Planning & Zoning

AGENDA Planning & Zoning Commission City Council Chambers – 800 Municipal Drive January 30, 2025 - 3:00 p.m. Item 1 Call Meeting to Order 2 Approval of the Agenda 3 Approval of the Minutes of the December 12, 2024 P&Z Meeting 4 Petition SUP 24-112 – A request for a Special Use Permit to allow for a body art establishment (Permanent Makeup). Located at 3005 Northridge Dr. Unit F. Presented by Associate Planner Gonzalez (Pg 33) 5 Metropolitan Planning Organization Overview, Presented by Peter Koeppel 6 Annual Election of Chair/Vice Chair 7 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: 8 Adjournment Petition items on this agenda will be scheduled for the next City Council Meeting – February 11, 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 December 12, 2024 The Planning & Zoning Commission met in a regular session on December 12, 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 Amber Hodge Jennifer Wood Shay Davis P&Z Members Absent Clete Berens Gary Hanson Staff Present: Colby Gibson Mike Safrany Joaquin Gonzalez Tami Spencer Others Who Addressed the Commission Sam Henry Leo McCormick Robert Echols Trevor Hatch Tommy Ray King 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 Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the agenda of the December 12, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission. This motion passed by a 7-0 vote. Approval of the Minutes A motion was made by Commissioner Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Davis to approve the minutes of the October 24, 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. This motion passed by a 7-0 vote. Petition ZC 24-91 – A request for a Zone Change from General Commercial to Industrial. Located within lot 2 of the Macnat Subdivision Senior Planner Safrany presented the following: 1  Petition Information Petitioner: Sam Henry Zoning: GC: General Commercial District Existing Land Use: Vacant Property used as outdoor storage for oil and gas equipment Requesting: Zone Change to IND: Industrial Background • The property is 3.05 acres • The property is currently zoned General Commercial. • The property is currently vacant and is currently being used as outdoor storage for industrial oil and gas equipment. • The petitioner intends to expand the existing industrial business located to the south of the subject property and possibly combine lots for additional structures. 2  Zoning Map 2040 Land Use Map 3  2040 Land Use Description View from McCormick School Road 4 View from Bloomfield Hwy View from S Carlton Ave 5  Zoning Map Amendment (REZONE) UDC 8.7.4 – Issues For Consideration 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? 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 they 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? 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? All utilities are either existing or directly accessible. 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. 6  Public Notice This petition has been properly noticed and posted. Letters were sent to surrounding property owners. At the time of this report, no public input has been received. Conclusion Staff concludes the zone change from a GC, General Commercial district to a 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 Lot 2 of the MacNat Subdivision with the following condition: Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. Discussion The Commission had no questions for staff. Petitioner, San Henry, 4608 Samantha Ln., Farmington NM Mr. Henry stated that with this zone change he will build a fabrication facility and he has the opportunity to bring in about 20 high paying jobs into Farmington. With no further public input, Chair Freeman closed the public portion of this meeting for ZC 24- 91. With no Commission discussion needed, Chair Freeman called for a motion. 7  Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to APPROVE Petition ZC 24-91 as recommended by staff with the following condition of approval: 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5. AYE: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioners Davis, Ragsdale, Waldroup, Hodge and Wood NAY: None ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hanson, and Commissioner Berens The motion passed with a vote of 7-0 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. Associate Planner Gonzalez presented the following: Petition Information • Applicant: Hidden Empire LLC • Representative: Doug Farley • Location: 613 N Wall Ave • Existing Zoning: Single Family - 7 • Existing Land Use: Multi-Family • Request: A request for a zone change from Single Family - 7 to Multi-family Medium Density to allow up to 2 dwelling units. Subject Property 8 Site Plan 9  Surrounding Zoning /Uses North: Single Family – 7; Single family residence South: Single Family – 7; Single family residence East: Single Family -7, Multi Family Medium and High Density; Single family residence, apartments West: Single Family -7, Multi Family Medium Density; Single family residence, apartments 10  UDC Sec. 8.7.4 Zone Change Issues for Consideration 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 supports vibrant and inclusive neighborhoods including townhouse, duplexes and live/work units. B. Is the proposed zoning and land use 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 (MF-L, MF-M and High). 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 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. D. Is the proposed density and intensity of use permitted in the proposed zoning district? 11  • 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. F. Are adequate public facilities and services available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone? • 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 Notice  This petition has been properly noticed and posted.  Letters were sent to 16 surrounding property owners.  At the time of this report, no written public comment has been received. 12  Staff Conclusion  The proposed zone change to Multi-Family is supported by the Medium Density Residential designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.  The proposed zone change to Multi-Family 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.  The applicant initially requested MF-M, based on the feedback from two concerned affected parties as well as the consent from the applicant staff supports a zone change to Multifamily Low Density which will allow up to 2 units. 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 Low 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. Discussion Commission asked staff: 1. What triggered this zone change? 2. By changing the zoning to Multi-Family Low Density will they be able to add more rental units in the future? Staff Replied: 1. The Planning Division received an email regarding an appraisal on this property and their main area of concern was the legal non-conforming status of this property. We are basically cleaning up the zoning for this property. 2. No, the Multi-Family Low Density will only allow what is already there, they cannot add any other rental units. Affected Parties Leo McCormick, 615 N. Wall Ave., Farmington Mr. McCormick stated that he is in favor of this zone change to clean up the zoning that has been in effect for a number of years. 13 With no further public input, Chair Freeman closed the public portion of this meeting for ZC 24- 92. With no Commission discussion needed, Chair Freeman called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Vice Chair Brown and seconded by Commissioner Davis to APPROVE Petition ZC 24-92 as recommended by staff with the following condition 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. AYE: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioners Davis, Ragsdale, Waldroup, Hodge and Wood NAY: None ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hanson, and Commissioner Berens The motion passed with a vote of 7-0 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 Senior Planner Safrany presented the following: Petition Information Petitioner: Joe and Stan Kozimor represented by Bob Echols Requesting: Preliminary Plan for a Class 1 Subdivision Zoning: N/A, San Juan County Tier II of Farmington’s Platting and Planning Jurisdiction Existing Land Use: Vacant Property, Phase 10 of the Little Creek Subdivision 14  Subdivision Information • Tract 1 is 17.95 acres - Phase 10 will develop 4.15 acres of Tract 1. • The subdivision will be a Class 1 with 18 lots ranging from 7,700 sf to 8,880 sf. • All infrastructure will be constructed to City standards to facilitate any future annexation. • All lots conform to the minimum standards of the SF-7 Single-family Residential Zone. Setbacks are noted on the plat. 15 Phase 10 16 Zoning Map 17  Preliminary Plan Review 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. 2040 Land Use Map 18  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. Discussion The Commission had no questions for staff: Petitioner’s Representative, Robert Echols, 909 W. Apache St., Farmington NM: Mr. Echols stated that he has no problem with staff’s condition. The funding for this project requires that this subdivision be located in the county, but it can be annexed when fully developed. With no further public input, Chair Freeman closed the public portion of this meeting for ZC 24- 95. With no Commission discussion needed, Chair Freeman called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Davis and seconded by Commissioner Ragsdale to APPROVE Petition PP 24-95 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. AYE: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioners Davis, Ragsdale, Waldroup, Hodge and Wood NAY: None ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hanson, and Commissioner Berens The motion passed with a vote of 7-0 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. Senior Planner Safrany presented the following: 19  Petition Information Petitioner: Trevor Hatch Zoning: SF-7: Single-family Residential District Existing Land Use: Vacant home on lot with an existing commercial business. Requesting: GC: General Commercial District Background • The property is 1.67 acres • The east end of the property is currently zoned SF-7, single-family residential • The majority of the property is zoned GC: General Commercial • The property is currently being used as a commercial business Future Development • The petitioner intends to convert the existing home into an office for the business. • This zone change would allow the petitioner to expand the existing business and in the future construct a building to be used as a show room 20  Zoning Map 2040 Land Use Map 21  2040 Land Use Description View from E. Main St. Facing East 22  View from E. Main St. Facing West Zoning Map Amendment (REZONE) UDC 8.7.4 – Issues For Consideration 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? 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 they 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? 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? 23 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? All utilities are either existing or directly accessible. 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. Public Notice This petition has been properly noticed and posted. Letters were sent to surrounding property owners. At the time of this report, no public input has been received. 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: 24  1. Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5 Discussion The Commission had a conversation regarding the time frame for the first zone change on this property. Petitioner, Trevor Hatch, 7 Road 30201 Aztec NM Mr. Hatch stated that they took over the business from the Lilywhites a few years ago. With no further public input, Chair Freeman closed the public portion of this meeting for ZC 24- 100. With no Commission discussion needed, Chair Freeman called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Waldroup and seconded by Commissioner Hodge to APPROVE Petition ZC 24-100 as recommended by staff with the following condition of approval: 1. Future commercial development shall comply with the development standards of the UDC, Article 5 AYE: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioners Davis, Ragsdale, Waldroup, Hodge and Wood NAY: None ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hanson, and Commissioner Berens The motion passed with a vote of 7-0 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) Associate Planner Gonzalez presented the following: Petition Information • Applicant: Tommy Ray King • Representative: Norman Begaye • Location: Southeast Corner of Locke St and Animas St (R0025384) • Existing Zoning: General Commercial • Existing Land Use: Undeveloped 25 • Request: A request for a zone change from General Commercial to Mixed Use to construct a single-family residence. Subject Property 26  Site Plan Surrounding Zoning / Uses North: General Commercial; The Salvation Army Services Center, Harvest Food Hub, Vacant building South: Industrial; Industrial Equipment rental and tool repair, Jim’s Bait and Tackle Distributing East: General Commercial; The Well Inc., Single family residence West: General Commercial, Mixed Use; Single family residence, apartments 27  UDC Sec. 8.7.4 Zone Change Issues for Consideration 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 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 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. 28 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? • 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 Notice • This petition has been properly noticed and posted. • Letters were sent to 11 surrounding property owners. • At the time of this report, no written public comment has been received. 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. 29  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 St 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. Discussion The Commission and staff had a conversation regarding the surrounding zoning to this property Petitioner, Tommy Ray King 508 W. Animas St., Farmington NM Mr. King stated that he is ok with the conditions recommended by staff and that he will be using this property for his personal use. With no further public input, Chair Freeman closed the public portion of this meeting for ZC 24- 101. With no Commission discussion needed, Chair Freeman called for a motion. Motion A motion was made by Commissioner Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Waldroup to APPROVE Petition ZC 24-101 as recommended by staff with the following condition 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. AYE: Chair Freeman, Vice Chair Brown, Commissioners Davis, Ragsdale, Waldroup, Hodge and Wood NAY: None ABSTAINED: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hanson, and Commissioner Berens The motion passed with a vote of 7-0 Business from the Floor: There was no business from the Floor. 30 Business from the Chair: Chair Freeman wished the Commission and Staff a Merry Christmas. Business from the Members: Vice Chair Brown brought to the attention of the Commission and staff that a property owner trying to sell a property cannot get title insurance on a property that has any cannabis facilities related to it. Business from Staff: Planning Manager Gibson updated the Commission on the three petitions that went to City Council. The cannabis variance at 104 ½ E. Main which was recommended for denial by this Commission was denied by City Council. The zone change on Smith Ln. and the special use permit for 4100 Piedras St. we both approved by Council. Additionally the minimum design standards were adopted by the City Council. There were three more code updates that were presented to Council, they will need to go before two more Council meetings before they can be adopted. The annual chair elections will be held at the first meeting in January. There was a special use permit (for cannabis cultivation) revocation hearing for the property at 408 E. Broadway, scheduled for the last City Council meeting but some improvements had been made and the petitioner signed a voluntary revocation agreement with the City. Adjournment: With no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Ragsdale and seconded by Commissioner Hodge. The motion carried unanimously 7-0 and the meeting was adjourned at 4:11 p.m. _______________________________ _________________________________ Clint Freeman Tami Spencer Chair Administrative Assistant 31 32  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112- 3005 NORTHRIDGE DRIVE UNIT F SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A BODY ART ESTABLISHMENT (PERMANENT MAKEUP) PROJECT INFORMATION Applicant Summer Rose-Scott Representative N/A Date of Application December 18, 2024 A request for a Special Use Permit to allow for a body art Requested Action establishment (Permanent Makeup). Location 3005 Northridge Dr Unit F Legal Description NORTHRIDGE OFFICE CONDO UNIT F BK.1684 PG.380 Existing Land Use Salon and Spa Existing Zoning Office and Professional Future Land Use Employment Mixed Use Designation North: Single Family - 7; Single Family Residences. South: Office and Professional, Local Neighborhood Commercial; Mix of Office and Professional Service uses Salon Surrounding and Spas Zoning & Land Use East: Office and Professional; Vacant Land. West: Planned Development; Mix of Office and Professional Service uses. Publication of Notice: January 13, 2025 Tri-City Record Notice Property owners’ letter: January 13, 2025 Requirements Sign posted: January 20, 2025 Staff Planner Joaquin Gonzalez, Associate Planner Background: The subject property is zoned Office and Professional. The San Juan County Assessor’s Map shows one 1,370 square foot office building. The building is currently being used as a Salon and Spa. Request: The petitioner is requesting a Special Use Permit to allow for a body art establishment. The special use permit will allow their cosmetic makeup practitioners which are licensed through the state of New Mexico to perform their services (semi-permanent eye liner, lip blush, and micro blading). 33  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F ZONING Office and Professional (OP) 34  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F AREA MAP 35  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE COMPLIANCE UDC Section 2.4.63 Body Art Establishments (Retail sales and services, entertainment oriented) 2.4.63 Body art establishments. (Retail sales and service, entertainment-oriented). Body art establishment uses in nonresidential structures shall comply with the standards of the Farmington City Code Article 15, body art safe practices, sections 8-15-1 through 8-15-6. City of Farmington Municipal Code Sec. 8-15-3. - Location. (a) Body art will not be allowed at any physical location other than a permanent licensed body art establishment. 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, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this UDC. o 8.9.2 Applicability: Special Use Permits may or not be appropriate in a given zone district depending upon the nature and compatibility of surrounding uses, and mitigating site- specific conditions or requirements. Such uses require individual review of their location, design, configuration, density, and intensity, in order to determine whether or not a use should be allowed; and may require the imposition of additional conditions in order to ensure the appropriateness and compatibility of the use at a particular location. o Special use permit approvals attach to the property and are transferable to subsequent owners. o 8.9.3 Special use application process: The Special Use Permit application process shall be followed per UDC Sec. 8.9.3 o 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 including [section] 8.9.4 special use criteria; that such use has been allowed to accumulate litter or debris, to be a public nuisance, to an attractive nuisance to children, or to attract vagrants, criminals or public intoxication; or is otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. 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. As part of this Special Use Permit application review, staff has considered the following criteria: A. Effect on environment: The location, size, design, and operation characteristics of the proposed use shall not be detrimental to the health, welfare, and safety of the surrounding neighborhood or its occupants and shall not be substantially or permanently injurious to the neighboring property. 36  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F Placement of a body art (permanent makeup) establishment at this location should not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood. Surrounding similar uses include small local retail, professional services, and salons/spas. The applicant will meet the New Mexico Body Art Safe Practices Act requirements. B. Compatible with surrounding area: The proposed site plan, circulation plan, and schematic architectural designs shall be harmonious with the character of the surrounding area with relationship to scale, height, landscaping and screening and density. The existing building is in good shape and harmonious with the character of the surrounding area. The San Juan County Assessor’s Map shows one 1,370 square foot office building. The building is currently being used as a Salon and Spa. C. External impacts minimized: The proposed use shall not have negative impacts on existing uses in the area and in the city through the creation of noise, glare, fumes, dust, smoke, vibration, fire hazard, or other injurious or noxious impact. The applicant shall provide adequate mitigation responses to the impacts. The proposed use shall not have negative impacts on existing uses in the area and in the city through the creation of noise, glare, fumes, dust, smoke, vibration, fire hazard, or other injurious or noxious impact. The body art establishment is anticipated to have a similar impact as the neighboring existing salon and spas. D. Infrastructure impacts minimized: The proposed use shall not have negative impacts on existing uses in the area and in the city through impacts on public infrastructure such as roads, parking facilities, and water and sewer systems, and on public services such as police and fire protection and solid waste collection, and the ability of existing infrastructure and services to provide services adequately. The proposed body art establishment will not have a negative impact on existing infrastructure and services. The subject property is currently located within the Northridge Executive Plaza and has access from Northridge Drive, which is classified as a local street by the City’s Major Thoroughfare Plan. The subject property does have ample parking for the proposed use. E. Consistent with the UDC and Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use will be consistent with purposes of this UDC, the Comprehensive Plan, and any other statutes, ordinances or policies that may be applicable, and will support rather than interfere with the uses otherwise permitted in the zone in which it is located. The petitioner meets the requirements of UDC Sec. 2.4.63. The proposed location is zoned Office and Professional (OP), body art establishments are permitted in the OP zoning district with a Special Use Permit. The 2040 Future Land Use Plan designates this area as Employment Mixed Use. The proposed body art establishment conforms to the entrepreneurial start- ups aspects of the Employment Mixed Use designation. The applicant shall meet the State of New Mexico requirements to operate a body art establishment at this location. F. Parcel size: The proposed use may be required to have additional land area, in excess of the minimum lot area otherwise required by the underlying zoning district, as 37  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F necessary to ensure adequate mitigation of impacts on surrounding land uses and the zoning district. The San Juan County Assessor’s Map shows one 1,370 square foot office building suitable for the proposed use. G. Site Plan: The proposed use shall be required to comply with the site plan review procedures and standards of Section 8.5, site plan review, as specified. The site plan complies with the standards of Section 8.5. o 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. o 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 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. PUBLIC COMMENTS This petition has been properly noticed. Letters were sent to 16 surrounding property owners. As of the date of this report, no feedback has been received regarding the petition. STAFF CONCLUSION • The proposed body art establishment use is allowed within the ‘Employment Mixed Use’ designation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. • The proposed body art establishment (permanent makeup) use is compatible with the surrounding area and nearby uses. • The proposed use complies with the Unified Development Code SUP criteria outlined in 8.9.4. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition SUP 24-112, a request from Summer Rose-Scott, for a Special Use Permit to allow for a body art establishment located at 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F with the following conditions of approval: 1. The SUP shall be effective for five years, at which time the applicant can renew. 38  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F 39  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F 40  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F 41  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F 42  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F 43  COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT PETITION SUP 24-112 3005 Northridge Drive Unit F 44 About the Farmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) The Farmington Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is the regional planning forum responsible for transportation planning for the Cities of Aztec, Bloomfield, Farmington, the Town of Kirtland and the urbanized areas of San Juan County. The MPO carries out federal laws related to coordinated, continuing, and comprehensive transportation planning. The MPO, in cooperation with its entities, NMDOT, transit operators, and the general public, develops long and short range transportation plans. Presented by Peter Koeppel 45