Good evening. Uh, welcome to the land use planning and zoning committee meeting. I call it to order on April 15th, 2026. All councilors are present this evening with councilors Grout and Rogers joining via Zoom. This is a hybrid meeting where all participants will be in person or on Z on a video or audio conference. Members of the public have the opportunity to address the committee if they have signed up for public comment per the rules established on the agenda or as published on our agenda and on our website. Friday, we will call the speakers when we get to the individual agenda item you signed up for. Each speaker will have two minutes to present. Comments will be addressed to the committee members only, and any disruptive conduct will result in removal from the meeting. Agenda item A is for councelor Fubcorn. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. R2 is directing the city to update all maps, information, and documentation to accurately reflect the city's ownership of the Montano Bridge. I move it do pass. >> There is a motion. and a second from I think councilors Grout and Rogers and councelor Feebleorn do you want to open and then I know that uh I know that councelor Baka's online but also we have Mr. Cox that was going to on this the next one >> next one okay so Mr. Paul is here too if you want. Go ahead council. >> So my opening was just that this is for councelor Baka. Um this is uh an issue that I was unclear on. So I asked him to be sure he was online in case we had any questions and so we can just move to questions if you'd like. >> All right counselors, any questions or comments for councelor Baka or councelor Fiborn? >> Councelor Champine. >> Thank you madam chair. Uh why I mean we we have the bridge, we've been using the bridge. So what's what's the what's the mixup on this? >> Councelor Baka. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um so for if you look at the map of Albuquerque does not show um the bridges as being owned by the city and the common not the common thought was that it was owned by the county. These last couple of years, we've been doing adding in a hawk light at Montano, a full-on street light on Montano, and repaving it for um, you know, restriping it, adding bike lanes, doing some safety work, and wanted to do a mural on the bridge as well. And my understanding was that it was the county, it's not ours. And so we Kevin Marl did a little bit of research, found a court case that cited that the bridge was ours. Um, but we'd never recorded it in our in our database that way. So essentially, we misplaced Albuquerque property for 30 years. So we're like, well, let's just update the maps. Here's a resolution telling everybody to update it. >> Perfect. I'm glad we found it. Councilors, any other questions or comments? >> Just Madam Chair, councelors. Thank you. Just quick question. So, is there any talk on the county side? Are they going to say we we it actually is ours? What's the conversation with the county? >> Councelor Baka. >> Thank you, Ma Madam Chair. Councelor, uh I did talk to county. Um they're they're fine with it. Um, we we already pay for all the maintenance and and do all the the because I I reached out to them talk about painting it this that like you guys already do that. You guys are good. And then I showed them the the court documents and happy to share those with counselors as well if we if you'd like to read through that. Um, and they're fine with that. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions or comments? Councelor Pubicorn to close or support. All right, since we're on Zoom, Mr. Clerk, >> Councelor Shampine, >> yes. Councelor Fiborn, >> yes. >> Councelor Grout, >> yes. >> Councelor Rogers, >> yes. >> Chair Bassan, >> yes. >> That passes unanimous. >> Moving on to agenda item B. Councelor Fableorn by request. Madam Chair, R six designating approximately 36 acres on San Pedro Drive as blighted. Approving an expansion amendment to the boundary of the Near Heights Metropolitan Redevelopment Area. Approving a corresponding non-substant substantial amendment to the Near Heights Metropolitan Redevelopment Area Plan, amending section 121211 of the code of resolutions. I will move a do pass. >> Second. >> There's a motion and a second by councelor Champine. Councelor Fableorn. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So, this is the expansion of the San Pedro um uh metro health and redevelopment area up past LMUS north to the interstate. Basically incorporating the entirety of the San Pedro main street uh area as this um near Heights Metropolitan Redevelopment Area. Really just thinking through how we the work we're doing on San Pedro um starts at at uh central and does go all the way up to I40. and we wanted to make sure that the entirety of that area was included. >> Thank you. All right. So, seems as though Mr. Cox dodged a bullet on the last one and is also not adding anything on this one. So, we'll move to Miss Delgato for a presentation. Sorry, we're just going through some technical Okay. Okay, counselors. So, uh, the item before you is a proposed expansion of the Near Heights MRA into the San Pedro corridor that is north of Lomis Boulevard. Uh, particular to this item is that the applicants to this item are city council services and also revitalize San Pedro Partnership. Um so the proposed expansion is um proposing an addition of 36 acres um or 74 properties. You can see um on this map that let me just okay so both maps the red is the area that we are referencing. Um the map to the left is actually a an image of where the existing near heights MRA is. That's the larger lighter blue area and then the expansion is the is the darker blue. Um the near heights MRA plan was originally adopted by this body in the year 2000 and then underwent an expansion in 2010. Um its general goals are to revitalize wided commercial corridors, enhance small business development, job creation, stabilize low-income neighborhoods, and increase affordable housing. Uh this area really developed during the 1970 1970s 1980s um as auto auto oriented and in 2016 underwent a small road diet to add bike lanes. In terms of what existing land use zoning and our corridor designations look like. Uh so land use is a mix of strip mall type commercial development. Um also very auto oriented business uses, office spaces, large box stores, self- storage, uh food and beverage establishments as well as the primary zoning. There are three primary zones in this area. MXT mixeduse transition, uh mixeduse low intensity and mixeduse medium intensity. um which generally calls for a mix of both residential and commercial um higher density stack type development which right now existing is you know one story type one one story one use type development um and was designated as a main street corridor in 2017 for our comprehensive plan which is this map here that shows the the purple boundary outline. So in terms of what we're seeing in the analysis as signs of blight. So um of the 74 properties about 15 to 20% of those are vacant. That is reflected in the map here. Um when we looked at growth in property taxable value about 44% of those properties have not not grown more than 20% over the last 10 years. When we compared that to the adjacent land in district six and seven, um land in that area has increased in uh taxable property value by by about 25%. So it is uh underperforming relative to its its neighbors. These are images of the signs of blight that were identified. uh old damaged parking lots, damaged signs, unsafe sidewalk conditions, dilapidated structures, as well as um lack of in those images, lack of public infrastructure, but not really up to meeting the design standards of our main street corridor designation for the comprehensive plan. So that means it's lacking uh pedestrian connectivity, crosswalks, um reduced sidewalks, um disconnected site layouts, and just again not a lot of pedestrian amenities in the area. This map shows um code enforcement infractions in 2025. So those really were about revolved around building safety complaints, weeds, litter, snow, and business license complaints. um we um analyzed about 250 code enforcement infractions in 2025. Now, in terms of the public outreach that was done for this area, so uh January 2026, we went out there to flyer all properties to invite them to a stakeholder meeting, which allowed us to also have conversations with folks in in those properties, uh whether it was a business owner or a property owner on site. We uh held a public meeting at the offices of the San Pedro Revitalization Partnership on January 13th. We had about uh 30 stakeholders in attendance of those being business and property owners, res residents and neighborhood association reps. uh we made sure to not only flyer but also invite those folks via mail invitations and we also issued a survey of which we got 23 respondents to get that anecdotal data as well as you know um the actual data the analysis the numbers and then you know then it underwent all of the legal public notice requirements January 29th um there was a legal notice published in the Albuquerque Journal on February 6th the MR agency did issue that public notice of hearing mailed to all affected property property owners within that boundary as well as emailed all neighborhood associations uh surrounding that area. And then this item went to the development commission on February 19th of which the commission did provide a recommendation of approval to the council. And that brings us to today to its second public hearing. >> Thank you very much, Miss Delgato. Any questions counselors? I'm gonna be in a minute. I don't think if they don't have hands up just to confirm. Okay. All right. No questions, comments, anything from the administration? >> We do have somebody signed up to speak. Did they Are they online? >> I will be calling Adrien Carver to speak. Madam Chair, thank you. Uh good afternoon uh madame chair and counselors. My name is Adrian Carver. I'm the executive director of Revitalized San Pedro Partnership where the accredited uh main street program serving the corridor from central to I40. Um as many as of you know and as outlined in the proposal, um this is an area of town that has experienced some long-term disinvestment and needs focused attention. Um the I just want to thank councelor Speeblecorn and and Rogers for working on this and especially council staff and MRA staff for working closely with our organization to bring this proposal forward. Um we support this amendment and look forward to using the tools of the uh Near Heights MRA to revitalize the San Pedro Main Street corridor. Thank you for your time, >> Madam Chair. That concludes comment. Thank you. >> Okay. And council grout, did you want to comment? >> Okay, thank you. I um I have um I have property south of here of of what this um expansion includes. So, um, just to be safe, I'm going to recuse myself from this vote until we know that it's safe for me to participate. >> Any other questions or comments? Counselors? Seeing none, council people corn to close. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. So, um, I just want to reiterate this. This was not from um, city council. This was from council services staff and revitalized San Pedro partnership. Um and so I I'm very very pleased that this is happening. It is needed. We need to open up all those tools that are available through the MR for this area. Um and I'm very very much looking forward to sharing an MR with Councelor Rogers um and getting some work done there. So with that, I urge your support. >> All right. With that, Mr. Solless, >> Councelor Champine, >> yes. >> Councelor Feebleorn, >> yes. >> Councelor Rogers, >> yes. >> Coun Chair Bass, >> yes. >> That passes 40. >> Thank you. Seeing that there is no further Oh, councelor Peopleorn. >> I'm sorry, Madam Chair. I just got a message and I I don't know the tech the the correct answer, but um is it possible since this is by request to add Councelor Rogers to the um sponsorship list on this bill since it does affect both of our districts? >> Let's call it on. >> Sorry, >> Madame Chair. Councelor Fubicorn. Yes, we should be able to add two sponsors to a by request. >> Okay. So, Councelor Rogers um would like to be added. Thank you. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> All right, everyone. I don't think there's any further business. Seeing none, this LP's committee meeting is adjourned. >> Thank you.