Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive September 28, 2023 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the September 14, 2023 P&Z Meeting 4 Discussion regarding Cannabis Variance noticing procedures. Presented by City Attorney Breakell - (Pg. 25) 5 Petition ZC 23-61 – A request for a Zone Change from Single-Family 7 to Mixed Use to allow for a commercial mixed-use development located on 8.259 acres along Cliffside Dr. (behind Home Depot) Parcel No. R0030308 – This was rescheduled from the September 14, 2023 meeting. Presented by Long Range Planner Gibson (pg. 29) 6 Business From Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 10 Adjournment Petition items on this agenda will be scheduled for the next City Council meeting – October 10, 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 September 14, 2023 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on September 14, 2023 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. P&Z Members Present: Vice Chair Ryan Brown Cheryl Ragsdale Cody Waldroup Amber Hodge Gary Hanson Shay Davis P&Z Members Absent Chair Clint Freeman Joyce Cardon Clete Berens Staff Present: Mike Safrany Colby Gibson Tami Spencer Jennifer Breakell Russel Frost Others Who Addressed the Commission Elvira Chavez Orlando Maestas Mike Atchison Tony Martinez Call to Order Vice Chair Brown 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 September 14, 2023 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting with item #6, Petition ZC 23-61 being rescheduled to the September 28, 2023 meeting. This motion passed unanimously by an 6-0 vote. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Brown and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to approve the minutes of the August 24, 2023 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by an 6-0 vote. Swearing of Witnesses Tami Spencer, Administrative Assistant swore in all parties that wished to speak. 1 Petition ZC 23-59 – A request for a zone change from SF-7, single-family residential to GC, General Commercial. Senior Planner Safrany Presented the Following: Petition • Applicant: Elvira Chavez • Location: 4205 Hudson Street • Zoning SF:7 – Single family residential • Requesting rezone to GC: General Commercial • No specific development plans • Parcel Size: 0.08 acres • Current use: Existing 869 square foot residence to be demolished Zoning Aerial Map 2  Street View Wide View Aerial Map 3  2040 Comprehensive Plan • The 2040 Future Land Use Plan designates area as 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 Public Input • This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 11 surrounding property owners. • At the time of this report, no input has been received. Notifications 4  Zone Change Criteria • The proposal is consistent with the Mixed-Use Village designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan • General Commercial zoning is consistent with properties to the north, west and east • No adverse impacts are noted. • Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. Staff Recommendation • The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-59, a request from Elvira Chavez, for a zone change from SF:7 – Single Family Residential to GC: General Commercial, to allow for commercial development on the property at 4205 Hudson Street with the following condition: 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. Discussion The Commission Asked Staff: 1. What is the status of code enforcement on this property? Staff Replied: 1. Currently there are no code enforcement issues. Petitioner Elvira Chavez, 3503 Sierra Vista Dr., Farmington NM Ms. Chavez addressed the Commission and stood for questions. The Commission had no questions for Ms. Chavez. With no public input Vice Chair Brown closed the public comment portion of the meeting for petition ZC 23-59. With no Commission discussion needed. Vice Chair Brown called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to Approve Petition ZC 23-59 as recommended by staff. The motion was passed with a vote of 5-1. 5  Roll Call Aye Votes Commissioner Ragsdale voted aye because she felt like the petitioner would be taking care of this, unless the home is habitable. Either way they would have do something to clean it up. Vice Chair Brown voted aye and is hoping this zone change would prompt some kind of new development. Commissioner Waldroup voted aye and he feels that it is not up to the Commission to force the property owner to demolish the building, He hopes they would, but it’s not up to the Commission to do that. Commissioner Hodge voted aye for the same reasons already stated. Commissioner Davis voted aye because he feels it is a blight and the most productive means of rectifying that is with a zone change to allow the property to be sold and in doing so it would get demolished. He also felt that if they forced it to get demolished as part of the zone change, then it would likely stay the same. Nay Votes Commissioner Hanson voted nay because based on information provided he feels this is an opportunity to resolve the issues with this property. Petition ZC 23-60 – A request for a zone change from SF-7, single-family residential to GC, General Commercial. Located at 4201 ½ Hudson St. – Lots 1B (R0031851), 1E (R0030750), 1F (R0026302). Senior Planner Safrany Presented the Following: Petition • Applicant: Helen and Orlando Maestas • Location: 4201-1/2 Hudson Street • Zoning SF:7 – Single family residential • Requesting rezone to GC: General Commercial • No specific development plans • Parcel Size: Three Lots Totaling 0.132 acres • Current use: All three lots are currently vacant 6  Zoning Aerial Map 7  Street View Wide View Aerial Map 8  2040 Comprehensive Plan • The 2040 Future Land Use Plan designates area as 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 Public Input • This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 11 surrounding property owners. • At the time of this report, no input has been received. Notifications 9  Zone Change Criteria • The proposal is consistent with the Mixed-Use Village designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan • General Commercial zoning is consistent with properties to the north, west and east • No adverse impacts are noted. • Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. Staff Recommendation 1. The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-60, a request from Orlando and Helen Maestas, for a zone change from SF:7 – Single Family Residential to GC: General Commercial, to allow for commercial development on the property at 4201-1/2 Hudson Street with the following condition: 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. Discussion The Commission Asked Staff: 1. Will they be combining these lots into one lot? How would this work with no access to that back lot? Staff Replied: 1. I have no specifics on how or if these lots would be combined. It would probably depend on who bought the lots and what their intentions would be. Petitioner Orlando Maestas, #5 Rd. 3777, Farmington NM Mr. Maestas stated the zone changes started with the lot at 4207 Hudson St. All these lots have been family lots for quite some time. He thinks it makes sense to make all the lots zoned the same for future development. With no public input Vice Chair Brown closed the public comment portion of the meeting for petition ZC 23-60. With no Commission discussion needed. Vice Chair Brown called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to Approve Petition ZC 23-60 as recommended by staff. The motion was passed unanimously with a vote of 6-0. 10 Petition ZC 23-62 – A request for a Zone Change from OP, Office Professional to IND, Industrial. Located at 900 W Pinon St. Parcel No. R4005266 Senior Planner Safrany Presented the Following: Petition  Applicant: El Rancho Holdings, LLC  Representative: Mike Atchison  Location: 900 W Pinon St.  Parcel #R4005266  Existing Zoning: OP, Office Professional District  Requested zone change to IND, Industrial District  Parcel Size: 28,750 sf (.66 acres) Applicant: El Rancho Holdings, LLC 11  Zoning Map Request Overview  Request is for a zone change from OP, Office Professional district to IND, Industrial district.  There are two existing light industrial warehouses on the property with office buildings.  The buildings are 2,000 sf and 2,500 sf with office space.  A potential buyer of the property intends to open a dog grooming business with on site dog kennels.  Dog kennels are allowed in Industrial and General Commercial zoning districts. Recorded Summary Plat 12 Pinon Street Facing West Pinon Street Facing East 13  900 W Pinon Street - Front Elevation 2040 Future Land Use Plan: Issues For Consideration  Is the proposed zoning consistent with the Farmington Comprehensive Plan?  The proposed zoning shown in the Comprehensive Plan is Commercial Mixed Use, which is general commercial and office professional oriented. The existing storage warehouse 14  buildings are appropriate for light industrial use. The comprehensive Plan also shows Industrial Uses to the south and to the west of the subject property.  Does the proposed change constitute “spot zoning” as defined in Article 11, definitions?  No. There is a variety of Industrial zoned properties in the surrounding area.  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 has Industrial zoning on adjacent properties to the north and south. To the west is also Industrial zoning. Of the 888 acres which was annexed by the city in 2014, the vast majority of the area was zoned Industrial.  Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated?  No adverse impacts are expected. The uses are already existing, non-conforming.  Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district?  Yes, the light industrial warehouse buildings meet the density and dimensional standards of the UDC Table 2.82 with appropriate setbacks and parking areas.  Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district?  The site as proposed must meet all of the relevant regulations of the Unified Development Code.  Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone?  Yes. All utilities are existing. Public Input  No public input has been received at this time. 15  Recommendation The Planning Division recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-62, a request from Mike Atchison, for a zone change from an OP, Office Professional district to IND, Industrial district, Lot 2 (0.66 acres) of the Genevieve Subdivision, at 900 W. Pinon St. with the following condition: 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the requirements of Article 5 of the Unified Development Code. Discussion The Commission Asked Staff: 1. Was this location originally zoned industrial and it was rezoned office professional because of the hospital? 2. On the future land use map what is the distance from this location to the other industrial zoning? 3. Would this be considered spot zoning? 4. Would you be worried as far as uses go with general commercial vs industrial? 5. If the dog grooming business does not work out there, would general commercial benefit other businesses in the future? Staff Replied: 1. Yes, he believes that was the intention, because it is around the hospital. 2. The distance is roughly 500 ft. 3. No, because it is zoned industrial to the north and south. 4. This would be considered light commercial, I don’t see large trucks or heavy equipment pulling in or out of this location. The buildings themselves are light industrial metal buildings. 5. When talking to the petitioner and the future buyer, both general commercial and industrial were discussed. It was decided the industrial would work and the surrounding properties are mostly zoned industrial. Petitioner Mike Atchison, 7560 US Hwy 64, Blanco NM Mr. Atchison addressed the Commission and stood for questions. The Commission had no questions for Mr. Atchison The Commission Asked Staff: 1. Just to clarify, this rezoning would not be specific to a dog grooming/boarding business. Once zoned industrial it could be used for any authorized industrial use, is that correct? 2. You are using the term “light industrial” can you explain that? Staff Replied 1. Yes, that is correct it could be used for any authorized industrial use. The dog grooming is limited to general commercial or industrial. 2. In the future, if someone wanted to use this lot for industrial use with heavy equipment, by right they could. But, considering the lot size and the type of buildings on the property, I have given it that designation. 16 The Commission Asked Petitioner: 1. Was there a reason you chose industrial over general commercial? 2. The Commission is concerned with a business going in that would have the heavy equipment and large trucks. Would you be ok with the zone change to general commercial? Petitioner Replied: 1. When I acquired that property, it was part of a law suit settlement. I had never checked on the zoning. To my knowledge, all the businesses that have been on this property have been industrial. 2. Yes, general commercial would be ok, the proposed dog grooming business would work well with that zoning. With no public input Vice Chair Brown closed the public comment portion of the meeting for petition ZC 23-62. Commission Discussion The Commission had a discussion regarding general commercial vs industrial zoning. They were all good with either one. They decided to recommend general commercial because it would limit the use of heavy equipment and large trucks. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to Approve Petition ZC 23-62 with the zoning being changed to general commercial and the recommended condition. 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the requirements of Article 5 of the Unified Development Code. The motion was passed unanimously with a vote of 6-0. Petition SUP 23-63 – A request to allow cannabis manufacturing, production and commercial cultivation at 5100 E. Main St. #105 Parcel No. R0020709 Long Range Planner Gibson Presented the Following: Petition Information o Applicant: Mothers Meds LLC (Lava Leaf Organics) o Representative: Tony Martinez, tenant 17 o Location: 5100 E. Main Street suite #105 o Existing Zoning: General Commercial o Existing Land Use: Cannabis retail sales o Request: A request for a Special Use Permit to allow for cannabis manufacturing and production. Subject Property o Size: 1.365 acre lot o Nine commercial suites o Suite #105 is 1,800 square feet in size. o Currently operates as a cannabis retailer. 18 19  Street View Project Description o Seeking SUP to allow for cannabis manufacturing and production. o Level III manufacturing license. o Using an extraction process consisting of ice, water, mesh bags, freeze dryer, heat press and filters. o Applicant cultivates outside of City limits. Continued use of retail sales. o Monday through Saturday 10AM - 7PM o Production space approximately 120 Square feet (next slide) Site Plan 20  UDC Section 2.4.69 o Cannabis manufacturing and production permitted in GC zoning with a SUP. o Not permitted within 300’ of a school, religious institution, registered day care, residential use, or another cannabis dispensary. Special Use Permits UDC Sec. 8.9 o Section 8.9.1 Purpose: The purpose of a Special Use Permit is to allow for discretionary approval of uses with unique operating characteristics. o Section 8.9.2 (A) Approval: Special use permit approvals attach to the property and are transferable to subsequent owners. If this SUP was approved, it could transfer to another owner, carrier or tenant. o Section 8.9.6 Expiration of approval: Special use permit approvals shall expire after 18 months from the date of approval if construction or operation of the approved use has not commenced. 21  Time limits of Special Use Permits shall be set through the conditions of approval. The city council may extend the special use permit for a definitive time period upon written request from the applicant, which must be received before the date of expiration. UDC Section 8.9.4 SUP Criteria A. Effect on Environment: The use will be carried out indoors and be required to meet the New Mexico CCD regulations. The applicant will not be permitted to use any chemical agents or hydrocarbons in the manufacturing process. B Compatible with surrounding area: The existing building is newer and in good condition. No changes to the exterior are proposed. Surrounding uses are commercial and there are not any protected uses within 300 feet of the subject property. C. External impacts minimized: The Class III manufacturing license issued by the New Mexico Cannabis Control Division limits the applicant to using either mechanical or nonvolatile solvents for extraction. Adequate mitigation to any potential impacts are provided through an air filter system to eliminate any potential fumes or odors. D. Infrastructure impacts minimized: No infrastructure impacts identified. The subject property has access from E. Main Street, classified as a major arterial. The City will work with the petitioner to ensure the facility has sufficient water and sewer systems. UDC Section 8.9.4 SUP Criteria E. Consistent with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan Applicant meets all relevant Code standards. Mixed Use Village o Variety of shops, services and neighborhood commercial. o Promotes walkable areas. o Recommends placement along arterial corridors. 22  F. Parcel Size: The subject property is 1.365 acres in size and suite 105 is 1,800 square feet, sufficient for the use proposed. The applicant estimates that the manufacturing process will take 120 square feet of space. G. Site Plan: The applicant has submitted a site plan to staff for review, meeting all applicable standards. Public Notice Staff Conclusion Compliance: The proposed use meets the Special Use Permit criteria outlined in the Unified Development Code Section 8.9.4. The proposed location meets the UDC Section 2.4.69 distancing requirements. Consistency: The proposed use is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and compatible with the Future Land Use Plan designation of Mixed Use Village. Compatibility: The proposed use is compatible with the area and built environment and is not expected to have a negative impact on the environment or surrounding area. Staff Recommendation The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition SUP 23-63, a request from Mothers Meds LLC, for a Special Use Permit to allow for cannabis manufacturing and production at 5100 E. Main Street unit #105 in the General Commercial zoning district with the following conditions of approval: 1. A building and fire inspection shall be required. 2. The SUP shall be effective for five years, at which time the applicant can renew. Discussion The Commission had no question for staff. 23 Petitioner Tony Martinez, 5100 E. Main St., Farmington NM Mr. Martinez stated he will help bolster the retail portion of the business. He wants to help people understand where their medicine come from and that it can be made safely. With no public input Vice Chair Brown closed the public comment portion of the meeting for petition SUP 23-63. With no Commission discussion needed. Vice Chair Brown called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Hanson and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to Approve Petition SUP 23-63 as recommended by staff with the following conditions. 1. A building and fire inspection shall be required. 2. The SUP shall be effective for five years, at which time the applicant can renew. The motion was passed unanimously with a vote of 6-0. Business from the Floor: There was no business from the floor. Business from the Chair: There was no business from the Chair. Business from the Members: There was no business from the members. Business from Staff: Long Range Planner Gibson informed the Commission the City Council carried forward your recommendation on the three petitions. One for the outdoor sales and display and the two cannabis related petitions on 1717 Schofield Ln. There was also a similar discussion on the distance and the noticing that we had at the last meeting. Adjournment: With no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale. The motion carried unanimously 6-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 3:54 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Ryan Brown Tami Spencer Vice Chair Administrative Assistant 24 25 26 27 28  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive STAFF REPORT Zone change request from Single-Family 7 to Mixed Use to allow for a residential/commercial mixed-use development located on 8.259 acres south of Cliffside Drive. STAFF REPORT, September 28, 2023 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Michael Schweitz, potential property buyer Representative N/A Date of July 27, 2023 Application The petitioner is requesting a zone change from Single-Family 7 to Requested Action Mixed Use to allow for a residential and commercial mixed-use development located on 8.259 acres south of Cliffside Drive. Undeveloped lot located on the south side of Cliffside Dr in Farmington. (R0030308) TRACT 1 BEG S00-52-40W 161.86 FT FROM NW CORNER OF NE/4 SW/4 OF SEC 1 29 13. THENCE S00-52-40W 1119.19 FT, N30-50-08E 1021.32 FT, N48-10-29W 156.57 FT, 143.06 FT ALONG CURVE TO Location RIGHT, N05-29-04W 44.92 FT, 93.15 FT ALONG CURVE, S85-10-16W 230.83 FT TO BEG.ALSO TRACT 2 BEG AT NW CORNER OF NE/4 SW/4 OF SEC 1 29 13. THENCE S89-37-26E 581.40 FT, S75-35-16W 211.68 FT, 156.34 FT ALONG CURVE, S85-10-16W 224.74 FT, N00- 52-40E 101.54 FT TO BEG.BK.1573 PG.198 Existing Land Use The parcel is currently undeveloped. Existing Zoning Single-Family 7 2040 Future Land Commercial Mixed Use Use Designation North: Single-Family 7 – Residential use Surrounding South: General Commercial – Commercial sales and service uses Zoning & Land East: General Commercial – Commercial sales and service uses Use West: Single-Family 7 – Residential use Publication of Notice: September 11, 2023, Farmington Daily Times Notice Property owners letter: September 11, 2023 Requirements Sign posted: September 15, 2023 Staff Planner Colby Gibson, Long Range Planner 1|Page 29  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive BACKGROUND The San Juan County Tax Assessor’s records show the subject property as 8.259 acres in size. The parcel is currently undeveloped. The applicant proposes a zone change for the lot to Mixed Use with the intent to subdivide for commercial, two-family, and multifamily developments. The applicant proposes the following project if the zone change request is approved: • Subdivide the property into 15 parcels. • Four (4) commercial lots are proposed varying in lot size from 11,000 – 42,000 square feet. The actual use of the lots would be required to conform to the permitted use standards for Mixed Use zoning. • Nine (9) lots are planned for duplex (two-family) dwellings with lot sizes varying from 10,000 – 17,000 square feet. • One (1) lot is planned for a multifamily dwelling (4-plex) with a lot size of 66,000 square feet. • Build one road providing access to each of the lots from Herrera Road. • Extend Herrera Road from the southeast to Cliffside Drive. • Preserve existing forested/vegetated areas to the north along Cliffside Drive as well as along the western property line of the subject property. • Dedicate right of way to the City of Farmington connecting Mortensen Road to the proposed new road for possible future connectivity. 2|Page 30  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive Site Plan 3|Page 31  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive Aerial Map 4|Page 32  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive Area Overview 5|Page 33  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive Surrounding Uses Subject Property 6|Page 34  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive Zoning 7|Page 35  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive 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 Future Land Use Plan designates this area as Commercial Mixed Use. The proposed zone change and use conforms with the horizontal mixed use intent of the designation and promotes development with smaller format retail and multi-family density residential. It is worth noting the existing zoning (SF-7) is not consistent with the Future Land Use Designation of Commercial Mixed Use, the change to Mixed Use better aligns with the 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 proposed Mixed Use zoning and land use is compatible with the current conforming uses and character of the neighborhood. The four commercial lots being proposed are located on the outer edges of the development adjacent to nearby collector streets. Existing trees and vegetation act as a buffer between the existing residential and proposed commercial lots as well as between the proposed duplex lots (D6-D9) and the existing single family residential to the west. Uses proposed as part of this zone change are congruent with other uses in the neighborhood. 8|Page 36  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? The proposed use of commercial in Lots C1-C4 have the potential to create adverse impacts on the adjoining existing residential and proposed duplex uses such as increased noise, traffic and outdoor lighting. These impacts should be mitigated through the use of buffering, distance and screening. Additionally, the applicant is proposing significantly larger lot sizes than required which will further mitigate adverse impacts. There is a higher potential for these adverse impacts to affect the proposed duplex properties, specifically proposed lots D1-D5 and D9 as these lots abut the commercial lots. UDC Section 5.10 Residential Protection standards shall apply in order to minimize the impact. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? The proposed development meets the minimum lot width, minimum lot area, and density standards of UDC Section 2.8.2. Mixed Use zoning requires a minimum lot area of 3,000 square feet per dwelling unit for two-family uses, therefore requiring a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet. The proposed duplex (two-family) lots vary in size from 10,000 – 17,000 square feet. The smallest lot, just 10,000 square feet in size, is more than 60% larger than required for the number of dwelling units proposed. The proposed multifamily lot (MF1) is 66,000 square feet which is more than adequate for the proposed use. These standards do not apply to nonresidential uses. Sec. 3.11 - Mixed use (MU). 3.11.1 Purpose. 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). 3.11.2 Allowed uses. Uses are allowed in the MU district in accordance with the use table of section 2.3. 3.11.3 Density and dimensional standards. All development in the MU district is subject to the density and dimensional standards of section 2.8. A. 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. 3.11.4 District standards. Standards applicable in the MU district include the following: A. 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? Two dwelling units on 10,000 (minimum) and four dwelling units on 66,000 square foot lots is suitable for the development while leaving adequate space for required open space/landscaping and parking. 9|Page 37  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive 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 development is provided from a proposed road connecting to Herrera Road. Both Herrera Road and Cliffside Drive are identified as Collector Streets as defined by the City of Farmington’s Major Thoroughfare Plan with an estimated 5,000 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) count. The potential future extension of Mortenson Road would provide additional connectivity that the area currently lacks. Utilities are available from both Cliffside Drive and Mortensen Road, adequate to meet the proposed uses. The applicant will be responsible for the extension of any applicable roads, infrastructure and utilities for the proposed development. 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 because it is in pursuance of the Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this area as Commercial Mixed Use. The proposed horizontal residential/commercial development is explicitly permitted within the designation. STAFF COMMENTS Planning Manager – Beth Escobar: • Mortensen Rd is not constructed to City standards. I suggest this is an emergency access only. • It is unclear what the proposed use of Lot 13 is. • What is the acreage of the parcel designated as a community park? • Residential protection will apply to development on Lot 1. • I suggest landscaping along the border between commercial and residential and preservation of trees along Cliffside and within site. Engineering – Toni Sitta: • No comments regarding the zone change. • All proposed subdivisions and developments must meet the City’s standards within the Unified Development Code Article 5 and Article 5. • Long Range Planning – Colby Gibson: • The future land use plan designates this area as Commercial Mixed Use. The proposed zone change and uses conform to the horizontal mixed-use intent of the designation and promotes development with a smaller format retail and multi-family density residential. 10 | P a g e 38  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive Traffic Engineering and City Engineer - D. Henry & I. Blue Eyes: Today, Demetrius and I met with Vaughn in the field and looked at the current right of way for Herrera Road. For any future development of this property behind Home Depot and Star Collision, the city will be requiring right of way for Herrera Road and Cliffside Drive. We will also be requiring connection and construction of Herrera Road from Cliffside Drive to Home Depot. Currently Herrera Road is built closely to 36 feet in pavement width (maybe just a little narrower) therefore we would require Herrera Road to be built per the City's residential plans for a residential street, meaning 50 foot right of way and 40 foot wide street (including curb and gutter), with 5 foot sidewalks on the west side. For the properties frontage off Cliffside Drive, we will also require development: 60-foot right of way and maybe some street widening, curb/gutter, and 5 foot sidewalk. HERRERA ROAD EXTENSION Herrera Road is classified as a Collector street as defined by the City’s Major Thoroughfare Plan. The extension of Herrera Road has been planned since at least the year 2000. Herrera Road has an Average Daily Traffic of 5,000 at the Main St approach. Herrera Rd Extension The extension is shown as part of the Plaza Farmington Subdivision Plat: 11 | P a g e 39  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 24 surrounding property owners. At the time of this report, staff has received several comments from nearby community members regarding the petition including six emails of opposition. Concern has been expressed regarding the duplex dwelling units having a negative effect on property values and had asked about whether the developer could be required to install a privacy fence along the rear of each of the proposed residences along the frontage of the property. STAFF CONCLUSION • The proposed use is in compliance with the Unified Development Code density standards outlined in UDC Sec. 2.8. • The proposed zone change and use is consistent with the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • The proposed zone change and land use is compatible with the surrounding area and nearby uses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 23-61, a request from Michael Schweitz, for a zone change from Single-Family 7 to Mixed Use to allow for a horizontal mixed-use development located on 8.259 acres south of Cliffside Drive with the following conditions of approval: 1) Site shall be developed in the general conformance to the submitted site plan with the exception of required adjustments. 2) Developer shall extend Herrera Road from the current terminus to Cliffside Drive with the following standards: a. 50-foot right of way starting at the existing east right of way line at the toe of the slope. b. 40-foot road width including curb and gutter. c. Five-foot wide sidewalks along the western side of the street only. d. Two (2) ADA compliant ramps installed at the proposed intersection of Cliffside Drive and Herrera Road. 3) Developer shall dedicate a 60-foot wide right of way on Cliffside Drive along the property frontage and install five-foot wide sidewalks along the south side of Cliffside Drive along the property frontage. 4) Developer shall dedicate a minimum 50-foot right of way through the subject property connecting Mortensen Road to the extension of Herrera Road for future development. 5) Residential protection standards provided within UDC Sec 5.10 shall apply to all residential and multifamily uses. 12 | P a g e 40  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive 13 | P a g e 41  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive 14 | P a g e 42  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive Properties within 100’ 15 | P a g e 43  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive 16 | P a g e 44  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive D. Henry & I. Blue Eyes – Traffic Engineering and City Engineer Today, Demetrius and I met with Vaughn in the field and looked at the current right of way for Herrera Road. For any future development of this property behind Home Depot and Star Collision, the city will be requiring right of way for Herrera Road and Cliffside Drive. We will also be requiring connection and construction of Herrera Road from Cliffside Drive to Home Depot. Currently Herrera Road is built closely to 36 feet in pavement width (maybe just a little narrower) 17 | P a g e 45  Staff Report: ZC 23-61 Cliffside Drive therefore we would require Herrera Road to be built per the City's residential plans for a residential street, meaning 50 foot right of way and 40 foot wide street (including curb and gutter), with 5 foot sidewalks on both sides. For the properties frontage off Cliffside Drive, we will also require development here as well: 60- foot right of way and maybe some street widening, curb/gutter and 5 foot sidewalk. 18 | P a g e 46 I completely oppose the petition to build more apartments right here in the middle of shopping and neighborhoods when it only attracts the wrong kind of people, drugs, vandalism and more... I should know as I rented an an apartment on Lee Avenue and the cops were called at least once a week.... I would like to remain anonymous for reasons of my own! Thankyou, and I support you..... 49 9/13/23, 4:21 PM fmtn.org Mail - [External] Duplex construction at cliftside Gibson, Colby <cgibson@fmtn.org> [External] Duplex construction at cliftside Alvaro Cordova <alvarocordova10@yahoo.com> Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 3:59 PM Reply-To: Alvaro Cordova <alvarocordova10@yahoo.com> To: "cgibson@fmtn.org" <cgibson@fmtn.org> Hello My name is Alvaro Cordova I live on Mortensen road and out to my attention the petitions for building a duplex on Cliftside Dr parcel No R0030308 And I'm concerned about the fact that this is going to bring changes to our neighborhood And I'm afraid the sone of this changes are not good We all well know that duplex residents don't have ownership of them and often don't have the interest of keeping a safe and quiet area Our neighborhood is fairly safe and have enough traffic and noise from all the business close by and by allowing this new project of building a duplex is going to bring more unwanted traffic to our streets is going to bring even more noise and probalbly crime. Most of us that live by this area know and care for each other and we all happy that we have a farley safe place to live. We chose to have our forever home in this area to find the quiet and privacy not found in most of the areas of the city and to watch our children grow in a safe area like this one. I don't think is fair to take the good things of a place like this Thanks in aAdvance Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android 51 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=b28c4c86d2&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1776961341484600885&simpl=msg-f:1776961341484600885 1/1 9/14/23, 10:28 AM fmtn.org Mail - [External] Zone change off Cliffside Gibson, Colby <cgibson@fmtn.org> [External] Zone change off Cliffside Kris Head <headkm@yahoo.com> Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 9:09 PM To: cgibson@fmtn.org Mr. Colby Gibson, I am responding to a leaflet about a zone change off Cliffside. I live on Arch right off Cliffside. I cannot make it to the meeting. Please do not make this zone change. It can only end up negative for our neighborhood. I live on Arch Lane. Our road already has heavy traffic. It is used as a short cut. The traffic on Cliffside is too heavy. Mortensen cannot handle more traffic. We already have enough noise. Please vote against this zone change. Kris Head 2614 Arch Lane Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 47 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=b28c4c86d2&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1776980835633372191&simpl=msg-f:1776980835633372191 1/1 9/14/23, 1:08 PM fmtn.org Mail - [External] attempted zoning change for parcel on Cliffside drive parcel #R0030308. Gibson, Colby <cgibson@fmtn.org> [External] attempted zoning change for parcel on Cliffside drive parcel #R0030308. J. L. Nichols <capnconch@gmail.com> Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 12:18 PM To: cgibson@fmtn.org Attempted zoning change for parcel on Cliffside Dr. We do not need increase in population density or increased traffic density on Cliffside and surrounding areas. Cliffside drive is already a dangerous street as it is so narrow with no sidewalks or bicycle lanes and obviously no room to expand in this area as the cliffs are on one side and private property with drop offs on the south side of this street. That particular parcel absolutely should stay zoned as originally intended (SFR) as Farmington is already such a mixed bag of mobil homes, small older homes with very poor city enforcement of junky non running cars, commercial equipment and junk filled yards. Farmington needs more new single family residences where possible. and keep these remaining neighborhood areas as such and not introduce hi- density housing that will require a lot more infrastructure costs. Farmington has a majority amount of poorly maintained homes and mobile homes in disrepair that makes a lot of Farmington unappealing to people moving in from other areas. High density low income housing with increased traffic, increased cost of infrastructure requirements will not help Farmington upgrade the appearance, quality of life, and appeal to increase desirabilty to familys that would consider locating here. NO to change zoning of this parcel! John Nichols and family 2450 Apple Ln, Farmington 87402 50 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=b28c4c86d2&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1777038037580232497&simpl=msg-f:1777038037580232497 1/1 9/18/23, 9:06 AM fmtn.org Mail - [External] Petition No. ZC 23-61 Gibson, Colby <cgibson@fmtn.org> [External] Petition No. ZC 23-61 Stephanie Coneybeer <stephconeybeer@gmail.com> Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 1:37 PM To: cgibson@fmtn.org Cc: Danielconeybeer@gmail.com Good Afternoon, We received the information on the Notice of Public Hearing Zone Change Petition No. ZC 23-61 on Thursday. We live on 3119 East 22nd Street in Farmington, NM. We feel it would be in our best interest to oppose this petition. When we purchased the house, we were under the impression that more houses would be built, however after living here since 2007, only 4 houses have been built. The land next and across the home has been overgrown with weeds, trees, and even trash. We also have so much foot traffic of people going to and from Home Depot and Safeway at all hours of the day, especially late at night. There also have been homeless people setting up camp and living on the land mostly in the summer months. Bringing more foot and vehicle traffic is not something we would like for our home area; we also feel that the value of the home would go down due to this. Please count our vote of opposing this petition. We are unable to attend the meetings scheduled due to work obligations and schedules. Thank you so much for the notification and if you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you, Daniel Coneybeer Stephanie Coneybeer 3119 East 22nd Street Farmington NM 87402 724-531-8490 505-215-3536 52 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=b28c4c86d2&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1777224179261029765&simpl=msg-f:1777224179261029765 1/1 9/18/23, 4:54 PM fmtn.org Mail - [External] PETITION NO. ZC-23-61 Gibson, Colby <cgibson@fmtn.org> [External] PETITION NO. ZC-23-61 Rosemary Donahoo <rdangel64@gmail.com> Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 4:15 PM To: cgibson@fmtn.org Mr. Colby Gibson. I want to oppose the petition for the zoning Petition No. ZC-23-61. I have given this a lot of consideration and decided against it. It will bring in a lot of riff raff and traffic. I like my little neighborhood where I live on Mabel Drive.altho Mabel Drive is starting to become a race track. We need a little police security around here, in the evenings mostly around 7:30 to 10:30 at night. They go flying by my house and bouncy over the speed bumps. Maybe the cops could hide a little bit and they will catch them. Sort of like the police patroller does on 20th. Sorry, I can't come to your meeting. I drive the school bus in the evenings for activities, and take students home during those hours. Thank You Rosemary Donahoo 48 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=b28c4c86d2&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f:1777415331207217096&simpl=msg-f:1777415331207217096 1/1