During its regular meeting on Nov. 20, the Archuleta County Planning Commission unanimously approved a motion recommending denial of a minor subdivision proposed to be located at 2884C County Road 400.
The minor subdivision application was presented by Planner Katie Neher, who indicated the applicant intends to split his parcel into two, with one being 54.06 acres and the other being 6.53 acres.
According to Neher’s staff report, the county’s future land use map designates the area as “very low density,” which has a base density of 35 acres per dwelling unit.
Neher also noted the parcel is currently zoned as agricultural ranching, “which has a minimum lot size of 35 acres.”
The staff report states, “Due to the Very Low Density designation, and because the project does not align with zoning district standards, Planning Staff is recommending denial. In recent years, neighboring parcels were approved for minor subdivisions like this one; however, it is the belief of the Planning Staff that when we are made aware of errors, we act in accordance with the Regulations and pursue the correct process from that moment forward.”
The applicant, Samuel Hughes, explained during the meeting that he originally purchased the property in 2004 and last year he witnessed his neighbors to the north and south split up their properties into multiple smaller parcels.
“So, I just watched the neighbors do that and thought, ‘Oh, I might do the same,’” Hughes said.
He explained that he communicated with county planning staff and was informed by a former employee that the subdividing of his neighbors properties was not done according to the county’s policy.
Hughes also mentioned that he communicated with the county’s former planning director and Commissioner Veronica Medina.
“And Veronica let me know it didn’t seem fair for me to watch both neighbors do it and not be allowed to do,” Hughes said. “She said she would approve the split if it came through the planning committee on to the commissioners.”
In a later interview, Medina indicated that she had likely spoken to the applicant, but did not recall the particular conversation and did not provide any further comment on the matter.
During the meeting, Hughes explained that he had engineers plot the property and studies that would be needed to create the new parcels.
He noted that the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) approved adding a new water tap to service the new parcel, while acknowledging that the county’s current zoning does not align with his application for a minor subdivision in the area.
“But, I think with any luck that the commissioners would let one more sneak through, maybe,” he said.
Hughes explained that his home would be on the larger parcel, while future plans for the smaller parcel could include building another home for his sons or selling it.
“I want to maintain the integrity of this beautiful acreage,” he added.
Planning commissioner Mont McAlister mentioned that over the past few months the commission has been talking about “the precedent that has been set” while also trying to stop splitting up larger agricultural ranching properties.
McAllister also noted that Hughes had received approval from PAWSD for another water tap.
“I would stick with our precedent we’ve already set,” McAlister said, indicating that since PAWSD approved servicing an extra lot, the minor subdivision should be allowed.
Planning commissioner Peter Beaudry commented that he has had issues with “parceling off” less than 35 acres in the past based on the county’s community plan and zoning.
“I don’t believe this body has the option of changing the regulations,” Beaudry said, indicating that he would support the staff recommendation for denial in this case.
“We’ve let this happen in the past,” planning commission chair Matt Nobles said, noting that two of Hughes’ neighbors have done the same thing in the past year or two.
Nobles described the trend as a “hot commodity” with people purchasing larger agricultural ranching properties and then looking to do a minor subdivision.
Nobles indicated that he agreed with Beaudry in that the planning commission is not the body to go against the code.
“I think staff is correct,” he added.
“I think staff is very correct on this, but we have set a precedent,” McAlister said, explaining that if Hughes wants to appeal to the Board of County Commissioners (BoCC), “I think that would be the direction to go.”
Beaudry motioned to recommend denial of the minor subdivision, with McAlister seconding on the condition that Hughes takes the matter to the BoCC, which was unanimously approved.
Nobles clarified that the BoCC has the authority to override the planning commission’s decision on the matter.
clayton@pagosasun.com
>