►
From YouTube: Planning Commission 12/1/22
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
D
E
E
F
A
A
Faulkner,
yes,
Simon.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
We're
on
the
motion
to
approve
the
agenda.
Yes,
thank
you,
commissioner
Lucero.
Yes,
commissioner
Rondo.
Yes,.
A
J
E
Has
been
approved,
okay,
now
we'll
move
on
to
the
minutes.
No,
are
there
any
changes
by
staff
to
the
November
3rd
2022
minutes?
E
Any
changes
by
the
commission.
A
A
A
E
Okay,
next
we'll
move
on
to
the
approval
of
findings
and
conclusions
and
we'll
go
Case
by
case.
The
first
is
case
number
2022-5865,
Paseo
De
conquistadora
subdivision.
A
I
A
E
And
2022-5506
matter,
5505
is
the
is
6
30
6350
Airport
Road
General
plan
Amendment
and
case
number
5506
is
6350
Airport
Road
rezoning
there
any
changes
to
those
findings
and
conclusions.
C
E
And
next
we'll
move
on
to
case
number
2021
4648,
2021-4649,
2021-4650-2021-4651-20.
E
E
A
E
Okay,
now
for
new
business,
we'll
move
to
case
number,
2022,
6012,
Del,
Oro,
final
development
plan
and
case
number,
2022,
6013,
caja,
De,
Oro,
final
subdivision
plan.
E
K
Good
evening,
I'm
Heather
lamboy
with
planning
and
development
services,
and
this
evening
I
will
be
presenting
caja,
De
Oro
final
development
plan,
and
there
is
an
Associated
final
plot
as
well.
This
case,
you
saw
I-
guess
maybe
a
little
over
a
year
ago,
with
reference
to
a
rezoning
and
a
general
plan
Amendment,
as
well
as
a
preliminary
development
plan.
K
K
Likewise,
on
the
zoning
there,
there
was
an
approval
on
September
28th
to
rezone
the
site
from
C2
and
R1
to
r10
the
reason.
The
request
for
the
zoning
was
to
allow
for
a
development
plan
to
be
determined
by
the
Planning
Commission,
rather
than
having
rigid
setbacks
like
what
would
be
offered
in
a
typical
R6
Zone
District.
Or
what
have
you?
Because
these
are
paired
homes?
They
require
sort
of
a
special
analysis
of
the
the
setbacks
and
consideration.
K
So
the
discussion
for
the
preliminary
development
plan,
the
concerns
were
the
setbacks
and
the
height
of
the
buildings,
the
availability
of
parking
for
residents,
school
capacity,
access
to
Parks
plants,
bike
lanes
and
trails
as
well
as
density,
and
how
it
would
compare
to
the
Agua
Fria
traditional
Village.
This
is
located
somewhat
approximate
to
the
traditional
Village,
but
not
within
the
village
itself.
So
this
is
an
introduction
of
density
into
an
area
that
currently
is,
is
vacant
and
adjacent
to
5.99.
K
K
So
the
final
development
plan
which
illustrates
here
is
for
the
for
I
guess:
36
of
the
80
dwelling
units
that
would
be
located
south
of
caja
Del
Oro,
Grant
Road,
so
the
the
map
itself
is
North
is
to
the
right.
Instead
of
you
know,
being
up
and
and
down
and
the
final
development
plan,
the
spaces
organized
is
responding
to
the
concerns
that
were
raised
by
the
Planning
Commission.
You
may
recall
the
conversation
about
setbacks
and
the
structures
and
having
livable
open
space
for
the
residents
on
their
own
particular
lot.
K
K
There
is
access
to
park
within
the
site
itself,
there's
going
to
be
an
amenity
and
then
our
planned
bike
lanes
and
trails.
So
there
there
are
Trail
connections
to
Regional
Trails,
as
well
as
the
red
lines
on
that
graphic
illustrate
Trails
planned
on
site.
K
The
landscape
plan
provides
a
little
additional
detail
and
I
know
it's
pretty
hard
to
see
on
this
graphic.
It's
pretty
small,
but
there
is
a
plant
playground
as
well
as
a
picnic,
shelter
and
a
picnic
table
for
the
site,
so
an
access
will
be
provided
by
that
internal
Street
Network
for
all
of
the
properties
on
this
phase,
one
so
Stan
Holland
has
spoken
with
the
applicant.
K
So
and
the
condition
of
approval
relates
to
those
technical
issues
that,
if
you
have
specific
questions
regarding
that
Stan
can
answer
I'm,
not
very
good
I'm,
not
a
good
engineer.
A
L
My
name
is
Nathan
manzanadas
and
I.
Am
a
member
of
Jim
Siebert
Associates
we're
located
off
of
915
Mercer
Street
Santa
Fe
New,
Mexico
foreign,
so
I
have
a
presentation,
but
Heather
did
a
great
job
and
basically
did
my.
L
L
So,
as
Heather
stated
we're
if
I
could
share
my
screen,
please
we're
here
tonight
for
a
final
development
plan
and
final
Subdivision
plat
for
phase
one.
D
L
So
we
have
a
vicinity
map
of
the
site.
As
stated
there
will
be
a
two-phase
development.
It'll
be
here's
another
aerial
of
the
site.
It
shows
the
proximity
to
existing
there's
a
existing
fire
station
in
the
area.
That's
in
the
Santa
Fe
county
jurisdiction,
there's
also
an
existing
Park
in
the
area
and
a
community
center,
as
well
as
health
clinic.
L
So
we've
spent
a
lot
of
time
on
this
project.
We've
actually
been
in
front
of
the
Planning
Commission
a
number
of
times
to
get
this
just
right,
so
I
think
the
latest
design
and
final
design
really
achieves
what
the
Planning
Commission
was
asking
prior.
As
Heather
stated,
there's
a
lot
of
trails
as
well
as
a
lot
of
internal
circulation
within
the
development.
All
of
the
yellow
lines
represented
here
will
be
public
sidewalks.
We
also
have
two
Park
areas
that
we're
planning
on
and
a
substantial
amount
of
landscaping
to
the
site.
L
Here
is
We've
brought
this
before
the
Planning
Commission
a
couple
months
back
to
this
brought
us
down
to
80
Lots
from
88,
but
we
agree
that
this
new
design
is,
is
nice
and
will
likely
be
a
design
that
is
used
later
on
in
other
developments.
It
allows
for
better
walkability.
It
allows
for
better
access
to
guests.
It
also
provides
better
parking
for
guest
parking
as
well.
L
So
one
request
that
we
do
have
and
I'll
have
Kevin
Patton
of
polti
kind
of
go
into
further
detail
on
this
is
we
are
asking
for
final
plot
for
phase
one,
but
we
would
like
to
ask
the
commission
to
grant
us
the
ability
to
also
start
grading
for
infrastructure
installation
for
the
phase
two
portion
of
the
project.
The
aim
is
to
come
in
within
the
New
Year
fairly
early
in
the
new
year
and
submit
for
phase
two
final
development.
L
L
So
these
are
the
proposed
renderings
of
what
each
unit
will
look
like,
as
stated
they're
attached,
townhome
units
very
similar
to
other
product
that
has
been
provided
by
Pulte
in
the
city
and
with
that
I
think
I'll
stand
for
questions
I.
Once
again.
Thank
you,
heather
for
doing
a
great
job
in
representing
this
project.
E
We
can
I
think
see
if
there's
any
clarification
questions
before
we
open
it
to
the
pub
public,
but
I
have
a
question.
Is
it
appropriate
for
us
to
be
dealing
with
the
grading
issue
on
phase
two?
If
it
there's
no
public
notice
on
that
issue,.
F
Thank
you,
chair
cloud
and
members
of
the
commission
yeah.
It's
our
contention
that,
because
we're
only
approving
phase
one
this
evening
that
permit
that
that
it's
a
moot
point
to
consider
allowing
grading
of
phase
two
this.
If
it
came
to
the
permit
counter,
there
would
be
no
approval
and
no
allowance
to
allow
grading
on
phase
two
until
that
was
also
approved.
G
Sure
if
I
may
yes
go
ahead,
so
they
they
could
come
in
for
a
grading
permit
if
they
submit
the
entire
Financial
guarantee
for
the
whole
project.
L
A
A
M
M
For
the
recipe
Kevin
Patton
7601
Jefferson
Street
Suite
320
Albuquerque
New
Mexico
87109
Medicare
Commissioners.
M
Let
me
give
you
just
a
quick
background
of
my
experience,
so
you
know
that
when
I'm
talking
about
what
I'm
talking
I
have
some
some
ex
professional
experience
when
in
in
my
ask
before
the
board,
so
1992
graduated
from
Mexico
state,
with
a
bachelor's
of
Science
in
civil
engineering,
came
to
work
for
Bohemian
Houston,
a
civil
engineering
firm
in
Albuquerque
and
for
30
well,
actually,
23
years,
I
worked
on
residential
subdivisions
throughout
Albuquerque
and
Santa
Fe.
M
So
for
most
of
my
professional
career
I'm,
a
New
Mexico
licensed
professional
engineer,
I
designed
graded
subdivisions
throughout
again
Albuquerque
Rio,
Rancho
and
Santa
Fe.
The
request
before
you
is
that
when
we
do
a
design
on
the
subdivision,
the
engineer's
goal
is
to
try
to
balance
the
dirt.
So
what
we
want
to
do
is
try
to
minimize
the
impact
of
the
surrounding
Community
by
not
having
to
import
or
export
dirt.
When
you
do
that,
you
have
to
load
it
in
a
truck
the
truck
that
is
pretty
heavy.
M
There
weighs
a
lot
it's
the
roads.
It's
it's
an
impact
on
the
roads.
It's
impact,
you're
gonna.
You
know
you
try
to
cover
those
but
you're
going
to
have
dust
you're
going
to
lose
that
that
dirt's
got
to
go
somewhere.
It's
got
to
go
to
another
site.
So
if
it's
not
across
the
street
on
this
particular
one,
it's
going
to
go
somewhere.
M
So
it's
whether
it's
in
the
city
of
Santa,
Fe
or
in
the
county
they've
got
to
place
that
export
or,
if
they're,
going
to
import
it
they've
got
to
take
that
dirt
from
someplace
and
bring
it
in.
So
you
are
disturbing
another
site,
whether
it's
across
the
street
or
if
it's
somewhere
in
the
city
of
San,
Diego,
Santa,
Fe
or
the
county.
Our
hope
is
that
we
want
to
try
to
minimize
that
impact.
Try
to
minimize
the
carbon
footprint
that
we
would
have
by
grading
the
entire
site,
keeping
that
those
activities
within
our
boundaries.
M
So
we
minimize
the
impact
to
the
roads,
to
extra
fuel,
to
the
to
the
residents
that
you
know
where
this
this
might
be
going,
and
so
that's
just
our
request.
If,
for
whatever
reason,
the
commission
or
staff
doesn't
feel
that
that's
beneficial
to
in
any
way
or
or
disagree
with
us,
we're
we're
fine
with
just
grading
phase
one
we
just,
we
were
trying
to
do.
M
What
we
think
is
the
right
thing,
but
if,
whatever
reason
someone
disagrees
we're
fine
with
with
just
keeping
it
within
phase
one
we'll
look
to
importer
export,
it's
really
hard
in
a
small
to
try
to
balance
it
within
a
certain
phase.
Is
you
increase
retaining
wall
Heights
and
it
just
doesn't
as
far
as
the
grading
goes,
it
doesn't
necessarily
bode
well
when
you're
having
to
work
within
a
specific
phase.
E
J
So
I
have
good
evening.
I
have
just
a
couple
questions
that
might
be
more
appropriate
from
our
city
staff
reading
through
the
very
lengthy
covenants
that
are
proposed
for
for
the
project.
They
seem
to
be
very
comprehensive
on
my
experience
and
they
would
be
necessary
for
this
kind
of
a
development.
This
density
and
design,
for
example,
on
page
33
of
the
covenants.
We
talk
about
parking
limitations,
there's
limitations
about
rooftop
HVAC
equipment
on
page
35,
there's
prohibitions
about
garage,
conversions
and
whatnot.
J
K
Chair
Clow,
commissioner
pava
I
find
it
to
be
consistent
with
what
we
try
to
achieve,
both
through
our
architectural
standards,
as
well
as
simple
things
about
people
parking
in
each
or
over
each
other's
driveways.
And
you
know
that
has
been
an
Enforcement
issue
in
terms
of
cars
being
everywhere.
So
do
really
appreciate
the
addition
of
parking
for
guests
and
the
like,
so
and,
and
so
it
it
does
cover
the
things
that
are
necessary
with
reference
to
city
code.
Those
problems
that
we
find
the
most.
J
Thank
you,
Ms
lamboy,
my
experience,
having
been
on
a
homeowners
association
in
Los
Alamos
for
chimisa
Park
many
years
ago.
A
very
similar
kind
of
a
development
was
the
devil,
is
in
the
Administration
implementation,
with
with
a
design,
review
board
and
a
board
of
directors
for
the
for
the
association.
So
that's
why
I
asked
I
think
it's
very
important
to
have
these
covenants,
but
there
are
a
lot
of
restrictions.
I
mean
really
things.
J
K
Commissioner,
pava
I
believe
that
the
Lost
Solaris
those
have
been
built
in
Los
Solaris
have
similar
cabinets
as
well
they're,
just
starting
on
their
HOA.
E
Any
other
clarifying
questions
by
the
commission,
chair,
Clow.
B
B
I
may
be
showing
my
ignorance
as
a
relative
newcomer,
but
if
we,
if
you
do
the
financing
and
then
you
you
do
the
great
you
you
do
all
of
the
grading
and
then
for
any
reason,
your
the
second
phase
is
not
approved.
Is
there
a
fallback
position
in
terms
of
fixing
of
settling
the
issue
on
the
the
the
plot
of
land
across
the
road.
K
Your
Cloud
commissioner
Smith
with
reference
that
that's
one
of
the
reasons
that
Maggie
stated
that
we
prefer
everything
to
be
graded
by
phase,
although
Mr
manzanatos
indicated
that
they
would
be
coming
in
for
phase
two,
the
beginning
of
January.
That
is
one
concern
that
we
have
is
how
long
we'll
sit
there,
just
as
maybe
a
dust
bowl,
so
it
could
be
within
the
purview
of
this
commission.
If
you
find
that
it
would
be
okay
for
them,
did
you
one?
K
You
know,
writing
at
one
time
is
to
seed
the
the
second
phase,
so
that
there
will
be
grass
and
and
the
like
their
native
seed,
until
which
time
they
developed
that
site.
Thank.
B
L
Madam
chair,
if
I
could
just
add
to
that
and
as
Jason
stated,
we
will
have
to
put
up
a
letter
of
credit
or
a
bond,
and
one
of
those
line
items
will
be
re-bedged
and
a
contingency,
for
you
know
that
type
of,
if
that
were
to
happen,
we
would
plan
to
re
re-veg
that
site
accordingly,
foreign.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
is
I.
Wasn't
on
the
commission
when
this
was
presented
the
last
time
since
my
first
kind
of
go
through
understanding
what
this
development
is
and
I'm
just
curious
as
to
why
some
of
the
maps
that
were
shown
on
the
screen
here,
weren't
included
in
the
packet
that
we've
seen
because
I
had
it's
the
first
time
I'm
seeing
that
and
it's
certainly
more
detailed
than
the
than
what
I've
seen
and
I'm
looking
at
things
like
bike
trails
and
different
things
and
I'd
like
to
see
something
like
that.
C
L
That
yeah
Madam
chair
commissioner
Lucero,
so
a
lot
of
that
information
was
shown
during
the
preliminary
Latin
development
plan
application,
as
well
as
the
rezoning
application.
L
One
request
was
to
phase
so
with
those
Maps
came
new
phasing
Maps,
but
we've
all
been
consistent
since
day,
one
with
the
updated
Trails
setbacks,
sidewalks.
Those
were
reviewed
by
both
the
Planning
Commission
and
governing
body
prior
I.
Just
think
you
weren't
on
the
site
on
the
commission.
Unfortunately,.
C
All
right,
I
appreciate
that
you
know
in
the
future,
just
I'd
love
to
see
something
like
that.
Just
because
I'm
getting
used
to
and
I
know,
there's
other
new
Commissioners
here.
C
So
yeah
I'd
love
to
see
those
Maps
still
to
be
included
in
the
materials
for
any
time.
You
know
this
development
comes
through
absolutely
and
I
have
one
other
question
in
regard
to
the
strip
of
land
designated
as
R1
I
was
I
was
not
really
familiar
with,
or
I
was
a
little
bit
confused
on.
That
I
wondered
if
you
could
just
clarify
why
that
strip
of
land
either
is
not
included
in
the
development
or
you
know.
What's
the
intention
of
that
land
and
it
seems.
L
That,
like
an
awkward
piece
of
land
there
Madam
chair,
commissioner
Lucero,
there
was
actually
a
a
lot
of
work
that
was
done
in
order
to
create
the
new
rezoning
request.
There
was
multiple
legal
lots
of
record
that
had
to
be
proven,
legal
and
then
Consolidated
and
rezoned.
So
basically
everything
within
this
chunk
here,
I,
don't
know.
If
you
can
see
my
screen
is
now
zoned
as
r10
and
the
remaining
bottom
half
of
the
development
will
be
C2
within
the
caja
Del
Oro
phase.
L
L
C
L
Is
actually
oh
Jim?
You
want
to
speak
to
that.
H
N
N
My
name
is
James
Seibert,
my
address
718
Juniper,
Drive,
Santa,
Fe,
87501,
yeah
I'm,
stepping
in
because
I
working
on
this
project
for
the
last
two
years
now
I
know
the
kind
of
the
complete
history
of
it.
The
the
strip
that
you
referred
to
this
between
this
property
and
Camino
semantario
was
the
the
owner
who
put
all
these
lands
together
as
Carlos,
and
he
was
unable
to
Simply
purchase
this
from
and
he
had
to
deal
with
like
three
or
four
or
five
different
owners.
N
In
order
to
assemble
this
as
a
package,
he
was
unable
to
purchase
that
particular
strip
of
land
from
the
owner
that
they
just
simply
didn't
want
to
sell
gotcha.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
you.
Okay.
There
appears
to
be
no
one
in
on
Zoom
that
has
raised
their
hand,
so
we
will
close
the
public
comment
section
and
open
this
up
for
Commissioners
for
any
comments
or
other
questions.
N
B
I'm
moving
the
approval
of
the
two
I
can't
I'm,
just
a
minute.
I've
got
to
go
back
to
my
screen
and
look
at.
There
are
two
numbers.
Yes,.
E
B
B
D
A
N
E
K
Oh
yep,
no,
the
question
was
chair
Cloud,
whether
what
was
the
resolution
on
the
the
great
issue.
D
E
E
E
I
guess
we
need
to
start
over
or
you.
E
Q
K
Okay,
the
conditions
of
approval
associated
with
the
technical
issues
with
Wastewater
is
one
all
PVC
pipe
shall
be
identified
as
SDR
26
PVC.
All
eight
inch
super
sewer
pipes
shall
have
a
minimum
slope
of
no
less
than
0.4
percent
show
manhole
numbers
rim
and
invert
elevations
existing
finish
grades
for
the
sewer,
Alliance
and
Sarah
manhose
shown
in
the
PNP
sheets
need
to
know
number
four.
You
need
to
show
all
water
and
stormline
crossings
with
separation,
distances
of
the
sewer
lines
in
the
penp
sheets
number.
K
Five:
all
service
lines
shall
be
sch-40,
PVC
number
six
show
detailed,
drawing
for
six
inch
sewer
service
lines
and
how
they
connect
to
the
public,
8-inch
sewer
lines
or
manholes
number
seven,
some
City
details
are
not
current
and
will
need
to
be
upgraded.
Number
eight
need
detail
for
Vol
standard
detail
for
the
six
inch
line
referenced
in
the
sewer
line,
Construction
notes,
nine
new
typical
section
for
Road
details
showing
water
sewer,
storm
sewer
and
dry
utilities,
locations
and
number
10.
E
B
A
Commissioners
Lawrence,
commissioner
Smith.
Yes,.
E
And
now
we'll
address
the
whether
the
commission
will
agree
that
grading
can
occur
on
phase
two,
with
the
understanding
that
the
developer
will
put
up
a
bond
for
the
whole
project
motion.
N
O
I
I
think
that
I
potentially
have
the
the
same
concern
that
chair
Clow,
expressed
that
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm
not
opposed
necessarily
to
the
idea
of
grading
with
the
financial
guarantee
provided,
but
I
want
to
be
clear
is
the
step
of
grading,
something
that
is
part
of
the
development
plan
which
I
think
we
are
voting
on
today
for
phase
one
and
two
or
is
it
part
of
the
subdivision
plan,
and
is
that
the
necessary
precondition
such
that
we
are
not
voting
on
that
today?.
K
Chair
Clow,
commissioner
Lawrence,
the
phase
one
plan
is
being
approved,
grading
and
Grading
permits
are
permitted
prior
to
any
type
of
construction.
The
preliminary
development
plan
has
been
approved
for
phase
two,
so
they
would
be
coming
back
for
a
final
development
plan
to
complete
that
second
phase.
O
So
so
can
I
clarify
so
normally
in
order
to
begin
grading
on
a
site.
You
need
to
have
a
final
subdivision
plan
approval
for
that
site
that
correct.
P
And
also
isn't
there,
some
can
isn't
there
something
about
this
condition
that
we
can
forego
a
standard
of
practice
because
they,
as
long
as
they
put
in
the
the
the
full
bonding
capacity,
did
I
understand
that
right.
O
B
Q
Yeah,
this
is
only
actually
approving
phase
one
there's
a
error
in
the
caption,
so
it's
only
the
sort
of
spinal
subdivision
plot
on
the
final
development
plan
for
phase
one.
It's
not
both
phases.
O
E
R
I'm
not
sure
about
the
legalities
of
having
the
development
plan
approved,
but
we
you
can
grade
a
site
without
having
a
you
know,
a
complete
plan
for
the
site.
I
would
think
if
we
have
a
financial
guarantee
that
we
can
ensure
that
if
they
did
just
leave
it
graded
and
never
do
anything
that
we
have
money
to
go
back
and
fix
the
site,
so
the
financial
guarantee,
instead
of
just
saying
that
it
would
be
enough
money
to
reseed
the
site
with
just
some
grasses.
R
It
would
have
to
be
enough
to
re-do
the
site
as
close
as
possible
to
what
it
was
previous
previously,
with
some
you
know,
pills
or
and
significant
trees
and
bushes,
and
things
like
that,
so
there
would
have
to
be
a
significant
amount
of
money
put
in
I
had
just
stated
that
if
they
put
the
entire
bond
amount
for
the
second
phase,
that
would
cover
it.
Otherwise
they
need
to
come
up
with
a
plan
and
money
for
each
individual
thing.
R
I
think
having
all
the
money
required
for
the
second
phase
would
definitely
cover
anything
that
we
would
have
to
do
to
fix
the
problem
if
they
never
built
them.
So
that
was
my
reasoning
and
saying
that
they
would
just
have
to
have
Financial
guarantee
for
the
entire
thing.
Otherwise
they
need
to
give
us
an
entire
plan
for
what
they're
going
to
do.
R
Don't
think
there's
anything
in
the
code
that
that
states
that
you
couldn't,
because
you
could
have
a
grading
permit
for
a
site.
There's
there's
nothing
that
I
know
of
in
the
code.
That
says
that
we
can
only
require
a
grading
or
only
issue
a
grading
permit
if
we
have
a
development
with
I
think
that
we
have
the
leeway
to
say
that
they
could
balance
the
site
out
with
this
grading
of
the
second
phase.
As
long
as
we
have
assurances
of
at
least
money
that
they
can
fix.
R
P
O
Madam
chair
can
I
offer
a
friendly
Amendment
to
the
motion
that,
in
addition
to
the
full
Financial
guarantee,
provided
that
there
is
a
commitment
to
meet
any
other
City
needs
or
site
restoration.
If
it
turns
out
to
be
necessary,
as
recorded
here
in
this
meeting,
foreign.
P
I
A
J
E
Okay.
Next,
we'll
move
to
case
number
2022,
58995,
5200,
Beckner
road
development
plan,
Amendment.
L
H
D
S
Okay,
thank
you
sorry
about
that
members
of
the
commission
tonight
we're
going
to
be
hearing
case
22
2022-58.99.
It's
located
at
5200,
Beckner
road
development
plan
Amendment
for
the
owners
via
Sendero
and
the
applicants
are
Sebring
and
Associates.
The
applicant
is
requesting
an
amendment
to
a
development
plan
to
incorporate
the
third
phase
of
the
development,
which
would
add
56
units
on
an
r
on
a
2.5
acre
track.
S
This
would
be
in
addition
to
276
units
that
are
existing
or
approved
on
a
12.4
acre
track.
This
is
the
case.
Caption
I,
just
read
it
off
so
off
the
bat
we'll
just
say
that
the
staff
does
recommend
approval
for
this
case,
subject
to
conditions
of
approval
and
Technical
Corrections,
says
Ln
in
this
report
and
then
use
you
know.
One
motion
will
be
required
for
this
case
approve
or
deny
the
development
plan
Amendment
so
quickly.
S
First,
project
background
phase,
one
of
the
development
plan:
it's
the
Via
Sendero
development
plan,
but
the
look.
The
apartments
themselves
are
called
The
Silo
luxury
apartments
was
approved
on
January,
23,
2022
or
2020.
Excuse
me
and
phase
one
consisted
of
500
or
252
units
and
on
approximately
11.4
Acres
phase,
two
was
approved
in
a
development
plan
Amendment
on
November
10
2021,
which
consisted
of
24
units
on
0.99
Acres,
as
well
as
they
added
some
reconfiguration
of
the
drive,
aisles
and
internal
circulation.
S
The
parcel
where
the
amendment
is
proposed
or
the
phase
three
is
proposed,
was
previously
owned
by
the
New
Mexico
Department
of
Transportation
as
part
of
the
right-of-way
for
I-25,
when
the
diverging
Gene
Diamond
intersection
was
constructed,
the
parcel
was
put
on
the
market
as
Surplus
and
the
applicant
subsequently
purchased
it
and
now
we're
proposing
to
expand
their
development.
S
So
this
is.
This
includes
phase
one
and
phase
two,
but
that's
what's
outlined
in
the
in
the
line
there
for
context.
This
is
phase
three.
So
what
you'd
be
voting
on
tonight?
It
again
consists
of
2.5
acres
with
56
units,
maximum
of
three
stories
or
36
feet.
S
There's
82
surface
parking
spots,
47
garage
and
approximately
33
000
square
feet
of
open
space.
As
you
can
see,
the
the
layout
well
we'll
go
through
to
the
perspective
here
in
a
sec,
but
let
me
keep.
H
S
So
this
is
the
total
development,
so
you
can
see
phase
one
234
units,
that's
already
be
constructed.
You
can
see
in
the
satellite
photo
there
phase
two
is
that
small
parcel
that
has
a
blue
line
going
through
it
and
then
phase
three
would
be
the
third
parcel
that
has
the
green
line
through
it.
The
total
development
is
around
15
Acres
at
it
will
total
34
314
units.
It
has
one
entrance
off
of
Becker
Road,
plus
three
additional
emergency
access
points
which
you
can
see
in
this
photo
here
foreign.
S
These
are
some
perspectives
provided
by
The
Architects
I'm,
not
sure
if
they
have
something
more
updated
for
their
presentation,
but
this
is
what
was
provided
during
for
the
application.
S
This
is
obviously
looking
for
my
25
North
ish
towards
the
outlet
malls.
This
is
a
second
perspective.
Looking
directly
north
those
buildings
in
the
foreground
are
the
garages,
excuse
me
and
then
there's
a
second
story,
building
two-story
building
behind
that
and
then
the
three-story
buildings
in
the
back.
S
So
just
to
get
these
things
off
the
table,
the
applicants
have
already
met
a
number
of
these
conditions
or
have
agreed
to
meet
them.
The
they've
already
met
the
fire
prevention
conditions,
so
those
those
are
taken
care
of,
and
then
we
had
also
discussed
a
requiring
a
noise
analysis
for
this
phase.
Three,
it
turns
out
that
they
have
already
done
a
noise
analysis
for
phase
one
for
context.
S
I
was
not
the
case
planner
for
phase
one
that
was
several
years
back
as
I
just
said,
so
the
noise
analysis
for
phase
one.
We
determined
that
it
would
be
sufficient
to
cover
phase
three
as
long
as
they
adopt
the
same,
require
or
the
same
suggestions
from
that
noise
analysis,
which
mostly
are
improved
window
installation.
S
So
then
the
applicant
has
already
agreed
to
to
do
so.
We
may
need
to
amend
this
condition.
Considering
how
it's
written
is
I
wrote
it
sort
of
specific
to
be
based
on
our
noise
ordinance
or
we
can
just
consider
it
Matt.
It
depends
on
what
legally
needs
to
be
done
there.
S
S
So
both
the
mpo
and
land
use
Department
have
requested
that
the
applicants
provide
this
connection,
which
is
to
a
trail.
That's
recently
been
built
where
that,
where
the
off-ramp
used
to
be
for
for
I-25-
and
if
you
look
on
this
next
page
for
Regional
context,
you'll
see
when
that
star
is
the
development
and
the
dotted
green
line
is
the
diverging
diamond
Trail.
All
of
those
kind
of
fat
orange
lines
are
proposed.
Future
Trails,
although
I
think
some
of
them
haven't
already
been
built.
S
The
dotted
green
lines
are
existing
trails
and
then
the
blue
lines
are
existing
on
Street,
bicycle
and
multimodal
infrastructure.
So
this
is
to
say
that
we
we
really
think
this
is
a
vital
connection
for
regional
connectivity,
especially
considering
the
the
somewhat
lack
of
connectivity
for
this
project,
particularly
phase
three.
S
We
do
recognize
that
there
are
some
challenges
with
this
connection.
So
that's
why
we've
crafted
this
condition
with
some
caveats
and
I'll
explain
those
the
issue
is
that
there's
because
it's
read
against
the
highway
it
would
need.
The
trail
would
need
to
cross
into
what's
known
as
the
nmdot
Access
Control
line,
and
in
order
to
do
so,
they
have
to
receive
approval
from
a
board
in
an
MDOT,
and
then
they
would
also
need
to
receive
an
easement
to
make
that
connection.
S
So
we
recognize
that,
but
we
don't
think
it
alleviates
them
from
our
code
requirements
and
so
we're
asking
to
pursue
those
connections.
But
if
nmdot
does
deny
those
connections,
we
are
willing
to
accept
the
secondary
recommendation,
which
the
applicants
have
have
suggested
and
I
believe
they'll
probably
show
it
in
their
presentation
just
to
go
through
some
of
our
our
code,
citations
to
be
clear.
S
1475,
open
space
standards
is
perhaps
the
most
clear
citation
that
this
Trail
connection
needs
to
be
made.
As
you
can
see,
it
says,
to
the
greatest
extent
possible.
The
connection
shall
provide
to
public
open
space
in
the
trail
urban
trail
system
and
bicycle
paths
in
such
a
way
that
a
feature
connection
is
facilitated
and
then
also
in
1492
Street
improvements
and
design
standards
where
a
trail
Network
exists.
Access
to
the
trail,
Network
must
be
provided
every
500
feet
or
feasible.
S
Dedication
to
the
city,
public
trail
system
are
required
whenever
an
adopted
plan
shows
a
public
Trail
within
or
along
the
property
line
of
a
parcel.
This
may
or
may
not
apply
considering.
This
is
this
is
not
a
proposed
Trail
Connection
in
our
in
our
city
plan,
but
it
does
this
Trail
does
it
is
along
the
property
line,
so
it
it
may
it
may
be
applicable
as
well.
Finally,
I
I
do
want
to
point
out.
S
Also
that
in
our
development
plan,
condition
Authority
for
conditions
of
approval,
1438
there's
several
conditions
that
likely
apply,
including
Provisions
for
arrangement
of
parking
in
vehicular
and
pedestrian
and
circulation,
namely
D
on-site
and
off-site
sidewalk
or
utility
Improvement
and
maintenance
agreements
and
other
conditions
where
necessary
and
I
just
want
to
point
out
that
we
we
are
asking
for
off-site
improvements
all
the
time,
if
you
think
about
Road
improvements,
sidewalk
improvements
due
to
increased
traffic
load
that
are
not
on
site
that
are
in
city
or
public
right-of-way.
S
So
this
wouldn't
really
be
any
different
than
that.
As
far
as
that
kind
of
off-site
requirement,
I
also
just
want
to
point
out
a
few
more
citations.
I
won't
read
through
all
of
these,
but
you
can
see
in
the
gender
plan
the
Metropolitan
Transportation
plan,
The
Pedestrian
master
plan
and
the
bicycle
master
plan,
all
stress
the
importance
of
connectivity
and,
specifically
bicycle
and
pedestrian
connections
to
Trails.
So
we
really
feel
like
we
have
a
lot
of
support
for
this
for
this
connection.
S
Finally,
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
what
exactly
we're
requesting
just
to
be
clear.
We
Rec
we
recognize
that
this
is
going
to
be
a
private
gated
connection,
not
open
to
the
public.
This
is
a
picture
of
an
existing
gate
on
the
property
that
I
took
a
few
days
ago.
This
is
the
kind
of
gate
that
we
would
expect
to
be
either
at
the
property
line
or
at
the
trail
line,
depending
on
how
they
wanted
to
do
it
now,
because
this
is
in
the
nmdot
right
of
way.
S
S
S
We
understand
that
there
is
a
slope
there
that
presents
some
challenges,
but
I
think
there's
also
an
opportunity
to
use
the
natural
grade
to
achieve
that
and
then,
as
I
said
before,
if
nmdot
does
deny
this
through
their
processes
and
then
we're
willing
to
accept
the
secondary
connection
and
I
will
add
that
nmdot
District
5
engineer
Javier
has
already
expressed
that
they
would
support
that.
So
that's
one
member
of
the
of
the
board
that
would
approve
the
access
Line
crossing
and
that
concludes
my
presentation.
Thank
you.
E
Thank
you.
The
applicant.
L
L
Can
everyone
see
my
screen?
Okay?
L
The
first
phase,
as
stated,
is
located
off
of
Beckner
Road
and
that's
the
bulk
of
the
project.
Right
now.
It's
currently
built
out
and
97
occupied
phase
two
is
under
construction.
At
the
moment,
it's
a
smaller
section
of
that
Remnant
area,
but
phase
three
is
Ultimate
The
Remnant
track
from
dot.
That's
being
asked
tonight
when
the
this
will
be
the
third
and
final
phase
of
the
clo
development
and
when
it's
all
said
and
done,
we'll
have
314
units
so
just
to
give
a
little
bit
more
context.
L
We
have
the
three-story
buildings
in
the
back
that
are
approximately
three
six
and
a
half
feet.
High
or
eight
feet
below
the
max
height
limit
in
C2,
which
is
45
feet,
and
we
have
our
two-story
garage
units
with
below
parking
and
then
one
story
in
an
uninhabited
garage
parking
structures.
L
L
L
So
these
are
the
existing
conditions
right
now,
there's
a
the
multi-purpose
drill,
the
dumbled
diamond
Divergent
Trail
Ends
about
right
here.
As
you
can
see,
there's
bike
Lanes,
there's
Ada
ramps.
There's
you
know
a
lot
of
trails
within
this
area.
We
see
the
the
problem
in
this
area
and
we
want
to
solve
it.
L
L
If
you
feel
like
this
is
a
vital
connection
and
we're
willing
to
make
it
you
know,
so
we
think
that
would
be
a
better
use
of
a
trail
to
the
community.
Rather
than
a
private
gated
community
gated
Trail
to
a
gated
community
that
the
public
ultimately
can't
access
and
with
that
I
thank
you,
I'm,
going
to
turn
it
over
to
Joseph
Karns
and
he
will
go
into
a
little
bit
more
detail
on
the
trail
itself
and
thank
you.
A
T
You
chair
Cloud
members
of
the
commission.
My
name
is
Joseph
Karns
summer
Kearns
and
Associates
125
Lincoln
Santa
Fe,
as
Nathan
just
described
our
clients,
who
are
present
here
tonight
from
teakin
and
Associates,
appreciate
and
share
staff's
desire
to
increase
Trail
connectivity
in
the
vicinity
of
the
project
site.
As
Nathan
explained,
the
proposal
to
connect
the
trail
fill
that
existing
Gap
that
exists
on
Beckner
road
is
a
voluntary
proposal.
Our
position
is,
and
the
reason
why
I'm
here
tonight
is
that
staff's
proposed
condition
exceeds
the
city's
Authority
and
I'll.
Explain
how
and
why.
T
T
They
set
policies.
As
you
well
know,
the
city
does
not
regulate
based
on
policies.
The
city
regulates
based
on
chapter
14.,
chapter
14
implements
the
policies
set
forth
in
the
general
plan
and
the
other
plans.
So
what
we
need
to
do
is
look
to
chapter
14
for
authority
to
require
this
acquisition
of
off-site
property
interests
and
construction
of
the
offside
Trail
I
was
glad
to
see
that
Mr
Alvarado
mentioned
section
14815.
It
was
not
in
his
staff
report,
but
he
did
mention
it.
I
have
a
copy
of
that
section
here.
T
T
The
second
purpose
under
Section
A2
of
section
14815
States.
These
regulations
provide
standards
for
the
dedication
of
land
or
easements
to
the
city
to
assist
in
implementing
the
city's
parks,
open
space
trails
and
Recreation
master
plan.
It
speaks
only
of
dedication
and
the
rubber
hits
the
road
with
sex
subsection
D2
it
states
put
the
title
of
section
d
d:
is
public
Trail
dedication
requirements
and
subsection.
One
states
dedications
to
the
city.
T
Republic
trails
are
required
wherever
an
adopted
plan
shows
a
public
Trail
within
or
along
the
property
line
of
a
parcel
to
which
this
section
14815
applies.
Dedication
of
land
you
saw
in
the
previous
project.
What
is
the?
What
was
the
pro
the
applicant
doing?
They
were
dedicating
Parkland
and
trails
within
the
project
site.
T
If
the
city
council
wanted
to
go
so
far,
is
to
obligate
a
property
owner
to
purchase
property
outside
or
an
interest
in
property
outside
of
their
project
site,
they
would
have
said
so.
Where
would
they
have
said
it
in
this
exact
section?
This
is
the
section
that
addresses
dedication
and
development
of
land
for
parks,
open
space
trails
and
Recreation
facilities.
T
There
is
nothing
in
this
section
and
I'd
invite
I,
have
a
copy
of
Staff
or
Council
would
like
to
review
it,
but
there
is
no
provision
in
the
city
code,
obligating,
a
property
owner
to
go
acquire
property
off-site
to
build
Trails
or
to
dedicate
land
for
Trails.
Mr
Alvarado
spoke
of
off-site
improvements.
Absolutely
he
was
speaking
specifically
of
public
streets.
It's
quite
often
that
you
are
obligated
to
improve
the
street
Network.
That's
on
city
property!
T
That's
not
what
we're
talking
about
here!
We're
talking
about
a
situation
where
I
haven't
seen
the
city
ever
do
this
to
require
somebody
an
applicant
to
buy
an
adjoining
piece
of
property
in
order
to
connect
to
a
trail
that
does
not
run
within
or
along
the
property
line
along
doesn't
mean.
Oh
it's
over
there.
This
Trail
is
a
couple
hundred
feet
from
our
product
from
The
Edge
from
the
western
edge
of
this
property.
T
It's
not
along
it
by
any
stretch
of
the
imagination,
and
if
this
was
the
way
the
city
regulated
development,
there
would
be
no
end
to
the
Havoc.
It
would
cause
for
project
applicants.
What
happens
when
the
next
door
neighbor
doesn't
want
to
sell?
You
had
a
question
in
the
previous
case
about
that
area
on
zoned
R1
next
to
the
project
site.
Why
was
that
not
part
of
that
project,
because
the
owner
didn't
want
to
sell
again?
It's
not
in
your
code.
This
Commission
in
this
city
regulates
based
on
its
code
and
there
is
no
section.
T
That's
been
identified
that
states
an
applicant
has
to
go
out
and
buy
an
off-site
property
interest.
So
where
does
that
leave
us
as
Mr
as
Mr
manzanatus
explained?
We
want
to
provide
valuable
off-site
Trail
connections,
we're
willing
to
do
that
and
he
described
the
the
alternative
for
connection
and
filling
in
the
gap
on
Beckner.
T
So
our
request
is
that
you
approve
the
application
and
delete
the
recommended
condition
and
approve
the
project
with
the
voluntary
Trail
connection
that
Mr
monsanely
has
described
in
the
alternative.
If
you're
not
prepared
to
do
that,
we
ask
that
you
approved
the
project
with
the
condition
and
in
such
case
we're
going
to
delete
I've
talked
with
my
client
about
this.
We
will
delete
that
connection
connection
on
Beckner.
T
It's
a
voluntary
action
on
the
applicant's
part
and
they're
not
prepared
to
invest
and
spend
money
on
a
in
a
situation
where
they're
being
compelled
to
do
something
that
we
don't
be
believe
is
within
the
purview
of
the
city
and
in
that
case,
we'll
have
no
choice
but
to
appeal
this:
the
approval
to
or
denial
If
you
deny
but
appeal
to
the
city
council.
So
that's
where
we
stand.
T
We
would
much
rather
improve
an
existing
Gap
in
the
city's
trail
system
to
the
benefit
of
both
the
public
and
the
residents
of
the
project,
rather
than
spending
time
and
money
on
an
appeal
in
a
situation
where
there's
been
overreach
and
imposing
a
condition,
that's
not
supported
by
the
city
code,
so
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
have.
Thank
you.
E
I
have
a
question:
I,
don't
see
in
this
report
that
the
city
is
requiring
the
applicant
to
purchase
the
land.
The
city
is
only
asking
that
the
applicant
apply
to
the
New
Mexico
Department
of
Transportation
for
access,
meaning
that
and
I
don't
even
think
it's
an
easement,
because
it's
basically
public
land
anyway,
so
they're,
just
looking
for
probably
like
an
e
in
an
access
permit.
E
So
I'm
not
understanding.
Why
you're
thinking
that
the
city
is
requiring
you
to
purchase
the
land.
T
I
didn't
Cloud
I
didn't
say
that
they're
asking
to
purchase
the
land,
it's
an
interesting
property,
as
Minister
Alvarado,
accurately
described
I
think
it
would
be
an
easement,
but
in
any
event,
the
anti-donation
Clause
prohibits
a
public
agency
from
donating
something
of
value
to
a
private
party.
E
Might
not
it
was
a
problem
I,
don't
think
that
the
city
is
requiring
you
and
we
could
get
clarification
from
the
city
to
purchase
an
easement
to
purchase
the
access
they're
only
requesting
that
you
obtain
permission
to
be
able
to
access
the
trail
through
their
property.
So
I'm
not
seeing
I
mean
we
and
if
that's
correct,
then
we
could
make
it
a
condition
that
you,
if
everyone
else
thinks
it's
appropriate
that
the
applicant
needs
to
comply
with
this
condition
only
if
they
don't
have
to
put
out
any
money
for
the
access.
Q
Correctly,
commissioners,
we
are
not
asking
the
applicant
to
purchase
anything,
we're
simply
asking
them
to
apply
to
mmdot
for
this
access
to
be
able
to
create
this
path
from
their
property
to
the
trail
for
the
benefit
of
their
residents.
Essentially
so
yeah
there's
no
and
you
if
you
would
like
you,
can
put
in
the
condition
out
of
section
that
says
if
an
nmdot
requires
funds
for
this
access
that
they
you
know,
it's
not
necessary.
They
can
do
the
alternate,
but
the
way
that
the
condition
is
written,
it's
just
to
apply
to.
Q
P
The
Madam
chair
can
I
offer
some
insights.
I
I
would
offer
that
the
process
the
city
is
requesting
of
the
applicant
with
nmdot
will
be
a
very
lengthy
process,
and
the
applicant
is
correct
in
that
it
is,
it
will
be
a
process
that
they
have
to
go
through
the
attorney
general
and
some
other
things
because
of
the
anti-donation
clause
in
in
the
Constitution
and
so
In
fairness
to
the
developer.
This
is
not
as
cut
and
dry,
as
perhaps
staff
well-meaning
believes
that
it
is.
D
S
To
clarify
a
few
things,
I
did
bring
up
a
right-of-way
dedication
review
checklist,
which
is
what
our
mpo
Aid
manager
director
Eric
Ani
believes,
is
what
they
would
have
to
apply
for
for
for
this
dedication,
so
I
may
have
been
incorrectly
describing
it
as
an
easement
and
I
apologize
I'm,
not
a
land
use
lawyer,
but
these
this.
This
is
what
the
process
would
be.
S
And
if
you
can
see
this
here,
you
know
there's
a
title
review:
there's
there's
a
survey
review
and
there
is
a
I
believe
a
fee
to
apply,
but
it's
not
a
it's
not
like
a
purchase
per
se,
but
I
I
again,
I'm,
not
a
expert
on
that
on
that
part
of
it,
particularly
but
I'm,
not
sure
if
they
need
to
go
through
the
Attorney
General's
office
and
all
that,
because
it's
essentially
like
dedicating
a
driveway
right
of
way
or
something
like
that.
S
It's
an
access,
easement,
it's
not
a
you,
know:
land
donation
per
se.
So
if.
P
I
may
I
would
also
I
mean
I.
Do
a
lot
of
stuff
at
the
state
level
in
in
my
career
as
a
lobbyist,
and
I
will
tell
you
that
this
process
that
you're
asking
them
to
go
through
is
not
a
simple
matter
of
checking
things
off
of
a
list.
Each
one
of
those
items
will
take
a
lengthy
period
of
time
to
process.
P
It
could
conceivably
set
the
project
back
90
to
120
days,
if
not
longer,
and
it
may
go
to
the
attorney
general.
It
just
depends
on
what
the
staff
at
nmdot
interprets
to
be
anti-constitute
like
against
the
anti-donation
clause,
and
so
that's
that
they
they
have
a.
They
have
a
a
reasonable
concern
about
this
process
and
I
I
totally
understand
staff's
position
like
this.
This
feels
like
it
would
be
a
good
idea,
but
I
will
tell
you
it
is.
P
It
will
be
cumbersome
for
the
developer
in
almost
an
unfair
way
without
them
having
the
lead
time
to
start
the
process
of
trying
to
get
the
easement
I.
Think
they're
they're,
probably
gearing
up
to
start
the
project
or
at
least
move
to
the
next
phase
of
the
project,
and
this
will
this
will
could
conceivably
set
them
back
by
90
to
120
days,
if
not
longer
get
just
from
my
experience
working
with
the
state
and
nothing
against
the
state.
But
it
is,
it
is
a
cumbersome
process.
E
But
it
seems
to
me
if
there's
there's,
if
the
New
Mexico
Department
of
Transportation
says
no,
then
there's
a
backup
and
the
backup
is
that
they
do
what
they
they're
asking
to
do
now.
So
it
seems
to
me
that
they
can
start
their
project
at
the
same
time
before
and
not
wait
for
for
a
response
from
the
New
Mexico
Department
of
Transportation.
E
They
don't
get
the
response,
then
they
can
do
the
backup
project,
which
is
on
the
Beckner
Road
continuation
I
mean
there's
no
desired,
I
think
on
anyone's
part
to
hold
up
the
project
waiting
for
New
Mexico
Department
of
Transportation
to
have
time
to
to
address
this,
but
I
think
that
it
could.
The
project
can
proceed
and
they
do
one
or
the
other.
Well.
P
Yes,
it's
a
cumbersome
process
and
so
that
to
me
it
doesn't
feel
like
a
fair
option
for
the
developer.
Not
this
not
at
this
point
in
the
process
I
I
like
it,
it
will
be
cumbersome.
It's
not
an
easy
process.
I've
actually
represented
clients
who
have
tried
to
do
these
very
things,
and
it
is
a
lengthy
process,
and
so
it
doesn't.
E
Yes,
go
ahead,
Mr
Corinth.
Do
you
have
a
comment.
T
Yes,
following
up
on
the
process,
question
I'm
reading
here,
an
email
from
Randy
Estrada,
the
property
management
agent
for
nmdot
good
morning
Nathan.
Please
see
a
brief
outline
of
the
right-of-way
use
process
below
approval
from
District
to
move
forward
with
the
following
steps:
internal
DMT
and
MDOT
review
through
multiple
departments,
traffic,
environment,
legal
Etc,
fhwa
approval,
Federal,
Highway,
Administration
approvals
number
two
and
the
number
three
is
responding
to
a
question
that
came
up
earlier.
T
If
all
approvals
are
met,
an
appraisal
would
be
required
to
find
the
current
market
value
that
would
be
used
for
an
annual
rental
rate.
That's
coming
from
nmdot
again
following
the
anti-donation
Clause.
They
can't
give
away
a
property
interest
nope
and
two
more
d.
A
right-of-way
use
agreement
would
be
drafted
with
rental
rate
and
reviewed
by
the
department
of
legal
counsel
and
finally,
access
control
committee.
Approval
would
be
needed
before
the
final
agreement
was
sent
out
for
signatures.
So
that's
the
process
again.
T
T
E
Thank
you
any
other
comments
before
our
questions
before
we,
yes,
okay,
commissioner
Faulkner
I
mean
I'm.
Sorry,
commissioner
Lawrence.
O
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I
I
would
like
some
more
clarification
on
what
you're
describing
as
your
voluntary
Trail
connection.
My
biggest
question,
I
think
is:
do
you
have
control
of
that
land?
Now?
Is
this
land
that
you
own?
O
D
L
Er
Lawrence,
so
we
did
take
a
lot
of
time
meeting
with
Dot
and
having
some
discussions
with
them,
and
one
of
the
the
biggest
concerns
was
the
access
control
line
break
and
we
also
met
with
Dot,
and
they
stated
that
the
portion
that
we
want
to
upgrade
along
Beckner
and
Cerrillos
is
actually
within
the
city's
right-of-way
and
outside
of
the
access
control
line.
So
it
would
be
as
simple
as
working
with
the
city
building
it
to
City
spec
and
then
donating
it
to
the
city.
So.
E
F
Yeah
thanks
chair
Club
yeah.
We
I
believe
it
is
the
the
Beckner
connection
there
that
they're
talking
about
yeah.
E
Okay,
thank
you
and
commissioner
Faulkner
I'm,
commissioner
pava
headed
his
hand
raised.
P
I
the
question
I
have
is
so
the
option
that
the
city
has
provided
would
be
a
gated
private
entrance
option
where
the
developer
is
offering
an
option
that
will
be
open
to
the
public.
Is
that
correct.
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you,
commissioner
Faulkner
in
listening
to
this
and
reviewing
the
plans.
I
would
like
to
ask
of
our
staff.
J
All
things
considered
the
the
proposals
to
have
the
the
access
directly
from
the
development
through
nmdot
Land
versus
what
the
applicant
is
proposing.
Is
there
really
any
difference.
S
Chair
Cloud,
commissioner,
probably
I,
believe
there
is
because
we're
thinking
about
the
long
term
of
this
development.
You
know
talking
about
approximately
500
people
living
this
in
this
development
for
the
next
50
years,
and
this
connection
will
allow
them
to
access
a
growing
network
of
trails
directly
from
their
apartment,
not
having
to
take
a
really
roundabout
way
down
to
the
road
onto
a
sidewalk.
S
By
the
way,
this
is
not
a
bike
path.
It's
a
bike
lane
on
the
road
and
they'd
have
to
cross
the
road
to
come
back
around
on
a
bike.
It's
not
nearly
as
easy
as
just
walking
on
your
apartment,
going
down
the
to
the
corner
and
also
I
think
the
city.
This
is
obviously
an
oversight
this
this
missing
piece
of
sidewalk
here
the
city
should
just
we
should
plant
it
is
on
our
own
and
I.
S
Don't
think
we
need
to
should
be
relying
on
the
private
sections
to
do
that
portion
of
connection,
whereas
this
is
our
only
opportunity
to
make
this
connection
with
the
private
development,
whereas
this
the
the
thing
this
the
secondary
connection,
is
a
connection
that
the
city
should
make
in
the
future.
But
is
we
have
other
opportunities
to
to
finish
that
can.
E
You
put
up
a
visual
showing
what
the
path
would
be
from
the
development
going
on
this
route
to
access
the
trail.
S
So
I
think
I'm
following
your
question
here.
Let
me
see
if
there's
a
good.
This
is
probably
the
easiest
way
to
look
at
this.
Can
you
see
my
cursor
so
the
connection
that
we're
recommending
is
here
you
know
in
the
corner
of
phase
three
you
know
ideally
would
be
a
direct
connection
here.
We
recognize
that
there's
a
grade
change
so
more
likely.
It
would
have
to
be
something
like
this
across
the
grade.
S
What
they're
proposing
is
all
the
way
over
here
in
the
corner,
and
you
know,
okay,
a
pedestrian,
so
if
say
you're
over
here
live
in
this
apartment.
That
means
you
have
to
walk
all
the
way
out
here.
I
think
I
think
they
actually
have
a
trail
here.
So
maybe
they
could
do
this
all
the
way
over
here
and
then
back
down
here
to
access
this
Trail,
whereas
we
just
want
them
to
go
right
here.
S
You
know
and
if
you're
on
a
bike
over
here.
All
the
way
through
here
through
here
have
to
cross
an
unprotected
Crossing
on
a
on-street
bike
lane
across
at
the
crosswalk.
Then
you
can
get
on
the
trail.
So
it's
much
less
convenient.
S
You
know,
as
somebody
who
walks
walks
and
bikes
everywhere,
I
can
tell
you.
This
is
something
that
would
be
very
frustrating
if
I
lived
in
this
corner
and
I.
You
know
just
for
example,
I've
seen
Apartments
like
this
and
what
ends
up
happening
is
people
find
ways
they'll
jump
over
the
fence,
they'll
cut
through
the
fence.
S
They'll
make
desire
paths
over
to
this
place
because
it
doesn't
make
any
sense
that
there's
not
a
connection
and
I
understand,
there's
a
lot
of
bureaucratic
hurdles,
but
I
don't
believe
that
the
code
exempts
the
applicants
from
our
code
requirements
based
on
bureaucratic
hurdles
and
we've
tried
to
craft
a
condition
that
allows
them
to
continue
with
their
development.
S
You
know
with
parallel
track
with
this
approval
and
if
it
gets
approved,
then
great.
If
it
doesn't,
we
move
on
to
the
next
option,
then
that's
that's
our
position.
E
I
have
a
question
so
in
your
recommendations,
when
do
you
say
that
they
need
to
have
just
prior
to
them,
recording
the
development
plan
Amendment?
F
Yeah,
chair
Clow,
you
know
as
we
as
you
know,
we
see
a
lot
of
variation
from
when
we
approve
a
development
plan
to
when
we
sign
the
mylars
and
we
get
it
recorded
by
the
at
the
Santa
Fe
county.
So
that
can
be
six
months
that
can
be
12
12
months.
That
could
be
two
years.
You
know
we
have.
The
the
approvals
are
for
three
years
for
a
development
plan
approval.
F
So
they
have
that
long
to
basically
address
all
the
conditions
of
approval
and
you
know
kind
of
bring
their
their
set
to
the
city,
but
they.
E
Can't
begin
work
until
the
development
plan
is
recorded.
F
E
And
could
this
be
that
the
they
could
record
the
development
plan
before
they
know
whether
the
department
which
alternative
they're
going
to
to
do.
F
Here,
Claudia,
the
way
that
we
wrote,
the
condition
is
that
here,
I'll
just
read
it
again,
so
so
condition
18
is
coordinate
with
nmdot
on
an
ADA,
accessible,
Trail
connection
from
the
property
to
the
adjacent
multi-use,
diverging
diamond
Trail,
including,
but
not
limited,
to
submitting
a
request
to
the
nmdot
access
control
committee,
an
MDOT
right-of-way
dedication,
request
and
establishing
a
right-of-way
agreement.
If
nmdot
approves
the
request,
the
trail
connection
shall
be
added
to
the
development
plan.
F
F
E
E
D
E
A
question
commissioner
Faulkner
so.
P
I'm
I'm
I'm
feeling
sick,
so
I'm
not
like
firing
all
my
Pistons
right
now
so
does
approval
from
nmdot
or
denial
from
nmdot.
Is
that
something
that
it
like?
Can
they
move
on
to
the
development
plan
with
to
to
the
Final
Phase?
Without
that
or
do
they
need
approval
or
denial
from
nmdot?
No.
E
P
P
F
Sorry,
chair,
Cloud
I
think
we're
just
acknowledging
that
we
can't
presume
to
know
the
outcome
of
the
application
because-
and
we
have
you
know,
I
know
the
applicant
has
reached
out
to
nmdot
and-
and
we
have
reached
out
to
nmdot
and
I-
know
Eric
Ani
wanted
to
be
here
tonight,
but
he
was
not
feeling
well,
but
he
also,
you
know
Works
regularly,
with
nmdot
I
used
to
work
at
nmdot,
and
you
know
they
have
expressed.
F
You
know
their
support
for
this
type
of
connection.
I.
Think
the
existence
of
the
diverging
diamond
Trail
is
a
real
kind
of
feather
in
the
cap
for
an
MDOT.
It's
so
I
think
that
they
are,
you
know
open
to
you,
know,
making
connections
to
this
Trail
and
and
I.
Think
it's.
You
know,
as
Daniel
stated,
you
know
with
over
500
people
living
here.
You
know
for
the
next
several
decades.
I
think
it
is
a
worthwhile
process
to
undertake
if
the
connection
can
be
made
and.
P
What
it
What
would
so
what
would
be
the
cost?
So
there's
an
appraisal,
that's
necessary,
there's
fees
that
are
necessary,
I,
I'm
I'm,
trying
to
wrap
my
head
around.
Why
this
condition
is
is
is
here
because
if,
if
the
outcome
isn't
required
for
them
to
move
on
to
the
next
process,
the
developer
will
basically
be
doing
a
lot
of
work
and
maybe
paying
some
fees
in
anticipation
of
an
outcome
that
really
doesn't
have
any
standing
at
the
end
of
the
day
right.
So
so
the.
F
Developers
sorry,
chair
Cloud,
commissioner
Faulkner
I,
think
what
we're
saying
and
again
you
know
sorry
the
we
are
saying
that
we
would
like
to
see.
You
know
some
outcome:
whether
approval
or
denial
prior
to
recording
the
development
plan.
Amendment
I
mean
that's,
that's
how
it
reads
right.
That's.
F
P
So
that's
my
concern
is
the
process
at
nmdot
can
take
a
long
time
absolutely
and
so
we're
requiring
something
of
a
developer
that
could
become
cumbersome
and
that
that's
the
part
that
I'm
like
I'm,
not
sure
if,
like
that's
what's
Weighing
on
me,
is
I.
I
have
again
I
have
tried
to
re.
I
have
represented
clients
in
a
similar
situation,
and
it
is
not
as
wham
bam
as
it's
being
described
is
a
lengthy
process.
Any
one
of
those
checklist
items
can
take
30
to
60
days.
Just.
B
P
P
B
Let
me
let
me
just
see
if
I
can,
if
I'm
understanding
this,
what
I'm
hearing
the
staff
I
think,
commissioner
Faulkner
is
raising
a
a
legitimate
issue.
Having
said
that,
what
I,
what
I've
understood
the
staff
to
be
saying
is
that
because
the
rest
of
the
plan
does
not
hinge
on
whether
we
go
plan,
the
first
approach
or
the
second
approach,
that
they
merely
have
to
apply
for
the
first
approach
and
they
can
then
proceed
with
the
rest
of
the
plan.
B
The
development
permit
is
for
three
years
or
the
the
plant
approval.
However,
we
say
that,
and
so
before
the
third
year
is
up,
the
department
of
nmdot
will
have
either
said
yes
or
no,
and
if
they
say
no,
the
developer
will
have
moved
with
the
city
to
plan
B,
which
is
the
less
desirable,
but
would
be
the
only
available
plan.
So
there
I
don't
hear
a
con
a
contingent
potential
that
would
derail
the
Project
based
on
what
nmdot
does
or
doesn't
do.
B
F
Chair
Cloud,
commissioner
Smith
yeah
I
believe
your
your
summary.
There
is
correct.
We
we're
not
going
to
block
or
prevent
this
development
based
on
the
outcome
of
nmdot's
access
board
decision.
E
And
I
think
but
I
think
an
added
question
is
they
can
go
ahead
and
begin
permitting,
while
they're
waiting
for
the
Department
of
New
Mexico
Department
of
Transportation
to
make
a
decision?
The
answer
is:
yes,
then
they'll
proceed
with
that
construction.
If
the
answer
is
no,
then
they'll
proceed
with
the
construction
on
on
Beckner
and
if,
if
the
commission
wants
to
proceed
that
way,
then
whoever
moves
the
motion
can
really
clarify
that.
E
P
I
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that,
if
the
developer
wants
to
move
faster
than
three
years
that
this,
the
kind
of
the
boundaries
that
are
set
for
the
developer
are
clear
in
that.
If
the
developer
wants
to
move
wants
to
build
out
that
part
of
the
development
before
the
three-year
Mark,
that
waiting
for
nmdot
is
not
going
to
hold
up
that
part
of
the
development
and
what
I
heard
from
Maggie
was
that
we
would
like
to
get
an
answer
from
the
nmdot.
Before
we
move
on
to
the
next
phase
of
approval.
No.
E
E
Putting
conditions
commissioner
Faulkner:
can
we
haven't
even
done
public
comment
yet
so
I'm
trying
to
move
this
along
I'm
going
to
let
Mr
Carnes
make
one
hopefully
informative
statement
and
not
an
argumentative
statement
and
then
we're
gonna,
maybe
open
this
up
to
public
comment.
T
Thank
you,
chair
Cloud
members
of
the
commission,
I'll
put
on
my
alternate
hat.
I
spoke
with
my
client,
and
so
you
you
spoke
about
permitting.
Not
how
not
having
the
permitting
being
held
up
so
long
as
the
applicant
is
being
is
not
held
up
from
getting
permits,
building
the
structures
and
get
and
getting
cos
because
we
don't
want.
T
If
we
have
the
buildings
built,
we
don't
want
to
hold
off
on
CO's
pending
nmdot,
so
I
think
the
appropriate
thing
to
do
to
assure
that
one
way
or
the
other
and
they're
willing
to
either
do
the
dot
Trail
or
if
they,
if
we
get
denied,
do
the
Beckner
trick.
Trail
connection,
so
long
is
the
condition
and
the
motion
is
stated
that
the
Reckoning
day
is
is
the
final
final
final
approval
or
sign
off
on
the
project
so
that
they're
able
to
serve
the
City
by
providing
you
know
CEOs
and
getting
people
into
these
units.
T
So
we
just
don't.
We
need
to
decouple
the
application,
we're
certainly
willing
to
make
the
application
within
the
time
period,
but
then
it's
out
of
our
hands.
So
the
project
goes
in
the
normal
course
and
they're
still
hanging
over
our
heads
and,
however,
the
nfdot
decides
it
triggers
whether
we
build
that
trail
connection
or
shift
to
the
one
on
deckner.
Thank
you.
E
And
cities
saying
fine
they're
shaking
their
heads,
so
I
think
we
can
move
on
from
this
one
and
commissioner
pava,
you
have
a
question
totally.
J
Unrelated,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
is
totally
unrelated
to
Trails
I'd
like
to
ask
of
the
applicant
given
the
color
palette
of
the
existing
buildings
and
the
general
sentiment
around
Santa
Fe
that
it
is
indeed
an
eyesore.
Are
you
prepared
to
maybe
use
a
different
color
palette
more
compatible
with
everything
else
in
in
the
in
the
southern
entrance
on
to
Santa
Fe?
Given
that
we're
a
city
that
values
our
unique
setting
and
Architectural
distinctions,
not
that
this
is
stipulated
by
ordinance,
but
public
sentiment,
I'm.
J
Looking
at
Mr
Alvarado's
comments
that
that.
J
What
did
you
say
here?
It's
compatible
I,
get
that
look
at
that.
So
my
question
basically,
is
what
I
just
asked,
instead
of
the
Grays
and
the
whites
and
and
the
colors
of
those
existing
buildings,
giving
that
the
massing
stays
the
same?
What
about
a
different
color
palette
for
at
least
this
to
hide?
What's
already
there?
Okay,.
L
J
Thank
you
for
studying
up
for
the
record,
I'm
glad
that
we
have
a
team
coming
up
with
the
development
code.
Changes
to
address
situations
like
this.
Yes,
it
did
meet
the
numerical
value
for
approval.
You
know:
Santa
Fe
parts
of
Santa
Fe
are
UNESCO
world
heritage
site
if
I'm
not
mistaken.
I
just
was
gone
for
a
month
and
I
traveled
across
the
Eastern
Mediterranean
to
Great
cities,
of
which
we
claim
to
be
one
in
every
single
one
of
those
cities.
J
There's
an
architectural
uniformity,
Conformity
and
beauty
that
we
claim
to
to
have
in
every
one
of
those
cities,
with
a
few
exceptions,
there's
also
an
eyesore.
That's
for
one
reason
or
you
you
look
at
it.
You
say
how
did
that
get
built
that
way
and
I
would
say
that
this
qualifies
for
the
record
I'm,
not
against
the
project,
but
I
have
to
say
that
I
would
agree
with
many
people
in
this
community
that
we
need
to
do
a
better
job
when
we
update
the
code
so
that
this
sort
of
thing
cannot
happen.
F
Yes,
chair,
klau
I
do
have
one
individual
Adam,
Johnson
who's
raised
their
hand.
If
anyone
else
is
on
Zoom
that
would
like
to
speak.
Please
raise
your
hand
and
we'll
call
you
on
you
in
order.
F
Adam
I
will
promote
you
to
panelists,
please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record
and
be
sworn
in
before
you
give
your
comments.
Thank
you.
D
F
A
U
Thank
you,
madam
chair
planning.
Commissioners.
My
name
is
Adam
Johnson
I'm,
the
director
of
the
Old
Santa
Fe
Association
and
wow
I
I
strongly
recommend
that
you
do
not
approve
another
phase
of
this
apartment
complex
unless
the
developer
makes
a
radical
departure
from
the
black
and
white
boxes
that
have
already
been
built.
Among
my
membership,
the
Cielo
luxury
apartments,
next
to
the
outlet
malls,
have
remarkably
surpassed
Capital
flaps
as
the
single
biggest
eyesore
in
all
of
Santa
Fe.
U
The
current
Seattle
apartments
make
the
outlet
malls
architecture,
look
like
an
exemplary
representation
of
the
Santa
Fe
style,
which,
ironically,
this
new
development
is
going
to
hide
so
cheers
to
commissioner
pava
for
making
this
point.
The
apartments
are:
garish
could
not
be
more
out
of
place
in
Santa
Fe
and
completely
Mar
the
visual
entrance
to
our
city.
We
need
more
housing
in
Santa
Fe.
There
will
be
one
thing
if
these
were
affordable
units
that
these
apartments
are
not
affordable.
As
of
10
minutes
ago,
a
one
bedroom,
708
square
foot
apartment
runs
80
1800
a
month.
U
We
want
handsome
entrances
to
Santa
Fe
entryways
that
allude
to
Santa,
fe's,
unique
charm
and
distinctive
architectural
styles.
The
built
clo
units
absolutely
ruined
the
view
sheds
north
south
east
and
west.
They
aren't
set
back.
They
lack
Landscaping
that
hides
the
Stark
black
and
white
and
gray
against
the
desert
landscape,
and
they
fly
literally
in
the
face
of
good
design.
U
They
aren't
affordable
taboo
so
and
and
with
regard
to
the
conversation
that
you
all
have
been
having
extensively
before
this,
they
don't
even
make
the
connections
that
are
reasonable
and
represent
good
design
and
a
benefit
to
the
community.
I
encourage
you
not
to
be
swayed
by
Mr,
carnes's
threats
of
appeal
to
city
council.
We
at
Oslo
would
welcome
the
opportunity
to
debate
the
merits
of
Cielo
flats
and
its
contributions
to
Santa
Fe
in
front
of
the
council
and
I
do
want
to
thank
staff.
U
That's
particularly
Mr
Alvarado
for
his
comments
about
Connections
and
for
advocating
for
intelligent,
Trail
planning.
Why
are
we
letting
developers
who
build
only
market
rate
quote
unquote:
luxury
apartments
build
whatever
they
like.
They
aren't
even
playing
ball
on
trail
connections,
which
are
a
Civic
benefit.
Santa
Fe
has
a
unique
architectural,
Heritage
and
I
know
that
those
in
districts,
three
and
four
want
their
neighborhoods
too,
to
represent
the
distinctive
character
of
our
town,
so
asthma
strongly
disapproves
of
this
product
project.
Excuse
me
thank
you
and
apologies
for
children.
In
the
background.
Thank.
D
E
No
one
else
on
Zoom,
okay,
at
this
point,
we'll
close
public
comment
and
I'll
open
this
back
up
for
comments
and
questions
from
the
commissioners.
B
I
wanted
to
go
back
to
the
comments
just
made
and,
and
the
comment
made
by
commissioner
pava
before
that
it
is
there.
Is
it
in
fact
the
case
that
there
is
no
there's,
there's
no
standing
for
us
or
no
reason
for
regulatory
requirement
for
us
to
ask
for
a
different
design
or
color
and
is
color
not
part
of
the
design.
Yeah.
S
S
Thank
you,
chair
Cloud,
commissioner
Smith.
Give
me
one.
Second
I
was
going
to
bring
up
the
code
for
you,
but
as
as
Nathan
mentioned,
it
does
meet
the
architectural
points
checklist,
although
it
does
get
a
deduction
for
the
color
scheme,
because
it's
not
an
Earth
Tone.
However,
the
way
it's
structured,
they
still
met
the
overall
points
structure,
so
we
can't
require
a
color
change
based
on
the
architectural
points
checklist.
S
S
S
In
a
moment,
okay,
it's
so
this
is
development
plan
1438,
going
down
to
the
approval
criteria
and
conditions
which
is
D
and
then
section.
Two
conditions
include:
let's
see
foreign.
S
S
D
S
You
know
I'm
reading
this
again
and
I'm,
not
finding
specifically
what
I
was
looking
for.
You
can
do
conditions
on
fences,
walls
and
Landscaping
arrangement
of
buildings,
other
conditions,
necessary
address
and
unusual
site
conditions.
P
S
P
Yeah
I
think
that
Pat
does
that.
Does
that
give
us
some
wiggle
room.
Q
Chair
Clow,
commissioner
Faulkner,
sadly,
perhaps
as
regards
to
development
plans,
the
commission
does
not
have
much
sway
over
design.
That
is
not
really
contemplated
in
this
section,
and
there
have
been
previous
cases
where
the
commission
has
attempted
to
do
so
and
has
been
overturned
by
the
governing
body.
So
in
these
cases,
as
regards
development
plans,
design
is
not
really
an
issue
as
long
as
they
meet
the
checklist.
Well,.
B
B
Q
G
Madam
chair,
if
I
may
yes,
there
have
been
previous
cases
where
we've
discussed
this.
In
fact,
I
was
I.
I
brought
this
exact
section
on
a
Case
last
year
when
I
first
started,
and
we
we,
when
we
were
talking
about
architecture
Styles
and
we
did
not,
the
commission
decided
they
could
not
take
that
into
consideration
as
a
condition.
P
B
B
But
this
is
not
a
50-year-old
value
that
is
entrenched
and
with
all
due
respect,
it
strikes
me
that,
as
we
rethink
some
of
the
rules
and
regulations
which
is
happening
in
several
aspects
of
how
we
review
proposals
being
able
to
begin
to
describe
the
concern
about
some
of
the
existing
omissions
in
the
regulatory
structure
or,
however,
we
refer
to
it,
I
think
is
not
a
bad
thing
and
if
the.
K
E
That
we
would
be
doing
something
that
the
city
assistant,
City
attorney,
is
recommending
that
we
not
do,
because
we
don't
have
the
authority
to
do
it
and
I,
don't
necessarily
like
to
step
out
a
place
and
do
things
that
we
don't
have
the
authority
to
do.
Even
though
it's
too
bad,
we
don't
have
the
authority
to
do
it,
but
I
for
one.
Don't
think
that
that's
fair
to
applicants
for
us
not
to
follow
the
rules.
P
P
Why
is
the
black
and
white
thing
a
non-negotiable
like?
Is
it
not
possible
that
you
could
move
to
a
different
color
scheme,
because
it's
clearly
what
the
community
wants?
It's
clear
like
I'm,
not
sure
why
that's
a
non-negotiable
for
the
developer.
So
if
we
can
unpack
my
questions
for
staff,
is
there
anything
in
the
code
that
says
we
cannot
make
these
recommendations
and
then
for
the
developer?
I
would
like
an
answer
to
why
you're
that's
a
non.
The
color
scheme
is
a
non-negotiable.
Q
It
has
the
necessary
findings
for
approval
and
they
do
not
involve
design
there.
There's
three
one
is
that
the
Planning
Commission
is
empowered
to
approve
the
plan
under
the
section
of
chapter
14
described
in
the
application,
which
I
don't
think
anyone's
debating.
That
part
B
is
that
approving
the
development
plan
will
not
adversely
affect
the
public
interest
and
see
is
that
the
use
in
any
Associated
buildings
are
compatible
with
and
adaptable
to
building
structures
and
uses
of
the
budding
property
and
other
properties
in
the
vicinity
of
the
premises
under
consideration.
Q
P
E
We
have
we
have
criteria
that
we
consider,
and
that
is
not
a
criteria
that
we
consider
so
to
throw
in
a
new
criteria
that
is,
is
not
appropriate
to
the
applicant
when
by
code
it's
not
a
criteria
that
we
consider,
but
I
have
a
question.
I
think
your
La,
your
other
Quest
question,
commissioner
Faulkner,
is
a
good
one.
Is
why
wouldn't
the
developer
consider
an
Earth
Tone?
Those
buildings
are
pretty
far
apart.
E
Phase
three
is
in
another
corner:
I
think
that
probably
get
a
good
editorial
in
the
new
Mexican
and
some
maybe
good
letters
to
the
editor.
If
they'd
consider
an
earth
color,
what
is
the
opposition
to
that
voluntarily?
Do
that?
Well,.
P
And
and
what
I'm
trying
to
get
to
is
I'm
trying
we
we
have
to
so
the
community
understands
why
we
make
some
of
the
decisions
we
make
is.
It
sounds
like,
in
this
case
we're
interpreting
the
code
with
personal,
purposeful
exclusion.
So
if
it's
not
included
in
the
code,
it's
by
purpose
that
it
is
not,
which
then
dictates
that
we
can't
consider
it,
and
so
that
was
the
purpose
of
my
first
question
is
to
say,
like
we
would
love
to
consider
that,
but
it
was
purposeful
exclusion,
which
means
we.
P
P
P
L
L
If
you
want
to
look
at
changing
that
in
the
future,
by
all
means,
but
under
the
current
rulebook,
it's
the
middle
ground
for
Developers
and
the
public,
we
are
in
compliance
with
the
code
and
that's
the
reality
of
the
situation.
They're
at
97
occupancy
people
like
this
development
and
they
want
to
live
there,
there's
already
a
wait
list
for
phase
two,
so
I
mean
we're
just
playing
ball,
we're
meeting
the
code
and
we're
doing
what
we
have
to
do.
P
E
Yes,
commissioner,
murando
thank.
I
You,
madam
chair
I,
I'd
just
like
to
make
two
comments
about.
I
What's
been
talked
about
so
far,
the
first
is,
you
know
we
we
keep
having
cases
where
affordability
or
not,
is
talked
about,
and
we
often
talk
about
the
current
rent
or
the
current
price,
and
what
I'll
continually
break
up
with
this
is
part
of
that
is
that
there's
a
shortage
throughout
every
tier
bracket
of
the
rental
and
new
construction
and
existing
construction
market,
and
what
that
means
is
if
those
apartments
should
be
under
normal
market
conditions,
let's
say
twelve
hundred
dollars.
I
If
a
bunch
of
people
that
are
in
the
market
to
spend
more
than
that
need
to
go
there
because
of
scarcity,
it
raises
the
prices.
So
if
we
always
go
back
to
the
the
current
market
price
as
a
reason
not
to
do
housing,
we're
going
to
stay
here
so
I
I'm,
not
saying
it
means
we
should
approve
or
not
prove
anything
but
I
I
just
feel
like
I
need
to
continually
bring
that
perspective.
I
I
Please
trust
that
if
I
felt
it
was
you'd
hear
from
me
a
lot,
but
the
only
thing
I
I
would
like
to
add,
and
maybe
Maggie
or
Jason
would
be
even
better
to
flush
out
this
point.
I
The
the
architectural
point
system,
as
it
impacts
design,
is
it's
pretty
aggregate
so
like
the
the
use
and
the
zoning
really
come
into
play
in
terms
of
what
you
can
or
can't
do,
and
so
part
of
that
is
where
you
are
in
the
city
and
what
kind
of
building
You're
Building
ends
up,
impacting
your
your
options
and
another
really
important
thing,
I
think
to
bring
out
of
but
this
point
system
it
is
not
possible
really
under
the
current
point
system,
to
do
a
housing
project
that
goes
outside
of
the
geometric
and
materiality
constraints
of
that
point
system
and
go
outside
of
color.
I
You
you
pretty
much
once
you
go
outside
of
color,
you
have
to
meet
everything
else
and
so
in
in
that
sense,
I
think
it
is
working
in
that
there
is
some
constraint
there.
The
the
other
thing
I'd
caution
about
this
whole
conversation
is
I,
think,
there's
a
real
expertise
needed
to
require
a
project
to
fit
into
Santa
Fe,
it's
simply
not
as
simple
as
color
or
dimension.
In
fact,
far
more
than
color,
sometimes
material
choices.
Even
the
the
specification
of
the
stucco
makes
more
of
an
impact
you
could
put
out
stucco.
I
That's
paper
thin
made
out
of
plastic
and
slightly
reflective
and,
and
it
can
be
a
color-
that's
Earth
toned,
but
in
reality
it
simply
has
no
representation
of
Santa
Fe
style.
So
these
to
me,
they're
they're,
complex
questions
and
I
do
think.
There
are
some
reasons.
Why
there's
this
line
between
the
Architectural
Review
and
permit
and
what
would
be
approved
in
a
development
plan
now
I
guess
what
I'm
suggesting
is
that
if
we
want
more
control
of
these
things,
maybe
we
look
at
what
that
Architectural
Review
is
during
permit.
I
E
O
Madam,
chair
I,
will
make
a
starting
motion
to
approve
the
development
plan
Amendment
for
case
2022-5899,
subject
to
the
conditions
of
approval
and
Technical
Corrections
recommended
by
staff,
noting
that,
regarding
condition
18,
that
it
requires
that
the
request
be
made
to
nmdot
before
recordation,
but
not
the
nmdot
decision
and
the
nmdot
pending
decision
will
not
prevent
further
permits
or
CEOs.
This
project.
B
E
Did
we
need
to
put
anything
in
there
about
the
fact
that
the
applicant
is
not
required
under
this
condition,
to
purchase
the
property
or
to
pay
an
easement.
P
Q
Chair
Cloud,
if
you
can
condition
it
that
if
an
MDOT
does
require
them
to
purchase
an
easement
and
is
not
able
to
donate
it,
that
it
may
not
be
required
to
do
it.
That
is
allowed.
A
I
F
Yes,
thank
you,
chair,
Clow
I
just
wanted
to
give
an
update
from
last
night's
gardening
body
meeting
in
case
you
didn't
tune
in,
but
it
was
definitely
a
Love
Fest
I
will
say
and
unanimously
supported
and
approved
by
the
governing
body.
So
and
we
received
yes,
the
Midtown
master
plan,
I'm.
Sorry
I
forgot
that
little
detail
and,
of
course,
yeah
when
we're
all
a
little
tired
from
from
being
up.
You
know
for
that
last
night,
but
we
there
was
a
lot
of
public.
F
You
know
that
came
out
and
and
spoke
out
in
support
of
it.
Members
of
the
community-
and
you
know
there
was
a
lot
of
good
discussion
from
the
council,
and
you
know
we're
all
very
happy
to
have
that.
Behind
us
and
and
rich
brown
director
of
Community
Development
announced
that
the
first
three
rfps
would
be
released
tomorrow.
So
that
is
also
very
exciting.
So
there
really
is.
You
know,
movement
on
Midtown.
J
Thank
you,
madam
chair
first
I'd
like
to
note
that
it's
eight
o'clock
and
I'm
still
awake,
even
though
jet
lag
has
been
an
issue
of
the
last
two
days.
I
was
watching
the
news
and
I
fell
asleep
and
I
was
like
what
happened.
That
was
yesterday,
but,
more
importantly,
a
little
little
more
seriously.
I
am
delighted
to
to
learn
that
that
we
have
chosen
Clarion
and
Associates
to
do
the
development
code
overhaul.
J
They
are
fully
capable
of
addressing
just
the
kind
of
complex
issues
that
we
just
dealt
with
here
and
resolve
them
so
that
maybe
the
city
of
Santa
Fe
can
live
up
to
its
aspirations
and
being
a
unique
place
to
live,
maybe
even
with
buildings
that
aren't
all
Earth
Tone.
E
It's
all
a
matter
of
opinion,
commissioner
Smith
and
then
commissioner
Lawrence
I
mean
commissioner.
B
D
C
You
chair,
I,
just
want
to
kind
of
back
to
my
first
point:
I
want
to
express
my
interest
in
having
all
the
materials
to
review.
I
was
seeing
things
on
the
screens
that
I
hadn't,
seen
in
my
packet
and
I,
think
that
would
have
really
helped.
You
know
so
and
I
think
you
know.
C
The
developers
said
that
it
had
been
shown
to
previous
commissions,
but
I
would
have
liked
to
have
seen
some
of
the
some
of
those
materials
before
this
meeting
so
I,
don't
know
how
that
I
don't
know
how
we
require
that
or
how
we
ask
for
that.
But
that's
certainly
something
I
would
have
liked
to
have
seen.
F
Yeah
thanks
chair
Clow
and
commissioner
Lucero
yeah
I,
appreciate
that
and
I
think
you
know
we
can.
You
know
talk
with
the
senior
planners
and
you
know,
certainly
in
that
instance,
where
we
had
you
know
previous
cases
and
then
get
period.
You
know
a
period
of
Gap
of
time
and
then
coming
back
with
new
information.
Art
Amendment,
you
know,
but
we
can
include
you
know,
maybe
just
the
whole
case
packet
as
it
was
presented
prior.
F
Maybe
an
idea
to
make
sure
that
we're
you
know
conveying
all
the
renderings
and
all
the
information
that
was
initially
presented
so
that
new
members
who
maybe
weren't
present
for
those
hearings
could
at
least
have
an
opportunity
to
review
that
I.
Think
that'd.
E
Be
good
okay,
Madam,
Madam,
chair
I,
think
it's
commissioner
Lawrence.
Next,
okay.
O
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
really,
I
just
wanted
to
make
a
comment
to
my
fellow
Commissioners
about
tonight's
hearing
that
I
really
appreciated
the
discussion
that
we
had
about
the
architectural
points.
I
think
we
all
agreed
that
it's
a
really
Troublesome
system
and
it
would
be
really
nice
to
see
some
changes
to
make
sure
that
we
have
consistency
and
positive
design
across
the
city
and
I
just
really
appreciated
how
that
discussion
came
out
and
what
everyone
had
to
say
in
that
regard.
B
Was
just
going
to
suggest
to
what
Ms
Moore
just
said
that
maybe,
rather
than
giving
us
another
95
pages
of
documents
that
are
four
years
old,
there
could
be
a
synthesis
just
some
kind
of
state
that
we
could
go
into
it
and
I
don't
know
if
Seth
would
agree
to
that,
but
the
notion
that
there's
an
enormous
volume
of
minutes
and
findings-
and
it
is
mind-boggling
if
you're,
just
an
old
man
like
me,
but
if
there
was
some
way
to
do
a
synthesis
where,
if
I
saw
something
I
wanted
to
know
more
about
I,
could
ask
I
think
that
might
be
a
little
more.
P
I
I
just
want
to
update
on
the
policy
committee
and
what
we're
working
on.
We
have
been
working
on
the
enn
possible
changes
to
the
e
m
process,
so
the
policy
committee
has
promulgated
some
recommendations
that
we've
forwarded
to
staff
and
at
this
point
in
the
process,
there's
been
some
questions
that
the
policy
committee
has
had
and
we
feel
like.
We
can't
move
forward
without
staff's
input,
and
so
we
have
given
staff
our
recommendations
in
kind
of
a
straw.
P
Man
format,
they're,
not
our
final
recommendations
but
they're,
the
building
blocks
and
foundation
and
staff,
and
the
policy
committee
are
going
to
meet
to
do
a
team
kind
of
Think
Tank
approach
to
the
recommendations,
next
Thursday
and
so
hopefully
we'll
be
able
to
give
a
commissioner
I
mean
counselors
worth
and
cassett
some
options
that
they
can
use
to
generate
some
kind
of
resolution,
ordinance
around
ens.
And
so
that's
been
our
big
push.
This
the
last
couple
of
months
and
I.
P
Think
we've
reached
a
point
where
we
can
really
get
into
a.
We
can
really
get
into
a
good
discussion
with
staff
and
and
approach
it
as
a
team
to
give
the
counselors
something
that
they
can
really
work
with,
and
so
that's
that's
been.
The
policy
committee's
push
and
I
think
I
think
we've
hit
a
good
place
with
it.
B
O
I
know
we're
after
the
meeting,
but
are
we
going
to
have
another
December
meeting?
Okay,
thank
you.