Cochise County supervisors remand disputed RV‑park appeal to Planning & Zoning for re‑review

The Cochise County Board of Supervisors voted 2–1 on Nov. 18 to remand docket SUA25‑04 — an appeal by Benny and Janelle Schmidt of a Planning & Zoning denial for a proposed recreational‑vehicle park in Palominas — back to the county’s Planning & Zoning Commission for reconsideration on March 11, 2026.

The matter drew an extended public hearing with neighbors and local conservationists urging the board to uphold the Planning & Zoning decision. Joanne Roberts, a wildlife conservation biologist and a representative of Friends of the San Pedro River, told supervisors the proposal should be denied because “we cannot look at it from an individual parcel, but look at it from a cumulative standpoint,” warning that increased water use, altered wildlife migration and changed traffic patterns could damage the San Pedro River’s riparian habitat.

Mark Appel, a former land‑use planner, told the board staff’s packet did not reference the Sierra Vista Subwatershed Water Conservation and Management Plan and said the application requested a density waiver (one RV unit per acre versus the existing residential density standard). “Any pumping this close to the river will have an impact on stream flow,” he said, urging the board to respect Planning & Zoning’s denial.

The applicant, speaking remotely, said he and his wife have invested more than $2 million on the homestead and argued that a presence on the land would discourage illegal hunting and trespass. Benny Schmidt told the board his property has two wells that he described as “each producing 500 plus gallons a minute,” and asked for more time to do outreach and to present a fuller application rather than being permanently denied.

Supervisors debated several procedural options — whether to deny, table or remand the appeal — and clarified prior motions on the record. Chair Jan Antonori moved to remand the docket to the Planning & Zoning Commission to be reviewed on March 11, 2026; the motion was seconded and passed 2‑1. The board recorded the outcome as remand to P&Z with a date certain for re‑review.

The remand allows the applicant to return to Planning & Zoning with more detailed information and gives opponents additional opportunity to present analysis to the commission. The board’s action preserves Planning & Zoning’s role in fact‑finding and requires the commission to reexamine density, water‑supply documentation and any other outstanding issues before the supervisors consider a final appeal.