►
From YouTube: Special Meeting-Governing Body 1/21/2023
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Morning,
everybody,
let
me
call
the
meeting
to
order.
This
is
a
special
meeting
of
the
governing
body.
January
21
we're
starting
a
little
late.
We're
set
for
a
10
a.m,
start
before
we
get
going.
Let
me
ask
everybody:
if
you
have
a
cell
phone
on
you,
please
turn
it
off
airplane
mode,
whatever
keeps
it
from
ringing.
That'll
be
great.
Thank
you
and
thank
you
all
for
coming
this
morning
to
this
special
meeting,
we're
going
to
start
with,
as
we
always
do
with
our
process.
A
Speaking
of
things
ringing,
Pledge
of
Allegiance,
led
by
councilwoman
Villarreal,
salute
to
the
New
Mexico
flag,
led
by
councilor,
Lee
Garcia,
and
then
an
invocation
from
councilor
Michael
Garcia.
Please
stand.
B
Thank
you,
mayor
I'd,
like
to
start
this
morning's
proceedings
with
thanking
mother
nature
for
the
recent
blessing
of
all
of
the
abundance
of
snow
we've
received
in
our
area.
It's
much
needed
and
mother
nature
please
bring
some
more
I
would
like
for
us
to
recognize
that
there
was
one
bond
that
unites
all
of
us
and
that
bond
is
love.
It's
the
love
of
our
country,
the
love
of
our
state,
the
love
of
our
city,
the
love
of
our
community,
the
love
for
one
another.
B
B
A
Thank
you,
councilor.
Are
there
any
remembrances
today
someone
we
want
to
call
to
mind
yeah,
go
ahead,
councilman.
C
Thank
you
mayor
today's
paper.
There
is
a
tribute
to
George
Bayless
who
died
at
the
age
of
91.
I,
encourage
you
all
to
read
it.
He
worked
on
my
first
campaign.
He
was
a
constituent
and
just
a
delightful
man
who
I
very
much
enjoyed
and
just
want
to
send
my
condolences
to
his
family
and
friends
and
remember
him
here.
Thank
you,
mayor.
A
A
You're
gonna
miss
the
roll
call
you
wanna
Sid.
You
want
to
wait
for
the
Roll
Call
foreign.
D
A
E
A
A
D
Mayor
items,
seven
eight
is
consideration
of
a
bill
number
2022-22
adopting
an
ordinance.
This
is
for
case
number
2022-5063..
This
is
a
2200
Old
Pecos
Trail
rezoning
this
case
number
2022-5063,
the
Montoya
land
use
Consulting
Incorporated
agent
for
the
Pierre
Ms
toy
applicant
requests,
approval
of
a
bill
to
rezone
approximately
9.59
Acres,
located
at
2200
Old
Pecos
Pro
within
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor
overlay
district
and
the
Suburban
archaeological
review
overlay
district
from
R1
residential
one
dwelling
per
acre
to
R3
residential
three
dwellings
per
acre
and
Dan.
A
You
and
while
we're
resuming
for
there
may
be
some
people
today
with
us
who
were
not
present
at
any
of
the
other
either
of
the
other
two
hearings:
Madam
City
attorney.
Can
you
remind
us
what
it
means
to
have
a
quasi-judicial
proceeding
and
advise
folks
who
were
sworn
in
previously
that
they're
still
under
oath.
F
Mayor
Weber
good
morning,
everyone
We
are
continuing
the
quasi-judicial
matter,
which
is
one
of
is
it
land
use
case?
And
in
our
these
types
of
cases
rezonings
we
do
have
the
governing
bodies
sitting
in
a
different
posture
than
they
do
in
their
policy
making
roles
which
is
rather
than
considering
whether
they're
going
to
adopt
a
new
law
or
policy
they're,
considering
how
the
existing
laws
of
the
city
of
Santa
Fe
apply
to
the
facts
that
are
presented
during
this
case.
F
Just
an
administrative
note,
there
was
a
request
for
the
redacted
version
of
a
letter,
that's
included
in
your
packet
to
be
included
in
addition
to
the
unredacted
letter,
so
we're
going
to
be
loading
that
this
morning
it
was
a
letter
you
received
in
September
on
this
case
for
Mr
Throne.
So
you
already
have
the
unredacted
version
we're
going
to
load
the
redacted
version
as
well,
that
you
received
in
September
and.
F
Mayor
Webber,
that's
correct,
so
if
you
have
already
been
sworn,
I
was
in
the
same
case.
So
just
let
us
know
that
you
were
already
sworn
in
this
matter
when
you
get
to
the
microphone.
If
you're
coming
up
to
answer
a
question
today,
if
you
haven't
been
sworn
for
some
reason,
please
alert
like
everybody
and
we
will
swear
you
in.
A
Great,
thank
you.
The
process
we
use
for
these
hearings
is
somewhat
different
from
other
matters
that
come
before
the
governing
body.
In
this
case,
we
are
following
our
rezoning
and
land
use
procedures
and
we
are
at
the
part
of
the
process
where
members
of
the
governing
body
have
the
opportunity
to
ask
questions
to
get
more
information
and
to
add
to
our
knowledge
of
the
case
governing
body.
A
Members
can
ask
questions
of
Staff
of
the
applicant
of
anyone
who
is
testified
from
the
public
from
our
own
team
in
land
use
and
we've
been
trying
to
go
through
the
governing
body
members
shooting
for
about
a
10
minute
per
person
round
of
questions
we've
gone
around
once
I
think
at
the
end
of
our
last
hearing
there
was,
there
were
still
some
unanswered
questions
that
members
of
the
governing
body
wanted
to
proceed
with.
A
When
we
finish
the
questions,
I
will
then
be
closing
the
public
hearing,
and
once
that
is
closed,
we
won't
be
asking
more
questions
so
to
the
governing
body
members.
If,
if
you
have
questions,
please
ask
them
while
the
hearing
is
open,
so
we
don't
have
to
make
a
motion
to
reopen.
It
then
we'll
consider
a
motion
with
a
second,
whether
it's
to
Grant
or
to
deny
the
application
and
the
person
who
makes
the
motion
is
asked
to
State
his
or
her
reasoning
or
their
their
findings.
A
Of
fact,
that
would
go
into
the
vote
governing
body.
Then
can
discuss
and
deliberate
again
we're
trying
to
keep
the
comments
within
per
person
a
five
to
ten
minute
comment
period
and
then,
at
the
end
of
that,
we're
ready
to
take
a
vote
and
reach
a
conclusion.
A
So
with
that,
as
a
setting
of
the
table
for
how
we're
going
to
run
this
meeting
today,
again
thanks
everybody
for
coming
back
out
on
a
Saturday,
the
floor
is
open
for
questions.
There
were
some
folks
who
had
not
gotten
all
of
their
questions
answered
at
the
last
meeting.
I'll
look
for
a
hand
of
who
would
like
to
start
from
the
governing
body
this
morning.
G
You
I'm
glad
you're
feeling
better.
Thank
you
just
a
couple
follow-up
questions
and
thank
you
all
for
joining
us
again
on
this
beautiful
sunny
Saturday
morning.
I
just
wanted
to
ask
a
few
things
about
the
area
and
Zoning,
so
I
think
first
I'll
start
with
so
in
looking
at
the
map
about.
You
know:
zoning,
that's
contiguous
to
this
area
and
we
see
our
two.
We
see
r4s.
G
F
So
mayor,
counselors
I,
think
Dan
has
generally
been
testifying
about
his
memo
and
things
in
the
record.
But
if
you
want
him
to
talk
about
just
his
personal
knowledge
about
the
area.
Is
that
what
you're
asking.
F
G
G
Six
but
it
yeah
six
of
15
in
the
packet
material
in
the
memo.
Sorry.
So
what
I
was
wanting
to
understand
because
we're
talking
about
precedent
or
different
zoning
methods
and
area
in
this
area?
And
so,
let's
see
if
I
could
so
I
guess,
maybe
you
can
articulate
for
me
and
you
stated
it
in
the
memo,
but
I
just
want
to
understand
this
better.
This
development
has
40
Lots.
G
It
is
on
19
Acres,
but
the
calculation
that
you
all
did
of
dwellings
per
acre.
If
staff
could
explain
that
it
said
it's
equal
to
2.1
dwellings
per
acre
and
then
right
now
we're
looking
at
25
dwelling
units
on
this
parcel
and
the
dwelling
units
per
acre
came
up
to
be
2.6.
So
it's
not
quite
different
from
the
plazas
at
Pecos
Trail.
So
can
you
explain
a
little
bit
how
you
how
you
calculated
the
2.1
dwellings
per
acre.
A
H
Members
of
the
council
cancer
via
Royal,
it's
a
it's,
a
basic
math
problem.
You
take
a
number
of
dwellings
divided
by
the
acreage
and
get
the
density
on
the
ground.
G
G
So
the
calculations
of
40
Lots
on
19.106
Acres
comes
up
to
be
2.1
dwellings
per
acre
and
that
development
was
constructed
in
what
year.
H
I'm
not
sure
when
that
was
that
was
actually
put
into
place.
I
think
I
I
got
the
year,
which
was
2005,
which
is
on
the
memo.
J
A
This
no,
no!
No!
No
excuse
me
unders,
please
understand
you,
don't
get
to
stand
up
and
chip
in
it.
Please
sit
down
I'm!
Sorry,
you
just
don't
get
to
do
that.
It's
not
audience
participation.
I
know.
People
are
really
eager
to
chime
in
the
way
it
works.
Is
the
council
member
asks
a
question
of
the
person
at
the
podium
the
person
at
the
podium
answers
it?
A
If
answer
excuse
me
we're
going
to
have
order
here
today,
please
imagine,
as
the
City
attorney
said,
that
for
today's
purposes
you're
in
a
courtroom-
and
we
are
sitting
here
in
a
quasi-judicial
hearing-
if
a
judge
is
asking
questions
of
a
witness-
the
people
who
are
in
the
courtroom
don't
get
to
chime
in
it.
Just
doesn't
work
that
way
and
we'll
be
here
longer.
A
If
you
do
chime
in
you
may
take
exception
to
what's
being
said,
and
there
may
be
members
of
the
governing
body
who
will
revisit
the
facts,
but
it
doesn't
get
to
happen
with
people
standing
up
and
and
offering
their
testimony
unsolicited.
So
please
go
back
to
the
question
that
councilwoman
viral
is
asking
you.
H
Mayor
Council,
Council
Villarreal,
just
to
understand
where
my
calculations
came
from
I
start
from
a
base
use
of
our
GIS
records,
so
our
GIS
programs
allow
us
to
calculate
that
is
how
we
determined
those
values.
I
wasn't
able
to
get
a
plot
to
actually
get
those
values,
but
I
figure,
since
density
is
plus
or
minus
it's
going
to
serve
our
purposes
for
our
calculations.
So.
G
Yes,
okay,
so
what
makes
a
PUD,
which
is
planned
unit
development,
zoning
different.
H
Find
unit
development,
mayor
council
of
plant
Council
of
Ural
planned
unit
development
is
an
overlay.
It's
an
ordinance.
It
is
a
zoned
ordinance
that
will
allow
an
applicant
to
massage
some
of
the
development
standards
typically
required
by
the
underlying
zoning
to
something
different.
So,
for
instance,
the
land
unit
development
was
able
to
utilize
much
of
their
property
for
open
space
and
consolidate
or
aggregate
the
density
into
a
smaller
area
which
may
have
been
complicated,
complicated
by
required
setbacks
of
each
lot.
H
The
zoning
has
specific,
very
euclidean
based
standards,
five,
eight
five
feet
from
the
front
or
70
from
the
front
five
feet
from
the
sides
15
feet
to
the
rear,
so
the
Pud
would
allow
that
massage
of
those
standards
in
favor
of
its
new
Matrix,
provided
it
doesn't
go
below
our
minimum
standards
for
health
safety
and
Welfare.
G
K
Good
morning,
mayor
and
City
councilor
Via
Real,
the
answer
to
your
question
was
in
the
very
beginning,
stages
of
the
design.
We
did
look
at
the
possibility
of
PUD,
but
it
didn't.
We
did,
chose
against
it
because
in
our
particular
design
we
weren't
needing
variations
of
the
code
to
to
meet
the
requirements
we
were
able
to
to
meet
all
the
minimum
requirements
for
setbacks
for
everything
else.
That
Dan
is
referring
to.
We
didn't
need
a
deviation
for
many
of
the
code
standards.
G
Okay,
thank
you
for
that
and
then
so.
The
other
question
I
have
is
just
what
what
the
development
is.
Thinking
for
this
error
for
I
guess
more
for
their
covenants,
and
did
you
say
that
the
homes
will
not
allow
for
conversions
to
short-term
rentals.
H
K
Mayor
Weber,
counselor,
Via
Real
discussions
about
the
the
short-term
rental
has
not
really
been
the
subject
of
discussion.
We
were
just
anticipating
that
our
subdivision
would
follow
the
same
requirements
of
the
Santa
Fe
city
code
as
any
other
property
in
the
city
limits
and
and
looked
at.
Should
someone
want
to
apply
for
a
short-term
rental
application
apply
to
the
city
as
anyone
else
in
the
city
of
the
mits
wood.
G
G
It's
not
necessarily
harder
to
regulate,
but
it
is
something
that
we've
done
in
the
past
that
development
has
allowed
for
prohibition
of
short-term
rentals
and
I.
Think
that
to
me
is
a
big
issue.
I
think
that
you
all
could
commit
to
that.
That's
an
easy
one.
In
my
opinion,.
H
Mayor
council,
as
an
option-
if
that
is
an
important
factor
in
your
deliberation,
it
is
something
that
you
can
direct
staff
to
relay
to
the
Planning
Commission,
so
that
the
Planning
Commission
during
its
final
plat
would
be
able
to
take
a
look
at
that
information
and
deliberate
on
what
the
commit
the
council
wanted.
Okay,
thank
you,
but
we
can't
put
a
condition
on
the
ordinance
here
tonight.
Mayor.
G
Thank
you
for
clearing
that
and
I
have
another
question,
and
this
is
for
the
applicants,
or
maybe
the
owners
in
considering
the
design.
If,
if
there
was
a
option
for
you
all
to
be
able
to
consider
more
affordable
housing
units
as
well,
what
I
would
say:
A
good
measure
of
community
Equity.
You
know
I
I'm
I'm,
happy
to
see
there's
affordable
units
there
that
are
meeting
the
code
requirements,
but
did
did
you
all
consider
actually
increasing
the
number
of
affordable
units.
L
Madam
Mr
Mayor
Madam
chair,
my
name
is
Carl
summer
for
the
record
I
am
under
oath
from
the
last
hearing,
councilor
Via
Real.
We
I'm
not
aware
of
any
conversations
related
to
the
increase
in
the
number
of
affordable
units.
We
did
increase
the
number
of
the
lowest
base,
affordable
units,
there's.
As
you
know,
there
are
three
tiers
and
you
have
to
spread
them
out
among
the
three
tiers
we're
doing
an
additional
unit
at
the
lowest
possible,
the
lowest
required
level,
where
there's
only
one
required
we're
doing
two
there.
L
So
that's
the
only
thing
that
I'm
aware
of
in
terms
of
Mr
amistoy's
discussion
about
that
we're
communicating
with
him
now
to
see
to
ask
I
think
the
question
is
is:
would
we
consider
this
we're?
Also
communicating
with
him
with
your
question
there
about
short-term
rentals
and
hopefully
I'll
have
an
answer
for
you
about
that
and
I
agree
with
the
attorney
that
you
you
know,
perhaps
can't
impose
it
like
that.
L
G
Thank
you
I
think
it's
in
our
best
interest
to
be
able
to
have
well
for
one
just
a
provision
that
short-term
rentals
are
not
allowed,
because
we
keep
talking
about
how
this
housing
the
need
for
housing,
the
need
for
affordable
housing
and
to
then
have
an
ability
to
have
short-term
rentals
defeats.
The
purpose
so
I
really
just
think
that
that
would
be
an
easy
consideration
or
prohibition
for
this
area.
B
L
A
quick
answer
on
both
of
those
things
we
have
no
problem,
including
in
our
covenants
and
the
commitment
that
we
would
not
allow
for
short-term
rentals
in
the
neighborhood
in
the
in,
and
we
he's
not
willing
to
add
additional
units
because
of
the
densities
doing
20
already
and
and
one
at
the
lowest
level.
So
that
answers
your
question.
Thank
you
very
much.
G
Thank
you,
the
next.
The
next
question
is
so
so.
M
G
That's
thank
you
for
that
reminder.
I
think
that's
important
I
also
would
like
to
see
the
other
market
rate
ones
have
the
same
rules,
so
we
had
talked
about
adu's
accessory
dwelling
units
which
are
allowed
to
be
constricted
and-
and
just
so
you
all
know
historically,
that
was
spearheaded
by
a
former
counselor
Peter
Ives
to
be
able
to
allow
for
adus
in
our
city
as
a
affordable
option.
G
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
these
properties,
once
homes
are
built
they
will
be
able
to.
They
are
also
allowed
to
have
adus
correct.
H
Mayor
Council
councilor
via
Royal,
if
they
have
the
ability
to
mathematically
on
the
property
given
the
size
of
the
lot,
the
open
space
required
and
the
lot
coverage
that
the
current
owner
is
proposing
for
each
lot.
It
may
or
may
not
work
for
them,
but
the
option
is
available
if
they
make
sure
that
their
design
on
that
lot
includes
for
what
for
accessory
loan
units.
H
G
It
depends
on
the
house,
size,
lock,
coverage,
Etc,
okay,
and
this
is
for
staff
just
so
because
I
know
there
was
some
concern
about
setting
precedence
and
there
are
I
believe
the
map
said:
there's
three
three,
three
more
Parcels
one,
two
on
the
same
side
as
the
subject:
development
and
one
on
the
east
side
of
of
opecos
trail
that
are
vacant
and
I'm.
Just
curious.
G
If
you
can,
let
us
know
if
there's
been
any
inquiries
or
project
development
plans
that
have
come
forth,
that
you
are
aware
of,
and
those
adjacent
vacant
parcels.
F
Area
counselors
I
think
this
is
going
to
stuff.
That's
outside
anything.
Dancer
has
from
his
record
from
the
proceedings
below
so
we'd
like
to
go
ahead
and
swear
him
in.
H
Hi
Daniel
I
asked
about
residing
at
oh
hi,
Daniel
I,
ask
about
residing
at
17
19
hour
for
your
street
number
E's
only
declare
and
affirm
that
the
testimony
I
have
referenced
to
22
Old
Pecos
Trail
rezoning
shall
be
the
truth
to
nothing
but
the
truth
and
do
this
under
penalties
of
perjury.
G
H
Mayor
council
councilman
that
I'm
aware
of
no.
A
You
mayor
great,
thank
you
anything
else,
looking
to
clarify
things
that
have
not
been
asked
or
go
overground
that
that
needs
to
be
covered:
okay,
okay,
we'll
do
counselor,
Lindell
and
then
counselor
Garcia.
J
Thank
you
mayor.
Thank
you,
councilor
Garcia.
Thank
you.
Councilor,
be
a
real
for
those
questions.
They
were
helpful.
I
think
that
I
have
a
question
to
direct
a
couple
questions
to
Miss
Moore.
J
Actually,
mayor
am
I
able
to
request
a
audience
member
to
come
to
the
mic.
Okay,
I'll
keep
Miss
Moore
on
Deck
and
Mr
Throne.
You
must
be
in
the
audience
somewhere.
I've
I
have
a
question
for
you.
A
J
Have
you
been
sworn
in
Mr
Throne?
Yes,.
N
J
Thank
you.
I
just
have
a
really
one
question
in
from
Miss
Moore's
slide
deck.
She
references
in
on
December,
13,
2001.,.
N
Mayor
counselor
Mendel,
thank
you
for
asking
that
question
and
first,
let
me
say:
I
was
here
at
the
last
meeting,
although
I
saw
the
slideshow
and
some
information
put
on
there
for
the
first
time
by
Miss
Moore
when
she
presented
her
history,
I,
don't
remember
this
specific
letter
that
you're
referring
to
but
I
I
was
a
personal
participant,
as
the
staff
knows
in
the
public
participation
process
called
for
in
the
implementing
policy
regarding
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
scene
in
Corridor
that
Consular
Chavez
actually
read
aloud
at
last.
N
The
July
11th
meeting
so,
and
and
actually
one
of
the
exhibits
to
my
December
2nd
comments,
has
the
minutes
from
one
of
those
meetings,
which
explains
not
only
why
I
was
there,
and
one
of
the
reasons
was
because
it
says
right
in
there
that
the
city
attorney's
office
at
the
time
did
not
have
anybody
with
any
legal
experience
to
help
draft
and
help
counselors
held
Meyer.
Former
counselor
hid
Meyer
or
counselor
Chris
Moore,
who
were
involved
in
that
they
didn't.
N
You
know
that
one
is
because
it
says
that
credit
page
3-12
of
the
general
plan
that
counselor
Chavez
read
at
the
last
meeting,
and
that
was
a
that.
Was
there
because
Council
former
counselor
Moore
actually
and
in
the
minutes
to
that
meeting,
which
unfortunately
I
provided
to
the
city
clerk
I,
provided
to
the
City
attorney
I,
provided
the
staff
and
asked
on
January
3rd
that
they
add
to
your
packet
without
any
further
commentary.
N
In
fact,
what
they
did
was
exactly
what
the
general
plan
says.
It
said
no,
what
we're
going
to
do.
You
know
and
there's
a
general
infill
policy
argument.
There
you
have
in
the
general
plan,
there's
a
general
policy
in
favor
of
affordable
housing,
but
there
is
something
more
specific
in
the
general
plan.
That's
implementing
policy
3-I-9,
it's
right
in
there
and
you
know,
there's
a
general
rule
of
interpretation
of
rules
and
laws.
That
says
you
know
when
you
have
something
specific.
N
It
prevails
over
the
the
general
and
that
says
specifically
on
this
particular
area
because
of
its
value
to
the
community,
we're
going
to
have
this
public
participation
process
and
as
part
of
that
process,
we're
going
to
develop
density
and
other
development
standards
and
then
we're
going
to
bring
that
back
to
the
governing
body
and
and
then
we'll
codify
that
in
the
land
use
plan,
and
we
all
know
that
that
has
not
been
done
to
date.
N
So
now
getting
back
to
specifically
your
question,
so
there
I
was
and
I
think
I'm
the
only
person
with
personal
knowledge
of
this
under
oath
and
I'm
doing
this
subject
to
perjury.
That
knows
that,
why
was
I
there
discussing
density
with
other
people
and
why
was
I,
helping
draft
or
other
and
by
the
way
it
was
all
volunteer.
I
put
many
many
hours
volunteering
to
do
that
this
is
22
years
ago,
22
years
ago.
N
N
Next
to
these
were
people
all
along
the
corridor,
and
the
discussion
was
what
kind
of
density
should
we
proposing
to
your
predecessors,
the
governing
body
or
as
part
of
this
process,
and
one
of
the
things
that
was
discussed
was:
should
it
be
what
staff
wanted,
what
staff
put
into
the
future
land
use
map
without
any
approval
of
the
city
council,
three
to
seven
dwelling
units
per
acre,
or
should
it
be
something
less
my?
What
happened
in
that
in
those
meetings
was
the
consensus?
N
Was
it
should
be
protected
and
the
density
should
be
in
the
range
of
one
to
three
dwelling
units
per
acre.
This
gets
to
the
letter
that
you're,
apparently
referring
to
which,
by
the
way,
I
don't
think,
is
in
the
record,
which
means
you
can't
rely
on
it
as
a
quasi-judicial
body,
but
but
I'm
more
than
happy
to
address
that,
because
that
density,
the
idea
was
not
to
be
didactic
to
the
governing
body
and
say
no,
it
all
has
to
be
R1
and
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
I
believe.
N
Maybe
perhaps
you
and
other
people
have
made
comments
that
R1
is
not
sustainable
here
throughout
the
city,
and
that
isn't
the
argument
that's
being
made
here,
but
the
point
was:
should
that
group
acting
responsibly
have
they
did
propose
two
former
counselor
held
Myers
right
of
those
minutes,
yeah
we're
okay,
with
with
going
ahead
back
to
you
as
a
governing
body.
The
people
who
sat
in
your
chairs
and
saying
it
should
be
one
to
three,
and
that
should
be
the
discussion
now.
Does
that
mean
at
the
end
of
the
day?
N
It's
one
is
two
or
three:
no.
What
it
means
is
once
you've
established
that
then
Developers
anybody
wants
to
develop
anything
of
property
in
within
this
Corridor.
They
come
back
and
they
come
make
an
application.
They
tell
you
well,
we
want
to
put
in
this.
We
want
to
put
in
perhaps
PUD
like
like
the
plazas
did,
because
the
Chapman
family
was
very
sensitive
to
the
Old
Pecos
Trail,
Scenic,
Corridor
and,
and
they
used
the
Pud
zoning,
so
they
could
do
what
did
they
do
they?
N
They
specifically
set
that
back,
so
you
can
barely
see
any
of
the
homes
from
opaicos
Trail
and
they
had
to
deal
with
the
problem
of
well
we're
going
to
have
this
high
density
area.
How
are
we
going
to
deal
with
the
50
open
space
requirement
that
is
applicable?
It
was
applicable
to
the
entire
South
Central
Highway
Corridor
projection
District
that
predated
this
Old
Pecos
Trail
Scenic
Corridor
that
wasn't
designed
to
protect
this
Corridor.
That
was
the
whole
South
Central
Highway
quarter,
Protection
District,
and
so
what
they
did
and
hats
off
to
the
Chapman
family.
N
They
allowed
that
higher
density,
and
then
they
have
common
open
space,
almost
20
acres
of
it.
Now
this
the
pot,
if
you
look
at
your
code
under
planned
unit
development
purposes
and
innovative
subdivision
design,
there's
nothing
Innovative
about
this
subdivision
design.
They
said
it's
an
Innovative
Street
design,
Mr.
J
Throne
I
ask
you
a
pretty
simple
question
and
you've
really
gone
around
the
barn
on
it
and
we're
gonna
end
up
meeting
behind
the
barn
here
pretty
soon.
F
N
N
N
N
J
It's
I
think
that.
J
I
think
that
you've,
given
an
answer,
Mr
throne
and
it
wasn't
really
directed
exactly
to
my
question-
you
went
a
lot
of
different
places.
What
I
do
know
is
is
that
the
document
from
the
Old
Santa
Fe
Trail
neighborhood
association,
stated
exactly
what
I
read,
which
was
in
the
slide
deck
from
Miss
Moore.
So
thank
you,
I
I,
don't
think
I
have
any
other
questions
for.
N
A
Don't
think
that's
the
intent
and
I
don't
think
we're
in
our
Council
rules.
We
don't
apply
intent
to
other
people.
They
have
to
speak
for
themselves,
so
counselor
Lindell,
I
think
was
simply
asking
a
matter
of
fact,
which
was
if
there
was
a
prior
document
that
was
cited
by
Miss
Moore.
That
said,
there
was
a
group
of
Neighbors
at
that
time
who
thought
R1
to
R3
was
acceptable
and
paraphrasing
her
question,
what
made
it
less
acceptable
today?
It's
not
in
not
in
described
to
to
you
personally.
A
A
Moore,
can
you
pop
that
up
on
the
screen,
I
think
it
is
in
your
slide
deck
about
a
date
of
December
13
2001.
C
C
A
Well,
I
did
both
so
I
apologize
if
it
upset
the
process,
but
there
is
a
document
in
her
in
the
slide
deck
that
councilor
Lindell
was
referring
to
and
it
and
her
question
was
simply
if
or
if
there
is
this
matter
that
was
recorded.
Is
there
a
difference
in
that
level
today
and
I?
Think
Mr
Throne
answered
the
question.
A
N
A
Fine,
that's
not
the
point,
you're
missing
the
point,
sir.
She
was
simply
asking
you
if
you
had
an
opinion
based
on
your
deep
knowledge
of
this
matter
as
to
why
what
was
Avail.
What
was
acceptable
then
wouldn't
be
acceptable.
Now,
it's
not
holding
you
to
account
no
you're
not
being
put
on
the
on
the
griddle,
sir.
This
is
not
holding
you
to
account
for
the
letter
or
anything
since
okay,
counselor.
B
Garcia,
thank
you
Mr
Mayor,
given
that
this
slide
is
up
on
the
screen.
I
do
got
a
question
for
staff
regarding
this
information.
B
C
Mayor
counselors,
councilor,
Garcia
I
could
find
no
record
of
an
ordinance
being
presented
to
the
governing
body
voted
on
or
passed.
Okay.
I
C
B
B
Thank
you
for
clarifying
that
for
me
just
because
I
think,
if
they
put
out
a
statement
saying
we
want
to
Zone
it
to
R9,
it's
not
going
to
change
City
Zoning
efforts
before
us.
We've
got
a
case
where
we've
really
got
to
look
at
the
criteria
and
does
the
applicant
meet
the
criteria
for
proposed
approval,
and
so
with
that,
I
want
to
focus
on
the
criteria
a
little
bit.
B
B
So
within
criteria-
one
there
is
three
sections
section
one.
There
was
a
mistake
in
the
original
zoning
and
in
the
applicant's
response
there
is
the
responses.
There
is
not
a
true
mistake
and
in
snap
response
there
was
not
a
mistake,
so
am
I,
humble
opinion.
That
criteria
is
not
met.
B
Now
when
we
get
into
criteria.
Two
and
three
is
where
it
gets
a
little
murky
criteria.
Two
there
has
been
a
change
in
the
surrounding
area,
altering
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
to
such
an
extent
as
to
justify
the
changing
of
the
zoning.
So
the
applicant's
response
refers
to
the
land
use
map.
The
future
land
use
map
and
staff's
response
refers
to
that
as
well.
B
I'd
like
to
get
and
I
think
it
was
good
that
Mr
Throne
was
up
here
testifying
earlier.
Regarding
some
of
the
information
he
has
been
able
to
discover
during
his
intensive
research,
so
Mr
Throne
I
have
a
question
for
you.
B
So
Mr
Throne,
as
you
stated,
you've
done
a
lot
of
research
on
this
you've
been
involved
in
this
process
dating
back
to
the
early
2000s.
B
He
provided
us
with
a
heap
of
information
in
in
particular,
why
you
feel
certain
criteria
was
not
met.
So
can
you
help
me
understand
why
you
fill
criteria?
Number
two
was
not
met.
N
Yes,
Marin
and
counselor
Garcia.
Thank
you,
yeah
second
criteria,
as
you
know,
and
I'll
just
do
it
from
memory
is
whether
or
not
there's
been
a
change
in
condition
in
the
surrounding
areas
such
as
to
justify
the
proposed
zoning
change,
and
if
you
were
to
look
at
the
app
the
applicants,
application
report,
March,
21,
2022
you'll,
see
that
the
applicant
isn't
relying
on
that.
N
There
was
no
evidence
factual
evidence
supporting
that
and
further.
If
you
look
at
the
developments
that
have
occurred
in
the
plazas
being
the
most
significant
of
them,
it
was
PUD.
R2
PUD
was
done.
That
did
not
create
a
change
in
the
surrounding
area
such
that
that
would
justify
the
straightforward,
non-pud
R3
zoning
requested
here.
Even
even
if
you
look
at
Quail
Run,
which
is
R4,
you
can-
and
this
is
one
of
the
reasons
why
back
in
September
we
requested
a
site
visit.
N
N
So
there
was
no
change
there
and
and
but,
but
if
you
look
closely
at
both
the
staff's
July
21st
2022
report
to
the
Planning
Commission
and
also
the
staff
December
14
memo
to
you,
you'll
see
that
on
that
second
criteria,
staff
kind
of
gets
off
the
criteria
and
what
staff
says
is
there
is
a
conflict
or
a
mismatch
between
current
R1
zoning
under
our
zoning
code,
which
is
existing
law
and
the
designation
specifically
approved
by
the
city
council
would
approved
the
general
plan
of
three
to
seven
dwelling
units
per
acre
for
this
South
section
of
opecos
Trail
and
that's
what
I
was
referring
to
before
when
I
was
responding
to
to
councilor
lindell's
question
is
that
designation
was
not
made
by
the
governing
body.
N
App
designation
was
made
by
the
planning
division,
read
liming,
it's
reflected
in
those
minutes
that
I
refer
to
now.
We
all
know
that
the
you
know,
with
with
respect
planning
department,
doesn't
make
policy.
They
don't
make
plans,
it's
the
it's
the
governing
body
right
in
the
governing,
so
so
so
so
it
doesn't
meet
the
second
criteria
and
then
they
get
to
the
third
criteria.
B
Right,
and
so
with
that
being
said,
let
me
jump
into
that
and
regards
to
future
the
future
land
use
map.
B
I
do
have
a
question
for
you
regarding
that,
so
that
there'll
be
an
opportunity
for
you
to
go
much
more
in
depth
if
you
like,
regarding
future
land
use
map
here
in
a
moment,
the
third
criteria-
sorry
I'm,
trying
to
scroll
back
up
through
the
document
is
a
different
use
of
category-
is
more
advantageous
to
the
community,
as
articulated
in
the
general
plan
or
other
adopted
City
plans,
and
so
again
future
land
use
map
is
referenced
here.
B
N
Yes,
the
key
phrase
in
there
is
is
our
as
articulated
in
the
general
plan
or
other
City
plans.
So
first
you
have
to
look
at
when
you,
when
you're
and
I
think
even
the
mayor
referred
to
the
fact
that
we're
looking
at
costs
versus
benefits
of
this
but
you're
weighing
advantages.
Is
it
more
advantages
to
the
community
and
I
certainly
agree
that
Community,
referring
to
the
community
at
large?
It's
not
solid,
Lomas
or
any
one.
Neighborhood
I
mean
I
agree
with
with
staff
on
that
we
have
from
the
get-go.
N
So
looking
at
that,
the
question
then
becomes
well.
What
is
the
art?
What
is
the
what?
What
is
the
general
plan?
Articulate?
Oh
again,
councilor
Chavez
read
what
it
articulates
now,
if
you
look
at
those
myths
carefully,
yes,
the
the
governing
body-
or
this
is
called
the
city
council
in
those
days.
N
Yes,
they
said
if
they
were
going
to
adopt
the
future
land
use.
That
was
future
land
use
map
that
had
been
developed
by
staff
that
was
presented
at
that
meeting,
but
they
said,
however,
we're
also
going
to
designate
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
Scenic
Corridor.
That
was
constantly
more
made.
That
motion
motion
was
accepted
as
a
friendly
amendment
by
the
city
council
and
and
then
they're
a
few.
N
Now
when
getting
to
the
to
the
really
the
Crux
of
your
question,
why
doesn't
it
meet
that
category?
Commissioner
inoho's
fall
in
the
Planning
Commission.
She
hit
the
nail
right
on
the
head.
She
called
up
Mr
summer
and
she
said
first
of
all,
which
criteria
are
you
relying
on
in
this
case
Mr
summer
acknowledged?
That
was
that
third
criteria,
the
more
Advantage
more
advantageous
to
the
community,
as
articulated
in
the
general
plan,
and
then
she
said
well,
let's
talk
about
what
what's
going
to
be
provided
here
you
got
20
Market
homes,
She
asked
Mr
summer.
N
And
you
say:
well
I,
don't
know
for
sure,
but
probably
in
the
700
000
to
a
million
dollar
range,
which
I
think
is
probably
accurate,
just
based
on
what
I
read
going
on
in
town
generally,
let
alone
in
that
area
of
town
and
her
comment
about
that
was
well.
How
is
that
going
to
benefit
existing
members
of
this
community
and
I?
Don't
want
to
that
was
her
question.
She
questioned
that
as
those
advantages,
then
you
get
to
the
five
affordable
housing
units.
N
Now
this
is
not
an
argument
against
affordable
housing.
I,
don't
I
mean
you've
heard
other
people,
Mr,
Bell
and
others
talk
about
yeah.
We
we
need
affordable
housing
in
this
town,
but
you
weigh
are:
are
the
advantages
of
five
affordable
housing,
Lots,
none
of
which,
by
the
way,
have
been
identified
in
the
record
At
All
by
the
applicant
to
date,
even
though
we
asked
for
that
at
the
during
the
early
neighborhood
notification
meetings,
we
had
three
of
them
started
in
December,
and
then
there
was
one
in
January,
possibly
one
in
February.
N
We
specifically
said
which
of
these
Lots
by
the
way
are
going
to
be
the
affordable
housing.
Lot
because
some
of
them
are
are
less
than
16
percent
of
an
acre
and
they
enjoy
and
they
adjoin
the
Foothills
Arroyo,
which
is
a
designated
FEMA
floodplain
area,
and
we
wanted
to
know
and
the
answer
we
got
from
the
applicant's
team.
What
Ms
natoya
was
well
all
we
know
they
won't
be
those
lots
along
the
Royal,
because
we
think
those
are
the
most
going
to
be
the
most
attractive
lots
for
market
rate
Lots.
N
N
Did
that
outweighed
the
advantages?
The
disadvantages
of
this
zoning,
which,
by
the
way
and
I
have
must
disrespectfully
disagree
with
something
that
the
City
attorney
said
about
when
the
mayor
said?
Will
this
be
a
precedent?
Well,
of
course
it
will
be
a
precedent
and
the
reason
is
look
at
that
second
criteria
that
you
read
the
criteria
says:
if
there's
a
change
in
the
surrounding
area,
to
justify
this
change,
that's
a
basis
for
City
approval
and,
of
course,
a
developer.
N
There's
there's
four
point:
acres
of
land,
an
advertised
for
the
last
year
and
a
half
the
sign's
still
up
available
for
sale
right
next
to
it,
just
just
south
of
the
subject:
property
Seven
Acres
across
the
street,
of
course,
that
you
know
they're
they're,
just
waiting
to
see
so.
B
Mr
Thurman
I
think
you're
getting
off
topic
from
the
the
question.
So
with
that,
let
me
go
ahead
and
move
on
just
because
my
time
is
limited
in
this
round
to
to
my
next
question
and
it's
dealing
with
Criterion
three
and
that
is
on
page
10
of
our
memo
and
and
I
think
this
is
where
it
brings
about
some
great
concern
for
me.
B
This
one
states
that
rezoning
is
consistent
with
the
applicable
policies
of
the
general
plan,
including
the
future
land
use
map.
So
the
way
I
read
this:
it
kind
of
breaks
up
into
two
parts:
the
applicable
policies
of
the
general
plan
and,
as
as
it's
been
confirmed
earlier,
the
general
plan
doesn't
really
have
any
policies.
The
policy
stated
in
the
general
plan
is
the
development
standards
include
land
use,
density
and
design
controls.
We
will
be
developed
through
public
participation
process
which
hasn't
come
to
fruition.
B
B
My
concern
comes
about
that
I
think
it's
we.
We
haven't
been
able
to
find
record
that
this
land
use
map
has
been
approved
by
City,
Council
and
and
I
guess.
My
question
to
you:
Mr
Throne
is
because
you
in
your
comments
to
us,
you
submitted
an
emperor
request
to
us
requesting
any
documentation
anything
regarding
justification
that
this
land
use
map
was
approved
by
city
council,
thus
making
it
City
policy
am
I
correct
in
that
reading
of
your
comments
that,
through
your
April
request,
there
was
no
documentation
on
the
record
found.
Yes,.
N
Mayor
and
councilor
Garcia
I
did
I
think
four
or
five
I
know
it's
in
my
exhibits.
Ip
requests
we're
all
looking
for.
Where
is
the
April
1999
future
land
use
map
Miss
lillis,
who
was
testified
previously
and
give
her
a
tremendous
amount
of
credit,
was
Intrepid
in
her
research,
and
this
is
by
the
way
before
we
even
found
the
minutes.
N
The
minutes
to
the
meeting,
because
that
that
was
never
disclosed
to
any
of
us.
It
was
just
miss
lillis
uncovered
it
to
her
credit,
but
but
on
the
map
on
the
future
land,
you
snap,
it
was
never
produced,
but
but
I
was
told
by
Miss
lillis
that
about
three
or
four
days
before
the
first
Council
hearing
on
December,
14
and
I
think
there
was
some
reference
by
Ms
Moore
to
this.
N
They
had
finally
found
in
a
box
somewhere
they
had
found
in
a
box
a
map
that
was
dated
April
1999
that
showed
that
designation.
Now,
as
you
recall
me,
so
let's
testified
well.
If
you
look
at
the
general
plan
on
the
on
post
it
online
it's
a
folded
map,
you
couldn't
read
any
of
it,
so
we
kept
asking
for
it
and
asking
for
it.
I,
don't
know
if
that's
been
put
in
the
record.
N
I
remember
Miss
Moore,
referring
to
that,
but
but
that
all
that
showed
that
that
just
aligns
exactly
with
what
I
the
minute
show
is
that
that's
the
map
that
the
planning
department
developed
there's.
No,
we
asked
over
and
over
again
is
there
any
city
council
resolution
after
April
1499
and
the
general
plan
was
approved.
It
says
we're
now
approving
all
these
density
designations
in
this
particular
future
land
use
map
and
every
response
we
got
back
I
think
the
custodian's
name
is
Ms
Whiting,
as
I
recall.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
Throne,
so
I
want
to
be
respectful
of
my
colleagues
in
it
so
staff.
Can
you
confirm
any
information
for
me
regarding
the
during
the
passage
of
the
1999
General
plan,
the
resolution
that
approved
it?
Was
there
any
Maps
part
of
that
package
I
mean.
Can
you
help
me
on
untangle
all
of
this,
because
from
the
documentation
that
Mr
Throne
submitted
I
I,
don't
see
evidence
that
any
map
was
approved
by
the
city
council?
So
can
you
help
clarify
for
me?
H
Mayor
council,
counselor
Garcia
there's
a
lot
in
that
question.
I
think
for
the
most
part,
I
cannot
confirm
what
they
presented
to
the
governing
body
at
the
adoption
of
the
99
General
plan.
I
do
know
that
it
was
cashler
Boucher
after
a
recommendation
was
was
made
to
adopt
the
1990
General
plan
added
a
friendly
Amendment,
which
was
accepted
by
the
person
who
made
the
motion
and
went
through
there's
no
actual
discussion
about
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
Corridor,
within
the
minutes
that
we
received
from
Mr
throne.
H
In
terms
of
the
the
map
itself,
the
general
plan
includes
that
map
as
an
exhibit
identified,
as
figure
3-2
within
that
map.
It
does
identify
those
zoning
parameters
at
the
time
were
accepted
and
adopted.
Currently
we
don't
use
the
old
General
plan
because
it's
been
digitized,
that's
why
it
was
folded,
whoever
whoever
ran
it
through.
The
scanner
at
the
time
probably
didn't
have
a
large,
no
scanner,
so
they
just
provided-
and
this
is
an
assumption
so
I
don't
know
the
facts
here,
but,
however,
it
was
folded,
it
was
folded.
H
H
However,
we
we
did
find
that,
because
I
remembered
that
Greg
had
a
lot
of
old
codes
from
time
to
time,
so
that
we
can
refer
back
to
them
to
identify
what
those
changes
were.
I
spoke
to
Maggie
and
I
said.
Can
you
look
at
the
back
of
your
office?
You
Greg
put
all
of
those
or
Noah
put
all
of
Greg's
old
books
when
he
retired
in
his
office
and
I
said.
Can
you
look
to
see
if
there's
no
General
plan
there?
There
was
when
we
opened
it
up.
The
map
was
in
there.
H
The
original
map
that
was
adopted
as
part
of
this
General
plan
identifying
that
the
council
did
adopt
as
part
of
this
General
plan,
a
density
of
load,
a
low
density
requirement
for
this
area.
That's
what
the
council
wanted,
because
they
adopted
that
map
as
part
of
the
overall
and
Global
approval
of
this
General
plan.
So
now,
in
terms
of
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
was
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
put
on
there.
Yes,
it
is
in
the
old
map.
H
The
old
package
Trail
is
highlighted
to
identify
that
from
point
A,
Cordova,
Road
and
point
B
I-25
Old
Pecos
Trail
is
designated
as
a
Scenic
Corridor,
and
it
is
further
requested
of
staff
to
develop
rules
and
regulations
to
identify
how
Development
Across
that
area
would
be
achieved.
H
B
Thank
you,
Mr
Esquibel
have
been
warned
that
we've
we've
hit
our
our
my
mark
and
exceeded
some.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
for
your
testimony.
I
I
just
find
it
very
concerning
that
we,
as
a
city
government,
don't
have
Crocker
proper
archivial
standards
to
quickly
go
back
and
see
what
was
approved
through
such
a
a
significant
legislative
legislation.
Piece
of
legislation
such
as
the
general
plan
for
something
to
say,
let's
find
it
and
it
just
some
mysteriously
pops
up.
B
That
should
be
something
we
should
just
quickly
go
back
into
our
archives
and
say
here
is
what
was
in
front
of
the
governing
body.
Here
is
what
was
approved.
I
know
it
was
a
different
day
and
age
where
we
had
binders
of
thousands
of
pages
and
whatnot,
but
I
I
I'm.
B
It
causes
me
concern
that
that
we
don't
have
proper
documentation
regarding
what
was
actually
in
front
of
the
governing
body
or
city
council
at
that
time
when
they
approved
it,
and
we
don't
have
that
concrete
evidence
that
says
that,
such
as
we
would
in
today's
packing
material.
So
thank
you.
Mr
Mayor
I
do
have
two
short
questions.
After
my
colleagues
do.
A
Have
we'll
come
back
around
councilor
mayorworth
and
then
character,
cat
I'm.
Q
Sorry
before
yes,
sir,
my
speaker's
coming
out
I
think
we've
had
some
people
leave
and
we
have
a
handful
of
people.
Who've
been
standing
for
over
an
hour.
Can
we
ask
for
another
show
of
hands
if
people
have
an
open
seat
next
to
them,
so
that
someone
who's
been
standing
can
sit
if
you
really
yeah
or
if.
A
There's
two
seats
here
in
the
front
row
or
if
you'd
like
to
take
a
stint
standing
and
let
somebody
have
your
seat,
we
can
change
around
because
it
is
it's
good
we're
going
to
be
at
this
for
a
while.
All.
Q
A
C
Thank
you,
mayor
line
for
us
what
this
development
would
like,
look
like
under
R1.
If,
if
the
zoning
change
were
not
adopted,
what
kinds
of
things
would
happen
on
this
property
if
it
were
developed
at
R1.
L
Mr
Mayor
councilor
Romero
worth
we
haven't
done
a
plan,
but
I
S
I
will
attempt
to
answer
your
question.
Yeah
just
kind
of
like
I
think
the
roadways
would
look
almost
identical.
The
Lots
would
be
much
larger.
L
They
would
be
one
acre
lots
instead
of
the
smaller
lots
that
you
see
here,
but
the
access
to
these
Lots
would
probably
be
the
same,
and
the
reason
being
is
because,
in
order
to
access
it
in
any
other
way,
you'd
have
to
come
off
of
zero
Road
and
you
would
have
to
cross
the
the
Arroyo
there,
which
were,
which
is
preserved
or
not
to
be
crossed.
So
I
would
submit
to
you
that
the
Lots
would
be
bigger.
The
roadways
would
be
probably
almost
identical.
L
Setbacks
under
R1
under
R1,
the
the
setback,
is
still
75
feet
from
the
right-of-way
of
the
old
PEC.
Well,
I
guess:
that's
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
there
and
that's
by
virtue
of
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor,
so
you'd
have
that
setback
and
I
believe
you've.
Had
interpretations.
I
mean
the
staff's
interpretation.
What
that
means.
So
there's
no
no
one's
going
to
build
within
that
setback
and
it
deals
with
structures
and
fences
and
then
in
the
Lots
you
would
have
the
normal
R1
setbacks
for
for
Lots.
L
On
the
lot
itself,
there
would
have
to
be
a
50
open
space
requirement
and
that
50.
So
if,
if
you
have
one
acre
lots,
fifty
percent
of
that
would
be
roughly
what
is
that
twenty
one
thousand
square
feet
would
be
open
space
and
then
of
the
lot
itself.
Only
40
percent
of
the
lot
could
be
for
lot
coverage.
So
40
of
an
acre
is
the
the
area
that
could
be
covered
by
by
structures
and
then,
within
the
you
know,
so
I'm
dividing
it.
This
way,
counselor
50
open
space.
L
Forty
percent
max
lot
coverage
leaving
ten
percent
for
you
to
do
the
rest
or
whatever
you're
going
to
do
on
that
lot.
That's
how
those
lots
would
roughly
be
designed
and
and
built
out
there
would
be-
probably
no
25
foot
set
back
from
the
yeah
from
the
adjoining
lot
lines
of
the
subdivision.
This.
This
does
include
a
25
foot
setback
over
on
that
side
and
that's
on
the
I
guess
it
would
be
the
west
side
of
this
property,
so
there
probably
wouldn't
be
a
25-foot
setback
that
is
included
here.
L
That
would
be
gone.
These
houses
would
not
be
restricted
in
height
or
style,
so
they
could
go
to
25
feet
and
they
could
be
whatever
style
is
allowed
by
the
code,
so
I
I'm,
hope,
I'm
answering
your
question.
Yeah.
C
Thank
you
all
right,
I
have
limited
time
so
I'm
gonna
do
rapid
fire
here.
Yeah
I
want
to
go
back
now
to
and
I
think
this
is
a
question
for
Mr
Esquivel.
So
we
get
the
R3
R1.
What
is
it
R1
through
R3
through
the
adoption
of
the
general
plan
and
supposedly
the
adoption
of
the
future
land
use
map
that
Council
Garcia
was
just
talking
about
R3
to
R7?
Okay,
sorry.
C
H
H
Far
as
the
mask,
the
the
zoning
requirements
outline
findings
that
have
to
be
met.
One
of
those
findings
has
to
be
a
consistency
with
the
general
plan
and
future
land
use
map,
so
it
doesn't
identify
what
that
consistency
is.
It
just
says
there
has
to
be
a
consistency,
so
you
know
in
some
of
our
cases,
we've
seen
one
house
because
of
an
R2
designation
and
the
lot
size
will
only
yield
based
on
the
acreage,
an
additional
house
or,
in
this
case
you're,
going
to
get
a
19
additional
houses,
five
of
which
will
be
affordable
housing.
H
The
general
plan
identifies
what
the
will
of
the
council
and
gov
or
governing
body
was
at
the
time
specifying
how
the
city
is
to
be
developed,
so
I.
Think
of
that
as
the
master
puzzle
piece
for
the
City
of
Santa
Fe,
where
you
have
C2
R1,
R3
a
whole
host
of
different
zoning
categories
that
the
governing
body
has
identified
as
what
they
wanted
and
how
they
wanted
the
city
to
develop.
So
when
that
future,
when
that
rezoning
request
comes
in,
we
look
to
that
General
plan.
H
So
that's
how
we
process
the
application
and
how
this
application
was
processed
and
how
we
evaluate
this
case
and
assess
it
against
the
general
plan
and
future
relations
map
to
get
that
R3
to
R7
designation
and
for
the
R3
zoning
to
be
consistent
with
the
future
language
map.
For
us
to
be
able
to
recognize
that
it's
compatible.
C
H
C
H
C
H
H
C
H
H
If
you
look
at
the
old
packet,
the
South
Central
Hobbit
quarter,
the
South
Central
Highway
quarter
is
written.
In
the
same
vein,
however,
the
ordinance
does
articulate
that
with
it
tells
us
how
far
to
go
from
the
right-of-way
outward,
which
properties
are
affected
by
that
and
what
the
standards
that
we
have
to
apply
to
each
and
every
one
of
those
properties
that
are
affected
by
those
brown
do
boundary
widths
articulated
within
the
ordinance
I.
H
Don't
have
the
ability
to
force
an
applicant
to
meet
an
ordinance
that
doesn't
exist
in
order
for
me
to
process
that
application
I,
don't
have
that
kind
of
authority.
C
H
Mayor
council,
Council,
Romero
worth
I
think
that
the
entire
general
plan
is
somewhat
subjective
in
terms
of
how
we
how
it's
used
it
doesn't
really
have
any
teeth,
like
an
ordinance
does.
So
you
have
to
apply
a
consistency
across
the
board,
as
has
been
as
policies
are
developed
through
Administration
and
administration,
so
that
we
can
actually
regulate
properties
equitably
equally
and
consistent
across
the
board.
So
the
approach
that
we
take
is
that
consistency
that
you've
seen
so
many
times
across
the
board,
whether
we
recommend
approval
or
denial
for.
H
O
F
And
miracles
I'd
add
to
that.
So
certainly
the
word
advantageous
is
subjective.
It
would
be
good
to
attach
the
Advent
advantages
that
you
find
or
don't
find,
two
things
that
are
in
City
policy,
which
also
may
be
subjective
in
themselves,
but
they
exist.
C
Okay,
so
we've
heard
that
and
I
think
councilor
cassette
walked
us
through
the
last
meeting
about
some
of
the
things
that
you
know
affordable.
The
general
plan
talks
about
affordable
housing.
It
talks
about
infill,
I,
think
Mr.
Throne
has
pointed
out
in
his
documents
that
whether
this
property
was
dealt
developed
in
its
current
zoning
or
in
what
it's
being
asked
to
be
zoned
at
it
would
still
be
in
full
infill.
C
It
would
just
be
a
different
density,
but
the
general
plan
also
talks
about
you
know
adoption
of
a
Scenic
Corridor
and
in
two
different
spots,
and
we
also
have
a
resolution
that
says
that
that
is
something
that
the
community
found
to
be
advantageous.
That
and
I
want
to
find
scrolling
through
here.
I
think
there
are
specific
places
where
we
talk
about.
C
The
corridor
protection
area
between
urban
and
rural
uses
to
prevent
sprawl
and
delineate
clearly
the
boundary
between
urban
and
rural
areas.
Future
land
use
shows
a
corridor
protection
area
between
urban
and
rural
uses,
along
veterans,
memorial,
high
highway
and
Interstate
25.
This
isn't
actually
going
to
help
me.
The
hillsides
to
the
east
will
result
in
a
natural
boundary
between
urban
and
rural
development.
There's
somewhere
in
here
and
I
can't
put
my
finger
on
it.
C
So
maybe
I'll
come
back
about
basically
the
the
idea
that
we
also
want
to
see
open
space
that
we
also
value
that
we
need
to
balance
and
I
I.
Don't
know
Mr
esquibal
if
you
can
put
your
finger
on
what
I'm
looking
for.
Maybe
I'll
come
back
so
that
I.
F
C
P
Thank
you
so
much
Mr
Mayor
just
to
confirm
this
is
the
general
plan
in
the
future
land
use
map
that
has
essentially
been
used
to
help
dictate
every
land
use
decision
we've
been
making
since
1999
am
I
correct
in
that.
P
H
H
But
we
use
the
text
in
terms
of
that,
because
when
you
have
those
human
errors,
especially
when
you're
drafting
by
hand
like
they
did
in
1999,
you
have
several
people
who
touch
those
maps
and
it's
not
uncommon
that
zoning
zoning
occurs
right
through
a
house
when
it
wasn't
supposed
to.
The
zoning
does
require
it
to
follow
property
lines.
H
So
we
have
to
go
from
time
to
time
look
to
determine
whether
or
not
it
was
a
map
error
or
whether
or
not
it
was
actually
adopted
that
way
by
the
governing
body
and
through
our
analysis,
we
either
bring
it
back
to
the
governing
body
to
correct
that
map.
In
its
to
you
know,
based
on
what
was
adopted,
or
we
correct
that
map
error
in
the
general
plan
that
was
corrected
for
the
Corridor.
H
We
corrected
it
relevant
to
how
the
text
reads
as
opposed
to
how
the
drafter
interpreted
that
highlight
along
that
road,
because
that's
technically
what
it
was.
It
was
a
highlight
to
identify
that
area
of
concern,
but
it
didn't
include
properties,
so
we
reflected
it
correctly
as
it
was
written
so
that
it
wouldn't
be
misunderstood
as
actual
boundaries
within
that
text.
Those
boundaries
have
not
been
adopted.
Yet
by
this
governing.
P
Body,
correct
I'm,
more
looking
at
the
assertion
that
nine
point:
what
is
this
What's?
The
total
nine
point:
five
thank
you
Acres
could
be
designated
as
three
to
seven
by
staff
without
confirmation
from
their
approval
from
the
governing
body
on
the
future
land
use
map.
That
is
not
that.
H
H
A
higher
density
to
a
lower
density.
You
can
find
those
changes
throughout
the
city.
There
are
also
there
are
also
additional
element.
If
you
look
at
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
in
just
further
down
it's
zoned
R1,
it's
a
commercial
use.
The
future
land
use
map
identifies
it
as
General
commercial,
Nobody,
Has
Come
forward
to
make
that
actually.
H
I
think
that
would
be
another
fight
as
you
have
here,
but
there
are,
there
are
a
lot
of
them.
This
was
not
one
that
we
found
as
an
anomaly.
It
is
ingrained
within
the
general
plan,
through
all
the
maps
that
we've
that
we've
got,
including
one
of
The
Originals,
that
we
found
that
identified
that
our
drafters
did
get
it
right.
It
is
not
errored.
P
Okay,
thank
you.
I
also
want
to
make
sure
that
we,
maybe
let's
take,
take
our
numbers
away
and
go
to
our
categories,
so
we
have
very
low
density
residential.
We
have
low
density
residential
meat
and
then
it
goes
goes
on
and
on.
R3
sits
on
the
border
between
very
low
density,
residential
and
low
density
residential.
P
H
That's
true
it
it
would
meet
the
our
the
very
low
density
category.
The
only
problem
with
that
is
that
if
they
were
to
actually
come
in
with
an
R2
zoning
request,
because
the
general
plan
has
already
identified
this
as
low
density
starting
at
R3
in
order
to
get
to
R2
we'd
have
to
require
them
to
change
the
future
land
use
map
to
reflect
the
R2
zoning
to
very
low
density
in
order
for
them
to
get
an
R2
designation.
Okay,.
P
H
Mayor
Council
Council
cassette
from
my
reading,
it
was
when
they
were
adopting
the
99
General
plan,
this
one
councilor
Boucher
after
they
made
a
motion
to
accept
it.
Counselor
Boucher
actually
asked
a
for
a
friendly
amendment
to
include
this
designation
for
this
particular
area.
It
was
accepted
by
councilor,
Morris.
P
H
I
according
to
colleague,
it
was
before
the
general
plan
in
the
80s.
F
P
H
P
So
I
know
what
we
are
voting
on
today
is
really
rezoning.
We're
not
we
don't.
You
know
the
development
approval,
that's
down
at
the
Planning
Commission,
but
we
do
have
a
bit
of
an
opportunity
to
explore.
If
this
passes,
what
we
would
talk
to
you
know
maybe
send
back
to
Planning
Commission
as
what
we
would
like
them
to
consider.
P
I
know
part
of
the
concern
again.
How
do
we
balance
this
need
for
housing,
and
this
need
for
a
Scenic,
Santa
Fe,
and
it
honestly
is-
is
a
it's
a
constant
conversation
and
almost
everything
that
we
do.
You
know
how
do
we
build
the
future
that
we
need,
while
honoring
the
the
past,
that
we
love
and
it's
complicated
in
regards
to
this
development
Merlin?
S
Mayor
Commissioners,
the
the
grades
are
pretty
gentle
on
this
property
they're,
all
generally
less
than
10
percent,
except
right
next
to
the
Arroyo
excuse.
S
Second,
question:
yeah:
the
a
good
portion
of
the
property
adjacent
or
closest
to
Old
Pecos
Trail,
sits
lower
than
opecos
Trail
and,
if
I
recall
correctly
it
it
it's
as
low
as
eight
feet.
Lower
eight.
P
P
H
Mayor
Kessel
councilor
cassette
as
part
of
the
Planning
Commission
review
and
approval
they
did
require,
and
it
was
a
staff
condition
that
additional
Landscaping
be
placed
within
that
75-foot
setback.
The
applicant
did
agree
with
that,
so
those
there
will
be
more
Landscaping
there
than
there
is
today.
Okay,.
P
H
Foot,
obviously,
there
are
going
to
be
trees
that
are
going
to
be
removed
where
houses
are
going
to
sit,
but
in
terms
of
what's
along
that
75-foot
setback,
the
applicant
will
be
placing
those
trees
that
are
being
targeted
as
significant
and
placing
them
into
that
75
foot
setback.
If
those
trees
are
are
destroyed
by
any
means
they
will
then
have
to
replace
them.
According
to
the
code,
okay,.
P
And
is
there
any?
Is
there
anything
else
that
can
be
considered?
Okay,
I,
I,
apparently
I'm
going
to
move
on
from
this?
That
is
something
that
I.
Would
you
know
if
this
were
to
pass
that
would
like
to
send
down
to
the
Planning
Commission
is
to
really
take
a
look
at
what
some
of
those
options
are
for
landscaping,
I
apologize.
This
is
a
little
bit
all
over
the
place.
P
Is
it's
follow-up
questions
I
do
want
to
discuss
traffic
again
for
a
moment
and
looking
at
historical
traffic
counts
on
Old
Pecos
Trail
I
know
that
there
is
a
conversation
that
generally
traffic
in
this
area
has
decreased
over
the
last
10
years,
and
is
that
information
for
along
opecost
trail
or
is
that
other
parts
of
this
vicinity
and
Mr
Pacheco?
Thank
you
for
being
here?
Yes,.
E
Mr
Mayor
I'm,
Leroy,
Pacheco
I'm
working
with
Regina
wheeler,
Public,
Works
traffic
I'm
also
I
mean
I.
Think
Mike
Gomez
is
here
who
might
need
to
speak
to
this
as
well
right,
I
heard
your
question.
The
state
mpo
organization
measures,
traffic,
all
over
town
and
traffic
is
decreasing
in
this
Corridor.
It
is
flat.
E
P
E
Okay,
well,
I
think
one
way
to
think
about
this
is
when
you're
looking
at
a
development
like
this,
we
we
use
the
same
criteria
all
over
town,
There's,
no
different
criteria,
any
applied
anywhere
else,
and
so,
for
instance,
this
particular
development,
which
is
I
think
in
terms
of
its
traffic
measurement.
T
E
When
we,
when
you
look
at
traffic,
just
comparing
the
city-wide
to
recent
developments
that
have
been
considered
by
the
Planning,
Commission
and
Council,
one
of
the
issues
that
has
come
up
is
the
timing
of
the
traffic
counts.
The
traffic
was
counted
at
this
particular
location,
approximately
around
the
same
time
that
traffic
was
counted
for
Christa
St
Vincent's,
the
Bartolo
apartments
on
cerios
road,
it's
solely
at
soletas,
the
roof,
the
South
Meadows
development
for
rufina,
Clark
Etc.
E
A
E
Thank
you
for
your
patience,
all
of
you,
okay,
so
this
particular
development
is
going
to
generate
at
West
Via
five
cars
in
the
morning
in
the
peak
hour
and
seven
cars
in
the
evening
in
a
peak
hour
and
at
Old
Pecos
Trail
18
cars
in
the
morning
and
20
cars
in
the
peak
hour.
So
that's
when
you're
looking
at
the
worst
case
time
of
what's
happening
to
this
road.
This
is
the
additional
impact
that
this
particular
development
will
generate.
E
A
E
Question
was
specifically:
the
traffic
counts
on
Old,
Pecos
Trail
and
its
history
that
that
exists.
It's
volume
is
flat.
It's
noted
in
the
TI
and
Mike.
You
have
that
information
in
the
ti
which
I
don't
have
in
front
of
me,
but
it
is
flat.
It's
not
the
traffic.
Okay,
it's
not
growing
in
that
area.
Thank.
P
You
thank
you
I
appreciate
that
I
will
I'll
yield
the
floor
for
now.
Thank
you.
A
We
can
come
back
around
councilor,
Chavez,
mayor.
F
V
Thank
you,
mayor.
I,
have
brief
questions,
follow-up
questions.
Just
to
some
questions
that
my
colleagues
asked.
One
of
my
colleagues
asked
the
applicant
the
impacts
if
zoning
was
reduced
and
one
of
the
things
I.
It's
obvious
to
me
this
answer,
but
I
would
just
want
to
hear
from
you
what
impact
would
that
have
on
affordable
housing.
L
Mr
Mayor
Council
Chavez,
the
impact
on
affordable
housing
would
be
on
this
development.
There
would
be
no
on-site,
affordable
housing
and
the
developer
would
pay
a
fee
based
on
whatever
this.
The
the
standards
are
at
the
time.
V
Thank
you.
The
next
question
I
have
is
around
criteria
three,
so
let
me
get
there.
Sorry,
the
rezoning
is
cons
and
this
is
going
to
be
for
City
staff.
The
zoning
is
consistent
with
applicable
policy
applicable
policies
of
the
general
plan,
including
the
future
land
use
map.
The
word
applicable
I
want
to
go
to
because
we
did
say
that
the
general
plan
is
often
subjective.
So
when
I
think
of
applicable
I
think
applicable
applies
to
the
case
at
hand,
but
also
ties
to
city
code
right.
V
We
would
want
there
to
be
a
correlation
of
the
application
to
the
general
plan,
but
then
also
city
code,
that
backs
up
or
defines
more
clearly
what
is
stated
in
the
general
plan.
So,
for
example,
here
because
I
know
I
asked
earlier,
why
wasn't
there
a
general
plan?
Amendment?
We
don't
have
city
code
that
would
justify
a
general
plan,
Amendment
correct.
H
Mayor
counselors
Madam
chair,
counselors,
councilor
Chavez.
If
they're
requesting
to
comply
with
the
future
land
use
map,
there
would
not
be
a
general
plan
needed.
V
And
so,
if
I
want
you
to
just
expand
for
me
a
little
bit
on
criteria,
three
and
I
just
want
to
hear
it
one
more
time
from
me.
How
do
we
feel
the
applicant
met
this
criteria.
V
H
So
the
rezoning
is
consistent
with
the
applicable
policies
of
the
general
plan,
including
the
Petro
land
use
map.
Is
that
the
one
you're
talking
about
again
as
I
went
over
in
my
in
in
my
presentation,
together
with
what
the
applicant
presented
to
us
as
their
application?
H
We
believe
that
affordable
housing
infants
infill
all
of
those
other
items
that
have
been
rattled
off
here
throughout
the
night
throughout
the
day
in
past,
along
with
what
the
governing,
along
with
what
the
Planning
Commission
identified
within
their
findings
of
facts,
we
believe
that
they
are
consistent
and
comply
with
the
general
plan
relevant
to
their
application.
H
A
You
I
think
councilmember
worth
found
the
thing
she
was
looking
for
earlier.
So
I'll
give
come
back
to
you
and
then
I
think
councilor
Garcia
wants
the
floor
again:
Council
Rivera,
you
said
you're,
okay
at
the
moment.
Okay,
so
councilmember
worth
you
have
the
floor.
C
Again,
thank
you
and
thanks
for
patients,
while
I
looked
for
this
I
just
was
skipping
over
the
page
and
I
think
so
in
in
chapter
two
of
the
general
plan.
It
talks
about
Heritage
resources
and
it
says
throughout
the
public
meetings
and
comment
period
which
led
to
participation
of
this
document.
Santa
fe's
Heritage
resources
were
cited
as
some
of
the
planning
areas
major
assets.
These
resources
reflect
Santa,
fe's,
archaeological,
historic
and
cultural
heritage.
The
physical
layout
of
older
and
established
neighborhoods
were
looked
at
as
critical
elements
in
planning
for
sustainable
development.
C
The
preservation
of
Santa
fe's
visual
character
was
identified
as
essential.
This
chapter
provides
a
context
for
Santa
fe's
Heritage
Resources,
by
presenting
a
historic
overview
of
the
development
of
the
city,
Santa
fe's.
Current
efforts
at
identifying
and
managing
its
Heritage
assets
are
demonstrated.
C
Implementing
policies
establish
a
means
by
which
the
city
intends
to
further
its
efforts
of
appropriately
managing
its
Heritage
resources
and
integrating
them
into
the
Urban
Design
and
development
strategies,
and
so
some
of
the
themes
that
we
go
through.
We
have
themes,
and
one
of
one
of
the
themes
is
character,
maintain
and
reset
respect.
C
Santa
fe's
unique
personality,
sense
of
place
and
character,
the
guiding
principle,
Foster,
Municipal
and
Community
awareness,
positive
appreciation
and
support
for
Santa,
fe's,
agricultural,
cultural
and
historic
resources,
and
this
one
and
then
well,
there's
a
bunch
here
that
are
identify
and
assess
Agricultural
and
Heritage
resources
man-made
for
the
aesthetic,
educational,
economic
and
scientific
contributions
they
make
to
Santa,
fe's
quality
of
life,
respect
and
scientifically
manage
archaeological,
cultural
and
historic
patterns,
resources
and
symbols.
C
Preserving
the
contribution
they
make
to
understanding,
Santa,
fe's,
characteristic,
cultural
traditions,
preserve
the
heterogeneous
cultural,
historic
and
visual
qualities
of
Santa
Fe
recognize
that
the
city's
policies-
and
this
is
where
I
think
is
key-
of
promoting
affordable
housing
and
preserving
the
cultural,
historic
and
visual
qualities
of
Santa
Fe
may
require
close
coordination
and
I.
Think
in
this.
C
H
C
I
had
two
where's,
the
third
one:
maybe
we
better
go
over
those
mayor
council
comes
from
marrow
Earth,
so
it
in
my
reading,
I
didn't
I,
didn't
find
it
in
the
Heritage
resources
chapter
in
chapter
two,
no
mention
of
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
Scenic
Corridor.
There
is
a
list
of
you
know
quite
extensive
lists
of
historic
sites.
C
At
the
end
of
that
chapter,
there
are
some
sites
that
are
along
Old,
Pecos
Trails,
specifically,
but
not
the
entire
quarter
itself
and
there's
sections
of
like
Agua
Fria
Street,
for
example,
in
chapter
three
in
land
use,
it's
mentioned
three
times
and
the
first
one
I
count
is
the
future
land
use
map.
So
it's
you
know
signified
on
there.
It
is
signified
as
an
implementing
policy,
and
it
has
that
little
brief
paragraph
as
well,
where
it
talks
about
different
overlays.
C
Because
we
have
I,
think
every
chapter
has
guiding
principles
and
then
an
implementing
policy
yeah
mayor
council,
councilor
mayorworth.
The
introduction
to
the
general
plan
covers
these
definitions.
They
have
definitions
for
the
themes,
for
The
Guiding
policies
and
implementing
policies,
and
so
implementing
policies
are
at
the
end
of
each
chapter
and
represent
commitments
to
specific
actions.
They
may
refer
to
existing
programs
or
call
for
establishment
of
new
ones.
Q
Q
Q
C
Right
I
believe
that
mayor
yeah,
Council,
councilor
mayorworth
I
believe
that
resolution
was
specific
to
direct
staff,
to
reconvene
the
efforts
to
establish
the
corridor
which
was
referenced,
and
then
it
references
the
references
in
the
general
plan.
So
it
says
a
resolution
directing
staff
to
complete
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
scene,
a
corridor
plan
by
following
the
necessary
public
processes
in
2015.,
and
that
is
that
so
under
criteria,
three
a
different
use.
Category
is
more
advantageous
to
the
community,
as
articulated
in
the
general
plan
or
other
adopted
City
plans.
I
I
C
If
there
was
an
adopted
Corridor,
that
would
have
been
an
ordinance
which
would
have
been
in
chapter
14,
similar
to
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor,
and
then
we
would
have
applied
those
standards
had
they
existed,
but
not
the
resolution.
That's
not
an
ordinance
okay.
So
it's
not
considered
another
adopted
City
plan
correct
because
it's
basically
a
memorial,
it's
a
it's
a
statement
of
what
the
governing
body
wanted
to
have
happen.
F
And
part
of
the
General
plan
also
uses
that
future
language,
like
a
prediction,
we
will
do
this
in
the
future,
but
it
doesn't
set
a
deadline.
Okay,
in
the
general
plan,
I
know
the
resolutions
had
may
have
had
deadlines,
I'm,
not
sure
so.
C
In
essence,
the
only
thing
we
have
to
go
on
a
different
use
category
is
more
Advantage
advantageous
to
the
community,
as
articulated
in
the
general
plan.
Is
the
general
plan
and
the
three
references
to
creating
Old
Pecos
Trail
overlay,
so
mayor,
councilor,
councilor
mayorworth.
What
I
think
we
have
to
go
on
are
the
the
14
themes
that
are
kind
of
adopted
as
part
of
the
general
plan
and
then
reference
specifically
in
the
land
use
chapter
and
throughout
the
other
chapters.
C
You
know
the
one
we've
talked
a
lot
about
is
the
affordable
housing.
You
know
that
we
will
actively
participate
in
the
creation
of
affordable
housing.
I
think
the
infill
has
been
the
urban
form.
You
know,
that's
one
of
the
themes
promote
a
compact
Urban
form
and
encourage
sensitive,
compatible,
infill
development.
C
You
know
and
I
I
think
there's
several
here
that
you
know
you
could
kind
of
stretch
to
apply.
There's
a
transportation
alternatives.
This
you
know.
Development
is
a
longer
Corridor
that
has
bike
trails.
They
will
be
installing
sidewalks
that
people
can
can
walk
along
that
aren't
there.
Today
there
is
sustainable
growth.
C
C
With
this
development
there's
you
know,
the
flood
zone
is
not
buildable.
There's
a
25
foot
setback
from
the
Arroyo.
Let's
see
another
theme
you
haven't
mentioned
yet
is
in
chapter
two:
the
character
maintain
and
respect
Santa,
fe's,
unique
personality,
sense
of
place
and
character.
C
Yes-
and
that's
also,
you
know
one
of
the
themes
that's
referenced
in
land
use.
Land
use
has
quite
a
few
themes
because
we
kind
of
touch
on
so
many
different
aspects
of
life
and
yeah
character,
maintain
and
respect
Santa,
fe's,
unique
personal
sense
of
place
and
character,
and
you
know
all
of
these
themes
are
listed
in
the
general
plan.
They
are
not
prioritized,
they
do
not.
One
is
not
preferenced
over
the
other.
C
It
specifically
says
you
know
that
in
the
in
the
introduction,
when
it
discusses
all
of
these
themes,
but
these
are
just
kind
of
the
the
as
part
of
that
public
process
that
developed
this
plan.
These
were
the
main
concerns
of
the
community
and
they
one
is
not
superior
to
the
other.
So
we
you
know
so
that
balancing
between
these
these
themes
and
these
desires
of
the
community,
but
if
I'm
determining
more
advantageous
I
I
in
in
this
subject
s
subjective
standard
I
could
prioritize
mayor.
D
C
C
C
There
shall
be
consistency
between
the
general
plan
and
the
city's
land
use
development
laws.
In
reading
the
general
plan,
this
seemed
to
be
a
really
big
issue
at
the
time
that
the
general
plan
was
adopted.
C
There
wasn't
consistency
in
how
the
zoning
laws
were
being
implemented,
and
so
you
that's
I,
believe
why
that's
the
first
guiding
policy
is
that
there
is
this
consistency.
C
Plant
and
then
the
third
guiding
policy
is,
there
shall
be
infill
development
at
densities
that
support
the
construction
of
affordable
housing
and
a
designated
mix
of
land
uses
that
provide
an
adequate
balance
of
service
employment
opportunities
to
address
residential
growth
throughout
the
urban
area,
including
the
rail
yard
yeah,
which
is
interesting
when
you
go
back
up
to
the
Heritage
section
and
two
which
says
we're
supposed
to
balance,
not
just
retail
employment
opportunities,
residential
growth,
but
we're
supposed
to
balance,
you
know
sense
of
place
character,
I
have
to
scroll
back
up
there.
I
F
I
C
So
I
guess
the
point
being
there's
an
awful
lot
of
things:
we're
trying
to
balance
all
right
and
I
guess
my
time
is
up
for
now
so
I'll
regroup,
thanks
councilor.
A
T
Problem
Mr
Mayor,
thank
you.
I
I
really
didn't
have
many
more
questions,
but
I
did
something
to
spark
my
interest
and
I
I
believe
this
was
something
that
Mr
Sumner
stated
last
last
meeting.
If
you
can
come
up
and
discussions
for
you,
we
were
talking
about
building
Heights
and
how
that
is
affected.
For
this
specific
project
and
in
the
current
proposed
development
plan
there
are
no
two-story
houses
that
are
being
proposed
on
this.
T
L
T
L
It
would
be,
it
has
been
imposed
as
a
condition
of
our
approved
development
plan.
It
will
also
be
part
of
our
covens,
that's
a
private
matter,
but
it
is
a
condition
of
the
approved
development
plan.
So
when
you
ask,
is
there
a
possibility?
What
somebody
would
have
to
do
is
go
back
to
the
Planning,
Commission
and
say
hey.
P
Thank
you
so
much
Mr
Mayor
I
do
just
want
to
read.
I
found
the
change
to
the
South
Central
Highway
corridor
and
I
have
a
thousand
tabs
open
because
I
have
every
chapter
of
the
general
plan
open
now
here
it
is
so
it's
actually
2010-9.
F
P
Yeah
I
apologize.
Well
then
tell
me
if
this
is
what
you
are
seeing,
because
what
I
see
is
that
the
minimum
building
setback
from
the
edge
of
the
right-of-way
from
the
street
shall
be
50
feet,
except
that
the
minimum
building
setback
from
Old
Pecos
Trail
between
I-25
and
St
Michael's
Drive
shall
be
75
feet
was
the
red
line.
Was
that
Old
Pecos
Trail
piece?
The
part
that
was
put
in.
F
Mayor
over
counselor
and
there
were
additional
changes,
so
I
have
verified
that
at
this
point,
Pat
might
want
to
speak.
F
P
P
Okay,
I
think
it's
it's
kind
of
the
idea
of
what
sets
Old
Pecos
Trail
apart
and
looks
like
that
was
contemplated
in
some
other
work
that
previous
governing
bodies
did
Mr
Esky
Bell.
Did
you
have
something
bad.
H
Not
to
that
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
everybody
understands
it.
This
project
is
a
subdivision
and
a
rezoning,
no
development
plan,
so
all
conditions
that
were
imposed
previously
at
the
subdivision
level
are
specific
to
the
subdivision.
We
do,
we
do
not
have
a
can.
We
do
not
have
any
conditions
relevant
to
any
of
the
zoning
requests.
G
U
P
So
so,
back
to
the
general
plan,
we
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
there
more
than
we
normally
do.
This
is
this
is
great
I
love
the
general
plan
I'm
looking
at
you
know
this
conversation
about
opecos
Trail,
also
in
on
chapter
three.
P
P
Thank
you
I
think
that
that's
important
that
that
there
are
other
areas
where
there
has
been
this
call
for
corridor
protection
and
that
yet
has
not
stopped
development
occurring
in
those
areas
and
really
taking
into
consideration
about
again
the
balance
of
needs,
and
this
really
is
a
conversation.
The
balance
of
needs,
which
brings
me
to
my
next
conversation.
Following
up
on
what
council
Romero
worth
was,
was
discussing
in
regards
to
chapter
two
and
this
conversation
of
character.
What
was
it
it's
character.
P
The
visual
character
is
identified
as
essential.
There
was
also
something
I
believe
that
said
that
the
personality
of
the
city
is
in
there
and
then
this
this
chapter
goes
on
to
discuss
history,
who
was
here
and
when.
M
C
Know
my
Council
concert.
R
P
P
H
Council
I
don't
know
if
we
have
any
demographic
data
to
actually
answer
that
question.
I
do
know
that
in
reading
the
minutes
when
this
was
adopted,
the
minutes
identified
that
the
city
was
about
73
000.
strong,
now
we're
about
83,
000
strong,
so
the
demographics
or
the
population
has
definitely
grown
in
terms
of
the
mix
of
races
that
have
populated
these
areas.
I
would
not
have
that
without
looking
at
at
the
Census
Data.
A
Me
do
a
quick
check
with
my
colleagues
on
the
governing
body.
We're
at
about
the
two
hour.
Mark
I.
Think
councilor
Michael
Garcia
has
some
more
points
he
might
want
to
explore.
I
know,
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
ask
a
few
questions:
counselor
you're
good
counselor,
any
other
counselor
mayorworth.
Did
you
have
another
round
you
wanted
to
get
into.
A
R
R
I
I
I
R
S
R
L
R
I
A
Thank
you
everybody.
We
thank
you
for
your
patience.
If
you
get
all
take
a
seat,
please,
there
are
more
seats
at
the
moment,
so
grab
one
if
you've
been
standing
and
we'll
reconvene.
Thank
you,
everybody.
A
Okay,
we
have
a.
We
have
a
couple
of
folks
who
have
a
couple.
We
have
a
few
people
who
still
have
questions.
They
want
to
use
to
clarify
the
the
consideration
in
front
of
us
I'm
willing
to
I've
been
waiting,
my
term
but
counselor
Lindell.
You
go
ahead
and
I'll
follow
up
after
you
and
then
we'll
come
back
around
again.
J
So
I'll
ask
a
different
question
than
the
first
time
counselor
Garcia
had
Mr
Throne
go
through
the
criteria
on
the
honor
rezoning,
so
I'm
gonna
ask
Mr
Summers
to
go
quickly
quickly
through
the
other
side
of
of
those
steps.
L
Mr
Mayor
councilor
lindel.
If
I
understand
the
question,
it
is
to
address
the
reasons
that
the
criteria
have
been
met,
correct.
How
that
shows
up
here.
I'll,
be
very
brief.
The
general
plan
has,
as
you
all
have
noted,
various
stated
policies
and
there
are
adopted
policies
of
the
general
plan
and
they
carry
with
them
a
land
use
map
that
incorporates
expressly
the
designations
on
the
land
use
map.
One
of
them
is
an
infill
area.
L
This
is
in
the
infill
area,
and
the
General
plan
says
that
infill
usually
should
be
done
at
higher
densities
than
maybe
the
surrounding
density
for
purposes
of
promoting,
affordable
housing.
Affordable
housing
is
an
expressly
adopted
policy
of
the
general
plan
and
the
other
is
is
the
efficient
use
of
existing
resources.
This
property,
currently
as
zoned
allows,
will
will
will
allows
for
the
use
of
septic
tanks
at
R1
on
this
property
does
not
require
that
anybody
connect
to
the
city,
a
sewer
line,
which
is
there.
L
This
designation
would
require
the
connection
to
the
sewer
line,
the
use
of
that
the
efficient
use
of
that
sewer,
without
that
the
the
property
can
be
developed
on
septic
tanks.
The
the
the
other
is
that
this
is
a
a
I
think
that
that
those
are
the
prominent
policies,
infill,
affordable
housing,
the
use,
efficient
use
of
existing
infrastructure,
the
other
is
to
to
avoid
urban
sprawl
sprawl
is
defined,
the
as
the
extension
of
city
services
and
infrastructure
beyond
the
location
where
it
is
for
the
purposes
of
accommodating
future
development.
L
L
So
I
believe
that
those
are
the
five
policies
that
are
stated
in
the
general
plan
that
we
believe
are
more
Advent,
that
this
zoning
incorporates
and
is
more
advantageous
than
the
R1
and
and
I
I
believe
that
the
question
that
councilor
Romero
worth
was
getting
at
is
the
question
of
advantageous
is:
is
that
subjective?
That
is
your
prerogative.
What
is
more
advantageous,
look
at
the
list
of
policies
and
say
these
are
more
advantageous
or
they
are
not
and
I
think
that's
the
essential
question.
J
Thank
you,
Mr
Somers,
for
being
so
brief.
So
a
couple
of
things
that
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I'm,
clear
about
and
maybe
Miss
Moore
or
Mr
escobal,
could
answer
so.
H
Mayor
council,
councilman
Dell
chapter
22
requires
that
anybody
within
200
feet
of
the
sewer
line
has
to
connect.
If
this
is
beyond
that
200
foot
threshold,
then
they
would
be
allowed
septic
systems.
J
H
Mayor
council,
councilman
Dell,
currently
the
applicant
can
go
to
25
feet
to
the
roof
deck.
According
to
the
South
Central
High
recorder,
they
restricted
themselves
to
18
feet.
So
if
this
went
back
to
an
R1
which
would
have
to
go
back
to
the
en
process
to
revise
their
original
subdivision
because
it
wouldn't
be,
it
wouldn't
be.
The
final
plot
would
not
be
compatible
with
the
preliminary
plastic.
I'd
have
to
redo
it
before
the
Planning
Commission.
J
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
mayor
all
yield.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
I'm,
going
to
ask
a
few
questions.
If
the
city
clerk
would
hold
me
to
my
own
time,
limit
I'd
appreciate
it.
I
I'll
I'll,
look
over
to
you
as
I
move
on
I
think
the
conversation
this
morning
continues
to
be
impressive
and
increasingly
fine
hone.
What
we're
working
on
as
a
decision
and
I
have
to
salute
every
member
of
the
governing
body
for
the
level
of
preparation
and
work.
That's
gone
into
these
hearings.
A
This
is
if
people,
whether
people
agree
or
disagree
with
any
member
of
the
governing
body.
You
have
to
give
everybody
up
here,
credit
for
the
extent
to
which
they're
prepared,
thoughtful
and
doing
very
hard
and
consistent
work
to
balance,
as
counselor
kassid
said,
to
balance
the
desire
for
more
housing,
more
affordable
housing
and
preservation
and
respect
and
maintenance
of
the
character
and
quality
of
life
in
Santa.
Fe.
A
To
that
point,
councilmanworth
was
working
on
a
series
of
questions
regarding
the
criteria
by
which
we
determine
whether
or
not
a
proposal
is
more
or
less
advantageous,
and
how
do
we
evaluate
that,
and
is
it
subjective
and
I
want
to
go
to
some
criteria
that
are
designed
to
help
us
make
it
less
subjective
and
there's
more
come
back
to
your
earlier
point
that
the
first
first
mention
in
the
general
plan
is
that
our
land
use
decision
should
be
as
you
described
it.
A
We
should
strive
for
consistency
and
for
clarity
so
that
we're
not
whipsawing
the
community,
as
we
only
apply
subjective
decision
making
one
guideline
or
set
of
guidelines
to
help
us
be
less
or
to
be
more
consistent
that
that
should
give
us
some
guidance
is
the
South
Central
Highway,
Corridor,
Protection
District,
and
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
they
lay
out
a
number
of
standards
for
any
development.
In
that
quarter,
point.
A
A
Do
you
want
I
can
read
them.
You
can
read
them
density,
maximum,
21
units
per
acre
height,
maximum
25
foot
structures,
setback
or
yard,
minimum
building
or
yard
setback
is
75
feet
from
the
edge
of
the
right
away.
However,
that
ordin,
that
ordinance
was
changed
for
Old
Pecos
Trail
to
have
75
feet.
Setbacks
existing
Landscaping
to
the
greatest
extent
possible.
Existing
natural
Landscaping
shall
not
be
disturbed
within
25
feet
of
the
property
line
that
it
joins
the
right
of
way.
A
No
parking
structures
or
parking
are
allowed.
Plant
material
shall
be
provided
in
the
open
space
setback
and
so
on.
There's
a
list
of
these.
Can
you
working
from
whatever
list
you
have
or
if
you
have
the
same
ordinance
that
I
have?
To
what
extent
does
this
proposal
either
meet
or
miss
these
protections?.
C
Mayor
councilor
mayor
the
the
subdivision,
the
preliminary
Subdivision
plat
that
was
before
the
Planning
Commission
meets
and
exceeds
all
of
the
requirements
of
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor,
or
exceed
some
of
the
requirements
of
the
house.
South
Central
Highway
corridor,
and
there
are
no
variances
that
were
requested
as
part
of
the
application.
C
It
no,
it
meets
every
requirement
in
code.
Okay,.
A
Now
let
me
ask
about
screening,
because
we
heard
from
earlier
witness
about
fences
and
walls
and
screening
I
know:
Quail
Run
has
an
extensive
fence
that
runs
the
length
of
that
property
and
a
gate,
and
all
would
this,
let
me
ask
the
applicant:
does
your
proposed
development
include
walls
or
fences
at
this
time?
Honorable.
K
Mayor
the
the
planet,
commission
plays
a
condition
on
the
property
which
we
accepted
to
beef
up
all
of
the
Landscaping
along
the
lopecos
trail,
which
we
will
show
the
planet
when
we
go
back
to
them
for
final
plot.
If
we
are
successful
today,
but
we
do
not
have
presently
a
commitment
to
build
a
wall,
but
we
do
have
committed
to
make
sure
that
if
someone
does
build
a
wall
that
it
does
set
back
to
that
75-foot
setback.
A
K
It
was
a
it
came
from
a
concern,
what
the
senior
they're
driving
along
the
old,
the
old
trail
and
the
project
could
make
the
view
of
our
particular
our
project,
consistent
with
what
you
see
along
the
old
pickles
Trail
already
and
from
that
discussion
came
additional
landscaping
and
no
structures
sheds
Etc
within
that
75-foot
set.
Thank.
A
You,
yes,
sir
Mr
Escobar.
H
Mayor
council,
that
was
actually
a
condition
required
by
Heather
lamboy
when
she
reviewed
the
memo
before
it
got
signed
by
Rudy.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
Ms
Moore,
I.
Think
councilor,
mayor
worth
has
a
point:
do
you
have
your
slide
available
from
your
presentation
on
our
first,
our
I
guess
our
second
meeting,
where
you
cite
what
a
draft
Old
Pecos
Trail
ordinance
from
2016,
would
require.
A
Do
would
you
like,
would
the
does
the
audience
or
does
the
council
need
this?
A
larger
screen
turned,
so
you
all
can
see
it
or
is
the
one
up
above
adequate
okay,.
A
Q
C
A
So
if
you
look
at
the
this
chart,
first
of
all
I
want
to
ask
a
question
about
the
process
we
heard
from
Mr
Burke.
We
we've
heard
that
there
were
three
attempts
to
get
an
Old,
Pecos,
Trail,
ordinance,
introduced
and
adopted.
How
far
did
this
actually
get?
What
are
what
records
or
documents
exist
about
the
potential
drafting
or
creation
of
such
an
ordinance.
C
Right,
okay,
so
I
I
found
I
think
probably
three
iterations
of
a
draft
with
different.
You
know
dates
for
this
effort,
I
believe
the
and
and
records
of
various
in-person
meetings
with
staff
back
and
forth.
So.
C
Yes,
yeah
with
the
Senate
group
and
with
with
land
use
staff,
okay,.
A
So
it
got
to
the
point
where
there
was
a
series
of
documents
representing
a
conversation
on
paper
about
what
an
Old
Pecos
Trail
ordinance
might
look
like,
and
this
is
where
it
stopped.
A
C
Mayor,
thank
you.
So
this
is
a
hypothetical
right.
C
Okay,
so
if
so,
if
this,
if,
if
this
applied
to
2200
Old
Pecos
Trail,
they
would
be
the
so
the
quarter.
Boundary
is
600
feet
from
the
right-of-way,
which
is
the
same
as
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor.
So
it
would
apply
to
them.
C
We
have
an
open
space
setback
of
20
feet.
So,
as
we've
discussed,
they
are,
you
know
exceeding
that
by
55
feet,
because
they
are
committed
to
a
75
foot
setback
of
a
of
essentially
an
open
space,
no
build
Zone.
C
The
residential
requirement
would
be
met
of
50
open
space
per
lot.
The
building
setback
again
would
be
exceeded.
They're
listed
here
is
25.
We
have
a
75
foot
setback
in
this
proposal.
C
C
Let's
see,
non-residential
density
would
not
apply
and
we
have
an
Arroyo
setback
here
of
20
feet.
The
application
is
committed
to
a
25
foot,
Arroyo
setback.
I
A
A
Be
placed
on
the
agenda
and
introduced
correct
Okay,
so,
regardless
of
how
this
vote
goes
today
or
whenever
we
take
it,
there's
nothing
to
prevent
me
from
introducing
this
draft
ordinance
for
the
governing
body
to
consider,
as
it
is
described
on
this
piece
of
paper.
F
A
Thank
you.
Is
there
somebody
here
from
the
who
was
active
in
Santa
at
the
time
anybody
who
helped
participate
in
that
activity?
Do
you
want
to
come
up
for
a
minute?
I
have
a
quick
question
for
you.
A
W
A
W
W
A
I
actually
wasn't
my
question,
so
my
question
is:
having
listened
to
the
criteria
for
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor
protection.
What
would
you
add
to
those
protections
to
make
the
more
sustainable
more
attractive
and
to
do
more
to
preserve
the
the
nature
and
the
character
of
that
Corridor?
If
you
could
advise
us
on
additional
protections
beyond
the
ones
that
are
listed,
which
involve
density
height
setback,
planting
Landscaping,
Arroyo's
floodplain,
open
space,
what
would
you
propose
taking
back
on
the
Cena
activity?
What
kind
of
additional
protections
would
you
like
to
see?
Well.
W
Well,
I'm,
a
part
of
Cena
and
I
I
think
the
general
plan
says
to
go
through
a
public
participation
process.
So
for
you
to
ask
me,
these
questions
is
just
not
I,
don't
think
appropriate
as
I
think
there
are
a
lot
of
people
who
go
come
on.
A
W
I'm
I'm
saying
that,
first
of
all,
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor
is
completely
different
than
the
Old
Pecos
Trails
Scenic
Corridor,
that's
listed
twice
in
the
general
plan
and
why
I
don't
know
why?
Why
we're
even
here
is
kind
of
unbelievable
because
it
says
implementing
policies
that
standards
were
not
set
were
not
set
in
the
general
plan.
For
these
two
two
parts,
I
can
read
them.
It's
short.
A
W
A
This
failed.
Okay!
Thank
you.
Okay!
Thank
you.
That's
that's
my
last
question.
Councilor
Garcia.
You
have
some
follow-ups.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
Mayor,
and
this
topic
did
actually
bring
up
a
question
for
me
and
thank
you
to
the
prior
Community
member,
who
pointed
out
that
this
ordinance
has
has
only
covering
half
of
opecos
Trail,
Cena,
Corridor
and
but
my
question
is
to
staff
that
was
doing
the
research
on
this
because,
as
we
all
know,
as
governing
body
members
legislation
is
drafted,
and
there
are
many
times
when
it
gets
drafted-
goes
nowhere.
B
It
gets
drafted,
it
gets
a
sponsor
goes,
nowhere
gets
drafted,
it
gets
a
sponsor,
goes
to
governing
body,
it
gets
denied,
it
goes
to
governing
body,
gets
shift
and
changed
flipped
up
around
mixed
up.
It's
not
even
what's
potentially
proposed.
So
my
question
is
what's
proposed
here.
Is
we
can't
we?
We
would
be
doing
a
disservice
to
the
community
to
be
judging
against
what
was
proposed
in
a
draft.
So
my
question
is:
was
there
a
potential
sponsor
on
this
legislation
that
you
found.
B
Okay,
thank
you
for
clarifying
that
so
so
now
let
me
get
on
to
my
questions
that
I
had
and
I
do
want
to
Circle
back
to
sure
Dan
mayor.
H
While
there
was
no
sponsorship,
councilor
Ives
did
put
forth
that
legislation
that
required
us
to
go
back
to
the
process,
which
is
what
Noah
did
now,
whether
or
not
you
had
one
side
of
the
street
or
the
other
side
of
the
street
participating.
It
did
go
through
the
public
process,
as
articulated
within
the
general
plan,
as
we
pushed
forward
it
just
did,
go
all.
B
The
way
right
and
I
think
that's
the
critical
part
that
there
was
not
any
recommendations
put
forth
to
the
governing
body
to
consider,
which
is
the
critical
component
of
the
recommendation
of
the
the
resolution
that
was
sponsored
in
2015,
as
well
as
the
general
plan.
So.
I
B
You
for
that
clarification,
but
to
get
back
to
one
of
the
topics
that
was
that
I
missed
I
wanted
to
bring
up
last
time
because
we've
been
talking
about
definitions,
I,
try
to
find
definition
of
scenic
portal
or
Scenic
byway
I
haven't
found
anything,
but
I
did
find
a
definition
of
spot
zoning,
which
was
part
of
our
last
meeting,
and
so
just
for
the
record.
B
There
is
a
definition
in
State
Statute
which
would
I'm
assuming
apply
to
us
as
its
municipality
and
chapter
3
municipalities,
article
21
zoning
regulations,
Section
3-21-1
zoning
authority
of
County
or
municipality
to
spot
zoning.
The
term
spot
zoning
refers
to
the
rezoning
of
small
parcel
of
land
to
permitted
use
that
fails
to
comply
with
the
comprehensive
plan
or
as
inconsistent
with
the
surrounding
area,
grants
a
discriminatory
benefit
to
the
parcel
owner
and
or
harms
neighboring
Properties
or
the
community
welfare
spot.
B
C
Thank
you,
Mary
and
and
Council
councilor
Garcia.
So
essentially,
that
definition
that
you
talked
about
is
is
our
approval
criteria
for
rezoning.
It
has
to
be
more
than
two
acres.
It
has
to
benefit
more
than
you
know,
one
landowner,
so
we
that
is
embodied
in
our
approval
criteria.
You
know,
as
we
consider
a
rezoning
request.
Okay,.
B
Thank
you
for
clarifying
that,
because
my
recollection
is,
we
said
we
didn't,
have
it
so
I
quickly.
Looked
it
up
and
thank
you
for
clarifying
it's
it's
in
our
it's
in
our
code,
so
I
want
to
jump
back
to
the
general
plan,
because
I
jumped
online
using
the
the
search
and
looked
at
the
general
plan
that
we
have
posted
and
so
I
was
looking
at
section
three
and
it
I
I
want
to
jump
back
to
this
inconsistency.
B
We
would
jump
to
page
three
and
then
what
would
be
technically
page.
Five
is
the
map
that
has
been
kind
of
in
question.
The
future
city
land
use
map.
This
map
in
here
is
dated
April
2000,
the
land
use
map
or
this
General
land
use
plan
is
from
1999.
So
unless
somebody
was
time,
traveling
I'm
a
little
got
some
questions
on
how
this
map
got
in
here.
B
I
understand
that
there
was
updates
made,
but
the
that
should
be
an
addendum
to
the
process.
With
that
being
said
page,
we
start
with
page
I'm
going
from
page
four
to
what
would
look
like
it
would
be
page
five,
which
is
the
feature
land
use
map.
Then
there's
another
following
map
on
which
would
be
page
six
and
then
I
jump
to
the
next
page,
which
would
be
page
seven,
but
in
the
plan
it
identifies
it
as
Page
Six.
B
So
it
looks
to
me
like
if
this
future
land
use
map
was
squeezed
into
the
process,
somehow
along
the
way
and
and
I'm
just
wondering
how
that
could
be
when
the
entire
rest
of
the
document,
which
has
been
updated
at
some
way,
shape
or
form,
whereas
this
is
the
kind
of
outlier.
So
can
you
help
me
understand
how
that
can
be.
C
Hey
Council
mayor
cancer,
Garcia
there's
a
lot
there,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
I
answer.
You
know
your
exact
questions
there
and,
and
just
to
you
know,
clarify
I
did
put
up
the.
So
this
is
the
you
know.
Kind
of
much
talked
about
physical.
R
C
Of
the
general
plan,
1900
General
plan
that
I
had
unknowingly
had
in
my
office
from
Greg,
Smith
and
so
I
want
to
just
take
out
the
map
which
was
folded
and
you
know
kind
of
talk.
So
this
is
the
figure
three
two
future
land
use
map,
and
that
is
a
paper
copy.
C
Obviously,
and
so
we
now
live
in
a
digital
world
and
we
rely
on
GIS
and
at
the
time
this
was
developed
on
GIS,
and
so
you
can,
you
know
we
can
go
to
our
GIS
map
and
we
can
print
out
a
copy
of
the
future
land
use
map.
You
know
at
any
time,
and
it
you
know
so,
but
this
is
this-
is
the
original
paper
copy
so
can
I
clear
help
clarify
what
you
need
to
know
exactly
sure.
B
So
then,
my
follow-up
to
that
is:
why
isn't
that
map
included
in
what's
posted
online
and
then
have
an
appendix
as
an
updated
map?
It
seems
like
if
it
was
cut
and
pasted
out
again,
just
just
it's
not
beneficial
to
to
our
processes,
because
we've
had
a
lot
of
confusion
around
this
and
and
just
trying
to
clear
up
what
happened
along
the
way
from
the
adoption
in
April
of
1999
to
this
map
to
the
map
that
is
currently
being
used,
which
is
data
2003.,.
H
Mayor
council,
Council,
councilor
Garcia
our
documents,
our
maps
are
living
documents
right.
They
get
amended
from
time
to
time,
either
through
rezonings
or
general
plan
amendments.
As
a
direct
result,
many
maps
that
were
adopted
originally
adopted
are
going
to
look
very
different
from
what
we've
done
over
the
course
of
time.
H
So,
at
the
time,
the
planning
division
long-range
planning
division
whenever
they
scanned
in
the
general
plan
to
put
up
for
a
download
on
their
web
page,
they
must
have
had
a
much
newer
map
at
the
time
it
was
scanned
in
what
we
found
was
the
original
map
and
in
the
general
plan
that
is
on
the
online,
it
is
folded
so
that
the
only
thing
you
see
are
the
various
elements
that
tell
you
what
low
density
is.
H
A
very
low
density
is
so,
while
I
wasn't
there
at
the
time
it
was
scanned
in
I
can
only
assume,
based
on
how
the
city
has
operated
since
I've
been
here
that
these
maps
are
always
going
to
be
amended,
they're
always
going
to
be
updated,
and
they,
if
it's
not
the
same
map
that
was
originally
put
into
the
general
plan.
It's
still
a
map
that
follows
whatever
the
governing
body
at
the
time
adopted
as
part
of
any
changes
that
may
have
occurred
in
that
date.
Stamp
reflects
that
that
map
okay.
B
H
B
Correct
so,
but
my
question
is
because
this
is
the
document
that
is
public
facing
any
member
of
the
public
wants
to
go,
look
at
our
1999
General
plan
and
they
want
to
look
at
the
future
land
use
map
right
now.
What
there's
they
would
see
is
a
folded
up
version
from
2000,
where,
as
you
mentioned,
we've
got
a
much
much
cleaner,
crisper
version
2003.
H
Fair
Council
councilor
Garcia,
the
GIS
is
a
web-based
application
that
is
available
for
everybody,
so
everybody
has
that
opportunity
to
get
it
and
everybody
has
the
opportunity
to
to
download
Just
the
Future
land
use
map
from
rgis
archive
or
map
Center,
although
it's
a
lot
harder
to
read
than
going
through
the
digital
format,
because
it's
been
pixelized
as
a
graphic.
H
The
map
that
you're
referring
to
here
is
just
an
archive
document
based
on
when
they
downloaded
the
information.
The
text
within
that
General
plan
has
not
changed,
so
we
still
used
a
lot
of
that
text.
Information
within
the
general
plan
from
all
of
the
chapters
the
maps
may
have
changed,
and
we
refer
back
to
the
current
maps
that
we
use
today
and
which
are
available
to
the
public
across
the
board.
B
Okay,
thank
you
Mr
askebel,
but
I
I'm,
but
I
think
it
would
be
more
beneficial
for
the
community
to
have
the
map
as
part
of
the
document
versus
saying.
You've
now
got
to
jump
to
the
gis
system.
So
that's
just
me,
as
as
a
policy
maker
wishing,
we
had
the
best
tools
and
resources
available
for
the
public
aside
from
the
maps,
because
my
time
is
limited
and
I
don't
want
to
waste
all
the
time
on
this
unless
it's
something
critical,
Mr
risky
Bell.
What.
H
What
I'd
like
to
do
is
just
have
our
our
our
Clerk
and
our
our
team
upstairs
just
reproduce
this
book
in
its
entirety
identified
as
original,
so
that
people
have
the
opportunity
to
know
what
was
passed
and
they
have
the
digital
format
to
know.
What's
current
okay.
B
Thank
you,
Mr
esquibili
I
really
appreciate
that.
So
my
next
question
is
dealing
with
rezoning
efforts
and,
and
it
was
stated
that
there
was
the
I
think
it
was
roughly
2005
when
the
plazas
was
proposed
and
and
it
was
approved
for
rezoning.
H
Mayor
councilor,
councilor
Garcia
I'm,
not
aware
of
any
applications
that
have
gone
forward
within
that
area.
Well,
at
least
that
segment
was
Morningstar.
H
The
resolution
that
Council
arrives
put
forth
was
a
direct
result
of
the
Morning
Star,
so
that
would
have
been
before.
Okay
have
there
been
building
permits
along
Old,
Pecos,
Trail
I
would
assume
there
have
been
remodels
and
other
stuff,
but
in
terms
of
any
developments
that
would
require
public
hearing
process.
I'm
not
aware
of
any.
At
this
point.
B
Okay,
thank
you.
Mr
Esky
bill
director
Ladd,
quick
question
for
you.
B
Sorry
for
come
on
down,
as
they
say
and
price,
is
right
right.
The
quick
question
about
affordable
housing
should
this
be
denied.
What
would
be
any
requirements
for
affordable
housing.
M
Well,
there's
no
percentage
of
affordable
housing
that
would
be
built
at
all,
so
it's
just
they
would
pay
a
fee.
It's
approximately
or
forty
five
hundred
dollars
per
unit,
so
somewhere
around
forty
thousand
dollars.
Roughly
and
I
say
that
roughly
because
those
pricing
schedules
are
updated
every
year
as
the
income
data
changes
and.
B
M
Mayor
Robert,
counselor
Garcia
would
be
a
20
requirement,
but
it's
not
a
requirement
because
that's
not
what
we
require
them
to
do:
Under
the
code
and
with
nine
homes
that
works
out
to
one
point
something:
okay,.
B
I
think
maybe
your
best
call
just
because
you've
been
speaking
to
the
advantageousness
and
you've
brought
the
topic
of
affordable
housing
being
a
component
of
that
advantageous.
B
Given
that
my
question
is,
why
would
the
applicant
pay
the
fee
in
lieu
of
instead
of
developing
the
units,
because
they
they've
seen
that
that
there
is
that
need,
and-
and
so
my
question
is-
why
not
move
forward?
If,
if
it
were
to
be
denied,
why
not
still
continued,
because
they
see
it
advantageous
to
to
develop
those
units
as
a
scene
need
of
the
community
Mr.
L
Mayor
councilor
Garcia
I
think
that
that
the
answer
to
that
to
Frank
answer
is
that
it's
it
is
financially
driven.
If
you
have
a
forty
five
thousand
dollar
check,
you
have
to
write
that
covers
your
affordable
housing
versus
a
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
or
a
hundred
and
eighty
thousand
dollar
cost
to
develop
a
a
home.
It
probably
is
more
than
that
that
you
lose
I,
think
it's
financially
driven.
Is
that
it
just
it
plays
havoc
with
the
investment
okay,
but
it
does
not
foreclose.
B
B
So
if
this
project
was
denied-
and
it's
been
stated
that
we're
going
through
a
revamping
of
our
chapter
14.-
and
there
are
changes
made
to
the
corridor
where
it
may
not
require
an
applicant
to
come
before
us
because
it
gets
zoned
up
but
but
with
that
being
said,
let's
pretend
the
status
quo
stays
the
same.
We
we
revamped
chapter,
14
status
quo,
stays
the
same.
B
If
we
deny
can
the
applicant
come
back
before
us
to
apply
given
we've
went
through
the
public
participation
process
and
proposed
done
all
the
duties
proposed
through
the
general
plan
or
the
2015
resolution.
H
O
B
A
T
Thank
you,
mayor
I,
just
have
one
one
question
in
regards
to
the
setbacks
and
if
you
look
at
the
maps,
you
see
the
the
plazas.
Maybe
staff
can
answer
to
this.
What
was
the
the
setback
that
that
development
was
built
at.
H
I
H
It
looks
like
everybody,
along
with
the
exception
of
a
couple
of
anomalies,
which
were
portals
and
garages,
have
met
that
75-foot
setback,
at
least
along
that
Corridor
between
St
Michael's
drive
and
I-25.
H
So
that's
that's.
What
we
found
based
on
our
GIS
discoveries.
T
H
Mayor
council,
the
plazas
has
a
completely
different
development
as
it's
subject
to
the
Pud
standards.
This
one
does
not
have
a
PUD
standard,
so
they
may
have
massaged
some
of
the
rules
and
regulations
in
order
to
achieve
their
goals
at
the
time.
I
wasn't
sure
what
that
was,
but
that's
what
the
Pud
allows.
Okay,.
T
Thank
you
and
then
going
back
to
the
applicant
this,
the
Mr
Summers
I,
guess
this
plan
would
obviously.
P
Thank
you,
Mary
I
think
I
found
my
answer
in
the
memo
real
fast
just
to
confirm
use
cat
each
each
zoning
is
its
own
use.
Category
correct,
so
R1
is
a
used
category.
R2
is
a
use
category.
Is
that
accurate
use
of
the
word
use
category.
H
Mayor
counselor,
Council
Castle
uses
are
the
uses
like
a
house,
a
commercial
unit
of
like
a
church
or
something
zoning
is
more
of
a
designation
that
allows
for
the
categories
of
uses
within
that
that
District,
okay.
So
it's
a
zoning
more
so
than
a
use
category.
I
guess
you
can.
P
H
P
H
Category
would
be
residential,
and
then
you
have
different
uses
within
that
category.
Under
the
residential
category,
housing
single
family,
multi-family.
H
C
Councilor
Romero
worth
thank
you.
This
question
is
for
Ms
Moore
I
just
want.
Since
the
mayor
brought
this
up.
I
want
to
go
back.
Your
presentation
about
the
history
of
the
Old
Santa
Fe
Trail
overlay
reflects
basically
the
city
side
of
that
story,
correct
what
you
found
in
our
archives
about
the
stop
and
start
of
that
trying
to
get
an
overlay
mayor,
counselors,
counselor,
mayorworth
yeah.
This
was
primarily
electronic
documents
that
I
found
on
our
planning
drive
and
it
included
the
the
ironically.
C
The
oldest
kind
of
effort
in
2001
had
a
lot
more
files.
I,
don't
know
if,
because
they
printed
them
and
scanned
them
back
in
or
something
but
yeah
there
were.
There
were
records
of
emails
between
the
There
Was
An,
Old,
Pecos,
Trail
working
group
that
was
included
members
of
the
public
neighborhood
associations,
those
sorts
of
things
and
staff.
C
You
know
back
and
forth,
so
I
got
to
read
those
the
white
paper
that
staff
wrote
and
then
the
various
drafts
of
ordinances
that
were
kind
of
marked
up
by
members
of
the
working
group
and
responded
to
by
staff.
So
it
was
a.
It
was
a
record
of
a
dialogue
between
the
members
of
the
working
group
and
staff.
C
C
Mayor,
councilor,
councilor,
Meredith
well,
I
had
the
the
record
from
that
I
think
it's
the
old
Santa
Fe
Trail
Association
Old
Santa,
Fe
civilization
yeah.
That
was
the
arrest,
the
resolution
that
they
passed.
You
know
their
kind
of
group
and
that
was
in
there
other
emails
and
faxes
that
came
from
the
public.
You
know
to
the
city,
you
know
I
had
those
records
as
well.
Okay,
thank
you.
C
And
can
you
articulate
why
you
think,
specifically,
we
we
heard
the
applicant
say
that
the
policies
of
the
general
plan
he
thinks
promote,
infield,
infill,
affordable
housing,
avoid
sprawl
uses
the
existing
infrastructure
and
I
think
he
had
one
more
which
I
missed,
but
he
he
kind
of
ticked
off
five.
He
said:
can
you
in
pretty
quick?
Yes,
what?
What
are
the
reasons
you
think
it
has
not
met.
N
Mayor
councilor
overworth
and
these
These
are
in
my
written
comments
as
well.
So
again
you
have
to
look
at
as
articulated
in
the
general
plan.
It's
not
just
Advantage,
it's
not
just
it's.
R3
is
R1
better
than
R3.
No
one's
there's
been
the
debate
about
in
the
abstract
is
to
do
is,
as
articulated
in
general
plan.
So
the
reason
why
I
and
I
think
many
others
have
said
is
okay.
What
are
the
advantages?
N
They've,
the
applicant
and
staff
have
cherry-picked
certain
parts
of
the
general
plan
but
say
with
their
advantages,
but
the
advantages
of
are
there
advantages
to
five
portable
homes.
Certainly
there's
available
advantages
to
that.
Do
that
outweigh
the
damage
to
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
Scenic
Corridor
is
articulated
in
general
plan
and
is
articulated
in
the
subsequent
2015
resolution.
2015-92.
C
N
N
Is
there
in?
There
would
be
more
infill
with
this,
but
there
would
still
be
infill
at
R1.
It
would
be
20
market
rate
housing
that
Mr
summer
had
acknowledged
would
probably
cost
in
the
range
of
seven
hundred
thousand
to
a
million
dollars.
A
piece
is
that
an
advantage
to
the
existing
Community
I
mean
you
have
to
decide
that
you
know.
N
We
believe
that,
certainly
that
that
this
is
that's
not
those
aren't
affordable
houses
for
people
in
this
community
right
now,
in
fact,
the
general
plan
says
there
really
should
be
a
minimum
density
of
five
dwelling
units
per
acre
to
reach
the
people
who
really
need
it,
which
is
it
back
in
1999,
was
defined
in
the
general
plan.
Is,
is
people
families
earning
seventy
thousand
dollars
or
less
so
so,
there's
the
the
infill
sure
there's
infill,
but
you
know
it's
sort
of
like
asking.
N
You
know
it's
a
thousand
gallons
of
water
better
than
a
gallon
of
water,
and
the
answer
is
certainly
unless
it's
coming
off
from
your
roof
into
your
living
room.
That's
why
this
is
that's
why
the
general
plan
you
know
has
has
designated
this
specifically
it's
it's
a
carve
out,
it's
more
specific
than
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor
Protection
District,
that
District
existed
prior
to
the
99
General
plan
and
I
gave
you
the
the
the
date
on
that
in
my
public
comments.
I
can't
remember
if
it's
19.
N
97,
but
it
was
pretty
predated
it.
So
when
when,
when
the
general
plan
came
along,
it
was
recognized
that
well
we
have
this
corridor
and
and
by
the
way
there
was
a
question
about.
Why
wasn't
the
general
plan
amended
to
adopt
the
corridor?
It's
in
the
plan,
so
other
other
disadvantages
we've
got
also
aside
from
the
the
you've
got
the
the
traffic
issues,
and
you
know
with
extensive
comments
about
the
traffic
impact
analysis.
Okay,.
N
I
think
I
think
it
is
the
general
plan,
because
there
are
sections
of
the
general
plan
that
talk
about
impacts
on
existing
neighborhoods
which,
by
the
way,
Sally
Lomas
neighborhood,
is
actually
specifically
recognized
in
the
general
plan
as
one
of
the
historic
neighborhoods
that
is
part
of
the
comp,
the
urban
Forum
in
this
town,
and
it's
one
that
should
be
preserved.
Now.
Is
this
just
a
neighborhood
issue?
No,
but
but
it
is
recognized
so
I'm.
So
that's
in
the
general
plan.
N
You've
talked
about
the
fact
that
there
are
parts
that
recognize,
even
in
the
city
code
you
have,
which
is
you
know,
part
of
the
equation.
You
have
the
whole
the
issue
of
the
the
visual
character.
N
Now
this
this
pertains
to
the
old,
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor,
Protection
District,
within
which
the
opecost
Trail
Santa
quarter,
exists
that
that's
a
that
that
openness
that
open
space,
that
sense
of
place
for
which
the
city
actually
was
given
an
award
by
the
National
Geographic
society
that
was
addressed
I,
think
by
one.
R
N
Of
the
community
members
in
the
very
first
December
14th
meeting,
so
you
have
that,
but
but
there
is
an
impact,
there's
an
impact
in
the
neighborhood
in
terms
of
safety,
I
mean
you
know
it's
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
asked
for
a
site
visit
back
in
September,
because
if
you
go
on
on
that
sharp
curve,
where
seven
of
the
units
of
the
proposed
25
unit
subdivision
will
be
exiting,
that
is
already
a
dangerous
curve.
N
I
mean
I
I
actually
had
to
write
to
to
the
head
of
the
public
works
and
I
copied.
The
mayor,
I
I,
was
almost
killed
at
that
intersection
three
two
days
ago.
Now,
not
not
because
of
this
development,
because
people
drive
way
over
the
speed
limit
on
Old,
Pecos,
Trail
and
and
they
ran,
and
they
run
the
light
at
Old,
Pecos,
Trail
and
and
Wesley
road.
All
the
time
now,
I'm,
not
attributing
that
to
the
development.
Of
course
not,
but
when,
when,
when
you
have
people
say,
oh
well,
we
have
flat
traffic
there.
N
That
is
not
the
experience
of
someone.
Who's
lived
there
for
32
years.
I
drive
that
every
day,
because
I
I
go
work
out,
I'm
on
that
section
and
and
it's
not
just
the
peak
times
that
are
very
busy
but
keep
in
mind.
You've
also
have
a
situation
where
the
traffic
counts
were
done
in
November
2021.
that
wasn't
post
pandemic,
and
we,
even
today
we
have
a
situation
where
we
have
a
lot
of
our
state
employees
and
probably
I,
think
you
have
some
City
and
County
employees
who
are
working
remotely.
N
The
other
thing
is:
there's
an
assumption
and
I
addressed
this
in
my
comments
in
the
traffic
impact
analysis
and
it's
a
200
Page
analysis,
so
I
get
it
most.
People
don't
have
the
time,
patience
to
go
through
it.
But
one
of
the
assumptions
in
there
is
it's
a
10-year
study.
Horizon
they
take
the
November
traffic
counts
that
they
took
again
not
post
pandemic
and
what
they
do
is
what
we
project,
what
the
traffic
level
is
going
to
be
there
for
the
next
10
years,
2024
to
2034.
N
and
what
it
assumes
is.
There
will
be
no
other
developments
in
the
area
because
there's
no
other
pending
proposal
for
development
of
any
property
along
opecost
Trail,
Santa
quarter,
well,
they're,
already
vacant
land
and
there's
property
for
sale
now.
So
the
fact
that
there's
no
pending
application-
that
is
not
a
reasonable
assumption
to
say.
Well,
it's
not
going
to
increase,
so
we
have
so
getting
back
to
your
question.
N
You
know:
you've
got
traffic
safety
concerns.
You've
got
the
concern,
I
think
I.
Think
counselor.
If
I
have
my
memory
serves.
Billy
Royale
asked
a
question
about
this,
about
the
u-turns
they're
going
to
have
to
happen
for
the
18
units
that
access
on
Old
Pecos
Trail
those
people
come
out
in
the
morning
if
any
of
them
want
to
go
into
town
they're
going
to
have
to
cross
two
lanes
and
they're
gonna
have
to
make
a
u-turn
during
that
Peak
period
and
and
I'm
telling
you
you
don't
want
to
be
doing.
N
That
I
mean
it's
already
a
problem
area,
so
we
have
a
lot
of
people
who
who
have
commented
that
that's
that's
a
one
of
the
disadvantages
of
this
of
of
this
proposal.
You
also
have
the
impact
on
the
foothills
of
Royal.
That
Arroyo,
which
goes
under
opecos
Trail,
is
a
current
Wildlife.
Corridor
people
have
commented,
it
they've
shown
you
films
of
it
and
what's
good
and
and
the
sewer
line
will
cross
this
so
now,
they're
gonna.
N
It
is
designated
as
open
space
and
there's
a
setback,
but
the
idea
that
you're
going
to
go
in
and
build
25
homes
in
there
and
you
go
in
with
your
leveling
equipment,
all
the
equipment
that
you
know
you
have
to
by
the
way
they're
cutting
down
117
trees,
significant
trees,
as
defined
in
the
land
use
code.
How
do
we
know
that
well
buried
in
their
plans,
but
it's
in
there
is
a
significant
tree
survey.
N
They're
required
to
submit
that
to
you
and
it
says
right
up
in
the
corner
for
those
of
people
who
want
to
go
look
at
it,
and
this
is
an
art
of
their
March
21,
2022
application.
It
says
they're
going
to
remove
117,
significant
trees
and
the
code
does
require
that
they
replace
some
of
those
trees.
But
again
that's
an
impact.
Now,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
you
have
to
weigh
all
these
things
and
I
get
it.
N
We
need
affordable,
housing
and
I
get
it,
there's
also
a
need
for
other
housing,
but
I
think
that
is
the
whole
point
of
the
general
plan.
Is
it's
it's
it's
that
you're
supposed
to
be
looking
at
when
it
says,
as
articulated
in
general
plan,
is
why
why
is
this
different?
Why
should
this
area
be
treated
any
different?
Is
this
a
situation
where,
where
you
know
all
people
in
this
area,
you
know
why
shouldn't
they
have
their
share
of
affordable
housing
or
density?
N
That's,
and
the
reason
is
because
the
general
plan
said
well,
there's
an
asset
here,
it's
and
in
fact
the
city
resolution,
2015-92
and
I
believe
councilor
Lindell
was
also
a
sponsor
of
that
along
with
former
councilor
Ives.
It
calls
it
iconic
and
irreplaceable.
N
The
reason
why,
and
by
the
way
this
whole
discussion
about
the
75-foot
setback
to
me
is
a
bit
of
a
red
herring,
because
if
you
look
at
the
how
it's
Artic
this
Old
Pecos
Trail
Scenic
corridor,
implementing
policy
is
articulating
the
general
plan.
It
says
that
density
and
other
development
standards
will
be
developed
and
then
brought
back
to
the
to
the
to
the
to
the
city
council
or
governing
body
for
codification
in
chapter
14..
N
N
Because
it's
in
that
2015
resolution,
you
can't
square
that
resolution
and
say:
oh
no,
we've
already
taken
care
of
this
and
you
can't
square
and
say:
oh
no
city
council
approved
a
specific
specifically
for
this
property,
a
density
of
three
R3
to
R7
for
this
property.
With
what
stated
in
that
resolution
and
what
stayed
in
the
general
plan
and
by
the
way,
the
argument
or
the
the.
In
my
comments
and
others
wasn't
that
that
2015
resolution
was
some
new
plan.
N
It
reiterated
the
plan
exactly
the
language.
It
quoted
the
language
in
the
1999
General
plan.
So
when
you
put
so
those
are
all,
we
believe,
I
think
a
lot
of
the
opponents
believe
it
if
you
start
to
add
up
the
impact
on
the
old
Vegas,
Trail
Santa
Corridor,
the
impact
on
traffic,
the
impact
on
the
neighborhoods
impact
on
public
safety,
and
you
weigh
that
against.
N
Oh,
the
advantages
of
20
market
rate
houses
and
five
affordable
houses,
it
doesn't
measure
up
and
we
really
think
that
you,
that
is
the
question
here
and
that's
why
we're
kind
of
hoping
I
think
a
lot
of
people
is
that
you'll
pay
attention
to
that.
We're
not
arguing
against
affordable
housing.
And
you
know
there
was
a
comment
I
think
by
councilor
cassette.
N
You
know,
I,
don't
know
how
old
you
are.
I
know
how
old
I
am
but
well
I'm
72,
but
I
need
you
to
wrap
up
too
I
can.
But
I
can
tell
you
when
you
talked
about
the
children
when
you
grew
up
there.
N
My
kids
grew
up
there
and
we
actually
have
over
the
years,
fought
in
that
neighborhood
to
do,
among
other
things,
to
keep
Wesley
a
road
not
becoming
a
through
a
through
Street,
because
we
were
afraid
that,
with
the
increasing
traffic,
that's
been
coming
off
of
little
Pecos
Trail
on
to
westia,
because
that's
the
way
people
cut
through
to
get
to
Albertsons
and
places.
Okay.
C
E
A
A
If
that's
the
case,
then
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
recognizing
that
once
it's
closed,
if
someone
suddenly
discovers,
they
need
to
ask
more
questions.
We'll
have
to
have
a
motion
to
reopen
it.
We
can
do
that,
but
I.
We
can't
just
do
it
without
a
formal
reopening
at
this
time,
then
I
will
entertain
a
motion
in
a
second
on
whether
to
Grant
or
deny
this
zone
change.
A
C
C
A
There's
a
motion
and
there's
a
second
and
I'd
like
to
hear
discussion
as
we
tried
to
do
during
the
questioning,
if
it's
possible,
to
keep
the
points
to
five
to
ten
minutes
that
would
be
that'll
be
optimal,
but
I
understand,
there's
a
lot
of
ground.
We
covered
in
all
of
these
hearings,
and
you
may
want
to
revisit
some
of
that,
as
you
take
a
position
on
the
issue:
councilor
Cassat
and
then
counselor
Garcia.
Thank.
P
You
Mr
Meyer
you're
right
there
is
a
I,
could
speak
on
this
for
30
minutes
and
I
will
not
thanks.
P
I
think
that
there
really
actually
is
a
lot
that
speaks
to
some
of
the
broader
processes
that
we
need
to
be
moving
forward
with
in
terms
of
planning,
especially
with
the
general
plan
update
coming
forward
and
there's
there's
a
lot
of
really
challenging
conversations
here
about
the
challenges
that
our
community
is
facing
and
I
think
that
we
are
at
a
Tipping
Point.
P
We
might
actually
be
over
it
of
really
needing
to
understand
that
the
world
has
changed
and
that
the
housing
market
has
become
almost
untenable
for
a
lot
of
are
so
many
individuals
when
I
talked
about
character-
and
you
know
I
specifically
reference
the
character
of
Sully
Lomas,
but
I
also
think
we
need
to
think
about
overall,
what's
happening
in
the
city
of
Santa.
Fe
people
are
being
displaced
out
of
our
city.
We
cannot
stop
people
from
moving
here.
This
is
an
incredible
beautiful,
Community,
there's
a
reason
that
we
all
love
it.
P
I
have
to
say,
I
say
this
frequently
I
should
not
exist
in
this
city.
I'm,
a
single
mom
that
makes
under
forty
thousand
dollars
a
year
but
I'm
lucky
I,
have
a
safety
net.
I.
Have
this
incredible
Safety
Net
in
my
family,
so
I
do
get
to
be
here,
but
that
means
that
it
is
my
job
to
look
at
those
individuals
that
do
not
have
the
safety
net,
that
I
have
and
see
how
we
can
make
this
city
work
for
them.
P
P
M
I
P
As
a
general
plan
states,
there
should
be
no
neighborhood.
There
should
be
no
part
of
the
city
that
does
not
do
its
part.
What
I
find
really
interesting
about
this
application
is,
while
it
will
meet
the
the
letter
of
the
future
land
use
map
which,
by
the
way,
I
understand
the
opecost
trail.
Corridor
was
called
out
in
the
general
plan
in
the
same
breath,
the
governing
body
that
did
have
the
ability
to
I.
Imagine
at
that
point
amend
the
future
land
use.
P
Mapping
could
say
we
think
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
Corridor
is
so
important
that
on
this
area,
this
future
land
use
map.
We
are
going
to
actually
change
it
to
one
to
three,
take
it
out
of
the
infill
Zone,
which
gives
it
a
minimum
of
R5,
and
they
did
not
do
that.
So
they
understood
that
this.
This
is
a
balancing
act
that
we
are
going
to
have
to
be
looking
at,
and
so
we
are
taking
taking
this
opportunity
to
say
yes,
infill
is
important
and
also
how
we
do.
P
The
infill
is
incredibly
crucial
with
our
current
code
with
our
current
zoning.
We
do
not
necessarily
have
the
tools
at
our
fingertips.
To
perhaps
do
this
in
such
a
way
that
might
be
might
be
more
creative
might
be
more
amenable
might
allow
us
to
balance
out
these
various
needs
and
I
hope
that
we
really
take
a
hard
look
at
at
that
as
we
move
forward
with
the
general
plan
and
the
code
updates
coming
forward,
but
right
now
sorry,
circling
back
I
know
that
20
houses
will
not
change.
P
This
I
know
that
five
houses
will
not
change
this,
but
the
the
point
is
that
it
is
an
additive
effect
and
the
entire
city
has
to
be
part
of
this
as
I
brought
up
last
time.
You
know
the
numbers
that
we
have
for
what's
going
on
with
units
in
the
housing
pipeline,
remembering
that
our
districts
are
not
geographically
equally
spread
and
District.
P
Four
is
currently
the
smallest
Geographic
district,
with
district
one
at
780
District
2
at
906,
District
3
at
4034,
second,
smallest
Geographic
district
and
District
Four
at
four
thousand
six
hundred
and
fifty
one.
We
can
see
that
the
south
side
is
taking
the
brunt
of
the
housing
crisis.
P
P
The
general
planet
called
for
this
this
area
to
be
more
dense.
It
put
it
in
the
inville
zone,
it
called
it
for
beat
it
for
it
to
be
at
least
R5
I
mean
if
we
think
that
that
housing
is,
is,
you
know
such
a
crucial
need
and
that
our
three
doesn't
meet
the
need?
Well,
what
does
R5
R7
you
get
more
affordable
units
there,
so
this
is
a
balancing
act
and
so
with
with
going
to
R3,
actually
our
2.6
still
keeping
it
in
the
very
low
density
residential.
P
We
work
on
increasing
the
density.
We
work
on
this
gentle
density,
as
it
sometimes
is
referred
to
without
making
drastic
changes
to
the
neighborhood
and
and
whether
or
not
that
is
enough,
I'm
sure
there
are
members
of
our
community.
That
said,
you
know
this.
This
project
was
not
dense
enough.
P
I
think
that
it's
been
really
interesting.
I
haven't
asked
them,
but
to
see
that
the
housing
advocacy
groups
have
not
come
out
for
this
one
and
I'm
going
to
guess.
If
I
ask
them
that
they
would
say,
this
project
wasn't
good
enough
for
us
to
support,
because
we
need
more
density
in
the
city,
but
I
do
understand.
As
I
mentioned,
I
grew
up
in
this
neighborhood
this.
This
is
the
neighborhood
that
raised
me.
P
Zia
and
olpecos
was
the
very
first
intersection
that
I
turned
on
to
a
major
street,
because
I
was
too
afraid
to
turn
onto
Rodeo,
so
I
drove
through
on
those
dirt
roads
to
to
make
the
the
right
turn
on
onto
rodia
wasn't
ready
for
a
left
yet
and
I
I
do
understand
that.
P
That
there
is
something
extremely
special
about
this
Corridor
I
drive
it
every
single
day
to
take
my
child
to
school.
It
is
beautiful,
and
part
of
the
beauty
of
this
Corridor
is
actually
the
architecture
that,
as
you
drive
through
you
know,
there's
these
gorgeous
walls
with
these
beautiful
Gates
that
are.
They
know
that
that
bright
blue,
that
we
see
all
over
Santa,
Fe
and
the
restras
I
mean
there's
there's
a
lot
that
goes
in
to
the
visual
appeal
to
the
character
of
our
city
and
I.
P
A
B
I
can't
explain
why
that
didn't
happen,
but
it
didn't
happen.
Then.
In
2015
there
was
a
number
of
counselors
and
former
mayor
Gonzalez
that
brought
forth
the
resolution
that
requested
to
re-initiate
that
process,
and
we
we've
got
two
sides
of
the
story
during
the
hearing
on
what
happened
and
how
things
broke
down
and
again,
it
comes
back
down
to
trust
and
it
behooves
us
as
a
city
government
to
complete
what
we
commit
to,
because
this
is
a
perfect
example
of
when
we
don't
get
our
work
done.
B
B
B
That
is
what
this
city
has
done
since
its
Inception
hundreds
of
years
ago,
we
grow,
we
grow
as
a
community,
we
grow
as
a
culture,
and
it's
up
to
us
as
a
government
to
ensure
that
we
are
adapting
to
that
growth
and
moving
forward
in
this
communities
in
the
residents
best
interest.
So
thank
you,
Mr
Mayor
thank.
G
Thank
you,
mayor
I,
just
wanted
to
first
thank
the
staff
for
the
amount
of
work
they
did
with
this
project
and
the
different
iterations,
and
so
it's
a
lot
of
work.
It's
very
complex
and
I
also
want
to
commend
the
community
members
that
took
so
much
time
to
dive
into
the
details
and
the
learn
about
the
facts
understand
how
complex
land
use
is
in
in
Santa
Fe
and
just
wanted
to.
Thank
you
all
too,
and
also
to
my
colleagues
for
your
thoughtful
questions
and
trying
to
really
see
Clarity
in
a
land
use.
G
G
I
just
wanted
to
note
that
I
was
active
in
the
process
with
very
passionate
community
members
like
yourselves
in
the
completion
of
the
West
Santa
Fe
River
Corridor
zoning
overlay.
A
couple
of
you
are
actually
in-house
that
participated
in
that
and
at
the
time
we
did
actually
have
long-range
planning
staff
that
was
available
to
assist
and
so
that
that
project
actually
took
priority
and
community
members.
They
worked
diligently
with
staff
for
I
think
it
was
about
six
to
eight
months
or
so.
G
G
So
all
these
things
to
say,
like
the
unspoiled
pieces
of
Santa
Fe,
there's
some.
That
would
say
that
there
aren't
any
left
and
I
actually
think,
there's
some
new
ones
that
we
have
beautiful
areas
that
we
come
into
that
are
very
different
from
the
past,
but
they're
they're.
What
we
are
we
have
right
now,
contemporary
in
contemporary
times
and
I
guess.
G
G
Keeping
our
one
zoning
anywhere
in
the
city
is
not
Equitable
and
it's
frankly
that
poor
planning
and
if
we
go
through
any
future
overlay
or
Corridor
plans,
our
one
shouldn't
be
allowed
I.
Think
I,
don't
personally!
If
I'm
still
in
the
council,
I
will
not
approve
anything,
that's
R1,
it
doesn't
make
sense
in
an
urban
setting
that
kind
of
density.
We
are
only
going
to
probably
be
seeing
in
the
county
or
in
semi-rural
areas,
and
that
kind
of
zoning
actually
contributes
to
people
living
outside
of
our
city.
G
We
have
60
percent
of
our
our
Workforce
that
commutes
into
the
city
that
to
me
is
unstained
unsustainable
and
that's
all
income
groups,
actually
so
I
just
I
think
there's
aspects
of
this
development
that
are
reasonable.
They
made
some
good
modifications,
I.
Think
it's
going
to
be
nice
for
the
people
to
get
to
live
there,
whether
they're
market
rate,
homes
or
or
affordable
homes
and
I
also
think
that
you
all
were
going
to
be
under
a
microscope
and
you're
going
to
need
to
do
everything
right.
G
G
I
do
want
to
have
my
colleagues
consider
that,
maybe,
for
lack
of
a
better
term,
a
temporary
moratorium
on
an
area
in
this
area,
so
that
we
can
actually
complete
the
corridor
overly
designs,
development
standards
in
partnership
with
the
community
and
staff
I.
Don't
know
what
that
looks
like
I'm
willing
to
explore
that,
but
I
just
think.
We
can't
do
anything
if
it's
not
clear
about
what
our
standards
are
and
not
having
anything
in
place
that
the
public
feels
good
about
or
the
this
area
and
community
members
feel
good.
G
C
Thank
you,
mayor
yeah.
This
has
been
a
tough
one.
Thank
you,
everyone
for
your
participation.
Thank
you,
counselors
for
your
patience
and
your
time
and
all
of
this.
Thank
you
to
the
staff
for
their
time
and
all
of
this
and
their
willingness
to
continue
to
answer
our
questions
again.
C
I
just
want
to
state
that,
for
the
record
that
who's
to
blame,
for
why
the
Old
Pecos,
Trail
Corridor
was
not
adopted,
and
the
fact
that
I
tried
to
get
some
movement
on
getting
a
Old,
Pecos,
Trail
Corridor
overlay
in
place
when
I
was
first
elected,
aren't
relevant
to
the
criteria
that
we
have
been
asked
to
use
in
forming
in
forming
a
decision
around
the
whether
we
approve
this
zoning
or
not,
but
I
do
think
that
the
general
plan
does
lay
out,
and
we've
heard
three
different
times
that
this
Corridor
is
special
and
there
should
be
an
overlay
district,
and
we
should.
C
Develop
the
develop
the
density
and
development
standards
for
this
area.
That
was
never
done.
The
general
plan
said
it
should
be
done
so
in
some
ways,
I
I
find
it
in
conflict
with
also
the
fact
that
the
general
plan
says
that
we
should
have
zoning
in
this
area
for
a
particular
level.
When
we
also
say
we
should
have
development
standards
and
density
requirements
for
this
particular
area,
and
since
we
never
did
the
overlay,
we
don't
really
know
what
they
should
or
shouldn't
be
I.
C
Think
the
general
plan
also,
as
I've
said,
you
know,
says
that
we
should
where's
the
words
maintain
and
respect
Santa,
fe's,
unique
personality,
sense
of
place
and
character.
I,
don't
deny
any
of
the
my
colleague
talking
about
the
problem
we
have,
we
may
be
at
a
Tipping
Point.
C
We
certainly
are
struggling
with
affordable
housing.
We
are
struggling
with
people
being
able
to
afford
to
live
here.
C
If,
if
we
just
want
to
build
the
whole
city
up
and
not,
you
know,
pay
any
attention
to
our
historic
nature,
our
our
our
our
open
space,
our
the
things
that
make
us
unique,
the
things
that
give
us
character,
I
I,
think
we're
shooting
ourselves
in
the
foot
and
so
I.
Don't
think
that
this
meets
the
the
criteria
that
it's
more
advantageous
to
the
community,
because
we're
not
honoring
some
things
in
the
general
plan
that
we
say
we
hold
as
values
and
should
be
themes
and
should
be
guiding
policies.
V
V
V
I
go
back
to
youth
you'll
find
I
often
do
that
I
might
happen
to
work
with
the
population,
which
is
our
youth
and
the
number
of
homelessness
we
have
amongst
our
youth
right
now
is
alarming
and
more
than
most
people
know
I
happen
to
hug
and
interact
and
support
these
youths
who
are
actually
going
through
it.
So
I
actually
know
it
firsthand,
and
when
we
talk
about
five,
affordable
houses,
we're
talking
about
family
homes
I,
see
firsthand
when
these
kids
are
able
to
have
a
house
of
their.
I
V
It
works,
we
have
great
programs
and
they
do
end
up
in
these
homes.
I
know
there
was
some
conversation
about
like
who
will
it
actually
benefit?
V
It'll
benefit
these
kids
because
I
see
it
I,
see
it
happen
and
when
these
units
become
available,
and
we
can
share
news
as
Educators
and
educational
Leaders
with
families
that
they
will
finally
have
a
home,
it
is
amazing
and
the
impact
is
long
lasting
because
it's
youth
who
Define
our
future
as
Santa
Fe
I,
also
wanted
to
really
value
what
councilwoman
Villarreal
said
in
regards
to.
We
have
new
things
that
are
adding
value
to
our
city.
We
have
people
that
add
value
to
our
city.
V
We
have
developments
that
bring
people
together
and
form
communities,
and
we
have
kids
meeting
up
and
riding
bikes
and
exploring
the
beautiful
city
that
we
have
that's
supposed
to
support
them
and
nourish
them,
and
development
isn't
negative.
It's
bringing
the
diverse
people
that
Define
Santa
Fe
as
Santa
Fe
together
we're
creating
a
space
for
that
I
value
that
I
find
that
advantageous
I
found,
find
placing
children
and
home
advantageous
and
I
think
that,
with
this
development
in
particular,
we
are
still
valuing
things.
That's
why
we
are
meeting
setbacks.
V
That
is
why
we
are
not
going
too
tall.
That
is
why
I
imagine
when
there
is
actually
a
design
presented
to
the
Planning
Commission
it'll
respect
the
design
of
other
neighborhoods
in
the
area,
but
I
don't
want
to
rest
on
the
fact
that
we
think
development
or
creating
neighborhoods
where
people
can
come
together
is
not
advantageous
because
I
see
it
firsthand
I
see
my
kids
enjoy
it.
I
am
a
mother
of
two
and
I
too,
have
really
struggled
with
finding
housing.
V
I
lived
with
my
parents
for
a
very
long
time
as
an
adult
with
kids
talk
about
feeling
like
a
failure.
Fortunately,
I
was
able
to
move
up
in
leadership
and
provide
for
them,
but
if
we
had
true
numbers
that
represented
the
number
of
parents
that
feel
the
way
I
did
then,
but
actually
have
no
hope
or
Direction
and
providing
a
home
for
their
children.
I
think
that
this
might
look
a
little
bit
different
I
believe
in
equity,
I
believe
in
housing
people
we
don't
have
Equity
right
now.
V
Councilwoman
cassette
expressed
some
of
the
numbers
across
our
districts
right
now
in
regards
to
housing.
Our
neighborhoods
are
growing.
Some
of
us
have
had
to
deal
with
that
growth
exponentially
and
there
hasn't
been
this
much
voice
a
lot
of
times
with
that
growth
and
I
I
I'd
encourage
us
to
reflect
on
that
fact.
V
I
think
that
this
plan
is,
in
my
mind,
acceptable,
I,
look
forward
to
individuals
here
being
pleasantly
surprised
with
what
it
could
possibly
offer
if
it
is
passed
today
and
with
that
I
think
I'm
done
mayor.
Thank
you.
A
X
Be
brief,
mayor
I
know
everyone's
probably
getting
pretty
tired
on
our
third
day
of
hearings,
but
I
just
wanted
to
thank
everyone
for
being
here.
Both
the
applicant,
the
neighbors.
These
heart
issues
are
difficult
and
I
know
that
you
living
in
that
area
it.
It
means
a
lot
to
you
and
I
know.
This
decision
is
going
to
be
tough
and
I
just
wanted
to
thank
you
all
for
the
participation
and
to
the
applicant
as
well
for
going
through
the
process.
X
This
is
what
it's
all
about
and
we'll
make
a
decision
here
shortly,
one
way
or
the
other
and
again
just
wanted
to
say
thank
you
and
to
staff
as
well
who's,
giving
up
your
Saturday
to
be
here
to
answer
questions
and
all
the
work
that
you
put
into
this.
It's
been.
It's
been
a
very
well
thought
process,
I,
think
and
I.
Think
I
mentioned
this
to
somebody
after
our
first
meeting
that
I
think
Dan
Esquibel.
X
This
has
been
his
finest
presentation
that
I
think
I've
ever
seen
him
make
so
and
he's
done
a
lot
of
good
ones,
but
this
one
was
very
well
thought
out.
So
thank
you.
T
Thank
you
mayor.
Yes,
reiterate.
The
thanks
to
both
sides.
It
was
presented
very
well
and
I.
Do
appreciate
having
the
opportunity
to
ask
of
both
sides,
especially
with
our
questions
or
my
questions,
about
the
criteria.
Because
again
it
went
back
to
Criterion
and-
and
we
keep
on
talking
about
subjectivity
and
and
that's
difficult
to
to
take
out
of
this
process,
because
everybody
here
is
passionate
about
our
community
as
elected
official
for
district
three
I,
don't
just
represent
them.
I
represent
the
whole
city
and
and
I
feel
strongly
about
that.
T
Because
you
know
we
we
sit
here
and
listen
to
fact.
T
We
listen
to
test
and
when
we
listen
to
sometimes
things
that
come
up
that
you
know
aren't
part
of
the
facts,
because
it's
we're
passionate
about
it
and
I
do
want
to
again
say
thank
you
to
stop,
because
I
think
this
was
a
very
difficult,
very,
very
difficult
plan
and
process,
and
they
worked
very
hard
on
making
sure
that
things
are
presented
to
us
in
a
way
that
we
understand
and
as
well
as
the
the
people
of
the
public,
because
I
I
think
that
everyone
that
came
in
was
passionate
about
where
they
live
and
and
I
think
that's.
T
The
thing
that
we
need
to
not
forget
overall
in
our
city
is
that,
yes,
we
are
a
full
community
of
Santa
Fe.
So
thank
you
all
for
being
here
and
as
Council
Rivera
said,
we'll
be
coming
up
with
the
decision
here
shortly.
J
Thank
you
mayor,
I,
too,
want
to
thank
everyone.
Everyone,
that's
shown
up
everyone
that
wasn't
able
to
show
up
lots
of
people
that
we
heard
from
with
varying
points
of
view
that
haven't
been
in
the
chamber
and
those
of
you
that
have
shown
up
numerous
times.
J
It's
a
lot
of
effort,
also
to
my
colleagues,
I
think
that
people
on
this
Council
have
done
an
exceptionally
good
job
on
this,
as
well
as
staff,
it's
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
hours
that
they
put
into
this
and
I,
don't
think
anybody's
at
the
end
of
all
of
this
is
going
to
go
out
and
take
a
Victory
lap
around
the
building
everybody's
worn
out
with
it
everybody's
done.
J
Their
best
I
do
know
that
I
think
that
there
were
some
terrific
questions
to
ask
some
Concepts
brought
forward
that
we
haven't
talked
about
before
that.
We
needed
to
talk
about,
and
it's
been
a
mammoth
amount
of
work
from
the
council.
J
And
certainly,
staff
didn't
take
it
lightly
either
so
I'm
appreciative
about
it
and
I
think
that
those
are
my
comments
mayor.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
You
counselor
I'll,
take
a
moment
to
share
some
of
my
thoughts,
starting
with,
as
has
been
said,
thanks
and
appreciation
and
gratitude,
but
also
a
comment
about
how
this
land
use
decision
tells
us
much
more
about
Santa
Fe
than
about
one
particular
zoning
case.
A
The
level
of
Engagement
commitment
concern
desire
to
get
to
a
good
outcome
is
why
Santa
Fe,
regardless
of
the
decision
today,
will
continue
to
be
an
outstanding,
unique
and
exceptional
Community
people
here,
love
this
city,
members
of
the
community
love
their
City
members
of
the
governing
body,
love
their
City
and
we're
willing
to
take
the
time
and
make
the
effort
read.
A
Listening
to
my
colleagues
as
we're
getting
ready
to
take
a
vote,
I'm
struck
by
the
fact
that
there
are
really
two
discussions
going
on
simultaneously,
one
is
about
the
case.
That's
what
we'll
vote
on
the
other
is
about
the
teachable
moment
that
we're
in
as
a
community
Educators
talk
about
teachable
moments
as
times
when
something
becomes
so
crystal
clear
that
you
have
to
talk
about
the
underlying
principles
and
the
Deep
opportunity
to
learn
something
from
the
specifics
that
goes
far
beyond
the
specifics.
A
For
me,
I
think
I'll
just
share
some
of
the
thoughts
that
have
been
going
through
my
mind
as
we've
wrestled
with
this
very
challenging
case.
A
It
is
clear
that
there
are
tough
decisions
that
come
to
this
governing
body
for
votes.
None
is
more
challenging
than
the
decision
on
land
use
cases.
Our
job
in
these
quasi-judicial
hearings
is
to
come
to
the
case
as
if
we
were
judges.
That's
why
I
said
earlier.
Imagine
you're
in
a
courtroom
and
have
that
kind
of
seriousness
and
decorum
we're
supposed
to
come
to
these
cases
with
open
minds.
We
listen
to
both
sides.
A
A
A
Admittedly,
it's
hard
to
understand
why
it's
different
we're
sitting
up
here
on
the
Deus.
We
look
the
same.
We
sit
in
our
usual
chairs,
it's
just
the
same
as
if
we're
voting
on
a
contract
or
a
an
ordinance,
but
when
it
comes
to
these
cases,
we're
supposed
to
conduct
ourselves
differently,
we
aren't
supposed
to
talk
to
either
opponents
or
proponents.
A
A
We
heard
that
from
the
proponents
who
agreed
to
that
proposition
when
I
asked
them.
At
the
same
time,
we
understand
that
the
proposed
development
meets.
The
zoning
called
for
in
the
general
plan,
responds
to
our
critical
need
for
housing,
including
five
affordable
units
in
a
part
of
the
city
where
affordable,
single
family
units
are
hard
to
come
by.
Arguments
on
both
sides
of
the
issue
are
true.
A
The
governing
body
ends
up
weighing
and
balancing
the
conflicting
points
of
view.
If
nine
homes
are
permitted
under
the
existing
R1
zoning
with
the
25
homes
proposed
under
the
R3
zoning
substantially
harm
the
beauty
of
the
corridor
are
the
five
affordable
homes
of
benefit
that
makes
the
trade-offs
worth
it.
These
are
hardly
black
and
white
arguments,
despite
how
they're
presented
during
the
public
hearing
weighing
the
pros
and
cons
of
the
two
sides,
where
both
sides
have
Merit
makes
it
hard
for
the
governing
body
to
make
a
decision.
A
A
In
these
cases
there
are
usually
facts
that
can
be
agreed
upon,
and
in
fact,
most
of
the
facts
are
agreed
upon.
Both
sides
understand
how
important
the
corridor
is.
Both
sides
agree.
Housing
is
a
priority,
so
what
makes
them
difficult
are
the
emotions
and
the
anger
that
often
accompanies
them?
How
can
we
reduce
the
level
of
anger?
What
can
we
do
to
make
cases
like
these
less
divisive?
A
First,
we
need
to
review
and
revise
our
existing
early
neighborhood
notification
process
in
the
case
of
the
Old
Pecos
Trail
zone
change,
despite
three
e
and
and
meetings
I
can't
say
that
much
was
accomplished
to
bridge
The
Divide
between
the
proponents
and
the
opponents.
The
en
can't
solve
every
dispute
in
every
land
use
case,
but
we
can
look
at
practices
that
other
communities
and
other
places
have
developed.
A
It's
almost
an
unnatural
act
not
to
hear
you
it's
just
as
hard
for
you
to
understand
why
we're
suddenly
so
unresponsive
or
seemingly
so
a
packed
Council
chamber
can
and
often
does
influence
a
policy
decision
on
a
vote
or
an
ordinance.
It's
explicitly
not
supposed
to
drive
our
decision
on
land
use
cases
as
counter-intuitive,
as
that
seems.
A
Third,
we've
all
acknowledged
that
we
need
to
update
our
general
plan.
Our
land
use
code
needs
updating.
That
work
is
now
underway.
We
budgeted
for
this
several
years
ago
only
to
have
those
plans
disrupted
by
covid.
If
you
take
the
time
to
read
our
general
plan,
you
will
be
impressed,
so
much
of
it
still
stands
up
after
25
years
of
from
its
initial
adoption,
and
similarly,
the
zoning
code
is
still
fundamentally
sound.
A
And
finally,
as
my
colleagues
have
acknowledged,
we
need
to
say
out
loud
how
important
these
cases
are
for
our
City's
future
and
the
legitimacy
of
differing
points
of
view
as
we
resolve
them.
There
is
no
doubt
in
my
mind
that
the
future
of
Santa
Fe
runs
through
our
land
use,
Department
we're
working
hard
to
staff
it
up
to
improve
the
use
of
technology
in
its
daily
operations,
to
provide
excellent
service
and
to
emphasize
the
professionalism
that
informs
all
of
its
work.
A
There's
also,
no
doubt
in
my
mind
that
the
people
who
propose
or
oppose
any
given
development
still
have
the
best
interests
of
Santa
Fe
at
heart.
It's
simply
wrong
to
ascribe
bad
motives
to
anyone.
In
these
cases,
not
every
developer,
who
proposes
to
build
more
housing
in
our
city,
is
evil
simply
looking
to
make
a
fast
Buck,
while
ruining
our
precious
quality
of
life
and
unique
sense
of
place.
A
Not
every
neighbor
who
opposes
a
housing
development
in
any
part
of
our
city
is
evil
simply
interested
and
seeking
to
practice
a
knot
in
my
backyard
philosophy
when
it
comes
to
growth
and
development,
we
all
love
this
place.
We
call
our
home,
we
need
more
housing,
so
Working
Families
can
afford
to
live
and
work
here,
and
we
need
to
respect
and
protect
the
unique
treasure
that
is
Santa
Fe.
The
best
way
for
us
to
achieve
both
of
these
goals
is
to
respect
each
other.
A
A
We
are
blessed
as
a
city
that
we
can
still
make
these
decisions
and
provide
a
better
future
for
our
city
and
for
the
residents
who
will
live
here
in
the
future.
The
decision
today
is
difficult
and
it
involves
trade-offs.
It's
not
a
black
and
white
decision.
It
is,
as
we
have
said,
over
and
over
again,
a
question
of
whether
the
impact
on
the
community
by
the
development
is
worth
the
benefit
to
the
community
of
the
additional
housing
and
the
five
affordable
units
that
it
will
provide.
A
It
is
a
special
Corridor
that
deserves
special
treatment.
This
development,
we've
heard
consistently
has
tried,
over
and
over
again
to
meet
or
exceed
the
South
Central
Highway
Corridor
requirements
and
the
requirements
for
the
zone,
change
I
think
we
will
have
to
do
our
very
best
to
apply
those
criteria
and
make
that
judgment
about
the
relative
merits
of
this
case,
understanding
that
there
is
no
absolute
right
or
absolute
wrong
in
this
decision.
A
If
there
are
none
Madam
clerk,
can
you
call
the
role.
A
The
motion
motion
is
to
deny
the
request
for
zone
change,
and
the
explanation
offered
by
the
motion
maker
was
that
it
did
not
meet
the
third
criteria
regarding
what
is
in
the
community's
best
interest
when
matched
to
the
general
plan.
D
I
got
it
counselor
cassette,
no
counselor
Chavez,
no
counselor,
Lee
Garcia.
T
D
I
X
T
A
All
right
is
there
another
motion
to
consider:
I'm,
sorry,
councilor
Rivera
your
hand
was
up
I.
P
A
A
motion
there's
a
second
I'll,
look
to
see
if
anyone
wishes
to
make
a
final
comment
before
we
go
to
a
vote
on
it,
Madam
clerk.
Could
you
call
the
roll.
I
A
C
Mayor,
yes,
ma'am
I'd,
like
some
guidance
from
the
city
attorney
about
how
we
move
forward
about
talking
about
this
case.
I,
believe
we,
you
will
be
bringing
findings
and
facts
and
conclusions
of
law
to
us.
I
have
the
feeling
that
there
are
a
lot
of
people
who
would
like
to
discuss
this.
What
is.
F
Your
advice,
mayor
counselors,
thank
you
for
the
question.
Yes,
we
will
be
bringing
findings
effect
and
conclusions
of
law.
The
action
is
not
formally
final
until
you
adopt
those,
and
then
should
this
be
appealed.