San Juan County LVPRC defers review of change-of-use permit for Building 25-0061, cites incomplete materials

The San Juan County Village Land Use & Planning Review Committee on Tuesday deferred review of a change-of-use application for permit number 25-0061 after committee members said the permit file lacked key information about the proposed use and site improvements.

The committee said the drawings and permit portal record do not identify what new activity is proposed for the specific space shown on the plan, and staff noted an existing code-enforcement case for nonpermitted uses at the building, including a distillery and a gym. Committee members said that without clearer information they could not assess whether the use would be allowed, whether it required a conditional-use review, or what parking and accessibility improvements would be necessary.

“...I am deputy county manager. I’ve been on the job for all of 3 weeks,” said Tillery Williams, deputy county manager, introducing herself to the committee. She did not propose substantive changes to the permit at the meeting; her remarks were introductory.

Why it matters: committee members raised site-planning and public-safety questions that depend on the identified use — particularly ADA parking placement, restroom availability, and how vehicle circulation would be handled. The parcel contains multiple active uses (distillery and gym were discussed in the file) and the permit appears to cover a separate, currently unoccupied area of the building. Staff said a deficiency letter had been issued in the portal and that the file arrived in late April; formal land-use review had not yet occurred.

Key details discussed - Permit identification: committee and staff referred to the application as “change of use” land-use/permit 25-0061; the application record lacked a clear description of the proposed activity for the mapped space. - Code enforcement: staff located a code-enforcement case noting nonpermitted operations listed as a distillery, gym and a salon in the building’s history; the change-of-use appears to be sought after those uses were in operation. - Site plan issues: committee members flagged the proposed ADA parking location shown on the plan as problematic because it conflicts with an on-site barbecue truck and may be too far from doors; a possible alternative location to the south was discussed. Staff noted proposed native-plant landscaping and a gravel area shown for additional parking but said the drawings are not detailed enough to confirm compliance with parking requirements. - Restroom question: the plan shows a restroom labeled “if required,” and staff said whether a restroom is required depends on the eventual use. - Timeline: staff said the permit only recently entered the system (late April) and has not yet undergone full land-use review; they estimated review would take at least a month or two.

Actions and next steps - The committee took no formal action on the permit. Instead staff and committee members agreed to invite the applicants, identified in the permit portal as Lynn and Catherine Sorensen, to attend the committee’s next meeting and make a short presentation about the proposed use and site changes. - Public Works participation: staff confirmed that a Public Works representative, Colin, will be invited to the next meeting to address circulation and turning-radius questions and to advise on driveway/vehicle access concerns. - Staff follow-up: committee members assigned outreach to committee members with access to the applicant contact information so applicants could be asked to prepare clarifying materials on parking, ADA access, the proposed use, and restroom requirements.

Committee context and related updates - Staff reported a deficiency letter has been issued in the permit file. Committee members noted the Lopez Food Center subsequently submitted updated site and landscape plans showing enhanced screening and removal of a catchment tank; the committee thanked the applicant for that change.

What remains unresolved: until the applicants identify the proposed activity for the specific space and provide a clearer site plan, the committee will not provide substantive comments about land-use compatibility or parking compliance. The committee scheduled the permit for re-review after applicants and Public Works attend a future meeting.

Ending The committee closed the item without a vote on the permit and set staff outreach and an invitation to the applicants and Public Works as the next steps. A subsequent meeting will include the application presentation and a focused discussion of ADA parking and circulation before the committee issues formal comments to county reviewers.