all committee members are present today via zoom this is a remote or online meeting where all participants will be on a video or audio conference we're holding this meeting remotely so that everyone can participate safely while we are conducting business under a public health emergency we appreciate your patience as lups meetings are conducted in this way members of the public will be able to address the committee if they have signed up for live public comment per the instructions published on the agenda and on our website friday speakers will be moved into the meeting and will remain muted with their camera off until they are called upon to speak at which point they can turn on their camera unmute themselves and will have four minutes to provide comments to the committee after that they will again be muted and returned to be an attendee of the zoom webinar written comments were also received and distributed to the committee members in advance of the meeting members of the public city staff and the media have the ability to view this meeting live through youtube and zoom webinar the live stream can be accessed from most smartphones tablets or computers for those watching on the live stream thank you for joining us today's agenda contains both quasi-judicial and legislative matters for that reason i will be swearing in all members of the public and staff before the staff presentation and public comments we'll now go on to agenda item a 060. this is adopting text amendments to the integrated development ordinance paragraph 14 through 16 for the 2020 ido annual update including text amendments for small mapped areas i move a do pass i'll second that man i'm sure thank you councillor gibson with a second we will begin with a staff presentation by miss petra morris and i it will be necessary for me at this point to swear in all staff all staff members that may address the committee today please raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth i do they do and thank you miss morris would you go forward with the presentation adam chair counselors uh thank you i am just going to share my screen um so that you guys can share with us this visualization so um to begin my presentation just a short overview um the id this is the second ideo annual update uh and this is the 2020 even though we're in 2021 this is a 2020 ideo annual update uh section 6 3b of the ido calls for an annual process to update the ido in order to ensure predictability and to ensure that the ideo remains an up-to-date and current document the uh main form of communication for this annual update is the abcc email list which has over 10 000 recipients on it we are um about a halfway maybe two thirds of the way through the process for this this began with an epc application um it began as two epc applications the first part was uh citywide text amendments and uh the second part was um small mapped area text amendments both of these applications um were combined into the bill before us today which is o 2160 and the epc recommendations are reflected in the exhibit to the bill this exhibit has the citywide text amendments in red and the small mapped areas are shown in in blue i've just realized my presentation says green and i've been saying green to everybody for the past three months and i must be colorblind because it is clearly blue so my error there epc hearings we've had three of them so far we had the first one on january 21st at this meeting both the city-wide and the small mapdarium amendments were considered the second hearing was on february 18th at this one it was just the small mapped area amendments and then on march 4th the epc considered the city-wide amendments and then made their recommendations last week on may 5th we had the first lups presentation on this uh we heard from the public we heard from staff counsellors had an opportunity to ask any questions there was a presentation on 18 amendments um and today this is the second lapse next steps in the process um is is really at the discretion of the councillors more lups or onto full council um in the packets uh to uh with for today there are two amendments that have been revised a2 and a15 these were both revised for clarity a2 is the campground amendment and a15 is the technical edits this is a spreadsheet with a number of line items that were ripples of putting together the red line document when the planning department was putting together the red line document there was some imagine you throw a stone into a pond and the ripples come out the epc threw a number of stones into the pond and we didn't quite catch all the ripples with the epc recommendations and so these tech edits catch those those ripples um there is also a new amendment in the packet tonight uh that is amendment a19 um this is about some additional restrictions for cannabis uses and then it is also worth noting that the amendments a3 a4 a12 and a19 so that's cannabis cultivation and manufacturing cannabis distances overnight shelter and cannabis the additional uh restrictions um i'll be available to answer any questions on them do any discussion um but there is no uh intention to move these this evening and but they may be considered before council as a a floor amendment um i have uh men us i have slides prepared to talk about each amendment um as we come to it if that is the discretion of the councils when it comes comes to that um so that is the end of my my brief presentation about tonight and where we're at uh so with that i hand myself over by any questions thank you sports counselors are there any questions all right let's um move on then here are the public comment ground rules comments are to be addressed to the committee members only please keep your comments germaine to the topics on the agenda and any disruptive conduct or non-german commentary will result in removal from the zoom webinar thank you all for joining us and each speaker will be given four minutes to provide public comment the mr moya will start the timer once you begin speaking then the zoom moderator will let you know when your time is up mr moyo please allow all speakers into our zoom webinar as speakers will need to be sworn in we have a few speakers tonight so it's going to take a while to get you all into the room we could ask councillor gibson to sing would make it a little more fun oops she just shut herself off doesn't want to sing you don't want me to sing okay we don't want her to sing i think we're getting close everyone please be patient this is much more difficult than just asking you to walk to the front of the room madam chair uh for those that sign up to speak and are here in the attending the webinar i've let everybody into the meeting room that is signed up to speak all right that is good news and since everyone has been let in who is here and has signed up to speak i now um need to swear you in so would each of you please raise your right hand want to see you on tv okay do you swear to tell the truth i do i do i do yes i do i didn't count but i'm assuming you all said yes i do oh thank you all so julian would you please ask the speakers to turn off their camera and mute themselves until they're called on to to speak and then we will call out each speaker's name your four minutes will begin when you start speaking thank you again all for being here thank you madam chair our first speaker is kathleen munson to be followed by sabrina smith nick monson please feel free to turn your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking workday hello council my name is kathleen monson um i go by katie i'm here primarily regarding the new cannabis regulation act um i'm not sure if many of the other people here tonight also have questions regarding that act and zoning for the city of albuquerque um i had a few questions that i submitted via writing and i also signed up to speak so i guess i'll just go over those same questions i'm not sure if you were given those prior to the meeting um my first question is has the city appointed a contact person regarding cannabis dispensary zoning requirements and other cannabis industry related questions and if so what their contact information is um has the council outlined the zoning requirements yet for cannabis dispensaries in the city of albuquerque this is my first city council meeting that i've attended via zoom so i'm not sure if you all have discussed that yet i apologize if you are repeating information that you've already gone over if you have gone over it is it available online anywhere that we may be able to find and if not do you anticipate a future meeting date where you might review the zoning requirements um regarding the zoning requirement questions is there going to be a limit on cannabis retail licenses in albuquerque if so how many licenses will you be permitting uh will there be cannabis uh will cannabis or sorry where will cannabis retailers be permitted to operate in the city of albuquerque so the specific zoning requirements um does the location of the cannabis retail store have to be identified prior to the application for a license are there residency requirements for a license and if so what are they and how will the application be processed will it be based on qualifications or will it be a point-based or scourge system as other states have used those are my questions all pertaining to the cannabis industry so if you have answers for me i'd appreciate it or i appreciate being pointed in the correct direction respond to that thank you very much ms munson for your questions and i'm going to respond which i usually don't on these because we have so many people but we'll be addressing some of that uh this evening and in future meetings uh there will also direct you to someone will get back to you and direct you to a website and we'll also have the planning department get with you give you them your information so we can see if we can give you more but we are still answering questions on all of that so uh your your question is very timely so thank you for being here our next speaker is sabrina smith please feel free to turn your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking hi council my name is sabrina smith and i am in support to amend the ido allow to allow short-term stay locations within the city of albuquerque i am among one of the most fastest growing trends in the country called digital nomads we are individuals who are able to work remotely using the internet and live their life on the road i successfully make my living performing marketing and business media consulting for numerous clients in several different states uh since 2019 there has been a 49 increase in the digital nomad community up almost 3.6 million from 2019 a point i can speak personally about is the difficulty we have in finding safe and convenient places to stay within city limits suitable rv parks in albuquerque are in short supply and commonly full this presents a hardship for us having short-term rv stays within the city of albuquerque would allow others and myself to enjoy what the city has to offer and not be forced to pass through to the next rest area completely passing albuquerque we would rather be in proximity to friends and family and to be able to support local businesses with covid this need has increased as more people have gone small and mobile as businesses and recreational travel increases by rvs the community will benefit in more ways than just one the traveling community is strong with word of mouth and online forums so when this amendment is passed the word will spread and people will see the opportunity to visit albuquerque for short-term stays and not have to continue on with their journey so i hope you can see the opportunity this brings for the albuquerque community and thanks for your time thank you ms smith our next speaker is dan rich mr rich please feel free turn your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking mr rich are you there i'm here i didn't know i was being called um am i on yes sir your four minutes will begin when you start speaking okay hello everybody glad to be back um i didn't quite finish last time um but i won't use the whole four minutes this time um i wanted to just respond to a couple comments made last week and just do my wind down that i didn't have a chance to do last week what i wanted to say is short-term rv parks should not be thought of as undesirable rather small well-thought-out projects located in non-residential neighborhoods geared to short-term travelers they should feel welcomed and i'm talking about parks with well-thought-out design nice landscaping amenities offered that would be inviting to out-of-town guests and there's kind of an ingrained image that people have of like trailer trash or we don't want that in our neighborhood but what is being proposed is a new concept for new times and i think that there's a great need and this would be an enhancement to our city that will bring favorable results and that's basically what i want to add that i didn't have a chance to completely express last time and i thank everybody for their attention thank you mr rich our next speaker is miss ward please go ahead and unmute yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking counselors please vote 488 liquor and nicotine retail and four a 18 northwest mesa escarpment view protection ordinance 488 and 418. please vote against a2 camp brown and harvey park against a 10 mxl drive-through and against a 14 post-application facilitated meetings any proposed amendment using the temporary situation of the covid19 pandemic to justify permanent zoning or landing land use changes cannot be justified on that basis so why were campgrounds and rv parks put in nrsu in the first place that they shouldn't be there which date is the effective date of this ido for declaring primary permissiveness if it refers to may 2018 then that should be the date in the ordinance would the proposed change lead to inconsistent permissiveness status within the same zone the pandemic is not a justification for liberalizing frequently problematic drive-throughs please see the journal's road warrior columns from april 12th april 26 and may 3rd for broader community opinion on this if i had a cynicism meter surely it would be at 11. a14 further restrains the opportunity for public input by assuming there is timely and error-free notification the srmna has experienced an onc error that left it off a notification list the error was corrected but left the srmna without adequate time for facilitated meeting requests and scheduling some of the remaining amendments have aspects needing further worker discussion special notes on a1 a13 and a15 please support the removal of concreted and reinforced oils from the common open space calculation there is debate on natural arroyos and the amendment is mistitled as it does not define arroyo but defines common open space please remove references to pnm or public service company of new mexico in the ido a private company's name should not appear in city ordinance and the private company's plans should comply with the ido not the other way around if there is a national standard to which both the ideo and private companies should adhere and reference the national standard a15 puts forward substantive text amendments as technical amendments this is misleading and further discussion is needed on a five what is a daytime gathering facility that would be left uncovered by removal of this designation i'm sorry what is an example of a current daytime gathering facility that would be left uncovered by removal of this designation is the city simply saying that it does not want ordinances that apply to others to apply to it my understanding is that zoning decisions were not supposed to be based on what could happen this requires further clarification of intent and effects on a6 the geographic response of this language to go in a gold or intense section as exists elsewhere exists elsewhere in the ideo for example as done in protection overlays um a9 there appears to be textual errors in the proposed amendment with consecutive wood occurrences and what happens if the epc do not deny the zone mapping amendment request have you tied yourself in a knot um and i forgot where i was a 12. agree with the concepts but i wonder if the limit is too high for a residential zone you need to consider an upper limit of six if you also have to add bed numbers for staff a13 i think i talked on that one already yeah um thank you miss ward your your time is up thank you thank you our next speaker is sarah fitzgerald please feel free to turn your video on oh and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking madam chair not seeing ms fitzgerald in the room anymore uh i'll go back to her if i see her come back thank you uh so the next speaker will be dr joe vias and madam chair uh dr vias was not in the room yet when you swore in the speaker so you'll just have to swear him in before he starts his comments thank you i will he's ready all i have to do is find my swearing in got it dr avayas yes do you swear to tell the truth please raise your right hand and swear to tell the truth i sort of tell the truth absolutely thank you dr bias thank you uh it was the time i went i was on the wrong zoom link so i i thank you for getting me on anyway but anyway first i want to greet you all again and i want to express to counselor pena my deep frustration with the possible arson at the pat baca community center knowing how hard the community and leaders coalesce to make that a reality next i would like to recommend that proposed amendment a6 to the original geographic responsiveness be pulled from the packet uh it's unnecessary in my opinion and it sends the wrong message we should try to preserve as much of albuquerque's uniqueness as possible i also recommend strongly that we continue to protect the coors boulevard you protection overlay or vpo i hope you won't buy into mr strozier's notion that only the view of the sandia mountains is valid his argument that because coors is not a straight north south corridor it is caused to eliminate 45 degrees from the divisions of north-south please protect the court's corridor uh next i'd like to just address a little something on the c2 and c3 conversions in the ido uh during the ido zoning conversion process c2 and c3 zones were converted to the nrc district on the west side c2 became mxm and c3 became mxh on the east side new amendments have changed or proposed to change the ideal to allow uses in mxm as conditional on the east side but are permissive on with the nrc on the west side so in general nrc is allowing nuisance uses for more liberally than the mxm zone the rv park amendment for example currently before you it's proposed as conditional for mxm on the east side but permissive for nr nrc on the west side how will both c2 and c3 put together to make the nrc district on the west side i mean just it just doesn't make sense it doesn't seem equitable and uh i think that should be corrected or at least adamantly explained and so for that i thank you i i don't know what the timeline is but thank you for your attention thank you dr vales madam chair councillor benton could i we have staff address the um the last issue of the difference between the conversions east and west of the river yes thank you we'll ask ms morris to address that thank you madam chair counselors yes so with the adoption of the ido uh mxm is the was the conversion from c2 uh mxm uh all c2 throughout the city east side or west side converted to nxm however the c3 zone um converted to either the nrc zone district or the mxh zone district uh that depended on the conditions in the area however in the on the west side um there was a push for more of the c3 to convert to nrc than mxh in order to preserve the commercial properties on the west side we know that there is a big jobs to housing imbalance between the east side and the west side and so when mxh zoning came in we were concerned that people would use the residential component of that mixed-use zone district if it was on the west side and that potentially we would lose a lot of commercial properties and employment opportunities on the west side um this uh a two amendment um has uh the mxm zone district which is um in on both the east and west sides of the city as a conditional use mxm as the old c2 is pretty close to a lot of residential and so that's why it's proposed as conditional nlc when it does occur on the west side is generally away from residential it's the old c3 so it's pretty heavy and intense a lot of these are old business and industrial parks and so the nrc that exists on both the east and the west side would have if this amendment were to pass um campground on rvs as a permissive use in the nrc and in the nrbp madam chair thanks for the update i appreciate that you're reminding me of that whole discussion um yeah so it was a policy call in that sense of the trying to address jobs housing imbalance all right i i didn't see anybody saying no thank you madam president uh share thank you councillor benton councilor borrego do you have a question i do have a question of mr bias um good afternoon mr vias or dr bias rather joe's good um i had a question on a6 geographic responsiveness right um could you further elaborate on um are you in support of this or not in support of this i'm in support of the original amendment not in support of a6 okay all right because i was a little confused by which comment you were referring to so yeah i i get confused with the idea all the time thank you sir thank you thank you councillor barreo next speaker our next speaker is peter kalitzus please feel free to turn your video on unmute yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking hello i'm peter klitzes thank you for allowing me to speak again and i appreciate the four minutes so i hope to keep it shorter um as i submitted some written comments and some verbal comments i said last week i hope they get addressed um um my comments were relating to a12 overnight shelter and a5 daytime gatherings the quick one i'll say is the a5 daytime gathering facilities um i don't know if it's good or bad on my question that i had and hopefully uh miss morris it sounds like she's a great resource for these answers as far as where these are covered in other areas of the ideal okay and regarding a12 overnight shelter my biggest question actually has to do with uh what parts are you looking at to be conditional or permissive or they are going to be permissive i love the idea of this being prescriptive giving many zones opportunities we need the shelter so much um and hopefully this will also cover the um the situation similar to denver with the tent structures because to be able to put this throughout the city provide much more housing that's not uh severe impact to a neighborhood i think is great um so you have my comments from last week i asked them to be part of the record so if my request to that my request and maybe miss morris can answer it is a12 what parts is you looking conditional permissive or both thank you very much thank you mr clintus next speaker please hey mr madame oh i'm sorry counselor gibson you guys are going to have to wave more i'm not being you're too small there's so many little tiny faces on here so i i would really appreciate uh giving uh miss morris a chance to um to to respond to mr cliff clinton's uh comments please thank you council gibson ms morris would you like to respond to those comments madam chair counselors yes um so the first question um was about daytime gathering so as drafted in the ido daytime gathering is is very broad it would cover an accountant who offers tax preparation services at a discount it would cover a medical clinic that offers reduced fee care for example planned parenthood it would cover city community center it was not intended to cover such a broad swath of spaces it was as drafted really intended to cover services that were providing assistance to the homeless population during the day so not overnight um but if we were to revise the definition to say things that are happening during the day for the homeless we'll end up in court and we will end up being told that we're discriminating and so as as phrased the daytime gathering is is not enforceable and then to rephrase it to revise it would put would get us in trouble and so amendment um a uh um five the daytime gathering proposes to strike this reference to this throughout the ideo um it's a conditional use currently in the ideo in a number of zones it's not permissive in any other zones um and it has a separation distance associated with overnight shelters um striking this uh could possibly allow some overnight shelters in places uh that would have been too close to what was considered a daytime gathering um but that but that's something that will have to come with uh some language unfortunately we have this that's not not viable um the overnight shelter amendment uh this one i believe council davis has asked us to talk about but not vote on um the overnight shelter use in the ido is conditional in every zone district sorry is conditional only in a handful of zone districts but not permissive in any it's conditional in the mxh zone districts the nrc zone district the nrbp zone district the nrlm and the nrgm zone district this amendment would add bed capacities to those overnight shelter is also part of a religious institution there's a federal level act called rupa that tells governments around the country that they cannot interfere with how a church pursues their mission and helping those who are needy is is a the mission of a number of churches and so um overnight shelters are considered an incidental use within a religious facility the other thing that reluca talks about and um chris is on the call if i get too close into legal stuff and misspeak so he can correct me if i'm wrong but uh ralph also tells us that we have to allow churches to operate and so churches are in every zone district in the city and so for that reason uh this amendment has uh bed capacity depending on the zone district you're in in case that the overnight shelter is part of the incidental church use and so that is why there are overnight um bed spaces in zones that just a regular overnight shelter um wouldn't be allowed and i think that was all of the questions conditional versus permissive uh yes yes religious institutions are permissive and all zones overnight shelters are conditional in some zones thank you sir we appreciate all your comments thank you sir uh counselor pam i see that you have your hand up counselor pena let's go on with our next speaker and if we find counselor pena we'll ask her if she has any comments on this thank you thank you very much go ahead please i apologize i was actually just going to say that i'm not related to this but um dr vice i was going to ask to bring him back into the um into the hold on one second hold on one second hold on um to bring dr vice back in because he felt like the question on east west was an adequately answered so if we can pull him back in i would appreciate it dr vice i see you're back in the chat room uh counselor penny do you have a question or comment for dr bias um dr bias i was just um wanting you to elaborate on your your question you felt that wasn't completely answered you're on mute dr vias you are muted i'm gonna meet it now you're fine you're on thank you i'm on okay thanks uh yeah uh counselor opinion can you hear me now yes you're on yes so i can hear you okay it just doesn't seem right something doesn't seem right about the conversions of c2 and c3 zones and um i'm just not sure why uh there are more allowances with the zoning for the west side than there are for the east side with those particular conversions and why there's so much of it i don't know if that makes sense so if petra maybe you can elaborate a little more i know it's you know lots of it's based on the jobs to housing and balance but i don't think that really satisfied dr joe's um well it's it's not about really just satisfying dr joe i think it's a it's it's giving an explicit and and um and and fair explanation about why it is that somebody decided to mark up the west side differently than the east side particularly when you're applying specific zoning that that's that's my problem but i'm not the only one concerned about that there's others counselor dr joe if it's all right with you since this is public comment and not question and answer may we bring this up when we come back to the item on the agenda of course thank you dr baez counselor pena sure thank you thank you thank you all we'll go with the next speaker then please our next speaker is heather hoffman please feel free to turn your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking good evening miss hoffman good evening um first of all thank you counselors for taking the time to hear from me today i greatly appreciate it my name is heather hoffman and i'm the executive director with barrett foundation also known as barrett house shelter my comments are in relation to amendment a12 a proposal to restrict shelter beds per zoning type while i think and hope there's going to be a lot more information to follow on this particular proposal i'd like to impart these two particular points for the purpose of today's conversation first i have great concern about the message that the council and the city would be sending to our community at large if we try to relegate human beings to industrial areas for shelters over 100 beds it feels really questionable to me at best to tell and show our community that we are pushing our fellow human beings in need of safety shelter and support into a zoned industrial area for this to be the only space where we would allow larger shelters i feel we're sending the message that we're devaluing these particular humans and have no trust in them this doesn't feel on par with the mayor's platform to work to truly address and reduce homelessness as opposed to simply trying to hide it secondly in the face of the ongoing economic crisis with the recognition that our community's most vulnerable population is being just proportionately affected i can't imagine that this is the right time to restrict shelter space to keep local shelters from growing to meet the need in our community and possibly even reducing our current capacity it seems likely we're only going to add to the problem with this blanket answer to a very nuanced problem i'd hope very much that barrett foundation in particular would be invited to particular or to further discussions on this proposal as solutions are being sought out i absolutely appreciate what a huge topic homelessness is and i appreciate the efforts that the city and the council are taking on to solve this very daunting issue thank you for your time thank you miss hoffman counselors any questions thank you miss hossman we appreciate you being here our next speaker is eleanor walter please uh feel free to turn the video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking i'm eleanor walther and i'm president of the rio grande boulevard neighborhood association and we oppose the red line in the ido that allows cottage development as a conditional use outside the ucmspt zone lots of lots in the north valley or a quarter acre so we think this severely impacts us and we wonder if it doesn't lead to de facto duplex and townhouse development where it's not allowed now we also oppose in a14 on the reducing from 15 days to 10 days to ask for a facilitated meeting um and also the ideo doesn't specify whether that's business days or calendar days and in general we oppose amendments that are um have come about because some problems have arisen to covert we'd certainly would like to see um that um that this behavior continues after we're out of lockdowns and truly is a change in people's behavior and uh with cottage development part of our problem is that um i don't i don't know of and i frankly don't know how to find out if any cottage development has been approved on these um 10 000 square foot lots but it's very hard for us to envision what that will look like um and so if we could keep where it's currently allowed and see some built that would ease our minds greatly thank you thank you miss walter um i see no questions we'll move on to the next speaker thank you ma'am our next speaker is dan regan please feel free to turn your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when he starts good evening mr reagan i think i'm unmuted good evening you are indeed uncuted thank you there and loves members i am with district 4 coalition and the knapp heights neighborhood association the agenda for today's meeting still carries the fact that speakers will have two minutes or less i'm not sure when it went to four i'm not complaining about it but it's rather arbitrary because i had to whittle down 2 minutes and 15 seconds to 2 minutes having these council amendments considered on the same level of public awareness and vetting as the amendments which pass through the ido is bad governance pure and simple it is damaging to this city that you were elected to guide wisely at least four of the council amendments are being drug back into existence after being rejected by the planning staff in the epc so i'm wondering which and whose constituency is demanding passage by any means possible amendment 6 in its original wholeness was approved by the epc and recommended to the council for passage it is based on solid and extensive collaboration between senior planning managers in consultation with senior and retired architects community consultants and neighborhood association leadership i wonder counselor benton if you were in contact with the architects that participated in those consultations to understand their thinking on putting in the geographical responsiveness section the reasons offered for striking the geographical responsiveness section are bogus straw person rationales which reject the number of the aspirational goals of the comp plan again the question of which constituency is playing the tune to this jig arises in my mind amendment 10 another council amendment that was thoroughly considered by the epc and was rejected as written this amendment purposefully denies public input from the very residents who will be most impacted nearby residents will not be permitted to have any say in these drive-throughs which will endanger pedestrians at busy locations the favored constituents in this matter are clearly not these taxpaying residents who live nearest to the drive-throughs you have my written comments from last week i asked you to incorporate them into my spoken comments today you heard last week that homeowners are selling their properties and moving elsewhere because of the way the ido is being implemented by the city council keep fiddling and i think you'll see more of that happening to the detriment of our city i thank you for this opportunity in one one-way communication thank you thank you mr regan we appreciate you and i just want to remind you and the listeners that the um the epc is a recommending body and not a voting body so thank you sir for your comments and we appreciate your attending and your concern our next speaker is will gleason please feel free to put your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking good afternoon madam chair counselors good evening mr gleason welcome thank you thank you for all your time and effort on this and um i want to speak specifically about the cpo 12 and speaking this is for sawmill i submitted a letter today on behalf of heritage hotels from susie lubar and jim long the basic issue that concerns heritage hotels is the application of uh residential design standards to the area immediately surrounding hotel choco and sawmill market so while um we support one of the amendments to the uh character protection overlay zone which um designates the area in which some of those design standards apply i believe it's still not really clear as to whether the residential design standards apply to the entire character protection overlay zone so we just we would appreciate if you could help clarify that and whether that is in this round of amendments or a subsequent subsequent one i believe that would really help that area to develop to its full potential and specifically i think that if you exclude those some of those very specific uh residential small uh scale character design standards from the mxm and mxh zones along with the nr um lm that that would that would go a long way towards addressing this issue and uh again i appreciate your time and um i overall i really do support the ido and i think it has helped move forward the quality and um reliability of of decisions in the city thank you thank you mr gleason and thank you for being here our next speaker please our next speaker is jane beckel please feel free to turn the video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start good evening ms beckel good evening thank you madam chair and counselors um i wanted to comment on three items first is addressing the importance of the view protection overlays to the west side um the views from the west side are probably some it's its most significant and valuable assets um in previous public and written comments i've spoken to my support for the northwest mesa vpo and today i want to also comment specifically on support for the coors boulevard um dpo um like dr joe i think it is not accurate to state that the only relevant or important view along coors boulevard is that of the crest or the ridge top of the mountains it is actually the entire view and if you look at existing development along coors the majority of which does comply with current height restrictions the the views are not only of the crest and the ridge top but also of some of the mountain face and in some cases of the trees in the bosque so i think it's not accurate to conclude that there is a choice between development or views in fact protecting the views improves the value of the development as well the second item i wanted to comment on is also to state that like a previous speaker i think the reduction of the time allotted to requesting a facilitated meeting from 15 days to 10 it's not appropriate that assumes that even if it's an administrative matter that doesn't mean that it is either straightforward or that it is not largely terribly impactful on the people who would be involved i think it's important to a lot a 15-day period to request a facilitated meeting so that all interested parties can do so and be prepared and finally i want to go briefly to another item and that is the um the formation of a dedicated food truck courts or defined food truck courts i noticed in that there are requirements for hand sanitation and permission to provide tables and chairs and umbrellas that suggests to me that people are not picking up food and leaving and if people are going to be staying in that area as a public health measure toilet facilities should be required to fail to do that i think raises the possibility that adjacent properties will have to deal with with you know waste issues basically um so those are three points i would like to make um there are others that i've submitted in written comments and thank you for this opportunity thank you ma'am thank you for being here this evening our next speaker is kathy adams please feel free to turn your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking thank you so much for being here this evening and thank you so much for being here this evening ms adams thank you i just have to say that every time i come to these meetings um especially when we're given a little bit more time i learned things that i would not have learned otherwise and isn't that the purpose of public meetings so that we have a chance to learn from each other and so i'm not going to comment on specific things today i'm going to kind of highlight uh the public's frustration with this process um i have been an active participant in the ido process since 2015 i did attend large meetings and i work with small groups i was opposed to the adoption of the ido in 2017 i think many of us were we felt it was rushed and we felt that it was rushed purposefully before our new mayor had a chance to take office as a result of that rush i think we're dealing with huge amounts of necessary changes and amendments but this amendment process is flawed we need more opportunity to talk to people we need to have questions answered how many times have we stopped this evening to say tell us more and we need to have meetings that allow us to interact this process allows no opportunity for genuine citizen input at the committee level i do have to thank members and the staff and staff members in the planning department because they have made themselves available to work with us and answer questions on your part there is not a systematic or timely schedule that allows all interested parties to meet review discuss you should be actively engaging and actively encouraging citizens your work could be better informed by more interaction we are concerned about transparency because we are not invited to participate in general information or hear you discuss changes we cannot always trust the final outcome we need to know more we would like to see more effort dedicated to make information more easily available we want to know the reasoning behind proposed changes we want to know the data that supports the need for changes you could be organizing meetings you could have zoom sessions where we could watch people like petra morris speak you could record it and have that recording available you could have zoom meetings for interact that are more interactive so i urge you all to make a more concerted effort to make this process more user-friendly and more transparent thank you and help us see that you want the best for albuquerque just like we want the best for albuquerque thank you miss adams uh councilor gibson i see you have a question or comment yes thank you madam chair so i would just like to uh uh say once again this was stated in our last lopes meeting uh why there's been fairly short turnaround uh on this um on this ido amendment uh and that's because council only got it from the mayor's office not that long ago so that's the first comment that's that's the first point that i want to make um so and the other thing that i think needs to be said and repeated over time in a public meeting like this that we don't get together and you know talk about the ido amendments we do get briefings from staff which are very uh very helpful uh but there's nothing that you know we're held by the opens me open meetings act so that we can't um you know for example get more than four counselors together anyway uh without appearing to go afoul of the open meetings act uh which we're really painfully aware of all the time i might add uh so that that's not happening either so i i understand your frustration uh miss adams um and i'm sorry for that i truly am but you know we kind of share a little bit of that frustration as well uh we're doing the best we can um so if you have like specific questions uh we will you know answer them the best that we can we have two very capable planners on our staff um that's really all i have to say but i'm glad she came in i'm glad she said what she said and and i hope that what i have said helps thank you thank you thank you councillor gibson and councillor benton has a question yeah just more of a response again um you know the our um i think we have a record at the lups committee of our staff being available to the public to answer their questions of course yeah it's always more difficult with with covet and so forth but um but they i they do remain available uh um as do the planning department staff but of course it is now in our court and speaking of which just to reiterate um this has been a long process of this update it got off schedule for various reasons last year but now it's here it did go through the epc that is a public hearing process but as was stated it's a recommending body and and they didn't make a decision they commented on on each of the items and then after appc sends it on um it should be kind of a pro forma turnaround uh where okay i read the we've got the cover letters and everything when we send it to the council but but in this case there was a long delay and um you know we can that's not okay we've got to do better than that in the future uh in order to have adequate public comment and so i just wanted to say that there's been no intention here of like pulling a wool over anyone's eyes and um if there are specific you know when things come out of the epc if there's an upswell of community support for them we do need to hear about that you know at that time and before it comes to us so that we do have that input um so anyway just just a process thing but but uh understandably a lot of it was an unusual year so hopefully we can get on track you councillor benton and our next speaker thank you madam chair next speaker is renee horvath thank you for you turn your video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking good evening miss horvath oh good good afternoon yes it is isn't it yes it's beautiful outside and i do want to thank you for extending the time to four minutes it's a lot better and a step in the right direction and i do have a lot to say because i spent i was up till three looking at all this stuff and trying to send my comments in by one o'clock so um uh yeah and i do agree with the uh speakers on process we do need to improve them and i've always wanted to talk to you counselors about some of your proposals uh to understand where you're coming from and and give you my side of things because i see a lot of things here that don't work out very well and like to communicate that with you so one of them one of the first ones that i've always been a little concerned about is the college development being on a 10 000 square foot lot uh because my my dad's house is a mossman house on a 10 000 square foot lot and i can't imagine putting uh three houses on that lodge it i can just see it would look very cluttered i've seen neighborhoods in albuquerque on the southwest side in the northeast heights where uh you can put three houses on a ten thousand square foot area and the whole subdivision is like that and it looks very cluttered there's not enough parking there's no place for the kids to play and so i i think we could get a better design with cottage if we had a little more discussion and review about it so we're all on the same page secondly the view regulations along cords this is why we've been so concerned about getting rid of our sector plans i think we're kind of getting away from the intent of preserving the views along cores and i'd like to see us go back to the original language of the course plan and the pictures to demonstrate what we're trying to achieve um also getting into the 18 newest amendments the arroya definition for common open space uh uh that needs some work too because i see cl cluster development could be a great design tool but you need to have 30 percent open space to be the buffer around the sensitive areas and they should not include things like a seiki's ditches waterways auroras rivers floodways wetlands steep slopes escarpments sandy bluffs those should not those are pretty much off limits you're not going to develop on those they should they're not a fair exchange of common open space for in order to reduce your lots and so i think we need to uh look at that a little more and try to get that definition uh where we all support it uh let's see campgrounds rv parks okay um i i've been driving around the city to get a sense of what these rv parks look like i usually find that they're in lot light industrial areas or near business parks or adjacent to mobile home parks and and uh it's possible that we could find the right zoning for it uh and uh right now you got it for nrc zones possibly some of them could work uh especially and if they're kind of in a light industrial or business park area or away from the residence i don't see rv parks adjacent to residents there's usually a separation uh at least by a street but even more separation than that so i think we could come up with something but i think that needs more review uh i'm glad you're looking at the cannabis to look at more review the geographic responsiveness uh sponsoredness uh taking advantage of the views of albuquerque to i would encourage developers to do that because i i think that's the greatest asset that we have in albuquerque and it would be a uh amenity to the people living there uh m okay drive-throughs yes uh they weren't appropriate in neighborhood centers which was c1 zone which is now mxl thank you ms horvath oh well can i say one thing uh i do support the last one a 18 northwest mesa bpo i wanted to get that in thank you miss horvath we appreciate your madam fair can i ask that she finish thank you councillor borrego oh okay thank you uh yeah uh i i think it's very important because the mesa top is an important feature just like the mountains and the river is and we need to design it carefully and i think that's what this amendment is doing to limit the building heights because you on the east side of town are going to be looking this way to look at the beautiful sunset the volcanoes and the mesa so we need to design it so you still enjoy those views and and i think that it's appropriate to limit the building heights and the type of uses that you have in the area because we do have the petroglyph national monument that is our one of our greatest assets so we need to show the world that we care about this place and want to uh do more to preserve it thank you mr bath we appreciate your comments the next speaker please our next speaker is pat gallagher mr walter please feel free turn the video on unmute yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking well does it look like i have a video can you hear me okay good evening miss gallagher we can hear you okay uh madam sheriff counselors my name is pat gallagher my comments are in reference to um the vp01 the coors view protection overlay and uh a little on slightly well very unnoticed paragraph in there allows variances and we've discovered over the years that any kind of variation in a view protection zone can be disastrous it's not like in the rest of town where you have moving a curb cut over uh a foot if you move uh anything in the view protection overlay zone you can end up with a with a real problem and and usually will when the coors corridor plan was initiated uh we specifically made sure that they kept no variances in there but when the ido came through somehow this paragraph crept its way back in there and kind of was stuck at the end of the vp01 and sort of unnoticed so it's been there since uh since 17 and now it really is a time when it needs to come out because i'm afraid that each one of the developments is looking for any kind of loophole they can find and this loophole is big enough to drive a truck through it and so if you could take out this 16 3 3-6 d 8. it would be extremely helpful and it shouldn't have been there in this in the first place and oh by the way i wanted to thank the planning staff for the really uh good and helpful work they did on reworking the vp01 there was a lot of new stuff in there and it's greatly appreciated and uh and it was appreciated that we got to work with them on doing that but please uh make it a condition that this uh that this paragraph goes away because it will absolutely ruin the bpo1 at some point in time madam church would you ask him to repeat what section he's asking to take out sure it's um 14 16 3 of course and it's 3-6 d is in dog 8. is the paragraph is that good answer brego any other questions no thank you thank you mr gallagher we appreciate your comments thank you next speaker our next speaker is peggy nev miss neff please feel free turn the video on and meet yourself and your four minutes will begin when you start speaking good afternoon counselors planning staff community members i keep my video off to represent the people who cannot get on to these calls yes thank you for the additional time i appreciate that and i too would like to thank the planning staff for their commitment to attempt to answer questions and address public comment i believe that the ideal amendment process is crooked i believe it's a it's a skew it's slanted to the idea that we need to have growth at all costs in albuquerque i have found that it favors developers and insiders who have a direct line to council staff and who will those people who will draft their interests into amendments it denies due process and it promotes abuses of the open meetings acts of the six thousand six hundred thousand residents in albuquerque less than a hundred have been involved in these amendments you have my comments i still stand against the driving drive-throughs b and the campgrounds becoming permissive uses across the city we did a quick review on this rv parks that are open are not full there are lots of airbnb options that have parking on the street these are visitors to our community we shouldn't be making plans that take away from residents and favor visitors doesn't make sense to me i agree with the comment made this afternoon regarding pnm i wish this person who was commenting had had time to review the 102 amendments instead of just the most recent 18. we all would have a more and clearer understanding of the incongruencies and the brokenness of the ido to radiate reiterate some of the specifics i disagree that toilet facilities shouldn't be included at primary use food truck lots it just makes no sense to me to have seven food trucks on a lot where you have no bathroom facilities i have suggested changes to the overnight shelter amendment but have had no feedback to those suggestions and don't see them incorporated here i do not support the changes in common open space in the current trend of growth at all cost we can expect to see a hundred percent of common open space being used for sensitive lands we should just get rid of common open space and write clear guidelines to protect both our sensitive lands and we should make sure that usable open space is required for all cluster cottage and multi-family housing plans i agree with the epc recommendation that light vehicle sales be restricted along mass transit routes and at activity centers i agree with councillor benton's comment from last week that there needs to be a way to enforce geographical responsiveness i don't see an amendment of this nature but i don't think we should throw out a good part of a positive amendment i disagree that we should narrow this notifi we should i disagree that we should narrow the notification process just to note here i'm echoing this comment from another community member who could not get on the public comment because she missed the deadline i disagree that we need to push the calendar for these amendments through we don't need to push any calendar there's nothing here that is restricting any growth except for your personal interests anyway in fact i think that we should only be amending the amendment process i think it's difficult to go into different zoom meetings i i think that that technology is improving but the fact that we can't even read through these and discuss them together that's something more difficult that you need to address i believe the albuquerque community has been cons has not been consulted and i think this is wrong the comments coming from kt strike at the core of the current current systemic administratively sanctioned abuse of our right of deliberation on the laws that affect us she asked basic questions that just made me cringe imagine that public comment and public feedback will be fully recognized in the ido process thank you your time is up miss neff thank you very much for your comments thank you the next speaker madam chair that concludes public comments thank you and thank you all for being here this evening we appreciate it so first we will go to agenda item a 060 which is adopting text amendments counselor benjamin would you like to move this legislation i think it's already on the floor oh i'm sorry it's already on the floor i have too many notes tonight um so let's move on counselor morris i believe or counselors ms morris i believe you have a presentation about this okay madam chair uh counselors yes um i'll go i have a slide per amendment which i can bring out i can do a very short summary on what each amendment is and then um if you have any questions for me then uh i can address those and and then you guys can have your deliberations and votes does that sound okay that sounds perfect great okay amendment a1 this is the arroyo definition this amendment adds concrete or reinforced arrios to the areas that cannot be considered common open space in a cluster development common open space definition refers to sensitive land and sensitive lands list includes arroyos uh the common open space is intended to be the area on a lot that predates the development uh on the lot and this is the area on the lot um that should be preserved thank you morris and councillor would you like to move amendment a1 um actually uh before we move the amendments counselor i would like to make a motion uh to defer all of our discussion uh to another lups meeting because i think that there are a number of questions that still have not been answered regarding many of these amendments um and i would point out um issues related to view quarters issues related to cannabis issues uh related to day time gatherings and overnight shelters i think there are substantial questions and i think this allows the public to have additional time to take a look at all of the amendments so i would like to make a motion to defer the entire bill councillor borrego has made a motion to defer the entire lups bill for this evening and we could defer to june if possible counselor borrego would you like to make it a full motion of when so that what we're voting on is infected yes it would be our first meeting in june and i don't have the date in front of me so let me repeat that and make sure i have it your motion is to defer the this lups meeting and all associated motions in her business unit until the first lups meeting in june is that correct correct which is june 14th okay are there any seconds off that counselor pena i see your hand is up is that a second yes counselor pena has had a second uh there's a motion in a second is there any discussion counselor gibson you have your hand up uh yes madam chair so my mine is a question and um uh so whether or not we defer you know let's let's say for the purpose of this question let's assume we do not defer so it would come out of this if it was passed out of this committee it would go to our very next um meeting of the full council would it have to go through two council meetings actually councillor um let me let me stand corrected um i think that it would be appropriate to defer to a june lups meeting at which time we can answer some of the questions that came up from the public today i think that would be appropriate and we could still hear it in june at our second june council meeting okay well excuse me for interrupting but i would just like to get uh staff some guidance on this just for the just for the sake of this this question if it should be voted out of committee to today would it what council meeting would it go to and how many council meetings would we need to have counselor gibson i'm going to ask petra to answer that question for us thank you for asking and then counselor benjamin you're next madam chair counselors um if the idea was to leave lups today um it would be reported out on may 17th which is monday uh and then it would be heard at the june uh first june meeting which i believe is june 7th and then the second meeting in june which will be june 21st the ido has no requirement on the number of meetings but that would give us two council meetings before the july recess um if the ido were deferred to the june 14th lups in order to be heard at the june 21st city council meeting it would need immediate action and it would also give us only one system council meeting in june before the july recess and so if the councillors wanted to have two city council meetings on this topic it would need to be heard uh in in august which means that the bill would go into effect in september there's a one month effective period in in order to address the enrolling and engrossing um and other sort of technical aspects of putting the document together and getting the bill published this would lead us to about a month between the ideo going into effect and the october submittal date for the next ideal annual update let's see okay thank you miss morris so i don't think i i'm leaning against deferral and and let me just tell you why um we've had two meetings on this before we have also um amassed a few questions uh that i believe that miss morris and michelle's are very capable of of answering um are we putting anything like this up on a website miss morris are we or have we done that this time i know we've done used that as a tool in the past but maybe not this time madam chair counselors yes this is on the abc to z website and then uh whenever anything new is added to the website an email goes out to the abcs is the email list which i believe has about 10 000 email recipients on it so what about answers excuse me one second please um one more question and that is are we also putting up responses to questions on the abc disease website um madam chair counselor gibson we haven't res um responses to public comment okay uh no we we um have we share the public comment with the counselors and then if the counselor um wants us to respond to the public comment in the form of amendments then new amendments would be crafted that's generally how we respond to to public comment um and so eventually the the response goes on in the form of an amendment yes so but not a uh q a spreadsheet or anything like that well that might be that might be a little bit of improvement so that if somebody missed the question the first time they wouldn't need to answer it a second time if they did have a place to go to but anyway so i i'm still let me just say this i'm still leaning against a little bit on the deferral because you know with two more council meetings ahead of us to hear this i think we're going to have a lot more time and in answering uh our emails from constituents so thank you thank you thank you council gibson councillor benjamin and then council borrego thank you madam chair i wanted to ask ms morris i think i heard you correctly if the council were not to act on this before the july break it would not go into effect under the best of circumstances until when and chair councillors uh it would uh if if the council has acted in august uh there's a 30-day um effective period and so it would go into effect in september so if it was early august it would go into effect early september if it was late or mid august mid mid to late september uh and it is early october i believe for well maybe it's the end of it sometime october um for the epc submittal for the next ideo annual update application and wonder when when are we going to be back on track with that daniel so this is the 20. we still got to do the 21. should we be i know that this guy this type of schedule was built into the ido right madam chair counselors um this year we are hoping would be the first year that we get on track so the ideo builds in an annual update process and the idea is that the update goes in at the end of the year so that you have a year of collecting information once we're really in in the thick of the cpas the intent is that most of the amendment process is the information that comes out of the cpa process and so by having the application submitted in october uh that would mean that the first hearing would be in december so you'd still get an epc hearing within the year of the applica the the annual update but you would have a whole year to collect that information through the cpa process okay thank you well i'm going to be very parochial on this boat because one of the planning area the planning area process at the end of this year is within my district and i want that process to be informed if we keep cooking the can down the road then we don't you know then there's still [Music] people are still focused on basically the past which is what this year in which we've been trying to catch up i know i would rather you know that that our constituents have all the information about what has happened so far and you know yes some of these some of these amendments have been around for a while even though i think the cannabis originally i was involved in that early on uh when councilor davis was not able to do it but um there's been a lot of discussion about this and yes um the community planning assessment process is everyone's ability to weigh in on this stuff so it's not really i don't think it would would be practical given the size of the council staff and the the process that preceded us receiving this for us to somehow have time for whatever it would be months you know it it never it's always going to be a need for more questions to be answered that that will never stop but we've got to keep some sort of schedule in order to have the whole process of community assessments be effective so i can't support this you know it is a shame that we had to push it so quickly um and we won't comment anymore on why that is but but nonetheless um this is where we are and there's a lot of work to be done and kicking the can down the road is not going to get it done thank you thank you councillor benton and councillor borrego you're next well if i can convince the counselors um i heard more than two three people today speak about the process and their concerns with the process and i think a couple of weeks is not going to um you know change anything we could still act on this at our uh june 21st council meeting if we take the time now to look at the technical amendments a lot more closely it's possible that we could come to some better consensus and we could simply pass it in june and still implement it fairly early so implementing it she said 30 days after it's adopted it would still be adopted in july so i don't see any reason that we sh we could not um defer it and look a little more closely at some of these amendments uh get a little bit more buy-in from the public and um move forward with it in in our at our july hearing and and if we did that we probably wouldn't need more than one city council meeting to adopt it thank you council borrego i just want to remind the counselors and councillor borrego that we have no meetings in the month of july so if no i said it done i said it would be adopted it's 30 days after it's approved so if it was approved june 21st madam chair then it would be adopted in in either early august or late july thank you councillor borrego are there any other comments there is a motion on the floor to defer this until when this meeting until june 14th all those let's take a roll on this can we please absolutely point of order madam yes sure um okay so this would conclude our discussion of the rest of these how is that served i mean don't we want to go through you know the motion to defer would conclude this meeting am i wrong or this this topic in the meeting i would think that that's true mr melendrez madam president uh madam chair counselors yes the the motion to defer is the presidential motion that's articulated in our rules in general practice and so if this motion passes uh you would have no further business on this item today well thank you thank you thank you that clarification mr malendras uh you know uh the public wants to hear what we have to say about this counselors and i think we need to conclude this meeting and and and see at that point uh whether something needs to change i guess but but uh um this has been duly advertised may i ask one question another question of staff which would be to uh ms moore is the fault of the the bulk of these uh amendments before us have been out in the public for how long madam chair counselors the bulk of these are a ripple from the environmental planning commission they're a response to the discussion so it's a continuation of an ongoing conversation uh the three cannabis amendments uh there is no intention to move any of those tonight those are all new and they're new because um the state had uh um the new mexico cannabis regulations act passed during this the spring session um and then overnight shelter which is also a new one uh council davis has also requested that that one um discussion or questions about it that that be discussed but but it not be moved right so both of those by definition are not going to be part of this package um we don't you know i'm i'm not ruling out that that we could discuss a deferral after we hear everything but i really think it's not serving anyone for us to just just uh stop and by the way another point of order we're not supposed to be answering questions from the general public comments that is not that's for staff to do and for us to refer to staff when we heard public comment according to as far as i understand our rules you know we're supposed to hear the public comments but that they are not to be addressed in individual counselors or or to uh pose questions and then have them answered during the meeting itself that's not to say that the question wouldn't be answered by our staff but but uh you know it's just not an effective way to to try to run meetings it's not even it's not feasible to operate the meetings this way we could be here all night i kid you not thank you councillor benjamin i appreciate that thank you uh councillor pena thank you madam chair just to clarify what counselor benton said in terms of like public comment because i know you know we've asked questions and questions have been asked in the past um during public comment does public comment mr melendez exclude us from asking questions or responding to questions um madam chair counselors so the underlying purpose of the council rules i think in pretty much everything there is instilled this idea that they are to promote the orderly business of the council and so general public comment um often is uh for the purpose of of allowing of hearing from the public obviously very important and laudable for the council to do that um but it is ultimately at the discretion of the chair uh how how that occurs with respect to um in the event that something comes up that does necessitate an answer at the time or not the chair has latitude obviously subject to an override by the council or the body but uh they are for the purpose of of order and so to the extent that it's more orderly to hear from folks and continue those conversations somewhere else that is appropriate if the chair believes or or counselors requests that something requires additional discussion or some back and forth it probably is okay and still consistent with the purpose of promoting order um so long as it's not you know a huge discussion that would disrupt the progress of the council so basically it's at the chair's discretion madam chair counselors yes okay that's cool i just wanted clarification thank you mr miller andrews thank you counselors madam chair madam chair may we uh move forward with the motion on the floor call for the question there's a motion and a petrol would you give read for me motion in a second would you give me the motion please chair uh counselors yes i believe it was a a motion to defer the bill to the june 16th flops with a second from councillor pena thank you that's where i was too but chad we put the dates around a little too much so there's a motion and a second for to defer this meeting at this point uh to the june 16th lups uh would you take a role please absolutely counselor benton no counselor bordego yes counselor gibson no counselor pena yes counselor jones no and that motion fails on a 2-3 boat thank you counselors i think we are ready for our do we have any more speakers yes we do ah we're working on the amendments now um are there any questions anymore uh that you would like to tell us ms morris uh madam chair councillors uh no i think we were on the first amendment and you had asked councillor borrego if she wanted to move um the arroyo death uh definition amendment thank you so much it's on you to make a motion to move this i move the amendments i'm sorry councillor borrego would you wait until i'm finished speaking so we can all hear you okay it's your floor now are you finished counselor i am that's why i stopped speaking yes okay counselor i would like to move amendment a1 that would need a second i'll second that yes sir pena councillor pena seconded thank you there's a motion in a second uh for a do pass on a1 let's take the vote counselor benton yes councilor bordego yes councillor gibson yes councillor pena yes councillor jones yes and that passes on a 5-0 vote thank you counselors um uh we can take one more counselor gibson if you would like to move amendment a2 and then we need to take a break all right thank you madam chair i move uh uh ordinance or awareness um amendment a2 campground and rv park there's a motion in a second for a2 uh do we staff do you petra do you have something do you have a comments on this one on a2 uh madam chair counselors uh just a short summary um amendment a2 this would take campground and rv park from a non-residential special use zone district to be conditional in the mixed-use medium and then permissive in the non-residential commercial and the non-residential business park zone districts thank you miss morris councillor gibson would you like to comment more on your motion uh thank you madam chair i'd just like to say we we heard a number of things uh from a couple of the um there were two or three of the public speakers um mr rich in particular um really researched this quite a bit and and all counselors received his email um but uh he really did a lot of research on this so i just like to point out a couple of things that i thought were you know kind of stuck with me this does potentially um fill a demand uh for for this type of um overnight stay that we really don't have enough of right now it's it's very clear and we have there's documentation that he cites in this to show that there are so many different users somebody mentioned the um oh what are they called uh digital nomads i just learned that folks who have learned how to do their jobs using the technology communication technology as well as um living either part-time or full-time on the road and they they uh they spend times out in rural areas but they also come into town and of course you know to do things that you we would expect go shopping and take care of services that they they need to have um and there's just not not not enough good quality spaces for these um and i have seen several in the past weeks have looked and on the internet and there i have seen some very well designed an attractive looking rv parks campground and rv parks that exist in other cities so um so not only do we have the the digital nomads but we have a growing population of people who are liking to vacation this way uh in fact the the prices for rvs trailers vans etc has just skyrocketed because the supply just cannot meet the demand right now if you want to buy a casita for example you're on a waiting list because it just takes out very a long time to get one um oh they they uh the number is 10.9 million people are digital nomads and that's just one section of this this this demand out there right and that's up from 7.3 million in 2019 so over one year it's grown what about over over three million but uh the other thing that i wanna wanted to mention is that uh you know during this last year we had um a lot of moving around of medical personnel doctors and technicians and nursing nurses and nurse practitioners and and many of them did come or do you know did go to their new work assignment uh uh you you know taking their home with them their rubber wheel home with them and uh and thank goodness for that because it kept them much safer in being able to go home to their own space and the industry has recognized that that without that we would have we would have had a hard time so i i'm talking a little bit too long i don't mean to but i am really excited about this i think that this will uh provide a an option for people to stay here in a safe and comfortable place and i think it's going to make a a big difference in in the the the type and the numbers of tourism that we'll have here so i urge your support thank you counselor gibson counselor penny you have a question yes thank you madam chair this is for uh miss morris so miss morris kind of this goes back to the question that um dr jovias had in terms of the the mx m zones and the difference between the um what's allowable in the mx m on the east side in the west side so um well let me preface it with saying that i think it's a good idea counselor gibson i think that you know it's um something that uh i'm pretty excited about and obviously you know everybody knows i'm attached to the visitors center and i'm so excited about that and if you um see statistics on people who are going to be traveling uh by car um the numbers are pretty outstanding right so we so we do need this so my question to miss morris though is just how will this impact kind of you know community underserved communities in terms of sometimes there's an unintended um consequence of of zoning right and i think i've explained that in some of our discussions um before about how um you can't discriminate on any person um based on their their color whatever in in terms of uh building in a certain district right for affordable housing but then it ends up although affordable housing ends up coming into communities of color so how do you see this maybe having a negative impact madam chair counselors um the mxm zone um is mapped to both sides of the the city the vast majority of the mxn is on the east side of the city and then the the mxm was was mapped and treated the same in the ideo on both the east and the west side it was the mxh and the nrc that were a little bit different right i meant to say the nrc i'm so sorry oh that's okay uh so the nrc while um where there was c3 zoning on the west side uh the there was a preference for converting it to nrc rather than to mxh the vast majority of the nrc is still mapped on the east side of town there's only a handful of locations on the west side where the nrc is is mapped so most of these campground and rv parks would go on the east side of the city there is not very much um nrc or nrvp zoning on the on the west side of the city um it's mostly on the east side okay and it wasn't what my preference would that it would be on the east side i just wanted to make sure that it was going to have a a larger negative impact on the the west side so um okay okay thank you thank you thank you councillor pena any other questions or discussions if not counselor gibson would you like to close um i urge your support thank you there's a motion in a second on a do pass for a2 uh would you take the role please counselor benton yes councillor bordego yes councillor gibson yes counselor pena yes and councillor jones yes and that passes on a 5-0 vote and thank you all we're going to need to take a break now we have some uh time constraints with with people helping us so let's take a 30 let's reconvene at 5 30 please thank you all right counselors are we all back in place now shall we start up again do you want to give me a high five high five so i know you're all here good i'm missing councillor gibson councillor borrego and councillor pena councillor borrego thank you let's see if we can get councillor gibson and councillor pena i hope you enjoyed your break feels kind of nice to get up and walk around isn't it all i did was take another call yeah i think so there we go there's counselor gibson we'll give counselor penny a couple more minutes i came on a little early council brego you're on mute counselor benson's voice is muted or like funny yeah do you want to talk counselor benton let's see what you sound like i don't think he's connected yep he's on mute speak counselor speak [Music] okay counselor benjamin we want to hear you speak he's not on he might want to leave him you guys are on youtube he's being shy okay i think we lost him i think so too yeah there we go there you go counselor benjamin let's uh one more minute and we'll see for a counselor hear me now yes i can hear you now nobody remembers that ad i do hello counselor opinion you are very prompt thank you so let's call this meeting back to order and we're going to start off with a presentation by petra on a3 a4 a anyway four amendments so they will not be voted on they will just be uh give us a an idea of what's going on with them madam chair counselors yes uh so the next um two amendments plus amendment a19 um these are the three cannabis amendments uh the ido 2019 so the first ideo annual update we added a framework for cannabis that involves cannabis retail as a use cannabis cultivation which is the growing as a use and then cannabis manufacturing that's doing stuff with the things that you grow ready to sell the ido has zone districts where these uses are allowed or conditional and some general standards about distances from sensitive uses residential schools and daycare however since the 2019 ido went into effect uh the state has um developed and approved the new mexico um cannabis regulations act and so there are in response to that three amendments that counselors have requested um to respond to that state action um there are uh we're not going to move on these tonight they'll be considered at full council but they are out there for the public to consider um the first one is a3 this is a cannabis cultivation manufacturing this amendment takes cannabis cultivation and cannabis manufacturing um from a prohibited use to a conditional use when located within 330 feet of a residential zone um school or child day care facility um amendment a and this is uh if amendment a4 passes then the 330 fee in this would be changed to 300. amendment a4 this is kind of a tidy up amendment and makes revisions to the distances and references to licensed premise to be in compliance with the new mexico cannabis regulation act and so this this one has revisions in cannabis retail cultivation and manufacturing it's kind of a tidy up one and it gets to the 300 feet that the cannabis regulation act specifically refers to and i'll jump ahead in the presentation now to the the third cannabis act amendment which is uh a19 um this is an amendment that comes at the request of the administration this amendment um would prohibit on-site consumption until the state has implemented regulations the language in the amendment on this is in the bill rather than in the ido as this is an item that will be relevant for a short period of time but not something would be on relevant in the in the future um once the state rules are implemented uh in the exhibit so permanent changes to the ido this would prohibit cannabis retail and cannabis on-site consumption in main street areas and within 660 feet of main street areas it would require a thousand feet between a cannabis retail use and an adult use so that'll be adult entertainment or adult retail it would limit the size of on-site consumption areas to 500 square feet it would limit signage in terms of type and content um in relation to design um hours and and what the signage could cover it limits hours of activity to 10 pm and sorry out to um uh to not be active between 10 p.m and 7 a.m and then it adds a definition to uh on-site consumption to clarify a what that consumption is um and then also that that is part of the retail use um council has any questions on the three cannabis amendments that are not going councillor borrego you have a question yes um so if we are you said we're not acting on this earlier uh madam chair so petra if we're not acting on this what does that mean when what is the the process then does it come back to lups or do these go straight to council and without recommendation or how does what is the strategy madam chair counselors um this uh we would there would be no votes on these three amendments tonight so they wouldn't get moved uh the idea about the presentation is so that the public knows what the content is you know a lot of people are watching lups now and we'll maybe watch the video later um and so the public has an opportunity to consider these but they would come back in the form of a floor amendment full council um so at the assuming that a a councilor wanted to continue to sponsor an amendment um then then they would come back at full council potentially you know a counselor might uh hear some public comments and decide they want to change some aspect of an amendment and so maybe it would be a revised version that comes back for council um to help in transparency um when we do have an amendment that started at lups uh but changes at council we we do different colors to show where the changes have occurred thank you madam chair i just wanted to mention to you that i had asked the staff to put together uh and this is for the all of the counselors uh to put together a study session uh just to discuss cannabis and it hasn't been scheduled yet but they're working on it you thank you madam president i appreciate that that should be helpful are there any other questions or comments if not uh petra is at the end of the presentation thank you oh you would need to do a19 uh a5 one more oh uh madam chester that's the end of the cannabis presentation um but not the overall presentation great we have a little more presentation coming up okay uh so the next amendment for acting on so a3 and a4 if you're following the numbers are two of the cannabis ones so the next one to consider taking uh a vote on is a5 daytime gathering so this amendment strikes all references to the daytime gathering use uh this uses as defined as too broad and encompasses users it isn't intended to cover and is tuned and to narrow the definition would result in a potential discrimination against those considered a protected class under the fair housing act um so any any questions on this amendment if not i think it's over to you guys to move and vote and yes if there are no questions counselor gibson this is uh your sponsor would you like to move this legislation yes thank you madam chair um i'll go ahead and move the 11th amendment a5 daytime gathering there's uh councillor benton your second okay there's a motion by councillor gibson to move a five and a second by councillor benton counselors is there any discussion counselor gibson would you like to close yes thank you madam chair um i think that that uh i don't think there was any male intent when we first did this uh i i think that uh we realized we you know it became more apparent to the city uh as time went on so um i i'm very happy to to see um our planning staff uh bring this up and i'm glad to be sponsoring it because i think it really was a mistake so i i urge your support thank you thank you councillor gibson there's a motion in a second would you take the role please absolutely counselor benton yes counselor porreco no counselor gibson yes counselor pena yes councillor jones yes and that passes on a 4-1 vote thank you um moving right along councillor benton on a6 thank you madam chair and uh i'm not going to be moving this uh this amendment tonight but i would like to have a bit of discussion on it um we heard about this from many of the speakers today um and um i am well aware of the long history and really i am friends with most of the people who are advising the planning department on this amendment so i don't think anybody should get anything wrong that i'm somehow carrying water for somebody who doesn't want to have to do these things my issue is to the contrary and i may have mentioned it before that concern is that this is really not regulatory it is if you read it it says that the design professional shall prepare these checklists which are all good things and good designers should be doing that i don't question that in any way and i i applaud uh ms wolfely's who did so much work on this and we've had a good discussion about it as well just yesterday but um my concern is really that it it's you're asking the developer and the architect to go through an exercise okay what's the outcome of that exercise the wording implies that you're in for instance you're too just to take one of the not the part i struck out actually but even the first part um you're going to do an an analysis to improve the energy performance but it's not saying that you shall improve the energy performance it's just saying that you shall conduct an analysis and uh jolina and i had a long good discussion about this i understand better her intention and the intentions of those who brought this forward but what worries me is that it just doesn't really have any teeth but but as she said um as jolene associate director ms wolfely said that the intention was to inspire but not require and i think that's laudable i totally applaud that however we need to be careful that the ido does not become some aspirational document and that is something that is lean and mean that's what it was always intended to be but we're going to be expanding it as we do these community assessments that's why that is so important that we keep that on schedule we will be expanding the idea to take into account the aspirations of different communities but so i understand the popularity of this and i am very much again in favor of the intent i'm not going to move it because i'm going to try to at least wordsmith it i don't think we're in a position to to create an enforceable mechanism at this point but uh but we could perhaps if this is going to be something that's kind of just guiding something that we might do more of in the future then we need to be very clear about that so but i'm open to any questions and and i have heard the concerns um i think this is laudable these are laudable goals and the idea of inspiring with but not requiring is an interesting concept for a regulatory document but i'm not going to knock it or anything because that's a that's a laudable goal as well but uh so i'll just leave it at that and i will not be moving the amendment madam chair thank you councillor benjamin are there any questions or comments all right uh moving right along to amendment 7 uh petra miss morris sorry madam chair counselors um a7 this is light vehicle sales this amendment would allow the light vehicle sales to be displayed outdoors in the mxh zone um and uh unless they are in a ucmspt area so if you're on mxh and it's ucm spt you would be prohibited from doing the outdoor display but in all other areas zoned mxh you would be able to do that outdoor display um madam sure i believe this is your amendment to consider moving yes um um i would make a motion uh for approval and open the floor for amy do i have a second ah it looks like i have no second on that second second thank you councillor gibson there's a motion and a second is there any discussion with that let's call the role counselor benton no counselor porego yes councillor gibson councillor gibson counselor pen counselor pena counselor panel counselor gibson can't bear to hear you did you call on me or counselor i did sponsor pena no jones yes that passes on a 3-2 vote thank you next on the list is amendment a8 ms morris would you like to tell us what that is padam chair counselors yes uh this is this is another amendment at the request of the administration um last year as part of the 2019 update we introduced a new use nicotine retail and we also made some revisions to the liquor retail this amendment would make liquor retail conditional in all zones and less accessory to a grocery store which is a defined use in the ido and nicotine retail would also become conditional in all zones unless accessory to general retail or a grocery store so if you think about um types of stores nicotine retail could be would be accessory and maybe a walgreens or a grocery store but not just just nicotine retailers stand alone and liquid liquor retail again would be uh conditional and less accessory to a grocery store um but not as a standalone for example like a package licker thank you uh counselors any questions along those lines if there are no oh councillor borrego yes uh thank you madam chair um so i uh petra if you have a grocery store that is in a residential zone or um i guess that's grandfathered in uh madam chair counselors uh existing ones would be grandfathered in this is about future um uh liquor retail if you're in proximity to residential it's conditional and so um i believe the liquor retail would would be if the liquor retail is associated with a grocery store but close to residential that would still be a conditional use it's just like a retail um uh as a standalone that this is affecting okay thank you councillor borrego do you have any other questions counselors any other questions all right there's a motion and a second on a due pass let's uh take the role please counselor benton yes councillor portegos yes councillor gibson no counselor pena yes and councillor jones no and that passes on a 3-2 vote all right counselors moving on to amendments benton this would be yours thank you mr president um i'll move this which would be help me out amendment number amendment number nine and and um this reads us follow us on page 478 section six seven amend the text as follows the subject section applies to any application that would zoning map to change any parcels or parts n r p o pob zone history regardless of gross area designation of barrier change or consistency um and so this would add a provision of applicability um i guess i'll ask ms morris to elaborate thank you councillor benjamin ms morris madam chair councillors um yes this and then oh there we go uh sorry uh madam chair councillors um this amendment would make epc their approving body for all zone map amendments um to the nrpob zone district which is the non-residential parks and open space zone district for city-owned properties um zone map amendments occur after um property is purchased and so uh council has a role in the purchase of a property and so they've already uh given their blessing as it were about the site and so uh it's not necessary to the council then to approve the zone change and and it's a appropriate for council to delegate their zone changing authority to the planning commission for lots of any size uh when converting to nrpob thank you any other questions i think i have one so petra would you give me just a brief so this means that the council already has a role but would they have a second role in in this type of thing madam chair counselors um this would be not requiring the council to have a second role so their first role would be in the purchase and and this would say you don't need it doesn't need to come back to council the idea being that the ido has a lot of protections for um non-residential of a major public open space and so the faster we can get those protections applied to a property the sooner those protections can can kick in thank you miss morris counselors are there any other questions okay there's a motion in a second let's oh we still need a second yeah i didn't hear a second thank you is there a second on that i'll second it there's a second by counselor gibson let's call the role please counselor benton councillor benton yes councillor bordego no counselor gibson yes counselor pena no and counselor jones yes that passes on a 3-2 vote you counselors uh miss morris we're moving on to a10 um madam chair counselors a10 this is the mixed-use light drive-through amendment this amendment takes drive-throughs from a conditional use to a promis to a permissive accessory use in the mxl zone district okay counselors um there is a motion is there a second emotion i haven't put emotion through yet i would make a motion for a due pass and this of course is at the request this is uh by request of the administration is i lied this is mine sorry um is there a second i'll second oh counselor pena thank you there's a motion in a second any more any discussion we'll call the roll thank you councillor benton no councillor bordego no councillor gibson yes counselor pena yes from councillor jones yes that passes on a 3-2 vote okay with that confusion let's go on to amendment 11 a11 would you like to give us a description on this one madam chair counsellors this is a non-commercial broadcasting antennas so this amendment lists the zone districts in which a non-commercial broadcasting antenna is allowed the ideo already has a height limitation for non-commercial broadcasting antennas and a definition but it does not list what zone districts this use is allowed in when the ido was originally drafted non-commercial broadcasting antennas were included in the section on wireless telecommute wireless telecommunication facilities however we realized um during the adoption process that there are different federal regulations associated with non-commercial broadcasting antennas from wireless telecommunication facilities so we separated them out but forgot to add non-commercial antennas in the use table and so this is just um making that correction uh we're we're uh quite heavily regulated by the federal um communications fcc uh on what we can or can't do in terms of restrictions and so this is allowed in in most zone districts throughout the city thank you thanks for the explanation so i will move it do pass and close a counselor painted seconded that is there any discussion oh i think it was me uh counselor borrego did you have a question no i think i'm the one who seconded it but i'm not i'm so sorry counselor borrego second that i just saw a hand i didn't see i saw hands okay uh let's call the roll please counselor benton yes councillor bordego yes councillor gibson yes counselor pena councillor pena yes sorry councillor jones yes that passes on a 5-0 vote next we have a 12 which will not be discussed um madam chair counselors yes this one's not from moving this is an amendment on the overnight shelter bed numbers um i did a little bit of a summary and response during the general public comments so if anyone has any questions let me know thank you so very much and the next one is a13 uh and would you give us a description of that please madam chair counselors yes um this amendment completes the edits and revisions from pnm on the electric generation you specific standards and procedures this is an ongoing discussion through the epc process this amendment was drafted in collaboration with the planning department and pnm to basically uh tidy up the work that was done at epc thank you miss morris um i would like to obviously this is my request and i would like to make a motion do pass second councillor borrego is the second are there any questions or comments counselor pena there was actually some public comment i think it's in reference to this one miss morris thank you madam chair sorry um that reference that we should not have a private company's name should we amend that or is was that just inaccurate or is it taken out it is taken out uh madam chair counts as the pnm's name is in the amendment um but the section is about the electric generation new specific standard the ido doesn't use the term pnm and that's a good point from the public that's uh sloppy work on on our work and that we uh was also familiar with pnm we we kind of treat them like a a governmental agency and so we probably really should have called this the electric generation amendment so my apologies for that okay thank you thank you any other questions let's call the role please do something i was going to suggest that that we amend uh the name as part of our motion um it's i believe that's already been done counselor borrego but we didn't get a second on that on the amendment please petra would you like sure um madam chair counselors so that the reference to pnm is only in the amendment titles not in any of the texts in the ido and so um i i'm not sure um uh what changing the title of the of the amendments would would do um madam chair yes councillor borrego as i read this uh or as i read this on number two it says electric service provision from the public service company of new mexico and it references pnm and it's in table 5-1-1 and then as you read further in section 5-4 i for or alpha i'm not sure what that is um so it is referenced madam chair um counselors thank you for reminding me of that yes i have forgotten about that part of the amendment um so part of the work that we did with pnm was um there was a request to reference the nesc standards and uh the pnm electric guide the idea already makes a reference to this and so these revisions were to clarify how that pnm electric guide um it is relevant to properties and so pnm as the electric provider has certain design guidelines that they require people to follow before they will give them power to the site and so the concern from pnm was that if somebody looks at the ido they design their site entirely around the ido there's no warning or reminder to them that there might be some other rules that apply and so we added this language at the request of pnm to be sure that the public was aware when they were designing a site that they would need to consider the design constraints within the pnm design guideline book which is what they they use before they give somebody power to the site this was intended to make sure that uh folks in designing a site didn't go down one design route and then suddenly find after they've got all their approvals that they can't get pnm to approve uh electric provisioning to the site so it's just kind of an early warning and so that there is a reference thank you for reminding me that there is a reference to pnm in the ido but it's in reference to this design book so do we need the amendment or not petra we do need the amendment yes this is a this is an important amendment so counselor pena was your motion and i'd second it or how do we do that madam chair oh sorry i meant we need the amendment a13 as is not the ideo not the amendments to be amended the amendment a13 does need to reference pnm and it does and it does apologize for the interruption counselor i think i'm clear thank you i think what we're seeing is the item that we're voting on a13 is correct and it needs to have the pnm reference in it uh petra is nodding her head so i think that's it all right there any other questions or comments let's move forward and call the roll then please thank you councillor benton yes councillor bordego yes councillor gibson yes councillor pena [Music] councillor pena yesterday council council jones yes yes counselor pena that passes i'm on i'm unmuted so i am i have am i being hurt or yeah you are yes okay okay and the vote was yes just to confirm your vote is yes thank you yes that passes on a 5-0 vote thank you we're getting near the end guys um amendment 14. uh ms morris madam chair councillors um amendment a14 uh does two things uh this is the post application facilitated meeting for site plan administrative so site plan administrative are the smallest scale uh types of applications and they're the applications that don't go to any kind of boards like the zoning hearing examiner the development review board or the epc in some instances these cases will have already gone through the drb process for a subdivision this amendment proposes to strike low density residential development from the site plan admin uh post-submittal facilitated bleed meeting list and then to reduce the number of days in which a site plan administrator post-submittal facilitated meeting can be requested from 15 days to 10 days the intention here is to try and strike a balance between the neighborhood's interest in the opportunity to request a site plan administrated post-submittal facilitated meeting and also to allow the planning department to continue to pro to approve and rev review and approve um site plan administrative requests in a timely manner thank you miss morris are there any other questions okay and this is uh councillor bassans and we've we made a motion to approve i know wait is it within do i have a second counselor gibson this is second any more discussion call the rule please madam wait wait uh councillor benton president yeah if i just could so if uh uh ms morris would just kind of repeat the the timeline repercussions of this um i just wanted to hear that again as far as getting projects approved and you know the the the effect upon that madam chair council is yes so uh if somebody submits an application today uh without this amendment passing um the application would sit at the planning department for 15 days before code enforcement could begin to review it the reasoning for that is that the software that code enforcement works with doesn't allow a application to proceed and then come back it doesn't have a pause button as it were it just has to to sit there and so this would mean that all applications would be taking a minimum of three weeks to be approved um oh sorry two weeks it's 15 calendar days um and so uh the some of the amendments for exam uh site plans for example low density residential development get reviewed in a matter of a day or so um these are the sort of applications where there's already been a site plan reviewed has gone through drb and this is just a single site um individual house coming in for its site plan admin those are a pretty quick turnaround usually but then with without this amendment they would have to sit there for 15 days before code enforcement could begin review um for the other types of requests so for example um multi-family um those would be reduced from 15 days to 10 days um uh for that type of request um so any any other does that help on the timeline yeah i mean i i think this is this is addressed at scale right i mean the scale of the smaller projects and when you have over overall governing approved plan and then you're just getting a permit for one off under that existing plan correct uh random cherry council sorry can you repeat that question i got distracted yeah this is primarily trying to fix the small scale approvals is that correct madam chair counselor yes that's correct it would only have a five-day impact on the bigger ones uh that yes that's correct so this would impact the it would fix it entirely for the low density residential but it would just be a sort of a in between fix for um the other site plan admin types of requests and this is kind of trying to get a compromise between um the planning department who are trying to get things through in a timely manner and the neighborhoods who would like to still have an opportunity to ask for a site plan admin post-submittal facilitated meeting thank you are there any other questions counselors and of course i am carrying this for counselor basan and it seems like a good compromise for everyone to try to get things through as we're as our production is going to start booming we hope in the city so there's a motion in a second to approve all those in favor oh wait i can't do it that way let's call a wrong counselor benton yes cancer bodega no counselor gibson counselor pena yes councillor jones yes and that passes on a 4-1 vote thank you i think we're getting closer uh amendment a15 petra would you like to address this one adam chair counselors yes amendment a15 um earlier i think i described this one as the ripple in the pond so this is a series of edits and clarifications to the ido based on the recommendations made at epc um these came from the planning department and planning departments and putting together the red line realized there were a couple of items that the epc recommendations didn't quite address the complete thread of the changes that needed to be made you counselors to do any questions i would move a do pass counselor borrego you have a question counselor pena has a question yeah petra i read through these technical amendments and there's a lot of them and they're very uh design specific so my question is for small developers that are trying to survive how do they maneuver through all of those design i mean it seems to me like it's going to cause some um undue difficulty for people who are the smaller developers that don't you know i mean that don't understand all of the design criteria and so i just want to wonder how that i mean i i was i was frank frankly when i read through them i was i mean i'm a planner so i i understand them but for people who don't and they're just trying to do some small jobs how does that not impact them madam chair counselors so i think the amendments um that you're referring to are some clarifications to the proposed multi-family texts that ms wolfley was working on um that's those are the design changes that are in this technical edits amendment um there was some language that we needed to clarify within the ido to make sure that the intent of the work that mrs wolfeley had worked on was was properly enforced as it was enforced as intended rather than maybe as drafted and so those design um references that that you're um referring to um are the uh uh the work that ms wolfley has been doing with the um architectural and development community so there's two prongs there's some changes to the multi-family design and then there's a section on climatic responsiveness and geographic responsiveness which council benton has been focused on okay so i i mean i i have difficulty just reading them and thinking about design as i was thinking about a smaller development and you know i've had a significant amount of experience and i was just concerned that we're trying to spur economic development but at the same time people who are trying to survive and put food on their table um you know paycheck to paycheck are going to be impacted by by some of this and probably i'm going to vote no on this for now because i i need some i need some stronger answers than that and and i just i don't want to see i mean i want to see everyone working in our city not just the big developers that can afford architects and and lawyers and such i want to see the smaller developers as well um and so i i'd like to have a meeting with you on this one uh between now and council thank you uh councillor pena and then councilor benton um yeah this is thank you madam chair this is for um miss morris just based on counselor borrego's comments these are just really tech technical edits correct and and clarification there's no i think maybe what and just help me i think what counselor borrego is reading is what we already have in the ideal and this aren't these are not the changes right that's you're just making clarifications and technical edits so everyone checks without except counselor bragel i mean that's the way i understand it so if it's different let me know madam chair counselor pain uh counselors yes um these are just uh those those corrections within there uh that the largest section on the multi-family changes are mostly within the red line and this is what's in the technical edits is just some tidy up to the language that was uh recommended by the epc on the multi-family design regs thank you madam um chair and thank you um so i i was clear thank you councilor pena and councillor benton i i think thanks for for asking that question and and for the clarification and also i would just point i was going to just point out that most of this uh language if you look at it in depth uh council borrego madam president is uh they're really mostly making it easier to comply they're they're actually less strenuous uh after the amendment than than most of these i would say then prior man i'm sure yeah yes i just i just still would like to meet with petra because that's not how i read it and um maybe i maybe i interpreted different but i i'd like to be corrected if you know if that's the case but for now until council um i think i'm going to probably vote no on this thank you council borrego i'm sure ms morris would be happy to meet with you are there any other comments um then there's been a motion in a second on a do pass oh there's a motion do i have a second thank you counselor miss morris or sorry counselor benton yes councillor bordego no counselor gibson yes counselor pena yes and counselor jones yes and that passes on a 4-1 vote thank you thank you councillors uh we're we're getting towards the end we we are getting towards the end's counselor benton if you would like to move amendment a16 actually i'll move amendment a16 and then let you discuss it would you like to second that uh counselor benjamin you're on mute sorry yes i will second that and that means do you want to give us an overview and then i'll turn it over to councillor benton madam chair counselors yes so amendment a6 um some of you may remember um a resolution that went through council about a month ago um limiting the authority of the ceo and granting taller walls and addressing some concerns about a phrase low density residential this amendment um is in response to that and so this would add the missing phrase residential from low density low density development the ido has multiple places where it references low density residential development but it doesn't have low density development so this just makes that correction and then this amendment also limits the ceo's authority for granting taller walls and fences to just those surrounding critical infrastructure which was the original intent of the epc recommendation during the adoption of the ida for this section thank you anyone have questions of miss morris and councillor benjamin it's yours to close yes i think this is a simple simple cleanup and uh you know this is the kind of amendment that the um the epc is not necessarily going to catch planning department not necessarily going to catch um and these come up and this is our last chance to fix them when they're before the council so nothing nefarious about these kind of amendments we're actually making it much more clear as to what was intended so i urge your support thank you motion in a second let's take the role counselor benton yes councillor bodego yes counselor gibson counselor pena yes counselor jones yes that passes on a 5-0 vote okay we're moving right along councillor benton amendment a17 i'm going to let uh miss morris give us a little overview first madam chair counselors yes amendment a17 um this responds to uh this this refers to the urban residential forum in the form-based zone district um these revisions make um some changes to the language in there to encourage small scale infill residential development in terms of its residential form especially on small lots it makes changes to building entrances ground floor player height window percentages and on the ground on upper floor levels sill height and window shape the residential forms in the form base tend to lead towards more commercial forms of building but the urban residential form is intended to be for development that is 100 residential and so these revisions uh create a more residential character if you imagine a row house in in form for example are there any questions counselor benton yeah just again um this is a good small fix to this particular zone we haven't i don't know that we've had any applications or i guess there's you know maybe some applications on the horizon for the use of this form in this zone but what we did actually for the most part in analyzing the building forms was actually reduce the amount of windows required and not have it feel too much like a storefront and have it feel more like a resonance which is what it is thank you council abandoned counselors all right oh yes i seconded it so there's a motion in a second on this one let's call the roll please counselor benton yes cancer porego yes counselor gibson yes counselor pena yes counselor jones yes that passes on a 5-0 vote all right uh councillor borrego i think you are next thank you madam chair um the last amendment that we have in our packet is a further protection of the northwest area and i guess probably petra should be reading this not me would you like for her to give her overview before you speak out yes all right thank you miss morris madam chair counselors uh yes this amendment uh whoops technical differences here of a physical nature because of the whole squiggly person i know so this amendment um proposes a second height sub area so the the northwest mesa vpo currently has an existing height sub-area and this would be a concentric ring around the existing height sub area that would um have additional protections in terms of heights landscaping and uses within this second height sub area building heights would be lifted to 30 feet additional landscaping would be required um and then potentially incompatible uses would be limited within this area um may i ask a question sorry i just hit it too many times councilor borrego it's back to you oh councillor jones i think councillor gibson has a question i see that i don't have very close screen but counselor gibson yes thank you so here's my question 30 feet in a ribbon around the existing um area where there's already high height restriction what what kind of building do we anticipate in that ribbon area that this this uh uh this second area uh second ribbon area around the uh first is that mr would you like to answer that um counselor gibson much of this area is zoned residential so it be single-family homes for the most part there's there's primarily a single-family residential already and what about the um are there any places where where uh there might be commercial or um well the thing is that this is adjacent to the uh petroglyphs really i mean it's really protecting giving that further protection to the petroglyphs so it's really for the that's the intended um goal oh to give a view of the to the petroglyphs right to keep that buffer or maintain that buffer um much like like in the same you know close to the sandias you don't have very high buildings um so it's much much like that okay so my question was was uh you're trying to protect at least for some of that that perimeter are you trying to then protect the view of the of the um yes yes trying to protect protect the view plane yes escarpment yes okay all right so my other question is what is standard for uh building heights what's what's is is there a number a magic number that we have to have a minimum high petrol thank you we'll have miss morris answer that thank you councillor gibson uh madam chair councillors um generally uh modern commercial uh buildings come in at about 35 feet in height um the single-family residential is usually up to about 26 feet which is the um single-family height limitation okay councilor gibson do you have any other questions no thank you counselors are there other questions counselor borrego urge your support thank you did we get a second on it uh there's a motion and we need a second now sorry i'm getting this out of order everyone i'll second that there's a motion in a second uh councillor benjamin do you have a question are you seconding i was seconding thank you thank you thank you councillor benton let's call the roll please counselor benton yes councillor yes councillor gibson uh qualified yes counselor pena yes councillor jones yes that passes on a 5-0 vote uh with that counselors we are down to the final um bill here and this is a counselor benton do you want to try to do this one it's a move or do pass as amended would you like to get your name on this since you did all the work guess not counselor benton i i don't seem to have it in my pocket so um i will all right this is a do pass of this legislation as amended would you like to second it oh for the entire bill you mean yes yes i'll second that thank you thank you yeah the notes are difficult for me tonight so there's a motion and a second to pass uh as amended any comments let's call the rule please counselor benton yes councillor borego yes councillor gibson yes councillor pena yes and councillor jones yes and that passes on a 5-0 vote let's make sure i'm not doing this wrong but i believe that that concludes the business for the evening and therefore the meeting is adjourned thank you all for your patience uh we'll do better the next time when we don't have so many things to vote on thank you everyone good night