Jo
...Jo.
0I
cc
City of Santa Fe Governing Body Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Case No. 2016-137 Appellant Eloy Lucero Applicant/Appellee
Vallecita, LLC
THIS MATTER came before the Governing Body of the City of Santa Fe for hearing on January 25, 2017 (the Hearing) upon the appeal (Appeal) of Eloy Lucero (the Appellant) from the October 6, 2016 decision of the Planning Commission (Commission) approving the request of Vallecita, LLC (the Applicant) for preliminary subdivision plat approval (the Application) to permit the division of 10.73 acres of land south of the intersection of Valley Drive and Vallecita Drive (Property) into 9 residential lots. The Property is vacant and is zoned R-1 (Residential, one dwelling unit per acre). Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Commission Findings and Conclusions) embodying the Commission's September 8, 2016 vote approving the preliminary subdivision plat and the Commission's Order (Commission Order), were adopted by the Commission on October 6, 2016 and were filed with the City Clerk as Item #16-0946. A copy of the Commission Findings and Conclusions and Commission Order is attached as Exhibit A. The record on the Appeal (the Record) includes the following documents: 1. Memorandum titled "Request for Approval of the Recommendation of the City Attorney Pursuant to Santa Fe City Code Section 14-3.17(D)(6) that the Governing Body Dismiss the Appeal ofEloy Lucero", dated January 17, 2017 for the January 25, 2017 Meeting of the Governing Body to the Members of the Governing Body from Zachary Shandler, Assistant City Attorney, regarding Case No. 2016-137 with Exhibits A-G (the Background Memo). 2. The Verified Appeal Petition in Case No. 2016-137, filed on October 31, 2016 (Exhibit A to the Background Memo) (the Petition); 3. The report of Land Use Department (LUD) staff in Commission Case No. 2016-70 for the September 8, 2016 Commission Meeting, with Exhibits A-E (Exhibit C to the Background Memo); 4. Minutes of the September 8, 2016 Commission Meeting (the Minutes) (Exhibit D to the Background Memo); 5. Commission Findings and Conclusions and Commission Order in Case No. 2016-70, incorporating conditions of approval recommended by LUD staff, adopted by the Commission at its October 6, 2016 meeting and identified in the records of the City as Item #16-0946 (Exhibit F to the Background Memo).
1
Case No. 2016-137 City Attorney's Request for Dismissal of An Appeal Appellant Eloy Lucero Page 2 of3
After reviewing the memorandum titled "Request for Approval of the Recommendation of the City Attorney Pursuant to Santa Fe City Code Section 14-3.17(D)(6} that the Governing Body Dismiss the Appeal ofEloy Lucero", the Governing Body hereby FINDS, as follows: FINDINGS OFFACT 1. The Governing Body reviewed the Record and heard the report of City Attorney's Office. 2. Pursuant to Code§ 14-3.17(D)(6), a party filing an appeal must conform to the Code's appeal requirements. 3. Pursuant to Santa Fe City Code (Code)§ 14-3.17(A)(2), a party filing an appeal is required to appeal on one of three bases. 4. Pursuant to Code §14-3.17(D)(6)(a), ifthe Land Use Director and City Attorney's Office determine the appeal does not conform to the Code's appeal requirements, the City Attorney's Office may ask the Governing Body to dismiss the appeal. 5. Based upon the Record, including, without limitation, the Background Memo, Mr. Lucero's appeal did not provide sufficient grounds for any of the three bases of appeal. 6. Mr. Lucero filed an appeal that did not conform to the Code's appeal requirements. 7. Pursuant to Code §14-3.17(D)(6)(a), the Governing Body may accept the City Attorney's Office's recommendation to dismiss the appeal and the decision is final. 8. As a result, Commission Findings of Fact 1 through 17 shall stand. 9. Commission Conclusions of Law 1 through 4 are within the authority ofthe Commission and shall stand. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Under the circumstances and given the material submitted at the Hearing, the Governing Body hereby CONCLUDES: Mr. Lucero's appeal is DISMISSED. Commission Findings ofFact 1 through 17 and Commission Conclusions of Law 1 through 4 shall stand. WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED ON THE 8th OF FEBRUARY 2017 BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF SANTA FE: The Appeal from the Commission's approval of the Application is DISMISSED. The Governing Body's decision may be appealed to District Court.
Mayor
Date:
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
Yolanda Y. Vigil City Clerk
Date:
2
Case No. 2016-137 City Attorney's Request for Dismissal of An Appeal Appellant - Eloy Lucero Page 3 of3
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~~ A.s.s'~ (,~l.ktl'l elley . Brennan
Date:
City Attorney
3
ITEM # lte - D~tf-te City of Santa Fe Planning Commission Findings ofFact and Conclusions of Law Case #20 16-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat Owner's Name- Vallecita, LLC Agent's Name- JenkinsGavin Inc. THIS MATfER came before the Planning Commission (Commission) for hearing on September 8, 2016 upon the application (Application) of JenkinsGavin Inc., agent for Vallecita, LLC (Applicant). The Applicant seeks the Commission's approval of the preliminary subdivision plat for 9lots on
+1-1 0. 73 acres. The property is located south of the intersection of Valley Drive and Vallecita Drive. The property is zoned R-1 (Residential, one dwelling unit per acre). After conducting a public hearing and having heard from staff and all interested persons, the Commission hereby FINDS, as follows: /
FINDINGS OFFACT
1. The Co~ssion hear~ reports from staff andreceived testimony and evidencl' from the Applicant and there were thirteen membersofthe public In attendance to speak~ . . 2. Pursuant to Code § 14-2.3(C)(l), the Commission has the authority review and approve or disapprove subdivision plats. 3. Pursuant to Code § 14-3.7(A)(l)(b) subdivision of land must be approved by the Commission. 4. Code § 14-3.7 (B)(l) requires applicants for preliminary plat approval to comply with the pre-application conference procedures of Code§ 14-3.l(E). 5. Pursuant to Code §14-3.l(E)(l)(a)(ii), pre-application conferences are required prior to submission of applications for subdivisions unless waived. 6. A pre-application conference was held on March 31, 2016 in accordance with the procedures for subdivisions set out in Code§§ 14-3.1(E)(2)(a) and (c). 7. Code§ 14-3.7(B)(2) requires compliance with the early neighborhood notification (ENN) requirements of Code § 14-3.l(F) for preliminary subdivision plats and provides for notice and conduct of public hearings pursuant to the provisions of Code §§ 14-3.1 (H), and (I) respectively. 8. Code§§ 14-3.l(F)(4) and (5) establish procedures for the ENN. 9. The Applicant conducted an ENN meeting on May 12, 2016 at the Santa Fe Public Library Main Branch in accordance with the notice requirement of Code§ 14-3.l(H). 10. The ENN meeting was attended by the Applicant and City staff; there were thirty-four members of the public in attendance and concerns were raised. 11. Code § 14-3.7(C) sets out certain findings that must be made by the Commission to approve a preliminary subdivision plat.
to
l/fi/IJIIIIIiiE•x•H•IB•IT--.
~
a
4
Case #20 16-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat Page2 of4
12. The Commission finds the following facts:
a. In all subdivisions, due regard shall be shown for all natural foatures such as vegetation, water courses, historical sites and structures, and similar community assets that, ifpreserved, will add attractiveness.and value to the area or to Santa Fe. The land to be subdivided meets applicable standards and is eligible for the development purposes proposed. The proposed preliminary plat will comply, subject to recommended conditions of approval and technical corrections. b. The Planning Commission shall give due regard to the opinions of public agencies and shall not approve the plat if it determines that in the best interest of the public health, safety or welfare the land is not suitable for platting and development purposes of the kind proposed The land to be subdivided meets applicable standards and is eligible for the development purposes proposed. i. The buildable lots of the subdivision are not within the Arroyo de las Piedras or designated floodplain, and the portion of the site that lies within the floodplain would be reserved as private open space with a drainage easement. ii. The Applicant's proposed design has been reviewed by the City's Development Review Team in accordance with Chapter 14 for Terrain Management and Escarpment regulations and that review has determined that each building lot can be developed in accordance with applicable standards. c. All plats shall comply with the standards ofChapter 14, Article 9 (Infrastructure Design, Improvements and Dedication Standards). The proposed plat complies with applicable standards ofChapter 14, Article 9. 1. The proposed preliminary plat identifies the location of existing water and sewer lines and new water and sewer main extensions, as required at this stage. ii. The proposed subdivision will meet applicable standards for access to and within the subdivision. d. A plat shall be not approved that creates a noncoriformity or increases the extent or degree ofan existing nonconformity with the provisions ofChapter 14 unless a variance is approved concurrently with the plat. No variances are required or have been requested for this subdivision. Approval of the proposed subdivision would not create nonconformities under current city regulations. e. A plat shall be not approved that creates a nonconformity or increases the extent or degree of an existing nonconformity with the applicable provisions of other chapters of the Santa Fe City Code unless an exception is approved pursuant to the procedures provided in that chapter prior to approval of the plat. The proposed plat will not create a nonconfonnity with any other chapter of the Santa Fe City Code. 13. The Applicant submitted a traffic study, which showed the subdivision would add nine vehicles in peak afternoon time. 14. The Applicant stated it would be willing to do a second traffic study prior to submittal of the Final Subdivision Plat. 15. The Traffic Engineer provided that the second traffic study should include a Scope of:
Page 2 of4
5
Case #2016-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat
Page3 of4
a. The traffic study shall include the following intersections: (i) Valley Drive and Bishop's Lodge Road; (ii) Valley Drive and Vallecita Drive b. The applicant's traffic engineering consultant shall analyze each intersection for Level of Service (LOS), capacity, source generation and actual on-the-ground counts. c. The consultant shall also evaluate the crash history at the intersection of Vallecita Drive and Valley Drive. 16. Code§ 14·3.7(B)(3)(b) requires the Applicant to submit a preliminary plat prepared by a professional land surveyor, together with improvement plans and other specified supplementary material and in conformance with the standards of Code § 14·9 (collectively, the Applicable Requirements). 17. City Land Use Department staff reviewed the Application and related materials and information submitted by the Applicant for conformity with applicable Code requirements and provided the Commission with a written report of its findings (Staff Rsmort) together with a recommendation that the preliminary subdivision plat be approved, subject to certain conditions (the Conditions) set out in such report. 18. The information contained in the Staff Report, along with conditions in Sta:ff's Exhibit, is sufficient to establish that the Applicable Requirements have been met. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Under the circumstances and given the evidence and testimony submitted during the hearing, the Commission CONCLUDES as follows: General I. The proposed preliminary subdivision plat was properly and sufficiently noticed via mail, publication, and posting of signs in accordance with Code requirements. 2. The Applicant has complied with the applicable pre-application conference and ENN procedure requirements of the Code. The Preliminary Subdivision Plat 3. The Commission has the authority to review and approve the preliminary plat subject to conditions. 4. The Applicable Requirements have been met.
WHEREFORE, IT IS SO ORDERED ON THE 6th OF October 2016 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA FE That the Applicant's requests for preliminary subdivision plat is approved, subject to Staff conditions and completion of the traffic study prior to submittal for Final Subdivision Plat.
(Signatures to Follow on Next Page]
Page 3 of4
6
Case #2016-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat Page4 of4
h~~ Vince Ka ubek Chair
Date:
Date:
Date:
dler Assistant City Attorney
Page 4 of4
7
0I
cc
City of Santa Fe Governing Body Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Case No. 2016-137 Appellant Eloy Lucero Applicant/Appellee
Vallecita, LLC
THIS MATTER came before the Governing Body of the City of Santa Fe for hearing on January 25, 2017 (the Hearing) upon the appeal (Appeal) of Eloy Lucero (the Appellant) from the October 6, 2016 decision of the Planning Commission (Commission) approving the request of Vallecita, LLC (the Applicant) for preliminary subdivision plat approval (the Application) to permit the division of 10.73 acres of land south of the intersection of Valley Drive and Vallecita Drive (Property) into 9 residential lots. The Property is vacant and is zoned R-1 (Residential, one dwelling unit per acre). Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (Commission Findings and Conclusions) embodying the Commission's September 8, 2016 vote approving the preliminary subdivision plat and the Commission's Order (Commission Order), were adopted by the Commission on October 6, 2016 and were filed with the City Clerk as Item #16-0946. A copy of the Commission Findings and Conclusions and Commission Order is attached as Exhibit A. The record on the Appeal (the Record) includes the following documents: 1. Memorandum titled "Request for Approval of the Recommendation of the City Attorney Pursuant to Santa Fe City Code Section 14-3.17(D)(6) that the Governing Body Dismiss the Appeal ofEloy Lucero", dated January 17, 2017 for the January 25, 2017 Meeting of the Governing Body to the Members of the Governing Body from Zachary Shandler, Assistant City Attorney, regarding Case No. 2016-137 with Exhibits A-G (the Background Memo). 2. The Verified Appeal Petition in Case No. 2016-137, filed on October 31, 2016 (Exhibit A to the Background Memo) (the Petition); 3. The report of Land Use Department (LUD) staff in Commission Case No. 2016-70 for the September 8, 2016 Commission Meeting, with Exhibits A-E (Exhibit C to the Background Memo); 4. Minutes of the September 8, 2016 Commission Meeting (the Minutes) (Exhibit D to the Background Memo); 5. Commission Findings and Conclusions and Commission Order in Case No. 2016-70, incorporating conditions of approval recommended by LUD staff, adopted by the Commission at its October 6, 2016 meeting and identified in the records of the City as Item #16-0946 (Exhibit F to the Background Memo).
1
Case No. 2016-137 City Attorney's Request for Dismissal of An Appeal Appellant Eloy Lucero Page 2 of3
After reviewing the memorandum titled "Request for Approval of the Recommendation of the City Attorney Pursuant to Santa Fe City Code Section 14-3.17(D)(6} that the Governing Body Dismiss the Appeal ofEloy Lucero", the Governing Body hereby FINDS, as follows: FINDINGS OFFACT 1. The Governing Body reviewed the Record and heard the report of City Attorney's Office. 2. Pursuant to Code§ 14-3.17(D)(6), a party filing an appeal must conform to the Code's appeal requirements. 3. Pursuant to Santa Fe City Code (Code)§ 14-3.17(A)(2), a party filing an appeal is required to appeal on one of three bases. 4. Pursuant to Code §14-3.17(D)(6)(a), ifthe Land Use Director and City Attorney's Office determine the appeal does not conform to the Code's appeal requirements, the City Attorney's Office may ask the Governing Body to dismiss the appeal. 5. Based upon the Record, including, without limitation, the Background Memo, Mr. Lucero's appeal did not provide sufficient grounds for any of the three bases of appeal. 6. Mr. Lucero filed an appeal that did not conform to the Code's appeal requirements. 7. Pursuant to Code §14-3.17(D)(6)(a), the Governing Body may accept the City Attorney's Office's recommendation to dismiss the appeal and the decision is final. 8. As a result, Commission Findings of Fact 1 through 17 shall stand. 9. Commission Conclusions of Law 1 through 4 are within the authority ofthe Commission and shall stand. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Under the circumstances and given the material submitted at the Hearing, the Governing Body hereby CONCLUDES: Mr. Lucero's appeal is DISMISSED. Commission Findings ofFact 1 through 17 and Commission Conclusions of Law 1 through 4 shall stand. WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED ON THE 8th OF FEBRUARY 2017 BY THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF SANTA FE: The Appeal from the Commission's approval of the Application is DISMISSED. The Governing Body's decision may be appealed to District Court.
Mayor
Date:
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
Yolanda Y. Vigil City Clerk
Date:
2
Case No. 2016-137 City Attorney's Request for Dismissal of An Appeal Appellant - Eloy Lucero Page 3 of3
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
~~~ A.s.s'~ (,~l.ktl'l elley . Brennan
Date:
City Attorney
3
ITEM # lte - D~tf-te City of Santa Fe Planning Commission Findings ofFact and Conclusions of Law Case #20 16-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat Owner's Name- Vallecita, LLC Agent's Name- JenkinsGavin Inc. THIS MATfER came before the Planning Commission (Commission) for hearing on September 8, 2016 upon the application (Application) of JenkinsGavin Inc., agent for Vallecita, LLC (Applicant). The Applicant seeks the Commission's approval of the preliminary subdivision plat for 9lots on
+1-1 0. 73 acres. The property is located south of the intersection of Valley Drive and Vallecita Drive. The property is zoned R-1 (Residential, one dwelling unit per acre). After conducting a public hearing and having heard from staff and all interested persons, the Commission hereby FINDS, as follows: /
FINDINGS OFFACT
1. The Co~ssion hear~ reports from staff andreceived testimony and evidencl' from the Applicant and there were thirteen membersofthe public In attendance to speak~ . . 2. Pursuant to Code § 14-2.3(C)(l), the Commission has the authority review and approve or disapprove subdivision plats. 3. Pursuant to Code § 14-3.7(A)(l)(b) subdivision of land must be approved by the Commission. 4. Code § 14-3.7 (B)(l) requires applicants for preliminary plat approval to comply with the pre-application conference procedures of Code§ 14-3.l(E). 5. Pursuant to Code §14-3.l(E)(l)(a)(ii), pre-application conferences are required prior to submission of applications for subdivisions unless waived. 6. A pre-application conference was held on March 31, 2016 in accordance with the procedures for subdivisions set out in Code§§ 14-3.1(E)(2)(a) and (c). 7. Code§ 14-3.7(B)(2) requires compliance with the early neighborhood notification (ENN) requirements of Code § 14-3.l(F) for preliminary subdivision plats and provides for notice and conduct of public hearings pursuant to the provisions of Code §§ 14-3.1 (H), and (I) respectively. 8. Code§§ 14-3.l(F)(4) and (5) establish procedures for the ENN. 9. The Applicant conducted an ENN meeting on May 12, 2016 at the Santa Fe Public Library Main Branch in accordance with the notice requirement of Code§ 14-3.l(H). 10. The ENN meeting was attended by the Applicant and City staff; there were thirty-four members of the public in attendance and concerns were raised. 11. Code § 14-3.7(C) sets out certain findings that must be made by the Commission to approve a preliminary subdivision plat.
to
l/fi/IJIIIIIiiE•x•H•IB•IT--.
~
a
4
Case #20 16-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat Page2 of4
12. The Commission finds the following facts:
a. In all subdivisions, due regard shall be shown for all natural foatures such as vegetation, water courses, historical sites and structures, and similar community assets that, ifpreserved, will add attractiveness.and value to the area or to Santa Fe. The land to be subdivided meets applicable standards and is eligible for the development purposes proposed. The proposed preliminary plat will comply, subject to recommended conditions of approval and technical corrections. b. The Planning Commission shall give due regard to the opinions of public agencies and shall not approve the plat if it determines that in the best interest of the public health, safety or welfare the land is not suitable for platting and development purposes of the kind proposed The land to be subdivided meets applicable standards and is eligible for the development purposes proposed. i. The buildable lots of the subdivision are not within the Arroyo de las Piedras or designated floodplain, and the portion of the site that lies within the floodplain would be reserved as private open space with a drainage easement. ii. The Applicant's proposed design has been reviewed by the City's Development Review Team in accordance with Chapter 14 for Terrain Management and Escarpment regulations and that review has determined that each building lot can be developed in accordance with applicable standards. c. All plats shall comply with the standards ofChapter 14, Article 9 (Infrastructure Design, Improvements and Dedication Standards). The proposed plat complies with applicable standards ofChapter 14, Article 9. 1. The proposed preliminary plat identifies the location of existing water and sewer lines and new water and sewer main extensions, as required at this stage. ii. The proposed subdivision will meet applicable standards for access to and within the subdivision. d. A plat shall be not approved that creates a noncoriformity or increases the extent or degree ofan existing nonconformity with the provisions ofChapter 14 unless a variance is approved concurrently with the plat. No variances are required or have been requested for this subdivision. Approval of the proposed subdivision would not create nonconformities under current city regulations. e. A plat shall be not approved that creates a nonconformity or increases the extent or degree of an existing nonconformity with the applicable provisions of other chapters of the Santa Fe City Code unless an exception is approved pursuant to the procedures provided in that chapter prior to approval of the plat. The proposed plat will not create a nonconfonnity with any other chapter of the Santa Fe City Code. 13. The Applicant submitted a traffic study, which showed the subdivision would add nine vehicles in peak afternoon time. 14. The Applicant stated it would be willing to do a second traffic study prior to submittal of the Final Subdivision Plat. 15. The Traffic Engineer provided that the second traffic study should include a Scope of:
Page 2 of4
5
Case #2016-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat
Page3 of4
a. The traffic study shall include the following intersections: (i) Valley Drive and Bishop's Lodge Road; (ii) Valley Drive and Vallecita Drive b. The applicant's traffic engineering consultant shall analyze each intersection for Level of Service (LOS), capacity, source generation and actual on-the-ground counts. c. The consultant shall also evaluate the crash history at the intersection of Vallecita Drive and Valley Drive. 16. Code§ 14·3.7(B)(3)(b) requires the Applicant to submit a preliminary plat prepared by a professional land surveyor, together with improvement plans and other specified supplementary material and in conformance with the standards of Code § 14·9 (collectively, the Applicable Requirements). 17. City Land Use Department staff reviewed the Application and related materials and information submitted by the Applicant for conformity with applicable Code requirements and provided the Commission with a written report of its findings (Staff Rsmort) together with a recommendation that the preliminary subdivision plat be approved, subject to certain conditions (the Conditions) set out in such report. 18. The information contained in the Staff Report, along with conditions in Sta:ff's Exhibit, is sufficient to establish that the Applicable Requirements have been met. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Under the circumstances and given the evidence and testimony submitted during the hearing, the Commission CONCLUDES as follows: General I. The proposed preliminary subdivision plat was properly and sufficiently noticed via mail, publication, and posting of signs in accordance with Code requirements. 2. The Applicant has complied with the applicable pre-application conference and ENN procedure requirements of the Code. The Preliminary Subdivision Plat 3. The Commission has the authority to review and approve the preliminary plat subject to conditions. 4. The Applicable Requirements have been met.
WHEREFORE, IT IS SO ORDERED ON THE 6th OF October 2016 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SANTA FE That the Applicant's requests for preliminary subdivision plat is approved, subject to Staff conditions and completion of the traffic study prior to submittal for Final Subdivision Plat.
(Signatures to Follow on Next Page]
Page 3 of4
6
Case #2016-70 Alma Dura Preliminary Subdivision Plat Page4 of4
h~~ Vince Ka ubek Chair
Date:
Date:
Date:
dler Assistant City Attorney
Page 4 of4
7
