Heated public hearing on Camino Verde conceptual plan: developers propose 158 lots with large open‑space set‑asides; residents raise traffic, fire, water and sc

Samara Real Property’s conceptual plan for the Camino Verde subdivision dominated the afternoon and evening public hearing on June 9, drawing more than a hundred speakers and a wide range of technical and neighborhood objections.

Agent Jennifer Jenkins presented a four‑phase plan for roughly 158 lots on about 304 acres north of State Road 599. The project uses the Sustainable Land Development Code’s cluster‑development and density‑bonus provisions to concentrate homes on smaller lots while dedicating more than 50% of the acreage to permanent open space and trail easements, including preservation of the historic Chile Line rail bed. Jenkins said the development will include a substantial trail network, 18 affordable housing units to meet code requirements and one of several on‑site community wastewater options that, she said, could be permitted by the New Mexico Environment Department.

But neighbors and civic groups delivered sustained and detailed objections. Speakers representing adjacent subdivisions and registered community organizations asked the board to deny or delay the proposal for several reasons: they faulted the applicant’s use of density bonuses across two non‑contiguous parcels, questioned the legal and factual basis for aggregating open space across separate tax parcels, and challenged the consistency of the plan with the county’s growth‑management policies and long‑standing residential‑estate expectations. Several presenters asked for an independent update of floodplain mapping and asked that the county require a demonstrable wastewater permit prior to any plat approval.

Public safety featured prominently. Multiple speakers, including volunteer emergency managers and residents who had experienced major wildfires, warned that Camino Latiierra is the primary evacuation route for more than 2,000 homes to the west and that constructing a roundabout at the primary development entrance could create a potential chokepoint during evacuations or during construction. Fire officials and the applicant argued the project includes fire‑resilient features—class A roofing, non‑combustible siding, five‑foot cleared zones around structures, hydrants and maintained access—while acknowledging that evacutation modeling and public‑safety coordination would continue in subsequent permitting phases.

Traffic engineering presented by the applicant’s consultant found existing intersections and ramps would retain acceptable levels of service under the plan after proposed mitigations (roundabout at Blue Canyon Trail, turn lanes, and a four‑way stop at one ramp). Neighbors challenged traffic counts, noted seasonal variation, and asked the county to analyze county roads such as Buckman Road and others not included in the original study. Several commissioners and staff emphasized that a conceptual plan does not create final infrastructure approvals and that future preliminary and final plats must demonstrate permitted wastewater, utility line extension agreements, updated traffic studies, geotechnical analyses and redline responses to staff comments.

The hearing consumed several hours; staff and the applicant recorded all comments and will work on the outstanding technical items. No final action was taken: the commission heard testimony and asked staff and the applicant to return with the requested technical clarifications and any required legal findings about the bonus density calculations. The record remains open for those materials and additional public comment prior to any final decision on upcoming plat applications.