[Music]
uh good evening and welcome to
the july 27th meeting of the planning
and zoning commission
before we start i would like to say that
how happy i think we all are
to be back in chambers being on zoom for
the last year and a half
has not been such a pleasure but at
least we got our business conducted
so anyway we're here and we're glad to
be here
so what i'd like to do is call the
meeting to order
first is there any conflict of interest
i'll take care of that okay
i'd like to make a motion i'd like to
have someone make a motion to allow
commissioner thomas to be present by via
telephone i make a motion that
uh commissioner thomas be present uh
over the phone
all right i need a second please a
second
all in favor aye
aye hi commissioner thomas are you here
can you hear us
i'm here can you hear me yes thank you
all right um now i need an approval of
the minutes
can i have a motion please i make a
motion then we approve the minutes
is there a second
i second the motion
you're going to call the roll yes i will
call the rule for you
uh board member thomas
yeah thank you board member smith
president
this is for approval of the minutes i
will need a yes
or no please yes thank you
board member bennett yes
board member foreign yes boy member
gordon
yes thank you all right there are no
postponements
is there any public participation here
this evening that would like to address
something that is not on the agenda
all right sing none
right then we can move to the consent
agenda there are two items on the
consent agenda this evening
i need a motion to approve the consent
agenda
a motion to approve a second
board member thomas yeah
board member smith yes board member
bennett
yes yes board member vega
yes board member gordon yes
all right to know all business then we
can move
to new business
the first item on the agenda is item
number one rancho las vegas preliminary
plot
before we vote on this i'd like to make
a comment of what we plan on doing this
evening for that item
because the the item calls for
basically two votes one on a plot and
one on a road
road waiver so we will split this in
half
we'll take one vote on the plot and one
vote on the
road waiver so
john if you want to go ahead do i have
to make a motion first after that
you have to make much to approve this
chair chair gordon this is catherine for
the record
um i would like to maybe encourage
the commission to make a motion to
suspend the rules
meaning that you're going to split it in
two and vote on it as two separate items
and that should be sufficient for at
least that portion
and then of course you can vote to to to
make a motion to hear it
all together okay did i need a motion to
suspend the rules
to split item number one into two parts
one to vote on the plot and one to road
on vote on the road waiver
i make a motion to suspend the rules
on the preliminary plat and the waiver
commissioner second emotion
board member thomas yeah
board member smith yes board member
bennett
yes yes for member vega
yes yes
all right john
good evening mr chair uh commission um
as
uh commissioner gordon stated this is
gonna be two separate um
items that you will be voting on
separately today it's for the approval
of the ranchos las vincus preliminary
plot
and the associated road improvements
waiver
yeah i can't hear you
um so the current conditions of this
property um it's located currently right
now northwest of
the northwest corner of dunn drive and
aldridge road
um it is approximately 9.35 acres
and it's currently zoned rem which is
our residential estate mobile
as it sits right now it's an undeveloped
vacant tract of land
from our zoning map we can see here it
is the one that's highlighted with the
checkered type pattern the aerial map
right here shows which property it is
so what they're proposing for the
preliminary plot is an eight single
family residential lot gated community
it's going to provide one interior
roadway
to provide access off of dunn road
associated with this was a road
improvements
waiver request for aldrich road to
provide
the necessary road improvements such as
sidewalks
curb and gutter and asphalt as part of
this request
the developer was going to propose to
extend utilities
essentially gas and sewer
in lieu of the roadway improvements
this is the proposed preliminary plot
at the time reviews were sent out to all
relevant agencies
staff approved the preliminary plat
however staff did deny the road
improvements
this was then taken to the development
review committee our drc
discussions took place and they did
provide a recommendation to the planning
and zoning commission
notices were also sent out to the
surrounding properties within a 500 foot
radius
we did receive one email in regards to
signage located
along aldrich road and adjacent
properties not necessarily to the
concern
of the actual development of the
subdivision staff recommendation
approved the preliminary plat based on
the following findings which was
that it complies with the city of las
cruces subdivision code and the city of
las cruces design standards
the proposed preliminary plaque complies
with all requirements of the 2001 zoning
code
and it was approved by the drc the drc
on june 2nd of
staff did propose a recommendation of
denial for the road improvement waiver
request
based on the fact that the ranchos las
vinco's preliminary plaque complies with
the requirements and standards of the
las cruces subdivision code
and design standards based upon review
of the relevant city staff
at this moment we have nothing that
really enforces
the development of utility extensions on
the property
they are allowed to use propane and gas
so at that moment we
don't have anything solid to
drc on june 2nd did approve
the preliminary plot and provided a
recommendation of denial for the road
improvement waiver
today's options are to vote yes to
approve vote no to deny
or vote yes with conditions or devote to
table
all right thank you john is there
anybody here from the petitioner who
wishes to speak
all right then seeing none are there any
our commissioners would like to
make some comments
i see none and i have a comment
i think the improvements the road
improvements certainly would not
contribute
any benefit to the area or certainly
improve safety or access for police and
fire
since the petition does not involve the
development of the property
playing on all just road this is another
reason
to to grant the waiver
so the approval let's
so that is my opinion i think that it's
i was out there i did my site visit i
looked at dunn road there's certainly no
reason there to do anything that's a
paved road
but alderage road is just a gravel
enhanced
dirt road and the property at this time
is not slated that
borders on aldo's road is slated for
improvement
so hurt for uh development so i don't
think there's any reason that we should
grant a waiver that will be necessary
so in that case i guess we have to now i
guess make a motion
on part one which is the
uh the plat so if i could have a motion
to
approve the plan item number one
i make a motion to approve the plot for
item number one
is there a second i second the most
jesus christ all right
boar member thomas yes um
i quote yes supplies with
the subject code and
and the uh prosecution
thank you board member smith hello yes
i vote yes uh it complies with the
elevate loss crucial company has a plan
and uh i think it's um
it also complies with the official plan
board member bennett
uh mr smith can you please turn your
microphone off nope
thank you sorry i vote yes
based on staff recommendation and it
meets all
zoning codes thank you board member news
i will vote yes
my vote's based upon staff
recommendations and they've met all
conditions
board member vega how about yes it
complies with zoning code and
based on staff recommendation board
member gordon
i vote yes based on findings my site
visit
state of recommendation and its
ability to go along with the element las
cruces
in that case
okay so the vote is then six zero
okay then we go on to item number two
which would be the road waiver
uh point of order mr our commissioner
gordon
yes i do have a member of the public
that would like to speak about the road
improvements
portion at least all right
thank you no problem is that person in
the chamber
yes sir oh okay mr barry
if you like to step up
[Music]
before you begin sir would you please
state your name
professor david michael bogey a phd
and i have to swear you in before you
speak
do you swear affirm that the testimony
you're about to give is the truth and
nothing but the truth on the penalty of
law
i do thank you go ahead sir thank you
you're welcome
let's see i live directly across
the street from the property that has
the proposed waivers
so i'd like to speak to it i'm
diagonally across
about nine acres i have
no it's six acres about six acres horse
ranch
i am welcoming the rancho las fincas
development so i would like to raise a
couple of issues
with the city if that's permissible
so you can speak whatever you like thank
you
okay there's a no dumping fine of 300
according to section city code 19-45
for the past week this lazy boy chair
has been dumped on the roadside there's
been no action
would call for the enforcement of
section 19-45
according to that regulation
that is littering and it's illegal
dumping
the street signs on the corner of dun
and aldridge
where the proposed development will take
place
we would like to see that development
but as you can see
in a two through through ways
dunn and aldrich
there is a single stop sign on one of
the four corners
that stop sign was placed by the city
but is placed inappropriately
because that's actually the land of the
new mexico public land the state land
office
it's confused with the bureau of land
management but i've checked it out and
i've talked to the people
they've done site visits and i want to
explain
problems with the installment of the
street sign
at aldrich and dunn and the lack of stop
signs on the four corners
when you come down aldrich on the paved
section
it does say pavement inns no city
services
however there is city services to the
right on
aldrich but no city services to the left
and speaking to the former city manager
the reason for this
is there's one hold out person that
doesn't even live there
that is afraid that the taxes will be
raised so there's no street
maintenance on that part of aldrich even
though it's on the city sir excuse me
for interrupting you yes sir
i will allow you to speak whatever you
like as far as pertaining to the road
waiver is concerned all these other
items i think
are legitimate concerns right that you
could probably address the respective
city departments such as traffic and
whatever takes care of dumping and
street signs
but if you have something to say about
the road waiver that we appreciate your
limiting
comments well my understanding of the
word roadways it's the road aldrich
the entrance from aldrich and right now
it's a dangerous intersection
and the plan as we understand the the
new owners
have said they're going to put up a six
foot wall that
rock wall which is a good improvement
however you won't be able to see
oncoming traffic in either direction
the other thing is the water is being
polluted in the area
including on the property and all around
the four parts of that stop area on
aldrich have done where the new property
is being
waivered the city co the city plan for
40 years
includes the water these are two maps
from your city plan
there are no city no dumping signs in
the whole area
of this part of the east mesa and we
feel we're being treated
differently than sonoma ranch this is a
county sign
and there's a reason why the county
can't put up signs that i'm going to
explain to you now
and that is because the encroachment of
illegal vehicle traffic there used to be
when i moved there 14 years ago
barbed wire fence and to the right was
public land
and the county had their easement where
they could put up no dumping signs
and i know that you have other things to
talk about but
if you're going to move to that part of
las cruces
and east mesa there's some severe
problems that need to be addressed this
is the
the only sign and i got this put up
after
an effort of 14 years sure again i'm
sorry to interrupt you but you're not
addressing the item of a road waiver let
me let me try to explain something to
you what a road
basically is yes sir the road waiver is
a city is going to require
that that portion that borders the
property along orange roads
makes certain road improvements such as
sidewalks drainage
uh sewer street lights
that's what a road waiver is in
reference to it has nothing to do with
dumping or
water drainage or full stop signs
so i like again i think all those
comments are fine
i have no problem with you making them
but i think you should you should direct
them specifically to the city
okay i appreciate your reprimand i'm not
recommending just trying to explain
i appreciate your correction and i would
like the opportunity to finish my
presentation for two minutes
yes sir
all right there is nightly gunfire
almost on a nightly basis of
ar-15s in the area and mike telos who
lives also directly
across and would like to speak to you
here's the gunfire
including not only semi-automatics but
actual machine guns
we have called the sheriff's office the
sheriff's office doesn't realize
that that green bordered area that the
city has
that the new property is inside of it
but if you're not if you're in the this
part of the east mesa
there is no sheriff coming out there's
no city
police coming out to enforce the law and
i spoke to fish and game
today and they said they're willing to
start coming out
but we need to have the city council
make it clear to codes enforcement who
come on these properties
what is the jurisdiction of the city
what is the jurisdiction of the county
what is the jurisdiction of the state
and the federal government
so that's what i'm speaking to i want to
just back
up here how do i back up
oh let's see previous okay
all right i want to give you an idea
what it sounds like at night
on this neighborhood
i don't know if you can hear the gunfire
but that's that single gun fire
that's ar-15 semi-automatic
and it's also the bump
work of this record i am a vietnam
veteran
and i do not like to have automatic
semi-automatic
fire i did my service to the country
and i don't like it my neighbors were
afraid to walk in the area
well i spoke to a lady who said that she
goes to this pond
one time to see what was there and
people were firing ar-15s
and a young boy was firing it
and the bullet was by her ear and she
said to the man please stop
and he said get out of here this is a
violation of the law
for recreational vehicles to be in this
area it is a violation to be burning
tires and trees
and illegal dumping and to have a tax
rating of
one in this area is
kind of unconscionable and i'm done i
know you have other things to do
but i appreciate it if you would look
into how to communicate
the actual regulations of the city
to residents so that the
off-road illegal vehicle traffic
stops i have a 35 permit to be on public
land i pay for that permit to the state
land office
it does not entitle for a motor vehicle
to go anywhere else but
on the official roads it doesn't allow
to go from wilt and davis off aldrich
into this property and i know you have
other things to do and i appreciate the
time you've taken to listen to me i am
done
thank you sir i'll tell you what i'd
like you to do
i currently personally can't take these
issues to city council or the relevant
departments of the city but if you would
certainly make a list of those items
that of your concern
dumping full stop signs and
water ponding and anything else that you
think you would like to have the city
and to look to look into
if you please just make a list and
perhaps give it to someone
in the community development department
and they can pass it on to the
certain departments that i hope that i
hope that will take care of these
problems for you
i can understand your concern and they
are their concerns that i probably would
have if i lived there
but again sir thank you for your
comments thank you i've been a resident
of las cruces for 23 years love it i
love the east mesa i've been there for
14 years but these problems are ongoing
and it's your responsibility to correct
them thank you sir
is there anyone else who has any
comments uh mr chair i do have um
moy serving who's the representative for
um
the road improvement waivers on behalf
of the property owner
okay
sir before you start will you please
speak your name anton marvanas
okay before you speak i'd like to swear
you in please
do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give is it
true to nothing but the truth under
penalty of law
i do all right thank you sir go ahead
thank you thank you all
good evening um just to clarify one of
the things i wanted to mention was that
when john was giving the presentation
he stated that we were able to have gas
along with propane
at the site and i don't want to speak
out a term for him but what i think he
meant to say was that
because of where the location of the
property is we're actually allowed to
have propane along with septic
and so the the real the big the big
question this point is the septic
um excuse me we've worked with the
utility department to talk about our
opportunities for gas
so that we don't place propane tanks on
the sites once the proposed development
is approved
if in fact well since it has been
and so what the city is the city utility
department is willing to do
is bring gas from davis drive or from
davis
across down through aldrich and then we
will in turn
tie our road into dundrive so this is
the utility department
not at the cost of the developer will
bring gas service
to what would be our new proposed
roadway and we will tie into the service
there
so then that would thus eliminate us
having the requirement of propane tanks
which i think is a benefit on the
proposed development tier
the second one which is where the road
waiver comes into play
is that since we are not required to tie
into the sewer system since we are far
enough away
we're proposing that we have a waiver
for the road improvements on aldrich for
all road improvements on aldrich the 600
feet
and in turn the owner is willing to
provide
sewer through an adjacent lot that they
have
which would then connect down into their
road
thus eliminating the need for septic
tanks also on this site
because of those costs we know that it's
hard for them to manage both of them
and so what we're hoping for by
requesting this road waiver is that we
can have
the road waiver in place and then they
would agree to in fact
not place septic systems if the road
waiver unfortunately wasn't i think they
may have to forego the cost of placing a
sewer system
and then opt for septic tanks on their
lots
so with that said i mean i we just
recently saw a huge ordinance that was
unanimously voted
for residents tying into sewer systems
at their lots
helping to not create more of a
groundwater contamination issue with
more septic tanks and i think this is an
area in question
and so i think the proposed waiver which
would then in turn
trigger the um the sewer system
in place would allow us to not continue
to compound that problem as it exists
when we were working with staff and
through the drc process
they did state that aldrich was a very
low significant road
as we've seen davis and dunn have its
improvements built out
through excuse me through recent uh
paving projects and unfortunately all of
which didn't make the cut
um and
and for those reasons the other the
other concern when we did in fact
vote and receive denial for the waiver
through staff recommendation
every staff member mentioned you know i
just can't find
areas in the code that can support the
waiver which
kind of threw me for a little bit of a
loop because i don't
think there would be areas in the code
that would align very closely with the
waiver or else we wouldn't be in fact
asking for a waiver
so yes we are requesting a waiver for
the aldrich improvements
we did have one staff member vote in
favor for that
and i think because of helping to not
continue to compound that
septic water pollution as dr boji
mentioned
issue along with staff mentioning that
aldrich is already a very
low significant road we're hoping that
we could receive approval for our waiver
thank you excuse me sir don't leave yes
sir
is there anyone from the commission who
has any questions
all right if not i do yes sir
i was informed that on aldridge there is
gas and sewer is that correct that's
what you said
there is neither of those services at
this time on aldrich
any sorry from done i guess so done
done done i'm sorry davis i'm sorry yes
okay you are correct so as i also was
told that there is water
on done is that also correct yes i'll be
tying into that for your water
yes sir so i'm sorry you should be no
need for wells or anything correct no
need for well no need for septic if the
road waiver is improved or
you know exactly okay so basically what
you're asking us to do
to help you avoid to pay the large cost
of the road improvements that you feel
are not necessary
you will have then the minimal cost of
now
extending sewer from davis
and gas to your property for this new
development so
through yes through talks with the city
though however they have already agreed
to tie
not at the expense of the owner gas from
davis
through aldrich and then up to where our
street would intersect
dunn and our new proposed street so we
would be placing a gas
service line within the compounds or
confines of our road
tying into what would then be at that
time an existing city gas line
all right i understand does everybody on
the commission understand that
i do are there any questions
um commissioner vega i have a question
yeah commissioner vega go ahead
so in terms of the cost difference of
this is my first and person meeting so
i'm probably a lot of questions
um in terms of the cost to developer
versus city
if we were to grant the waiver how
significant are we looking at
um i i don't know if i have the answer
to that question i know
when i and the owner is here and i know
that they've reached out to some of the
contractors to try and
start to estimate what those cost
differences are i know that it is not
feasible for them to provide
both improvements to aldrich and a sewer
line
although i know there might be we have
to remember that it's 600 feet of
frontage for the aldrich improvement
with the sewer line they would be going
the full length of the road
and then through another adjacent parcel
which is just to the west
tying into potentially placing a new
manhole into davis road
so i i don't have a dollar to dollar
comparison as to what
it would cost to do aldrich versus the
septic system or exceeding the sewer
system
however i don't think that the sewer
system is going to be by any means
inexpensive as well
because they do have to traverse that
much distance and then of course place a
new manhole and make sure everything is
that great
yes i have a question i'm a little
confused
you have a choice am i correct
of of putting in sewer lines or septic
tanks
yes ma'am i find that
a lot of homeowners who have septic
tanks
hook up with the sewers and it's quite
an expense
you're all ready
am i understanding that you're already
not that far from sewer line hookups
so wouldn't it be more profitable for
you
to update your the the streets and the
development
hooking everything up to the sewers
correct i mean because people don't
really like septic tanks that's a yearly
fee to clean them and
pollution and we're looking at
environmental things today
and maybe i misunderstood you you have a
choice
why aren't you taking the choice of
upgrading
and connecting to city sewers well
you're right so because of the proximity
of this
parcel they are not within the minimum
footage required to have to in fact by
code connect to a sewer system
so they're far enough away to then have
the option
if they chose to the owner that is when
development comes to either place
propane tanks
and or place septic tanks now this is a
gated private community
and i have two of the six household
members back there with us right now
so they're not looking to necessarily
develop this at this point in time and
sell it
to anybody outside so they're okay with
incurring the cost of
whatever that septic maintenance may be
this you know for however long they in
fact do
but they've already told me which cousin
and daughter and
spouse are getting which lots so it is a
small scale development because we are
only looking at
eight lots i agree 100 um
with what you're stating in terms of the
maintenance that a septic system has
however we're looking at eight lots
versus anything larger than
than that in terms of the subdivision
size
all right thank you is there anyone else
all right let me just ask you something
else to make sure that we all
understand i know that to do road
improvements is not just
uh it's just a little thing it's a
matter of putting in sidewalks and
gutters and street lights and paving the
road
and we're talking about uh a distance of
maybe i don't even know how many feet it
is on your 600
how many 600 all right so it's almost
ludicrous to pave and do all these
things for 600 feet and the rest of
aldridge
stays the way it is there's no really is
no point there's no
there's nothing in the future that looks
like there's going to be any development
out there that's going to require road
improvements
so based on that i think really the best
thing to do is to go ahead and have them
bring
the soaring gas in from davis
and whatever your cost is of hooking up
to that right i think solves a lot of
problems and certainly
uh reduces the amount of your financial
exposure
is that what you're saying yes sir and
and i think the other thing to point out
is that
as dr bogey mentioned um aldrich
currently is only servicing one side of
the road
with you know either the blm land uh
south of that and then of course the
portion that we would be paving would
only then
you'd have four houses that don't in
fact have
any paving until it reaches davis so it
does seem like a really small stretch to
to pave such a small area
all right thank you is there anyone else
who has some comments from the audience
do i have a comment is that thomas
i'm sorry commissioner thomas is that
you i can hardly hear you
this is a comment yes go ahead
so um i want to know
how much
and is the condition of the road the
same the whole length of all right
i i believe it is i think aldridge all
the way down is nothing more than a dirt
gravel road is that correct
how far down does it go
i'm not familiar with as far down as
what i looked
doctor
does anybody know okay
i think the gentleman at the dentist
knows the answer to that sir could you
please state your name for the record
my name is michael deus
excuse me john do you know the answer uh
excuse me sir this is john castillo for
the record
uh commissioner gordon aldrich road
is
[Music]
uh
so aldrich road has um it's not
completely asphalt
and it's a it's a mix of gravel and
asphalt
but it does go all the way down from
devious to done
so basically um the preliminary plat
portion of it would be 600 feet
uh the remaining lots would not have
those necessary requirements such as you
know sidewalks
curb and gutter right okay thank you
commissioner thomas did that answer your
question
i have a further question so if they did
do the uh they would only be doing half
of it right
yes they would only be doing half they
would just be doing their portion of it
so they're going to be doing one half of
the 600 speed
of a road that how long do you think the
entire road is
i'm sure i'm sure the road must be at
least a half a mile long
i believe it's uh between half a mile to
a mile right it's quite long
okay so they would used to be doing this
really small
section and off behalf of the pros is
on this whole road that the rest of the
talks
would be kind of um
and asphalt so i don't see
i don't see any reason to do that
right put in that 600 feet of apple
road half the 600 feet of the road and
make it different from the
entire rest of the road
okay because i did that commission
thomas i can't is that it
thank you thank you
okay sir do you still like to speak yes
okay i'm sorry would you repeat your
name again please my name is mike
all right before you speak i have to
swear you in do you swear affirmative
testimony you're about to give the truth
to nothing but the truth under penalty
of law
i do thank you you go ahead sir thank
you i'm the resident of uh
the corner of dunn and aldridge directly
across the street from his
proposed development is going to take
place and my question is well first of
all
i do welcome the the new development i
have no problem with
with the improvements that are proposed
for this area my questions are
uh shouldn't the city require
before any more uh you know development
takes place up there
shouldn't the city be making an effort
to bring in all the utilities
after all we are in the city limits uh
there's currently no gas in my area
there's no sewer
the only reason we have water is because
the city bought out jornala water you
know a few years back
and other than that the only improvement
that's ever taken place in the last 30
years
back in the late 80s when the city
incorporated that area when it annexed
that area
is the the pavement of dunn street and
that was done without any utilities
in place so it it seems to me like
you know the city should be doing their
part and it shouldn't be fair on on the
new owners to have to shell out all the
costs enough
shouldn't the city have some sort of
responsibility to bring in all
the utilities to make just like the rest
of the city because
yeah another thing is it just seems like
that particular part of the city is one
one you know one area that's been
forgotten for the last 30 years
it's like we don't matter out there
i understand your concern but perhaps mr
weir from
community development be able to answer
your question
mr chairman committee members this is um
david ware deputy director of community
health department
mr tayes the city policy is usually
for development to pay for itself when a
subdivision such as this comes in
they're responsible for extending all
the utilities
and streets to support that
that's the way our development
ordinances read and so
the other projects within the east mesa
would it be something that would have to
be dealt through the city council's
budgeting process
and capital improvement projects but uh
tonight we're just talking about this
particular development
and the requirements the code has for it
to be to be
for them to subdivide the property
it just it just somehow doesn't seem
fair that they should
the new owner should be forced to shell
out the entire cost when
the city has taken no no effort nothing
to do anything for the last 30 years or
so
and you know and uh another thing too is
no one's brought up the the fact that
there are no fire hydrants out there
you know and how can you allow
development without
adequate fire protection you know yeah
you know like i said i don't have
anything against him coming up there but
shouldn't the city be making an effort
to at least install fire hydrants out
there
i'll tell you i do have a suggestion for
you i think these are legitimate
concerns and i think i would also be
concerned about the same things
perhaps you might address these concerns
to your
city councillor in your district
yeah and i would want to speak to him or
her directly
and bring these concerns to him or her
and see if there's something that she
can give you reason either a good answer
or perhaps do something about it
well i i just thought maybe what i said
may have something to do with the
outcome of whether you approve this or
not and it just seems like
you know all right well thank you sir
okay and uh i guess that's
all i gotta say thanks thank you
all right
commissioner thomas yeah go ahead
so that um you should see my treatment
phone and if
that's pretty handy
the sidewalks and streets facilities and
all this
were put in by help and the builders
and in which people blocked those
[Music]
um
all right thank you commissioner thomas
all right is there anyone else in the
audience who has anything to say
if not then i'd like to entertain a vote
on the second part of this
sir does it only pertain to the road
raider or nothing else
all right i'll give you a minute
just state your name again please uh
professor david bogey
thank you
it's been said that this is a gravel
road on aldrich with some paving
to be more accurate between porter and
dunn
it is paved it just doesn't have
sidewalks
the city also comes regularly after the
monsoon rains and a sweeping of that
portion of aldrich
after you go eastward at dunn on
aldrich then it is gravel all the way to
the end
so if this development actually
if the city meets them and does
sidewalks
around the property it's actually going
to continue the sidewalks already undone
and then move them to the west
through the property so that is a
development that is worth
considering thank you all right thank
you sir
all right is there anyone else all right
john
so as i mentioned before this is a
recommendation
um for the approval of a
road improvements waiver um the next
step after you provide your
recommendation we will go to city
council for approval
all right then we do we need another
motion that we have the motion
all right we need another motion and all
right we have
we have to vote we have to make another
motion to
according to the item is to deny
the waiver you can please vote
and if you vote yes you must state your
cause
i want to call
oh that's what can i say all right i'm
sorry i have to correct myself you have
to make a motion to either approve or
deny the waiver
now i make a motion to approve the
waiver
i need a second
i second the motion all right so now we
need to move
all right then now we need to vote can
you call the roll please sir
remember thomas so we're voting
to approve the favor yes we are
and we're we're not voting for the
denial
suggested
what you're saying are you voting to to
uh to deny your approved
we've asked it for being asked to quote
to to uh approve the flavor
all right that we didn't hear what you
said i'm sorry
we're being asked to approve
the waiver right well how do you vote
i i vote yet to approve the waiver
because
i can seek that only half of 600 feet
doesn't she do worth doing
all right you can call the rolling yes
board member smith
i'll vote yes to approve the waiver
member bennett
uh yes i vote to approve the waiver uh
due to financial hardship
that would accrue from building out
aldridge and the benefit to the
environment
to add this city to work board member
muniz
i vote to approve the waiver we've had
this problem come up before
and i thought staff was gonna
talk to us about it uh it's quite an
expense on homeowners and
and this is a small private development
so
and it's going to come up again because
people have property out there
they're they're developed trying to
approve it
and this is a hindrance to improving
some of that property
we need to have something i believe
that's more consistent
when we have this problem come up
boar member vega
a motion to approve
i need your reasoning please thank you
uh just based on some of the comments
shared today and um
the fact that the road is already
halfway done
makes sense to complete it thank you for
member gordon
i vote to approve based on the fact that
this is
would be very costly and i think some of
the things that they're planning on
doing by
extending the gas lines and the
shorelines are
a very good solution to this problem so
therefore i vote yes i approve to
approve
all right i think that takes care of
that item
all right okay
can we move on now to item number
two which is the valley drive industrial
park master plan
can i have a motion please
somebody please make a motion
i make a motion to approve uh
item number two
all right john okay uh today we're going
to bring you the valley drive industrial
park master plan um
we are requesting um approval of the
master plan
it is the subject property west of
valley drive it's located on
or it's located located on multiple
parcels
it comprises 7.69 acres and it's
currently zoned to m1m2
the properties are developed industrial
commercial use lots
here is a zoning map that shows a zoning
designation
here's an aerial image
the proposal of the master plan is going
to sub subdivide three existing lots for
future development of industrial lots
into three to twelve industrial use lots
utilizing an alternate summary process
it will connect two existing lots
through farney lane
and it also meets the requirements of
the subdivision code design standards in
the 2001 zoning code
it's also supported by elevate las
cruces as it falls into the regional
commercial place type
here's an image of the proposed master
plan
as we can see from here the old
coca-cola company
is the larger lot in the middle it will
be subdivided into three
or less lots depending on what's moving
in
as well as the other two adjacent lots
public notice was sent out to all
relevant agencies
they all supported the master they all
supported the master plan
and there was notice and data
surrounding property staff at
the time that the presentation was made
and reports were done there was no
phone calls or emails in regards to the
proposed master plan
the design review committee met on june
16th of 2021
to review the subdivision from an
infrastructure utilities improvement
standpoint
after some discussion the the drc
recommended approval for the proposed
master plan
staff recommends approval based on the
following findings the master plan meets
the objectives of a master plan and
required
by the subdivision code based upon
review by city staff
the proposed master plan complies with
the 2001 zoning code the subdivision
code and the design standards
today we do have an option to vote yes
to approve vote no to deny
vote yes with conditions or vote to
table
all right thank you john is there anyone
from the petitioner who's requesting to
make a statement
all right so state your name please good
evening mr chairman paul pompeo with
southwest engineering
hi you know i must wear you in you've
done this before
yes sir do you swear affirmative
testimony we're about to give is the
truth nothing but the truth on the
penalty of law
yes i do thank you go ahead thank you mr
chairman i did have a short presentation
however it mimics a lot of what staff
has already
presented so i'll put that aside
i stand here to take any questions that
the commission might have
this is a pretty straightforward
application we're looking at
redeveloping
underutilized industrial property into
more opportunities with smaller lots
so as to bring more business to that
area of las cruces and so i stand for
questions thank you mr chairman
all right thank you
any questions from the commission
seeing none either anybody from the
audience who wishes to make a comment
i have a question all right seeing none
then we can have a vote
board member thomas
i vote yes on this approval
from the staff from the subdivision
science tent and i think it's a good
idea to
follow a lot which could encourage
more small business
thank you board member smith i've always
based on site visit
and also with compliance to elevate las
cruces and also
just the redevelopment of a already
previously industrial
area remember
bennett i vote yes meat zoning code
supports elevate las cruces and based on
staff recommendations
[Music]
i'm going to vote yes upon the
recommendations of
staff and i hope once it's built
the buildings are filled don't sit empty
because we need
jobs in the city boy member vega
i vote yes based on a site visit and
a staff recommendation gordon
i wrote you this based on findings and
my site visit on staff recommendation
and certainly it will definitely do
something to enhance here and perhaps
bringing some new jobs
thank you that's six nothing
okay
is it all right for us to take items
three and four together
chair gordon members of the commission
yes uh we can hear
both the master plan and the zone change
related to rinconada industrial park
together
again i do recommend that there be a
motion to suspend the rules
so those could be heard together and
then voted upon separately
all right then i need a motion to
suspend the rules that we
uh although that we will discuss both
these items will vote on them separately
item three and number item four
[Music]
can i have a vote please i need a motion
i'm sorry
i make a motion to suspend the rules so
that we can put on both of these
or combine them all right a second
i second that motion all right rule
board member thomas
yeah former smith
yes former bennett yes
yes for member vega yes board member
gordon
yes
okay john thank you commission
today we have the rancho del rey master
plan amendment number three
and the corresponding zone change
current conditions are the rancho del
rey master plan which is currently
279.438 acres
today we will be looking at changes that
encompass 14.64 acres and incorporates
3.95
acres into the master plan the sub
the subject properties are located in
the northwest corner of ring canada
boulevard and bataan memorial east
it is consistent of multiple parts
multiple parcels
and it does contain a vacant and
developed commercial and industrial uses
uh the current zoning right now as it
stands is m1m2 industrial standard
c3c commercial high intensity with a
condition
and a2 which is a defunct zoning
designation from our 1981 zoning code
here's a zoning map of our
subject properties
here's an aerial view in the lower
left hand corner it is a commercial
development as a business center
the master plan modifies the boundaries
of two planning parcels designated as p1
and p22
and it will also incorporate 3.95 acres
of undeveloped land into those
boundaries
as part of this there is going to be an
additional roadway providing access to
rankinatta boulevard and bataan memorial
east
the amendment also proposes five
commercial industrial use slots
that will follow boundary lines of the
associated rinata industrial park
preliminary plat that we'll be hearing
after this
the amendment also proposes a secondary
access to the north
along what we call planning parcel p3
for future roadway development and
providing access to park hill estates
here is the proposed master plan
as you can see the zoomed in one is the
secondary access for the future
local roadway
this one is the boundary adjustments as
we can see we're incorporating
a
this 3.5 acres here or 3.95 acres
into the boundary sorry
and this is a land use table depicting
what
the new parcels are going to be
the second part of this is a zone change
proposal of the subject properties
conform to
associate the ring canada industrial
park boundaries and corresponding zoning
districts
the proposed zones are going to be for
lots 1 and 2 which are a stacked zoning
of
m1 m2 and c3
this will allow for any changes of
businesses within that shopping center
as well as provide the ability to move
increase the density of industrial
standards
lot 3 is going to be m1 m2 which is our
industrial standard
lot 4 will be a c2 commercial medium
density
zoning district and lot 5 will be c3 as
well
at the time reviews were sent out to all
relevant agencies
staff had no major concerns for the
approval of the master plan
at the time of the presentation and
staff reports that were sent out staff
did not receive any phone calls or
emails
staff recommends the staff
recommendation is that pnz is the final
authority on the master plan
and a recommending body to city council
on the rezoning
individual motions and votes for each
proposal
are needed staff recommends approval of
both proposals
based on the following the master plan
and rezoning are consistent with
submittal requirements outlined in
section 38.2 of our zoning code
and article 2 of the subdivision code
we also base upon staff's analysis the
proposal meets the intent of the
comprehensive plan elevate las cruces um
and outlined in section 38-2 of the
zoning code
as amended and fulfills the purpose of
the las cruces municipal code section
2-382
this master plan amendment and resorting
is also harmonious with the
and not out of character with the uses
in existing zoning districts of the
surrounding area
on july 14th our development review
committee met
and recommended approval of the master
plan amendment
and today our options are to vote yes to
approve vote no to deny or vote yes with
conditions
all right thank you john anyone from the
public who has something to say
don't go away you gotta run the
for your record my name is eddie benz
okay sir i know you're familiar with
this also
i have to still swear you in do you
swear affirm that the testimony you're
about to give is the truth
and nothing but the truth under penalty
of law i do
thank you go ahead sir good afternoon
and uh
hello sheriff thomas i wish she was here
so we could wave at each other
anyway uh john you did a good job in
presentation
and i can't resist the the opportunity
to get up and visit with you folks just
a little bit
uh john would you help me out and pull
out the master plan amendments we'll
start with that
and give you a little bit of history of
way we think
number one you can see over in our
lower left hand lower right hand corner
the area that is ballooned is a roadway
that goes from
my project into the park hills
subdivision
this was a roadway that was negotiated
between
developers to provide a fire exit into
that region
for the benefit of the neighborhoods
giving us a better fire access and also
it gave us an access for a sewer line to
feed
an area that was questionable whether we
could feed it so
that there's a no-brainer so to speak
if we take a look below it let's blow up
the industrial subdivision
a little bit there and see it
okay again you can see that the new
proposed road
in the subdivision goes into a
cul-de-sac
in looking at good development i feel
that we did not need
industrial traffic traveling through an
industrial area entering into a
residential area
so that we isolated the industrial
activity with a cul-de-sac
and closed the road which was proposed
at one point in time to go back in
through a residential subdivision and
again to me that's a no-brainer and it's
it's a
thing that makes a better project for me
and all the other people
involved the new road that is proposed
to come in there
obviously we've had to go through the
highway department and we have had
approvals and grants and such and
negotiated the acceleration lanes on
that particular item
so that those things are moving
politically there
john help me out and let's go to the map
area that shows boundaries a little bit
better in
yeah this is the one the ariel that
shows boundaries
there we go this one uh it
gives a little better explanation the
large
area there that says subject property is
property that has been
zoned industrial and this back portion
for the last
30 40 years it just zoned a long time
ago
the small odd shape property to the
right hand side there next to ren kanata
is a people process that i just acquired
through a property exchange with the
city of las cruces
that property was uh acquired in
a trade to enlarge the veterans park so
that the park
grew by another five acres for parking
and improvements to access to behind the
dam
and in exchange this piece of truck land
was acquired
in that exchange this piece of land
carried a
agriculture or an unzoned situation when
it was acquired
because it had been set in in advance
for that time
so therefore looking at it nobody wants
to live on the corner of a
canada and highway 70 and it's a natural
for some form of
commercial activity and that's why we're
asking for commercial activity on that
corner because it's
it's what its logical use and best use
is
the industrial activity is still staying
there
and it's doing a little cleanup as far
as the boundaries are concerned so that
they comply with
the lot lines of the new subdivision but
it
gives you a little explanation of what's
going on and what i think is good
planning
and it's a opportunity to visit with you
folks just a little bit
and give you an idea what's going on
the subdivision layout is it's again
simple lots blocked off for potential
use for future development activity
with that i think i've said enough and i
will leave the door open i'd be glad to
answer any questions you all might have
regarding it and
thank you for your time mr prince thank
you
thank you very much does anybody have
any questions of his depends
i don't have any questions i just wanted
to thank you for that breakdown
[Music]
then i think that we might be ready for
a vote
all right then can we get them get a
motion to vote on
number one which will be the approval of
the master plan
i make a motion to approve the master
plan can we get a second
i second that motion all right could you
call the role please
board member thomas i vote yesterday
staff recommended
and also because these industrial areas
have
made for a long time to see this
happening
thank you board member smith i vote yes
based on staff recommendation also it
appears to be best use of that of that
property
board member bennett i vote to approve
based on staff recommendation
and the conversation today
i'll vote yes on staff's recommendation
and i like the idea
that this plan is for the president but
he's also
on the development he's looking toward
the future
also development there
boom remember vega um i vote yes
i think that was a very helpful overview
also it supports the
elevate las cruces and based on staff
recommendation
remember gordon based on findings
on my site visit staff recommendations
elevate las cruces and i think this is
another an excellent choice
for this piece of land it's been sitting
near vacant as long as i've been living
in las cruces and i hope that we get
some nice development in there that
will also provide us with some jobs
therefore i guess we have a vote
six nothing thank you
all right all right then we can move on
to the next item which
is the ricannada industrial park
preliminary plant
oh i'm sorry i forgot already we need to
vote on the zone change
uh gotta get a motion to approve
i make a motion to approve the zone
change
a second please second
i forgot more members thomas
yes i vote yes facebook african states
and uh eddie bent's description
and i would also like to mr ben
as companies there to please work
with the workforce connection
to make sure we have worked with the
skills
those businesses need
thank you board member smith how about
yes based on staff recommendations and
also
these objectives of the master plan
board member bennett i vote i vote yes
based on staff recommendation
board member muniz
vote yes would be on staff
recommendations
board member vega how about yes based on
staff recommendation
board member gordon i vote yes based on
staff recommendations
all right thank you now we have a vote
on that for six nothing
all right now we can move on to uh item
number five
which is the recon industrial park
preliminary plot
can i have a motion on that please make
a motion to approve the preliminary plot
and a second i second emotion all right
thank you
john once again good evening um
this is an association and it's also
connected to the rancho del rey
master plan amendment this is for a
requested approval for
the rinata industrial park preliminary
plant
current conditions of the property are
to be located east of rinata boulevard
and north of bataan memorial east it is
comprised of multiple parcels
that are 18.598 acres
as previously stated is currently zoned
to m1m2
c3 and a2
so we are proposing five lots which are
going to be commercial
industrial use lots there is going to be
a proposed interior local roadway as
explained previously
and it will also provide access to
rinkenatta boulevard and battan memorial
east
staff recommendation is approval for the
following
based on the following findings the
proposed preliminary plat known as
rinconada industrial park complies with
the requirements and standards of the
city of las cruces
subdivision code and design standards
has been reviewed by relevant city staff
and complies with all requirements of
the 2001 zoning code
it is also supported by elevate las
cruces comprehensive plan
on july 21st the drc met
and provided a recommendation of
approval
it was sent out to all relevant agencies
and departments there was no issues it
also took place
at drc for a discussion no input was
provided
from the public as it was sent out to
surrounding properties
today's option is to vote yes to approve
vote no to deny or vote yes with
conditions
all right thank you is there anyone from
the public or anyone i'm sorry is there
anyone from the presenter
of the petition who would like to make a
comment if not anybody from the audience
mr binge you'd like to say something
since you're already sworn in i'm still
sworn in not
just my first first rodeo okay
uh i don't have a whole lot to add but i
have an opportunity to stand up and
visit you folks for just a half a minute
and uh i think what we're looking at is
first standard
but what i've got to say is a thank you
to
ladies and gentlemen in this room that
are listening to this stuff back and
forth
unfortunately the majority in las cruces
has no idea
of what you guys put up with how many
hours you spend
trying to see that las cruces is
developed in a reasonable manner
and i try to make people aware of
people such as you that donate your time
to a planning and zoning staff to try to
see things are done
reasonable and it gives me an
opportunity to express
from not only i but from some of the
other development developers in the area
thank you for spending the time and the
effort that you do
trying to see las cruces built in a
reasonable manner and
i thank you and uh
sorry you have to put up with so much
crap sometimes
this depends thank you very much for
those kind words we certainly do
appreciate it
and we will hope that we will continue
to do the same in the future
okay then we move on to item number five
which is the ricannada
industrial park preliminary plan can i
have a vote to
approve
i won't make a motion to approve i'll
second
all right then john
if we need a roll call
boar member thomas um
i vote uh recommendation
and uh again we need hard industriality
so board member smith
hello yes based on the staff
recommendation also the neighborhood
character and compatibility
i know this area continues to grow
residentially i think it's important
that we
have areas for commercial development
too i think that'll help
minimize as far as like travel that
people make
to you know to shop and also to just uh
it just helps with
just the livability of that area
board member bennett um i vote yes based
on staff recommendation
um meets uh development standards of the
zoning code and elevate las cruces as
well
board member muniz i'm voting
yes on staff's approval
board member vega i vote yes supports
elevate las cruces and based on staff
recommendation
board member gordon
i vote on yes i vote yes on staff
recommendations my site visit
and then it does meet the zoning code
requirements and certainly we'll
hope of the elevate las cruces
all right then thank you john then we
move to the last item on the agenda
which is item number six was the zoning
code amendments for cannabis use
good evening members of the commission
uh let me go ahead and open the
presentation
alrighty i'll go ahead and get started
if that's all right
catherine harrison rogers for the record
um hopefully most of you are aware but
back in march the cannabis regulation
act otherwise known as house bill 2
was approved by the state to
legalize recreational cannabis
for adult use the state
has organized the cannabis control
division it's part
of the state's regulatory and licensing
division they're responsible for the
licensing and regulation
of cannabis uses throughout the state
the city of las cruces also plays a role
we are in charge of determining the most
appropriate land uses or
zones for which those types of uses can
occur
we process the business registrations
related to this and of course we're
applying the building codes as it
relates to to the various types of
occupancies
be it retail or manufacturing or things
of that nature
september 1st we have some hard
deadlines in terms of
what we do with cannabis in the city
september 1st the cannabis control
division will begin
processing permits for the producers
those are the growers the micro
businesses
and also licensed medical cannabis
businesses because of that we need
to respond and establish some
some guidance in our our land use codes
namely zoning to accommodate these types
of uses
we are anticipating also in september
september 1st excuse my stutter
that we will begin doing business
registrations for these producers and
the micro businesses and the licensed
medical cannabis
businesses uh starting january 1st
of 2022 the state will begin issuing
server permits and also the commercial
medical licenses and start accepting all
application types so that's those retail
businesses
and we will also begin doing business
registrations for all the other cannabis
business types
april 1st it's anticipated that those
retail sales of cannabis will begin
so with that little history i'm going to
talk about some of the land use
implications
this is a really large growing and
producing
operation this is a cannabis operation
and
apologies i don't recall if this one is
in indiana or if this one was in canada
so the cannabis regulation act outlines
what
we as a municipality can do
we can control the time the manner and
the place
of the cannabis businesses including
density
we cannot restrict transportation
prohibit operation
prohibit or limit signage we can't
require the relocation of existing
businesses such as the medical cannabis
dispensaries
and we can't prohibit personal use or
production
so what we have done and what's been
presented before
you today and i'm going to give you a
nice summary so that it's not as
complicated as perhaps it may have
seemed in your packet
we are modifying certain code sections
to accommodate
these uses this does not clue include
any changes to our overlays as they
stand today
that's because they are unique
and require oftentimes additional
public hearings in front of the board
specific to those overlays
but we will get to that but this is to
accommodate the rest of the city at
least for the time being
so with that we are
are adding specific definitions
to 38-21 where all of our definitions
live
we are adding some uses specific to our
residential zoning districts
our office and commercial districts as
well as our industrial districts we are
adding
these uses to our land use table and
parking
requirements we are adding these
specifically
to some agriculture and equestrian land
uses retail land uses and again
manufacturing and other
types of land uses as well as adding
some conditions
and some of these uses with special
special use permits now these are just a
listing of the sections in the code that
are being affected
i'm going to talk about what that really
means in a nice
tidy summary for you so these
recommendations
are for cannabis retail
to add those to the c1
which is our our
low intensity commercial zone a
neighborhood commercial is what that is
adding those to c2 and adding those
to c3 these are all of our commercial
zones in the city
we're recommending that there be no
consumption in the c1 zone
the reason behind that is because the c1
zone
really is intended for those small
neighborhood commercial types of uses
and at this time the city doesn't allow
for for bars or taverns at that location
so it made sense to us that there
wouldn't be consumption sites um at that
location
we are also recommending that cannabis
industry that would be your growers your
manufacturers that produce
various types of extracts the big
packaging and warehousing types of uses
be located in our standard industrial
zone which is the m1 m2
and the m3 zone which is our more
intensive industrial zone
cannabis research laboratories again we
are recommending that those be allowed
in all of the industrial zones with the
inclusion
of our technology zone which really is
geared towards research
the reason behind that is the cannabis
research is allowed to do
some larger scale cultivation research
and things of that nature
and then we're recommending that canvas
micro businesses and
this is this is our version of a micro
business the state's version i'll
explain that a little bit
more detail in a second uh we're
recommending that those be allowed in
our agriculture and low density
single family residential zones
specifically equestrian estate ee
and rem which is residents residential
estate mobile
with a special use permit now the reason
behind that
is because those specific zones allow
for horticulture
of all types and they also allow
breweries and
wineries at those locations with a
special use permit
if of course those crops are grown on
site so it's a logical transition
for that in terms of the state's
definition of micro business which
there's several different variations
there's a producer there's the
vertically integrated micro business the
maximum amount of plants that can be
grown at those locations is 200
adult plants and
these are allowed not just at this
location but they're also allowed in all
of the
the industrial zones that we've outlined
here
and there is an opportunity in the code
if not otherwise allowed
to be able to utilize our infill
development process
to then allow those at other locations
as well
specifically those under utilized or
vacant lots
or buildings around the city you've seen
many of those types of projects come
before you
in terms of those infill development
projects it is a free process and it is
an expedited process
that the city does for people who
qualify
there are some conditions that we're
recommending we're recommending
that all cannabis uses be 300 feet from
a school or daycare
now the state has very specific
requirements in terms of
essentially what um that can be
they are are trying to prevent i guess
jurisdictions perhaps from from
making those distances too great and so
this is the
this is actually the the cap the maximum
cap of distance from a school or daycare
that we can apply we can't go we can't
require more than this
and so we're requesting the maximum that
was recommended by the state
for cannabis retailers i'm gonna i'm
gonna talk about these buffers in a
little bit more detail
one of the one of the elements that's
listed
in the house bill is that we can control
density
time place and manner we're recommending
300 feet from single-family residential
zones
and a thousand feet from other cannabis
retailers that's in between
i'm going to talk about some of the the
public input we've received thus far
about that and also some of the
discussions that took place at city
council
yesterday evening again
one of the provisions that we've added
is that these could be closer
if a special use permit was obtained
and would go before this commission in
terms of the cannabis industry
again it's going to be 300 feet from
school or daycare in addition to that
there is the ability
as part of the conditional uses to allow
accessory retail
as part of industry that's something
that's already outlined for
most of our industrial uses it is capped
though
it really has to be primarily in
industrial or manufacturing or growing
and then of course you can have a little
a little retail
shop attached to that again
cannabis micro business with a special
use permit
in the ee or rem zones that would be
accessory to a primary residence you
would have to live on site
it would be limited to no more than the
200 mature plants if you were to be
growing on site
the products for sale must be grown on
site
and then located fully in an enclosed
accessory building and
were requesting that they be 100 feet
from other residences
if you recall these zones are actually
large lot zones
and so generally the 100 foot distancing
um
is predominantly not not an issue to be
able to achieve that
on these lots that are that are half
acre acre and larger
so i have some examples of some grow
facilities some large some small
in terms of how they could be done just
some photos
some of them can be quite large when
we're talking about some of the
industrial grow areas
indoor and outdoor some examples of
of retailers you know it looks like a
pharmacy or any other
sort of small boutique retail
[Music]
we do have some policy considerations
that have come about
from some a survey
um a work session that we had with city
council
as well as a public meeting that we held
i think that was about a week ago one of
the
one of the one of the questions was
related to buffers i'd like to talk
about that first
that's maybe a little out of order of
the slide but it's one of our biggest
concerns
um in terms of the distancing buffers to
try to control densities
within the city the the new mexico
cannabis
chamber of commerce actually did support
a 600 foot or less
buffer between businesses
would like to point out that alcohol
uses currently in the city
and pharmacies are not buffered from one
another or from residential zones
and we don't have density limitations at
this point in time
i do want to point out though that
alcohol was sort of a self-regulated
in terms of the densities that could
occur in the city until very very
recently
the the state of new mexico had very
limited number of alcohol
permit i mean alcohol permits that that
were available
for people to purchase around the state
of course those
limitations have been lifted so at this
point in time
the city has never limited the density
of
of alcohol locations but that's
something that might change in the
future depending upon
what happens with with the lifting of
those restrictions
by the state do want to say that we do
have some buffers throughout
the city for example i realize this is
not this is
not apples to apples but i just do want
to point out there are some buffers that
we do have in the city
adult uses we do have several buffers
related to those
amusement parks have buffers body shops
and paint booths have buffers
and the extraction of raw materials have
buffers
again this is an entirely different
industry but i do want to point out some
of them do exist in our code
in terms of what occurred at city
council work session
it really was a split discussion in
terms of whether or not
the distancing buffer was was supported
in full
or if there was a thought process behind
behind whether or not it should be
reduced i did hear from some counselors
that one was
supportive of the thousand feet others
were supportive of 600
or perhaps a city block which is about
300 feet
and there were some questions about
maybe exploring whether or not we should
we should buffer
at all and perhaps to do a little bit
more research about that
um and i did want to speak about
consumption areas as well
um the way this the state has it listed
is they they really don't differentiate
between
indoor and outdoor consumption areas in
terms of how that's licensed
but we did want to point out that we do
have some concerns about informed
consent
and outdoor smoking so for example if if
we had several
outdoor consumption areas and and people
were to be in an area where they were
exposed to that secondhand smoke
um it could be problematic and so at
this point in time we're actually
recommending
that a condition be added to this for
consumption areas in particular
that they'd be limited to indoors and
also be in compliance with the clean
indoor air act as amended
it should be noted that the house bill
actually says we may have
consumption areas we're not obligated to
have them throughout the city
but i do want to point out that we don't
exclude alcohol consumption areas and so
it doesn't really
make logical sense at least in a land
use
in a land use sense to exclude those as
well
all together
and so at this point in time staff is
recommending approval of these
particular amendments
with some of the considerations that
we've outlined that i just did discuss
about the
indoor consumption areas and perhaps
leave it up to to this
this commission and city council to
determine whether or not they're
comfortable with that thousand-foot
buffer
or if there's a preference to reduce
that moving forward
and today your options are to approve to
deny
vote yes with conditions or to table i
would like to point out this is just a
recommending body
to city council and while we're feeling
pretty confident about the amendments
that we've drafted thus far
there is a possibility that they could
be amended at
city council and with that i stand for
any questions and it does look like we
have several people in the audience so
i'm sure there will be some public
participation all right thank you
catherine for that presentation very
nice
but before we continue i think we're
going to need a motion to approve
the zoning code amendments for cannabis
use so can i have a motion please
uh i may i make a motion to approve the
um
uh cannabis uses amendment
labor second a second
either the commission have any questions
i didn't think so go ahead
maybe a roll call on the motion
well i thought we would vote on that
first but okay
all right can i ask is there anybody in
the audience who wish to speak i only
see one person two people
two all right then
can someone please come forward and we
can start
yeah i guess you can have as much up to
five minutes we're not having that many
people
so before you start can we please have
your name uh derek pacheco for the
record
all right and i have to swear you in you
swear affirmative the testimony you're
about to give is the truth and nothing
but the truth and the penalty of law
i do all right go ahead sir thanks for
having me
i just wanted to voice my opinion for
the residential
buffer zones that are a potential for
this
um
if we enact more rules on top of what we
already have
we have lots of governing bodies
including codes
and all sorts right if we start enacting
rules as far as distance that don't
match with other rules such as alcohol
consumption distances and available
locations
next to residential then we're kind of
re-stigmatizing
the entire plant
and we're not trying to do that so i'm
asking you to consider
dropping any sort of buffer zones
for sales and consumption as related to
residential
thank you all right thank you
someone else
all right please state your name alyssa
pearson
i can i swear you in please yes sir do
you swear our affirmative testimony
about the
is the truth or nothing but the truth on
the penalty of law i swear
thank you can you continue that yes um
so for the most part i want to say the
rules that have been proposed so far
exceeded my expectation my biggest
concern that i have is with the
cannabis industry proposed rule
what i noticed in the presentation is we
saw what industrial grows looked like we
saw what small growers looked like
we saw what retail locations look like
but there was
no visualization of what production
looks like
and part of the reason for that might be
that production
can vary it can vary from a huge
industrial manufacturing facility
where you have volatile compounds where
you have
potential for explosion there was a big
explosion at an extraction plant in
albuquerque
so i understand why the
why the tendency is to think of those
things as being industrial processes
however there are ways of producing
cannabis and cannabis products
that aren't in line with traditional
industrial processes
in line with the city's already existing
cottage industry zoning regulations
light manufacturing regulations
that's what a lot of cannabis
manufacturing is going to look like
you're going to see small commercial
kitchens
where especially for the micro producers
the micro
businesses you know maybe a stove maybe
an oven just a standard kind of
commercial kitchen
so this idea that we would need a
industrially zoned lot to make
gummy bears is kind of is a ridiculous
burden
well maybe that's a little strong word
it is an undue burden especially on
small businesses
and in line with the
elevate las cruces plan and the
recommendations you're looking for
things like economic equity
you're looking for things like
entrepreneurship and if you're forcing
us
to get industrial land which is limited
which is expensive you're also creating
this potential
for out-of-state out-of-city businesses
to come in
swipe up that land raise the prices
and that's going to push small producers
out that's going to limit
entrepreneurship
and it's not in line with the rationale
that you've used
for other for bakeries for candy
manufacturers
so i hope that maybe there can be
a consideration to add to the rules a
light industrial process
or a light industrial cannabis industry
does the board have any questions for me
does anyone on the commission have any
questions
i'm saying done but thank you thank you
i think that these comments are well
taken i think perhaps you should plan on
attending a meeting with city council
when they
take this matter up and present you same
arguments
yeah well a minute from tonight's
meeting we'll go to city council so i'm
sure that they will see your
your comments and and perhaps someone
will take notice of it and perhaps
even think of doing something in respect
to what you've said
so thank you
all right if there's no one else perhaps
now we could have a vote
on the on the approval of the zoning
code amendments
for cannabis uses
board member thomas
thomas
i would like to have a discussion i have
a few questions
we never heard you ask we're trying to
get i'm sorry then go ahead
so i want to ask katherine
the two uh questions here for
wanting this that alcohol
distances can't dissipate
to be the same and that
don't force small growers are
distributed
to half by commercial land
both of those included in what we're
voting on
commissioner thomas again catherine
harrison rogers for the record
you were asking about
wanting to make alcohol buffer
distances as well as the distances for
cannabis retailers the same
is that correct it's really hard to hear
you so i'm trying to
interpret yes
the gentleman has said that
what's being suggested for cannabis
does not match the problem
commission commissioner thomas we're
having a lot of difficulty in
in understanding what you're saying i
don't know if it's a connection you have
with your telephone
but we can try that again please
the suggestion was that
the cannabis distance
should match that um
so again uh commissioner thomas this is
catherine so you're recommending that we
do away
with the the buffers is that correct
is that what i'm hearing
[Music]
i'm asking
if the gentleman's right that we that
would buffer
that he doesn't lock hearts in there
so currently the way it's written there
is a
recommendation to have a 300 foot buffer
from single-family residential zones
and then of course the thousand-foot
buffer
between business locations
but again we've had a lot of feedback on
those
and so if you have a recommendation
to remove those or modify those
that would be something that would need
to come from you at this point in time
my other question was
the comment about please don't
force them to have to buy commercial
land
is that how it's written commissioner
thomas members of the commission
the the way um we have the
language is that um for
for what we're calling producers
manufacturers things of that nature they
would be
limited to the industrial zones
with the exception of the micro
businesses which would be allowed
in the agricultural zones ee and
rem with a special use permit
further there's the ability for people
to obtain
an infill development process approval
for eligible properties if they were to
go through that
to maybe allow those on those
underutilized or vacant
properties throughout the city
okay thank you you're welcome
so did i hear her ask for a motion no
i didn't ask for anything i was only
asking for clarification
all right thank you all right then if
there isn't anything else
now can we vote i've added my light on
i'd like to
ask staff a question
have you talked to other communities who
have
legalized medical and recreation
sales of marijuana and if you have
have you shared have they shared
problems with you and successes
i go to colorado quite a bit and i know
that they've had some problems
and i just wonder has staff gone out to
other communities
to see how they've worked things out
thank you for the question um
commissioner muniz members of the
commission
uh yes staff including city management
has been really involved in looking at
other communities in terms of how
they've handled this one of the unique
things about california
and colorado for that matter is that the
state gave them an opt-in or an opt-out
ability in terms of whether or not
municipalities or counties wanted to
consider recreational cannabis
the state of new mexico has not given us
that option
we are obligated to do it
and we've been speaking with the
municipal league
other jurisdictions within new mexico to
determine sort of the best methods by
which to do that
but we are somewhat unique in terms of
of
how it's being handled specifically here
compared to some of the other states
thank you
you're welcome catherine yes before we
vote um i did have some concerns about
um the buffer as far as uh outdoor
consumption
site i know the the analogy of use of
was use of bars serving alcohol you know
you could have bars beside each other
people could sit outside
and consume alcohol but i think with the
use of cannabis outside
if you have two or three cannabis
businesses beside each other where it is
outdoor consumption
there is a density that could be created
with
secondhand smoke which doesn't occur
with alcohol consumption
that would be one of my concerns with
eliminating any buffers between
businesses for on-site or outdoor
consumption
thank you members of the commission uh
commissioner smith
uh yes and one of the concerns that
staff has and
and we've brought up is informed consent
and being exposed to that secondhand
smoke
and one of the recommendations well not
written into the language that you were
provided in your packet but that was
discussed tonight
is that perhaps those consumption areas
be limited to indoor only
it would have to be a motion made by
this commission
if you were if you wish to move forward
that way or
as you stated continue to have those
buffers between
um between retailers
um right now i see a hand from the
audience
do you wish to speak all right then come
forward
my name please state your name randy
estrada
i have to swear you in do you swear for
him that the testimony you're about to
give is the truth to nothing but the
truth on the penalty of law
yes all right sir go ahead okay
um this is a comment on the idea of
treating going about the informed
consent
my question here is is it because of a
health concern or is it an intoxicant
how is it that we're metering this
because we don't treat
tobacco the same way and that is another
regulated substance
that we allow in a consumption area that
is
covered by the bill for how it is
allowed
in those areas whether they be casinos
or already pre-approved tobacco
consumption areas
i believe that that is another
additional stigmata
stigmatization of how something works
you are already informing the idea that
i'm going into a non-clean air space
with tobacco whether you accept that
that is not a carcinogen
is for you to decide that is not the
difference between
cannabis and tobacco it becomes the same
issue are you going into smoke
yes or no that's really all i have to
say is
you decide that you go into a smoky area
you're exposing yourself
to carcinogens and all kinds of just bad
health effects
in many different ways so
i just look at it that way you already
know you're walking into an area it's
already been approved
we should look to see how it is that we
then meter those experiences for
individuals do we put signage to let
someone know
this is a fully open smoking area both
cannabis and tobacco is allowed
so another consideration for the city to
go about
thinking about these kinds of things
because if we're taking away the stigma
of it being
a prohibited substance something that
we've had prohibition
then we should look at it as how it is
we already use substances
that are regulated thank you
all right thank you sir is there anyone
else
serving the back do you ever want to
speak i see your hand what's up i'm
sorry
uh commissioner smith are you willing to
make a motion to that effect
yes i make a motion that we vote um
on i'm sorry
just a second
all right thank you i understand all
right then i guess we are ready to vote
on this amendment
so we have a vote to approve the zoning
court amendments for cannabis uses
can you call a rule board member thomas
[Music]
i vote to approve based on increased
from staff and and tonight
thank you board member smith i vote yes
uh that we approve uh with the condition
that we maintain a buffer
for outdoor consumption former bennett
i vote yes to approve based on staff
recommendation and commentary today
board member news i vote
yes to approve the amendment
remember vega i vote yes based on staff
recommendation
former gordon i vote yes based on
staff recommendations so we therefore we
have a vote of six nothing
all right then we can move on as anybody
for the commission have any comments for
this evening
[Music]
all right are there any staff
announcements catherine
chair gordon members of the the
commission
i do want to remind everyone that we are
getting close to having
a a copy for review of our code
diagnostic
it's our first phase of realized las
cruces
our zoning code and land use code
amendments
and the diagnostic is a report that will
inform
the way the the draft is is not only
structured but some of the bigger topics
of concern and it it's an excellent tool
at least to inform you all what those
big concerns
are we're proposing to have a joint
city council and planning and zoning
commission
work session that will be held august
23rd
so please do reserve that that would be
getting
that would begin at 1 pm in the
afternoon it is a daytime meeting
so if you're unable to attend of course
we will have the information
for you but by all means we encourage
you to to attend that meeting
um and i know i sent an email about it
and you'll be receiving invites if you
haven't already
um and and we look forward to hearing
your input and having you all
review that code diagnostic and get well
on our way towards actually drafting
sections of the code
all right katherine if there's nothing
else do i have a motion to adjourn it is
now
7 50. i make a motion to adjourn
a second a second all in favor
aye aye
[Music]
[Applause]
you