Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive February 29, 2024 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the February 15, 2024 P&Z Meeting 4 DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION regarding proposed changes to Sections 6.4.6 Subdivision Access and Section 6.8 Subdivision Improvements, within the Unified Development Code. Presented by Planning Manager Gibson (Pg 13) 5 Business From Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: 6 Adjournment Petition items on this agenda will be scheduled for the next City Council meeting – March 26, 2024 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 February 15, 2024 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on February 15, 2024 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 Cheryl Ragsdale Amber Hodge Clete Berens Gary Hanson Cody Waldroup P&Z Members Absent Shay Davis Staff Present: Colby Gibson Mike Safrany Joaquin Gonzalez Tami Spencer Others Who Addressed the Commission David Hampton Wilbert Bradly Call to Order Chair Freeman called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. Approval of the Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Berens and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to approve the agenda of the February 15, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 7-0 vote. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Hodge to approve the minutes of the January 25, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 7-0 vote. Swearing of Witnesses Tami Spencer, Administrative Assistant swore in all parties that wished to speak. Petition SUP 24-01 – A request for a Special Use Permit to allow for keeping of one horse on a residential property. 1 Planning Manager Gibson Presented the Following: Petition Information o Applicant: David Hampton, property owner o Location: 300 Dekalb Street o Existing Zoning: Multi-family Medium Density o Existing Land Use: Multi-family o Request: Approval of a Special Use Permit to allow for the keeping of one horse. Project Details Zoning o Multi-Family Medium Density zoning o Surrounding zoning: 2 o North- Rural Agricultural o South- Multi-family o East- Multi-family and Rural Agricultural o West- Single-family 7 3  UDC Sec. 2.4.7: Animals or Fowl Use Regulations I. In all residential districts other than residential agricultural (RA) the keeping of animals such as horses requires a Special Use Permit. o Zoning of the subject property is Multi-Family Medium Density, requiring a Special Use Permit. K. Adequate fencing, screening or separation from adjoining premises shall be provided based upon the type, number and size of animals for protection of the animals or fowl; protection of the public; and for control of dust, noise, odors or similar nuisance factors. o Horse corral structure to be constructed with a metal pipe frame. Applicant proposes to use coarse sand in the corral to minimize dust. o The horse shelter/stall is proposed to be constructed with metal panels and wood planks. A layer of plywood will be provided underneath the roof to minimize the sound of rain. o The location of the stall and corral is approximately 30 feet away from the residential units to the north and approximately 36 feet away from the residential units to the south. o Large lots, most of which are over an acre provide distance and natural buffering. L. A drainage narrative, waste management plan and watershed protection plan shall be required to accompany a special use permit for the keeping of animals in all districts. 4 o Waste Management Plan: o Corral and shelter mucked daily. o Manure will be placed and held in a closed container throughout the week and transported to La Plata or Bloomfield on a weekly basis. o Drainage Narrative: o Planning and storm water engineering staff visited the site. o No anticipated runoff issues anticipated. o Property is fairly flat with a slight southern slope. UDC Sec. 8.9: Special Use Permits o 8.9.1 Purpose: Allows for City Council discretionary approval of uses with unique or widely varying operating characteristics, neighborhood compatibility uses, or unusual site development features. o 8.9.2 Applicability: Special use permit approvals attach to the property and are transferable to subsequent owners o 8.9.3 Special use application process: Pursuant to UDC 8.9.3(H) the Special Use Permit may be revoked by this section whenever: o It is determined that a use of property for which a special use permit has been granted is not being conducted within the terms of the special use permit. o Before the special use has commenced, and it is determined that such special use is not in the public interest; or o The owner of the property affected petitions for revocation. o 8.9.4 Special use review criteria: Special use permits may be approved where it reasonably determines that there will be no significant negative impact upon residents of surrounding property or upon the public. Staff has considered the following criteria per this section: o Effect on environment: Not expected to have detrimental effects to the health, welfare or safety of the surrounding area. o Compatibility with surrounding area: The proposed use is compatible with the lower density residential neighborhood with large lots and several livestock or agricultural uses. Nearby vegetation and trees act as natural buffer. o External impacts mitigated: Dust, odor, and sound mitigation efforts mitigate negative impacts on exiting uses in the area. 5  o Infrastructure impacts minimized: No infrastructure impacts identified. o Consistent with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan: The applicant has demonstrated compliance with the UDC for the standards of 2.4.7 Animals or fowl o 8.9.4 Special use review criteria: Special use permits may be approved where it reasonably determines that there will be no significant negative impact upon residents of surrounding property or upon the public. Staff has considered the following criteria per this section: o Effect on environment: Not expected to have detrimental effects to the health, welfare or safety of the surrounding area. o Compatibility with surrounding area: The proposed use is compatible with the lower density residential neighborhood with large lots and several livestock or agricultural uses. Nearby vegetation and trees act as natural buffer. o External impacts mitigated: Dust, odor, and sound mitigation efforts mitigate negative impacts on exiting uses in the area. o Infrastructure impacts minimized: No infrastructure impacts identified. o Consistent with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan: The applicant has demonstrated compliance with the UDC for the standards of 2.4.7 Animals or fowl o 8.9.4 Special use review criteria: Special use permits may be approved where it reasonably determines that there will be no significant negative impact upon residents of surrounding property or upon the public. Staff has considered the following criteria per this section: o Effect on environment: Not expected to have detrimental effects to the health, welfare or safety of the surrounding area. o Compatibility with surrounding area: The proposed use is compatible with the lower density residential neighborhood with large lots and several livestock or agricultural uses. Nearby vegetation and trees act as natural buffer. o External impacts mitigated: Dust, odor, and sound mitigation efforts mitigate negative impacts on exiting uses in the area. o Infrastructure impacts minimized: No infrastructure impacts identified. o Consistent with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan: The applicant has demonstrated compliance with the UDC for the standards of 2.4.7 Animals or fowl 8.9.5 Additional Conditions: The Planning and Zoning Commission may recommend and the City Council may impose additional reasonable conditions as necessary to carry out the purpose and intent of this UDC and to mitigate adverse effects of the proposed use. 6 Staff recommends the Commission and City Council impose the following conditions of approval: o A maximum number of one horse shall be kept on the property. o The petitioner shall muck the horse stall and corral once per day and keep animal waste in an enclosed container a minimum of 10-foot away from any residential dwelling. o A building permit shall be required for the horse shelter. o Animal waste shall be properly disposed of and relocated from the subject property a minimum of once per week. 8.9.6 Expiration of Approval: o Special Use Permit approval shall expire after 18 months from the date of approval if construction or operation of the approved use has not commenced. o 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. o Staff recommends this Special Use Permit be permitted for a time period of five (5) years, at which point it can be renewed if so desired. 8.9.7 Appeals: Any person aggrieved by a decision of the City Council pursuant to this section may appeal to the district court within 30 days of the date of the decision rendered by the City Council. If no appeal is filed in writing within 30 days, the decision shall be considered final. City Staff Comments Legal o Stated concerns regarding sufficient open space for the large animal and the multi-family use on the property. o Applicant has stated that the horse will be provided exercise daily using nearby property and trails. o Tenants of the parcel do not get notified by mail of the petition as they are considered Interested Parties, however a large public notice sign has been posted with this SUP at the entrance to the property. Planning o Requested additional information regarding a drainage narrative. Concerns stated regarding run-off to nearby residential structures. This ultimately led to an on-site visit. 7  o As previously mentioned concerns were addressed. Building Inspection o Stated that a building permit would be required for the horse shelter. Public Input o This petition has been properly noticed: o 7 property owner letters sent out. o Publication of notice in the Daily Times. o Public notice sign posted on the property. o To date no public comment has been received. Staff Conclusion 1. Compliance: The proposed use complies with the Unified Development Code Section 2. 8.9.4 Special use review criteria as well as 2.4.7 Animals or fowl. 3. Compatibility: The proposed keeping of one horse is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and uses. 4. Staff Recommendation 5. The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition SUP 24-01, a request from David Hampton, property owner, for a Special Use Permit to allow for the keeping of one horse located at 300 Dekalb St with the following conditions of approval: 6. A maximum number of one horse shall be kept on the property. 7. The petitioner shall muck the horse stall and corral once per day and keep animal waste in an enclosed container a minimum of 10-foot away from any residential dwelling. 8. Animal waste shall be properly disposed of and relocated from the subject property a minimum of once per week. 9. A building permit shall be required for the horse shelter. 10. This Special Use Permit shall be permitted for a time period of five (5) years, at which point it can be renewed by the property owner. Discussion The Commission Asked Staff: 1. Is this the first Multi Family zoning district that has asked for an Special Use Permit 8  (SUP) to allow a horse? Did staff contemplate the different zoning aspects? 2. The subject property is surrounded by Rural Agricultural on at least two sides. 3. Is there other livestock in close proximity to this property? 4. Has the drainage from this property been looked at in the event of a heavy rain? Staff Replied: 1. That was something that staff had looked at, the different zoning aspects and what the code specifically stated. The code does not differentiate between zoning districts you are either in the Rural Agricultural zoning district or you are not. 2. We had looked at the surrounding zoning and the Rural Agricultural zoning district did play into our decision to recommend the SUP for approval. 3. Yes, there are a number of livestock uses further to the north of this property. 4. Yes, Mr. Ute, the City’s Storm Water Engineer, look at the potential storm water runoff and he was satisfied that there would not be any problems. Petitioner David Hampton and Evanie Hampton, 304 Dekalb St., Farmington NM Mr. Hampton stated that he and Planning Manager Gibson had gone through most of the issues that they thought would come up with boarding a horse of this property. He wants to be considerate to the tenants living on this property. The Commission Asked Petitioner: 1. Can you address how you plan on exercising the horse? 2. Have you talked to your tenants living on the property? 3. How would you handle the fly situation? Petitioner Replied: 1. Ms. Hampton explained that she is home schooled and will have plenty of time to exercise. She plans on doing two 40 minute sessions per day. She also stated that she has friends in Bloomfield and out on La Plata where she can take her horse out for grazing and trail riding. 2. Mr. Hampton stated they had talked to several of the tenants and they have had mixed reactions. They were mostly worried about the smell and the flies. 3. Ms. Hampton explained all the different ways she would be mitigating any fly issues. Interested Party Wilbert Vernon Bradly, 300 Dekalb St. #F, Farmington, NM Mr. Bradly has lived on the property for almost 20 years. He will be living right next to the horse stall. His main issues will be the smell and the flies. With no further public comments, Chair Freeman closed the public comment portion of the meeting for petition SUP 24-01. 9 The Commission Called Staff Back to the Podium: 1. Do you remember what the fly larvae killer that was brought up the last time we had a horse SUP request? How does the city handle smell/fly issues? 2. The five year time period for the SUP, is that in the code or just what has been recommended? Staff Replied: 1. Staff did not remember the name of the fly larvae killer, but it killed them at the larvae stage. If a complaint is made, Code Compliance would be called to handle the issue. If the issue is not taken care of the SUP can be revoked for non-compliance. 2. That was an expiration date that staff had attached to this SUP, but the Commission can change that to a number they are comfortable with. The Commission Called the Petitioner Back to the Podium: 1. How do you feel now that you have heard Mr. Bradley’s concern? 2. Since this is a wild horse, do you expect him to be nosier than a domestic horse? 3. Do you have a plan B in case boarding the horse on your property does not work? Petitioner Replied: 1. Mr. Hampton is hoping that the plans to mitigate the smell and flies will work out best for all the tenants on this property. 2. Ms. Hampton does not have the horse yet, they have him on hold. He is a three year old Mustang that will be gilded on March 1, 2024. He has been in captivity for over two years, and she has been told that he is a calm horse. 3. Yes, the horse can boarded at one of Ms. Hampton’s friend’s house. Commission Discussion The Commission discussed different number of years for the SUP to expire. They decided to go with two years instead of five years to see how things go. With no more Commission discussion needed Chair Freeman called for a motion. A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Berens to Approve Petition SUP 24-01 with the conditions as recommended by staff, except changing item #5 from the five year time period to a two year time period. Staff Recommendation 1 A maximum number of one horse shall be kept on the property. 10  2 The petitioner shall muck the horse stall and corral once per day and keep animal waste in an enclosed container a minimum of 10-foot away from any residential dwelling. 3 Animal waste shall be properly disposed of and relocated from the subject property a minimum of once per week. 4 A building permit shall be required for the horse shelter. 5 This Special Use Permit shall be permitted for a time period of two (2) years, at which point it can be renewed by the property owner. AYE: Vice Chair Brown, Commissioner Hanson, Commissioner Ragsdale, Commissioner Hodge, Commissioner Berens and Commissioner Waldroup NAY: Chair Freeman ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None APPROVED 6-1 Roll Call Commissioner Berens voted aye because he feels that Evanie and her father did a great job presenting and that they have a good plan for the future of the horse. He also feels that Mr. Hampton will work with his tenants regarding the horse. Commissioner Hodge voted aye because she felt they have a good plan and a backup plan that she feels that they would adhere to. Commissioner Waldroup voted aye to give the Hampton’s time period to have that horse there and he feels that the two year time period will also show his willingness to work with the tenants. Vice Chair Brown voted aye because he likes the two year plan and hopefully if there are any issues Code Compliance can get it worked out. Commissioner Ragsdale voted aye because after listening to Evanie, she knows what she is doing and she feels they will take good care of this horse. Commissioner Ragsdale also feel like if there is a problem they would be able to see it within the two year time. Commissioner Hanson voted aye because he feels the two years gives the petitioner time to get the facility built as proposed. He feels there is good incentive with Evanie’s love for horses and the landlords wish to have his units filled. Chair Freeman voted nay because he feels this is a weird situation. Wilbert has lived on this property for over 20 years and he did not have any choice if a horse would be boarded next to his apartment. 11 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 Gibson informed the Commission that Council approved ZC 23-106, the zone change on Dekalb. He added that Mayor Duckett had one last interview to fill the District 2 City Council vacancy. Adjournment: With no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Berens and seconded by Commissioner Hodge The motion carried unanimously 7-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Clint Freeman Tami Spencer Chair Administrative Assistant 12  UDC Proposed Changes  Section 6.4.6 Subdivision Access  Section 6.8 Subdivision Improvements 13 14 6.4.6 Subdivision access. A. Large tracts or parcels. When land is subdivided into larger parcels (further sub-dividable parcels) rather than ordinary building lots, such parcels shall be arranged so as to allow for the opening of future streets and logical further subdivisions. If the comprehensive plan of the city requires thoroughfares to cross the subdivision, the right-of-way shall be dedicated to the public. B. Required subdivision accesses points. All subdivision accesses shall meet city standards and specifications. When determining the number of required accesses, all other connecting subdivision lots shall be counted. A Site Threshold Assessment (STH) shall determine the level of street classification required to connect to the existing public roadway system. Additional accesses shall be shown on the plat and construction plans for the development; however, construction of the street may be postponed to a later phase of development. The city may require the construction of any accesses at the time of approval of the final plat. (1) A subdivision of 49 lots or less may provide access to the existing public roadway system via a single access to the STH determined roadway sytem. point; however, two access points may be required where feasible. (2) Two accesses shall be required for a A subdivision of 50 lots or greater. A subdivision must connect to a roadway that does not converge to a single choke point. The developer shall be required to provide a minimum of two unique accesses as determined by the STH.shall provide access to the existing or proposed public roadway system via two access points at minimum unless extreme natural conditions, as determined by the director, make such connection infeasible. (3) Subdivisions of 250 lots or greater shall be required to provide a minimum of three or more non-choke point accesses points to the existing or proposed public roadway system, subject to review by the director. The third and additional access points shall be shown on the plat and construction plans for the development; however, construction of the street may be postponed to a later phase of development. The city may require the construction of any access point at the time of approval of the final plat. The timing, or "trigger," for construction of the third additional accesses point shall be established as part of the subdivision review process (final plat). C. Offsite Access Improvements If an offsite access is required as described above in B, the following provisions shall be applied only if the offsite street abutting property is undeveloped and developable. The original offsite developer shall provide full right-of-way in the initial offsite improvements per the standards outlined in UDC Sec. 6.4.7.j geometric standards - street design criteria. 1. The offsite road shall be improved to a partial street width, or at least a minimum of 24 feet in width, without sidewalk, curb and gutter for the initial developer; representing an approximate proportional cost for full build out to all potential developers. 2. Where both sides of the offsite access are developable, the abutting future developers shall add sidewalk, curb and gutter and the remaining portion of asphalt width to abutting existing asphalt as per UDC Section 6.4.7.j geometric standards – street design criteria. 3. Where only one side of the offsite access is developable, the developer is responsible for building all improvements on the already developed side as per UDC standards 6.4.7.j geometric standards – street design criteria. DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.4.6 SUBDIVISION ACCESS: REDLINE 15 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements Figure 6.8.1: Flow Chart of the Conceptual Subdivision Process DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 1 of 9 16 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements 6.8.1 Construction of improvements Preliminary plat. 6.8.1 Construction of improvements. If, after city approval of the final construction plans, the subdivider elects to construct the required improvements prior to recording of the final plat, after such plat has been approved, all such construction shall be inspected while in progress, by the director, and must be approved upon completion by the director. A. No infrastructure construction shall begin without first notifying the city engineer of the start date of construction for any utilities, or improvements including streets, curb and gutter, etc. A city construction inspector shall be onsite for the installation of all improvements. The subdivider or construction representative shall notify the Farmington City Engineer prior to the installation or construction of all improvements. B. City approval of signed construction plans shall expire three years from the date of the community works director's signature. The preliminary plat process shall follow UDC Sec 8.8 – Subdivision plat review. Per UDC Sec 8.8 the planning and zoning commission and city council shall review the preliminary plat application and either vote to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the plat application. Initial review by staff shall be completed within 30 days of submittal. 6.8.2 Financial assurances Improvements agreement. 6.8.2 Financial assurances. Following approval of the final plat including construction plans and prior to the issuance of building permits and construction, the subdivider shall utilize one of the following methods of guaranteeing the cost of installing all required improvements, within an agreed period of time not to exceed three years from the date of final plat approval. An extension of time may be granted by the Director for up to three more years if the number of lots sold in the subdivision is less than 80 percent. A. Performance bond. Has filed with the city clerk a bond executed by a surety company holding a license to do business in the State of New Mexico, and acceptable to the City of Farmington on a form approved by the city, in an amount of 125 percent of the cost of the improvements as certified by the director. The performance bond shall be approved as to form by the city attorney. B. Trust agreement. Has placed on deposit in a bank or trust company in the name of the city, and approved by the city, in a trust account, a sum of money equal to 125 percent of the estimated cost of all improvements required by this section, the cost and the time of completion as estimated by the director; selection of the trustee shall be subject to approval by the city and the trust agreement shall be executed on the form provided by the city and approved as to form by the city attorney. C. Unconditional guarantee from bank (letter of credit). Has filed with the city clerk a letter, in a form approved by the city, signed by a principal officer of a local bank, local savings and loan association or other bank, acceptable to the city, agreeing to pay to the City of Farmington, on demand, a stipulated sum of money to apply to the estimated cost of installation of all improvements for which the subdivider is responsible under this section. The guaranteed payment sum shall be the 125 percent of the estimated costs and scheduling as prepared by the subdivider's engineer and approved by the director. The letter shall state the name of the subdivision and shall list the improvements, which the subdivider is required to provide. No expiration of the guarantee shall be permitted. DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 2 of 9 17 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements D. Improvements agreement. Has executed an agreement approved by the city attorney (between the subdivider and the city) wherein the subdivider agrees to install all improvements for which the subdivider is responsible under this section. Such agreement shall be signed by the mayor and recorded with the final plat. Following city approval of the final plat including construction plans, the subdivider shall enter into an improvements agreement with the city. The subdivider has two options: A. Construct the whole subdivision infrastructure without financial assurances prior to the issuance of building permits (i.e. Sec 6.8.3 – Construction of improvements without financial assurances); or B. Obtain a method of financial assurances, allowing for the issuance of building permits prior to completing the whole subdivision infrastructure (i.e. Sec 6.8.4 – Construction of improvements with financial assurances). Once having executed an agreement approved by the city attorney, the subdivider agrees to install all improvements for which the subdivider is responsible under this section. Such agreement shall be signed by the mayor and recorded with the final plat with San Juan County. 6.8.3 Release of financial assurances Construction of improvements without financial assurances No release of any security or agreement and no residence or other building shall be constructed until the city has formally accepted the improvements that are the subject of such security or agreement have been installed for the entire block in which the residence or other building shall be located. A. Prior to the acceptance of a subdivision by the city, the design engineer shall submit to the city staff a complete set of as-built drawings in "reproducible" hard copy and digital format showing all subdivision improvements, including utility locations (gas, water, sewer, telephone), paving and drainage improvements, and all changes made in the plans during construction. Each hard copy sheet shall contain an "as-built" stamp bearing the signature of the engineer and the date. Digital information shall be provided in the latest version of AutoCAD, or other format compatible with the city GIS as may be specified by the director with all measurements stated in feet. B. Prior to release of security provided by the subdivider pursuant to the requirements of section 6.8.2, financial assurances, the director shall independently inspect the construction of improvements while in progress, and, shall likewise inspect such improvements upon completion of construction. The design engineer shall certify that construction was completed to plan, and shall have approved any change(s) to the approved plan in consultation with the director. After final inspection, the director shall notify the subdivider and the city Attorney in writing as to its acceptance or rejection. He shall reject such construction only if it fails to comply with the standards and specifications contained or referred to herein. If the director rejects such construction, the city attorney shall enforce the guarantees provided in this section. C. The financial assurance shall be utilized by the city to complete project construction after 120 days following abandonment by the subdivider and his contractor. DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 3 of 9 18 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements D. Upon completion of construction in accordance with approved construction plans, the subdivider shall require his construction contractors, with whom he contracts, to furnish materials and to install improvements required by this section, and shall himself be required to post a bond guaranteeing that all workmanship and materials shall be free of defects for a period of one year from the date of acceptance by the director. Constructing the whole subdivision infrastructure without financial assurances prior to the issuance of building permits: If, after city approval of the final construction plans, the subdivider elects to construct the required infrastructure prior to recording of the final plat, after such plat has been approved, an improvements agreement shall be executed between the subdivider and the city. The improvements agreement shall follow Sec 6.8.2 – Improvements agreement. Once the agreement is executed, all such construction shall be inspected while in progress, by the city engineer or their designee, and if standards are met, be approved upon completion by the city engineer or their designee. The construction of infrastructure shall follow Sec 6.8.6 – Construction process. Once the subdivider satisfies all requirements per Sec 6.8.6 – Construction process, the final plat may be recorded and subsequently building permits and certificates of occupancy (CO’s) may be issued. 6.8.3.1 Construction phasing If the subdivider elects to construct the required infrastructure of the subdivision in phases, then the subdivision phases must be separated into their own construction plans and preliminary plat. Requirements for construction phasing include: A. Phases must be designated in the preliminary plat, construction plans and the improvements agreement. B. Triggers for connecting access roads and offsite improvements shall be stated in the agreement and meet UDC Sec 6.4.6 – Subdivision access. The proportional improvements as triggered must be completed prior to additional phases. C. The final plat for each subdivision phase must be recorded prior to the issuance of building permits and CO’s. Following city approval of the final plat of subdivision phases including construction plans, an improvements agreement shall be executed between the subdivider and the city per each approved subdivision phase. Once the subdivider satisfies all requirements per Sec 6.8.6 – Construction process, the final plat for the subdivision phase may be recorded and subsequently building permits and CO’s may be issued per approved and recorded subdivision phase. 6.8.3.1.1. Undeveloped infrastructure For the remaining and undeveloped infrastructure within a subdivision phase, in lieu of constructing the required infrastructure to record final plat and obtain building permits and CO’s, the subdivider shall acquire a method of financial assurance of 125 percent of the remaining required infrastructure within said phase, in a manner jointly agreed upon by both the subdivider and the director or designee to allow for the issuance of building permits and CO’s. For releasing financial assurances please see Sec 6.8.5 - Release of financial assurances. DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 4 of 9 19 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements 6.8.4 Building permits Construction of improvements with financial assurances. Building permits for onsite construction shall not be issued by the City of Farmington until: A. The final plat and any related documents have been recorded with San Juan County. B. Construction plans have been approved by the city. C. All infrastructure, per the approved construction plans, has been installed by a state licensed contractor and approved in writing by the city engineer. D. Building permits may be issued for the complete subdivision or portion completed and approved in writing by the city engineer. The subdivider may elect to acquire building permits and certificates of occupancy (CO’s) in advance of construction. This can occur only after the approval of the final plat including construction plans, and after the final plat is recorded with San Juan County. In lieu of completing all required subdivision infrastructure before the issuance of building permits and CO’s, a method of financial assurance will be executed. An improvements agreement would need to be executed between the subdivider and the city, and a method of financial assurance will need to be posted and accepted by the city. The improvements agreement shall follow Sec 6.8.2 – Improvements agreement. Once the improvements agreement has been executed, a method of financial assurance shall be applied to the remaining and undeveloped infrastructure or to the whole subdivision in an amount of 125 percent of the estimated subdivision infrastructure improvement cost. The subdivider shall utilize one of the following methods of guaranteeing the cost of installing all required improvements, within an agreed period of time not to exceed three years from the date of final plat approval. Extensions of time may be granted by the director for three more years if the number of lots sold in the subdivision is less than 80 percent. A. Performance bond. Has filed with the city clerk a bond executed by a surety company holding a license to do business in the State of New Mexico, and acceptable to the City of Farmington on a form approved by the city, in an amount of 125 percent of the cost of the improvements as certified by the director. The performance bond shall be approved as to form by the city attorney and shall have a deadline printed on the bond document. B. Trust agreement. Has placed on deposit in a bank or trust company in the name of the city, and approved by the city, in a trust account, a sum of money equal to 125 percent of the estimated cost of all improvements required by this section, the cost and the time of completion as estimated by the director or a bona fid quote from a state licensed contractor; selection of the trustee shall be subject to approval by the city and the trust agreement shall be executed on the form provided by the city and approved as to form by the city attorney. C. Unconditional guarantee from bank (letter of credit). Has filed with the city clerk a letter, in a form approved by the city, signed by a principal officer of a local bank, local savings and loan association or other bank, acceptable to the city, agreeing to pay to the City of Farmington, on demand, a stipulated sum of money to apply to the estimated cost of installation of all improvements for which the subdivider is responsible under this section. The guaranteed payment sum shall be the 125 percent of the estimated costs and scheduling as prepared by the subdivider and approved by the director. The letter shall DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 5 of 9 20 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements state the name of the subdivision and shall list the improvements, which the subdivider is required to provide. D. Cashier’s Check These methods of posting financial assurances in lieu of completing all required subdivision infrastructure will allow for the issuance of building permits and CO’s prior to completing all required infrastructure as showed on the approved construction documents. Please see both building permit and CO requirements outlined in Sec 6.8.7 - Building permits and Sec 6.8.8 Certificates of occupancy. For releasing financial assurances please see Sec 6.8.5 - Release of financial assurances. Within the agreed period of time not to exceed three years from the date of final plat approval, all require infrastructure shall be constructed and inspected while in progress, by the city engineer or their designee, and must be approved upon completion by the city engineer or their designee. The construction of infrastructure shall follow Sec 6.8.6 – Construction process. 6.8.5 Release of financial assurances. The release of financial assurance will follow the issuance of the Notice of Acceptance (NOA) letter. No release of any security or agreement will occur until the city has issued an NOA and formally accepted the improvements that are the subject of such security or agreement. 6.8.5.1 Terminate financial assurance In the event the subdivider desires to terminate the project they may terminate the financial assurance (i.e. bond, etc.) for any lots that have not begun construction of structures. 6.8.5.2 Final inspection Prior to release of security provided by the subdivider pursuant to the requirements of both Sec 6.8.3 Construction of improvements without financial assurances and Sec 6.8.4 - Construction of improvements with financial assurances, the director or designee shall independently inspect the construction of improvements while in progress, and shall likewise inspect such improvements upon completion of construction. After final inspection, the director or designee shall notify the subdivider and the city attorney in writing as to its acceptance or rejection of the required subdivision infrastructure. 6.8.5.2.1 Acceptance An NOA letter will serve as formal acceptance of the required subdivision infrastructure. Following the NOA, the subdivider will submit a letter of release request to the director or designee, requesting the release of financial assurance. 6.8.5.2.2 Nonacceptance The director or designee shall reject such construction only if it fails to comply with the standards and specifications contained or referred to herein after the subdivider has been allowed sufficient time to correct any such deficiency. If the director or designee rejects such construction, the city attorney shall enforce the guarantees provided in this section. The financial assurance shall be utilized by the city to complete project DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 6 of 9 21 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements construction after 120 days or as otherwise required by the expiration date on the method of financial assurance by the subdivider and their contractor. 6.8.6 Construction process. The subdivider is responsible for constructing all required infrastructure per the approved construction documents, except sidewalks adjacent to a buildable lot. Sidewalks are typically built by the home builder and are constructed per buildable lot, usually after the issuance of building permits and prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy. All sidewalks adjacent to an unbuildable lot must be constructed per the construction documents along with all other infrastructure. 6.8.6.1 Infrastructure improvements If applicable all as-builts submitted shall follow Sec 6.8.6.2 – As-built plans. All infrastructure improvements shall conform to the following: A. No infrastructure construction shall begin without first notifying the city engineer or their designee of the start date of construction for any utilities, or improvements including streets, curb and gutter, etc. The subdivider or construction representative shall notify the city engineer or their designee prior to the installation or construction of all improvements. When infrastructure construction begins the city will provide inspections. B. City approval of signed construction plans shall expire three years from the date of the director's signature. Completed and approved construction improvement components shall be grandfathered. Extension of time will be granted by the director for three more years if the number of lots sold in the subdivision is less than 80 percent. C. All infrastructure (except sidewalk) as stated on the subdivision construction documents shall be given separate inspections and Notice of Inspections (NOI) will be issued if final inspections are passed. Once a NOI is granted for an individual utility, it may be used. D. The city engineer or their designee shall have all water, sewer and subsurface storm systems captured by the city’s survey division for the city’s GIS. The city’s ArcGIS as-built standard operating procedure will be followed. The city’s surveyor shall respond within provided 24-hour notification. Upon completion of all required infrastructure (except sidewalks), the subdivider will satisfy all requirements in the approved construction plans and improvements agreement, and supply infrastructure as-builts. 6.8.6.2 As-built plans Prior to the acceptance of a subdivision by the city, the subdivider shall submit to the city staff a set of as-built drawings. The as-built drawings shall be completed by the subdivider’s design engineer. The as-built drawings shall conform to the following: A. Each hard copy sheet shall contain an "as-built" stamp bearing the signature of the design engineer and the date; DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 7 of 9 22 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements B. Be in such form and size as required by the city engineer or designee; C. Be prepared on reproducible mylar or similar material satisfactory to the city engineer or designee, and digital information shall be provided in the latest version of AutoCAD, or another format compatible with the city’s GIS as may be specified by the city engineer or designee; D. Show horizontal and vertical locations (above and below ground) of all improvements required by the Agreement. Show all public utilities the design engineer was responsible for on the construction drawings, including, but not necessarily limited to streets, drainage ways, storm drainage, irrigation facilities, recreation areas and facilities, common use areas, slope stabilization, and utilities such as water, sewer, and gas, which the city, at present or in the future, may be required to locate or to maintain. i. For additional utility locations (i.e. gas, telephone, electric, cable TV, fiber optic, etc.), if the subdivider or their designee will notify the city when these utilities are being installed the city survey technicians will record the locations of these utilities on the city’s GIS. Alternatively, a professional surveyor may be hired to create an as-built of the same. E. Capture changes to the approved construction plans, including but not limited to changes to pavement, sidewalk and drainage improvements; F. The location of improvements on such drawings shall be tied to lines which can be re-established through survey, i.e., a survey base line tied to section corners, quarter corners, other survey reference markers, property lines or right-of-way lines. Horizontal distances and vertical elevations shall be based on exact measurements taken during construction and shall be within on tenth of one foot (0.10 foot) of the exact location. G. All such as-built drawings shall be submitted to and approved by the city engineer or designee prior to the issuance of the notice of acceptance (NOA), which is the acceptance by the city of the infrastructure, improvements, development or facility. 6.8.6.3 One-year warranty and notice of acceptance After the as-builts are supplied, the city will issue a NOA letter within 10 days of final inspection, accepting the newly constructed infrastructure and initiating the one-year warranty period for the whole subdivision, or its respective phases as outlines in the construction plans or improvements agreement. The one-year warrant is a guarantee that all workmanship and materials shall be free of defects for a period of one year from the date of acceptance on the NOA letter. The City Engineer and the Water/ Wastewater Administrator sign the NOA letter. The developer will also sign the NOA letter, acknowledging the one-year warranty. If applicable, following the NOA, the subdivider will submit a letter of release request to the director or designee, requesting the release of financial assurance. For more information regarding the releasing financial assurances please see Sec 6.8.5 - Release of financial assurances. DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 8 of 9 23 Sec. 6.8 Subdivision improvements 6.8.7 Building permits. Building permits shall follow UDC Section 8.2 – Building permits for all onsite construction, building permits shall not be issued by the City of Farmington until: A. The final plat and any related documents have been recorded with San Juan County. B. Construction plans have been approved by the director. C. The improvements agreement has been executed, signed by the mayor and recorded with the final plat with San Juan County. D. All infrastructure (except sidewalks), per the approved construction plans and improvements agreement, has been installed by a state licensed contractor and approved in writing by the city engineer via the notice of acceptance (NOA) letter. In lieu of completing all infrastructure (except sidewalk) the subdivider may choose to post financial assurances per Sec 6.8.4 - Construction of improvements with financial assurances. All other requirements per the improvements agreement may need to be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits. Building permits may be issued for the complete subdivision or portion completed and approved in writing by the director or designee. 6.8.8 Certificates of occupancy. Certificates of occupancy (CO’s) may be issued for the complete subdivision or phase completed and approved in writing by the director or designee. CO’s shall be issued following the procedure as outlined in Section 8.3 – Certificate of occupancy in the UDC. Before the issuance of CO’s, sidewalks shall be installed, inspected and approved following both Municipal Code Section 7-1-2-Sidewalks and ramps for handicapped, and UDC Sec 6.4.8 – Pedestrian, biking and multi-use facilities. (Ord. No. 2011-1251, §§ 4, 5, 10-25-11; Ord. No. 2022-1335, 1-25-22) DRAFT VERSION UDC SECTION 6.8 SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS: REDLINE Page 9 of 9 24