Planning Commission Meeting
Thu, Sep 17, 2026 · Planning Commission
https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/1409-planning-commission-sep-17-2026

== Executive Summary ==
The Planning Commission held a comprehensive meeting on 09/17/2026, focusing on the Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) process, ethical guidelines for commissioners, and the development review process. A key presentation by a professional engineer explained TIAs, which analyze how new developments affect traffic, walking, and biking, emphasizing that these assessments typically lead to site improvements rather than project denials. Commissioners requested simplified explanations of TIA sections in future packets.

Assistant City Attorney Natalie Cauley provided an overview of the City's Code of Ethics, the Inspection of Public Records Act, and the Open Meetings Act, reminding commissioners of their responsibilities regarding impartiality, conflicts of interest, and public access. Commissioners were asked to return ethical documents and review draft meeting minutes. The meeting also delved into the development review process, detailing triggers for development plans, the role of the Development Review Team, and the importance of Early Neighborhood Notifications. Staff highlighted efforts to improve efficiency, such as standardized templates and a future digital submission platform, while cautioning against overly streamlined processes that could compromise public health and safety.

The Commission discussed the extent of its quasi-judicial role, with the attorney clarifying that "public interest" is primarily defined by adopted ordinances and established minimum standards. No formal decisions or votes were taken during this meeting, but several action items were assigned, including future presentations on the Commission's discretion and procedural guidelines.

== Motions & Votes ==
- Motion to reorder staff communications, moving the Transportation Impact Assessment (TIA) presentation to the first slot — Passed

== Public Comment ==
No public comment period.

== Topics ==
- Development Review Process
- Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA)
- Traffic Level of Service
- Public Interest & Ordinances
- Developer Costs & Profit
- Digital Process Improvements
- Impact Fees
- Planning Commission Discretion

== Full Transcript ==
Yes, you're set to go? Duke, you call a meeting to order? And could I rise to pledge allegiance and ask the permission to do so? Are we live? Michael, we are live. Okay, great. You weren't thinking, oh, live. We are live too. Yeah. Why don't we call the roll so we know who's here? Vice Chair Smith, are you the acting chair tonight? That is my understanding. Okay, thank you. Ready for a roll call? Chair Smith? Yep. Commissioner Gutierrez? Here. Commissioner McGhee? Here. Commissioner Rieland? Here. Commissioner Rivera? Rivera. Here. Rivera. Sorry. Thank you. Commissioner McReynolds? Here. We have a quorum, Chair Smith. My understanding there are no minutes to approve. There are no findings or conclusions and no consent, so we will move directly to the staff communications.

Mr. Chair, are you okay with the current configuration of presentation mode? Yes. Vice Chair, I would like to make a motion that under staff communications, if possible, and please the commission, that we rearrange the order and ask to hear transportation impact assessment first, and move that up in order. I'll second it. Mr. Chair, is that part of the approval of the agenda, the rearrangement? Just need to vote for the agenda to approve the agenda and the new arrangement just specified. Real quick, just for clarity. So the traffic will be first, the last, and the attorney in the middle? That's fine. That's acceptable. So I'll just make sure my motion is clear. Make a motion under staff communications to change the order of sequence of the presentations so that the traffic impact analysis assessment is done first, then we hear from the assistant attorney, and then the third item would be the development review process. That would be an amendment, but you're still approving the agenda subject to the amendment to the agenda. So Vice Chair Smith, first, you vote on the agenda as it is. And if that is approved, then you would vote on an amendment to the agenda. They would be two separate motions. This is a roll call for approval of the agenda. Commissioner McGhee? Yes. Commissioner Gutierrez? Yes. Commissioner Rieland? Yes. Commissioner McReynolds? Yes. Commissioner Rivera? Yes. Chair Smith, we have the motion passed. Commissioner Gutierrez? Yes. Commissioner Rivera? Yes. Commissioner McReynolds? Yes. Commissioner McGhee? Yes. Commissioner Rieland? Yes. The motion has passed. Okay. Well, then the first one up is going to be our traffic engineer. Did you guys second the motion to amend the agenda? Yeah. Is this working?

Good evening, Mr. Chair, Commissioners. My name is Leroy Nicholas Pacheco. I'm a licensed New Mexico professional engineer contracted by Public Works to coordinate development review with the city's traffic engineering agent, Wilson and Company, a New Mexico-based engineering firm. The Land Use Director has asked me to describe, in general terms, how the city reviews the transportation effects of development. This is not a case. I will not discuss any pending or recent application. If a question is about a particular site, it belongs with the case manager and the record for that case.

A TIA, Transportation Impact Analysis, studies how a proposed development connects to the existing street. It looks at the access into the site and at the nearby network that will carry the added travel from the development, usually the closest arterials and collectors and any intersections, signalized and unsignalized, in the vicinity. The TIA identifies what changes on the affected network by comparing the street as it is with the street plus the project. This is a localized study. This is not a study of the whole city. The study tells the city what site-related modifications may be needed so the affected streets can keep working after the project is built. It looks at more than vehicles. It includes walking, bicycling, and transit. The study provides a mechanism for the city and the applicant to look at that effect together. The methods are taken from accepted national engineering practice, and the details live in the city's adopted TIA guidelines.

Under New Mexico's Engineering and Surveying Practice Act, this traffic analysis is professional engineering work and requires a responsible licensed engineer. The developer's engineer prepares the study and stamps it. The developer's engineer is the engineer of record for the analysis. The city reviews that sealed work with its own licensed and traffic engineers at Wilson and Company. I coordinate that review. The applicant owns the analysis. The city decides whether the file is complete and what conditions follow from it. This commission receives a stamped study that staff and the city's traffic engineers have already reviewed. You use that work as one part of the land use decision. If the study does not address something this body needs, the item can be postponed and brought back after the engineer of record addresses or reanalyzes your concern.

For many years, the city has used the State Access Management Manual, the SAM, as the default criteria for traffic review. The SAM is a product of the NMDOT for use on its state highway system, and it is included as a reference in the appendix to the city's guidelines. The city wanted its own guidelines for local streets that make walking, bicycling, and transit an explicit part of the local review criteria. A few years ago, the Santa Fe MPO, the Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the Land Use Department hired a consultant to draft local guidelines. City staff and local licensed engineers reviewed the drafts. In August 2024, the city put those guidelines into use. They adapt accepted engineering practice to Santa Fe streets. Where the city's jurisdiction sits next to or overlaps with another agency, such as Santa Fe County, NMDOT, the State of New Mexico, Santa Fe Public Schools, or others, the city coordinates the traffic review with that agency. The city's TIA guidelines are available on the city website. The SAM is on NMDOT's website.

The city owns, operates, and maintains a network of hundreds of miles of streets and urban trails, including on the order of 120 signalized intersections. A TIA does not restudy that entire city network. How far the scope of a traffic study reaches is determined when the city scopes the traffic study parameters with the developer's engineers. The general principle is that the scope needs to be broad enough to see the impact, but it is never citywide. Every study starts with a street as it is without the project. We then look at the same street with the project in the opening year. For development with higher intensity traffic generation, the studies look out ten years beyond the opening year. The size of the study area and how far it looks ahead are set at scoping. The point of comparison is simple: what did this project change and what was already there? The applicant study is required to analyze the change. It is not required to rebuild what was already there.

The usual product of a TIA is not a veto of a project. It's typically a set of site improvements tied to what this development generates: access that works, a sidewalk along the frontage, a movement that is restricted if it cannot be made safe. The applicant's own engineer often finds that package well before a plan is filed. It is uncommon for a traffic study to conclude that no workable access exists. When the access as drawn cannot be made to work, the usual path is a revised driveway, a change in intensity, or a different site plan. Work that happens in the engineering review process and with the applicant often before this body is asked to decide the land use.

A TIA is not an impact fee. Impact fees are under a separate ordinance. Those pay toward planned system expansion that is listed in an adopted impact fee capital improvements plan, the IFCIP, required by state law. Impact fees are not a repair bill for the existing street, and they are not a substitute for a driveway or an intersection that does not work. The traffic study shows this site's increment. What the applicant builds is the improvement that is attributable to that site. System fees, if they apply, follow the fee ordinance, which is a different process under its own legal framework.

When a development plan reaches you, the package should already show whether a study was required, how far it reached, that a New Mexico PE sealed it, that staff reviewed the sealed plans, and whether any site improvements came out as recommended conditions. This commission then makes the land use decision. Traffic is one input among others. For example, zoning, water, architecture, grading and drainage, etcetera. It is not the only finding. In sum, a TIA is a disciplined look at how one site connects to the nearby street for all the ways people arrive. It is prepared by a licensed engineer, reviewed by licensed engineers, and used by this body as one piece of a larger decision. I'm happy to take process questions after three of you. Whenever, I'm happy to take process questions. Great. Thank you very much. Are there questions for members of the commission? Commissioner Rivera.

Thank you, Vice Chair. Mr. Pacheco, I have the unfortunate pleasure of being new here. So I will take advantage of that and ask some questions just to get myself kind of acclimated with the way things work, if you don't mind. My understanding for these TIAs is it produces kind of a status of the project and the road and the accessibility of that specific project. I'm being generic. When we hear of grades that are given, like letter grades of A, C, or D, or E, or F, are those grades determined by your office, or is it a calculation? Can you maybe explain a little bit how those grades are determined?

Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Commissioner Rivera. You're speaking of levels of service, and it is an engineering standard typically applied to signals. And it's a criteria that's established by the profession. It's not a grade that we or the developer's engineer would give. It's based on how much a, let's say, an intersection flows, it's given a grade, and the levels are A through F. F is obviously a failing signal. And I guess the simplest way to think of it is imagine yourself at 2:00 in the morning going down Cerrillos Road through the signalized system. You're probably experiencing levels of service A because you're hitting green after green after green, and things are flowing. We typically use peak hours because that's when the flows get most constricted. And, you know, you're probably not seeing levels of service A during peak hours on any of the signals. There's an acceptability before something needs to be done. And it's really, it's once you're at an F, things can get kind of chaotic. And I think that the standards talk about when action needs to be taken, and that's when we might add a turn lane or some way playing with the timing or whatnot to improve the flow, looking at what it is now and, you know, what this particular development might affect in terms of a signalized intersection. But it's not set by us. It's a standard that says this is moving traffic through at an acceptable rate.

Thank you. Do you, the numeric or, I guess, the alphabetic rating, does that come from data that's collected during what you guys determined during the scoping meeting and how often and how it's collected? I'm just trying to figure out how does that data get translated into those letter grades. We take peak hour volume counts, and they are modeled. And that is where the work of the developer's engineer and the city's traffic engineering reviewers, peer reviewers, look at those models and make sure they're doing the calculations properly.

It is a mathematical model that's used based on data that's collected and then projected based on assumed growth when it's being built and if it needs to be increased based on a 10-year horizon, et cetera. So it is, thank you.

The other question I have, when you mentioned associations or assorted needs to have conversations with the county or the public schools or other entities, the state, for example. Those entities are usually, in my understanding, that they would get together during the scoping meeting and have the discussion as to what needs to happen and how it needs to happen. Is that my understanding?

Every case is unique, so I can't say that there's one thing that happens. But there are a number of streets within the City of Santa Fe jurisdiction that are owned by other entities. For example, we just did a TIA with Santa Fe County. I won't get into the specifics, but one of the roads that was being affected is a county road that's currently owned by the county and under their jurisdiction. So one of the first things we figure out is whose jurisdiction is being impacted. And it kind of goes the other way as well. Some things that go to the Planning Commission at the county come through traffic because they're impacting a city road, even though the development's in the county. Rufina near our Fria would be an example. And so, it's not a formula for exactly this is a check, but entities are made aware and the engineering teams are involved and aware of outcomes. I mean, I've been involved in a couple of TIA reviews with county developments at the fringe of I-25 where it would impact the city signal at Third.

Thank you for that. Can you just remind me how many sections of road, specifically Cerrillos Road, have been transferred over to the city from the state? Or is it all transferred over? What sections remain under the state jurisdiction? Can you maybe refresh our memory on that?

Sure. I think the department's intention is to eventually transfer 100% of Cerrillos from I-25 to Saint Francis, which remains a federal highway. Currently, from Beckner, north and east, north up Cerrillos and East Beckner is city jurisdiction. It's a shared signal jurisdiction. South of Beckner and west into the frontage road is DOT jurisdiction, and it'll remain so. That's kind of the juncture on the south end.

Okay. So signal, it's shared jurisdiction. I believe that the city is completely in control of from Saint Michael's to that point. And there's an intention and a design underway, if not complete, and seeking construction for Cerrillos from Saint Michael's to Saint Vincent. And that's still, so that's still under NM DOT in their interim. Yeah.

Okay. I don't have any more questions at this moment. I can fill it. Any questions?

Mr. Rieland. Thank you, Mr. Pacheco. One question I had was, does the time of year play a factor into your guys' consideration since we're a tourist community and, obviously, our traffic is much more impacted in the summer months as compared to the winter months? And if your TIA is done in the winter months, how do you factor that in?

Mr. Chair, Commissioner Rieland, the answer is yes. We definitely take what's going on in the city into effect or into consideration. One of the big drivers is school traffic in general. So we are careful to make sure that that impact is included in the analysis, which sort of counterbalances what you were talking about with respect to summer and tourism because schools are out, but the tourists are here. But each case is unique and all things are considered at this time of year, what events may be happening.

Thank you. Are there other questions? Yes, Mr. Gutierrez.

Thank you, sir. Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Pacheco. I'm going to say I'm a recycled commissioner, and I have a question for you. Is it fair to say that traffic, and you guys can shake your heads yes or no, is one of the biggest issues in what comes in front of this commission? Because I feel that back in the day was one of the bigger things that we always heard was an issue.

Mr. Chair, Mr. Gutierrez, traffic is always, it's something that we all live in. We all are in traffic all the time. And, you know, so that does come because these are public hearings and we live, you know, we live in a world where people are very interested in their communities and in their surroundings, et cetera. So traffic will always be a subject, which is why I wanted to really share the technical process of what we're analyzing because sometimes that's not completely understood. I mean, some people are dealing with issues that perhaps are real, but not necessarily something that can be addressed through a TIA. And so it's challenging sometimes to sort of separate and focus on what is this particular legal framework that we're operating under to analyze traffic and in light of, you know, the bigger sort of world that we're all living in, getting here and getting around town. So traffic just will always be a major talking point.

And so you said technical and get into the technical portion of it. Let's say, for example, you have something that is a level of service that is not acceptable to the city. What do you implement? What happens in a situation where it's questionable or the level of service may drop down to where it's questionable in the near future? What kind of mitigation plans do you have, or what kind of ordinances might play in that, kind of alleviate some of this pressure on these intersections?

That's an excellent question. And it's complicated, but I'll try to answer it generally so I don't pull into a specific case. Sometimes, well, generally, the city is, you know, there's an impact fee capital improvement plan that is every seven years updated by the city with a list of capital projects that are identified that can be used, addressed with contributions by impact fees. So separate from, so that's kind of an ongoing tool. There's also the ICIP, the Infrastructure Capital Improvement Plan, which is an annual resolution with funded and unfunded needs in the city, including public works projects that identify that. And we're, in fact, through this committee, I'm looking for a way of putting some of these horizon impacts, communicating them to those lists so that we're sure they're being addressed that way. But there are also times in a specific development where the impact for it to work, and it comes out through this engineering process for it to work, that something would be done at the signal itself, such as an additional left or right or another capacity lane that's built into the project itself. It could be signal timing adjustments. So it doesn't necessarily mean there won't be specific improvement that was required for the development to work. Some of them are longer and broader than, you know, let's say this project could be contributing a portion to that problem, and then that would go into the IFCIP or the ICIP world of addressing a signal need that's citywide.

That's helpful. That's helpful. And so you said the MPO and the city are kind of in charge now, as you could, that in the day you guys got together and you figured out what was best for the city. Do you feel that there is enough emphasis on pedestrian and bikes taken into account? And do you have leeway to change something on a development if they're not addressing properly those two issues?

Mr. Chair, Commissioner Gutierrez, I don't think what's new and the MPO and the Land Use Department did was they made the technical criteria and standards very city-specific to include all of these modes with, how would I put this, with ways of looking at those modes uniquely. I don't think this wasn't being done before. It was being done before, but it's now built into the recipe, so to speak, so we never miss that. And I'm sure, I, you were, it's my answer is we're always addressing all modes. Public Works, Traffic and Traffic Operations, signals, roadways, complete streets to deal with the streets. Parks tends to deal with operation and maintenance of our urban trail system. And so we do have those components on the DRT review team. So you get comments both from traffic and also from MPO and Parks with respect to urban trails. And I think we do a pretty good job of broadly making sure cyclists, pedestrians, transit, and motorized vehicles are covered, not only by this, but other review team members as well.

Thank you. And so this is Wilson and Company is your employer, but you work for the City of Santa Fe doing reviews for the city through Wilson. Are there instances where Wilson is doing traffic for the other side, the development side, at the same point? Is that done by a separate individual? You guys collaborate. How's that done?

Mr. Chair, Commissioner Gutierrez, I'm a contractor directly for the Public Works Director, and Wilson is also a contractor for Public Works Director for traffic engineering review for development review. They do not participate or would be involved with any private development that comes towards their review. They would never participate in that. They are also the Midtown traffic engineering person. And so that is not the work with respect to Midtown is not reviewed under this contract as well. So it is completely avoided that Wilson would be reviewing its own work.

Yeah, I was just wondering maybe if it was a two for one or something to that effect, but that answered my question. And then, just one more, kind of an ask for us or for me. I don't know about the rest, but sometimes when you get into these traffic parts of the packet, if there was a footnote or a way to dumb something down to a level that's not on an engineer's level, if you think there might be confusion on something or that that would help. So, and I'm done with my questions, comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Anybody else have questions? I return to the commission. Thank you. Mr. Pacheco, if I am following the process correctly, you have stated that there was a summary of the guidelines with recommendations, PE sealed, I think is the word you used. So when a plan comes in front of this commission and we see that in the packet and the information, this may be an obvious question. Maybe it's more for the development process that we'll hear later. How often would it be that that detail gets changed or amended even after we see it here at the commission? Are there changes that are allowed and done by the developer that would change what we saw here after the fact?

Mr. Chair, Commissioner Rivera, another great question. Oftentimes, the engineer of record that's doing the development plan for infrastructure is not the engineer who's sealed the traffic impact analysis. However, all conditions that are approved and required by the Planning Commission are recorded and carried forward all the way through the development process. So, they would be carried and studied all the way to the building permit process, and they're continued to be reviewed by staff and traffic to make sure those conditions have been met. So there would be no change to anything that came before the Planning Commission and was approved. That, you know, I mean, there might be a minor change that staff deems, but nothing significant like, you know, that would require coming back to, I mean, commissioning today.

All right. Thank you. And just a couple, two more questions, really. Have there been any changes to the city's TIA since, I guess, since the end of June?

TIA process? To the TIA document that you've been referring to, has there been any changes since the end of June? No, there have been no changes since they were implemented in 2024. Okay. All right. And I think the last question I have, if there are existing conditions, kind of like Commissioner Gutierrez was mentioning, if there are existing conditions on a road that was known previously, is there some expectation that that data and that analysis should be used as part of the study for a new project?

Well, I think it goes back to the first question I answered with Commissioner Smith. We do try to communicate those discoveries to the Public Works Department, whether it's through the ICIP or other methods. And it came up in a case recently where we talked about this need to sort of get a mechanism because the development may or may not happen. And what's being communicated as an existing condition may still need to be documented and addressed with or without the development. All right. Thank you very much. Are there other?

I have an observation, and I want you to tell me whether I got it or not because I could easily not have it. But it's when you were talking about the back to the actual A through F, I understood you to say that the standards that are used to determine A through F and signaling are not adopted by the city. They are professional standards of the association. And I'm wondering, is that, when we get a traffic study, what I'm sort of hearing is that if you have a D or an F or a C, D, or an F, the issue isn't that your proposal, the permit can be denied. It's always telling you what you have to do to have your permit approved. And that's, I'm trying to, there are other parts of the code, the old code, and I will assume the new code, or if you can't meet the requirement, the permit's denied, period. But I haven't heard anything that suggests that traffic studies could end up being a denial. It's always, we need a turn lane, we need this, we need that. And my, which is troublesome to me, I think, because with the ebb and flow of the traffic in this city, especially on the main thoroughfare, there could come a time when it's too much. And, of course, some would argue that happened years ago. That's not my, but it seems that just a little bit, you know, general in terms of, are there any red lines at which recommendation would be, no, this project cannot go?

Mr. Smith, it's a really complicated question for me to jump into, and I almost jumped into these levels of service. But I think I'll stay higher and basically say, in my experience, I'm thinking of cases without mentioning them. When you hit a point where something actually needs to be done to make the project work, typically, that's built into that condition of approval to make that project work. And I'll just throw generic examples out. Dual lefts are added if they're failing in the left turns, or an additional right turn lane is added. In other words, the levels of service would be addressed by that development if it couldn't work for that development to open day one. And so it's, you know, the engineering is finding a way to make sure that the public safety criteria is met so that the network works. And so if something were at a point where in the existing build condition, it, you know, this isn't going to, you would then be responsible for making it work for it to operate and finance those. That helps. That makes sense. It does, and thank you.

I think, from my perspective, if I'm understanding you correctly, that could lead over time to wider and wider roads. If we're always adapting, we could end up with six-lane highways and turn lanes on either side, just because, as opposed to saying, there's some point at which it's too much traffic and there's too much business. So rather than becoming a condition that can be adjusted or adapt and must be, I understand that. It becomes a condition that's not that because we have a standard about that. I'm not sure what that would be or whether or not. I'm just, this seems a little, on the traffic side, it seems a little foggy in terms of whether they, like height and height conditions, there are other circumstances, density. There are all sorts of things where you don't meet the whatever the code is, you don't ask for a variance. Don't get a variance, you don't, you don't see. And I don't hear that about traffic, and I think listening, I figured this is listening to these earlier questions about how we anticipate with tourism and millions of people would come here. How are we in school? All right. How do we anticipate when something is one thing too many and if they're able and that that's just enough? I'm still thinking that may be an issue that we want to, mission or ask this. Thank you.

I think that's, you're right. It's complicated. It's challenging. And I think some of it goes to, you know, the city's long-term transportation planning and modeling apart from this. In other words, what is our existing network? What is, where, you know, certain decisions are driven by those decisions. In other words, I'll give an example. Rufina was stopped at South Meadows. Originally, the city owned the right-of-way all the way to Airport Road. That was a land use decision that is now measured in terms of how projects impact Rufina or, and so that those are kind of built into the cake by others with those types of decisions. And so it's, we're looking at, you know, here's the network. It's, here's the focus time range we're looking at. But you're looking at a broader transportation planning vision, and, you know, that's ongoing as well. So sort of apart from planning. Also, from a logical perspective, the fact that in this case, the street department, whatever its formal name is, would have a plan that, in fact, from a development of traffic perspective, it appeared to us, allowed too much traffic, too much congestion because it's already in place. We cannot do it. We have to defer to them and to their plan as opposed to raise a question.

Well, I think, again, it's what is this commission's charge and duty? But there are other entities designing, thinking, and working around the long-range transportation of the city. So for example, Rufina, I mentioned ending. When the city purchased the right-of-way, you could actually make that a wider road. There's enough right-of-way to, you know, maybe 30 years from now when most of us are dead, some of us may still be alone, someone will make those decisions. You know, so we are, so there's, you know, there's right-of-way. I think, for instance, Beckner itself within Las Salettes has capacity for growth itself. It's now a two-lane, one lane each direction road. So those are deferred to, you know, we've, the world keeps revolving as the conveyor belt keeps going, and we drop off of it. So that's, you know, but I think those are longer-term land use transportation planning questions, and, you know, we're just sort of more myopically looking at, here's the development and here's what the city network. No, no, that's, that's enough, and thank you so much.

I think my observation is, as we're thinking about the general plan, there ought to be a way the agencies communicate with each other as they are putting together a long-term plan and to have a conversation so that we are not simply a set of silos that where one set of decisions may negatively affect, but another group thinks. I'm not sure what to do about it, but I just, I really appreciate your, thank you. Yes. On that note, I will advise you that we are working with all city departments in our, in collaboration with the general plan so that everybody's input is, is input. And I'll be asking more questions as we get stuff. Of course. Yes, Commissioner. So if I can ask one last question. Sorry. Sorry, Mr. Pacheco. You may have said this, and I missed it, but I'm curious. Post-development, is there ever, like, a follow-up traffic impact analysis to make sure that what we, like, what we analyzed and decided at, like, prior to project is actually correct?

The simplest answer would be no. Yeah. I mean, these TIAs are somewhat shelf life. And one little suggestion I'm going to make is that I, we actually have the TIA filed with the development plan so that as others are developing around it or surrounding it, they can actually, we give them freely once they're sealed and their public information, but I'm having to hunt them down and look for them and, you know, so it'd be efficient if the city started storing these with the development plans that they went to. That would be extremely helpful. But I don't generally, even with a back-to-back development that was done in a piece, typically, we require a whole new TIA because they do have a shelf life because you have to count traffic and that, that would be why it's now, things change, it's dynamic, so you're wanting to see the newest dynamism.

Then I have a maybe related question, but I see, Mr. Esquibel, that you want to respond to that as well. Oh, I was going to add some of this into my presentation. But, ultimately, the way our system works is you have a lead, a project manager that happens to be built into the ordinance for the land use department to move it. As a direct result, we coordinate with all of the city departments that become a team for that project because not all departments will become a team. And we make sure that before it reaches your review, those conditions of approval that are assessed against another engineer or whatever, they're met before we can complete the review. If you have an incomplete, if something's incomplete and you can't finish that review, you're not going to progress forward. Sometimes it gets political, and typically, that's usually when we recommend denial because we can't support something that isn't compliant. But, ultimately, when it's passed and when everything is said and done, we make sure that there's a set of conditions that aggregates all of those needs into that development plan. So when the building permits are issued and or the horizontal permits are issued, we have a collection of information based on the review, based on the approval, and the conditions of that approval are sitting right on that development plan so that if any one of us leave, we have something for posterity's sake to make sure that they still get implemented. And that's why we have such a laundry list of conditions that end up on the development plan when it gets recorded and then filed downstairs because they'll always going to be used. And it's not uncommon for somebody to come up 10 years from now, five years from now, and want to modify that. We need to know what those approvals were so we are able to dig those up and understand exactly what happened.

And all of those occur prior to the development's completion. Correct? Yeah. But some projects are phased, so it also accommodates that phasing. Okay. And then, last question that's slightly related. You may have addressed it in your long-range traffic planning answer earlier, but is a development project the only thing that triggers a TIA, or is there another standard process that triggers a TIA? Say, for instance, is there a standard city process where a neighborhood can trigger a TIA because they've realized that there are issues within their neighborhood regarding traffic? Mr. Chair, Commissioner McGhee. The vehicle for neighborhoods typically, in my experience, has been the city's traffic calming program and policy. And the reason we like to use that is it has a pretty significant public involvement process.

When you see a neighborhood succeed in getting traffic calming implemented, you know there's neighborhood buy-in. They've worked really hard because the city's not going out soliciting this. It's coming to the city, and it requires at the get-go a ballot with 30% of the affected neighbors to concur and to bring this to the city. Then, at that point, the city can either contract out to private engineers or do it in-house, depending on the scope, and perform a traffic study. The technical use of the word TIA is unique to the development review process, but that's the way neighborhood studies are typically handled.

Another method is, and this is political, meaning people dealing with counselors, neighborhoods, something that gets identified on the ICIP and be identified and funded for a contracted-out study by the city. The most recent one I can recall is there was a traffic study done for Alafria from Seiler to Osage, probably four years ago. It was in-house, done by a private contractor, but managed by Gene Wolfenbarger, a $100,000 study. So they're not, you know, they're, that's unique because it's resources and time, etcetera. But I think the first easiest gateway would be to go through the city's traffic calming program. And often, even before that, this constituent services group has their work order dashboard, and those get sent out to city staff with issues that are addressed by staff directly. Sometimes those can evolve into deeper dives because a safety issue was highlighted that came to light, etcetera. So those would be the two sort of lower-level entry points: the CRM with the constituent services group or traffic call. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your report and your candor. Appreciate it. Attorney Cauley.

Thank you, Chair Smith. I'll get set up at the podium, but for the commission's awareness, I anticipate this being about a 30 to 45-minute presentation. So in case you need to step out or use the bathroom, please feel free to do so at any time. Good evening, everyone. I think you all know me by now, but my name is Natalie Cauley. I'm the Assistant City Attorney that works with the Planning Commission and with the Land Use Department more generally. I can wait for Vice Chair Smith to come back. I think that's probably best before getting started. I will say, I have a presentation, as you can see, that I'll be giving that I will absolutely circulate to you via email after this meeting. Would anyone like to have it in front of them while the presentation is going on? I will email that right now. On the screen. Good evening again. As I just said to the others, Vice Chair Smith, I just emailed the presentation as well. Have any of you received it yet? I know there can be a delay with the city internet. Right. I, well, I guess I can see the presentation up there. I was going to say I can't see it very well, so let me know if something goes wrong with the presentation. But, hopefully, I can see it just fine.

So today, I'm going to present on the ethical and statutory guidelines that cover your work as Planning Commissioners. At the next Planning Commission meeting, I'm going to present on the procedural guidelines that cover your work, so then we'll get into Robert's Rules of Order, the governing body rules, that sort of thing. As I said, this will be at least a 30-minute presentation just covering the subject matter, so I didn't want to overwhelm you, especially considering the other presentations happening tonight. So this is what we're going to be discussing tonight. We're going to talk about the city's Code of Ethics that governs your work, the Inspection of Public Records Act, also known as IPRA, and the Open Meetings Act. Please feel free to interrupt me with questions at any point. I'll also leave questions for the end. If I can't answer your question tonight, I will, of course, research it and bring it next time.

So as members of the Planning Commission, you are all considered public officials, which means that the city's Code of Ethics applies to you just as it does to public employees. This is the, okay. My computer looks a little different, but it looks like it looks okay for you guys. This is the statement of policy of the Code of Ethics. So it says the proper operation of a democratic government requires that public officials and public employees be independent, impartial, and responsible to the people. This is the part that's covered on my screen, that government decision-maker, the government decision and policy be without conflicts of interest, that public office or employment not be used for personal gain, and that the public has confidence in the integrity of its government. So I believe you should have all received papers or documents from the City Clerk's office related to the ethical code. My understanding is that a few of you have not returned your ethical documents for this year yet. So if you have not returned those, please do. Otherwise, the City Clerk's office will be reaching out to you soon.

Yes, Chair Smith. Make sure that people are told who hasn't done it, not today publicly, but it's like I might not, I think I have. I believe you did. I'm an old man. How about yes. I can follow up with individuals directly. Thank you.

So the city's Code of Ethics, as it sounds like you all are aware, is quite lengthy, and a lot of it might not pertain to your daily work as Planning Commissioner. So I'm obviously not going to talk about it at length, but I want to highlight just a few of the items that are most likely to come up in your work. I will also say in the presentation that I've circulated to you, many of the slides have notes attached to them, which include links to various documents. So, for example, this slide provides a link to the city's Code of Ethics. I'll also flag other places where there are relevant links that you might want to review when you have time.

So one issue that is most likely to come up during your work as Planning Commissioners are conflicts of interest. Obviously, the code has a very lengthy definition of what is a conflict of interest. But just to generally summarize, a conflict of interest can arise if an official act of yours would lead to a specific benefit or loss for one of these six types of individuals. So that would be a benefit or loss to yourself, to your family, to a business that you or a member of your household owns, a specific benefit or loss to anyone who has paid you or a member of your household more than $500 in the last year, a benefit or loss to an organization of which you or a member of your household are an officer or director, and then, finally, anyone that has contributed more than $250 to a campaign for elected office. Obviously, that does not pertain to your work as Planning Commissioners. But just to get into an example that maybe is a somewhat more attenuated situation that wouldn't be obvious. So if a member of your household owns a business, let's say it's a catering business or an accounting business, and then a developer comes before the Planning Commission to have a development plan approved, and that developer has paid the member of your household more than $500 in the last year, maybe they bought their catering services or they retain your household member as their accountant, then that would be a conflict of interest.

So not every official act that benefits the actor is a conflict of interest. It's not a conflict if a gain or loss is de minimis in amounts. That's just a very common legal term that just means it's a really small negligible amount that we don't have to worry about affecting your decision-making, or if it's a gain that's shared with a substantial segment of the general public. So another example, as Planning Commissioners, you'll be asked to review proposed code text amendments, which are changes to Chapter 14. So if a proposed code text amendment came before you that changed requirements for yards in Santa Fe and you have a yard in Santa Fe, that would not be a conflict of interest because you share that interest with a substantial segment of the general public. Of course, if you ever feel like a conflict of interest is potentially arising, please don't hesitate to reach out to me, and I'm happy to talk through it and figure out if a conflict actually is taking place.

So what do you do if you do have a conflict? You don't participate, as I'm sure you can imagine. And the way that actually works is you will disclose at a public hearing that you have this conflict. You don't need to get into specifics. You can just say, "I have a conflict of interest." And then when the decision is being made pertaining to the party that you're conflicted out from, you'll actually leave the room during that time, and that's because we want to make sure that your presence isn't influencing the other members of the commission.

So another potential issue in the ethical code that could come up are gifts. Not every gift is improper, but some can be. So at times, so the code says that a public official shall not request or receive directly or indirectly a gift from any person that the public official knows might benefit from an official act when the gift has a fair market value over $50. And gifts can include travel and accommodations. So just as an example, if we're looking at these photos here in the top photo, if you were to be gifted one a bag of pistachios or some holiday cookies, probably not an improper gift because we can doubt that that fair market value is over $50. But if you were to be gifted all of the items in that photo or a trip to Ojo Caliente, then that would likely arise to, or that would likely be an improper gift because of the fair market value. And, again, so what do you do if you discover that you have accepted a gift that you later discover is improper? First, obviously, the ideal is that if someone offers you a gift, you decline it, and you don't receive it. But if you do receive the gift and then later realize it's improper, you have two options. You can either, one, return the gift, or, two, disclose the gift at a public hearing and then follow the procedures for a conflict of interest. So as I described before, you disclose and then you would leave the room while a decision was being made that related to the person that gave you the gift. The ethical code does not get into, so this first option where you have received the gift, you realize there's a conflict, and you return it. The ethical code doesn't get into these specifics, but I would advise that best practice is if that happens, that you also disclose that on the record so that the public is aware that you received this gift, but that you also returned it so you're no longer conflicted out from making a decision on that case.

So the next area we're going to touch briefly on is the Inspection of Public Records Act, also known as IPRA. IPRA is motivated by the public policy that the public is entitled to the greatest possible information on public affairs. So that means as the Planning Commission is a public body, your records related to your, sorry, related to public business as a Planning Commissioner can be subject to IPRA. This includes emails and texts about public business even if they are to private accounts. So if you are asked, you would be asked by someone in our IPRA office to provide these public records, these emails, and texts. You would have to provide them. So this is just something to be aware of as you're communicating about public business. For example, if you are emailing with another commissioner about public business and application, and you start out discussing the public business, but then you veer into scheduling a time to get coffee or discussing your thoughts on a local news article.

All of those conversations in that thread would be subject to an IPRA request. So just one consideration that you might want to think about is creating an email account where you only deal with Planning Commission work. That would make it much easier if you were subject to an IPRA request to be able to provide those records to the IPRA office and not be as concerned about overlapping personal and public business.

Just related to the communications that might be subject to IPRA, when I started with the city, I was told the advice, "Don't say anything in your public business and things that can be IPRA that you don't want on the front cover of the New Mexican." And I think the same advice would apply to public officials on the Planning Commission.

So the next statute we'll talk about a little bit more at length is the Open Meetings Act. So the Open Meetings Act is what's called a sunshine law. All states have such laws, which are essentially motivated by the belief that the democratic ideal is best served by a well-informed public, as you can see in the act's policy statement here. The Planning Commission follows the Open Meetings Act because the act applies to policymaking bodies of state and local governments. And, of course, you are a policymaking body.

So the significance of the Open Meetings Act is that public business is to be conducted in public. That means that public business is to be conducted in full public view. Deliberations of public bodies are to be open to the public. This is another one where my screen is covered up. And actions of public bodies are to be taken openly. So this is another place where if you review the presentation and the notes for this slide, it includes a compliance guide put together by the Attorney General's office about the Open Meetings Act that really gets into the details of each of the different provisions and provides lots of examples. So if you ever have questions about the actual application of the statute, that is a really wonderful resource.

So public meetings that are subject to the Open Meetings Act are those where a quorum exists. So all meetings of a quorum of commission members are to be public meetings open to the public at all times unless the meeting qualifies for one of a certain list of enumerated exceptions. Most, or really all, of those exceptions are not likely to arise in your work, so I'm not going to get into them tonight. But if they do arise as we're working together on the commission, I'll, of course, bring it up and talk you through that at that time.

A quorum means a simple majority of all members, that's defined by Robert's Rules. So here, because we have eight filled positions, a quorum is five. If we go down to seven filled positions, then the quorum will be four. It's important to know that a quorum can occur unintentionally, so it doesn't just occur when we're here in Council Chambers as part of a formal meeting. A quorum technically occurs if five commission members were to be at a holiday party together. That would be a quorum. So if something like that happens, if a quorum happens not in this room, the best practice would be to announce that at the next public hearing to say, "A quorum technically took place at this place at this time, but public business was not discussed."

So another thing to be aware of is that quorums can occur that are called rolling or walking quorums. The act applies if there is any quorum discussing business, even if those discussions are informal, not all commission members are present at the same time, and no decisions are being made. So that means that a quorum can technically occur just through a series of email and phone conversations. So if five commissioners were to communicate in separate individual phone conversations, that would actually qualify as a quorum even though you're not all talking at the exact same time. This is the exact reason that when staff emails you, we always try our best to blind copy you because otherwise, we are creating a quorum with that email thread.

So the significance of the act is that the public has the right to attend and listen to deliberations and proceedings. This just requires reasonable public access. The act has been interpreted by courts to mean that it's not meant to be so strictly construed as to impair or impede the workings of government. This is another place where if you review the slides, I have some examples of cases from the New Mexico courts that have interpreted what reasonable access actually means.

So if a public meeting does occur that is subject to the act, that means that notice needs to be given. So notice needs to be given of all public meetings of a quorum of the commission. The governing body determines what reasonable notice is, and the governing body has determined that 72-hour notice is reasonable for itself and all of the subordinate policymaking bodies, which includes the Planning Commission. The notice needs to include the date, time, place of the planned meeting, and a list of the specific items of business to be discussed. This is, of course, so that the public can know something is being discussed that I'm interested in. I can show up and share my thoughts with the Planning Commission.

Relatedly, the Open Meetings Act requires certain requirements for the agenda that's put out. This also requires 72 hours before a meeting. The important part about the agenda requirements for you, obviously, you're not putting together the agenda. That's the responsibility of city staff. But it does mean that if something is not on the agenda, then the commission cannot take definitive action on that item. Items can be discussed that are not on the agenda, but no definitive decisions can be made until they are placed on the agenda for a future hearing. And then, as I said, individuals in the public are aware that they should show up and provide their opinion about that decision.

This also is not very relevant because we meet on Thursday evenings. But just for your awareness, the 72-hour requirement includes weekends. So if we were to meet on a Monday, then that hearing would just need to be noticed on Friday. It wouldn't need to be noticed all the way on Wednesday.

Another issue that the Open Meetings Act addresses is remote appearance. So that would be, obviously, you're all in person today, but if anyone needed to attend via Zoom. So the act allows remote appearance for commissioners if the commission has its own authority allowing for it, and the governing body has allowed remote appearance under city code, but only when it's difficult or impossible to attend a public meeting in person. So that's important to note, that is a higher bar than just inconvenient. The Attorney General's office has also provided guidance on what difficult or impossible means. They have said that that means remote participation should only occur when circumstances beyond the member's control would make attendance in person extremely burdensome. So that's just something I want to make you aware of.

As you're thinking about your plans for the next year, if you're planning any travel, I would really encourage you to either plan your travel so that you can be at these meetings in person or just know that you're going to miss a meeting. If you're planning travel well in advance, the Attorney General's office has said that you would be expected to plan your travel such that you're here in person. Obviously, if an emergency arises, if an emergency arises and you're called out of the city, out of town, out of state very last minute, then that would likely suffice to allow for remote participation.

Yes, Chair Smith. But if you can attend by Zoom, so if you're traveling and you want to attend that, you can attend the meeting by Zoom. That has happened many. So, technically, under the act and the governing body's rules, remote attendance should only take place if it would be difficult or impossible to attend in person. So the Attorney General's office has said if you can plan your travel such that you would be present in person, then you're expected to do so. But if you can't, you can then attend remotely? If it would be difficult or impossible to be there in person, then you can attend remotely. Yes.

Another issue covered by the Open Meetings Act are reconvened meetings. So if an issue is being discussed and you're not able to finish that discussion during the meeting, but you don't want to wait until the next Planning Commission meeting, then you can recess the meeting and reconvene it within 72 hours without having to abide by all of the agenda and notice requirements that I've already discussed. The only things to note for this is if you do reconvene a meeting, you can only discuss the items that were on the agenda of the original meeting. And then prior to adjournment, the commission must state the date, time, and place for the continuation of the meeting.

And the last item that I'll discuss are minutes. So the commission is required to keep minutes of all open meetings. Those minutes require all votes to be recorded so that the vote of each member can be ascertained. That means no secret ballots are allowed. The commission must approve, amend, or disapprove the draft minutes, and the minutes are not official until they are approved. I will note for your awareness, it is very important that you review the minutes for their accuracy. This is actually more important now than ever. The City Clerk's office has struggled to hire a stenographer, so we no longer have a stenographer working with the Planning Commission. So currently, staff are sending the recordings to an outside firm to create the minutes and then receiving them back. We're not able to review them closely for their exact accuracy. So we're relying on your review when you approve the minutes to ensure that they accurately reflect what took place, which is especially important because, as I'm sure you can imagine, the person who is remotely reviewing the recording is not able to always tell exactly who is speaking because, especially if we have people who are remote or just because of the way the audio is in the room, it's not always obvious who the speaker is. I'll take any questions that still linger.

Great. Well, I will also just touch base, describe quickly what I'll be presenting on next time. So next time, as I said, I'll get into the procedural guidelines that cover your work. So that's parts of Chapter 14, the governing body's rules for your work, and then Robert's Rules of Order. I did want to poll the commission so I can do this presentation at the next Planning Commission meeting, which is October 1, but we don't currently have anything else scheduled for that day. There are no cases that will be considered or other presentations at this time. Would the commissioners prefer to have the October 1 meeting with this presentation, or would you prefer to punt it to October 15? My instinct is to do it on the first because we may have other business on the 15th, but I would defer to the members of the commission. I would agree with you. Great. Thank you.

And one other note for the next Planning Commission meeting, which will be October 1, is that we will be doing an oath of office. All of the commissioners will be doing an oath of office. So because you are public officials and an appellant recently challenged the fact that the commissioners do not do an oath of office, in that appeal, the District Court agreed with us that the oath is not strictly necessary.

But just to head off this argument in the future, we will have you go forward with the oath of office. So prior to the October 1 meeting, we'll be circulating the oath for you to review. There are two options, and so you can choose which one you would like to take. I also just want to touch base on two other quick things.

So Chapter 14, I'm going to show you something about Chapter 14 in a moment. There are, as I think you're all aware, we passed a new version of Chapter 14 that took effect January 1. The current version that's online is a PDF document. There are some missing links or things missing from that that I'm sure you'll notice as you're reviewing it. Currently, the legislative office is working on passing a scrivener's error bill that fixes those links, and then it will be up, and then the code will be up online just in the same way that the other portions of the city code are and much easier to access.

I will also say, my last item is that in the notes for this slide, you can find links to the governing body rules for city committees. It can be a little bit difficult to access just by searching online, so you can find that here. If there are no other questions, that's all. Thank you so much.

Dan Esquibel: Mr. Esquibel, I am your turn. I believe she lucked out with no questions. Hope I'm as lucky. Give me a few minutes. I'm going to be making the presentation from here. Unfortunately, I'm plugged into the Zoom, so let's see. We're going to share. Okay. This presentation is going to be, yeah, approximately ten minutes. I've put in a bunch of graphics. Hopefully, that helps with the understanding. It's a very high-level review, but it should give you an understanding of what a development plan is, why it's reviewed, who reviews it, and the process of a development plan before it even reaches the Planning Commission. Are you guys able to see the screen? I might have chosen weird colors, and I'll have to apologize. Now I didn't get a chance to practice because I finished this five minutes before this meeting or ten minutes before this meeting started. I'll be shooting from the hip. My middle name will be...

You want to send it to us? This is 588 megabytes. It will not send by email. I think our email is capable of my... is the largest 24 megabytes for an email? Or is it, can it handle a 588 megabyte?

Email is going to be capped at that size. If you're going to try that size, maybe OneDrive. Share it that way. You may be able to share it faster than sending multiple emails. I would try that way.

Thank you. Okay. So development plan overview. And I've updated this so that it reflects current code. Hopefully, I got the right sections in. As if you've been there, it's kind of an interesting find. So the purpose of the development plan, one, is to enable the Planning Commission and the Land Use Department to verify compliance with Chapter 14. It documents compliance with the final actions to approve or conditionally approve development applications and to provide plans to be followed up in the construction operations, including phasing. So a development plan is a construction document. The final development plan, we use today, to initiate the horizontal permit. So once it's approved by this body, we no longer have to send it back out to the development review team. That approval will stand. We upload that when the building permit application comes in into our system, and it reduces three, four, maybe up to six weeks of additional review time down to maybe a day or two, at most a week. And then the horizontal permit is released. The caveat there is that the applicant must have their financial guarantee in place and approved. And as far as the compliance, I talked a little bit about that. You know, we do use the development plan to catalog all of the conditions of approval that are established by that approval from this body or administrative approvals. That's the purpose of a development plan.

The triggers of a development plan, there are many. The first one is 10,000 square feet or more in a residential district, or if you're within 200 feet of a residential district and you're 10,000 square feet or greater. That will trigger a development plan to the Planning Commission. If you're under that, then it becomes a building permit. The second one is the construction of a single-family dwelling that is 10,000 square feet or greater. That was put in a while back because there was a building permit up in the hills that was about 24,000 square feet, and the general public initiated some changes. And one of the counselors championed that change, and we ended up with a change to the code. So any residence that exceeds 10,000 square feet will have to come to the Planning Commission. The other one is a flea market with 15 or more vendors. You rarely see those, but they come in from time to time. Outdoor commercial recreational uses that are 15,000 square feet or greater, with the exception of circuses and carnivals or similar short-term things, those don't have to come here. But we don't really see a lot of those. I think I've seen one in the twenty years that I've been here.

Now the other triggers, any construction that is 30,000 square feet or greater anywhere in the City of Santa Fe. If you're 30,000 square feet or greater, you trigger a development plan before the Planning Commission. And then finally, well, not finally, but the second one is the cumulative square footage of multiple permits. There are some developers, some applicants that believe that if we break it up into smaller pieces, we're going to get away with not having to look at the bigger picture and the impacts of the bigger picture. This captures that event. If they start breaking it up into smaller pictures, you know, they come into the office and they say, well, we don't know what we're doing with that part of the property. We can't tell you. We don't want to do a development. This is all we're doing. And they sort of isolate it to that one area. We will capture it because we keep track of those permits. And the second they reach that trigger, Planning Commission.

There are requirements for the submittal for a development plan, and those are, you know, they get into the weeds 200 feet adjacent to the site. You have modifications to the site, which include the location, existing of new construction, grading, landscaping, lighting, pedestrian, vehicular circulations, parking and loading facilities. You have types and extent of intensity of land uses that are proposed, proposed modifications to infrastructure serving the site, including public and private streets, driveways, and traffic control measures, and utilities. If you can imagine each one of those elements, each one of those requirements have a specific section in Chapter 14 or in other chapters of the city code, and each one will have its own idiosyncrasies and requirements for meeting that set of standards. Parking, 90-degree parking, 45-degree parking, driving aisles for 90-degree parking is 23 feet. I mean, everything has its own set of unique standards, and it's up to the case planner to review for each one of those elements within every section of Chapter 14. And that's why those developed plans are quite large is because they have to hit all those nuances. And you want them to package that because you want to look at the application in its entirety as opposed to isolating it in a piecemeal sense. Because then it, once it's a small application, but the bigger picture is not really looked at, then you have siloed events from every department. One person approves it here. Another person denies it here, but they're not communicating. And you could end up with problems when the building permit gets issued because one person, one team member could say, hey, look, I told you you weren't supposed to put the landscaping here because the trees and shrubs are going to go and affect the sewer line. And the other person approved the trees and shrubs on the easement where the sewer line is, but neither one of them are communicated because they're independent. So the global development plan allows us to coordinate that effort of review. We have a team leader that manages that review, and when conflicts arise, we bring them together and we mitigate those impacts and come to an agreement under both rules because some, you know, each, you have Chapter 23, Chapter 24, Chapter 26. Everybody has a different set of standards to look at, and we have to make sure that everything cooperates where we're not compromising one ordinance over another ordinance because we can't do that. So we manage it. And then as we talked earlier with Mr. Pacheco, you know, we also look at off-site improvements for the streets and the infrastructure. All of those elements are looked at as part of that global review because, you know, I often say this, if you throw a pebble into a pool of water pond and that pebble hits the water, the greatest impact and turbulence occurs at that impact. But it doesn't stop there because those waves are going to continue outward. And what we have to do is take a helicopter, look at, you know, pull it up and look at those waves and identify, well, what's going to be impacted by those waves? Let's see how we can mitigate this development so that those areas of concern are also mitigated. That's one of the, that's one of the, the reviews that our traffic review does is that we look at this, and we all coordinate together as a team or a project in order to manage that need.

Document compliance with development standards, such as required for yards, covers, heights, structures. Again, those are just other elements within Chapter 14 that we have to look at, the elevations of a project. You know, the hotel was a big issue and a four-story, but, you know, when people got angry at that, well, we have to look at that and measure it against the standards of Chapter 14. Same thing with lot coverage and yard requirements, open space requirements. So those are all other elements that are just part of the review. And even though the code doesn't specify thou shalt bring this in, if we have to review that, it's interpreted that you have to have a set of plans for us to look at. We have to have enough information to provide to the Planning Commission so that the Planning Commission can make an informed decision as opposed to guessing. So we require those elements. We require that information in a global packet. That packet is submitted and all of the team that is required to look at that has already looked at it. So when you get it, you get a complete review. Residential development, a proposal for provisions of affordable housing. If we have an application under that section, it would come to the Planning Commission. And then as you know, water rights, a water budget that is specifically required for every development plan. If it doesn't come in on the application, it's incomplete. They won't even get on the agenda. We won't even process them. So, that's one of the things that we look at is when an application comes in, we do a quick completion review against all these. We measure it and said, do they have these elements? Even those elements that we have to review by that aren't required that aren't specifically specified, we're going to force those issues. And if it's incomplete, they won't get billed. We're not going to give it a case manager. They're not going to move forward. And sometimes that can take a while because interpretations of the code often find their way up the chain of command. For development plan or final development plan, sufficient details clearly show how each applicable development standard is to be met and identify any variances or waivers.

And again, we've talked about this. Once that application comes in, we usually catch those at a pre-application conference where we identify that, hey, you're not going to make it here. This is what the ordinance says. This is what you want to do. You're going to have to ask for some sort of relief. And I can tell you that that variance criteria is very difficult. You might want to think about it before you move forward or perhaps redesign your project so that it doesn't require waiver or variance.

So here we have, and what we've talked about, is the DRT. And if you can see this development plan that you've been seeing to the left, this development has now been broken up into its core pieces. You have the lower bottom. You have the water and sewer, which are connected into the building. You have your landscaping. You have the terrain management, roads, any kind of improvements to the road or any kind of intersection. Parking is looked at. Driveways are looked at. Connection to the roads are looked at. And then you have the building itself, vertical construction, points analysis, placement on the lot, setbacks, impacts are all looked at.

The core team is made up of about 15 people, 17 core members. Not all of them are going to review a simple application. For instance, if a variance came in for a sign that wants to increase the size of the sign, I'm not going to send it to water, and I'm not going to send it to sewer. They don't have to look at that. This way, I don't have to wait for their comments to come in to tell me that I have no comments. So, the case manager is in charge of understanding which department does what and who to send these applications to. And this is just a breakdown of how those elements are looked at and the core review that is being assessed for each and every piece of that project, from subsurface to vertical construction on top of the ground.

And this is the review process. So now you have an idea of what a development plan is. We're going to look at the review process. The first step is a pre-application conference. The pre-application conference is where we meet with the applicant, and it's a precursor. It is a fundamental requirement; they have to do it. The only way out of it is the land use director, and it's written into the code, says, "No, you don't need to come." And that's usually because it's so easy that a staff member can just talk about it. And then so they're required for annexations. They're required for rezonings. They're required for development plans, anything in the Santa Fe Homes Program that met that section. And then, basically, that meeting is about the information between the city and all the other departments because most of the departments are going to be at that pre-app. Traffic, water, sewer, all of those departments are there to look at what their proposal is so that we can give them advice, and we're going to answer their questions. And this is to help them build that packet of material, and we hope that they get that information right so that we can minimize the ping-pong between an incomplete application and a complete application and process. So the pre-application is essential, and it's a prerequisite to getting on the Planning Commission.

The next one, after the pre-app, you're eligible to start moving forward to an early neighborhood notification. That is nothing more than an exchange of information between the applicant and the developer. The staff has no application on file. We haven't accepted an application on file. So, in one sense, we have some knowledge because of the pre-application, but we don't have full detail of the project yet because it's still being developed between the planning, between the pre-application and the submittal date. And the ENN is a way station in between so that they can meet with the community. And, hopefully, if there are issues, the applicant is not allowed and shouldn't have plans that are hardened to the extent where they can't make changes. Because if they do, sometimes it happens. They start designing their application early on, and you've got hundreds of thousands of dollars in engineering fees, architectural fees, drafting fees. That's not what we want at a pre-app or at an ENN. We want something that's light and malleable so that when the community comes in and provides their comments, their concerns, the applicant has enough flexibility to help mitigate some of those concerns within that application as they move it forward and build it for a submission to the city. And that's what the ENN is designed to do.

Once the application is submitted, it follows a schedule. There are two schedules. The first schedule up at the top, the development review time, that's the schedule that sets it in place when we accept it so that it gets processed. And the second schedule is once they've gone through that review period, that review period gets set for a public hearing process. And that is everything that Natalie spoke about. We need to go through our notice requirements for public hearings to this Planning Commission. You need to notice 15 days prior to the meeting date. That includes a poster. That includes letters to adjoining property owners. That includes letters and emails to neighborhood associations if they're within that 200-foot radius, and then we have to publish an agenda within that 15-day period. So once all that is met, then it's just administrative work to get that report, that review, the aggregate of the development team's comments and concerns into that report so that we can regurgitate that to the Planning Commission for your ultimate decision.

And then, again, this is just a larger view of the development review team, who gets to look at it, how it works. The project comes in. It's an application. It's given to the case manager. The case manager assesses who's going to be part of that DRT team, and then he sends that information out to the DRT team. And then that team becomes the working group that is going to review that application. And then they have a set of deadlines based on that schedule. Hopefully, they meet it in order to track it on its path to a public hearing. And there are 17 members. On average, as they rotate members, not all members are on every case, but a lot of them are going to be on different cases. It's usually between 13 and 15 different professionals and engineers that make up those city departments that are reviewing this case at all times. So there are many people who have their hands in the cookie jar when we're looking at this development project before it's presented to this body.

Finally, when the DRT gets that information, they're going to take it, and they're going to send it back to the staff member, and the staff member is going to write a preliminary review memo, an initial review memo. That initial review memo is going to aggregate all of those comments from all the DRT that submitted on that deadline. And we're going to give that to the applicant so that he can revise their application, resubmit that application with those changes. Now at this point, we always hit a stall because while we're on a specific schedule, a lot of the times, the developer is going to be on their schedule, but they also have their own team. They're going to have their own engineer. They're going to have their own architect. They're going to have their own team that's also building this application. But many of those team members also contract with other agents and are working on other projects. And as that whole development community has shrunk, very few surveyors. Engineers are retiring. There are very few left. There's an abundance of architects. But, ultimately, each one of those is going to, when you get them with your changes, they're going to put you on their schedule. If they're light in work, you're going to get your stuff back pretty quick. But if they're buried, you could wait for weeks, months. It could be a while before you build your application again to resubmit it to the city. We have no control over that. That's between the applicant and their team.

Once we get everything back, once that review has been completed enough in order to say, "Okay, they're good enough to move forward," then we're going to issue them notice. That notice, again, is you're going to post on the property. That posting must be in plain, unobstructed view. You must put a poster on every street, public or private. Makes no difference. You have to send everybody a first-class mail within 200 feet, anybody within that 200-foot distance from the property. It could be a square. You might have an amoeba. You might have a really hard time because if you're in a downtown area where it's really dense, you can have two or 300 people that you're sending a mailing to. That can get pretty pricey if an error is made because the postage stamp is not very cheap, right? And if you have a neighborhood association, you're going to have to send that letter to the neighborhood association president as well as an email. Now, neighborhood association is in Chapter 14 once and in the notice section only, and all it says is that we will send to registered neighborhood associations that are on our list. So if a neighborhood association is not registered, they're not going to get noticed because they didn't register with us. And we do have problems with neighborhood associations that keep that up to date as they move from president to president to president. And once it's dropped, they don't get mail.

Finally, the agenda is posted. The staff developed that agenda as Natalie discussed. The final review comments are provided to the case manager, aggregated for the report. This is when the staff starts to write that report. And those reports, as you've seen them, can be anywhere from 15 pages to 42 pages, depending on the complexity of the project. If you have a project that has multiple cases, you have a general plan amendment, rezoning, master plan, development plan, and a variance, you've got a huge case on your hands. And each one of those elements has its own requirements criteria to look through. And that, unfortunately, yields a very large report. And it's a redundant report because the code is redundant, and it overlaps in many cases. So we're finding a lot of redundancies in these reports because we have to address those needs in order to make a finding for the Planning Commission of whether we recommend approval or we're recommending denial.

After they write the report, the case manager will present that report and the packet of information that is going to the Planning Commission to upper management. That includes me, the assistant land use director, the land use director, and our city attorney. And we all take a look at that information for our own needs, spelling, grammar, making sure that the position that we're holding is true to Chapter 14, that we're being consistent with our reviews and our approvals so that we're not being arbitrary and capricious with any kind of decision we're making on a development plan or a subdivision or whatnot. We want to make sure that we collect that data as we move forward so that those approvals or denials have been consistent across the board. In the event we have to go to court, our attorney has the ability to say, "No, Your Honor. This is how we do it. This is what we do." And we've been pretty successful with our reviews, from the old Pecos Trail to another rezoning.

So that's why we have such a hefty review process. As you can see, this report that you're getting is pretty integrated with the city review and fairly integrated with our department. Finally, the case manager is going to present that case to the Planning Commission, and a big discussion is made. You take staff's considerations and review and recommendation. You take the applicant's presentation and consideration. You take the neighborhood or comments from the community, their consideration, and then you start discussion, deliberating, and you make a decision or a decision with conditions of approval or denial. And that is all I have, and I can answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you so much, Mr. Esquibel. I have a question or a few questions about the E&N process. I believe I know the answer to this, but I want to throw it out there anyway. I'm curious who ultimately owns the E&N process, and who is responsible for ensuring that what was stated in the E&N is included in that packet.

The E&N itself is a process between the applicant and the neighborhood. It is up to the applicant to disclose the information about that project and what's going to be ultimately submitted to the city. Our staff is there to help answer questions about the process because we don't have an application on file. They're not allowed to submit an application on file. So there's nothing we can say about the application itself. What we do is we make sure that we understand what was said at the E&N so that when the application comes in, it's not different from that E&N. If an applicant comes in and it's different from what they projected to the community, but it wasn't something that the community actually made comments on and recommended changes on, and they're just following through with that and submitting something different based on that meeting, it's a complete design, or they're adding something that didn't get disclosed at the E&N, they're going to go back to E&N. We're not going to process them. It's not going to happen. And we do that. That's just a consistent approach that we've done at least for the last 20 years that I've been here.

We also will, in the event it gets a little hard, and there's a lot of angry people and there's a lot of things that are being said, we're going to have to manage that E&N or help the applicant manage that E&N. And so we become co-partners on running that E&N Zoom meeting. And when you have people who are being belligerent and they're not cooperating with the protocols of that E&N that was specified in the beginning so that everybody can hear what needs to be said, ask the questions, listen to what their neighbor said, but they're not talking over them. They're not interrupting. They're not being belligerent. We will remove them from that E&N. The same thing happened when we were live and in person. There were a couple times I had to, once, call the fire department. Two, I did have to call the police in order to calm down the meeting. So it is a function that we do in order to help manage those E&Ns so that everybody can understand what's being presented because it's not uncommon for people to want to slow down a project, and they're going to make sure that nothing moves and the disruption is pretty heavy. We want to remove that disruption so that the meeting can continue. But in terms of who owns the E&N, the E&N is ordinance-driven, but it is run by the applicant since we have no application in place.

Is it required for the E&N to be recorded? And if so, is that recording available to the public? Who ultimately owns that recording, and is it posted anywhere?

As a policy, we do require the applicant to record the meeting, and we have them give us a copy of that recording. And for one of the main reasons, well, there's two main reasons. One, if somebody wants a copy of that, we can give it to them through an IPRA request. And I don't really, if they want a copy and I have it, I just release it. I don't wait for the IPRA. Two, if that staff was not going to be the case manager because you don't know when that E&N is going to come in. It can come in three months from now, two months from now, but something that was already being looked at by that staff member is coming in and now they're overloaded. I have to shift that case over to another senior planner, and it's a lot easier for that senior planner to go and look at that video to understand exactly what the dynamics of that E&N was.

So it sounds like the recording of the E&N is not treated similarly to city meetings where the recording is automatically accessible to the public. An individual would need to reach out specifically to request the recording.

Right. And that's one of the reasons we have Zoom. It's because there's not too many venues out there that are going to handle 100 people, 200 people. Right? Because it may be a very controversial case. But in a Zoom platform, the applicant is required to have a professional account with Zoom so that they can handle more than 100 people. That was one of the reasons, and that proved significantly for Old Pecos Trail. They had three E&Ns because the first E&N, I didn't do the first one, but the first E&N, they only had up to 100 people. And that wasn't discovered, but it was so controversial that they couldn't get the information out. So they required a second E&N is when I took over. That second E&N, I found out that they were cycling people in and out because they didn't have capacity. And I required them to do a third E&N and told them that they're going to have to have capacity or they're just going to continue to do those E&Ns until everybody who wanted to attend could attend. So that's the benefit of Zoom is you can be across the street or across town and attend a meeting that you're interested in, without having to find parking, without having to drive late at night. It just works better for all of us. So that's one of the things that we kept as a result of the COVID changes because it worked. We have more participation via Zoom than we ever did in person.

But if you missed that E&N, you would have to reach out to a member of staff in order to get access to that recording? It's not automatically uploaded.

We don't upload, but we just keep them. And it's not a requirement by ordinance. It's a policy. Every once in a while, there are meetings that the recording didn't start, and I can't tell them that they have to do it over again because it's not a code requirement.

Sure. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Esquibel, again, I'm going to invoke the fact that I knew, and I'm trying to understand the process. So I appreciate a little grace here. You described the pre-application process. Is that similar to what Mr. Pacheco was describing earlier about discovery, about existing conditions, or would that discovery for his application happen later on when they get into the traffic?

So a pre-application and the traffic, you call that the scoping meeting. So they're independent. They can run simultaneously. You can have a scoping meeting long before you have a pre-app because many applicants are going to want to start early enough to start gathering that data. So when they hit that pre-application, they have additional information that they can ask. And Mr. Pacheco is at those pre-apps, and he's able to provide help. So they're not a requirement that they be done at the same time.

Thank you. The other question that I have, and I am struggling with how to describe this, I've had, again, the unfortunate pleasure of sitting through some historic board applications, so it doesn't apply to this commission here. But having just watched your description of the process and the amount of review and the amount of people involved, I still am surprised that we would get to a situation where even after the application is completed and submitted for approval, there is a debate about how the height is calculated. So I don't know if there's things that are must be a factor of the way the code is written or some debate, but I would just imagine that with the case manager and the amount of review that's put on, they would have caught some strange calculation if, in fact, we're trying to be true to Chapter 14. Can you talk about that at all?

So the historic district's height is based on their section of the code, which is an historic value that they have to maintain. Chapter 14, outside of the historic district, we have set values. So there's no interpretation of height. It is spelled out and explicit. It tells us what the maximum height is that can occur for every district from an R-1 district to a C-2 district to a mixed-use district and SC district. All of those heights are built into tables within Chapter 14 that the applicant is aware of, that the staff is aware of, so they're static. There is no interpretation of height. Where interpretation of height comes is when you're building on a slope, and you have to read that interpretation as to how to calculate the height to maintain those charted values up against the slope, which in reality forces you to stare that building in order to meet those height requirements as you push that element up plus four feet. So it gives some recognition to the fact that you're going to have some difficulties on a slope as opposed to on a flat surface.

Thank you. And I think the last question that I have, and this is similar to what I had asked Mr. Pacheco. Given the process that you outlined and the amount of review and the detail that's put forward before the application gets to this commission, how often is it and what is acceptable for changes to occur after our approval?

Chapter 14 allows the land use director to make modifications to development plans, subdivisions, special use permits, and master plans. Those modifications can be qualitative or quantitative. What those modifications can't approve are increases in density. But if changes were to occur to move buildings around, change certain architecture features, a request for a decrease in parking, other elements that are well within her authority granted to her under the ordinance, she can make those modifications. It is up to the land use director to determine whether she feels it's a minor modification or something that has to go back through the process and go back to the commission for review and approval. That is her decision.

Thank you. That's all the questions that I have.

Other questions? Yes, sir.

Mr. Esquibel, so a developer decides they're going to take on a project, and they come in and they schedule a pre-app meeting with you. From the time that they decide to the pre-app, what's the time frame on that? Is there a certain set of dates or is it just this is how busy we are, we'll get to you?

I didn't understand your question.

You said that you get your team together for a pre-app. Right? So from the time they walk in the door, what's your goal to have this pre-app? Is there, do you have something set out or is it just we're busy and here's how the list looks?

Unfortunately, and it happens a lot more often than you would think, is you're going to get an applicant with a consultant, and they're going to request a pre-application. And then after that, we never see them again.

Just open it. Sometimes we get a pre-app, and it'll take six months, eight months before they come back and see us again. We have had some that have gone as long as a year. But on your side, we do not, we're not, we won't manage that. We're not going to force them to put on once they hit the pre-app. No. I guess let me try and restate the question. So a developer wants to do a project, and they notify you or whoever they have to notify, and you get your team together for a pre-application conference. In a perfect world, what's the time schedule from their first contact with you to that pre-application on your side? Not on their side. If they're ready to go, what's your timeline on that?

So we do pre-apps on Thursdays, and we only put two applications on that Thursday pre-app day. That gives us an hour and a half per applicant for us to answer those questions. But we don't do them every Thursday. I believe we do them every other Thursday. So that's how that is managed. So when we get an application, the first thing that comes in is a form, tells us what's going on, tells us what they're doing, gives us a synopsis, gives me legal out of record, and I get some sort of site plan, very, very preliminary draft, something that tells us what's going on. Once I deem that application complete, Geraldine will then schedule it on the appropriate Thursday where there's a slot. They'll coordinate with the applicant to identify which timeframe is available and which one they want. If there's only one timeframe, then they'll ask them. If they say yes, then they'll schedule them in on that pre-app date.

Okay. So in a perfect world, you could be together two weeks, but it's probably more like four or six weeks to get your pre-app. No. If your application is complete when it comes in, it'll get shipped that day to Geraldine to process. And it could take a couple weeks. If that next Thursday, that next pre-app Thursday is full, you'll have to go on to the next one. So it could take some time if they're all full. I would say that happens on occasion, but overall, we tend to get everybody in.

Okay. And then on your slide 14, you said that's where, or 14 out of 15, you said that's where it starts to stall. In a perfect world, what timeframe? I'm just trying to wrap my head around from pre-app ENN to that it may stall because people are needing to adjust things. What's that timeframe look like?

Well, again, I couldn't tell you. In a perfect world, from the pre-app, you set your time. You submit your application the very next day for an ENN. That ENN is going to run you 15 days notice and 10 days to hold before you submit an application. So you got 25 days from submitting your ENN, getting your ENN accepted. You have 25 days before you can submit an application. Then we have submittal deadlines. So if you're watching that chart that I put up on the screen, it's going to tell you when that next submittal deadline is. You submit your application on that submittal deadline. If your application is complete, it goes back to Geraldine. You get billed. Once we receive payment, that case is then assigned to a case planner. That case planner then starts the process of meeting that schedule as you move along that chart. So in a perfect world, to get your application in, you're looking at pre-app, let's say, two weeks, a week. Well, two weeks depending on when you're smart. Let's be conservative. Let's say two weeks plus 25 days, and then your complete application is submitted on a submittal deadline. And then you have basically a three-week review with the DRT, and then it's a back and forth between what the DRT wants changes of, and then that's where it stalls. It's going to stall at the applicant when they have to make changes because every applicant is different. Some applicants have really strong development teams, and they can get those changes in in a week. Some developers, some applicants don't have what others do, and it could take them months before they can complete that repackaging of material with the comments before they submit it to us. And some applications won't get to the Planning Commission for a year because of that, because we just don't have control over that.

And at what point do you put a case number on these, or at what point do they get issued a case number?

When you pay the bill.

When you pay your bill. Okay. But there's more than one bill. Which bill?

The first initial application submittal, you're going to get billed. You'll get a case number.

And the reason for my question, if I'm not mistaken, minutes were approved last commission meeting for 2024. So those minutes are something that started in 2024 and finally got done now in 2026. Is that correct?

That's right. I still have cases in file that are 2024. In fact, I've called the applicant on some of these, and I said, "Look, we're shelving this. We're going to consider it abandoned." And we do. And then there's a fight to get it back, to keep it back. They still don't want to submit anything, so we will consider it abandoned. They'll have to start over. If there's movement, it just keeps going through until it's done. And in that particular case, it took two plus years to get that done. Yep. It still hasn't come in. Yeah.

Okay. That's all my questions. Thank you. The pre-application and then the development plan is the first stage or three stages to get a permit. Am I correct?

Right. So you have to set it out. You have pre-app, ENN, application, Planning Commission, permit.

But so when the request for a permit comes to us, and that has, they're asking for variances, they're asking for that is the penultimate, that's when those decisions are made. But the development plan has been approved prior. That it's a separate approval. Is it not?

That's right. Because the permit is a separate permit process, but your approval is the meat and potatoes that allows them to get to that building permit process. If you don't get that approval, you're not moving forward.

So, okay. So my then my question is, where is the, when the staff brings us something that they say has met the requirements, and then you said we can move it or deny it. My question is, what are the, and we'll do the permit stuff in another time, I assume, but I think that what is the basis in your mind for the use of the interpretation of the term quasi-judicial?

I'm going to have to pass that on to our attorney.

I'm just, it's never been clear to me. We are told we are quasi-judicial. At the same time, we have other people saying staff recommends something and it meets the code and you turn it down, we can be subject to a lawsuit. Now my view of that is if we're doing our job the way we think it ought to be done, that's part of the process. But are there particular parts of the decision of the development plan or the finalized request for the permit, where, like, a variance can be turned down? I mean, are there some areas where the quasi-judicial role of this commission is more clearly defined in other areas where it doesn't exist?

So the Planning Commission works in both a quasi-judicial and a policymaking capacity. So quasi-judicial functions are happening when you're determining the individual applications and making a ruling on those. Policymaking is less common for you all. That would be recommendations with regards to the general plan, not specific to individuals. But when you're deciding an application, with the case planner presenting and everything that's been described, that is a quasi-judicial function.

So the use of discretion on the part of commission members in voting for or against a development plan or, I assume, a permit at the final stage, is entirely up to their sense of the appropriateness of the proposal.

So you are still restricted by what's in code. So in the same way that a judge is restricted by what the law is, they can't, they do have discretion within the law, but there are certain things that they have more or less discretion on. So the decision that you're making, you can have discretion in certain areas of the decision, which will be subject to code, like whether something is in the public interest. But there are other things that are that you don't have as much discretion on, like, go ahead.

It would be very helpful to me. I can't speak for the other members. If we could know what our area is, like, is it in the public interest? What are the areas where we have expressed judicial responsibilities, and what are the other areas where it is more constrained or confined because it's defined by code? That would be very helpful.

Yes, absolutely. And that's exactly what we discussed with Chair Clow at the last minute commission hearing was trying to incorporate that into future presentations as to for specific decisions that the commission is making where you do have discretion. Because, again, even though I use public interest as an example, we do have guidelines for what is in the public interest that should be considered. Otherwise, the commission can be challenged as acting in an arbitrary and capricious way, which gets into a whole another area of law. But, yes, I would be happy to present on those items at a future meeting.

You guys have a standardized issue of what you deem public interest. I think Dan might be able to speak to this. We were discussing this recently, and he's very familiar with this.

So public interest is not defined in Chapter 14, not really defined in the general plan. Public interest is broader than a single neighborhood association as opposed to public interest for the city. So when the governing body adopts, and this is what we have generated over the course of time as our process and consistency of review, as the City Council adopts resolutions and ordinances, those go through a public review process. The community is involved in whether, you know, bits and pieces of that so that it becomes the interest of the public. So when those ordinances are adopted, we use those ordinances as our mechanism of meeting the public interest, being minimum standards for health, safety, and welfare. So those are the ordinances and the rules and regulations that sort of guide us and bind us to identify what that public interest is. Because otherwise, we're going on emotions. Right? People who, I think this is too high for this area. I think this color shouldn't be approved. I think that this use is inappropriate for this location. Well, it's already been established and well established within those policies and within those ordinances as to what is and isn't allowed within any given area or zoning. And we're going to follow those because that was deemed to be what we consider the public interest that was adopted for the City of Santa Fe or that area. I hope that answers it.

Very, very much so. Thanks, Dan. Thank you.

In this whole process, I mean, we've sat up here, Brian, you're a returner as far as that goes. Is there anything that you guys see as staff where you feel like you could create efficiency within the process? Something, not to say to push something down somebody's throat, but just create a timeline as Brian was alluding to that creates the general public understanding, the developers' understanding. The city actually does undertake a lot. Is there anything within the process itself that you see that could be more efficient for this?

Well, that's a very good question, and it's a whole lot harder to answer.

Taking a look at what was specified for a development, right? When you look at a development, let's see if we can go back to the presentation here. Can you put me back up on the presentation, Mike? I am still, oh, am I not sharing? Okay, there we go. The host has asked you to start the video. I don't know if that is okay.

So let's take a look at, we're going to go to, just going to go to a couple sections. So let's take a look at this. The ordinance requires us to review for certain things. In this, for this development to the site, I have to look at modifications to the site, which include the location of existing new structures, existing and new structures. So that means that if there's anything on the site that they're going to maintain, I need to, I need to incorporate that review. Then we're going to have new structures. Those new structures have to meet elements of a certain chapter section of Chapter 14. Then they have a laundry list of things to review. You have grading. All of those grading plans have to be reviewed by an engineer so that we don't flood. Our engineers also the FEMA administrator for the City of Santa Fe. We have to follow certain policies or anybody with flood insurance is going to not have flood insurance. You have landscaping requirements, lighting requirements, pedestrian vehicular circulation. All of those things have real legitimate fundamental needs for health, safety, and welfare. If they're not looked at, if you strip some of those away, then when you start growing, when you start adding more and more buildings, more and more uses, more and more dwellings, but you've stripped some of these elements away, eventually, you're going to have something that you wish you didn't have because you weren't looking at them in the beginning.

So the planning side of that says, we want to take a look at what is going to happen at the worst-case scenario so that we can mitigate those issues so that as we grow this area, everything is going to fit into place, and everybody's going to be able to live under the conditions that were approved to meet those minimum standards for health, safety, and welfare, especially if, for instance, if we strip lighting out, we didn't have to do a photometric analysis. Then you're going to have applicants who are going to be able to put those bright lights, and they're going to shine anywhere they want. And one could be right into your bedroom. Or maybe as you get more and more and more out there, you lose complete sight of the stars. Your fundamental well-being is going to be affected over time. So if you're going to reduce a review process and the elements of that review, you're going to have to pick and choose which ones are unimportant not to look at in order to bring that down to something more efficient.

The development community is always looking to cut corners. Their argument is, if we're just going to pass that on to the consumer, the more expensive you make it for me, the more expensive we make it for the consumer. But if you were to cut those costs, I don't think that the costs are going to be, are going to be shown at that consumer level. That just becomes a greater profit for the developer, right? They have to be really generous to say, yeah, we're probably going to give those millions of dollars onto the community so that they can, they can buy out my subdivision. I don't see that ever happening. The trickle-down effect has never actually worked, and it doesn't work for development because I've never seen it happen in my time of 30 years of review. Once in a while, but not really.

So, ultimately, there's been talk, and the Planning Commission was here during that discussion of a development plan light. I don't know what that is. Because if you're not looking at that big package, then what is it that you're approving? And then what happens to the balance of the material that still needs to be looked at, right? You're going to cut corners in the initial review, but is the Planning Commission going to give a 100% review and approval over a development plan that they didn't see? And how is that going to affect other departments who have other chapters that are going to be bound by that decision? And secondly, how is the community going to fit into that? If everybody became siloed and every application has to go to every department independently and on different time frames, then how does the community understand where to go to look at that information? It's not. We're not collecting it. We're just collecting a site plan, really. We're going to review it against the design standards for a site plan. But the balance of that information is going to be left up to you to, who, where did it go? Who had to see it? When did they submit? Do I have to put a tickler file every week to find out when that application is going to come in? And then, then you have appeal processes. For the site plan, if it's a development plan, you have 30 days. Well, if the applicant comes in and submits their water 60 days after that and their traffic analysis 80 days after that, there's no appeal there, right? Because you've already approved this development plan light. We're not going to go back and unwrap it and say, oh, because there was an issue here at this department. Now it's going to affect this. It doesn't work that way.

So I don't know how to, how to make it more efficient for developers given the complexity of ordinance-driven criteria that are currently in Chapter 14 today. In fact, I was put on a building permanent development review task force in 2025, 2026 by Mayor Delgado because it was the same issue then as it is today. And we came up with suggestions and solutions, and some of those were implemented. But as ordinances get brought, as the council adopts more and more ordinances, you have to adjust those time frames, and you have to make processes in order to address those review criteria. So I don't know how that would work. I don't know how to reduce that.

What we have done in order to reduce the process, I'll tell you. We have a senior planner in our office, Claudia. You've seen her make presentations. She's very efficient with doing DWG files. And what she did is she took my Photoshop drawings. She converted those Photoshop drawings to AutoCAD drawings. And then on her own, she went to every city department, every DRT member that you saw on this list. And she aggregated all of their criteria, their checklists, what they want to see on the plans, what they, what they need to see in order to expedite that review. Because currently, when applications come in, their drafting or engineer or surveyor, they're going to put things where they think they want it because it makes sense to them. But when you give it to those DRT members, you got 200 pages of information that's going back to you on sheets this big. You're going looking for your material that could be put anywhere. So what we've done now is we've created these DWG files and these templates, Claudia did. And it allows the applicant now to know where to put the information for each and every department. So that actually speeds up their review time because they know where to go. They know what to review. And the material that they're asking for is on the template so that they can design it. That reduces that ping-pong effect dramatically.

The second thing we did is we cut out the second review at the building permit. We used to collect, for commercial development, you usually have six sets of plans, and those, those, you've seen those plans. They're tree trunks. You have six of those. That was $10,000 worth of printing, right? What we've done is we've taken the approvals that have been handed here, put into Mylar, recorded in the clerk's office, and now it's a PDF. That PDF gets uploaded into our database, and they fill out a form. They bring information in such as a letter for prairie dogs, a letter if they have affordable housing. They have other things, but they're minor, right? And it's only one additional set, which is the set that's perforated that goes to the site so that when the inspection team goes out there, there is a set there that they can do those inspections against. That has also dramatically reduced a lot of time because that old process took six months, eight months because we had to send it back out, and that goes back and forth to DRT members and applicants. Now we make sure that everything is correct and finalized before we, before we actually record it so that building permit can be issued out that horizontal probably the next day it comes in as long as they have their financial guarantee.

So between that efficiency, Heather has brought us so far beyond our horse and buggy process that once we get into our digital platform, which is still pushing forward and pushing forward very strongly, that's going to also bring down that time frame, because now people won't have to submit an application via email. Now they're going to submit an upload that application automatically, which is going to be automatically distributed to where, where it goes so that you reduce that, those admit, that administrative time frame in order to achieve a better efficiency. But it's not compromising the quality of the review that's going in. It's just taking those administrative processes and bringing us from the horse and buggy to more of a motorized vehicle that gets us from work to get us to our destination quicker.

I would be happy to include that in a future presentation. I still need to think through this, but my initial thoughts had been presentations on the various types of decisions that the Planning Commission makes, like variances, rezonings, et cetera, and then talking about each of those individually and where the discretion might lie or where it does not, but just so that we're not trying to talk about all the decisions that you're making all at once. But, again, at the next Planning Commission hearing, I'll focus on the procedural guidelines. And so then this discretion conversation will be at a future one after that.

Chair Smith, could you speak into the microphone? Thank you. As long as there's a structure to it, so we have something we can organize around.