Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Committees - Economic and Community Development - 05/14/2012 (3) • Economic & Community Development �- KENT Wns HINQTQN Committee Agenda Councilmembers: Bill Boyce • Deborah Ranniger • Jamie Perry, Chair AGENDA Monday, May 14, 2012 5:30 p.m. Item Description ActionSpeaker(s) Time Pace 1. Approval of the April 9, 2012 Minutes YES Jamie Perry 5 min 1 2. Public Hearing: YES Fred Satterstrom 20 min 5 Medical Marijuana Ordinance Katie Graves Consideration of zoning options for David Galazin medical marijuana collective gardens. 3. Neighbors of West Hill Council YES Toni Azzola 10 min 29 Resolution 4. Downtown Strategic Action Plan Update YES Fred Satterstrom 15 min 37 Resolution Gloria Gould-Wessen 5. Economic Development Report & NO Ben Wolters 10 min 8 Permit Process Update Informational Only Unless otherwise noted, the Planning and Economic Development Committee meets the 2nd Monday of each month at 5:30 p.m. in Council Chambers East, Kent City Hall, 220 4th Avenue South, Kent, 98032-5895. For information on the above item(s), the City of Kent's Website can be accessed at http://kentwa.igm2.com/citizens/Default.aspx?DepartmentID=1025 on Thursday, May 10, 2012 or contact Julie Pulliam, Pam Mottram or the respective project planner in the Planning Division at (253) 856-5454 or as indicated on the agenda. Any person requiring a disability accommodation should contact the City Clerk's Office at(253) 856-5725 in advance. ForTDD relay service call the Washington Telecommunications Relay Service at 1-800-833-6388. This page intentionally left blank. KENT W.=r i ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES April 9, 2012 Committee Members Committee Chair Jamie Perry, Deborah Ranniger, Bill Boyce. Perry called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. 1. Code Enforcement Update Economic and Community Director Ben Wolters introduced Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) Brian Swanberg. He stated that the city processed and successfully closed over 600 cases through December 2011 with two code enforcement officers. Wolters stated that the code violation process begins by receiving complaints (whereby many times the code enforcement officer is able to resolve complaints by phone), if a determination of violation is made, fines are levied and the alleged violator may appeal to the Hearing Examiner (HE). Wolters stated that only a couple cases have been taken to Superior Court within the last decade and it is pretty egregious when that happens. He stated that he along with Building Office Bob Hutchinson and Brian detected a gap between what Kent is able to do under the law versus what people expect Kent to do. Swanberg stated that code enforcement evaluates complaints by phone or through site visits to determine if a violation exists and warrants further action. Code Enforcement will ask for a description of the potential violation and for an address of where the violation exists. Code violations are assigned a case number through the KIVA tracking system, and information is entered into the system as the case progresses. Swanberg stated that research for property ownership is completed to ensure the applicable property owners or those with a vested interest in the property (such as tenants) will be contacted. Cases are closed when violations are corrected. If violations are not corrected an admonishment or notice of compliance letter is mailed to the applicable parties. Extensions are issued to allow time to correct violations under mitigating circumstances. If violations continue unresolved, a correction notice is sent out defining the consequences of noncompliance and includes the issuance of a $500 fine. The violation will be reviewed by the City law department, and will be heard before the HE who has the authority to reduce the fine to $100. A Notice of Violation does not predicate a HE meeting. Wolters stated that Kent is constrained by State law in how far code enforcement can go in pursuing correction. Code enforcement has streamlined their procedures over the years, are trying to incorporate and get citizens involved by calling the city to report when violations have been cleared up which saves the city time and money. City Council and citizens want the City to get more aggressive in terms of pursuing correction of violations. Pursuing violations through Superior Court requires resources that the City does not have available. It would benefit the city to have specific funds set aside to pursue solutions. Wolters questioned if the committee wishes to examine community standards although that would create the question about Washington's property rights law. Councilmember Perry asked staff to evaluate other cities codes, review Kent's code to evaluate where it could be strengthened and where gaps exist. City Council's perception is that the codes are too lenient. Perry stated that she would like the code to address handling of abandoned buildings. Wolters noted that Swanberg is attempting to get hold of the owner of an abandoned house on Meeker Street near Naden being used an encampment for the homeless. Wolters stated that the City does not have the money to pursue placing a lien on the property citing that having an estimated $25,000 available would allow Swanberg a little latitude to pursue legal action. City Attorney Tom Brubaker stated that Tammy Purdue is prepared on all the cases that have to go to court. Swanberg stated that staff is prioritizing cases so that violations that pose life safety risks are addressed first. ECDC Minutes April 9,2012 Page 1 of 2 2. Approval of Minutes Councilmember Ranniger Moved and Councilmember Boyce Seconded a Motion to approve the March 12, 2012 Minutes. Motion PASSED 3-0. 3. Second Public Hearing: ZCA-2011-3 Amendments to KCC 12.04.221 Planner Katie Graves stated that this hearing addresses amendments to Kent City Code (KCC) Chapter 12.04.221 that regulates extensions and expirations of preliminary plats. Graves stated that these updates are part of an overall effort to keep codes current, respond to changes to State law, and provide clarity. Planning Director Fred Satterstrom stated that the City must conform to State law. He stated that State law recently changed the period of validity from 5 to 7 years. A Bill signed by the Governor extends that time period to 9 years effective June 2012 for preliminary plats approved prior to Dec 31, 2007. 30 of 34 plats inventoried by staff will be subject to the new law. Brubaker noted that the RCW will revert to a 5-year period of validity in 2015. Councilmember Boyce MOVED and Councilmember Perry SECONDED a Motion to Open the Public Hearing. Motion Passed 3-0. Jack Kastien, 20609 941h Ave S, Kent, WA, 98031 spoke in support of Option B to not allow preliminary plat expiration extensions beyond the RCW time limitation (7 years, no extensions). He submitted his testimony (established as Exhibit 1) for the record. Garrett Huffman, Master Blders Association of King & Snohomish Counties spoke in support of Option B with the addition of a 1 year 'date-certain' extension. Councilmember Boyce MOVED and Councilmember Perry SECONDED a Motion to close the Public Hearing. Motion Passed 3-0. After deliberating, Councilmember Boyce MOVED and Councilmember Perry SECONDED a Motion to recommend to the City Council approval of a new Option D for the RCWs 9 year period of validity plus the addition of a 1 year automatic extension bright line rule. Motion Passed 2-1 with Councilmember Ranniger Opposed. 4. Economic Development Plan (EDP) - Phase II Contract Wolters introduced Chris Mefford, Principal of Community Attributes International (CAI). He stated that CAI is the economic consultant firm retained to develop the new Economic Development Strategy (EDS) for the city of Kent of which Phase I has been completed. Wolters introduced a proposal to the Committee to consider acceptance of a contract for $49,000 to proceed with Phase II to develop the action plan for the EDS in keeping with what the Council granted as part of the 2012 budget. Wolters stated that monies was shifted from the budget identified for the Midway Subarea Plan (MSP) to backfill the reduced amount originally identified for Phase II as staff determined that Phase II took priority at this time and that the City had time for the MSP to mature. Staff envisions tackling the MSP beginning next year. Mefford stated in Phase I staff gathered information on how to bring people together with a common understanding of the local economy and identified several goals for Kent and the Region that would be a focus for Phase II. Those goals includes considering where opportunities exist to link neighborhoods, Downtown, Kent Station, ShoWare Center, and Industrial areas for ease of strategy. Phase II is an engagement process whereby cluster strategies will be refined and opportunities for diversification will be looked at. A detailed action strategy includes engaging stakeholders and businesses through holding a series of subcommittee meetings and community wide forums. Mefford stated he envisions concrete tangible action steps being implemented by stakeholders through a variety of formats. Wolters stated that Phase I of the EDS developed a consensus of what the city's priorities should be in terms of economic development in the community and provided staff and policy makers with a reference point to guide what things the City would pursue. That plan played into the ECDC Minutes April 9,2012 Page 2 of 3 previous strategic goals of the City Council. Wolters stated that staff reviewed the previous plan to discover that about 3/4 of what was contained in the plan had been accomplished and considered the relevancy of those things not yet accomplished. Wolters and Mefford stated they would remain engaged with the Economic Community Development Committee (ECDC) and City Council with the desire to hold a business forum that would include Council participation. Wolters stated that resolution and adoption of the plan would be part of the ECDC's delivery process. Councilmember Boyce MOVED and Councilmember Perry SECONDED a Motion to authorize the contract with Community Attributes International for Phase II of the Economic Development Strategic Plan. Motion PASSED 3-0. S. Economic Development Report & Permit Process Update Wolters reported that the pace is continuing with the Goodman project; Town Square Center and Town Square Apartments. One staff review meeting has been completed and a second meeting scheduled. There is a question of whether or not they will save the existing foundation slab. This has a financial consequence for Kent under the terms of agreement Kent had for the lease to own. If the slab is saved, the cost of demolishing will not be deducted from the initial payment which occurs at time of sale resulting in a bigger payment to Kent at that point. If the slab is demolished, the cost would be deducted from the initial payment then added to what we would collect over time in the payment process phase after it opens. This is a unique deal that matches Kent's needs with their needs. In response to Perry, Wolters stated Goodman is preparing for a review by the Downtown Design Review Committee to include review of design and materials for the fascia of the building. He stated that preliminary work is in keeping with what City Council desires. Wolters stated that a formal process as identified in code is being followed noting that he would speak with Economic Development Manager Kurt Hanson about holding a briefing with the Citizens Advisory Committee. Informational Only Adiournment Committee Chair Perry adjourned the meeting at 6:46 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Secretary Economic & Community Development Committee PIAPlanningAECDQ2012VMIInute A0409 12_DaftMln.doc ECDC Minutes April 9,2012 Page 3 of 4 This page intentionally left blank. 5 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director KENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent, WA 98032-5895 May 4, 2012 TO: Chair Jamie Perry and Economic & Community Development Committee Members FROM: Katie Graves, Planner RE: Medical Cannabis Collective Gardens [ZCA-2011-2] For the meeting of May 14, 2012 MOTION: Move to recommend/not recommend/amend adoption of the medical cannabis collective garden ordinance to the City Council. SUMMARY: On December 12, 2011, the Economic and Community Development Committee voted on proposed medical cannabis definition and zoning options for recommendation to the City Council. On January 3, 2012, the Council voted against the ordinance, and reenacted a moratorium regarding medical marijuana [cannabis] collective gardens or dispensaries for another six months. At the April 10, 2012 Public Safety Committee meeting, the committee recommended that zoning for medical cannabis collective gardens be on the agenda for the next ECDC meeting, and further recommended that the ECDC pass an ordinance to ban collective gardens and dispensaries from the City of Kent. Attached is a draft ordinance reflecting the Public Safety Committee zoning recommendation. Tonight's public hearing is to discuss this draft ordinance, and any other zoning options for medical cannabis collective gardens. Please find attached Ordinance 4025 that was not passed by City Council on January 3, 2011, and the staff memo from the October 10, 2011 ECDC hearing, which outlines the zoning options that were presented. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: During the 2011 legislative session, E2SSB 5073 was passed, legalizing medical cannabis collective gardens, but clearly stating that medical cannabis dispensaries are illegal. A medical cannabis "collective garden" is an area or garden where qualifying patients engage in the production, processing, transporting, and delivery of cannabis for medical use as defined in state law (RCW 69.51A). Collective gardens can be run by up to 10 qualified patients with a maximum of 15 cannabis plants per patient, up to a total of 45 plants, and a maximum of 24 ounces of useable cannabis per patient, up to a total of 72 ounces. This legislation became effective on July 22, 2011. The new law delegates to cities 6 MEMORANDUM: Economic & Community Development Committee May 14, 2012 Page 2 the authority to implement zoning requirements, business licensing requirements, health and safety requirements, and business taxes on collective gardens. Possession, use, growth, and distribution of cannabis, whether or not it is for medical use, are still illegal under Federal law. On July 5, 2011, Kent City Council passed an emergency 5-month moratorium on medical cannabis to allow time to determine an appropriate regulatory framework for collective gardens. A public hearing on the moratorium was held by Council on July 19, 2011 and staff was directed to research regulatory options. Staff presented preliminary findings for information only at the September 12, 2011 ECDC workshop and was directed by ECDC members to provide zoning options for the location of medical cannabis collective gardens. A public hearing was held on October 10, 2011 to discuss proposed collective garden definitions, options for allowed zones (including an option to not allow collective gardens at all), and options for separation requirements from other uses (for your reference, attached is the staff memo from this meeting that outlines these options). At the November 14, 2011 ECDC meeting, the committee voted to recommend adoption of the following: medical cannabis definition that references RCW 69.51A; allow collective gardens in designated commercial and industrial zones, including CM-1, CM-2, M1, M1-C, M2, and M3, and GC, and GC-MU; require collective gardens to be at least 750' from a public or private school; and limiting collective gardens to only one garden per tax parcel. On December 12, 2011, ECDC voted to recommend adoption of the ordinance that reflects these options (attached for your reference), and held a public hearing on extending the moratorium. City Council did not adopt the ordinance at the January 3, 2012 meeting, and voted to reenact the moratorium for another six months. This moratorium will expire on July 11, 2012, unless sooner terminated by the City Council. The SEPA Responsible Official has determined that the proposed amendments are not categorically exempt from SEPA review under WAC 197-11-800(19) and 11.03.200 Kent City Code; therefore, a SEPA analysis was conducted. The amendments were determined to have no environmental impact, and a Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on September 26, 2011. Staff will be present at the May 14, 2012 ECDC meeting to answer any questions. KG\pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONING_CODE_AMENDMENTS\2011\ZCA-2011-2 Medical_Cannabis\05-14-12 ECDC\StaffMemo.doc End Draft Ordinance,Ordinance 4025,Oct. 10,2011 ECDC Staff Memo cc: Ben Wolters, Economic and Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager Tom Brubaker, City Attorney Pat Fitzpatrick, Deputy City Attorney David Galazin,Assistant City Attorney Project File ZCA-2011-2 7 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, amending Title 15 of the Kent City Code, to specify that medical cannabis collective gardens are not permitted in any zoning district within the city of Kent. RECITALS A. Recent amendments to Chapter 69.51A RCW, relating to the medical use of cannabis, have expanded the scope of certain activities, involving the use of cannabis for medical purposes that are permitted under state law. B. Section 69.51A.085 RCW allows "qualifying patients" to create and participate in "collective gardens" for the purpose of producing, processing, transporting, and delivering cannabis for medical use, subject to certain conditions. C. Section 69.51A.140 RCW delegates authority, to cities and towns, to adopt and enforce zoning requirements, business licensing requirements, health and safety requirements, and business taxes, as 1 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 8 those requirements and taxes relate to the production, processing, or dispensing of medical cannabis within their jurisdictions. D. The city council understands that approved medical uses of cannabis may provide relief to patients suffering from debilitating or terminal conditions, but potential secondary impacts from the establishment of facilities for the growth, production, and processing of medical cannabis are not appropriate for any zoning designation within the city. E. The city council further understands that while the medical benefits of cannabis have been recognized by the state legislature, cannabis remains a Schedule I controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and possession and use of cannabis is still a violation of federal law. The city council wishes to exercise the authority granted pursuant to state law in order to clarify that the establishment of a collective garden will be deemed to be a violation of city zoning ordinances, but the city council expressly disclaims any intent to exercise authority over collective gardens in a manner that would directly conflict with the CSA. F. The city's State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) official issued a Determination of Nonsignificance on September 26, 2011. G. On September 23, 2011, notice was sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce requesting expedited review. On, October 10, 2011, the city was granted expedited review 2 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 9 and was informed that it had met the Growth Management Act notice requirements under RCW 36.70A.106. H. The Economic and Community Development Committee considered this matter at its September 12, 2011 workshop, and held a public hearing on October 10, 2011. The matter was then considered at the Economic and Community Development Committee meetings on November 14, 2011, and December 12, 2011. The city council further considered this matter at its regular meeting on January 3, 2012, and the Economic and Community Development Committee again took up the matter at its May 14, 2012 meeting. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. — Amendment. Chapter 15.02 of the Kent City Code is amended to add a new Section 15.02.074 to read as follows: Sec. 15.02.074. Collective gardens. Collective garden means the growing, production, processing, transportation, and delivery of cannabis, by qualifying patients, for medical use, as set forth in Chapter 69.51A RCW, and subject to the following conditions: 3 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 10 A. No more than ten qualifying patients may participate in a single collective garden at any time; B. A collective garden may contain no more than fifteen plants per patient up to a total of forty-five plants; C. A collective garden may contain no more than twenty-four ounces of useable cannabis per patient up to a total of seventy-two ounces of useable cannabis; D. A copy of each qualifying patient's valid documentation, including a copy of the patient's proof of identity, must be available at all times on the premises of the collective garden; E. No useable cannabis from the collective garden is delivered to anyone other than one of the qualifying patients participating in the collective garden; F. A collective garden may contain separate areas for growing, processing, and delivering to its qualified patients, provided that these separate areas must be physically part of the same premises, and located on the same parcel or lot. A location utilized solely for the purpose of distributing cannabis shall not be considered a collective garden; and G. No more than one collective garden may be established on a single tax parcel. 4 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 11 SECTION 2. -Amendment. Chapter 15.08 of the Kent City Code is amended by adding a new Section 15.08.290 to read as follows: Sec. 15.08.290. Medical cannabis collective gardens. A. Collective gardens, as defined in KCC 15.02.074, are prohibited in the following zoning districts: 1. All agricultural districts, including A-10 and AG; 2. All residential districts, including SR-1, SR-3, SR-4.5, SR-6, SR-8, MR-D, MR-T12, MR-T16, MR-G, MR-M, MR-H, MHP, PUD, MTC-1, MTC-2, and MCR; 3. All commercial/office districts, including: NCC, CC, CC-MU, DC, DCE, DCE-T, CM-1, CM-2, GC, GC-MU, 0, 0-MU, and GWC; 4. All industrial districts, including: MA, M1, M1-C, M2, and M3; and 5. Any new district established after June 5, 2012. B. Any violation of this section is declared to be a public nuisance per se, and shall be abated by the city attorney under applicable provisions of this code or state law, including, but not limited to, the provisions of KCC Chapter 1.04. 5 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 12 C. Nothing in this section is intended to authorize, legalize, or permit the establishment, operation, or maintenance of any business, building, or use which violates any city, state, or federal law or statute. SECTION 3, — Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4, — Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. SECTION 5, — Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law. The City Clerk is directed to publish a summary of this ordinance at the earliest possible publication date. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR 6 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 13 ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of , 20_. APPROVED: day of , 20_. PUBLISHED: day of , 20_. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the city of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Med Cannabis Zoning-Hnal.3.docx 7 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 14 This page intentionally left blank. 15 urdinance (Amending or Repealing Ordinances) CFN=1320 - Medical Marijuana - Cannabis DID NOT PASS - 1/3/2012 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 16 e A� frY� .. t 6,10 r ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, amending Title 15 of the Kent City Code, to specify zones in the city in which medical cannabis collective gardens are not permitted. RECITALS A. Recent amendments to Chapter 69.51A RCW, relating to the medical use of cannabis, have expanded the scope of certain activities, involving the use of cannabis for medical purposes, that are permitted under state law. B. Section 69.51A.085 RCW allows "qualifying patients" to create and participate in "collective gardens" for the purpose of producing, processing, transporting, and delivering cannabis for medical use, subject to certain conditions. C. Section 69.51A.140 RCW delegates authority, to cities and towns, to adopt and enforce zoning requirements, business licensing requirements, health and safety requirements, and business taxes, as 1 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 17 those requirements and taxes relate to the production, processing, or dispensing of medical cannabis within their jurisdictions. D. The city council understands that approved medical uses of cannabis may provide relief to patients suffering from debilitating or terminal conditions, but potential secondary impacts from the establishment of facilities for the growth, production, and processing of medical cannabis are not appropriate for all zoning designations within the city, nor should such facilities be in close proximity to schools. E. The city council further understands that while the medical benefits of cannabis have been recognized by the state legislature, cannabis remains a Schedule I controlled substance under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA), and possession and use of cannabis is still a violation of federal law. The city council wishes to exercise the authority granted pursuant to state law in order to distinguish those zoning districts within the city in which the establishment of collective gardens will be deemed to be a violation of city zoning ordinances, but the city council expressly disclaims any intent to exercise permitting authority over collective gardens in a manner that would directly conflict with the CSA. F. The City's State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) official issued a Determination of Nonsignificance on September 26, 2011. G. On September 23, 2011, notice was sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce requesting expedited review. On, October 10, 2011, the City was granted expedited review - 2 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 18 and was informed that it had met the Growth Management Act notice requirements under RCW 36.70A.106. H. The Economic and Community Development Committee considered this matter at its September 12, 2011 workshop, and held a public hearing on October 10, 2011. The matter was also considered at the Economic and Community Development Committee meetings on November 14, 2011, and December 12, 2011. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORDINANCE SECTION 1. — Amendment. Chapter 15.02 of the Kent City Code is amended to add a new Section 15.02.074 to read as follows: Sec. 15.02.074. Collective gardens. Collective garden means the growing, production, processing, transportation, and delivery of cannabis, by qualifying patients, for medical use, as set forth in Chapter 69.51A RCW, and subject to the following conditions: A. No more than ten qualifying patients may participate in a single collective garden at any time; 3 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 19 B. A collective garden may contain no more than fifteen plants per patient up to a total of forty-five plants; C. A collective garden may contain no more than twenty-four ounces of useable cannabis per patient up to a total of seventy- two ounces of useable cannabis; D. A copy of each qualifying patient's valid documentation, including a copy of the patient's proof of identity, must be available at all times on the premises of the collective garden; and E. No useable cannabis from the collective garden is delivered to anyone other than one of the qualifying patients participating in the collective garden. SECTION 2. - Amendment. Chapter 15.08 of the Kent City Code is amended by adding a new Section 15.08.290 to read as follows: Sec. 15.08.290, Medical cannabis collective gardens. A. Collective gardens, as defined in KCC 15.02.074, are prohibited in the following zoning districts: 1. All agricultural districts, including A-10 and AG; 4 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 20 2. All residential districts, including SR-1, SR-3, SR-4.5, SR-6, SR-8, MR-D, MR-T12, MR-T16, MR-G, MR-M, MR-H, MHP, MTC-1, MTC-2, and MCR; 3. The following commercial/office districts: NCC, CC, DC, DCE, O, and GWC; i 4. The following industrial district: MA; and 5. Any new district established after January 15, 2012. B. Collective gardens are prohibited within the area circumscribed by a circle which has a radius consisting of the following distances from the following specified uses or zones: 1. Within seven hundred fifty (750) feet of any public or private school. C. The distances provided in this section shall be measured by following a straight line, without regard to intervening buildings, from the nearest point of the building or tenant space in which the collective garden is to be located, to the nearest point of the parcel of property or the land use district boundary line from which the collective garden is to be separated. D. Collective gardens are limited to no more than one per tax parcel. 5 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 21 E. For purposes of this title, this section KCC 15.08.290 and KCC 15.02.074 shall not be subject to the following provisions of KCC Title 15: 1. KCC 15.09.065, except for KCC 15,09.065(C) pertaining to appeals; and 2. KCC 15.03.040(A), to the extent pertaining to permitted land uses. F. Any violation of this section is declared to be a public nuisance per se, and shall be abated by the city attorney under applicable provisions of this code or state law, including, but not limited to, the provisions of KCC Chapter 1.04. G. Nothing in this section is intended to authorize, legalize, or permit the establishment, operation, or maintenance of any business, building, or use which violates any city, state, or federal law or statute. SECTION 3. - Severability. If any one or more sections, subsections, or sentences of this ordinance are held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this ordinance and the same shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 4. - Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including 6 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 22 the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. SECTION 5. - Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage as provided by law. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED: day of 20. APPROVED; day of 20. PUBLISHED: day of 20. 7 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 23 I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK P:\Civil\Ordinance\Med Cannabis Zo Nng-FInall.docx 8 Medical Cannabis Collective Garden Zoning Amend KCC Title 15 24 This page intentionally left blank. 25 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director KENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent, WA 98032-5895 October 5, 2011 TO: Chair Jamie Perry and Economic & Community Development Committee Members FROM: Katie Graves, Planner RE: Medical Marijuana Collective Gardens For the public hearing of October 10, 2011 MOTION: Move to recommend/not recommend/amend adoption of the medical marijuana collective garden definition, zoning districts option and separation requirements option to the City Council. SUMMARY: During this year's legislative session, E2SSB 5073 was passed, legalizing medical marijuana collective gardens, but clearly stating that medical marijuana dispensaries are illegal. A medical marijuana "collective garden" is an area or garden where qualifying patients engage in the production, processing, transporting, and delivery of marijuana for medical use as defined in a 1998 state law (RCW 69.50). Collective gardens can be run by up to 10 qualified patients or a designated provider with a maximum of 15 marijuana plants per patient, up to a total of 45 plants and a maximum of 24 ounces of useable cannabis per patient, up to a total of 72 ounces. This legislation became effective on July 22, 2011. The new law delegates to cities the authority to implement zoning requirements, business licensing requirements, health and safety requirements, and business taxes on collective gardens. Possession, use, growth, and distribution of marijuana, whether or not it is for medical use, are still illegal under Federal law. On July 5, 2011, Kent City Council passed an emergency 6-month moratorium on medical marijuana to allow time to determine an appropriate regulatory framework for collective gardens. A public hearing on the moratorium was held by Council on July 19, 2011 and staff was directed to research regulatory options. Staff presented preliminary findings for information only at the September 12, 2011 ECDC and was directed by ECDC members to provide zoning options for the location of medical marijuana collective gardens. BUDGET IMPACT: None 26 MEMORANDUM: Economic & Community Development Committee Public Hearing October 10, 2011 Page 2 BACKGROUND: Since the ECDC workshop on September 12, 2011, staff has compiled a list of options for the committee to consider in adopting medical marijuana collective garden regulations. This includes a definition for collective gardens, options for allowed zones (including an option to not allow collective gardens at all), and options for separation requirements from other uses. The SEPA Responsible Official has determined that the proposed amendments are not categorically exempt from SEPA review under WAC 197-11-800(19) and 11.03.200 Kent City Code; therefore, a SEPA analysis was conducted. The amendments were determined to have no environmental impact, and a Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on September 26, 2011. The proposed definition, consistent with the language contained in E2SSB 5073, and zoning options are outlined below: The proposed collective garden definition is: A collective garden is the premises wherein a group of qualifying patients shares responsibility for acquiring and supplying the resources required to produce and process cannabis for medical use by the qualifying patients in the group, including necessary equipment, materials and labor. A collective garden may have up to 10 qualified patients as members, and may contain no more than 15 cannabis plants per patient, up to a total of 45 plants for the collective garden. The premises of a collective garden may contain no more than 24 ounces of useable cannabis per patient, up to a maximum of 72 ounces for the collective garden on site. A collective garden may contain separate areas for growing, processing and delivering to its qualified patients, provided that these separate areas must be physically part of the same premises, and located on the same parcel or lot. No useable cannabis from a collective garden may be delivered to anyone other than one of the qualifying patients participating as a member of that collective garden. Optional additional language: The Council may wish to consider any or all of the following additional language, which appears to comport with the intent of E2SSB 5073 as it relates to collective gardens: Option A: A location utilized solely for the purpose of distributing cannabis shall not be considered a collective garden. Option B: The phrase "participating as a member of the collective garden" shall mean a qualifying patient who shares responsibility for acquiring and supplying the resources required to produce and process cannabis for medical use. Option C (This would be an addition to Option B): A person who purports to become a member of a collective garden after the cannabis from the collective garden has been produced, processed, and transported, and solely for the purpose of making or taking delivery of cannabis shall not be considered a person who is "participating as a member of the collective garden." 27 MEMORANDUM: Economic & Community Development Committee Public Hearing October 10, 2011 Page 3 Zoning alternatives under consideration include: Proposed Zoning District Options; Option A: Do not allow collective gardens at all within Kent City Limits. Option B: Allow collective gardens in industrial zones only, including M1, M1-C, M2, M3. Option C: Allow collective gardens in designated commercial manufacturing and industrial zones, including CM-1, CM-2, M1, M1-C, M2, M3. Option D: Allow collective gardens in designated commercial and industrial zones, including CC, CC-MU, CM-1, CM-2, GC, GC-MU, M1, M1-C, M2, M3, GWC (excludes NCC, DC, and DCE). Option E: Allow collective gardens in zones where crop and tree farming is currently permitted. This would include the following zones: A-10, AG, SR-1, SR-3, SR-4.5, SR-6, SR-8, MR-D, MR-T12, MR-T16, MR-G, MR-M, MR-H, MA, M1, M1-C, M2, M3, GWC. Proposed Separation Requirement Options; The Council may wish to determine whether there should be distance requirements between collective gardens and schools, parks, other collective gardens, etc. The State of Washington has made a policy statement against drug related crimes near schools by enacting RCW 69.50.435. Pursuant to RCW 69.50.435, a criminal sentence for the distribution of a controlled substance is doubled if the distribution occurs "within one thousand feet of the perimeter of . . . school grounds," or "within one thousand feet of a school bus route stop designated by the school district." Option A: Collective gardens shall be located at least 1000' from a public or private school. Only one garden per tax parcel is permitted. Option B: Collective gardens shall be located at least 750' from a public or private school. Only one garden per tax parcel is permitted. Option C: Collective gardens shall be located at least 1000' from a public or private school and 500' from a residential district. Only one garden per tax parcel is permitted. Option D: Collective gardens shall be located at least 750' from a public or private school and 500' from a residential district. Only one garden per tax parcel is permitted. 28 MEMORANDUM: Economic & Community Development Committee Public Hearing October 10, 2011 Page 4 Option E: Implement separation requirements from other collective gardens. Example: Collective gardens shall be located at least 500' from another collective garden. Option F: Implement collective garden separation requirements from other uses that may include parks, community centers, youth centers, and/or rehabilitation facilities. KH\pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONING_CODE_AMENDMENTS\2011\ZCA-2011-2 Medical_Cannabis\10-10-11_ECDC_Hearing Memo.doc cc: Ben Wolters, Economic and Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager Tom Brubaker, City Attorney David Galazin,Assistant City Attorney Project File ZCA-2011-2 29 OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Suzette Cooke, Mayor Phone: 253-856-5700 �IKENT Fax: 253 856 6700 WA S A IN°-0 N Add ress: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA. 98032-5895 May 10, 2012 TO: Chair Jamie Perry and Economic & Community Development Committee FROM: Toni Azzola, Neighborhood Program Coordinator SUBJECT: Recognition of Neighbors of West Hill Council Neighborhood Council MOTION: Recommend Council adopt the proposed resolution which repeals Resolution 1781 and recognizes the Neighbors of West Hill Council Neighborhood Council, supports its community building efforts, and confers all opportunities offered by the City's Neighborhood Program. SUMMARY: Neighbors of West Hill Council Neighborhood has completed the process to be recognized as a neighborhood council. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND: The City's Neighborhood Program is an initiative designed to foster better communication among residents in a geographic area and city government. The underlying objective of the program is to provide an avenue for residents to work together to enhance the livability of their neighborhoods. The program encourages organization of neighborhood councils, which serve as independent, non-profit organizations to promote resident-based efforts for neighborhood improvements while also establishing a partnership between City government and the neighborhoods it serves. May 14, 2012 1 ECDC Meeting 30 This page intentionally left blank. 31 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, repealing Resolution 1781 and adopting a new Resolution recognizing the newly-formed Neighbors of West Hill Council. RECITALS A. The City of Kent has developed a Neighborhood Program to promote and sustain an environment that responds to residents by building partnerships between the City and its residents. In addition, the City of Kent encourages residents to work together to form geographically distinct neighborhood councils as a means to foster communication among residents and to enhance their sense of community. B. The City of Kent recognizes and supports neighborhood councils by endorsing a process to establish neighborhood boundaries, approve neighborhood councils, and provide neighborhood grant matching program opportunities to make improvements in defined neighborhoods. C. Resolution No. 1781 was adopted March 18, 2008, recognizing the Kent West Hill Neighborhood Council. On December 9, 2011, the Council dissolved. D. New residents of the neighborhood have reorganized and are seeking to become a neighborhood council recognized by the city of Kent. 1 Neighbors of West Hill Council Resolution 32 E. The Neighbors of West Hill Council consists of 1,136 households. In addition to these households, there are also multifamily complexes, a school, a National Guard building, and commercial properties. F. The Neighbors of West Hill Council is located on Kent's West Hill and is situated generally to the east of I-5, to the south and east of SR 516/Des Moines Road, to the north and east of 259th Street also known as Reith Road. The Neighborhood is shown on the attached Exhibit A. G. On April 26, 2012, the Neighbors of West Hill Council submitted an official registration form to request that the City recognize the Neighbors of West Hill Council and to allow the Neighborhood to take part in the City's Neighborhood Program. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: RESOLUTION SECTION 1, — Repealer. Resolution No. 1781 is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION 2, — Recognition of Neighborhood Council. — The City Council for the City of Kent hereby acknowledges the effort and commitment of the Neighbors of West Hill Council and all those who participated in forming the Neighbors of West Hill Council. The Kent City Council hereby recognizes Neighbors of West Hill Council as an official Neighborhood Council of the City of Kent, supports Neighbors of West Hill Council community building efforts, and confers on the Neighbors of West Hill Council all opportunities offered by the City's Neighborhood Program. SECTION 3, — Severability. If any section, subsection, or sentence, of this resolution is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, that decision shall 2 Neighbors of West Hill Council Resolution 33 not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution and that remaining portion shall maintain its full force and effect. SECTION 4, — Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed. SECTION S. — Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage. PASSED at a regular open public meeting by the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, this day of 2012. CONCURRED in by the mayor of the city of Kent this day of 2012. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRU BAKE R, CITY ATTORNEY I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, the day of , 2012. BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK 3 Neighbors of West Hill Council Resolution 34 This page intentionally left blank. - Data Revised March,2°12 35 gtorg� �,,.: qU Parking � �errretery„ _ Tr s 9 Scale. 1 = 600 off„ King,,,9un .,,... 5 m �Ta I eel r BEIM thh �aa�n � 5 #, 5 1JatAonal; .. Uarfl ,rii rrrr; S�h041 e4ail s a �s 1 % Park ° r��rrr, WestlleCI e , ,8th t .. ,. — ; Id es s °a Ig9 UmZs, h zm� u x' -4 rrs —( Chinch i 25 lot +r ire el 93 N _ a P o 2S6th , m Rd h PI m 36 This page intentionally left blank. 37 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director KENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager WASH INGTON Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA 98032-5895 May 8, 2012 TO: Chair Jamie Perry and Economic & Community Development Committee FROM: Gloria Gould-Wessen, Planner/GIS Coordinator RE: Update Downtown Strategic Action Plan & PAO (CPA-2012-1) For Meeting of May 14, 2012 MOTION: Move to forward resolution to Kent City Council that declares an emergency to pursue an amendment to the Kent Comprehensive Plan to revise the City of Kent Downtown Strategic Action Plan. SUMMARY: A strategic goal of City Council is to create neighborhood urban centers. The update to the 2005 Downtown Strategic Action Plan (DSAP) addresses this strategic goal by refreshing the DSAP and incorporating it into the City of Kent 2004 Comprehensive Plan. The State's Growth Management Act (GMA) and Kent City Code require a declaration of an emergency to amend the Kent Comprehensive Plan outside the annual update cycle and notification to the State Department of Commerce. BUDGET IMPACT: Yes BACKGROUND: The Economic and Community Development Department's 2012 work program identifies the 2005 Downtown Strategic Action Plan for an update. The DSAP document will expand into a subarea plan and be incorporated into the City of Kent Comprehensive Plan. The update effort will engage stakeholders, reflect current economic development opportunities, and identify actions to advance the vision for downtown. A Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) to incentivize redevelopment will also be an outcome of the DSAP update. The Land Use & Planning Board and the Economic & Community Development Committee will consider the amendment to the City of Kent 2004 Comprehensive Plan and the associated Planned Action Ordinance. GGW/pm S:\Permit\Plan\COMP_PLAN_AMENDMENTS\2012\CPA-2012-1 Downtown\05-14-12_ECDC_Memo.doc Enc Attachment A-rresolution cc: Ben Wolters,Economic&Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP,Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager David GalaAn,Assistant City Attorney Hie 38 This page intentionally left blank. 39 Attachment A RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, relating to a revision of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, and declaring an emergency for the adoption of a comprehensive plan amendment. CPA-2012-1 RECITALS A. Pursuant to the Growth Management Act ("GMA"), the Kent comprehensive plan provides for subarea plans that are consistent with the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.080(2). B. The city council's strategic goal is the creation of neighborhood urban centers. C. The city council desires to amend the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, dated April 19, 2005, to reflect current economic development opportunities. D. The GMA requires that the city establish procedures governing amendments to the comprehensive plan that limit amendments to once each year unless certain circumstances exist. RCW 36.70A.130(2). The city has established a procedure for amending the comprehensive plan in Chapter 12.02 of the Kent City Code (KCC) that permits amendments in addition to the standard annual update if an emergency exists. An emergency is defined as an 1 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Downtown Strategic Action Plan Emergency Resolution 40 issue of community wide significance that promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare of the city of Kent. KCC 12.02.010(A). E. On May 14, 2012, the Economic and Community Development Committee moved to direct staff to update the Downtown Strategic Action Plan. F. The city council finds that consideration of proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan through revision of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan is an issue of community-wide significance that promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare of the city of Kent; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: RESOLUTION SECTION 1, - Recitals. The foregoing recitals are incorporated by this reference. SECTION 2, - Emergency. The revision of the Downtown Strategic Action Plan, dated April 19, 2005, constitutes an issue of community-wide significance that promotes the public health, safety, and general welfare in accordance with the definition of an emergency as set forth in section 12.02.010(A) of the Kent City Code (KCC). The city council, therefore, declares that an emergency exists and authorizes staff and the Land Use and Planning Board to process this amendment to the comprehensive plan outside the annual amendment process in KCC 12.02.030. SECTION 3, - Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is declared unconstitutional or 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Downtown Strategic Action Plan Emergency Resolution 41 invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. SECTION 4, - Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect and be in force immediately upon its passage. PASSED at a regular meeting of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington this day of , 2012. CONCURRED in by the mayor of the city of Kent, this day of 2012. SUZETTE COOKE, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: TOM BRUBAKER, CITY ATTORNEY I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, the day of 2012. BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK (SEAL) S:\Permit\Plan\COMP_PM AMENDMENTS\2012\CPA-2012-1 Downtown\I solution_CPA2012-1_Downtown.doc 3 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Downtown Strategic Action Plan Emergency Resolution