Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County upholds setback and open‑space variances but denies higher‑density split in North Horizon Lane appeal
Summary
The Board denied a density variance that would have split an 8.95‑acre parcel into seven small lots but approved two other variances allowing development within a 250‑foot frontage setback (with buffering conditions) and permitting perimeter setback to count toward open‑space requirements.
The Santa Fe County Board of County Commissioners resolved an appeal Nov. 10 concerning land‑use variances requested for an 8.954‑acre parcel on North Horizon Lane (case numbers on the record: appeal 25‑5210, underlying case 255010). The board considered three separate variance requests: (1) a density variance to allow seven ~1.25‑acre lots (the code allows one dwelling per 2.5 acres in the zone), (2) relief from a 250‑foot setback from State Road 599, and (3) permitting perimeter setbacks to count toward the site’s required open space.
The board voted to deny the density variance (motion carried by roll call) but approved variances 2 and 3 with conditions intended to reduce impacts. Commissioners discussed options for buffering the frontage along 599 — including required landscaping or a 25‑foot setback for any noise/sound walls — and recorded conditions into the approval. The board also emphasized that utilities and infrastructure requirements (water hook‑ups and septic or well rules) must be met in subsequent permitting.
Applicant and agent presentation: Lisa Martinez, representing property owner Javier Juarez and prospective buyers, described a long‑running effort including Technical Advisory Committee reviews, a neighborhood meeting and a ready‑willing‑and‑able (RWA) letter from county utilities indicating the potential to extend water service. Martinez said the applicant seeks small family transfer lots to keep family members close and described examples of similar small‑lot family transfers nearby.
Neighbor and community testimony raised concerns about water and traffic access, the chronology of prior platting when NM‑599 was constructed, and whether prior property conveyances used different rules. Henry R. Anaya Jr. and other nearby property owners cited issues with well reliability, driveways and school bus turning patterns on North Horizon Lane; an adjacent property owner, Phyllis Baca, testified she supports the applicant and indicated infrastructure easements could allow service extension.
Board action: • Variance 1 (density): denied. • Variance 2 (250‑foot setback from NM‑599): approved with conditions addressing buffering and placement of potential barriers (commissioners asked that any yard walls be set back 25 feet from the frontage or otherwise buffered by landscaping to reduce sound/visual impacts). • Variance 3 (open‑space perimeter): approved, allowing perimeter setback areas to count toward required open space in the proposed configuration.
Votes were recorded by roll call; in each case the board’s action was supported by the majority of commissioners present. The board directed staff to include the conditions in the recorded plat and any subsequent approvals.
Representative quote from applicant’s agent: “The infrastructure, roads, sewer and water lines will be constructed in accordance with code requirements… The proposed density variance… is not unusual as many 1.25 family transfer lots have been created within this district,” said Lisa Martinez.
Next steps: The approvals are conditioned on meeting subdivision requirements (road upgrades, utility connections or demonstrated feasibility of wells/septic where allowed). Staff will add the board‑imposed conditions to the record and coordinate the platting and permitting process with the applicant.
