Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive May 25, 2023 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the May 11, 2023 P&Z Meeting 4 Petition ZC 23-31 – A request for a zone change from SF: 7 Single Family residential to GC: General Commercial. Located at 4207 Hudson St. Parcel No. R0026303. 5 Petition FP 23-32 – A request from Scott D. Bird, represented by Bob Echols of Cheney-Walters-Echols for final plat approval of a 55-lot residential subdivision Sandstone at San Juan Country Club. Parcel No. R0033344. This item has been postponed until June 15, 2023 6 Petition ZC 23-33 – A request for a ZC: Zone Change from Single-Family 7 (SF-7) to Mixed Use (MU) to allow for a 30 unit group care facility located at 400 E. Gladden Drive, a 0.44 Acre parcel. Parcel No.’s R0021960 & R0021862. 7 Petition ZC 23-35 – A request for a zone change from LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial to MU: Mixed Use to allow for a 5-unit group care facility. Located at 414 N. Wall. Parcel No. R0025214. 8 Petition ZC 23-36 – A request for a Zone Change from IND, Industrial (No minimum lot size) to MF-L: Multi-family low-density residential (minimum 10,500 sf lot size). Located at 609 S. Carlton Ave. Parcel No. R0021542. 9 Business From Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 10 Adjournment Petition items on this agenda will be scheduled for the next City Council meeting – June 13, 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. 1  Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission May 11, 2023 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on April 27, 2023 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. P&Z Members Present: Chair Clint Freeman Vice Chair Ryan Brown Shay Davis Cheryl Ragsdale Cody Waldroup Clete Berens P&Z Members Absent: Joyce Cardon Gary Hanson Staff Present: Beth Escobar Tami Spencer Others Who Addressed the Commission Scott Nygren Kim Dutremaine Billy Dutremaine Doug Dykeman Tony Martinez Call to Order Chair Freeman 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 Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the agenda with item No. 5, ZC 23-31, item No. 6, FP 23-32 and item No. 7, ZC 23-35 being removed. This motion passed unanimously by a 5-0 vote. (Commissioner Ragsdale had not yet joined the meeting.) Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Vice Chair Brown and seconded by Commissioner Berens to approve the minutes of the April 27, 2023 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 5-0 vote. (Commissioner Ragsdale had not yet joined the meeting. Swearing of Witnesses Tami Spencer, Administrative Assistant swore in all parties that wished to speak. Petition ZC 23-21 – A request for a zone change from Central Business to PD: Planned Department to allow for the placement of two pre-fab housing units at 121 N Behrend. Planning Manager Escobar presented the following: 2  Petition • Applicant: Scott Nygren, property owner • Location: 121 N. Behrend Ave • Existing Zoning: CB - Central Business • Request: Rezone to PD: Planned Development to allow for the placement of two additional residential units on the property. • Legalize existing non-conforming residential use in existing structure • Allow for future commercial uses allowed in the Central Business District • Property is 0.16 acres, 50 feet wide by 140 feet long. • There is a 20-foot wide alley to the west. This alley connects to Arrington Zoning 3 Aerial View Alley View 4  Street View Sample Site Plan 5  Looking East Sample Floor Plan 6  Staff Analysis • The proposed zoning of Planned Development will provide much needed housing. • The property is walkable to restaurants, retail stores, city facilities and a Red Apple transit stop. There are pockets of residential uses in the Central Business District. This is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan designation of ‘Downtown’. • The purpose of the Planned Development zoning is to allow for creative design and land use. The subject property is 6,970 square feet. The density of units proposed conforms to the requirements of the Multi-family Medium Density zoning District. • The petitioner is asking for reduced setbacks for the new duplex residential units. The duplex will have five-foot side setbacks and a 25-foot rear setback. This triggers the zone change request to Planned Development. • The petitioner is requesting to retain the right to allow uses typically allowed in the Central Business District. Public Notice Letters were sent to five surrounding property owners. At the time of this meeting no written input has been received. Staff Recommendation • The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-21, a request from Scott Nygren, property owner, for a zone change from CB: Central Business to PD: Planned Development to allow for a placement of two small prefabrication units or one duplex on the western portion of the lot, to allow for a residential use in the existing structure, and to allow for future uses typically allowed in the Central Business District in the existing structure at 121 N. Behrend Avenue. 1. All required building permits shall be obtained. 2. A detailed site plan delineating all dimensions shall be required to be submitted with the building permit. Site plan shall include one ADA van accessible parking space. 3. The existing fence which transects the property shall be removed. 4. One ADA van accessible parking space shall be delineated at the front of the existing structure facing Behrend Avenue. 5. Construction of a barrier shall be required protecting the 20-foot driveway. 6. Parking in the alley shall be prohibited. Discussion The Commission Asked Staff: 1. Where will the new building be placed on the property? The simple site plan shows that it will be placed on the fence line. 2. Will the alley be the access on to the property? 3. Does the petitioner own the property to the south? Will they have to drive through that property to the south to access their parking? 4. What will be the separation of new structure from the existing structure? 7 Staff Replied: 1. The existing fence will need to be removed. The building will be placed on the west side of the property, facing the alley. 2. Yes, it will be accessed by the alley, the alley is a public right-of-way. We do anticipate with the units being so small, there will be limited vehicles. We accepted minimum required parking due to the walkability of the property and the access to Red Apple Transit. 3. No, they do not own the property to the south. The front of the building will face the alley and they will access the parking from the alley. 4. There will be 20 feet separating the structures. Requirement for the fire code is only 10 feet, but the 20 feet will give each unit a little more space. Petitioner Scott Nygren, 415 Cerrillos Dr., Farmington NM Mr. Nygren stated he would like the flexibility for the house on the front of the property to be either a house or a business. At this time he was not sure if he wanted to build one house, two tiny homes or a duplex. He needs to check into the cost of each option to see what is the most affordable. The Commission Asked Petitioner: 1. You have been given a list of conditions, do you have any issues with that list? 2. Will the duplex be two stories? 3. What wall will be shared between the two units? 4. What is the square footage of the existing house on the front of the property? Petitioner Replied: 1. No, not a problem at all. 2. No, they will be single level. 3. The bedroom/kitchen wall will be shared. 4. The square footage is roughly 900 sq. ft. Affected Parties Kim Dutremaine, 653 W. Arrington St., Farmington NM Ms. Dutremaine stated she and her husband own properties at 112 Locke Ave. and 324 W. Main St. Ms. Dutremaine also stated that she believed the purpose of the Metropolitan Redistricting Agency (MRA) was to revitalize the downtown area. The City and others have put a lot into making downtown a place that people want to come too. These properties are in the historic district, when we opened Ironwood Gym and Locke Street Eats, we kept that in mind. Ms. Dutremaine added they have an event center for people to come and gather, they also have live music. They have put hundreds of thousands of dollars creating their event center. If the zone change is approved, there will be a duplex facing west looking directly at Locke Street Eats, with only an alley separating the two. Her concern is that people living in the duplex will get frustrated with the loud music and the noise coming from the event center. Would that be a desirable place to live? She also feels that a small 600 sq. ft. residence will not alleviate the housing concern in Farmington. When she read the zoning guidelines for a Planned Development (PD) she stated it talked about putting items in there that have a high quality appearance. The petitioner’s site plan is a pre fab mobile home, and for many reasons she is not ok with that. 8 Ms. Dutremaine read the following statement from the MRA Guidelines. “While each area within the MRA carries its own unique character, future development should establish transitions between neighborhoods. The City should establish zoning that discourages the development of incompatible adjacent uses, such as heavy industrial activity alongside residential developments. This protection could be achieved by establishing transitional buffer zones along the seams of neighborhood boundaries to “blur the lines” between disparate use patterns or neighborhoods.” She added there is an ally way between the proposed duplex and Locke Street Eats, and that is not a sufficient buffer zone. Especially when they have live music, and rent spaces for people to have their own events. Ms. Dutremaine is worried without a proper buffer zone that the residents of the proposed duplex will complain about the amount of activity, the noise, and the lights that come from the business. She wants to be sure that if the zoning is changed that their business that was there before the proposed duplex is protected. Ms. Dutremaine also noted that Front Line Mission at 129 N. Behrend Ave., hands out food twice a week and the alley way at Behrend Ave. is usually blocked from about 8:00 am too late in the afternoon. She believes the alley access and the parking will be a problem. She added when they built their project they were held to city standards regarding setbacks, the 20 foot space between parking areas and light pollution. She and her husband Billy Dutremaine are frustrated as community members, they built something for the community. They are trying to help revitalize downtown and go along with the MRA Action Plan. It you were to allow this it feels like the petitioner would be held to a different standard. She does not want a prefab or whatever plopped in the middle of historic downtown. The Dutremaine’s want to make sure that Locke Street Eats will not be affected and have to modify their business model to satisfy the zone change. The Commission Asked Ms. Dutremaine: 1. Your main concerns are: a) Any noise complaints you may get from the proposed duplex? b) The aesthetics of the proposed duplex? c) What do you feel would be ideal for that property? 2. You don’t think mixed use is good for downtown? 3. How late do you allow the music at your facility? 4. How often do you have those events? 5. Have you had noise complaints? Ms. Dutremaine Replied: 1. Yes, those are the main concerns. We actually tried to buy that property for an extension of Locke Street Eats. Since they could not acquire that lot, she would like to see something artistic that went along with events that happen or something that would benefit the community as a hole. 2. Mixed use is good, if you were to put short term rentals there. That would probably be good, but we are not even sure what the petitioner wants to build there, so how can you give him a zone change without an actual site plan. 3. The live music goes to 10:00 during the week and 11:00 on the weekend. 4. We have events every weekend starting in April through October. 9  5. We have had no complaints, a lot of the residents who live north of Locke Street Eats walk down and hang out. William Dutremaine, 653 W. Arrington St., Farmington NM Mr. Dutremaine stated he put a lot of time, effort and money into making this space for the community. They took extra precautions to make sure that they were not affecting the residential area surrounding Locke Street Eats. They worked with engineers on the stage placement so it would not affect the neighborhood. If a family moves into the new residence, their quality of life will drastically affected. They have night shows, live music and adult comedy shows that is above PG-13. He wouldn’t want his kids sitting in a house listening to vulgar comments made by a comedian. He also stated that he is not in this for the money, he built it to bring the community together. Mr. Dutremaine measured the alley and does not agree with the city that the alley is 20 feet, he measured 15 feet. He is just frustrated because he built Locke Street Eats by the book and when mistakes were made by the city it came out of his pocket, but he continued to build. He also stated that he lets Front Line Mission use their parking lot so they won’t block Behrend Ave. He added if a family moves into the proposed duplex, they will have a hard time using the alley for access to their property. Mr. Dutremaine added all of his events are free to the public and he invites all the neighbors to attend their events. They have not had one complaint, but knows a family would complain if they lived just across the alley from Locke Street Eats. He is adamantly against this zone change. Petitioner Nygren Addresses the Commission Mr. Nygren informed the Commission that whatever he puts there will be very nice. It will resemble the house of the front of the property. He added the people that would be residing in the duplex would be aware of the activities happening at Locke Street Eats. He brought up the point that the people waiting in the alley for food at Front Line Mission may be a hazard too. The Commission Asked Mr. Nygren: 1. Will these units be pre-fab? 2. Would you approve of a condition stating no pre-fab units? 3. If you were going to do this anyway, why not extend the existing house? 4. Is there another way to get access to the parking area for these units? 5. Have you considered a VRBO or some kind of temporary rental? Mr. Nygren Replied: 1. No they would be site built. 2. Yes, I don’t have a problem, we were planning on site built units. 3. My son and I were looking at getting some extra income out of the new units. 4. No, the access would have to be through the alley. 5. There are a few rentals up the street, but I hadn’t thought about that. The Commission Asked Staff: 1. Is the alley one way or two way? 2. Are most of the homes in that zoning district all zoned commercial? 3. With the zone change, would mobile homes be allowed? 10  4. What does the city view as pre-fab? 5. Can we add no pre-fab homes, only site built to the conditions? 6. What about the noise issue that was brought up? What if there are multiple complaints. 7. If the tenants made a noise complaint, how is that handled? 8. If the alley is only 15 feet, how does that get addressed? 9. Can we dictate what is in the lease agreement? Staff Replied: 1. The alley is two way. The only traffic that should be in the alley would be to access Pals or to access Locke Street Eats. 2. The zoning is all central business, I couldn’t tell you what is commercial and what is residential. There are residences across Locke Ave. There is some upper story residential along W. Main St. and possibly along Behrend Ave that have been residential forever. Residential and businesses are mixed all around this area. 3. We do allow manufactured homes in all residential uses, but this is a planned development so it has to be developed as specified, and we are not specifying manufactured or mobile homes. We can also clarify that in the conditions if the Commission is comfortable with that. 4. Pre-fab would be a modular home. Manufactured mobile homes are HUD certified and modular homes are state certified by the CID and have to be built to those standards. 5. Yes you could add that to the conditions. 6. As Mr. Nygren mentioned, any one moving into these units would be made aware that they are moving into a vibrant downtown. 7. The complaint would have to be valid and so far under their current operation Locke Street Eats has not been outside of the regulation. If there was a complaint a code enforcement officer would go out and take decibel readings and either proceed with the complaint or let the complainant know they are within the allowable noise decibel. If there are multiple noise complaints which are not valid, it will never get to the Dutremaine’s. If the complaints are valid then the Dutremaine’s would be contacted and advised how to address the issue. 8. Both the fire department and police department reviewed this application and the only concern fire had was the access to the building, they were not concerned with the width of the alley. They could get an emergency vehicle to Behrend Ave. then get to the residences from there. 9. If you are worried about noise complaints you can dictate what is in the lease agreement. This is a zoning entitlement, so you get to make the rules. We would probably be more comfortable with an acknowledgement of the location by the tenant. Interested Parties Doug Dykeman, 211 N. Orchard Ave., Farmington NM Mr. Dykeman wanted to thank the owner of the property, that a refurbishment of the Hippenmeyer house is greatly appreciated. Mr. Dykeman stated he is opposed to the rezoning to a PD. He has issues regarding the compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan and the MRA itself. The Comp Plan does not include PD as an allowed zoning. However, the MRA has a history of promoting residential use of the upper floor of buildings on Main St. The MRA states that the downtown core will also benefit the introduction of housing overtime to provide more feet on the street as well as market support for businesses. It appears that both plans would encourage residential development, but they suggest it should be outside of downtown. 11 Mr. Dykeman also stated in the UDC, the PD zone does not appear to be appropriate for a lot that measure less than a quarter of an acre. Section 4.1.1 of the UDC identifies a PD as a special purpose district. Which district implies a larger area and seems inconsistency with this application on a small property. Section 4.1.7 requires a master plan for the PD. The application before you does not appear to be a master plan and it does not mention development of a master plan. Section 4.1.8 B which list the district standards for a PD. A minimum of ten percent of the site shall be developed as usable common open space; i.e., pocket park, play space, plaza, picnic area, etc. Usable common open space shall include buildings and/or facilities devoted to recreational and social center purposes. This requirement is not discussed in the application or shown of the plan view of the site. Section 4.1.10 Architectural review, this is not a requirement but can be asked for by Planning & Zoning or City Council can request an architectural review. Mr. Dykeman thinks this should be considered before a zone change is approved because the property is in an established historical district. This is mentioned in the staff analysis but the analysis does not suggest an architecture is compatible with the neighborhood. Mr. Dykeman added if this zone change was approved in the central business district, it would represent a spot zone which may lead to more spot zoning throughout the district. The main concern for the downtown development was to provide welcoming environment for businesses. Do we as a city really want to carve out a piece of the only business district we have. He feels that PD is the wrong zone to be changing this too. With no further public input, Chair Freeman closed the public portion of the meeting. No Commission discussion needed, Chair Freeman called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Davis to deny ZC 23-21. The motion carried 6-0. Discussion/possible action regarding proposed changes to the Cannabis Regulations of the Unified Development Code. Planning Manager Escobar informed the Commission that Mayor Duckett has asked that we bring forward changes to the cannabis section of the UDC to include residential uses as one of the uses that require a 300 foot distance. It would be for all types of cannabis use. Retail sales, manufacturing and production. Planning Manager Escobar and the Commission discussed the proposed changes. 12 Proposed UDC Changes 13 Cannabis Sales for the Month of April 2023 14 Tony Martinez, CEO of Lava Leaf Organics, 5100 E. Main St. Ste. 105, Farmington NM Mr. Martinez addressed the Commission and provided a summary of the cannabis industry at the state and local level. Motion After the Commission discussion a motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup to table this discussion. This motion was withdrawn. After additional discussion a new motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Berens to approve the changes to the UDC. The motion carried unanimously 6-0. The Commission gave direction to Staff to have further discussions regarding the cannabis industry. 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: Planning Manager Escobar shared with the Commission that the City Manager’s office has brochures which are a snapshot of the Comprehensive Plan that are available to share. Adjournment: With no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Davis. The motion carried unanimously 6-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 4:52 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Clint Freeman Tami Spencer Chair Administrative Assistant 15  COMMUNITY WORKS PETITION REPORT Petition ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street A. STAFF REPORT, May 11, 2023 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Kenny Kendrick, Ken Investment, LLC Representative Same Date of Application March 22, 2023 Requested Action Zone Change request from SF:7 Single family residential to GC: General Commercial Location 4207 Hudson Street Existing Land Use Vacant residential building Existing Zoning SF:7 Single family residential 2040 Future Land Use Mixed Use Village Designation Surrounding Zoning & Land North: GC: Citizens Bank Use South: SF:7 Single Family Residential East: GC: Single Family Home West: SF:7 Single Family Residential Notice Requirements Publication of Notice: April 12, 2023, Farmington Daily Times Property owners letter: April 25, 2023 Sign posted: April 21, 2023 Staff Planner Beth Escobar, Planning Manager STAFF ANALYSIS Background The petitioner, property owner of 4207 Hudson Street, is requesting a zone change from SF:7 Single Family Residential to GC: General Commercial. There is an existing 937 square foot residential building constructed in 1950 on the subject property. The building is rundown and boarded up and the site has been a code enforcement issue due to vagrants, trash, weeds etc. The petitioner intends to demolish the existing house, finish the lot with gravel and fence it off. The petitioner believes this property is better suited for commercial development due to the surrounding area. The subject property is 0.23 acres. 17  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street Zoning 18  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street Aerial View 19  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street FARMINGTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan’s 2040 Future Land Use Map designation is Mixed Use Village. One of the trends noted for this land use designation is to ‘create a better balance between market-supported, commercial-designated area and residential areas’. The general location noted for Mixed Use Village land designation includes ‘small pockets buffering commercial area from Medium Density Residential developments. STAFF ANALYSIS The Unified Development Code states that the City shall consider whether the proposed zoning and land use are compatible with the conforming zoning and land use of nearby properties and with the character of the neighborhood. Section 8.7.4 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) outlines issues for consideration in determining a proposed zone change as follows: A. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the Farmington Comprehensive Plan? Yes, the proposed zoning of GC: General Commercial is consistent with the Mixed-Use Village designation of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use(s) compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and the character of the neighborhood? GC: General Commercial zoning exists across Hudson Street to the north and Iles Avenue to the east. The first lot on the block is also zoned commercial, however there is no structure on the property and it appears to be used as parking. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? 20  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street No immediate adverse impacts are noted. Any future commercial development on the property shall comply with the residential protection requirements of Section 5.10 of the Unified Development Code. Demolition of the existing structures and fencing of the property will resolve current code enforcement issues. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Any future commercial development shall comply with the regulations of the GC: General Commercial District. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? Future development on the site shall conform to the requirements of Section 2.8.1 of the Unified Development Code. F. Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone? If utilities are not available, could they be reasonably extended by the applicant? Is the applicant willing to pay for the extension of public facilities and services necessary to service the proposed development? Access and utilities are already in place. G. Does the proposed change constitute “spot zoning” as defined in Article 11, definitions? UDC 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 does not constitute spot zoning by this definition. The proposed zone change is in conformance with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to eight surrounding property owners. At the time of this report no comments have been submitted. STAFF CONCLUSION In staff’s opinion, the zone change request is appropriate for the neighborhood and will revitalize a dilapidated property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-31, a request from Ken Kendrick, property owner, for a zone change from SF:7 – Single Family Residential to GC: General Commercial, to allow for commercial development on the property at 4207 Hudson Street. 1. All required building permits shall be obtained. 2. Future commercial development shall comply with the requirements of Section 5.10- Residential Protection of the Unified Development Code. 21  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 100 FEET NAME1 ADDRESS CITYSTATEZIP BUTLER EAST MAIN LLC 6301 TRIANA ST SANTEE, CA 920715671 FARMINGTON, NM CITIZENS BANK PO BOX 4140 874994140 FARMINGTON, NM HAMILTON W G INTER VIVOS TRUST ETAL PO BOX 3523 874993523 KEN INVESTMENT LLC 1451 SHANNON LN FARMINGTON, NM 87401 FARMINGTON, NM MAESTAS ORLANDO 1309 N TUCKER AVE 874018609 3503 SIERRA VISTA FARMINGTON, NM MAESTAS RAYMONCITA DR 874028352 SANCHEZ RENE O AND GONZALES AURTHUR R 4301 LARGO ST FARMINGTON, NM 87402 FARMINGTON, NM 87402- TOLEDO HELEN W 3409 ILES AVE 8615 22  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street 23  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street PLANNING MEMO ZC 23-31 DEADLINE: April 7, 2023 City of Farmington Departments CW Planning Manager – B. Escobar CW Addressing – Planning Division A demolition permit will be required to CW Chief Building Official – D. Childers remove the building CW Long Range Planner – C. Gibson See Comment Below: CW MPO – P. Koeppel No Comment CW Oil & Gas Inspector CITY City Manager’s Office – J. Baird No Comment ELEC Customer Care Manager – L. Richardson ELEC Electrical Engineering –Roberto Ga No Comment FIRE Fire Captain – K. Rix No comments from the Fire Marshal's FIRE Fire Marshall – B. Vega Office. We appreciate them removing a dangerous structure. LEGAL City Attorney – J. Breakell LEGAL Deputy City Attorney – R. Frost No Comment POLICE Code Compliance – M. Romero No Comment POLICE Sergeant – J. Jensen PRCA Parks - R. Crosby PRCA ORII – W. Unsicker CW City Engineer – I. BlueEyes CW Engineering – T. Sitta No Comment CW Streets Superintendent – C. Fuller CW Traffic Engineer – M. Hathcock CW Water/Waste Water – D. Dalton No Comment Other Entities New Mexico Gas Company – R. Castillo No Comment CenturyLink/Lumens – L. Joe Enterprise Field Services – M. Waszut No Comment Comcast Cable – M. Johnson JACOBS – P. Johnson No Comment Surface Land Negotiator for BP – M. Venzara Farmington School District – C. Lyons COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 24  City of Farmington ZC 23-31 4207 Hudson Street CW – Long Range Planner – C. Gibson The 2040 Comprehensive Plan designates this location as ‘Mixed Use Village’. The proposed zone change to GC: General Commercial is in conformance with the designation as it allows a diversity of shops and services focused on in the district. 25  STAFF REPORT A request for a ZC: Zone Change from Single-Family 7 (SF-7) to Mixed Use (MU) to allow for a group care facility located at 400 E. Gladden Drive, a 0.44 Acre parcel. STAFF REPORT, MAY 25, 2023 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Come As You Are Representative Leilani and Darin Gregg Date of Application March 30, 2023 Requested Action The petitioner is requesting a Zone Change to Mixed Use (MU) to allow for a group care facility. Location 400 E. Gladden Dr. Farmington, NM 87401 (R0021960 & R0021862) Existing Land Use Vacant religious institution Existing Zoning Single-Family 7 2040 Future Land Use Medium Density Residential Designation Surrounding Zoning & North: SF-7: Single-Family 7- Residential use Land Use South: SF-7: Single-Family 7- Religious Institution Use East: SF-7: Single-Family 7- Residential use West: SF-7: Single-Family 7- Residential use Notice Requirements Publication of Notice: May 8, 2023, Farmington Daily Times Property owners letter: May 8, 2023 Sign posted: May 12, 2023 Staff Planner Colby Gibson, Long Range Planner 1|Page 27  ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report BACKGROUND 400 E. Gladden Drive includes two parcels R0021960 & R0021862, with a combined size of 0.44 Acres. The property has one 8,808 square foot building built in 1965. The petitioner proposes a zone change to Mixed Use to allow for a group care facility for approximately 27 adult women. Group care facilities are not permitted in the existing zoning Single-Family 7, however are permitted by right in the Mixed Use zoning district. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The petitioner plans to operate a 12 month residential recovery and discipleship program. The program will house an estimated 27 residents at a time and will include two live-in staff members. The petitioner states that the business will operate from 9am to 5pm daily. Residents and live-in staff members will be on the premises 24 hours a day, seven days a week with the exception of planned activities away from the facility. Of the 27 total residents, 20 women will reside in a dorm area with bunk beds, dressers and lockers. The remainder of the women will be housed in separate bedrooms. Staff members are allocated two separate rooms and manage the residents of the program. Internal and external building improvements are planned per the petitioner. A site plan has been provided by the petitioner and includes the following spaces: Lower floor: Kitchen, dining, lounge, offices, multi-purpose room, storage rooms, restrooms (2), bedroom (1). Upper floor: 20 bed dormitory room, separate resident bedrooms (4), resident restroom, staff restroom, group restroom / shower, staff bedrooms (2), washer/dryer utility room, storage. 2|Page 28 SUBJECT PROPERTY 3|Page 29 AREA OVERVIEW 4|Page 30 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report SURROUNDING USES Subject Property School Multifamily Residential Church Single-Family Residential 5|Page 31 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report ZONING 6|Page 32  ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report UDC SEC. 2.4.25 - GROUP CARE FACILITY STANDARDS Group care facilities must comply with the standards of this section. A. Care may be provided for more than eight adults or 12 minors, including 24-hour caregivers may reside in any group care facility. The petitioner is proposing 27 residents. B. City Council may increase occupancy limits where the square footage of the building, lot size, and similar factors warrant increased occupation. Not necessary C. Applications for group care facilities shall include: 1) A site plan prepared in accordance with the requirements of section 8.5 shall be approved and filed with the findings of fact and conclusions of law. A site plan has been provided by the applicant. 2) Detailed plan of operation showing proposed hours, number of residents, number of staff and number of 24-hour equivalent staff, lighting and other similar components that impact neighboring uses. Narrative has been received by staff. 27 residents are proposed. Operating hours are 9am-5pm. Two staff members will be present on site. No exterior changes are proposed that would impact neighboring uses. 3) Demonstration that a group care facility will not be used for purposes other than serving the residents except for normally allowed uses of the district. Petitioner meets this requirement. 4) Off street parking plan in accordance with the provisions of section 5.2. Off street parking meets UDC Sec 5.2 requirements. D. Applications for permission to construct or operate a group facility shall be accompanied by copies of all valid permits required by the State of New Mexico. Any approval may be conditioned upon approval by the appropriate state agency. Petitioner is required to abide by all state requirements as applicable. E. All group care facilities shall have direct access to a dedicated public street. Direct access is provided on East Gladden and Monterey Ave. F. All group care facilities shall comply with the applicable state requirements for the location of such facilities and the minimum square feet of safe, outdoor recreation area and usable floor area for every person that the facility is licensed to accommodate. Petitioner is required to abide by all state requirements as applicable. G. The applicant must demonstrate adequate access and circulation for police, fire, ambulance, and other emergency vehicles and must prominently display the street address. Increases in traffic above the allowed uses in the zoning district may not impact the safety of abutting landowners. Site access and circulation meets City requirements. H. The City may impose other conditions that it deems necessary and appropriate to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare. Conditions are outlined in staff recommendation. I. A 24-hour equivalent care provider shall be a single provider residing in the facility or a number of providers who together provide coverage totaling 24-hopurs and may be housed on site. Two staff members will be housed on site. J. Services shall be provided to persons who because of mental or physical disability, addition to drugs, alcohol, incarceration, or family/school problems require specialized attention and care to achieve personal interdependence. Services are provided for persons recovering from addiction to drugs and other substances. 7|Page 33  ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report STAFF ANALYSIS The Unified Development Code states that the City shall consider whether the proposed zoning and land use are compatible with the conforming zoning and land use of nearby properties and with the character of the neighborhood. Section 8.7.4 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) outlines issues for consideration in determining a proposed zone change as follows: A. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the Farmington Comprehensive Plan? The Comprehensive Plan’s 2040 Future Land Use Map designates this areas as Medium Density Residential. Medium Density Residential provides for a mix of housing options supporting vibrant and inclusive neighborhoods including townhomes, duplexes, live/work units, and group care facilities. The proposed zone change and use conforms to the Medium Density Residential designation. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use(s) compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and the character of the neighborhood? The Mixed Use zoning and land use is compatible with the current conforming uses and character of the neighborhood. Properties in the area are primarily single family with scattered multi family, religious and institutional uses nearby. Mixed Use zoning accommodates low-intensity mixed-uses while maintaining a strong residential character. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? 8|Page 34  ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report No adverse impacts have been identified. The petitioner will be subject to all group care facility standards outlined in UDC Sec. 2.4.25. Minimum off-street parking requirements are met as outlined in UDC Sec. 5.2.3 (A). Group care facilities are required to provide a minimum of two parking spaces per dwelling unit plus one per employee. 30 parking spaces, four of which are handicapped accessible and two van-accessible. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Group care facilities are not subject to zoning district density standards. For reference- UDC Section 2.8, the proposed zoning of MU allows up to 8 dwelling units. • The mixed use (MU) district is intended to accommodate low-intensity mixed-uses with a strong residential character. The MU district provides specific standards for the development of limited business, office, or service uses in existing residential structures, or in new structures within residential areas. • The MU district is intended to implement the planning policies of the comprehensive plan's "Mixed Use" land use designation, in the Animas Neighborhood (South of Broadway) and the Civic Center Neighborhood (north and west of the Civic Center). • Allowed uses. Uses are allowed in the MU district in accordance with the use table of section 2.3. • Density and dimensional standards. All development in the MU district is subject to the density and dimensional standards of section 2.8. Minimum front setbacks shall be treated as (mandatory) build-to lines as specified in section 2.8.2, nonresidential base zoning district density and dimensional standards. • District standards. Standards applicable in the MU district include the following: o All parking shall be located in the rear yard, or interior of the property, and accessed from an alley where such alley access is available. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The site as proposed meets all of the relevant regulations of the Unified Development Code. Existing buildings and structures will be utilized. Interior building improvements are planned per the petitioner. The petitioner has supplied staff with a site plan indicating the layout of the proposed group care facility that meets building standards. F. Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone? If utilities are not available, could they be reasonably extended by the applicant? Is the applicant willing to pay for the extension of public facilities and services necessary to service the proposed development? Access to the site is provided on E. Gladden Drive, with additional alley access to the north. All utilities are available to the site. The COF Water/Wastewater Division has verified that the existing water and wastewater infrastructure is adequate for the use and number of residents. Gladden Dr and Monterey Ave are local streets (no ADT study). Dustin Ave serves as a minor arterial (3,423 ADT) and Ute St serves as a collector (1,194 ADT). 9|Page 35  ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report G. Does the proposed change constitute “spot zoning” as defined in Article 11, definitions? UDC 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 does not constitute spot zoning by this definition. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map designates this area as Medium Density Residential which permits group care facilities. Additionally, while there is no specific Mixed Use zoning in the area, there is a variety of Multi-Family and institutional uses nearby. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 16 surrounding property owners. At the time of this report, no written public comment has been received. Staff has received one phone call from an affected party with concerns regarding the proximity of the group care facility to McKinley Elementary School. STAFF CONCLUSION • The proposed use is in compliance with the Unified Development Code density standards outlined in UDC Sec. 2.8 as well as the standards for group care facilities outlined in UDC Sec. 2.4.25. • The proposed zone change and use is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • The proposed zone change and use is compatible with the surrounding area and nearby uses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-33, a request from Come As You Are, represented by Leilani and Darin Gregg, for a Zone Change from Single- Family 7 to Mixed Use to allow for a group care facility located at 400 E. Gladden Drive with the following conditions of approval: 1) Permits shall be required for building improvements. 2) A fire and building inspection shall be required. 3) A fire suppression system meeting City of Farmington standards shall be required. 4) Standards outlined within UDC Sec. 2.4.25 shall be met and maintained while the group care facility is in operation. 10 | P a g e 36 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 11 | P a g e 37 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 12 | P a g e 38 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 13 | P a g e 39 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 14 | P a g e 40 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 15 | P a g e 41 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 16 | P a g e 42 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 17 | P a g e 43 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 18 | P a g e 44 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 19 | P a g e 45 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 20 | P a g e 46 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 21 | P a g e 47 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 22 | P a g e 48 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 23 | P a g e 49 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 24 | P a g e 50 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 25 | P a g e 51 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 26 | P a g e 52 ZC 23-33 400 E. Gladden Drive Farmington, NM 87401- Staff Report 27 | P a g e 53  COMMUNITY WORKS PETITION REPORT Petition ZC 23-35 – 414 N Wall Ave A. STAFF REPORT, May 25, 2023 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Family Crisis Center Representative Carlyn Rodahl Date of Application April 8, 2023 Requested Action Zone Change request from LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial to MU: Mixed Use to allow for a 5-room group care facility with a kitchen, lounge, office and laundry room. This is an extension of the existing Family Crisis Center at 410 N. Wall Avenue Location 414 N. Wall Avenue Existing Land Use Commercial building, vacant Existing Zoning LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial 2040 Future Land Public Facilities Use Designation Surrounding North: LNC: Family Crisis Center Offices/Apache Queen Laundry Zoning & Land Use South: MU: Pals Private Duty and Homecare East: LNC: Parking Lot West: MU: Lions Pool Facility Notice Publication of Notice: May 12, 2023 Farmington Daily Times Requirements Property owners letter: May 1, 2023 Sign posted: May 5, 2023 Staff Planner Beth Escobar, Planning Manager PROPOSAL The petitioner is requesting a zone change from LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial to MU: Mixed Use to allow for a 5-room transitional facility. Rooms may be occupied by an individual or a family. This is an extension of the Family Crisis Center Group Care Facility located at 410 N Wall Ave. The existing 2,620 square-foot building will be remodeled with no addition to the footprint. Because of the potential for occupancy in excess of 7 residents, this proposal would be classified as a Group Care Facility. Per Section 2.3 of the Unified Development Code, Group Care Facilities are not a permitted use in the Local Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District. Family Crisis Center provides shelter and support services to victims of domestic violence. 55  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Ave. Zoning 56  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue Aerial View 57  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue Site Plan 58  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue Floor Plan 59  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Ave. FARMINGTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan’s 2040 Future Land Use Map designation is Public Facilities. Public Facilities support civic uses including local and state government buildings such as the airport, offices, libraries, museums, theaters, public and private schools, and colleges. Previously categorized as Institutional, these areas should support the community with accessible walkways, central locations, integrated design standards, and supportive transit. Several of the institutional areas are small buildings mixed with other uses downtown, while others are large campuses with large green spaces, dining facilities, and support a large number of employees. The proposed group home facility use is congruent with the Public Facilities land use designation. MRA District The subject property is located within the Civic Center Neighborhood District of the Metropolitan Regional Area Plan. Two strategies for this district listed in the 2019 Downtown Plan are: 1. Revitalize, protect and reinvest in the Civic Center Neighborhood’s residential character. 2. Review, reevaluate, and revise as appropriate Civic Center Neighborhood zoning to support desired land uses and development projects. The proposed rezone and use supports both of these strategies. 60  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue GROUP CARE FACILITY STANDARDS Group care facilities must comply with the standards of Section 2.4.25 of the UDC A. Care may be provided for more than eight adults or 12 minors, including 24-hour caregivers may reside in any group care facility. The petitioner is proposing 27 residents. B. City Council may increase occupancy limits where the square footage of the building, lot size, and similar factors warrant increased occupation. Not necessary C. Applications for group care facilities shall include: 1) A site plan prepared in accordance with the requirements of section 8.5 shall be approved and filed with the findings of fact and conclusions of law. A site plan has been provided by the applicant. 2) Detailed plan of operation showing proposed hours, number of residents, number of staff and number of 24-hour equivalent staff, lighting and other similar components that impact neighboring uses. Narrative has been received by staff. 27 residents are proposed. Operating hours are 9am-5pm. Two staff members will be present on site. No exterior changes are proposed that would impact neighboring uses. 3) Demonstration that a group care facility will not be used for purposes other than serving the residents except for normally allowed uses of the district. Petitioner meets this requirement. 4) Off street parking plan in accordance with the provisions of section 5.2. Off street parking meets UDC Sec 5.2 requirements. D. Applications for permission to construct or operate a group facility shall be accompanied by copies of all valid permits required by the State of New Mexico. Any approval may be conditioned upon approval by the appropriate state agency. Petitioner is required to abide by all state requirements as applicable. E. All group care facilities shall have direct access to a dedicated public street. Direct access is provided on East Gladden and Monterey Ave. F. All group care facilities shall comply with the applicable state requirements for the location of such facilities and the minimum square feet of safe, outdoor recreation area and usable floor area for every person that the facility is licensed to accommodate. Petitioner is required to abide by all state requirements as applicable. G. The applicant must demonstrate adequate access and circulation for police, fire, ambulance, and other emergency vehicles and must prominently display the street address. Increases in traffic above the allowed uses in the zoning district may not impact the safety of abutting landowners. Site access and circulation meets City requirements. H. The City may impose other conditions that it deems necessary and appropriate to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare. Conditions are outlined in staff recommendation. I. A 24-hour equivalent care provider shall be a single provider residing in the facility or a number of providers who together provide coverage totaling 24-hopurs and may be housed on site. Two staff members will be housed on site. J. Services shall be provided to persons who because of mental or physical disability, addition to drugs, alcohol, incarceration, or family/school problems require specialized attention and care to achieve personal interdependence. Services are provided for persons recovering from addiction to drugs and other substances. 61  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue STAFF ANALYSIS The Unified Development Code states that the City shall consider whether the proposed zoning and land use are compatible with the conforming zoning and land use of nearby properties and with the character of the neighborhood. Section 8.7.4 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) outlines issues for consideration in determining a proposed zone change as follows: A. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the Farmington Comprehensive Plan? Yes, the proposed zoning, providing a public service, is consistent with the Public Facilities designation. The property is fully developed with sidewalks on the west providing a walkable connection in the area. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use(s) compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and the character of the neighborhood? The proposed zoning of MU: Mixed Use is compatible with the surrounding area. There is existed MU zoning to the east, south and west. Per UDC Section 3.11, the mixed-use district is intended to accommodate low-intensity mixed-uses with a strong residential character. A group home facility aligns with this intention. The surrounding developments, including the existing Family Crisis facility to the south, the parking to the east, and the park facility to the west are nicely landscaped. Staff is recommending a condition that landscape areas in conformance with Section 5.5 of the UDC be added to the site within one year of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? No adverse impacts have been identified. With the connection to the existing facility to the south, and the availability of parking along the east, minimum off-street parking requirements as outlined in UDC Sec. 5.2.3.A are met. Staff is suggesting a condition that one van-accessible ADA parking spot be added as close to the south facing entry door as possible. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Group care facilities are not subject to zoning district density standards, however the propose structure conforms to the density and dimensions of the Mixed-Use District. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The site as proposed meets all of the relevant regulations of the Unified Development Code. Existing buildings and structures will be utilized. A building permit has been submitted for interior building improvements. F. Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone? If utilities are not available, could they be reasonably extended by the applicant? Is the applicant willing to pay for the extension of public facilities and services necessary to service the proposed development? Access and utilities are already in place. 62  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue G. Does the proposed change constitute “spot zoning” as defined in Article 11, definitions? UDC 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 does not constitute spot zoning by this definition. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map designates this area as Public Facilities which permits institutional uses. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 12 surrounding property owners. At the time of this report no comments have been submitted. STAFF CONCLUSION • The proposed use is in compliance with the Unified Development Code density standards outlined in UDC Sec. 2.8 as well as the standards for group care facilities outlined in UDC Sec. 2.4.25. • The proposed zone change and use is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • The proposed zone change and use is compatible with the surrounding area and nearby uses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-35, a request from Family Crisis Center, property owner, for a zone change from LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial to MU: Mixed Use to allow for development of a group care facilities in an existing structure on a 0.36 square foot-property at 414 N. Wall Avenue with the following conditions: 1. All required building permits shall be obtained. 2. One ADA van accessible parking space shall be delineated by the front door. 3. Landscaping in conformance with the Section 5.5 of the UDC shall be installed within a year of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 63  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 100 FEET NAME1 ADDRESS CITYSTATEZIP 204 E APACHE STREET LLC 386 INGRASSIA RD MIDDLETOWN, NY 109402235 3500 HIGHLANDS VIEW BILLINGS CECILIA DR FARMINGTON, NM 87401 F MICHAEL FIELD LLC 3700 SILVERTON AVE DURANGO, CO 81301 FAMILY CRISIS CENTER INC 208 E APACHE ST FARMINGTON, NM 87401 FARMINGTON CITY OF 800 MUNICIPAL DR FARMINGTON, NM 87401 FARMINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 5 3401 E 30TH ST STE A FARMINGTON, NM 87402 GANNON BRIAN J AND SHANNON S 1450 GEM LN BAYFIELD, CO 81122-9320 GONZALEZ GILDARDO AND VICTORIA A 512 N WALL AVE FARMINGTON, NM 87401 COTTONWOOD HEIGHTS CITY , UT IRVIN REVOCABLE TRUST 2510 E NANTUCKET DR 841215658 LHORN II BPAC VENTURES LLC PO BOX 321087 LOS GATOS, CA 95032 MONTGOMERY COMMERCIALS LLC PO BOX 6517 FARMINGTON, NM 87499 SAN JUAN INDEPENDENT PRACTICE ASSOC 110 E APACHE ST FARMINGTON, NM 87401 64  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue 65  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue PLANNING MEMO ZC 23-35 DEADLINE: April 14, 2023 City of Farmington Departments CW Planning Manager – B. Escobar CW Addressing – Planning Division CW Chief Building Official – D. Childers No Comment See Comment Below: CW Long Range Planner – C. Gibson CW MPO – P. Koeppel No Comment CW Oil & Gas Inspector CITY City Manager’s Office – J. Baird No Comment ELEC Customer Care Manager – L. Richardson ELEC Electrical Engineering –Roberto Ga No Comment FIRE Fire Captain – K. Rix FIRE Fire Marshall – B. Vega No Comment LEGAL City Attorney – J. Breakell LEGAL Deputy City Attorney – R. Frost No Comment POLICE Code Compliance – M. Romero No Comment POLICE Sergeant – J. Jensen PRCA Parks - R. Crosby No Comment PRCA ORII – W. Unsicker CW City Engineer – I. BlueEyes CW Engineering – T. Sitta No Comment CW Streets Superintendent – C. Fuller CW Traffic Engineer – M. Hathcock No Comment CW Water/Waste Water – D. Dalton No Comment Other Entities New Mexico Gas Company – R. Castillo CenturyLink/Lumens – L. Joe Enterprise Field Services – M. Waszut Comcast Cable – M. Johnson JACOBS – P. Johnson No Comment Surface Land Negotiator for BP – M. Venzara Farmington School District – C. Lyons COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS CW – Long Range Planner – C. Gibson 66  City of Farmington ZC 23-35 414 N Wall Avenue The 2040 Future Land Use Map designates this area as ‘public facility’. The proposed zone change and public service use of the property appears to be complementary to the land use designation. 67  City of Farmington ZC 23-36 609 S Carlton Ave. COMMUNITY WORKS PETITION REPORT Petition ZC 23-36 Zone Change from IND: Industrial to MF-L: Multi-family Low Density A. STAFF REPORT, May 8, 2023 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant CDW Development, LLC Representative Cecil Tullis Date of Application March 12, 2023 Requested Action Zone Change from IND: Industrial to MF-L: Multi-family Low Density Residential Location 609 S Carlton Ave. Existing Land Use Existing manufactured home on 35,284 sf (.81 acres) Existing Zoning IND: Industrial Surrounding Zoning & North: IND: Industrial District Land Use South: IND: Industrial District East: GC: General Commercial West: MF-L: Multi-family Low Density Residential District Notice Requirements Publication of Notice: May 10, 2023, Farmington Daily Times Property owners letter: May 15, 2023 Sign posted: May 12, 2023 Staff Planner Mike Safrany, Senior Planner STAFF ANALYSIS BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a zone change from an IND, Industrial District to an MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Zone District. The current zoning is in the IND, Industrial District. The 3.52-acre parcel currently consists of an existing 15,000 square foot industrial shop and a legal non- conforming residential doublewide (28 x 60) manufactured home. The residence has accessed the property from S Carlton Ave. by driving through the industrial yard being used by the existing business. 69 A Summary Plat has been recorded on May 2, 2023 to divide the parcel into two lots, Lot 1 (2.71- acres) and Lot 2 (0.81-acres). This has been approved by the Community Works Department and is awaiting mylar submittal, see Petition SP 22-73. Lot 1 will remain Industrial with the current existing business in operation. The business will continue to access operations using S Carlton Ave. and will keep the S. Carlton address. Lot 2 will be rezoned from Industrial to Multi-family low density residential. An access easement has been granted through City of Farmington property to access the residence (Lot 2) from McCormick School Road. The owner then wishes to fence off the residential lot from the industrial lot to improve the usage and safety for both lots. 2040 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN: 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (Medium Density Residential) Medium Density Residential areas primarily contain traditional gridded-street neighborhoods. New neighborhoods, or upgrades to existing neighborhoods, would provide a walkable environment intermixed with public facilities, retail services, housing, and park areas. A mix of housing options supports vibrant and inclusive neighborhoods including townhomes, duplexes, and live/work units, and group care facilities. Limited high-density would also be appropriate in this area. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) or detached apartments are allowed in this area on single-family structures with administrative review. Planning trends show housing opportunities should be available for all income groups with a diverse mix including duplexes, townhouses, apartments, condominiums, workforce housing, and single-family homes ranging in size. A community must guard against an abundance of subdivisions in similar and repetitive densities, appearances, and price ranges. 70 ZONING MAP 71 OVERHEAD VIEW 72  City of Farmington ZC 23-36 609 S Carlton Ave. SUMMARY PLAT RECORDED MAY 2, 2023 73 74 N ALLEN AVENUE FACING SOUTH N ALLEN AVENUE FACING NORTH 75 HOPI AVENUE FACING WEST EXISTING SITE PLAN 76  City of Farmington ZC 23-36 609 S Carlton Ave. STAFF ANALYSIS The Unified Development Code states that the City shall consider whether the proposed zoning and land use are compatible with the conforming zoning and land use of nearby properties and with the character of the neighborhood. Section 8.7.4 of the Unified Development Code (UDC) outlines issues for consideration in determining a proposed zone change as follows: A. Is the proposed zoning consistent with the Farmington Comprehensive Plan? Yes, the proposed zoning conforms to the future land-use designation of Medium Density Residential along McCormick School Road. Planning trends show housing opportunities should be available for all income groups with a diverse mix including duplexes, townhouses, apartments, condominiums, workforce housing, and single-family homes ranging in size. A community must guard against an abundance of subdivisions in similar and repetitive densities, appearances, and price ranges. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use(s) compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and the character of the neighborhood? The proposed zoning is compatible with the area. The subject property is located on the east edge of a square mile of Multi-family low-density zoning, and several blocks of Industrial zoning directly to the east. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? No adverse impacts are expected. The uses are already existing, legal non-conforming. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Yes, along both sides of McCormick School Rd. there is existing Multi-family low density zoning, appropriate for the existing single-family residence on the site. One block to the east along the west side of Carlton Ave. the entire street is zoned industrial, appropriate for the existing business on the east side of the subject property. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The site is currently physically suitable for the existing business and the existing single- family home. F. Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone? If utilities are not available, could they be reasonably extended by the applicant? Is the applicant willing to pay for the extension of public facilities and services necessary to service the proposed development? Yes. All utilities are existing. 77  G. Does the proposed change constitute “spot zoning” as defined in Article 11, definitions? No. The area consists of numerous blocks of MF-L, Multi-family residential lots with a strip of Industrial zoning along Carlton where the existing business will continue to operate. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan shows Medium Density Residential uses with Commercial Mixed Use in the area. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to seven surrounding property owners. At the time of this report no public comment has been received. STAFF CONCLUSION Staff concludes the zone change from Industrial to MF-L, Multi-family Low Density Residential for Lot 2 of .81 acres is supported by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and in keeping with the general character of the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-36, a request from CDW Development, LLC represented by Cecil Tullis, for a zone change from an Industrial district to an MF-L, Multi-family low-density residential district. 78 79 80 81 NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP McCormick School Road, LLC 2504 Western Ave. Farmington, NM 87401 Alpha Trading Co 10507 E Fernwood Lane Scottsdale, AZ 85262-3430 CDW Development LLC 5720 US 64 Farmington, NM 87401 Henry Production Inc 3440 Morning Star Drive Farmington, NM 87401 Jiten Shirali Inc 1601 E Broadway St. Farmington, NM 87401 M and B 4 LLC 27C Road 3451 Flora Vista, NM 87415 82