A G E N D A. Administrative Review Board City Council Chambers 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, NM August 9, 2018 at 6:00 p.m.

Transcription

1 A G E N D A Administrative Review Board City Council Chambers 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, NM August 9, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. Item No. 1 Call Meeting to Order Page 2 Approval of the Agenda Approval of the Minutes from the July 5, 2018 Meeting Petition No. ARB a request from Shane Lostak, represented by Derald Polston, for a variance to allow for a six-foot tall fence to be placed on the south property line (a corner lot with double frontage) with a 0 front yard setback for property in the SF-7, Single-family Residential District located at 3601 San Medina Avenue. (Helen Landaverde) Petition No. ARB a request from Leaf Properties, represented by Douglas Kinsey, for a variance from the requirements of UDC Sec Minimum offstreet parking requirements for the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District, to reduce the number of parking spaces for a Family Dollar Store on Wildflower Parkway. (Teri Clashin) Petition No. ARB a request from Blake Barnett and Robert & Sandra Burnett, for a variance to allow a lot size variance for three properties that do not meet the one-acre minimum lot size. The properties are located north of Sunrise Parkway, east of Butler Avenue, across from the driveway into Piñon Hills Golf Course in the RE-1, Residential Estates District. (Cindy Lopez) Business from: Floor: Chairman: Members: Staff: Adjournment All decisions of the Administrative Review Board are final unless appealed in writing to the City Clerk s office within 15 days. 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 or , prior to the meeting so arrangements can be made.

2 2

3 1

4 2

5 3

6 4

7 5

8 6

9 7

10 8

11 9

12 10

13 11

14 12

15 13

16 14

17 15

18 16

19 17

20 18

21 19

22 20

23 21

24 22

25 23

26 24

27 25

28 26

29 27

30 28

31 29

32 30

33 31

34 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB Variance to number of parking spaces for a Family Dollar store. August 9, 2018 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB 18-51, is a request from Leaf Properties, represented by Douglas Kinsey for a variance from the requirements of UDC Sec Minimum off-street parking requirements for the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District, to reduce the number of parking spaces for a Family Dollar Store on Wildflower Parkway in the City of Farmington, San Juan County, New Mexico. The property is legally described as: NE1/4NE1/4 of Section 13, Township 29, North of Range 13 West, NMPM, City of Farmington, San Juan County, New Mexico. Otherwise located on Wildflower Parkway approximately 576 feet east of Wildflower Mesa Drive. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant... Leaf Properties Inc. Representative... Douglas Kinsey, CEO Leaf Properties, Inc. Property Owner... Leaf Properties Location of Property... Wildflower Parkway approximately 576 feet east of Wildflower Mesa Drive (R ) Nature of Petition..The applicant is requesting a variance from the requirements of UDC Sec Minimum off-street parking requirements for the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District, to reduce the number of parking spaces for a Family Dollar Store. Applicable Regulations... The City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): Pursuant to UDC Sec Minimum off-street parking requirements, in the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District. Zoning... LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District. Existing Use... Vacant and undeveloped. Surrounding Zoning.North: Unincorporated San Juan County/Commercial South: MF-M, Multi-family Medium Density/Vacant East: RE-20 SMHAO, Residential Estate with a Special Mobile Home Area Overlay/Residential West: Unincorporated San Juan County/Future Farmington Pump Station and Commercial Public Notice Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Sunday, July 22, Adjoining property owners were sent notice by certified mail on Wednesday, July 18, 2018, and a sign was posted on the property on Friday, July 27, Staff... Teri Clashin, Associate Planner BACKGROUND The petitioner is requesting a variance to the number of parking spaces allowed for a Family Dollar store. The subject property (R ) is 5.47 acres and is located on Wildflower Parkway, approximately 576 feet east of Wildflower Mesa Drive. The subject property is part of a larger 32

35 parcel and will be required to be subdivided through a plat process prior to the issuance of any building permits or release of electricity. The design drawings indicate that the subject property will be subdivided into two lots and that the western property will be developed with a Family Dollar Store. On March 27, City Council approved a request from Leaf Properties, represented by Douglas Kinsey for a zone change from Multi-Family Medium Density (MF-M) to Local Neighborhood Commercial for the purpose of a small retail store to be located on the subject property. The petitioner has purchased the property and is in the process of surveying the land and to come into compliance with the City s subdivision standards. Parking space requirements are based on the size of the building. The petitioner submitted conceptual design drawings for a Family Dollar Store. The proposed Family Dollar store is 104 feet X 80 feet = 8,320 ft². The UDC Section Minimum off-street parking requirement for Retail Sales and Service, Sales-Oriented is 1.0 parking space per 200 square feet. Estimated Building Area 104 feet X 80 feet 8,320 feet² Minimum parking requirement 1 parking space per 200 feet² 41.6 TOTAL PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 41 The minimum number of accessible spaces required per UDC Section Accessible parking for physically handicapped persons is as follows: UDC Section Accessible parking for physically handicapped persons. Total Parking Spaces Required Minimum Number of Accessible Spaces Minimum Number of Van- Accessible Spaces The minimum parking requirement is 41 parking spaces with a minimum of three (3) accessible spaces one of which has to a van-accessible space. The petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the number of parking spaces required from 41 to 30 parking spaces, of which two must be accessible handicap spaces. The request is a reduction of 11 parking spaces (25%) for a total of 30 parking spaces. As part of the justification for the variance the petitioner has stated that other dollar stores within the City have fewer parking spaces than the UDC requires. Staff conducted the following research for the number of parking spaces at other local dollar stores. Name (Year Built) Location Building Area (SJCAO) Required Parking Spaces/Accessible # of Actual Parking Spaces Dollar General (2012) 4700 W. Main St. 9,232 46/3 45/ 3 Family Dollar (2002) * 660 W. Main St. 7,913 39/3 25/2 Dollar Tree (2014) 501 E. Broadway Ave. 9,016 45/3 72/3 Dollar General (2011) 506 E. Broadway Ave. 9,112 45/3 37/3 Dollar General (2013) 1101 S. Dustin Rd. 9,188 45/3 50/3 33

36 Based on the other dollar stores found within the City, two have fewer parking than the UDC requires. The Family Dollar store on West Main was built before the implementation of the UDC in 2008 and has only 25 parking spaces. In addition, the petitioner was able to conduct a Traffic Impact Study on Wildflower Parkway. The consultant, Sefton Engineering Consultants conducted the study using the Institute of Transportation Engineer (ITE) Generation Rates 9 th Edition to generate rates. The findings include AM peak hours at 35 trips and PM peak house at 63 trips. Based on the findings the development of Dollar Store would not generate more than 100 trips during peak hours. The physical layout of the property also poses constraints to the land. The subject property is located on a slope, causing restrictions to the location of the building, parking area, storm water detention and septic system placement. In addition, the location of the building cannot be placed within the existing utility easements found on the property. As for the setback requirements, the subject property is located in the LNC, Local Neighborhood District. The LNC density and dimensional setbacks are as following: Front: 30 feet; Side: 20 feet; and Rear: 30 feet. The petitioner stated that he plans on creating a lot split of the triangular shaped lot. The western lot would be used for the Family Dollar store at 2.56 acres. The Dollar Store will need to meet the required LNC setback requirements. If not, another variance will be required for the setbacks. The petitioner has stated he intends on subdividing his parcel into two lots. According to the design drawings submitted, the petitioner will develop the western part of the lot with the Family Dollar store. Staff recommends the eastern part of the property be used as overflow parking if needed. In addition, if the eastern lot is developed in the future a shared parking agreement between the two businesses is highly recommended. The petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the number of require parking spaces from 41 to 30 spaces. ANALYSIS Variance Criteria Section , UDC A variance may be granted only where a literal enforcement of the Code provisions would result in unnecessary hardship for a particular property. In order to grant a variance, the ARB must make a positive finding of fact concerning each of the following or, if a positive finding of fact cannot be made that the ARB specifically describes the circumstance that would outweigh the strict requirement for a positive finding of fact and determine the variance will not be a public detriment: 1. That special conditions and circumstances exist, which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; and, furthermore, that they are not self-imposed, selfcreated or otherwise the result of actions by the applicant. The subject property is located on vacant land and is triangular shaped. The petitioner indicated that the buildable area of the Family Dollar store is not large enough to accommodate 41 parking spaces due to a number of constraints that do not allow for the required number of parking spaces. These limitations include the septic system 34

37 and the storm water detention pond needing to be placed west of the building due to the downhill slope. In addition, there is a gas utility easement that straddles the northern part of the property along Wildflower Parkway. The southern part of the property slopes uphill. The petitioner is requesting a reduction in the number of parking spaces from 41 to 30 with 2 accessible parking spaces. The constraints of the subject property are not self-imposed or self-created. This criterion IS met. 2. That a literal interpretation of the provisions of the Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the Code. The literal interpretation of the provision of the Code would deprive the petitioner of rights commonly enjoyed by other property owners in the surrounding area. The petitioner is requesting a variance to reduce the number of parking spaces allowed for a Family Dollar store from 41 to 30 parking spaces. The shape of the parcel along with the land constraints of easements and the sloping of the property make it difficult for the petitioner to provide the recommended number of parking spaces. The utility easements and the topography of the subject property considerably reduce the site s buildable area and parking area. This criterion IS met. 3. The applicant demonstrates that the request is a minimum easing of the Code requirements, making possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure. The variance request is to reduce the number of parking spaces for a Family Dollar store from the required 41 parking spaces to 30 parking spaces. Less parking means a reduction in the imperious surface and less water runoff from the parking area. Research has indicated that local dollar stores have fewer parking spaces than required by the UDC without any complaints or complications to the City or store. Therefore, the request can be considered as a minimum easing of the code. This criterion IS met. 4. That the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general interest, the general purpose and intent of the Code, and is not injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The petitioner has demonstrated that the requested variance is in harmony with the general interest, purpose and intent of the UDC. The requested variance will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise detriment to the public welfare. This criterion IS met. 35

38 5. That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. The granting of the variance will not permit a use that is not otherwise allowed in the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District. This criterion IS met. 6. That no nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district and no permitted use of lands, structures or buildings in other districts has been or shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. No nonconforming uses, structures or buildings in the same district have been considered as grounds for the variance request. This criterion IS met. 7. That the applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance requested were denied. The strict application of the parking requirements would create an unnecessary hardship to the petitioner to provide the required minimum off-street parking on site. Large areas of open space would need to be replaced with additional asphalt in order to create a larger parking lot, which in turn would diminish greenspace, impact the size of the storm water retention area, and would be costly to the developer. Research has demonstrated that the minimum parking spaces needed for these types of convenience stores can be reduced and still be fully functional. This criterion IS met. CONCLUSION The Community Development Department concludes that approval of ARB is appropriate. The request is a minimum easing of the code and it would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the code concerning off-road parking requirements. In addition, the petitioner must have an approved summary plat before any building permits are issued and the setbacks for the LNC, Local Neighborhood Commercial District must be met or a variance to the setbacks will be required. It is recommended that the eastern part of the parcel be used as overflow parking if needed and if the eastern lot is developed in the future a shared parking agreement between the two businesses is highly recommended. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ARB from Leaf Properties, for a variance to reduce the number of parking spaces from 41 parking spaces to 33 parking spaces for a Family Dollar Store on Wildflower Parkway in the City of Farmington, San Juan County, New Mexico. 36

39 37

40 38

41 39

42 40

43 41

44 42

45 43

46 44

47 45

48 46

49 47

50 ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD Petition ARB Variance to allow a reduction in lot size North of Sunrise Pkwy, east of Butler Ave. across from entrance to Pinon Hills Golf Course August 9, 2018 DESCRIPTION OF PETITION Petition No. ARB is a request from Blake Barnett and Robert & Sandra Burnett for a variance to allow a lot size variance for three properties that do not meet the one-acre minimum lot size in the RE-1 Residential Estates zoning district. The properties are located north of Sunrise Parkway, east of Butler Avenue across from the driveway into Piñon Hills Golf Course. The property is legally described as: Tracts of land located in the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SE/4SE/4NW/4) of Section thirty-five (35), Township (30) North of Range Thirteen (13) West, N.M.P.M., San Juan County, New Mexico. Otherwise located north of Sunrise Parkway, east of Butler Avenue across from the driveway into Piñon Hills Golf Course (R , R and R ) GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant... Blake Barnett and Robert & Sandra Burnett Property Owner... Blake Barnett and Robert & Sandra Burnett Location of Property... North of Sunrise Parkway, east of Butler Avenue across from the driveway into Piñon Hills Golf Course (R , R and R ) Nature of Petition... The applicant is requesting variances to a lot sizes for three properties that do not meet the one-acre minimum lot size in the RE-1 Residential Estates zoning district. Applicable Regulations.. City of Farmington Unified Development Code (UDC): UDC 2.8 Density and Dimensional Standards, the minimum required lot size in the RE-1 Residential Estates District is one (1) acre. Zoning... RE-1 Residential Estates District Existing Use... Vacant Surrounding Zoning/.. North: RE-1 Residential Estates/vacant Land Use South: RA Rural Agricultural/institutional-Golf Course East: RA Rural Agricultural/institutional West: RE-1 Residential Estates/residential Public Notice. Publication of Notice of this petition appeared in the Daily Times on Sunday, July 22, Property 48

51 Staff owners within 100 feet were sent notice by certified mail on Wednesday, July 18, A sign was posted on the property on Friday, July 20, Cynthia Lopez, Planning Manager BACKGROUND The applicants are requesting a variance to allow a reduction to the required one (1) acre minimum lot size for three parcels of land north of Sunrise Parkway across from the driveway for the Piñon Hills Golf Course east of Butler Avenue. The properties were created by deed in The two properties owned by Robert and Sandra Burnett (R and R ) are each 0.44 acres (19,166.4 square feet) and the one owned by Blake Barnett is 0.59 acres (25,700.4 square feet). All three parcels are vacant. The middle property (R ) is addressed as 2134 Sunrise Parkway. The property to the east owned by Steve Biernacki (R ) along with the three parcels owned by the Burnett s and Mr. Barnett where all part of the 2.47 acre parcel created by deed in 1978 and subsequently sold to Mr. Biernacki. Mr. Biernacki then sold the other three parcels to the Burnett s and Mr. Barnett. They were not aware that the lots did not meet the City s subdivision or minimum lot size regulations. The Unified Development Code Section 2.8 requires a minimum lot size in the RE-1 Residential Estates District to be one (1) acre. Section 6.3 states No electrical service and, where applicable, no permit for the construction of a building or buildings upon any lot, tract or parcel shall be issued until a building lot, tract or parcel has been created by compliance with a platted subdivision or is a lot of record. A lot of record must be deeded prior to the original subdivision regulations established on June 22, None of the parcels were created by plat, including Mr. Biernacki s and the only one that meets the minimum one (1) acre requirement is Mr. Biernacki s. The City annexed this area on March 26, The area of San Juan College was annexed into the City on December 18, The petitioner s property, which abutted the City limit at the time the property was created, was in the Farmington Planning and Platting Jurisdiction. To be a lot of record the owners are required to be submitted a summary plat to the City for review and approval. The owners of these properties will be required to submit a subdivision plat to the City prior to the issuance of any electric or building permits. The properties are located in the RE-1 Residential Estates district. The RE-1 district requires a 35-foot front yard setback, a 30-foot rear yard setback and a 15-foot interior side yard setback. The Burnett s properties are approximately 99 feet by 195 feet. Blake Barnett s property is approximately 132 feet by 195 feet. Depending on the location of any residence on the site, the two properties owned by the Burnett s could have a buildable area of approximately 34 feet by 135 feet 49

52 and Blake Barnett s property could have a buildable area of approximately 67 feet by 135 feet. Patent easements (33 feet wide), which were created by Congress, are on the south and east side of each of the original 2.5 acre parcels in this area of the City. Access to Blake Barnett s property can utilize the patent easement along the south side of his property, and, to Robert and Sandra Burnett s property from the patent easement on the south side of the north abutting property. However, the middle property owned by the Burnett s will require an access and utility easement from the patent easement through the northern-most property to the site. Both of the patent easements access Sunrise Parkway to the east. There is sewer access to the west in Daybreak Drive and the owners can access the sewer through the same patent easements. ANALYSIS Variance Criteria Section , UDC A variance may be granted only where a literal enforcement of the Code provisions would result in unnecessary hardship for a particular property. In order to grant a variance, the ARB must make a positive finding of fact concerning each of the following or, if a positive finding of fact cannot be made that the ARB specifically describes the circumstance that would outweigh the strict requirement for a positive finding of fact and determine that the variance will not be a public detriment: 1. That special conditions and circumstances exist, which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district; and, furthermore, that they are not self-imposed, self-created or otherwise the result of actions by the applicant. The three parcels were created by deed in 1978, prior to being annexed into the Farmington and seven years after the adoption of the City s subdivision regulations. The parcels have since changed ownership, which makes it difficult to remedy the lot sizes by consolidation. The current owners purchased the properties in 2006 thinking they were legal properties. The value of the land already reflects the division of land into separate parcels. The different owners were not aware that the parcels did not meet the zoning regulations when they purchased the property. If the variance is not granted these properties will be unbuildable. This criterion IS met. 50

53 2. That a literal interpretation of the provisions of the Code would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of the Code. The City annexed this area in Some of the properties to the north and west have legal nonconforming multi-family dwellings. The properties to the north and west existed prior to annexation into the City. The county did not have zoning and therefore did not limit the number of residential units on a property. The owners thought they were purchasing legal properties and were unaware of the 1-acre minimum lot size requirement. The properties are large enough to accommodate a single-family dwelling on each lot. This criterion IS met. 3. The applicant demonstrates that the request is a minimum easing of the Code requirements, making possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure. The petitioner s properties are the only lots that do not meet the 1-acre minimum in the surrounding area. The other parcels in the area are at least 1-acre but primarily they are 2.5 acre parcels. However, the properties to the east have more than one residence and a few properties to the northeast have mobile homes, which are not allowed in this district. This criterion IS NOT met. 4. That the granting of the variance is in harmony with the general interest, the general purpose and intent of the Code, and is not injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. The general purpose and intent of the Code is to provide a rural residential area within the City limits. The properties are 19,166.4 square feet or more on which a 3,000 square foot house can be built while maintaining the desired rural character of the zoning district. The required setbacks for the RE-1 Residential Estates zoning can still be met. This criterion IS met. 5. That the proposed variance will not permit a use not otherwise allowed in the underlying district. The area is for residential uses with a rural character. The variance will still allow for a rural residential use. This criterion IS met. 51

54 6. That no nonconforming use of neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district and no permitted use of lands, structures or buildings in other districts has been or shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. No nonconforming uses, structures or buildings in the same district are considered as grounds for this variance request. This criterion IS met. 7. That the applicant would suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance requested were denied. The applicant will suffer an unnecessary hardship if the variance is denied. The lots that they purchased in good faith, that they thought were viable buildable lots, will not be buildable without the variance as requested. The petitioner s did not create the situation. The deeds were recorded with San Juan County and the owners were not aware that the lots did not meet the zoning requirements, nor were they aware that the lots were not properly subdivided by City standards. This criterion IS met. CONCLUSION The Community Development Department concludes that approval of ARB is appropriate. The need for the variance is not self-imposed, self-created or the result of actions by the applicants. The literal enforcement of the Code would result in an unnecessary hardship on the applicants and will not be detrimental to the neighborhood or the public. RECOMMENDATION The Community Development Department recommends approval of Petition ARB 18-53, a request Blake Barnett and Robert & Sandra Burnett for a variance to allow a lot size variance for three properties (R , R and R ) that do not meet the one-acre minimum lot size in the RE-1 Residential Estates zoning district. The properties are located north of Sunrise Parkway, east of Butler Avenue across from the driveway into Piñon Hills Golf Course. The following conditions apply: The two lots owned by Robert and Sandra Burnett must be no smaller than 0.44 acres and the lot owned by Blake Barnett must be no smaller than 0.59 acres. 52

55 All three lots must meet the setback requirements in the Unified Development Code for the RE-1 Residential Estates zoning district. The owners must submit a plat to the City for review and approval for the lots to come into compliance with Farmington s subdivision regulations prior to the issuance of any electric or building permits. The lot addressed as 2134 Sunrise Parkway (R ) must be granted an access and utility easement from one of the other two properties. 53

56 54

57 55

58 56

59 57

60 58

61 59

62 60

63 PLANNING MEMO COMMENTS SUMMARY ARB SUNRISE / BUTLER Deadline: 7/23/18 City of Farmington Departments CD Director M. Holton CD Addressing Planning Division CD Chief Building Official D. Childers No comment CD CD CD Long Range Planner MPO D. Garcia Oil & Gas Inspector L. Simms CITY City Manager s Office J. Baird No comment ELEC Customer Care Manager L. Richardson ELEC Electrical Engineering L Aligarbes No comment ELEC FIRE FIRE LEGAL LEGAL T & D R. Romero Fire Captain D. Doudy Fire Marshall B. Vega City Attorney J. Breakell Deputy City Attorney E. Wayne POLICE Code Compliance M. Romero No comment POLICE Sergeant P. Flores PRCA C. Styron No comment PW City Engineer N. Westerling PW Engineering T. Sitta No comment PW PW PW Streets Superintendent Traffic Engineer C. Trask Water/Waste Water M. Tso Was a rezone to RE-20 considered for the 3 lots? Other Entities New Mexico Gas Company L. Moore CenturyLink D. Willato Enterprise Field Services Comcast Cable M. Johnson CH2MHILL OMI R. Rosen Field Services Farmington School District C. Lyons No comment No conflict 61

64 62

65 63

66 64

67 65

68 66

69 67

70 68

71 69

72 MINUTES ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD July 5, :00 P.M. The Administrative Review Board met in regular session on Thursday, July 5, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, 800 Municipal Drive, Farmington, New Mexico. Members present Members absent: Staff present: Others addressing the Board: Acting Chair-James Dennis Jeff Johanson Oliver Roe Ireke Cooper Paul Martin Helen Landaverde Karen Walker Scott Hatch Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Acting Chair Dennis and there being a quorum present the following proceedings were duly had and taken. Approval of the Agenda A motion was made by Board Member Johanson and seconded by Board Member Roe to approve the agenda. The motion passed unanimously by a vote of 3-0. Approval of the Minutes from the June 7, 2018 Regular Meetings Board Member Roe made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 7, 2018 regular meeting. The motion was seconded by Board Member Johanson and passed unanimously by a vote of 3-0. Swearing in of Witnesses All parties that wished to speak on behalf of any agenda item were sworn in by Karen Walker. Petition No. ARB Variance to allow for a vehicle repair (auto detailing) shop to be within less than 200 feet of any property line of a residential use located within a residential boundary property, in the IND, Industrial District 4550 Rowe Avenue Discussion of ARB No on July 5, 2018 Associate Planner Helen Landaverde presented the staff report for ARB 18-46, a request from Dennis Mould, represented by Scott Hatch for a variance to allow a vehicle repair (auto detailing) shop to be within less than 200 feet of any property line of a residential use located within a residential boundary; for property located at 4550 Rowe Avenue in the IND, Industrial District. Pursuant to UDC Section (C) No repairs shall be conducted within 200 feet of any property line of a residential use located within a residential boundary. San Juan County Tax Assessor s records show that the size of the property is acres. 70

73 There is a mini lube garage, a storage warehouse, and a three-bay carwash structure on the property. In addition, the following businesses previously operated at this location prior to the adoption of the Unified Development Code in 2008; except for Lubricators Incorporated: Countryside Construction ( ) Pinon Hills Xpress Lube & Wash ( ) Tucker s Express Lube (2008) Lubricators Incorporated ( ) Scott Hatch, owner of King Detail, relocated his detail shop business in August The Planning Division normally conducts the zoning compliance and approval process prior to the relocation of a business for business license registration purposes. Mr. Hatch relocated his detail shop before notifying the City Clerk of the business relocation. Upon updating the new location of the detail shop it was discovered that the detail shop is next to a residential district and less than 200 feet of a property line of a residence, said Ms. Landaverde. Currently, the mini lube garage is being used as an auto detailing shop. The nearest residential structure from the mini lube garage is approximately 189 feet away. The three-bay carwash structure is not being used for the auto detailing shop; nevertheless, the nearest residential structure is approximately feet away from the carwash structure. The three-bay carwash structure openings face Main Street and it is closed off by a solid wall facing the residences. Ms. Landaverde noted that Mr. Hatch has a two-year lease agreement with the petitioner for the use of the subject property as an auto detailing shop and the hours of operation for King Detail are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. on Saturday and is closed on Sunday. The surrounding properties are commercial, zoned IND, Industrial and GC, General Commercial District, except for the properties to the south, which are zoned as SF-7 Single-family Residential. On June 24, 2014 special use permit SUP was approved by City Council. The SUP was also a request from Dennis Mould for 4550 Rowe Avenue, to allow for a craft distillery and tasting room, and a waiver to the 200-foot distance requirement from any residential structure for a liquor store. The operation of the approved craft distillery and tasting room did not commence within 18 months from the date of approval and has expired. A vehicle repair shop is an allowed use in the IND District subject to the following requirements: All repairs must be conducted within an enclosed building. All inoperable automobiles upon which repairs are to be conducted shall be enclosed behind a six-foot screening fence. No repairs shall be conducted within 200 feet of any property line of a residential use located within a residential boundary. No automobile repair or service facility shall be permitted to have bay doors facing a residential use located within a residential district. The Community Development Department concludes that the request for ARB is a minimum easing of the code, is in harmony with the neighborhood, and will not be injurious to the neighbors. The property has a unique circumstance and the approval will allow the applicant a practical and reasonable use of the property. Staff recommends approval. 71

74 Ms. Landaverde mentioned an from Coleen and John Wayne who own property at 4502 Rowe Avenue. Their concerns were in regards to noise, odors, and late hours of operation. Community Development also received a telephone call from Jessie McConnell retarding the variance and was not opposed to the proposed detail shop being less than 200 feet from residences. Scott Hatch, owner of Detail King, 4550 Rowe Avenue, said he came to the City prior to moving into the building and was told he needed to get the building up to the requirements of the City fire code. Mr. Hatch said it took approximately 6 months and $3,000 to bring the buildings up to code. He said he did not know the building was not zoned for a detail shop until he tried to get his business license. Mr. Hatch said he does not use loud tools. He said he would like to have air blowers to dry the cars after they have been washed. Mr. Hatch reiterated that his hours of operation will only be during the daytime. He said he does not do body work or painting. Mr. Hatch said he hopes to buy the property once his 2-year lease is over. Board Member Dennis mentioned that the detail shop would be no more invasive than the car wash that was already there. Administrative Review Board Action of July 5, 2018 A motion was made by Board Member Roe and seconded by Board Member Johanson to approve Petition No. ARB 18-46, a request from Dennis Mould, represented by Scott Hatch for a variance to allow a vehicle repair (auto detailing) shop to be within less than 200 feet of any property line of a residential use located within a residential boundary property; for property located at 4550 Rowe Avenue in the IND, Industrial District. AYE: NAY: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Acting Chair Dennis, Board Members, Johanson, and Roe. None Martin Board Members Ireke Cooper and Paul Martin APPROVED 3-0 Business from the Floor: Business from the Chair: There was no business from the Floor. There was no business from the Chair. Business from the Members: There was no business from the Members. Business from Staff: There was no business from Staff. Adjournment: The July 5, 2018 meeting of the Administrative Review Board was adjourned at 6:19 p.m. 72

75 James Dennis-Acting Chair Karen Walker-Administrative Assistant 73