Planning Commission Meeting Thu, Sep 4, 2025 · Planning Commission https://santafeminutes.space/meeting/629 == Executive Summary == The Planning Commission meeting addressed several key items, including the approval of the agenda with two postponements, the approval of past meeting minutes, and the unanimous approval of findings of fact and conclusions of law for six cases. A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to a variance request for an addition to a home at 195 Brownell Holland Road, which was approved unanimously after staff confirmed its alignment with variance criteria and the intent of the escarpment overlay district. The commission also heard extensive discussion and public comment regarding a proposed 46-unit all-suite hotel at the former Alvord School site (1625 Po de Peralta). While the project received support for adhering to the master plan and addressing a vacant property, numerous public comments raised concerns about traffic, worker parking, the preservation of historical murals, and the broader impact of another boutique hotel on Santa Fe's housing crisis and community character. Despite these concerns, the development plan for the hotel was ultimately approved with a 4-0 vote, with one commissioner recusing themselves due to a conflict of interest. Towards the end of the meeting, staff announced a visioning session for the General Plan update and discussed plans for commissioner education, including an Open Meeting Act training and participation in a "Livability Series" on housing and sustainable communities. New staff members were also introduced. == Key Decisions == - Approved the agenda with two postponements (Case 2024-9320-7205 Plaza Control Development Plan and Case 2024-9461-1372 Boland Lane, 2743 Boiling Circle, and 2745 Boiling Circle Rezoning) to the October 2nd Planning Commission meeting. - Approved the June 5th, 2025, meeting minutes. - Approved findings of fact and conclusions of law for six cases: 2025-107600 St. Michael's Drive Master Plan Amendment, 2025-10189, 4157 and 4161 Walking Rain Road Development Plan Amendment, 2025-100037, 1111 Okate Road, 2024-8901, 2768 AUA Rezoning, 2024-8902, 2768 AUA Master Plan, and 2025-10172, 4161 Walking Rain Road Special Use Permit. - Approved the variance request for 195 Brunell Holland (Case 2025-10781) for an addition to a single-family dwelling, subject to conditions of approval and technical corrections. - Approved the development plan for Case 2024-8195 at 1625 Po de Peralta (all-suite hotel), with outlined conditions and technical corrections. == Motions & Votes == - Motion to approve the agenda — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve the June 5th, 2025, minutes — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Case 2025-107600 St. Michael's Drive Master Plan Amendment — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Case 2025-10189, 4157 and 4161 Walking Rain Road Development Plan Amendment — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Case 2025-100037, 1111 Okate Road — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Case 2024-8901, 2768 AUA Rezoning — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Case 2024-8902, 2768 AUA Master Plan — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Case 2025-10172, 4161 Walking Rain Road Special Use Permit — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve Case 2025-10781, the variance request for 195 Brunell Holland — Passed unanimously (5-0). - Motion to approve the development plan for Case 2024-8195 at 1625 Po de Peralta — Passed 4-0 (Commissioner Rein, Commissioner Capen, Commissioner Smith, Commissioner McGee voted "Yes"). == Public Comment == Public comments were primarily focused on the proposed hotel development at the former Alvord School site. Themes included strong support for preserving the historical murals on the property, with suggestions for faithful recreation or incorporation into a conservatory concept. Concerns were raised about the impact of another boutique hotel on Santa Fe's housing crisis, the potential for increased traffic and inadequate employee parking in the Railyard district, and the general preservation of Santa Fe's unique character against over-development. Some residents expressed disappointment that the site was not being used for affordable housing and questioned the project's benefit to the local community. There was also discussion about pedestrian safety at intersections and the need for policy mechanisms for residents to benefit from tourism revenue. == Topics == - Escarpment Overlay District - Development Plan Approval - General Plan Update - Traffic and Pedestrian Safety - Planning Commission Procedures - New Staff Introductions - Community Engagement - Street Design Program == Full Transcript == Chair Clow, thanks for your patience and everyone here and hopefully those online. I think we've got it sorted, so we can officially start the meeting. Then I'd like to make a little announcement just clarifying why we're delayed and once we're live on YouTube. So, Michael, we can start the YouTube stream when you're ready. We will call the September 4th, 2025, regular meeting of the Planning Commission into session. Maggie, do you have something? Yes, sure. I just wanted to double-check that we are streaming on YouTube right now from the IT. Okay, thank you. Yes, thank you, Chair Clow. I'm sorry for the delay. When we arrived at 6:00, we saw that the Zoom link that was posted on the agenda on Civic Clerk was inaccurate and wasn't functioning. So, we were able to update that and repost it. So, if there's anyone who's watching on YouTube or trying to get into the Zoom option for the meeting this evening, it is up on the agenda and live. So, thank you. Thank you. So, the first matter is the Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Smith, could you lead that? We have a roll call, please. I will start the roll call. Chair Clow, present. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner McGee. Here. Commissioner Miranda. Here. Commissioner Reland. Here. Commissioner Embry. Commissioner Capen. Here. Commissioner McReynolds. Commissioner Barber. Thank you. The next is the approval of the agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda from staff or from commissioners? Madam Chair, members of the commission, there is one agenda item. We'll be looking at postponing case number 2024-9320-7205 Plaza Control Development Plan. The reason for the postponement is due to an incomplete notice for public hearings. We're also postponing case 2024-9461-1372 Boland Lane, 2743 Boiling Circle, and 2745 Boiling Circle Rezoning. The reason for the postponement on that one is the application was incomplete for the Planning Commission type that was being proposed for tonight. Both cases were postponing to the October Planning Commission meeting. That's October 2nd, correct? That is October 2nd. Okay. Any other changes to the agenda? Madam Chair? No. Okay. If not, can we have a motion with the notation of the two postponements? Motion to approve as amended by staff. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Miranda. Yes. Commissioner Reland. Yes. Commissioner Cid. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. Thank you. We have nothing on the consent agenda, so we'll move past that. The approval of minutes. The July 17th minutes were not posted. Is that correct? The last I looked, I had. Madam Chair, I believe that they are on the agenda, but we are going to have to postpone those to the October meeting since we did not make that 72-hour meeting mark to meet the Open Meetings Act. But we have the June 5th, 2025, minutes. That is correct. Okay. Any changes to those minutes by staff or the commissioners? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Second. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Miranda. Yes. Commissioner Reland. Yes. Commissioner Gabin. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. Thank you. Next, we'll move to approval of findings of facts and conclusions of law. We have six of those. The first one is case number 2025-107600 St. Michael's Drive Master Plan Amendment. Any changes to those findings and conclusions by staff or commissioners? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve case 2025-1070600 St. Michael's Drive Master Plan Amendment. Second. Second. Commissioner Caven. Yes. Commissioner Veland. Yes. Commissioner Mirando. Yes. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. Thank you. The next one, our findings and conclusions in case number 2025-10189, 4157 and 4161 Walking Rain Road Development Plan Amendment. Any changes to those findings and conclusions by staff or commissioners? Not entertain a motion. Motion to approve the effects, findings, and conclusions of case 2025-10189, 4157 and 4161 Walking Rain Road Development Plan Amendment. Second. Second. Commissioner Veland. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner Mirando. Yes. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Capen. Yes. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. Thank you. Next, findings and conclusions that need to be approved are case number 2025-100037, which is 1111 Okate Road. I don't remember what that was about, but in any event, are there any changes to those findings and conclusions? Madam Chair, no. I did read them, though. I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the findings and conclusions for case 2025-100037, 1111 Okate Road. Second. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Miranda. Yes. Commissioner Reeland. Yes. Commissioner Capen. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. The next one is case number 2024-8901, 2768. We're free rezoning findings of facts and conclusions of law. Any changes by staff or commissioner? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the findings and conclusions for case 2024-8901 for 2768 AUA Rezoning. Second. Commissioner Morando. Yes. Commissioner Reland. Yes. Commissioner Capen. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. Thank you. Next is approval of findings of fact and conclusions of law in case number 2024-8902, 2768 Were Free Master Plan. Any changes to those by staff or commission? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the findings and conclusions for case 2024-8902, 2768 AUA Master Plan. Second. Commissioner Reland. Yes. Commissioner Capen. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Miranda. Yes. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. Thank you. And finally, findings and conclusions for case number 2025-10172, 4161 Walking Rain Road Special Use Permit. Any changes to those findings and conclusions by staff or the commission? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Is there a reason it's blue? Madam Chair, no. Motion to approve the findings and conclusions for case 2025-10172, 4161 Walking Rain Road Special Use Permit. Second. Commissioner Kin. Yes. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Commissioner Miranda. Yes. Commissioner Veland. Yes. Madam Chair, the motion has passed. Thank you. Next, we'll move on to new business. We'll call case number 2024-9461, which, I'm sorry, you're right. We'll call case number 2025-10781, 195 Brownell Holland Road Variance Request. Good evening, and commissioners. I'm here to present staff's finding on case number 2025-10781, the variance from 145.6. Next. Oh, wow, that's a lot better. Should I start over? Okay. I'm here to present staff's findings on case number 2025-10781, a variance from 145.6 E1 to build an addition to the home at 195 Brownell Holland Road. My name is Alexa Hemple, and I'm a Senior Planner for the Land Use Department and the case planner for this project. The agent is Paulo Santo Designs, and the applicants are Shauna Davenport and Brian Sharon. So, first, I'm going to just go over a brief overview of the project. So, like I said, the applicant is requesting a variance from 145.6D1 to put an addition of two portals, a mudroom, laundry room, and dining room to the home at 195 Brownell Holland Road atop existing patios. The section of code that they're seeking a variance from states that for all lots subdivided or resubdivided after February 26, 1992, development in the ridgetop subdistrict of the escarpment overlay district other than driveway access and utilities is prohibited. The existing home is legal non-conforming within the escarpment ridgetop overlay because the home was built in 1958. However, the lot was created through a lot split in 2009, which is why they're requesting a variance from this specific section of the code, which references lots created after 1992. The property is zoned R1 and is 5.079 acres, and the previous homeowner was unanimously approved for a variance of a 300-foot addition to the attached garage in 2016 through case number 2016-17. So, the Planning Commission is the decision-making body for variances in the escarpment overlay district for 145.6K, which grants the Planning Commission the following authorities: Where the Planning Commission finds that extraordinary hardship may result from strict compliance with these regulations, it may vary the regulations so that substantial justice may be done and the public interest secured, provided that such variation will not have the effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of these regulations. And in granting variances or modifications, the Planning Commission may require such conditions as will in its judgment assure substantially the objectives of the standards or requirements so varied or modified. So, like I said, this property is zoned R1. You can see that on the image on the left of this slide. The future land use of this property is shown in the middle of the slide. The majority of it is R1, and the light yellow towards the north side of the property is R1 through three. And then finally, the image on the right is that red pin in the top right is the location of the house just to show context of where the home is in regards to the city. So, we're looking at the northeast side of the city. So, this is the site plan for this home. The left image is the current home, and the green line that goes through it is the escarpment ridgetop overlay. You can see that it cuts through their home. The right image is the proposed additions. So, all proposed additions are on top of existing flagstone patios. The blue squares on this photo are the proposed portals. And then the red object, red shape, is the mudroom, laundry room, and dining room addition. The total roofed area to be added with this addition is 806 square feet, and 440 of that is within the ridgetop, which is shown in the yellow shaded areas on that image. So, here are some photos of the home as it currently stands. The image on the left is the south side of the home as seen from entering the driveway off of Brunell Holland Road. This facade will remain unchanged. The image on the right is the northeast side of the home. There is a portal proposed atop that walled patio that you see on the left side of that image. Then moving to the northwest side of the home. This is where the bulk of the additions are proposed. This area will house the mud and laundry room and the dining room additions, as well as an additional portal. Now, you may notice that this home has blue accent colors. These accent colors are not typically allowed in the escarpment. However, the applicant was able to prove that this color existed prior to the establishment of the escarpment code, making it legal non-conforming. Staff did not impose any conditions of approval to alter the existing blue facades. However, staff did impose a condition to not allow the applicant to add any additional blue color with this addition. The Planning Commission may impose additional conditions onto this development if they choose. Then next, here are the architectural elevations. This is the north side of the home where the changes would occur. You can see the top image is the existing elevation, and the bottom image is the proposed elevation. So, in the red square areas are the changes. On the left side is the portal, and then on the right side is the portal as well, and the dining room, laundry room, and mudroom. These proposed additions will meet all dimensional standards required for height, lot coverage, setbacks, and lot size within R1 zoning, as well as the escarpment ridgetop overlay. And because the addition exceeds 500 square feet of roofed area, the applicant must also comply with fire prevention codes and has conditions of approval to do so. Now, I'd like to describe the escarpment overlay district intent since the Planning Commission's authority, as stated a few slides back, granting variances to this code includes not nullifying the intent and purposes of these regulations. Specifically, I'm going to highlight sections C and E of this intent. First, section E of the escarpment overlay intent states that the interest and welfare of the people of the city is to restrict development in the escarpment overlay district to preserve the aesthetic beauty and natural environment of the ridgetop areas of the foothills and to protect the mountain views and scenic vistas from the city to the extent possible. The leftmost photo in this slide was taken along Sierra del Norte Road looking north from the city. 195 Brunell Holland is not visible from this road as it exists behind the residence at 190 Brunell Holland, which is what that arrow is pointing to in that image. The middle and right photos were both taken along Bishop's Lodge Road looking south towards the property. The middle photo is as seen from the road, and then the right photo is zoomed in. The addition is right of the, the majority of the addition area is right of the blue facade, which is pointed to with that yellow arrow. Additionally, this addition as proposed will limit disturbance of the natural environment on and around the ridgetop since it is within the previously disturbed areas that are currently patios. Next, section C of the intent states that lands within the escarpment overlay district are environmentally sensitive due to the presence of steep slopes, erosion problems, drainage problems, and other environmental attributes. This property is majority 20% or greater slopes going downhill towards the north of the property. You can see that with the contours on the right image. These are two-foot contours. Only a small area of land is less than 10% slopes, which is where the house is currently situated and outlined in purple on that image. Again, the addition will be located atop existing patios to preserve the native vegetation and slopes on the property. And then the image on the left of this slide is taken standing on the patio looking to the north side of the property, just to show the existing vegetation that is behind the home that would be preserved with the addition in this location. To avoid the need for variance, two alternatives were considered by the applicant and staff but were determined infeasible. First was building onto the living room window facade, as that small chunk of the house exists outside of the ridgetop overlay. The yellow square in this image is the same size as the proposed addition, excluding the portals, that's put on top of the window facade. This is infeasible because the New Mexico Environment Department requires that buildings be a minimum of 8 feet from septic leach fields, and this design would land on top of the septic leach field, which is shown on the top of that image there. NMEED also submitted a letter with the applicant's application for this, stating that the location of the septic field as is, is the most feasible for maintenance, and that altering its location would be difficult and would disturb the natural mountainside. An alternative design of this to not encroach into the septic leach field would mean that the addition would have to be limited to six feet extended off of the house. This is estimated with the yellow rectangle with the lines going through it. This design would not fit the intended uses of the addition as planned. Both of these options also oppose the intent of preserving existing native vegetation as shown on the previous slide. The second alternative considered was building the addition as a separate structure outside of the ridgetop. This design would mean building behind the home, disturbing 20 to 30% or greater slopes, as well as existing vegetation. Additionally, the applicant stated that having a separate structure behind the home for a mud, laundry, and dining room would not meet their desired needs. This proposal also includes the removal and thinning of some significant trees that abut the existing patio shown in this image. The applicant understands that replacement trees and a landscaping plan will be required prior to permitting, and staff did not impose or require the submittal of grading and drainage or structural plans for the purposes of this variance. However, those would be required for building permitting. An ENN was not required for this application per 143-3.1 F2A 7, not good at Roman numerals, as ENNs are required for variances except those requesting construction or modification to an individual single-family dwelling. The applicant has complied with 14 3.1HH notice requirements for public hearing. Next, I'll go over the variance approval criteria. Staff determined that the applicant has satisfied the variance approval criteria. Criterion one calls for unusual physical characteristics that distinguish the land or structure from others in the vicinity. Staff found that this home has unusual physical characteristics due to the location of the existing septic leach field, its unique position behind other homes that make it not visible from the city to the south, and the footprint of the proposed addition being within previously disturbed areas. Criterion two describes that doing the addition outside of the ridgetop must be infeasible. Staff found that the location of the septic leach field and the intent of the escarpment code to limit destruction of the natural landscape make it infeasible to complete this addition outside of the ridgetop. Criterion three describes that the intensity of the development shall not exceed others. Staff found that the intensity of this development with the addition is limited due to the nature of it being attached to the existing structure and atop existing disturbed areas, and its lack of impact on traffic and noise for the vicinity. Additionally, the proposed uses are all permitted in R1 zoning, and the home will remain as a home and be one of the smallest in the vicinity. Criterion four ensures that the variance must be reasonable and in line with the various intents and purposes. The proposed additions as designed are in a manner to improve functionality of the home in a way that limits disturbance of natural areas, complying with the intent of the escarpment code in Chapter 14, as well as the general plan theme on sustainable growth. And then criterion five, the last one here, ensures that the variance is not contrary to public interest. And staff found that this addition would seek to improve the functionality of the home in a minimally visible way to not impact public interest. Given that, staff is recommending the Planning Commission approve case number 202510781, 195 Brownell Holland variance request, subject to the conditions of approval and technical corrections outlined in Attachment A of the staff report. One motion will be required for this case. Either approve case number 202510781, 195 Brownell Holland variance request, subject to the conditions of approval and technical corrections listed in Attachment A, or deny case number 202510781, 195 Brunell Holland variance request. Thank you, and I will stand for questions. Thank you. Are there any clarifying questions from any member of the commission? Commissioner Wyland. Hi. So, in your case, you guys brought up on numerous occasions that the septic system to not be moved or the difficulty in moving it in the New Mexico Environment Department's analogy of the property was an advanced treatment system included in that analysis because there was no mention of it in the report. I am unsure. I would have to defer to the applicant for that. Okay. Any other questions? If not, we'll hear from the applicant. Thank you. Sandra Odems. I'm an architect with Palisanto Design. You have to speak into the mic for us. Okay. Get your name and address for the record. Sandra Odems. Raise your right hand. You swear and affirm that the statements you're about to are true and do this under the pains of penalty. I do. Also, please state your address for the record. Address is 46 Kais San Martin. Thank you. Go ahead. Proceed. Please state your name and address for the record. Raise your right hand. Mark Georgetti. Mark Georgetti. I reside at 36 Tano Escandido in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Do you swear and affirm that the statements you're about to make are true and correct and do this under the pains of penalty? I do. Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Ryland, your question about the septic system, an advanced treatment system was not considered. There was a new septic system put in not very long ago. So, this is fairly new, and so they did not look into replacing the entire system with an advanced treatment system. Okay, sure. You're welcome. Happy with what staff did. We're actually very happy with what staff did, and we'd like to thank Alexa and everybody for working really hard and doing a good job and being very thorough. So, we don't have anything additional to add, but we're happy to answer any questions you might have. Are any questions from the commission? If not, I'll entertain a motion. Sorry. Public hearing. Sorry. There's a lot of people here too. So, we'll open this matter up for public comment. So, if anyone here in the audience wants to come forward and make a comment on this project, please do so now. Come on. Yes. You have to be sworn in. Please raise your right hand. State your name and address for the record. Sonia Thorp Bohannan. I live at 115 Old Bishop's Lot Road. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth so penalties perger? Yes, I do. Morning. Go ahead and proceed. Briefly, I'm the immediate neighbor to the north of the Davenports and Sharons, and I'm in full support of the project. So, I just wanted to put my vote in there. Right. We appreciate that. Thanks. Anyone else from the public would like to come forward? If not, do we have anyone on Zoom? Maggie. Thank you, Chair Clow. If anyone is on Zoom and would like to provide public comment for the case number 2025, Brownell Holland, please raise your hand. Okay, I do not see any hands raised. Thank you. Okay, then we will go ahead and close the public portion of this meeting, and there are no questions from the commission. I'll go ahead and entertain a motion. Chair Cloud, I would like to recommend approval for case 202510781, 195 Brown Mill Howland Variance request, subject to the conditions of approval and technical corrections listed in Attachment A of the staff report. Excuse me. Commissioner C, could you speak into the mic for the record? Second. Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Smith, Commissioner McGee, Yes. Commissioner Miranda, Yes. Commissioner Ryland, Yes. And Commissioner G, Yes. Madam Chair, the motion is passed. Thank you. Okay. Now we'll move to case number 20248195, which is 1625 Peralta Alfro in development plan. Madam Chair: Yes. If you just allow me to excuse before we move on to... I understand you have a conflict. Yes. You're working on this project. Yes. Yes. Appreciate it. Thank you. Madam Chair, I just want to state for the record that we still have a quorum that is left for future posterity. There are five members left, making the quorum of the commission. Good evening, commissioners. I'm Rebecca Clauser, and tonight I am presenting case number 2024-8195, 1625 Pala Development Plan. The applicant is Andy Dutra, and the agent is Wayne Lloyd with Lloyd Associates and Architecture. The request is for the review and approval of a development plan to construct an all-suite hotel containing 46 units on approximately 2.09 acres. To start, here's an aerial overview of the area and the current zoning. 1625 Pedo Peralta is south of the master-planned rail yard and has residential properties in the vicinity. On the right is the current zoning of the project as Business Capital District in the Redevelopment Subdistrict. The property was rezoned in 2018 to BCD Redevelopment. The applicant provided the property's legal lot of record. The lot currently has the former Albert Elementary School on it and is both legal and conforming. To go over a brief history of the project with the Alvard Master Plan, the master plan was approved in 2018 for two phases. Phase one is located at 1625 P delaratha, and phase two is located at 1617 P delar. There are no specific triggers or timing for the phases, and tonight's request is just for phase one. The master plan was approved with conditions to govern future development of the site. This included a 25-foot no-build zone around the neighborhood edge, which would be on the north and the west of the exhibit as shown. This also included a buffer zone with landscaping, yard walls, and fencing. The master plan included a list of approved uses, which included a hotel. Another important requirement of the master plan governed the dimensional standards. This included height as well. There are height zones for one, two, and three stories. The setbacks around the north and west are 25 feet, and the front and the side do not have any setbacks. The master plan did not require any lot coverage or open space. So, moving to the project request before us tonight. Here is the site plan for the proposed Phase One. The hotel is proposed in three buildings with 46 units. These units will contain a kitchenette, which makes them an all-suite. The applicant has provided a demolition plan that will include removing all signage and infrastructure that's specifically there for the school. The project proposes three access points: two along Pedo Peralta and one along Alard Street. The access point along Alidge Street will be gated. This also includes the elimination of one of the current access points, which is along Alidge Street closest to Pedo Praa, and a new access point, which is the one shown here in the middle, which will be the new access point along Pedrala. The driveway will surround all of the hotels. There are 49 vehicular parking spaces provided, which exceeds the required 46, and eight bicycle parking spaces provided, which exceed the required four. There is landscaping proposed along the perimeter of the property and throughout the open space along Pano Peralta. The sidewalk will be 6 feet. The subject parcel is also within the Historic Downtown Archaeological Review District. The property exceeded 2,500 square feet of lot coverage and was required to have archaeological clearance. The city's Archaeological Review Committee granted clearance on September 1st, 2022. The applicant has complied with the master plan height zone requirements. Shown here in green is the outdoor space with yard walls. The orange is outdoor space with portals. The pink is one story, and in blue is the proposed two-story building. So again, here highlighted in yellow is that 25-foot no-build zone that the applicant is complying with. There were various conditions of approval from the development plan from City Water, City Wastewater Engineering, and corrections. Some of these examples include just updating the landscaping plan with types of plants in the ponding. The applicant has received an approved water plan and water budget. Shown here is the approved water plan. The applicant will upgrade the existing water and wastewater. The existing fire hydrant on the corner of Aid and Pose Peralta will be removed, and two new fire hydrants will be in place: one along Po del Peralta and one along Alred. All buildings will be equipped with an automated fire suppression system. Here are the proposed building elevations for the hotel. The project lies within the BCD district, which requires each structure to reach 205 points per Table 14-8.7-1. The applicant complies with the required 205 points. The master plan includes additional restrictions on building mass, materials, and color. The submitted materials for the building walls, fence, and stucco are stucco coyote fencing. This is in compliance. All buildings are proposed in the Territorial Santa Fe architectural style. The Territorial Santa Fe style is compatible with the existing Alvort Elementary building and the character of the surrounding neighborhood. This slide approximately identifies what the proposed development would look like with the surrounding conditions. An important note is that a very small portion of one of the yard walls was proposed into Phase 2. This is conditioned and will be completely in Phase One at 1625. The applicant complied with the pre-application conference requirements and public notice requirements. The applicant has also complied with all of the development plan criterion. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve case number 2024-8195, 1625 POD Peralta Development Plan, subject to the conditions of approval and technical corrections. One motion will be required in this case: approve or deny case 2024-8195, 1625 Boda Peralta Development Plan, subject to the conditions of approval and technical corrections recommended by staff. Thank you, and staff will stand for questions. Any questions from commissioners? If not, we'll move to the applicant. Michael, is it possible to present the presentation from my computer? Sorry. Oh, Nathan's in the back. I'm sorry, Nathan. Thought that was Michael. Please. I can do it. Please raise your right hand. State your name and address for the record. Wayne. I think I got it. There we go. Yeah. Wayne, raise your right hand, please. Wayne Lloyd, Lloyd and Associates Architects. Raise your right hand. And your address for the record? 740 St. Michael's Drive, Santa Fe. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? I do. The applicant has been sworn in. As soon as we're ready. Thank you. Rebecca has done a really thorough job of explaining this. We're just going to run through a few slides that give you a little better indication of what we're doing. Then I have a letter from Mr. Bernie and Rosemary Menard, who have been involved in this property longer than I have in terms of getting planning, the master plan, and all of that. They couldn't be here tonight, so they sent a letter that I'd like to read into the record after we go through some of the slides. So, Rebecca has covered a lot of this. This first slide that you're seeing, the larger rendering on the left, is the main entry. So, there are two main entries. This one being the first one on the south side on P de Geralta. Then there's a second one further west on P de Paralta. Next, please. So, this again shows the compliance with the master plan that was approved quite some time ago. It's fairly complex. I can go into an explanation if you'd like, but the legend is on the right, showing the blue is the two stories. The maroon or purple is the first floor under those two stories. Green is landscaping. Yellow or the tan yellow is patios, outdoor spaces. Next, a little better rendered site plan showing the parking. This clearly shows the two main ingress/egress. One on the right, furthest east along Po de Peralta. The second one being the major parking area. There is a third ingress/egress at the very top left corner, but that is only for fire trucks. It has a Knox box. The neighborhood did not want access onto Allarid Street, so that's a gate with a Knox box for fire trucks that they requested. Next, these are the murals that are presently on the building on the south side, predominantly south side. There's been lots of discussion and input actually from the artist and the neighborhood. We simply can't save those and have windows that comply with the building code for rooms. So, we're repurposing those. If we go back, I think back one slide, we'll show you where we're putting those. The bottom right corner has three arrows. So, we're proposing to rebuild and repaint those three murals at that point. They'll be much more visible in their new location than they were in their old location. However, we can't make them as tall because we can't go above 6 feet. So, they'll be about 60% of the actual size. So, more than half but not full scale. And those are the three that we're saving. Next, this is just showing the parking. We've got 46 units. We have 48 or 49 parking spaces, so we comply. If this were not an extended stay facility and just a standard hotel room sizes, we would have twice as many rooms and require twice as many parking spaces. So, this simply minimizes the amount of cars that will go in and out of this facility. And rarely do hotels get to 100%, though they would like them to be. Okay, next. Seems to be freezing up a little bit. Hold on. The square footage on these extended stays range from about 600 square feet on the smallest ones up to a little over 1,000 square feet in some of them, more like a home with suites. I think this is the next slide. There you go. This just shows streetscapes. Po de Peralta on the right, and you're inside the project on the left. So, it shows how we've got a pedestrian way, a wall, a landscaped area, all of which was part of the master plan and regulations for this approval process. Next is... I think we have several of these sections at various places from Allerid Street and P de Paralta, just demonstrating that we've met the criteria for screening. That is the very northwest corner showing the gate that would be fire truck only access. Another streetscape showing... Yes. So, this is the west end of the property. Allard Street on the left. Landscaping, sidewalk, sorry. And the walls. So, this is a northwest looking southeast. Next, further down Po de Pala again, landscaping, sidewalk. The sidewalk is larger than required. Starting on the east end, it's almost 9 feet wide. By the time we get to the west end, it's about 5 feet wide, but certainly wider than an average or standard sidewalk. Showing the wall, showing the landscaping. And then outdoor patio space. This is from the entryway. So, this is the far east elevation and partial south elevation, and this is due east. That is more of a construction document, which is way too small for any of us to understand. I think that's the last one. No, this just shows second floor versus first floor. And that was designated better earlier in the slideshow. Is that the last one? I think it is. Yeah. I'd like to read this letter into the record. Again, it is from Bernie and Rosemary Menard. We live at 534 Allard Street, across Allard Street from Alvo Elementary School, which stands at the entrance to the historic Guadalupe neighborhood. For many years now, the former school site has been vacant, an eyesore, and a magnet for mischief. Over the years, several proposals for development have been offered and eventually abandoned following objections from various neighbors. We believe the current plan to develop the site into an extended stay hotel is a reasonable use for the property. In 2018, Rosemary worked with many other neighbor representatives, the city, and the Barker family, then owners of the property, to develop and agree on a master plan requiring certain setbacks, restricted vehicular access to the adjacent neighborhood, minimal traffic through this old neighborhood, minimal impact on the direct neighbors living along the north boundary, and an attractive wall along Allard Street with landscaping to ensure privacy and transition to the nearby residents. The master plan also expressly forbids the development of many types of businesses allowed under the BCD zoning. The current owners are legally obliged to adhere to the details of the master plan and have agreed with our neighborhood association, Historic Guadalupe Neighborhood Association, to respect this agreement and be bound by it without contention. We believe they will act in good faith to make sure the development process and usage does not encroach on neighbors and the neighborhood. We believe it will create an attractive entrance to the historic Guadalupe neighborhood. Repurposing a large existing building is environmentally preferable to raising it and building from scratch. That is in part because of the potential for the release of asbestos particles into the surrounding atmosphere. Quite a bit of the interior asbestos in the Albert school has already been removed. The current owners/developers are required by federal law to adhere to the EPA requirements for any further asbestos remediation and are subject to EPA inspections throughout the demolition and remediation process. The school has been vacant for many years now and continues to deteriorate. It is time now to move forward with a reasonable development of this now privately owned, commercially zoned site before the building becomes too derelict to save. We urge the City Planning Commission to approve this proposal. Rosemary Menard and Bernie Menard, 534 Allard Street. I stand for questions. Any questions? If not, we'll open up the matter to public comment. If anyone is present in the chambers who'd like to comment on this project, please come forward. You can line up over the wall, and we'll limit comment to two minutes. Does that work? So, we're limiting the comment to two minutes. I'm going to also ask that people not repeat what other people are saying. Keep it fresh, please. Please state your name and address for the record. Diane Benes, 517 Allard. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth and do so under the penalties of perjury? Vince Warren. I guess my concern, there's two concerns. We recently moved. The first concern is safety. A house on the corner was just built. There was so much traffic. The city has allowed all these worker bees to park anywhere. They are never given a ticket. The street is just loaded. So, what is the company going to provide for the worker bees to be able to come to the site and work is my first question because it's a safety. I'm a nurse. People are sitting on the sidewalk eating lunch. They're roaming around the area. So, I would like to know how the development is going to provide a safe place for them to park their big trucks. That's my one concern. And my other concern is because we're new, is how long this development is going to take. Okay. Hello. Please state your name and address for the record. Lucy Fulma, 714 Rosita Street. You shall declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth, nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury. Yes. She's been sworn. Hello, my name is Lucy Fulma. I am a lifelong neighbor to this property and also part of a family that owns a business adjacent to the property, Smith Smith Jen LLC and the Rail Yard Performance Center, which have been in the Rail Yard since the early 90s. I'm also a member of the Federal Caril Neighborhood Association, which is the Alvar or Allard stretch along Losa. Just as some background, because I know that applicant read a letter of support. But in 2018, the Santa Fe Public School Board came to the Planning Commission and asked for this property to be rezoned so that it could be sold for roughly like $2 million. And this Planning Commission approved that on April 5th, 2018. $2 million is like what the property that this other woman just talked about is being sold for now. It's like one house's worth of property at this point. This is 2.9 acres that we're talking about here. So when the first developer who bought the property came to the neighborhood association to propose a 10-lot subdivision, single-family homes with garages, our neighborhood association came together and said, you know, this isn't really appropriate for our neighborhood. It wouldn't fit in. And we weren't just opposed to development. We were asking, we were trying to collect what has this property functioned as for our neighborhood for the past 100 years. It's been a neighborhood school. It's been a voting facility. It's been a playground basketball court. It's, you know, it's been overflow parking for the Rail Yard development. And so, we were just trying to bring forward like how does this property fit in with the development that has become the Rail Yard district. I understand that this planning body does not have the ability to undo what I think was a poor decision by the school board to sell a property that they will never be able to buy back for public use in the future. But I did have a request for some conditions possibly. So the Rail Yard has become a really vibrant district and us as business owners, us as residents have really benefited from that. We're very grateful. And that's speaking to the value of planning. Overall, the master plan for the Rail Yard development in 2001 had all these uses. It had the park and the plaza and businesses and pedestrian-focused activity. And it also has not quite met the needs of all of the programming that has been scheduled there. So, I've heard from people who are part of that planning process that there was going to be a southern portion, a Baca district parking garage to meet the parking needs of the community like there is on the north side under REI. From reading the document, it doesn't say parking garage, but it said that there was going to be a Baca and Troda with a bus facility there to like have public transit serve the Rail Road district. That hasn't come to fruition, but I, you know, this development is going to be building more parking spaces than they need to for the suites that they have. They're saying 49 parking spaces for the 46 suites and average occupancy for an all-suite hotel is like 60% or at least that is for like any kind of hotel. So, I'm asking that if there could be paid public parking incorporated into this development because it has historically accommodated overflow parking for all of the events that we have in the Rail Yard. I mean, my dream would be that they would build underground parking and I understand that that is very expensive, but maybe there could be a public-private partnership to build underground parking like there is under REI. If not just to have paid public parking accommodated for the all-suite part that's not accommodated current guests. And then for Tract B to also incorporate when they bring a proposal forward for that development, to please incorporate some form of paid public parking because all the programming needed or needs parking in this area. Thank you very much. Please raise your right hand. State your name and address for the record. 725 Messia Road. Right hand. Right. Did it last time. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth, nothing but the truth, and do so in the penalties of perjury? Been sworn. I wanted to just start off by, I was part of the drafting that master plan with Dan Esau at the time too. So, I know this project very well. One of my biggest concerns of the whole master plan was preserving the murals that were there, but that wasn't brought up. But I wish staff would have brought that up during their presentation too, that the murals were there, other than hearing it from the developer himself. I like the idea that the murals are going to be reproduced on the side there where it's more visible and it was a collaboration from the neighborhood that came up with the idea to come and figure out where the murals could be so where they could be saved because these are school kids that did this. And it was back in the days where art was in schools and taught schools, not on computers. It was hand-drawn. So, this is that was very, very special. The rest of the project I think is as well. There's also, I'm kind of worried that the other lot you're looking at, Lot 2, is not part of the subject because that also can go up to another three stories. So, I would like to make sure that you remember that. But my main thing about putting the murals in there is that making sure that it's set in stone that if this developer decides to sell it to somebody else, that this idea that the murals have to stay in with whatever it is. I mean, I've seen this plenty of times before where developers come in and they do something, then they're going to leave something out, you know. And then art is so important in this city. I did that caboose on St. Francis Drive and they destroyed it. So, that's really, that was another sad thing, but that's something the city did, and this is something an oversight I don't want the city to fall through in the future. So, I think however we decide to go with this process, that there's an element in there that we can have these murals, make sure they're set in stone to whoever takes it, whoever takes advantage of it next. And when it's done, the murals are there and it's done with even the same artists that we can. And there's artists that are here that redid it for. So, my whole goal with this whole thing is to make sure those murals are saved in a sense that all Santa Fe can enjoy this piece of art that the kids did and they laughed and they cried for the whole time they did it. And when they, they're grown up now, they can still come and see it. And they're not here now, but you know, I'm here with them. So, thank you. And that's what I hope we push this project. Hello. Hi. Hi. Please state your name and address for the record. Anna Guy Reinhardt, 1147 Don Gaspar. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth, nothing but the truth, and do so under penalty of perjury? I do. He's been sworn in. Good evening, commissioners. Thank you so much for all you do in Santa Fe. I'm a Santa Fean. I actually know a lot about the railyard because I grew up in the railyard. My grandparents owned a house on Montezuma across from the VFW. And us little rascals would go to the railyard when it was a very blighted area, when the old train would come through, and we would race each other on the tracks and watch the tar bubble up from the ground. The bad boys would chase the train and jump the train and end up at the penitentiary down on Penn Road. I've been involved with youth programs since the 80s, but in 1993, an organization, a nonprofit, the CCA Warehouse Teen Project, hired me to be a project director in collaboration with Chrissy Ore, who was the executive director at the time. She is here tonight. We resided, if many of you were here back in the day in the 90s, the Catellus Corporation owned the railyard and the CCA warehouse was in an old 3,500 square foot, probably close to 80 years. People used to call it the shack, but we served many young people in our community in that building. In the 90s, there was an abundance of graffiti in Santa Fe, and the city graffiti people didn't know what to do. They just kept buffing the walls and it never resolved anything. So Chrissy and a bunch of kids went to the mayor, former Debbie Hadio, and also the Arts Commission to say, "Hey, what about public art? Public art is a successful way of maintaining graffiti from happening in abatement." So the city created the Youth Mural Project back then in 1994. And in 1995, we were the first program, the CCA warehouse, to paint this mural on the Alvord School. And Chrissy will talk about the history of this mural, but it was a long six-week program where we interviewed a lot of neighbors that knew a lot of the history from the 30s. So back in that day period, that old building was demolished to make way for the railyard, and I created a new nonprofit, Warehouse 21. We ended up raising 1.4 million and the city a million, and built that railyard building that's there now across from the Farmers Market. We were in there for 11 years and the city kicked us out in 2019. We still exist. We're still doing youth programs. But one thing between CCA and Warehouse 21, we've done 14 murals in Santa Fe through the years at the value of $141,000, supporting young people and professional artists. So we are ready with Chrissy and artists and students to carry on with this mural project on the railyard. Thank you to the developers and to the architect for maintaining the name Alvord as a part of historical notice and also to maintain the mural in some fashion. We're happy to work with them on a replica. Thank you. Please raise your right hand. State your name and address for the record. My name is Chrissy Ore. I live at 615 Cortez Street. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? I do. You've been sworn in. I just want to start off and thank everyone here for their time. Thank the architect, thank Rick Martinez, and thank all the people that really want to save some form of this mural. It really was, it was the first youth mural project in Santa Fe. And the problem with reconstructing the mural is that we can't bring back that process. Unless we have a really, I mean, it would need a budget. It would need a budget. It's not just the mural. It's what went into creating that mural. It was nine young people. We spent two weeks interviewing all the elders in the neighborhood. The teachers in the school, the kids in the school painted, I don't know if you've noticed, but the splash guard at the bottom was all painted by the kids at the school, and the rest were the teenagers and myself and Ken Wolverton. So, it's the process that is vitally important. It's not just the painting. It's not just the painting. It's the history. It's the place. It's telling a story. It's relating to the neighborhood and it's relating to those youth. Those youth now have their own children. They may have grandchildren. So, I just want to say that the process is vitally important. Just moving the mural, having it repainted by someone is not really, it doesn't involve the process. Thank you. I'm Ken Wolverton, 3115 Highway 14, Cerrillos, New Mexico. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? I do. You've been sworn in. Well, Chrissy and I were married for 20 years. We got along pretty well doing murals. We've painted murals in Scotland, England, France, Iran, all over the place. We work, we specialize in collaborative collective murals, working with children, young people, for the 20 years that we did murals. As Chrissy said, it's the process. Being a mural painter is not just being an artist in a studio, especially if you're working with young people. It's a guild. It's a master-apprentice situation. We were so blessed that the Teen Project had these extraordinary young people that had already gone through art for years and actually had very developed skills. So from the very beginning, we had an amazing team of young people, but they had two people, Chrissy and myself, that directed how to take a little sketch, 6 inches by 10 inches long, and blow it up to a wall that's 16 feet high and over 100 feet long. Not all artists are capable of understanding what goes into that, but these young people got into it. The design was a collection of all of their drawings. Each one of them came up with ideas. Chrissy and I looked at all the ideas. We incorporated all of their ideas directly from their sketches into that mural. I laid out the full final scale drawing of it. Chrissy colored it in with all the things that the young people had wanted. We showed the scale drawing, which Chrissy still has, to the young people and they said, "Yeah, let's go for it." We had unanimous approval from the beginning that that's what they wanted from all the work that they'd done to create the mural. So, disappearing the mural is not only disappearing, destroying the mural, it is destroying the legacy of those young people who all were amazing young artists and have inspired thousands of young people, I think, in this community ever since in mural painting. So, what I recommended to Chrissy was, I said, "Well, if they're going to tear down the wall and they're going to build a wall, why don't we redirect a mural again? Find some of those young people if we can to bring them back to help repaint the mural as tutors that they can bring in young people themselves." So Chrissy and I would run a master class. I think that was a wonderful idea that you wanted to restore them in one way or the other rather than just destroying it and being out of it. I would say you'd be an evil merchant in town from then on if nothing was ever done. Something might go on about the building from just the resentment. So I'm glad that there is this support for the mural and thank you very much for keeping that in mind and showing it. It's, we understand the property has to be used one way or the other and be rather derelict. So that's what I have to say. Thank you. My name is Susan Davis, 503 Adolfo Street. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalty of perjury? You've been sworn in. Please proceed. I have two questions relating to phase two, which I know is not on the agenda tonight. However, it pertains to the, in particular, the northern edge of the property line, which as you can see on the site plan, there's quite a bit of it to be developed in phase two. And living on Adolfo Street, I wonder if there will be any treatment of that northern edge. In other words, what we've had for many years now is a chain link fence, which is fine, except that it has been broken through more than a couple of times. And my, it's just a, it's a question about the future. And then my second question, which may not be known at this time, is if there's a time frame for phase two. Thank you. Please state your name and address for the record. My name is Daniel Clevenger E. Martinez. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? I do. Please proceed. Hello everyone, and I want to say thank you all for coming. Please address the commission, please. Thank you very much for coming. I just wanted to say that I am the president, current president of the Historic Guadalupe Neighborhood Association. But however, I'm coming here for my own opinion now that you're going to be hearing. This is not, I'm not representing the Historic Preservation Association at this point, but I do support this development very much. It does solve a problem that we've had in that neighborhood now for 15 years since the school closed. And it's been a nice, long journey to the present time. And I consider what I've seen there a very success. This has been a very successful process, planning process for the city of Santa Fe. The school board was involved for quite a few years. The Alacantes were there for a little while. The middle school there then was sold to the Barker family and they worked on it. Worked on several processes, moved through a master planning process. What they were proposing was not successful for various reasons. They sold the property again now to another developer who has now the current proposal. So, it's been quite a process. I applaud the city of Santa Fe and the incredible website that you all have there. 150 plus pages of documentation that's available to the public on this, on this project. So it's very clear from taking a look at that. I haven't read all of it, of course, by any stretch, but I've taken a look at it, how much effort and energy has gone into this project in terms of planning on behalf of the architect clearly. And I just want to say I'm very impressed with that and I think it's really an example of a successful process city planning. I do think the project as it stands now is going to be very beautiful, very appropriate. I do think it addresses apparently a need, the Airbnb processes, because I think this all-suite hotel will absorb some of those energies of people who want to come to Santa Fe for a week or two weeks. They can stay at this hotel and not be in somebody else's property. That's, that's mentioned by the developers. So that's, that's my part of my idea. I think they've, the developers, including the Barkers, have responded to the requests made in various meetings by this developer and the Barker family. The height restrictions, setbacks, preservation, of course, of the three murals, and I was delighted to hear some excellent history about that. I think that's very valuable, very, very interesting and certainly should be taken into and has been apparently taken into account by the development trying to do something to preserve those images and make them available to the public. There's no impact on Adolfo Street, although that, that does involve the other parcel. No public access from Allred Street. There is access, it's gated and designed for emergency use only. The intended use will not create a lot more traffic in that regard. May I respectfully suggest the city look into a stoplight at the corner of Sal del Alta and Allred Street? That is becoming a real dangerous intersection. I don't think this particular development has been hurt, it is already a problem. So that's something for consideration elsewhere, I guess, in the city of Santa Fe. The old school building will not be demolished, saving the demolition problems that would be very difficult to deal with by the neighborhood and by the city. The asbestos issues were raised already. That's a historic building. The bones of the school will be preserved and built upon and around wonderful landscaping, adequate parking. I just think it's going to be an excellent project and I think it will, it's adjacent to the railyard, so it's very appropriate for that area of town. I've certainly personally supported it. Thank you very much. My name is Eric Gent. I live at 621 Allred Street. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth, nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? I do. Please proceed. We have lived on Allred Street since 1989. My wife and I raised our two children, one of whom is Lucy Fulma, very proud of. She's very engaged and she's very passionate about this area and many others. She's a Fulbright fellow, lived overseas many times. She came home to have her family here. We're very proud. Yeah. So I lament, we also have this building on the railyard, the Railyard Performance Center, and we were doing a remodel there in the year 2000, and the kids were playing in the schoolyard and it was a delightful sound all during that time. I do lament that that use being abandoned. It was our polling place. It was a place we had our neighborhood meetings in that school. It was a disaster that the school board sold that property. Really, that being said, I am grateful that the developer is willing to work with this mural. It's a big deal for all of us. Ray Montes, who was sitting here and decided not to speak, it's his grandfather who is apparently wearing the overalls on the mural. I can't remember the grandfather's name, but Montes Street, that family owned much of that neighborhood for a long time. The image of the elephants getting off the train when the circus came to town, they would parade them down to the plaza, was a big deal. So, it is a real cultural touchstone for us in this neighborhood. I'm again grateful that they're going to revision, replace the mural somehow. It's unclear to me. The official staff report did not include that. So I'm unclear whether this is phase one or phase two. It is okay. All right. Secondly, I think you mentioned that it was six feet. I think on the neighborhood boundary of the railyard, it's actually eight that you could do it. But yeah, great. Well, that's great. Thank you so much because you all just did a variance for a rooftop thing. Can we do a variance for the full size of this mural? That's a suggestion. Okay. Right. I don't mind. We got some big buildings over there. The, what is it called? The Llewellyn Gallery is three stories right across the street. It would be whatever. I would love it. And it's great. And Wolverton has now agreed to participate. Yesterday he wouldn't, he wasn't willing to participate in this thing. He was so frustrated and infuriated. He says, "I'm done with this." So, I'm happy that he's turned around a little bit and is willing to oversee. I think it's a great idea to incorporate, to make it a process again. It's a revisioning. It's unusual, I think, for a mural 30 years old, the artist, the people that funded it, Anna Reinhardt, that we're all still here. I mean, it's a great thing. A lot of times people die. Let's see what else I have to say. The ingress egress. I'm a little concerned and we talked about this before. There's the road, the new entrance on Poe is two lanes in and out. I think that's functional. The one that's coming out to the, to the east is problematic because it comes out right next to Camino La Familia. And I'm wondering if that would be an egress only and right turn only perhaps, because if people are trying to take a left out of there, people trying to take a left into Camino La Familia, it's going to be tough. It's going to be difficult. So consider that. Another consideration for plan B, and I had this conversation with David Barker a long time ago, there's a break in the fence along the east side of that property. I think there's two gates. It's actually historic ingress egress to that phase two part of the property. David said that he was stonewalled by parking division because they wanted him to, they wanted him to pay for park, you know, because they were going to lose a couple parking spaces for that ingress egress. They wanted him to pay for income from however many spaces it was for 20 years. And he said it just wouldn't work. I said, you know, really if you're going to pay for it, it could be an annual contribution to the parking loss, whatever. Could be some other way to structure it. I think the Railyard Corporation also did not like the idea, but I think the fact that it is, has a historic, again, chain link fence gates, you know, it existed before everything else did over there. So those are my comments and again, thank you so much. Please state your name and address for the record. My name is Patty Montes. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth and do so under penalties of perjury? Please proceed. I'm here. I'm not on my recliner watching the US Open, but I felt that it was so important to come here tonight. In honor of my dad and my grandpa, they were born on Montes Street. My cousin was back here, Ray Montes. His dad consulted with the muralists to get the stories for the mural, the backgrounds of the stories of the mural. They're very historic. I just wanted to tell you that my dad had the most awesome, fond memory that he used to often share with us regarding the circus, the way it came into town on the train. The kids would come running because they knew that the elephants would be unloaded from one of the cars and paraded trunk to tail in a circle and just exercised. So that was just such a vivid image in my mind from when I was back in my teenage years. For decades now, I often, I used to ask my dad, "Can you tell that story again?" He's just so, he's part of this, even though he's passed, he's part of, and my grandpa is part of this neighborhood and all that went on before us and all the newcomers and all the tourists and all of that. We want to be careful in Santa Fe. We want to be careful that we don't ignore and obliterate the things that make Santa Fe, Santa Fe. People come here to get a sense of our history. Those murals gave that. They gave the Guadalupe Parish that whole, you know, embraceable organization of the whole neighborhood. That neighborhood was inspired and protected by Guadalupe Parish. My dad went to Guadalupe School, went to church there. I just want to also just give a public applaud to the skill and the talent and the colors that are in that mural. They cannot be, they cannot be replicated the way they are right now. You know, about three years ago, my dad, well, I lost my dad in 2020, and before that he lost his vision, but he was able to tell me and share with that beautiful story, but he never saw the murals on the Allred School. They were painted before he lost his vision, but he never really, he never, it was a tough time. So, when I realized driving slowly and recognizing the murals around town and I saw the elephants and I, you know, took a, took a stopped car, took a close look and was able to recognize the story that he told me was in that mural. You know, so that's my tie to that mural. When I got off the car and I noticed how skillfully painted that wall is from corner to corner, it's skill. It's beauty. It's colors. It's colors on the stucco. So you, you know, you can't get that texture on a, on a wall or on a newly formed wall and a newly formed canvas. So, I'm hoping, you know, I spoke with David Barker before he, he changed ownership, before he accepted the offer, and I, you know, I went to school with him. So, we had a talk and I wanted to present him with these drawings, but I never was able to. So I'd like to present them to you tonight. It's, it's food for thought about how we could incorporate the murals as they are into a new concept, into a conservatory. A conservatory by definition, I didn't bring a mic. A conservatory is a building or room having glass or other transparent roofing and walls used as a greenhouse or a sunroom. Can I submit this to the panel for your consideration? It's, it's food for thought. It's just food for thought about how we might incorporate these walls into a new glass front that has botanicals, that has plants that we recognize around the city that are important to, that are important to this area. May I do that? I would suggest that you give them to Mr. Lloyd, who is involved in this project, because they will be the ones that are, if this project gets approved, they will be the ones that will be handling the mural. Okay, not the city. Okay. I am, you know, I'm bringing this up and I'm kind of pleasantly surprised that I think I heard that the walls are going to remain in place. The front of the building, I'm not so sure if that's the front of the building where the murals are, that that wall, is that going to remain in place? Please, please only address the... We'll have Mr. Lloyd come up and address some of the issues that were raised, but I'm going to ask you to wrap up because we really try to limit it to about two minutes. Yeah, I did it. We're not here all night. I'm just very, very grateful for you to be able to hear me and I feel like for the record, you know, I just wanted to bring my dad and my grandpa into this and we appreciate how historic, how historic that is. Thank you. My name is Helga Anona. Please raise your right hand and state your name and address for the record. My name is Helga Anona. I live at 35 Calle Enrique in Santa Fe for the last 30 years. Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth and do so under penalties of perjury? Yes. Please proceed. Santa Fe is considered the City Different. Tourists come here because they love all the arts. They love the museums. They love the wonderful galleries of which there are many on Pio de Peralta. I was absolutely shattered when the Vladin Museum came in and destroyed the beautiful building, the beautiful mural that was at the Vladin Museum. We have hardly any murals left in this town. There is the Empire building that has a wonderful mural that is becoming fainter and fainter and nobody seems to care about fixing it up or bringing it back to what it used to be. And so that was, that's the Empire Building. And I just feel that what's happening with Chrissy Os and her ex-husband's wonderful mural is an absolute crime. We don't need another boutique hotel in this town. We need to preserve our arts. Our arts are extremely important, and we should not erase murals that are here. I mean, this mural on Paseo Peralta is a treasure. It's absolutely beautiful, and it should be kept forever and ever. The boutique hotels, we have so many hotels in this town. We don't need another boutique hotel. We should take care of the arts that we have in the town, for which we are so famous, and forget about another hotel, another hotel of which we have absolutely plenty here. And we have on Paseo, we have all these, we have Site Santa Fe, we have a number of wonderful, wonderful galleries. So let's take care of that, and let's not think about getting another hotel. We don't need that. It's absolutely unnecessary. Let's take care of what we have and what we treasure. : Please state your name and address for the record. : Elizabeth West, 318 Senna Street. : Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? : Yes, I do. : Please proceed. : I'm sort of wondering, why did I come here today? You know what I realized? I came here today because I'm in a good mood as a result of coming here, and I had this thought that maybe that good mood would come to some fruition. I believe in some kind of compromises occasionally in order to get ahead. I'm over 80, so obviously compromises occasionally worked. I'm doing great. I consider myself sort of living in the neighborhood of this wonderful place since I'm over on Senna Street. And so I got to thinking, I had heard, I'd heard wrong things on occasion, and that's why I came here tonight. I wanted to see, is there any possibility of dealing with this mural? And a little backstory: I am not representing the Old Santa Fe Association, but I am a member of the board, and we, as you might know, we're kind of stuck up for a lot of murals around town. So, but as I say, I'm not speaking for them. We spoke informally about this, and I know kind of what they're thinking. I am speaking for myself. So I think this compromise of, I think I heard 60%, is pretty adequate. I would like to echo what one person said in relation to the colors. Sometimes when we get excited, it shows up on these screens of incredible saturation of color, and I think, really, is that the color it's supposed to be? Doesn't look like adobe to me. So I would just say that some of the beauty of these murals are not only their cohesiveness, their availability to everybody of all kinds of people, including me, but they have a sensitivity that is partly the patina of time, of course. So, the person who was talking about, let's honor the beauty that's in the murals, I think I want to go on record as saying I support that. I support what is the effort here, and the previous speaker was talking about, we don't need more hotels. I could sort of agree with that. But, I liked what I heard about this sort of hotel. It might be the kind of hotel that would help get in the way of short-term rentals. So, a lot of things I'm interested in kind of have grown out of this mural, but I'm mostly here to say thank you for finding a way to save it. So, when I walk by, I get to see it. Not perfect, but here we are. Thank you very much. : I'm going to ask people not to clap. We generally don't allow that when we're having public hearings. So, just please be respectful of that. : Please state your name and address for the record. : My name is Cheryl Odum. I live at 1152 Vuelta de la in Santa Fe. : Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? : I do. : Please proceed. : I'm going to make this quick. Having listened to everyone tonight and having lived here for 45 years, I've gotten very invested in the traditions and history of Santa Fe and indigenous people worldwide. In their culture, the keepers of the traditions, the keepers of the history, the keepers of the wisdom of the people are the responsibility of the elders, the grandmothers, the grandfathers who carry that wisdom. And you've heard from them. You've heard from many of them tonight. I just want you to have some respect for the history and the keepers of that history and the wonderfulness that is the history of Santa Fe and the traditions. Thank you. : Is there anyone else in chambers that would like to make a comment, make a public comment on this matter? If not, Maggie, is there anyone on Zoom? : Yes, Chair Claw. Thank you. There are a few hands raised. We'll start. I will allow you to talk. Please state your name and address for the record and be sworn in before you give your comment. I have John Gee first. : John, can you unmute yourself? There you go. : Yes, I am unmuted. Do I still have two minutes? : Please raise your right hand and state your name and address for the record. : I raised my hand on Zoom. My name is John Gee. I'm 511 Allery Street. : Do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? : I definitely do in my truth. : Please proceed. : That is up to you guys. Well, I've heard a lot. It took me a very long time to get on this meeting because the way it takes for somebody doing it remotely was kind of absurd. I documented it in video. Lots of links, lots of links that don't work. Finally, they worked. Anyway, so far what I've heard. So, yeah, I grew up in Santa Fe. And don't mean to call Anna Reinhardt out earlier, but Warehouse 21 in the Railyard District saved my life 100%. I wasn't very good at high school. We had an arts district that wasn't the Railyard Arts District. We had to abandon it. It became a new building, which is currently pretty much abandoned. But yeah, I live on Allerene. I went to Alvord when I was a kid. I played basketball there, you know, before it was all shut down. The reason we don't have an elementary school there is because the district is changing. And I know I also heard earlier, I wrote it down, keep it fresh, please don't say the same thing. Please. And all I've heard a lot is about the murals. The problem is not murals. We live in Santa Fe. Drive down Cerrillos. Our problem is housing, right? And one person earlier mentioned the house across the street. I live on the street, right? So yeah, there were trucks and it's all parking. It's parking problems and it's and it's murals and I and I understand the mural thing, which I will touch on in a second. That house right now by Logic Real Estate, that house on the corner has been defunct for years. Me and my friends used to joke about squatting it. It was boarded up like, let's get in the boards or whatever. It's going for $1.6 million. That house claims to be a three-bedroom, four-bath, $1.6 million for that house. That is right across the street from an abandoned elementary school that has been abandoned forever because there's no kids in this district because we let rich people move to Santa Fe and push the kids out to the southside and then defund those schools and then maybe there's some charter schools if their parents even know about it. These are local people. You can't live in this neighborhood. I live, well now you have my address and you can show up here anytime and charge me with perjury. But that's the problem. It's it's murals. It's also capitalism. What are we letting happen to our community? It's an abandoned school that's going to get turned into a luxury suite hotel. And we're talking about parking. We are talking about egress or ingress and what's good for the neighborhood. Are you kidding me? There are people dying on the streets of Santa Fe. I see it every day. I'm not going to tell you where I work. You could you could do a Google search, but come on. And the murals and well, there we go. Let's talk about the murals. They're going to redo it. The history, the elephants, all of that. We're going to have new kids do it and it's going to be a little smaller and people care about the size. That's not their history. The kids that are going to do those murals now, they live on the southside. Let's be honest. That it's not their history. It's not their wall, their new wall to put in somewhere so that the developers can placate the people so that we can have a new history of kids that have never ever even seen the plaza. And I've known a lot of kids, I'm talking 17 to 21 years old, that have never seen the plaza. When I asked them the other day if they were going to Zozobra, they said, "What's that?" These are 18-year-olds. They didn't, I have kids that didn't know there was a road going to the ski basin and well skiing but the mountain. There's a road that goes up there. They said this is our community and we're talking about parking. We're talking about egress, regress. You can cut me off whenever you want when my two minutes is up. I I I appreciate the mural talk, but come on. There's bigger fish to fry in this town, and murals are not going to placate the people. But they might because they don't know about it. They don't know where Alvord is. Hasn't been a school in years. They don't know where the Warehouse 21 used to be when it was a warehouse and saved my life. It saved my life. And now, as far as I know, it's pretty much empty. And the city owns it. And it's probably 10,000 bucks a month to rent it. We're talking about housing. There are people on our streets that are dying. There are kids in houses that are dying if they get lucky enough to have a house. So, yeah, I know you can't answer my questions and cut me off when you want, but : John, I'm I am going to ask you to wrap it up, please. : Yeah. Well, how can I wrap it up? I I even wrote it down. Parking, parking, parking, parking, parking. We We We can have houses for cars on a street, but we can't have houses for people. Why are people living outside? I guess that's it. : Thank you. : Thank you. We have Miss Stephanie Benonato. Please unmute yourself and state your name and address for the record. : Stephanie Benonato, PO Box 1601, Santa Fe, New Mexico. : Stephanie, do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? : I do. : Please proceed. : Thank you. I am more in the key of John Gee. I am disappointed, of course, it's been years now, but I'm disappointed that the city has pushed the BCD this far away from the downtown, really. And I'm disappointed that it went from being a work-live work to residential to a high-end boutique stay. It doesn't matter whether there's kitchenettes in there or not. I'm not sure that it's going to do anything to stop short-term rentals. And Mr. Dutra has many, many, many, many short-term rentals in and around the downtown. I think it's really unfortunate that he didn't want to do something that was more residential. The school served the residents, and it's unfortunate again that the character of that area has changed greatly. And I am concerned about a few different little things, or not so little things, in this development. One is phase two. It always makes me kind of nervous when you don't know what phase two is going to be and how much more short-term rentals, vacation rentals, whatever you want to call them, are going to be there. I'm also concerned about the wall on Allered Street. To me, it's extremely unappealing. It's a long, massive wall with no relief and a big "don't come in here" fence, or gate, excuse me. My other concern is the access by Camino de la Familia. I, too, am worried about the closeness of that access to that street, especially during events at the Railyard or during the Farmers Market. Of course, I also think that it will be looming over many other residential buildings there, and it's hastening the transition from affordable or attainable, as one city council candidate said last night, attainable housing to non-attainable housing, to housing that's only for people who have more money than the norm in Santa Fe. So, I wish Mr. Dutra would really rethink having this hotel there and make them into long-term rentals, which is what we really do need here. And again, the safety concern for the access close to La Familia, Camino de la Familia, and the sort of unrelieved wall on Allered Street. Thank you. Okay, we have one more. Madeline Kerry, please unmute yourself, state your name and address for the record, and be sworn in before your public comment. Thank you. **Madeline Kerry:** My name is Madeline Kerry, 1674 Camino Cruel Blanca. **Chair:** Madeline, do you solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony you have in reference to this item shall be the truth and nothing but the truth, and do so under the penalties of perjury? **Madeline Kerry:** Yes. **Chair:** Please proceed. **Madeline Kerry:** Thank you, Commissioners, for sitting through all of this public comment. I broadly support everything that has been said before, and I have two specifics and two macro things I'll touch on. One of the specifics is parking. I used to work at an office in the Railyard district. I go to events in the Farmers Market in the Railyard district, and I talk to a lot of employees who work at businesses in the Railyard district, and there has been a decade or longer running problem with access to employee parking for businesses in the Railyard district. So, I want to raise, I think there's been this conversation of, you know, there are fewer parking spots than there would be for a regular hotel, and that's maybe good. I want to make sure there's enough on-site parking for employees and that part of the operating plan for this hotel is that employees will park on-site because otherwise, they will be pushed into the neighborhood, or they will be pushed into paying for city parking in the Railyard, and that's been a long-running problem that I know many businesses have tried to work with the city on. It would be good to not compound that. And two, just reiterating, I also run a lot. I have lots of opinions about every sidewalk and intersection in Santa Fe. From a pedestrian's perspective, the Allred and Poe intersection is bad, both as a pedestrian and in a car. I think this project will make it worse, and I would encourage the city and the developer to figure out how to use this project as an opportunity to make that a safer intersection for multimodal transportation. Then there's been a lot of conversation about the sidewalk along Paseo de Peralta. The sidewalks on Allred are pitiful. And I again encourage the city and the developer to think about how this project can bring that to a macro level. You know, my husband has been a resident and homeowner and now landlord in the historic Guadalupe for decades on a motto street, at great personal expense and cost to his sanity. He has remodeled historic properties, and it's really the people of Santa Fe in the neighborhood that create the product tourists come to see when they stay in these hotels. There is no policy mechanism for the public in Santa Fe to benefit from that tourism. There is no way for people who stay at this hotel. There is no tax mechanism, and there's no benefit fund that supports the upkeep of the other historic properties in the neighborhood, and that is one of the things that drives gentrification. It's one of the things that drives young people out. So that is not something that's going to get solved with this project. But I share the sorrow of the neighbors that this is no longer going to be a public property. It's going to be a private one that generates revenue for some out-of-state corporation. It's going to provide jobs that don't pay enough to live in this city. We know that. And I would just encourage this commission to be an advocate for developing some sort of policy mechanism that when we have these large industrial use projects come in that really benefit from the labor that generations of New Mexicans have done to build this city, we have a way to sort of distribute that revenue more equally. And there are developers who do optional community benefit funds to help invest in other properties in the neighborhood that have to go through the rigorous historic review process and expensive upkeep. There are room tax tools for that, and I hope that we as a community and you all as leaders of this community can work on that and use this project as an inspiration for that. Thank you very much. **Chair:** I don't see any other hands up on Zoom. Okay, thank you. With that, we'll close the public comment portion of this matter. Mr. Esel. **Mr. Esel:** Madam Chair, members of the commission, I'd like to take you through a history of this particular project. There's a member in the audience that was actually part of this, Mr. Martinez. When this first came up, there was a lot of concern from the neighborhood. So what I did, through the ENN process, I asked those members to pick a team amongst the community to sit down and meet, and I asked the developer if he would also meet. I facilitated a meeting between David Barker and the community. When we set those dates, my first step was to educate that group what the city's rules were so they understood what I had to do in order to review this project. We went over the use list, we went over the zoning requirements, we went over the master plan requirements, we went over every rule associated with this particular project. Once they understood that rule, we started talking about the application. When they started recommending changes, I took it to the developer on another meeting date. I didn't bring them together, and then we talked about that, and it went back and forth until there was an exchange of information that both were starting to agree to. I brought them both together as a group, and they started collaboratively talking about the master plan. The master plan was built by the community and the developer, and Mr. Martinez is there as a witness because he was part of that, even though he's not a member of those associations, he helped guide them so that they understood those processes. So, the master plan is a culmination of uses that they wanted in the neighborhood and what they didn't want in the neighborhood. And they painstakingly went over every single use that the business capital district allows, and they extracted and they left and they extracted until we came up with that master plan. When it went before the Planning Commission, there was a lot of discussion about the mural, just like there is tonight. There was no condition approved as part of that master plan by the commission, and the governing body did not add that condition despite the same discussions that were present tonight. So if the developer is willing to meet the master plan criteria and he wishes to keep the mural, that is something that he's able to do. If he's able to meet a middle of the ground by adding it to a wall, then I think that that's something that the developer has to agree to. If there was another condition identifying that if there was a condition that can be imposed that if he sells this property, it can move forward with the next buyer. If you added that as a condition, that next buyer, if they made any changes, did a new development plan, they would have to come before this body. That's a condition that would have to be reapplied because it would be a new development plan technically. So, I just wanted to make sure that everybody is aware of the time that it took for this master plan to be approved and that it wasn't just, if I could find that video, I would love to show you, but it wasn't one or two people that came in support of this master plan, but it was the entire neighborhood. In fact, they walked their neighborhood to get a petition signed from the entire community for that master plan approval. That secondary entrance along Allred Street that leads into that initial, not the one closest to the Railyard, but the one furthest away that goes into the parking area. Traffic did not want that particular access. They did not want to have another access point off of Allred Street, and parking did not want to lose those parking spaces. So there was some truth tonight. I was supporting the traffic department because we support the DRT team, and the commission recommended because the entire community did not want that second access on Allred Street. They wanted it closed, and they wanted it moved. And as a direct result of that public participation, the Planning Commission recommended to the governing body that that secondary driveway be added to Allred Street and that other driveway be closed. The governing body accepted it. There probably is going to have to be some renegotiation with the traffic department. I do recall that there were going to be some fees associated with the loss of that parking when you actually put that driveway in, and I think there were some conditions in the file that led to that. But that's during the construction phase. So, I just wanted to take you down that history of the master plan before you start deliberating. **Chair:** And I understand that the master plan has been approved and that our decisions are controlled by that. And as I understand what you stated and in the reports, the master plan did not address the mural at all. And so, I don't think the commission can make that a condition, but it sounds to me like the developer is willing to work with the community on that, which is great. And I think the community appreciates that. And it's, you know, up to the developer to really work with the community to make it be something that everybody's happy with. I don't really think that we have the authority to address that issue at all. I would like to hear from the applicant just to answer some of the questions that were raised on safety during the building process, using your private property for public parking. Again, I don't think we have any control over that. It's your private property. You don't have to use it for public parking if you don't want, but if you could address that, the mural, and sort of what your thoughts are in terms of the process for that. Phase two, if you feel like, you know, not being bound by anything, but just sort of letting people know what it might be. And then, and I guess a fence, there were some conversations about a fence along phase two. **Applicant:** The first speaker had two questions. One, where is all the construction parking going to be? The benefit of track two being empty allows that to be the construction staging area. So there shouldn't be any construction parking on the streets at all. The other question she had was, "How long is this going to take?" I'd like to say we could start construction next week. That's not going to happen. We have to get all of the development plan and final plat signed off on. We have to finish the construction drawings. We have to gain a permit, which normally takes increasingly a longer time, probably four or five months, just for the permit. So we hope to get started next spring in construction, and I would suggest that construction phase is at least a year, maybe 14 months. So that was the first two questions Mr. Jent brought up. The left-hand turn out of the easternmost entrance, I think phase two has the opportunity to have access out onto the other street, thereby potentially eliminating a left-hand turn out of that eastern ingress egress. So I think there's some possibilities there as phase two gets developed to create a better traffic ingress egress. What will phase two be? It's taken 10 years to find a developer willing to go forward with this project. They haven't given us a clue, nor are we hired to address Tract B. So, I can't answer that at all of what might happen. I don't think the developers know what they want to do with that. Were there other questions? The mural. I mean, there's been a lot of positive discussions about the murals. Yes, and we, and the developers, we stand by what we submitted tonight. We're, they want to do all three of those. At present, it's at 60% because of city regulations. Maybe you're willing to change some of those, but I think that would take at least a variance. It would, and it's not before us tonight, so we have no authority to address it. Right. So, other questions, Madam Chair, we'll go ahead and look into those for you. Great. Any other questions from any other commissioners? Commissioner McGee, I just wanted to confirm. Are you altering the sidewalks around the property at all? Are we what? Altering the sidewalks. Oh, yeah. They're increased in width. Yes. That's okay. Just wanted to make sure that we called that out again. Thanks. Yeah, they'll all be new sidewalks. Mr. Wheel, so I believe one of the neighbors brought up the north border facade as far as what it was going to, all the northern border of the property, how it's going to be enclosed. I'm not sure I understand your question. Her question was, what will the north border of the property? Ah, yes, I forgot about that one. We sent to the neighborhood a sketch of a six-foot coyote fence with at 10 feet on center, two 16-inch square stuccoed pilasters with coyote fence running, and the six feet is as high as we're allowed to go. We got no feedback on that or complaints about that type of fence along that north wall. Any other questions? If not, are we ready to proceed? Commissioner McGee? Yes. Did we want to ask about the process for the recreation of the murals? For information purposes, sure. I'm sorry, the question. What process do you anticipate going through on these murals for the? Well, we had a lot of input from people that were involved in that, and we're happy to talk to them further on how we manifest that. Absolutely. Thank you. Any other questions? If not, are we ready to proceed with a motion? Okay. Commissioner Rein, I think this might be for staff. Concerned about the two ingress egresses going in on Po, and I think for a road that is so heavily used by pedestrians, walking, biking, all this stuff, and we're talking about multi-modality, like we have Allered, we have the road. I think this is for Get Three, Traffic engineer. Oh. Oh, great. Come on up. Didn't see you back there. Hi. Did you work on this project? It seems like a lot of ins and outs on Po in between two already pretty busy streets to add more ins and outs when there's already streets that this project could go out to and have controlled traffic. And I guess I'm just wondering if there was any studies done or and or looking into ways to not interrupt the SEO with some a decent amount of traffic, more than if it was just a house or something in that area, 10 houses even. Well, we did look at what this particular development would generate out of the development onto the street. And one improvement that was mentioned is the intersection. I mean, this property currently has access right at the intersection, which is not good. Right at the intersection is a driveway that will be closed, moved further back, and be used only for emergencies. So there's a conflict point there that's been removed from the property at the western side of the site completely vehicular. So there's no motorized access that's going to hit Allered before it hits Po. So that's been eliminated. And with respect to Po Epidala itself, this particular development, I think, adds five additional evening peak hour trips. These were sort of modeled, and what is a, is a, this level of a hotel going to generate out, and that was what was most significant. And I'm completely from memory, and I don't think his traffic engineer is here who did that, but in a certain sense, I can say the impact of traffic vehicular onto the street is, it's accommodated by the existing infrastructure that this, that this public, and it's, it's not going to be problematic. It's also in a dense business, mixed-use area, and we anticipate pedestrian traffic would be, you know, many people will choose to walk to the Rail Yard or and such from the site. So, we did look at traffic, and I mean, I guess my question is, if it's so unimpactful, why can't it come out? And, and I know the neighbors aren't going to like this, but just for the sake of the, the whole community and everyone that accesses the Rail Yard from the other neighborhoods all the way down, walking all the way down from Tuneup neighborhood and further, all the parking that goes down that way. It's like, why make more curb cuts and crosswalks and places that bikes have to navigate with street parking and cars coming out onto if it's minimal traffic? Why not use that? It's not that close to the intersection on Allered, the one that's getting the gate that's getting closed off. I guess I'm wondering, I don't know about that. It's concerning to me to interrupt. Okay. So you're, you're asking why that all is being closed just with the exception of emergency traffic? Kind of like, was it looked at as a possible, I understand that the, the neighbors spoke up about this, but as a design and a way to not have interruption on these major sidewalks and, and bikeways and just less street, I mean, there, it's right there. So, I'm just, I guess I'm just curious on the thinking. Sure. And I think that, Go ahead, Mr. Madam Chair, members of the commissioner, Commissioner Capen, as I stated earlier, that the closest access to Allerate Street off of West Alamita, or not as dea, there was not an access there originally. And, but there's not one there now. You see where all those cars are? You see that parking area accessed Aller Street? Originally, the neighborhood through the master plan process, they, they, they wanted that closed. No, not the back one was good. It was the front one. They wanted it closed, and they wanted, they wanted to, and the developer David Barker wanted to breach that curb cut into Po de Peralta traffic. That was, John Romero at the time was adamant he did not want it, did not want that second breach. So it would have kept the two driveways along Allerie Street. The Planning Commission and the governing body gave the community and David Barker that secondary access. That's why it's built into the master plan, adopted as part of the ordinance. So it isn't that they didn't look at everything. They, they're just following the master plan process, given the tools that were given to them based on the, the master plan that the applicant now has to follow. He's obligated by following the master plan because that's how it was adopted by the governing body. I hope moving forward, I guess I will just state this. Thank you. I think you answered this, is that as we're doing things like this with areas that have existing streets like the one that goes into the Rail Yard and all an easy a right in a left out right there on an existing street that doesn't disrupt pedestrian use on these roads is something that I would like to be taken into consideration in the future with these. It just seems right there. I agree. We supported the, the traffic department. You see where that red car is right on Aler Street, where that, that's, that's very close to where that breach is onto Po de Peralta, and all of those are city parking. There's a city parking meter just further up the street, and our parking department was worried because when that, that driveway was going to get onto, that driveway cut was going to go onto Po de Peralta, they were going to lose about two to three parking spaces. And the developer agreed to, to basically offset those fees in order to to get that parking or that driveway. That was about the only thing that was, that was got out of it. Outside of that, the community, they did not want that, and the Planning Commission agreed to it. And the governing body agreed to it. Hear you. I'm just, yep. They're actually eliminating conflict points. So every intersection is an opportunity for a probability of an accident. But by not having the driveway on Allery, those conflicts, they're eliminated. Those conflicts with pedestrians, conflicts with car-to-car, those go away. So actually, Where they are coming out, don't they create new conflicts? Not really, because there's a limit to what's coming out of there. And if there are less points of conflict for that finite number of cars coming out, if there were more options to exit, the probability of conflict goes up. But so you've eliminated, there will be no pedestrian and vehicular conflicts on All Street leaving the hotel. It's, it's moved to conflicts of Po. So then, Where there are more pedestrians that to have conflict with, right, the pedestrians up and down Po. So if there's more cars crossing that, I, I don't want to, okay. You know, I just thought I'd make that point. And unfortunately, there's nothing we can do. So, any more questions? Do we want to make a motion for case 2024-8195 at 1625 Po de Peralta development plan? I recommend approval with the conditions of approval as outlined in this report. Conditions of approval and, And technical corrections recommended by staff. Thank you. And Commissioner Smith, you second. Okay. Commissioner Rein. Yes. Commissioner Capen. Commissioner Smith. Commissioner McGee. Yes. Madam Chair, the motion is passed. Yes. I just like to make the observation that everybody involved with this has done something that I wish we could experience more often. There are deep feelings on all sides. There's controversies, there's culture, there's development, and this is one of the finest conversations I've heard since I've been on this commission. I just want to thank all sides. It was really, it went on a little long for my money, but it was one of the best I've heard. I mean, I agree. It good, positive conversations, and the neighborhood has been really, really thoughtful and very open-minded, and the developer, really appreciate it. Always works when the developer works with the neighborhood from the very beginning to try to make things work out. So, thank everybody. Commissioner McGee, I just want to third that and also thank everyone for bringing in the stories. I feel like you really enriched, you really enriched our experience up here by, I feel like I could see the elephants. So, so thank you, and also thank you to Daniel Esabel for all of the work that you put into supporting the process well before it got to us. So, thank you, Madam Chair. That was a long time ago. Today, I had actually had hair back then. Are you saying never again? No, I do miss it. I'm not going to lie, but I want to say that I have the most fantastic team of planners that I work with that now have taken the ball, and they are just absolutely phenomenal. Every single one of them. Rachel, who has volunteered to take the minutes and has done a fantastic job. I don't know what we would have done. So, I want to thank her and all the rest of my staff who just absolutely just hit it out of the ballpark. And the reports have been really good. Makes our job a lot easier. So, thank everybody. Staff communications. Thank you, Chair Clow. I was going to unmute myself on Zoom, but that wasn't going to work. So, I just wanted to say that we are going to be holding a meeting on September 18th to have a visioning session with the Planning Commission and the public for the General Plan update that we've been working on, Santa Fe Forward. And so, I just want to make that known to the community. We're not done with the hearing yet, folks. But, you know, so that we'll be posting the agenda and more information online and really advertising a little bit more broadly. So, excited for that opportunity to bring you information and the public on the assessment report that we've done with the General Plan and then kind of pivot into our visioning, which is really where do we want to see Santa Fe in the next 20 to 25 years. So, it's going to be a nice meeting and I look forward to it. So, thank you. And I think all the commissioners need to know that there's probably going to be second meetings of the month for quite some time. I know I myself have not put them on my calendar because we haven't had them for a couple years. We used to always have them. But we need to start planning for those. Of course, I won't be here for the October 18th one. I'll be able to pan, but Commissioner Smith will chair it, and then it'll be on Zoom. So, if we don't attend some of those work sessions, I mean, I really plan, and you do too, to really watch them so that we're all up to speed. I also think that there was discussion about the special committees, and in talking to Heather, she talked about that we're going to try to do it as much as possible as a group, which I think would be even better with these special study sessions that are public, so that we're all hearing it and that we might need, though, at some point to break down if there's something more complex that needs more attention. I do think she does want to have a special committee form for the street design program. And so, be thinking about who might be interested in that. And I was surprised that the city employee could make streets so interesting in his discussion. So, it probably wouldn't be a bad committee to sit on. That's great. Yeah. And I thank you, Chair Clow, just for the record, it's going to be on September 18th, not October 18th, this visioning session. And yeah, we're going to, we'll try to utilize that second meeting of the month for these long-range planning efforts that we're undertaking with the General Plan and the code update as well, as a lot of informational things. And Dan and I have been talking as well. We have our new commissioners aren't here tonight, but we do have three new commissioners that have joined us. And we want to bring back folks like Eric Anie from the Planning Commission or Melissa McDonald from our Parks Department and representatives of our development review team from other city departments that participate in this process to speak to the commission and those educational, introductory things at the beginning of sessions, so that we can again, kind of understand the complexities and also the rules and regulations around all of these development approvals. And I also think that our assistant city attorney, Rebecca, is going to give a presentation, I think maybe October 2nd, on the Open Meeting. Oh, yes, yes, I will. So, we're going to be talking about the Open Meeting Act and a rolling quorum and those issues so that we're all on sort of the same page in terms of what we can do and what we can't do, how we need to be careful, and also to help with the three new people that are coming on. Madam Chair, Yes. I know you met him during the study session, but I'd really like to give him a formal introduction and presentation. And that is our new Senior Planner, Nathan. Would you come and introduce yourself and give a little spiel about who you are? And thanks, Dan. Is it on? Are we up? Hi, Commissioners. I'm Nathan Linquist. I started here in July. Moved here from Denver. I was working for the state of Colorado there, and prior to that, I was out at the City of Rifle, which is kind of near Aspen on the Western Slope, and which was a quickly growing community. And so, I'm really looking forward to working here in Santa Fe and living here. It's a nice middle ground size community between Denver and Rifle, like small, or we saying small city, big town, which is a really, really nice place to be. And lots of community involvement, and excited to get to work with the team and working some on the code update as well as the General Plan and be doing some cases as well. So, it's fun to be in a place where we get to do a little bit of everything. So, looking forward to working with you all. Thank you. We're looking forward to it, too. Any matters from the commission? Commissioner McGee. Thank you, Chair Clow. I just wanted to quickly mention that there are four Planning Commissioners that are currently engaged in a process called the Livability Series. It is a monthly series that is kind of facilitated by Homewise, but it focuses on essentially bringing individuals with expertise around housing and sustainable communities and like development in communities to Santa Fe to have conversation. Not this month, but starting, or maybe actually the second, the second Thursday that we'll meet, we're hoping to start bringing some of that information back to the entire commission due to quorum issues. Not all commissioners can be a part of that Livability Series. But we really want to make sure that everyone is getting the benefit that we're getting by sitting in, having really thoughtful conversation about how we can make smart decisions for Santa Fe. Great. That's good. Thank you guys for doing that. It's been great. Madam Chair, Yes. We actually have another employee who's never introduced herself, but you heard her present a case today, and this was her first case before the Planning Commission. If we can bring Alexa up to the podium to introduce herself and talk about her. Thank you, Dan. Yeah, my name is Alexa Humph. I moved here from Michigan around Christmas time, and before this, I was working for the National Park Service as an outdoor recreation. So, I'm excited to be here. It's been a lovely two or three months that I've been working here now. So, yeah, that's all. Thank you. And good presentation tonight. Thanks. Amazing. Anything else? If not, we'll adjourn. Thank you. Well done, team. Well done. You want to go too? Oh, to the bathroom. Oh, yeah. Two more. You can always get up at public comment and go to the bathroom.