Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.2 Municipal Code Amendments STAFF REPORT CITY CLERK CITY COUNCIL File #450-20 DATE:January 19, 2016 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Christopher L. Foss, City Manager SUBJECT: Amendments to Dublin Municipal Code Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries), Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) and Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) Prepared by Martha Aja, Associate Planner & Alex Mog, Meyers Nave EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The new Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (the Act) consists of three separate bills, Assembly Bill 243, Assembly Bill 266, and Senate Bill 643, which were enacted together in September 2015 and went into effect on January 1, 2016. Under this legislation package, all aspects of the commercial medical marijuana industry are regulated and subject to licensure. Among the new guidelines is the establishment of a dual licensing structure for medical marijuana cultivation, requiring a license from the California Department of Food & Agriculture (DFA), as well as a license, permit, or entitlement from the local jurisdiction where the cultivation is to take place. In addition, the legislation provides that if a local jurisdiction does not have a land use regulation or an ordinance prohibiting or regulating medical marijuana cultivation in effect before March 1, 2016, the DFA will be the sole licensing authority for the medical marijuana cultivation in that jurisdiction. The purpose of the proposed Ordinance is to ensure the City retains local control over medical marijuana cultivation. The Ordinance also adds the existing local prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries to the Zoning Ordinance, and prohibits the delivery of medical marijuana within the City. The proposed Ordinance was introduced at the City Council meeting of December 15, 2015. Tonight, the City Council will consider adopting the Ordinance. FINANCIAL IMPACT: No financial impact. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the public hearing, deliberate, waive the Ordinance reading and adopt the Amending Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries), Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) and Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) of the Dublin Municipal Code to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries, deliveries and cultivation within the City of Dublin. ITEM NO. 6.2 Page 1 of 6 Submitted By Reviewed By Community Development Director Assistant City Manager DESCRIPTION: California voters enacted the Compassionate Use Act in 1996 to permit the possession and cultivation of marijuana for limited medical treatment purposes. In 2004, the Legislature adopted the Medical Marijuana Program Act to provide greater access to medical marijuana for qualified patients and caregivers by allowing collective, cooperative cultivation projects and fixed distribution facilities known as “dispensaries”. Neither the Compassionate Use Act nor the Medical Marijuana Program Act prevents a City from enacting nuisance and land use regulations regarding medical marijuana use or dispensaries. A City is constitutionally authorized to make and enforce within its limits all local police, sanitary, and other ordinances (Cal. Const. Art. XI, § 7.). California courts have affirmed a City’s ability to prohibit medical marijuana dispensaries and medical marijuana cultivation as part of the traditional land use authority (City of Riverside v. Inland Empire Patients Health and thth Wellness Center, et al. (2013) 56 Cal. 4 729; Maral et al. v. City of Live Oak, 221 Cal. App.4 975). The City of Dublin has previously exercised this authority, and adopted a prohibition on the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries anywhere in the City. The City also regulates agricultural uses, although the Dublin Municipal Code does not explicitly prohibit medical marijuana cultivation. The Medical Marijuana Regulation & Safety Act (the Act), which comprises Assembly Bill 243, Assembly Bill 266, and Senate Bill 643, went into effect on January 1, 2016. The Act does not eliminate the authority of local government to regulate medical marijuana within their jurisdictions, and the current local ban on medical marijuana dispensaries provided in the Dublin Municipal Code is unaffected by the passage of these bills. However, Staff is recommending the adoption of the proposed Ordinance to preserve the City’s authority to regulate medical marijuana cultivation, in response to one of the bills. Among its specific guidelines, the Act establishes a dual licensing structure for the cultivation of medical marijuana. Under this law, a person wishing to cultivate marijuana must receive a license from the DFA, as well as a license, permit, or entitlement from the local jurisdiction where the cultivation is to take place. Furthermore, the Act provides that if a local jurisdiction does not have a land use regulation or ordinance prohibiting or regulating cultivation of medical marijuana in effect before March 1, 2016, the DFA will be the sole licensing authority for the cultivation of medical marijuana in that jurisdiction. Accordingly, if the City does not have a prohibition or any regulations in effect before March 1, 2016, the City may lose its ability to control medical marijuana cultivation within the City. If the City has regulations or a prohibition in effect before March 1, the City has the power to later modify the prohibition and/or regulations. The Act also amends and provides new sections to the California Business and Professions Code. In particular, Section 19334 authorizes the licensing of dispensaries for the purpose of making deliveries. This new provision authorizes a licensed dispensary to make a delivery in any city that does not explicitly prohibit deliveries. Although Dublin prohibits dispensaries, these statutes likely mean a dispensary licensed in a different jurisdiction could make deliveries in Page 2 of 6 Dublin unless the City explicitly prohibits it. If the ban on deliveries is adopted, the City has the authority to later modify or repeal the ban. In light of the recently adopted State legislation, Staff is proposing amendments to Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries), Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) and Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land). The proposed amendments will prohibit medical marijuana cultivation in every zoning district within the City and will also prohibit the delivery of medical marijuana within the City. The proposed amendments are intended to preserve the City’s authority to regulate medical marijuana cultivation within its jurisdiction. The proposed amendments would also add the City’s existing prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries to the Zoning Ordinance, and amend Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries) to ensure consistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the City’s existing prohibition on Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and prohibit the cultivation and delivery of medical marijuana within the City. In order to have an Ordinance in effect before March 1, 2016, the Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance must be adopted at the City Council meeting on January 19, 2016 (the Ordinance was introduced at the City Council meeting on December 15, 2015). If the City has regulations or a prohibition in effect before March 1, 2016, the City will retain the flexibility to maintain, narrow, or lift the prohibition on cultivation at some point in the future. The City Council is currently requested to waive the second reading and adopt the Ordinance amendments to Chapter 5.58, Chapter 8.08 and Chapter 8.12 of the Dublin Municipal Code (Attachment 1). ANALYSIS: The proposed amendments to Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) and 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) of the Zoning Ordinance prohibit the cultivation of medical marijuana in all zoning districts in the City. Additionally, Chapter 5.58 is being amended to prohibit the delivery of medical marijuana within the City. The Ordinance is necessary to ensure that the City retains authority regarding the medical marijuana cultivation within the City, and to prevent the DFA from becoming the sole licensing authority for medical marijuana cultivation within the City. The proposed amendments to Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries) are necessary to ensure consistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the existing prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries, and will add that existing prohibition to the Zoning Ordinance. The following is a description of the proposed Ordinance Amendments. Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) The following new definitions will be listed in Chapter 8.08 and there will be a cross reference to Chapter 5.58: Medical Marijuana Dispensary . See Section 5.58.010(C). Medical Marijuana Cultivation. See Section 5.58.010(D). Page 3 of 6 Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) Section 8.12.050 (Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to add Medical Marijuana Cultivation as an Agricultural Use Type to read as follows: AGRICULTURAL A R-1 R-2 R-M C-O C-N C-1 C-2 M-P M-1 M-2 USE TYPE Medical Marijuana - - - - - - - - - - - Cultivation Section 8.12.050 (Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to add Medical Marijuana Dispensary as a Commercial Use Type to read as follows: COMMERCIAL A R-1 R-2 R-M C-O C-N C-1 C-2 M-P M-1 M-2 USE TYPE Medical Marijuana - - - - - - - - - - - Dispensary Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries) The proposed amendments to Chapter 5.58 of the Municipal Code include revising the existing definition of medical marijuana dispensary and adding two new definitions. The definition of “Medical marijuana dispensary” contained in Section 5.58.010 of the Dublin Municipal Code is revised to read as follows: “Medical marijuana dispensary” means any facility or location, whether fixed or mobile, where medical marijuana is made available to, distributed by, or distributed to two (2) or more of the following: a qualified patient, a person with an identification card, or a primary caregiver qualified patients, persons with an identification card, or primary caregivers, or combination thereof. The following new definitions are proposed to be added to Section 5.58.010 as follows: “Medical marijuana delivery” means the transfer of medical marijuana or medical marijuana products from a medical marijuana dispensary to a qualified patient or primary caregiver, as well as the use by a dispensary of any technology platform to arrange for or facilitate the transfer of medical marijuana or medical marijuana products. “Medical marijuana cultivation” means any activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading or trimming of medical marijuana. In addition, two new sections (as shown below) are being added to Chapter 8.58 to prohibit the cultivation and delivery of medical marijuana within the City of Dublin. Page 4 of 6 5.58.030 Medical marijuana cultivation prohibited. No person shall engage in medical marijuana cultivation in or upon any premises or property in the city. 5.58.040 Medical marijuana delivery prohibited. No person shall engage in medical marijuana delivery in or upon any premises or property in the city. Planning Commission Action On December 8, 2015, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments related to medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation. The Planning Commission had a lengthy discussion regarding the proposed Ordinance (Attachment 2). The Planning Commission understood the need to adopt regulations at this time in order to ensure that the City maintains local control. However, a majority of the Commissioners also expressed an interest in considering future amendments to relax the proposed standards to address the medical needs of community members. A medical marijuana advocate residing in Sunol spoke in opposition to the proposed Ordinance. Ultimately, the Planning Commission voted 3-2 to adopt a Resolution (Attachment 3) recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS: A Public Notice was published in the Tri-Valley Times, posted at several locations throughout the City, and emailed to all persons who have expressed an interest in being notified of meetings. The Staff Report was also made available on the City’s webpage. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with State Guidelines and City Environmental Regulations, requires that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared. Pursuant to the CEQA, Staff is recommending that the proposed Ordinance be found exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), which. Section 15061(b)(3) states that CEQA applies only to those projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. The adoption of the proposed amendments of the Municipal Code does not, in itself, allow the construction of any building or structure, or authorize any activity, but rather prohibits the cultivation and delivery of marijuana within the City. This Ordinance of itself, therefore, has no potential for resulting in significant physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance amending Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries), Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) and Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) of the Dublin Municipal Code to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries, cultivation and delivery within the City of Dublin 2. Draft Planning Commission Meeting Minutes dated December 8, 2015 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 15-15 recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 8.08 Page 5 of 6 (Definitions) and Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) of the Dublin Municipal Code to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation within all zoning districts the City of Dublin Page 6 of 6 ORDINANCE NO. XX – 16 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AMENDING CHAPTERS 5.58 (MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES), CHAPTER 8.08 (DEFINITIONS) AND CHAPTER 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES OF LAND) OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES, DELIVERIES AND CULTIVATION WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN WHEREAS , Health and Safety Code section 11362.5 , the Compassionate Use Act of 1996 (“CUA”), adopted by the voters in the State of California, authorizes a limited defense to criminal charges for the use, possession or cultivation of marijuana for medical purposes when a qualified patient has a doctor's recommendation for the use of marijuana; and WHEREAS , Health and Safety Code section 11362.7 et seq., the Medical Marijuana Program Act (“MMPA”), was adopted by the state legislature and offers some clarification on the scope of the Compassionate Use Act of 1996, and section 11362.83 specifically authorizes cities and other governing bodies to adopt and enforce rules and regulations related to medical marijuana; and WHEREAS, neither the CUA or the MMPA prevent a city from enacting nuisance and land use regulations regarding medical marijuana cultivation or dispensaries; and WHEREAS , the Legislature recently passed, and the Governor signed, several bills regulating the commercial activity of medical marijuana, including Assembly Bill 243, which assigns certain state agencies with regulatory task regarding commercial medical marijuana, including product labeling and environmental regulation; and WHEREAS, Section 6 of AB 243 adds Health and Safety Code section 11362.777, which puts the California Department of Food and Agriculture (“DFA”) in charge of licensing of both indoor and outdoor cultivation sites in the state; and WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code section 11362.777 provides that the DFA shall be the sole licensing authority for medical marijuana cultivation within a city if that city does not have land use regulations or ordinances regulating or prohibiting the cultivation of marijuana in effect on March 1, 2016; and WHEREAS, Chapter 5.58 of the Municipal Code currently explicitly prohibits medical marijuana dispensaries in the City; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Code allows certain agricultural uses within the City, but medical marijuana cultivation is not an existing allowed use; and WHEREAS , the City Council desires to retain local control over the cultivation of medical marijuana, and therefore desires to adopt a land use ordinance regulating or prohibiting marijuana cultivation that will be in effect before March 1, 2016; and WHEREAS, the cultivation of medical marijuana in other cities has resulted in calls for service to the police department, including calls for robberies and thefts; and WHEREAS, medical marijuana cultivation could pose safety risks for surrounding neighbors, including but not limited to, risks of violent confrontation in connection with attempts to steal marijuana and the risk of fire from improperly wired electrical lights within structures growing marijuana; and WHEREAS , the ability to obtain marijuana for medical purposes is available in other jurisdictions within a short drive of the City; and WHEREAS, there is a threat to the public health, safety and welfare of the community if medical marijuana is cultivated in the City without proper regulations, and such unregulated cultivation which may result in harmful effects to the businesses, property owners and residents of the City; and WHEREAS, Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution provides a city may make and enforce within it limits all local police, sanitary and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws; and WHEREAS , the City Council desires to confirm that the cultivation of marijuana is illegal within the city and enact an explicit prohibition on the cultivation of medical marijuana within the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority to amend a prohibition in effect before March 1, 2016, and such amendment may allow certain types of cultivation, but if no regulation or prohibition is in effect before March 1, 2016, the City could permanently lose the authority to license and regulate medical marijuana cultivation within the City; and WHEREAS , Staff has advised that members of the public are sometimes unaware of the City’s existing prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries because it is not contained in the City’s Zoning Ordinance and that the existing definition of a medical marijuana dispensary causes occasional confusion; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to add the existing prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries within the City to the Zoning Ordinance and rephrase the definition of medical marijuana dispensary to eliminate any confusion; and WHEREAS, Business and Professions Code section 19340 authorizes licensed medical marijuana dispensaries to make medical marijuana deliveries in any city that does not explicitly prohibit it; WHEREAS , the City Council desires to prohibit medical marijuana deliveries within the City; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the Title 8 Zoning Ordinance amendments on December 8, 2015, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 15-15 recommending that the City Council adopt the amendments; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Title 5 and Title 8 amendments on January 19, 2016, at which time all interested parties had the opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Dublin does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein. SECTION 2: Chapter 5.58 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows (with text in strikeout format indicating deletion and italicized text indicating addition): Chapter 5.58 Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and Cultivation 5.58.010 Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, unless otherwise apparent from the context, the following definitions shall apply: A. “Medical marijuana” is marijuana authorized in strict compliance with Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq. B. “Medical marijuana delivery” means the transfer of medical marijuana or medical marijuana products from a medical marijuana dispensary to a qualified patient or primary caregiver, as well as the use by a dispensary of any technology platform to arrange for or facilitate the transfer of medical marijuana or medical marijuana products. CB. “Medical marijuana dispensary” means any facility or location, whether fixed or mobile, where medical marijuana is made available to, distributed by, or distributed to two (2) or more of the following: a qualified patient, a person with an identification card, or a primary caregiver qualified patients, persons with an identification card, or primary caregivers, or combination thereof. A medical marijuana dispensary shall not include the following uses, so long as such uses comply with this code, Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 et seq., and other applicable law: 1. A clinic licensed pursuant to Chapter 1 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 2. A health care facility licensed pursuant to Chapter 2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 3. A residential care facility for persons with chronic life-threatening illness licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.01 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 4. A residential care facility for the elderly licensed pursuant to Chapter 3.2 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. 5. A hospice or a home health agency, licensed pursuant to Chapter 8 of Division 2 of the Health and Safety Code. D. “Medical marijuana cultivation” means any activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading or trimming of medical marijuana. EC. “Person with an identification card” shall have the meaning given that term by Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7. FD. “Primary caregiver” shall have the meaning given that term by Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7. GE. “Qualified patient” shall have the meaning given that term by Health and Safety Code Section 11362.7. 5.58.020 Operation of medical marijuana dispensaries prohibited. No person shall operate or permit to be operated a medical marijuana dispensary in or upon any premises or property in the city. 5.58.030 Medical marijuana cultivation prohibited. No person shall engage in medical marijuana cultivation in or upon any premises or property in the city. 5.58.040 Medical marijuana delivery prohibited. No person shall engage in medical marijuana delivery in or upon any premises or property in the city SECTION 3: Section 8.08.020 (Definitions (A-Z)) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to add the following definitions: Medical Marijuana Dispensary. See Section 5.58.010(C). Medical Marijuana Cultivation. See Section 5.58.010(D). SECTION 4: Section 8.12.050 (Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to add Medical Marijuana Cultivation as an Agricultural Use Type and to prohibit the use in every zoning district, to read as follows: AGRICULTURAL A R-1 R-2 R-M C-O C-N C-1 C-2 M-P M-1 M-2 USE TYPE Medical Marijuana - - - - - - - - - - - Cultivation SECTION 5: Section 8.12.050 (Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code is hereby amended to add Medical Marijuana Dispensary as a Commercial Use Type and to prohibit the use in every zoning district, to read as follows: COMMERCIAL A R-1 R-2 R-M C-O C-N C-1 C-2 M-P M-1 M-2 USE TYPE Medical Marijuana - - - - - - - - - - - Dispensary SECTION 6: Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if any provision, clause, sentence, word or part thereof is held illegal, invalid, unconstitutional, or inapplicable to any person or circumstances, such illegality, invalidity, unconstitutionality, or inapplicability shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions, clauses, sentences, sections, words or parts thereof of the ordinance or their applicability to other persons or circumstances. SECTION 7: CEQA. This Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Section 15061(b)(3) states that CEQA applies only to those projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. The adoption of the proposed Ordinance is exempt from CEQA because the adoption of the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code does not, in itself, allow the construction of any building or structure or authorize any activity, but rather prohibits the cultivation and delivery of medical marijuana within the City. This Ordinance , therefore, has no potential for resulting in significant physical change in the environment, directly or ultimately. SECTION 8: Effective Date and Posting of Ordinance This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after the date of its final adoption. The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three (3) public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 39633 of the Government Code of California. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Dublin on this th 19 day of January, 2016, by the following votes: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: _____________________________ Mayor ATTEST : ___________________________________ City Clerk DRAFT DRAFT Planning Commission Minutes Tuesday, December 8, 2015 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Tuesday, December A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on 8, 2015 , in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Plaza. Chair Goel called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chair Goel; Vice Chair Kohli; Commissioners Do, Bhuthimethee and Mittan; Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director; Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney; Martha Aja, Associate Planner; and Debra LeClair, Recording Secretary. Absent: None ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDANONE – MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS – On a motion by Cm. Bhuthimethee and seconded by Cm. Mittan, on a vote of 3-0-2, with Cm. Kohli and Cm. Do being absent from that meeting, the Planning Commission approved the minutes of the October 27, 2015 meeting with minor modifications. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS NONE – CONSENT CALENDAR NONE – WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONSNONE – PUBLIC HEARINGS – 8.1PLPA-2015-00043 - St. Raymond’s Church Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Review for the operation of a Pre-School and Community Facility with up to 345 children and a new building and site improvements Martha Aja, Associate Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Chair Goel asked about the current condition of the drop-off zone and if will it be modified. Ms. Aja pointed out the drop-off zone on the slide. She stated that, at the beginning of the school year, St. Raymond’s modified their drop-off and pick-up procedure to prevent queuing onto Shannon Ave. Chair Goel asked if the school currently has a drop-off zone. Ms. Aja answered that they do not currently have a designated drop-off zone. Chair Goel asked how vehicles would circulate through the facility with the new proposal. Ms. Aja pointed out the direction of vehicle circulation on the site. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 92 DRAFT DRAFT Chair Goel opened the public hearing. Eric Hom, St. Raymond’s Church, explained the current and proposed modification to the circulation of the site. Chair Goel asked how the exit would work, and if it would be in conflict with the queue. Mr. Hom explained how the circulation would work with the exit. He stated that there will be enough room in the circulation for two-way traffic. Chair Goel felt that Mr. Hom was trying to maximize the queue length within the parking lot using a meandering opportunity and then circulate out without conflict. Mr. Hom pointed out the diagram of the site and how the vehicle circulation would work. Chair Goel invited the Applicant to address the Planning Commission. Mr. Hom spoke in favor of the project, and thanked Staff and the Planning Commission for their work on the project. He introduced the St. Raymond’s staff. He spoke regarding the history of project and the feasibility of a pre-school at St. Raymond’s. He stated that they have worked with neighbors over the last six months regarding their concerns and have made adjustments to the original plan which included moving the building back from property lines and rotating the placement of the building by 180 degrees. He stated that they have also addressed traffic and safety issues by implementing a new drop-off and pick-up area and adding stop signs and landscape modifications to provide better sightlines. He stated that there were also some concerns regarding balls going over the fence and into the neighbor’s yard, and the church bells; they met with neighbors to resolve these concerns. He stated that their goal is to continue to be a great neighbor, and encouraged the Planning Commission to approve the project. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked how many community meetings were held. Mr. Hom answered that they held five meetings since mid-May. Cm. Do asked how they determined that a pre-school was needed. Mr. Hom responded that they conducted surveys within the community of St. Raymond’s and also realized that the City of Dublin is a growing community and felt there was a need in the community for additional pre-schools. Cm. Mittan asked about the current use of the site where the pre-school will be built. Mr. Hom answered that the site is currently being used as two playgrounds. Cm. Kohli asked if there are any outstanding issues after conducting five community meetings. Mr. Hom felt that they have addressed all the concerns with the neighbors. Tim Sbranti, Project Chair for the Capital Campaign at St. Raymond’s, spoke in favor of the project. He stated that he has been a resident of Dublin and a St. Raymond’s parishioner since Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 93 DRAFT DRAFT 1978. He felt that there is a history of St. Raymond’s supporting the overall community with the expansion of the hall, construction of the school and now construction of the pre-school. He stated that the survey found that there was a need among parish families. He stated that the Dublin population has doubled over the last 15 years, but preschool capacity has not. He felt that the preschool is a good opportunity to meet the community’s needs and concerns and that the process enhances the existing Conditional Use Permit and will facilitate better use of the property. He stated that the project is consistent with the zoning, and provides aesthetic as well as safety improvements to the property while meeting the State and City objective of providing and expanding public/semi-public uses. He stated that over 600 families have pledged approximately $2.2 million to make the project a reality. He urged the Planning Commission to adopt Staff’s recommendation and approve the project. Chair Goel closed the public hearing. Cm. Bhuthimethee stated that she is in favor of the project and felt it is a good design as well as a good use of space as far as traffic queuing and the addition of an early childhood school will fulfill some of the community’s needs. Cm. Kohli agreed with Cm. Bhuthimethee and stated that he is in favor of the project. He felt that there is a need for more early childhood education programs and was impressed with the community outreach that was done and resolving the issues to benefit the community. Cm. Do also agree with the other Commissioners and was in favor of the project. She felt it was important for early childhood education and would only improve the community. Cm. Mittan asked if there would be an opportunity to make a U-turn at the intersection of Shannon Ave. and San Ramon Road. Ms. Aja pointed out the driveway where only right turns will be allowed, and stated that at the western property boundary, which is less utilized, a left turn can be made. Cm. Mittan asked how the area is accessed. There was a brief discussion regarding the circulation within the site. Chair Goel re-opened the public hearing. Catherine Deehan, Principal of St. Raymond’s School, felt that, when the parents leave the property, they would go around the block; turn right onto San Ramon Road, then around the next block. She stated that this situation is acceptable to the parents and has kept traffic moving on Shannon Ave. Cm. Mittan asked if the colors and materials for the proposed project match the current buildings. Ms. Deehan answered that the proposed project will match the current building. Cm. Mittan asked if the material was stucco. Ms. Deehan answered yes. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 94 DRAFT DRAFT Chair Goel closed the public hearing. Chair Goel stated that he is in favor of the project and was impressed with the extent to which the Applicant went to resolve issues with the community and that 600 families came together to fund the project. He felt that schools are needed in the community and will provide another option for Dublin families and will alleviate some other congestion. Ms. Aja mentioned the Form SB 343 which shows modifications to the Conditions of Approval based on a recent meeting between the Applicant and the neighbors. Chair Goel stated that the modifications address cut-through traffic, school bells and the walls for the playground and other compliance issues. Ms. Aja agreed and stated that the modifications addresses the timing of outdoor play, cut- through traffic, the school bell system, the location of the wall, a gate added to an existing garden and requiring any necessary repairs to portions of the fence along the western property boundary. On a motion by Cm. Do and seconded by Cm. Bhuthimethee, on a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted, with modifications: RESOLUTION NO. 15-xx A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE OPERATION OF A DAY CARE CENTER and COMMUNITY FACILITY WITH UP TO 345 CHILDREN AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT FOR A NEW 2,560 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND RELATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDING A NEW ENTRY PLAZA AT 11555 SHANNON AVENUE (APN 941-0102-001-20) 8.2PLPA-2015-00056 - Amendments to Dublin Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) and Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) Martha Aja, Associate Planner, presented the project as outlined in the Staff Report. Chair Goel asked if the Planning Commission is acting on Chapter 8.08, 8.12, and 5.58. Ms. Aja responded that the Planning Commission will make a recommendation to the City Council regarding Chapters 8.08 and 8.12. Chapter 5.58 is in the Municipal Code regarding Medical Marijuana dispensaries and will be acted on by the City Council. Chair Goel asked if Staff’s recommendation is to prohibit the cultivation and delivery of marijuana in the City. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 95 DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Aja answered yes; in the future the City may decide to modify the Ordinance, but if there is no ordinance in place by March 1, 2016 then the City loses local control on the issue. Chair Goel asked what adjacent cities have done on this legislation. Ms. Aja answered that both Pleasanton and San Ramon are moving to ban both commercial cultivation and delivery of medical marijuana; Livermore Planning Commission will be considering the item at an upcoming meeting and will recommend banning the commercial cultivation of medical marijuana. Cm. Kohli asked where the closest medical marijuana dispensary is located from Dublin. Ms. Aja answered the closest dispensary would be located in Hayward. Cm. Do asked if there have been any applications for a medical marijuana dispensary within Dublin. Ms. Aja answered that there have been calls occasionally regarding dispensaries. Cm. Kohli asked if the City would have to approve an application for a dispensary, similar to a coffee shop, if no Ordinance is passed as of March 1, 2016. Ms. Aja answered that dispensaries are currently not allowed and that would continue to be the case; however, the way the legislation is written, if there is no Ordinance in place by March 1, 2016 then the individual who would want to do cultivation would need to apply to the State of California Department of Food and Agriculture to get their license. Cm. Kohli asked why go to the trouble of obtaining a license from the Department of Food and Agriculture if the City of Dublin would still not allow the cultivation. Ms. Aja clarified that the Ordinance is regarding the cultivation of medical marijuana within a commercial or residential district. Cm. Kohli asked if he would be legally allowed to grow marijuana in his home under the State law if he had a license. Ms. Aja answered yes. Cm. Kohli asked if the reason for the Ordinance is to ensure that the City of Dublin has control of cultivation within the borders. Jeff Baker, Assistant Community Development Director, answered that dispensaries are prohibited. He stated that the discussion is regarding the cultivation and delivery of medical marijuana. He stated that the City does not have anything in the land use section specific to cultivation, and the law states that as of March 1, 2016, if no Ordinance is in place, then the City will never have control of that issue, and control will always be at the State level. He stated that Staff is proposing to enact something now to secure the right to control the issue at a local level. In the future, the City Council could ease the restrictions or eliminate it all together. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 96 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Kohli asked if the City would be aware of everyone who has a license to cultivate medical marijuana within the City. Mr. Baker answered that the City would be out of the approval loop. It is not clear at this time what reporting the State would provide. Cm. Mittan asked if the Ordinance is specifically to restrict cultivation only. Ms. Aja responded that dispensaries are currently prohibited; however, it is being added to the Zoning Ordinance to provide clarification. She stated that the cultivation component is within Chapter 5.58 with a definition being added to Chapter 8.08 as well as the land use table in Chapter 8.12. Cm. Mittan asked if Livermore will be prohibiting dispensaries also. Ms. Aja was unsure. Cm. Kohli asked if there were any recommendations from Dublin Police Services. Ms. Aja answered that Staff has not received any and with such a short time frame Staff has not had time to do extensive outreach. Mr. Baker stated that the Dublin Police Services is in support of the proposed Ordinance and the Ordinance is generally in line with guidance from the League of California Cities. Cm. Kohli asked how many cities in the state have done something similar. Mr. Baker answered that the legislation is new and felt that most of the cities are dealing with this issue at the same time. Chair Goel asked if the League of California Cities has taken a position as far as guidance to the cities. Mr. Baker answered that the League of California Cities has provided guidance as far as how to maintain local control, consistent with what is being proposed. Chair Goel felt that the proposed Ordinance would allow the City to re-evaluate the issue at a later date. Mr. Baker answered yes. Cm. Mittan asked if Oakland and Hayward, who already allow the activity, might submit a partial ban. Cm. Do asked if the cultivation component is not specifically in the Zoning Ordinance and that is why the Ordinance is being proposed. Ms. Aja answered that cultivation is currently not in the Zoning Ordinance or in Chapter 5.58. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 97 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Do asked if the proposed Ordinance is adopted, would the residents who currently cultivate marijuana be in violation. Ms. Aja answered yes. Chair Goel opened the public hearing. Adam Pine, Sunol, spoke in opposition to the proposed Ordinance. He stated that he works for a company that delivers medical marijuana to this area. He stated that they do not have a brick and mortar facility in the City of Dublin but operates his facility in unincorporated Alameda County in an agricultural zone. He stated that he supports local regulation as opposed to State level only. He continued that San Jose, Oakland and Vallejo enacted Ordinances to examine the issue and came up with acceptable rules for these facilities to operate with their city. He stated that Oakland, San Francisco, San Jose and San Leandro adopted an ordinance that allows the city to have control, and will allow a certain number of dispensaries. He stated that they have quite a few patients in the area, and asked if they would still be allowed to service these patients, who are in wheelchairs and unable to travel. He felt that the facilities in Hayward are not ideal; the better facilities are in Oakland and San Jose. He felt that the proposed Ordinance would require people to go further away to obtain medical marijuana. He stated that his business imposes stringent requirements for drivers and utilizes background checks, and tries to employ every possible regulatory measure. Cm. Kohli asked if his business also cultivates the marijuana. Mr. Pine answered that the law was designed to allow collective farms. People who aren’t able to cultivate join a collective. The cannabis was grown on their behalf and processed and distribute under a non-profit status. He stated that his business is set up similarly; they cultivate approximately 90% of the cannabis in an agricultural area; they process and distribute it themselves. Cm. Kohli asked if they purchase from licensed growers. Mr. Pine answered that the things that they procure are specialty items that require a commercial license, but they never procured medicine from any other grower other than own facility. Cm. Kohli asked if the process to obtain a license for cultivation is a rigorous process or is it easy to obtain and how has that impacted the industry. Mr. Pine answered that, before the new bills were signed, it was an unofficial business. They incorporated as non-profit through the State of California and set the business up as a collective. He felt it was simple to obtain the non-profit status. He stated that they are compliant at the State level but, there are no permits in the local level. They try to work with cities that do not have a ban. He stated that his team members are all community members who grew up in the area and would like to continue to be part of the community. Chair Goel closed the public hearing. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked how the proposed Ordinance would affect delivery. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 98 DRAFT DRAFT Ms. Aja answered that Chapter 5.58 is proposed to be amended to prohibit deliveries within the City of Dublin. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked if that means anyone coming from outside the City of Dublin would be prohibited from delivering medical marijuana to people within the City of Dublin. Ms. Aja answered yes. Cm. Mittan asked if the City Council has considered the consequences of banning deliveries leaving patients to obtain the medicine themselves or someone else for them, outside the City. Cm. Kohli felt that it was unclear if a resident would be able to possess medical marijuana but would not be able to have it delivered within the City. Cm. Bhuthimethee was concerned that if a resident were unable to leave to obtain the medical marijuana themselves then they could be incapacitated. Mr. Baker stated that the proposed Ordinance would not allow a business to deliver to a patient with the City, but a caregiver could obtain the items outside of the City for the patient. He stated that the Planning Commission is making a recommendation to the City Council regarding Chapter 8 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Planning Commission could recommend approval of the Ordinance as is; could recommend modifications now; or could recommend future consideration of easing the restriction and then, when time allows, taking a closer look at the issue. He stated that the timing of the law did not allow thorough analysis regarding unintended consequences of cultivation and delivery that should be reviewed. He felt that there is not enough time to effectively understand the community’s interest and potential impacts. Chair Goel felt that the City has not had the opportunity to do proper outreach or public involvement beyond the item at the Planning Commission. Mr. Baker agreed. Chair Goel felt that Staff’s recommendation is to put the hardest restrictions now and then loosen up the restrictions at a later time. He was concerned that the City may be potentially impacting those with a current medical need, and asked if there are services currently being provided within the City of Dublin. Cm. Bhuthimethee felt that she understands that Staff is trying to keep control within the City; however, she did not want to shut the door on these patients, even temporarily, and there is no guarantee as to when the Ordinance would be rewritten. Cm. Mittan asked what the penalties would be for delivering within the City of Dublin. Ms. Aja answered that would be a violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Kit Faubion, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the violator would be subject to administrative citation through the City’s Code Enforcement process. Ms. Faubion explained the process for an Ordinance and the time it takes before the Ordinance becomes effective. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 99 DRAFT DRAFT Chair Goel asked if the Planning Commission continued this item to do further analysis would push the item into 2016. Ms. Faubion answered yes. Chair Goel urged the Planning Commissioners who are feeling that they don’t have enough information and want to continue the item, to consider that if there is nothing in place by March 1, 2016 the City will lose the option to control this issue. He felt that, if there is concern, that when the Planning Commission makes a motion that they state their concerns. He felt that this is a sensitive subject but that the Planning Commission should take action whether following Staff’s recommendation or a different recommendation and asked if follow up items recommended to the City Council would be appropriate. Ms. Faubion answered yes; it would be appropriate to make a recommendation agreeing with Staff with their concerns stated. Chair Goel asked if the Planning Commission can make a recommendation regarding timelines and stated that he was concerned about putting a potential freeze hold on a situation that is currently going on, but it would be a recommendation not a requirement. Mr. Baker responded that the City Council could set a potential timeframe, but the Planning Commission could make a recommendation. Chair Goel stated that he was trying to put into context what may be considered to give the Planning Commission some guidance. He asked if there were any other guidance elements that need to be discussed. Cm. Bhuthimethee stated that Mr. Baker had mentioned that there was some possibility of easing what is in the proposed Ordinance and wanted to discuss that. Chair Goel suggested that the Planning Commission follow Staff’s recommendation because he felt that to change the Ordinance at this point would confuse the public. Cm. Bhuthimethee asked what Staff would suggest regarding easing the proposed Ordinance at this point. Mr. Baker responded that, because Staff has not heard from the community on this subject, or had an opportunity to fully research options, they have no specific recommendation at this time. He stated that essentially the proposed Ordinance would prohibit the cultivation and delivery of medical marijuana and felt that the discussion could include some easing of those restrictions. Ms. Faubion stated that there is no basis for identifying a different option because Staff does not have the information. She felt that it could be developed in the future and once the timeline is met then Staff can conduct public outreach. Cm. Kohli was concerned with a prohibition act and felt that it would be difficult to repeal the Ordinance in the future. He felt that the item description posted on the agenda was not clear and that some people did not understand what the issue was. He was concerned with such an extreme Ordinance. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 100 DRAFT DRAFT Cm. Do stated that she is in support of Staff’s recommendation because of the deadline issue. She felt that, once the City has met the deadline, they will do the right thing and ascertain what the community’s feelings are towards this subject and move forward from there. She felt that the Planning Commission is discussing this item from personal feelings because they do not know the community’s feelings on the subject. She felt that the Planning Commission has concerns regarding people who legitimately need medical marijuana in the community and the number of people is not known nor how it will affect them. Chair Goel reminded the Planning Commissioners that their purview is to make a recommendation and cannot direct Staff. Cm. Do stated that she would support Staff’s recommendation but would make the recommendation to the City Council to reach out to the community. Cm. Mittan was concerned that the people who need medical marijuana will not have a voice on this issue. Because the number of people in need is unknown, their voice will be drowned out by the people who do not want the Dublin community to turn into “Berkeley or Oakland.” He felt that the issue will not be revisited and merely fade away. Chair Goel stated that he understands the other Commissioners’ feeling but he personally has no attachment to the issue. He stated that he would be in support of a recommendation to move forward as is and also making a recommendation to City Council to bring this issue for evaluation at a future date. Cm. Bhuthimethee agreed with Chair Goel and with Staff’s recommendation to maintain local control. She was in support of Chair Goel’s suggestion of making a recommendation to the City Council to bring the item back for future consideration and that the proposed Ordinance is considered only a placeholder. She stated that she agrees with Cm. Kohli that an outright ban is not the ideal situation. Chair Goel stated that the recommendation is an outright ban. Cm. Kohli asked if Chair Goel would agree that by recommending to the City Council to move forward with the proposed Ordinance is an outright ban. Chair Goel stated that the Staff recommendation is an outright ban. Cm. Kohli responded that if the Planning Commission approves the Resolution then they are recommending that City Council move forward with essentially an outright ban. Chair Goel agreed and stated that, even if the Planning Commission makes a recommendation for further study, it is still an outright ban. Cm. Bhuthimethee was not in support of an outright ban and also agreed that it is a sensitive topic. Cm. Kohli felt that it would be irresponsible to go forward without all the information and recommend a ban on all activity at the local level and maybe go back and revisit the issue. He Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 101 DRAFT DRAFT stated that he believes in the State government. He stated that he cannot support this Ordinance as proposed. On a motion by Cm. Do and seconded by Chair Goel, on a vote of 3-2, the Planning Commission adopted: Ayes: Chair Goel, Cm. Do, Cm. Mittan Nays: Cm. Kohli and Cm. Bhuthimethee RESOLUTION15-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 8.08 (DEFINITIONS) AND 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES OF LAND) OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES AND CULTIVATION IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS – NONE OTHER BUSINESS - NONE Brief INFORMATION ONLY 10.1 reports from the Planning Commission and/or Staff, including Committee Reports and Reports by the Planning Commission related to meetings attended at City Expense (AB 1234). 10.2 Chair Goel asked if the application for the Schaefer Ranch project has changed since it was denied by the Planning Commission. Mr. Baker answered that the project has not changed and will be heard at the December 15, 2015 City Council meeting. However, there has been some clarification regarding the timing of a donation from Discovery Builders for park maintenance. 10.3 Cm. Bhuthimethee asked for an update on the modifications requested by the Planning Commission regarding the Trumark/Regional project. Mr. Baker answered that those modifications were part of the Conditions of Approval and the Applicant has not submitted drawings as yet but Staff will work with them to ensure compliance. He stated that he will update the Planning Commission assuming that the project moves forward. 10.4 Mr. Baker informed the Planning Commission that the meeting scheduled for December 22, 2015 is cancelled and the election of a new chair and vice chair will be held at the meeting scheduled on January 12, 2016. 10.5 Mr. Baker reminded the Planning Commission that the Planning Commissioner’s Academy is scheduled for March 2-4, 2016 in San Ramon with more information to follow. Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 102 DRAFT DRAFT ADJOURNMENT – The meeting was adjourned at 8:29:06 PM Respectfully submitted, Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: Jeff Baker Assistant Community Development Director G:\MINUTES\2015\PLANNING COMMISSION\12.8.15 DRAFT PC MINUTES.doc Planning Commission December 8, 2015 Regular Meeting Page | 103 RESOLUTION 15-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 8.08 (DEFINITIONS) AND 8.12 (ZONING DISTRICTS AND PERMITTED USES OF LAND) OF THE DUBLIN MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES AND CULTIVATION IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS WITHIN THE CITY OF DUBLIN WHEREAS , the Legislature recently passed, and the Governor signed, several bills regulating the commercial activity of medical marijuana, including Assembly Bill 243, which assigns certain state agencies with regulatory task regarding commercial medical marijuana, including product labeling and environmental regulation; and WHEREAS , Section 6 of AB 243 adds Health and Safety Code section 11362.777, which puts the California Department of Food and Agriculture (“DFA”) in charge of licensing of both indoor and outdoor cultivation sites in the state; and WHEREAS , Health and Safety Code section 11362.777 provides that the DFA shall be the sole licensing authority for medical marijuana cultivation within a city if that city does not have land use regulations or ordinances regulating or prohibiting the cultivation of marijuana in effect on March 1, 2016; and WHEREAS, an amendment to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.08 and 8.12 enacting a prohibition of medical marijuana cultivation will ensure that the City of Dublin retains local control over medical marijuana cultivation within the City; and WHEREAS , if the City has a prohibition regarding medical marijuana cultivation in effect before March 1, 2016, the City retains the flexibility to maintain, narrow, or lift the prohibition on cultivation at some point in the future; and WHEREAS, an amendment to Chapter 5.58, along with the proposed amendments to Chapter 8.08 and 8.12, will ensure consistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the City’s existing prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries, which will remain in effect; and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with State guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impacts and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS , the proposed project is exempt from CEQA per CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), which states that CEQA applies only to those projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. The adoption of the proposed amendments to the Municipal Code does not, in itself, allow the construction of any building or structure, but prohibits medical marijuana cultivation within the City; and WHEREAS , a Staff Report was submitted to the City of Dublin Planning Commission recommending approval of the proposed amendments; and 1 WHEREAS , the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on December 8, 2015 and WHEREAS , proper notice of said hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS , the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used its independent judgment to evaluate the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City Council adopt the following amendments to the Zoning Ordinance: The following new definitions will be listed in Chapter 8.08 and there will be a cross reference to Chapter 5.58. Medical Marijuana Dispensary . See Section 5.58.010(C). Medical Marijuana Cultivation. See Section 5.58.010(D). Amend Section 8.12.050 (Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses) of the Dublin Municipal Code to add Medical Marijuana as an Agricultural Use Type to read as follows: AGRICULTURAL A R-1 R-2 R-M C-O C-N C-1 C-2 M-P M-1 M-2 USE TYPE Medical Marijuana - - - - - - - - - - - Cultivation Amend Section 8.12.050 (Permitted and Conditionally Permitted Land Uses) of Title 8 of the Dublin Municipal Code to add Medical Marijuana Dispensary as a Commercial Use Type to read as follows: COMMERCIAL A R-1 R-2 R-M C-O C-N C-1 C-2 M-P M-1 M-2 USE TYPE Medical Marijuana - - - - - - - - - - - Dispensary 2 th PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 8 day of December 2015 by the following vote: AYES: Do, Mittan, Goel NOES: Kohli, Bhuthimethee ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Planning Commission Chair ATTEST: _________ Assistant Community Development Director 3 Ordinance Amendments Related to Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, Deliveries & Cultivation January 19, 2016 Background •Medical Marijuana: –1996: Voters enacted Compassionate Use Act –2004: Legislature adopted Medical Marijuana Program Act –2005: CC adopted Ordinance prohibiting medical marijuana dispensaries Medical Marijuana Regulations & Safety Act •Dual licensing system to regulate cultivation –License from Dept. Food & Agriculture –License/permit from local jurisdiction •Authority to regulate cultivation –Local land use regulation: March 1, 2016 •Authority to regulate deliveries Proposed Amendments •Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries) •Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) •Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts & Permitted Uses of Land) Definitions – Revised •“Medical marijuana dispensary” means any facility or location, whether fixed or mobile, where medical marijuana is made available to, distributed by, or distributed to two (2) or more of the following: a qualified patient, a person with an identification card, or a primary caregiver qualified patients, persons with an identification card, or primary caregivers, or combination thereof. Definitions - New •“Medical marijuana delivery” means the transfer of medical marijuana or medical marijuana products from a medical marijuana dispensary to a qualified patient or primary caregiver, as well as the use by a dispensary of any technology platform to arrange for or facilitate the transfer of medical marijuana or medical marijuana products. •“Medical marijuana cultivation” means any activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading or trimming of medical marijuana. Regulation of Use •Prohibited Activities in all Zoning Districts: –Cultivation of medical marijuana –Delivery of medical marijuana –Dispensaries of medical marijuana (maintains existing prohibition). Planning Commission •Public hearing held on December 8, 2015 •Expressed interest in future amendments to relax regulations •Adopted a Resolution recommending the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance Recommendation •Waive the reading and adopt an Ordinance amending Chapter 5.58 (Medical Marijuana Dispensaries), Chapter 8.08 (Definitions) and Chapter 8.12 (Zoning Districts and Permitted Uses of Land) of the Dublin Municipal Code to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries, deliveries and cultivation within the City of Dublin.