Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive July 11, 2024 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the June 13, 2024 P&Z Meeting 4 Presentation On Current Development Around Farmington – Presented by Senior Planner Safrany 5 Business From: • Floor: Comments are accepted in person, limited to three (3) minutes and to items that are not listed on the agenda. No formal action will be taken at this meeting relating to comments provided from the floor. • Chairman: • Members: • Staff: 6 Adjournment 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 June 13, 2024 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on June 13, 2024 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. P&Z Members Present: Chair Freeman Vice Chair Brown Cheryl Ragsdale Cody Waldroup Gary Hanson Amber Hodge P&Z Members Absent Jennifer Wood Shay Davis Clete Berens Staff Present: Colby Gibson Mike Safrany Joaquin Gonzalez Julie Baird Shaña Reeves Jennifer Breakell Tami Spencer Others Who Addressed the Commission Irving Lin Ben Hazlewood Julie Grow Iran Ward Jeff Raichel Lisa Maxwell 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 Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to approve the agenda of the June 13, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission. This motion passed unanimously by a 6-0 vote. 1 Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Vice Chair Brown and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to approve the minutes of the May 30, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed unanimously by a 6-0 vote. Open Meetings Resolution - 2024 Planning Manager Gibson asked the Commission if there were any changes to the 2024 Open Meetings Resolution. With no changes requested, a motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to approve this resolution. This motion passed unanimously by a 6-0 vote. Petition SUP 24-36 – A request for a Special Use Permit to allow for cannabis cultivation at 3100 La Plata Hwy. Associate Planner Gonzalez Presented the Following: Special Use Permit A request for a Special Use Permit and a Variance to the 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis cultivation facility to a residential use, as outlined in UDC Section 2.4.71 for cannabis cultivation. Petition Information Applicant: Irving Lin Representative: Brandon Pino Location: 3100 La Plata Hwy Existing Zoning: Industrial Existing Land Use: Vacant Request: o Approval for a special use permit for Commercial Cannabis Cultivation. o Approval for a Variance to the 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis cultivation facility to a residential use, as outlined in UDC Section 2.4.71 for cannabis cultivation. 2  Subject Property Surrounding Zoning / USES o North: Rural Agricultural. o South: Rural Agricultural, Industrial. o East: Rural Agricultural. 3 o West: Rural Agricultural, General Commercial. 4  Properties Within 300-Feet UDC Section 8.9 Special Use Permit A) Effect on environment: o Placement of a commercial cannabis cultivation facility at this location is not expected to be detrimental to the surrounding area. Based on research from the National Institute of Health (NIH) there have not been any sustained health effects related to the operation of a cannabis cultivation establishment. Cultivation will be carried out indoors and meet the New Mexico Cannabis Control Division requirements. B) Compatible with surrounding area: o The existing building is in good shape and harmonious with the character of the surrounding area. The building is a 4,960 square foot service garage. No exterior 5  modifications are planned for the service garage. C) External impacts minimized: o The proposed commercial cultivation facility does have the potential to cause pungent odor to the existing residential uses. D) Infrastructure impacts minimized: o The proposed cannabis production facility will not have a negative impact on existing infrastructure and services. The subject property has access from La Plata Highway which is classified as a major arterial by the City’s Major Thoroughfare Plan. E) Consistent with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan: o The petitioner meets the requirements of UDC Sec. 2.4.63. F) Parcel size: o The subject property is located on a 9.5-acre parcel and is zoned Industrial. The building they will utilize is a 4,960 square foot service garage sufficient for the use proposed. G) Site Plan: o The site plan complies with the standards of Section 8.5. UDC Section 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; • 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 IND, and GC zoned properties in this area are within 300-feet of the protected uses described in UDC Sec 2.4.71C. 6  • 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 5 residential lots with a total of 13 residential units within 300- feet of the subject property. • As measured by the UDC, the nearest residential use is 0-feet away. (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 13 residential units. (5) That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the 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 has been or shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance; and • This criterion is met. No nonconforming uses have been considered for approval. (7) The applicant would suffer a hardship if the variance requested were denied. • This criterion is not met. The applicant does not own the subject property. An unnecessary hardship has not been provided by the applicant. Public Input o This petition has been properly noticed: o 6 property owner letters sent out; o Publication of notice in the Daily Times. 7  o Public notice sign posted on the property. Staff Conclusion o The proposed Special Use permit and commercial cultivation use is allowed within the ‘Commercial Mixed Use’ designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. o The proposed Commercial Cultivation use is not compatible with the surrounding area and nearby residential uses. o The requested variance to the 300-foot distance requirement from a residential use does not meet five (5) out of the seven (7) variance criteria. Staff Recommendation The Community Works Department recommends Denial of Petition SUP 24-36, a request from Irving Lin, represented by Brandon Pino, for a Special Use Permit and a Variance to the 300-foot distance requirement from a cannabis cultivation facility to a residential use, as outlined in UDC Section 2.4.71 for cannabis cultivation located at 3100 La Plata Hwy. If the Commission were to recommend approval of Petition SUP 24-36, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. A City of Farmington business registration will be required. 2. A building and fire inspection shall be required. 3. A building permit shall be required for remodeling. 4. Plans for odor ventilation will need to be submitted and approved by the City. 5. The SUP shall be effective for five years, at which time the applicant can renew. 6. The variance approval shall become null and void in the event that the use is discontinued for a time period of 12 months or longer. Discussion The Commission Asked Staff: 1. If this is approved, would the petitioner be able to build another structure to use for cultivation? 8 Staff Replied: 1. Yes, this variance would allow the petitioner to build another structure for additional cultivation. Affected Party/Petitioner Petitioner Irving Lin, 23 Rd 6940, Waterflow NM: Mr. Lin stated that he did not understand the 300 foot distance to a residence, but staff explained it to him and now he understands it. He has done research on the ventilation system and states that with an internal circulation filter the odor will stay inside of the building. You should not smell anything outside of the building. The Commission Asked Petitioner Lin: 1. If this petition gets recommended for approval, would you have any problem with the internal circulation filter becoming a condition of approval? 2. How many plants do you plan on growing? 3. Do you have other grow facilities? 4. Will you be doing any extraction on site? 5. Do you have the state license that allows extraction? 6. Are you aware that if you want to manufacture you will have to come back to the Planning & Zoning Commission? 7. Do you have any intention on building other structures on the property? Mr. Lin Replied: 1. No, he would not be opposed to that becoming a condition. 2. It is a small operation with about 300-500 plants. 3. Yes, he has an outdoor grow in Waterflow, NM, and an indoor grow in Oklahoma. 4. Yes, eventually he would like to do extraction. 5. Yes, he has a vertical license, which would allow for extraction. 6. He is aware of that. 7. He does not plan on building any new structures on this lot, if things go well and he wants to expand he will acquire an additional location. Interested Party Jim Dennis, 120 E. 28th St., Farmington NM Mr. Dennis stated that he has started a recent relationship with Mr. Lin and what he is trying to do. He explained that he feels since the property is so large and that the distance from building to building is generally over the 300 feet that the SUP and the CV should be granted. He added that Mr. Lin is willing to add the internal circulation to their ventilation system to control any odor coming from the building. With no further public comment, Chair Freeman closed the public portion of this meeting for 9 SUP 24-36. The Commission called staff back to the podium. The Commission Asked Staff: 1. If this petition gets recommended for approval, could we make limiting of additional structures a condition? 2. Has the Commission had a cultivation facility propose an internal circulation process before? 3. Has the City had any complaints regarding odor? 4. If this gets recommended for approval and the petitioner wants to grow and expand, how does staff feel about that? 5. Since the ventilation is an issue, and the petitioner is going to add the internal circulation would that change your thought on the recommended denial? 6. If this is recommended for approval what would the conditions be? Staff Replied: 1. Yes, you can make that a condition. 2. There is one cultivator that does have this kind of filtration system at their location. Staff has done a few site visits where there is an odor outside of the building, but this particular facility has absolutely no odor or smell outside of the building. 3. Yes, there has been a few complaints, there are a few that do have an odor during certain growth stages and cultivation. 4. The City would have to go off of the variance criteria process again for production and manufacturing. If this internal circulation process is effective, it should also be effective at mitigating any odor from processing and manufacturing as well. 5. It would for the SUP because the biggest criteria that was not met was the creating adverse impact and the mitigation efforts, however the Cannabis Variance criteria also needs to be met. There are seven criteria, and with this change they have only met four out of the seven. Typically if two of the criteria are not met we recommend denial. 6. If the Commission were to recommend approval of Petition SUP 24-36, staff recommends the following conditions: 1. A City of Farmington business registration will be required. 2. A building and fire inspection shall be required. 3. A building permit shall be required for remodeling. 4. Plans for odor ventilation will need to be submitted and approved by the City. 5. The SUP shall be effective for five years, at which time the applicant can renew. 6. The variance approval shall become null and void in the event that the use I discontinued for a time period of 12 months or longer. With no further discussion, Chair Freeman called for a motion. 10  Motion A motion was made by Vice Chair Brown and seconded by Commissioner Hanson to Approve Petition SUP 24-36 with the following conditions as recommended by staff. With an addition to #4 and adding #7. 1. A City of Farmington business registration will be required. 2. A building and fire inspection shall be required. 3. A building permit shall be required for remodeling. 4. Plans for an internal circulation odor ventilation will need to be submitted and approved by the City. 5. The SUP shall be effective for five years, at which time the applicant can renew. 6. The variance approval shall become null and void in the event that the use I discontinued for a time period of 12 months or longer. 7. No additional structure used for cannabis cultivation shall be built within 300 ft. of any residential structures. AYE: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioner Hodge, Commissioner Ragsdale, Commissioner Hanson and Commissioner Waldroup NAY: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Shay Davis, Clete Berens and Jennifer Wood APPROVED 6-0 Business from the Floor: • Ben Hazlewood, 4794 Sundown Rd. • Julie Gow, 4704 Calle Mio Ave. • Iran Ward, 4764 Sunrise Cir. • Jeff Raichel, 4766 Sunrise Cir. • Lisa Maxwell 4771 Sundance Rd. All spoke their strong opposition to the Dollar General going in at the southeast corner of Butler Ave. and Sunrise Pkwy. 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 the June 27, 2024 Planning & Zoning meeting has been cancelled due to the lack of petitions. At the July 11, 2024 meeting there will be a presentation on some of the commercial development going on in Farmington. There will also be some UDC changes to go over at a later meeting. 11 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 4:12 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Clint Freeman Tami Spencer Vice Chair Administrative Assistant 12  Current Development Around Farmington Presented by Senior Planner Safrany 13