Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Committees - Economic and Community Development - 09/08/2014
• Economic & Community Development KENT Committee Agenda ��To� Councilmembers: Dennis Higgins • Jim Berrios • Bill Boyce, Chair AGENDA September 8, 2014 5:00 P.M. Item Description ActionSpeaker(s) Time Pace 1. Call to Order YES Bill Boyce 1 min 2. Roll Call YES Bill Boyce 1 min 3. Changes to the Agenda YES Bill Boyce 1 min 4. Approval of the August 11, 2014 Minutes YES Bill Boyce 2 min 1 5. Recreational Marijuana Zoning Regulations YES Fred Satterstrom 10 min 5 David Galazin 6. Comprehensive Plan Update Guidance PrinciplesYES Charlene Anderson 10 min 33 7. Sound Transit Update NO Charlene Anderson 10 min 37 (Informational Only) 8. Urban Land Institute Technical Panel NO Charlene Anderson 10 min 39 (Informational Only) 9. 2014 ECD Work Plan Progress Report NO Fred Satterstrom 10 min 41 (Informational Only) Ben Wolters 10. Economic Development Report Update NO Ben Wolters 10 min (Informational Only) Unless otherwise noted, the Planning and Economic Development Committee meets the 2nd Monday of each month at 5:00 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, August 7, 2014 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. `✓ KENT ECONOMIC & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 11, 2014 1. Call To Order Committee Member Bill Boyce called the meeting to order at 5:00 pm. 2. Roll Call Committee Members Chair Bill Boyce, Dennis Higgins and Jim Berrios were in attendance. 3. Changes to the Agenda Economic Development Manager Kurt Hanson asked that the Economic Development Report be given after the report on the Meeker Street Underpass with the Committee concurring. 4. Approval of Minutes Berrios MOVED and Higgins SECONDED a Motion to approve the Minutes of July 14, 2014. Motion PASSED 3-0. S. Riverbend Surplus Property Comprehensive Plan &Zoning Amendments Senior Planner Erin George stated that when considering zoning, some things to consider are environmental constraints, the surrounding uses and zoning, as well as the topography of the site. George stated that the Comprehensive Plan (CP) establishes land use designations with the subject site currently designated on the Land Use Map as (OS), Parks and Open Space and MDMF, Medium Density Multifamily with a current zoning designation of SR-1, Residential Agricultural and MR-M, Medium Density Multifamily Residential George described four (4) zoning options. The first two options fit Council's vision for a mixed-use development. Option 1 (MCR), Midway Commercial Residential, is intended for use in the Midway area but could work for Par 3 site. The MCR designation allows up to 200 foot height limits, which may not be appropriate for the Riverbend site. Staff expects that the highest building likely to be built would be 80 feet. Option 2 (GC-MU), General Commercial Mixed Use ensures some commercial development as multifamily residential must include 5% commercial use as a percentage of total building square footage. The City recently expanded the GC-MU zoning district further west through adoption of the Downtown Subarea Action Plan (DSAP). Option 3 (MR-M), Medium Density Multifamily Residential does not allow any commercial development. Option 4 is No Action (SR-1). At the July 28, 2014 Land Use and Planning Board (LUPB) Hearing, the Board recommended Option 2 for a (GC-MU) General Commercial Mixed Use Zoning Designation as recommended by staff that included concerns related to walkability, human scale design, height restrictions, public use spaces, and citizen input. The Request for Proposal (RFP) process and a development agreement will ensure a quality development and will include various conditions related to land use and design, which should address the Board's concerns. Committee Member Boyce opened the floor to anyone wishing to speak. Chris Ullrich, Richard Sample, Manny Espinosa, and Thomas Brice spoke in opposition to developing the Par 3 site with additional residential and commercial. They voiced opposition to the City selling the site. They spoke in favor of retaining existing zoning, with Espinosa suggesting taking the subject of selling the site to a citizen vote. Concerns were raised with the issue of adding to already high volumes of traffic congestion, and with the issue of property value decreases. Seeing no further speakers, Boyce closed the public hearing. Parks and Community Services Director Jeff Watling addressed questions raised by Committee Member Berrios with respect to finding some possible funding solutions for the ECDC Minutes August 11,2014 Page 1 of 4 2 Riverbend Golf Enterprise comprised of the 18 Hole Golf Course, the Par 3, and the Driving Range. He spoke about the need to re-drill the well on site at a cost of $300,000-$400, 000 dollars with a proposal submitted to the Mayor for budgetary consideration. Staff is looking at the idea of assessing an admissions tax for the 18 Hole and Par 3 golf course site as a possible solution; which would require a policy decision by City Council. Staffing changes have been proposed to save operating costs. Staff has made some hard operational decisions to resize the golfing facilities which will reduce the operational footprint at the Par 3 site, the Golf Course and the Driving Range, where now there are three tills staffed seven days per week. If the City chooses to stay at the current footprint, moving forward, there will be a lot of challenges associated with that decision. If a resized model were to work, the city would need a sustainable budget. Higgins clarified that rezoning the subject site does not mean that the city is required to sell the property with George and Watling concurring. Higgins further stated that based on the financial shortfalls it seems the only solution is to sell the property but that he is open to finding alternative solutions. The cost to implement Capital Improvements would be $6 million dollars. Economic Development Manager Kurt Hanson stated that he reviewed a letter received by the City from Dr. Edward Vargas Superintendent of the Kent School District voicing concern over possible impacts caused by redevelopment of the Riverbend Golf complex to add additional housing. The City collects school impact fees and redistributes those fees to the School District which could help offset some of the cost for school expansions. In response to the Committee, Hanson stated that the site has an expansive trail system with great connectivity attributes. Hanson stated that with development moving east towards downtown, densification will lead to more people but there are mitigation measures in place that can address issues related to increased densification. To gauge the marketability of the site, zoning needs to be in place, and staff needs to assess the market place. Committee Member Boyce stated that Council deliberated over what to do with the Riverbend site and the general feeling was to not sell, but the city does not have the funds to sustain that site. The site can be rezoned and staff and City Council can continue to work towards finding some alternative options for the site that would not require selling it. Committee Member Higgins MOVED and Committee Member Berrios SECONDED a Motion to recommend to the Full City Council approval of Option 2, a comprehensive plan land use designation of MU, Mixed Use and a zoning designation of GC-MU, General Commercial Mixed Use for the Riverbend Surplus Property. Motion PASSED 3-0. Boyce stated that this item will go to Council under Other Business. 6. Green River Corridor District Zoning Code Amendment George stated that the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) began in 1971. The Kent Shoreline Master Program (SMP) was adopted in 1974. The Green River Corridor (GRC) Plan was adopted in 1980. In 1985 GRC District Regulations were adopted regulating areas within 1,000 feet of the Green River. The GRC District limits building height to 35 feet and building length to 200 feet within 1,000 feet of the Green River. The Zoning Code and the SMP also regulate building height. The 35 foot height limitation conflicts with the new 65 foot height limit applied by the Downtown Subarea Action Plan (DSAP) for the GC-MU zoning district, a portion of which is located within the GRC. Buildings may exceed 200 feet in length if vegetative screening is provided. The SMP requires a 15 foot landscape buffer between new buildings or parking lots and the Green River Trail and Mixed Use Design Review requires aesthetic treatment. Staff presented the Land Use and Planning Board (LUPB) with four options. The LUPB approved staff's recommendation of Option 1 to eliminate the height restriction and add GC-MU to the building length exception. ECDC Minutes August 11,2014 Page 2 of 4 3 Committee Member Berrios MOVED and Committee Member Higgins SECONDED a Motion to recommend to the City Council approval of Option 1, amending the Zoning Code to eliminate the Green River Corridor District height restriction and add GC-MU to the building length exception. Motion PASSED 3-0. 7. Meeker Street Underpass Planning Manager Charlene Anderson presented proposed improvements to the Meeker Street Underpass located in the middle of the Meeker Street Corridor which includes; power washing, added lighting, painting and landscaping; as well as improving the pork chop island with landscaping and removing the left turn lane onto Smith Street from Meeker, thereby eliminating maneuvering issues. These improvements are intended to encourage pedestrian movement along the Meeker Street Corridor, which is a good cross connection and gateway to downtown. Informational Only S. Economic Development Report Hanson revealed that the new Economic Development Specialist is William Ellis. Mr. Ellis comes from Eugene, Oregon and holds a Master's degree from Cornell University. He begins on September 2nd Hanson stated that over 30% of the Platform has been preleased. The Committee Members were invited to tour the building. Perspective tenants have been allowed hard hat tours since August Is'. The Platform is targeted for completion and official opening by the end of September. As the result of focusing on quality (MF-R) Multifamily-Residential development in the downtown area, Kent is seeing wonderful rentals returns from the Platform. Tarragon applied for their MF Design Review for a 150 apartment unit development within Kent Station with parking to be located under the apartment building. Trader Joes is scheduled to hold their grand opening in October. They are heavily involved in the community and will bring in elements of Kent's history through their decor. Mod Pizza is moving into the former Los Margaritas site with outdoor seating at the Market Place on Lake Meridian. The Grandview Apartments are completing a purchase and sales agreement with the City representing over $2 million dollars in closing fees, of which 46% of their proceeds from sales will go to Kent. Kurt stated he will report back to the Committee soon. As the Puget Sound area grows, Kent's great location will drive that interest. The intent for downtown will focus on the young professional set who are better positioned for higher quality housing and who will utilize alternative transportation systems such as Sounder. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) released their Request for Proposals (RFP). Kent submitted proposals to the FAA for consideration of the Naden Avenue and Riverbend site. If the FAA responds favorably to either of the Kent sites, the FAA would build a 300,000 facility that would employ 1600 people. The FAA deadline for submittals is November. Kent Downtown Partnership Executive Director Barbara Smith spoke in support of the proposed improvements project for the Meeker Street Underpass. She stated this area is a gateway into historical downtown. Kent has a good relationship with the State Department of Transportation that allows Kent to implement the needed improvements. Informational Only 9. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Principal Planner Matt Gilbert spoke about the updated rules regarding the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) found in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11. He spoke about SEPA rules that have changed allowing local agencies to increase their base exemption thresholds under which environmental review for minor new construction is not ECDC Minutes August 11,2014 Page 3 of 4 4 required. This means cost and time saving to the developer and a streamlined process will move projects through quicker and save staff time as well. Gilbert spoke about the public notification, cultural, and historic resource requirements that the City must have in place through Kent City Code prior to adopting the new SEPA thresholds. Gilbert asked for Committee concurrence to send notice out to affected agencies, jurisdictions, Department of Ecology and local tribes that the SEPA Thresholds are changing. The Committee unanimously agreed. Gilbert stated he would return to the Committee within 60 days with an update. Informational Only 10. Short Plat Activity Update Gilbert reported on the issue of short plat (short subdivisions with nine or less lots) expiration periods. He stated that in 2009 City Council extended the validity period for preliminary short plats from two to four years with no allowable extension in response to the housing market collapse. Under current rules, applicants have four years to complete required improvements and record a final short plat before preliminary approval expires. The time extension benefitted 44 short plat projects. Six projects made it through to recordation while the remaining 38 expired. Since the four-year timeline was enacted in 2009, 35 new short plats have been filed, 9 recorded, 5 expired, and 21 remain active. Staff finds that even with the four years, developers are requesting additional extensions. There are no provisions in code to change the expiration time period. Stormwater, wetland, and development regulations have changed. If a developer is vested under old regulations, they would build under those old standards. If a project expires the developer can refile a similar project and move forward under new standards. In response to the Committee, Gilbert stated that he has been counseled that in order to avoid litigation; any adopted changes would not be applied retroactively. Standard practice is to send letters to the developers to inform them of the four-year window and a notification letter to those developers whose short plats are about to expire. Informational Only 11. Sound Transit Update Anderson referenced a letter sent by City Staff to Sound Transit in response to their long range plan update. Staff has engaged the Urban Land Institute Technical Panel. An invitation was sent to all of the Council members to attend a half-day discussion session scheduled with the Panel on September 91h. Staff will give the Technical Panel a tour of the Midway area. The concept is for the Technical Panel to inform staff of the pros and cons in their opinion of the various station locations in Midway, how Kent can support Transit Oriented Development (TOD). Following that half-day session, the Panel will spend a day deliberating to come up with some recommendations, and then submit their report to Kent. Informational Only Adiournment Committee Member Boyce adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Pamela Mottram, Secretary Economic & Community Development Committee P:\Planning\EC \2014\Minutes\08-11-14_Min.docx ECDC Minutes August 11,2014 Page 4 of 4 5 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director KENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager WASHINGTON Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA 98032-5895 September 3, 2014 TO: Chair Bill Boyce and Economic & Community Development Committee FROM: Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director RE: Recreational Marijuana Zoning Regulations For September 8, 2014 ECDC Meeting MOTION: To recommend to the full City Council approval of the Land Use & Planning Board's recommendation to disallow the production, processing, and retail sale of recreational marijuana in all zoning districts in the City of Kent. SUMMARY: On June 23, 2014, the Land Use & Planning Board (LUPB) held a public hearing on recreational marijuana zoning regulations. Following the hearing and after consideration of several optional zoning schemes, the LUPB voted to disallow the production, processing, and retail sales of recreational marijuana in all zoning districts in Kent. The staff report prepared for the June 23rd LUPB public hearing is included here as part of the Committee's packet. It includes a discussion of some of the anticipated impacts of recreational marijuana uses including odors, public safety, crime, and land use impacts to surrounding uses. It also includes a number of zoning options for production, processing, and retail uses related to recreational marijuana. This information as well as the public's testimony at the public hearing was considered by the Board prior to making their recommendation. BACKGROUND: At the September 81h ECDC meeting, Planning and legal staff will review this background information and outline the recommendation of the LUPB. In order to meet the timelines imposed by the existing moratorium ordinance, the full City Council will have to act by mid-October. Finally, at the City Council's workshop on this topic on July 15, 2014, some councilmembers expressed interest in how Kent's neighboring cities were dealing with recreational marijuana zoning. The following chart reflects the status of such zoning regulations in King County and the seven cities that surround Kent as of August 28, 2014. FS/pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONING_CODE AMENDMENTS\2014\ZCA-2014-2 Marijuana\ECDC\0 -08-14 Rec Marijuana Staff Memo.docx Enc: Att A: 6-23-14 LUPB Hearing Staff Report and Minutes Att B: King County and Adjacent Jurisdictions Zoning Regulations Chart cc Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager Ben Wolters, Economic &Community Development Director 6 ATTACHMENT A 7 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director [CENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Manager WASMIN(iT6M Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S Kent, WA 98032-5895 June 16, 2014 TO: Chair Jack Ottini and Land Use & Planning Board Members FROM: Katie Graves, Planner; David Galazin, Assistant City Attorney RE: Recreational Marijuana Zoning ZCA-2014-2 For the June 23, 2014 Public Hearing MOTION: Recommend to the City Council OPTION _ for recreational marijuana production land uses by businesses validly-licensed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board. Recommend to the City Council OPTION _ for recreational marijuana processing land uses by businesses validly-licensed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board. Recommend to the City Council OPTION _ for recreational marijuana retail land uses by businesses validly-licensed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board. BACKGROUND: On November 6, 2012, the voters of Washington approved Initiative No. 502 ("I-502"), which allows for limited production, processing and retail sale of marijuana and marijuana-infused products, 1 subject to oversight by the state Liquor Control Board ("LCB") and certain administrative rules it was required to adopt in order to implement such a system. The Kent City Council adopted a six- month moratorium prohibiting recreational marijuana businesses from locating within the city of Kent through passage of Ordinance No. 4094, which took effect on November 27, 2013. That moratorium was further extended for another six months through passage of Ordinance No. 4109. The recitals to these ordinances clearly spell out the problems with allowing such businesses to operate within the city of Kent: namely that any and all uses of marijuana, whether personally or as a business venture, remain violations of the federal Controlled Substances Act ("CSA"), 26 USC §§ 801 et seq., and the land use impacts of marijuana-based business were too new for there to be enough reliable data upon which to base reasonable land-use regulations. 'This was modified on by passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2034, which took effect on June 12, 2014, to allow for the processing and sale of"marijuana concentrates" as well, which refers to oils and other similar extracts. MEMORANDUM: 8 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 2 The federal government has not abdicated any of its authority to enforce the CSA, but in a series of position statements, first regarding medical marijuana and then regarding recreational marijuana, the US Department of Justice has issued guidance memoranda to federal prosecutors on the use of prosecutorial discretion in states where marijuana was first decriminalized then where it was affirmatively legalized through voter initiative (such as I-502). The "Ogden Memo" and the "Cole Memo", dated October 19, 2009, and June 29, 2011, dealt solely with "medical" marijuana. Deputy US Attorney James Cole has subsequently issued two memoranda regarding "legal" marijuana, the first on August 29, 2013 and the second on February 14, 2014, indicating that the federal government is not going to make an affirmative effort to block I-502 at this time, so long as the State and local jurisdictions implement a "robust system" that contains "strong and effective regulatory and enforcement system" to control the legal marijuana market in line with eight specifically-identified federal priorities. The city bears some responsibility to see that this is carried out. I-502 contained no mention of zoning, nor did it contemplate where marijuana businesses should be located were they to receive a license from the LCB to operate. In response to a request from LCB Chair Sharon Foster, the Washington State Office of the Attorney General issued AGO 2014 No. 2, affirming that cities such as Kent derive their power to regulate and zone for businesses within their jurisdiction under the Washington State Constitution, not state statute, and while the state legislature can restrict this power in certain instances, I-502 contained no language that removed the preexisting authority of cities to adopt ordinances that regulate businesses if the regulations promote public health, safety or welfare, and bear a reasonable and substantial relation to those purposes. This is what is typically referred to as the local "police power' of a city, and zoning falls squarely within this category. While the police power must be exercised with this in mind, the AG's Opinion made it very clear that I-502 does not preempt a city from completely banning licensed marijuana producers, processors or retailers within city limits. I-502 absolutely prohibits the Board from issuing a license for any marijuana-based business that seeks to locate within a thousand feet of: • Elementary or secondary schools • Playgrounds • Recreation centers or facilities • Child care centers • Public parks • Public transit centers • Libraries • Game arcades (where admission is not restricted to people age 21 or older) I-502 was codified mostly within Chapter 69.50 RCW. The LCB adopted administrative rules that are housed within Chapter 314-55 WAC. Certain portions of these statutes and rules deal with eligibility to apply for a license, certain security requirements, reasons why the LCB may reject a license application or an application renewal, or revoke an existing license. These laws and rules cover a lot of requirements that have nothing to do with the proper zoning district for a given MEMORANDUM: 9 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 3 type of marijuana-based business. Importantly, however, WAC 314-55-020(11) states: "The issuance or approval of a license [by the LCB] shall not be construed as a license for, or an approval of, any violations of local rules or ordinances including, but not limited to: Building and fire codes, zoning ordinances, and business licensing requirements." (Emphasis added.) The laws and rules that a marijuana-based business must follow in order to obtain and maintain a license from the LCB are numerous and detailed, and have been provided to you and discussed at previous workshops. The Land Use and Planning Board's role is not to dissect or critique these requirements, though it is important that you, as Board members, understand them; nor is it the Board's role to decide whether personal use of marijuana is ethically or morally proper or whether such uses should be allowed in the city of Kent as a larger policy decision. The Kent City Council seeks a recommendation from the Board, having gone through the potential and reasonably foreseeable impacts of recreational marijuana business and having examined the goals and policies of the city's different land use zoning districts, as to where, if at all, such business should be located if the City Council chooses to allow such businesses to operate in the city of Kent. It is important to remember that identifying and recommending a particular zone for a particular use is no guarantee that any such business will ever actually open there. Landlords, in particular, may be wary of renting space to a marijuana-based business, even one holding a valid license from the LCB, because that property would then be subject to forfeiture by the federal government under the CSA. The policy memoranda issued by James Cole are just that — policy statements — and they are subject to change or revocation with little or no advance warning. Likewise, any lawful business permitted in a particular zone may be shut down if it is operated in a manner that constitutes a nuisance. This would be no different for a validly-licensed marijuana retailer than it would for a validly-licensed liquor store. Finally, any vote of the Board will have no bearing on personal consumption of marijuana within the city of Kent, whether legally-obtained or not. Such personal use is beyond the scope of the Board's action regarding this matter. The land use impacts associated with state licensed production, processing and retail sale of marijuana have not been definitively established, but do have potential impacts that need to be taken into consideration. Here is a recap of potential impacts of recreation marijuana production, processing, and retail facilities that have been discussed at the workshops: 1) Odors. Marijuana production and processing may create odors that can be detectable to the surrounding area, whether it be a tenant space next door, or an adjacent property or sidewalk. 2) Safety. Some safety concerns may be warranted, since processors start with raw materials and use solvents, chemicals, gases, and other compounds to extract oils and create and process marijuana infused products. MEMORANDUM: 10 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 4 3) Crime. It is unknown at this time how these retail facilities may impact crime rates; however, despite recent federal financial guidance, marijuana retail shops are likely to remain cash-only businesses for the foreseeable future, and will contain easily-transportable products that will be in high demand. There is an obvious concern that this combination may invite more crime at these locations. Kent Police has prepared crime rate maps that show where the concentration of crime in Kent has occurred in the past year; specifically vehicle prowls, vehicle theft, recovery of stolen vehicles, robberies, rapes, residential burglaries, and commercial burglaries (see ATTACHMENT 2 for maps) 4) Impacts to surrounding land uses. As noted above, the WSLCB has through its rules passed this fall, prohibited marijuana uses from being within 1000' of the following uses (See ATTACHMENT 1 for map that demonstrates these buffers in Kent): -Elementary and secondary schools -Playground -Recreational center of facility-Child care center -Public park -Public transit center -Library -Game arcade (where admission is not restricted to persons age 21 or older) Neither I-502 nor the rules adopted by the WSLCB address the proper location within a city for state licensed production, processing or retail sales facilities, other than these buffer restrictions. Through State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the proposed amendment options were determined not to have a significant, adverse environmental impact, and a Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on June 6, 2014. Please see attached SEPA checklist, decision document, and Determination of Nonsignificance (see ATTACHMENTS 3, 4, and 5). With all that in mind, staff has prepared certain options and staff recommendations as set forth herein. It is also anticipated that definitions for recreational marijuana production, processing, and retail will be adopted into the zoning code by reference to the applicable provisions of the RCW. MEMORANDUM: 11 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 5 OPTIONS: The City of Kent has the ability to determine the appropriate uses of land through its zoning authority, including the ability to ban recreational marijuana uses. Each recreational marijuana use (production, processing, and retail) can be considered and zoned for separately. Should the decision be to allow recreational marijuana facilities, several options have been prepared by staff, along with preliminary staff recommendations. These options address the three types of marijuana business use (i.e., production, processing, and retail) separately and are outlined below: Production: WAC 314-55-075: "A marijuana producer license allows the licensee to produce marijuana for sale at wholesale to marijuana processor licensees and to other marijuana producer licensees. Marijuana production must take place within a fully enclosed secure indoor facility or greenhouse with rigid walls, a roof, and doors. Outdoor production may take place in nonrigid greenhouses, other structures, or an expanse of open or cleared ground fully enclosed by a physical barrier. To obscure public view of the premises, outdoor production must be enclosed by a sight obscure wall or fence at least eight feet high. Outdoor producers must meet security requirements described in WAC 314-55-083. Option A: do not allow marijuana production in any zoning district Option B: allow marijuana production only in M3 General Industrial District Kent City Code 15.03.010: "The purpose of the M3 district is to provide areas suitable for the broadest range of industrial activities, and to specify those industrial activities having unusual or potentially deleterious operational characteristics, where special attention must be paid to location and site development ..." MEMORANDUM: 12 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 6 M3 Zoning District M3 Zoning District f 1 0 M r 1`� n ' �'�y I r✓rF ���� i CJ',4 � � � r✓ /e f r Q rr ., I Q� 0i ei, qv�/f�✓'r��i r ro� f ✓ t w, t >�y�����in r �'i it � CS41v r 1 ,' ��l�r �ltr � �T ��✓ ,l� �t��,�/. vr„~if ",L"t i �r tt S✓L2 8Sl �r�r � �"m �/rpp ? , ir�i�� r r I h f .1 IWf� r e ,4 W Kent City Limits Kent City Llrnik5 =LigiwQ,Gant✓ol 00o'd 1,000 Ft Buffers ®Liquor Control Board 1,000 R Buffers MEMORANDUM: 13 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 7 Option C: allow marijuana production in the same zoning districts as an existing use in the zoning code: "Manufacturing, processing, blending, and packaging of drugs, pharmaceuticals, toiletries, and cosmetics": CM-1, CM-2, M1, M1-C, M2, M3, GWC M1,industrial Wade Intlustnal PwkrC 0.W.,ti,a M7,limited Industrml r MS,General Industrall Vr"�IX CM-1,.OUmn.erael Ma,efa94unrtq l kT�/f✓r Oi-7,Commercial MervufAttUHncJ II r GUIIC.Gateway 0,mmiercial ` LID Kent City Limits `sy ! 31 Llq=conholl soertl 1,000 Ft Bufrels f I .✓M Nr rJ� ra�� r fY��� ,. If /i f s, 71sst /F a✓ �(�y k"' n S r / !F/�'7 Gan � 1� �� ', ✓�✓� '4k�/,d ,�Q � ,� 1 j'Fr�n/✓N Ayf r / �r✓ / //%4iD /l�// rid rr/f 1 ,/ �f'0/i'",�"" �' ��eo'ans or/ ;tF r F I IIIUI,�. ,�jjF�,r"�f✓✓ IX 2X ✓ 'ri // �Ir j ( r /// ," ✓r r .'l i/i / r %rr W JBrFres 9t /+r �'q,l Er'Sames st ✓ rF/F r ✓i'''nrr // / N r✓ WSmith 5�'°ny ✓/ f j. 4a�� M'✓�/�nY✓rr / % €Y / / °' r CU �P r ✓rY � y "/ %/yp Meeker Sk' ^' / %' i� i✓/ ✓ f. �/ v � /�l // ✓ -, r / ✓r / /F/ r '// r/fir ✓//r / a ✓ d �>/ ✓ //s: Fr U / ✓ r N/ i ✓ //// 'err - f , , 4 r rF// S Ifent-Oes Moinas RQ /t ✓, 35 01 rog T f///' W l f'✓ ✓ /'`q.� 11166/� �F F ✓ ( ✓ .. �r Fjr '%% Q/rd/'4 f/f✓% � q s 27Wmyt..a+ , .- nurmnmmua 4k MEMORANDUM: 14 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 8 Option D: allow marijuana production in the similar zoning districts as an existing agricultural use in the zoning code: "Agricultural uses such as planting and harvesting of crops, animal husbandry (including wholesale nurseries and greenhouses)": A-10, AG, MA (exclude SR-1 from this use) // r r n UY W/:" i „ / yap; 4 i i 1� l' rah 5 22'8 St d arr yJpgefaMs D� � } > ,, ✓/ a r r i t r i ; %'1 � r✓- r r ; � l G r r z I A e ✓ r r � r s� 4 r� � � ✓ VI/.garners$E ' '� �, r rF i �i' OCR y r/ ✓ r r r r i < d �' 'ft r ;l% 9 IS�nt bas Maihlbs fttl r „ ! it rr ' ,N 10 Ag i,cadtluwl y r f���/r, AG kyriLUltwaaPlt'e�en%I .,._o %�/us R sINN MA lodusinal A9ocuiltiml r Kent r C ntrolls. � i9 LI ucrr CoraSm79 L3crarrJ t,cU41 rE Buffers r'� �' S^.....S4�;�...........,,�® .. MEMORANDUM: 15 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 9 Processing: WAC 314-55-077: "A marijuana processor license allows the licensee to process, package, and label usable marijuana and marijuana-infused products for sale at wholesale to marijuana retailers." Option A: do not allow marijuana processing in any zoning district Option B: allow marijuana processing only in M3 General Industrial District Kent City Code 15.03.010 definition of M3: "The purpose of the M3 district is to provide areas suitable for the broadest range of industrial activities, and to specify those industrial activities having unusual or potentially deleterious operational characteristics, where special attention must be paid to location and site development..." M3 Zoning District M3 Zoning District / I i J M Y, �'✓ M1 !l / ✓ � �� am / R r rtfl i00y6 nub „,. d. KxvvC1, n,l myart C.0 a al t@naitl t00u1 Mi P IY.la ' � � �Iignmrc E,mmUm4lYgsrd t,U[Mp ft fDtiAvrg. MEMORANDUM: 16 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 10 Option C: allow marijuana processing in the same zoning districts as an existing use in the zoning code: "Manufacturing, processing, blending, and packaging of drugs, pharmaceuticals, toiletries, and cosmetics": CM-1, CM-2, M1, M1-C, M2, M3, GWC M1,Industrial Park JEN M1-C.Industrial Park/Commercial IM M2,Limited Industrial /� J7lTlTr M3,General Industrial a CM-1,Commercial Manufacturing I / �f CM-2,Commercial Manufacturing 11 > � 1 GWO,Gafaway Cnmmerrial �b S 196 St-- m Kent City Limits ye y { a >t 0 f/r'S2 Liquor Control Board 1,000 Ft Buffers �2+J KENT -- 5296 St" ok�js<,� '°m N / i� � �... .9 2.28 St ✓h r �C ��1Y�'jN�/i ii%� ✓i/ �i' j�. ��'J //i���i% bw i�`i i�r yr ie/ii/ii it ��/�i ii//i�� W J�mes St iyy,��i�/ �E�ames 3t fflo �. �i� i / � i /r��" 'ii✓i ii/i ''�iii /�///W Meeker St� iiiii i ii/i�ji �/ a G i/ Qr�/�/ / S Kent-Des Motnes�Rtl//� ,/,//yr cz e59 PI//lr<; a /�/ /'/�// 272sc f� ... S 277,,St.111 0 — 'm+xnmmmaem®exawy r N MEMORANDUM: 17 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 11 Retail: WAC 314-55-079: "A marijuana retailer license allows the licensee to sell only usable marijuana, marijuana-infused products, and marijuana paraphernalia at retail in retail outlets to persons twenty-one years of age and older." Option A: do not allow marijuana retail sales in any zoning district Option B: allow marijuana retail sales only in GWC (Gateway Commercial) zoning district: Kent City Code 15.03.010 definition of GWC: "It is the purpose of the gateway commercial district to provide retail commercial uses appropriate along major vehicular corridors while encouraging appropriate and unified development among the properties within the district. It is designed to create unique, unified, and recognizable streetscapes while ensuring land use compatibility and the exclusion of inappropriate uses. It is also intended to promote flexibility in appropriate areas of site design and to encourage mixed use developments. The gateway commercial district recognizes the significance of the automobile while simultaneously minimizing its dominance in commercially developed areas and avoiding unsightly highway strip commercial development. The gateway commercial development standards promote land uses which minimize physical and visual impacts normally associated with highway commercial developments. Landscaping, parking, and sign standards have all been enhanced as compared to the current commercial and industrial zoning districts. These standards will promote a viable, unique, and recognizable commercial area along East Valley Highway. Moreover, the gateway commercial district will encourage the development of commercial uses capable of benefiting and ensuring the long-term enhancement of properties throughout the study area." MEMORANDUM: 18 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 12 GWC Zoning District GWC Zoning District as Ply" 0 0 y y S'z�"� (( S 222 t � n� /// // �<�• �� � �P av�� 522 rrf ���� f %/ Q r ru dtV 5-228 St— Vol ' r �iri � � 9�✓ G�IF� t � �� , // m �a r , r w� II W fHf 'i'. p� Liquor 0 m.R Y "C'�J' .„,.✓ ® q Control Board 1 000 Ft Buffers Kent City Limits w O Liquor CONmI Board 1,000 Ft Buffers g,r,yr MEMORANDUM: 19 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 13 Option C: allow marijuana retail sales only in CM-2 (Commercial Manufacturing 2) zoning district: Kent City Code 15.03.010 definition of CM-2: "It is the purpose of the CM-2 district to provide locations for those types of developments which combine some characteristics of both retail establishments and small-scale, light industrial operations, heavy commercial and wholesale uses, and specialty manufacturing." CM-2 Zoning District T 9.-.. .l r3tIL4!S Sv�. ....-. >_ ( �A e of eher 9t C... 4Gcn1 L7 ninas fdtl J v�/lam If! L!l ro a. . Kr•m cny L��Ins0„. S,2,72 uk __ ✓r LJ LogWror CanGgl&oard'I,D t&where 1 CM-2 Zoning District I i � r ;l 1 l,- s o , pnrn cry i.ir,dirs r�, MEMORANDUM: 20 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 14 Option D: allow marijuana retail sales only in the M1-C (Industrial Park/ Commercial) zoning district (definition of this zone is part of the M1 definition): Kent City Code 15.03.010 definition of M1, M1-C: "The purpose of the M-1 district is to provide an environment exclusively for and conducive to the development and protection of a broad range of industrial, office, and business park activities, including modern, large-scale administrative facilities, research institutions, and specialized manufacturing organizations, all of a non-nuisance type, as designated in the comprehensive plan. This district is intended to provide areas for those industrial activities that desire to conduct business in an atmosphere of prestige location in which environmental amenities are protected through a high level of development standards. It is also the purpose of this zone to allow certain limited commercial land uses that provide necessary personal and business services for the general industrial area. Such uses are allowed in the M1 district, through the application of the "C" suffix, at centralized, nodal locations where major arterials intersect." MEMORANDUM: 21 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 15 Mi-C Zoning District Mi-C Zoning District a � B"'P7ry0"St" r tiarctl�Sk„ 1 YJv. r / IG�uf401 9 tit 1ffB:�t �)� xr ,,...B=10I�q ��. t" /IDa�l IY nP,✓i; r ` aI___. ml yry on ry rr � 1 / 1 ff St �71 Kent a vy ,7fr5 ., j + µ K0119 c1,r LJ I tr,,I CC,'III CA BOO I d 1,0@rl Ft RUffW L,iquai ConII Baand I CCU F1 B.frsrs SrKent-Des Moines Rttl��K�n@-lkI ,ii la,.ut r/iir� /%� �. r r ® bquort Control Board 1,000 Ff Buffers =Liquor Control Board 1,000 Ft Buffers MEMORANDUM: 22 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 16 Option E: allow marijuana retail sales in the same zoning districts as an existing use in the zoning code: "liquor store": NCC, CC, DC, DCE, MTC-1, MTC-2, MCR, CM-2, GC, M1-C, GWC ''"' M I C Id ti IV N,L _.. . I° OL IN bYwi C I i mmzro /'" ._. t �rc1J C.— ,C ;. rW' eure W NCC N lh,n h W C C runeYdef ' m 4M ttlN' Y P ly ua1 y � Y f �; /�XI%C L.M9v�p fiTn5Y U)m;'mrylr u / AI u, R A Cr �f ', Y Y,'l� r. f I i n .� ✓ If vv VI 1 T ©UCIUCC Q trolEreulw0pv rs rccn MEMORANDUM: 23 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 17 Other restrictions to consider: a) "Marijuana producers, processors, and retailers shall not operate as accessory to a primary use or as a home occupation." b) "All activities shall occur within an enclosed structure and shall be designed, located, constructed, and buffered to blend in with its surrounding and mitigate significant adverse impacts on adjoining properties and the community, and special attention shall be given to minimizing odor, noise, light, glare, and traffic impacts. Marijuana uses shall be designed to include controls and features to prevent odors from travelling off-site and being detected from a public right-of-way, or other properties or uses." STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: If the Land Use and Planning Board decides to recommend to the City Council that marijuana land uses be permitted within the City of Kent, staff recommends the following zoning options for marijuana production, processing, and retail: Production: Option B: allow marijuana production only in M3 General Industrial District. The M3 zone is designed for industrial activities that have unusual or potentially deleterious operational characteristics. Potential adverse impacts of marijuana production are not specifically known at this time, because production facilities under I-502 have not yet been permitted. In addition, production and processing facilities may be located together to benefit from the tax break offered by the WSLCB for facilities that both produce and process marijuana; the M3 zoning district is best suited for the marijuana processing, as discussed below. Processing: Option B: allow marijuana processing only in M3 General Industrial District. The M3 zone is designed for industrial activities that have unusual or potentially deleterious operational characteristics. Potential adverse impacts of marijuana production are not specifically known at this time, because production facilities under I-502 have not yet been permitted. Some safety concerns may be warranted, since processors start with raw materials and use solvents, chemicals, gases, and other compounds to extract oils and create and process marijuana infused products. It is also recommended that the same zoning district be selected for both production and processing. Retail: Option B: allow marijuana retail sales only in GWC Gateway Commercial District. It is unknown at this time how these retail facilities may impact crime rates; however, marijuana retail shops will be cash-only businesses, which may invite MEMORANDUM: 24 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 18 more crime. The GWC zone is a viable commercial area that is generally not within a high crime concentration area. u GWC ' IN In addition, this zone is not located within close proximity to a large number of residentially zoned areas. For example, there are 134 residential units adjacent to the GWC zone, and approximately 752 residential units on properties zoned residential immediately adjacent to the CM-2 zoning district. The intent of this option is to not overburden the Kent Police Department by locating these facilities in areas with historically high crime rates and to protect residential areas from potentially adverse impacts. Additionally, the buffer restrictions imposed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board limit commercially zoned areas where marijuana retail uses might exist. The GWC zone is not heavily impacted by these buffer restrictions. MEMORANDUM: 25 Land Use and Planning Board Hearing June 23, 2014 Page 19 Staff also recommends including the following restrictions, if the decision is the allow marijuana uses in the City of Kent: a) "Marijuana producers, processors, and retailers shall not operate as accessory to a primary use or as a home occupation." This restriction would prohibit operations from circumventing the zoning districts in which these uses may be allowed by preventing them from being a part of another use or operating out of a home, as a home occupation. This additional language has been proposed in other jurisdictions as well. b) "All activities shall occur within an enclosed structure and shall be designed, located, constructed, and buffered to blend in with its surrounding and mitigate significant adverse impacts on adjoining properties and the community, and special attention shall be given to minimizing odor, noise, light, glare, and traffic impacts. Marijuana uses shall be designed to include controls and features to prevent odors from travelling off-site and being detected from a public right-of-way, or other properties or uses." Marijuana production and processing may create odor impacts to the surrounding area. "The pungent odor from marijuana cultivation operations is objectionable to many people. Offensive odors can easily migrate in and around the marijuana cultivation site and some strains produce odors that are detectable in the surrounding neighborhood as well as adjacent tenants" (Best Management Practices: Commercial Medical Marijuana Cultivation, City of Denver, April 2011). Indoor facilities may be more equipped to properly vent odors, as well as address security concerns. Similar additional language has been proposed in other jurisdictions as well. Puget Sound Clean Air Agency has also indicated that marijuana producers will be required to obtain permits from their agency to address odor and is in the process of researching odor impacts for marijuana production facilities. Staff will be available at the public hearing to answer questions. KG\pm S:\Permit\Plan\ZONING_CODE_AMENDMENTS\2014\ZCA-2014-2 Marijuana\LUPB\Hearing6-23-14\06-23-14_LUP13_Hearing Memo.doc Enc: Attach 1-Kent Buffers Map Attach 2-Kent Crime Hot Spot Maps Attach 3-SEPA checklist Attach 4-SEPA decision document Attach 5-SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance cc: Ben Wolters, Economic and Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager David Galazin,Assistant City Attorney Project File ZCA-2014-2 26 ATTACHMENT A 27 LAND USE & PLANNING BOARD w RCNT MINUTES wns Hirvcro�.. JUNE 23, 2014 Land Use & Plannina Board Members: Chair Jack Ottini, Vice Chair Barbara Phillips, Frank Cornelius, Navdeep Gill, Alan Gray (absent/excused), Katherine Jones, and Randall Smith. Ottini called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. City Staff: Planning Director Fred Satterstrom; Planner Katie Graves, Assistant City Attorney David Galazin 3. Approval of Minutes Board member Smith Moved and Board member Phillips Seconded a Motion to Approve the May 27, 2014 Minutes. Motion CARRIED 6-0. 4. Added Items None S. Communications Satterstrom stated that there are some further communications related to the public hearing topic that will be introduced later. 6. Notice of Upcoming Meetings None 7. Public Hearing ZCA-2014-2 Recreational Mariivana Zoning Assistant City Attorney David Galazin handed the Board Members the latest version of the administrative rules adopted by the Liquor Control Board (LCB) and the LCB Notices of Emergency Rules. With passage of Initiative-502 the LCB approved the creation of a legalized marijuana production, processing and retailing structure within the state of Washington. This structure remains illegal under Federal Law as a Schedule One controlled substance. Galazin spoke about how Initiative-502 influences how Kent is allowed to provide for the local zoning and licensing for all types of businesses. An opinion from the Washington State Washington Attorney General confirmed that the authority of cities to provide for the local zoning and licensing for all types of businesses is inherent by virtue of the state constitution, as well as state statute. A special notice issued on June 121h by the Washington State Department of Revenue explained how the State will tax marijuana production. I-502 imposes an excise tax of 25% at each level of production, processing and retail sales with none of those revenues going to the City of Kent. Galazin recommended that the Board consider the various impacts to surrounding land uses associated with recreational marijuana production, processing and retail sales, and to identify the appropriate zoning districts within the city for any of those uses. Potential impacts include odors generated from marijuana production and processing that can be detectable from surrounding areas - whether it is the tenant space next door, adjacent properties or adjacent sidewalks. Some safety concerns may be warranted, since processors start with raw materials, and use solvents, chemicals, gases and other compounds to extract oils and create and process marijuana infused products. Crime is a third item to consider with Galazin referencing crime rate maps provided as part of the presentation. The LCB passed rules prohibiting marijuana uses from locating within 1000 feet of the elementary and secondary schools, playgrounds, recreational centers, childcare centers, public parks, public transit centers, libraries, and certain game arcades. Those buffer areas are subject to change depending on where and when certain facilities open up. 28 Planner Katie Graves described: 'marijuana production' presenting four zoning options defined as Options: A, B, C and D; 'marijuana processing' presenting three zoning options defined as Options A, B and C; and marijuana retail' presenting five zoning options defined as Options A, B, C, D, and E. Additional options proposed by staff includes: limiting how marijuana producers, processors and retailers operate; not allowing these uses to operate as an accessory to a primary use or as a home occupation; requiring all activities to occur indoors, mitigating for significant adverse impacts and requiring that marijuana uses be designed to include features that prevent odors from impacting other uses. Graves stated that indoor facilities may be more equipped to properly vent odors as well as address security concerns. Marijuana production and processing may create odor impacts to the surrounding area. Staff is recommending adoption of the following language: "Marijuana producers, processors, and retailers shall not operate as accessory to a primary use or as a home occupation. All activities shall occur within an enclosed structure and shall be designed, located, constructed, and buffered to blend in with its surroundings and mitigate significant adverse impacts on adjoining properties and the community, and special attention shall be given to minimize odor, noise, light, glare, and traffic impacts. Marijuana uses shall be designed to include controls and features to prevent odors from traveling off site and being detected from a public right-of-way, or other properties or uses." Graves stated that should the Board recommend allowing marijuana uses in Kent, staff recommends Option B to allow marijuana production only within the M-3 General Industrial District, as the M-3 zone is designed for industrial activity that have unusual or potentially negative or harmful operational characteristics. Staff recommends Option B for both the production and processing of marijuana as those two processes can be located together to benefit from tax breaks. Staff recommends Option B to allow retail sales only in the GWC (Gateway Commercial) zoning district, as this zone is not heavily impacted by those 1000 foot buffer restrictions imposed by the LCB, and the GWC district is generally not an area with higher crime rates, nor is the GWC located in close proximity to residential zoning districts. Galazin reported on a bill passed by Legislation on June 121h that dealt with the production of marijuana concentrates. Marijuana concentrates are developed through an extraction process to produce the kind of oils that may be used the same way as the E-cigarette vaporizer pens. The processes involved to extract those oils could be potentially dangerous and staff does not yet know what the impacts will be from that process. The law now allows marijuana processors to produce this type of product and sell it. Galazin spoke about the law and rules governing the issuance or approval process associated with licensing of marijuana production, processing and retail facilities, as controlled by the LCB. Galazin addressed questions raised by the Board with respect to LCB, Federal, State and local jurisdictional authorities, rules, regulations, tax revenues, and the technicalities associated with licensing of recreational marijuana facilities. Galazin cited the rules Section 314-55-104 that speaks to the marijuana processor license extraction requirements. Graves submitted for the record, an email received from Grant Girdner, dated June 23, 2014 and defined as Exhibit #3, commenting in support of marijuana production, processing and retail sales citing specific zones he would favor for those uses. WPB Minutes June 23,2014 Page 2 of 29 Ottini MOVED and Smith SECONDED a Motion to accept an email submitted for the record from Grant Girdner into the record, Motion PASSED 6-0, Ottini MOVED and Jones SECONDED a Motion to Open the Public Hearing whereupon Ottini declared the public hearing open, Paul Nickelson, 1217 E Walnut, spoke in favor of supporting the recreational marijuana processing, production and retail entities in Kent; recommending that the Production Option B and C be combined. He encouraged the Board to allow for more flexibility for both the distribution and retail aspects of the businesses. Jeff Piecewicz, 14100 SE 282"' St, spoke in opposition to recreational marijuana and stated that he supports a total ban on marijuana franchising based on business liability, economic development and social degradation issues. Kirsten Brown, 6123 S 242"' Place, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to recreational marijuana facilities and favors banning marijuana production, processing or retail within Kent. She spoke about research she conducted outlining the negative health and safety risks associated with the use of marijuana. Tyler Jones, 2826 103r' PI NE, Bellevue, WA stated that he is the owner and applicant of the Orchard View West, who has applied for a producer and processor license in Kent. He spoke of his food manufacturing background comparing the marijuana industry as similar in nature. Jones stated that he is proposing locating his facility in the M-2 zoning district, urging the Board to expand the zoning district beyond the M-3 zone. Jones stated that if the facility is sited in Kent, the business will be conducted professionally and responsibly. Donna Payne, PO Box 196, Auburn, WA stated that she lives on West Hill near Pacific Highway in one of the highest crime areas in town. She spoke in support of speakers two and three, stating that she is vehemently opposed to the use of marijuana and believes that Kent needs to take a stand against allowing these facilities in Kent. Gary D Jones, 12515 Bel Red Road, Bellevue, WA stated that he is advocating on behalf of the applicant to receive their production-processor license in Kent. He urged the Board to expand zoning to include the M-2 zoning district for production and processing of recreational marijuana. Jim Schack, 24615 142"' Ave SE, Kent, WA spoke in opposition to allowing Recreational Marijuana Facilities in Kent asking the Board to take a stand and vote for Option A to not permit marijuana use in Kent. Seeing no further speakers, Ottini MOVED and Phillips SECONDED a Motion to close the Public Hearing. Motion PASSED 6-0. Board Members Cornelius, Ottini, Smith, Phillips, Gill, and Jones expressed opinions on why they oppose recreational marijuana production, processing or retail facilities in Kent. Upon concluding deliberations, Cornelius MOVED and Phillips SECONDED a Motion to recommend to the City Council Option A for Recreational Marijuana Retail and Uses by Businesses Validly-Licensed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board to not allow marijuana retail sales in any zoning district. All members voted in favor, Motion PASSED 6-0, Jones MOVED and Gill SECONDED A Motion to recommend to the City Council Option 8 for recreational marijuana processing land uses by Businesses validly- licensed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board to allow marijuana WPB Minutes June 23,2014 Page 3 of 30 processing only in the M3 General Industrial District. MOTION FAILED 3-3 with Ottini, Phillips, and Cornelius voting in opposition, and Gill, Jones, and Smith voting in favor of the Motion. Galazin recommended the Board make a motion to reconsider; whereupon Cornelius MOVED and Board Member Phillips SECONDED a Motion to Reconsider. MOTION PASSED 6-0. Ottini MOVED and Phillips SECONDED a Motion to recommend to the City Council Option B For recreational marijuana processing land uses by businesses validly- licensed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board Only in the M-3 General Industrial District. MOTION FAILED 4-2 with Ottini, Phillips, Cornelius and Smith voting in opposition, and Gill and Jones voting in favor of the Motion. Cornelius MOVED and Phillips SECONDED a Motion to recommend to the City Council Option A for recreational marijuana production land uses by businesses validly-licensed by the Washington State Liquor Control Board to not allow marijuana production in any Zoning District. MOTION PASSED 4-2 With Ottini, Phillips, Cornelius, and Smith voting in favor, and Gill and Jones voting in opposition to the Motion. Satterstrom stated that the Land Use and Planning Board will hold a workshop on July 14thto consider the Riverbend Amendments. The Recreational Marijuana issue will tentatively go to City Council Workshop on July 151h. Adiournment Seeing no further business to come before the Board, Ottini MOVED and Gill SECONDED a Motion to Close the Public Meeting. Motion PASSED. Meeting was adjourned at 9:05 pm. Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager/Board Secretary WPB Minutes June 23,2014 Page 4 of4 ATTACHMENT B 31 Figure 1. Status of Marijuana Regulations in Neighboring Cities (8/2014) Jurisdiction Moratorium in Regulations Allow Regulations Regulations Do effect Production& Allow Retail Not Allow Processing Sales Recreational Marijuana Auburn V Covington J J Des Moines J J Federal Way V Renton J J Sea Tac Tukwila J J King Count J J 32 33 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director KENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager WASHINGTON Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA 98032-5895 September 3, 2014 TO: Chair Bill Boyce and Economic & Community Development Committee FROM: Charlene Anderson, Planning Manager RE: Comprehensive Plan Update Guidance Principles For ECDC Meeting of September 8, 2014 MOTION: Move to recommend to the full Council approval of the Vision and Framework Guidance to be used for the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan. SUMMARY: On July 141h staff presented to the Committee the schedule, objectives and new topics associated with the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Plan is due to be adopted by June 30, 2015. For the September 81h meeting, staff is requesting the Committee's approval of the Vision and Framework Guidance which will be the guiding principles for the update. BACKGROUND: The City's update of its Comprehensive Plan is an opportunity to tell Kent's story as we create the vision for 2035 and set the strategy to accomplish it. On June 171h, staff held an official kick-off meeting on the update with staff from multiple departments and divisions in the City. The public outreach strategy is underway with a social media survey and web presence. The Comprehensive Plan update is guided not only by the State's Growth Management Act, regional and countywide planning policies, but also by the City Council's Vision Statement and Strategic Plan for 2025. The Vision and Framework Guidance to be presented to the Committee on September 81h will further frame the update. Staff will be available at the September 81h meeting for further discussion. CA/pm S:\Permit\Plan\COMP_PLAN_AMENDMENTS\2011\CPA-2011-3_CPZ-2011-1_CompPlanUpdate\City_Quncil\ECDC\090814_ECDC_Memo.doc Eric: Att A-Vision and Framework Guidance cc: Ben Wolters,Economic&Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP,Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager David GalaAn,Assistant City Attorney File 34 ATTACHMENT A 35 Vision and Framework Guidance In preparation for Kent's first comprehensive plan adopted under the State's 1990 Growth Management Act, the Kent City Council in September 1992 passed Resolution No. 1325 which adopted local goals to be used as the policy framework for the Plan. With this update, the Plan uses the following planning guidance in the development of goals and policies in each element. The planning guidance is consistent with the State, regional and countywide goals and policies. Vision (Current Council-adopted vision) Kent is a safe conne d and beautiful city, culturally vibrant with richly diverse urban centers. Urban Growth Foster a growth pattern that accommodates years of projected population jobs centers. and employment growth in compact, safe, vibrant neighborhoods and Transportation Provide a safe, reliable, and bala d multimodal transportation system which will support current and /o acted growth u"pp p J `9iftg context-sensitive design. Public Facilities and Services O Provide a full range of�p,ublic facilities.ar services to support the envisioned urban growth path�� Frf a sustainable rt anner. Housing %// Encourage diverse hocking"cippoefUt (tf that are affordable to all income levels and household rfd "#. Urba_� Fl Sup pi' t an urban design strategy and development pattern that create pIaces�,'that attract pedple and promote active lifestyles. Human 5efyices Invest in the deliv�J ",of human services programs which are essential to the community's gr0,,W , vitality and health. Economic Development Foster businesses that economically and socially enrich neighborhoods, growth centers, and the overall community. Natural Resource Industries Promote, support and protect natural resource-based industries, such as agricultural industries that provide local access to healthy foods. Kent Comprehensive Plan - 1 - 36 Open Space and Recreation Practice responsible stewardship of parks, significant open spaces, recreational facilities and corridors to provide active and passive recreational opportunities for all persons in the community. Historic Preservation Preserve and enhance Kent's cultural, physical and environmental heritage as a means of sustaining vibrant and unique places that are the roots of the community. Environment j// Protect and enhance a sustainable natural environme� ;'thcluding critical areas, endangered species and aquatic habitat, air Water quality, and large-scale natural resources. Property Right4t��n Protect private property rights from arbit�/ dis riminatory actions while considering the public's interest. Permits Establish a fair, timely, efficienta ,predictable p¢rmit process. Community Involvement Provide for public participation in th ,deve mdnt and" amendment of City plans and regulatory actions. / Kent Comprehensive Plan September 3, 2014 37 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director KENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager WASHINGTON Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA 98032-5895 September 3, 2014 TO: Chair Bill Boyce and Economic & Community Development Committee FROM: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager RE: Sound Transit Update For ECDC Meeting of September 8, 2014 MOTION: None Required — Information Only SUMMARY: As Sound Transit continues to move forward on the Federal Way Link Extension (FWLE), including a station in the Kent-Des Moines area, staff is providing monthly updates to the Committee on the status of the project. At the September meeting, staff will update the Committee on the status of the project's environmental impact statement, transit-oriented development analysis and public outreach. CA/pm P:�Planning�South_Corndor�City_Council�09082014_ECDCMemo_Update.doc cc: Ben Wolters, Economic &Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager David Galazin,Assistant City Attorney File 38 39 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director KENT Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager WASHINGTON Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA 98032-5895 September 3, 2014 TO: Chair Bill Boyce and Economic & Community Development Committee FROM: Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager RE: Urban Land Institute Technical Panel — Light Rail Extension For ECDC Meeting of September 8, 2014 MOTION: None Required — For Information Only. SUMMARY: City staff has contracted with the Urban Land Institute (ULI) to determine the pros and cons for transit-oriented development (TOD) surrounding light rail station alternatives in the Midway Subarea. Included in the ULI analysis will be TOD market viability and recommendations for incentives Kent may provide to support TOD. BUDGET IMPACT: $20,000 from existing 2013-14 budget BACKGROUND: ULI is a nonprofit research and education organization. The City contracted with a ULI Technical Assistance Panel to assess light rail station alternatives as catalysts for TOD. The ULI panelists are volunteer real estate, planning, and development experts who provide unbiased, pragmatic advice for addressing complex land use and development issues. The first ULI panel meeting is a half-day session that is occurring on September 9th. At the September 81h meeting staff will update the Committee on the agenda for the half-day session. Then, on September 1811h, the panelists will return to Kent to deliberate on their analysis, present preliminary findings, and ultimately deliver a final report to the City. For Kent, the analysis will assist in determining which light rail station location will best promote the TOD envisioned in the Midway Subarea Plan. CA/BW/pm P:\Planning\SOuth_COrrldor\City_Council\09082014_ECDCMemo_ULI.doc cc: Ben Wolters,Economic&Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP,Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP,Planning Manager David GalaAn,Assistant City Attorney Hie 40 41 ECONOMIC and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Ben Wolters, Director PLANNING DIVISION KENT Fred N Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director WASHINGTON Charlene Anderson, AICP, Planning Manager Phone: 253-856-5454 Fax: 253-856-6454 Address: 220 Fourth Avenue S. Kent, WA 98032-5895 September 3, 2014 TO: Bill Boyce, Chair and Economic & Community Development Committee FROM: Ben Wolters, Director, Economic & Community Development Fred N. Satterstrom, AICP, Planning Director RE: 2014 ECD Work Program - Progress to Date For the ECDC Meeting of September 8, 2014 MOTION: None Required - For Information Only SUMMARY: At the February 10, 2014 ECDC meeting, staff reviewed the draft ECD 2014 work program with the Committee. A copy of that work plan is attached. At that February meeting, it was suggested to do a mid-term report on the progress of projects and programs. Staff is prepared to discuss this at your September 81h meeting. For your convenience, we took the projects in the work plan and categorized them according to whether they were Completed, Underway, Not Yet Undertaken, or Ongoing. Following is the result of that exercise: 2014 ECD WORK PLAN - PROGRESS TO DATE (8-31-2014) COMPLETED - the following proiects have been completed • Economic Development Plan • Branding Kent Marketing project • Riverbend Surplus Property Comp Plan Amendment • Riverbend Surplus Property Rezone • Green River Corridor District code amendment • Multifamily Property Tax Exemption extension • Downtown Design Guidelines • Downtown Parking Study and implementation • Stryker - major permit project • General Permit process - 2538 permits/$189 million building valuation UNDERWAY - the following proiects are currently being worked on • SMG Contract renewal/extension • KEHR/East Hill revitalization • Brownfields Inventory/EPA Grant 2014 ECD Work Program - Progress to Date 42 9/8/14 ECDC Meeting Page 2 of 2 • CAMPS Growth & Expansion • Naden property disposition • Clark Lake Shops/248th property disposition • Grandview Permitting and Property disposition • Comprehensive Plan Update • Downtown homeless strategy • City/Downtown Gateways/SR 167 underpass • Tarragon Phase III permitting • Regional Industrial Lands study • Code enforcement - major cases and legal strategies • Problem apartment rehab • SEPA rulemaking/increased thresholds • Residential Design Standards - implementation and review • FAA Headquarters competition • SR 516 Naden access • REI completion of 224th Bike connection NOT YET UNDERTAKEN - the following proiects have not vet started • Urban Center boundary adjustments • Downtown LID for lighting and wayside horns • Meeker Street Revitalization Initiative • Sound Transit - development standards amendment • Sound Transit - development agreement • Sound Transit - infrastructure improvements ONGOING PROJECTS - the following are ongoing proiects • Aerospace recruitment and retention • Resource management during increased permit activity • Continuous improvement/Lean exercises/PIG • Respect Action Plan • Kent regional participation • Sound Transit planning/South Corridor Interagency Working Group • KIVA Update Technology OTHER PROJECTS NOT ON WORK PLAN • Marijuana zoning - underway • Trader Joe's recruitment @ Lake Meridian Shopping Center - complete • Remote KIVA access for code enforcement and Building inspections - complete • Evaluation of new tracking system for code enforcement - underway BWIF 1pm P:\Planning\ECO \2014\Pkt Documents\9-08-14\ECD Work Plan Progress Rpt Memo.docx cc: Ben Wolters, Economic &Community Development Director Fred Satterstrom,AICP, Planning Director Charlene Anderson,AICP, Planning Manager