Amendment 7 should not be passed I have benefited from eyes on the street and have been happy that my neighbors can keep an eye on my house allowing walls up to 5T as a permissive use will make us less safe and diminish the welcoming environment of our neighborhood Amendment Six as it is written must also receive a do not pass recommendation the proposed amendment provides cursory information on the development regulation oversight and maintenance of an ESS substation there is absolutely no reference to current federal regulations and it should be noted that other municipalities have developed ordinances regulations and indeed task forces to help guide their construction an ongoing oversight thank you Debbie Conger followed by Patricia Wilson chair bison and committee members um thank you I have lived in Albuquerque since 1978 in my current neighborhood South B Salos for 40 years and I can I am against A7 increasing the walls to 5 foot permissive in my neighborhood people do not put up walls to protect their pets and their children and to have a hot tub for the most part what a lot of people are doing is they are putting up 5-ft walls with quote view fencing in order to park three to five cars in their front yard in addition to perhaps another couple cars what they do they do this in violation of the Ido taking up more than 60% of the front yards often they Concrete in the entire front yard which increases the heat Zone in our neighborhood and in fact we had a tree New Mexico Grant last summer because Parks and Rec found that our neighborhood had a high heat in high heat index heat Zone um so that's why we got this Grant and in many cases I can I canvased with Tree New Mexico and there are a lot of yards that were not even eligible for trees because of the parking in the front yards thank you thank you Patricia Wilson followed by Jane Beckley may I wait for the chair to return it's okay she'll be right back Madam chair I have more concerns about the original 17 pages of the 60 proposed changes submitted to the EPC last September after their notice of decision was issued in January I went back through that spreadsheet and exed out all the items that EPC recommended to delete by my count EPC recommended deletion of 20 of the 60 items yet there's no document that clearly shows this I hope counselors are clear about what is in the city-wide package I'm not sure I am the ND lists 25 findings 31 conditions and three conditions that are new amendments two of those 32 32 and 33 revising the definition of adjacent to exclude catty corner and revising the definition of Street facing facade appear to have been written to solve a developer issue on a particular site and should not receive should get a do not pass number 34 which would change the annual update cycle to a biannual update cycle for that amendment I respectfully urge a do pass thank you very much you Jane Beckley followed by Gary eer accept that neighborhoods that are welcoming and walkable where Neighbors develop Community keep an eye out for one another First Responders work safely are places where all people are safest and Lead their best life thank you Loro Nano Lopez followed by Bill Jarvis good evening um chair and members of the committee um my name is Letta Nan Lopez I'm here representing the historic neighborhood alliance in Santa Bara martines toown neighborhood association whereas the City of Albuquerque is currently facing the crisis of homelessness and catastrophic housing shortage due to the City of Albuquerque neglect of dealing with these issues before the pandemic and whereas the increasing cost of renting or purchasing a home has become untenable for many of our neighbors due to many issues such as the no rent control allowed Airbnb investors lacking of living wage Etc and whereas the City of Albuquerque needed to in the past more today meet the supply needs by creation of a permanent affordable housing and needs to protect preserve the existing character of the star neighborhoods and whereas duplicates already exist in the star neighborhoods as conditional in the R1 Zone and are allowed under the RT Zone which supports housing options in order to address the housing supply issues in our city I would just refer to April 2 fifth letter that we sent you and also to the resolution where we're saying to oppose this uh we feel that this is just a continuation of the perpetuation of discrimination against our neighborhoods thank you for this opportunity talk thanks Bill Jarvis followed by Russell Brito thank you madam chair I'm the newest member here of Santa Fe Village um homeowners association in regards to Amendment 85 in our R1 Zone neighborhood lot sizes and narrow streets would not be suitable for duplexes of any size a conditional use rather than permissive would be the better choice in my opinion in our opinion for A7 Not only would it drastically change the landscape of our neighborhood met with a sergeant at pizza with a cop recently at Dion's and he stated it would create a hazard for the PD to chase down a suspect in a burglary or for fire rescue to provide service for a particular residence I would hope the council would take this issue seriously thank you for listening Russell Brito followed by Evelyn felner Madam chair committee members uh my name is Russell brto with Public Service Company of New Mexico thank you for this opportunity to speak I'd like to address Amendment A6 for energy storage systems uh we've had an opportunity to look at the amended language that includes uh new requirements for residential district concealment uh in general uh we see these uh as uh challenging but a challenge that we can address on a site sby sight basis but we do have a few concerns uh that my colleague DeAndre Lopez will address thank you Evelyn feltner followed by Carlos Michelin have an exhibit for the counselors which I hope is passing among you well I'd rather they pass around but I'm the district 7 secretary uh district 7 Coalition secretary and you probably had our letter saying we are opposed to extending the boundaries of Uptown urban center for permissive use of duplexes our neighborhood of VZ will be particularly affected if you look at the map there is a line there for a quarter mile it takes about a third of the neighborhood and it doesn't go straight because our streets don't go straight it would CA enmity among neighbors it would not be a good idea for duplexes of any stretch or the imagination above two or three streets it is also impractical we have Hoffman houses I'm sure some of you know what those are they are solid brick the only way you could convert them into a duplex is via the garage the garages are unheated code code for the city requires you to have indoor plumbing and a heating Source if you rent out something you can't do it if you're converting the garage or already have cost would be prohibitive thank you Miss feltner and I know that staff will make sure to get us get us those documents thank you good idea perhaps for some neighborhoods our neighborhood not thank you Carlos Michelin followed by Michael Vorhees um Madame chair committee U members thank you for this opportunity to address you my name is Carlos Michelin I live in District 2 I'm a homeowner I'm a scientist and uh someone who cares deeply about my community um I'm here today to ask you to pass amendment five allowing duplexes permissively along Transit corridors the city estimates we need over 30,000 new homes 30,000 that did not happen overnight um is a result of Decades of restrictive government regulation in the form of zoning this is a scientific consensus it's a consens it's uh the opinion of think tanks from all over the political Spectrum um and bringing into Albuquerque two3 of the city is own for single family detached homes two3 um a market uh so heavily regulated it's not free market it cannot respond to supply and demand rules um I would never argue for a wild west less a fair housing market I'm not um a Libertarian uh and the city does have legitimate interest in controlling how growth occurs um what I'm saying though is that we should be allowing the very next smallest increment of development to occur uh without much restriction or regulation thank you Michael vores followed by Jim Price chair bassan and counselors the the battery energy storage systems are critical for a renewable sustainable energy system but it's an emerging technology and even technologically competent Global Enterprises have had explosions and runaway fires it's not ready for prime time it's certainly not ready for a permissive use uh throughout the city would you be comfortable with the lot next to your house having a 12ft tall wall with constantly droning 53t containers uh of operating their cooling system putting out heat All Summer Long next to you would you like the fire risk next to your kids in school should these be put in flood zones put in Parks or open space should they jeopardize critical infrastructure or any of the vibrant Economic Development uh it's it's simply uh not ready for a a permissive use everything should be conditional and the conditions need to take into account all of the risks and mitigate them thank you very much Jim Price followed by Antonio Aragon um chairman ban counselors thank you my name is Jim Price I live in molon rock um I'm going to address the A7 walls because from recent experience with code enforcement I have been told that they do not like having to look over walls because that's like looking inside the house and I think if we allow residents to raise the front walls we create more opportunity for another obstacle for code enforcement to um enforce code also it was put forth at the meeting in April that this would make front yards more animal friendly raising the walls is directly 180 de from the city's um secure fence ordinance under the heart thing in for Animal Welfare if you have a view fence and unattended animals a person could an animal can easily come in contact with another animal through the view section um it' create a false sense of security a person might want to reach over to pet and animal and get bit it goes totally contradicts the secure fence and so I have to say that th this needs to not happen also it's going to affect the clearance triangles of people backing up Americans Drive bigger vehicles where it's harder to see out the back backup cameras can cannot see around a wall Mr price thank you thank you Antonio Aragon followed by Michael Devon Madam chairman my distinguished members of my city council the City of Albuquerque I'm standing in a room where Vince gregos was my best man at my wedding and I come to you as the vice president of barelas neighborhood association a very concerning matter and the most should I say busy intersection in the downtown area in the neighborhood of barelas it is important that this SE intersection stays safe not only for pedestrians but for my residents of barelas we feel highly strong that the corporate management of Dunkin Donuts we want but we need it to be safe we'd highly appreciate it if the vote goes where where it'll take a little bit more notion and mind for us to keep that Community are my community safe my family's lived in the same house for 124 years and that that used to be my place of selling papers when I was a kid now it's under should I say very important notification when it comes to safety of my community I'd highly appreciate it if you vote within our community thank you very much and excuse my time over going over Michael Devon followed by Brandy Thompson thank you madam chair and committee members for your time I stand today in support of amendment five regarding duplexes I was moved to speak because I've have seen the success of allowing duplexes and established neighborhoods from experiences in my own family I have an aunt and uncle living in the small town of Little Falls New York which mended their zoning code in 2019 to allow duplexes as part of a City Waterfront revitalization project my aunt and uncle were empty nesters and had extra space but wanted to stay in the Home and Community they loved after the change in zoning code they had a small Contracting crew of four composed of other Little Falls residents come in to convert part of the garage to a second kitchen add one new wall and build a second entryway under the new zoning code that was all that was needed to turn their single family home into a duplex and a second unit and the second unit was then purchased by young family I envisioned amendment five enabling a similar change in alp in Albuquerque through creating small scale investment opportunities by local homeowners creating new affordable smaller houses for new home buyers and providing sustainable work for Independent local building Crews for these reasons I urge your support to pass amendment five thank you for your time Randy Thompson followed by Jude Miller Madam chair Council now this is the story all about why do duplexes in Albuquerque are worth a try and I'd like to take a minute just to sit right there tell you why we need duplexes [Music] everywhere in the west of the country born and rais and Albuquerque is where I spend most of my days working hard saving up trying to find a place but the ca of single home was tough to face when a couple of Builders started thinking ahead creating duplexes instead of more spread I saw benefits and I knew it was clear we need more duplexes to keep our cost in the rear more homes more space more families to grow with prices that don't put a strain on cash flow affordable living when neighbors close by community grows strong and here's the reason why less land is needed which means to me Save Green Space is preserved it's a modern wave Urban SW reduced traffic less of a bear with duplexes in the mix it's only fair so let's push for duplexes let's make it clear Albuquerque's future is something we steer no homes for everybody and the old and the youth living in duplex now that's the truth apologies to Will Smith you get a lot of points for creativity thank you for that Jude Miller followed by Deandra Lopez chis and counselors thank you for your time I'm here today in support of amendment five which prits duplex housing near Transit quarters Al kque faces a housing shortage and permitting a variety of housing types along our Transit quarters and near Urban centers will help increase housing Supply to meet the needs of individuals we either need or prefer to live near Transit and accessible amenities without relying on a car please support this amendment to permit duplex housing this policy represents a lowrisk step towards addressing the housing Supply issue in aler additionally I want to comment on Amendment nine uh I support the idea of small overnight shelters being a permissive use however I believe that the outright ban on shelters with more than 50 beds is shortsighted just two years ago New Mexico experienced its largest and most destructive Wildfire which temporarily displaced more than 15,000 people and destroyed several hundred homes unforeseeable events such as this in addition to the existing housing shortage underscore the importance of removing the prohibition on shelters with more than 50 beds from this amendment I do not support this amendment as it currently stand as it is currently written due the extremely limited scope of parcels where shelters should be permissive and the unnecessary prohibition of larger shelters thank you DeAndre Lopez followed by Crystal Garcia Madame chair ban members of the committee my name is Deandra Lopez I'm the local government uh Community manager for P&M serving the greater Albuquerque area in addition to my colleague Mr breo's comments earlier regarding Amendment Six P&M would like to thank and acknowledge the planning staff Council Services Council grout and Council f corn for working with P&M to address concerns and work towards an amendment energy storage systems are an Emer are an emerging technology it is very important that we collaborate as this is crucial to our Clean Energy Future and to continue serving the growing and evolving energy needs of our community P&M requests a pass with no recommendations on Amendment Six to continue conversations with planning staff and Council Services again we thank you for working on this amendment with P Crystal Garcia followed by Renee Horvath hi uh Crystal Garcia with the historic neighborhood alliance and the protect and preserve Bellas and um the first thing I have is the A10 pre-application facilitated meetings switching to postm midle facilitated meetings limits the opportunity for constructive change and collaboration also adds more risk of disruption for communities and development projects pushing surprises later on in the timeline leaves less time to change without harming the development timeline and adding greater cost complexity to the development and the h& does not support A5 duplexes um the small area for duplexes is arbitrary and capricious this amendment would allow duplexes permissively in R1 zones within 13 20 ft um and allow duplexes sorry uh as a conditional use the parking in our historic neighborhoods is already at capacity the reason is because many of the homes do not have rooms for their cars the area was built before cars and uh this is um discriminating against the historical neighborhoods by allowing the process to be placed by duplexes in our neighborhoods Renee Horvath followed by Amba II uh hello my name is Renee Horvat and I live on the west side in Taylor ran and I sent two letters in one for Taylor Ranch neighborhood association we did review the Amendments last week and for the Westside Coalition um so basically uh TRNA pretty much believes a lot of um what's already been spoken about maintaining zoning protections because it's really important to maintain these things to preserve the quality of life for our neighborhoods but uh so I've already spoken with the um duplexes last time but I think conditional does address some issues it allows the neighbors to address some issues about parking um and uh privacy shade you know not shade the yard too much views it it does allow them that much to do and just realize that uh permissively people can add on to their homes with kitchens and bathrooms and uh extra room but to have a door between the the two buildings and it's almost just expanding your home so it is permissive to do that realize that the other thing that's I want to hit real fast is the pre-application meeting uh that's very important that's our facilitated meetings that really helps us uh to know and understand the proposals and get our uh get prepared for the upcoming EPC hearings and that is very helpful so I would not remove or change any of that uh and then uh a people do agree with front yard walls if you uh if you change the ordinance it changes the whole character of the area and conditional use does allow people to give input and so maintain conditional use with all your amendments so thank you oamb Umi followed by Janet manry Madam chair uh members of the council my name is OT Ami I'm the associate state director for advocacy for AARP New Mexico and while we're pleased to see the ordinance changes uh that allowed accessory dwelling units we were hoping that this would additionally include duplexes and more of Albuquerque residential areas to address ongoing affordable housing shortages as a designated member of arp's network of age friendly States and communities the City of Albuquerque has a commitment to provide Housing Development um options that will benefit generations of Albuquerque residents now since it's data shows that New Mexico's older adult population is expected to be the third largest in the nation by 2030 including 40% of all those living in buron Leo County now permitting the construction of duplexes in a manner that respects neighboring land uses individuals can maintain a connection to their neighborhood as they age and their housing needs change we believe that the neighborhoods that include duplexes are part of a missing middle housing or well positioned to respond to housing Supply is isues affordability smart land use income equity and empowerment on behalf of AR ARP New Mexico thank you for providing opportunity to share uh this important information Janet manry followed by Jim kardin Madam chair and counselors my name is Janet manry and speaking in support of amendment five but D permissive duplexes I'm the current president of rolds adition neighborhood association our neighborhood border Central just west of downtown we we will be covered by this amendment if it's passed we currently thrive in a dense neighborhood with multi-unit housing mixed with single family housing and many many many duplexes at our monthly meeting this uh this month we uh we voted to approve a resolution in support of this amendment which i' emailed to all of you so Raina supports this amendment thank you de dejardines pardon me followed by Julie dry on Zoom good evening M Madam chair members of the committee my name is Jim de shardan I'm the executive director of the renewable energy Industries Association of New Mexico a lot of folks know us by acronym re a or Ria we have 60 plus diverse mainly local members we've been around since 2004 I'm here to provide comments to a propos Amendment to the integrated development ordinance for energy storage facilities Amendment A6 as we transition to renewable energy I believe it's going to be critical that we have energy storage facilities we applaud the proposed amendment to energy storage over what was originally proposed however we do question the amendment how the amendment prescribes strict Landscaping requirements that are more than are currently required for electrical Transformers gas infrastructure water infrastructure also I want to take a moment to point out that Ria the largest renewable energy trade Association in New Mexico was not involved in crafting this amendment and we ask that in the future we do have that uh ability to be involved in energy storage discussions and all renewable energy policy discussions thank you very much for your time Julie dry followed by Evelyn Rivera good evening chair and counselors I've previously submitted written comments on all of the Amendments and tonight we'll speak quickly about three of them First Amendment Three I support councelor grout's amendment to limit the parking of RV in boats in front yards if you choose to to allow parking of RVs and boats in the front and side yards you'll need to also have a good plan for code enforcement because if you go through any neighborhood in this city you will find violations Amendment seven I oppose taller walls in the front yard in opposed this effort by the administration to add taller walls for the last three years I sent a survey to the members of the uto canyon neighborhood association and 100% of those responded opposed taller walls the primary reason they cited is that we want to be a community where we watch out for one another taller walls eliminate eyes on the street and eyes on our friends who live across the street my neighbors provided multiple examples of how they watch out for one another taller fences taller walls do not make for a safer Community time's up thank you Evelyn Rivera followed by Kelly odonnell Madame chair and members of the committee my name is Evelyn Rivera I am speaking as a residential certified appraiser in opposition to A5 the duplex proposed amendment A5 is a zone change R1 does not equal R2 the original Ido amendment was introduced uced as a Citywide amendment has now morphed into small area amendments requiring due process notification to Property Owners neighborhood associations and coalitions according to the 2023 New Mexico affordable housing needs assessment quote single family home development is critical to support growth increasing Supply will help attract a Workforce and create asset building opportunities for lowincome renters this Zone change unfairly and disproportionately affects older historic neighborhoods it also disproportionately affects lower and middle middle inome neighborhoods in fact A5 will diminish the supply of single family residences available to aspiring homeowners because investors will move into these areas and convert those single family homes into rentals thank you Evelyn oh sorry Kelly odonnell followed by Greg we uh good evening uh my name is Kelly O'Donnell I am the chief research and policy officer with Homewise I we stand in support of the duplex Amendment um every piece of incremental progress you make towards greater density means um more opportunities for affordable housing in New in New Mexico and albuquer which of course is sorely needed so thank you Greg rears followed by John Cochran Madam chair counselors the Knob Hill neighborhood association voted unan unanimously to oppose amendments A5 duplexes A6 energy storage systems A7 front yard walls and fences residential and a 10 pre-application facilitated meetings others from our association have spoken on electric storage systems and front yard walls we voted to oppose the amendment removing pre-application meetings because we regularly have such meetings and find them very useful pre-application meetings were put into the Ido specifically to address problems that were um that were caused by not having enough time to have communication with applicants for Zone in our case zoning hearing examiner requests and in our experience both the and the neighborhood association are happier with the preapplication meetings the process we have now uh which give a longer time which is 6 to8 weeks versus less than two weeks to communicate and address neighborhood concerns by removing pre-application meetings the amendment essentially eliminates neighborhood input in the development process thank you John Cochran followed by Moren scorin you muted sir are we here please proceed Madam chair counselors my name is John Cochran and I think it's just common sense that you can easily see over a three-foot front yard wall that bad guys can't hide behind a 3-foot wall and it's easy for emergency response personnel and police to hop over a three-foot wall if you make that a five- foot wall then you create a compound in the front yard people can't see over it bad guys can hide behind it emerc response Personnel can't get over it therefore I urge you to oppose Amendment seven thank you Moren scolin followed by Steven pyom yes thank you I urge you to support amendment five to increase the number of duplexes so it's um wiely understood one of the most pressing issues in Albuquerque is the number of our homeless population and it should be um pretty common sense that the more housing you have the less homelessness you'll have in the book homelessness is a housing problem it was shown that the main cause of any Regional variation between cities as far as the homelessness is just due to the housing Supply it's not drugs it's not poverty it's not mental illness it's the amount of housing you have and how much it costs thank you Meredith Paxton followed by Stephen um pardon me uh Steven pyone followed by Meredith Paxton thank you um Madam chair and members of the committee um I Rise to uh support amendment five which would allow duplexes um in the centers and transportation corridors that have been identified uh doing so would uh increase the supply of affordable housing would also make these neighborhoods um more walkable and uh bikable and it would do so in a way that uh would minimize the infrastructure costs that are involved in increasing uh the housing Supply um so I I I support amendment five and I I think this change in in in the the code um can be consistent with maintaining um the character of the existing neighborhoods um using um uh regulations involving setbacks and and uh type of uh um treatments on the houses but um uh it would also uh reduce people's uh um property taxes by increasing the the property value of the the uh the entire area area thank you very much Meredith Paxton followed by Jordan McConnell oops um please vote against A5 conversions of R1 homes to duplexes the Citywide change was rejected by the EPC but now has reappeared to be imposed only where it would be most detrimental the tar targeted sectors neighborhoods near corridors and urban centers are along routes designed to attract high traffic volumes as detailed in my letter the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has identified many extremely serious health problems that traffic related air pollution or trap causes increased risk for asthma among children is just one of these I would urge you not to expose a greater percentage of our population to such hazards no there are no limits to the concentration of these conversions Spruce Park and others like it near neighborhoods like it near the main UNM campus would surely suffer disproportionately because of increased demand among investors concerned only with maximizing rental profits there's more but I've run out of time sorry thank you for your consideration Jordan McConnell followed by George Franco good evening I'm a proud resident of our Historic downtown core and have worked in housing and health care including in service of our unhoused neighbors I support passage of amendment five um amendment 10 which would remove unneeded barriers to housing caused by public meetings which I believe to be undemocratic by their nature and I have some constructive criticism on Amendment nine concerning overnight shelters uh the housing crisis is our largest inflationary pressure and increasing our housing stock is how we solve that duplexes offer a first step in addressing this providing more options aiding in Social mobility and easing financial burden with a severe lack of family housing especially impacting our voucher holders duplexes can stabilize prices and prevent homelessness among Working Families I strongly recommend passing the duplex Amendment small shelters while beneficial for some especially single people people that are recently homeless Overlook the broader needs of our homeless population this amendment would for example situate these shelters in hostile environments in industrial parks that are far from essential services in transit um Banning larger shelters also ignores a vital role in supporting quantally homeless folks um who need a lot more support um I've seen firsthand how larger shelters can support these folks and get them back into housing we need a multifaceted approach with more tools not fewer tools um so please defer this bill and rewrite it thank you George Franco followed by Peggy nef good evening uh Madam chair and members council meeting um I'm speaking as the Bas neighborhood citizen on the pre-application meeting uh please keep that time in do not reduce a time in with meeting with developers this change in the Ido process reduces opportunities for understanding in early stages of the process and therefore eliminating more input from the parties affected and limitations opportunities for constructive change and adds more risk of disruption for Neighborhood on development projects affected not in favor of this change thank you and now I'm speaking as a board member from the barelas uh Association um on the development of the 300 uh block of aen CH Dunkin Donuts the uh we are working hard to meet them halfways on the develop on the development and the zone change we want to say thank you to the developers in the city for listening to us and part two thank you PF has declined promotion to panelists so we're going to move on to Aaron thoron and then elanar walner Walther excuse me hi there thank you very much Madam chair of the committee for your time my name is Aaron Thorton and I'm a homeowner in District Six I'm here to voice support for the permissive zoning of duplexes Amendment uh five uh we all deserve housing options that our needs and my partner and I had a whole laundry list work in place however it took over a year of waiting and constantly trying to get a house before we were able to scramble and actually buy our two bed one bath of our dreams unfortunately we aren't the only ones who struggled or currently struggled to find a home suite home lanyard base the universities the hospitals and other major job centers are largely fully developed single family homes and more housing is desperately needed in these kind of locations smaller homes like duplexes uh nestled and communities serve to meet the needs of both young families looking for a starter home as well as seniors looking to stay put in their community and downsize we need many solutions to tackle the housing crisis and permissive zoning of Zo plexes but one more tool in our Bel for those needs uh that's why I'm asking you to support the permissive zoning of duplexes and since I have a tiny bit more time I would also like to voice my opposition against the tall wall Amendment we uh living on a street full of neighbors it's been so instrumental to be able to walk up to people's doors and be able to interact with them oneon-one and having walls in the way just prevents that from happening so thank you very much have a good evening hello or Walter followed by Alia Atherton you are muted [Music] Eleanor okay I think I got it now um so uh chair bassan and committee members um I oppose A7 the walls and and fences um and I couldn't say it better than Gary eister so I'm not going to say anything more on that um as myself and also um representing on these issues the North Valley Coalition um the there was a letter set in opposing A10 um dated uh April 10th um so I'll refer you to that um and then on uh Cottage development Max I sent in a letter today and also a letter was s in by the Coalition on April 9th um so um we support limiting um how many adjacent Cottage development there are um I believe my um the original EPC recommendation was five acres then it went down to three acres it's currently 2 Acres um there's a development in the North Valley that's N9 plus acres has 90 homes in a historic neighborhood where that scale just does not fit the neighborhood um and as know your time is up okay thank you hopefully you can read the letter Alia Atherton followed by Michael B Madam chair bassan thank you for your time I come to you in favor of amendment five the Victory Hills neighborhood association Board of which I'm a member passed a resolution about the need for duplexes in April which has been emailed to you all um Victory Hills is somewhere that single family homes and duplexes already Thrive side by side and Transit corridors need that too I apologize for my son being noisy in the background um as a near daily Transit Rider I see the importance of a portable housing in the are is best served by ABQ Ride every day this change allows incremental density increases of affordable units laser focus on where we need it the most and where our residents are best served by existing infrastructure I also want to urge you to not pass A7 as a toddler parent as you may have heard um uh and The Pedestrian who lives close to many other young families I worry about structures so close to the street that impacts my ability to keep an eye on my son and keep an eye of all the other kids in the neighborhood um I also worry about turning like large vehicles um around corners um and I think that these are conversations that are best on a case-by Case basis and so I oppose a five thank you Michael B followed by Peggy nef hello my name is Dr Michael bue I'd like to thank the committee for the opportunity to speak today in support of amendment 5 permissively allowing duplexes and R1 zones and urban centers and near Transit so I am a homeowner in the supper Rock neighborhood in District 9 and I honestly wish that this amendment applied to my neighborhood I want more neighbors um there are already Town Homes across the street from my neighborhood multiple apartment complexes just to the east of it and none of this makes my neighborhood worse in any way it makes it better and while I would love to see more permissive zoning in my own back yard I also want to applaud the incremental nature of the current Amendment it targets the areas of our city that are most in need of additional housing in a low-risk way it's an amazing first step in solving the city's housing shortage and uh make no mistake we do have a housing sorted one which will be impossible to address without increasing housing Supply if we to reduce homelessness among our neighbors and make Albuquerque economically Strong City duplexes are going to be uh a necessary and important first start so I urge the committee to recommend this amendment for approval by the city council thank you very much for your time Peggy nef followed by uh Mary H Smith within Chambers thank you hi again um Peggy nef here uh for many years I've been asking the council to amend the Ido amendment process to respect and fully address substantive amendments as I've done now for five years I'll forward my notes on each amend there are so many of these amendments that need more discussions tonight I want to introduce you to an age-old concept known as the tragedy of the commons going all the way back to Aristotle the tragedy of the commons explains that when a few people enjoy unfettered access to finite valuable resource they will tend to overuse it and they may end up destroying its value all together even if some users exercise voluntary restraint other users merely supplant them the predictable result being tragedy for all I put it to you that the IBO and its broken amendment process is a clear example of the tragedy of the comons please step back send amendments without data back to planning make deferring and rewriting as was mentioned earlier a normal common response from this Council on this committee build back our protections keep adjacency keep pres submittal meetings keep conditional permitting tools make safety Public Safety a serious priority build build in requirements that promote full and deliberate reviews of all of these amendments put oversight into place attempt with your authorities to help us reach the benefit of the commons and avoid the tragedy of the commons thank you thank you Mary H Smith Abraham Lincoln committed to a government of the People by the people for the people to that end and believing that the people should propose legislation not just the administration or lobbyists I speak in opposition to amendment 0- 24-13 that increases the maximum height for walls I live in a historic district where front yard walls are uncommon walking is enjoyable because I can admire people's yards and Landscaping and their homes architecture and can chat and visit with the people that I see a 5 foot high wall with the top two feet being view fencing that reminds me of Prison Walls is unattractive off-putting and inconsistent with the historical Integrity of many neighborhoods last week my next door neighbor went out of town and asked me to keep an eye on his house how could I do that if he had a wall that red my access I respectfully ask that tonight you reject the increased Wall height because it encourages people to create barriers that prevent them from keeping an eye on their neighborhood allows criminals to access a home without fear of being seen prevents fire and rescue from quickly reaching a wal off home deters neighbors and law enforcement from ensuring that all is well in our neighborhoods and for side street yard blocks a driver's view of oncoming traffic Madame chair that concludes public comment on 02 2413 thank you thank you very much uh so while we're at a good breaking point I think we're going to take 20 minutes and then we can move on with everything else for the rest of the night e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e all right everyone welcome back hopefully you had a four course meal and enjoyed your break currently we are on 013 there is a motion for a due pass we have several amendments councelor Rogers we're going to start with your Amendment for councilor feble corn thank you madam chair would like to move Amendment one which is in our iPads for on behalf of counselor Fe corn all right and this is for Animal Welfare Amendment proposes to add Animal Welfare Department as a commenting department for development applications that involve specifically any animal keeping on site and I will stand for any questions or comments and what is your what is your motion Council Rogers is it up for a due pass or yes thank you madam chair I move for a due pass okay there's a due pass is there a second second there's a second from councelor grout council's any comments or questions about that okay well that's easy Mr solace councelor Baka councelor [Music] shampine yes councelor grout yes councelor Rogers yes chair basson yes that passes 5 thank you councelor Rogers amendment number two thank you madam chair this is amendment two um uh Amendment proposes to remove the buffering requirements applicable for the areas of change consistency in D2 D- ms- PT areas the buffering and Landscaping in section 5-6 E1 through 4 should apply in dt-- ms- PT areas I move for a due pass there is a motion and a second for from councelor Baka on amendment number two uh councilor any questions or comments councilor grout yes thank you um could you explain could somebody could someone explain this one a little bit to me Mr Mr Cox is here and he can go ahead and elaborate um chair and committee uh basically areas of change and consistency are a um layer found within or designated via our comprehensive plan um they are really tied to two specific policies area of change are areas where we want to promote growth and um find that changing the zoning designation can be applicable with the right um zoning proposal uh area of consistency is just that that we want to keep it the same and this is also a way that we can um hopefully protect the character of our neighborhoods as you will find area of change is generally along corridors um centers and uh brings in Metropolitan Redevelopment areas as well and specific um goals found within those plans uh area of change and consistency when adjacent um this buffer is hoped to alleviate um some of the stress um that a a large development next to possibly an area of consistency can put on a property and so the um the change though is that um if an area of change of consistency are adjacent to each other but an Alleyway is in between them then essentially the alleyway is already a buffer and so this change would eliminate the extra 15ot buffer if uh an Alleyway is already breaking those areas up um just to essentially not double up on a buffer where an Alleyway already um could achieve that Council grout thank you that that's I just wanted to make sure it's what I understood it to be thank you counselors any other questions or comments Mr Solace councelor B councelor shampine yes councelor grout yes councelor Rogers yes chair bassan yes passes 5 Z amendment number three uh is uh I would like to move amendment number three it's in exhibit 1 to0 2413 the EPC Redline make the following changes on pages 272 to 273 remove the redline text added at EPC as follow follows this is an amendment to propose uh to remove the prohibition on boat and RV parking that was recommended by the EPC at present the Ido allows boats and RBS to park in the front side and rear yards and this amendment would ensure that remains uh and so I would like to move a due pass there's a second by counselor champine uh my reasoning for wanting to bring this back is private property owners have a right to be able to park things in their property and in front of it and next to it we you have regulations and code enforcement who can and already do and need to and should and will enforce regulations uh with different uh setbacks boundaries sidewalks uh and prohibitions but I think that for us to come in and tell private property owners that this is another way we need to limit the use of their own personal property I I don't agree with that so council's any questions or comments about this councelor grout thank you that thank you madam chair um sadly um code enforcement doesn't always get out you know they can't be everywhere and that's one of the problems and that's why uh many of residents had reached out to me and asked um about bringing this back um or or you know having a an RV in the front yard is is they should be on the sidey yard or behind a garage or in a storage unit you store there's lots of storage places um and and boats too and they can be stolen too sadly so I think if they're um if if we had this amendment if we had this um this proposal um it would it would be better in in all around but that's just my take on it C's any additional question vo councilors any additional questions or comments uh I do want to add one more thing to if if my my rebuttal to that is that if code enforcement is struggling now and can't be everywhere at once what's to say that code enforcement or who's going to enforce if we now create further regulation on these private property owners and we could prevent theft or we could force them into paying for outside storage and I think that that's just something that is a little bit beyond what I'm comfortable doing so I would urge your support Mr Solace councilor Baka yes councelor champine yes councelor grout no counc Rogers yes chair ban yes passes 4 One we're moving on to amendment number four councelor Baka Madam chair Amendment four exhibit one to0 24-13 uh this amendment proposes to revise the maximum project size for a cottage development to Acres limit the number of cottage developments that can be adjacent to each other uh when access to the project site is from a local Street requires a 330t distance separation between Cottage development projects and pro however project sites within 1300 ft of a Mt ucms or PT area are Exempted from the limitations I move a due pass councel there's a motion on the floor for a due pass is there a second second from counselor Rogers and counselors I'm going to ask that I know that it's tedious but for the record and for people watching that don't know also because I try to be a stickler for some of policy rules that we have that we we read most of the amendment in its entirety so that the the public and people can know exactly what it is so this does say that on page 159 in section 43 B4 revise a as follows the maximum project size for cottage development is three acres instead of five or two and on page 159 in section 43 B4 add a new C and re accordingly where accessed from a local Street this use is prohibited within 330 ft of other Cottage development except for the following up to two Cottage development projects may be adjacent and there is no distance separation required if the subject property is within 1320 ft a quar mile of ucms PT and Mt areas and thank you for putting that on the screen as well so that those that are watching from home know what we're talking about out in detail as well back to counselor Baka to share or speak on this or no okay any other questions or comments counselors all right Mr salace councelor Baka councelor champine no councelor grout yes councelor Rogers yes and chair basson yes passes 4 to1 amendment number five is Council Rogers thank you madam chair amendment five is uh Amendment proposes to allow duplexes in the R1 Zone District now that we have that on the page I will follow your lead on the Amendments on in exhibit 1 to 02 24-13 the EPC Red Line make the following page uh following changes on page 16 2 revise 4-3 b5b as follows and we're striking in red and adding r a r1a on two lots where the building straddles a common lot line and each dwelling unit is on a separate lot Amendment next Amendment on page 162 adding new use specific standards and appropriate numerical order as follows and then thirdd uh on on page 213 section 4-3 46 add a spec use specific standard to dwelling unit accessory as follows and last throughout the Ido where it appears replacing dwelling to family detached duplex with dwelling duplex and I move for a dup pass counselors there's a motion for a due pass on amendment number five and a second from counselor Baka uh councelor Rogers do you want to elaborate on any of this sure so uh councelor feeble corn and I took a lot of feedback from the conversations from last year around this and really tried to incorporate those into this legislation uh to if a property is vacant a duplex is uh conditional use so not all the way permissible still allows the community to weigh in and it makes duplexes in need to use on the same site prohibited so we heard that from a lot of folks they didn't want to tear down an existing dwelling to just put up 2 adus so we T talk we uh plan for that in here and also the amendment requires Street facing window and door we heard a lot about that last year as well and so we worked really hard to to take those uh concerns into consideration for this this year thank you H's any questions or comments regarding amendment number five Baka Madam chair thank you um we heard a lot of comments on this both for and against um so I I'm listening to all of it um I do I am a big believer that we are in the middle of a housing crisis and we should do all that we can with that um similar to your comments on Amendment Three that uh a person should be able to do what they want with their private property um I I do uh do believe we should pass this thank you there's any other questions or comments I will add that uh and I do realize that this is contrary when you say it that way but you know private property owners should be able to do what they want on their property however we do have zoning codes for a reason and there is that that parameter with this so I'm not opposed to duplexes I think they're great I think that they're very beneficial and they help a lot of families I think that they should be conditional and I think that that is something that people should go ahead and apply for go through the process and as evidenced by what we've seen from a lot of the permits that have been allowed they end up getting the variance in the majority of cases but that's going through the process that we did set up rather than moving the goalpost and switching it up Midstream so um you know I definitely am am not opposed to duplexes sure councelor Rogers thank you chair I did just want to point out that it is still conditional use for uh R1 Zone districts uh specifically if there are areas within I think we have 1300 fet um um so we're definitely taking that into consideration it's still conditional I think our one zone districts would make it permissible um um so there is that we did plan for that or maybe am I I see Mr Cox wanting to chime in as well I think when you're ready Council Rogers uh chair bong commissioner or committee um they would be conditional within R1 districts if it is a new construction they would be permissive if they are being uh a unit is being added onto an existing structure and the uh purpose behind that was from public comment we heard last year there was a lot of concern about de um demoing existing historical structures to build duplexes and this tackles um that concern hopefully anything else councilors anything further or to close no thanks I urge your support Mr Solace councelor Baka yes councelor champine no councelor grout no councelor Rogers yes chair bassan no fails 32 we will move on to amendment number six councelor Baka Madam chair amendment number six uh exhibit 1 o23 24 13 EPC Redline the Ido annual update uh on page 154 the Ido EPC Redline annual update tele telecommunications towers and utility subcategory at a new RightWay for energy storage systems with permissive in all Zone districts except for nru and RPO Zone districts where it shall be listed as permissive uh number two on page 199 of the Ido EPC Redline the annual update revise the text as follows um and this is under Section 43 E8 electric utility would you like me to read all of that uh you know I think that as now that we have it up as well for people to see I think that that's beneficial so I think that if you want to at least describe the changes that you're making that would be great so that people can see what is being proposed as well not necessarily reading it exactly right right thank you madam chair uh this would allow for battery storage and our Utility Systems in residential areas and throughout the city um while also providing um making sure that the a they're secure uh from from uh gosh why am I trying to blank of the word secure facilities from from the public and B also making sure that they fit within the residential areas themselves that they don't stick out that they look like they belong there you know we energy energy is is a big issue for us here in this downtown there's a blackout because of the systems and you know this is this is just a big step towards that um P&M has spoken out in favor of this and so I support and Mr Cox will you also elaborate I know that councelor grout had added some information on councelor grout would you like to elaborate on that or would you like Mr Cox to um Mr Cox can do it and then I do have some questions okay Mr Cox um chair counselors um the added language that we had from counselor grout addresses kind of aesthetic concerns in neighborhoods and so for uh energy storage systems that you would find within residential Zone districts there are added design requirements um those added design requirements follow some of the existing language that we have around um buildings and uh Wireless telecommunications facilities and those would be um one uh to match an our architectural style that is found within 330 ft of the energy storage system uh two to add uh architectural characteristics bump outs um for every 20 ft of the wall and that is to avoid any type of kind of monness uh design to the wall and those could be um Windows Doors uh anything that kind of makes it look like an existing structure rather than a wall um here for any questions on that language counselors uh there's a motion on the floor is there a second I'll second it second from counselor grout thank you Mr Cox for that we're going to go for counselor grout first with your questions and then we'll move on to a couple other counselors thank you um I have a question for our staff has the Fire Marshall reviewed these plans um for energy storage systems um chair counselors um we have word from the planning department that they have um allowed the Fire Marshall to provide comments on this I was told by our staff um earlier today that all um generally available Fire Marshals are either um on vacation or at training and so we do have um Michael Voss from the planning department here to provide any background on that anymore Mr Boss thank you chair and counselors um I have met with members of the fire Marshall's office uh to discuss these amendments um and and their alignment with or they do not conflict with our with our fire codes um I unfortunately could not get one of them here tonight uh to speak to you uh but we are we have conversed with them and have not heard anything negative in their feedback so far Council grout thank you um I know um lithium batteries um are the pro are they're the they're the ones that have overheating issues and so forth and they catch fire so I I think they're I think we need to hear from fire to to let us know what they think about safety and so forth now I have some questions for possibly some people from P&M that might be able to answer some of these questions councelor grout they're on their way down here but while they're on their way down would you mind if I ask uh direct uh Co Montoya do you have a statement to say on behalf of AFR and their position with this at all or do you know uh Madam chair excuse me no we have not had the discussion with them okay we will we will definitely follow up okay all right and councelor grout uh right we we have DNM here Deandra is right here hi Deandra thanks for being here Madame chair um these question or these batteries require atten 10 foot set back from all property lines is this consider uh considered a defensible buffer for firefighting do you know maybe fire needs to answer that one councelor grout AFR is not here go ahead okay it also requires a block wall is the wall intended for Aesthetics or fire suppression counselor groud it looks like Deandra is looking at me like fire probably should answer that but DeAndre do you want to Lopez Madam chair um councelor grout I can't speak to the fire on that I will speak to that um P&M does have walls uh for around our infrastructure for Safety and Security reasons safety of what um safety that does include fire um as far as other safety uh and security they go hand inand with this is to prevent um the you know uh unhoused from going into you know to try to seek shelter um and uh you know just to protect our infrastructure from any other security issues that could arise okay how far can DC power travel so U Madam chair counselor grout um the short answer is that it depends um energy distribution is not one size fits all we'd kind of have to go by it on a situational basis um if you have a specific uh you know example we're happy to talk and look at that with you um I um Madam chair and counselor grout I do have a clarifying question on that if I can go ahead um go ahead so um is is this with these batteries are you asking this for the purpose of um under the assumption that with a battery that the energy would change directly from the battery to your home or no no um I am my questions come from um mainly for safety of fire risk um I am concerned about one being in my neighborhood next you know next to my house or my neighbor's house or somebody down the Street's house um and these um because we hear that these these batteries store it gets hot and um so is it quite ready for prime time that is kind of my question have these um have these concerns been addressed sufficiently so that people in the neighborhood aren't don't have to worry that their house might be burn might burn down um also I had somebody ask me how um when you're going to put these on a lot in a neighborhood how many of them do you need in how how many homes will um one of these um structures um service so how many will we be looking at in a particular neighborhood um Madam chair bisan counselor grout um complex but um to to go back to um the DC um thank you for the clarification on your uh reasoning behind the question um I will say that as in this particular instance when it comes to the battery energy storage it is just for that for storage it um it's it's uh it does uh we do have an inverter that it just stores it and then the inverter will put it back into the existing infrastructure so it won't really change how you receive your energy on the fire safety I can only speak to what P&M does I can't speak to um private but for uh P&M we do um only purchase batteries that are UL certified that have been fire tested um and what we purchase are um batteries that are already come with an enclosure that has uh safety precautions in it it has ventilation it has Cooling and um is not accessible right anybody so um if there is a fire that does happen it does stay contained in that enclosure and does not spread councelor grout uh I don't mean to interrupt but I mean to interrupt in that regarding your question for the storage uh each storage how many houses and Mr Cox wants to say something okay uh chair counselors thank you we did receive a letter from P&M um addressing a lot of the questions that we heard at the lups meeting last year and it is part of the packet in your iPads um as far as the residential districts and how many storage units uh can be on one acre which is the maximum in the residential unit districts um uh a storage uh the approximate size of a shipping container they could fit about three to four on one acre with the different Landscaping buffers walls setbacks uh Etc um the the other is something or something to point to as well is that they did Define the different Homeland Security requirements uh at the federal level and that is um video surveillance within the storage area uh motion activated lights and a 12 foot wall but there there is some clarification and other answers as well Mr Cox do you know how many houses those three to four units on one acre would be able to serve if needed or do you know Miss um chair commission I I will let uh P&M explain more but what I was told is that um they would have to run a model to get the approximate number of homes but basically the the farther a house is away from a energy storage system the weaker that current gets to the home thus it's not as reliable um and the analogy I constantly hear um is like a garden hose but please more Madam chairis on counselor grout um at the risk of sounding redundant it depends so I would um say that it is situational basis there are variables that go into it it depends on the demands it depends on the loads it depends on you know other existing equipment that um businesses and residentials may have on their on on their buildings councelor grout thank you thanks Madam chair um a followup to that um so in a in a neighborhood of 600 homes how many would we need how many one acre lots would we need to supply energy to 600 and I know there's a variable but there has to be some kind of number we could come up with a roundabout kind of number right now what are we going to get for an acre he Madam chair bisan uh councelor G I'm going to defer to uh Carlos zero on this one okay good evening Madam chair members of the council um councelor grout um Carlos Lucero from Public Service Company New Mexico senior manager of government Affairs and um so really you know it does depend but I guess you know the I guess the um the way you can look at it is one of these um units that we probably see in a residential area of a battery storage would be about one megawatt and um any kind of megawatt it used to be a megawatt could um serve about a thousand homes but with today's um home um average home and all the bells and whistles that everybody might have for their electrical needs it's prox approximately about anywhere from 4 to 500 Homes at this battery of one megaa Serv one storage unit yes and one storage unit is equivalent to about one megawatt okay thank you for that it's nice to have a roundabout number for we have a little bit more information now thank you okay I think that's all I have thank you I appreciate you okay councelor champine thank you thank you madam chair um I think he answered a lot of the questions that I'm I'm a little concerned about the cooling issue and I know that the batteries are going to generate as they're being stored or drained electricity running in and out is going to create a lot of heat which I'm I'm not going to hold you to the picture that's being used here but has four AC units per storage unit um and I'm guessing that those have to be running consistently all the time or just when the batter is being charged up or pulled from Madam chair um um counselor champine I think really you got to look at it so like your car battery and you know as as um your car battery when when you start your car you need the battery to actually start the car but once once a car is started then then you the alternator alternator is what really runs the car and you could get to and from and the alternator will be charging your battery as you're driving but once it's charged then it'll just keep that that same charge it's not going to go over it and that's kind of what we're looking at with these these um these batter you know same same concept with the battery energy storage is that once they're charged then they're just kind of um think of it as a a water storage tank once the you know you're pumping water and and you know you're using water the homes businesses and it's the the the water and the water tank is going to fluctuate but once it's all filled up it just kind of stays at that capacity it's not going to just over you know you're not going to overwhelm it so it's the same thing with the batteries and and and when when they are utilized you know the power will start moving out to where where it's needed so I mean it's it's and we have a battery storage unit there in the madil soil area that was a a a pilot project that we did about close to 15 years ago and it was a it was a pilot project that we partnered with sand Labs UNM and and NSU and and that particular battery storage unit has been you know um we we saw the first generation of batteries in it they didn't actually they didn't hold a lot of good charge but we've we've moved on to the the better batteries they're holding their charge and they're doing what they're supposed to do and and really when it when it comes down to any of the hazards it's um where we're looking at as de Deandra mentioned they're UL certified they've been they've been fire tested with the heating and so we're very confident that these these batteries are are safe they're reliable and um and really it helps it helps our grid and the customers we serve to be more have more reliable resilient energy and that's really what the purpose of of of the batteries will be will be and and it really in in a sense um we're getting in in situations we are at capacity limits on on our power lines and um and these battery storages will help and especially customers that want more solar on the rooftop solar is that this could enhance the the grid to where they can they can have more capacity where we can put more solar thank you I don't want to get this into a a Q&A of of us making sure to get sold on the idea but at the same time um did you get your answer questions didn't address the AC units that are on top of the units the batteries are going to generate a lot of heat when you're filling them up not when they're sitting there stored and when you're pulling from them this picture depicts four AC units per conx box how often are those going to be running and are they going to be consistently running I know that a Tesla car has fluid surrounding the batteries keeping the batteries cooled as the car is running because they generate a lot of heat these are a conx box generating I don't know how much heat that for AC units have to cool it down how often are these AC units running Madam chair um councelor champine um again it's going to be depend dependent on your ambient temperature outside it's just kind of like your home you know your your AC unit is going to cool your home to to whatever how you know whatever Heat you're generating in your house to keep it cool and how how how's okay then what temperature do these batteries have to be kept at then that part I I don't have on the top of my head um I would have to get back to you on on exactly how much at what temperatures um but I'm thinking you know it's it's it's got to 100 degrees 200 degrees 50° I I you're the expert on this and you're trying to sell us you just spent five minutes telling me about it and and and Madam chair um counselor champine I'll have to get the actual number on what how much the batteries on the coolant I don't have that information on right now thank you madam chair and just out of curiosity sir where in the city are you planning on putting these because you have to have an acre of land and I'm really worried about districts 2 and counselor champine I think that that's going to be part of the zoning question and so I think that Mr Cox might be able to show us some of the or at least can you describe where some of these might be able to go um chair counselors the the idea is is truly to create a grid and put them everywhere now um to councelor shamp Pine's concern of where do we actually have an existing acor within residential Zone districts is a whole another question and and we do believe it's limited and um a lot of our policy points to using that land for housing or parks in open space um but yeah as far as like what actual land is available uh unsure but they can permissively if this is passed go anywhere in the city councelor champine thank you madam chair uh you'd mentioned and this was off of what you said that this isn't the first generation batteries and you've had to replace because they weren't holding charges what's the shelf life of these batteries that are in the conx boxes Madam chair counselor champ champag um it it really is based on the technology and um you know it's kind of like today's solar panels it's like um the first generation where the lifespan could be up to 20 years the newer models are could be up to 25 you know that's what we're seeing actually with the batteries as well and um it is an emerging technology and as as the years go by they the technology will just continue to get better councelor Rogers thank you madam chair um just have a couple of questions about I asked last time about Homeland Security concerns for the battery storages and just I received some guidance from Homeland Security and so just wanted to know how are we um securing and protecting um these energy storage units counselor sh um Madam champine or um I'm sorry I'm very nervous please excuse me m Adam terban councelor Rogers thank you for your patience um we'll say for the thank you for the question the homeland security aspect of it P&M does take that very seriously um my um we already have safeguards in place that protect our existing infrastructure and that would just go into you know whatever energy storage we add um uh the existing included you know the 8 to 12T parameter security walls motion activated interior lighting cameras monitored 24/7 locks on all equipment and then of course cyber security safeguards and um you know because this is a public forum I can't get too big into the details on that okay thank you madam chair just a couple more questions um and I think I would need fire for these but um just thinking of the Hazmat um having a little bit of fire knowledge on Hazmat I think I'd like to ask questions about do they have the Hazmat um resources that they need to be able to handle a physical thermal electrical damage to the batteries that can cause what Homeland Security sent as thermal runaway reactions um Madam chair Bon counselor Rogers um again um I we would have to get more information on that we do have uh safety procedures in place that we do work with our local Hazmat teams and our fire teams but um for more specifics I would have to get back to that would be great my grandfather actually wrote the New Mexico manual for hasmat so um this is something I have little knowledge on and I would definitely think we need to talk to fire about specifically Hazmat um what I was reading in the manual is that L lingering energy can potentially reignite hours days or even weeks after the initial fire was put out and so Hazmat is going to be a very big concern for me to know we have that in place to be able to if this happens make sure we can remedy that for the community thank you uh I have a couple things to add too but I'm gonna go to councelor Baka first thank you madam chair uh just one question since we have P&M up here is there any evidence that these are any more dangerous than existing transfer stations in our residential neighborhoods um Madame chair bisan counselor Baka uh no there's no evidence that it's any more dangerous or you know different than what's existing thank you uh I want to add a couple things on here so I I would like these to happen but I want them to happen on different terms there's a lot of I don't knows we got to get back to you AFR hasn't responded like that's that's not how we should be making decisions safely for the community especially if we're supposed to answer questions on protecting them while also providing you know on that acre of land we need more housing but eventually with more housing who's going to be the one to serve the electricity to it I mean they both go hand inand but we have to make sure that we're doing our due diligence and so uh I would ask that the amendment sponsor would you be willing to change your motion to without recommendation so that this can still be heard when this goes to uh eventually either if we defer it at this meeting or if it goes to full Council without recommendation we will still have more commentary on it and we can get more answers Miss Miss ronio uh Madam chair just to um clarify if uh the intent is that we do not vote on this amendment tonight withdraw we would just withdraw the motion the maker of the motion and the seconder would have to agree to that and then we could discuss it at full Council so I would ask then if you would be willing to withdraw it and then bring it back when we discuss the Ido at full Council so that we can discuss this and hopefully get a lot more answers to make an educated decision on how to proceed with this again I recognize the importance I I want to support it but as it stands right now with all of these unknowns I won't I wouldn't be able to do that tonight Madam chair yes I'm willing to withdraw make Mo can you remind me grout grout and I would also second that um I like that idea a lot okay so that motion for uh or for I'm sorry amendment number six has been withdrawn and we are going to move on to amendment number seven councelor Rogers for councelor Pena thank you madam chair Amendment seven is amending front wall front yard walls and fences for residential areas on page 328 of the Ido EPC redl line of the Ido annual update 2013 7 d3a add a new subsection with with the text as follows ruming subsequent subsections accordingly one for low density residential development the maximum height for a wall in the front yard or Street yard is 5 feet if all of the following requirements are met a the wall is not located in a small area where taller walls are prohibited P pursuant to subsection 3 below B view fencing is used for portions of a wall above 3 ft or C the wall is set back at least 5 ft and the setback area is landscaped with at least three shrubs or one tree for every 25 ft along length of the wall on page 329 of the idio EPC Redline the idio annual update 2023 revise the first row to text underview fencing as follows we're removing 10 feet to th feet from the lot line AB budding the street and I'll motion you want to move I would move for approval do pass thank you do pass okay there's a motion for a do pass is there a second all right I'm GNA second it for the sake of discussion because I really get my feelings hurt when somebody doesn't second my bills so that's just me being honest so please note that uh okay so counselor if you would like to thank you I am not in support I'm just moving it um for counselor pen or councelor Pena um and so the amendment proposes to allow 5T walls in the front yard without requiring a special hearing if they are set back 5 feet to provide additional accommodation for pedestrians along the sidewalk and if view fencing is used above three feet to ensure eyes on the street and follow crime prevention through the environmental design principles and I stand for questions councilors any questions or comments councelor champine thank you madam chair I don't know if this is if you can answer this but according to the the the statistics we're looking at is we're trying to make an amendment for go from three to five based on demand um but looking at these numbers it says that 159 cases were brought forth in 21 104 in 22 and then 123 um and again 91% were approved 75 and then 90 were approved so we're trying to make an amendment for Citywide for a 100 people you're correct I can't answer that question uh director Mona or is somebody here from Administration that can answer that question Madam chair uh this is the first we see the amendment but Mr verella is here or staff from the planning department that can answer that question for you this is the first you've seen the amendment for front yard walls the the the one here the one that was changed yes that I saw anyway I'll let Mr verella address it I see director verella too okay perfect thank you the uh cases that you're referring to are the people who uh took it it's not everybody who wants them those are the people who went through all of the hoops and came forward in order to request that but we do regularly get inquiries people do want these and this is a pol a decision for Council but we are actually in favor with the compromises that have been built into the bill you know for we were hearing for the first year or two was I don't want to walk down a mud Canyon Etc and very interesting comments like that well we moved it 5T back uh others people saying people are going to hide behind these the top uh two two feet are um view fence you can see through them and so those those don't take the case and uh the that's not the case to where people are going to hide behind it you can't see them same thing as a three-foot wall right now you can hide behind that just as easily and so U we continually hear from people who are generally afraid to come forward because of the um the uh the attacks they get saying that they would like the city to allow them to do this on their private property thank you director council's any other questions question or comments Mr Solace councelor Baka no councelor champine no councelor grout no councelor Rogers no chair basan no it fails 5- Z amendment number eight is councelor Baka Madam chair thank you um this is Amendment 8 landscape appli applicability on page 299 section 56b applicability revised as follows I won't go into that as it is on the board however I will uh explain it this amendment proposes to increase the instances when Landscaping would be required for existing developed properties the amendment reduces each of the thresholds by 20% as an urban area Albuquerque experiences an urban heat island effect in landscaped areas can significantly help reduce that effect I move do pass councel there's a motion for Amendment eight is there a second second there's a second from Council Rogers uh any questions or comments councilors I want to make sure to point out that this changes uh this amendment does change construction of a new parking lot containing 20 or more spaces rather than the original proposed 25 and um for non-residential development by which 2,000 square F feet or more whichever is less are are changed in this plus the $400,000 change from 500,000 so I think that that's to tighten it up yeah any other questions comments St good okay Mr salace councelor Baka yes councelor champine no councelor grout no councelor Rogers yes chair ban no that fails two to three on to Amendment moving on to amendment number nine councelor Rogers thank you madam chair this is amendment nine overnight shelters in exhibit 1 to- 24-13 the EPC Redline making the following changes on page 152 and table 4-2-1 allowable uses revise the row for overnight shelters to make the use permissible in all Zone districts were currently allowed as conditional for all of the zone areas on page 166 revise the text as follows uh where Redlin uh Item B and replacing with overnight shelters providing 50 or more breads are prohibited C use uh this use requires a conditional use approval pursuant to all the following areas we're making more than 10 beds uh in mxm and R nr- czone districts locations within 330 ft of residential Zone districts or any residential use in mixed use zone areas explanation for this is basically we're saying 10 or less are small and permissive in mxm mxh NRC nrbp NR LM NR GM then we would say medium or permissible for 11 to 49 beds in these uh Zone districts but conditional in mxm and NRC and then in all zones we are prohibiting 50 or more large uh shelters uh and that the change to large shelters would not mean any of the existing um organizations that are operating including the City of Albuquerque would have to stop operating those it would just see moving forward we cannot have more than 50 in one particular area um and I think personally that's just for me because I do not think we're doing it well with over 50 people we cannot end the cycle of homelessness with 700 people in a in a like let's say Westside shelter for instance um we're just not doing it well um and I don't think we can do that well and all the research and data shows that we can so I urge a due pass is that your motion thank you madam chair yes I motion for a due pass there's a motion in a second or there's a motion is there a second there's a second from counselor Baka counselors any questions councelor grout thank you madam chair um so I understand the intent but I think that um limiting overnight shelters to 50 is not smart um uh Albuquerque let's see heading home has a really good model over on um in the Northeast Heights and they house anywhere between 50 and 75 men a night and um and then they also have uh room for respit too and if they and they are doing it right they're doing it well those men are um well cared for their business model works and if they had the need um there there we all know there is a need um if they needed to grow I would not want them to not be able to do that on their same site because they are doing it well so um to prohibit more than 50 I don't think smart especially when we have 2,000 people on the streets um we'd have whole lot of little shelters all over town and I don't know that that's usable either so I'm GNA have to vote against this councelor Rogers thank you I would just like to point out that heading home is also the operator of the Westside shelter and they're not doing we're not doing it well period I think the other opt other thing is that um again the the research shows and I think heading home has even said 50 to 75 is Max to do it well so I would be IM meable to changing it to 75 but I don't think we need to have the open freefor all that we have of 700 people at the Westside shelter and so I would be willing to amend that up to 75 um but I do not think we should be doing it there there's just no model including heading home that does it well p over 75 people I I I don't think that I I think that if heading home was allowed to do it run the Westside shelter the way that they wanted to it would be a whole lot it would be a different case that that's what I've been told um and I do believe that's a big shelter yes um but I I don't think I think that putting a cap on it is not this is too low of a cap and even 75 is too low of a cap coun Rogers my opinion sure thank you for that I appreciate that what would be a reasonable cap for you are gr uh thank you madam chair um I I would I would say two 200 um I know that there there are shelters around town that are doing a good job um and they're they have more than 200 people thank you madam chair can you tell me who those are Joy Junction for one counselor I'm going to remind you to please address the chair I'm sorry madam chair sorry okay any other additional questions or comments counselors councelor Rogers thank you um councelor grout would you be amenable to 100 at the max I don't know I I honestly don't I I'm going to have to vote against it just because we have such a huge problem in our in our city um and then just the cost of building a a facility for homeless um you know to run a shelter to run any kind of a um a facility um is expensive and so um I limiting limiting the number I think is is not wise at this time and that's my opinion okay coun counselors though and this is me going back to rules please make sure to ask questions through the chair not directly to each other it's not necessarily a conversation like that but uh counselor Rogers one more time and then we're going to go to counselor Baka sure so then I would like to do an amendment to amend it to 200 if that's the number that councelor grout feels comfortable with okay so there's an amendment on the floor and then you need to she did make a motion and then counselor Baka had seconded it originally and now you're going to um this is your own bill so you can just direct staff to change 50 beds to 100 beds as long as councelor Baka is also okay with that yes as a second as a second not necessarily but Council Rogers is that what you would like to do that is what I'd like to do I think the the point of this is for us to actually make a dent in homelessness and actually end homelessness for people the research shows 50 100 Max but I'd be willing to to make sure we just have to have a cap so I'm willing to negotiate with councelor Rogers just to be clear it's going to in the in the part on number two part B It should read overnight shelters providing 100 or more bits beds are prohibited is that correct that is correct okay counselor Baka you're okay with that change yes second and so councelor Baka thank you madam chair um you know I I myself went back and forth on this today I was at two different shelters I've been trying to visit all of them within our city um the idea of tying our Hounds in any way makes me a little apprehensive especially as a lot of these questions are at the uh US Supreme Court right now simultaneously this build does allow for smaller and medium siiz shelters in a way that that currently we don't have and with the amount of people out there um everything we need all you know all of the above I hate to use that term but um so so with the the raise to 100 um I'm I'm very good with this so thank you uh I have a question uh is there a map now for the locations that these would be allowed at the last leps meeting I had asked and I was told that we would get a map of kind of showing what that looks like chair counselors I do have a map that and I can share my screen chair counselors is what you're looking at is all the Zone districts where the small to mediate shelters would be permissive if this amendment passes um as a reminder or not as a reminder but also as part of this amendment um the a shelter would have to go through the conditional use process if it is within 330 ft of a residential Zone District or residential use within MX zones and Mr Cox this does not necessarily show available properties this just shows all properties within the City of Albuquerque that would have that zoning correct chair counselor uh you are correct and I imagine it's an immense workload to find out which of those are potential available properties chair counselors it it it may go to door knocking if that's where we go believe me I'll save door knocking for other purposes appreciate it councelor champag Mr Cox the map shows a royal Delo golf course that is colored in so the golf course could put up a structure chair counselors this shows the underlying Zone District of that area and so uh what it does not uh bring on is the existing use and so um I just want a clarification because Tan's there I think Four Hills is there in the golf course a crazy obstacle for sure very yes okay councilors any additional comments or questions councelor Rogers oh wait councelor champine and then we'll go to council Rogers to close Okay um the locations it says in in getting old um let at C 6 A2 it says locations within 300 ft of the residential Zone districts or any residential mixed use Zone District so it's allowed within a block there there isn't you currently have to put in request for it if it's that close so we're getting rid of that request um chair counselors it would be conditional And to clarify what my colleague is concerned about is that a lot of this property would be conditional because it is adjacent to residential Zone districts um basically we would have to provide a buffer um on this map but uh when you look at the zoning District map uh all that y yellow zone all of the yellow zones the light yellow to dark yellow are uh residential Zone districts and so um it would have to go through a conditional use process if it's within 330 ft of that councelor Rogers uh you know I'm not looking to move all of these amendments not in this bill to full Council this is another one that has a lot of unanswered questions and on the fly to go from 50 to 100 and expect one way or the other to be okay with it I I would hope that you would consider withdrawing it and bringing it back at full Council so that more answers can be had and there can be more dialogue amongst the other counselors thank you madam chair I think I think for me the research is clear we are not going to make a dent in actually ending homeless for people if we're housing folks in a m mass amount of like we are at the Westside shelter even Joy Junction I don't agree um that Joy Junction um I'll save my personal opinions um but um also I have to say that the the majority of services and housing for unsheltered folks really is in District Six and we also need help um I have to say that publicly we H we need other places to help with this with shelter um and I think that more neighborhoods would welcome them if they're not so large and not I mean we heard that for Gateway we heard that um recently for a lot of the things we want to do around homelessness so um as far as are you saying withdrawing just the part that we're sticking on for the 50 plus beds or withdrawing the whole Amendment uh right now counselor you have a motion for a due pass and we can vote on that or you can I I'm wondering if you would consider withdrawing this amendment Al together tonight and then moving it as a separate amendment when we hear the Ido bill at full councel Madam chair I would be okay with that we can work through we can work who is and then councelor Baka are you okay as the person that seconded okay so we're going to withdraw amendment number nine and move it well they can move it at full Council later if if you all want to and we can work on it that way counselors I would like to make a motion for reconsideration on Amendment 8 is there a second second there's a second from councelor Rogers Amendment eight is Landscaping applicability I think that this is a good middle ground and I want to vote in favor of it so we need to vote first on the motion for reconsideration Madam shair Canen well first first we have to make a motion uh there's a motion on the floor and a second for a motion to reconsider I was on the prevailing side of the original decision so I was I am allowed as one of the prevailing voters to be able to make a motion for reconsideration so now we need to vote on whether or not to reconsider that or not and it needs a majority vote if it passes we will reconsider the bill if it fails then we will continue on with it failing as originally occurred Mr Solace councelor Baka yes councelor champine no counc grout no councel Rogers yes CH ban yes the vote is three to two so the motion to reconsider passes I would like to make a motion for uh Amendment 10 it'll still be eight okay so it'll still be eight so I make a motion for Amendment eight which is the Landscaping applicability which we discussed um and again I think that this is something that it says construction of new building containing multif family mixed use or non-residential development or any accessory parking structure construction of new parking lot containing 20 or more spaces or expansion of an existing parking lot by 20 spaces or more expansion of the gross floor area of an existing building containing multif family mixed use or non-residential development by 2,000 ft or more or 20% or more whichever is less and then renovation or Redevelopment of an existing building contain containing multif family mixed use or non-residential development for uh including but not limited to reconstruction after fire flood or other damage where the value of the renovation or Redevelopment indicated by building permits is $400,000 or more I would like to move a do pass is there a second there's a second from councelor Baka councelor grout I don't have anything to say okay I wasn't sure if it was on the original part or not Mr solace councelor Baka sorry I'm sorry councelor Baka yeah I'm sorry yes I did have a comment for statement I apologize go ahead you know the this amendment doesn't does not apply to single family homes this is simply apartment complexes commercial developments and so forth tightens it up just a tiny bit to require some Landscaping um obviously there's some aesthetic uh value to that if that's what you like which I think most people do um but there's also some practical implications here you know for those of us who were campaigning Last Summer through June through August we were well over 100 degrees every single day in this city minus you know the Foothills where it's little bit cooler um that's not going to change that's going to continue to happen from here on out and adding short of planting a gajillion trees this is one way to help mitigate those effects uh which helps with you know you won't need as many battery stations if we're saving electricity because your AC is not going so with that said I do urge to pass I almost uh I almost think we've come full circle any other questions or comments Mr Solace councelor Baka yes councelor champine no councelor grout no councelor Rogers yes Cher ban yes vote was 3 to2 so that Amendment now passes counselors we're going to move on to amendment number 10 and this is uh counselor uh oh it's me sorry got a little thrown off by that one so I would like to make a motion for a due pass of um amendment number 10 this is by request for councelor Lewis please do not read into it as the chair of a committee typically we will move bills for other counselors and I want to make sure that that's very clear um so this one is the one that is going to the pre-application facilitated meetings it indicates that a facilitated meeting is eligible for an application type that is in table 661 um it goes into further details it is on the screen and the planning it says the planning director may require a posts facilitated meeting for any of the following reasons and the decision-making body may require a post submittal facilitated meeting for any of the following reasons I'm clearly skipping over some of this but the explanation for this is the amendment replaces the prese submittal neighborhood meeting with the posts submitt facilitated meeting and gives the responsibility to require a meeting to the decision maker of each application and to define the scope of negotiations I would like to make a motion for due pass there's a second from counselor Baka um I see Miss Schultz here if you want to go ahead and unless Mr I should go to you first sorry uh thank you madam chair oh go to me first or Mr I'm gonna go to Mr Cox first Mr Cox thank you anyway sorry uh chair counselors I was just going to say that the admin had a request um to go into more detail about some concerns they heard from the public okay so miss Schultz if you want to elaborate uh Madam chair we would just request that this amendment not be moved this evening so that we can look a little deeper at it and bring you something better at full Council okay so I will make a motion to withdraw second well I guess I'm withdrawing councelor Baka says he's okay with it thank you okay we've been productive sort of counselors we are on the final bill as amended this is 013 no yeah 03 as amended multiple times are there questions or comments about the overall bill councelors I do want to change my motion to without recommendation so that we discuss this at full Council and I believe Council champine was the one who gave the second are you okay with that so there is a motion for without recommendation on 013 as amended multiple times Mr Solace councelor Baka councelor shampine yes councelor grout yes counc Rogers yes chair ban yes passes 5 Z councilors moving on we're going to go to agenda item e uh item e01 this is again for councelor Lewis By Request um okay 01 is adopting a small area text Amendment to the integrated development ordinance for the volcano Heights urban center to allow drive-throughs in mixed use own districts um this is a quasi judicial request which requires special procedures to allow the applicant staff and the public the opportunity to speak this agenda item will proceed as follows Council planning staff will have a presentation of five minutes testimony by public speakers will be 2 minutes each rebuttal by the applicant will be 5 minutes cross-examination by anyone who spoke during public comment can have 2 minutes each comments by the planning department if any are 5 minutes and Council planning staff closing comments if any are 5 minutes again I want to say I am moving this for councelor Lewis not because I am in support or not of this bill uh but this is how it gets through committee uh so I want to make sure that City staff members of the public and the applicant have to be sworn in and if you're willing to speak on this item as a staff member or member of the public you need to please raise your right hand now if you're on zoom we're going to have to figure that out do we have anybody on Zoom yeah okay so we'll get to zoom in a minute but if you're in the room and you are planning on speaking please raise your right hand and do you affirm under penalty of perjury that your testimony today will be true okay thank you um Mr Cox will you please begin with your introduction chair counselors um this is amendment to the volcano hides urban center um um we go the volcano Heights urban center is found in the Northwest part of town and urban centers are a um one of our uh many types of different centers within the comp plan and the urban center is meant to um create a uh walkable uh environment with um many different amenities that are in close proximity to residential high density development as well uh the volcano Heights urban center has um not seen much development uh up until this point and one of the concerns we have heard um is uh a Prohibition on drive-throughs in the area and so this amendment would remove that prohibition on drive-throughs um within the mixed use Zone districts found in um the volcano Heights urban center so um the EPC did hear uh this item and recommended denial based on the policies that exist within the comprehensive plan that is the only change being considered uh for this item and I am here for any questions you may have thank you thank you Mr Cox we will move on to testimony from public speakers thank you madam chair our first speaker in house is Jane Beckley followed by Michael vores Madam chair counselors o 2411 Begins by acknowledging applicable goals and policies of the ABC comp plan for the volcano Heights seran Center but then proceeds to remove a Prohibition on Drive through establishments putting forth a bogus argument that this prohibition effectively prevents development of the vhu and inconveniences residents of nearby neighborhoods the prohibition does not prevent development in mixed use zones it does not prevent drive-throughs in the nrbp zone which as you can see extends considerably around the intersection of un and poo the parcel Zone mixed use are closer to the monument and its surrounding area and to already developed residential areas they are available for development for a wide variety of uses which are entirely consistent with the comp no doubt some Property Owners would like to build a Starbucks or a McDonald's or a car wash that is precisely and completely inconsistent with a comp's intent which ends with it's the the following its intent is to create a vibrant walkable district with an identity character and sense of place inextricably linked to the volcanic landscape the comp plan is not an aspiration to be ignored because someone wishes to develop property differently both planning staff in their staff report and the EPC supported denial of o2 2411 we in Santa Fe Village uh respectfully request that you recom recommend a do not pass in other words um recommend denial thank you very much Michael Vorhees followed by Elizabeth Haley so I testified a month ago about this one um it's it's a bad Amendment on its merits but I also brought up the more important problem with this is the applicant while it appears to be Dan Lewis uh By Request it's really Mark Edwards a land developer and Speculator there's a process for members of the public and businesses to submit to the annual update process and they pay a fee they submit the application and it goes through that process that wasn't done here instead those fees were waved Dan Lewis sponsored the amendment which was essentially a gift to Mark Edwards in violation of the state's anti-d donation clause in the Constitution he did this before on a vp2 Amendment for other property development uh Advocates on a parcel that was already under legal review um he's repeating the same process here he's causing city employees to expend their resources to continue to push this on behalf of an individual property owner who'd like to flip that property to a franchise that's not the way to do this you heard some of his uh Associates testify last month saying well they really were concerned that that they didn't have any drive-throughs within walking distance of their house they actually said that drive-throughs within walking distance of their house it's absurd the zoning is designed to create a walkable area with Community amenities including restaurants and other things uh for the people up there and this would totally decimate that but the whole process of sponsoring this as a gift to that individual is unconstitutional and I'll end up in court and will waste a lot more money please don't go down that same path thank you so much Elizabeth Haley followed by Renee Horvath thank you um chair and and members of the city council for allowing us to speak to this um I actually live in the in the area and the par this is actually located in a section that was incorporated into the city from Paradise Hills as you're going up B um and you start rising up the escarment just at the top adjacent to the petroglyphs and other major public open spaces this particular parcel one of the reasons that it has this restriction has to do with just the traffic as it's going and processing up uh poo because poo is a limited access street so technically it just has issues beyond that the reason that the overlay zones were placed there was to protect the National monument and to the experience within the National Monument the um the idea that there aren't drive-throughs just just beyond that is is not truthful there are drive-throughs as you go farther west follow over the place including just below Ventana Ranch all the way around Universe they're all over the place and so just saying that this is a hardship because it's under the monument overlay is just um an argument with no substance thank you for listening Renee Horvath Follow by Evelyn Rivera on Zoom uh good evening again uh my name is Renee Horvat and uh yes uh this is a very sensitive area and I don't know if you ever been up there but this is really unique with a lot of geology a lot of viewscape juniper trees right next to the National Monument it does deserve to be customized to be more a sensitive type development uh what's so frust frustrating is that we keep chipping away chipping away protection last year is the removing the view protection uh that we had in place to make it less I know that Nancy Hendrick from the park service that uh for Petri Li park has been very concerned about all these removal of protections and so and that we did have a facilitated meeting and nobody supported it it went to EPC they did not support it the staff did not support it and neither did the public there are plenty of drive-throughs in the area down below the escarment over there as Elizabeth Haley said in Ventana Ranch and there's also zoning up there that does allow drive-throughs it's just you don't allow it in mixed use zones and most of the mixed use zones is adjacent to the monument so this should not be approved thank you Evelyn Rivera followed by Daniel Regan M Rivera Miss Rivera before you start Miss Rivera Miss Rivera please please wait for a second Miss Rivera thank you uh because this is a quasa Judicial matter will you please raise your right hand and do you affirm under penalty of perjury that your testimony today will be true I do thank you you may proceed okay so please do not allow more drive-throughs in this uh in the sensitive area I believe the sole purpose of the zone change is to increase the value of the property for investors who currently own vacant Lots uh a major portion of volcano Heights urban center is already zone for uses that allow drive-through facilities there is a plethora of drive-through uses adjacent to volcano Heights urban center directly north at the intersection of Paradise Hills Boulevard and and University Boulevard and nearby along Golf Course Boulevard at this time heart disease diabetes and liver disease are one are in the top 10 causes of death in New Mexico I don't think we need to have a drive-thru on every quarter thank you Daniel Regan followed by Nancy Hendricks Mr Regan before you start will you please raise your right hand and do you affirm under penalty of perjury that your testimony today will be true as true as I know it all right Mr Regan please proceed Let Me Clear My screen here chairperson bassan and and L's members the VC vhu matter I sincerely hope that each of you were aware that there is a fact pattern involved with the volcano Heights UC see that is most similar to the vp-2 matter the developers in each of these different matters are different but the fact pattern of who put it forward in the name of who and that the city staff produced the 285 pages of documentation for this item when those should have been produced by the developer if this is approved I suspect that there will be a district court filing and could result in the same results as 02412 the vp2 I recommend that it is not a good thing for the city council to knowingly vote to use more taxpayer dollars for lawsuits that should not have to be filed and you've already got one on your hands that was filed thank you Nancy Hendricks followed by Mark Edwards words Miss hrx before you begin will you please raise your right hand and do you affirm under penalty of perjury that your testimony today will be true I do thank you you may proceed thank you chair thank you council members for this opportunity to speak with you again this proposed change will reduce the protection for the monument and is in conflict with the comprehensive goals goals the comprehensive plan goals I've spoken to you previously about why the monument is important to the City of Albuquerque the nation and the world you all know the history and why the monument is in place it was a Grassroots effort by members of the Public Public officials like yourselves and the area tribes in the 1980s to preserve a very special place protecting more than 20,000 petroglyphs 350 archaeological sites and the views to and from the volcanoes the sandas and the canyons and Mesa tops with in the monument the entire area of the West Mesa is a cultural landscape considered Sacred by 29 tribes and plos across New Mexico and around the Southwest the West Mesa has numerous opportunities already for drive-throughs and groceries in place for example from the Ventana Ranch area there's numerous drive-throughs located on Universe Which is less than a mile from parts of bentana ranch there's Walgreens there's Blakes Taco Bell there's a Dion Walmart and Smith are less than four miles away off golf course very convenient and both have pickup options for Shoppers putting drive-throughs north of Paco and east of uner in the volcano Cliff area would not save the the um Shopper more than a mile of travel are we really talking about changing the zoning requirements to save a mile the West Mesa is a unique Petroglyph deserves protection don't change the unique character of the area adjacent to the monument at pedus marcatus Canyon to allow drive-throughs please this proposed me Amendment would detract from the cultural landscapes of the West Mesa and Petroglyph National Monument it's in com conflict with the comprehensive pling goals please deny this uh request thank you Mark Edwards followed by John Edward Mr Edwards yes thank you I see your right hand do you affirm under penalty of perjury that your testimony today will be true I do thank you you may proceed and I a I apologize I'm sick so I'm trying not to I didn't want to infect anybody by going in so bear with me if I'm hacking so I apologize in advance so so I am a longtime resident of Anana Ranch 25 years right I'm a I'm a also a real estate broker I'm trying to figure out are figuring out ways to enhance our community because I've lived here for 25 years um and trying to bring more services to an underserved area so that's what prompted this whole process I wasn't aware of you know the you know that the the process or formal process you need to go through so blame that on my Nativity and people wanted to question that so be it I can't I can't help what they think but at the end of the day we do need Services here um we did circulate a petition uh both written and online and got over a 100 signatures over the last month from residents and or workers in the in the volcano Heights area Andor the surrounding area and I'd call those people uh stakeholders um they are constituents they are people that live here they're people that are directly impacted by uh what is happening in the volcano Heights area so I question some of the I mean I'm not questioning everyone's comments that is as a opposing it but I do question you know if you if there's no direct stakehold with this property um how they how their comments are valid but you know from that standpoint I think uh you know I can't help I can't help what what what is eventually passed but that was the spirit of how everything began in terms of just trying to make our community better uh have more services because we do know that that as a real estate broker that bringing additional retail services will will likely bring uh a grosser to the area which is much needed um you guys talk about walkability uh they talk about infrastructure nrbp zone property that um is developable for drive-throughs but there's no infrastructure and it's going to take years as it has to this point to get that portion developed thanks John Edward followed by Federico Crosby Mr Edward before you begin will you raise your right hand and do you affirm under penalty of perjury that your testimony today will be true and you are on mute you you are on mute but do you affirm under penalty of perjury that your testimony will be true you couldn't hear me either uh yes I do thank you um uh so we're actually a landowner um there's no relationship between me and Mark even though we played Little League baseball against each other um I would like to bring forth this idea of evolution and if you take a look at any of the urban centers within Albuquerque or any other Urban centers which this area is a designated area of an urban center uh the tallest building doesn't get built when the town opens up as a town and so there's usually EV evolutionary use uses property gets changed and the uses get changed over time and to that extent as an urban center um the walkability doesn't always occur immediately anyway because you have to have a critical mass of a certain number of buildings and uses for that to happen I support the walkability I mean we've been working on a plan out in that area since 2002 at one time the area was supposed to have three times the density and buildout that it does now uh and so what I believe is that you need small catalysts along the way they're going to be widening poo and uner to the extent that much of the nrbp is going to be consumed by the ride of way of the widening of the road and I think that that's an important consideration to take on in some cases there are areas in that area that are you know um probably a meaningful place for a drive-thru to probably go through to stimulate some activity to build out the other infrastructure necessary to support uh those walkable retail uses that people would like to have and I think that that's an important consideration to take when thinking of this um I live in an area where you know maybe I don't want a lot of drive-throughs but I know that they were probably part of the evolution to get my neighborhood to where it is today and I think that people should think about those things um I'd like people to think about it in those terms that we are a living community and that we need to evolve over time and not all uses are forever am I done thank you sir anyway thank you very much for your time and consideration and uh it's late and I know You' probably like to be with your family so thank you for letting me talk Federico Crosby has denied multiple um promotion attempts so we're going to move on to Courtney Morgan good evening before you begin will you please raise your right hand and do you swear under penalty of perjury that the testimony you give tonight will be true yeah thank you you may proceed so I work for a senior center in the area and um I work with a high volume of senior participants we are growing more and more in less than a year we have gone from 20 members to about 60 members the members would appreciate a short commute to stores they need and more opportunities of restaurants they could easily get to and overall growing area would make more job opportunities for all ages and continue to help families friends and neighbors I understand that there's only there's a Walmart or a Smith like pretty close to us but that's in One Direction what about the other direction we need something that's easy access for everyone thank you we now move on to Federico Crosby hello and good evening everybody my name is fedo wait sorry Mr Crosby before you begin I know we can't see you so if you can please at least I don't know swear that you're holding your right hand up too and do you also swear under penalty of perjury that the testimony you are going to give tonight will be true yes all right you may proceed okay I am a Community member and I do live in this paradise um area I'm also a husband and a father of two which I'm raising in this community I'm also a manager at a community center in this area I'm also a coach in this volcano area um I do support section e proposed Bill 02 2411 which is hopefully allowing the drive-thru to be passed I do believe that it's going to be helpful for my family to have other options other resources and other services I also believe that with our city growing th will have closer um resources for the families in the area and the volcano family in this community thank you madam chair that concludes commment thank you thank you thank you all for your comments uh counselors there is no rebuttal by applicant or and therefore no cross-examination by anyone who spoke during public comment so we will move on to portion five which is comments from the planning department Mr Boss um as Mr Cox mentioned and you heard in some comments your environmental Planning Commission heard this case and on February 15th voted for a recommendation of denial the planning department stands behind the recommendation of the EPC in this matter thank you Mr Voss so now we will go to Council planning staff for a close chair counselors I have no closing remarks okay counselors I would like to make a motion for without recommendation do I have a second there's a second from councelor champine any questions or comments counc councelor Rogers thank you madam chair um May I just ask some for some as the Newbie clarification of why we wouldn't want to why we wouldn't want to do give a recommendation uh councelor Rogers I'm going to go ahead and defer to miss Rono on that uh counselors this is at the recommendation of um your legal staff um that these get sent to council without recommendation for consideration before the full Council counselors any other questions or comments all right Mr Salis councelor Baka yes councelor champine yes councelor grout yes councelor Rogers yes chair bassan yes passes 5 councelor Rogers for 012 agenda item f thank you so much Madam chair item F I'm moving on behalf of councelor freeorn adopting a small area text Amendment to the integrated development ordinance for the Northwest Mesa encar incurment View protection overlay Zone vp-2 requiring referrals of applications to tribal Representatives thank you counselor uh o 2412 is a quasa Judicial request which requires special procedures as you all just recognized before this is going to be the same process that we are going to undergo for 02 as we did for uh the previous bill on o1 although just to get ahead of it there is no rebuttal or cross-examination for this one either so we're going to go ahead and begin with Council planning staff presentation of five minutes testimony of public speakers for two minutes comments from the planning department for up to 5 minutes and then closing by the Council planning staff for up to five minutes as well Mr Cox chair counselors thank you uh this is 02412 um 02412 proposes to add um Indian nations tribes and pblos uh and tribal Representatives as commenting agencies within any development application um that uh takes place within vp2 uh this is in a similar area as the last case um and basically surrounds the Petroglyph National monument and many other places VP VP um stands for view protection overlay um and this um basically protects views uh of the sandas but the um concern um or the reason why uh or why this amendment is being proposed is because the Petroglyph National Monument generally contains um culturally significant land um as designated by the national monument and concerns about culturally sensitive um parts of land outside of the monument as well um this was uh recommended as a denial at EPC um within the redline draft of uh the Ido annual update coming from EPC uh there was a um an approved amendment that would put uh tribes Representatives uh pblos as commenting agenc sees um for any development taking place within 660 ft of major public open space tribal land and tribal land um the other part of this is that it would give the opportunity for the tribes to look at any archaeological studies um or certificates uh if so please this does give the tribes 15 days to provide comment for um any development application I am here for any questions you may have uh we are going to go move on to public speakers however for the record I want to say that councelor grout is now excused so we will have the same uh process for public comment City staff members of the public and the applicant must be sworn in if you will be speaking on this item and are in the room please raise your hand do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony will be true okay thank you all very much and then we will we will make sure to swear everyone in on Zoom when we get to to that as well but thank you so um Mr Cornelius thank you madam chairman our first speaker is Jaden Beckley followed by Michael Vorhees thank you all again Madam chair and counselors the arguments arrayed against the small area Amendment to the bp2 are among the most factually challenged in this year's Ido annual review process some examples it will delay development no tribal Nations will have the same 15-day period to provide comment as any other commenting agency it will give tribal Nations veto power over applications no quoting the Ido 6-4 J comments received after such a referral shall be considered with the application materials in any further review and decision-making procedures it creates an added burden or cost for applicants no planning staff are responsible for making the referral and finally tribal nations are not residents or property owners in Albuquerque this is arguably the most pejorative argument of all tribal Nations have stewarded the land we consider Albuquerque for hundreds of years and maintain deep spirit and cultural ties to the entire area particularly the area within the vp2 there is no factually accurate or ethical reason to oppose adding tribal Nations to the list of commenting agencies for applications for development within the vp2 this represents the minimum the city should do to ensure tribal engagement and recognition and to quote honor and respect the enduring relationship that exists between these people and tribal Nations I'm cloting now city of of Albuquerque website um we respectfully request a vote of D pass and in closing I really want to say you all approved adding Animal Welfare agencies as commenting agencies I'm all in favor of Animal Welfare but really Michael VES followed by Elizabeth Haley thank you chair bassan and counselors Al's comprehensive plan States and I quote the Rio Grand Valley has been continuously inhabited for thousands of years and is home to several Native American communities Albuquerque is situated between Sandy peblo to the north zetto peblo to the South and Laguna Pueblo and tajali Navajo Community to the West Native American Heritage has fundamentally shaped the area's cultural landscape and continues to make our community a unique place to live and visit weblo and Native American cultures deserve to be preserved and perpetuated while advancing understanding by presenting the accomplishments and evolving history of native people with dignity and respect that's written in the comprehensive plan Albuquerque also passed a law just a few years ago requiring that the city shall quote consult with tribal governments prior to taking actions that affect federally recognized tribal governments and shall assess the impact of City programs on tribal communities that's in in in the Albuquerque code uh for the commission on Alaskan native and uh American Indian Affairs and yet planning and zoning and the Ido completely ignore this they're cut out no requirement to talk to them on any of this if the city wants credit for acknowledging the contributions native peoples have made and still make to Albuquerque's cultural landscape then allowing the pblos and tribes to be commenting agencies with at least the same status of animal weal Ware and I support that as well it's it's the bare minimum of respect opposing this amendment is to acknowledge the city gives lip service to supporting Native Americans for marketing purposes only but with no substance to back it up please do the right thing and recommend due pass on this amendment thank you Elizabeth Haley followed by Renee Horvath thank you for the opportunity to speak on this issue my name is Elizabeth Haley I'm a retired consultant for the Department of the interior and tribal Nations one of the areas that was my area of expertise was Land review including providing Congressional testimony to the house resources committee on the issue this um uh tribal consultation was one of the federal requirements that was in the originating documents for the Petroglyph National mind Monument it continues to be necessary for almost any kind of funds that are funneled through state agencies um including um uh uh roads money through the the uh Interstate um Highway Act there are Myriad numbers of reasons why you would need to do a tribal consultation having it just part of your process just makes sense and since the Hearth Act was P giving tribal Nations the opportunity to do Land review themselves uh several years back many of the uh tribal historic preservation uh departments actually probably have better files than the city on the on the resources the cultural resources that might affect them and can quickly and expeditiously give this kind of uh re review they're part of the network that is coordinated under the department of of the interior and I think that there's absolutely no factual reason for not doing this beyond the beyond the just the statement that the City of Albuquerque still has to adhere to applicable state and federal law and in fact the Ido instructs in instructs it to do so thank you Renee Horvath followed by Daniel rean on Zoom good evening again and thank you for letting us speak another amendment and uh uh the community really does support tribal engagement allowing them to provide comments and these are just comments that a regular agency would provide like pnm APS the mafa is allowing them to do that staff does support this I know that it didn't pass the EPC but it wasn't in a unanimous vote and so uh but people ask me why not why can't they you know be allowed to comment on this and I do remember because I was involved in the helping to make this a national monument in 1980s and uh and I do remember meeting people from the pblos like Herman ngoyo from the s ju Oken peblo up north and Joe Sando from hus and Bill Waki from coed and I do remember Philip laurano from Sania pelo they were all very interested and they did join us on tours and at hearings to express uh their knowledge and concerns that to please be sensitive but I do think it's respectful since they have a historic uh connection to this area and that it be respectful to go ahead and allow them to provide agency comments so thank you Dan Regan followed by Nancy Hendricks Mr Reagan before you begin will you please raise your right hand and do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony will be true I do thank you you may proceed chairperson mad and L members I am an Regan an at large board member of nap Heights neighborhood association I am totally in support of the tribes being recognized as valid Partners in zoning matters but I have another issue tonight all of you have received two copies of the District Court's judgment regarding vp-2 the bottom lines of that judgment were because Ido procedures were grossly not followed and a city counselor acted improperly the lups and Council approvals for the vp2 were declared null and void and the matter was remanded by the court for a new public hearing without that counselor's involvement to my knowledge that new hearing has never happened and L's consideration of this matter tonight is not what was ordered by the district court so first I don't know why anything having to do with 02412 is on the L's agenda for tonight and if you act on this this evening are you in violation or contempt of the directives of the district court second this district court case took 18 plus months from filing to decision have any of you found out how much the city's legal costs were for this one case third do any of you know the dollar value of the council staff hours spent creating this Matter's 782 pages of documentation all of which should have been created by the developer is it okay with you that taxpayer dollars funded both the defense and the documentation none of these questions are rhetorical if you don't know the the answers to the what's the cost questions how are you going to pass an informed City Council budget 12 business days from tonight thank you Mr I stand for questions Nancy Hendricks followed by Peggy nef hello again thank you do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony will be true I do thank you thank you the National Park Service does support this proposed change to the Northwest Mesa escart vp2 which would add the tribal Nations and representatives as commenting agencies for development proposals within the Northwest Mesa vp2 we had PR previously provided comments and other um to the EPC and other City Planning groups and that included the recognition of this indigenous cultural landscape of the West Mesa and Petroglyph National Monument significant to the City of Albuquerque the nation and and the world we get visitors from all across the world as part of our federal processes we regularly notify and engage with 29 pblos and tribes that have connections to the monument and they consider this area sacred in fact today we met with more than 25 representatives from cultural resource staff and tribal Elders from across the region and I actually found it surprising that none of them knew about this proposed amendment they were all very interested in learning more about the development around the Northwest Mesa and interested in helping and engaging with the city but I do have a question about what type of notification occurred to the area tribes in pblos since it's not required right now under the Ido to notify the tribes I am not sure how the notification occurred I've learned from experience experience that if you only notify the tribal leaders you are not going to get much feedback I compare it to notifying the president of the United States about something happening in little old Petroglyph National Monument he is not going to be interested in that but if you notify their staff they will be interested so I would be very happy to provide information and um email addresses to our tribal contacts so you can expand your notification about this issue thank you Peggy nef followed by John Edward I do swear Sorry Miss nef sorry thank you you're like come on let's go uh so do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony will be true I do thank you in fact all I want to do is encourage you to lead us in the way of Truth this has to happen we are the ones to do this and its time is overdue thank you John Edward Mr Edward hello again hello will you please raise your right hand and do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony will be true yes ma'am thank you uh I spoke at the EPC hearing and one of the things that was brought out in the EPC hearing is that um there's already a process by which um anybody including the tribes um can have a voice in these matters um the other thing that was um uh that was discussed is that um that the tribes and the Petroglyph National monument in some of these areas have been long been included in much of the discussion about what was going to be planned and built in the area um I attended meetings going back to 2004 about this area and uh what the National Monument wanted I think grene Horath and other people have testified to the fact that they've been involved in the planning in this area and the tribes people have been informed they can continue to be informed and there doesn't need to be a special rule for that I don't think we should be exclusionary but I don't think that people should be elevated at a higher standard or class than that of other people within the community itself and I think we all want to be treated equally and fairly Madam chair that concludes comment thank you Mr Cor corus we move on to the portion where there's comments by planning department Mr Voss you get C stage chair and counselors on this matter the planning department doesn't have any further comment thank you Council staff for closing Council staff has no further comment all right so councel Rogers do you have a motion yes Madam chair I would like to motion that we move this with no recommendation to full Council okay there's a motion for no recommendation is there a second I'll second it that's okay all right uh any questions or comments okay councelor champine thank you madam chair my simple question and this was based off of some of the speakers um tonight the speaker pointed out that the tribal has has all the same timelines and allowances that everyone else does so it begs the question of why are we doing this Mr Cox uh chair counselors so um right now you get notification if you are a uh property owner within a certain distance of a development um as far as like public notification but as part of um just a list of organizations and agencies that the planning department sends out um such as Albuquerque uh commun or public schools or um Animal Welfare tonight we would add the tribes to that automatic list of notification and that it is a different designation than just notifying people they are able to provide um comment that will be part of uh the packet that comes back to the planning department at that time and so um yeah they they are more or less the tribes will be given the same designation as as a department or a community organization rather than just a um a neighbor to a Development Council Shai Madam chair so when they said they advise that there's programs exist like um within the federal guidelines or the state guidelines those aren't just being they're just not being followed or are we making these new rules because we're not following them chair counselors I am unsure about the state or federal regulations I don't know if anyone from planning um what have that information or admin Co Montoya anybody U Madam chair we are not prepared to answer that question unfortunately okay and then Mr Boss so the the federal and state uh rules that were mentioned are for federal and state agencies that are doing their own projects and they don't apply to Land Development projects like the Ido does um so this additional rule is specific to Our Land Development procedures thank you thank you madam CH thank you councelor Rogers anything thank you madam chair I just also want to point out I think from uh Steward of the land that has always been the native community and so I think this just speaks to the city's affirmation that if we are moving that land we should consult the stewards of that land and so I think that's the fundamental um basis for this and that we have that in legislation through equity and inclusion with we have a tribal liaison Terry Sloan whose job is to make sure that the notifications go out so that they have the ability to weigh in when we're moving land so I think that's just the basis of the history of why this is important counselers any other questions or comments the motion is for without recommendation Mr solace councelor Bach is excused councelor champine yes councelor groud is excused councelor Rogers yes chair bosan yes passes 30 z o 17 is for councel Baka by request it's adopting a small area text Amendment to the integrated development ordinance to require development standards including Building height step Downs landscape buffering building design and parking reductions for properties located adjacent to the rail trail this this is also a quasa Judicial request I think everyone in here and well almost everyone there's new people online to speak for comments so because this is a quaj Judicial request we will have the special procedures um there is going to be the five minutes from Council planning staff testimony by public speakers we will have rebuttal by the applicant cross-examination will then be an opportunity for those who spoke during public comment and then we will finish with comments by the planning department and then Council so with that we will begin with Council planning staff chair counselors thank you this is 0247 um this is in uh is regarding the rail trail small mapped area uh the area or the line in green shown on this map is the approximate um area where the rail trail will be going through uh generally our historic parts of town um this uh proposed small map area M brings in some design regulations um starting with the applicability is that uh these regulations would apply to development or Redevelopment on Lots adjacent to the rail trail um as far as access and connectivity um this would require developments along the rail trail to have a pedestrian connectivity to the rail trail uh as approved um by the parks and recck Department um Landscaping uh outside of industrial uses and single family residential uh you would have to have a um 5 foot wide Landscaping buffer with um trees and shrubs as approximately shown by the graphic on the screen for Industrial Development you would have to have a 15ot wide buffer um for walls and fences generally other than Industrial Development it's going to go back towards just our standard fencing for the base District that you are within uh for Industrial Development you cannot have chain link fencing um at least not visible from the rail trail uh but you can have it temporarily for security during construction or other temporary times um the building Heights step down um outside except for areas that are within the downtown Center um Main Street or premium Transit there is a building height step down requirement and as shown by this graphic uh basically within the first 20 ft um Step Back From The Rail Trail you would not be able to go over 48 ft in height uh after that 20 feet it just allows what the base zoning District uh height or any other overlay allows within that District um so just to give youall a visual representation of what the downtown Center Main Street and premium Transit areas kind of take out of the rail trail um these buffers that are shown within the blue circles and pink um are those um areas where the building height steep down would not be applicable um as far as the building design uh any facade facing the rail trail shall meet the standard uh building design requirements found in uh subsection 14651 E2 A3 um also at least 50% of the outdoor seating and Gathering areas required by the subsection uh shall be located adjacent to the rail trail um as far as parking there is a minimum number of off- street parking spaces required um but it may be reduced by 10% if the proposed development is located within 330t feet in any direction of any city park or Trail I stand for any questions or clarifications you may have thank you very much we're going to move on to public comment because it's quasi judicial for those of you in the room that are going to speak on the matter will you please raise your right hand do you swear under penalty of perjury to that your testimony will be true okay thank you Mr Cornelius thank you madam chair first is Loretto nanho Lopez followed by Renee horbath good evening um chair and members of the committee the housing neighborhood and economic development uh 2022 comprehensive plan on page 16 States higher rents lower vacancies and increasing demand for new real estate development character characterize office industrial retail multif family rental markets since 2002 and suggest that while the real estate market in the pocket is growing these conditions have not improved local residents economic prospects these pressures will only intensify as there are many new development projects in the pipeline that it will impact the local real estate market Drive demand upward and potentially Place increasing cost pressures on low-income households and low in and local businesses while these new developments are exciting for Albuquerque residents they may create inhospital economic conditions that produce neighborhood displacement of residents and S and small businesses and overall genfic these projects include but are not limited to rail trail and greater downtown urban trail projects Rail Yards Redevelopment propos stadium and for the New Mexico United professional soccer team um we are respectfully asking that the that um the MRA work with the historic neighborhoods um to provide in this ordinance protection and benefit of the historic now toown neighborhoods the neighborhoods where Albuquerque began so we ask that you provide these um uh make sure that we are protected and we have made a recommendation in our letter that was just submitted on May 13th I thank you for this opportunity to speak Renee Horvath followed by Crystal Garcia hello my name is Renee Horvath again and uh uh I did attend that uh hearing at the EPC on another case but listened in on what the comments were and uh and I was most interested in hearing the design standards and and I thought it was very important to uphold the design standards and the buffers and the step down and one of the biggest uh the most that was commented was that they wanted to prevent the canyon effect along the rail trail so I think that's why there is the step back and uh and I think that would make it architecturally more interesting instead of a straight up and down building and uh and so I guess I hear that there is amendment to remove that step bound step down requirement and maybe for somebody in the saw mail area would like to have that but uh maybe um instead of removing it maybe there's another approach if he can come up with another specific architectural design that really complements the building so it's an attractive along the rail trail maybe go that direction instead of removing the whole thing so I still push for more protection make sure we have enough parking nice architectural features and uh I think people will enjoy this and so that's where I'm coming from with my comments thank you Crystal Garcia followed by Suzanne lubar on Zoom hi uh thank you Crystal Garcia with the h& and the protect preserve BOS um the historic neighborhood alliance is concerned with the rail trail in due to the proximity of the historical neighborhoods the City of Albuquerque continues to perpetuate racial inequities in minority communities and provides no plans to stop the gentrification and elimination of our if our of our historic neighborhoods the hna does not support the outdoor use along the rail trail due to the environmental impacts to the neighborhood the following is recommended the Metropolitan Redevelopment office will meet the historic neighborhoods to begin a process to stop the impacts for the the rail trail no parking facilities in the historic neighborhood provide no parking sites throughout the historic neighborhoods and provide permits to Residents in the neighborhood to park in front of their homes Airbnb shall not be allowed in the historic neighborhoods traffic and environmental impact study be provided before any construction of the rail tra begins and real measures to alleviate the traffic and environmental impacts no Drive ups allowed services in the historic neighborhoods all historic neighborhoods shall have their character protection overlay zones updated to be equivalent or stronger than the wells Park neighborhood no cannabis dispensary or consumption in the historic neighborhoods Rehabilitation of older homes h& requests that the city of albuque show how the rail trail is more Advantage advantageous to the community and how it would protect the identity and cohesiveness of neighborhoods before any construction begins Suzanne lubar followed by Jordan McConnell Miss lubar before you begin will you please raise your right hand and do you swear under penalty of perjury that your testimony tonight will be true I do thank you you may proceed thank you madam chair counselors my name is Suzanne lubar I'm president of Heritage real estate company I'd like to express our support of 0247 amendment one sponsored by councelor Baka the proposed rail trail changes to the Ido are particularly challenging specifically for Corner Lots where the property may have two entrances one from each Street on Corner Lots there's already an existing requirement that the building be set back far enough to achieve the Clear Sight triangle in The Sawmill district there are additional setback and step down requirements that have to be met due to the character protection overlay for that area with the proposed changes to the Ido there would essentially now be three sets of step back back and step down requirements for these Corner Lots all of these requirements limit the area of the lot upon which the property owner can build making some of these Corner Lots essentially undevelopable this third layer of restrictions along the rail trail particularly for Corner Lots may have the unintended consequence of disincentivizing Redevelopment in a metropolitan Redevelopment area without catalytic Redevelopment the benefits of the rail trail will be significantly less impactful than they might otherwise be please vote in favor of O 2417 Amendment 1 which creates an exception for intersections or Corner Lots thank you very much Jordan McConnell good evening thank you very much do you swear under penalty of perjury tonight that your testimony will be true yes thank you you may proceed so good evening again I'm going to speak in favor of passage of the amendment concerning these changes near the rail trail so as a downtown resident and like many who live in the corridor from Oldtown to Knob Hill I don't use a car very much instead preferring my bicycle or the art system so I look forward to the changes that this Trail could bring rail trails and Paths of a similar type in cities in both North America Europe and Japan have helped Spur new growth healthy development and helped create more options for active Transit given the rail Trails connections to both The Rail Runner and art and to the existing bike Network it's uniquely positioned to help facilitate these changes that will bring more vibrancy to the downtown area neighborhoods particularly our historic neighborhoods that are often sned by a lack of investment like Wells park and need Vitality or neighborhoods that are being left to stagnate or even gentrify due to a profound lack of new housing construction uh landscaping and design guidelines will ensure a pleasant experience for trail users and are not too burdensome and will also help link our neighborhoods Better Together additional reductions or even eliminations of parking requirements would help add to the Vitality as well as successful potential developments while also spurring more alternative transit in the core um the amendment helps take steps in removing barriers toward new development can help improve our neighborhoods and city as a whole attracting new residents to our part of the city particularly the amendment concerning Corner buildings which I hope will be passed as a downtown resident we're all excited about the rail trail and that possibility that it could bring a lot of new businesses and a lot of new neighbors I recommend this amendment for passage and I'm excited at the Vitality it will bring by allowing more flexibility in the area and allowing more people to enjoy our dents Historic downtown areas on bike and foot which is the best way to experience them so thank you and please pass this uh Amendment have a good evening Madam chair that concludes public comment thank you counselors we're going to move on to the rebuttal by applicant Miss Schultz is here Madam chair committee members thank you um at your last Lep's hearing you got a pretty robust present from Metropolitan Redevelopment staff about these proposed changes the EPC process um the uh that's the word I'm looking for it's late I'm sorry um negotiations that happened as a part of the EPC process where the department responded to public comment and altered The Proposal at EPC um I'm not going to reiterate the presentation that was given to you last month uh we would request that you affirmatively vote this package as the EPC recommended it and myself and the agen director Mr Bruner are here for questions thank you at this point there could be cross-examination by anyone who spoke during public comment if you have something to cross-examine based off of those comments going once going twice anybody online okay moving on to comments by the planning department Mr Boss chair and counselors uh the planning department uh stands behind the recommendation of your EPC on this matter for approval thank you and to council staff for a close there is no close in addition to what was already said from Council staff I'm getting the head shake uh counselors uh councelor Baka do you have a motion Madame chair yes I move do pass with no recommendation it's one or the other counselor is it with doe pass or without recommendation without recommendation okay so there's a motion for without recommendation is there a second second from councelor champine councilor's any additional comments or questions Mr Solace do we do the no that I I was told that that's going to wait for the because this now without a recommendation we're not going to go ahead and do any amendments on that we'll save those for full councel councelor Baka yes councelor shampine yes councelor groud is excused councelor Rogers yes chair ban yes passes 4 to zero well it was a pleasure to do this twice I can't wait to do it a third time at full Council thank you all for being here with no further business this meeting is adjourned J