Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board recommends Rancho Alegria master plan, citing consistency with area plan
Summary
The Rio Rancho Planning & Zoning Board voted to recommend approval of the Rancho Alegria master plan and a related zone map amendment, approving a proposal for about 350 homes on 66.25 acres and forwarding the items to the governing body with findings and conditions.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Rio Rancho Planning & Zoning Board on June 9 voted to recommend approval of the Rancho Alegria master plan and an associated zone map amendment that would rezone roughly 66.25 acres along Northern and Rainbow boulevards to R-3, enabling an estimated 350 dwelling units at full build-out.
Planner Liz Reyes Carlos presented the proposal and told the board the plan conforms to the Northern Rainbow specific area plan and the city’s comprehensive and affordable housing plans. "The subject property totals 66.25 acres," Reyes Carlos said, noting the master plan calls for access points on Northern Boulevard and Rainbow Boulevard and anticipates the expansion of Rainbow Boulevard to a 156-foot right-of-way in the future. Staff recommended the board forward the master plan case (25-400-6) and zone map amendment (25-100-17) to the governing body with findings and conditions.
The applicant, Michael Wright of Consensus Planning representing Pulte Homes, said the master plan proposes two builders, a mix of housing types and neighborhood amenities including approximately 2.7 acres of parkland, pocket parks, a central park, walking paths and a dog park. "We agree with staff report findings and conclusions," Wright said, adding the development would implement the Northern Rainbow area plan.
Nearby resident Roger Norton, who lives east of the proposed subdivision, told the board he learned of the plan that afternoon and objected to some design decisions. Norton said he was not categorically for or against development but was concerned the proposal "does not meet the city’s master plan or requirements" and questioned whether the developer had met the city’s parkland standards. He also said the planned park across Northern Boulevard lacked safe pedestrian access for children.
After public comment the board moved and, following a unanimous roll-call vote, recommended approval to the governing body. The board’s recommendation does not itself change zoning or allow development; if the governing body adopts the map amendment and master plan it will permit the applicants to move forward with site-level approvals. The applicant will also need to follow the city’s development process manual and any conditions attached by the governing body.
The governing body will take final action at a later meeting; the board’s packet lists the cases as subject to findings and conditions that must be satisfied before development proceeds.
