Santa Fe board approves special-use permit for garage-to-ADU conversion despite well‑sharing concerns

The Santa Fe Board of Adjustment on the evening of the recorded meeting approved a special‑use permit allowing the conversion of an existing 371‑square‑foot garage into a one‑bedroom accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at the property listed on the agenda as 195 Brownell (the transcript includes multiple spellings of the street name).

Senior planner Alexa Hempel, the case planner with the city’s land use department, told the board that the lot is 5.079 acres in R‑1 zoning and sits in the Escarpment/Ridgetop Overlay, meaning the structure and use are legal nonconforming and require a special‑use permit. "The applicant is requesting approval of a special use permit to convert their garage into an accessory dwelling unit within the escarpment ridge top overlay," Hempel said, summarizing staff’s recommendation to approve the permit subject to the conditions and technical corrections listed in Attachment A of the staff report.

Hempel told the board the conversion would not increase the 371‑square‑foot footprint but would alter window and door placement and would add a bedroom, bathroom and kitchenette. She said the property uses a private well and septic system; the septic has been upgraded to accommodate the additional bedroom and city water and sewer did not impose conditions because the home is over 1,000 linear feet from the nearest city services.

During questioning, board members raised potential impacts on a private, shared well. One member said, "I guess my main concern is that if the well fails and the other property hires a [hydrogeologist] and says it failed because you got this extra unit ..." and asked whether any study had been done on well flow or whether adjacent owners had objected. The applicant’s representative, Sandra Odoms, said she had not heard concerns and that no study had been done.

Colleen, who moved approval, resisted requiring a private well‑sharing agreement as a condition. She said the State Engineer issues well permits and noted that sharing is allowed: "It is allowed to be shared between up to 4 properties, by code," she said, adding that the board should avoid micromanaging state oversight. Staff and counsel advised that private covenants and well‑sharing agreements are a private matter outside the board’s jurisdiction, though staff said the city could, at the building‑permit stage, require an acknowledgement or additional documentation if the board wished that assurance.

Colleen moved to approve case number 2025‑11289 subject to the conditions and technical corrections in the staff report’s Attachment A; the motion was seconded and adopted on a roll‑call vote. Members recorded as voting in favor included Vice Chair Dury, Secretary Painter, Member Ip, Member Alexander and Chair Friedman; the motion passed.

The board chair thanked staff for a thorough analysis and noted the public hearing was not opened for public testimony because no one attended in person or via Zoom. The staff report cites specific code references related to this decision, including chapter 14 and sections governing escarpment/ridgetop development and special uses.

Next steps: the board’s action approves the special‑use permit with the conditions listed in Attachment A of the staff report; any compliance items identified by staff as part of building‑permit review (including potential documentation related to utilities) would be addressed through that separate permitting process.