PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE FOR THE WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION CHARLES D. CAMERON PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING (AUDITORIUM) 155 N FIRST AVENUE, HILLSBORO, OR 97124 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19 , 2015 PUBLIC MEETING 6:30 PM Prior to scheduled public hearing items, the Planning Commission schedules time to receive briefings from county staff as work session items. These briefings provide the Planning Commission an opportunity to conduct informal communications with each other, review the agenda, and identify questions they may ask before taking action on the agenda items during the public meeting. No public testimony is taken on work session items. Following work session briefings, the Planning Commission considers items published in their agenda, including scheduled public hearing items and consideration of minutes. The public is welcome to speak during the public hearing portions of the meeting. The public may also speak on any item not on the agenda during the Oral Communications section of the agenda. Upon request, the county will endeavor to arrange provision of the following services: Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing impairments; and Qualified bilingual interpreters Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. If you need a sign language interpreter, assistive listening device, or a language interpreter, please call 503- 846-3519 (or 7-1-1 for Telecommunications Relay Service) by 5:00 p.m. on the Monday preceding the meeting date.
Transcript
PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE FOR THE
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION CHARLES D. CAMERON PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING (AUDITORIUM)
155 N FIRST AVENUE, HILLSBORO, OR 97124
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19 , 2015 PUBLIC MEETING 6:30 PM
Prior to scheduled public hearing items, the Planning Commission schedules time to receive briefings from county staff as work session items. These briefings provide the Planning Commission an opportunity to conduct informal communications with each other, review the agenda, and identify questions they may ask before taking action on the agenda items during the public meeting. No public testimony is taken on work session items. Following work session briefings, the Planning Commission considers items published in their agenda, including scheduled public hearing items and consideration of minutes. The public is welcome to speak during the public hearing portions of the meeting. The public may also speak on any item not on the agenda during the Oral Communications section of the agenda. Upon request, the county will endeavor to arrange provision of the following services: Qualified sign language interpreters for persons with speech or hearing
impairments; and Qualified bilingual interpreters
Since these services must be scheduled with outside service providers, it is important to allow as much lead time as possible. If you need a sign language interpreter, assistive listening device, or a language interpreter, please call 503- 846-3519 (or 7-1-1 for Telecommunications Relay Service) by 5:00 p.m. on the Monday preceding the meeting date.
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
CHARLES D. CAMERON PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING AUDITORIUM
The Planning Commission welcomes your attendance at the Public Meeting. If you wish to speak on a public hearing agenda item or during Oral Communications, please feel free to do so. Time is
generally limited to five minutes for individuals and 10 minutes for an authorized representative of a Citizen Participation Organization (CPO). The Chair may adjust the actual time limits. However, in fairness to others, we respectfully ask your cooperation on the following:
Please follow sign-in procedures located on the table by the entrance to the auditorium.
When your name is announced, please be seated at the table in front and state your name and home or business address for the record.
Groups or organizations wishing to make a presentation are asked to designate one spokesperson in the interest of time and to avoid repetition.
When more than one citizen is heard on any matter, please avoid repetition in your comments. Careful attention to the previous speakers’ remarks will be helpful in this regard.
If you plan to present written testimony at the hearing, please bring 15 copies for distribution to Commission members and staff.
PUBLIC MEETING DATES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WORK SESSIONS
8:30 a.m. 1st and 3rd Tuesdays
2:00 p.m. 4th Tuesday
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETINGS
10 a.m. 1st and 3rd Tuesdays
6:30 p.m. 4th Tuesday
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS
1:30 p.m. 1st Wednesday
6:30 p.m. 3rd Wednesday
Note: Occasionally it may be necessary to
cancel or add a meeting date.
Department of Land Use & Transportation · Planning and Development Services Long Range Planning
155 N First Avenue, Suite 350, MS 14 · Hillsboro, OR 97124 Phone: 503-846-3519 · Fax: 503-846-4412
PUBLIC MEETINGS BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHARLES D. CAMERON PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING
WEDNESDAY AUGUST 19, 2015 6:30 PM
AGENDA
CHAIR: A. RICHARD VIAL VICE-CHAIR: JEFF PETRILLO
COMMISSIONERS: ED BARTHOLEMY, TEGAN ENLOE, LILES GARCIA, MARY MANSEAU, ANTHONY MILLS, ERIC URSTADT, MATT WELLNER
PUBLIC MEETING (AUDITORIUM)
1. CALL TO ORDER – 6:30 PM 2. ROLL CALL 3. DIRECTOR'S REPORT 4. WORK SESSION 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
6. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES
a. July 15, 2015
7. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Proposed Ordinance No. 804 – An Ordinance Amending the Community Development Code Relating to Standards for Marijuana Facilities
b. Proposed Ordinance No. 805 – An Ordinance Amending the Comprehensive
Framework Plan for the Urban Area, the Transportation System Plan, and the North Bethany Subarea Plan of the Bethany Community Plan Relating to the North Bethany P2 Road Alignment and Location of Trails
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OF WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 2015
ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS ARE RECORDED
1. CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 P.M. Public Services Building Auditorium The meeting was called to order by Chair Vial. 2. ROLL CALL Planning Commission (PC) members present: A. Richard Vial, Ed Bartholemy, Liles Garcia, Anthony Mills, Matt Wellner. PC members absent: Tegan Enloe, Mary Manseau, Jeff Petrillo and Eric Urstadt. Staff present: Andy Back, Theresa Cherniak, Steve Szigethy, Stephen Shane, Steve Kelley, Mike Dahlstrom, Robert Fraley, Susan Aguilar, Long Range Planning; Jacquilyn Saito-Moore, County Counsel. 3. DIRECTOR’S REPORT Andy Back, Manager for Planning and Development Services, provided an update to the PC: • Bonny Slope West (BSW) work – DOGAMI (Department of Geology and Minerals Industries)
Landslide Susceptibility report has been posted to the web. • The Board of Commissioners (Board) is scheduled to hear the BSW infrastructure funding plan at
their August 11 work session. • The PC is scheduled to hear their first Plan Amendment in September regarding Tualatin Valley Fire
& Rescue’s (TVF&R) request to change zoning from Institutional to R6. • PC hearings for proposed Ordinance Nos. 802 and 803 are scheduled for August 5 as are any other
ordinances carried forward from July 15. Hearings for proposed Ordinance Nos. 804 and 805 are scheduled for August 19 and any other ordinances carried forward from August 5.
4. WORK SESSION None 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Joseph Rayhawk provided handouts regarding the potential for an earthquake expected off the coast. He urged community leaders to get serious regarding preparing for this disaster.
Page 2 of 5 Testimony/Documents submitted Attachments submitted by Joseph Rayhawk 6. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES • June 17, 2015 Commissioner Mills moved a motion to consider the June 17, 2015 PC minutes as written. Commissioner Garcia seconded. Vote: 4-0 (Commissioner Wellner abstained). Motion passed without objection. 7. PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 799 – Transportation System Plan (TSP): Update and Implementation (continued from July 1, 2015) Steve Kelley, Senior Planner, presented information regarding three primary topic areas which included trails within a half mile of high capacity transit stations, equitable cost sharing for regional trails and other technical amendments. Ordinance No. 799 proposes to integrate recommendations from recently adopted community planning efforts of other jurisdictions into the Washington County TSP and modify various system maps for consistency. This ordinance amends the Comprehensive Framework Plan and the Community Development Code. Staff recommendation • Conduct the second public hearing and recommend approval of Ordinance No. 799 to the Board
including the proposed amendments as shown in Attachment A. Testimony/Documents Submitted regarding Ordinance No. 799 • Letter submitted in favor of ordinance from Lisa Franks – Bicycle Transportation Alliance, 618 NW
Glisan St, Ste 401, Portland, OR Discussion • Questions regarding trail funding and impact on development • Concerned regarding 24 hour trail operations and lighting Testimony regarding proposed Ordinance No. 799 • Joseph Rayhawk, 15248 NW Germantown Rd, Portland, OR – commented on trail right-of-way
Commissioner Garcia moved to recommend adoption of Ordinance No. 799 to the Board as set forth in Exhibit A in the staff report with the exception of provisions in Community Development Code section 502-902.1 as recommended by staff. Commissioner Wellner seconded. Vote: 5-0, motion passed without objection.
Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 2015
Page 3 of 5 PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 800 – An Ordinance Amending the Community Development Code Relating to Minor Changes to Definitions, Exclusions From Permit Requirement, Mixed Solid Waste and Recyclables Storage Facilities, Parking Requirements for Urban Residential Districts, Standards for Model Homes, and Property Line Adjustments Outside the Urban Growth Boundary Mike Dahlstrom, Senior Planner presented a PowerPoint presentation to the PC regarding proposed Ordinance No. 800. This ordinance proposes six minor amendments to the Community Development Code. These amendments expand development opportunities, clarify existing code to reduce planning department discretion during application review, or reduce fees. The amendments address the following: • Facilitate written testimony by email • Create Model Home Temporary Use Permit applications • Provide mixed Solid Waste Recyclables Storage Facility review authority for certain redevelopment • Provide alternative on-street parking options in urban residential development • Allow conversion of limited number of automobile parking spaces to bicycle parking spaces in
existing commercial, industrial, institutional, and multi-family developments • Make specific non-discretionary property line adjustments in the Exclusive Forest and
Conservation land use district a Type I application Staff Recommendation Conduct the public hearing; recommend approval of Ordinance No. 800 to the Board. Discussion • Question regarding emailing testimony and a concern regarding proof of actual person submitting
testimony per email • Question regarding whether large developments have the need for more than five model homes Commissioner Wellner moved to recommend approval of Ordinance No. 800 to the Board. Commissioner Garcia seconded. Vote: 5-0. Motion passes without objection. PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 801 - An Ordinance Amending the North Bethany Subarea Plan of the Bethany Community Plan and the Community Development Code Relating to Density Restricted Lands and Natural Features Buffer Robert Fraley, Associate Planner, gave a PowerPoint presentation to the PC regarding proposed Ordinance No. 801. This ordinance amends the North Bethany Subarea Plan of the Bethany Community Plan and the CDC relating to density restricted lands and the natural features buffer. The 2015 Long Range Work Program adopted by the Board authorized reconsideration of a request by K&R Holdings to reduce the North Bethany natural features buffer located along the north edge of North Bethany from the current variable width to a uniform buffer width of 30 feet and to develop regulation with this change. The Board directed staff to prepare an ordinance reducing the buffer to a uniform 50-foot width. Staff recommended and the Board concurred that additional landscape screening requirements be considered to address Metro’s urban/rural compatibility requirement.
Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 2015
Page 4 of 5 Mr. Fraley shared background information and key issues related to the buffer reduction which included: serviceability for sanitary sewer and stormwater, impacts to THPRD (Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District) planned trail alignments, and maintaining compliance with Urban/Rural compatibility requirements (Condition 6 of Metro’s Ordinance No. 02-987A). Staff recommendation • Conduct the public hearing; recommend approval of Ordinance No. 801 to the Board Testimony/Documents submitted regarding Ordinance No. 801 • Emails from Carol Chesarek sent July 2 through July 13, 2015 • Letter in opposition from Carol Chesarek provided at hearing • Picture submitted by Planning Commissioner Ed Bartholemy • Attachments submitted by Joseph Rayhawk • Letter from Michael Robinson - PerkinsCoie, 1120 NW Couch St, 10th Floor, Portland, OR
representing K&R Holdings • Letter from Tim O’Brien, Principal Regional Planner - Metro, 600 NE Grand Ave, Portland, OR Oral Testimony regarding Ordinance No. 801 • Carrie Pak – Clean Water Services, 2550 Southwest Hillsboro Hwy, Hillsboro, OR – Provided
information and updates regarding utility services (sewer/stormwater availability and potential development costs).
• Michael Robinson – PerkinsCoie, 1120 NW Couch St, 10th Floor, Portland, OR – Testified in favor of ordinance; submitted information from a landscape architect stating that proposed vegetated buffer would ensure compatibility between urban/rural uses; is coordinating communication between K&R Holdings and necessary service providers. Other important concerns will be addressed during the development application phase.
• John Schmidt - K&R Holdings, LLC, 17933 NW Evergreen Pkwy, Suite 300, Beaverton, OR – Testified in favor of the ordinance. The reduced buffer would allow more efficient lot layout patterns and street locations.
• Carol Chesarek - 13300 NW Germantown Rd, Portland, OR – Stated concerns that the neighboring equestrian boarding facility could be adversely affected by urban development if the buffer is reduced to 50 feet; would like the prohibition of street stubs or driveways abutting rural land; and the buffer and vegetation screening proposed in ordinance are inadequate to ensure compatibility between urban/rural uses.
• Joseph Rayhawk - Abbey Creek Stables, 15245 NW Germantown Rd, Portland, OR – Testified in opposition to the ordinance based on several concerns: reduction of the buffer to 50 feet could create a dangerous environment for horses/riders using the equestrian trails which are within 10 feet of the buffer; landslide susceptibility; stormwater and pollution negatively impacting the salmonid spawning areas in Abbey Creek; and loss of use of the southern pasture due to run-off would force downsizing the number of horses that could be boarded, possibly causing him to close his business.
• Russell Dondero - 1506 Limpus Ln, Forest Grove, OR – PC and Board should obtain more information about sewer/stormwater serviceability before reducing buffer.
• Martha Moyer - 16638 NW Graf St, Portland, OR – Strongly opposed to the ordinance. Concerned with county planning supporting a buffer ordinance which allows for more development and a greater profit for the developer.
Planning Commission Minutes July 15, 2015
Page 5 of 5 • Jeannine Rustad - Superintendent of Planning - THPRD, 15707 NW Walker Rd, Beaverton, OR –
Affirmed THPRD is continuing to work with developer on the location and alignments of trails. Discussion • If the buffer is reduced, which areas outside of the buffer are developable? Commissioner Wellner recused himself from participating in the hearing for this ordinance as he was previously employed by K&R Holdings. Chair Vial continued the public hearing on Ordinance No. 801 to August 5, 2015. All PC members present agreed to the continuation. Commissioner Bartholemy will not be present for the August 5 hearing. 8 ADJOURN: 8:50 P.M. There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, the meeting was adjourned. A. Richard Vial Andrew Singelakis Chairman, Washington County Secretary, Washington County Planning Commission Planning Commission Minutes approved this __________ day of ______________________________, 2015 Submitted by Long Range Planning Staff
debilitating medical conditions to use small amounts of marijuana when advised by a doctor without fear of civil or criminal penalties. Oregon’s Medical Marijuana Program (OMMP) was established as a result of the Measure’s passage and continues to be regulated by the Oregon Health Authority. A key component of the OMMP is the provision of medical marijuana dispensaries, which provide marijuana and edible marijuana-infused products to patients. Local governments may adopt ordinances that impose reasonable regulations on the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries, with reasonable regulation described as including “ reasonable limitations on the hours during which a medical marijuana facility may be operated, reasonable limitations on where a medical marijuana facility may be located within a zone described in ORS 475.314 (3)(a), and reasonable conditions on the manner in which a medical marijuana facility may dispense medical marijuana.”1 The bill also allowed for temporary prohibition of medical marijuana dispensaries, subject to adoption of a moratorium ordinance by May 1, 2014. Ordinance No. 781, adopted on April 22, 2014 and effective May 22, 2014, implemented such a moratorium within unincorporated areas of Washington County until May 1, 2015. A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 792, adopted on October 28, 2014, amended the CDC to allow medical marijuana dispensaries as a Special Use within certain land use districts in unincorporated Washington County. It also simultaneously repealed Ordinance No 781. County regulations for dispensaries are found at Section 430-80 of the CDC and regulate hours of operation, entrance lighting, parking, and distance requirements from other dispensaries (2000 feet). Currently there are four known medical marijuana dispensaries operating in unincorporated Washington County. The map included as Attachment A to this Staff Report is current as of July 2015 and shows the location of known dispensaries, as well as adjacent dispensaries in Hillsboro, Beaverton and Sherwood. The map also includes school buffers of one thousand (1000) feet. Marijuana for Recreational Use In the November 2014 general election, Oregon voters passed Ballot Measure 91, which allows for the growing and legal sale of marijuana for recreational purposes to adults 21 years of age and older. The measure tasked the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) with creating a regulatory, licensing, and tracking system for the growing, processing, distribution, and sale of recreational marijuana and marijuana derivatives, such as edible and topical products.
Since February of this year, state legislators and relevant government agencies have been working toward finalizing regulations prior to the commercial legalization of marijuana for recreational use on January 1, 2016. The OLCC will begin to accept applications for growing, processing, wholesale and retail marijuana businesses after this date. Each of these marijuana-related activities will require a license from the agency subject to annual renewal; individuals engaging in more than one of these business activities will require a license from the OLCC for each. Although the OLCC will accept licenses after January 1, agency staff has publicly
1 Oregon Senate Bill 1532. Effective March 14, 2014.
indicated that licenses are not expected to be issued for these business activities until April 2016 at the earliest.2
The provisions of Measure 91 are separate from and did not amend elements of the OMMA and the Oregon Health Authority will continue to oversee and regulate the existing Oregon Medical Marijuana Program (OMMP).
A provision in Ballot Measure 91 allows for the possession and home cultivation of marijuana for adults 21 and older beginning July 1, 2015. Individuals 21 and older are now able to possess up to:
• 8 ounces of marijuana and grow up to four marijuana plants; • 16 ounces of solid homemade marijuana products; • 72 ounces of liquid homemade marijuana products; and • 1 ounce of marijuana in public.
2015 Legislative Activity The 2015 Oregon Legislature passed several marijuana-related bills prior to the end of the legislative session on July 6 of this year. The most comprehensive of these was House Bill (HB) 3400A, which expanded OHA’s mandate to oversee and regulate elements of the medical marijuana program while also establishing a framework for future regulation of the recreational marijuana industry by the OLCC. This bill, referred to as the Marijuana Omnibus bill, will inform rulemaking by OLCC and OHA during the remainder of 2015. The bill was signed by the Governor and became effective under state law as of June 30, 2015.
Senate Bill (SB) 460A, signed by the Governor and effective July 27, 2015, allows medical marijuana dispensaries to legally sell marijuana to adults 21 years of age and older as of October 1, 2015, thereby providing adults with a legal means to obtain marijuana for recreational purposes. The bill provides local jurisdictions with an opt-out for this allowance by ordinance.
Additional discussion of these bills and other legislation from the 2015 legislative session is found in the Analysis section of this report.
2015 County Ordinance At their June 9, 2015 work session, planning staff briefed the Board of Commissioners to seek Board direction on whether or not to move forward in 2015 with an ordinance to address recreational marijuana regulation in the county. Staff informed the Board that OLCC staff has stated they do not expect to issue licenses for commercial marijuana businesses prior to April 2016 and presented an option to file a 2016 recreational marijuana ordinance at the earliest possible time next year. The Board indicated their preference was that some regulation be in place prior to the county receiving any potential land use applications for recreational marijuana businesses in early 2016 and directed staff to proceed this year with an ordinance that addressed regulations for retail marijuana facilities in the same manner as the county’s existing regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries. 2 OLCC Commissioners Marijuana Study Session. OLCC Central Office. Portland, OR. March 27, 2015.
The following chart shows the various timelines for the county ordinance process and the state’s pending rulemaking.
Ordinance Notification Ordinance No. 804 and an accompanying summary were mailed to citizen participation organizations (CPOs) and interested parties on July 14, 2015. A display advertisement regarding the proposed ordinance was published in The Oregonian and Hillsboro Argus newspapers on July 31, 2015. Individual Notice 2015-09 describing proposed Ordinance No. 804 was mailed to approximately 450 people on the General Notification List on August 5, 2015. A copy of this notice was also mailed to the Planning Commission at that time. IV. ANALYSIS
Local options for recreational marijuana regulation are found in Sections 58 through 62 of Measure 91. Authority for local jurisdictions to regulate marijuana businesses is found in Section 59, which states:
Cities and counties may adopt reasonable time, place and manner regulations of the nuisance aspects of establishments that sell marijuana to consumers if the city or county makes specific findings that the establishment would cause adverse effects to occur.
Washington County and City Regulations On March 19, 2014, Senate Bill (SB) 1531 became effective. It allowed local governments to adopt regulations for the operation of medical marijuana facilities in their jurisdictions. The bill also gave cities and counties the option of creating a temporary prohibition on medical marijuana dispensaries, if adopted by ordinance prior to May 1, 2014. All Washington County cities voted to place a moratorium on medical marijuana dispensaries within their jurisdictions, with most adopting regulations to do so in April, 2014. The moratoriums were typically for a one-year period, resulting in cities throughout the county revisiting this issue in spring, 2015. Washington County cities have taken different approaches to regulating marijuana. Some cities limited their ordinance work only to medical dispensaries and other cities were more expansive in updating their regulations. Tualatin and Beaverton have recently adopted ordinance language that does not distinguish between medical and recreational marijuana facilities and Tigard has adopted regulations that differentiate between public facilities, such as retail outlets, and non-public facilities, which are likely to apply to processing and wholesale operations. Table 1 lists recent medical marijuana ordinance efforts of the larger cities in the county. The state requires a minimum of a 1000-foot buffer around schools from all medical marijuana facilities. Included in the table are additional jurisdictional buffers enacted by cities.
Table 1
Cities Ordinance Adoption
Medical, Recreational or Both? Buffer Regulations
Hillsboro April 2015 Medical 1000 ft. from schools/parks/plazas. 2000
ft. from other med. dispensaries.
Beaverton January 2015
Single Set of Regulations for Both 1000 ft. from schools.
Tigard
April 2015
Single Set of Regulations for Both
Marijuana facilities - public (sales): 2000 ft. buffer between facilities & 500
ft. from library/park/residential. Facilities - non-public use (grow/ processing): 500 ft. from library/
parks/residential. 1000 ft. from schools.
Tualatin April 2015
Single Set of Regulations for Both
3000 ft. from residential and schools/ parks/libraries. 2000 ft. from other
dispensaries. No co-location. Packaging restrictions. Must be in permanent building and be 3000 sq. ft. or less.
Forest Grove April 2015 Medical 1000 ft. from schools.
Sherwood May 2015 Medical 1000 ft. from schools/parks/plazas. 1000
ft. from other med. dispensaries.
Washington County
October 2014 Medical 1000 ft. from schools. 2000 ft. from any
Washington County adopted A-Engrossed Ordinance No. 792 in 2014, which allowed for medical marijuana dispensaries within certain land use districts in unincorporated Washington County. County regulations for dispensaries are found at Section 430-80 of the CDC (Special Use Standards) and address hours of operation, entrance lighting, parking, and distance requirements from other dispensaries (2000 feet). Currently there are four known medical marijuana dispensaries operating in unincorporated Washington County. The county has yet to enact regulations that reflect the pending legalization for growing, processing and sale of marijuana for recreational purposes. 2015 Oregon Legislature – House Bill (HB) 3400A As noted in the background section of this report, HB 3400A is the primary bill of the 2015 legislative session to address the recreational use of marijuana by adults 21 years of age and older. The enacted bill reflects the intent, opportunities, and limitations of Ballot Measure 91 but refines with additional detail the responsibilities and operating requirements of dispensary owners, medical marijuana and recreational marijuana growers and processers, wholesale and retail recreational marijuana businesses and the regulatory obligations of the OHA and OLCC. It requires the OHA, in consultation with OLCC, to establish standards for packaging, labeling, and testing of marijuana items and to establish, by rule, public health and safety standards for processing of cannabinoid edibles, concentrates, and extracts. The bill requires the OLCC to establish a seed-to-sale tracking system for all marijuana products, gives the agency enforcement powers and duties, and allows it to require segregated areas for premises that hold multiple licenses. Other important elements of the bill include:
• Ability of local jurisdictions to regulate time, manner, and place activities for all marijuana facilities;
• Limitations on amount of marijuana and marijuana-derived products for personal use for both medical and recreational marijuana users;
• State recognition of marijuana as a farm crop and allowance for cultivation in rural areas; • Two paths for local governments to ‘opt out’ of any one or more categories of marijuana
businesses; • Provisions for state and local taxation of marijuana and marijuana-derived products; • Requirement that all marijuana businesses licensed with the OLCC obtain a Land Use
Compatibility Statement (LUCS) from a local government specifying that the proposed use is appropriate for the zone; and
• The preclusion of wholesale, retail, and processing recreational marijuana business activities in residential areas.
In Exclusive Farm Use zones, an individual would not be allowed to obtain a new dwelling in conjunction with a marijuana crop. Farm stands and farm use commercial activities [pursuant to ORS 215.213(2)(c)] are likewise not allowed in conjunction with marijuana activities under this legislation. The bill maintains the requirement of a 1000-foot buffer between schools and marijuana dispensaries but changes existing law to allow an existing dispensary to remain if a
new school is opened within 1000 feet of the facility.3 A new buffer regulation bans local jurisdictions from codifying through code amendments distance buffers of greater than 1000 feet between licensed retail marijuana outlets.
There are two avenues under the bill’s provisions for cities and counties to elect not to allow new medical or recreational marijuana facilities within their jurisdictions, notwithstanding the existing legal status of medical marijuana dispensaries and pending state legalization (on January 1, 2016) for growing, processing, wholesale and retail activities associated with recreational marijuana. 4 The first option allows cities and counties to opt out of state legalization of marijuana facilities if their electorate voted no on Measure 91 by at least a 55 percent margin. An ordinance to opt out would have to be adopted within 180 days of the June 30, 2015 effective date of HB 3400A. Washington County voters passed Ballot Measure 91 by a 61-38 percent vote; hence, this opt out provision is not available to the county. The second opt out option, which the county could elect to undertake, is to put the issue of whether all marijuana facilities should be allowed in the county on the next general election ballot.
2015 Oregon Legislature - Additional Marijuana Bills Senate Bill (SB) 460A – the targeted purpose of this bill is to allow medical marijuana dispensaries to legally sell marijuana for recreational purposes to adults 21 and older beginning October 1, 2015. This will allow individuals a mechanism to legally obtain marijuana for private consumption until the OLCC issues licenses for retail marijuana establishments, expected in the second half of 2016. The bill allows only for the sale of dried marijuana leaves, flowers and immature (non-flowering) plants and includes individual limitations on the amount of dried leaves and/or flowers sold per day.
The bill allows cities and counties to prohibit the retail sale of marijuana from medical marijuana dispensaries through adoption of a land use ordinance.
The above provisions are scheduled to sunset on December 31, 2016 pursuant to Section 2(5) of the bill.
House Bill (HB) 2041A – the purpose of this bill is to address taxation of marijuana and marijuana-derived products. The bill imposes a 17 percent tax on marijuana items sold by recreational marijuana retailers upon licensing of these retailers by the OLCC. If jurisdictions allow medical marijuana dispensaries to sell marijuana to the recreational market pursuant to SB 460, the tax for these sales is fixed at 25 percent at the point of sale. Cities and counties that pass ordinances prohibiting any kind of medical or recreational marijuana facility or site may not receive any funding from state revenue derived from marijuana activity. Senate Bill (SB) 844 – this bill establishes a task force on researching the medical and public health properties of cannabis and requires the task force to develop recommendations and report to the legislature by December 15, 2015 and again by February 1, 2016. The bill also allows for some criminal convictions to be removed from an individual’s police record in certain instances.
3 Prior state law required the OHA to not reissue a license to any dispensary within 1000 feet of a school. 4 Legally operating dispensaries would be allowed to remain unless their registration from OHA is revoked.
Ordinance No. 804 and Engrossment Considerations As noted, at their June work session the Board directed staff to apply existing county regulations currently in use for medical marijuana dispensaries to any future applications the county may receive for retail recreational marijuana facilities. The Board did not provide direction for developing county regulations that would address the pending legalization of growing, processing, or wholesale activity associated with the recreational marijuana market. The filed ordinance therefore does not address these activities and applies existing regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries to retail recreational marijuana facilities. State rules that could inform county regulations on recreational marijuana have yet to be codified into law. While HB 3400A will inform the final drafting of state law, additional modifications to applicable rules and statutes beyond what HB 3400A and Ballot Measure 91 require may be forthcoming from both the OHA and OLCC. Growing, Processing and Wholesale activities Staff discussed the pending legalization of recreational marijuana with Washington County Sheriff Pat Garrett in May 2015, who stated his preference that the existing time, manner, and place regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries also apply to recreational marijuana sales facilities as well. Sheriff Garrett further recommended that – for ease of enforcement and reduction of potential impacts to surrounding businesses - marijuana growing and processing facilities be located solely in the county’s industrial areas. Staff agrees with Sheriff Garrett's assessment that growing and processing facilities in the unincorporated area inside the urban growth boundary may be best suited to the county’s Industrial District. Industrial areas typically have limited foot traffic, buildings are generally easy to secure through the use of fencing, gates, and cameras, and generally buildings and access can be more easily monitored than areas with a high degree of public activity, as found in most commercial districts. Ensuring public health and safety for business employees and for surrounding uses is likely easier in these areas for the above reasons. It is still unknown to what extent state rules are going to allow general public access to growing, processing and wholesale marijuana businesses. Limiting these activities to Industrial areas can serve as a placeholder until state law provides further guidance. State rules governing the recreational marijuana industry are expected to be in place by January 1, 2014. For growing, processing, wholesale, and retail marijuana activities, staff could prepare draft language for engrossment that would create a new section of the development code specifying in what land use districts these activities could occur and the time, manner, and place regulations for each. Extent of Buffer Clarifying code amendments are ultimately needed to the county's existing marijuana regulations given Section 33(2) of HB 3400A, regulating buffers between retail marijuana facilities. The ordinance as filed retains the existing 2000-foot buffer between medical dispensaries and applies the buffer to any marijuana facility (medical dispensaries and retail recreational marijuana
outlets). Section 33(2) does not allow a local jurisdiction to apply a buffer greater than 1000 feet between retail marijuana outlets.5 This change should be incorporated into the code at some point. Opt out of retail sales at medical dispensaries As noted, SB 460 allows early sales of marijuana for recreational purposes from medical dispensaries as of October 1, 2015. Pursuant to Section 2(3) of the bill, local jurisdictions have the option of prohibiting by ordinance the sale of retail marijuana product to the general public from medical dispensaries. If the county wishes to enact such an ordinance prior to October 1, 2015, engrossment of Ordinance No. 804 would be necessary. Direction on engrossments These and possibly other potential code amendments could be undertaken this year through engrossment of Ordinance No. 804 or could be addressed in a 2016 land use ordinance, pending direction from the Board. Staff requests Planning Commission discussion and potential recommendations on these items if the commissioners agree that recommending engrossment of Ordinance 804 is warranted. Issues for Future Consideration HB 3400A both tasked the OLCC with crafting regulations to address the recreational marijuana industry and gave the OHA additional responsibilities to more comprehensively regulate the medical marijuana industry. Rulemaking by these agencies is on-going and not expected to be finalized until the end of 2015. For this reason, the regulation of these two industries is currently in flux and details of their regulation remain unknown. For example, it remains to be determined how or if the state will regulate issues such as the degree of public access to processing and wholesale facilities and whether co-location of different marijuana facilities, such as a retail marijuana outlet in the same building as a wholesale distribution outlet, should occur. One of the several possible issues for consideration by the Planning Commission and Board in the coming year is whether to allow the production of marijuana in the county’s Exclusive Forest and Conservation District (EFC) and the county’s AF-10, AF-5, and RR-5 Districts. The EFC District is a resource zone subject to Goal 4 (“Forest Lands”) and the AF-10, AF-5, and RR-5 Districts are exception areas not subject to either Goal 3 (“Agricultural Lands”) or Goal 4. Section 34 (3) of HB 3400A specifies that a county may allow the production of marijuana in land zoned for farm or forest use in the same manner as the production of marijuana in exclusive farm use zones.
HB 3400A designated marijuana as a farm crop and authorized the growing of marijuana as a farm use in farm and forest zones. Farm uses on resource and exception areas are allowed outright (no permit required) and growing marijuana as a farm crop on EFC and exception lands would be allowed under HB 3400A. However, it would be within the county's purview to be
5 The bill retains the existing 1,000 foot buffer requirement between dispensaries.
more restrictive for the production of marijuana in the EFC and on these exception lands, based on Section 34 (3) of the bill. The AF-10, AF-5 and RR-5 exception districts are often more residential in nature and tend to smaller tax lots than AF-20 and EFU farm districts. For these reasons, potential impacts to surrounding uses from growing marijuana in these land use districts may be more pronounced than growing marijuana in farm zones. The majority of the county’s EFC areas are comparatively isolated by being located in the foothills of the coast range west of the county’s urban areas. It is unknown to what extent individuals would attempt outdoor growing operations on these lands. Possible impacts between forest practices such as logging, hauling, and aerial spraying and marijuana growing operations is likewise not known at this point. Staff expects the need to return in 2016 with further land use regulations regarding marijuana sale, growing, processing and wholesale activities once state regulations are in place.
Summary of Proposed Changes
Ordinance No. 804 proposes to amend the Community Development Code to apply existing medical marijuana dispensaries standards to retail recreational marijuana outlets. Key provisions of Ordinance 804 are: To allow retail recreational marijuana facilities to locate in the following land use
districts: • Community Business District; • General Commercial District; • Industrial District; • Rural Commercial District; • Transit Oriented Districts; and • North Bethany Neighborhood Commercial Mixed Use District.
To include Medical Marijuana Dispensaries and Recreational Marijuana Facilities under the term “Marijuana Facilities” and to apply identical regulations for each.
To add a new definition for Recreational Marijuana Facility to Community Development Code (CDC) Section 390-16.15 and CDC Section 430-80.
