Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Uh, we'll call the meeting of the April 17, 2025 Santa Fe County Planning Commission to order. May I get a roll call, please? Yes. Carl Trillo, Dan Pava, Wendy PR, Duger here. Um Jeremy Mia here. Jose L Cruz Crawford here and Eric here. You have a quorum. Thank you very much. So please let's stand for the pledge of allegiance. Okay, we have a new planning commission uh staff. Would you like to introduce our new uh commissioner? Chair, commission members, I'd like to introduce you to uh Mr. Jose Lu uh is it Luis Jose Luis uh L Crawford. Um and uh he's uh very well known in uh in um the Santa Fe County Land Use Department. You know, we've worked with him. Um he's a he's an architect and um we've worked with him and he's really knowledgeable of the SLDC and of construction in general. So, we'd like to welcome him to the planning commission. Thanks very much. And yeah, we we welcome you here and this is fun and um we hope to see none of your cases here before the planning commission. Thank Thank you. I'm glad to be here.

Great. Thank you. Um next item on the agenda is approval of this agenda. Um staff, are there any changes to the agenda? Uh chair, commissioners, there are no changes to the agenda. Okay. May I get a motion to approve the agenda? to approve the agenda. Thank you, Commissioner Buger. Is there a second? I'll second. Thank you. All those in favor, please signify by saying, "I I." Any opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. The next item is approval of the meeting minutes for the March 20th, 2025 planning commission. Uh are there any suggested changes to those minutes? May I get a motion to approve? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. Thank you, Commissioner Meyer. And may I get a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Ruger. Uh, all those in favor of approval, please signify by saying I. I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion passes. Next is the consent agenda. We have a single case. Um, case 245300. Um, may I get a motion to approve the consent agenda? Thank you, Commissioner Buger. May I get a second? I'll second. Thank you. Um, all those in favor, uh, please signify by saying, "I I." Any opposed? That motion passes. Uh, new business is case number 24-5270, Robert Sherwin variance. Um, so great. Uh, would you staff ready to go? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission members, John Lovato, building development services. I'm a supervisor. Robert Sherwin, applicant, requests

approval of a variance of chapter 8, table 8-10 dimensional standards to allow a second two-story residence on a 2.50 acre parcel. Currently, the applicant has an existing residence that is 4,000 square ft and a guest home with a loft which is 922 square ft. The subject property lies within the residential estate zoning district where the base density is one dwelling per 2 and a half acres. The property is located at 28 Estreas Dano within township 17 north range 9 east section 4 commission district 1 SDA 2. applicant states that he bought the property as is with the two-story residence on the property in 2016. There are three permits that have been associated for this property. Permit 20 4040 is for a low impact home occupation. 2539 is for a storage addition to the garage and 94987 is for an addition remodel. Anra request for permit 94987 was unable to be located and permit 2539 references the ADU as a studio on the plat. Applicants plans illustrate a guest house on the illustration provided on the site plan contrary to the plat. The request for an accessory dwelling does not meet standards as the unit is two stories measuring 19 feet 6 in exceeding the height that would allow it to qualify for an accessory dwelling unit and is on an individual septic system that is not registered and does not have a leech field which is contrary to the SLD standards of the accessory dwelling unit as defined by the SLDC section 10.4.2.3. Therefore, the request is for density variance. Planning Commission members, I want to note that last paragraph that I read has been um re-reviewed and they have provided a

septic permit with the actual leech fields and the actual um location of that. So, they do have two septic systems. Thank you very much, John. The applicant has addressed the variance criteria and staff has responded to the applicant's responses as contained in the memo. At the February 13, 2025, the Santa Fe County Sustainable Land Development Hearing Officer Met and acted on this case, the hearing officer stated the application failed to meet the requirements of chapter 4.9.74 for variances to the density requirements of table 8-10 that allows one dwelling per 2 and 1/2 acres. The application did not set forth extraordinary and exceptional situations or conditions of the property to justify granting a variance and the spirit of the SLDC is to maintain the density requirements of the code. Staff recommends denial of the request for a variance to allow the two dwelling units on the 2.5 acre parcel. If the decision of the Santa Fe County Planning Commission is to approve the variance, staff recommends the following conditions be imposed. Mr. Chair may enter those conditions into the record. Yes, please. And for the record, I'd like to strike condition number four that the applicant shall provide a OSE NMED permits at the time of after the fact permit submitt that has been provided. Thank you. This report and exhibits listed below are hereby submitted as part of the hearing record. Thank you, Mr. Chair and planning commission members. I stand for any questions you may have. Thank you, John. Um, commissioners, do you have any questions of staff? Commissioner Pava. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, good afternoon. I regarding the, uh, original building permit and the conversation throughout the staff

report and documentation about the house being built in the time frame of 1989, 1990ish, uh, and that there was no building permit located. Could you elaborate if there's any new information regarding that because there's been uh I'll call it testimony submitted at the hearing officers um um meeting that indeed there there may be something or it's not searchable because it was paper and could if you could just elaborate a little bit Mr. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Pava. Um, so the residence is permitted and is recognized on our legal lot of record plat as well as the the structure in question which is was permitted as a studio. Sometime between then and when the applicants purchased the property um it was found to be converted with a loft on top which qualifies it as a secondary dwelling as its uh function is a fourbedroom. a follow- on question to that. Thank you for that information. So, it sounds like there is uh documentation that there is a building permit dating back to the original uh construction on the site, if I got that right, of the two of the two units, right, Mr. Chair, Commission Member Pava, it was recognized by the by the plat of legal lot of record as a studio. Therefore, we okay, even though we were unable to locate the actual permit for that, uh we still recognize that. Okay. Um a related question has to do with um how this all came to the attention of the county that they're now uh requesting the variance. Kind of read it between the lines in the staff report, but maybe you could illuminate us a little bit more as to how this came to the attention of the county and why we're why we're hearing this now. M Mr. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Pava, um

the applicant came in for a short-term rental and that when that's when it was discovered that it was a full-blown residence and didn't meet the criteria set forth in the SLDC. U thereafter, sorry. Thereafter, we did uh issue them a temporary STR while the applicant went through the process of the bearings. Thank you. And regarding that short-term rental, um, so the applicant came in to apply for a short-term rental. Does staff have indication that there was a short-term rental business happening on the property prior to that? Mr. Chair, Commission Member Pava, we uh staff would have never really known this until the STR ordinance came into effect. Uh-huh. Um that's the the catch 22 in this scenario. But then thereafter um we did note that there was a home occupation associated with the property and we assumed that they did utilize that structure for part of the component of their home occupation. I see. Okay. Yeah. I noticed the home occupation license was granted what in 20 Mr. Chair, the home occupation was in 2020. Okay, that helps. Thank you. Are there any other questions from commissioners? I Yeah, I do have a question. Um, so one thing I'm trying to um just kind of a follow up to what the commissioner mentioned. So with respect to this, we've got a uh another unit that essentially doesn't qualify as an ADU under the SLDC. So it's being looked at as another f uh single family dwelling. Is that correct,

Mr. Chair, Commission Member, that is correct. It is a um it was recognized as a studio. on part of that is that it has a second story which is a loft that didn't qualify as an S for a for not so much a short-term rental but a ADU and and secondly at the time we didn't or thirdly at the time we did not know uh where the septic system was and whether there was permits for that septic system which have since been provided. Gotcha. So uh so because of the fact of the extra height that it has doesn't meet the ADU. Obviously the separate septic tank also doesn't meet the requirements for the ADU. Now my question I guess is with respect to this is with the with the fact that the zoning allows only a single dwelling unit for 2.5 acre lot. Um if this was to be approved does that mean that there would be no no additional ADU allowed if uh if that was the case? Mr. Chair, commission member, that is correct. We do have an a condition on on the approval. And a follow-up question with that with respect to that with are there any is there anything that would need to be recorded I guess or any plats that would need to be recorded? Anything with respect to this if any you know whether it's denied or approved or whatnot so that way there could be some kind of recording for what was what's gets decided here. Mr. Chair, Commission, Member Crawford, we can do that. However, it will be noted in the in the development order or the finding of fact that will be presented to you at such time. Um, and it'll also be noted on the actual final order of any building permit that comes through our department. Any other questions? Commissioner Buger. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I have a few questions. The

uh first background um so the use in question is uh guess it could be categorized as bed and breakfast slash retreat. Um, so is it's correct is it correct that a bed and breakfast retreat use is not a permitted use by a right in a rural estate zone, but it's uh it can be approved as a conditional use. Is is that correct? Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, I believe that's the the fact, but I do not have the ordinance in front of me to give you a definitive answer on that. I can look into that. Okay. Uh if it is, is it even if it is a uh not a by right but conditional use, at least my version of the code has that. Um, is it correct that if you're approved for a home occupation license, uh, you can operate a qualifying home business in a zone where it otherwise would not be permitted by right. That might be a legal question as much as that. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, I believe you're accurate on that. um they do have an home occupation which has specific criteria that only allows such amount of visits per day uh square footage to be utilized and so on and so forth. Um the other second part to that for the ADU would be a standalone on its own and granted where it's permissible. So follow up. So they have a for home occupation license and from the report a excellent staff report it uh it's a guess is there's different there's no impact there's a

low impact and then there's a medium impact uh home occupations and they were designated as a low impact uh rather than a medium. Is that correct? That is correct. Commission member, the uh and if it were designated as a medium impact, there was a um it is there would be u per the code there would have to be other than a minimal increase in traffic uh and visitation on the property there would be no further quoting the the code no further exterior signs that there was a home business. The only reason I asked that is because at least some of the material that I read uh from folks opposing the uh um this this request uh commented on the uses that were happening exterior. So uh but but they are a low impact use. Correct. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, that is correct. Okay. [Music] Uh there was discussion in the um staff report about uh and kind of request justifying by the uh by the consultant representing the the applicants that this should be grandfathered in.

uh because the the use was existing. uh um is uh to your knowledge uh prior to the implementation of the SLDC was uh uh was the zoning the same or was it different? If I understood what the uh the applicant uh the consultant was saying is that uh it might have the rules might have changed from before to when the LD SLDC was approved. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, while the rules did change, uh Santa Fe County prior to the SLDC was based off of water hydrarology. uh for more likely reasons it was it's always remained two and a halfs in this general location. This area was known as the extr territorial zoning um area and so there was a two and a five mile. Those basically stayed the same in terms of lot size requirements um as well as many other locations within Santa Fe County. So density really didn't density controls didn't change really from before to now. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger. Um, correct. And just the justification behind that to kind of give a little more backup to that would be the fact that it was permitted or what we have as record as a as a studio, which told me basically they weren't allowed a secondary residence at the time. And as the SLDs changed, SLDC came into effect, that's when uh ADUs were being granted for certain areas. Okay. Mr. Lovato, um is the word studio

defined in either the SLDC or the previous code that it replaced? Mr. Chair, commission members, I'm not sure about the previous code. I I believe it was from my knowledge. Um and it is in our SLDC. So, it is essentially an accessory. It's an accessory structure that may have plumbing but cannot be used as a residence. Is that right? I'm just trying to understand what those requirements for a studio are. Mr. Chair, that is correct. It It's allowed to have a a toilet. It's allowed to have a sink, utility sink. It's not allowed to have a shower or be functioned as or can be converted into an accessory dwelling and that's in the 201620 2017 SLDC whenever that was adopted. Right, Mr. Chair, planning commission members that is correct. Thank you very much. Commissioner Buger, do you guys some more? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh I I read somewhere in the report that it I may have got this wrong, but if this if this request were not approved, um were you asking them to or directing the applicant to take down the loft? Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, we would not um give that type of information. we would ask that they bring in compliance. That could be a possibility that they do. So, um they could remove the loft, they can do an addition and um being that their permit was done prior to 19 to the prior SLDC, I'm sorry. Um we would recognize that it's its own standalone septic system. Um because we did allow ADUs back or accessory structures, I should say, under the old ordinance to have a its own standalone septic system.

So that would be a fix for them to do an addition 400 foot take off the loft. It's no longer two stories. Meets the criteria of the SLDC that so so if this were not approved then you would you you would be forgive me for being dense. uh you would be asking them to take down the loft and they could do an addition but they'd have to spend the money to take take the loft down or could that be grandfathered in? Mr. Chair, commission members. So the request here is for density. It's no we're not really discussing but since it plays a factor into this that would be their that would be their fix. Um it'll be a singlestory structure which is required by our accessory dwelling. We would recognize the septic permit as it was done prior to our ordinance and granted back when and they would fit the SLD standards SLDC standards because they would be still under the maximum 1400 foot as their house is 4,000 foot. So they'd be half of what they have and they would meet the standards of the ADU. Okay. Thank you. Any other commissioners have questions? Yeah, I'd like to follow up on that grandfathering questions that that was brought up. So, I understand that um I believe the last code that was up prior to SOC was a 1996 one. Um and yeah, I was I briefly looked at it and I think it's yeah, nothing brings up ADA ads. It just brings up accessory an accessory structure. Um do you recall if there are any height restrictions in that previous code? because I'm just wondering when this was permitted since it seems like some permits were issued, did it did it meet the current code at the time? Mr.

Chair, Commission Member uh Cruz. Yeah, I'm sorry, Dea Cruz. Um, it would be so the question is would it would the height be allowed is what I'm hearing. Right. He just I guess as a more general question, you know, since I believe it sounds like a permit was issued at the time, at least for the studio, um would it have met the code at the time? And then I guess a follow-up question because I guess there was some sort of remodel that was done, but I wasn't sure was a permit actually found for the remodel um or not. Mr. Chair, Commissioner member, um that is correct. it would meet it would have met the standards back uh in 1996 ordinance. Um as it is now, it does not meet those standards and and the permit that we tried to pull from our archives was unable to be located. Um but I can tell you we recognized this as a studio which would be an accessory structure um due to the fact that legal lot of records indicated it was a studio. Okay. Um, and then I I think you kind of hit something that for me, so as you mentioned, it's more of a density request as opposed to like, you know, uh, an ADU request of any kind. So, I did not take a look at the zoning map, but is this property located near another zone or is it kind of smack in the middle of a zone? I guess my my question for that is are is there an adjacent zoning near it that has a different density requirement because I know sometimes there are changes to the zoning map. Mr. Chair, uh, commission members, I can't tell you the exact distance from another zoning district, but it's quite a bit of ways. This general area was again based off the old hydraology and then converted into our new SLDC as as the proper zoning district it's located in.

One more history question, Mr. Lovato. Um, so the SLDC, um, the 96 code, it appears that this this was referenced as a studio on the plat in 1991. So, do we know? So, what I'm trying to understand is was everything done legitimately in at the time that it was constructed? Because this is not a request to construct something new. This is a request to use the existing structures that may or may not have been um put in legitimately at the time um for a use. So, you know, we've we've seen this case a number of times in with with different properties because of the the short-term rental pushes everybody back through a new civ. Um and so I what I'm trying to understand is were the rules followed in 1991? um for this and and sorry because it's like going back in time. Mr. Chair, commission members, I can tell you that we recognize it due to the legal lot of record plat whether or not it was built to the actual standards or what those elevations indicate on those plans that were unable to be located. I cannot tell you. Uh but staff has taken the initiative to recognize the structure as a studio which is an accessory structure in 1991. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Pava, sorry, John, to put you on the spot, but um follow-up question to the notification requirements here. Uh can you give us an idea of how many adjacent properties were notified and with what distance? Remind me what the requirement is for notification. And uh I know we had some people uh submitting their comments in opposition at the hearing officers. So, I'm kind of

curious to know how many how many adjacent property owners might have been notified for this case and I don't know if it's 100 ft or if it's more than that. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Pava, it is required by repair ordinance that they notify anyone within 500 ft of their property boundary. And that's for actual pre-application or neighborhood meetings and our general noticing requirements. I do have under exhibit H a listing of all the members they've sent this out to approximately since I don't have that handy in front of me I'm sorry to ask can you give me a general idea of how many people might have been notified within 500 ft roughly 20 member public any other commissioners have questions of staff just one one Last one. Sorry. So, I was just curious because um you know obviously single family and ADU etc. um with an ADU current SOTC code generally has some requirements as far as like utilities being on the same um you know same access and so on so forth in this situation where it's got a separate sectic field and so forth. I'm just curious, is there what any other current SLD codes would apply to this what would be now a single family dwelling or if if it was approved or or if it wasn't, etc. I'm just trying to figure out what other kind of um code requirements might apply in this. So, Mr. Chair, commission members, uh they will if it was an ADU and we're moving forward towards that route, they would be required to share a driveway access point. It would be required to share septic system and all utilities. Um the structure has to somewhat be of the same in principle or principal residence. Um so it has to

look the same. The aesthetics have to be the same. Uh pitch roof, pitch roof, flat roof, flat roof. We kind of work around those standards, try to make things fit. Um all other aspects as I'm aware of meet the criteria for that other than the separate septic system. Any other questions? Commissioners, Mr. Chair, I don't have any questions, but given the questions and the issues that have been raised by the commissioner's comments, I I would like to point out a couple of SLDC provisions that that are applicable. Please do. That that may answer some of the questions. uh and it concerns what is referred to as a non-conforming use or a non-conforming structure. That's the equivalent of the grandfathering uh that the the applicants mentioned in their response to the hearing officer uh recommended decision. Uh I I think at least a couple of the pertinent provisions regarding non-conforming uses is that those uses or structures uh have to have been in existence and lawfully constructed at the uh at the time that they were put in. They have to have been in uh constructed in accordance with laws and regulations at that time. the burden is on an applicant to seek and prove uh the the non-conforming use or the satis satisfying those conditions. Perhaps more you significant is the fact that when a non-conforming use is found to exist and is established, that non-conforming use cannot change. And uh

there there would be some certainly uh issue and concern with a a studio even if it was deemed to be a non-conforming use becoming a any type of actual residential dwelling unit. Thank you very much. Roger. I I'm just trying to understand, you know, the word studio in the current code says no shower. in the previous code two codes ago may or may not have and so that's the you know that that's the dissonance I'm I'm seeing but thank you very much any other questions of staff commissioner Buger Mike question just follow up on uh what Mr. Pino had just stated. So to be determined as a non-conforming use, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that all provisions were met, including not just county code, but uh but building code. Would that be a fair conclusion? The phrase in the SLDC is lawfully constructed. Um that could be interpreted to incorporate all bu all building codes. So with that interpretation then to be at least as as I understand it u to be determined as a non-conforming use then you would have to demonstrate that you complied with county provisions and that uh CI construction industries division um um approved

u approved the construction, you had a permit to do that. I ideally uh yes, obviously there are practical hindrances to to some of those requirements, but ideally yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger. Um that is one of the reasons why we have the applicant shall submit an application after the fact permit to ensure this gets looked at properly by both county staff and construction industries of New Mexico. Thank you Mr. Vato. Thank you very much Commissioner Pava. Thank you uh Mr. Chair. So this is kind of a hypothetical. Let's say the the applicant lives on the property, has this studio, whatever it is, but doesn't have doesn't carry on short-term rentals, doesn't pursue that, but pursues their business, which if you go online shows all the kind of spa treatments that they offer, but it's that people come and go. They don't stay there. does that um um if in such a situation as that would would they even be here applying for the density variance or does the issue go away or is there still the issue even though they're not going to use it as a short-term rental or as an ADU but as a studio for maybe daytime activities does the issue go away? Mr. Chair, Commission Member Pava, it does not go away. Um due to the fact that Santa Fe count county has acknowledged that this is um not in compliance with our requirements, code enforcement will do any type of action to bring the structure into compliance. Thanks very much. Any other commissioners have any other questions

of staff? Thanks. Um so the applicant or their agent um uh please stand. Anyone who is interested in speaking, please be sworn in. Thank you. Thank you very much. Please proceed. Please turn your microphone on. Uh hit the button so it turns green. Thank you. Thanks. My name is Danny Martinez. I represent Bob and Denise Sherwin, uh, owners of the property. Uh, they will be speaking on their own behalf in relationship to the, uh, business license and their purchase and acquisition of the property from n uh, 2016 when they purchased this. So again, this is an opportunity to present what I believe is a um, a grandfathering. Again, we use the word grandfathering because it really does represent grandfathering. I did an intensive search through the county records. I did an intensive search through the construction industries division and they don't keep records back to 25 35 years ago. How? So, there's no record to be found. How? But in my communication with the state construction industries division, they recognize this building as a conforming uh structure. crowd. They don't recognize it as uh non-conforming based on height earnings. So, the reality is is this house and this guest house were probably built

between the years of 19 uh 888 and 1990. Uh the septic tank permits were issued in 1990. Uh so that gives you the the the initial stage of when all this took place. the original development code which was very ambiguous back in those days because it was very open. It it just didn't cover what the SLDC covers or even the uh 1996 code covers. Uh they basically allowed sorry they allowed for this type of construction to take place because it was compliant with the development code back in 1988. So, it's not like we're creating something that was not approved. It was approved. There's just no documentation that you can pull out to show it was permitted. Part of the conditions is that we've been asked to resubmit for the guest house a uh a set of plans that would re allow us to permit the guest house, which is kind of again ambiguous because if it's already been permitted once, permitting it again, uh we're going to do it just because we think that we're satisfying what the county wants out of this. Again, we go back to the history 1988, 1990, 1976 code, uh, the SLDC in in 2018. You know, all of this that took place all just really pushes you back into that issue of was it grandfathered? Well, it had to have been grandfathered, otherwise we wouldn't be where we were at. Tom, when the SLDC was adopted, it was intended not to harm uh, properties like this. It was intended to bring compliance to any new applications that come before for uh this type of permitting, a house, guest house. And again, you know, it would be run through

the mill when they see that it does it meet zoning, does it meet uh uh water? Does it meet all the public utilities? That's a whole different game. H what we're talking about is this existing condition that basically met the conditions at the time of the permitting. And again, it's unfortunate the records aren't kept. Micros microfish wasn't available back then. So there's no tracing this back. Again, the commitment is is we're willing to resubmit for a permit on this guest househole. When we look at the the conditions out there, how the issue is really the compliance with height and the compliance with the loft. Well, again, if you look at the loft, and I think you've got pictures, the loft is basically the roof for the bedroom, the bathroom, the kitchen, and then there's a one bedroom up on top. There's no uh utilities. I mean, there's no restroom facilities or anything upstairs. It's strictly a bedroom. So, go to think that they can go in there and just rip that out and modify it and come back in and ask for a permit for 400 square foot, it doesn't make any sense. And I think the staff report is very clear when it states that it doesn't it's not feasible for something like that to happen on this particular property. Huh. Again, lots were completed in 19 developed in 1988. They're legal lots of record. Whatever happens in the new SLDC is a whole different game. You can't take away what is a legal lot of record. H Mr. Sherman and and and and his wife own the adjoining lot next to them. It's a two and a halfacre parcel undeveloped, but that lot is also grandfathered because it's considered a legal lot of record based on the data it was recorded in the clerk's office. So, so again, we're going to go back to that whole

scenario again. How do you try to deny an application that has been in existence for over 35 years? uh you know we totally understand that you know we can make our submitt bring it in for a permit and satisfy that condition septic tank they were approved there's two septic tanks out there there's one well that serves both prop the house and and the guest house these were all pre-approved again we're talking back history that goes back to 1990 now if I came over here uh and and I told staff, we want to do a house on this other lot and we want a guest house and we want all this. Then it's a whole different game for us because we know we have to come in into compliance with the code. And again, that's what I'm trying to emphasize is what happened then and what happened tomorrow on this other lot are totally different things. So, what we'd like to do is we'd like to just again stand on the ground that grandfather and again the word grandfather, it's not specific in the SLDC, but it sure was specific in the 1996 code. Huh. In the 1996 code, I didn't bring it with me. I've got a copy of it, but it it talks about uh grandfathering because a lot of these old properties back in those days were that's what they were. They were grandfathered properties. Well, so what we're doing is we're we're standing on our ground that this is definitely a grandfather property. We stand on the ground that the this buildings were permitted and again there's just no way to go back and trace permits, but we can stand on the fact that septic tank permits were issued. uh uh everything that we needed to build these structures was built on under compliance with the county code back then and the construction industry division. And it's interesting you could

talk to construction industry division and the first thing they tell me is we see this stuff coming before us a lot and we don't understand why they're doing that especially that age that long. So I can permit through the county, I can go permit through the construction industries and that should satisfy the concern of that building even though it's very evident that it was built in 1990 or before. Um there's not a whole lot that can be said about this, you know, not that's our ground is, you know, we firmly believe that this is a legal conforming uh structure. Um, if there's any non-compliance, there's nothing that shows that there's non-compliance other than what the SLDC says. You're no longer compliant. So, had the great opportunity to talk to Jose Martinez. So, he's the code enforcement officer that went out there and his comment to me was is well, you know, the counties implemented this code. Now they're as they're they put me in charge of going out there and finding facilities like this that they consider non-compliant. Again, the word non-compliant is is a very ambiguous word because how can you not be compliant when this thing is that old, 35 years? It just doesn't make any sense. So, what we'd like to do is again, we'll satisfy the concerns of the county. will permit the structure, but I firmly believe that uh everything that we've done out there is legal and I would just only ask that you would look at it from that standpoint that this is a legal conforming property. I'm going to turn this over to Mr. Sherman and his wife. You have any questions about the business operation or since what they've bought it? And I think that that's the interesting part about it is when you buy a piece of property anymore, you always would assume that somebody's going to issue you a uh uh disclosure statement. Well,

there was no disclosure statements. So, there was nothing that said you're buying a piece of property that's not in compliance. So again, that can be a penalty against the Sherwinds because they bought it under the understanding that it was a legal use and all they're doing is just uh taking advantage of it by uh making it useful for their business. And and again, Denise will talk more about her business if you want to hear more about that. Thank you very much, Mr. Martinez. Planning Commission Chair and Planning Commission members, I just wanted to inform you that letter that John handed out was actually a letter of opposition um that was sent in on February 10th, 3 days prior to the hearing officer meeting on February 13th. So, it didn't make it into the packet at that time. And the former case manager um as an oversight failed to make that as one of the exhibits for this hearing as well. So, I just wanted to bring that to your attention. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Any questions? Are there any questions of Mr. Martinez from the commissioners? Mr. Buger, I think uh I I may want to wait until after uh Mr. Sherwin's presentation and then ask both of you. So, I'm Bob Sherwin. Uh my wife and I, Denise, own the property uh at 28 and 30 Australia Stano. 28 is the guest house that uh when we got the business license, it required another uh address. Uh it does share the same uh driveway and we do share the same utilities. Um please confirm you're under oath. And I confirm that I am under oath. Thank you. um wanted to address just a couple of

the points that was brought up u by the parties in opposition. Um once we uh got notice about uh the STR license being required, we immediately uh contacted u Christina at that time and started the process. and um as it's been continued, we've received temporary um continuation of the STR. So, we have been in compliance with that and we've also given notice to everybody within 500 ft as as he uh as John pointed out, the 10 parties uh have been uh notified. Um and just to give a se kind of a sequence of events of of that particular property, it became a legal lot of record. Uh the five acres were uh created into two two two and a halfs and um as you asked what was the other zoning in that area. We back up to Sundance Ridge and Sundance Estates which are all two and a halfacre u lots and the the parties that are in opposition are actually condominium u association that's even smaller and so the 2 and a half acres has been consistent from the beginning. Um the other thing that is important to note is that um the house and guest house uh were under construction in 1989 and completed in '91. They have not changed. Uh the surveyor labeled it a studio, but it's been the same two-story guest house since 1990. That's 35 years. Um, and it they're both northern New Mexico style architecture and so, you know, it has the pitched roof with just a loft. Um, as been has been pointed out.

Um, and we bought the house in 2016 uh from the original owners and they had been renting out the guest house uh well before we did. We've been renting it out for nine years since uh 2016. And what doesn't make sense to me regarding the loft um granted I I get that the uh SDLC changed the height restriction in uh uh first of all Santa Fe development code I believe was 1996 and then the SDLC was uh 2018. Uh what was Uh what was the May I ask uh Commissioner Krueger what year? Uh December it was SLDC was approved December 8th I think 2015. 2015. So it's before you bought it. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. So, um, in in either case, the the structure had been 25 years old at that time and and so um we owned the uh the light vessel uh wellness center in the DVARUS and also the LoveYou Yourself Cafe that when uh COVID shut down the the state, we we lost those businesses and had to had to shut them down. And so that's what my wife has been doing since 2006. And the wellness facility that we have on property was really just to continue with those people that really had some health challenges and particularly the children and and some people with cancer and so forth. and the wellness facility has state-of-the-art frequency, vibration, light, and sound

kind of treatments that have had great success. um the the home occupational license that we applied for and received in 2020. We went through all of these same um requirements and none of this was brought up to our attention then and seems like that would have been the right time to bring it forward, but we were approved for that uh uh license. And it has a restriction of a maximum of four people a day and we don't even do that. Um uh so it's a very low-key, low impact. Um and then it's supplemented uh by Airbnb guests and it's been a five-star rating on Airbnb for for nine years. It's a quiet retreat. It attracts the older uh clientele that are um paying $200 a night to stay there and and it helps offset all the costs of everything that we're doing. And so it's not getting the rowdy young people that want to party and make noise. And we live very close. The main house is, you know, 100 ft from the guest house. So if there was noise and and issues with that, we would be the first to know about it. And I want to say on record, we have never had a complaint in nine years from any of our neighbors. If they had issues, why did they why are they using this platform to make a complaint? And they have never made a complaint. not one to the county, to us, or any of the neighbors. So, I'm not sure where that opposition is coming from, but it's it's not valid. Um, we haven't had noise. And and and for the the people that stay there, they're they're going through three and four day detox things. They're very quiet. They're going through healing and and they're not partying. So, don't again don't understand uh what that opposition is. But um anyway, we uh want to be good

neighbors. We want to be in compliance. Uh when we bought the the property, we were represented uh by an attorney and our and our realtor and nothing was any any of the paperwork showing any disclosures that we were out of compliance with anything because those um even the 1998 changed um eight years after the house was built and then SDLC was 25 years after that. So, no, we we uh did everything we thought we could do in our due diligence to make a good purchase and and uh everything was permitted in in 1990. This is a substantial property, a 4,000 uh square foot main house and 900 and something guest house and a swimming pool. They wouldn't build that without a permit. So, because the records are not go don't go back 35 years, uh doesn't mean it wasn't all done. it it had to have been done and and and certainly it was represented to us that it was at the time of our purchase. So, thank you. Thank you very much. Do miss Sherwood, are you interested in speaking or I'm not sure. Thank you. I I've I'm I'm Denise and commissioners. I appreciate the opportunity to bring a more legitimate picture of what we've actually been doing. Can you please confirm that you are sworn in? I am I commit that I am sworn in. Thank you. When we had to close the downtown center, that was the third center I have built. The first one I built, I staffed with an MD, a DC, and a nurse. That center is now booked way into the future, and it's helping so many people

in this town. It's it's one of the greatest pleasures Bob and I have had to have provided that. I have a lot of experience in how to run a wellness center. I did not want to have a full-blown wellness center in our home. But when we had to get out of the location because of COVID, I took one of each of the equipment pieces, put the rest of it in storage, and put it on the second floor of our house so that we could at least continue to treat those people who were really dependent on what we were doing. We I haven't had in the last two weeks, I haven't had more than one client there. We are not running some kind of a fraic problem or whatever you want to consider it as. I've scaled it way down only for those that need it the most. They don't disturb anybody. I understand that they heard some noise around a fire pit that we had. Could have been our daughters. Could have been the family doing marshmallows. It could have been some guests, but when I found out that was a problem, no one's now allowed to use it. And I feel like we've done everything we can to be a good neighbor. I don't I've never had neither is Bob. We've never had anybody have a problem with us in the neighborhood. It's been the opposite because we're decent, kind, caring people. That's why the wellness business was so important for me. So, I don't know how to actually address that anymore, but all I can say is we we don't want any ill will with anybody and we don't want anybody being upset. So, no more fire ring, which frankly I'm going to miss. But if that's going to make them more comfortable, that's why we're not going to be using

it anymore. So, I hope that the truth around all of this can get very clear. We're not a big noise problem. We are the opposite. We're not bad neighbors. We would help any neighbor that asked us for help. We're not those kind of people. So, I hope that there can be a common sense approach to this and that we can mend this so that there aren't any more ill feelings or issues around what has been frankly impossible for me to understand. So, thank you commissioners. Any questions or Thanks very much, Miss Sherwin. Uh, commissioners, do you have any questions of either the agent or the Sherwins? I have a question for the staff. Commissioner Meyer. Yeah. Um, based on the business that's being run out of the residence, is that being permitted or does it need to be permitted um as a business with the county for staff? Oh, okay. I'm sorry. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Mir, can you repeat your question? Yeah. So, is there a business license associated with a business that they're running out of that the county has issued? Mr. Chair, a commission member, mayor. That is correct. There is one. So, they are in compliance with that business. Mr. Chair, commission member, mayor. Yes. Any other commissioners have questions of the agent or applicant? Commissioner Pava. Thank you, Mr. Chair. U my question regarding the home occupation license. Um I understand that it's a county function. Um, since you have these various medical treatments and

procedures, were you required to have under state regulations, could you explain a little bit more because when I look at the website, there's some pretty interesting treatments and things that are maybe non-conventional, but at the same time, I'm curious to know what kind of oversight that is required for your business, whether it's here or there. There is no oversight for the equipment I use. Everything that I use, I've been trained on on and certified in. However, the first center that I opened, when I put the MD, the DC, and a nurse on board, we could do things. We could use IVs. We could do a lot of things that I wish I could do there, but I can't because it's outside of the scope of my licensing. But the equipment that I use, I've used it on hundreds of people over many years and they've only had positive effects because there's safety. There's great consideration about what is happening in a person's body. We've seen even young children with stage four cancer who didn't see themselves ever growing up. And we would spend time telling them that they actually have the ability to work really hard and find ways to heal the body because the body's amazing resilient if you give it what it needs. We've helped a lot of families. I have taken care of a lot of children with no cost to them. I didn't get in this business to make my fortune because it's cost a fortune to do it. I did it because I care about the wellness of our planet, of children, of people who are suffering with things they shouldn't be suffering from. So, I just hope that our neighbors can can be willing to just sit down together and have a different type of relationship.

I don't have any problems with any people in my life and I felt really bad when I realized they were having such an issue with us. So I think that's all I have to offer unless there's any more question. Any other commissioners have questions? Commissioner Buger. Mhm. [Music] Uh, so how many clients do you have at any one time in the wellness facility? Well, what it's gotten to now is I've cut it back so that there are oftentimes nobody in the center. I only take a handful of people and those people are the ones that I know need the treatments the most. So, we've had a whole week where there was no clients. Then I may have one client on the next day. Sometimes maybe two, but it isn't any more than that. Did it used to be more? When I first had to close the downtown center, we had so many people counting on us that came from different parts of the country. So, I had to, you know, find my way out of that and limit those people. But now there's not a need for any more than one or two. Sometimes maybe five max in a week. Sometimes maybe three. But it is certainly no imposition on anyone. So hopefully we'll just take care of those that we still can for as long as we can. So thank you for the response. So at at any one night maybe no more than two people are they that they're clients and then they stay over if I understand. Uh that's part of the package that you offer. Well, no that is not the way it was set up. We set up the Airbnb because it's

it's really a charming place and it happened to be convenient especially when I first had to close down the downtown center. we could treat people in there, you know, like they could stay there for the weekend and they could get treatments, walk across the the patio area, but now it's mostly just an income producing Airbnb and typically it's not for a lot of young rowdy people to come. If there was noise around the fire, it probably was our family before I realized it was an irritation to the neighbors. We don't do that anymore and that's why I decided not to even have it available. So, we aren't a we aren't a big threat over there. And um I don't know what else to say. So, do you uh uh so you use the the guest house to accommodate uh the clients of the Airbnb there? Uh, no one stays in the main house other than No. Where you live? No. It's like a typical Airbnb anybody in the neighborhood can can do if you go through the process. They book online. They get all the information they need. We don't invite them into the wellness facility. If someone is aware of it by a friend referring it, we will look at whether or not they need to actually be treated. And that rarely rarely happens now. So the Airbnb's standalone business, it's a standalone independent thing that we would use at times to accommodate people who needed to stay a somewhere. The uh uh you mentioned that no so no one

is allowed to use the the barbecue pit, fire pit, uh uh pool, well, the exterior uses, we're not allowing that to be used. In fact, it's being disassembled. that had, you know, a lot of brick around it to protect it from any kind of fire issues. We just made a decision that if it was such a problem for the neighbors that we just wouldn't allow anybody to use it, including family now. So, and shortly there'll be no sight that there was ever even a little fire ring there. It's right next to a labyrinth that was put in and people used to like to come down sometimes sit by a fire on a full moon and walk a labyrinth. It's a peaceful property. We what we do with people especially who've been sick is we try to help them understand that you've got to calm down. You've got to start taking life a little bit more mindfully, breathe more, walk a labyrinth, eat better. So that's the extent of my particular life. So there was a and some of the commentary that was included in our package, the testimony before the hearing officer, uh some folks were the opponents this were uh uh stating that uh they could hear music playing, people partying, that sort of thing. And what you're saying is that uh uh that's a thing of the past. It's not just that it's not a thing of the past. Were there ever some nights where maybe who if it was family down there roasting marshmallows, whatever, but we had one beautiful party celebrating the house and moving there and that was a lot of people, but it's the only one we've had.

So, I can't say that, you know, you wouldn't never hear anybody chatting around a fire, but I do know that we would hear it if it was really bad. So, now there's not an option. There won't be a way for them to sit around a fire anymore. Excuse me. I'll just add something. Uh I I would add that the the thing that I find unusual is that the neighbor in opposition we have never had one conversation with in the nine years we've lived there. Um and so I would wonder or ask them if you had a problem or or there was some noise, why didn't you come to us and say something? That's never happened. We've never had one conversation in nine years before. So, I find it very odd. And and I and like I said, we live 100 feet away and if we noise, we would be the first ones to hear it. They're they're more than a football field away. Another question then. So what's your protocol to [Music] control noise activity? Yeah, we have uh posted in the guest house um you know quiet after 10 o'clock and and uh if they go outside on their little patio deck which is the opposite direction but nonetheless so we have you know the the property is is uh got a coyote fence around the entire um uh property and um it's private and quiet and we don't we can't see uh really any other neighbors from where we are. We have a total of five acres with the two uh two and a half acre adjoining properties and um

and and you know people have to go through certain protocol in in Airbnb there. They have requirements and they leave a uh um what do you call it when they the reviews the review uh of the property and we can leave a review on them and so uh that makes it if there if there was anybody that was disruptive we would leave a review on them and then they wouldn't be able to rent from the next Airbnb place. So everybody's pretty respectful of the rules that are built within that system. Mr. Chair, commissioners, I'd like to stick to the facts of what's being requested here, which is the variance request. I understand this is a component of it and some sense. Um, that being the case, there are quiet hours that the county requests and if it is being violated, we request that they put a um complaint in and we will address that. Oh, Mr. about the the just it's explanation the reason to me that uh this is a density case but it's there's a use factor involved too we have three criteria that we're up here for a reason that uh it's a variance request and the request has to meet uh three criteria where the request is not contrary to the public interest so that the spirit of the SLDC is observed substantial justice is done and then extraordinary exceptional conditions of the property. So to me it's use factors in that and um that's an explanation for some of the questions that that I'm asking. Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, I do agree and that's why I kind of said it's somewhat

of a part of the criteria. Any other commissioners interested in asking question? Commissioner Paba. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just questions for the applicant. So, these other services that are rendered exclusive of say somebody staying in the Airbnb, they must be in structures elsewhere on the property and not not the main residence and not the Airbnb. So, are there other structures on the property where these treatments occur? No, the treatments all occur on the second floor of our home that has its own private entrance that you have to walk around and get into. The equipment that I use is all safe. I've used it for a long time and we don't have any concerns about safety at all because we know what we're doing. So yeah, there's no other. So it's kind of like if I were going to see a shrink and I I go into their house and they got like a an office off to the side and it's their home occupation licensed and all of that. So there are no other structures where these activities happen that's done as part of the home occupation in your primary residence. Right. Say that again, please. There's no other what? There's there's no other structures on the property that you're using to house equipment to do these treatments. It's in the primary house. I needed that clarification. I appreciate it. Thanks. Yeah. You're welcome. Any other commissioners have questions of the applicant? Uh yeah, I do have a question. Um yeah, a couple questions here. Um so I'm just looking at the at your property itself and I you know there's the main residence and the um and the guest house in question. There's another structure right next to the guest house as well and I guess greenhouse as well, right? Um could you just tell me a little bit more about what these other structures are on the property? That structure is housing an organic greenhouse to grow our own organic food.

Is that Sorry, I turned mine off. Is that the the kind of hoop house looking one? Is that the greenhouse? Green house. What about the other um the other structure that's nearby the guest house? What is that seed house? Oh, planting seed house. Yeah, there there's a little kitchenet area and a planting seed area that's right next to the garage, which is what you're referring to. Okay, that's the garage then there probably. Okay, I got you. Um yeah, and I guess um moving forward, I guess that might that would be my other question. just just what's your I guess goals and intent with this with this property? Well, my personal goal is is um I'm no longer doing the kind of volume of owning three different centers. I've seen a lot of people get well and I've been rewarded by that. Now, I'm only looking at taking those people or children if need be that really need the help and oftentimes their parents can't afford it. I'm certainly not in this for the money at this point. I have a strong commitment to if there's a way we can help someone who's really in trouble, then we'll do what we can to do that, but that's the extent of it. And that's where the Airbnb does help um finance some of these things because we do treat a lot of people at no charge. And the Airbnb um gives us we have caretakers on the property to keep keep it up and it just helps offset the costs. Um, so that's the the way we use that facility. Thank you. And any other questions from any of the commissioners? Commissioner Buger. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The uh

just read letter from homeowners association and I read your report too. U before the uh some of the the objections have to do with short-term rental nature of the business. So, uh uh maybe and I'm sure they'll say maybe they'd object in any event, but uh is uh for the guest house is the use the only use that uh you have for that short-term rental or uh would it be another kind of rental just out of No, it's a short-term short-term rental and friends and family come to stay with us. Okay, we have a lot of those. Okay, I do have one question if I could for staff. Well, let's let them sit down if we're done if if we're done of with the applicant. Um, let's actually, if we can, let's uh have any opponents speak and then you can ask your questions of staff because they can't leave. So, thank you. Thank you very much, M. Thank you very much. Thank you. Are there anyone who is anyone here who is interested in speaking either in support or in opposition to this? So, please come forward, state your name and address, and verify that you are sworn. Thank you. Good evening. I'm Terry Graves and I'm a resident at uh three tiara dutano and have been since

1996. I live directly across the street from the Sherwin Retreat uh commercial property as it's being used according to what you many of you have assumed tonight. I uh I'm representing also the Fiser Replat homeowners who were notified only a portion of us were notified about the short-term rental uh specifications. Uh we've had a meeting and to discuss those of us in the Fiser Plat. We are all directly across from the wellness retreat. We in turn share a well. We maintain the road ourselves. The county does not maintain it. It's a dirt road. we maintain it. And so some of the concerns we've had as we've uh seen the traffic increase, just to note that it in the Airbnb there are 76 room nights available between now and September at the Sherwin Airbnb. That being said, all this has been done prior to the short-term rental approval. We're very aware of Airbnb rules. My husband is a GM of a hotel who also has Airbnb uh certifications. We know what it takes to run an Airbnb and how you need to be notified and how neighbors need to be included when you choose to open your home as a business. None of those things have been done. I'm a little disappointed that the Sherwin said we have never said anything to them. We had a person-toperson meeting on October 22nd of 2024. that in that meeting my husband either he is not Mr. Sherwin's memory is lacking or my husband's not memorable but they had a meeting at the home where my husband toured the facility on behalf of the homeowners association at that

time he brought up those concerns that all of the homeowners have had. Those concerns being the fire pit. The reason the fire pit is a concern is not because of the noise. is because me as a homeowner had my home insurance cancelled due to the fire of 87506 uh area zip code. Part of it was in that inspection by those insurance and it's many of us are being cancelled is because of open pits and if the sherins have decided once we brought that to their attention at that person-toperson meeting that they no longer had that pit. It is advertised today in their Airbnb that they have a fire pit for everyone to use for marshmallows. So, if that was s something of a concern to them, it has been a concern to all of us due to the fact that we are at fire risk. If you haven't read, it's been in the newspaper. My husband and I are some of the first ones in that area, though we've never had a claim. So we are now searching for home insurance due to the fact of fire. So that's a big concern and it's a big concern in the neighborhood. The other is the road. There is increased traffic. Whether the wellness center has one or two, they brought a commercial business from Dvarus Mall to my residential area. You can't tell me that moving something that had traffic in a mall to a residential area does not have increased traffic. That increased traffic is on a road that I personally maintain with my own dollars. We did confront the the Sherwinds and said, you know, you could contribute it to our road fund. They agreed to do so. We've not ever seen anything since that persontoperson meeting in

October. One of the other concerns that we had is safety. This brings a lot of strangers to your neighborhood. Airbnbs do. Sorry to say whether they're doing wellness or whatever, it still brings a lot of traffic and a lot of strangers. And while I am a good neighbor also, I have not contacted them. But I am the obviously the concierge of the neighborhood for their Airbnb because it's a hard place to find where we live. And when the people finally get to that area, many many times I get the doorbell rang or I have somebody pull into the driveway who's lost. And I'm sure those of you who have lived here and worked here know that this is kind of your refuge, your home. And it hasn't been since these kinds of businesses have been popping up across the street. And my husband and I both work and we both work several jobs. I too work sometimes out of my home. I have a big Pinsky truck parked in my driveway right now, but I don't increase the traffic. I don't increase PE strangers coming to the area. We've had a breakin since this has all come and we've never had one before. Not to say that the customers that they're bringing from the Airbnb are individuals who can't afford the $200 a night could be criminals, but it still brings people to the area that are unwanted. Some of the other concerns that we had was that we hadn't been contacted. When you are in turn doing an Airbnb, you need to be contacted. So, when they were putting together the short-term rental application, none of us were contacted about that. we hadn't been told. So that may be the reason we didn't have a complaint was in turn we didn't know about it. I'm disappointed to see that in the administrative procedures of this uh commissioner that my letter didn't make it on behalf of us and it was just passed out

tonight. That's an administrative mistake. A second min administrative mistake and this is a question. When you have a public hearing and the public hearing notice is posted and that public hearing is changed on behalf of the applicant, are those of us as neighbors supposed to be notified when it's changed? I'm asking that as a question for us for us to answer questions. Thank you very I I was told that uh this is the opportunity. I called the office today and they said this is the opportunity to ask. So what you would like an answer on is which which meeting uh date was changed the date for tonight's hearing? It was originally done. So staff I wonder if you could respond to the u to her question. So this case was previously tabled uh from last month's ca uh last month's uh public hearing. uh when a case is tabled um it is not required to be republished or renoticed um in the New Mexican or to neighbors. It's notified on the website. Thanks very much. Thank you. I I just needed to know that because the public notice has remained up there it with the wrong date and time. Um, some of the things that I think that have been mentioned tonight, uh, that we've discussed about the not only the process of notifying neighbors when you're going for a short-term rental, uh, when you decide that you're going to do something on the outside, both in noise and in um, with even using a barbecue pit, those notifications need to be done to the neighbors. It says it in your short-term rental agreement. None of those are ever notified. And so that you know whether they're having a party at their fire pit or I had a party in mine and I don't have a fire pit is

still there has to be a notification. None of those are being done. Some of the other things I think that our neighbors in the area are concerned about is just the water usage. We are all in our association under the agreement we only can have two bathrooms. We cannot have a swimming pool. But yet when you're bringing in an Airbnb, they have a swimming pool. They have the Airbnb. That's a lot more water usage. So those are some of the concerns that we've had. Is that a when you're having a wellness center that's considered somewhat in their description, a spa, is there more water usage for the neighborhood in an area that we are basically restricted? Our five homes are all restricted in water. And while we are concerned about some noise in the area, yes, we're an older group of people who live in that area and have lived there way before the Sherwins purchased the the property. Um, we just want to make sure that it's it goes with the county code that if you're going to have people in your Airbnb, and we all know that all Airbnb uh BNB customers are not 50 and older. We know that for a fact. We want to make sure that we've been that they just live by those noise codes. And I think that pretty much uh talks about the areas that we're most concerned about. We want to make sure that they've operated without certification on several areas and we just want to make sure it's not setting a precedent for the neighborhood of we

will do as we please, we will violate as we please and then we'll ask for forgiveness. So because of that, we just like to make sure that everything is within code that the uh Fisher repl Homeowners association that we're all respectful that they contribute to the road fund if they in turn are going to be using the road that we use. And Mr. Sherwin has said that his he has only one driveway. He has two driveways. And if he'd like to see a picture of those, I'll present it to him tonight. And that one driveway filters down into our dirt road where most of his uh individuals exit both employees, himself, and Airbnb customers. There's definitely more usage to a county road not being maintained by the county. Also, I just wanted to make sure that we keep considering it that it was a studio. It is a studio. In one point, they call it a guest house and another point they call it a studio. Did it remain a studio? That's what it was grandfathered in as. Is it now a guest house? Thank you for your time this evening. Any questions from the homeowners association? Any any questions of or from the SH Commissioner Buger? Yes. Uh thank you for the testimony, Miss Graves. And first off, I read the letter. Thank you. Uh, second I'll um I read something in the packet that spoke to that the Fiser Replat Homeowners Association

is uh not in good standing with the Secretary of State uh is is that uh is that correct? Meaning that it that we're not registered with the Secretary of State. Yeah. If uh uh if you don't file annual reports and pay your $10 or $20, then you're not in good standing and you're not we are we are not a a official homeowners association. We don't have a bank account. We we do not have to have a tax filing when we need the road maintained. One owner or the other pays for those things. We are known as the homeowner uh Fisher Replat Homeowners Association because that's what the deed says on each one of our properties. So I'll address the subsequent questions to you and as individual rather than as the association. Uh so you said in your letter that uh uh you it was you or someone uh was within 300 ft of the subject property, but you weren't notified. Is that of the for the short-term rental use or for was that for this request or both? Both. We were notified for the first public hearing because we did come to that for with the hearing officer, but when the change for the I guess when you tabled it and then moved it to we were not notified in that. I I did the follow-up work on that because the neighbors have asked me to do so because they wanted to see what the outcome was. Many of our neighbors are uh part-time residents and uh still have concern for it. And so that's that's part of when I say in the notification, but for the

short-term rental, no. I we had no notification that that was uh going to be considered part of the wellness retreat. And while I appreciate Miss Sherwin's contribution to the health and wellness of human beings and children, um part of part of that is relief of stress. We too as neighbors would like to have that relief addressed by having some of these conditions addressed. Thank you. Uh so you heard Miss Sherwin's testimony when uh I asked about the volume of traffic coming in. How many people typically stay? Uh um just out of curiosity, does that uh uh has that been your experience? there there is way more impact. But of course, I've been in the neighborhood since 1996. So, you can imagine that a lot of there's there has been an increase of traffic, but the the major portion of what we're concerned about is that it's at an edge of a stop sign. So, where their property is located is on a corner and they have two ways to get in and out of their property. that has increased that traffic causing that the road to really turn into an aoyo. And uh the ingress of their driveway is has been looked at by our road person uh several times and because of that increased traffic and when we get a snow or any kind of wet weather, it causes it to drain down into our area which now has made the road have to have more m maintenance. We also have one neighbor that's in our supposed association who is directly across from them and he in turn would like to have that area fixed because it it makes the

road almost impassible and sometimes of the year. Last question. Promise that's the uh for Miss Graves. The uh so you've you've lived in the neighborhood a long time even before u this current ownership uh um were was the use of the property similar from to what had happened in the past? And I just asked that because you've heard the discussion on grandfathering. Uh, correct. The I prior to the Sherwins being there, I if that studio was used as a rental, as Mr. Sherwin said prior, it must have been a long-term rental. We never had any traffic in that area. And I think the previous owner of the home was there on and off, not there as often. But it it surprised me to hear tonight that that studio was also a a rental at the time because I know it was not used as an Airbnb prior just from the fact that Airbnb didn't exist and I think mainly in that area. If it was ever used for a rental, I'm sure it was a long-term rental. But I don't know that for a fact. We were not uh we knew the neighbors, but we weren't social partners and I never asked them what they did with their home. Okay, thank you. Do any other commissioners or commissioner Ber, does anyone else have any question? Thank you very much, M. Once again, thank you for your time. Thank you. Is there anyone else interested in speaking either for or against um this sir?

My name is Brian Graves. I live at three tier Dano and uh I've been sworn in and I just had a quick comment to make in reading the Santa Fe County, you know, documentation on the website and what have you. A variance is not to negatively impact the neighbors. I don't see how increased traffic with somebody who doesn't contribute to our road fund. I don't consider increased water usage on people who there are on wells out there noise and increased fire danger even though they say they uh taking their fire pit out of their property. I don't see how that does not negatively impact the neighborhood. That was my only comment. Thank you very much. Amen. Thanks. This is a public hearing. Anyone else interested speaking either for or against this application? Uh, chair, there's nobody online indicating they wish to speak. Thanks very much. Let's close the public hearing. Um, Commissioner Buger, you mentioned that you had questions of staff. Is now an appropriate time to ask those questions? Please do. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh just u you may not be able to answer this, Mr. Lovato, but uh is the notification requirement for the short-term rental is that the same as this? Is it 500 ft or or is it less? Uh chair, commissioners, the requirement for STR is adjacent properties, I'm sorry, a budding property. So only properties that touch that property are required to be notified. Okay. So it was a total of four properties that were notified at the time. Is anybody here that was Are you an

adjacent property or or or no? Is that a yes? Okay. Okay. Thank you. Uh commissioners, any other What's Commissioner Pavo? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Question for staff. I'm going to get back to my question about if the variance is denied and does that affect the carrying out of the home occupation as long as it is consistent with the licensing requirements of the home occupation per se use of the uh studio uh Airbnb stuff. What about the home occupation? Mr. Chair, Commission Member Pava, that that is a total separate item. they have a license to operate their business. If the variance is denied, then they must bring that structure into compliance and revert it back into a studio accessory structure is what it's labeled as. Thank you for the clarification. So, uh, Mr. Lovato, if you could stay up just a couple more questions. So let's let's imagine that this variance is denied and um as I understand the in order to bring this to compliance one option would be remove the shower right remove the bath slashshower because that is the difference between a studio which was the classification when it was built and now I'm I'm just trying to understand the possible future scenarios if you could help me. Thank you, Mr. Chair. What would have to occur would be one, the applicant only utilize the top

area for storage as an accessory structure and two um they remove the shower from the actual structure. Okay. a stairs and shower or something or some certification that the that the sleeping area in the loft is no longer a sleeping area. It's full of cardboard boxes instead. I'm just trying to understand a future. Thank you very much, Commissioner Meyer. Yeah, so we have quite a few issues at hand here. We have the business wellness center. We have the Airbnb issue. We have water usage. We have road traffic slusage. We have the noise. and we have the fire pit. Um I guess the heart of this issue right now is we're voting on the um variance for the guest house. We're not considering all these other issues that go into what has been brought up or what we've received through comments. Uh we're just simply voting on whether the guest house should be allowed to remain a guest house in an Airbnb. Correct, Mr. Chair, Commission Member Mir, that is correct. We're not voting on any other issues. every it's just centered around the guest house. Mr. Chair, Commissioner Mir, that is correct. Thank you. Um, commissioners, what is the will of the commission? Do have just one general comment and maybe this is sorry, apologize. Um just a general comment based on uh the tax partial viewer and the Google maps and and hopped on to Google Earth as well to take a look at some historic imagery etc. And maybe this is something that the applicants can answer to too. But um you know just one thing that I see here in this particular lot is that looks like at some point in time a fence was built um maybe in like 2017 or something

like that. Um, and it does, you know, go into this other lot, the the upper lot that's also owned by the by the applicants. Um, so yeah, it's just again more of just a general comment that I do see that this particular property, you know, does appear to be more of an estate, right, compared to other properties around it and is, you know, kind of mixed between the two lots. um which I just find interesting I guess and something to comment for commissioners as well to be aware of you know if they're they're not so thanks commissioner yeah that's a lot of coyote fence yeah thank you very much um commissioners I get a motion or further discussion buger [Music] little further discussion and a request for some help from staff. the uh uh I uh I find it very difficult to to be in favor of this variance request that it I see it meeting one criteria. It's an extraordinary circumstance. these folks bought the property that the it was it existed already, but uh whether uh it's uh in the public interest and uh meets the spirit of the SLDC uh I'm not there. I can't I can't see that. Uh and at the same time, uh it would be good if there was a way

to minimize not that this wouldn't be appealed, but uh uh any additional expense um involved in um not having the second floor. um you know, altered, demolished, whatever. Uh so is the path that you laid out there, Mr. Lovato, is that uh is that the only path or that we've got that this is uh denied? Then they have to do that or uh or is there another alternative? Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, are you asking if there's an appeal process for them because No, I'm ask I'm sure there is an appeal process. That's how it works. No, I'm asking uh do they have to do is there another alternative than to take out the plumbing or uh Sure. So, Mr. Chair, Commission Member Buger, they can remove the second floor as a whole, which would loft. They can convert that into a storage area because accessory structures are allowed to be two stories. Um, there are also they would also be allowed to remove and and part of that would have to move the the shower. They would be also allowed to remove it, put it as storage, leave the shower, and do an addition of a single level um floor to allow for the bedroom.

[Music] Okay. Ask questions, please. Please. Yeah. Uh so yeah, would the applicant please come? We have questions. Thanks. So Mr. Sherwin, uh what happens if uh uh you're asked to your business to the wellness center if you're uh asked to u uh make these changes to the uh loft space in the studio? Please turn your mic on. Thanks. Sorry about that. to come into complete compliance, we'd have to, this is a northern New Mexico house, it'd have to go from 196 to 18 feet, cutting off 18 inches of the house, which accomplishes nothing in terms of aesthetics for neighbors or, you know, there's nobody can hardly see this house from anywhere anyway. Um, I don't understand why we're even fighting for a variance when this was built before the rules changed on us. Everybody here bought your properties with certain property rights. And if the game got changed after you bought it, why would you have to ask for a variance? That's the the fundamental question I have. Mr. Mr. Sure. When I from what I understand from what staff was saying that even before this SLDC was adopted essentially the same density limits would would have been in place. So it had not changed. If if that is incorrect I'm not sure I'm I'm not sure that's correct.

You know that they spoke to the definition of studio in 1996. This was built in the 90s or 91. I have a fully permitted house and studio, two baths, one in each. Now, my wife and I never have had anyone live in either one, but that was that is a legitimate because I haven't gone through and tried to get a short-term rental. My propertyy's not been pushed through the civ again. So, um so I think the the conditions the legal conditions have significantly changed um as the applicant has said. So, so this is not this is not cut and dried. Thanks. Yeah. And and I I think the the surveyor that that noted it on the survey as a studio, it it's semantics. It could have been a guest house, but it it was approved and built and has not changed since 1990. And and that was before the 1996 and the 2015 changes. And so, um, I feel like our p our property rights are being taken from us and we will certainly challenge that. Um, we feel like we're within our rights and and I think if you your homes that you bought with personal uh or not personal, but with property rights, if the if the goalpost was moved and the game changed, that doesn't seem fair. when it was approved when it was built and uh uh comment regarding the not contributing to the road. We're not in their association. We're not members of their five member association that's not in good standing. We're members of another association because there's we're on the corner and there's two roads. So, we pay to the to the other one. Um and so uh and in terms of the fire pit, this is

a a builtup brick, you know, 3 ft high that protects the fire in a in a uh labyrinth that has no trees. It's very well protected, but as we said, if that is the the u compromise, we'll take it down. No, no problem. We're happy to do that. Um we don't want a fire either, and we've got the same fire insurance issues that she has. So, um I think uh yeah um I think the commissioner made a great point because the reality is you know like lawyer mentioned you've got a non-conforming structure. something, but you bought it that way, right? Um, and normally if you go in and you do an addition, then that's really what triggers sometimes like, you know, bringing things up to code and looking at everything, but it's kind of unfortunate like you said, it's like it's it's going after an STR application that caused this to to come into into play, right? where now you're having to go through through um through a variance process because of an STR application in which you're trying to actually follow the rule of law that came into place when the STRs were required to get permits. So I do find that um that is could definitely qualify as a hardship you know and a situation that you were placed on that's not of your own. Um and to comment also on what commissioner mentioned here too. Um obviously denying this variance and some of the discussions or questions that have been asked as far as like okay what would that mean you know as far as some sort of you know either not using a loft turning into storage or ripping it down. I mean that is certainly what I would consider an extraordinary and exceptional situation that would be a hardship to you as an owner and again something that was placed on you by the purchase of the house not by the fact that you did this or you built something out of code or anything like that.

Um, you know, I also I'm looking at the review criteria now and considering that, you know, whether the request is contrary to the public interest. Um, I'm looking at the property here and where it's located. And there's obviously been discussions of like who was notified or not. Legally, you're only supposed to notify the four properties, you know, around you or the direct properties adjacent to you. The majority of the properties around you are empty lots is what I'm seeing here on the lot. In fact, I only see one residence that's adjacent to you across the way from Estrea Satano. Uh the other property you own, the adjacent property in the corners technically doesn't necessarily even touch your lot or doesn't appear to. The 12A Kamino Bonito and that house is pretty far away. Property to the to the west empty. Property to the south is empty as well. Um um so I not sure whether I would agree that it is contrary to the public interest if we were to accept this variance. Um and and you know maybe Beagle can talk to me a little bit further as far as the legal definition of public interest with respect to this as opposed to just my uh you know looking at this on a on a site plan and considering okay who's who's the public you know are we dealing with you know there's obviously some concern by local neighbors which is totally understandable. Um yeah and and the other thing is just the spirit of the SLDC which obviously we're dealing with zoning regulations. One that has been in place apparently for a long time. You know I guess we mentioned um the you know two one single dwelling per 2.5 acres which was kind of based uh according to Mr. Lovato on um water, right? Or like topography, right? Or I forget what you mentioned, but there was something that you used that you mentioned that that was what the reason behind this particular zoning

classific classification, you know, and that's another thing that I'm trying to look at and consider as well is like, okay, you know, okay, this property is located here is zone as such. um you know the intent of the code itself by allowing you know two single family dwelling units is it really that much different than a single swelling unit and an accessory structure which is allowed by the code you know if we're talking about you know water use um you know etc and everything else like that there's really not a huge difference between the two um in in that sense you know um other and the fact that our code has regulated what a single family dwelling is and what an ADU is and how you know how the ADU should be built etc and stuff and heights and so forth. So just some some of my own thoughts with respect to that. Thanks very much commissioner commissioner Pava. Mr. Chair, uh, may I indulge the commission in making suggesting a motion for for this? Uh, please, if you have a motion to make, please make that motion. Right. Uh, first one clarification I have of legal, if I make a motion and want to add an additional condition regarding signs and signage, um, is that something I can do? Did you ask about an additional condition regarding Well, condition four is going to be deleted as we heard on the record and I I have a substitute condition that regards wayfinding signage that's in accordance with uh county rules and regulations. You can certainly present already.

Okay. Yeah. I'm unfortunately Give me a minute here. in the in the my motion would be in in the matter of um of this case requesting the density variance um I want to give the case number um I don't have it right here one moment are you thinking of 24-5270 yes thank you thank you yeah in the matter of case [Music] 24-5270 a motion for approval. Uh subject to a new condition replacing condition four, which was deleted by staff. Um stating that appropriate wayfinding signage shall be provided on the property in accordance with county with with the with the county regulations in the sustainable land development code. That's my motion. Thank you. Is there a second for that motion? Yes. But what signage requirements are stipulated by the Santa Fe County? That is that even a legal request for signage? There are uh none for the STR ordinance, which I believe what Mr. U. Commission member Pava is referring to is, you know, some sort of signage to find the short-term rental um so that people aren't getting lost at the, you know, neighboring properties. But there is no such requirement for that in the uh short-term ordinance. Um you know, for the business itself, the home occupation, I mean, the home occupation is to be limited in signage overall. Um because there is to be no

sign of a business being run there. is supposed to be a home occupation. Um, you know, I don't know if there's going to be any trouble putting, you know, some small signage, you know, directing people to where a short-term rental is that's on the property, but I'm not sure how helpful that would be. It could be helpful. Um, but that I'm not really sure about if if I may, and thanks very much, Commissioner Pava, for the motion. If I may, um, uh, Mr. Sherwin, what is the name of this um short-term rental on Airbnb? Is it called Casa something or other or No, I don't. Oh, so there's not a you know Okay, thanks. So, and do you have um do you have street number signage? Do you have um that is visible on your Coyote fence adjacent to the entries? Okay. We we do, but I I have uh one suggestion is is we we have a an entry gate on the property that slides and uh because we have two addresses, 28 and 30, and we've been leaving the gate open, the 28 is is blocked. So, we could reposition and that's the one that the Airbnb and probably why it's caused some confusion. So, we could certainly re place that. And it's a lighted little uh 28. So I could put that in a place where that I think would solve that problem. So Commissioner Pava is is basically having more clear address signage adequate to satisfy your motion. Now the reason I made the Thank you, Mr. Chair. The reason I suggest this as a specific condition is this is is mentioned several times in testimony uh this evening about confusion about addresses and neighbors having to provide directions. And I get all that. Um also, um I think this may alleviate some some

of the concerns. Um whatever is permitted under code, it's a minimal sign. Um it appropriate for the area. Um that's that's why I had mentioned it, but but but I'm not going to follow my sword on that. If if the rest of the commission is is is not concerned about signage, my my motion still stands for approval. I'll second the motion. I just want to make sure that we're not stipulating something that we're not allowed to stipulate and create a new rule that we're not allowed to create. That's my only thing. Um, chair, commissioners, can we change your signage requirement to that they properly post their 911 address at the active gate for that address. So that way that people driving by because the ordinance does not allow signage to say STR here. But if they have a sign on the gate that says the address of the STR, people driving through will be able to see that. And it ought to be three inch letters, numbers. It'll need a reflective background or it needs to be lighted and that would identify the address that people are looking for and will be within code. That's all good and fine. I do believe as planning commissioners, we do have the purview to insert a condition like this, but as I said, I'm not going to fall on my sword about it. Um, if I were the Airbnb folks, I would take a picture of this newly installed sign in context and when I go to an Airbnb, and oh my god, I do occasionally, um, I would look for clues because sometimes it is hard to find the the space. So, yeah, that would satisfy me. Thank you, staff. Thank you very much. So, we have a motion and a second. Um, may we have a any any discussion? May we have a roll call vote, please. Mr. Pava. Yes. No.

Yes. That Crawford. Yeah. Uh, yes. It's a yes for me. Yes. Thank you very much. Next we have on the agenda petitions. Oh, TDR. There was going to be presentation on TDRs. Oh, I'm sorry. Great. He's gonna show slides to see slides. that turns your screen into what they're seeing here. It should always a mess. Thank you very much. It comes. Good afternoon, uh, commissioners. Um, I am Herbert Foster. I'm a team leader in the growth management department. I manage the transfer of development rights program and I'm happy to tell you uh a little bit about it and a status of where we are where we're at and some ideas of uh where we're headed with the

transfer of development rights program. Uh we call the TDR program. TDR. The P TDR program is basically a voluntary system that encourages land owners of environmental, cultural, scenic, or agricultural property to preserve their land by selling development rights to other land owners who can develop at a higher density in certain zoning districts where development is more appropriate. So, we're asking land owners who own certain types of properties. Thank you. I was just reminded um use the mic and stay on script. So there's basically three components of of the TDR program. The sending area, the receiving area, and the administration of the system. That's that's what I do. Um the sending area basically is what happens in this process. A an owner of property in the sending area, this image here is irrigated agriculture. They agree voluntarily to permanently sever the remaining rights to develop on their land. They get a certificate. Certificates literally look like this. This represents uh their foregoing building one house on their property. This is equal to one house not built to preserve the farm. And they sell this certificate to other developers who get to build five houses at a different piece of property. So there's a density bonus there. There's a financial incentive for property owners to buy and sell these certificates to transfer density in areas where we don't want it to areas where we do want it. The incentive is they get five houses for every one certificate that they buy. There other ratio other provisions if it's not they're not building residences they'll do commercial and and industrial and so forth. I'm sorry I just stepped away from the mic again. And again uh they they pay cash or they pay money uh to the property

owner um as the incentive. The owner can pay off their mortgage, they can buy farm equipment, they can uh do whatever they like. Um it doesn't have to be an agriculture property. So I don't want to give you that idea, but those are the three basic components of how it works. uh the sending area. The SLDC outlines several criteria for what uh can be considered in a in a as a as a sending area. Uh those are uh a number of the overlay districts that we have. An overlay district can specify that this is a sending area. Um sensitive environmental lands those are some examples are given uh as riparian habitats, endangered or threatened species habitat or archaeological sites. Um agriculture land is eligible ascending area and areas uh considered for preservation like open space, scenic vistas, natural features and what they call areas of special character. If your property meets one of those criteria, it's eligible as a sending area where you can sell your development rights and and permanently protect your property. There's certain zoning districts in the county that are eligible as receiving areas. Uh these are the mixeduse zone, planned developments, the industrial general zone, industrial light, commercial general, and all of these properties, regardless of its uh zone, as long as it's one of those, must have access to community water, sewer, and a public road. A little bit about the the TDR process on the sending area side. They an applicant will will have we have an application. We I conduct a site visit. I write a qualification report. A qualification report is a non-binding agreement between the county and the property owner about their intent and an estimate of the number of certificates

that they're probably going to get based on what their intent is. Um we want to know at that point are they planning on subdividing on developing etc. Uh there is a plat that is required that identifies the sending area and a buildable area and permanently protects all of the land from from future development. The TDR agreement is approved by the county commissioners and after that commission hearing if they approve it we I print and we issue certificates. All these documents, the certificates and the agreement and the plaque get recorded and at that point the land is permanently protected. We issue this the the signed certificates and they can sell them. They can do whatever they want with them. Let's see the receiving process. Um a property owner presumably a developer would buy them at whatever market price they can get. They can barter, they can trade, they apply for a development permit application just as they would uh any other application. TDRs do not uh trigger any kind of special hearing process. If your application requires a public hearing, it requires a public hearing if it has TDRs or not. TDRs do not require any kind of special development review. And then uh once the the development proposal is approved um it all all it all gets certified and we stamp redeemed on these and it's it's done. They're they're redeemed. Any questions thus far? I I have a question. Mhm. Um so if uh some rights are transferred or sent somewhere and subsequently the same or

future property owner, do they have the ability to receive um a different uh development right or once it's severed it's that's it for the life of everybody here? Uh it is it is permanent. Um and a a single property cannot be a sending area and a receiving area at the same time. But but even two years later, 5 years later, 10 years later, once the rights are severed, there's no way to get those rights back. Is that correct? It is correct. It's permanent. Correct. Thank you. Permanent. Please, Mike. So, say I buy I'm a developer. Uh So, say I buy um TDRs, um I'm going to do I'm gonna I'm going to use that to increase the density in the subdivision that I would otherwise develop. So, can I be denied? Is my approval assured or uh uh do I still have to go through the approval process? What happens if uh if uh my request subdivision request is denied or conditions are ownorous and I don't want to go through with it. So so just to make just to make sure so conditions other than density it so if for example the thing falls apart because of some other condition that is too you know you need too much infrastructure other than density. Thanks. Yes. I I gotta be honest. I'm not certain. I I completely understand the question. The I got you. Okay. Chair, commissioners. Um so the TDR certificates are requirement at the time of recording the plat. So after the final plat when they go to record, they will have to have TDR certificates in their hands. So the developer can either

a purchase them before they go to BCC and get approval. If they get denied, they still hold the certificates. They can be used for another project in a receiving area or they can wait until they have BCC final plat approval and then come and buy the certificates, present them to us at the time of recordation of the plot. I'm kind of with you. Bear with me. Sure. So, I'm a developer and I I uh this allows me to do five units an acre rather than two units an acre. So, I go through all the process. I'm preparing my plats, doing the engineering. I would uh um I'd be really upset even if uh you know if I wasn't approved. So, whether I bought the TDR before or I guess you'd it'd be a conditional. You you'd close on it after. Correct. I I see what you're saying. Most of the time they come in for conceptual then preliminary and final separately. So at the time of conceptual they will be going to BCC. BCC can sit there and tell them we disagree with your density. We think you have too many lots. We want you to do this. At that point in time, the developer has the opportunity to change it and see does it still make money to meet what they are asking me to do. If not, they can abandon the project then or they can keep moving forward. Very few times have we ever had a subdivision go forward for final plat approval and BCC not approve it because they have seen it at least twice before. Okay, got it. Um so question from my end of stuff because I'm just curious about this too. So we're talking about um the sending

portion of it, right? Is a is a density scenario that a particular land has, right? So like say it's um one dwelling unit per two acres or something like that. Somebody has a 4 acre lot. Um they can sell or transfer that two acres or whatnot that they would have been able to build a one dwelling in. Is that correct? The number of certificates is based on on the the zoning and the and the size of the property. Correct. So if if um one acre is allowed one house and they can they can get one certificate. Um 10 acres are allowed 10 houses they can get sent 10 certificates. So the it's based on on the zoning and and the size of the property on the zoning and stuff. And are there any restrictions I guess into what can be transferred? Like for instance, there are a lot of lots that have non-buildable uh areas or are in flood zone etc. Can somebody still transfer that portion of that land as a uh as part of this for the certificate? Yes. Um u Mr. Chair and commissioners um the owner does not have to sever all the development rights on all the property all at the same time. they can set aside areas within the plat that are still developable or areas that that are not subject to the restrictions of the agreement. Gotcha. Thank you. Thank you. Sure. Uh some frequently asked questions. There are many. Um these are just some of the more frequently ones. Does uh on the sending side, do you still own your land? Yes, you do. You're not giving up ownership of the property. You retain ownership. You're just agreeing voluntarily to permanently not develop it anymore. Um, how uh does the TDR change the zoning? No. Uh, that that does not change the zoning on on either side, sending or receiving. Is it permanent? Yes, it absolutely is. Um, how much is a certificate worth? It's worth what everyone any anyone is

willing to pay for it. Uh, we have a uh well, you have to sever all of the development rights on my property. No, if I'm allowed to build 10, I can agree to retain the right to build two and sell sell eight, for example. So, I don't have to do that for all of the property. I can retain right to develop and that's identified in those areas on the plat and in the agreement. Uh, is the TDR the same as a conservation easement? No, it's a different legal mechanism, but it really has the same outcome to permanently protect a property from development and with different financial incentives. With the TDR, uh, you have to you you're selling certificates at the mar at the free market for whatever price you can get a conservation easement. There's, uh, uh, before and after appraisals and and tax benefits that that come with that. So, slightly different legal mechanisms and, uh, costs to participate and different risks. Uh, what can I build with a TDR certificate? I mentioned a developer who owns them can build five additional homes with each certificate that they have. They can use num different numbers of certificates for different uh setbacks and lot sizes and building heights so they can achieve the greater density with the number of certificates that that they purchase. Uh where can I go to buy and sell TDR certificates? In your packet, I think the very the very last sheet in your packet has a screenshot of the TDR marketplace. It's the county's website where it's kind of the the central place to go for buyers and sellers to learn uh what kind of certificates are for sale or would be coming up for sale. Uh what about water rights? Say what about water rights? Um the the the ordinance does allow a property owner to uh permanently agree to retain their water rights on their

property for in exchange for a certificate. One one acref foot of water is equal to will get you one certificate. May I ask one more not frequently asked question please? What does the assessor do with regard to the taxable valuation of the land once the rights have been severed? Are those assessed at the same general amount? Um can't really speak for the for the assessor. Um, I do know that I'm required uh to notify the assessor whenever there are uh a TDR agreement is in place uh for for a sending area. Um I can't I can't say exactly how they how they would or would not respond. I know there are exemptions and uh procedures they go through to evaluate and re-evaluate, but I know that agriculture, for example, is also the the least tax type of property and they have limits on on how much they can increase and so forth. But so far, frankly, for the the few properties that we've have, I I don't know of any of any real effect on property taxes. Water rights question. So, if I'm selling uh if I'm sending TDR, but I can still retain my water rights. Um, is that what you said? Uh, Mr. Chair, I got to remind myself, Mr. Chair, commissioners. Um, you don't have to uh do anything with your water water rights. It's just just an option if you happen to to own them. But you can retain them even if you sell your development. Correct. Right. So, you can sell those, too. you can sell their either the the development rights to the property and the water rights or just one or the other. Okay. Thank you. We have a lot of discussion uh about water rights and it's it's

uh legal the legal staff is still discussing all the particulars of of how that works. It becomes very very complicated very very quickly. Yeah, that was my follow-up question with that. So, but I think I got the answer. But essentially with the these transfer development rights, you're dealing with density that you can sell, right, for development, as you mentioned, you can also sell water rights as well. Correct. You're not selling water rights. You're agreeing to re to re to never sell them to never use them to not use to not sell them. Correct. Yeah. Which is interesting because I mean there's the whole thing with respect to beneficial use with water rights, etc. I'm just kind of curious how we've been that's been handled with respect to the uh water engineer and how they've been looking at this program with respect to that as well. So, Mr. Chair and commissioners, we're the legal department is looking at that right now. Yeah. Okay. Interesting. So, some of the TDR program of where we are today, uh three owners have participated. This is on the sending side. Three owners have agreed to permanently uh protect their property. Um there are four different properties. Uh these are images of of the three you can see in a ranchob VJO uh Gloretta and uh calling it Dalton Canyon in the upper right hand corner of that Dalton Canyon you can see a little blue dot that that's two two oneacre properties. So between three owners there have been four different properties uh in the in the program uh for 11 certificates. Since then, four of them have actually been sold to another owner. Um, she's going to hold on to them. Uh, right now, well, as of uh this month, four certificates are on sale on the TDR marketplace, and a total of 216 acres have been preserved uh since the program started. I didn't have anything to do with these, but I I hope to more in the future.

Uh the county is also participating in the TDR program. The county owns several open space properties. The uh BCC by the recommendation of the COPAC, the county's count open space uh committee recommended that the county participate and sever its development rights on 16 properties that it owns as a pilot project. And we've been moving forward with that process. As of just the other day, we have 28 TDR certificates in the bank. They're not for sale yet because the commission of the BCC, we're going to be asking them within the next few months to set the price for that. Um there's a number of other uh properties um coming down the pike that we're going to be severing those development rights. So, the county is participating and uh we participate not only in the open space program, but what's called the TDR Bank. The TDR Bank is essentially three things. It's a website. Um, it's a line item in our budget for us, the county to buy and sell certificates. The purpose of the county retaining uh getting these certificates is so the county can sell them, put the money in the TDR bank and use that money to buy certificates elsewhere to preserve more land and a way to stimulate demand in the market and to stabilize the price. So those are the basic functions of the bank that that process of buying and selling uh the county's TDR certificates. Question. Uh so how do you determine the price for the the TDR then that you're selling? Because and does the state weigh in on this at all? Because if you have any property, you need don't you need to sell it at

market value? So, uh how do you determine market value? And uh do you have to check with anybody at the state? Uh Mr. Chair, commissioner, the uh the state has uh enabling legislation. They basically say local governments can do a TDR program. um been working with procurement and and legal and I work with a county staff work group about the procurement procedures uh on on the county on how to precisely process and administer the bank and meaning set a price. We've uh just signed a consultant contract just the other day. Uh so we're going to get started with an expert nationally in TDRs. He's an economist going to help us determine the price and give us a methodology every year to um to uh to update the price. The commission updates the price. So the precise method that we're going to go through, I can't quite say. This was studied in 16 and 17 a report for the county. They did what they call an internal rate of return uh calculation uh under under different scenarios to come up with what they thought a developer would be willing to pay for a certificate. That was some numbers of years some number of years ago. The market has changed quite a bit. The county uh changed the ordinance to allow one certificate. Used to get you four houses now we get you five. So some of those dynamics have changed and we're we're thankfully hiring some help to help us uh figure out precisely that that method. Um, and we are looking we have looked into the the state procurement requirements for such a a kind of property. So nothing final, but we're aware of that and we're we're tightening up that process right now. Thanks. So So yeah, so it's a it's basically goes through an open procurement. So it's basically just going to be you'll set a process where people will respond and you'll then find out what

those are. I have a question about the so the the 28 that the county through open space has. So those can those cannot be sold as 140 individual one unit. They have to be sold in chunks of five. Is that right? No. No, not at all. Mr. Chair, commissioners, we can sell all of them at once to one owner. We can decide never to sell them. We can decide just to to sell a few. But you could do one. So, so in the usual transaction, if if I'm selling to Steve, I send one, he gets five units in when it goes in the bank, those are split. So, you can buy Steve can buy one out of the bank. Oh, I see. No, no, it doesn't work that way. And you can't disagregate those five homes. You have to buy in lots of five. Correct. Got it. Okay. Thank you. If I may, Mr. Chair and Commissioner, you don't again, you don't you don't have to use all of those five. If you can only fit four, okay, if you have if you want to fit six, you have to buy two certificates. Um, there's other what we call dimensional relief. A certificate, one certificate, if it's not a residential project, if it's commercial, one certificate can get you a taller building or a bigger building or if rental um on on the matter of rentals, one certificate will get you uh 10 home ownership or 10 uh multifamily. I'm sorry. I I I think I misspoke. One certificate will get you five home ownership units and 10 multif family or rental units. Right. Yes. Yeah. So, just curious. So, if a home owner or whoever it is, right, decides to transfer and get one of these certificates, right? Um like you said, it's something that happens permanent, right? So, it's a permanent thing. So now they can't use that whatsoever. They have the certificate with I guess the idea that they would potentially be selling it to the developer at some

point in time, right? Or I mean that's the concept, right? Correct. Um but um I mean are I know this is kind of a pilot program or a beginning program now, but I mean I guess is there an instance where an owner does that, right? Gets a certificate and then never never sells it, never does anything with it and they just essentially lose their rights without any benefit. Um, hard to say. I can just tell you what what I know from uh, Mr. Chair and Commissioner. Um, to be perfectly honest, I I talked to one woman who who bought them and she she forgot that she bought them. Nice. Okay. Um, if that's an anecdote to tell you what might happen. And just to follow up on my first question because I do think you kind of answered, but I just wanted to make make clear. So like obviously you mentioned that you know you don't have to necessarily sell all the development rights you can kind of piece meal it et all that gets kind of identified in in a plat right or maybe some sort of quick claim to eat or something like that right but um so you know you got some properties that are you know sitting on like 30% slopes or more where they can't develop anyway right um you can still allocate those portions of the land and transfer that as that's kind of one of my questions I had before right it's like can you transfer for land that absolutely will not get developed anyway because it can't because you're not meeting land development code. Is that still is that possible, Mr. Chair, Commissioner? Uh yes and no. Um the example you gave of slope um that will that can still be counted towards the the TDR the acres. Um there other we've just been discussing this quite a bit. The the code does have some uh provisions for setbacks, easements, those kinds of things. uh deed restrictions that already put permanent restrictions on developing the land that doesn't count. There's other things other things like

setback slope um those sorts of thing wetlands uh that are already you know presumably or are very explicitly protected but um those those are counted towards the acres and I would just add a comment because I am a myeroma to myia and transferring water rights is a very very touchy subject you know um you know obviously u la was la and you know certainly a lot of sikas want to make sure to keep water rights within you know our traditional communities within our sikas ourselves um and sometimes these transfer rights happen because there doesn't necessarily have um you know a a rule book or whatnot with respect to that but generally in stuff you know if somebody is trying to transfer water rights you're supposed to notify the sika and the board members of that sika etc and stuff like that so I think you should make sure that legal uh takes that into consideration make sure that if any kind of consideration of a selling of water rights as part of the trans TDR program should have some sort of notification, some sort of uh just more checks and balances with respect to uh to ours here in New Mexico. Mr. Chair and commissioners, I want to I want to be clear that um the water right component of the TDRs is not giving you certificates to sell them. It's giving you certificates to retain them permanently on your land. Oh, gotcha. Okay, we get we the commission and and we it's very well understood that aua vita and agriculture without water is really isn't much of agriculture. So the the the intent of uh retaining the water right in exchange for certificates is precisely for that goal to keep the water within with on the land within the system. Gotcha. That's good. Thank you, Mr. Mr. Foster. Um, is is the county open space, you

know, I I believe there was a Bobcat Ranch is a is a imminent acquisition. I'm not sure if is is the county open space looking at two prices either with or without the rights. Um because I would imagine if they acquire properties that are sending areas and they can then sever and split into the bank that makes it permanent so that people I'm just wondering if if there are setting the prices is going to be important and will have ramifications toward the toward the purchase price of open space is maybe where I'm getting at. Sorry. Uh Mr. Chair, I I I can't speak the specific thinking around the Bobcat Ranch. I I I don't can't speak to its eminence or not and considerations of its appraisal and with and without TD TDRs. I have to remind myself, frankly, um the zoning I if TDRs are even eligible in that particular zone, I'll be happy to get back to you. Not a problem. Not a problem. Just a thought exercise. Sorry. Any other questions from commissioners? Thanks so much for the presentation. It was interesting and engaging. You're very welcome. I I look forward to being here in future presentations for for developers who are who are um who are buying them because that really gets the market market going, right? And you can sit in the back and when someone needs variants, you can sell them one from the bank or before it comes to us. Sorry. Well, thank you again. Appreciate your time. Thanks so much. Next on the agenda, petitions from the floor. Alex, you're the only one on the floor. Do you have anything?

Okay. Matters from the commission. Um, welcome Jose. Uh, thanks very much. Appreciate your input and um and enjoy yourself while you're here. Thanks. Any any other commissioners have anything to say? Matters from Roger who's not here. Matters from staff. Uh we only have one. Just a heads up. The June 19th meeting will need to be moved to June 18th. So that month instead of it being on a Thursday, it'll be on a Wednesday, the county offices are closed on June 19th for Junth day. So to go and give you about a two-month notice that we'll need you here on that Wednesday. Thank you very much. Um, the next regularly scheduled meeting is May 15th and that's it. May I get a motion to adjurnn? A motion to adjurnn. Second. Second. All in favor? I I done. Thank you so much.