In recent days, there’s been a lot of controversy surrounding an application to the City of
The controversy mostly surrounds the fact that the public didn’t know much about the development until a little more than a week ago, even though final approval of the annexation and master plan is scheduled for April 23.
If you haven’t heard about the proposal for The Vista at Presidio, you can find a lot of information by clicking here.
My first opportunity to listen to a public presentation on the development was at today’s meeting of the Doña Ana County Board of Commissioners. Their role is to make a recommendation to the city council on the annexation, but they have no actual say in the approval process.
I was struck at the meeting by how much work has gone into the project. The developers, Solo Investments and Logos Development, have been working with the New Mexico Land Office for a year on the current proposal. They presented a master plan to the commission that includes zoning and land set aside for schools and fire and police stations. They’ve already met with staffers from the city and Las Cruces Public Schools to determine how many public facilities are needed and where they should be located.
What struck me even more was the fact that all this has already been done without the public, and even a number of public officials, knowing about it.
I’m not accusing anyone of anything improper. As far as I can tell, the developers are following all the laws in seeking approval of this development. They plan to build the roads and utilities within the development with their own money. They are considering building the schools and fire and police stations and then leasing them to the city and school district, if that’s feasible. They plan to include affordable housing as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
This is a city-changing project
But this isn’t a 50-acre annexation. This is a development that will change
The developers have been working on this for a year. They should have spent the past year conducting an ongoing dialogue with the community on the project.
Very few of the residents who attended the commission meeting complained about the development plans. They recognize the benefit of a large master plan as opposed to piecemeal annexation. They realize the city is going to continue to grow toward the
But they are upset that they haven’t had input. They have a number of excellent questions and concerns that could have been addressed before now.
For example, the developers have set aside four sites for schools. The development will have a minimum of 25,000 homes. The City of
The developers defended themselves during the meeting by saying this is the seventh public hearing they’ve had. Their defense indicates their lack of understanding of what is needed.
This is a development that will forever change
Commissioners want a public dialogue
Commissioners, who have become increasingly divided on development issues in recent months, were united today in expressing concern about a number of aspects of this project. They voted to make several recommendations, but the primary recommendation was that the city, as the project proceeds, require the developers to participate in a series of public meetings to address the following issues:
• Roads and public transit, including the impact on roads outside of the development area.
• Affordable housing.
• Trails, open space and identification of natural and cultural areas for accommodation or preservation.
• Appropriate land for schools and other public facilities.
• Order of development for the planned area, including the determination of a final eastern boundary for the development. Commissioners don’t want homes too close to the mountains.
• Water and drainage, specifically dealing with future water conservation and reuse.
There’s still time for input
There is still plenty of opportunity for input. Though the city council will likely approve the annexation and master plan later this month, for construction to begin, more specific plans will have to be approved for each phase. Keep in mind, also, that this is a 20-year plan, so development won’t move at lightning speed.
But the public needs assurance that it will be involved. There will be opportunity for public input at the city council’s meetings on April 16 and 23. People need to show up at those meetings and ask for additional meetings for each topic suggested by the county commission. If the city’s councilors are responsible, they’ll require such meetings, above and beyond the usual public hearings, as a condition of approval of the annexation and master plan.
The council and developer need to take seriously the fact that they’re about to change this community and be sensitive to what that will mean for residents. The developers held a public meeting last week, but it was really only a forum for them to share their plan with the public. Future meetings need to focus on the developers questioning and listening to members of the public and attempting to address their concerns, albeit without compromising the project’s cohesion and viability.