Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive March 14, 2024 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the February 29, 2024 P&Z Meeting 4 Petition ZC 24-10 – A request for a Zone Change from Local Neighborhood Commercial to General Commercial and variance to the City’s 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis facility to a residential use. Presented by Planning Manager Gibson (Pg. 15) 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 29, 2024 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on February 29, 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 Clete Berens Gary Hanson Cody Waldroup P&Z Members Absent Amber Hodge Gary Hanson Staff Present: Colby Gibson Mike Safrany Joaquin Gonzalez Derrick Childers Tami Spencer Others Who Addressed the Commission None 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 6-0 vote. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the minutes of the February 15, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 6-0 vote. Swearing of Witnesses There was no public comment 1  Overview of 6.4.6 Subdivision Access • Outlines required subdivision access standards and specifications: • Number of accesses; • Connecting street classification (local, collector, arterial); • Clarifies acceptable connections (non-choke point); • Introduces Site Threshold Assessment (STH) process; • Addresses offsite access improvements; 6.4.6(A) Large tracts or parcels • Clarifies the applicability of a ‘large tract or parcel’ with a 5 acre minimum parcel size; 2  • Large tracts or parcels. When land is subdivided into larger parcels (further sub-dividable parcels, at least 5 acres in size) 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. 6.4.6(B) Required subdivision accesses 1) Subdivisions with <50 lots require 1 connection (STH determines the street classification); 2) Subdivisions with 50-249 lots require 2 connections that do not converge to a single choke point (STH determines the street classification); 3) Subdivisions with >249 lots require 3+ connections (non-choke point) as determined by the STH; • Adds additional information: • Requires existing subdivision lots be counted when determining the total number of required accesses; • Requires a STH to determine the level of street classification to connect to; • Requires the accesses to be shown on the plat and construction plans; 6.4.6(C) Offsite Access Improvements • New section to outline requirements for offsite accesses which the code does not currently address; • Subdivider provides right-of-way for the access; • Partial street constructed by subdivider without sidewalk, curb, gutter etc; • As development comes, the builder is required to add additional street portions, sidewalk, curb, gutter etc.; • Designed to help the subdivider and later developers/builders “share the cost” of the access. Currently subdivider is responsible for developing the access at their full expense; 3  Overview of 6.8 Subdivision Improvements • Outlines the required roles and responsibilities of the subdivider when constructing a subdivision: • Type of improvements; • Subdivider constructs sidewalks abutting unbuildable lots and open space. • Individual lot owners/builders construct sidewalks abutting buildable lots. • Timing of improvements (including phasing); • Financing options; • Improvements agreements; • One-year warranty specifics; • Building permits; • Certificates of Occupancy (COs); 6.8.2 Improvements Agreement • After City approval of the final plat and construction plans, subdivider enters into an improvements agreement identifying the specific roles and responsibilities of the subdivider and the City- including timing of improvements. • Subdivider has two options: 4  • Construct entire subdivision without financial assurances- building permits not issued until subdivision improvements are constructed; • Obtain a method of financial assurances- allows for the issuance of building permits and COs before subdivision improvements are constructed. Currently improvements are required to be constructed before the issuance of building permits and certificates of occupancy. 6.8.3 Construction of Improvements Without Financial Assurances • Preliminary plan process; • Improvements agreement executed between subdivider and City; • Infrastructure constructed in whole; • NOA (notice of acceptance) and inspections. City takes ownership of improvements and 1-year warranty begins; • Record final plat; • Building permits issued; • Sidewalks constructed (as lots are built on); • Certificates of occupancy (CO) issued; *Construction phasing: if so elected to do so, must be shown on the plat and plans. Remaining and undeveloped improvements must either be constructed or financial assurances acquired prior to issuance of building permits and Cos; 6.8.4 Construction of Improvements with Financial Assurances • Preliminary plan process; • Improvements agreement executed between subdivider and City; • Subdivider acquires financial assurances and are accepted by the City. (125% estimated cost of the improvements); • Performance bond, trust agreement, letter of credit, cashier’s check • Record final plat; • Building permits issued (currently issued after improvements completed); • Sidewalks constructed as lots are built on; • Certificates of occupancy issued (currently issued after improvements completed); • Subdivision improvements constructed; • NOA (notice of acceptance) and inspections. City takes ownership of improvements and 1-year warranty begins; 5 • Release of financial assurances; 6.8.5 Release of financial assurances • Subdivider may terminate the financial assurance for any lots that have not begun construction. • After final inspection, the director or designee shall notify the subdivider and the city attorney as to accept or reject the improvements. • Notice of acceptance (NOA) letter serves as the formal acceptance of the required subdivision improvements. • Rejection of improvements only if they fail to comply with the standards and specifications referred. Financial assurances would be utilized to complete the construction after 120 days. 6.8.6 Construction Process • 6.8.6.1 Infrastructure improvements • Subdivider is responsible for notifying city engineer prior to start of construction and end of construction. City provides inspections; • City approval of signed construction plans expire 3 years from date of director’s signature. • 6.8.6.2 As-built plans • As-built drawings submitted to the City for acceptance. • Specific as-built drawing requirements are not changed in this update. • 6.8.6.3 One-year warranty and notice of acceptance • After as-builts are approved, City will issue a NOA letter within 10 days of final inspection. • City takes ownership of improvements. • One-year warranty period begins, guaranteeing that all workmanship and materials be free of defects. 6.8.7 Building Permits 6.8.8 Certificates of Occupancy • Per 6.8.7 Building permits are not issued until: • The final plat and related documents have been recorded with San Juan County. • Construction plans have been approved by the director. • The improvements agreement has been executed and recorded with San Juan County. 6  • All infrastructure (except sidewalks) are installed per the approved construction plans and approved via a NOA letter. *Subdivider may elect to post financial assurances and receive building permits and COs prior to the completion of the improvements. • Per 6.8.8 Certificates of occupancy may be issued for the complete subdivision or phase completed and approved and follow the process outlined in UDC Sec. 8.3. Flow Chart of The Subdivision Process FIGURE 6.8.1 Improvements Agreement Template Added to the Appendix 7 Updated Draft Version with Red Line Strike Out Section 6.4.6 8 Section 6.8 9 10 11 12 13  Discussion The Commission and staff discussed the different proposed changes to Section 6.4.6 Subdivision Access and Section 6.8 Subdivision Improvements. The Planning and Zoning Commission requested staff to look into the following two items and would like staff to report back to the Commission on what can be done to address the concerns: 1. The Commission asked to have further discussion regarding moving the construction of sidewalk from the developer/builder to the subdivider. Concern was expressed regarding lots potentially not selling and being developed upon and creating long term pedestrian connectivity issues. 2. The Commission asked staff to have further discussion regarding allowing offsite access be unpaved. The Commission had concerns regarding the daily use of these unpaved streets for the residents within the subdivision. There was also concern regarding the cost of maintaining the unpaved street for the City. The Commission was concerned with what would happen if properties abutting the unpaved street were never developed and who would be required to bring the street up to City standards. 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 unanimously approved SUP 24-01, for keeping of one horse. He also wanted to know since the next meeting falls during spring break, who will be available. He added that Mayor Duckett would be announcing the candidate he has picked to fill the District 2 City Council vacancy. Adjournment: With no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Davis The motion carried unanimously 6-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 3:57 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Clint Freeman Tami Spencer Chair Administrative Assistant 14  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST – ZC FROM LNC TO GC PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Jason Valdez Representative N/A Date of Application February 2, 2024 A request for a Zone Change from Local Neighborhood Commercial Requested Action to General Commercial and variance to the City’s 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis facility to a residential use. Location 511 E. 20th St Existing Land Use Professional services Existing Zoning LNC: Local Neighborhood Commercial 2040 Future Land Mixed Use Village Use Designation North: Local Neighborhood Commercial; Grocery store South: Multi-family Medium Density; Multi and single-family Surrounding Zoning residential uses & Land Use East: Local Neighborhood Commercial; Convenience store without gas pumps and cable company. West: Local Neighborhood Commercial; Restaurant/bakery Publication of Notice: February 26, 2024 Farmington Daily Times Notice Property owners’ letter: February 26, 2024 Requirements Sign posted: March 4, 2024 Staff Planner Colby Gibson, Planning Manager Background The applicant is requesting a Zone Change from Local Neighborhood Commercial to General Commercial to allow for a cannabis retail establishment. As part of this Zone Change petition, the applicant is requesting a variance to the 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis facility to a residential use, as outlined in UDC Section 2.4.67. As measured by the UDC, the proposed cannabis facility is zero-feet away from the nearest residential use. Within 300 feet of the subject property are 21 residential lots with a total of 58 residential units. Cannabis retail are not permitted within the existing LNC zoning district, triggering the request to GC. No other protected uses are within 300’ of the subject property. 15  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST Zoning Local Neighborhood Commercial 16 COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST Aerial View 17  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST Vicinity Map Grocery Retail Professional Services Food & Beverage Retail Neighborhood Retail Food & Beverage Retail Single-Family Residential Professional Services Professional Services Multi-family & Single-Family Residential 18  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST Properties within 300-feet 19  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST STAFF ANALYSIS UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE UDC Section 2.4.67 Recreational cannabis sales This section of the Unified Development Code outlines the standards for retail cannabis sales establishments. A. Retailers of Recreational cannabis shall be licensed by the New Mexico Cannabis Control Division. B. Retail sales are permitted in the CB, GC, and I zoning districts only. This standard has triggered the rezone request from Local Neighborhood to General Commercial. C. Such uses shall not be permitted within 300 feet of any school, religious institution, registered daycare center, residential use, or from another cannabis dispensary. As measured by the UDC, the proposed cannabis facility is zero-feet away from the nearest residential use. Within 300-feet of the subject property are 21 residential lots with a total of 58 residential units. As part of this rezone request, the applicant is requesting a variance to UDC Section 2.4.67 and 2.4.69. D. Sales and consumption is not permitted on public property or in public places. E. Business hours shall be from seven in the morning till eleven in the evening. UDC Section 8.7 Zoning Map Amendment (rezoning) 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 2040 Future Land Use Plan designates this area as Mixed-Use Village, intended to support medium-high density residential and neighborhood commercial uses. General Commercial zoning is permitted within the Mixed-Use Village 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 present zoning of this area is primarily Local Neighborhood Commercial along the 20th St corridor. A combination of multi-family and single-family zoning surrounds the larger area. Uses within the area to the north, east and west comprise of grocery stores, food service and professional services with outlying single-family residential uses. Uses directly to the south of the subject property are both single-family and multi-family. The proposed use is not compatible with the present zoning and surrounding area. Specifically, the Local Neighborhood Zoning does not permit cannabis sales, requiring a zone change request. If the zone change were to be approved, the surrounding LNC, OP and residential zoning would continue to not permit cannabis sales establishments. The City of Farmington’s Code does not allow for cannabis establishments within 300- feet of a residential use. As previously mentioned, 21 residential lots and 58 residential units are within 300 feet of the subject property. 20  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST The zone change to General Commercial would not be compatible with the surrounding zoning and uses. The surrounding Local Neighborhood Commercial zoning is the most restrictive non-residential zoning district in the City and is intended to be residential/neighborhood friendly. General Commercial zoning would allow more intensive uses, not typically desired adjacent to residential uses. The change to General Commercial would run with the property, even if the proposed cannabis establishment were to move from this location in the future. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? The New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department, Cannabis Control Division regulates the standards and operating procedures for cannabis retail establishments. These regulations help to mitigate potential adverse impacts such as noise, odor, and general safety. Industry best practices have proven to be effective at mitigating adverse impacts and the proposed cannabis sales use is not expected to be any more intensive or harmful than the surrounding neighborhood commercial uses (Smith’s, Walgreens, Speedway etc.). Staff’s primary concern is the change to General Commercial which would allow more intensive uses onto the property, which may have additional adverse impacts on the abutting residential properties. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? The proposed density and intensity of the cannabis retail use is permitted in the General Commercial zoning district. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? A change of use at the subject property would trigger parking standards to be reevaluated. The parcel allows for ample parking for the retail use, while also allowing for the other suite to provide sufficient parking. 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? Adequate public facilities and services are available. G. Does the proposed change constitute “spot zoning” as defined in Article 11, definitions? Section 11.1 of the Unified Development Code 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. 21  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST The proposed zone change to General Commercial would grant the subject property special privileges not granted generally which would meet the definition of spot zoning. The closest parcel with General Commercial zoning is more than half a mile to the east. The change to General Commercial is allowed by the Comprehensive Plan, therefore this petition could be approved without creating an instance of spot zoning. UDC Section 8.12 Variances The Unified Development Code states that variances may be granted if it is found that the strict enforcement of the UDC would create a substantial hardship to the applicant by virtue of unique special conditions not generally found within the vicinity, and that the granting of a variance would preserve the spirit and intent of the UDC and would serve the general interests of the public and the applicant. The following criteria has been used per UDC Sec. 8.12.4 variance criteria: (1) That special conditions and circumstances exist, which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; and; furthermore, that they are not self-imposed, self- created or otherwise the result of actions by the applicant; This criterion is not met. Staff is unaware of any special circumstances existing which are peculiar to the subject property. The applicant does not currently own the subject property and is aware of the distancing ordinances in place. The proposed use of a cannabis facility at this location is self-created. (2) That a literal interpretation of the provisions of the Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the Code; This criterion is not met. Each of the LNC and OP zoned properties in this area are within 300-feet of the protected uses described in UDC Sec 2.4.67. A literal interpretation of the code would deprive each of the properties in this area from operating a cannabis facility of any kind. (3) The applicant demonstrates that the request is a minimum easing of the Code requirements, making possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure; This criterion is not met. The applicant has not demonstrated that this request is a minimum easing of the code. Staff is aware of at least 21 residential lots with a total of 58 residential units within 300-feet of the subject property. (4) That the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general interest, the general purpose and intent of the Code, and is not injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare; This criterion is not met. The intent of the code is to separate cannabis uses from residential uses and to ensure cannabis uses are not being clustered within any one area of the City. The granting of the variance is not in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the code as it would allow a cannabis use adjacent to 58 residential units. In order to allow a cannabis retail sales establishment at this location a zone change to General Commercial must be approved. This would permit a wide variety of uses with moderate to high levels of intensity at this location which is not suitable adjacent to residences. 22  COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST (5) That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district; This criterion is met. The proposed variance will not allow any use not allowed in the district. (6) That no nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district and no permitted use of lands, structures or buildings in other districts has been or shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance; and This criterion is met. No nonconforming uses have been considered. (7) That the applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance requested were denied. This criterion is not met. The applicant does not own the subject property and maintains other cannabis retail establishments in Farmington. An unnecessary hardship has not been provided by the applicant. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to nine (9) surrounding property owners. At the time of this report, staff has received one letter in support of the petition. STAFF CONCLUSION • The proposed zone change to General Commercial and cannabis retail use is allowed within the ‘Mixed Use Village’ designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • The proposed zone change to General Commercial and cannabis sales use is not compatible with the surrounding area and nearby residential uses. • The requested variance to the 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis retail does not meet five (5) out of the seven (7) variance criteria. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends denial of Petition ZC 24-10, a request for a Zone Change from Local Neighborhood Commercial to General Commercial and variance request to the 300-foot distance requirement from a to a residential use to a cannabis establishment located at 511 E. 20th ST. If the Commission were to recommend approval and the Council approve Petition ZC 24-10, staff recommends the following conditions of approval: 1. All necessary building permits shall be obtained for remodeling. 2. The establishment shall comply with the New Mexico Cannabis Control Division regulations at all times. 23 COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST 24 COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST 25 COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST 26 COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST 27 COMMUNITY WORKS PLANNING STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-10 511 E. 20th ST 28