[Music]
good evening and welcome to the april 26
2022 meeting of the planning and zoning
commission
i'd like to call this meeting to order
before we start anybody on a commission
have any conflict of interest
if so
all right i need a motion to approve the
minutes
uh commissioner
i'll approve the minutes
i'll second
becky please
boar member kaiser
yes board member smith yes former
bennett yes for member vega
um i wasn't here upstate
thank you board member guerrero yes
chair gordon yes
before we get to public participation i
would like to reorder the agenda for
this evening
item
[Music]
9.1 which is the progress report on the
land development code
i'd like to move that to now before
public participation
can i get a
a a motion on that please
i make a motion to move 9.1
to
now
a
second board member kaiser
yes former member smith yes board member
bennett yes foreign member vega yes
foreign yes chair gordon
yes thank you
all right catherine
good evening members of the commission
let me go ahead and get this opened up
for you
um so this is a
just an update to let everyone know
where we are in terms of realized las
cruces our code update
we've had several of these discussions
before
ultimately this is a three-phase project
we're now about midway point uh through
the second phase which is the the actual
drafting of the code sections
we do have our consultant here to go
through some of the highlights of those
that is keren perez who is from freeze
and nichols we also have erica craycraft
and hopefully don warwick available via
phone
they were going to be they weren't
unable to attend in person
but we do have karen here and so with
that i'll go ahead and turn it over to
karen and she can talk about the
highlights about
where we are and some of the points and
exciting things that we're drafting in
the code
all right good evening good evening
thank you all for
moving this up on the agenda you look
like you have a full agenda so i'm going
to do the turbo version of this leave
your extra room for questions and we'll
go from there so mr chairman members of
the commission
this is i am karen perez she introduced
me i work for frieza nichols we've got
my colleagues on the phone where this is
the midpoint review so we're about
halfway through phase two
see if i can get this through there's
pictures of all of us just in case
you're curious and we'll keep on going
so
the agenda is just to go through the
code update process overview
go through the design standards draft
highlights that seems to be the most
interesting part talk about our next
steps and go into discussion and
questions and answers
so
if you all remember from the last some
of you are here i think for the last
update um we had a major review of the
zoning zoning maps subdivisions design
standards drainage and flood control and
signs that's the focus of the effort
however the outdoor lighting historic
preservation cross-connection control
and excavations and curb cuts are kind
of the ancillary parts of those so we
also hit those in the update
um
the update process was phased one which
was the diagnostic evaluation we go
through the code
um
it's it's to understand the code itself
hear from the people who most frequently
use the code although we did open it up
for public input and we have that on our
website as well
but just to make sure that we're
we're addressing the things that either
need to be improved or maintained
the phase ended with the development of
the code diagnostic which talks about
the code updates
and we presented this i think it was
almost well nine months ago so in august
of last year that code diagnostic
the i'm like sorry i'm gonna have to go
back if i can remember how to do that
phase two
was
is where we are right now
um oh
sorry i'm skipping around a lot but i'm
going to skip that whole section
in phase two we're going through the
actual draft sections of the report
so we're in the middle of that right now
what we do is we work with the staff on
reviewing the individual ques
parts of the code we get their input we
put in all of those comments then we're
going to put it out for
comments from everybody so you've got a
good clean copy to work with you know
that you have your staff and your city
recommendations that are represented
so these this is all developed on the
elevate las cruces that gave us our
guidelines
and what we were putting into the code
we had over
recommendations in that code that relate
to the code update so we're keeping
going back to the elevate and looking at
those re those recommendations and
trying to get those implemented
uh the code user interviews and and
again we got a little confused with code
users and stakeholders the code users we
called them that because they're the
people who use it all the time they fill
out the forms they come in they address
all of you they get their cases approved
and that involves
utilities and home builders and
engineers and architects and all other
people are involved with development in
the area but we also reached out to
other community groups the people who
were active on the elevate las cruces
and got input clarifications on some of
the things in the elevate that that we
were had questions on for the
implementation we had open houses
unfortunately online because it was on
covid but we did get a lot of comments
and those comments are still posted and
the realize las cruces dot com is still
up and available for comments
on the website
so going from there code map development
is where we are in phase two
phase three will be the refinement and
the adoption that we're looking at march
of next year to be done so end of the
summer for
the beginning of the draft comments in
that comment phase we'll implement those
those comments address them and then
we'll adopt it in the spring so we're
well on our way got a lot to work with
so today we wanted to share
the
design standards because that's what
we're right in the middle of so we have
these sections slot designed as listed
out right here
so i won't read through
there's nine subsections that relate to
the physical improvement of the land
so
starting with roads and cross sections
of
rights of ways we updated the cross
sections to implement the complete
streets and eleventh elevate and the
active transportation plan so all of
those have been put into a cross-section
this is a
sample of it but you can see it's got
the streets the medians some treescape
your multi-use paths bike lanes
and
whether or not we do the elevated
sections of the sidewalk is going to
depend on the application in places
where where we'll see that implemented
compo here is is probably a good example
but they'll be shared use and and paths
and bike lanes per the event the active
transportation plan and nacto uh
recommendations
and that is primarily for new
construction or or revisions to existing
roads and rights of ways so
one of the other things a big
section that we had a lot of comments on
was on traffic impact analysis
so one of the things we wanted to do was
go through and look at tia triggers
when are you going to ask for a traffic
impact analysis what is the time out
timing what is the criteria we're trying
to make that very concrete i think the
impression of the feedback we got is it
was somewhat subjective we want to make
sure that we we are able to
pinpoint some of those uh triggers and
timing and it's not such a a confusing
thing or the perception it's not there
that it's in any way subjective
we've also updated the or proposed to
update the maximum block lengths for
walkability so blocks are shorter in the
urban area longer in the rural area
we've updated the clear site triangle
requirements
that we had a lot of comments yesterday
from council on clearsight triangles
i if you have a question on it i'll
answer that at the end
they don't dovetail with the ashtow
requirements which is the standard the
national standard so we're um updating
that and just making sure that it aligns
with the national standards they're
they're not being really changed in any
substantive way
subdivision access points and
connectivity again this goes back to
elevate
we added the requirement for the number
of the accents points for larger
subdivisions beyond the minimum two
access points which are required under
the fire code
and added a connectivity index
requirement for new sub
subdivisions
to
encourage that indoor connectedness and
walkability
uh drainage flood cold
control and erosion also really popular
topics um
we're looking at and this this first one
applies primarily to annexed areas not
the in the city there was never um that
impact on the downstream properties it
wasn't the water on water off that was
um
part of the the county development in
some of the rural areas
so we're looking at
some of the annexed areas some of the
areas where where we have
development that am may impact that
downstream so we're tightening up those
requirements
maintenance of private drainage systems
setting up a system for that making sure
that they are
inspected on a routine basis that the
city has a way to track it call out
codes if there are issues so we don't
get those large ponding areas filling in
with sediment trash
that the vegetation is maintained that
the structures are there they're not
clogged or collapsed
so
utilities and flood zones my personal
favorite is putting sewer systems in
arroyos where you got the manholes
popping up after a while
those will be tightened up as well that
is a practice we should discourage and
slope and pond vegetation this aligns
with the elevate
as well making sure that instead of
using hardscape that we're using
vegetation and other methods to retain
slopes and minimize erosion so using
those natural means and of course with
desert appropriate landscaping that
doesn't waste water
also looking at hillside development
there weren't a lot of standards in
place so we've implemented or proposed
in draft
some mechanisms or some requirements for
hillside development that are specific
for this area
encroachment on flood floodways
making sure that the fema the letter map
revision has been filed before any kind
of proposed encroachment is reviewed
propose some buffers these are related
back to watershed size
and i know this will be a popular
topic for discussion i there's a lot of
varying opinions on whether or not the
buffers the building close to arroyos is
appropriate
and so there's a mechanism for proposing
the bigger the watershed the bigger the
area the bigger the buffer knowing that
more water will be coming down in
eroding it
again i know there will be a lot of
discussion on that where we're ready to
to talk about it and see if we can come
up with a compromise to discourage
people from building right up to the end
of the edge of the arroyos
um
so that'll be in the final draft for
comment
the last part is dust control
both enforcement and planning
this is there are permits for this and
and contractors are pretty good we were
looking more on the elevate side of what
is a way to discourage one of stripping
vegetation because it keeps the dust
down so trying to develop in phases and
also trying to use alternative
mechanisms i said gorilla snot in public
yesterday and i think i shocked some
people but it's a it's a non-water based
dust suppression that's a glycerin
natural
substance but it keeps dust control down
and it
minimizes the use of water for dust
control
even even non-potable water is just not
a great practice for this area so there
are some proposals there and we'll be
looking forward to comments on that as
well
parks and trails
looking at the parkland dedication for
development with new lots
or dwelling units
that
that system has been evaluated and we've
got some new proposals for that
dedication trail dedication for new
development where proposed show trails
are shown on the active transportation
plan
and the criteria and the procedures for
those dedications credits things that
are
associated with that
practice
landscaping and screening
there are requirements
for perimeter landscaping and intern
interior parking islands for large
parking lots right now
half of the the landscaping can be in
front some of it is on public
right-of-way which is not
necessarily a common practice
so the new standard proposes keeping
that landscaping on the property itself
doing the whole perimeter and then
getting those islands in to break up the
parking spaces and you'll see that in
some of the new development here they've
they've done that practice and it
actually is really really attractive and
does break up the big
i think they call it the sea of parking
so
um street trees would be required in the
parkway or on the adjacent property if
there is no parking
if there is no parkway associated with
that
so working on the street tree standards
that's on collector and arterial streets
i want to make sure i get this right
and it supports the city's cool
corridors initiatives
and before i forget something i'll go
back to the roads
i have not forgot we have not forgotten
about the um
the new street standard that just came
into my head and left that was just
about the complete streets
those are also to be integrated and and
we are aware that that was recently
passed
and i forgot to say that
i said street and it came back tree
preservation this is uh one of the
examples that came up yesterday with
council is the
the las cruces country club property so
when we're talking about
tree preservation we're looking at areas
like that where we're discouraging
either requiring replacement or a fee to
remove the trees that are larger than
two inches so if they're
an established tree
the director can give an exception for a
heavily tree lot
but
we're trying to encourage a removal
permit for large trees so that we have a
chance to save the trees on these
properties also evaluating damage
productions for for
existing trees construction lighting
cameras
those are some of those
um
the other thing that's in there is a fee
in lieu that the city could use for
planting trees elsewhere so if you have
to clear an area then they would pay a
fee and new trees would be established
so trying to keep that treat
count
balanced across the
city
signs signs are always fun to talk about
there's a court case read versus gilbert
there's some case law in 2015 that
prohibits cities from regulating sites
based on their content and an example
that was given was signs like real
estate signs or on and off premise signs
that aren't recommended to use that in
in codes anymore because you need to
read the sign to see how to regulate
them so that's just
not a really great way of of doing sign
control
large billboards
billboards billboards
billboards are hard to get rid of much
as not everybody likes them but they're
they're going to need to meet a certain
dimensional requirement i think the
maximum is the 50
um to 200 square feet
that is in there also expecting some
very
robust discussion on signage
we're also encouraging a recommended a
common signage plan for multi-tenant
lots if you have a bunch of them you
have the
the one main sign and it has all the
businesses listing and some consistency
across the property it's just
looks nicer and it minimizes the number
of signs which are also a visual
hazard if you're ducking around signs or
trying to see around signs to get out on
the street
there's a
so
if those signs are there the
recommendations is that there's a 15
percent
bonus in the maximum sign because
there's multiple signs within a sign if
that makes sense
so
definitely coming up with some
recommendations there
so the co-duner users and stakeholders
so right now we're primarily working
with city staff again to make sure that
we align with
all of the plans with the planning
department with the recommendations of
the of the city council pnc
once that's complete the drafts will be
shared on the website and we're looking
at august september before those drafts
will come up they'll be cleaned up we've
got the recommendations anything that
doesn't you know legal review and those
other things
there's also a technical advisory group
a working committee that the mayor has
proposed and i'll let staff give you
details on that if anyone has questions
it's an additional group that will be
doing review and it consists of a pretty
wide variety of people in addition to
the stakeholder
outreach we've already done
and then community-wide input's going to
be requested once there's a complete
draft in the fall of 2022 there'll be
lots of opportunities online
opportunities and meetings
and i don't think i breathed and i
probably whizzed through some important
things but i know you got a lot to do
tonight is there any questions or
clarifications or something that that
came up that you went
anyone made thank you very much does
there any members of the commission have
any questions comments
mr kaiser
uh just a couple of comments first i
appreciate the update um this was a very
informative especially some of the
examples of the work that you're doing
going back to the road cross sections
i know that's been there's been a lot of
discussion around that and the complete
streets and things like that but
are you looking at all at doing
something similar for intersections
i'm going to defer to my colleagues on
that i wasn't i wasn't the road person
don
erica
yes uh good evening commissioners my
name is erica craycraft with recent
nichols and um commissioner can i ask
you to clarify your question just a bit
about the intersections
yeah certainly so you're you're putting
forward example road cross sections that
would be appropriate under the new the
new codes my question is are you doing
something similar for intersections and
i'll just be blunt because the
intersections in the city are incredibly
dangerous
and we've we've completely failed in
that regard i mean you just look at the
new
uh go bond trails i mean none of the
intersection crossings where the trail
across a road
were even addressed and so i would like
to see
that aspect of the complete streets
be implemented here
okay okay thank you for the
clarification yes we will be addressing
that through
a number of different sections
one would be the clear side triangle
that was mentioned in the presentation
just making sure that there's better
visibility at intersections for
better safety
also the traffic impact analysis section
we'll be looking at
turn lanes for example and then also you
mentioned the trail crossings i don't
think we have anything specific for that
right now but we can certainly be sure
to take a look at that
thank you for that clarification and
i'll just make a recommendation that you
look beyond just the site
uh the sight lines and traffic impact
if you look at nacto the urban street
guidelines i mean
this is where
the the conflict happens
most of the time is at intersections
and it's more than just cars being able
to see other cars it's pedestrian
cyclist safety as well so just something
that i would hope you guys take into
consideration
when you're addressing the streets
the other question that i have
somewhat related
is there going to be any
unpacking of parking requirements
as part of the development standards or
the design standards
yes we'll be reviewing
all of all of the parking requirements
okay
that's good to know um
and
i think my last
comment
question uh for now
is on the
the landscaping
you mentioned the idea of having
street tree requirements for development
however you said that that was going to
be restricted to collector
or arterial
i'm just wondering what the explanation
is there for stopping at
those two classifications and not going
all the way down to the the local
designation which is the vast majority
of our road network
sure um the reason that we are looking
primarily at collector and arterial
roadways is because those are
largely the the commercial
or
the subdivision exterior
corridors
rather than a typical single-family
mod
but if if that's something that you
think would be more appropriate to also
extend to the local street network we
can look at that as well
i would strongly encourage it i mean the
urban heat island doesn't stop it at the
entrance to a subdivision
and you know if you have a subdivision
of 600 homes
and you're not planting street trees i
mean
it's great that you put a street tree on
the collector in artillery road but i
mean where people live and go home at
the end of the day and enjoy their
neighborhood i think this would be a
tremendous benefit
so i would strongly encourage you to
take a look at that
thank you
is there anyone else on the commission
mr chair if i may
okay
larry nicholas community development
director for the record
oftentimes people ask us why have we
undertaken this
update and review of the zoning code or
the land use code
two years ago we
took on a review of our comprehensive
plan
which had not been reviewed for about
eight or ten years
the zoning code that we're speaking
about tonight has not been updated
in about 17 years
we all know that many things have
changed in terms of planning and how our
city is growing and the components we
want to see
in our streets our landscape our parking
and our zoning so this is the endeavor
it's going to take about 18 to 20 months
uh where as
was presented tonight we're about
halfway through that
but we wanted to present an update to
the
commission and to the viewing audience
of
where we are at this point thank you
thank you thank you
my only comment is
i i'm just very happy to hear that the
commissioner i think the mayor i'm sorry
has
uh decided to form a committee to help
and support the formation of these plans
i'm hoping that he's someone from the
city council will appoint someone from
the planning and zoning commission
we have not had the opportunity at this
point to actually give our input
and i know from looking at the schedule
we will not have that opportunity until
sometime in the fall
and it would be nice if we could address
some of the concerns that we have that
we deal with at every case
that we could force all you know having
to wait till in
to give our suggestions and maybe have
it put into this process but i think
we're on schedule and i'm glad to hear
that
and i'm looking forward to have this
revision done
it's been a long time and i'm sure it'll
be very helpful to the commission and
people who are planning to
to do things here in the city and thank
you
thank you very much mr chairman and i
just like to add
when we started out this process we
interviewed
groups of people we we did a
two weeks i think straight of phone
interviews and in-person interviews as
well as we were able at that time at
that point we did invite members of the
that current planning and zoning
commission which i realized is a
is a group of people old
and we weren't able to unfortunately
schedule it and get the input we wanted
so we'll be looking forward to having a
similar
process prior to the open public input
with planning and zoning thank you
all right thank you is there anything
else
great we appreciate your coming thank
you all right thank you and thanks again
for moving me up
okay
let's move on
um
the next item on the agenda is public
participation
is there anyone here
needs to talk about anything that is not
on the agenda
will you please raise your hand
all right seeing none and we can move on
there are no postponements
we move to the consent agenda
is there anyone here who wishes to speak
or have an item to talk about under
consent
please raise your hand
seeing none anybody from the commission
i'm sorry i didn't see you come forward
please
all right i'd like to excuse me would
you please state your name for the
record and let me swear you in all right
kevin moore all right
do you swear affirmative testimony about
to give is the truth and nothing but the
truth and the penalty of law yes okay go
ahead thank you i'd like to see the uh
the proposal for the red hawk central
presentation because just let me
interrupt could you please try to speak
into the microphone
i'm sorry how about now can you hear me
now
all right i'd like to see the
presentation on the red hawk central
presentation
all right we can do that
john you're going to do that
point of order uh mr chair we do need to
vote to remove that from the consent
agenda um it will then be placed as the
first item on new business
and then you all can vote to approve the
remainder of the consent agenda before
that's heard
all right thank you for reminding me all
right then i do need a motion to
move item
6.1
to new business
just one quick question
do we have to pull and vote on each
specific consent agenda item or can we
pull multiple
at the same time
you can pull multiple at the same time
thank you so i i would also like to
uh
pull item
6.2
um i have a couple of questions for
staff i hope it will be relatively quick
but would like to pull that one as well
all right fine then i guess
i will need two motions one on 6.1 and
one on 6.2 first on 6.1 to move it to
new business
i'll make a motion to remove item 6.1
from the consent agenda
and i second that commission
board member kaiser
yes board member smith yes board member
bennett
oh sorry
yes
thank you boar member vega yes
guerrero yes
chair gordon yes thank you
all right then i'll leave the motion to
move item 6.2 to new business
uh on motion uh to remove item 6.2 from
the consent agenda
oh second
board member kaiser yes board member
smith
yes
board member bennett yes foreign vega
yes guerrero yes chair gordon
yes thank you
is there anyone who has interest in item
6.3 the telstra boulevard site
sweet
that wishes to have this poll for me
it's consent agenda
all right seeing none we'll just deal
with these two items then
all right then i guess
john could you do a presentation on 6.1
point of order um you do need to approve
the remaining item on the consent agenda
and the two items that were pulled then
now begin at new business and then
there's old business prior to that
yeah all right then i guess i need
another motion to approve item 6.3 i
make a motion to approve the consent
agenda
i'll second it
board member kaiser
yes board member smith
yes former member bennett yes foreign
member vega yes foreign guerrero yes
chairman gordon
yes thank you all right then in that
case we moved to old business
which is item 7.1 and 7.2 the camino
hills subdivision master plan
members of the commission uh catherine
harrison rogers for the record i do want
to point out this was not listed on
postponements um
but we were unable to receive certain
items that would have fulfilled
conditions of approval for these two
items um as per the requirement of the
development review committee
as such staff is requesting that these
two particular items be postponed to a
date certain which does require a vote
of this commission and that would be for
the the regular meeting in may
do we know what the date of the next pc
meeting is in may that's correct and i
believe that that is the 28th if if i'm
correct let me check this calendar
the 24th excuse me 24th yes
okay
all right then i do need a motion then
to
remove from all business items 7.1 and
7.2
to a date certain of may the 14th
to be placed on the agenda
may the 24th sir
not the 14th to 24th
did i say the 24th
i'm staying corrected i start the 24th
i make a motion to move
item 7.1 7.2 to the may 24th agenda
i'll i'll second it
boar member kaiser yes board member
smith yes former bennett
yes former member vega yes
guerrero yes chair gordon yes thank you
get a new pair of glasses
all right then i guess we have to go
back now to
item 6.1 the red hawk central final site
plan
good evening commission
uh tonight my name is john castillo i'm
a planner with the city of las cruces
tonight i'll be presenting the redhawk
central final site plan
current conditions of the property it's
currently a vacant lot that's
approximately seven acres it's currently
zoned u5a which is a mixed-use center
it's located on the northeast corner of
central avenue and red hawk road
and it's associated with the metro verde
south pud
as you can see on the zoning map this is
the
pud zoning classification for it
here's an aerial map showing the
relation to it
so today the developer is going to
propose 49 single family residential
lots two lots will be proposed for
commercial
it's going to have connectivity
through
two interior roadways one off of red
hawk central or red hot golf road and
the other off of central avenue
in between that there is also an
alleyway that will connect to central
and one of the interior roadways it does
meet all the requirements of the
subdivision code
design standards and the 2001 zoning
code as well as
the pud guidelines set forth in the
metro verde south
from these pictures this is the u5a
mixed use
zoning
it does allow for various
developments such as commercial uses
as well as townhouses
apartment complexes
here's
kind of the lot layout of exactly what's
going to be looking at central road does
have is considered a 68-foot
right-of-way
at this time there was no public or
at this time reviews were sent to all
relevant agencies discussions did place
take place at the drc on april 20
april 6 2022
and it was given a recommendation of
approval
notices were sent out to the surrounding
properties we did have a phone call
regarding discussions of what a pud was
and kind of general zoning designations
and what would be developed on the
property
staff is recommending right now approval
based on the following findings which
redhawk central final site plan conforms
to the metro verde south pud concept
plan the proposed final site plan is all
part of the development that balances
benefits the community with the vet the
developers interests
and it has its
recommended approval from the drc on
april 6th
today's options are to vote yes to
approve to vote no to deny
vote yes with condition or vote to
table all right thank you john is there
anybody from the commission who has any
questions or comments
uh does the um
does it does
is the petitioner here john
uh yes we do have the
mr moscato who's the developer who's
representing does he have any comments
or questions or statements
baby john would you please state your
name and let me swear you in please john
moscato
do you swear affirmative testimony about
to give is the truth to nothing but the
truth and the penalty of law yes go
ahead john thank you
i don't have anything to add but i'd be
happy to answer any questions that the
commission has
i don't think there are any in which
case you're available if we have someone
from the audience i believe has some
questions
thank you okay is that gentleman still
here
you want to come back please
okay so we already uh swore you in just
repeat your name for the record kevin
moore all right mr moore go ahead thank
you yeah i'm interested on you know
is that also gonna you talked about it's
gonna be multiple family units so are we
talking multiple stories
uh
whereabouts and the locations are those
gonna be and also
where is the traffic going to come from
that's to support that area is it going
to come
directly off of red hawk or is it going
to be at the central and
at a new intersection there
john and john
all right um so maybe mr moscato might
be able to clarify a little bit more
um
but as we can see from the
provided a plat we will have access
through
central avenue
down
right in here
as well as off of red hawk road
the housing that's going to be along
central and within the interior roadway
will have its primary access through the
alleyway
as
frontages can't occur
off of central avenue
so are they going to be is there going
to be single home
built on syndro right there where you
see central coming into red hawk is that
going to be multi-families those look
like bigger units that you have there
good evening again
all the housing here will be
single family so none of this is
technically multi-family some of it is
it's
attached single-family but it falls
under the category of
single family
the access as john castillo just
mentioned
would be from red hook golf road
or sonoma ranch boulevard
which is
connecting
from central avenue
so multiple access points
single family housing
it's a little more dense than has been
developed in metro rarity so far
this is an attempt to have more
attainable housing
slightly smaller footprints
addressing the need which i think the
commission has heard in previous
meetings
it's called the missing middle housing
so this is really our first attempt in
metro verde
with that type of housing
what about the commercial lots there
which where are they located on this map
the commercial lots are accessed from
redhawk gulf road
are they which end of that
map are they on
the commercial lots are the two large
lots on the left-hand side
so oh down here on this end right along
red hawk off-road
okay
all right thank you
no further questions okay thank you very
much is there anyone else
well in that case john
yeah i'm just getting rid of something
we need a motion in a second on this
item i make a motion to approve 6.1
a second
board member kaiser yes
i'm going to need your reasoning behind
that please
yes of course uh yes based on stats
recommendation and consistency with the
planning and development thank you board
member smith
yes based on staff recommendation
board bennett uh vote to approve based
on staff recommendation this complies
with the mpo thoroughfare plan and
elevate las cruces
board member vega i vote yes based on
staff recommendations and it meets uh
elevate las cruces
guerrero uh i will yes based on staff
recommendation and also elevate las
cruces plan chair gordon
i vote yes based on staff recommendation
and discussion and elevate las cruces
thank you
i guess six nothing
all right
then we can move then we can move to
item
6.2
good evening members of the commission
catherine harrison rogers for the record
this particular item is a special use
permit
for 4 21 avenida messiah suite c in
particular
there have been some questions about the
differences between special use permits
and variances and i would like to start
with that
cannabis uses uh in the city
have some recommendations um surrounding
them regarding certain buffering
distances
uh between daycares and schools between
single-family residential zones and
between each other
as part of that process
staff looked at various methods by which
to have some administrative relief
from those requirements if
if if it met certain standards
if applicants were interested in doing
so
during that time when those codes were
adopted the city council elected to
allow for a special use permit process
to deviate from the distancing between
single-family zones and from other
retailers a special use permit process
is
it's basically a use
that could be allowed at a location by
the zoning in so long as there are
either no impacts or any impacts that
may be created from said use are
mitigated um ultimately looking at
compatibility uh
in relation
and in relation to other uses and and
that particular use now variances on the
other hand are only allotted or allowed
for the distancing between schools
and the reason behind that is is because
um the city council elected to be much
more stringent in the regard between
the distancing between schools and
cannabis related uses very similar to
the way we treat alcohol
at the state level now variances have
much stricter criteria um they have
certain hardships that one must adhere
to adhere to in order uh to prove uh to
be allowed at that location so they are
slightly different
some of the reasons that we had two
special use permits that were placed on
the consent agenda this being one of
them and i'm going to go into details
about the case momentarily the reason
they were placed on consent uh simply
because they were not creating any
additional impacts based on the use
at those locations
they were allowed to have cannabis
at those locations they simply didn't
meet that that distancing rule and the
retail use
as as
as a category was not creating any
additional impacts that were otherwise
existed at those retail locations so
that being said i'm going to go ahead
and talk about the details of this one
in particular
this one at avenida macia is a special
use permit the current property is zoned
c3c
that c at the end of that it's it's
commercial high intensity conditional
and the condition that was placed upon
the zoning uh when that was was done
several years ago basically stated that
if the property were to be
redeveloped and were to trigger any of
the items that required that something
come into compliance based on any
non-conformities that it would that's a
pretty typical standard um it's
interesting that they added it as as a
zoning condition because it's actually a
condition of any property that's
non-conforming throughout the city it's
not a special or unique um situation
in in terms of this particular property
it was constructed in the 1970s and so
it's non-conforming in terms of the fact
that there is one building that's split
by a lot line
there
the front setbacks along avenue the
messiah don't quite conform to today's
standards
and the landscaping isn't as robust as
today's standards require
based on the proposal for a retail
establishment at this location this
location it's not triggering any of the
requirements
that would require it to
go through any sort of formal standard i
mean any formal conversion or
redevelopment to try to make those
issues conforming
so that being said this particular
property is a little under two acres
again developed as a small retail center
it has several suites and three
buildings on the property it is located
a very very active uh commercial
corridor intersection
that is avenida macia
and south valley drive
the surrounding neighborhood is a mixed
use neighborhood there's r1a to the
north
and to the east there's some r3 which is
multi-family
office and some commercial uses
you can see by this map the areas in
question that would require the special
use permit because it is within 300 feet
are these r1a zones and you can see the
property is right here as i'm circling
it with my cursor and then you can see
the remainder
of the area is multi-family
commercial and office
and
what's being proposed again is a is a
cannabis establishment specifically a
cottage industry they're proposing to
both grow package and sell
cannabis at this location
to the north it's about 108 feet from
the perimeter of the business footprint
to that r1a zone which is which is
actually at the center line of the
roadway and then to the east it's
approximately 147 feet
again the 300 foot deviation
or that deviation to the 300 feet rather
is what's triggering the need for a
special use permit
all other buffer distances are met and
those other buffer distances again are
between other cannabis retailers and
then school and day care properties
they are obligated to follow all of our
regulations regarding
cannabis and other business requirements
and all cannabis requirements of the
state of new mexico
should be noted again that this is an
established retail center it was built
in the 1970s
by staff's analysis there really is no
change in impacts from a used
perspective at this location there will
be no direct access to any of the
single-family neighborhoods and the
proposed business and single-family uses
are separated by a major commercial
corridor
to the north and then by a wall
another commercial building and some
parking areas to the east as well as
some landscaping
here's a site plan
we are looking this is actually pointing
south
so this is avenida demacia right here
here is the property in question and
this grayed out area is the suite in
question
and you can see that
to
the left of the screen where my cursor
is there are some single family homes
here and then of course across the
street there are some single-family
homes and as well some commercial
this is just an interior of the layout
of the building that particular suite
we did send notice to surrounding
properties we did once receive one phone
call
basically expressing general displeasure
discomfort related to the effects of
cannabis
use
for some people
and
i'm not quite sure if they're here this
evening or not but did indicate that
they may be
staff is recommending approval based on
findings those were outlined in your
staff report and i've listed them here
as well
and your options tonight are vote yes to
approve vote no to deny vote yes with
conditions or vote to table and i would
be happy to answer any questions as i
understand it the applicant is here as
well and can answer questions
of the commission
i thank you catherine has anyone for the
commission has any questions or comments
mr kaiser
thank you i just want to thank staff for
providing that clarification tonight
about the difference between the two
consent agenda items related to cannabis
and the one that's upcoming further on
in our agenda tonight i think and and i
hope folks understand the the difference
there between
why two were on the consent agenda
versus the other one not being
i think for just good governance and
transparency i think having that
explanation on the record
is beneficial so
again i think staff and i have no
further questions
okay thank you as the applicant have any
comments or does anyone else from the
audience have any questions or comments
all right if not then i will take a vote
from the commission i need a motion to
approve
item
what are we
6.2
a motion to approve item 6.2
hi second
member kaiser
yes based on staff's recommendation and
consistency with elevate las cruces
board member smith
yes based on staff recommendation and
site visit
board member bennett
yes based on staff recommendation this
also complies with elevating las cruces
and the purpose intent of the code
board member vega
yes based on
staff recommendation and site visit as
well
board member guerrero
yes based on staff recommendation and
complying with elevate last christmas
chair gordon
i vote yes based on my site visit staff
recommendations and compliance with
elevate las cruces thank you six
approval
okay thank you so now we can move into
new business which would be item 8.1
spanegas
yes sir mr chairman vincent banegas
interim planner for the record i will be
presenting
three cases this evening the first of
which is
a case involving 855
pinon street it is a infield development
process
development
that is seeking to place a single
manufactured home on property that is
currently
predominantly vacant there is an
abandoned shed on the property and some
chaining fencing but otherwise vacant
it's certainly underutilized
and
they're seeking to place that
manufactured home on the property along
with receiving some
approvals for associated deviations to
our zoning code
the property is at the corner of uh
pinyon street it's at the north
west corner of pinon street in north
santa fe street
as indicated it is
predominantly vacant
the r4 zone is our multi-dwelling high
density and limited retail and office
zoning district it does come with both a
minimum and a maximum
density requirement for residential uses
in this case
perhaps the one that is targeted the
most as as it relates to the proposal
is the minimum density and that is
established at 10 dwelling units per
acre
the property is currently comprised of
two lots lots one and two
it's part of block two cox's first
subdivision 117
the
as indicated they are both uh
making up the property in question and
our un under utilized properties
the property does fall within the infill
development boundary and this
thus is a qualifying parcel
combined acreage of both of those lots
is 1.58 acres or 68 82 square feet
so the
slide that is up right now is our zoning
map for the area
it does show the
perspective
property in red outlined in red here
santa fe street
is located here
pinon avenue
here
you do have other roadways in the
vicinity but primarily what you are
seeing is a good amount of existing r4
zoning
in place
covering obviously the subject parcel in
question
off to the east across santa fe street
you do have commercial zoning in this
case c2 that's our medium
medium intensity commercial district
solana drive is further east of that
on the west side you have r2 zoning
which is our multi-dwelling
low-density
residential district
that certainly allows for
apartments duplexes things of that
nature
as well as single family units as well
the aerial map
identifies the subject property once
again outlined in red
and you do see
a
rather robust mix
of
uses in the area everything from
duplexes sometimes triplexes single
family
certainly immediately adjacent to the
subject property you do have single
family uses again on that r4 zoning
that is in place
across from the subject property on the
east side you have
many storage units some of which at
least
years ago were utilized for some of the
smaller offices and that kind of thing
for not only storage materials but
actual office uses
so you do have quite a variety of
mixed use scenario going on in this
vicinity
you also have some vacant parcels
they would certainly be eligible for the
infield development process as well at
some point in the future if the
applicants
came forward and requested
a proposal
so in regards to the specific request
the applicant in working with staff has
requested that they be allowed to place
as their new home
a new manufactured home on the property
the
requirement going back to that minimum
density requirement
they would be required to place two in
order to meet density requirements
that said
they are off by less than half a
dwelling unit
in order to comply with that
so they are very close it's one dwelling
unit but nonetheless
they wish to place the single
manufactured home to serve as their home
they are also seeking some typical
ancillary
structures for the proposal
at some point in the future they're
looking at a phased approach to the
development here their main primary
concern is the home
but a covered carport for instance a new
shed on the property and maybe at some
point in the future they would alter the
existing fence that is there and maybe
put a wall
things of that nature are certainly
under consideration
by the applicant
in order to do so the deviations that
are listed on the slide are required
elements
these speak to the r4 zoning
and for instance in that they
the property in question contains two
lots
normally we seek the replating of the
two into a single lot
in that they're looking to place the
structure promptly and get
otherwise
under utilized vacant parcel into active
use
they're requesting that that be
waived
and there's also a deviation to the
minimum lot size requirement right now
in the r4 zone
the code requires 8 500 square foot
minimum lot size and they're shy of that
by 1618 square feet and again that's in
consideration of boats both lots one and
two
uh and adding up the acreage
respectively
there's also a need for an 18 foot
deviation to the minimum 70 foot lot
with requirement in the code
and i spoke about the dwelling unit
deviation it'd be a one
dwelling unit deviation to the minimum
two to meet that minimum density
threshold
the applicant
is also seeking to retain the r4
development rights for the property
their primary goal of course as
indicated is residential they want it
for their house
but in speaking with staff staff felt
that to be consistent with the elevate
las cruces comprehensive plan and what
it intends to do
with the urban place type that this
property is in
it uh by retaining these rights at some
point in the future should they opt to
do so
they may consider improving the property
beyond what they're going to do or what
they're going to seek
and maybe go into an office environment
or a
limited retail environment similar to
what the r4 standard would
would allow and certainly what the urban
place type
suggests we do
they're also seeking to in that it'd be
residential at this point in time if
approved allow for curb cuts
the sizing of which the driveway access
parking area standards and surfacing and
any landscaping requirement to remain
consistent with single-family dwelling
provisions
again it would be single-family if
approved and henceforth they're looking
to retain those
requirements in accordance to a single
family use
the stipulation being that if the use
changes in the future again if they seek
to
intensify or densify the property then
the prevailing standards would be in use
at that time or be applied at that time
i should say
so this is a site plan of the property
it is showing the boundary
of the property in question this
includes the two lots
they will be meeting the front yard
setback of the r4 zone at 20 feet
access will be along this area along
santa fe street
their proposed carport would be in this
general vicinity and their shed here
the rear yard setback is not going to be
a problem side yard is not going to be a
problem nor will the secondary frontage
be a problem
so again
for the most part
very compliant site plan in terms of the
r4 standards that are in effect today
in terms of analysis of this case
staff felt that the proposal was not out
of character with the immediate
surrounding area again if you look at
the r4 zoning and some of the uses that
are out there it's very consistent with
that
there were no health safety or welfare
issues identified with the request
and there were some review comments but
many of those spoke to comments that
could be addressed at a building permit
stage
and we saw no reason to prevent
consideration of this idp at this point
in time
in terms of public notice notice was
sent to the property owners in
accordance with the
zoning code
and staff has received three emails
protesting the request
the concerns of these individuals cited
the use of the manufactured home as one
reason for
the protest another was excessive number
of deviations
and there was also mention of
incompatible
use in terms of the surrounding area and
just to address that i'd like to speak
to the manufactured home
issue
i'd like the commission to be advised
that manufactured homes have the same
rights and privileges that a site-built
home has
and this is pursuant to state law
if it were mobile home that would be a
different situation but this is a
manufactured home
in terms of the excessive number of
deviations i'd like to point out that
some of these deviations speak to the
potential future use
should the property
be subject to again intensification or
densification
and so those
requests speak to that
ability compatibility of the surrounding
area i think staff has indicated that
there's quite a substantial amount of
compatibility
staff recommendation is approval based
on findings
the property is located in the idp
ido area and is an eligible idp property
and so this is an attempt to
reactivate if you will a property that
is
substantially under utilize and become
make it a an active property in terms of
tax rules etc
and the idp meets several of the purpose
and intent criteria of the zoning code
some of which speak to
encouraging innovations and land
development and redevelopment this
property did have a i believe it was a
manufactured home on it at some point in
the past
and had since been removed
but uh in allowing an idp to go forward
again allows development or
redevelopment in this case to to take
place
uh development of underutilized property
in an established area speaks for itself
development to be sensitive to the
character of existing neighborhoods
i think what they're trying to do here
is make sure that the manufactured home
use is indeed compatible with the
surrounding property
and then there's the minimized
neighborhood conflicts and again speaks
to to itself there
the property is also within the urban
neighborhood place type characterized by
medium to high density residential land
uses in supporting neighborhood
commercial development
the goals there are several goals and
policies and actions within elevate las
cruces that support the request
and
spoke to the consistency issue already
there's also
the fulfillment of the city's infill
policy plan
some of the criteria that's identified
there and the criteria for decisions
in the municipal code 2
dash 382
the property is adjacent to two
dedicated and proof rights away
so
use of the property would certainly take
advantage of any utilities and
infrastructure that currently exists
the options this evening regarding this
case is to vote yes
and approve
the case as presented
vote no and deny
the case if you deny the case please be
advised that new information or fax not
identified during the presentation it
would be necessary
and you could vote yes with conditions
stipulating those conditions as part of
your motion or vote to table and that
concludes uh steph's presentation
mr chairman
thank you vince is there anyone from the
commission who has any questions
commissioner kaiser
is
one of the issues here
uh
related to the density that even
with
the re-plat turning the two lots into
one that they wouldn't meet the design
standards
for that
at a minimum second unit is that is that
the case um mr chairman commissioner
kaiser that's correct when staff
reviewed this proposal it was
considering both lots one and two as one
lot anyway
okay so
theoretically in the future if they were
to
try to redevelop
this site they probably would have to go
through the idp process again is that
uh mr chairman commissioner kaiser that
could very well be the case depending on
what exactly they were proposing yes
okay thank you and then finally the
issue about retaining the rights to the
r4
i mean those won't go away just by
approving this idp right i mean the
underlying zoning would would still be
there correct
mr chairman commissioner kaiser that is
correct the r4 zoning would would still
be in play
um i think
to avoid any
future confusion on that issue staff
felt it might be a good idea to
incorporate that as part of the
discussion understood okay thank you no
further questions
is there anyone else
i have one question during your
presentation you made some kind of
comment
about uh there might be a possibility in
the future of some commercial use
mr chairman the
r4 zoning as its description implies
allows some limited retail
and office uses
and those are rather limited in the r4
r4 being the most
you know the highest if you will
residential uh
district in our code so that would mean
in the future that they're not
considering removing the
the manufactured home and replacing it
with an office structure
not at this time
their primary focus is purely
residential to create a home for the
family
all right
is there anyone from the public who
wishes to speak
mr chairman if i may real quick um the
applicant is also in attendance tonight
uh gilbert will leave us and and if you
have any questions or like to hear from
him he's certainly willing to do so all
right well let's hear from him first
the applicant is here
would you please state your name for the
record and allow me to square you in
to leave us and i swear
all right do you swear affirmative
testimony you're about to give is the
truth and nothing but the truth i do
under penalty of the law i do sir all
right go ahead sir thank you
okay good evening members of the las
vegas planning and the
chairman and also to the members of the
public in attendance my name is gilbert
libos and at this time my wife and i are
requesting an infill development
proposal the purpose of our respect is
simple we wish to place a new single
manufactured home on the subject
property to be used as a residence it'll
be ground set as va requirements so it's
not going to be up above or anything so
it's going to be look just like a hole
it's got a
pitch drill shingles
and
the siding everything complies with for
that as a manufactured home and once
it's set it's set there for life
it'll be ground set and we'll meet all
the easement requirements as explained
and presented by the excellent
professional staff
thank you mister vanessa the idp process
can be can aid us to developing our
property
eventually a fence
which we have a four foot uh chaining
fence at the moment right now but we
plan on putting up a different one some
you know better like maybe a rock wall
or
wooden pants or something like that
but it will meet all the requirements as
well
it'll it'll allow well it'll set back
it'll meet all the required setbacks and
requirements to meet all building codes
for the for our foreign zoning district
as well
the property has been in the family for
over 65 years
it has three different mobile homes at
the time never had it built home
it has been empty for a few years and
the yard maintained and cleaned always
up to code as has only had summer
gardens and my trees that are growing
around
we kept the utilities for such
we know most of the people that lived in
the neighborhood for many years my wife
was raised there and i was raised two
blocks north of that place
at the corner of spruce and santa fe
we both lived our lives there i except
for serving proudly and honorably in the
u.s army from 72 to 75
and we saw it grow it's always been our
dream to most as most americans to own
our own home especially in our
neighborhood where we grew up and we
were raised
we want to go back to our roots as this
is the only opportunity that we have
especially at this age
it'll brighten our neighborhood and
improve the neighborhood community
conditions and justify the infield
development plan it'll be advantageous
to the community as articulated to the
city las cruces comprehensive plan in
any applicable regional or neighborhood
plan
we really appreciate this assistance to
making this thing possible
and if you have any questions i will be
glad to answer to you
all right thank you is there any
questions
i do have one question is the picture
that was presented to us is the actual
home that you're going to put there yes
sir but that one that it's exactly the
same thing except it has a double pitch
behind us it's the same and it's going
to be ground level just like that that's
very nice
all right then is there anyone from the
public who wishes to speak on this
please raise you yes ma'am
yeah well there's only one person
i will vote i'll do that anyway
before you speak i'm going to only allow
you three minutes
and so will you please state your name
for the record and let me swear you in
rita science all right do you swear
affirmative testimony you're about to
give is the truth and nothing but the
truth and the penalty of law yes
okay go ahead uh first of all i have a
question for manufactured homes uh if
they are set in a and i don't know the
link on sorry can you speak into the
microphone so that yeah yes i'm sorry
so a manufacturer homes uh if it's um
set in a neighborhood where it's
primarily home built homes i guess will
that devalue
the
make the value of the homes less or not
even though i understand
mr chairman
just to to clarify again the
manufactured homes
uh pursuant to state law enjoy the same
rights and privileges as any site-built
home
they're considered
one in the same they have hud related
design standards they must comply with
so
in all
intents and purposes
they're considered the same
but do they devalue the home value
mr chairman that's subject to
interpretation some folks may feel it's
uh it might devalue property others
might feel it does not it improves value
there's no
set in stone
method of comparing and contrasting
homes
in terms of
single family detached
styles
to determine
value
devaluation or valuation
is there anything else yes so i'm here
on behalf of my sister claudia diaz has
property there my mother frita diaz has
property at myself i have two properties
around that
neighborhood and i believe you got an
email from my and i'm here physically to
represent as well
so another concern that we have is if
that it goes through there's a big
empty lot property right across it
that
that one sent a president to add more
uh manufactured homes which is like how
you say it it is a right or whatever
but um
i know that from spruce to the other
side i've
seen manufacturers homes but not through
at the site
where we are set in our
neighborhood
and we are
you know against if it's gonna come to
like if there's a precedent to add more
mobile homes as it is it's a
neighborhood that struggles with the
home value i have a empty property
myself i know you guys are trying to
um
fill empty lots i have an empty lot
across the behind the street and as for
me i really am trying to
you know when
my lot is
sewn to do like multiple dwellings
i'm trying to do homes because i do try
to
see my neighborhood
we can encourage them to build their own
homes our own homes
and
we're against it i don't know if
that makes i'm so sorry i don't know a
little bit nervous so we're here to be
against it and um
i'm representing like i said my sister
claudia diaz my mother
rita and myself who who we all have
properties there
and that
all right thank you thank you is there
anyone else
yes sir
again i'd like to limit you to three
minutes please so would you please state
your name for the record and let me
swear you in zachary flores
do you swear affirm that the testimony
about the game is the truth and nothing
but the truth on the penalty of law i do
please make sure you speak into the
microphone yes sir i can be raised a
little bit i think there you go you want
me bunched up um i'm here speaking
give or take professionally impartially
on behalf or on behalf of the lady that
just left
i'm a realtor in town i do i do sell it
but i also have
family home on the corner of spruce and
virginia
so
when you when you talk about devaluing
the neighborhood or you know all that as
a realtor and as having appraisers it it
matters on what style the the home is is
it a single wide or is it a is it a
double wide
so being as it's a
it's a double wide okay so being as it's
a double wide it
it allows some lenders but not all
lenders right so you're not going to
find every single lender so on resale of
that property
it's it's not going to provide the same
value as when he installed it ground set
we're living in a crazy time on this
housing market and i'm on behalf of the
gentleman that's fighting for this
i i feel for him because there's no
there's no answer to unexpected
inexpensive housing right now so we're
seeing that shortage and he's got land
there right but also there's real estate
professionals like myself and a
developer in this room right now or was
i'm not sure if he's still here but
there are people here
that could
push the agenda towards um
what las cruces in that area needs to be
so if you're looking at the
the alameda depot right and we're
pushing
east
right from the downtown main street and
the development and the rehabs and the
updating of that area is going to be
next right the mesquite historical
district so
in speaking for the lady and myself and
my family i definitely will like to
bring to your attention absolutely
double wides
make it a lot more difficult to sell
it won't devalue the neighboring house
but now if you're
if it does set a precedence and you
allow that big lot to have three four
another one in in my perfect vision of
las cruces born and bred um
you know we would we would see more site
built houses especially in these
historic depots where this gentleman
grew up right this this um
my family grew up my my blood were all
here so
i
would not side with
putting a double wide there
unfortunately there's not a good answer
for
our housing crisis and that's all i have
to say so if you have any questions
all right thank you
is there anyone else
all right in that case i guess any
comments or more questions from the
commission
yes this commission smith i have a
comment
you know mr olivas he did mention that
he and his wife grew up in this
neighborhood
and
the atlanta has been in the family for
65 years
and he also stated that this is going to
be a home that he will
remain in for the rest of his life so as
we
look at this
proposal
you have to take into account that you
know there is a home
shortage and the cost of homes continue
to you know skyrocket
and here is a couple
who have
had roots in the city for a very very
long time for many decades and they want
to come home to establish a home it is a
home it is a house
whether it's manufactured double wide
whether it's built out of adobe
that really doesn't matter in the
situation it is
a home
and so i feel that when someone comes up
from a real estate perspective they're
only thinking about money they're not
thinking about people they don't think
about homes they don't think about
families
thank you anyone else
and in that case i guess the commission
is ready for a vote
i apologize mr chairman i just wanted to
read a definition that i think may help
in the discussion
manufactured housing means a
manufactured home or modular home that
is a single family dwelling with a
heated area of at least 36 feet
by 24 feet and at least
864 square feet and constructed
in a factory to the standards of the
united states department of housing and
urban development the national
manufactured housing construction safety
standards act of 1974 in the housing
urban
development zone code 2 or the uniform
building code as amended to the date of
the unit's construction and installed
consistent with the manufactured housing
act and with regulations made pursuant
to that act
so these type of structures if you're
talking about assessed value they're
considered real property not personal
property like a mobile home would be
just to clarify
all right thank you
all right
then i guess we are ready for a vote
i need a motion to approve
item 8.1 i make a motion to approve item
8.1
i'll second it
for member kaiser
yes based on staff recommendation
consistency with elevate las cruces and
the idp board member smith
i vote yes based on staff recommendation
and also compliance with the end uh the
infield development plan
board member bennett i vote yes based on
staff recommendation this also meets the
idp requirements in elevate las cruces
board member vega i vote yes based on
the site visit and it means the idp
criteria
board member guerrero uh i vote yes as
well based on staff recommendation and
uh need for infill in las cruces chair
gordon
i vote yes based on my site visit staff
recommendations
good use of the idp and elevate las
cruces
approval by six thank you
all right
we can move on to item 8.2
mr banegas
you're on stage again
yes sir
let me get to that
if i could
okay here we go
excuse me just for a second john could
you come here for a minute please
go ahead i'm sorry
mr chairman members of the commission
and once again vincent banegas interim
planner for the record
presenting tonight's case involving 227
south main street
it is a variance request involving
cannabis
related use or proposed use
the property is currently located at the
corner bowman avenue in south main
street again 227 south main street
currently the facility is operated as
the messiah valley pharmacy
based on the information presented they
among other things not only
are they a pharmacy but they also
compound
in retail cbd related product presently
they're looking to expand and
incorporate cannabis related
compounds etc for the benefit of their
customers
the property is 0.381 acres in size and
it is zoned in our downtown development
code as main street
the
area in question was developed as part
of the las cruces
excuse me
original town site
the structure was originally built in
and
in this case it is located immediately
adjacent to the new america school
uh and in fact they share
uh a wall between them
they may have two separate walls but
nonetheless they're attached
so
this is
the zoning map showing the property in
question
dry throat
it's not covent
the property is outlined in red again
bowman avenue along the southern
boundary here south main street in the
middle
church street is off to the east
and you have the main street district on
either side of main street
each of these properties that i'm
pointing to are main street
elsewhere primarily in this area and
along several of the other surrounding
properties
you have the downtown
district of
downtown development code there is a
downtown designation and then you have
some civic uses
that are also
within the general vicinity to serve as
public related uses the plaza as an
example parking public parking etc
an aerial map showing the
area the subject property again outlined
in red
you have the
building that is currently
the messiah valley pharmacy here
it is along this edge of the building
where the attachment takes place to the
new america school located here
you have a variety of
uses in the in the area everything from
service restaurant retail
you have office you have everything
i should say you have a good mix of uses
that is certainly
promoted as part of the downtown effort
to date
the request as it was submitted is for
a variance of 300 feet to the required 3
300 foot minimum buffer distance between
a cannabis facility
and by that we're talking about the
building footprint
and a qualifying school property line
qualifying school just to be clear is
everything pre-k through 12.
no adult school trade school et cetera
are considered as part of that
definition
and the school in question is the new
america school is indicated
the applicant is farm true cannabis
retail and manufacturing and again
they're looking to expand a little bit
beyond the cbd aspect and incorporate
cannabis or thc
level product as part of their
medications
and offering to
their customers their customer base
the company is obviously
thank you david the company is obviously
healthcare
oriented
and as part of their package of
information they submitted there's three
criteria catherine uh
touched on as part of her develop
her presentation
uh regarding the cannabis case earlier
but there's three criteria that the
zoning code stipulates
one is a physical hardship
and two is showing that there's some eco
economic development justification to
the request
and a third is to show
economic hard hardship
in complying with the requirements of
the code
so this is one of the two items that
they submitted to help justify the
request
it is economic development driven at
least in
this slide and talks to the issue of job
creation
as part of the expansion they would need
some additional employees
and positions to facilitate that growth
there's also the
issue of
grts
as retail sales ex
expand as a result of the cannabis
use in their
medications etc they anticipate that
retail sales will increase thus the grt
increase
to the city
also in terms of
again the criteria for a decision the
applicant submitted some information
about monetary hardships
as it pertains to this particular
request
there's the
investment aspect that has already taken
place with the property getting it ready
for not only what they have in place now
but
for any potential
increase in activity
they illustrate that some of the
alternatives that would really affect
them and
you know put them in a bad position is
the issue of leasing additional
or another site to serve as their
facility for this use as requested is
going to be costly
there's a possibility of purchasing
commercial property for this proposed
use
and there's the cost to develop the land
uh for the building that would house
their operation so all that
equates to a substantial monetary
hardship which they illustrate
through these slides
the site plan that was submitted again
showing the property
in its entirety but the building
footprint here
it is again along this wall that the
connection to the new america school is
at issue
parking would take place along not only
south main street but along bowman
avenue you could see some of the
parking stalls identified as part of
this
graphic
up upper right you have the small but
useful
ariel showing again the connection point
to the
school a couple more photos this is just
more or less at the corner of bowman
uh in main street again showing mercedes
valley pharmacy the new america school
the one on the left is just a south
facade of
the subject
business
and the one on the right is
the east facade showing again connection
to the school
so public notice and input notice was
sent to the surrounding properties in
accordance with our zoning code rules
and regulations
um at first i must say that
staff had not received a lot of
input
but
since thursday last week most of it
coming in
this weekend and through the day there
has been substantial interest in this
case
10 emails were submitted
all protesting the request
and the concerns largely centered on the
items the bulleted items that are shown
in the slide and i'll just
touch on a few again the distance issue
was thought to be
excessive based on current code
their
large degree of concern with the impact
to the student population of the school
and to the children in the community
and they also felt the school felt that
there could be some school operational
concerns as well
but
those were some of the consistent themes
of the protest email staff did receive a
few additional calls
um but uh some of them were just
inquisitive uh
type calls and and another was in
opposition as well
recommendation in in reviewing this case
mr chairman members of the commission
this was a tough one
you had
uh
staff look at the issues that were
brought forward in terms of this request
and we looked at both policy and
ordinance keeping in mind that policy
was written
a couple years back
and the ordinance written certainly
more recently than that
and and we
considered some of the discussion that
took place regarding the buffer
distances
and
certainly thought that there was intent
to
to protect schools and to protect the
students that
go to those schools
so the staff has a what we would call a
soft denial on this uh but it is a
denial
and the findings for the denial are as
follows
obviously the site is 3.81 acres and
in size
and currently and this is important
currently operates as a pharmacy
compounding retailing cbd product
and the reason why i bring that up
mr chairman commissioners is because
there's a known quantity of what the
rules required
for a business that was already in
operation
looking to entertain cannabis as an
expansion
so
the other findings are
the
use of cannabis requires a 300 foot
buffer that has to be met and since it
cannot the variance
to the tune of 100 percent is being
requested
and staff
felt that this was just too excessive if
you recall we had a case
a couple months back
on the north side of this very same
school
where the applicants couldn't meet the
300 feet but they could meet two-thirds
of that
so there was a little allowance there to
to mitigate some of the impact and
that's kind of how we viewed that case
this one it's a hundred percent and a
little bit tougher to and to contend
with
again
discussion in the drafting of the
ordinance took place
trying to determine best practices to
limit exposure to school-aged children
there's been no 100 percent buffer
distance variance approved to date
and we did have the
superintendent and the school
oppose the request as they did in the
other case
and again they were the ones that cited
significant concerns to their student
population and to operational issues
i want to
indicate that elevate las cruces our
comprehensive plan lends broad support
to to the
request it does so through economic
development related policy
and it does throw so through broad land
use policy but nowhere in the comp plan
does it speak to specific issues related
to
cannabis locations and schools or
anything along
those lines
so
so even though there is broad support
staff feels that the recent ordinance uh
overrides
uh that broad support and was aimed at
protecting a specific group in this case
schools and students
if this is denied the action would not
be contrary to section 3810k criteria
for decisions
again one of the first things that's
listed there is demonstrating physical
hardship which staff did not find to be
the case with this request
as per section 38.2 there's three
provisions that further lend support to
the denial decision
staff didn't feel that the request
fostered a rational relationship between
different land uses for the mutual
benefit of all again you have
at least one property owner who's a
significant player in this issue
very concerned with the request
and there's also
the issue of sensitivity to the
character of the existing neighborhood
and trying to mitigate conflicts amongst
neighbors
so with this you have options this
evening mr chair commissioners
vote yes and approve
the case keep in mind that this is a
little different if you go that route
you'll need to
submit new findings of fact not
identified during staff's presentation
you could certainly vote no
and go with the staff recommendation of
denial
you could vote yes with the conditions
or vote to table
um if you do have any conditions please
include them in your motion for
approval
um
and that concludes steph's presentation
um i know that we have the
representative for for farm true in
attendance this evening mr chairman so
i'm sure he would like to
speak to the issues at hand
all right thank you uh would the
applicant like to speak first before i
go to the commission for questions
yes
would you please state your name for the
record and let me swear you in please
daniel g buck
how do you swear affirmative testimony
about the game is the truth and nothing
but the truth on the penalty of law i do
thank you thank you chairman and members
of the commission
to keep items moving efficiently and
effectively um we can reference
certain documentation i brought with me
in regard to the docket in the case at
hand i will take a moment to distribute
them and i will explain what the color
co color coding at the header
equates to
while we continue to pass out the docket
i'm going to take a few seconds to
describe my
background as it pertains to the state
of new mexico and cannabis i'm currently
the state appointed mediator for
chaparral's incorporation on behalf of
state representative willie madrid as
well as a case handler for items that
arise with cannabis and executive
director of the southwestern cannabis
trade association
which represents ancillary service
providers as well as economic drivers of
cannabis and cannabis adjacent
businesses
this specific client before you tonight
farm true has invested a large sum of
capital into the down street downtown
main street program and has employed
over 20 people since the dawn of this
year in august or 2021. as we all know
at the beginning of 2020 main street saw
a stall in its economic spur due to the
coveted rise case and then the shutdown
subsequently
and we're coming now out of the
recession in 2022 in the first fiscal
quarter
this client currently retails cbd
adjacent products and compounds and
they're looking to
expand into thc related products in a
two-step safety protocol program one of
the most comprehensive i've seen here to
date come before my staff in my office
upon checking on the green header of
your docket you will see that this
business will have a checking counter
for cannabis before they enter the
retail district at the furthest end of
the store
they will then have a an additional
check-in when you enter the retail area
through a dutch style split and a half
doors there'll be a counter upon first
check-in for an id retrieval then a
subsequent id check of the purchaser of
the cannabis adjacent product with the
cannabis adjacent product you will not
be allowed to leave the cannabis
retailing zone inside the pharmacy
without checking out in the designated
retail area for cannabis or have
purchased the goods from the retail
frontage as well as your prescription
that you may be retrieving
simultaneously upon checkout i'm going
to remove my tennis bracelet to enter
this is exhibit a
imagine this in a yellow highlighted or
blue highlighted color-coded manner i'm
sure we have all been to
nightclubs where there's underage
individuals by state statute who can
enter and they're usually governed by a
wristband or an x on the hand
cannabis retailers will be mandated to
wear a wristband upon the two-step
check-in protocol and upon leaving
the cannabis retail zone to enter back
into the normal commerce zone of the
pharmacy itself
if we do not work as a trade group and
as a commission to pass the the variance
that's before you we will have killed a
subsequent business that is benefiting
the main street area and employing
people and supplying food for their
families
this is an extremely safe business
and cannabis is governed very harshly by
the state of new mexico
upon discovery last friday
the school has continued a dual
relationship
with this client which is actually
illegal in a
broad stroke of breach of moral conduct
someone who receives a salary from dlcp
has been continuously communicating with
the client and failed to disclose her
involvement with the school board
and at the same time has been
giving verbal contacts that is relayed
from this client back to the school
board
which is a prime example of what hurts
e-commerce and economic incentive-driven
growth in las cruces in dona ana county
we must work with our trade partners and
our industries to ensure their future
and collaborate with people who are
investing on main street and i would
like to get for the record straight new
america's school represents mostly an
age
federally recognized 18 to 21 bracket
people here on a secondary education
tract
they provide preschool-related services
for the attendees relative children
it is not a daycare and underage
federally recognized bracket
that is being served continuously in the
ed program
and i would like to see a continuation
of economic spurt disperse in the
downtown
are you finished yes all right thank you
is there anyone from the commission who
has any questions to the applicant
i have a question mr guerrero oh yeah
sorry can you clarify uh so you were
saying that
i'm just a little confused of like when
you were talking about client
and then talking about the person that
has been working with new america school
is that like like
i guess a competitor to
you to this
company or what's a relationship there
the relationship is she has paid a
salary by dlcp as executive director
and then has failed to disclose her
involvement with the school board but
the school board has harassed the client
on more more than one occasion and this
individual has also taken the relative
economic information that the client has
exchanged with dlcp back to the school
board
serving i'm sorry serving on multiple
committees inside the city of las cruces
and civic duties that i uphold morally i
have to disclose my involvement on other
boards and i believe that other members
should be upheld to that moral standard
and should abstain from coming to
hearings or having a voice in opposition
due to duality
this is not a civil issue
it is a civil issue
i mean it's not a civil issue i'm sorry
are you saying it's a matter of conflict
of interest yes
is there anyone else
i just have a question um
is farm true uh in partnership with
merced valley pharmacy in this venture
uh or
is it are there two separate
businesses that are uh that are in
question i mean i know that
the missile valley pharmacy has already
been established and then now you're
trying to
have farm to be you know establish you
know a cannabis
uh business there are they both
connected are they one in
the same business
yes commissioner it's a board of
founders they're two separate llc's farm
true has been in existence since the
legalization of hemp in the state of new
mexico and they're transitioning into a
broader branch of their hemp related
products which would of course entail
cannabis which is a thc based product
governed by the same
board of directors governed by the same
founders and partnership just two llc's
coming together into one facility
all right thank you
i have a question to vince
please
could you go back to the slide that
shows the site plan
please
that's it
what did i understand when looking at
this information that we received
is there also a possibility that they're
thinking of building a separate building
or just
renovating the interior of the present
building
mr chairman members of the commission my
understanding is that the interior of
the building would be modified to
accommodate
the expansion so
all right wouldn't if they were to put
up a building let's say
far enough away from the from the school
would they qualify under the 300 foot
exemption
business seen anthony probably mr
chairman i think that would be tough the
property line
you know even if they located at its
furthest uh distance i think they'd
still be shy of the 300-foot requirement
okay i wasn't sure what you had said and
it's hard to read sometimes these
these
slides really couldn't be a little bit
bigger would have been nicer
all right anyone else for the commission
commissioner kaiser
thank you first question probably uh
well for staff or the applicant's
representative
the messiah valley pharmacy as it stands
now
fills prescription drugs is that
true
commissioner that is correct they
currently retail pharmaceutical drugs
and three of the founders on the board
to elaborate our board certified
pharmacists
thank you so
they're just established for the record
there's already
controlled substances if you will being
distributed
out of this pharmacy
so
from my perspective this is a this is
certainly a challenging case for sure
i think you know the location the
context of being downtown
is certainly challenging
the fact that we
just a couple months ago
approved a similar variance
precedent can be a slippery slope
if if
one-third variance is
is good
where do we draw the line
um
so i think that's what makes this really
challenging uh
to staff
i asked a question earlier about
the the 300 foot buffers applies to
both new american and the other school
facility near downtown i'm hoping you
have that map available
thank you
so this is this is the first time i've
seen it so i'm just sort of digesting
here what's on the slide um
but this is certainly informative at
least from my perspective i think one of
the the concerns i had was
how much of downtown would be
ruled out
of
of this potential opportunity based on
this 300 foot
buffer
it appears to me that
that it's
i mean it's hard to tell without context
here but it seems to me that there's
still a fair amount of downtown that
would be available
uh and remain outside of
the buffer is that am i reading that
correctly that's correct
mr chairman
commissioner kaiser yes the
the buffers if i could just kind of
orient folks uh the new america school
is located where my pointer is right now
farm
farm true is looking to
incorporate here in this building to the
south
health nautics the case that was
previously
dealt with a couple of months ago here
and then there is a
business i believe it's
at least in our database it was diner
llc here
so those are
and this one may be
the
cannabis related
centers if you will or retail
establishments
the air the items in blue are areas that
are alcohol based they have liquor
license of some sort uh
associated with them so we showed that
but this
red or pink orange whichever color you
want to call it is showing the buffer
distance 300 foot buffer from the
property line of central elementary out
and the property line from new america
school out
and so all this shaded area would be
within the 300 foot buffer distance i
and and
you'd have to consider
variants or an sup depending on what
we're dealing with and then any area
outside is free and clear
keeping in mind the other cannabis
related businesses
yeah thank you i think that this is very
helpful i i kind of wish we had had this
a couple months ago and i think just
broadly speaking from my perspective i
think there's a
possibly a larger question here for the
commission about
what
what should be downtown i mean downtown
by definition is the central business
district i mean you have a variety of
uses you have alcohol consumption you
have bars you have pharmacies that are
prescribing drugs
under prescriptions you know there's a
lot of activity going on and it
i guess the question is is if if a
a school decides to locate downtown does
does that mean we
push everybody else out
[Music]
i don't know i i mean that's just kind
of where i'm coming from um i i'm glad
to see this map that there's still
plenty of opportunity it would appear uh
but you know we do have some facilities
there's at least one
um
you know alcohol or liquor license
located within 300 feet so the question
is when their license comes up for
review or or whatever are we going to
have to exclude them are they going to
have to relocate in downtown
um you know i'm sympathetic to
to probably some of the folks in the
room tonight that are going to speak out
against this
um
but at the end of the day you know it's
it's downtown i mean this is where we
want to attract businesses
um you know certainly we have to weigh
the pros and cons but you know i think
that's certainly
something that we have to seriously
consider that there's some additional
context here
certainly um you know
providing pro or setting precedent you
know only a couple months ago i think
makes this a little bit more difficult
for me but that that's just my
perspective
i i do have a question also vince maybe
you could just answer this for me
there are certain criteria that will
enable us to grant a variance other than
to
approve the fact that there is not a 300
foot
barrier between the school and the in
the building
plus hardship economic
what else is in there beside that it's
physical hardship
justification citing economic
development
as a benefit
and consideration of
economic hardships or monetary hardship
sorry
in trying to meet
the development code as written so then
what you said should we consider is this
one out of three two out of three three
out of three
mr chairman
correct as it's
presented here this evening
the denial
looks at one of three
but i do cite the other two
criteria as
having merit i mean the applicant has
shown merit for those and it is possible
in consideration of the of the applicant
of this
proposal
that we could consider the hardships
outweigh
the distance restriction
and so
you're requesting that they want a
variance request of 300 feet
let me just look at this for a second
that doesn't say anything about the
summary of the request
they're just coming forward now just
asking for the 300 feet and providing
this other information as ancillary
information
mr chairman the
uh information that was provided uh
citing some of the
they had submitted a a powerpoint that
had several slides
and the monetary
hardship issue in the economic
development benefit was
came
just after packets went out
so
then we have something else to consider
here correct
okay
in that case is there any other
questions from the commission
commissioner vega i have one question i
know this came up in
march
what's the age range of the students at
the new america school
mr chairman commissioner vega that's
that's a good question we'll we'll
probably have to defer that question to
either the superintendent the
superintendent of the school if you
recall and on the other case there was
quite a bit of confusion on that
but because it included some of the
school-age children the pre-k through 12
we considered it a legitimate qualifying
school
mr chairman if i may
but before we leave the discussion of
the commission
nicholas for the community development
for the record
we have a lot of discussion uh on the
staff on this and as mr banegas
mentioned
the recommendation from the staff was it
was in denial
uh the primary factor in that had to do
with distance
we spent a lot of time before the
cannabis ordinance was
adopted
we first started with the distancing of
one thousand feet because we felt of
the necessary
separation from schools not churches but
schools
churches were not a part of the
formula here
then we said well that's it was decided
that was too great a distance and it was
reduced to 600 feet
and then we had a lot of discussion and
public input on that
and then it was reduced to 300 feet
and that's what was approved by the
ordinance
uh this proposal is zero feet
and so i think uh as commissioner kaiser
mentioned it's a slippery slope once you
begin to approve
variances what is the line that the
commission
wants to
work with
as it complies with the ordinance
in particular
the distancing we had discussion tonight
about the variance was based on
we have operational procedures that
would overcome that
that would be a safeguard to having the
distance reduced to zero
the staff determined
that the overriding factor here would be
complying with the ordinance that was
adopted at the 300 feet
thank you mr chairman
i understand what you're saying however
we do have the option
to
[Music]
to give them this experience we're not
restricted from
from
going with your
with your request of denial if we decide
that we want to approve this that's
that's still our requirement
and
school has its option
all right if there are no other
questions i'd like to we can go to the
public i'm sure they're right before
excuse me i do have one comment to make
sorry
miss commission smith um
this has been as commissioner kaiser
stated a really challenging
proposal that's come before us and
you know i have uh lived downtown
for almost 24 years and
i remember a time when you know the
downtown area was on life support
and you know there was you know uh a
church there still is calvary chapel and
uh the new america school came in at
some point over the last
uh 15 years
and other than that there were various
businesses down there but it was pretty
dead down there and
you know they had the you know the
downtown revitalization committee that
came into uh came into play and i have
seen downtown uh
really grow and
as a resident downtown i've been really
you know happy to see that
you know looking at this
this school buffer
zone that they
slide that they put up
i realized that when this school
was established downtown like i said
earlier there was
basically
nothing there from a business standpoint
and as we now know there are you know
various bars restaurants cafes
you know it is a business district
for the most part and
the difficulty for me in this
proposal is that
on one hand i want to see businesses
thrive downtown i want to see new
businesses come in
and
and as commissioner kai said it is a
slippery slope when you when you start
to issue variances
where they're we're completely deviating
from the standard that's been in place
so um i just i'm saying this because you
know as we
make a a
vote on this decision on this uh it's
not going to be
it's not going to be easy i know
particularly for myself you know being a
resident of downtown so um
you know
it's um
yeah this this is a challenging one for
me so i just wanted to state that that
whatever decisions made it it's not it's
not going to be an easy one to make
thank you
i'd like to thank the chairmen and
commission for their time tonight and
just urge you to consider the economic
benefactor the colloquium laid before
you and the modus operandi of the
current economic environment downtown
and overall in the municipality thank
you
all right then with that
we now can go to the public
just everybody who would like to speak
please raise your hand
one two three four five six seven eight
all right i count eight people
um i will allow each one of you to speak
for three minutes
so when you come forward please state
your name for the record and let me
swear you in and we'll start on this
side
the gentleman here in the first row
please state your name jay wisner yeah
make sure you're talking to the
microphone
okay i think it can be raised if you
want there you go
my name is jay wisner thank you
how do you swear to affirm that the
testimony you're about to give is the
truth and nothing but to give nothing
but the truth under penalty of law yes
sir thank you go ahead
yes i would
urge you
to think of family
to think of education
to think of the families
who
have children in this school and i do
mean children i've placed children in
the school before they do have
children at that school
and
i would ask you to think of
their
the impact on their children
i have forwarded a an article to each of
you i believe it's been distributed to
each of you about the impact of cannabis
ads and location
and the influence on youth
regarding marijuana use
i've forwarded a fact sheet on cannabis
from the dea
and a study
which talks about
increased
incidence of addiction for youth
and no they can't buy the cannabis there
if you were to pass it that's true
but it's there right beside them i want
you to thank each of you who have ever
had children would you want your child
in a school
with a cannabis distribution point
right next door with an adjoining wall
to where your child receives education
would you want that
i would also ask you to think about your
position as leaders in this community
the leaders in our community should be
looking out for the most vulnerable in
our community
and if children aren't the most
vulnerable and one of the poorest
counties in our country
then i don't know who is
i'm asking you to think of these
families i'm asking you to think of
their impact
and i'm also i would ask a question
which i'm pretty sure i know the answer
to were the parents at the school
of the children at that school notified
and if not why not
i mean
they
certainly have a voice here i would
think they certainly have an interest
if they have children in that school
i mean that would be my question do they
not have an interest
and
that's what i would ask you know the
decision lies at your feet and if
approved we may very well have the
dubious distinction of having the first
city in our country
was a thc distributor attached to a
public school do you want that
distinction
i would ask that and
i leave with that
i have some studies here if anybody's
interested they were emailed out to you
they're the same ones that were emailed
earlier
okay thank you does anybody have any
questions
comments
all right thank you sir
thank you just one last statement if if
it is approved we will
we will go on in the morning and
challenge it so i do appreciate your
time i do thank you
anyone in the second row
the gentleman with the hut
i guess that's the third row
are you please state your name mark
veath i have to swear you win
do you swear affirmative testimony
you're about to give is the truth or
nothing but the truth and the penalty of
law i do all right sir go ahead
i'd like to thank mr smith for pointing
out earlier about the greed of business
over the
welfare of somebody's house
or the welfare of children
thank you for pointing that out
there is currently a business
in this location
and when i drive by there i don't see
that business having any hardship
so they're just adding to how much money
they can make
hope maybe they might create a few more
jobs but the bottom line is they will be
making more money
mr kaiser
to you i point out yes you're correct
they are already selling
controlled substance there federally
approved controlled substance
not
something that santa fe approved
are we
300 feet should be non-negotiable
non-negotiable this is our children
are we gonna sell our children out just
so that somebody can make a little bit
more money
we had testimony that it started out at
a thousand that was too great 600 down
down down 300. 300 should be
non-negotiable thank you
all right thank you
and i moved to the next row
i guess that was three four five a
lady in the corner back there
can you please state your name my name
is marcy valdez all right i have to
swear you in please
do you swear affirmative testimony about
to give the truth and nothing but the
truth on the penalty of law yes i do all
right go ahead
my name is marcie valdez and i would
i come in
100 percent support of
farm true
messiah valley pharmacy
i met
um sorry i'm a little nervous
i met
these doctors
several years back when my daughter
became chronically ill and i'm going to
ask her to stand
and if you would please take a look at
her this is a walking miracle
without the products that these
pharmacists
so graciously had a vision and a dream
excuse me
several years ago
this my daughter
would not be here today
she lived in a dark room she suffered
chronic migraine
so if we want to talk about children
this is mine
and i thank the pharmacist
for creating the product that they have
today
and it's not about money it's not about
finances i'm sure they
are very well educated to do something
else
it's not about that it's about the
community
it's about the welfare of our community
and we're talking about the feet and all
that but i'm talking about a life
there's a different aspect as well
there's life and there's
use of medical
cannabis
there's a lot of information as well
regarding
the good use of it we're not talking
about recreational
you know kind of stuff like that we're
talking about the medical use of
cannabis
now my daughter has been using
farm true products
for the last three years
and like i said she is a walking miracle
and her doctors can testify regarding
that it is in her medical file
no other pharmaceutical narcotic that is
created synthetically anywhere on this
earth
worked for her the only thing that ever
worked for her was the cbd product that
farm true provided and it is documented
by her doctor
and i can provide that if anybody would
like it i don't have it today but if you
would like it i can provide it
and so i'm coming today to you chairman
and
commissioners to consider the fact that
there is a
community of
disabled people
that are thankful
for these pharmacists for the business
that they created and if we're talking
about a wall
that separates the two the school and
the business
children cannot walk through a wall
and i'm sure if you look at their
their
map
of what they did
there are protocols
provided for safety
thank you
but before you leave i have a question i
want to clarify what you just said did
your daughter take cbd or thc she took
cbd but i am not opposed for her trying
anything that they have provided that
provided that it would give my daughter
better quality of life well if cbd works
and i know you buy cbd almost anywheres
now you don't even need to go into a
pharmacy you can go any store
basically all everybody sells cbd and
that is correct although
in my daughter's case different cbds did
not work the only one that worked was
the the product that they provided and
their the way they produced it not
really sure how that is i'm not a
scientist i'm not a pharmacist and i'm
sure that they can provide that for you
all i know is that my daughter is now
here where before she was not okay thank
you thank you i appreciate your time
thank you
the gentleman with the
raise his hand
please state your name ramon martinez
all right do you swear affirmative
testimony you're about to give us the
truth or nothing but the truth on the
penalty of law
yes all right go ahead sir
i'm just here i wasn't going to talk but
my wife takes
medical marijuana that helps her
i've had two back surgeries i've tried
everything
my doctor tried the thc that really
expensive and it just
made me loony so i can't take it
i'm not against the marijuana use but i
am against
people selling drugs next to a school
and a church down the street
there are kids
that shouldn't be on that stuff at least
to other drugs we know that
but the thing is that we're fighting
here is the fact that they're trying to
sell marijuana next door and i think
that's wrong my wife is against it i
wish i would have brought her she would
have explained to you yeah there is
medical use for marijuana
but not next to his kids school
thank you
all right thank you
[Music]
going up any
all the way in the back
a little lady in the blue
dawn katnak okay i have to swear you in
please
do you swear or affirm that the
testimony about the game is the truth to
nothing but the truth on the penalty of
law yes all right go ahead thank you
my name again is dawn catnak i am a
teacher at new america school and have
been a teacher there since 2012.
our students range in ages from 14
to 22
pre-pandemic we would take students up
to any age if they had not yet gotten
their high school diploma
our target population is at risk
students
they come to new america because for
some reason or other they were did not
or were unable to be successful
in a regular high school
we have 12 teachers there we work with
them we try to convince them of the
importance of education
of the importance of getting their high
school diploma
there
were pretty successful
sometimes we have kids that drop out
we have kids that hit a stumbling block
one of our problems is drugs
maybe they
get taken away by the police
because of drugs not necessarily taken
away at our school
but drugs are a problem because our
oldest students can be up to 23 years
old
maybe they can find a retailer who sells
drugs and they can get the drugs from
them that is our big concern at our
school
thank you
all right thank you
anyone else on this side
wait a minute i'll come back to you
susie kimball i'm the president of the
governing council at new america school
okay let me sway you in then please
do you swear from that the testimony
about to give us the truth and nothing
but the truth on the penalty of law yes
all right go ahead first i want to
clarify that mr buck is wrong
the dlcp employee who sits on our board
has not surpri supplied us with any
economic numbers excuse me but just make
sure you're talking to the microphone so
the recorder can get you information the
glcp employee who sits on our school
board has not provided us with any
economic indicators any numbers any
inside information from farm true or
from the city valley pharmacy that's an
outright lie and i just want you to know
when we have talked about farm true and
the messi valley pharmacy
we talked in the very beginning of the
year they came and visited with us and
talked to us about building their
pharmacy and then said we're considering
going into the further realm what would
you all think about that and we told
them as a school we would be opposed we
didn't want that so close to our school
and they said we understand we will
probably still pursue it we said we
understand we will probably still oppose
it it's been cordial all along there's
been no conflict we haven't been mean to
them our staff our students go into that
pharmacy on a regular basis
half of us have gotten our vaccinations
at that pharmacy we enjoy that pharmacy
we appreciate that pharmacy we just
believe that the variance rule was put
into place for safety so for you all to
just disregard it and say ah that
doesn't mean anything we'll go ahead and
do it with a zero
zero very zero distance that's wrong and
you're setting a precedent you really
are and it is a slippery slope because
then the next time the next person comes
and says we're only 87 feet apart
they're gonna say you gave it to them
and they were zero feet apart and that's
what you're starting and that's what's
not good we're not opposed to marijuana
we're not opposed to being sold we just
don't want it sold at our back door
that's the problem we see as the miss
katnack said many of our students are
high risk which means they have a
history of not making good decisions so
if they see someone in the parking lot
that's likely to help them get marijuana
drugs marijuana products they're going
to try it it's going to increase
security requirements at our school it's
going to increase increased monitoring
by our teachers we already have to
monitor our students and if a student
walks in and we know they have drugs on
them we call the police
we don't we don't fiddle around we call
the police we can't have that on our
campus so to be so close to us puts us
in a bad way and they knew when they
came that we were going to protest it
and i just want you to know that we're
still friendly with them we still like
that pharmacy we still appreciate it
and and we want them to stay in the area
and as you talked about las cruces being
kind of run down when we built new
america school we bought the old las
cruces furniture building that had been
empty for 40 years it had molds it had
dirt it had crap we built it and turned
it into a beautiful building so for you
not to respect us as an anchor on the
downtown area
is really detrimental to what we do we
brightened up that end of the street
other businesses came because of us
we weren't the only driver but we really
were a driver and that building was an
eyesore so i just want y'all to keep
that in mind that
we are an important part and i think if
you had children that went to that
school you wouldn't want pot being sold
next door either
all right thank you
before you ma'am ladies and gentlemen
can i make a comment real quick
super super quick
oh
the
commissioner gordon could i could i make
a comment real quick um
and and i understand that you know
there's a lot of there's a lot of
emotions involved with this but if we
could please refer to uh this is
cannabis or the appropriate term calling
it marijuana or marijuana pot is not
helpful
so again it's not an attack on anybody
that has spoken i just want to make that
clear
all right thank you this gentleman here
and then we'll go back up to you right
after that
should be sure let her go she has that
little child thank you so much
could you please state your name sure my
name is nicole fox i do you swear or
affirm that the testimony about to give
is the truth or nothing but the truth i
know benefit lawn is saying for that
person
i do
my name is nicole fox i'm a technical
writer in the cannabis industry i do
licensing standard operating procedures
business plans and general consultation
ironically some of the people who stood
up and opposed before me are my former
colleagues as i worked in the behavioral
health field for 13 years at families
and youth incorporated
i also was the board president of las
montana's charter high school who serves
a similar population as new americas
i just want to make a few comments
i'll try to be as pointed as i can it's
a little distracting holding a baby
having to comment
i want to say first of all that
discussing the fact that
cannabis could potentially be
addicting for youth is
practically a null point in this
situation where opioids are also sold
right next door to the school
and the opiate problem that we have here
in dona ana county and basically
nationwide is much more unsettling than
any discussion we could have about the
negative effects of cannabis
secondly i understand the school's
concern however if they have a student
who is in possession of marijuana and
they are 21 or older the police cannot
be called on them because it is now
legal here in the state of new mexico
thirdly in order to receive a state
license
to be a retail establishment for
cannabis
businesses have to go through some
pretty strict compliance
including
security systems with cameras that are
monitored
by cell phone and on-site and can be
monitored at any time by the cannabis
control division and regulation and
licensing division
many cannabis businesses choose to also
have human security in addition to the
really intense security systems they're
required to have
the other point that i want to speak on
is the economic development point and
and the establishment of potentially
skilled jobs in the field of cannabis
when they're talking about mixing
compounds and retailing cannabis
this is not um a
line of work that is fulfilled by
someone without
special credentials not
just a pharmacist but also
people who are preparing
compounds or infusions or extractions of
cannabis
very likely hold some kind of degree
like a chemical engineering degree so
the positions that they talk about that
will be created are not minimum wage
retail positions these are highly
skilled positions that will contribute
to the expansion of our economy so
those are just a few points i wanted to
make there's a lot of misinformation
especially when we continue to
reinforce the stigmatization of cannabis
by calling it cannabis i mean by calling
it marijuana and or comparing it to
drugs thank you
all right thank you
yes sir
from a different perspective at the baby
house
you'll please state your name jerry
thompson
all right
do you swear firm that the testimony
about to give is the truth and nothing
but the truth under penalty of law yes
sir
go ahead
i i come to you from a little bit
different perspective than the other
folks in here uh about cannabis
are there any vietnam veterans
up on this you're a vietnam veteran i
won't put you on the spot sir uh but i'm
sure you're you remember
the vietnam war especially the combat
troops the infantrymen and all the
problems we had with drugs in vietnam
uh we had soldiers committing yes sir
you going to say something
nichols for the record i remember very
clearly sir
so we had fracture side going on we had
soldiers killing soldiers we had some
serious drug problems
i'm a former united states army soldier
the united states army went through some
real growing pains after the vietnam war
one of those growing pains was
recognizing the dangers
of drug abuse of these kind of drugs
cannabis okay not medical marijuana i'm
sorry medical cannabis the cannabis
among the soldiers
as a commander in the united states army
i chaptered out several soldiers
for drug related offenses
and i will tell you
when those sold when soldiers went to
the field or went on combat operations
went or got deployed they did not have
it they it was not there alcohol wasn't
there general order number one was the
rule
those soldiers did fine
i was
with specialist granberry i was a scout
platoon leader i had specialist
granberry
he became a hero
came back to garrison came back to the
states
one month later specialist granberry was
chapter out of the army
for drugs
i will tell you
it is it
your
it is a problem
with drugs in the in the military so i'm
i'm here talking about you know we've
had some people come up to talk about
how great
cannabis is and i'm sure it's got some
medical benefits but i will tell you
from first-hand experience the united
states army is a much better fighting
force now
because we got rid of the drug problem
in the united states army who had in
vietnam
thank you for your service sir that's
all i've got
all right thank you
anyone else on this side
right then we'll go to the other side go
towards the back
lady right there yes
can you please state your name
janet collins all right let me show you
in please
do you swear from that the testimony
about to give is the truth and nothing
but the truth on the penalty of the law
go ahead thank you okay good evening
ladies and gentlemen i have things
written down because i forget
my name is janet collins i am not a
parent at new america school
but i am a concerned citizen
i've never seen
anything like this try
come up
where either a bar or this type of
business would be butted up
to a school
when i heard that of this variant's
request i started looking into the
regulation set forth in the new mexico
cannabis control division and saw there
were a few operational requirements for
cannabis establishments
it said
that new mexico state law set the
300-foot rule article 2-c cannabis
regulation states a local jurisdiction
may adopt
time place and manner rules that do not
conflict with the cannabis regulation
act or the d johnson clean indoor act
although the minimum distance can't be
said
or forced
more than the 300 feet
if you start cutting it down
at some point you're not going to be
able to say no
you have to go back to the 300 feet like
you said it is a slippery slope once you
start cutting it down cutting it down
there's no turning back
these children
are our future
so what we're looking at is a business
worried about monetary problems
to our future
you know i don't point fingers because i
was there
you know i feel sorry for the lady back
here whose daughter is having to be
under all of that i went through that i
just
didn't do the cannabis
i found out
aspartame it was causing me migraines to
this day i have
i have
migraines regular headaches every day
guess what
i've got sleep apnea
so now i'm having to use a mask every
night and look like darth vader
but i'm waking up refreshed with energy
i don't want kids to go through
everything i did
and it does lead to that even if they
say it's not addicting what used to be a
good for me one joint it wasn't enough
it would the high wasn't there then it
was more and more if it's medical use
you have the card that's different i'm
not saying don't have these businesses
don't have them up against a school
don't knock down that 300-foot
law that's there set there for the
safety of children
daycares even churches
take all this into consideration please
thank you
[Applause]
all right thank you anybody else on this
side yes young lady
all right
do you swear affirmative testimony about
to give is it truth and nothing but the
truth on the penalty of law yes all
right go ahead
so my name is salma temez and i have had
the pleasure of working for messiah
valley pharmacy and their owners for a
little over half a year now
um
i can attest that
what they're trying to do
we're not tr they are not trying to
go over any
um
break any laws or anything
um
they're
i'm a little nervous so i'm sorry i'm
looking at my phone
while there is concern from the parents
here at the new americas school
this concern wasn't raised for
controlled substances where we dispense
opiates and 92 000
people in 2020 died of opioid overdoses
this cannabis is another way for people
to manage their pain
and have a better quality of life i've
known of several people
who
have been able to get off of opioids
that
they weren't able to work
weren't able to do anything and medical
cannabis saved their life
what better
what better place but better people to
operate a dispensary than pharmacists
they go through four years of
pharmacy school
they get educated on the
pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of
medicine and how it interacts in your
body
there is a stigma with cannabis
and people maybe aren't comfortable
asking their doctor about the effects on
their medications
pharmacists
like
joaquin
and the other owners are there to be
able to answer their questions
to be able to help their patients
understand if the medications that
they're currently taking
will are they going to affect it more
with cannabis
this is a really safe option for people
no other dispensary in town can offer it
as well
another concern as
commissioner kaiser
where it is a slippery slope but are we
gonna prevent other
if we don't do it someone else
more than 300 feet could do it
are we are they going to say no because
there's still a school involved
the the kids here can walk they do have
access to cars they can drive what's to
stop them to driving to another
dispensary
and getting cannabis there what is the
difference
there
they're
they're able there is three bars
in the vicinity or four broad retrograde
um and little toad there's alcohol there
there's a bunch of a lot of things we
have the security measures here
for to prevent students accessing the
cannabis
thank you for your time
all right thank you
is there anyone else
yes ma'am
my name is christina forbush all right
let me swear you in
do you swear for him that the testimony
you're about to receive is the truth or
nothing but it's a gift rather is it
truth or nothing but the truth on the
penalty of law yes thank you go ahead
so
i've been sitting here listening
uh to everybody and everybody has
extremely valid points however what i
would like to point out is it's all
about the education of what we teach our
children i'm sorry
of what we need to teach our children
and
what a better place than at this school
yes they're high risk and it is it could
be potentially hazardous however
it's all about educating and telling
them teaching them
not to do this not to do that and this
should be part of it i think and that
goes along the ways of
most of this cannabis uses the education
is where we need to focus on and
teaching our children and our
communities what we need to do and what
is correct
um i think that needs to be a little bit
more um
documented and
i don't know
looked into
if we could have some sort of a
community outreach
some sort of a curriculum addendum
something but we need to be able
education is where it starts and i think
that's where it needs to be
and then thank you
all right thank you is there anyone else
who cares to speak
yes sir 50 generally
all right
i don't know i'm going to ask you
you've already spoken on behalf of the
applicant what is it that you'd like to
add other than what you've already said
i would like to invite a doctor down
from the staff but can i make a closing
argument
all right well let let me just see if
there's anyone else has something to say
then they can raise their hand we'll
give them the same amount of time okay
yes sir
all right with great intentions i
promise just for the record please uh
secretary
zachary flores all right since we've
already sworn you in i don't think it's
necessary
all right cool
i just kind of want to start by saying
that i grew up with joaquin he's the one
of the owners of
farm true end of messiah valley pharmacy
we grew up since sixth grade middle
school together
making all the same choices hanging out
doing everything we could together
he went to school
he went to nmsu
he took advantage of the lottery
scholarship which we provide now to
everybody thank you for new mexico right
and he stayed
he stayed in new mexico he used his
degree in new mexico not just new mexico
he used his degree downtown right this
revitalization so if you want to talk
about
kids um
you know with with potentially trouble
pass he didn't really get in trouble you
probably wouldn't be able to find
something you mind but not his
um so
someone like him right
um i'd like to point to his integrity i
know him personally very well right so
as as a person
um
you probably won't find a better guy
and i've served as well thank you for
your service i've gone to afghanistan
twice so i know how to judge the
character of a person and he has from
the moment we we've met and became our
friendship
he was
a a very very respectable very
high integrity type person right and
then to come back to new mexico and
continue
business
it is business right a school is
business right so we're talking about
we're talking about this school
as if it's not it's not the the full
intention of this charter school is to
get children or children you keep using
this word children they're they're
almost they're they're adults they're
adolescent you know they're they're
older than 14 years old so we're getting
these these teenagers and pushing them
into into places that you if you say oh
all of this this cannabis user
everything that we're looking at right
now is is not good for for for this
it's in a new we're in a new new mexico
we're in a new u.s right so it's
legalized and that's not going anywhere
and if you talk about a
if you talk about a slippery slope well
the variance as a real estate
professional i know that there is a
variance of variance means of variance
right you don't have to give it to
everybody but i implore you to give it
to these gentlemen why because they have
those protocols in place to prevent
anyone from taking advantage of it right
what is to stop one of these kids from
going to one of the vagrants that that
stay on the downtown strip we talk about
it's in our house we have a lot of a lot
of you know nerdy wells or whatever um
on on this downtown strip what's to stop
those guys from getting it from
somewhere else and giving it to these
kids
there's nothing really stopping them
right but these these gentlemen have
controls in place to prevent any
anything from their store
from them
to to a student at the school right so
i'd like to close and say these
gentlemen
are high integrity people and i do
implore you to look at their character
in granting a variance not to look at
the the struggles between marijuana and
or cannabis and and students right
students being 14 15 16 year olds um
we're looking at variance between um
this business
and that 300 foot rule
with all of these measures already put
into place
for their opiates for adderall for xanax
it's already there so i would implore
you guys to grant the
variance
one time
because just as easily as they can move
theirs
new america which if you look at that
new america covers quite a bit
and you can say why don't they just move
mr chairman may interrupt sorry could
you wrap up please sir we don't want to
give you unfair advantage to the other
speakers i understand i i you know there
was a lot to be said about emotions and
i wanted to bring it back to the
business aspect this variance should be
granted
because these these businessmen have it
in place they're not going to sell to
minors there's no way that these these
guys are going to sell to minors so i
just want you to know
high integrity individuals
[Applause]
um your request of having
someone speak now are they the applicant
yes
right
is it just one of them which wishes to
speak
all right how many how many are going to
talk
just the one
mr chairman if i may
we have heard from a number of the
audience and the public on this issue
where it's about a distancing variance
it's not really about business
operations
it's not about other issues
and so if your comments are about the
distance variation then we'd be pleased
to hear them but otherwise i think we've
probably have
had a fair
presentation for the other
trey howard
all right then i'll allow you the same
three minutes let me swear you in do you
swear affirmative testimony you're about
to give is the truth and nothing but the
truth on the penalty of law yes sir go
ahead
ladies and gentlemen of the council and
of the audience we appreciate everyone
in attendance even those opposing
uh said ruling now i will take this back
to the 300 foot variants as you said sir
but i will focus on the fact that it is
a distance variance
and there's been a lot of talk this
evening about a slippery slope
okay everyone loves that word it's a
slippery slope
and i understand the precarious
predicament that you ladies and
gentlemen are in
here trying to make this call
but what you'll need to realize is that
we are not your run of the meal
dispensary
fly by night californian people that
come in and throw up a dispensary
because we're april 1st now
we are local
doctors
of pharmacy and drug use we went to
college here in new mexico
for nearly eight years studying drug
safety
and
controlled substance use
to try to better our state
this is not your typical variance in the
sense that
you know
sorry if i'm at a loss for words
we're not just anybody we are drug
professionals we are doctors of pharmacy
here to protect our community we are the
ones that take care of your parents
grandparents
children
we are not here to put anyone in danger
or at risk
we are only here to provide a higher
level of service for a new industry in
our state
we
do not intend to do anything but uplift
the cannabis industry by applying the
same standards of controlled substance
use monitoring and reconciliation that
we already do every day for hundreds of
patients in our community
to cannabis
this is not a typical dispensary to walk
in
grab your pot and get out this is an
opportunity for higher level health care
sorry about that by the way
this is an opportunity for higher level
health care better monitoring of a brand
new industry within our state
and the ability to allow trained drug
professionals
to take on
something that is
potentially one of the best things to
happen for new mexico in a long time
so i thank you guys so much for the
opportunity to talk i'm sorry that i got
off a little bit from the 300 foot
variance i hope you can forgive me
and
you ladies and gentlemen have a good
evening
all right thank you
with that i think i'd like to come back
to the commission that anybody has any
comments or questions or things they'd
like to say at this point
um commissioner vega
um just a quick question so
i think it's for staff can a school be
established within so we've said how you
can't establish a alcohol or a thc
dispensary within 300 feet of a school
could a school be established if they
decided to
push the variants
mr chairman commissioner vega
the ordinance
is
and catherine correct me if i'm wrong
but the ordinance is very clear in that
it's a one-way street
however in the past i can tell you that
we've applied it in two ways
it didn't deal with cannabis and it
didn't deal with a school but
nonetheless there were some restrictions
back in the day that were typically
applied one-sided and we made sure that
they were applied in both directions so
both uses
met with the same criteria and i would
assume
even though it's written in a single
direction
we'd have to take into consideration
the alternative
commissioner guerrero
yeah i just uh i wanted to make a a
couple quick comments i'll try to be
quick because it's getting late
but
you know i just want to just reinforce
that this is this is a tough choice for
us to make because it's true
whatever we decide may set presidents
for other
businesses in the future and i just you
know i just want to thank everybody for
being here giving your comments
i love public participation i wish there
was this was public participation when
the pharmacy first opened
selling opiates and prescribed
medications through so as it's been
pointed there's also three bars just up
the street four bars around the corner
from here
all to which
students
because it's not kids in the school
students could have access to
um
i also just want to say real quick you
know we know we know that this industry
is is here it's legal in new mexico um
it's it's not going anywhere um i mean
this is an extremely professional crew
um
and you know just you know want to thank
them as well for coming but you know
just want to remind you all that
uh i actually really was moved by the
lady that gave the comment about
education because it's true a lot of
education uh when it comes to to alcohol
and cannabis or other drugs starts at
home
society can definitely pitch in but it
starts at home as well so you know it's
a good opportunity for parents to get
more involved in the life of their
children as well if they're still
concerned so
you know just wanted to just share those
comments
i'd like to make one more
quick comment
forgive me for
speaking again
you know as i've sat here and listened
to both sides of this this um this
proposal um i've also been sitting here
looking at this powerpoint that's been
sitting here for you know for about over
45 minutes
and as i stated earlier i've been living
downtown for you know almost 24 years
and
i keep focusing on central elementary
school my daughter attended central
elementary school
i walked her to central elementary
school
and
i think about
downtown and the growth that has
occurred but we also have to remember
that this is still part of a
neighborhood
that there are homes and their families
there there are kids that will be
walked to school because there was a
point
though you've been here a long time
remember they
they were going to close central
elementary school and the parents and
the in
families that community fought to keep
central elementary school open
and so as i look at the new america
school
in in the location of this uh of the uh
farm true
[Music]
proposal
it's it's it comes back to how difficult
this this decision is going to be based
on the fact that there is a buffer that
is in place it is part of the city code
and
for the 300 feet and
looking at central elementary school if
we were to have a
a variance of zero
beside this school at what point where
this no longer becomes
a community of families
along with businesses it just strictly
becomes a downtown of businesses and i
just think it's important that we keep
that
in perspective when we think about
what's happening downtown because there
are families
and people like me who still live
downtown is part of our community it's
where we live it's where we attend
church it's where we go to school and
where we shop
so
like i said it's a difficult decision
that needs to be made but it's also got
to look at the the fact that
downtown is still about families too
all right
kaiser
uh just
one
question point of clarification so
is this medicinal
use
only or is there a recreational
component here
in other words how would you get access
to this as a customer do you have to
have some sort of
prescription
can the applicant could answer that
question i guess
i think apparently he's asking you
whether or not you need a a cannabis
medicine
certificate or card from the state
with this particular business no with a
proper id of an age marker of over 21 by
statute recognized by the state of new
mexico under cannabis and ccd
you will not be allowed to access
cannabis without an ear mark of 21 years
or older or a medicinal card issued by a
physician
okay so it's it you don't have to have a
prescription from a doctor to to buy
no and that is the case for all
retailers thank you
quick question for staff
going back to just the pharmacy as it
currently stands
is that an allowed use by right here are
there any
any restrictions based on the fact that
they are selling controlled substances
narcotics i mean are there any any
regulations that would apply to them in
this particular situation
without the cannabis component
mr chairman commissioner kaiser pharmacy
is an allowed use in this particular
zoning district
uh even the component
that
they speak to as it relates to
compounding
cbd that's
that's an acceptable use and and no
setbacks are required from the school
assuming that's correct no no criteria
that would
similar to what we're hearing tonight
didn't we thank you
i don't have any further questions other
than this this is this is hard
if there's no one else
let me just advise everyone here that
before the commission votes
if we vote to deny the applicant
then the applicant has the right to go
before city council and appeal our
decision so this is not the end of it as
far as they're concerned
if we vote to approve
then
the school or the general public or
whoever wishes
can also go to city council and appeal
our decision
i would suggest that if
whichever way this goes whichever party
is wants to do whatever they're going to
do is they contact community development
and get the proper protocol for
doing this appeal if that is what you
wish to do
so other than that
i think are we ready for a vote
all right and i need a motion
i'll make a motion
i'm not sure what so
i'm not sure what the motion is just for
a vote to deny or what are we
okay okay perfect so i make the motion
sorry make the motion to approve uh
the vote
oh a second
board member kaiser
i vote no based on status recommendation
and
the the fact that looking at this map
presented tonight i think there's plenty
of opportunity within the downtown
to establish
such a business
and come and fully compliant with the
setback requirements
board member smith
i vote no based on staff recommendation
although there is flexibility built into
this variant's request for a buffer i
believe that um a zero deviation um
actually
just nearly abolishes um you know the
standard of a 300 foot buffer for the
safety of you know
just
children whether it's the new america
school whether it's central elementary
school
board member bennett
i vote no
based on staff recommendation
a 100 percent buffer variance is too
excessive and sets a bad precedence
board member vega
um i also vote no this is um
it is challenging because you are a
local business and you're awesome
but
we
and and i think there's still so much
stigma tied to cannabis
but that being said to to share a wall
with a
with a school um it's it's just too
close we wouldn't even be having this
discussion if it was elementary school
right so um
that's my answer
board member guerrero
oh god that's a tough one um i i will
vote no but um i just want to say that
you know we should be holding the same
standard for other controlled substances
as well not just cannabis
so
moving forward and i know that this is
not you know legislation or anything but
i just i really i really hope to see the
public more engaged when it's other
controlled substances not just cannabis
chair gordon
if it wasn't for the 300 foot minimum
requirement
this would be a no-brainer and the
applicant wouldn't be here
but
i am also in a position where i think
i'm going to vote no
based on my
discussion this evening
and
my vote is no
thank you that's six for negative
mr chairman if i may
i would like to
suggest a
recess for
10 minutes and reconvene at 9 10.
you just can't keep
so
okay
what's the difference
thank you
uh
thank you
uh
so
okay just crashed
yes
oh
let's try to go around
uh
did you see
just
that you know
he's been in the same house longer than
any other house my mother's trying to
put her foot down
okay
when we moved here there was no
officers
i told you i didn't want to hear your
time
can we get everybody back in their seats
please
um
everyone is here all right let's let's
resume
it is now 9 10.
how so
mr chairman members of the commission
vince monaghan's interim planner
presenting the third and final of my
cases
involving 801 east farney lane it is a
rezoning
application that was submitted to staff
current prop zoning of the property is
r3 and c3 conditional
and they're seeking to rezone it to
straight r3
the current conditions uh that are in
play here with this application is the
property is located at
801 east farney lane
it is at the intersection
basically of three roadways el paseo
road
farney lane on the south el paseo road
is on the west
and
west park drive
is on the east
the property as presented in our
assessors
records is a plus or minus point
4.35 acres
it is an underutilized parcel
there is a single-family home on the
parcel
but because of its
acreage and because of the use it is
considered underutilized
and as indicated pursuant to the zoning
it does have a pancake zone what staff
considers to be pancake zoning of r3 c3c
the r3 is our multi-dwelling medium
density residential district in our code
and c3
is our commercial high intensity
the sea at the end of this
grouping of zoning districts means
conditional
conditions as per
ordinance 2767
stipulate
that there's
several conditions actually but they
stipulate that the residential units are
to be capped at 60 for the property when
development takes place
there's also restrictions
on alcohol sales and
hours of operations operation for
commercial establishments that
might locate on the property
and there's also a number of prohibited
non-residential uses that are
again outlined in this ordinance 2767.
the property is within the urban
neighborhood place type pursuant to our
comprehensive plan
and it's also subject to the alpa sale
corridor community blueprint
which established some
closer focus on attempting to develop
properties along el paseo
the applicant's request helps pave the
way to
facilitate the proposed development of
the property they're looking to
create or develop a senior apartment
complex
that issue is not part of this request
but i'm informing you of what they've
come forward with
the r3 zoning that they seek
pursuant to this request helps pave the
way for that development
and i think in your packets i had
stipulated that there's r3 zoning allows
for 15 dwelling units per acre that is
incorrect it should be 20 dwelling units
per acre
but again there is a cap of that 60 that
is still in play
today
the r3 zoning district allows a building
height of 35 feet and the c3
district allows 60 feet
and there's currently
no cap that was established pursuant to
that ordinance previously mentioned
so here's the zoning of the property
the properties outline are bordered in
red here you have west park drive along
the east side farney lane on the south
and el paseo road
on the west side
you have a good
percentage of acreage on the west side
of el paseo road that's currently r1a
zoning a lot of single family
dwelling development
occurs in this location
you also have a pud south of the
property it too a single family in
nature
in large part
and
the school is further northwest las
cruces high school i should say you have
immediately north of the subject
property church
and some additional las cruces high
school facilities
thereafter
further north
the park
sits there is a park that sits right
here along west park drive and in farney
lane
and further east of that is some
commercial property
that has various commercial type uses
both restaurant and
retail etc
this is the aerial of that property
again property outlined in red
churches again directly north
but you can see the distribution of land
uses taking place
what you don't see is further south of
the subject property and where it's cut
off on this aerial as you start getting
into other zones there's a
o2 zone which is our office zone and you
start getting to other development
that is apartment complexes things of
that nature as you get closer to the
university
so the proposal that was brought before
us again is to
[Music]
rezone the r3 c3c property
two straight r3
r3 again multi-dwelling medium intensity
and
the conditions
that i previously stipulated would be
removed there would be no conditions
unless your actions tonight
recommended that the
conditions be placed which would then go
to city council for consideration
but
as it's presented this evening they're
looking to eliminate the conditions
which basically eliminates any of the
commercial aspects associated with the
property
this again facilitates the senior
apartment complex
that the developer is seeking to
build on the property
and it was originally that aspect of of
the proposal was originally going to be
brought simultaneously as as a infield
development proposal
but because of some design site design
related issues they're working with
staff we're still trying to resolve some
of those
issues
it was decided to bring forward the
zoning aspect which would have to be
dealt with anyway
and
move on from there
the
elevate las cruces and el paseo corridor
uh community blueprints the provisions
that are provided in there the policies
and goals and focus that both documents
present
lend support for the r3 zone change
request
so uh associated with this proposal it
should be noted that the applicant was
informed of a need to do some early
notification pursuant to the zoning code
and they did take that initiative they
notified
property owners and neighborhood
associations within the area as outlined
in the
zoning code
and i believe it was in january that the
meeting with the neighborhood took place
they informed the neighborhood and the
associations of their intentions both
with the zoning and with the actual
development
and from the information obtained from
the applicant there was substantial
neighborhood support for
what they were seeking to do
one of the key things um staff feels and
that that came from that endeavor is the
removal
of the potential removal of the
commercial zoning and the land uses that
might
eventually coincide with the commercial
aspect of the zoning of the property
that was long held to be problematic
with this site
so
again this isn't part of tonight's
package
for consideration but nonetheless this
was the site plan that they had brought
forward
looking at this site plan there
they were proposing 74
units apartment units in this building
it was a three-story building
being proposed and you had some duplex
units there were three duplex units here
that made up the remaining six for a
total of 80 units
you had some garage
individual garages that could be leased
by the residents eventually in in the
facility
and garages here and here and also on
the opposite side along west park drive
here and here
access
that was discussed
embedded with staff not only community
development staff but transportation
staff was
going to be located here to avoid any
conflicts
with the exit point or her entrance
point to that
residential subdivision on the south
what you see here in the dashed line
was a proposed
basically pedestrian access
to the park facility
and so they tried to incorporate various
elements of again our comprehensive plan
and the el paseo corridor plan or
blueprint
into their design
a couple of photos
again this is at the corner farney lane
in el paseo this is that single-family
home
that currently sits on the property it
is being
utilized at least it's my understanding
is still utilized but it will be
demolished if if approval goes forward
and in order to accommodate the intended
development
this is a photo that's looking west
at the more or less intersection of west
park drive in farney
and another one from a different angle
looking northwest again
viewing that home and some of the
property to the to the right of it
in terms of analysis staff analysis
there were no health safety or welfare
issues that were identified by staff
staff felt that the proposed zoning or
zone change i should say
provided the necessary compatibility
with existing uses and of course the
neighborhood surrounding neighborhood
the property is within the urban place
type as per our comprehensive plan
and is subject to of course the
el paseo blueprint
the comp plan as we know now
after many cases being vetted before you
encourages mixed use
and in this case
the urban
place type encourages medium to high
residential densities
attainable housing and variety housing
styles while the blueprint encourages
higher density along the corridor and
attainable housing within the same
development
all these factors that are summarized in
terms of the comprehensive plan and the
blueprint or elements that were
introduced not only with the zoning
but with the proposed development that
had been presented to staff
public notice and input
the case was noticed as per code
staff received a couple of emails
those have been provided to you
one was in support of the proposal
and there was one that was proposing a
condition and i think
in looking at that email they were
proposing limiting the height to 25 feet
please keep in mind that the r3 zone
both today
and
if this goes through would allow
35 feet
so
somewhat
of an element or issue to deal with
there
the early notification meeting i touched
on already that was one 1822
again some of the concerns at that
meeting which were mitigated uh
talking about traffic impacts and and
how the offset and access would help
alleviate some of those concerns
but it was also mentioned that there
would be a good transition in terms of
land use
for this property and its intended
development in terms of some of the
more dense or
more commercialized properties further
north
oops
so staff's recommendation we're
recommending approval based on the
findings
they are provided in your packet
be advised that
again the neighborhood showed
substantial support at that neighborhood
meeting
the zone change facilitates the
applicant's proposal and is found to be
compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood
it is an infill parcel and subject to
infill criteria if they so deem
it necessary and so
in this case by facilitating the zone
change and ultimately
any development proposal via the idp
process we are changing virtually what
what consists of an inactive parcel to a
very active parcel should this
come to fruition
the
compliance with the blueprint and our
comprehensive plan has been illustrated
and so i just wanted to reiterate
there's a
consistency in that regard
and
several of the goals obviously are in
support of the request it's also
consistent with the purpose intent of
the las cruces zoning code
and
criteria for decisions in the municipal
code
your options this evening are to vote
yes and approve
the request that has been brought to you
this evening you can vote no and deny
please be aware that new findings would
be necessary
and you could vote yes with conditions
and vote to tape them
and mr chairman that concludes staff's
presentation i know the applicant uh
applicant's representative are in
attendance and and they would like to
say a few words and they'd be here to
answer any questions you might have also
i have a question
[Music]
just
something that was stated in the packet
of your summary or recommendation it
says
sorry it says that the owner developer
is proposing a senior apartment complex
is this going to be an over 55 community
is it
my understanding reading the
documentation provided mr chairman
commissioners is that it would be an age
restricted
development so specifically targeting
senior
is there like an age
a minimum that you could go there like
60 65
applicant will respond to that okay is
there any does anybody else have any
questions to staff
all right
yes
i'll wait until the applicant okay then
we can hear from the applicant who can
answer my question
mr chairman my name is tom mantrak all
right do you swear affirmative testimony
about to give the truth or nothing about
the truth on the penalty of law i do go
ahead thank you thank you i will be as
brief as i can possibly be and try to
stick with the zoning but i think
there's an important component
that uh needs to be layered into that
discussion basically what we have is a
4.2 4.3 acre parcel that is split zoned
we could build a 60 unit family
apartment complex that had four or five
bedroom apartments and about ten
thousand square feet of retail type use
on this site that's the ordinance that
was passed several years ago
what we're proposing to do
and i'm going to introduce ron bohannon
with the tiara west from albuquerque as
our engineer and land use consultant so
technical questions he can answer but uh
what we're proposing to do is to
to
give back if you will the more intense
use
of the 10 000 square feet of retail
roughly
and and and develop an 80 unit senior
apartment complex which would fit within
the r3 density so there's no density
variance that we're asking for
uh importantly
this apartment community will be age
restricted 62 and older and will be
income and rent restricted because some
of the financing package will go through
new mexico mortgage finance authority
uh the as i said the age is 62 and older
and based on the current income and rent
numbers uh and we'll be renting to
individuals and couples uh incomes will
range from about ninety five hundred
dollars per year to about forty thousand
dollars per year
the one bedroom rents are i'm believe me
when i say that's 307 dollars a month to
about 800 a month the two bedroom rents
are about 370 dollars a month to about
980.
the the land use restriction just like
when a subdivision comes in you put
ccnr's on a subdivision there will be
recorded covenants against this property
which ace which say you must rent to
your age group for a period of 40 years
and you must rent to this income group
for a period of 40 years and that
document is recorded ahead of our loan
documents so if we don't do it right
we're in trouble
so it's very important as you're looking
at this zoning request to even though
the intended use is not before you right
now that is the only use we will put the
property to and there will be
restrictions in place between us
probably the city of las cruces because
it's we have requested some money and
and natalie is here to maybe answer a
question you have one
but there will be recordable
foreclosable documents between our
company and new mexico mortgage finance
authority that requires us to do exactly
what i'm telling you tonight
we have always done neighborhood
outreach when we started doing this a
lot of years ago 32 years ago very few
jurisdictions required neighborhood
pre-application neighborhood meetings we
have always done that um the meeting we
had at las cruces high school was was
not very well attended because it was
cold and windy and rainy that night but
we had a number of people who attended
via zoom
and very good questions were asked we
did a follow-up letter
summarizing the meeting when the when
the application was submitted the first
part of february we mailed the
application with another summary to all
of the neighbors
when the staff report came in we mailed
the staff report and and another summary
to all the neighbors
what i did in the in the letter to that
that included the staff report as i said
you know if if you like what we're doing
would you please let the city know and
so we get i got two or three emails says
well we don't like what you're doing
and we just want it to be vacant land
forever
um
that's the way this business goes
sometimes we did have a follow-up zoom
meeting last night with
five neighbors run i think five
neighbors a couple of them were the ones
that said we don't like what you're
doing and they were okay by the end of
the meeting and you got a a positive
note i think today from one of them we
also spent about an hour this afternoon
with representatives of the church who
had not been able to come to any of the
previous meetings it was very thoughtful
and you know we're going to be neighbors
and you know tell us about your fence
and you know we have a community garden
are you going to have a community garden
it was very interactive and very
positive and the two gentlemen we met
with cannot be here tonight but they did
authorize ron and i to say that speaking
on behalf of the church they're very
supportive of what we're doing
so the zoning change is necessary to
construct 80 units of senior affordable
housing in las cruces which will be
governed by
new mexico mortgage finance authority we
will be income and age restricted for 40
to 44 years i don't remember what the
number but a long time
staff report was very well done i'm
happy to answer any questions
uh so not so much a question but um more
of i think a comment at this point
first of all i think the the proposal in
front of us is is great um i think it's
highly needed especially in the el paseo
corridor i know that's been an area of
focus for the city for quite some time
i'm wondering vincent if you could go
back to the proposed or the con the
conceptual site plan
yeah that's perfect so i know it's
conceptual in nature um however because
it was in the packet and in the
presentation i feel like it's a fair
game for some critique here
um i just want to kind of point out a
couple of things specifically from the
el paseo
corridor community blueprint there's a
couple of
goals and actions here
that i think are relevant in this
particular case
goal number one talks about redeveloping
the el paseo corridor as a safer and
more user-friendly corridor
goal number four talks about
improving the aesthetic appeal of the
corridor and fostering a sense of place
or community identity along the corridor
and number six
goal number six
says support active living and healthy
community designed through
appropriate guidelines and regulations
for the planning area
we can then get into the actions
there is one action
that is designed el paseo road as a
complete street
and also one in here
that
talks about urban design architectural
standards that improve the aesthetics
and user appeal of the street
so i say all that
because what i'm seeing here
this is still more of the same car
centric design
i'll even go to page six of the el paseo
corridor and i will quote
a short paragraph here that says the
following is a composite of visual
visualization sketches and images that
were part of the public visioning
process
picturing el paseo the sketches were
conceptualized and drawn by las cruces
residents the images are samples of the
preferences shown by las cruces
residents during the visual preference
survey
and some sort of photo voice exercise
the graphic of a complete street cross
section is a is an example of how the
mixes corridor may be configured there's
a series of images on this page and none
of them
have parking lots that are visible from
the street frontage
so i would just encourage staff and you
the applicant to
seriously consider
doing some rethinking about bringing the
buildings closer to the el paseo street
frontage as well as
the road to the the south
forget the name of it off top my head
but essentially basically hiding all
that parking uh behind the building so
that the frontage along el paseo
is
is not just the surface parking lot
other than that i think it's a wonderful
opportunity for the the corridor and for
the city
mr chair ron bohannon
okay could you state your name please
ron bohannon yes do you swear
affirmative testimony about the game is
the truth and nothing but the truth on
the penalty of law i do thank you go
ahead thank you um thank you mr chair
and thank you uh commissioner kaiser um
so yes we did look at that and and
really excuse me miss brandon could you
raise the microphone slightly so we can
hear you more clearly thank you
so what we have done is we did look at
your complete streets and we have looked
at that and and so what we have actually
done is
we are we place these here as well as a
landscaped enhanced buffer in here with
groves of trees
at these locations we brought these
duplex units up to the street to do
energize that and to create that that
walkable area through this area so we we
have created that and these area
actually blocks
this area right through here from the
street so you see over this and you can
see the building so you actually have
that visual that you're looking at we do
have some elevations and some
cross-sections that we could have
brought with you and and we will be
working with staff to meet
those guidelines
through that we we have looked at
elevate
elevate las cruces and so we we do do
that we also are looking at you know the
the fire circulation the drainage the
access we vetted the access with
transportation already so we're quite a
bit ways down here we just didn't have
enough time to really vet this to a
point here
and so we that's our neck with a
successful zone change as we move
forward to city council we plan on being
back with staff to vet all of those
questions to say how we can make
everything else the other thing i'd like
to point out is this is a completely
gated community
so we want to
prevent
the students that are parking on what
the drive next to the park from parking
inside of this area as well as uh
protection of the residents as well so
we've got a lot of
of thoughts in there we and we have been
looking at the at the comp plans
i appreciate that and and i'm encouraged
by that but i'll just
say a garage and a wall
and having to look over the parking lot
i mean even if you can't see the
physical parking lot you're still
looking at a wall you're looking at a
garage fronting the street i mean
it's just that's not that's not
consistent with the visioning of this
urban corridor i mean that's that's
essentially what the community has has
asked for and with all due respect i
mean even with what you just said right
now i mean that that's just not that's
not going to cut it i mean i think you
can bring those buildings to the front
edge activate that space the building
itself
uh you know you won't necessarily have
your entrances to the buildings so
essentially you've got your wall you've
got a more active visually appearing
appealing corridor for pedestrian
cyclists
and the like and and you know the way
that i see it
this is still more of the the same car
centric design and i know we're not here
to get into that detail but i just want
to encourage
uh
encourage the staff and and you the
applicant to
push a little harder okay mr chair
commissioner we we've heard you loud and
clear thank you
and we'll answer any other questions is
there anyone else
is there anyone from the audience who
cares to speak
if not
then i'll entertain a motion
i make a motion to approve 8.3
a second
board member kaiser
yes based on staff recommendation
consistency with elevate loss creases in
the el paseo blueprint
board member smith
yes based on staff recommendation site
visit and also meets
elevate las cruces
board member bennett
yes
based on staff recommendation complies
with purpose and intent of the code
elevate las cruces
and i just think this is a
great
project and i think it's a huge need for
the community
board member vega
yes based on site visit and it meets the
alpa sale blueprint
board guerrero uh yes uh again based on
uh staff recommendations um and just you
know the need for affordable housing
it's definitely there and this this
meets it
chair gordon
i vote yes
based on my site visit staff
recommendation
i do think that this does provide nice
affordable housing this could be a
wonderful project
that does include
concept of elevate las cruces
therefore
approval sex thank you
thank you thank you very much
good evening everyone for the last item
on the agenda this is the last item on
the agenda
item six point four john
i'm eight point four i'm so hungry right
so today i will be presenting a zone
change request from our
an r1a single family medium density
uh zoning district to r2 which is
multi-dwelling medium density at a
property located at 5600 mcguffey street
the current conditions of the property
is is currently a vacant property that
encompasses 2.68 acres and it's located
on the east side of mcguffey street
it's currently zoned r1a and the
property encompasses various
it is surrounded by various zoning
districts to the north west and east
which all deal with single-family
housing or multi-family
housing
then to the south of it is commercial
and industrial zoning areas
a little bit of history on the property
as it had been previously subdivided
within the past year
into three lots
as we can see from the zoning map here
you do see the subject property which is
highlighted by this
yellow checkered item
that is the one that is in question to
be
requesting to be r2 as you can see
across on the opposite side
there is r2
right across from it there's
c3 c2 and single family housing
here you can see an aerial image the r2
is predominantly a single family housing
as it was built
but it does have the option for
multi-family housing
so the proposal is to request a zone
change from the r1a to r2
to expand on the density and intensity
of the current zoning
so the analysis of the zone change
request is consistent with existing
zoning and proximity to the property the
property is located along a local
roadway which is recommended for various
residential land uses
meets the intent and support of elevate
las cruces as it's within its suburban
neighborhood
it meets the purpose and intense
statements and pnz's decision criteria
reviews were sent to all relevant
agencies they all supported the zone
change a notice was sent out to
surrounding properties there was concern
of traffic increases
along mcguffey street
either at the time of development and
future developments across uh on the
west side of mcguffey as well
staff provides a recommendation of
approval the proposed zone change is
consistent with the developing and
zoning in the area the subject property
is located on a
local roadway and it does meet the
intent and purpose of elevate las cruces
so your options today are to vote yes to
approve vote no to deny
vote to amend or vote to table
are there any questions by the
commission
seeing none
any comments from the audience
see none and i believe there was a i'm
sorry i believe there is one did you
have a comment
okay
what's up i guess not no no
all right then i guess we're ready to
vote i have a motion please
i'll make a motion uh to approve this
vote
i'll second
board member kaiser
yes based on stats recommendation and
consistency with elevate las cruces
board member smith
yes based on staff recommendation and
consistent with the intended purpose of
the zone sony former bennett
yes um based on staff recommendation
meets intent and purpose of elevating
las cruces board member vega
yes based on staff recommendation
guerrero
yes based on staff recommendation
chair gordon
based on my side visit staff
recommendations
elevate las cruces
i also vote yes
approval six thank you
is there any discussion or commentary by
commission this evening any comments
no how about staff
mr chairman and commission uh
no comments this evening from staff
we've had a very active evening and uh
appreciate the hard work and
and due diligence that we heard tonight
we will keep you informed as they
realize
how las cruces develops that you heard
about earlier tonight
thank you mr chairman
all right then the time is 9 48 i'll
entertain a motion to adjourn
seconding or are we making the motion
did you make a motion no i'm asking
someone to make a motion okay i'll make
a motion to adjourn
and i second emotion pull a favor
hi hi
you