HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.2 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