City Council
MEETING DATE: 1/12/2015
TITLE:
Title
Appeal of Planning Commission Determination of Incompleteness on Conditional Use Permit Application for Cathedral City Care Collective Medical Marijuana Dispensary
End
FROM:
Nicholas Hermsen, Deputy City Attorney
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
The City Attorney's office recommends that the City Council hear an appeal of the decision of the Planning Commission determining that the Dispensary Conditional Use Permit application was incomplete and then affirm the decision of the Planning Commission.
Body
BACKGROUND:
A. The Newly Enacted Ordinance and Planning Commission Determination
The City Council recently enacted a new ordinance which allows three medical marijuana dispensaries to open and operate in the City, subject to a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP"). (The full ordinance is found at Cathedral City Municipal Code ("CCMC") chapter 9.108). Under the ordinance, a deadline was established to submit a CUP application to the City, after which a lottery was held to determine in which order the applications would be processed. A total of 24 applications were received, the lottery was held, and each of the applications has been ranked.
The instant application for Cathedral City Care Collective is for the second-ranked application under the lottery. The proposed location is 68860 Perez Road, Suites K and M. The matter was considered by the Planning Commission on December 17, 2014, which determined that the proposed application was incomplete because the proposed location is less than 1000 feet from Green Cross Pharma medical marijuana dispensary, which is prohibited by CCMC section 9.108.060(A).
The administrative record for the Planning Commission meeting is attached to this staff report, including: (a) The Planning Commission Staff Report; (b) The application; (c) a map showing the distance of the proposed location from Green Cross Pharma; and (d) The Planning Commission Agenda.
The ordinance includes several criteria which can automatically disqualify a particular applicant. For example, dispensaries are not permitted to be located within 600 feet of a school, public playground or park, child care or day care facility, or youth center; within 1,000 feet of any other dispensary; in any residential zone; or within 250 feet of East Palm Canyon Drive or a residential zone. If any dispensary's proposed location violates these distance requirements, under the ordinance the application must be deemed incomplete and the next application on the list is considered. No variances or other exceptions are permitted under the ordinance with respect to these particular standards.
B. The Application
Pursuant to CCMC Section 9.108.080(B), the Planning Commission has the decision-making authority to find whether an application is in compliance with Chapter 9.108. A decision of the Planning Commission on the completeness of the application may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to CCMC section 2.04.100. The subject appeal was timely filed by the applicant's attorney, Steven L. Simas, pursuant to CCMC section 2.04.110. A copy of the appeal is attached. The City Council review of this matter is de novo.
Staff has conducted its initial review of the application materials and determined that the proposed facility is within 1000 feet of Green Cross Pharma, another medical marijuana dispensary for which the CUP was approved by the Planning Commission on December 17, 2014, which is in direct violation of CCMC section 9.108.060(A).
Planning staff has measured the distance from the nearest portion of the structure where the proposed dispensary would be located to Green Cross Pharma and determined that the distance is fewer than 1000 feet.
C. The Appeal
The appeal was received by the City on December 24, 2014, and is attached. The appellant also appeals the issuance of the CUP for Green Cross Pharma, which is located at 68730 Summit Drive. The grounds for both appeals are included in the same letter, and both appeals are scheduled for consideration by the City Council at the January 12, 2015, City Council meeting. The issues raised with respect to Cathedral City Care Collective begin on page 8 of the appeal letter.
The appeal asserts that the distance, door-to-door, from Cathedral City Care Collective to Green Cross Pharma is 1033 feet. While the applicant acknowledges that the closest point of its building is only 797 feet from Green Cross Pharma, he asserts that the shorter distance is "not relevant" because Cathedral City Care Collective will not operate from that location.
The measurements required by the ordinance are exceedingly clear. CCMC section 9.108.060(B) provides: "All distances specified in this Section shall be measured in a straight line, without regard to intervening structures, from the nearest point of the building or structure in which the Medical Marijuana Dispensary is, or will be located, to the nearest property line of those uses described herein." As shown on the attached map, this distance is less than 1,000 feet and therefore the application cannot be approved under the ordinance. The alternate interpretation suggested in the appeal is not authorized under the Municipal Code and is therefore directly contrary to law.
In the event the City Council decides to deny the application for Green Cross Pharma for any reason, then the application for Cathedral City Care Collective should be remanded to the Planning Commission for further consideration, as the only ground for denial before the City Council presently is the dispensary's proximity to Green Cross Pharma.
D. Appeal Procedures
The process for hearing the appeal is typically a summary of the situation by staff followed by testimony of the appellants. Following that testimony the City Council should take comment from those in attendance. Following the hearing the City Council will take action on the appeal. The City Council has several options in relation to the appeal:
1. The City Council may affirm, in whole, the decision of the Planning Commission.
2. If the City Council finds that new or additional information has been discovered in the appeal process that may result in the Planning Commission reaching a different conclusion, the City Council may remand the matter back to the Planning Commission with direction to consider the new or additional information.
3. The City Council may reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and vacate its determination of incompleteness on the application, and remand the application to the Planning Commission for further proceedings consistent with CCMC chapter 9.108.
4. The City Council may modify the determination of the Planning Commission however it deems fit.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The item that is before the City Council is an appeal on the determination of incompleteness on the Application, and not the actual CUP. Because the Application does not comply with the terms of CCMC Section 9.108.060(A), the Planning Commission's decision should be affirmed.
DISCUSSION:
Click here to enter text.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Staff Report for Cathedral City Care Collective
2. Conditional Use Permit Application for Cathedral City Care Collective
3. Map of Distance of Proposed Location from Green Cross Pharma
4. Planning Commission Agenda for December 17, 2014
5. Appeal of Cathedral City Care Collective Planning Commission Action