Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enforcement And Restoration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies retroactive approvals at 214 Old Santa Fe Trail, orders restoration
Summary
The board voted to deny retroactive approval for multiple unpermitted alterations at 214 Old Santa Fe Trail — including low planter walls, plate-glass openings to floor level, and a tall metal gate — and directed steps to restore the property to its condition prior to unapproved work.
The City of Santa Fe Historic Districts Review Board on March 25 denied retroactive approval for multiple unpermitted alterations at 214 Old Santa Fe Trail and directed the property be restored to its condition prior to unauthorized work.
Staff planner Paul Duran presented a long list of alterations that were performed without HDRB approval or building permits, including a continuous low planter wall along the primary (north) facade, replacement of traditional divided-light doors and storefront windows with plate glass that reaches the interior floor, large metal gates that exceed permitted materials and heights, and pilasters that were approved to be stuccoed but are now covered with stone cases. "Given this and the other neighboring property at 216 Old Santa Fe Trail, staff finds that all the exemption criteria have not been met and recommends denial of the application," Duran said.
Applicant representative John Padilla acknowledged the work had been done without permits and told the board the building owner acquired the property in 2022 and that much of the work had been completed by a tenant. "My owner has made it very clear to me that he is not here to ask for any special exceptions...his tenant made these changes," Padilla said, adding the owner is willing to work with staff to bring the property into compliance.
Public commenters urged the board to deny retroactive approval and to require the owner to restore historic materials. "I would ask that you don't grant exceptions here, and that you require the windows to come up and that there be a mass displayed in this front facade in particular," Stephanie Benonato said.
After extended discussion about prior conditions, earlier approvals, and public‑safety and streetscape impacts, the board voted to deny the application in its entirety and adopted staff’s recommendation as findings of fact and conclusions of law. The board also directed staff to require restoration to the condition prior to any unapproved work; staff and the City Attorney’s Office will follow up with enforcement and a timeline for compliance. The motion carried on a roll-call vote.
