Commission denies request to allow semi‑truck parking in a residential rural neighborhood after public opposition

The Cochise County Planning and Zoning Commission declined to approve SU25‑08, a special‑use authorization that would have allowed semi‑tractor‑trailer parking at 3281 West Monte Vista Trail, an 18‑acre parcel in a rural residential neighborhood west of Mescal Road.

Planning staff said the property is zoned RU‑4 and described a plan showing truck parking in a cleared northeast corner of the lot. Staff recommended approval with conditions intended to reduce off‑site impacts, including a limit of five tractor‑trailers on site at a time, idling limits, gravel surfacing of the parking area to reduce dust, planting drought‑tolerant trees along east and north property lines, and annual grading of Monte Vista Trail and Acorn Lane.

Applicant Jose (Jose/Jenny) Henriques told the commission he and his family moved to Cochise County for safety and planned to park a small number of company trucks at the property so he could monitor them. He described past theft problems at a paid lot in Tucson and said he had already delivered gravel and planned further surfacing and roadside maintenance. Henriques said his trucks usually leave Sunday or Monday and return Friday or Saturday and volunteered to limit idling and speed on private roads.

More than a half dozen nearby residents and landowners spoke in opposition at the hearing, citing problems they said would be caused by regular semi traffic: dust, damage to narrow dirt lanes (including a wash area that becomes impassable during monsoon), loss of mountain views, impacts on domestic animals, and diminished property values. Speakers who identified addresses on Acorn Lane and Monte Vista Trail described recent road improvements that would be at risk if heavy trucks used the route and said the lane dips and washes are not built for repeated 18‑wheeler traffic. Multiple residents also reported trucks already using the site on weekends.

Commission discussion focused on infrastructure and neighborhood impacts. Commissioners noted the number of written oppositions (11 responses within 750 feet) and questioned whether the private/limited public roads could support tractor‑trailers without significant upgrades. Staff indicated a condition would require the applicant to grade affected lanes at least once per year and to install two‑inch gravel on the truck parking area; the staff recommendation included a cap of five tractor‑trailers on site and restrictions on idling and washing.

When the commission voted, the motion to approve failed. The chair announced the motion did not carry; the clerk recorded a final tally provided in the meeting of "6 to 6 to 2" (as stated on the record). The chair advised applicants and interested parties of appeal rights to the Board of Supervisors.