Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive December 12, 2024 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the October 24, 2024 P&Z Meeting 4 Petition ZC 24-91 – A request for a Zone Change from General Commercial to Industrial. Located within lot 2 of the Macnat Subdivision. Presented by Senior Planner Safrany (Pg. 17) 5 Petition ZC 24-92 – A request for a Zone Change from Single Family 7 to Multi- Family Medium Density. Located at 613 N. Wall Ave. Presented by Associate Planner Gonzalez (Pg. 29) 6 Petition PP 24-95 – A request from Joe & Stan, LLC, represented by Robert Echols, Cheney-Walters-Echols, Inc. for a Preliminary Plan approval for an 18-lot subdivision located in the City of Farmington’s Tier II Planning & Platting Jurisdiction. Located at lot R6002199 - Directly west of Little Creek Subdivision Phase VIII Presented by Senior 7 Planner Safrany (Pg. 41) Petition ZC 24-100 – A request for a Zone Change from Single Family 7 to General Commercial. Located at 6401 and 6405 E. Main St. Presented by Senior Planner Safrany 8 (Pg. 53) Petition ZC 24-101 – A request for a Zone Change from General Commercial to Mixed Use. Located at the SE corner of Locke St. and Animas St. (Parcel No. R0025384). 9 Presented by Associate Planner Gonzalez (Pg. 63) 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: 10. Adjournment Petition items on this agenda will be scheduled for the next City Council Meeting – January 14, 2025 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 October 24, 2024 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on October 24, 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 Clete Berens Shay Davis P&Z Members Absent Amber Hodge Jennifer Wood Staff Present: Colby Gibson Mike Safrany Joaquin Gonzalez Tami Spencer Others Who Addressed the Commission Robert Echols Call to Order Vice Chair Brown called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. Approval of the Agenda A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the agenda of the October 24, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission with the Business from Staff item moved to the top. This motion passed by a 7-0 vote. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to approve the minutes of the October 10, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed by a 7-0 vote. Business from Staff: Quasi-Judicial Process Format Revision Presentation Senior Planner Safrany Presented the Following: 1 2 Mr. Safrany explained that the only change would be moving the cross examination of staff, the applicant, and affected parties after all parties have presented their information. Due process would still occur. The Commission thought this new process would flow better. Petition FP 24-88 – Sunset Ridge Subdivision Replat “A” Phase I – Final Plat approval for Phase I (11 lots of the 38-lot) Class 2 subdivision of the 59.18-acre parcel in Tier II of Farmington’s Platting Jurisdiction. Associate Planner Gonzalez Presented the Following: Petition Information • Applicant: Stonetown Animas Lender LLC, Adam Minnick • Representative: Robert Echols of Cheney-Walters-Echols • Location: Property is in San Juan County Parcel #R0050231 • Existing Zoning: N/A - County • Request: Final Plat Approval Background information • Petitioner is requesting final plat approval for Phase I (11-lots of the 38-lot) Class 2 subdivision of the 59.18-acre parcel in Tier II of Farmington’s Platting Jurisdiction. The Preliminary Plan for Sunset Ridge Subdivision Replat A was approved by City Council on May 24, 2022. 3 • There have been some minor changes done to the final plat. No changes are to be seen as substantial. The changes include adding in the location and widths of the shared driveways, the area for road dedication along road 3000 for Right of way which now includes the green space (GRN SP) and the subdivision will be now be conducted in phases. No other changes were included in the final plat. AERIAL VIEW Final Plat Sheet 1 4  Final Plat Sheet 2 UDC Section 8.8.4 General Provisions A. Design and improvement standards. All subdivisions shall be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable requirements of: (1) Article 5, development standards; and (2) Article 6, subdivision design and improvements. Staff Comments: There have been some minor changes done to the final plat. No changes are substantial. This includes the location and widths of the shared driveways, and the area for road dedication along road 3000 for Right of way which now includes the green space (GRN SP). The final plat complies with the approved preliminary plan and the requirements of Article 5 & 6. B. Waivers. The commission may recommend and the council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny waivers of the standards in section 6.4, subdivision design standards, during the platting process. Staff Comments: No waivers are requested for this application. 5  UDC Section 8.8.4 General Provisions C. Zoning consistency. All subdivisions and the resulting lots shall be consistent with the requirements of the applicable underlying zone district. Staff Comments: The subject property is outside City limits. The subdivision has large lots ranging from just under 1 acre to 2.3 acres. Setbacks per the recorded plat will be 35-foot front, 30-foot rear, 5-foot interior side, 15-foot street side. The large lot sizes can accommodate the topography of the land and the required distances for a septic system. D. Comprehensive plan consistency. All subdivisions shall be reviewed for consistency with the comprehensive plan, and every plat approved by the city shall constitute an amendment, addition or a detail of the comprehensive plan or part thereof adopted by the commission. Staff Comments: The subject property is outside the City of Farmington's municipal boundaries. Staff Recommendation The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition FP 24-88 a submittal from Stonetown Animas Lender LLC Adam Minnick, represented by Robert Echols of Cheney- Walters-Echols, Inc. for a final plat approval of Phase I, 11-lots of a 38-lot Class 2 subdivision of one 59.18-acre parcel located in San Juan County. Staff recommends the following conditions of approval, to be finalized and approved prior to recording of the Final Plat: 1. All technical corrections to the plat and construction drawings will be finalized and approved prior to submittal of the Final plat for signature, including any noted issues in this report. Discussion The Commission Asked Staff: 1. On the shared driveways, does the property line go down the center of the driveways? 2. Has the comment from Planning Manager Gibson been addressed? Staff Replied: 1. Yes, the property line does go down the center, there is 15 ft. on each side of the property line for each driveway. Each lot will be in charge of their potion of the driveway. 2. Yes, all comments from the Planning Memo have been addressed. Petitioner, Robert Echols, Cheney-Walters-Echols, Inc., 909 W. Apache St., Farmington NM The Commission had no questions for Mr. Echols. With no Commission discussion needed, Vice Chair Brown called for a motion. 6  Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Berens and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to APROVE Petition FP 24-88 as recommended by staff with the following condition of approval: 1. All technical corrections to the plat and construction drawings will be finalized and approved prior to submittal of the Final plat for signature, including any noted issues in this report. AYE: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioners Hanson, Davis, Ragsdale Waldroup, and Berens NAY: None ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hodge, and Commissioner Wood The motion passed with a vote of 7-0 Presentation/Action on Possible UDC Updates - Building Design Standards Proposed Addition Planning Manager Gibson Presented the Following: Proposed UDC Changes 7 8 9 10 11  Discussion The Commission and staff had conversations on different options and optional wording. The Commission also asked if staff can look into building standards for the General Commercial zoning district and doing building standards on Pinon Hills Blvd in whole as a corridor. With no further Commission discussion needed, Vice Chair Brown called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Hansen to APROVE the following UDC changes for Building Design Standards: a. The use of ribbed, standing seam, corrugated metal siding shall not compose more than 40% of a metal building facade. b. Corrugated metal siding shall be finished with a powder coating designed to withstand natural elements for a minimum of 20 years. 12  c. Roof design shall provide for screening of mechanical equipment and systems that need to be mounted on the roof. AYE: Vice Chair Brown, Commissioners Hanson, Davis, Ragsdale Waldroup, and Berens NAY: None ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: Chair Freeman, Commissioner Hodge, and Commissioner Wood The motion passed with a vote of 6-0 Presentation on Possible UDC Updates – Off Street Parking Proposed Changes Planning Manager Gibson Presented the Following: 13 14 15  Discussion The Commission and staff had a conversation regarding these changes. Staff recommended that the Commission think about these changes and there will be further conversations at the next meeting. Business from the Floor: There was no business from the Floor. Business from the Chair: There was no business from the Commission Business from the Members: There was no business from the Members Business from Staff: Planning Manager Gibson updated the Commission on the three petitions that went to City Council earlier in the week. The two that were on consent were approved. Petition CV 24-70 was denied by City Council. Mr. Gibson added that the Community Works Department will be splitting up to Public Works Department and Community Development Department. Mr. Gibson let the Commission know that he would be transiting over to the City Manager’s Office as the assistant to the City Manager, effective November 1, 2024. He added that he will still be acting as the Planning Manager until a Community Development Director is hired. Adjournment: With no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Davis. The motion carried unanimously 6-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 4:19 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Ryan Brown Tami Spencer Vice Chair Administrative Assistant 16  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT Petition ZC 24-91 Zone Change from GC: General Commercial to IND: Industrial A. STAFF REPORT, October 14, 2024 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Sam Henry Representative None Date of Application September 26, 2024 Requested Action Zone Change from GC: General Commercial to IND: Industrial Location Parcel R4008830 Existing Land Use Vacant lot used for industrial outdoor storage Existing Zoning GC: General Commercial Future Land Use Designation Commercial Mixed Use Surrounding Zoning & Land North: Multi-family Low Density Use South: Industrial East: Multi-family Low Density West: General Commercial Notice Requirements Publication of Notice: Wednesday October 30, 2024, Tri-City Record Property owners letter: Monday November 4, 2024 Sign posted: Friday November 1, 2024 Staff Planner Mike Safrany, Senior Planner STAFF ANALYSIS Background San Juan County Tax Assessor’s indicates Parcel No. R4008830 is a 3.05 acre property owned by Sam Henry. The property is zoned General Commercial. The property is currently vacant and is currently being used as outdoor storage for industrial oil and gas equipment. An outdoor storage permit was approved by City Council on September 9, 2008. Sam Henry also owns the two lots directly adjacent to the south. The 25-foot right-of-way (E. Elm St.) between the subject property and the two lots owned by Sam Henry directly to the south, has been abandoned and recorded per a survey recorded on July 29, 2008. Sam Henry is currently in the process of deeding the right-of-way to himself to remove the 25-foot right-of-way from the San Juan County Assessor's Map. The petitioner is requesting a zone change to Industrial zoning to expand the existing industrial business and possibly combine lots for additional structures. 17  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION ASSESSOR'S MAP - MacNat Subdivision (with right-of-way along south border) 18  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION ZONING MAP 2040 LAND USE MAP 19  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION 20  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION View from McCormick School Road View from Bloomfield Hwy 21  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION View from S Carlton Ave 22  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION UDC Sec 8.7.4 Issues for consideration 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 proposed zoning shown in the Comprehensive Plan is Commercial Mixed Use, which may include freestanding, mid-rise, retail and service buildings located in nodes and along major arterials. The proposed Industrial zoning district does not meet the land use category of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use(s) compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and the character of the neighborhood? The proposed zoning is compatible with the present zoning and the character of the neighborhood. There is industrial zoning and uses along S Carlton Ave. between the Bloomfield Hwy. and Murray Drive to the south. There is also industrial zoning across the Bloomfield Hwy. to the east and on the other side of the Animas River to the north. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? No adverse impacts are expected. The petitioner owns the property directly to the south where the existing business in operation building, renting and selling natural gas compressors. The subject property is currently used as an outdoor storage area for industrial oil and gas equipment with a special use permit since 2008. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Yes, the proposed 30,000 sf fabrication facility must meet the density and dimensional standards of the Unified Development Code. A lot combination will likely be required for the future development of this facility. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The site provides easy access and favorable topography for a fabrication facility along a major arterial thoroughfare, located in the direct vicinity of other existing industrial uses. 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? All utilities are either existing or directly accessible. 23  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION 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. STAFF CONCLUSION Staff concludes the zone change from a GC, General Commercial district to an IND, Industrial district, for a vacant property of 3.05 acres, is supported by the general character of the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition ZC 24-91, a request from Sam Henry, for a zone change from a GC, General Commercial district to an IND, Industrial district for a vacant lot at the MacNat Subdivision with the following condition: 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to surrounding property owners. At the time of this report, no public input has been received. NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP 1 Macnat LLC 4608 Samantha Ln Farmington, NM 87402 2 Henry Production Inc. 4608 Samantha Ln Farmington, NM 87402 3 Ice Cube Enterprises LLC 480 SW 87th Pl Farmington, NM 87401 4 Johnnie and Patrisha Dollar 4 Road 5841 Farmington, NM 87401 5 Elite Way Hospitality LLC 1704 Deer Valley Trail NW Farmington, NM 87120 6 Jiten Shirali Inc. 1601 E Broadway St. Farmington, NM 87401 7 Farmington 1600 LLC 8300 Washington St. NE Albq, NM 874113 24  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION Mark Hathcock - Water/Wastewater Administrator They need a plan on how they will connect to sewer and water. I believe the 12” that runs along Broadway would be the preferred. However, the sewer would need to connect on Hydro Plant Rd and it is a 6” pressure sewer. 25  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION 26  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION 27  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-91 MACNAT SUBDIVISION 28  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 – 613 N Wall Ave ZONE CHANGE FROM SINGLE FAMILY - 7 TO MULTI-FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Hidden Empire LLC Representative Doug Farley Date of Application September 30, 2024 A request for a zone change from Single Family - 7 to Multi-family Requested Action Medium Density to allow up to 2 dwelling units. Location 613 N Wall Ave (R0028420) Existing Land Use Multi-Family (Rentals) Existing Zoning Single Family – 7 2040 Future Land Use Medium Density Residential Designation North: Single Family – 7; Single family residence South: Single Family – 7; Single family residence Surrounding Zoning & East: Single Family -7, Multi Family Medium and High Density; Single Land Use family residence, apartments West: Single Family -7, Multi Family Medium Density; Single family residence, apartments Publication of Notice: October 28, 2024 Tri-City Record Notice Requirements Property owners’ letter: October 28, 2024 Sign posted: November 4, 2024 Staff Planner Joaquin Gonzalez, Associate Planner PRESENT SITUATION: The subject property is located on a 0.218-acre parcel and is zoned Single Family - 7. There are currently two residences on the property (rentals). PROPOSED CHANGE OR REQUEST: A request for a zone change from Single Family - 7 to Multi-Family Medium Density to allow up to 2 dwelling units (existing). They are requesting the zone change to bring the legal non-conforming buildings into conformance with the Unified Development Code. The setbacks for the use will still hold their legal non-conforming status. 29  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave ZONING Single Family – 7 (SF – 7) 30  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave AERIAL VIEW 31  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave STAFF ANALYSIS UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE 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 Map designates this area as Medium Density Residential. This designation supports a mix of housing options including single-family units, multi- family units, townhouses, duplexes and live/work units. The zone change to Multi-Family Medium Density will align with the 2040 Future Land Use 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 Multi-Family Medium Density zoning and land use is compatible with the current conforming uses and character of the neighborhood. Property uses in the area consist of single-family residences (SF-7 zoning) and multifamily uses. Along Wall Avenue and Orchard Avenue there are multifamily uses and zoning to the East and West of the subject property. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? The proposed use is expected to have a similar average daily traffic count to the existing surrounding uses. Wall Avenue is classified as a local street according to the City Major Thoroughfare Plan suitable for the proposed multifamily apartments. The attached “accessory dwelling unit” on the property is existing and considered legal nonconforming. As such, the unit may continue to be used. The zone change brings the unit into conformance. The applicant will need to have a minimum of 3 parking space per UDC Section 5.2.3 Off street Parking. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Per UDC Section 2.8, the proposed Multi Family Medium Density zoning district allows up to 5 units. The applicant is proposing 2 units in the multifamily development. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The subject property is 0.218 acres (11,572 square feet) in size and meets the minimum lot size requirements for the Multi Family Medium Density zoning district of 8,000 square feet. Per UDC Section 2.8, the MF- M: Multifamily Medium Density zoning district requires 2,000 square feet per unit. 2 units on 0.218 acres is physically suitable for the parcel. 32  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave 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? The current buildings are existing and being utilized as rentals. Utilities are already being utilized by the dwelling units. 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. The proposed Zone Change does not constitute spot zoning by this definition because it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this area as Medium Density Residential, the proposed use of multi-family residential supports vibrant and inclusive neighborhoods including townhouse, duplexes and live/work units. There is also existing multi-family zoning to the east and west of the subject property. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 16 surrounding property owners. At the time of this report staff has not received feedback from the community. STAFF CONCLUSION • The proposed zone change to Multi-Family Medium is supported by the Medium Density Residential designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • The proposed zone change to Multi-Family Medium Density and use is compatible with the zoning and uses within the surrounding area. • The proposed use complies with the Unified Development Code density standards outlined in UDC Sec. 2.8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends APPROVAL of Petition ZC 24-92, a request from Hidden Empire LLC represented by Doug Farley, for a zone change from Single Family - 7 to Multi-family Medium Density located at 613 N Wall Ave, with the following conditions of approval: 1. Petitioner shall meet the UDC requirements of section 5.2.3 Off street parking, and 5.3.3 Driveways and parking lot access, petitioner shall provide a minimum of 3 paved parking spaces one being ADA van accessible. 2. Petitioner shall meet the UDC requirements of section 5.10 Residential protection, the petitioner shall utilize either an opaque vinyl, wood fence or a masonry wall for screening on all 3 sides adjacent to the single-family residences. 3. Petitioner shall meet the UDC requirements of section 9.2.2 Change of use, the petitioner shall secure a certificate of occupancy. 33  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave 34  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave 35  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave 36  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave 37  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave 38  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-92 613 N Wall Ave 39 40  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 Petition No. PP 24-95 A. STAFF REPORT, October 24, 2024 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Joe & Stan, LLC – Stan Kozimor Representative Robert Echols of Cheney-Walters-Echols Date of Application October 8, 2024 Requested Action Preliminary Plan Approval Location Not addressed. Parcel is just west of Little Creek Subdivision, Phase 8. Parcel #R6002199 Existing Zoning N/A - San Juan County Surrounding North: SF-7. COF, Stillwater Subdivision Phase I South: SF-7: COF, Little Creek Phase VII Zoning and Land East: San Juan County, Little Creek Sub. Phase VIII Use West: San Juan County Subdivision Class Class 1 Notice Preliminary Plans do not require notice Staff Planner Mike Safrany, Senior Planner SUBDIVISION INFORMATION Number of Lots 18 Lots Acres of Land 4.15 Acres of Tract 1 (17.95 acres) Lot Size 7,700 – 8,880 square feet Utilities Water: Per City Standards Sewer: Per City Standards Electric: Per FEUS Engineering Access & Per City Standards Circulation Street Lights Per City Standards Street Sign Per City Standards Fire Hydrants Per City Standards Drainage Per City Standards P & R’s Fees Per City Standards NBU Mail Box Coordinate with USPS 41  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 GENERAL INFORMATION The petitioner is requesting a preliminary plan approval of the Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10, a Class 1, 18-lot subdivision on 4.15 acres of undeveloped land for property located west of the Little Creek Phase 8 Subdivision in Tier II of Farmington’s Platting and Planning Jurisdiction (R6002199). The lot sizes range from 7,700 sf to 8,880 sf. Parcel # R0051700 was divided into two tracts through Summary Plat 21-77. The Phase 8 Preliminary Plan was approved within Tract 2 by the City Council on May 14, 2022. The Final Plat was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission on January 26, 2023. The subject property is outside city limits in Tier II of Farmington’s Planning & Platting jurisdiction. A portion of the 17.95-acre parcel of Tract 1 is being subdivided into Little Creek Phase 10, a 4.15-acre, 18-lot residential development. Little Creek Phase 10 will be developed to City standards. The petitioner will construct all infrastructure to City standards to facilitate any future annexation. The petitioner has also agreed to deed restrict each lot to require cooperation with any future annexation process. 42  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 LITTLE CREEK SUBDIVISION - PHASE 10 43  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 LITTLE CREEK SUBDIVISION - MASTER PLAN 44  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 SAN JUAN COUNTY ASSESOR'S MAP 45  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 LITTLE CREEK PHASE 10 - ZONING MAP (Located in San Juan County) 46  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 Per Section 8.8.4 of the Unified Development Code, all subdivisions shall comply with the following minimum standards: A. Design and improvement standards. All subdivisions shall be designed and constructed in accordance with applicable requirements of: (1) Article 5, development standards; and (2) Article 6, subdivision design and improvements. Staff Comments: Through staff review, the plat as presented meets, or will be required to meet through stipulations of approval, development standards and design and improvement requirements. B. Waivers. The commission may recommend and the council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny waivers of the standards in section 6.4, subdivision design standards, during the platting process. Staff Comments: No waivers are requested for this application. C. Zoning consistency. All subdivisions and the resulting lots shall be consistent with the requirements of the applicable underlying zone district. Staff Comments: All lots conform to the minimum standards of the SF-7 Single Family Residential Zone, as do the setbacks, which are noted on the plat. D. Comprehensive plan consistency. All subdivisions shall be reviewed for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and every plat approved by the city shall constitute an amendment, addition or a detail of the comprehensive plan or part thereof adopted by the commission. Staff Comments: The subject property is outside the City of Farmington’s municipal boundaries. The properties within the City of Farmington boundaries, to the north and west, are designated as Medium Density Residential. 47  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 ISSUES IDENTIFIED DURING INITIAL REVIEW CW – Planning Manager – C. Gibson (505) 599-1455 Please see the following comments: 1. This classifies as a class 1 subdivision, the title states class 3. 2. Add Planning Manager and Community Works Director signature lines. 3. Show somewhere on Little Rabbit Dr that this is right of way. 4. It appears there are easements provided on the front of each lot, however I do not see a label or dimensions. 5. It is difficult to see the easements to the south of the subdivision and several of the words are on top of each other “PW Dugan”. Please clean this up and label what it is with widths. 6. Subdivision standards allow for a dead end street maximum length of 600’. Please let me know what the future plans look like in terms of connectivity. Revisions addressing these comments have been received and addressed. Staff is including a recommended condition of approval for any technical and corrective changes during construction drawing or drainage reviews. STAFF CONCLUSION Staff concludes approval of Petition 24-95, Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10, a Class 1, 18-lot subdivision in Tier II of the City of Farmington’s Planning & Platting Subdivision is appropriate, subject to any technical and corrective changes during construction drawing or drainage reviews. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends approval of Petition 24-95 a submittal from Joe & Stan LLC, represented by Robert Echols of Cheney-Walters-Echols, Inc. for preliminary plan approval of a Class 1, 18-lot subdivision of one undeveloped 4.15-acre parcel immediately adjacent to City limits with the following condition: 1. All technical corrections to the plat and construction drawings will be finalized and approved prior to submittal of the final plat. 48  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 PRELIMINARY PLAN - PHASE 10 9 49  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 Page 10 10 50  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 Page 11 51  Staff Report PP 24-95 Little Creek Subdivision Phase 10 Page 12 52  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT Petition ZC 24-100 Zone Change from SF-7: Single-family Residential to GC: General Commercial A. STAFF REPORT, November 15, 2024 PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Trevor Hatch Representative None Date of Application October 28, 2024 Requested Action Zone Change from SF-7: Single-family Residential to GC: General Commercial Location Parcel R6002398 Existing Land Use General Commercial with Outdoor Storage Existing Zoning General Commercial and SF-7: Single-family Residential Future Land Use Designation Mixed Use Village Surrounding Zoning & Land North: General Commercial Use South: SF-7: Single-family Residential East: General Commercial West: General Commercial Notice Requirements Publication of Notice: Wednesday November 30 2024, Tri-City Record Property owners letter: Monday December 25 2024 Sign posted: Friday November 29, 2024 Staff Planner Mike Safrany, Senior Planner STAFF ANALYSIS Background San Juan County Tax Assessor’s indicates Parcel No. R6002398 is a 1.67 acre property owned by Trevor Hatch. The property is zoned General Commercial. There are two addresses assigned to two buildings on the property, 6401 and 6405 E Main St. The 6401 address is currently zoned General Commercial and is used for display and sales at the Lillywhite business. The 6405 address is currently zoned SF-7 and the building is empty. The owner requests a zone change from SF-7: Single-family Residential to GC: General Commercial. The owner intends to construct an additional commercial building (1,800 sf) in the area of the 6405 building in the future. There are two different zoning districts (GC and SF-7) within the 1.67-acre property. This zone change would correct this issue and would provide cohesiveness with current zoning standards. 53  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. ASSESSOR'S MAP - 6405 E Main St. 54  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. ZONING MAP 2040 LAND USE MAP 55  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. 56  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. Proposed Site Plan 57  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. View from E. Main St. Facing East View from E. Main St. Facing West 58  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. UDC Sec 8.7.4 Issues for consideration 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 proposed zoning shown in the Comprehensive Plan is Mixed Use Village, which promotes redevelopment of older structures and vacant land along arterial corridors that introduces a variety of shops and services, neighborhood commercial, and high density residential uses. The proposed General Commercial zoning district meets the land use category of the Comprehensive Plan. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use(s) compatible with the present zoning and conforming uses of nearby property and the character of the neighborhood? The proposed zoning is compatible with the present zoning and the character of the neighborhood. There is general commercial zoning and uses along both the north and south sides of East Main Street. In addition, East Main Street is a principal arterial street. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? No adverse impacts are expected. The petitioner currently operates the business on this property. The east end of the property is zoned single-family where the existing house is located. The single-family use will be abandoned and the entire site will be used for the commercial business. The existing house will be used for an office. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Yes, the proposed development meets the density and dimensional standards of the UDC Table 2.82 with appropriate setbacks and parking areas. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The current business meets all relevant regulations of the Unified Development Code. The proposed development must meet all relevant regulations in the Unified Development Code. F. Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone? If utilities are not available, could they be reasonably extended by the applicant? Is the applicant willing to pay for the extension of public facilities and services necessary to service the proposed development? All utilities are either existing or directly accessible. 59  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. 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. STAFF CONCLUSION Staff concludes the zone change from an SF-7, Single-family residential district to a GC, General Commercial district, for a commercial use property of 1.67 acres, is supported by the general character of the neighborhood. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends APPROVAL of Petition ZC 24-100, a request from Trevor Hatch, for a zone change from an SF-7, Single-family Residential district to a GC, General Commercial district with the following condition: 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to surrounding property owners. At the time of this report, no public input has been received. NAME ADDRESS CITY, STATE, ZIP 1 TRIPLE H PROPERTY LLC 6401 E MAIN ST FARMINGTON NM 87402 2 DURHAM DON E AND RAMONA F PO BOX 6724 FARMINGTON NM 87499-6724 3 RABAZ GROUP LLC 4551 HWY 64 FARMINGTON NM 87401 4 PAYNE GEORGE AND JOANNE TRUST 5101 SAMANTHA LN FARMINGTON NM 87402 5 REMOTE DEVELOPMENT LLC 5101 SAMANTHA LN FARMINGTON NM 87402 6 HOTFOX HOLDINGS NM LLC 6520 E MAIN ST FARMINGTON NM 87402 7 COLEMAN FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP PO BOX 3337 FARMINGTON NM 874993337 8 VELASQUEZ VANGIE 11 ROAD 3499 FLORA VISTA NM 87415 9 CJ X2 INVESTMENTS LLC 6100 OLD COURSE DR FARMINGTON NM 87402 10 DOVE RUSSELL L AND RENEE S TRUST 6450 PRYOR LN FARMINGTON NM 874025174 60  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-100 6405 E. MAIN ST. 61 62  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 – SE CORNER OF LOCKE STREET AND ANIMAS STREET ZONE CHANGE FROM GENERAL COMMERICAL TO MIXED USE PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Tommy Ray King Representative Norman Begaye Date of Application October 30, 2024 A request for a zone change from General Commercial to Mixed Use to Requested Action construct a single-family residence. Location Southeast Corner of Locke St and Animas St (R0025384) Existing Land Use Undeveloped Existing Zoning General Commercial 2040 Future Land Use Downtown Designation North: General Commercial; The Salvation Army Services Center, Harvest Food Hub, Vacant building South: Industrial; Industrial Equipment rental and tool repair, Jim’s Bait Surrounding Zoning & and Tackle Distributing Land Use East: General Commercial; The Well Inc, Single family residence West: General Commercial, Mixed Use; Single family residence, apartments Publication of Notice: November 25, 2024 Tri-City Record Notice Requirements Property owners’ letter: November 25, 2024 Sign posted: December 2, 2024 Staff Planner Joaquin Gonzalez, Associate Planner PRESENT SITUATION: The subject property is located on a 0.14-acre parcel and is zoned General Commercial. The property is currently undeveloped. PROPOSED CHANGE OR REQUEST: A request for a zone change from General Commercial to Mixed Use to construct a single-family residence. 63  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST ZONING General Commercial (GC) 64  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST AERIAL VIEW 65  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST STAFF ANALYSIS UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE 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 Map designates this area as Downtown. This designation supports a diversity of residential uses. The zone change to Mixed Use will align with the 2040 Future Land Use 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. Property uses in the area consist of multifamily, single-family, commercial and industrial like uses. There are also Mixed-Use zoning districts to the west of the subject property. The zone change to Mixed Use will be more restrictive than the current zoning district allowing it to be more compatible with the area. C. Will there be adverse impacts; and/or can any adverse impacts be adequately mitigated? The proposed use is expected to have a similar average daily traffic count to the existing surrounding uses. Locke Street and Animas Street are classified as a local street according to the City Major Thoroughfare Plan well suitable for the proposed single-family residence. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? Per UDC Section 2.8, the proposed Mixed Use zoning district allows a single-family residence with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet. The proposed building will also cover approximately 43 percent of the lot which in the Mixed Use zoning the applicant is allowed up to 60 percent lot coverage. The change from General Commercial to Mixed Use is considered downzoning as it permits a lower intensity of uses. E. Is the site physically suitable for development of uses and density permitted by the proposed zoning district? The subject property is 0.144 acres (6,272 square feet) in size and meets the minimum lot size requirements for the Mixed-Use zoning district of 6,000 square feet. 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 66  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST pay for the extension of public facilities and services necessary to service the proposed development? The site is currently undeveloped but utilities are available nearby to serve the development and they can be extended by the applicant if necessary. 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. The proposed Zone Change does not constitute spot zoning by this definition because it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map designates this area as Downtown, the proposed use of a single-family residence is supported by the designation. There are also existing single family uses and multi-family uses to the east and west of the subject property. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 11 surrounding property owners. At the time of this report staff has not received feedback from the community. STAFF CONCLUSION • The proposed zone change to Mixed Use is supported by the Downtown designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • The proposed zone change to Mixed Use and the proposed use is compatible with the zoning and uses within the surrounding area. • The proposed use complies with the Unified Development Code density standards outlined in UDC Sec. 2.8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Works Department recommends APPROVAL of Petition ZC 24-101, a request from Tommy Ray King represented by Norman Begaye, for a zone change from General Commercial to Mixed Use located at the Southeast Corner of Locke Street and Animas St, with the following conditions of approval: 1. Petitioner shall provide to the City a legal boundary survey of the property of which is recorded by the San Juan County Clerk’s Office and prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. Petitioner shall construct sidewalks along the property frontage of Locke Street and Animas Street in accordance with City standards. 67  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST 68  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST 69  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST 70  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST 71  COMMUNITY WORKS STAFF REPORT PETITION ZC 24-101 SE CORNER OF LOCKE ST & ANIMAS ST 72