[Neighbors] Fw: Biennial IDO Update, 2025

Wed Jan 21 10:55:50 MST 2026

Good morning neighbors,

Gary, I am not sure it's fair to claim that zoning changes will cause
property taxes to rise. While zoning changes are technically allowed to be
considered for tax reassessment under State law, Bernalillo County's actual
practice for determining value and triggering reassessment is to monitor
individual properties for building permits and sales. The City
legislatively changed zoning for *all properties* back in 2018 when it
adopted the new IDO, and we did not see sweeping tax increases then based
on new zoning. I think the County only cares about *use *changes, not *zoning
*changes. Additionally, residential properties are protected by a maximum
3% annual increase (unless you sell/redevelop). This goes for apartments
and single-family homes alike.

The map below shows the potentially impacted properties. (I am also
including a screenshot of the Neighborhood Edges language in
their proposed update.) Anything that is marked R-T is currently R-1;
anything marked MX-T is currently R-T.

My feelings on this are mixed... perhaps, rather than carte blanche
rejecting this proposal, *I would propose requesting that any property
currently zoned in an R district not be upgraded anywhere above an R-T *(which
is the highest density protected under Neighborhood Edges). That would
address the Neighborhood Edges concern while allowing more gentle density
to grow in and around our commercial corridor.

[image: image.png]
[image: image.png]

*I am in favor of IDO 2-3(B)(1) *(allowed duplex/triplex in R-1). *I am
also in favor of allowing small retail in R-1 zones. *I doubt the small
retail would change our neighborhood's character very much (we have Central
Avenue right here! Who could compete with that?), but it could greatly
benefit other neighborhoods that don't have access to walkable
neighborhoods and grocery stores like we have the privilege of enjoying by
allowing coffee shops, corner stores, or other small commercial
neighborhood uses.

RE: allowing R-ML in R-1 (which would become R-L) - this is not a new
change. R-ML is allowed in R-1 within 1/4 mile of Main Street/Premium
Transit Corridors under today's zoning code. The update seems to be a
clarification rather than a major change (see redlined text below).* I am
fine with the EPC's proposed language and I am against the request to
remove it. *
[image: image.png]

Thank you!
Ciaran

On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 4:42 PM meyster1--- via Neighbors_nobhill-nm <
neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:

>
> Friends and neighbors,
>
> City Council is performing the 2025 Biennial Update of the Integrated
> Development Ordinance, Albuquerque's zoning code.
> You can find background at Integrated Development Ordinance, Biennial
> Update 2025 » Nob Hill Neighborhood Association
> <https://www.nobhill-nm.com/integrated-development-ordinance-biennial-update-2025/>
> You can see a discussion focused on Nob Hill at Integrated Development
> Ordinance, Biennial Update 2025 » Nob Hill Neighborhood Association
> <https://www.nobhill-nm.com/integrated-development-ordinance-biennial-update-2025/>
> Council's Land Use Planning and Zoning Committee (LUPZ) considered the
> Update on January 14. NHNA is developing a statement of position for the
> committee's next meeting Jan. 28. A draft appears below. We would value
> your comments before January 23 at 5 pm so we can firm it up. You may reply
> to sender or to all. When you do, please indicate if you are a resident or
> own property or a business in our boundaries.
> https://www.nobhill-nm.com/about-the-nhna/nob-hill-boundaries-2/
> We will put our statement out here and tell you how you can reach LUPZ
> personally.
> #VivaNobHill, Gary Eyster, member, NHNA Urban Planning Team
>
>
> __________________
> Chair and Councilors,
> This is the position of the Nob Hill Neighborhood Association on the IDO
> Update, O-26-2.
> 1…IDO 2-3(B)(1) *adding additional uses in the R-1 Single Family Zone
> District, namely duplexes and triplexes. *Neighbors, please reply with
> your take on this.
> 2…Section 4, *Legislative Zoning Conversions: Convert R-1 to R-T, R-T to
> MX-T, and R-ML to MX-L in Major Transit Corridor Areas and Activity
> Centers. *These areas are pictured at
> https://abq-zone.com/2025-update-proposed-legislative-zoning-conversions
> CABQ has not provided direct notice to property owners, it will likely
> cause property taxes to rise, it will result in many properties losing
> Neighborhood Edge protection, and it will raise maximum height in most
> cases. *We request that you remove Section 4 from the update.*
> 3…A change to 4-3(B)(8)(e) that Council made earlier this year says *the
> R-ML use is prohibited in the R-1 and R-T zone districts except in or
> within ¼ mile of Main Street or Premium Transit areas north of Central Ave.
> and east of the Rio Grande.* EPC recommended changing that to *either *north
> of Central Ave. *or* east of the Rio Grande. That means R-ML apartment
> cubes 30 ft. tall can be built on any R-1 property in the entire city east
> of the Rio Grande.
> We don’t want historic houses surrounding our historic houses demolished
> for 30-foot-high apartment cubes. Historic character isn’t just stucco and
> tile roofs. It includes the context of the community. There are plenty of
> vacant sites all over town where multi-family can be built. *R-ML in the
> middle of neighborhoods is not gentle. We request that you remove
> 4-3(B)(8)(e) from the IDO.*
> 4…Table 4-2-1 Allowable Uses and Use-Specific Standards; *The update
> proposes* *allowing General Retail, Small in residential zone districts
> including R-1;* on corner lots abutting at least 1 collector or arterial
> street this would be permissive. On corner lots abutting at least 2 local
> streets this would require a conditional use permit. The use could not
> exceed 5,000 sq ft.
> Table 4-2-1 Allowable Uses and Use-Specific Standards; *The update
> proposes allowing Grocery Store in residential zone districts including
> R-1.* On corner lots abutting at least 1 collector or arterial street
> this would be permissive. Otherwise, it is prohibited. The use could not
> exceed 5,000 sq ft.
> These uses would be adjacent to residences. *Individuals have expressed
> concerns around hours of business and other matters like solid waste
> disposal. We urge you address these in the use-specific standards.*
>
> _______________________________________________
> Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
> Neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
> https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
> This Message Sent To: ciaranlithgow at gmail.com
>

-- 
Ciaran Lithgow
ciaranlithgow at gmail.com
(818) 398-1182
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20260121/e35f7ede/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 33259 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20260121/e35f7ede/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 627146 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20260121/e35f7ede/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 28906 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20260121/e35f7ede/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/neighbors_nobhill-nm/attachments/20260121/e35f7ede/attachment-0003.png>