San Miguel SSR debates density, endorses deed‑restricted ADU requirement and 10‑foot setbacks

San Miguel County's SSR advisory group spent most of a three‑hour July 16 meeting focused on whether to change by‑right densities, how to structure density bonuses tied to deed‑restricted workforce housing, and how to make accessory dwelling units (ADUs) a realistic incentive.

"We are talking hard numbers about density," the chair said at the meeting's start, framing the session as a shift from conceptual discussion to concrete code choices. Staff presented a proposal that would align by‑right densities with several current PUD allowances: low density down to an average of one unit per seven acres, medium to one per three acres (with smaller minimum lots when connected to public water), and a high‑density figure based on dwelling units per acre — proposed at 15 DUs per acre as the by‑right target.

Why it matters: the changes under discussion would alter how and where new development could be built in the East End master‑plan area and beyond. The advisory group repeatedly returned to the question of how much of any new housing must be deed‑restricted and who pays for it — the developer, the county, or both.

Staff proposed a tiered bonus system to reward deeper affordability: modest bonuses for modest shares of deed‑restricted units and larger bonuses (including extra height) for substantially deeper affordability. "We started somewhat in that range because we figured we needed to if before already requiring 1 unit in every 3, that's 30%…the incentive would need to start to step up from there," the presenter said, describing proposed tiers around 25%, 35% and 50% bonuses above the base mitigation requirement.

Debate and concern: several members argued the county should not simply raise by‑right density without tying increases to affordable housing. "We're tasked with creating incentives for new affordable housing — we're not tasked with this broad brush up‑zoning," said Tony Dariani (a remote participant). Others said simply increasing supply could help, but in San Miguel County's high‑price market, smaller lots and more units can still produce high‑end homes rather than workforce housing unless deed‑restrictions and incentives are calibrated to make affordable units financially viable.

ADUs and enforcement: the staff described a narrower policy tool for larger rural parcels. Because state rules allow domestic wells to serve up to three dwelling units on parcels of 35 acres or larger, staff proposed allowing a second caretaker/secondary unit on qualifying parcels if that second unit is deed‑restricted for workforce housing and subject to administrative review. Kaye, a planning staffer, clarified that Fastrack is an optional review path and that caretaker units are typically administratively approved. Staff said deed‑restriction monitoring would be handled by the local housing authority, with fines and remedies if owners violate occupancy or vacancy terms.

Votes and outcomes: the SSR took a thumbs‑up vote to approve the slide and summary language with the explicit clarification that a second bonus unit must be deed‑restricted; members agreed staff should ensure the deed‑restriction requirement appears in the table language. The group also supported reducing side setbacks to 10 feet in medium and high density zones (a hands‑up vote), while asking staff to confirm there would be no conflict with building‑code or wildfire safety requirements.

Next steps: staff will model specific bonus scenarios, including deeper affordability thresholds (staff suggested moving to fewer, larger bonus steps such as a 50% and 100% option rather than many small tiers) and run fiscal examples to test whether bonuses make projects financially viable. The SSR scheduled a follow‑up working session and plans to present a summary to the planning commission and board of county commissioners at a July 29 joint work session.

What remains unresolved: the group did not adopt final by‑right density changes for low, medium or high zones; members generally favored preserving the existing 1‑per‑35 acres by‑right baseline for low and medium areas while using bonuses to drive affordability, with a more open debate about whether to raise by‑right high‑density only in places where the East End master plan already envisions it. Staff will return with modeled options and refined language.

The SSR adjourned with staff committed to circulate numeric scenarios and to reconvene before the joint July 29 session.