Campbell Ranch, a proposed development in the East Mountains, has been at the center of deliberation for a minor subdivision application, which requests to divide a parcel of land into small lots without significant alterations to infrastructure.
Edgewood’s Planning & Zoning meeting, set for Nov. 21 at 6 p.m. at Town Hall, will include a quasi-judicial hearing about the application.
Minor subdivision applications typically need far less review than substantial subdivisions. It makes it easier for restricted property splits without considerable development.
The meeting will review an application for subdivision through the Planning and Zoning Commission. The hearing will examine Campbell Farming Corporation’s request to “simply divide a larger parcel of land into several smaller parcels.”
“Unfortunately, an abundance of misinformation was recently exchanged among East Mountain community members who, understandably, may not have knowledge of the process or realize such a hearing goes before the Planning and Zoning Commission,” said Linda Burke, Edgewood’s community liaison.
Nevertheless, resisters have taken a clear stance on the project. The East Mountain Protection Action Coalition (EMPAC) has been vocal about opposing the proposed minor subdivision for the Campbell Farming Corporation’s Campbell Ranch since its inception in 2021. EMPAC opposes it for several reasons, the main concern being water.
“That is what has everybody concerned, because those folks would draw on our water supply, and we all would be negatively impacted. So that’s probably the primary reason. It’s all about water,” said Dennis Kellogg, EMPAC president.
The East Mountain community is also concerned about “maintaining the rural character” of their society.
“That’s what people love here, is the rural character, and the proposed Master Plan alters that. And many people have stated, ‘We don’t want to be Rio Rancho,’” Kellogg said.
EMPAC represents 500 residents and organizations. The coalition opposes the plan and highlights concerns in their recently delivered, notarized letter. The letter lists water supply, public services, education, infrastructure, cultural preservation, environmental impact and quality of life as its main concerns.
In this case, CFC will seek approval to divide the five parcels. This will be the only matter addressed in the application. The Planning and Zoning Commission will review whether CFC’s request complies with the Town of Edgewood’s regulations.
“If there is an appeal, it would then go before the Town Commission, which is why they cannot be subject to prior influence, such as public comment, which could violate ex-parte communication rules,” Burke said.
Burke also cleared up some confusion about the hearing.
“A quasi-judicial proceeding involves a determination of the rights, duties or obligations of specific individuals, and applies legal standards, policy and the facts, all at a hearing conducted for the purpose of resolving the application presented,” Burke said. “That being the case, a decision of the Planning & Zoning Commission must be in writing and provide findings and conclusions based on the evidence presented at the hearing before it. While both written and oral public comments will be allowed, public comment should not be confused with the evidence needed to support findings, conclusions and a decision.”
Burke said written public comments do not need to be notarized. However, legally affected parties who wish to make a written statement to submit as evidence do need their statement notarized to affirm authenticity. Legally affected parties who want to provide evidence testimony will be sworn-in at the quasi-judicial hearing.