zoning N/A, property is located in San Juan County Surrounding North: San Juan County/Little Creek VIII, phase 2 South: SF-7 – Little Creek Subdivision, VII Zoning and Land East: SF-MH-undeveloped 39.61 acre parcel Use West: San Juan County, undeveloped Subdivision Class Class 1 Notice Final Plats do not require notice Staff Planner Beth Escobar, Planning Manager SUBDIVISION INFORMATION Number of Lots 48 Residential Lots Acres of Land 10.98 Minimum Lot Size Property is in San Juan County, being developed to SF-7 district standards 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 GENERAL INFORMATION 66 The petitioner is requesting final plat approval for Little Creek Subdivision, VIII, Replat A. This is a 48-lot residential subdivision in San Juan County, just north of the City of Farmington municipal boundary. The subdivision will be developed to City standards for a SF:7 residential subdivision. Lot sizes range from 6,975 square-feet to 8,906 square-feet. There are two proposed accesses from the south, extensions of Soaring Eagle Drive and Sparrow Hawk Drive. Two new roads, Harrier and Raptor Streets, shall provide access to the interior lots. In anticipation of possible future annexation of this area, streets shall be developed to City standards. Water and wastewater infrastructure shall connect to the City systems. The Preliminary Plan for this subdivision was approved by City Council on May 14, 2022. 67 STAFF ANALYSIS Per Section 8.8.4 of the Unified Development Code (UDC), 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: The property is located in San Juan County and not subject to the regulations of the UDC. The subdivision will be developed to SF: 7 standards to be consistent with all of the previous Little Creek Subdivisions within the City. 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: There are no zoning standards within San Juan County. 68 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 2020 Comprehensive Plan Land Use map designates this area as Residential Single Family Suburban. The plat as presented complies with this designation. 69 Aerial Map of Surrounding Area 70 Final Plat Sheet 1 71 Final Plat Sheet 2 72 STAFF CONCLUSION Staff concludes approval of Petition FP 22-106, Little Creek Subdivision VIII, Replat A, a 48-lot residential subdivision in Tier II of the City of Farmington is appropriate. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition 22-106, a Final Plat for Little Creek Subdivision VIII, Replat A, a submittal from Joe & Stan, LLC, represented by Stan Kozimor for Final Plat approval of a 48-lot, Class 1, subdivision of a vacant 10.98-acre parcel located in San Juan County. 1. All technical corrections to the plat and construction drawings, including all as-built plans, will be finalized and approved prior to submittal of the final plat for signature, including noted issues in this report. 2. A subdivision agreement shall be required. 3. Inspections shall be required. Inspections shall be scheduled 48 hours in advance. 4. Sale documents for individual lots shall contain language stating property owners shall not oppose any future annexation. 73 74