Good evening.

I'd like to call this meeting of the June 25th governing body meeting to order.

Councilor Dobson, will you lead us in the pledge?

Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Please remain standing for a moment of silence for our to reflect on our first responders as well as all of our men and women overseas and locally that are protecting us from harm's way.

Thank you.

You may be seated.

Okay, first order of business.

Please take a moment to sign silence all of your electronic devices when attending the governing body meeting.

For the record, I will announce the names of the governing body members when I say your name.

Please acknowledge your presence by saying present.

Councilor Dabson.

Present.

Councilor Lynentine.

Present.

Counselor Tyler.

Present.

Councilor Culbreth.

Present.

Councillor List.

Present.

And of course, Councillor District 4 remains vacant at this time.

I'll have an announcement here shortly on the status of that.

Moving on to proclamations and awards of merit.

There are none.

If there's no objection by the council, I'd like to move items 14 and 15 from discussion and deliberation to be heard before the public hearings.

Moving on to public forum.

Each comment will be limited to two minutes and no more than two hours in total be allotted to public forum comments at any meeting.

First up for public forum, Mr.

Stephen Van Horn.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Counselors, I would ask that you not set the bookmark to uh skip past me and the video when it's recorded.

Um I came tonight uh planning to talk about things that are going on with Representative Stansbury bringing five hundred thousand dollars for that's a water storage project in in Albuquerque.

They use terms like this is a key project, and I agree with it.

Uh we in Rio Rancho have supposedly the first sort of pilot project of water injection that we still don't know.

I still don't know what the status of it is.

I would still would like to know.

Look forward to information in the water quality report, maybe that tells us a little bit about what's going on.

But looking at the agenda tonight, I thought what I would say is something totally different because the people behind me, the developers here really do not want discussion about water.

And this is I think the reason why the public infrastructure advisory board doesn't really function, doesn't meet.

But public discussion about water, especially now, is very important, very important.

And so I want to really encourage the mayor to make appointments to the structure, and I would like the council to consider revising the charter of the this board, making it more than just advisory, but actually proactive, looking at what's happening with our water, water in New Mexico, and be able to give you all advice on governing our water system.

We need to protect it.

And the only thing that I've seen protected is information about it and public disclosure.

And I would ask that that change that there be more openness.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Van Horn.

Next up on public forum, Mr.

Mike Jackovich.

Herewise, I'll fall behind.

I was shocked to discover that the city has not issued a single citation for the use of illegal fireworks from June 23rd, June 2023 through July 2025.

The city issues terse announcements warning that the use of illegal fireworks is subject to citations and penalties.

However, based on a response of my public request 26-1406, these threats are an illusion.

The city response, the citizens who complain about legal fireworks take two forms.

Contact your station state officials and ask that the fireworks licensing and safety act be amended for a complete ban on fireworks during the state during drought conditions.

But the city has their own illegal fireworks ordinance, which is applicable within the city limits as not being enforced.

Your second excuse is there are not enough police and fire personnel deal with all the calls to dispatch.

Well, the city should have thought of that when they authorized this statute.

Yesterday, June 24th, a neighbor on Clearwater Loop, just three blocks from Nicole List residents launched an aerial bomb.

I will be calling dispatch every time to report this illegal activity and will post my findings about no enforcement and urge citizens, especially those with PTSD and pests to do the same.

When I request a list of ninety-two oh three citations end of July, hope to see a few dozen.

The choices are clear.

Either enforce the law as is or dissolve this statute.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Jackovich.

Next up for public forum.

Let's see.

May Nate Nadine Mullinari.

Melinari, did I say that right?

Sorry.

Good evening, Mayor Weimer and members of the governing body.

Thank you for the opportunity for our group, the Rio Rancho Rockets with Special Olympics team to recognize Connie Peterson, Director of Parks and Recreation, for her continued support and dedication to our athletes and our organization.

Special Olympics is about more than just sports.

It's about inclusion.

It's about opportunity, confidence, and creating a community where every athlete is valued and celebrated.

None of this would be possible without partners who believe in our mission and work alongside us with our athletic athletes succeed.

Connie has been one of those partners.

Through her leadership and unwavering support, the parks and recreation department has helped provide opportunities for our athletes to train, compete, and grow.

Her commitment has made a lasting impact not only on our organization, but on the lives of the athletes and families we've served.

On behalf of the Rio Rancho Rockets, our coaches, our volunteers, all of our families, and most importantly, our athletes.

We want to express our sincere gratitude for everything Connie has done for and continues to do.

Her support demonstrates the very best of our community partnership and public service.

Connie, thank you for believing in our athletes and supporting our mission and helping make Rio Rancho a more inclusive community for everyone.

Absolutely.

Do you folks want us a group picture?

And we need a speech, Connie.

Absolutely, yes.

Thank you for that presentation and Connie, as always, thank you for all of your hard work that you do for the city.

Moving on, do we have any comments by counselors?

Hearing none.

Um I I did want to make uh comment and really it's more of an update for those of the those of you in the audience as well as the counselors themselves.

I want to update the everyone on the status of the district for council seat and my formal notification of an appointment decision.

Uh reminder that pursuant to the city charter, I must make an appointment within 60 days of the vacancy, which is coming up the end of this month.

I received nine eligible applications and interviewed all nine applicants.

Based on the first round of interviews, I selected three people to move on to a second interview, and I want to thank Deputy Mayor and District Five City Councilor Carissa Culbrath and District Three City Councillor Bob Tyler for their assistance in that second round of interviews.

Based on that process, I've selected Mr.

David Mann as my appointment to fill the vacant district four council seat.

Mr.

Mann is here, he's in the audience at this point.

Um this is my choice, it's not my decision.

This will be the decision by the council.

My uh my appointment is therefore scheduled now to be brought before the next regular governing body meeting, which will be on July twenty-third.

Uh real brief history on Mr.

Mann, he's been a resident of District 4 for more than 12 years.

Originally from England, he graduated from Brigham Young University, and then from the University of Tulsa Law School.

He served as an attorney for several departments within the state of New Mexico governor government, as well as Sandoval County government since twenty twenty-two as he has served as general legal counsel for Rio Rancho Public Schools.

Good luck, Mr.

Mann.

Moving forward to the next step.

All right, moving on to consent calendar.

Do I have a motion for the consent calendar?

I move to approve the consent calendar.

Second.

Any discussion?

Hearing none.

Call the roll.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Councillor Tyler.

Yes.

Councillor Dabson?

Yes.

Counselor List.

Yes.

Deputy Mayor Colbright?

Yes.

And Councillor Lennon Time?

Yes.

And uh Mayor Weimer.

Yes.

Thank you.

The consent calendar is approved.

All right.

Moving on to item 14.

As I mentioned, we were changing up the order for items 14 and 15.

So the next item up for discussion and deliberation is item 14 D twenty-four advice and consent of the governing body to execute a purchase agreement to acquire 200 acre feet of concept consumptive water rights from plat and water.

As you heard, we are seeking advice and consent to execute a water rights purchase agreement.

The city's um per the city's 2003 pumping permit, we are required to purchase 728 acre fee of water rights every five years over a 55-year period.

This require to meet this requirement, the city is requesting to purchase 200 acre feet of consumptive water rights from plat land and water at a cost of 4,500 or 4 million 500,000 dollars.

Thank you, Ms.

Gonzalez.

Can I get a motion?

I move to approve D 24.

Mr.

Van Horn.

Good evening again, Mayor.

Counselors.

So here we are in a public meeting.

None of you asked how many more water rights do we have to purchase?

Where are we?

None of you asked.

What has the price been doing as we've been buying that?

I know what the price was back when I was a utilities commissioner.

It was substantially lower.

I'm a little surprised that the price now is over 22,000 per acre foot.

And so we see these huge increase, and there's a lot of competition now to buy water rights because we have a Supreme Court decision that's telling people that are using the aquifer down south to stop depletion and sell water rights.

And that we're looking to chase those down here.

Well, my point is I I would expect you counselors to demonstrate your knowledge and be asking, well, how much more are we going to have to purchase of these water rights for this court decree?

And what's it looking like?

How much are we going to have to be spending in the future?

Well, I I'm asking you to consider what's happening right now to think about the need for a body to be looking at these things continually, not just go from meeting to meeting and have a silly person like myself coming up here and asking questions over and over.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Van Horn.

Do we have anyone else signed up to speak?

No, sir, we do not.

Any comments by council?

Mr.

Mayor, members of the government body.

I apologize for city manager.

Um, but I would just would like to highlight um that uh many of the the questions that were posed in the form of that you should be posing questions.

Those are in the ABM.

Um, and they're addressing the ABM on our our progress that's being made towards our pumping permit, um, how much of the prices uh and uh and additionally um our water rights advisor uh Maria O'Brien is online if there's any additional questions.

But uh this purchase, presuming it is approved by the Office of the State Engineer, uh, would put us uh through the requirements of 2040 on our pumping permit obligations to acquire water rights over 55 years.

So that puts us about 15 years ahead of schedule, 14 years ahead of schedule.

Um if there's any questions, uh Deputy Director Gonzalez, myself, Maria, or others would be uh more than willing to answer that.

Thank you, Mr.

City Manager, and I recall similar discussions with you with with uh Deputy City Manager Wells on this very issue.

We do not come into this blindly, we go into this with the facts in front of us, and to suggest differently is just wrong.

Um anyway, moving on.

Is there any discussion by council?

Mr.

Mayor, Councilor Colbert.

Thank you.

I think um, and just to reiterate what uh uh city manager guy geisel and yourself uh stated, reading directly from the ABM.

Um it says under a two thousand and three pumping permit issued by the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer.

The city is required to purchase 728 acre feet of water rights every five years for a 55-year period through 2063 to offset depletions caused by pumping groundwater, and the ABM further goes on to uh make statements about this.

And in all of the council meetings, this is certainly not the first time that we've addressed uh water uh purchasing water rights, um, and we've discussed over the years how the cost of purchasing water rights continues to go up, but is also why we continue to uh make conscientious investments so that we're able to make these purchases when they do come available.

Um, and so I appreciate the teams who are working on this um to make sure that we are always prepared when these water rights do come available that we can purchase them in bulk.

I know what we've seen over the time that I've been in on the council um that they're in smaller segments than they used to be.

We used to be able to purchase you know really large segments of water rights and now uh they're smaller, but we remain prepared uh to be able to purchase them as they come along.

So uh thank you to everyone who's uh continue to work on this um and keeping us ahead of the curve because we know that it may get difficult um as years come.

Uh, but we are are well prepared to move into the future.

So thank you for that.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Councilor Culbreth.

Any further council discussion hearing none, call the roll.

Thank you.

Deputy Mayor Colbritt?

Yes.

Counselor Lennon Tyne.

Yes.

Councillor Jabson.

Yes.

Counselor Tyler.

Yes.

Counselor List.

Yes.

Mayor Weimer.

Yes.

Thank you.

D24 is approved.

Advice and consent of the governing body to award a contract to Albuquerque Asphalt Inc.

for the Springer Drive Reconstruction Project.

Director Gottlieb.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor and Counselors.

That is correct.

I'm here seeking advice and consent.

Uh to award that Springer Drive Reconstruction Project Albuquerque asphalt in the amount of $2,898,444 and 71 cents, which includes gross receipt taxes.

Adding a new sewer line sub out on the road for the utilities department, uh future project, and improving ADA throughout the corridor.

Um it is anticipated this is project will begin in August and should take around six months to complete.

So with that I'll stand for any questions you may have.

Thank you, Director Gottley.

Can I get a motion?

I'll make a motion to approve D25.

Second.

Any council discussion?

All right, is there anybody signed up for public comment?

No.

No, there is not, Mr.

Mayor.

Any council discussion?

Mr.

Mayor.

Counselor Tyler.

About time, BJ.

Thank you.

That's all.

I know the residents over there will really appreciate it.

It's the road's horrible.

So I really appreciate you and all the work your team's done to get that done.

So I thank you very much for moving this forward.

Thank you.

So absolutely.

Absolutely.

Thank you, Councilor Tyler.

Any further discussion by council.

Hearing none, call the rule.

Thank you.

Counselor Tyler.

Yes.

Counselor Dabson.

Councillor Liszt?

Yes.

Mayor Weimer.

Yes.

Counselor Lennon?

Yes.

And Deputy Mayor Colbrith?

Yes.

Thank you.

D25 is approved.

Thank you, BJ.

All right.

We are going to move on now to public hearings.

Anyone with a pecuniary interest on an item under public hearing and wishing to address the governing body shall register with the city clerk.

Each comment will be limited to two minutes.

This hearing will be handled in accordance with the rules of procedure, section 3.4 in strict decorum, will be maintained.

Moving on, okay, item 807, which was postponed from the June 11th meeting.

Ordinance of the City of Rio Rancho, New Mexico amending the zoning classification and official zone map for the property legally described as Unit 10, Block 33, lot 98A from R1 single family residential district to C1 retail commercial district, identifying conditions of development, providing for severability, and an effective day.

Director Rincon.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body, Amy Rincone, Director of Development Services.

So the item before you tonight, 07, is an ordinance that would be amending the zoning classification again for the property legally described as unit 10 and block 33, lots 98A.

And so this is located just south of uh southern.

It is in unit 10.

Um and so the zoning when we look at this um at the map, um, it is across um from residential, but it is next to an existing church that is expanding um the the their school property.

It is also next to the uh Skafka Arroyo open space.

Um and so staff does recommend approval and I will stand for any questions.

Thank you, Director.

Can I get a motion?

Mr.

Mayor, I need to have recruits myself uh due to relation to the seller of this property.

Thank you, Councilor Vanatine.

Thank you.

All right, now can you get a motion?

Make a motion approve 07.

Second.

Do we have anybody signed up to speak?

Apparently we do.

Oh, it's the agent.

Okay.

Is there anybody else signed up to speak?

Just the agent.

Just the agent.

Okay.

Sounds good.

Um let's see.

Do we need uh is if the agents here would you like to come and make a presentation?

Okay, thank you.

All right, so um is there any council discussion, Mr.

Mayor?

Councilor Dabson?

I don't have any objection to this.

Um I actually like the idea of having a fitness center on that in that location.

So I'm okay.

I just want to say I'm okay with it in my district, and I approve.

I like it.

Thank you, Councilor Dabson.

Any further discussion from council seeing and hearing none, call the roll.

Thank you.

Councilor List.

Yes.

Counselor Tyler.

Yes.

Deputy Mayor Colbreth.

Yes.

Counselor Dabson.

Yes.

And Mayor.

Mayor Weimer.

Weimer.

Yes.

Confusing.

Yes.

Oops.

O seven is approved.

Thank you.

Good luck with the project.

Councilor Venatine can rejoin us.

Let me get him.

Oh, he's probably eating her.

Yeah, he's probably eating it.

I knew it.

All right, moving on to R 46, which was also postponed from the June 11th meeting.

Resolution adopting the Rancho Alegro Master Plan.

Director and Call.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

So I'm actually going to present items number nine and ten together.

This is how we uh presented them previously.

Um and then this item was postponed.

I have my whole presentation from the last meeting.

If you want me to go through it, um, but I I'm gonna defer to the applicant to go ahead and go through their presentation, and if there's any questions, I can always come back to my presentation.

Yeah, that's a lot so director and corner you're you're deferring at this time.

Yes, to the applicant to be able to go through their presentation, and I can always come back to my presentation if there's any specific questions.

Okay.

Let's first see.

Do we have a motion?

I move to approve 07.

Sorry.

R46.

We're on R 46 and Yeah, 446.

R46 R 46.

Yeah, I moved to approve R 46.

Second.

All right, and I see we have Mr.

Strozier here to speak to us.

Um Mr.

Mayor, Counselors, uh, my name is Jim Stroger, and uh it's a pleasure to be here uh this evening, talk about this master plan and zone map amendment.

I did prepare a presentation that really focused on the issues that we were asked to look at uh during the postponement.

And um, and as part of that, I'll talk about the overall master plan as well.

But um I think I've got that presentation teed up, but I'm not sure I can see it's here, yeah.

Okay, this there.

All right, okay.

Um, all right, so um our project team.

Uh it takes a lot of folks to put a project like this together.

And um, first and foremost, our client, Bulty Holmes.

Uh, and we have two clients for this project.

I'll talk a little bit about that as well.

Mr.

Kevin Patton and Brian Anderson.

Brian Anderson is here this evening.

Um, also Westway Homes is a partner on this project, and Mike Feetz and JP Rayle are part of that.

Our civil engineers, Bohan in Houston, Yolanda Padia Moyer is here in the room as well.

Um, and then myself, Jim Stroger, and Michael Wright, who couldn't be here this evening.

His uh his mom's having some medical uh issues, so he's uh apologizes for not being here with us this evening.

Um make sure we get this going.

All right.

So the postponement from your last meeting asked us to address concerns about traffic impacts, provide an update on the traffic impact study, address concerns about the size, amenities, and location of the pocket parks, and address park phasing.

With regard to the traffic study, uh the purpose of this study was to identify trip generation characteristics, identify potential traffic impacts on the surrounding street network, proposed mitigations for the identified impacts.

And you can see on this slide at the top is the trip generation table that was prepared, it was included in that traffic impact uh study.

Um the recommendations that came out of that study, and I'll just say that studied the way that process works.

The draft was submitted to the city staff.

They get comments back from city staff, they've addressed that that those comments and turned in a final um traffic impact study, and we're waiting on the final review and approval of that study.

So that study is in process, but the original has been submitted, comments received, and a final has been submitted to the city.

So that's what I'm going to speak about.

The recommendations that came out of that were primarily addressing the access on the south side of Northern, aligning with the Camino Crossing access, new access on the west side of Rainbow Boulevard.

That'll be the initial phase access into the subdivision, and then discussions regarding northern and answer to extend the westbound right turn lane 300 feet and the northbound right turn lane to 225 feet.

Additional planning recommendations, one of these things, one of the things that these studies do is, and I'll I'll show you a map in a minute of all the intersections that we analyze, but it makes planning recommendations that are looking out past the development of this project and more to a longer horizon period.

At this for this study, that was looking at 2037, um, so 11 years from now.

And so it determined that a signal warrant analysis said that it may the warrants for a signalization may be met by 2037 for UNSER and rainbow.

If that's confirmed, a signal or a roundabout should be considered at that time.

But once again, that's off in the future.

Also looked at additional turn lane modifications at UNSER and Rainbow that should be considered, and Southern and Rainbow it suggested implementing a four-way stop at that location.

This map shows the intersections that were analyzed as part of that study.

Um obviously Northern and Rainbow was one of those intersections, but also Northern Boulevard and 10th Street, Northern Boulevard and UNSER, Fifth Avenue and Rainbow Boulevard, Tulip Road and Rainbow Boulevard, and Southern Boulevard and Rainbow were all analyzed as part of that study.

One of the things about these studies, so these studies provide input into so one of I think one of Rio Rancho's maybe unique and really positive aspects of the way you uh the way you do these types of projects is that you have a development agreement.

And so that development agreement process, the traffic impact study informs that process.

Your DPM informs that process, and then the development agreement is negotiated between the city and the developer to allocate resources to best serve the needs of the future residents as well as the community at large.

Some of the opportunities for negotiations that have come out of this analysis and this master planning effort are that um that other roadway frontages that are not used to serve the project may not be a priority.

So in this case, that's 3rd Street and 7th Avenue that are adjacent to the project, but we're not taking any access to and from those.

Northern and Rainbow Intersection obviously is much more of the priority, and so it gives us an opportunity to look at potential solutions for that intersection, and that could include you know an interim uh solution of a four-way stop before you get to the warrants being met for either a signalization or roundabout for that in the future.

And so those are all opportunities that we have in terms of looking at um at the future conditions and this process of the development agreement.

The illustrative plan is identified within within the master plan, and I just want to talk a little bit about this and some of the I think key and really positive aspects of this project.

One is you can see that we don't have any, a lot of times it's very difficult with these areas in the city to not have a project that includes any out parcels in the middle of the project.

Those sort of provide a lot of constraints to how we do street layouts and just trying to create uh a community in a situation like this.

You can see we do have outparcels, but they're all on the perimeter.

Three of those out parcels have existing homes on them.

And so this allows us to provide a plan that looks at a major entrance off of rainbow.

Once again, I talked about the traffic study analyzing that intersection, as well as uh secondary access on northern.

Those access points provide opportunities to bring the interior street network that provides really an interesting layout for the community that includes landscape areas that the HOA will maintain, as well as a number of pocket parks, two kind of primary pocket parks kind of in the middle of the project, as well as a trail around the required pond and a dog park in that area.

So just to kind of blow blow up those areas and look at them in more detail.

We have another pocket park that's uh a little over a third of an acre in size.

Once again, that can provide turf areas, seating, shade structure, those types of activities and significant plantings for the enjoyment of the residents.

We've also included a number of these, I'll call them mini roundabouts.

They're not really roundabouts, but they're traffic calming devices that are installed at key intersections throughout the project to help slow down traffic and provide uh that provides an amenity as well.

The walking path around uh the pond and enclosed dog park is ends up being about three quarters of an acre in size.

And just to give you a sense of of some of the examples of parks like this, um this is uh rainbow park.

It's a little over a little under 0.3 acres, has play area, has turf, um, provides a nice amenity for the surrounding area.

Um we also have um examples within Broadmoor Heights.

Once again, these are smaller than what we've proposed, but there's a quarter acre park that includes a shade structure and turf, as well as this is within the Del Webb community of Meyerhaven, um down to the south in that other jurisdiction to the south of us.

Um but there's some opportunities to that.

Once again, that's also less than uh three-tenths of an acre.

So all of those are examples of what these small pocket parks can do.

And I I just want to talk about the phasing.

I'll go back to the area.

So our initial development is going to start as you come in off of Rainbow Boulevard, and then it's going to be phase kind of south to north across this area.

I mentioned earlier that this project has two builders that are participating in it, both Pulti homes and Westway homes.

And so each of those phases has a phase for Pulti and a phase for Westway, and that's going to help provide some differentiation and diversity of housing that comes on at each phase of this development project.

Those pocket parks, both the there's some really small ones as well as the two main ones, those are going to be developed in the second and third phases of the project.

And so those by doing these smaller HOA pocket parks, it allows us to bring those online kind of with the development so that earlier that rather than later, people have a park to use as they move in.

You can also see on this illustrative plan just the nature of street trees and the curvilinear and angled streets that are created, and those little um mini roundabouts are strategically located in order to slow that traffic down and calm the speed of that traffic.

And finally, in conclusion, um we agree with the staff reports, findings and conditions and the staff and planning and zoning board's recommendation for approval.

This project implements the Northern and Rainbow Specific Area Plan, which this body approved an amendment to it uh it also follows the current development process manual, the DPM.

It furthers the goals and policies of the Rio Rancho Comprehensive Plan, conforms to the Rio Rancho Affordable Housing Plan, and reaffirms Pulti homes and Westway Home's commitment to developing quality communities in Rio Rancho.

And with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Um other members of the team, as I mentioned, are here.

So if you have any hard questions, I'll probably uh pitch those to them.

But uh once again, and then I just add in conclusion that the zone map amendment is also consistent with that with the specific area plan, and that's the mechanism by which we implement uh this master plan and allow for the neighborhood and the lots to be created consistent with this illustrative plan and the layout before you today.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Sturger.

Anyone from the public assigned up to speak?

No, sir, there is not council discussion, Mr.

Mayor, Councilor Dabson.

I just have one question.

Um one of the concerns that I've heard is uh us considering using or this development being using communal crossings park.

Is this upgrade that you've done here?

Does that relieve us of that?

Because that would be a difficult thing.

Because I don't think communal crossings park is that big.

Um it does not, it does not alleviate alleviate that.

I think it what it what it does, I think that's part of the the city's process to use existing parks that are within a certain um distance of the site.

But I think what we what we tried to show is that we're doing while we're utilizing that park, um, we're also building a lot of new parks and new facilities within this project as well.

And so that's part of your process, and we're utilizing that, but we are um developing the amenities that are shown on the illustrative plan and the as it phases and making the crossing from the south side of northern to the it north side more that that's a dangerous street.

Yes, because it's there's no stop sign that they are going to fix that, right?

And I I think that's part of I think the the city's process as well with the with the development agreement and looking at where to where to put the emphasis.

So one of the things that I hope that comes out of this the traffic impact study and that process is that pedestrian improvements at Northern and Rainbow are prioritized as part of the implementation for this project as it moves forward.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Councilor Dabson.

Any more comments for counsel?

But I'll wait till everybody else goes.

I'm happy to ask a couple questions.

Can you put the park picture up first?

Please.

Um, and then also um, I know that that's been a hot topic, and this is not the first time, so I'm hoping uh Director Rincone that that has been added back to one of those things that we're gonna go revisit.

We had talked about six months out from the APM ABM that we're gonna go back and look at some hiccups.

I think that we need to add the parks to that list of things to revisit.

I think we need to clarify better so that we're not in a space to be in disagreement about what a park should look like.

Uh Mr.

Weimer, uh, counselor list, um, so um yes, that is something that we can look at with the DPM.

Um, these regulations are also in um our subdivision chapter, so we would also have to open up our subdivision chapter as well.

Um, but those are things on our list uh to revisit and come back to.

It just seems like in the last couple of months when subdivisions have come in, there have been the new regulations and everybody's had a lot of room for interpretation, and I don't think that we are always in agreement with what the spirit of it was, but yet developers are doing what the letter of the document says, and I think we need to go back and revisit to make sure they match because I think it's a hard place to continually tell the developers hey, you're kind of cheating the system when they're kind of probably closer to black and white.

However, when we represent residents, it doesn't always match what their quality of life expectations or requests are.

And so, anyway, if we could just add that in a future place to revisit that conversation, please and thank you.

Mr.

Mayor Counselor List, yes, we will that's on our list, and and we will come back to that one.

Thank you so much.

Um so I guess I'm confused um, Mr.

Schroeder, with those the pocket park.

I guess it's what it could be, but I heard you say turf, but will there also be grass?

I think that we are in uh a season where the not majority, but we have a lot of people with families wanting to go to parks, and so when you have a three-year-old, um, a small space with zero skaping is not a park.

Correct.

Right.

Like that's not useful for me.

Um Mr.

Mayor, Commissioner Counselor List.

So we do try, and so the the two kind of primary pocket parks are uh designed to include turf areas for outdoor play, um, and those are significant size.

I think they're um on the far left, and then the upper right corner are the two um sort of park layouts that we have, those would be refined as part of the subdivision and platting process, the design of those, but the intent is to have um turf areas, they're not big enough to have like a full soccer field or anything, but they there are um both of those pocket parks incorporate turf areas now.

The area around the pond, for instance, where there's a walking trail and a dog park, that's probably not gonna have any turf associated with that.

But and then there are smaller areas that have more xeric um plantings, but might have a bench, a shade structure, uh, those types of things that would provide respite for people walking around the neighborhood.

One of the things that I I think this neighbor this design does, and it helps that we don't have any of those interior out parcels to do this, is that with the street trees and the layout?

One of the things that and I see this in my neighborhood completely in a very different part of the part of the um region, which is um knob hill and down in Albuquerque.

Um in the morning, in the evenings, walking their dogs, walking their kids, um, and taking advantage of these small um areas where you can get let the kids out of the stroller, run around, do those things, and I think that's what we tried to achieve.

And we've kind of strategically located these amenities around the neighborhood so that they're accessible to people that are living there without having to walk too far, but also being able to accommodate a longer walk around the neighborhood where you might stop at both parks.

Um, and so those are all part of the the thought process here and the design, but we do include turf in both of those parks.

Okay, and will there be green grass or is that to be termed?

Do you turn it on?

Green grass, green grass, yes.

And then only one of the parks of those that you guys are putting out will have playground equipment.

Yes, that's what that's that's the way we've we've laid it out, and that we've got a pretty significant amount of play equipment area designed within that kind of the bigger, the bigger of those pocket parks.

Um, once again, it's pretty centrally located.

The idea being that families um, and let's see, I can go back to I think uh there.

It's kind of in that central north portion of the of the park, and then the smaller, the smaller ones in the southern area of the neighborhood.

So if I heard you correctly, that'd probably be in phase three and in the back end of the property.

It would be in phase three.

I think there are five or maybe six phases of the of the project.

I just um I know that quality of life is very important to our folks, and I want to make sure that we are providing them not only a roof over their head, but a place that they want to enjoy and appreciate, especially when they're paying those HOA fees.

Um, and so I I appreciate the efforts, and I hope that we can continue to make more progress because a space with zero skating is not a usable space.

So thank you.

Yeah, and and uh once again, Mr.

Mayor, um counselor.

I I agree with that, and that's that's why we really tried to provide those the green grass areas um within those two parks to provide that.

That's that's really what people think of when they think of parks.

There are small areas where you might sit down, get in the you know, have some shade, uh, maybe maybe talk with one of your neighbors, but that's not really the same as a park.

Um, and so the two parks do have those grass areas and um different types of amenities within them.

One with a pretty significant play area.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor List.

Mr.

Mayor.

Councillor Colbreth.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Stranger.

What's the total acreage for the uh whole development?

Oh, acreage for the whole development.

Like approximate like approximately.

Just work with me.

Do you have to like a big picture?

66?

Okay.

That's fine.

60, that's fine.

66?

That works for me.

That's good enough.

I asked that question because you know, I'm, as I think everybody knows, I'm both spatially and geographically challenged.

I've said that so many times in front of you.

And so looking at these parks here, you know, they look like little, they look like little morsels on the screen.

Right.

But this is a 66-acre development.

And I think if you go to the um at least that larger park, that was, I think it was like 0.56 acres.

Yes.

Right.

And then the other pocket park was point that that other pocket park I see is 0.63 or 36 acres, almost 0.4 acres.

You showed some images of parks, kind of representative uh parks.

Could you go back to that one?

So and and once again, these are these are actually smaller than than those parks.

But this is this is an existing park in um Rainbow Park, it's a little bit less than three tenths of a net.

So it's I mean it's less than that.

This one is even less than that smaller park.

It's about half the size of the bigger community park that you showed, right?

Correct.

Okay, just understanding that.

That's helpful for me to get a sense of size and scope outside of just you know the image on the screen where it looks like it's pretty small.

I mean, that's it's you know, it's not a like you said, it's not a football field.

It won't be soccer practice at some as somebody who though lived across the street from a park with lots of soccer practices.

There's pluses and minuses to being able to have soccer practice across the street.

Um so I I mean I think this this looks like a like a very fine, lovely park, um, and is about half the size of that larger community park, which makes sense to me.

And so I appreciate I actually very much appreciate uh the parks that are demonstrated.

Um, and I think they're you know, fine spaces to be able to go and kind of run around and and play and do all of those those great things.

Um, I also um as you know, thinking about walking and the safety measures put in place.

Um I it's if you could go back to the um the the visual that drawing there, um you know, by the just the simple fact that you all have um you know the curved design to the roads, even just that curved design offers so much in uh traffic slowing.

Um it helps if you know the the easiest thing to do would just be to grid it out, quadrant it, and put put roads across, and that would be the easy thing.

Um, but I do appreciate this approach with your road design uh that does help to slow down the traffic so that people can have that walking space through their neighborhoods through their communities because what this does offer is that community space.

Um, as I've always said, I've never heard anybody in Rio Rancho say, man, I wish I didn't have sidewalks, so I'm pretty sure there will be sidewalks where people will be able to go and enjoy.

Um so I think the efforts uh that have been placed here, particularly looking at the traffic study, um, and then offering more guidance on these parks really helps to uh demonstrate the work.

Also just want to point out we've had several items that have come before us uh that have these donut holes that have these out parcels sitting in the middle of a development that make absolutely no sense to me.

And so I completely appreciate this design and the effort that you all took to assemble this piece of property so that it can be an entire community and and and really put something forward for you know a whole range of families.

Um so I think the work and the effort uh is is really commendable and and I look forward to seeing what happens with this next.

So thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor, uh Counselor Colbreth.

The I I appreciate those comments and and it is and I want to point out it's really hard to get for the people who do these assemblies and try and track down folks and make sure that you can actually put forward a project like this.

It's it takes a lot of work, and Mike Feeds with Westway Homes really took that charge on and did a great job assembling this property and getting that continuity that we have.

And you know, I like to think of what like a lot of times we follow the subdivision ordinance, but we're really what we're what we're trying to do with these master plans is to create neighborhoods.

And something, you know, nobody says, oh, I live in a great subdivision.

They say I live in a great neighborhood.

And the reason they live in a great neighborhood is because they can walk, they they know their neighbors, they have places to walk to.

Um, and and so yes, I completely agree.

Thank you for your comments.

Thank you, Councilor Coldworth.

Mr.

Mayor.

Counselor Lennon.

Uh Ms.

Rincon, um, I know I'm well versed, obviously, but for the edification of other folks on proposed zoning M1, what are acceptable uses for uh M1 zoning?

Mr.

Mayor, Counselor Lennon, um, so M1 uh ranges anywhere from um industrial to um things like a concrete batching plant, um automotive um uh uh towing yards and those types of it's it's a pretty uh wide variety of heavy uses okay, thank you.

At this time I'm not too worried about that because I'm pretty sure that'll get rezoned in the future.

Um the question I do have uh for you, Mr.

Stroger is looking at the the one that's up there right now.

You said that the three of those six are currently uh have uh house or structure on it of the um out parcels.

Out parcels, yes, sir.

Yep.

Do you know where those three are?

If you could I I do so there's there's an existing house at the northwest corner of the property, and then the two that are along Rainbow that are the two southern lots along Rainbow are the the ones that have houses.

And you know, one of the things I think we talked about this a little bit at the last meeting, but you know, so rainbow is so rainbow and northern are both designated as as arterial streets.

And one of the challenges that Rio Rancho faces with some of these areas like this is and you have an overlay zone actually on rainbow that got incorporated into the update to the um northern rainbow specific area plan is to try and limit the amount of driveway access.

So those existing houses on rainbow have driveways on Rainbow Boulevard.

This what we've done as well.

I didn't mention this at the time, but I think we talked about it a little bit last meeting is that by having one entry off of rainbow and one entry off of northern, we provide for that important emergency access, but we also are preserving the ability to develop Rainbow Boulevard and Northern the way they're intended to be larger streets that move traffic.

Okay.

So even though the uh three lots that already had someone there, you guys also went to those out parcels and tried to acquire that land, I'm assuming.

I'm I'm I'm assuming that Mr.

Fe he's he was very diligent in trying to get uh all of this and and you know, going back to uh it's it's interesting when we first started this the design for this project.

That's right.

There were like three or four holes in the donut, you know.

Yeah, that's okay.

That's fine.

Uh I know that Councilor Tyler has a couple questions.

I just wanted to say that you know, I I'm not against this project at all.

Because I mean it when you go down rainbow, there's a lot of it's starting to get built out and you know controversial, but a lot of the things that are gonna put out there are probably uh manufactured kind of mobile homes or whatever else.

And so when we I am for subdivisions like this, because if we're ever going to, you know, rainbow is gonna be in is an important road, it will only become more important in the future.

Obviously, northern is already important all the way across the city, and so developing it out is always gonna be was always gonna be a challenge.

And there's people that have been there for a long, long time, but it's very sparse.

And so uh to see something like this.

I mean, I have some you know complaints and thoughts about parks as well, you know, walkability.

If there's not much to walk to, then I could argue walkability doesn't matter that much.

But um I overall I think that you guys did a good job as Councilor Colbert pointed out in arranging this, uh arranging the uh the structure of the streets and everything inside here.

And so uh I know it's a hard job, I know it's a lot to assemble, and so I respect that fact.

And uh that's all the questions that I had, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Lennon Time.

Mr.

Murray.

Counselor Tyler.

What did you say it like that for?

I've been waiting.

I'm sure Jim Stroger's waiting too.

Uh just real quick, can you put that picture back up for me of the parks?

I just want I just wanted to kind of take a look at something.

Yeah, there you go.

Where's a picnic table there?

So I didn't see it.

What about the barbecue grills?

I don't know if that one has that.

I mean, there is I I we did not we did not do the design for that park, but on on this one, this one does not have play equipment, but it has the shade structure at the end and and tables.

Um I don't know, there aren't any benches, I don't think in that one.

We would we've we've designed both of these pocket parks to include places for people to sit, made as well as here's it.

Here's the thing, Mr.

Schrozer.

And I'm just gonna I mean, I know all my peers, they're they're all this is great, this is best things in sliced bread, and I get it.

It's a good it's a good project.

But I do think there's some holes in it, and I'm gonna call them out.

Okay, and then we can just march on from there.

Um, I think when development gets developed, a lot of things that we overlook is what's called smart growth, and when we look at smart growth, and we're throwing 350 homes out there, who's gonna service that?

Our police and our fire department.

So then guess what?

Now we're strapped with increasing our manpower, both police and fire, and then we're in we're strapped in other services that we're gonna have to do.

So the smart growth piece to me is really important.

You know, the other piece too is when you start to look at those homes, where are they gonna go to the grocery store?

Close grocery stores at Southern and Uncertain, right?

At the Walmart.

Then it's the the next one down, and then they have nothing no other services other than McDonald's and Walgreens and stuff right there.

So every service is gonna go back the other way.

So when we start to look at some of these planned developments, and I know it's it's about getting the lots and the antiquated platform, I get it.

That part is huge.

But what I'd like to do is see some developers come up here with some C1, some commercial stuff, and say, hey, let's let's go here, let's get these out here so we can get those to support these or these to support those.

I'm not gonna look for your comment right now.

I'm just saying that that's what I'm looking for.

And so when I talk about the smart growth, it's about looking outside of the development, saying, okay, what services do we have for people?

And if we don't have them, then are we gonna come back?

As Councillor Lenintine said, well, that that property could have been used for um what was it, concrete mixers.

Well, then guess what?

Everybody's gonna be coming here complaining that they're gonna have a concrete plant next to their house.

So hopefully you're telling everybody before you sell these homes that there could be a concrete plant right behind their house, so we don't have to listen to it tomorrow.

And then at the other end, if it does come back and get rezoned, I'll bet you it'll get rezoned for more what's called affordable housing.

Have you looked for a house lately?

That's not affordable at 400,000 for a house for my kids.

So maybe if that comes back and gets rezoned later.

So I look at the smart growth and where we're going and the affordability and all that other part.

The parks, they're useless to me.

The park at parks.

I know that it's it's in our DPM.

We did it.

I it you can't even have kids in there with you can't have two families in there together having a picnic or a baseball or football or any of that other stuff that kids want to do.

They're gonna be smashed in doing that.

And are you talking about that walking around the pond?

What pond is that?

Is that a drainage pond?

Who's gonna service that for the mosquitoes?

Everybody's gonna be jumping to go over there, I'm sure.

But I mean, I I just look at all these things, and it's like let's talk about the reliability and the usage of all of these parks.

And they're not gonna get used that much, um, if at all, because of the sizes.

So I look at that, and and those are the things that bother me when I look at that.

Um the dog park, and that's where the dog parts gonna be is around the pond.

Yes, sir.

And is the turf is it turf when we say turf, is it turf or is it grass?

Grass.

Okay, so it's grass, all right, because turf is horrible.

I mean, horrible in the sense that it's in the summer it's bad because kids can't even stand on it without melting their feet.

But in the summertime, you know, on the grass, it's a lot easier.

So those are some of the things that I look at.

I look at the smart and the well-developed.

Now, do I say that go back up to the plan where you have all the streets and the other part?

There you go.

I mean, it it's very nice.

Um, and I and I understand the profitability of the homes.

That's probably why we couldn't make some of the parks bigger because we got to worry about our profit on the other end.

So we could have knocked out some of the other lots, maybe five or six of them and made a bigger park right there on that one triangle down there, but that's up to the developer to do.

But what I I do want to say is I I think that we could have done a little bit better on that.

I we're being cheesy.

Is the way I look at it.

I think we're just we're putting in there what we barely minimum have to put in there, just so we can say that we met the DPM standard and then we're moving on.

We're not looking at the real usage of it.

Go ahead.

I know you're biting a comment.

Go ahead.

So uh uh Mr.

Mayor, Counselor Tyler.

Um, a couple a couple thoughts, and uh I'll try and keep it brief.

But one of the things I think it's important to recognize when you look at this master plan, and I think a few months ago you heard a uh you saw a master plan in the southern portion of the northern and rainbow specific area plan.

That plan was originally designed to accommodate a pretty large uh industrial area.

A lot of it got zoned M1 at that time.

The amendments to that specific area plan are designed to be implemented with these master plans or projects that will come in over time.

The area to the south of this, so this takes away a portion of that existing M1 zoned land, which I think is a positive uh for the community, not just the future residents here.

But I think it's positive because that really probably was not going to happen.

There's one business that's developed in that area.

But that specific area plans did designate areas to hopefully to transition from that existing M1 zoning to a combination of C2 and uh C1 zoning that's in between the two master plans that you've seen.

That hopefully we can get a commercial center that could include a grocery store.

I'm not a retail developer, so I don't know what it takes, but I know that I've talked to a lot of them, and what they tell me is it takes rooftops.

They got to have customers in that area.

So right now you have some very spread out housing and you've got Camino Crossing.

Hopefully, with new projects and there's not enough residential density around this location to I'm gonna argue with you.

Okay.

Have you lived over by the dump and all those houses that are going up over there?

By the waste management dump and all the houses that are going up between us and the city center and there.

Have you looked at all those houses?

Oh, there's no, there's a lot, there's a lot going on, but it takes it you have to have that synergy of that that existing amount of rooftops in order to support the retail.

Before a grocery store is going to go in, they're gonna draw a circle around that site, and they're gonna make sure they have enough customers to support their store.

And that's what it takes.

So it is a chicken and egg or the egg and the chicken, but you've got to have those those customers before the retail will follow.

The specific area plan did anticipate that need and does incorporate that in the area in between this master plan and the this Dallagria master plan that was previously approved to the South.

I think that's part of what we tried to do with that amendment.

Okay.

Is to provide some of that you smart growth is uh is is what your terminology for it.

Yeah.

I think, but it's looking at the balance of land uses and providing an appropriate mix.

But we also have to look at the balance of services to provide, right?

And that community right there would be if you went by national standard, probably one plus police officer to our department, maybe, maybe two.

But at the end of the day, that's not on you, right?

That's on us.

So that's that's hold on, let me finish.

And that and that's what I'm saying is when we start to look at these developments, we have we have to look at all of those things that go with those developments, and that's the part for me that I sit back and say, yeah, we can keep building house after house after house after house after house, but ultimately then our services get strapped.

Okay.

So that's that's all I have, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

Thank you, Council Tower.

So I have a couple comments.

Looking at this layout, and thanks for leaving this up, Mr.

Stroger.

I personally think this is a very creative layout.

I've done these types of layouts in the past, and you're you're right, Counselor Tyler.

The most efficient way to do this is just grid it out and get as many lots as you can.

I suspect that that exercise was done at some point.

And what was the result of what would you estimate the loss of lots was to go with something that's a little more creative and a little bit more attractive?

And to Councilor Culbret's point, uh, less likely to be have speeding cars on straight long streets.

It uh I don't have a I don't have a number, but I would I would venture to say that it was uh pretty significant, as you're aware, having done this for years, the first thing you do is take that road around the perimeter and you figure out how to how to grid it out to get the maximum number of lots, and that basically gives you the yield that that property could provide.

And then you take that as your starting point and you start, I think with good with good builders, and I would say that both Westway and Pulti homes uh fit in that that category, that then you start looking at curving those streets, looking at at putting in um angled streets, creating I'll say funky intersections uh that provide opportunities for those pocket parks, provide opportunities for traffic calming, and create a more of a neighborhood.

That probably takes out, you know, start off 5% less lots, maybe you get to 10% less lots that that help you to achieve that sense of community that we're trying to achieve here.

And um, and I'd say that's what we've done.

Yeah, and and I would agree.

I like the design, I like the the curvilinear streets.

I know we use that term a lot, but that's also another traffic calming solution.

I would argue as well that the location of the pocket parks adds to the saleability and the marketability of the project because as new residents drive into this community, they're gonna be attracted by the park or the parks, the the mini parks, whatever we want to call them.

And in looking at the examples that you shared of other communities with even smaller parks, I think they're very successful.

And I would argue I've seen at least over at Lomo, Colorado, those parks are well used by the residents.

So with all of that said, we we went through an exercise of updating the DPM not too long ago.

And we came back and we said, okay, we want you development community to come back to us with a master plan when you're doing something like this.

You did.

You came, you came back, or we came back and said, we need you to include parks in your development.

You did.

We said we need the development to be walkable.

You did.

We said you need 90% ownership.

That's successful here.

We said you need to be more creative in your layouts.

You did.

You've done everything that we asked in the DPM.

Does the DPM need updating?

Perhaps so.

We've heard that up here tonight.

And I know there are other areas that I'm concerned about in the DPM.

We knew that was going to happen as we moved forward and tried to test this out.

But here we are.

My opinion, this plays by the rules.

It's a very logical solution.

That's not discounting any of the concerns and comments that were made up here, but that's my feeling for this development.

So that's all the comments I have.

Any further comments from council?

Thank you very much.

Call the roll.

Thank you.

This is for R 46.

Councilor Lennon Tyne.

Yes.

Counselor Dabson.

Yes.

Counselor List.

Yes.

Deputy Mayor Colbright.

Yes.

Mayor Weimer?

Yes.

And Councilor Tyler.

No.

Thank you.

R 46 is approved.

All right.

Let's move on then to R, I'm sorry, O eight, which was also postponed.

And I think Director Rencarney, you said that was the same presentation that you had for the 07, I'm sorry, item nine.

Mr.

Mayor, that's correct.

Um, so this is the uh corresponding or connected zone map amendment that um would uh go along with that master plan.

And I I'll stand for any questions.

Okay.

Do I need to read through the actual language?

Yes, that's what I was afraid you were gonna say.

All right, this is for 08 postponed from June 11th, 2026 meeting.

Ordinance of the City of Rio Rancho, New Mexico amending the zoning classification of and official zoning map for the property legal legally described as Unit 8, block 53, lots 1 through 24, block 49, lots 2 through 11, 14 through 23, and block 50, lots 2 through 11, 9 through 11, and 13 through 24 from M1, industrial and business park, and R1, single family residential, to R3 mixed residential, identifying conditions of development, providing for several ability, and an effective date.

Can I get a motion?

I move to approve One.

Second.

No, sir.

Hearing none.

Any counselor discussion on this item?

Seeing and hearing none, call the roll.

Thank you.

Deputy Mayor Colbert?

Yes.

Counselor Lennon Time?

Yes.

Counselor Dabson.

Yes.

Counselor Taylor.

No.

Counselor List.

Yes.

And Mayor Weimer.

Yes.

Thank you.

08 is approved.

All right.

Before we move on to the next item, I need to make an announcement.

If you are here to speak on the Maverick request, you need to register with the clerk as we will be closing the floor for or the list of the sign up list for that in 15 minutes.

So if you haven't already signed up, please do so.

Next item on the on the list is item 010, ordinance of the City of Rio Rancho, New Mexico, amending the zoning classification and official zone map for the property legally described as Unit 10, block A, Lot 6 from C1, retail commercial district to C2 wholesale and warehousing commercial district.

Director Rinco.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

Um so this item is a zone map amendment um from what would be uh currently C1 to a C2.

And so this property owner owns the the lots to the um like to the southwest um and they'll be joining these properties uh for their future expansion of their businesses.

Uh this was reviewed by the planning and zoning board at their meeting on June 9th, where they recommended approval.

Um, and I will um stand for any questions.

Thank you, Director Rencone.

Can I get a motion?

I move to approve O ten.

Second.

Is anyone signed up to speak on this item?

No, sir, there is not.

Councilor discussion.

Hearing none, call the roll.

Thank you.

Mayor Weimer?

Yes.

Councilor List.

Yes.

Councillor Tyler.

Yes.

Councilor Dabson.

Yes.

Counselor Lynn-Time.

Yes.

And Deputy Clerk.

Just gave you a promotion.

Deputy Mayor Colbreth.

Yes.

Thank you.

O ten is approved.

All right.

Moving on then.

So we didn't give the public 15 more minutes to sign up.

I'll do that after.

Yeah, we can do D22.

Let's do one more.

And then we'll break.

All right, moving on to item 12 D22.

Site plan amendment approval for the proposed expansion of the existing Sage Brush Church Building at 7555 and Chanat Hills Boulevard Northeast.

Director Rinco.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

Um so for item number 12 D22.

Uh staff is actually requesting a postponement uh to allow for uh proper notice on the property.

Um we we were behind on posting the sign for this property.

Um and so we're asking to go ahead and postpone this uh to your meeting on July 23rd, and I will stand for any questions.

Hearing none, call a roll.

Thank you.

Counselor Lennon Time.

Yes.

Counselor Tyler?

Yes, Councilor List, yes, Counselor Dabson.

Yes, Mayor Weimer?

Yes, Deputy Mayor Colbright.

Yes.

Thank you.

D 22 has been postponed.

All right, before we move on to D 23, the site plan for the Maverick gas station.

We're gonna take a 10-minute recess.

Let's meet back at 7 30.

And Mr.

Mayor, can you announce also that public sign up is now closed?

Oh, I'm sorry, yes, and public sign-up for that item has now been closed.

We are moving on now to item D 23.

This is item 13.

Site plan approval for Maverick gas station on the property legally described as Unit 17, block 131, lots 36 through 40.

Director Rincon.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body, Amy Rincone, Director of Development Services.

So the item before you tonight is uh for the approval of a site plan.

This is uh located at the northwest corner of New Mexico 528 in Opergon.

It is the uh encompasses the first five lots, uh long monterey.

The current zoning uh for this property was established in 2007 by ordinance number 34 enactment number seven-34.

There was a site plan attached to this SU that if substantially changed would need to be reviewed by the planning and zoning board.

The allowed uses um are all C1 uses except for free-standing bars, lounges, and adult only uses.

Um I don't know why this kind of switched, but what I have here is a list of all of the C1 uh retail commercial uses over the next two slides, and um my little red circle is in the wrong spot.

Uh gas stations and convenience stores are actually number nine, so it's at the bottom of that first column.

Um, and so uh it is a permissive use.

Uh and then the second slide is a continuation of the permissive uses allowed in C1 along with the conditional uses.

One thing that came up at the planning and zoning board hearing, and just to kind of talk through it a little bit more, is that it is my understanding that the applicant is not going to be opening this location selling alcohol.

But if in the future they decide to pursue alcohol sales, they would need to work through the New Mexico regulations and licensing apartment.

They have a sub-department called the Alcohol Alcoholic Beverage Control.

And they are the ones who review and issue licenses.

Liquor licenses, there is a limited or a finite number of those, and so you generally have to either purchase or lease those from somebody who already holds one.

And then that sale or lease has to be approved by ABC.

A preliminary approval letter gets sent to the city where then the city then has to notice in the newspaper twice and on the city website that a public hearing is being held to review after the public hearing.

There is also a 300 foot rule that liquor sales cannot be located within 300 feet, and we're talking a straight line from property line to property line of an active church or school, but there is an ability to request a waiver from that standard.

So this is the next two slides are going to be the 2007 site plan.

This site plan was attached to that zoning ordinance that I just referenced.

One thing I want to point out is that that zoning ordinance had two zoning designations attached to it.

So there was an SU, which is what we're talking about tonight, and then there was also 01 further to the north or to the yeah, to the north.

So these are the standards that we follow are in our municipal code in chapter 150 03 for applications and procedures.

So site plans, we do mail to out notifications to the adjacent property owners 15 days prior to the meeting.

We put a legal ad in the newspaper, we post on the property seven days prior to the meeting.

And so in this situation, as I referenced back on the ordinance, so the ordinance requires that the planning and zoning board reviews this, but the chapter 154 SU ordinance requires that the governing body reviews this.

So most of the time, governing body is the only one that reviews site plans.

In this situation, because of that 2007 ordinance, the planning and zoning board also reviewed this.

So this is two public hearings that were required for this specific site plan due to the regulations in place.

Just some snippets of of what we send out for the letters, a copy of the notification in the newspaper, the sign that was posted on the property, and then I'm also showing in that last image who was notified by mail because we are looking at the adjacent property owners, and adjacent would be the properties that are lied next to or bordering the subject property that we are talking about tonight.

So we look to our municipal code, chapter 154.24 for all of our rules and regulations on how we evaluate these site plans as they come in.

So I generally don't go into a ton of detail at governing body when I bring these forward, but I hope you'll bear with me tonight.

I'm going to go through each of these as as how we have evaluated these.433A.

So it sounds very basic, but we look for a north arrow.

We make sure that there is a north arrow and a scale on the site plan itself.

So that criteria has been satisfied.

We look at the lot boundaries and easements.

So I'm pointing out that, and these are a lot easier to see on your agenda briefing memorandums when you're able to actually like zoom in and see the boundaries.

But they did provide where the lot boundaries are, they did provide where the existing easements are.

They also are showing proposed easements.

But D, they also are showing the existing and proposed right-of-ways.

So with this one, what they're showing is uh what they have talked with DOT about the need to put in a D cell turn lane off of I28, um, the pavement that would happen along Monterey along with those turn lanes, and then any additional uh infrastructure needed along Obergon for 154.433 C, uh, so this is showing the existing and proposed utilities.

So in the it looks very tiny here, but again, uh agenda briefing memorandum is a lot easier to read.

Um, the blue lines are the water lines, the green lines are your sewer lines, so they will be extending utilities to the property and then along the section of Monterey that they will be paving.

Looking at 154.433e, uh, so they need to list out the proposed structures with uses, dimensions, and setbacks.

Um, so I've got a lot of little red circles on here, um, but what I am trying to highlight is that on the far right hand side, what they're showing is the setback, a setback line.

So what that does is it's actually telling us that the setbacks required in C1, that's as far as they could actually go.

Um, they're not going that far, they're actually meeting or exceeding what those setback requirements would be in C1.

Um, they are showing the access points along with and sorry, I skipped so uh setbacks dimensions uh for the buildings itself.

So uh the convenience store would be approximately 4,499 square feet.

They're also showing where the fuel canopy would be located.

Um just to go into a little bit of detail on that setback line that I referenced on the right hand side.

Um, so they would need to be 10 feet from the front, uh, 10 feet from the corner side, and then zero on their side and rear lot lines, um, they are again exceeding those distances.

Um, and then the other circles are highlighting their proposed ingress and egress, parking, and then circulation through the site.

Um, so that um bottom right hand circle is highlighting where they would have a cross lot access or circulation with the feature development.

Then we have 154.433G, uh, which is their landscaping and landscape buffer plan.

So uh what you can see is that they are um putting a lot of landscaping on the site.

Um again, they're showing a lot of those buffers between actually where the building is and the roadway, um, and then there is a requirement uh for a buffer wall.

One of the things that I'm trying to display on that right-hand side, and sorry that the picture is so tiny, uh, but it did come to our attention that the NMDOT has a right-of-way map from 1992, actually, um, and it's not something that that we knew about until we had reached out to the county about this.

Um, but those red boxes in that image on the right-hand side are um NM DOT right-of-way.

And so the distance between that southern property line for the subject property and the property to the south is over 100 feet, and so technically they they are not required to do a buffer wall uh for that uh section of the southern uh boundary for the property.

Uh that was something that came to our attention just recently.

Um so we did have a catch-all in our uh conditions of approval uh requesting that if they weren't going to put in that buffer wall that they would need to come in for a variance, um, but it is now our understanding that there is about 120 feet of right-of-way located on that section of road, and so therefore they would not be required to put up that buffer wall on that section.

Uh then for 154 43 3G, um, nope, sorry, next one, uh 3H.

Um, so elevations, um, and I actually have three pages on this one.

Um, so a couple of things that I wanted to uh point back to.

So the second picture for the site plan had a south view that showed that the road would be up here with the houses, um, and then any of the commercial would be located further down, right?

Um, or uh stepped down.

So on this uh specific portion of the site plan, it's it's the drainage plan, and so I'll come back to this later too.

Um, but that elevation at the road ranges from 1,000 or I'm sorry, 5,150 feet up to 5,170 feet, uh, and the finished floor for this building is actually going to be 5,150.

So depending on the location, there is about a 20-foot uh deviation or set down from where the road itself is located.

Uh when we're talking about building height, um we're looking that this seemed like kind of the easier uh image to point out.

Um and so what I have circled in red, and so it'll talk about 100 feet at that bottom uh circle, uh, and then that top circle is is uh 119.

Um when we're looking at site plans, architectural site plans, um they actually have their baseline starting at 100 feet uh because they don't like to go into the negative for things, so they actually always start at 100 and go up.

So this building is not going to be 119 feet.

Um the bulk of the building is 19 feet, um, and then that little awning on the top uh goes up to 29 feet.

Um but when as the city we measure um the building heights, uh since that is technically considered a uh gable roof, uh we do the average between the EVE, which would be the bottom little part of it, and the ridge, which is like the tip top.

Um, and so the average height of the building would actually be uh approximately uh 24 feet, um, but again, the majority of the building um is going to be around 19 feet.

So this uh just is some more illustrations of what the building would look like from some different angles along with the fuel canopy.

The fuel canopy is just a little bit over 19 feet in height.

Then for 154 43 3J, uh this is the uh preliminary drainage, and then uh for 1544.

Actually, I'm sorry, the last one was yeah, no, this one's I uh the adjacent characteristics for the property.

Um, so what they did was they did provide um a location map to show what other properties were around them and what those other properties look like, along with a um flood map to show the arroy to the south.

And so uh I didn't say it verbally every time we were going through, but it is written in the ABM.

I did put it on the slides that all of the criteria that we have to uh that we need to review for for a site plan, all of those criteria have been met and as within the standards that was submitted by the applicant.

One of the other things I wanted to show today, so this is the proposed site plan from 2007, and then I'm laying on top, um, and I don't have like the greatest technical skills, so I just did this in you know PowerPoint, so I did what I did.

Um but what you can see is how it overlays on top.

Um, and so um looking at it, uh the access point is very similar in location uh for this proposed site plan as it was in the 2007.

The um site the access point off of Oprah is also again very similar in location to where it was in the 2007 site plan.

Uh the cross access uh same thing again, very similar to where it was.

Um we are looking at just a portion of the entire site, right?

So uh when this 2007 site plan came in, it was looking at that bigger picture, um, and we are looking at a a smaller portion of that.

Um currently the traffic um study has uh been submitted to the city of Rio Rancho and has been approved.

Um, but there is always the options if there was additional um information or feedback from DOT that we can uh go back through that review process if we want to uh talk more about the larger um site as a whole.

Um and so the next one for the conditions of findings.

Um so this was reviewed and again generally not reviewed by the planning and zoning board, um, but the ordinance required it.

The planning and zoning board reviewed and approved at their meeting on June 9th.

Um, and then I have the findings of fact, and then I have the conditions of approval on the next three slides, uh trying to make it big so that we can read it.

Uh and with that, I will stand for any questions.

Thank you, Director.

Can I before I ask ask for a motion?

I want to let everyone know in the audience what the way we work this is we always ask for a motion in the affirmative.

That's not in an indication that that's the way the vote's gonna go.

It allows the project to or the request and move forward, so we can then move on to public comment.

So can I get a motion?

Motion to approve D23.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

All right, before we move on to I'm sorry, was there a comment from no right there?

There's comments box.

Can we move mute that's good job?

You ran.

You beat me.

No, you're all good.

Thank you.

Before we move on to public comment, I want to make make a couple of announcements.

First of all, I want everyone to be respectful and hear of each other.

I don't want to hear any applause, any whistling, any clapping, yelling.

We need to be respectful of one another.

If another individual has already presented something that you want to speak on, we don't need to duplicate comments.

So just keep those items in mind.

We do have uh law enforcement in the room.

If things go awry, I doubt that will happen.

However, just a forewarning.

All right, so we'll move on to public comment, starting with the I believe it's the agent, Mr.

Piggott.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor Weimer, Counselors.

Appreciate the making your sacrifice of your time and efforts to help with the City of Rio Rancho and go through this public process, which I really appreciate because it's how we were able to get things done and to do it the right uh the correct way and how your code is set up.

And um I know it's a great sacrifice, but we really appreciate the staff's times and efforts, and especially Director Rincon's uh comments with respect to the project.

Um she answered a lot of my comments, so I'll go briefly as best I can so we can get back to the public comment.

Let's see if we can work this.

So uh I think everybody knows a little bit about what Maverick represents.

Um we have several stores here in the Albuquerque area.

This would be our first one in Rio Rancho.

Um what our motto is is ventures for stop.

Um we're trying to build the coolest experience of a convenience store in the market.

Um we feel like we are unique to the market because one of the things is we're uh located in 20 states in the United States.

All our stores are privately owned by our owner.

Um we have 800 stores with over 14,000 employees with respect to those that have every kind of benefit and opportunity to be successful within our company.

Um the store itself would probably employ about 15 to 20 employees.

Um with that, we've trained our what we call our adventure guides into 40 different aspects of sales, point of sales, liquor control, um, how to keep customer right.

Uh, one of the rules that um Maverick has is what we call the titanium rule, which is treat others better than they expect to be treated.

And we kind of do that with everything we do from what I do as a site development manager, as we try to be as best as we can to accommodate what the neighbors want and to be successful within our community.

Um one of the nice things that's about being used, you know, owned by all our store, our stores are owned by one owner, is we have control over our stores.

Um we're not up to franchisees, we control, operate, manage the stores ourselves.

So we're able to keep our stores cleaner, well more well organized, and one of the things we've been really well uh respected in the industry is how clean our bathrooms are.

One of the things that people look for us on road trips is they know our restrooms are safe and able to be accessed and know that they're gonna be.

Um to go with our adventure stop theming.

Um you can see that we use uh metal accents, uh steel beams, exposed uh party board and rock cultures on the the corners of our stores.

This helps continue that adventure theme where we're trying to promote uh just getting out into your community.

One of the things that if you've gone to any of our stores, we put uh murals within our stores of the local uh typically the states.

You'll see most of the time, I think it's white sands that I think is around a lot of the parts of the store, plus some of the other nature stops, but because New Mexico is really a beautiful state, and we're able to reflect that into our stores here locally.

One of the things we're really concerned, of course, is and I think the residents were concerned was about the environmental construction or environmental controls.

We use we kind of exceed what the industry standard is.

We use double wall fiberglass construction on our tanks.

We have state of the art leak detection systems that are not only monitored here locally but also at our headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah, on a 24 hour basis.

Landscaping, of course, will be respectful to the community and meet local codes.

And of course, safety is one of our major concerns with that.

That's with not only our adventure guides but our customers.

We want to keep it as safe, clean, operable, and make sure that people are safe when they're using our facilities.

Um one of the key things we have is a lot of large glass are canopies.

Uh this way we can keep security well enforced and make sure that there's not people that are uh uh loitering or things of that.

We're we want to make sure that our uh customers have a big welcome inviting to our stores.

Um we are a 24-7 operation.

Uh one of the benefits of that is there's always going to be somebody there monitoring our stores.

Um, also it's sometimes somewhat of a safety net for the the area because there's always going to be somebody to be available if anybody ever needs a system.

Um kind of go to a little bit to the liquor issue.

Um maverick's a little different.

If you've ever been to a Maverick store, we're not really have a lot of racks with a lot of products for sale.

One of the things we have in our stores is what we call a bonfire grill, which sells um pre-packaged uh meals and fresh food that you can make in your local convenience.

Um those include destroy style pizzas, burritos, uh made to order case of these, things like that that just are ready to eat.

Um I'm a big fan, so I it's one of those things I actually like about the job.

Um, one of the things I should say is um not only do I really appreciate Maverick for who they are, it's one of the reasons why I work for the company.

I think we're a great brand.

I think we're really respectful of our neighbors, and I do like the Tule that we all honor as part of our uh our task as being members of this uh Maverick organization.

Um with the alcohol sales, um, I know it's a concern with the neighbors.

We are not pursuing an alcohol license this time.

Uh New Mexico is kind of unique for us.

Um, liquor licenses are quite expensive and they're not hard, they're hard to come by.

I would say off uh I didn't look at the actual numbers before I came.

I'd say about 50% of our stores don't sell packaged liquor because it's not part of our purpose of what uh our profit margins are at these locations.

It's not something that this store has been uh the success of this store is based on liquor sales.

So I know there's uh concerns about liquor licenses coming back later.

Um there is things within the code that limit the possibilities of liquor stores at this location.

There's also time that people can make adjustments to those things if the concerned citizens want to make efforts to that.

Um I think Director Rincon did a fabulous job of kind of explaining all the different aspects of this particular particular site plan.

So I'll be brief.

What's kind of interesting is that curved road that's there on the right side of that site plan as because of grading.

Um is really stringent on what we like to see on slopes because we're concerned about safety, making sure our customers have the ability to get through uh the site.

So those the the grades on that road are it's a winding grade uh road so that we can make sure we can keep to our own grading plan for slopes going up to the Monterey Road.

Um, what's unique about this site is the south west corner is so much lower than the north east corner, so there's a lot of fall across the site.

Um, one of the things that you could look at here is you can kind of see what this looks like in cross section with the neighbor's residence house with respect to where our building sits, the canopy sits, and also U.S.

highway, uh New Mexico 528 as well.

Um we are significantly lower than Monterey, as you can tell by that uh uh cross section through there.

Lighting was also another concern by the residents.

Um this is our current photometric plan we have for the site.

As you can see, we have lighting at the entrances, both on that right-in access there on Obergon.

It's 2.6 foot candles, 1.8 up on Monterey.

As you can see up by the residence, is a zero or 0.3.

You can of course make adjustments with that.

The benefit of the 25-foot poles and LED lights is you have louvers now that can direct the light.

So the old days of shielding are gone where we can just direct light with the the louvers themselves.

One thing this photometric plan doesn't take into account is any lighting or street lighting that uh real ranch will require of us.

So we haven't got that far in the design yet to know what uh street lights will be required of us to put in that road, but that would also provide lighting there on Monterey.

Uh one thing I should also note we are a 24 hour 24-hour operation.

We do have dimmers uh for the late night hours on our canopy lights.

They dim 25%, so 75% of what they is whether they'd be showing until some car comes up underneath the canopy.

I do want to say that if you've ever played with the dimmers in your house, 25% sounds like a lot, but it I mean it's the best we can do with the industry, and uh but it it it is a reduction, but it is uh what we can actually accommodate.

Um let's see.

The other questions that came up with uh public comment is uh our traffic study getting the approval through both NMDOT and also with the City uh Rio Rancho.

One of the things that was really back and forth for several months was the discussion of accesses onto the site.

Um we were not able to have uh for the best operation and safety for this development and for the development for the future.

The state required us to not have a write-in write-out access on New Mexico 528, and that we weren't able to get even a full movement on Obergon coming into our site.

So we're only limited to a right-in access, which of course allows us to only have the majority of the accesses coming out onto Monterey.

As you can see, we're improving Monterey Road, of course, with three lanes at the intersection of Obergon and Monterey for a right, left, and a uh entrance on onto the street, and then that narrows down to about 26 feet up towards where that access is.

We're of course uh widening Obergon itself, allowing for a right turn pocket that goes on to not only our right-in access, but also onto uh Monterey, and then on New Mexico 528, we are extending that.

Let me just make sure I get the numbers right.

So we're providing a 350-foot right turnpocket with 175-foot paper.

Uh and in addition to that, we're also putting in a bike lane.

They're on that uh westbound lane coming into Obergon.

And uh that is something that Maverick is willing to put in, and of course, with that adjustments will be needed to be to the signal there with signal timing, adjustment of light placements, things of that nature.

This is uh the the letter we received from Rio Rancho dated May 19th, where we had the traffic study accepted by the city uh based on the review by New Mexico Department of Transportation.

Um, this is kind of a little bit more of a blow-up version of what uh our approvements were proposing for Monterey, which is that the lane widenings there on Monterey paving the road and allow and installing those right and left turn pockets in addition to the widening we're doing on Obergon uh Oberground Road to accommodate what the traffic study is requiring us to do in addition to the uh eastbound uh lane on Mexico 528.

We're extending that right turn pocket or left turn pocket so that we can meet the requirements for the intersection that is controlled.

One of the things I do want to point out with traffic studies with regards to convenience stores, we're not a destination.

Uh if you can think about it when you're going to a gas station, you're not actually, oh, I just need to go to a gas station.

Uh, we'd like to think our customers really like us, but most of the time, only about 30% are it's a destination.

Most of our traffic is generated just by what we call bypass traffic.

So about 70% of the the cars that are coming to our site are already on the roadway.

So we're not really amplifying the traffic because most of our customers are already on the road, and just oh, I need to get gas today.

I'm gonna pull in and fill up my tank, or I need a tasty beverage, I'm gonna go in, give me a quick diet, Dr.

Pepper, which I always do, and then uh go on my way back to my home.

So that's one of the kind of things that to be understand of what uh community stores are a little different than a destination like a CVS or a coffee shop or something of that nature.

Um Director Ringcon did a good job of going through the elevations, so I won't belabor that.

So um typical branding that Maverick has.

If you see any of our stores in the local areas, this is the same thing you're gonna get.

A good example would be Gibson and Yale in Albuquerque, I think was our latest and greatest.

It's a little bigger than this store.

That would be a good example.

That is my presentation.

If you have any questions or concerns, I'm here to answer anything I can do.

So appreciate you, counselors and mayor.

Uh let me know if you have any other comments.

Thank you, Mr.

Piggy.

We will call you back up if we have additional comments or questions.

We'll move into public comment at this time.

I want to remind the public the time limit for speaking is two minutes.

I also want to remind the audiences or the the folks in the room as well.

Director Rincone made a very detailed explanation of the site plan.

The reason for that is because this is a site plan request only.

This is not a use change.

This use, this gas station is a permissive use on this site.

There's no zone change being requested.

So the comments that were that you should bring forward at this time are specific to the site plan itself, the layout of the site plan, as opposed to the fact that it's a gas station.

Gas stations are allowed on this site.

With that said, we will go through the public comment, starting with Teresa Poole Wentz.

That's not Teresa.

Did I get your name wrong?

It says No, I'm taking the place of my wife.

Okay.

And you are?

I'm Sean Wards.

Do you have do you have have you filled out one of these?

Yes, sir.

You're Sean.

Okay, so your wife's not speaking.

She's not going to speak at all time.

All right.

All right.

So this is Sean.

Thank you, Sean.

Members of the government body, thank you for the opportunity for me to speak.

And I like the presentation before.

I was going to dispute about due process, but let me just give you a little example of what Monterey Road is and what this gas station is going to do to that.

Being the newest member of the community, I just moved here in April.

And one of the things that I really was impressed about was neighbors themselves.

It's just a road where I drove down and people waved to me.

That doesn't happen that often.

And making it a paved road, it's a large uphill road itself.

Monterey going on the other side.

And on the other side is where I meet my neighbors where they are walking the dogs, walking their children to school.

And there's really no need for speed limits signs or anything like that.

There's not actually anything there because we're a community.

We know what's there.

The problem is that when you put increased traffic, that's where it's going to endanger our families on that.

Just me driving out.

There was a car coming out out of uh coming down Monterey that wasn't part of our community.

And thank God I have safety devices on my vehicle where I backed up where that detected before I even saw it.

And now it's going to be a paved road with no safety devices on there.

I mean, being a veteran, I don't want to go back to being a military surface depending on my property and my neighbors.

Um this gas station, there's really an idea for it because we got one across the street.

What's it gonna do for the community of Rio Rancho and immediate community or real rancho and extending community real rental?

Does it really make a difference?

It's gonna be there.

Um I also travel in in the early mornings and I go to Speedway where there is a gas station.

I already see the homelessness, already see drug familiar, and we're just increasing that.

If you go behind Speedway where the homeless thing is died at, you're just gonna add them to come across the street to our area.

And that and that's just the nature of it.

It's not the the Maverick station.

That's the problem.

It's a problem where people are coming through the Maverick station itself.

I just want to be able to point that out, and I just appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Wentz.

Moving on to let's see, we got Nikisha Lee.

Did I say that right?

Good evening, Mayor Weyer and members of the governing uh body.

Um, I respectfully ask that you deny the site plan or remand it to planning and zoning for further review.

Yeah, this is not about opposing maverick or opposing development.

We welcome response responsible growth in a rancho.

My concern is that the site plan is simply wrong for the location for the volume of for 24-hour fueling station.

Um this property sits immediately adjacent to established neighborhoods and near Enchanted Hills Elementary School.

Families choose this area because it is residential and family-oriented.

Placing it in intensive commercial use at this location, it changes the character of the neighborhood and creates an incompatible transition between residential living and commercial activity.

My question is: does the traffic study adequately evaluate school traffic during peak drop-off and pickup times?

Before approving a site like this, the city should have a complete understanding of how this location will impact children, families, and surrounding neighborhoods.

Ultimately, this decision is about land use compatibility.

A gas station may be appropriate in another commercial area, but this location besides homes and nearest school is not the right place.

I respectfully ask that you deny the site plan and remand or remand it for additional review until these compatibility traffic concerns can be fully addressed.

Thank you for your time and your service to the residents of Real Rancho.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Lee.

Next up is Thomas.

Let's see if I got this right.

Krupiac.

Yes, sir.

Mayor and members of the government body, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is Thomas William Krupiak, and I am a retired lieutenant from the Albuquerque Fire Department and a resident of 1253 Monterey Road.

I respectfully ask you to continue this application until you are satisfied with the public record that the public record actually demonstrates this project and it's the for health, safety, and welfare of our community.

Although zoning allows a gas station in today's decision, it's about whether the site plan is appropriate for this location and its compatibility with the 2007 ordinance.

The city's own review identified the need for a traffic impact study, Mexico DOT approval, the grading and drainage analysis, roadway improvements, utility review, and stormwater requirements.

Yet as a resident who has carefully reviewed the public record, I have been unable to determine whether all those issues has really fully been addressed.

This Maverick proposal represents only a two-acre portion of what was originally envisioned as a part of an approximately eight and three-quarter acre commercial development.

According to the city's own staff report, the original concept could have accommodated a partial access from New Mexico 528 that compiled that complied with the New Mexico DOT spacing requirements.

The current standalone proposal cannot, and instead relies on ingress and egress from Monterey Road, a residential street.

Before approving this revised plan, I respectfully asked you to consider whether the evidence demonstrates that directing commercial traffic onto a residential street is the safest and most compatible design for this neighborhood.

As a retired fire lieutenant, I understand the importance of identifying public safety risks before problems occur, not after.

Before casting your vote, I ask each one of you to question.

Can you honestly say that the record before you demonstrates that every reasonable concern regarding traffic safety, neighborhood compatibility, necessity, environmental protection, impact, keeping in mind grading, drainage, and all the surrounding domestic wells, that public welfare has fully been answered.

If the answer is yes, please identify that evidence for the public.

If there is any uncertainty, I respectfully ask that you continue this application until those questions can be answered.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr.

Krupiac.

Next up is Juan Lopez Corona.

Good evening, uh Mr.

Mayor and members of the governing body.

Um because this site plan contains zero enforceable noise conditions and routes, traffic directly onto our residential street.

There are no restrictions on delivery hours, no restrictions on truck idling, and no quiet hour requirements.

And this is not just a noise issue.

Heavy commercial trucks navigating residential streets create an immediate hazard.

There um, as mentioned before, their parents dropping kids off at enchanted Hills Elementary, less than half a mile away, and the track traffic study does not uh completely ignore uh school drop-off and pickup impacts.

Um yet, you know, as you all know, now that none of this is new since uh it was uh uh mentioned in the two in 2007.

Um, and back then the community accepted a special use designation uh specifically so this governing body could impose protections during the site plan process.

Uh tonight is that process.

Um, with speedway already operating safely across the street.

Uh, second gas station is entirely redundant.

I am standing here tonight with many neighbors who uh who have signed petition against this project.

And uh to conclude, um, a business can be legally allowed and still be poorly placed.

Uh, because this site plan fails to protect our neighborhood.

I respectfully ask you to deny it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Lopez Corona.

Next up, Jorge Colonel Rosa.

Mr.

Mayor and members of the governing body.

My concern tonight is the potential impact this proposed Maverick gas station will have on residential property values and the financial well-being of families in this area.

For many, a home is their largest investment.

Resident pay properly taxes and make long-term life decisions based on the safety and character of the neighborhood they choose.

When a high traffic commercial use is placed directly adjacent to homes, it fundamentally alters how future buyers will move to our neighborhood.

Even if technical requirements are met, homeowners face real consequences, increased traffic, fumes, and constant noise.

A house that once looked towards a quiet street may instead face fuel facing fuel pumps and late night activity.

This shifts in quality of life carries the financial cost to cause that is being on friendly pace on homeowners who have already invested in this community.

When a development creates burdens for residents while the businesses gain the benefit, the cost is shifted onto the people.

I respectfully ask you to consider this plan protect the residential investments of your constituents.

Without an independent review, the impact on property values and neighborhood character approval is premature.

I asked this site plan be denied as proposed, or delay until stronger protections are required to preserve the safety, peace, and value of our homes.

Voters and taxpayers should not have to lose their primary investment because the commercial use was placed in their front doors.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you.

Governing Body.

Thank you, Mr.

Clown Rosa.

Next up, Stephen Ryan.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

My name is Stephen Ryan.

I live at 1452 Monterey.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I am a longtime Rio Rancher resident, and I'm here to respectfully urge you to deny you deny, or at the very least, postpone approval of the proposed Maverick gas station.

My primary concern is safety.

The site is situated in an already congested intersection.

Residential near residential homes, churches, and an elementary school.

Adding a 12-pump facility, which effectively doubles the current fuel and capacity at this intersection, will inevitably increase traffic congestion and create dangerous conflicts for residents, pedestrians, and school traffic.

We have historical data showing that this intersection is difficult to manage.

We cannot afford to compound these issues.

Beyond traffic, we must consider the health and community impact.

This development is incompatible with a quiet residential neighborhood.

We're talking about a 24-hour operation.

Increased lighting noise and potential environmental hazards like benzene, all within 300 feet of families' homes.

The city's own comprehensive plan identifies this area as an activity center.

Meant to support a mix of issues for residents, not highway travelers.

This proposal contradicts that vision.

Furthermore, we deserve development that protects our families in alliance with the long-term growth of Rio Rancho.

I ask that you deny the site plan or at a minimum delay approval until thorough independent review of the traffic, environmental, and public safety impacts and be completed.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you, Mr.

Ryan.

Next up, Jonah Baca.

She's online.

Hello, my name is John Abaca.

I'm the owner at 1324 Monterey Road Northeast.

I just want to say thank you to the members of the governing body for the opportunity to speak.

Tonight I respectfully ask you to deny the site plan because it failed it fails to adequately mitigate traffic, pedestrian safety, school zone impacts, lighting, noise, residential capability, and public safety concerns.

This proposal is not just another commercial development.

It is a high impact use being placed directly adjacent to homes near an elementary school and in the heart of a family-oriented neighborhood.

Those impacts extend well beyond the property line affecting families who live here every day.

The burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that these impacts have been adequately addressed.

Based on the information presented, I do not believe that the burden has been met.

Significant questions remain regarding traffic congestion during school hours, pedestrian safety, and long-term capability with our neighborhood.

For these reasons, I will respectfully ask that you deny the site plan.

However, if the governing body decides to move forward with approval, I urge you to impose meaningful conditions to protect this community.

Number one.

Number three, traffic and infrastructure, restrict access from Monterey or Obregon.

Require a new traffic study during school hours, and mandate an independent review of crash data at 528 in Obregón.

Number four, site design.

Require larger landscape buffers, reduce sign brightness, comprehensive security plans, and enhance groundwater protection.

I'm almost done.

This decision will save our community for decades.

I respectfully ask for you to place the safety of our children above and our quality of life and our residents above the convenience of this development.

Thank you for your time and your thoughtful consideration.

Thank you, Miss Backer.

The last person I have signed up is Victoria Santos, who I understand is online.

Do we need to get her to read the oath?

I see that we don't.

Is that they'll have okay?

So Miss Santos.

Can you read it?

I'm here.

Can you read the oath?

Um my name is Victoria.

I, Victoria Santo, residing at 3749 Desert Pinon.

Um, I'm actually talking on the behalf of not behalf of my parents, but my parents do live at 1239 Monterey.

I do solemnly declare and affirm that the testimony I give in reference to shall be the truth, and I do understand I do this under the penalty of prejudice.

Okay, go ahead.

Okay.

Um good afternoon.

Um, one of my biggest concerns is emergency access.

If there is an medical emergency, fire or other urgent situations at one of the homes.

How will ambulances, fire trucks, and other urgent situations at one of the homes well?

How will they be able to get in and out when there's increased traffic, fuel trucks, delivery vehicles, and cars blocking the area?

Any delay in an emergency response could put someone's life at risk.

There's also concerns about fire risk, fumes, noise, bright lights, late night activity, and overall loss of peace and safety in the neighborhood.

A gas station directly across from homes changed the character of the area and creates risk that families should not have to live with.

We're not against development, but we do believe that this is the wrong location.

A gas station should not be placed across from residential homes, especially where families rely on private live, rely on private wells and where emergency access can be affected.

For those reasons, I respectively ask that you propose ask this proposal to be denied or move to a more appropriate commercial location away from private homes and wells.

Um I definitely think that we got to think about areas that are near Cleveland High School where we could really need some development in these areas.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Santos.

Ms.

Davis, is there anyone else that I am missing for public?

No, Mr.

Mayor, there is not.

You have them up.

Okay.

All right, we'll close the floor in public hearing and move on to counselor discussion.

Any counselor discussion on this item?

Mr.

Mayor.

Counselor Tyrell.

Okay.

Um I just have a couple really quick things.

Um this is a really difficult decision, and I don't know what where it's going to go.

There's a couple of concerns that I have.

But the biggest part I think when residents or when folks buy in real rancho, especially along a state highway, which is New Mexico 528, there's inevitably going to be something built there.

That that's there's just no doubt about it.

And so the protections and and the and that that site is and it's specifically zoned for this per this type of use.

So that in itself speaks volumes for where this could potentially go later.

But that being said, um, I do think that the residents have some concerns that we we really should take a look at.

I I do think that there is a concern with the lack of the utilization of 528, but I don't really know that it even if we utilize 528, if that would negate using uh the access on the other roads.

So I don't I just don't on Monterey, I don't think it would.

My only question is for the applicant, if you could just come up real quick.

Actually, not only I have like two, maybe three.

You don't answer them right, I have more.

Uh real quick on the height of the light poles that are in the lot, are they going to be is there a way to reduce the height of those to help comply with the the um light ordinance that we have in place because you're gonna have to comply with the light ordinance, right?

And then the dimmers that you talked about, so this is two part the dimmers that you talk about, are those on auto or manual?

So can some attendant inside go, ah, we're not gonna dim the lights today, or are they automatically dimmed at like Miss Bacca said, nine o'clock or whatever time?

If they're automatically dimmed, okay um if director Rincon, is there a height requirement on the poles?

Right now, the the the model that you saw was based on 25 foot poles on a two and a half foot base.

I just didn't know if there was well the only thing I'm saying is if they were reduced down in height, it might reduce some of the light projection to the rear of the residents, right?

So that's the only reason why I say there.

I don't know if there's a height limit for the trucks to go in and out.

I mean, uh that that part I don't know, but it's something to consider.

I'm not I'm not asking for you to make any changes, I'm just saying you might want to consider No, we can consider it.

I mean, we make limit uh limitations on light pole heights all the time.

Okay, um because we work with city staff.

All right, and then the other part that I have is part of the ECFR part 397 that's the federal transportation when it comes to driving hazardous materials on a roadway that's not specific, so on that um residential street.

Um we need to make sure that we comply with that, and it has to be five feet off, 300 feet from the residents, and there is some issues there, and I'm sure that if NMDOT looked at it, that you are in complete compliance with that, but we need to make sure of that piece of it as well.

So I would ask staff to make sure that that happens.

I do like, and I and I'll I'll just guide you in one other piece.

If this moves forward, I would like to urge you to work with the community because I actually like the list that Miss Backer rattled off.

I mean, maybe some of them are not doable, but I think the more the community, if this project moves forward, what the community needs to understand is how do we move it forward and gain something that makes it more acceptable to the community, right?

Nothing's ever going to be perfect, and if the site were to move forward, how do we compromise, be it you and the and the community in making something that everyone can buy off on, right?

Correct now, everyone's not gonna be absolutely happy with anything, but I think it goes a long way if you when you're developing it, work with the community, listen to their concerns, and you're not gonna be able to do everything.

But she has a really good list, and I do like her list.

I do too.

And I think that get with her, maybe listen to that list and go through it.

But that's the biggest thing I want to urge you to do as a developer, as developing the site and work with the community if it moves forward, make sure that we try to do as best we can to accommodate, but you still have to run a business.

So I understand that too.

Okay.

One thing I do want to make a comment, though I don't really need to, but um we own our own logistics, so we have we control our fuel trucks.

So late night delivery hours, those are not a concern.

Um there's a lot of her lists that we can easily accommodate.

Okay, and then the the delivery that adds to one more question and I'm done, I'm sorry.

Going in and out, is that truck gonna be going in and out off Albergon, or is it gonna have to use that?

It'll have to go in on Obergone, but it will exit on Monterey.

Because it's the only way to exit the whole site.

Okay, because if if we were able to use 528, would that change that pattern?

I mean, yeah, that was the so to kind of go with since I've full disclosure.

I've been in land development 30 years, licensed civil engineering in a couple states, just not New Mexico.

The DOT can always take away access from you.

And even though this was approved back in 2007, we fought for the access, whether we got uh for the site.

They really don't want to uh encumber 528.

A we were only able to get a write-in access on Obergone.

Um I mean we would have loved to have a full movement so that we could come circulated back out, but we're eliminated limited just to that write-in.

So we did what we could.

I think I believe um my traffic engineer was not able to come tonight, but I believe this the city was involved during those negotiations we had with the DOT.

Um, but again, um uh we're open for whatever suggestions have.

Okay.

Well, thank you.

I'm gonna yield them.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Counselor Tyler.

Mr.

Mayor, Councillor Carbworth.

Thank you.

Um actually um Mr.

Piggott, you could stay maybe there.

Don't run away too fast.

Um so just um a couple questions right there on that same line.

Um, since we're um here on this the 528 question, that's that's really my primary question, but it may not necessarily um be for you in particular.

Um really it's a question around the entire property as its own.

So I mean, I I believe you only are talking about the the single portion, and so I don't know if the property owner um and like the whole project development team is here or online or available to answer questions.

My development team is not online, they're all on family vacations, so you get me.

Sorry.

Okay.

Um I don't know if the landowner is here.

Um we are under contract with land, we don't own it.

Okay.

Um if you um one of the things that was in my PowerPoint presentation was the exhibit C from the approved traffic study from both the DOT and from the city.

Um go to that.

All right.

There.

Yeah.

Can you see it?

We can see it.

Yeah.

Hey, so if you read there, um you can see where in the bottom right hand corner, it has the no write-in, write out access on a new Mexico 528.

That was from the DOT.

You can see the highlighted portion on the the neighboring uh lot to the east of us.

All accesses are gonna be off on Monterey for the future development on the adjoining lot.

We did, however, what's not reflected in this site plan because this is back in the early discussions, we did provide that lot and access to our site, so they'll be the same lower part coming out and exiting onto that single access.

Um we've done what we can.

Um those were the the items, and you can also see up there.

I think that our access there has a comment Monterey improvements.

Um basically we're responsible for the improvements on the Monterey.

So those are the negotiations we had with the DOT and what we were limited to.

Okay, thank you.

So but you can still stay there.

So um can you tell me more about the um conversations that were had with uh NMDOT?

I mean, I think as with you know, in in some cases, their first response may be no, uh, but that doesn't always mean that's where the conversations should uh necessarily end.

Can you tell me more about the discussions that were had?

I wish I could, I wasn't at the president at the meetings.

Okay.

Um those between my engineers, um, the state officials and the city.

Um, and I wish I could uh answer that question.

Yeah, all I know is that we our site plan evolved through the six months, um, and this was the the results of that process.

Yeah.

Because I think based on my understanding of um being able to have access to a write-in right out.

Um, even if there were only one or two of the adjacent lots that I believe are all under the same ownership included in the site plan, it would be within the uh zoning or the like the appropriate distances to be able to have that write-in write out for NMDOT.

It's because this property is just short of the required uh distance that's needed for a ride-in right out on 528.

And that write in right out on 528, I think would begin to alleviate some of the concerns that are presented uh by the neighbors and would honestly quite honestly, I think provide better access for the property.

Um so I would be really interested in understanding what those conversations were, who was engaged.

Um, a traffic study is one thing, and that's that's just a one-way request, but then pushing back and asking uh and for what is needed to get that write-in right out, that would give us I think more information uh as we help start to make that decision.

Um so do you have any thoughts on on escalating those requests and pursuing additional requests for that ride-in right out from 528?

Um for my understanding, we did make every effort uh on trying to get the best access we could for mostly our site.

I will be specific that it was for our site, um, and this was the result of that.

I think um Rector Rincon, could you read that comment that it says on that highlighted portion on that lot?

So exactly what was written on that exhibit Cep that one right there.

Um so that one in the bubble it says no additional development proposed at this time on the C1 lots to the north.

Any access to the lots in the future will come from Monterey.

Well, the I mean I don't have the answer to this question, but is the C1 lot considered the office lots too where that write-in right out access would be from the the 2007 plan?

So um Mr.

Mayor, Councilor Culprit.

So um, so no.

So the SU that we're talking about, and I can pull up uh that site plan again.

Uh this area that for that rezoning in 2007 had a portion of lots that were zoned um SU for C1, and then there was another section of lots that was zoned um 01.

So there is two different zoning districts uh that went in um and that were included in this uh entire site plan.

Yeah, thank you.

So I I think there's opportunity to have some more conversation uh with the the landowner.

It's not often on 528 that we have eight and a half, nine acres of contiguous uh land with one property owner to be able to have the opportunity to get the access from 528, and that's probably the best served access uh for this road and to try to avoid uh access on uh Monterey as much as possible, um, in particular because those um those homes are the front yard is facing Monterey and some of the other uh areas it you know, it's the backyard, other parts of Rio Rancho, the backyard is what's facing that commercial uh area, and so it's not people's driveways uh that are being impacted, right?

Um so I I think there would be an opportunity to pursue more discussion with uh uh N M DOT on 528 access.

Um, and I think for the property owner, though they're not here, um, I think that's incumbent on them, not on you, uh, to be able to understand what we need to do, what they need to do to be able to get that 528 access.

Um, and so I want to be be very clear.

Um, I am I'm not opposed to the the gas station.

I'm not opposed to any other aspect of the site other than the access off of 528, and I think that is something that is easily that is at least we can attempt to mitigate it if we work a bit harder to have additional conversations with NMDOT, and I think there are ways to do that.

Um, but again, it I I think I think we have some time.

Um I I think we we should pursue this and see what we can do with NMDOT.

Um, it would take a little bit of time to get there, um, but I think there's a space uh if we look at a postponement, and I don't know what my colleagues would think about, but I think it's something to consider.

I appreciate your comments, Counselor Colbreth.

Yeah, thank you.

That's all I have.

Thank you, Councillor Cobreth.

Mr.

Mayor, Councilor List.

Uh first I want to thank everybody for taking the time to come out and to share your thoughts and concerns.

We have received dozens of emails.

I have read through every single one.

There are many things that are consistent through all of them that are the concerns of the residents.

We are the people that when we're on a road trip, we look for the Mavericks.

Like your product is great.

That I heard at this time we're not pursuing alcohol.

It seems like alcohol may not really be beneficial at this particular location.

So while it may not be a forever, it doesn't really sound like it's anywhere on the radar right now to be pursuing alcohol at this location.

Did I hear that correctly?

You heard that correctly.

Okay.

Also, we talked about school traffic.

So the traffic studies, um, are they coming as a next phase?

Um, folks are very, very concerned about that added traffic during those couple of windows of time pre and post pickup.

Um, and and what does that look like?

So I quit uh quickly looked at the traffic study before I came up here.

Uh, because of that comment, uh the traffic counts were done on February 11th, uh, which was a Wednesday from 7 a.m.

to 10 a.m.

for the AM peak traffic, and then for the PM peak traffic was from 3 to P 3 p.m.

to 6 p.m.

on that day.

Then through that, you have your traffic engineer that does the calculations for EM peak daily traffic counts and that nature.

All right, so your traffic study did include the school year.

Correct.

February 11th, which was a Wednesday, 7 a.m.

to 10 p.m.

Okay.

Um obviously the folks that specifically live on Monterey, this is very specific to them.

Um, as Counselor Calbrath pointed out, this is a unique situation in that you're talking about people's driveways, front doors are are going to be facing the gas station.

So um, not so much about the aesthetics, but about the fact that every single vehicle will have to pass their front door.

That is very, very significant.

Um, have any conversations been had, like a community outreach and allowed the neighbors to come and meet with you and have conversations about all of their concerns and an opportunity to try and minimize mitigate what are the things that you can absolutely make shifts because you control and what are the things you can't because they're out of your control.

Have you had that kind of a public opportunity for them?

No, we haven't.

Um of the requirements or one of the during the process, we're not required to have a neighborhood meeting.

But again, if uh if the council sees fit to postpone, we would have those conversations.

So you'd be open to doing that.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Um another thing that hasn't been addressed, although uh counselor Tyler kind of spoke a little bit about it, but many of the folks, maybe all of the folks, are on wells, and so there is a different kind of concern when you're on a well, should there be a gas fill or an oil leak?

What does that look like for them?

Um, so this site's kind of unique, and I'd have to look at the geotech report.

However, with the way this site's constructed, um, we are downhill the residents, as you can see.

Our our fuel tanks were up against highway 528.

Again, we go over and above what is required for leak detection, things of that nature.

Um spills are managed on site.

That's why we have 24 hour uh people there 24 hours a day to help mitigate those kind of concerns.

Um there's things we can do with our drainage patterns so that they're not dumped in if there is somebody that uh if somebody has a drives off with a hose attached to the car.

Yes, I've done that once.

Um you you mitigate those risks.

Okay.

Okay.

All of that is very much appreciated.

I thank you for taking the time to answer those questions.

Um, I do have one very specific statement, and I hope my colleagues hear me.

Um, I am very concerned about the fact that in 2007, 2006, when this came before this body, those members here approved a site plan and they approved it specifically for certain things, one of which is that 528 access.

The fact that within there it talks about should something drastically be different, you have to come before us.

And it is our role and our job to say this is drastically different, and um, primarily because of that 528 access.

And so I think that um then we have to revisit would this have been approved in 2007 this way.

And um, I I would feel that it would not.

So um, I just wanted to encourage my colleagues to think about some options I heard about a postponement.

If we're willing to go back to DOT, we're willing to have some conversations with community members.

Um, that could be an option.

Uh but otherwise, as is uh with 528 being an option, and again, I know your hands are slightly tied because you're talking about a specific piece, there is a larger piece that could have a different outcome.

Um I I think that that consideration needs to be very seriously taken care of um for this to be considered to move forward.

Thank you, Counselor List.

Mr.

Mayor, Councilor Danantine.

Uh couple cool questions.

Do you guys uh does this site have uh EV chargers?

Uh we don't show them on the site plan.

However, the state of New Mexico has a requirement for EV chargers.

Uh, we're required to by the state electrical code that happened last year.

So we've been retrofitting the ones that got approved.

So don't count me on this.

I think we were required to put in two to four with options for the future.

Okay.

Uh I believe that we're accommodating those on the parking lot that was to the west of the okay, very good.

And then uh I'm assuming the site has diesel on all 12 pumps.

Um clarify that one uh that's my memory, but I would say the majority of them will have diesel.

Okay, all right.

Uh I do I do think and agree with some of my colleagues that um I mean the the standards you have in Mavericks, it annoys me so much when you go to print a receipt at the at the pump and there's no paper in there, you guys you you always stock it, you take out the trash, all that other stuff.

Uh what will another gas station do on another corner?

It'll raise the competition level, and I think that that's probably something that's needed.

Um so you guys run clean establishments.

I'm gonna I'm in a Maverick four times a week, and um all of them are they're just they're cleaning immaculate, which is great.

Um if this slides to postponement, and I really hope it doesn't, but if it does, uh two years ago, probably, and I'm sure Peter Wells remember the date exactly, we pushed back on a gas station on the UNSER corridor, and when we push back on that, uh the whole thing fell apart and it didn't come forward again.

And so uh if that happens, um I just I think that we need this.

I think you guys have a great product.

So I want to just say, you know, please don't uh give up on a re rancho if that happens.

Um and I would like to just encourage my colleagues up here.

If they were if you work on this and DOT tells you that we can do nothing with the 528 access, which is what I think will definitely happen based on historical, you know, evidence.

Um would you still vote, you know, would you still vote no in the future on this?

And so you do have to think about that because I think that's what's gonna happen.

We'll postpone, you'll try to work with DOT, and then we're gonna be right back here again.

Um but if that's the case, please come back with this product again.

I think it's gonna be good for the area.

I think that even the residents here tonight, you know, can't reasonably think that along 528 that it's not going to develop commercially, we've got to have 528 developed commercially.

Um so I think it is a good product, and uh that's all the questions that I had.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Councilor Danantine.

Counselor Dobson, any comments from District One?

Mr.

Mayor, no, thank you.

Um, I do think we got it.

We really should maybe consider postponing all right.

So we've got a we've got a motion on the table in a second.

I'm gonna go back to our procedural question that we asked a ways back.

Oh, I'm sorry, counselor.

I mean, I commented earlier, but I just wanted to I think um, you know, given the given the comments and really what's before us, um, while it is always the possibility that uh we may get a no, I think you never know until you ask, until you push a little bit harder than normal.

Um, and I think uh given counselor list's comments about uh the actions uh that's the 2007 actions really were contingent on a complete site plan.

Um and so I I think it's important for the whole development team, which includes uh the the uh site owner, the property seller, and the applicant to really revisit the uh 528 access.

Um and so I would propose that we postpone this uh probably until the first meeting in September.

Um that will give enough time for the discussions, uh, give enough time to get some answers.

Uh my colleagues may have some different ideas on the timing, uh, but I really urge the entire development team.

You're only a piece of it, which I completely understand to really uh look at what we have in 528.

Um and um and and I I encourage us to to think about that.

I also would would ask for you to just hang with us while we go through that process.

I do think it's possible, especially if they look at uh the the properties that may need to be included to get that access on to 528.

Uh so I'd like to make a motion that we postpone until the first meeting of September, which is September 10th.

Thank you.

Okay, before we entertain that motion, is there further council comment?

Mr.

Mayor.

Councilor Denatine.

Uh if I could divert to City Manager uh Geisel, how responsive is NMDOT.

So if we weren't in September, like if we were in August, do they come?

Are they pretty responsive or are they typically bureaucratic?

Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

Um I think uh given that we're in summertime, uh, and you know, recognizing that we're in summertime when we're about to go into a holiday period, then July's vacation, August is back to school.

Um people's you know, people's availability uh you know fluctuates, and I think uh perhaps the thought process from Councilor uh Colbert with September is you know you know under normal conditions if it was February March, maybe not as long, but recognizing that we do have some other variables there.

Was it for September 10th?

Is that what you said?

Okay, all right.

Thank you, City Manager, Mr.

Mayor.

Councilor Tyler.

I also like Councillor Lennon, I do not want you to run away from this project because I do think it's a needed project.

And um we'll I'll be interested to see what NMDOT says.

I I would be happy if they would change that access point.

But um I don't think that even if they change that access point, correct me if I'm wrong, we're still gonna have the other access point off of the residential road.

Mr.

Mayor, the only thing we're doing is we're reducing the amount of traffic that could potentially use that side street.

That's that's what really what we're doing, correct?

Yeah, Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body.

Um the site would need multiple access points for for different reasons, such as you know, public safety response, etc.

There, you know, conceptually there's customers from the neighborhood.

Um, but being that you know, I think I'm gonna reference what the um the applicant reference said 70 percent of the traffic is driving by.

Yeah, they're driving by on 528, um, most likely heading you know southbound.

There's a write in, you make a write into the property, um, you make and then you can make a write out and you continue on 528.

So there's a good you know you know conceptually, presumably uh you know, a redistribution of the trips.

Okay.

Um I think going back to the the the time frame.

Um if uh the the applicant and the overall project development team, you know, including different folks, property owner, etc.

are able to get some traction with the DOT, there may be a need for them to do uh for the applicant to to do revised civil engineering work or revise TIA type work.

Um, you know, so that may, you know, it's part of also I think part part of the timeline.

Okay.

And if we come back in in September and they're making headway, but it's not finalized.

Um the governing body's rules of procedure allow for two two postponements.

Okay.

I mean, I just I too like I remember the other gas station unonsor, and I think that was a huge miss on our part.

And uh I don't want to see the same thing happen here.

So thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you, Councilor Tyler.

Any further council discussion?

All right, so now we're back to the procedural question.

So the current motion is to postpone to September 10th.

However, we have not received a second.

So is or are we though don't don't we have a motion already for approval of the site plan and a second?

We do, but because there is overall consent by the governing body, this would this super seats perfect.

Okay, that's what I need to help with.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Second.

Okay, so we have a motion and a second for postponement.

Any discussion by council on the postponement hearing none, Miss Davis.

Thank you.

Counselor List.

No.

Councilor Tyler.

Yes.

Councilor Dabson.

Yes.

Counselor Lenintine?

No.

Councillor Weimer?

Yes.

And Deputy Mayor Colbreth.

Yes.

And I apologize, Mayor Weimer.

I called you Councillor Weimar.

It's okay.

It's all news to it.

It's all good.

It's all right.

You messed up and called him Mayor Hall earlier.

D43 has been postponed to September 10th.

All right.

Well, I too hope to see you back here in uh in a few months because I agree.

I think it's a good project, and we just need to work through some of these details.

All right.

Moving on then to second reading of ordinances.

We have none.

First reading of ordinance, also none.

That takes us to city manager.

Mr.

City Manager.

Mr.

Mayor, members of the governing body, good evening.

Just a quick update.

Um, as we mentioned, are coming up on the holidays, uh, 4th of July, a week from this Saturday.

Uh 4th of July, a week from this Saturday.

The city's festivities will be here in the city center from 5 30 to 9 30.

The last day to sign up to participate in the parade is tomorrow.

Information on the city's website, R RnM.gov, or just Google Rio Rancho 4th of July 2026.

That's how I got there.

Again, last day to sign up for the parade is uh tomorrow.

I would also like to take a uh a second to acknowledge the folks uh from the Special Olympics for their thank you that they shared uh a recognition they had for Connie and the entire Parks and Rec staff.

I think the round of applause that she received was uh well deserved.

Um Connie is a trooper, Connie is a warrior for the city and is out front and center and takes a lot more uh takes a lot more uh negativity than the the positivity that she deserves.

So I thought that those comments were um I appreciated them taking the moment to recognize Connie because I appreciate Connie and value her significantly.

I would also like to take a second.

Um there was comments made, and we are in the time of year uh where fireworks start to get launched.

Uh Rio Rancho's um firework prohibition rules uh on our ordinary what we have uh is the strongest that the state allows us to have on the books, so we can't go any air quotes any further.

Um there is a um uh a large supply or easy access to um fireworks that uh go far above higher in the air and louder, etc.

than uh what should be permissible.

Um don't need to elaborate on how and why, but we know there's ample uh ample supply just minutes outside of city limits.

Um so it is a uh a little bit of a a challenge when the supply is so daunting.

Um however, I do want to uh acknowledge that you know the the work of the Rio Rancho Fire and Rescue as well as um our rear rancho police department and their efforts uh to address the illegal firework activity.

Um I remember former uh Chief De Filippo telling the story of confiscating fireworks from a nine-year-old.

Um he says it's one of the uh toughest days he had to go about it.

Maybe 12-year-old, I forget exactly.

Um, but we have uh both police and fire have patrols um out during it during and around 4th of July.

It is a uh a little bit of a oh, you know, the Dutch boy putting the holes uh in the in, you know, in the side of the you know the the uh the dike um given that there's a lot of calls for service.

Um but we do we do confiscate fireworks, do issue warnings, um both police and uh and fire, um respect the police officers' discretion to whether it's a citation or a warning.

Um I also want to highlight that it's not the only thing that's going on on 4th of July.

We have a lot of uh we have a special event taking place here at City Hall.

Uh police is obviously gonna look at um they have to for the purposes of public safety, higher priority calls.

Um because those do take literally higher priority because they represent a greater risk to the public safety.

But uh for instance last year um in 2020 2025, police issued nine verbal warnings, uh fire had 75 uh uh verbal verbal warnings uh and confiscations 2024.

Uh fire uh had 98 verbal warnings, uh confiscated fireworks from 77 um from 77 uh uh groups, eight verbal warnings from from PD.

So you see that work that's happening out there.

It is a difficult task, um, but we aren't turning a blind eye to it.

But I also think it's uh important to look at it in the context of the surrounding area, the supply of the illegal fireworks, and everything else that we have going on on 4th of July.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr.

City Manager.

So contrary to what we heard earlier, the ordinance is not being ignored.

That's what I heard.

With that, we are conclude the meeting.