When the city Land Use Code is insufficient
This past January, the city Planning Commission reviewed the application for the Estancias del Norte development. The proposed development is north of Hyde Park Road, above Bishop’s Lodge Road and the Greater Callecita neighborhood. Numerous citizens expressed their concerns about the flooding and erosion already taking place. A planning commissioner asked a city engineer about these concerns. The city engineer responded, as quoted in the Planning Commission minutes:
“Unfortunately we will be looking at bigger storms than in the past and their concerns are valid. But [the proposed development] meet[s] the limits of our code. I’m not sure how to address it, except to change our code.”
The city engineer’s response begs the questions: What if the Land Use Code is insufficient to ensure public safety? If a proposed development meets the requirements of the city’s Land Use Code but poses a risk to homes and roads downhill, must the development be approved?
The Estancias del Norte proposal is for 49 home sites to be built on 40 acres. Casitas are expected to sit on the lots as well. The foothills there are steep. Development removes water-absorbing vegetation and lays pavement through which stormwater rushes. The proposed development is also immediately uphill and alongside of a newer development called Haciendas del Mirasol. Haciendas del Mirasol sits on 28 acres with eight home sites. It was developed from 2016-17. Prior to these 28 acres being developed, severe flooding was predicted. The flooding became reality in July and October of 2017.
This flooding is hardly new: Flooding also occurred after development of Hyde Park Road’s south side began in the 1980s. In 1995, city engineer John Vengrin testified that the latter had caused drainage problems costing the city $500,000. These flooding incidents validate citizens’ concerns — the Land Use Code is not sufficient. Judgment and common sense are required.
A letter to the editor by Bryan Stuppy in the June 26, 1997, Santa Fe New Mexican, about this same acreage, seems as relevant today as it was then:
… The developer says that he has met all current ordinance restrictions and that everyone on city staff that are responsible for approving developments and who are to ensure they meet city code have done so … the developer contends that he has complied with the law, therefore he is entitled to have his development approved. … Fortunately … some City Councilors listen to their constituents.
Their constituents are saying: What if current city ordinances don’t protect people downstream from flooding? What if current city ordinances don’t protect the city of Santa Fe … from having to pay damages when sewers can’t handle runoff? What if current city ordinances don’t protect the city of Santa Fe … from having to pay for construction of protective drainage culverts, when the developers’ proposed drainage ideas don’t work? … Is the City Council supposed to rubber stamp the Planning Commission when these questions are raised? No. In 2000, a federal court of appeals affirmed this position (Hyde Park Co. v. Santa Fe City Council, Sept. 29): Even if a proposed development complies with the Land Use Code, the City Council has the discretionary power to reject it. Developers have long been willing to let the city gamble on the developers’ work product. And why not? If flooding occurs, the developers will pay nothing to repair the damage. Instead, it is the city, taxpayers and homeowners who will pay.
In 2016, the City Council gambled and lost on Haciendas del Mirasol. The risk that further development will worsen the flooding appears high. Should the city gamble again by approving Estancias del Norte? Please attend the Santa Fe governing body meeting July 25 and ask the City Council to say no.