The Santa Fe City Council took public comment on a proposed repeal and replacement of Chapter 14 of the Land Development Code (Bill 2024‑17 / Ordinance 2025‑TBD) during a meeting in which no formal action was taken.

Director Heather Lamboy, who introduced the effort, told the council the rewrite—labeled Phase 1—was intended to improve clarity and administration of nearly 700 pages of rules and to create a foundation for subsequent policy changes. “I’m excited to bring phase 1 of the land development code update forward for your consideration,” Lamboy said, noting the work required contributions from city departments, advisory groups and consultants.

The proposal, as read into the record by the clerk, contains more than 40 substantive changes and reorganizations. Staff described the package as a mix of organizational edits and targeted policy shifts, including changes to historic‑preservation review, archaeological permitting, building heights and densities, parking requirements, and new incentives intended to spur affordable and “missing middle” housing.

Why it matters: The rewrite would alter how the city regulates where and how housing, businesses and public improvements are built. Supporters told the council the incentives and administrative changes are designed to reduce cost and delay for projects that include affordable units; opponents and some residents said neighborhoods deserve a stronger role in later phases.

Key provisions and staff descriptions
- The bill would repeal and replace SFCC 1987 Chapter 14 and consolidate code‑violation references into a single violations section. The city clerk read the caption as Bill 2024‑17/Ordinance 2025‑TBD.
- The proposal shifts the burden of proof for establishing legal nonconformities to the applicant or property owner.
- The city would reduce the early neighborhood‑notification requirement for city capital improvement projects to projects exceeding $250,000.
- “Special use permits” would be renamed “conditional use permits.”
- The Historic District Review Board would lose authority to recommend personal property acquisitions; the draft also would require archaeologists to hold a New Mexico state burial excavation permit for certain work and would remove waivers of qualifications for archaeologists by the archaeological review committee.
- The draft increases permitted building heights in some residential and nonresidential contexts and establishes densities and heights by right for certain residential zones that exceed 10 units per acre.
- A new parks and open‑space zoning district is proposed; accessory dwelling units would be allowed to reach the maximum allowable height of the zoning district and residential compounds would have clarified dimensional standards.
- The draft adds administrative affordability incentives (density bonuses, dimensional flexibility, fee waivers and streamlined administrative review), clarifies that duplexes, triplexes, townhomes and residential complexes are permitted uses, and expands options to reduce on‑site parking; it also exempts the Business Capital District from certain parking requirements in Table 7‑4.
- New environmental and design measures include requirements for trees integrated into stormwater infrastructure in parts of the Airport Road overlay, updated landscaping and lighting standards (phasing out certain lamp types and lowering a specified incandescent wattage threshold), and a requirement for electric vehicle charging stations for all new developments.

Public comment: support, cautions and specific concerns
Dozens of speakers addressed the council during the public‑comment period. Supporters—affordable‑housing advocates, builders, architects and neighborhood residents—urged the council to pass Phase 1 largely “as is” so the city could begin using the affordability incentives and administrative changes immediately.

Miles Conway, chief executive officer of the New Mexico Home Builders Association, praised the package’s direction on housing and said it would allow smaller local builders to participate. “We’re going to legalize Santa Fe. We’re going to legalize a traditional Santa Fe way of building,” Conway said.

Several nonprofit and advocacy groups, including representatives of Santa Fe Habitat for Humanity, Chainbreaker Collective and the American Institute of Architects Santa Fe chapter, told the council the incentives package is critical to delivering workforce and deeply affordable housing. “Those with the least secure access to housing need our leadership on this now,” said Johanna Gilligan (commenter) in support of adopting the affordability package intact.

Speakers also expressed concerns:
- Neighborhood representation: Martin Martinez (commenter) said neighborhoods were not represented on the working groups and urged greater neighborhood engagement in Phase 2.
- Process and presentation: Councilor Michael Garcia objected that the council and public received only a reading of the caption and limited staff summary, saying, “we spent more time reading the title than going over any of these substantive updates tonight.”
- Homelessness services: Kat Kinkade and others noted an immediate need for more shelter beds and micro‑communities ahead of winter, separate from the land‑use rewrite.

A range of builders, architects and housing advocates urged the governing body to approve Phase 1 without substantive amendment so the package of incentives would remain coordinated. Multiple speakers from technical and community advisory groups commended staff for extensive public engagement and the new web‑based, searchable code format.

What the council did
No ordinance vote or formal action was taken. Mayor Alan Weber closed the public‑comment period noting that the meeting was intended to gather public input and that the bill will proceed through committee review and further hearings. “No action is anticipated,” the mayor said as the meeting closed.

Next steps
Staff and councilors said the matter will move into the committee process for detailed review and revision before any final vote. Members of the public who testified asked the council to maintain the affordability incentives as a cohesive package and signaled continued participation in Phase 2 and Phase 3 of the rewrite.

Ending
The meeting provided an extensive public airing of the proposed LDC changes and highlighted both broad support—centered on accelerating affordable housing—and concerns about neighborhood input and immediate homelessness needs. The council did not vote on the ordinance; the proposal will continue through the city’s committee review and public hearing process.