01/12/2015 - Minutes CITY OF TIGARD
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
January 12, 2015
CALL TO ORDER
President Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Tigard Civic
Center,Town Hall, at 13125 SW Hall Blvd.
ROLL CALL
Present: President Rogers
Vice President Fitzgerald
Alt. Commissioner Enloe
Commissioner Lieuallen
Commissioner Middaugh
Alt. Commissioner Mooney
Commissioner Muldoon
Commissioner Ouellette
Commissioner Schmidt
Commissioner Smith
Absent: Commissioner Feeney
Staff Present: Tom McGuire, Assistant Community Development Director;John Floyd,
Associate Planner; Doreen Laughlin, Executive Assistant
Also Present: City Attorney, Shelby Rihala
COMMUNICATIONS - None
CONSIDER MINUTES
January 5th Meeting Minutes: President Rogers asked if there were any additions, deletions, or
corrections to the January 5th minutes; there being none, Rogers declared the minutes approved
as submitted.
OPEN PUBLIC HEARING
President Rogers opened the public hearing.
PUBLIC HEARING
SW 121st AVENUE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (PDR) 2014-00002; SUBDIVISION
(SUB)2014-00005
MARIJUANA FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DCA2014-00002
PROPOSAL:The City of Tigard proposes legislative amendments to the Tigard Development
Code (TDC) to establish reasonable time, place, and manner regulations for marijuana facilities.
Page 1 of 9
Proposed changes include new definitions to be placed within Chapter 18.120 (Definitions); text
amendments to Chapter 18.210 (General Administrative Provisions) to remove a requirement
that development be consistent with federal law; and creation of a new chapter to be titled 18.735
(Marijuana Facilities) that would limit hours of operation, establish minimum buffer distances
from residential and park zones, require exterior design requirements to enhance security,
establish off-site odor standards, and create an associated review procedure. The proposed text
and map amendments for the Planning Commission's review are included in Attachment 1, and
summarized in Section IV of the staff report: APPLICANT: City of Tigard ZONES: Citywide
LOCATION: Citywide and properties identified in the staff report maps. APPLICABLE
REVIEW CRITERIA: Statewide Planning Goals 1 (Citizen Involvement), 2 (Land Use
Planning), 6 (Air,Water, and Land Resources Quality), and 9 (Economic Development); ORS
475 (Oregon Medical Marijuana Act); Statewide Ballot Measure 91 (Control, Regulation, and
Taxation of Marijuana and Industrial Hemp Act); Comprehensive Plan Goals 1.1.2, 2.1.2, 2.1.3,
2.1.6, 2.1.11, 2.1.21, 2.1.23, 2.1.24, 6.1.7, 9.1.3, 9.1.12, 10.2.1 and 10.2.8.; and TDC Chapters
18.380.020 and 18.390.060.G.
STAFF REPORT
Associate Planner John Floyd introduced himself and went over the staff report. (Staff reports
are available in their entirety on-line on the City Website one week in advance of the hearing.)
He summarized the project using a PowerPoint Presentation (Exhibit A)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission find in favor of the proposed development code
text amendments (Attachment 1 (Exhibit B);with any alterations as determined through the
public hearing process, and make a final recommendation to the Tigard City Council.
QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Muldoon: "Can you speak about the overlap or how the city regulations
mesh with county and the OLCC [Oregon Liquor Control Commission]?" In terms of the
OLCC —those really haven't been developed yet. Typically what happens is City staff has to sign
off a land use compatibility statement certifying that the proposed facility meets local regulations
before the state will issue their own license. At this point, it's hard to say but there is
coordination that that will happen. The OLCC regulations are meant to parallel liquor
regulations. So right now there's a fair amount of coordination high level. It's typically multiple
departments the city would have to sign off as well— the police department and the planning
department. In terms of Washington County,in the staff report on page three, I address
Washington County regulations. Our hours of operation are slightly more restrictive —they allow
8am to 10pm— as proposed—it's a little bit tighter. We are separate jurisdictions so their
regulations only apply to unincorporated areas. They also limited it to specified zones and added
a couple of buffer areas which we didn't include — one was a 1500 ft buffer from any light rail
platforms and a comparable regulation would be a buffer from our downtown transit center.
They also required a minimum of 2000 ft between dispensaries. Those are a little more expansive
than what's proposed here. They also include requirements for exterior lighting and for visibility
of the primary entry. So those are comparable as well. Our land use regulations are distinct and
separate from their land use regulations.
Commissioner Middaugh— "Could you clarify the definition of Marijuana Facility? I see
that it includes the production but I also heard you say that growth sites are general
Page 2 of 9
industrial..." Yes, there are a couple of different things here. In this case the marijuana facility is
a place that requires a special state license or registration. For example, a growth facility, in terms
of development would fall under a "general industrial use" classification. That would establish
what zones it's applicable in—how large it can be —how much parking it requires, etc. It's also a
Marijuana Facility in that it also has this sort of special status with the state and therefore we also
want to account for special potential impacts that may be associated with this type of industrial
facility. It's a layering sort of system. "Okay— so the growth site would be "General Industrial"
as well as a Marijuana facility?" Correct.
Commissioner Fitzgerald had a question about measuring the distance from a property
line. "So if there was a dispensary that was at the corner of 72nd and Lower Boones Ferry,
that regulation of a 500 or 1000 ft buffer would not apply?" It would apply but it would not
hit a parks zone... "My question is if it's up against another jurisdiction— and I was using
this as an example because we see Tualatin's name on it... pretend the zoning would
allow it— and there was a facility in Tualatin at the corner of 72nd and Lower Boones
Ferry—the limits of the 500' buffer don't start at that property line and go into our
jurisdiction... I'm trying to understand the definition of the buffer zone when we're
against another jurisdiction." I think when we're against another jurisdiction, state rules would
come into play— so for example, medical marijuana dispensaries would have to be 1000' from
each other regardless of what jurisdiction they're in. A facility in Tualatin, say 100' from our
border - that would reach 900' into the City of Tigard— so in those cases, the buffers would
reach in. The amendments proposed do not reach outside the City— or facilities that don't reach
in. It's a self-contained sort of system. There are plusses and minuses to that. "What's the
measuring guideline for the state rule? Is it by retail storefront — or is it by property line?"
It's by property line.
Commissioner Ouellette: "In reference to removing the term "federal law" from the
requirement of 18.210.030 - I understand it was addressed in reference to this situation
but blatantly removing that term as applications over any other possible developments...
I guess —forward thinking... does removing that term have any other implications that
that could affect?" Well, permits are still required from the state and from the Corp. of
Engineers — so it doesn't remove some of those requirements. We also have things like
Intergovernmental Agreements and developers are still responsible for complying with those
requirements as well. But other jurisdictions have a go with this language and no major issues yet
to my knowledge. The City Attorney can speak to that if you want.
City Attorney Shelby Rihalla came up to address that question "No, the issue was specific to
this that brought about removing that language. It was more of a policy - type guidance— more
of a feel good statement in this case. So any requirement - like Federal Environmental, Federal
Safety, is still going to be governed by other code provisions. It was more of a feel good kind of
statement in this provision, as opposed to a guiding principle of law.
Commissioner Lieuallen: "How are we accounting for apartment complexes?" There are a
couple of things —many are located in residential zones — for example the R12 & R25 zone —
but,if they're located in a mixed-use zone—we have single & multi-family properties inside the
mixed-use zones. They would potentially be in the area not subject to the buffer requirements.
The state presently allows medical marijuana dispensaries in mixed-use zone and if they're
located in mixed-use zones more than 500' away from a residential zone or a park— that could
Page 3 of 9
occur. For example the area between Washington Square and Metzger has a lot of apartment
complexes. "I'm looking directly here in the middle of your Tigard Triangle —you've got
an apartment complex located just about behind the Lowes facility, which would take a
big swath out of the circle there... if we were trying to keep away from apartment
complexes where people live... and there are children and..." Correct. So for example, if the
code were crafted to be 500' away from a residential land use— that would create a buffer around
that apartment complex —but for now it's crafted so that it's only around the zone. So that is a
policy question. Is the Planning Commission comfortable having residential land uses near
marijuana facilities inside of a mixed-use district?There are different expectations inside the
zones than say in a residential zone - so it's a policy question. But in this example in the Triangle
— that might occur switching to the Washington Square/Metzger area - it looks like that is
unlikely. "The other one I noticed here was... Don't we have a park right across the street
from the old Payless complex across from McDonalds next to the..." We actually had to
revise the maps on that one. There is a park there at the end of Main Street where it hits 99W
and just across — behind the slope on the north side of 99W- there's another small park. Those
are both entirely in the ODOT right-of-way. Those are parks - but they're not really lots or
parcels — they're just a part of the road right-of-way. It's a legal distinction, but we actually caught
that recently so we had to revise the map. It opened up more of downtown than we expected
initially. The City does not have adopted park boundaries necessarily— that's why we chose to go
from the lot boundary as opposed to the park boundary. It makes it easier to measure. "And
also—the comment we had earlier about not paying attention to —when we're deciding
our own buffers —for example, right at the edge of the City of Tigard on Upper Boones
Ferry Road - there's an apartment complex that's right up against our property line
there."Yes, that's a question the Planning Commission can consider—Do we want to account
for land uses outside the City? It would create some potential additional staff time in terms of
that and also potentially... "I care about the children there as much as I care about the
children three feet this side of the line." I understand that. It's a policy question and we can
certainly go there. "You gave us a great run-down on all the hours run by every individual
liquor store in the State of Oregon but my understanding is the OLCC does not set these
liquor store hours. They have an opening hour set at 7:00am and a closing hour set at
10:00pm - and they require the liquor stores to be open a minimum of 8 hours a day—but
they don't set these liquor stores hours. So when we're using these liquor stores —these
are just the agents themselves that are deciding what hours to set. So if we're going with
that we should be setting 7:00 — 10:00 and letting the individual agents set their own... I
mean if we're just following OLCC — that's how they're running it." The goal there was to
find out what was deemed reasonable by the business community and I think most of the stores
appear to be opening mid-morning and closing about mid-evening..."Probably based on
business —where they're making enough sales to stay open—if they're making sales in
the morning versus the evening. I'm just not sure we should be getting involved too
deeply in that. That's a business decision. I think the OLCC recognizes that." From my
conversations with the Police Department— they were very interested in having hours of
operation restrictions on this. They were concerned about opening too early in the morning and
too late in the evening. I can have them return to you...
There were some further questions about marijuana dispensaries and their link to an increase in
crime; security, policing lots, denying consumption on the premises, fine structures, etc.John
Floyd answered that this could all be looked into.
Page 4 of 9
Commissioner Ouellette —wanted to know if portable structures are considered a
permanent building. "For example — some elementary and middle schools have a
"portable" - if someone were to put a building like that on an empty lot —would that be
considered a permanent building?" That may be something we want to define. That's
something the code does not have a definition for—that's something we could add.
TESTIMONY IN FAVOR—
Robert Graham—Attorney, 236 NW E St., Grants Pass, OR 97526 spoke for a group of
more than 4 people who were present and was given 15 minutes to speak on their behalf. He said
he represents clients throughout the state who are involved in the medical marijuana and
recreational marijuana endeavors. He said he also represents the Oregon Candidate Business
Council which has about 100 members throughout the state. He said medical marijuana patients
generally work—and have lives — so the convenience of the hours is important. He would like
the dispensaries track what the liquor store hours are. He stated that the regulations of the
medical marijuana facilities are very rigorous. The only thing more rigorous about getting into a
medical marijuana facility is going through TSA. You do not get in unless you have a card—
or if you're under 21. Minors just do not have access. He spoke about the extensive security. He
recommends reducing the buffer zone from 500 feet to 100 feet—but keeping it in the high
traffic areas so they're more visible. He talked about good signage —he believes there should be
regulations so these blend in. There are a number of facilities that are signed so you can hardly
tell what they are — for instance there's one called a "Patient Resource Center" —unless you know
it's a dispensary—you wouldn't know. In a high traffic area—if you have the right signage, there
won't be the impression that this is just a "head shop" row. He said you owe it to your
community to make sure it fits in from a signage perspective. He went on to speak about the
OLCC & the OMMA (Oregon Medical Marijuana Act). He spoke about possible yearly licensing
fees, things of that nature.
He summed up saying "I want to leave you with this, the people involved in this business are
making large commitments of capitol. I don't think there's a single dispensary in the state — even
down in some rural areas that— at least a quarter of a million dollars is required to really get a
dispensary off the ground—and much more. So the people who come in and apply—they are
very serious. This is business. A lot of people's hard earned assets are being invested. They're not
going to try to cut corners. They're going to do this the right way within the rules. It's a good
community of people. Thank you for your time.
QUESTIONS
Commissioner Fitzgerald: "You made reference industry regulation. Can you speak more
of how a dispensary actually operates and what they have to put in place?" There are
extensive security requirements (of the state — the regulations of the Oregon Health Authority
(OHA) of which the OLCC will draft its own rules and regulations which will probably track the
dispensaries. They are enforceable). They need video cameras. There are panic buttons inside
during normal hours —in multiple locations, there has to be a recording of the video of the
people and the transactions — that has to be maintained for 30 days. Even if they get complaints
about rules not being followed... the OHA can come in with their enforcement people and look
at the video and see the transaction at issue.
Commissioner Lieuallen: "You mentioned a fee that your industry would be okay with—
what would be a fee you would feel comfortable with?" Given everything, I think a fee— a
minimum of$1000 —and it has to be reasonable. There are some communities that are imposing
Page 5 of 9
a sales tax. Gold Hill—they've imposed a sales tax. There's nothing to allow it into the statute —
but nothing to prohibit it either. There's a number of alternatives for those fees —in ways that are
reasonable.
"Are there things like time-lock safes that could reduce the risk of cash on hand?" The
cash is not maintained on-site. A minimal amount of cash is maintained at the facility. The banks
are where the money is and they're in safe deposit boxes. "What's a ballpark figure of the
amount of cash a building has on-hand at any one time?" If they are using the safe deposit
boxes, which I advocate to all my clients, you may have $5000 cash on a given day at any one
time. Usually what happens if they get a lot of cash on hand they make a run and put it in a safe
deposit box. There are requirements for safes at the facilities as well. Any cash or product that's
left over at the end of the day has to be put into safes so if somebody breaks in—they've got to
be able to crack some pretty big safes. They're using big gun lock safes —bolted to the floor.
Commissioner Muldoon "You mentioned about controlling signage —what was the basis
for being able to do that?" By the cities? "Yes." Time, place and the manner of which that's
done; I've heard there's some concern about regulating that and they would cross over into the
area of free speech. This is "commercial speech" and the bar for commercial speech is far lower.
I would submit to you that if you had a reasonable basis for your signage regulation it wouldn't
be challenged— and the chance of being successful at challenging it is slim to none. He said the
potential for litigation would come if they adopt a restrictive buffer that, in essence, creates areas
where you just won't be able to operate. A 1000' buffer from residential or parks —I think you'd
end up with a situation where you're zoning out the potential for anybody to open up a
dispensary. In that case, you probably would be subjecting the community to litigation; if,in fact,
it was a deliberate effort to zone out a dispensary.
Commissioner Smith asked some clarifying questions about who Attorney Graham represents
—is he talking about only medical marijuana— or also retail, recreational marijuana? Attorney
Graham clarified that he also represents recreational marijuana and the 100 foot buffer zone that
he advocates is also for recreational marijuana.
TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION
Julie Russell, CPO 4-B Chair of 12662 SW Terra View Drive Tigard, OR 97224 — spoke on
behalf of a group of four or more who were present. She said she is speaking as a personal
citizen, as a business owner who also owns a building in Tigard, as well as her husband. She's a
marriage and family therapist and works with a lot of people who have addictions and many of
them started with Marijuana. She is also a board member of Tigard Against the Tide and went
over the written testimony that was provided earlier (Exhibit C). She stated her case that the
scientific evidence shows that in the developing brain Marijuana can cause damage and can cause
increased mental health issues. She noted that there are some youth who have developed
schizophrenia after using Marijuana just one time. She said many kids self medicate by using
Marijuana. She said it's important to protect them and that, just like with alcohol, some of the
teens have their brothers or older friends buy it and then give it to them.
Ms. Russell concluded that what they've learned from underage drug and alcohol use is:
• Increased access
• Increased public opinion that "this is okay— and safe" increases the use in our youth—
and that's what we're concerned about. We want to protect them as much as possible.
Page 6 of 9
Morgan Chamberlain— 9360 SW Martha St., Tigard— a junior at Tigard High said she is the
Secretary of"STUDD"—which stands for Stop Tigard Underage Drinking and Drug use. Our
goal is to educate our peers so that they will choose to live a healthy lifestyle that is free from
drugs and addiction. We also travel to elementary and middle schools educating them and
encouraging them to live drug free. She said she sees first hand every day the effects that
Marijuana has on her peers at Tigard High School. She supports the strict regulations on
Marijuana facilities — especially the distribution of"edibles." Marijuana infused products that are
targeted towards her age group should be prohibited. Even now, they are commonly seen in high
schools and she strongly supports the position that edibles should be made as difficult to buy as
possible. She said they are viewed as "normal, non-harmful" things to eat by her peers. She said
she may not be a lawyer... but she's a teenager and from a high-schooler's perspective she feels
the most important issue to address is how we're going to regulate the distribution of Marijuana
so that underage people will have a harder time obtaining Marijuana than before. She passed out
additional concerns they have about marijuana dispensaries.
PUBLIC HEARING — CLOSED
No further testimony or questions from the audience are allowed.
DELIBERATION
The commission deliberated at length with many commissioners weighing in:
Commissioner Smith: "It's legal—it should be allowed in the City but it should be much more
restricted than I believe the proposed amendments are. The multi-family residential is the one
that just jumps out at me. There's a long list of... residential, parks, playgrounds, schools,
libraries, daycares, light rail platforms, bus stops,YMCA's, youth centers, rec. centers, hospitals,
medical office buildings, arcades, kids learning centers, youth books stores, churches —that's a
great place for kids to be —I don't see any restrictions about it being near churches. Even
McDonald's playgrounds —kids hang out by there all the time. There's just a number of places
that this doesn't address. Even the Regal cinemas near Winco and Costco... I know as a kid I
always went to the movies without my parents —they'd drop me off and we watched movies -
even the mall." He wonders if it shouldn't just be a "this is where it's allowed period".
Commissioner Fitzgerald: spoke about it being a fine edge and that when you're talking about
limiting exactly where someone can locate—it might be a better conversation to talk about
limiting the licenses within the City of Tigard, rather than limiting the location to be that
restrictive. She noted this is a tough issue. She said she thinks back to prohibition and how
restrictive it was and now Oregon is one of the last states with the OLCC that regulates the
selling of alcohol. She said that in modern times now we should be able to find a balance so that
it's not totally restrictive but that there is some regulation. Our concern is for youth and safety.
She thinks the building code addresses a lot of those concerns about dealing with the hash oil or
butane causing explosions. She asked Commissioner Mooney (who is with the Tualatin Valley
Fire Department) to speak about any concerns the Fire Dept had about the explosion issue.
Commissioner Mooney went on to explain about a number of explosions that the Fire Dept had
been involved in due to people using. He said mostly what he's seen is in multi-family dwellings
where they're doing it in private residences. He noted in the winter time they take the process
inside to try to speed things up. He's concerned about people doing butane hash oil in back
rooms to try to make money and no one knowing about it until there's an explosion that blows
out a back wall that may back to a residential area.
Page 7 of 9
Commissioner Muldoon's number one concern would be signage. He would like discreet signage.
Commissioner Enloe's input on the spacing restrictions was to ask whether the main goal is to
detour young individuals — saying this is not an acceptable thing to do. He knows there's an age
restriction but thinks they may be doing too much regulation on something that may be a
parent's responsibility or the individual's upbringing as to what is right and wrong. He agrees
with the signing and maybe an architectural review of the building to match the neighboring
properties. But to say we want certain spacing or 1000' —he thinks that's in the wrong arena.
That's trying to make it harder for youth to get hold of it when in essence - they're getting hold
of it through illegal interactions. He doesn't believe making it difficult for businesses to come
into Tigard is the right way because it is going to be legal. It should be reasonable. He doesn't
want them in some back lot behind some industrial yard because that happens to be the one area
that allows 1000' distance from everything. He would rather have it be on a main street, lots of
eyes,where it's well lit and well watched.
Commissioner Middaugh said he pictures a growth site as a place where marijuana is grown
outside. He appreciates Ms. Russell's comments on addiction and mental health. He's concerned
that we might be encouraging addiction and in creating a place where people that have a
marijuana addiction can turn to desperate measures. He thinks the proposed wording doesn't
include daycares and would like a buffer zone with the daycares as well.
Commissioner Schmidt thinks they shouldn't allow it to be in residential areas or even mixed-use
areas —anything that has a residential occupancy in it. When it comes to personal use—that's
your personal choice to do so —but to have a retail establishment near a residential area seems
wrong and out of character with our community. He doesn't think they should be near schools,
daycares, any types of facilities that cater to children.
Commissioner Lieuallen noted that it's a legal product and that it's up to the parents to teach
their kids their values when it comes to this product—just as we teach them about alcohol. We
won't hide it from kids by burying it. He's less in favor of large buffer zones and more in favor
of more reasonable buffer zones in the 300' range. He would like minimum signage that is as
bland as possible—without affecting people's rights to free expression. He'd be in support of
that. He would like additional security requirements for these businesses that we don't have for
other businesses to minimize the crime potential. He thinks something must be done about the
edibles but believes that should be at the state level.
President Rogers said there is a lot to consider. Health and safety for children and the elderly;
beautification of our city; baseline standard to protect the public; separation of these types of
businesses that produce flammable and explosive things need to be fairly strict to protect the
public. He's for the 500 and 1000' buffers. He's concerned about signage and so many other
things. So far as he's concerned he doesn't have enough information to make a decision at this
point. He wants to see some overlays, some sign language from staff... he asked if any of the
other Commissioners had anything else they need or did they have enough information to make
a motion. Commissioner Ouellette said he'd like an example of a permanent building definition
to avoid unintended consequences.
Page 8 of 9
The consensus of the commission was that they'd like a continuation. They went over the various
things that they would like staff to come back with by way of"homework"- some of which were:
• Request for 1000' buffer / 300' buffer in terms of overlay showing affected properties
• Information about OLCC & OMMA rules for security
• Mixed-use zones—potentially removing those where residential occupancies are
• Signage
• Language that addresses any zone that has a residential component—whether it's mixed-
use or otherwise
• Daycare buffers
• Security requirements
• Permanent building definition
• Re signage -words but not pictures
• Zones that would allow residential by conditional use... how would we address those
pieces?
• 300' buffer versus 1000' buffer... a visual of the two standards would be helpful
• A straight zoning map so we can say these are outright residential
The City Attorney gave an overview of the free speech law. You cannot regulate on the basis of
content (Article 1 Section 8). Size and materials is really all you can regulate signs from a 100%
safe legal position. If you're talking colors,words, pictures—those are all going to be seen as
regulating the "content" of the sign because "you're treating me with my marijuana leaf on my
sign different from me, as a baker, with a cake on my sign." That's the challenge.
There was more conversation about various other problems that could arise. It was decided to
end the meeting for now and to continue it to a later date.
CONTINUED HEARING TO FEBRUARY 9, 2015
OTHER BUSINESS —None.
ADJOURNMENT
President Rogers adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
vc -�.
Doreen Laughlin,Planning Comsion Secretary
y
ATTEST: President Jaso r, Rog
Page 9 of 9
2/3/2015
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
Respect and Care I Do the Right Thing I Get it Done
t1 ;u
MARIJUANA FACILITIES
D CA2014-00002
Planning Commission I January 12,2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
Project Summary
/ Text Amendments to Title 18 (Development Code)
/ Initiated at Council direction
1 Regulate full chain of production/sale
Adaptable to evolving State rules
Establish consistency between medical/recreational
Deadline: May 1, 2015
/ Applicable to any facility requiring state license or
registration
/ Future amendments possible/probable
1
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
Legislative History
1998- Medical marijuana legalized in Oregon
2013 - State authorizes marijuana dispensaries
2014- Tigard adopts temporary moratorium
Tigard adopts local marijuana tax (TMC 3.70)
Measure 91 legalizes recreational marijuana
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
Future Action Dates
May 1, 2015 End of temporary moratorium
July 1, 2015 Possession/use of recreational marijuana
becomes legal
Jan 4, 2016 OLCC accepts applications for four types
of commercial marijuana licenses
2
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
State Regulations
➢ Medical Marijuana Dispensaries
Minimum 1,000 feet from school site
Minimum 1,000 feet between dispensaries
Limited to Commercial,Industrial, Mixed-Use zones
s Must be separate from grow-site
➢ Recreational Facilities
r Unknown—OLCC to develop
Measure 91 does not affect Medical Dispensaries
State Legislature likely to adopt new regulations
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
Community Outreach - Methods
1 Council town halls
Website
/ Cityscape Articles
/ Online Citizen Forum
/ Survey of Business Owners
/ Interested Parties List— Email Outreach
/ Conversations with industry& real estate
representatives
3
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
Community Outreach - Response
/ Low response rate
/ Roughly split between support and opposition
/ Common response was "wait and see"
/ 300 Business owners polled / 34 responded
/ Marijuana investors/operators most interested in
Highway 99W (Pacific Highway)
Portland market described as saturated
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
Do you foresee the presence of recreational
marijuana shops as having a positive or
negative impact on your ability to do business in
Tigard?
Positive 5.9%
Negative 20.6%
Both Positive and Negative 8.8%
No Impact 64.7%
Unknown 0.0%
4
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
Should the City of Tigard regulate the design
and operation of marijuana facilities?
Yes 60.6%
No 24.2%
Unsure/Unknown 15.2%
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
If the City were to adopt local
regulations, would you support regulations for
one or more of the following?
Support Neutral Oppose
Odor Controls 19 9 2
Limits on Hours of Operatior 19 7 4
Minimum Buffers 22 6 3
Security Requirements 21 5 3
5
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
Potential Community Impacts
/ Exposure/Diversion to minors
/ Unpleasant odors (particularly grow facilities)
/ Noise
/ Crime associated with cash /controlled substances
/ Noncompliance with codes
/ Explosions from processing agents
/ Increased calls for service (fire, police, code enf.)
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
18.120 - Definitions
/ New definitions:
® "Marijuana"
I "Marijuana Facility"
/ Mirrors language of Marijuana Tax (TMC 3.70)
/ Includes commercial and public uses
6
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
18.210 — General Administrative Provisions
/ Existing code prohibits issuance of ANY permits for
development associated with marijuana
/ Amendments remove federal consistency requirement
/ Reduces legal uncertainty
/ Distances Tigard from Federal/State conflict
1 Reduces risk of litigation
/ Increases certainty for investors/property owners
1 Removes incentive to avoid permits
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
18.735 — Marijuana Facilities
/ New chapter
/ Applies to any commercial or public facility
1 State permit or registration is trigger
Establishes local uniformity for medical/recreational
Not applicable to personal grow/use
/ Additive to underlying use/zone regulations
7
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
18.735 — Review Process
/ Type I Review
► Minimum compliance review
► Requires "clear and objective" criteria
► Not locally appealable
/ Ensures minimum compliance review—even when no
change to underlying use or structure
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
18.735 — Hours of Operation
/ Commercial hours limited 10am—8pm
/ General Industrial uses exempted
Growing
I► Processing
/ Comparable to existing liquor stores in Tigard and
adjacent towns
/ Comparable to adopted marijuana regulations for
Salem, Ashland, and McMinnville
8
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
18.735 — Buffer Requirements
/ Minimum Buffers
k 500 feet from residential and park zones
® 1,000 feet from specified schools(recent change)
/ Measured from property lines, not structures
/ Maps (Attachment 2)
® Compares state dispensary buffers to proposed
® Biggest difference along Pacific Highway
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
18.735 — Design & Operations
/ Odor Limits
/ Entry Placement
/ Security Lighting
/ Permanent Structures Only
/ No Drive-Thrus
9
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
Public Comments
/ Gayle Allen
No dispensaries on Pacific Highway
/ Tigard Turns the Tide
► Increase buffer to 1,000 feet
► Include private libraries and preschools as buffered uses
► Prohibit dispensaries in industrial zones—incompatible
with adopted Strategic Plan
► Prohibit Hash Oil/Production
► Prohibit production/sale of edibles
C I T Y OF T I G A R D
Public Comments
/ Citizen Participation Organization 4B
► Limit number of license
► Limit number of dispensaries to one (1)
/ Increase 500 foot buffer to 1,000 feet
Confine dispensaries to Industrial Zones
► Prohibit Hash Oil Production in City
Prohibit production/sale of edibles
/ Require frosted windows and prohibit photos on signs
► Prohibit Public Consumption
10
2/3/2015
C I T Y O F T I G A R D
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning Commission find in favor
of the proposed development code text amendments
(Attachment 1); with any alterations as determined
through the public hearing process, and make a final
recommendation to the Tigard City Council.
11
Attachment "1"
CITY OF TIGARD
MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS
DCA2014-00002
Staff Contact:
John Floyd,Associate Planner
13125 SW Hall Blvd, Tigard, OR 97223
503-718-2429 / johnfl @tigard-or.gov
Staff Commentary
Introduction
The Tigard Marijuana Facilities Development Code Project is a series of text amendments whose
purpose is to bring the City of Tigard into compliance with State law. Proposed changes to the
Tigard Development Code include new definitions to be placed within Chapter 18.120 (Definitions);
text amendments to Chapter 18.210 (General Administrative Provisions) to remove a requirement
that development be consistent with federal law; and creation of a new chapter to be titled 18.735
(Marijuana Facilities) that would establish time,place, and manner restrictions on marijuana facilities
within the City of Tigard.
How to read this report
This document is intended to be read in book format,with proposed text amendments on the right
hand page and staff commentary on those amendments on the left. The comments are intended to
provide both clarity and future documentation as to legislative intent.
Proposed changes are indicated by the use of strikcthroughs to indicate language to be removed, a
double underline to indicate language to be inserted,and the use of red font to further identify the
proposed changes.
Commentary on Proposed Definitions
Definitions to be inserted in Chapter 18.120 are based on language used in the recently enacted
Marijuana Tax adopted by the Tigard City Council under Ordinance 14-02. Definitions have been
crafted to try and address the full range of economic activity associated with the production,
processing, distribution, transfer, and consumption of cannabis.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT-JANUARY 12, 2015 2
Proposed Text Amendments
CHAPTER 18.120
DEFINITIONS
18.120 Definitions
18.120.030 Meaning of Specific Words and Terms
"Marijuana" -All parts of the plant of the Cannabis family Moraceae,whether growing or not;the
resin extracted from any part of the plant;and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative,
mixture, or preparation of the plant or its resin, as may be defined by Oregon Revised Statutes as
they currently exist or may from time to time be amended. It does not include the mature stalks of
the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other
compound,manufacture, salt, derivative,mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the
resin extracted there from), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of
germination.
"Mari'uana Facili "—A comm-rci.l or .u.lic use or structur- ,here marijuana is .ro_u es
processed, distributed, transferred, sold, or consumed.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT!
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT—JANUARY 12, 2015 3
Staff Commentary
Proposed changes to TDC 18.210.030 would remove consistency requirement with Federal law, and
thus reduce legal uncertainties presented to the City and applicants where state and federal law
conflict on the matter of marijuana. Under existing code and the continued federal classification of
marijuana as a Schedule II drug, the city would be required to deny all land use applications for
medical marijuana facilities. This could also create legal uncertainty in situations where a facility
wants to open in a location and no land use or building permits are necessary (i.e. conversion of an
existing retail space to a state licensed dispensary). Another point of uncertainty exists in that
Measure 91 requires a petition and election of the voters for a jurisdiction to prohibit recreational
marijuana licenses. The proposed changes would remove those conflicts from local land use
regulations.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT—JANUARY 12, 2015 4
Proposed Text Amendments
CHAPTER 18.210
GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS
18.210.030 Consistency With Plan and Laws
A. Consistency with comprehensive plan and other local and state laws. Each development and use
application and other procedure initiated under this title shall be consistent with the adopted
comprehensive plan of the City of Tigard as implemented by this title and with applicable state mid
fcdcral laws and regulations. All provisions of this title shall be construed in conformity with the
adopted comprehensive plan
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAT T-JANUARY 12, 2015 5
Staff Commentary
The proposed text amendments would result in a new chapter of the Tigard Development Code
known as TDC 18.735 (Marijuana Facilities) that would establish specific development standards for
marijuana related businesses. These standards are being developed as a standalone chapter due to
the unique legal status and potential community impacts presented by this new land use.
Section 18.735.010 establishes the purpose of the zone. In addition to the reasons listed, the specific
community impacts this code is intended to prevent or mitigate includes the following:
➢ Diversion of marijuana to unauthorized cardholders, particularly minors, by avoiding the
location of facilities near places where children live and congregate;
➢ Unpleasant odors associated with the growing,processing, and consumption of marijuana;
➢ Unwanted noise generated by visiting customers during early or late hours, and/or the
constant hum of electrical generators and fans;
➢ Crime such as theft, burglary, armed robbery, and kidnapping that can result due to the
presence of large amounts of cash, a product that can be resold for significant amounts of
money on the black market, and potentially vulnerable users visiting the facilities;
➢ Threats to health,life and property resulting from facilities not constructed to code;
➢ Explosions resulting from the use of butane as a processing agent; and/or
➢ An undue burden placed on City and regional agencies who may be required to respond and
address the community impacts listed above.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT—JANUARY 12, 2015 6
Proposed Text Amendments
CHAPTER 18.735
MARIJUANA FACILITIES
Sections:
18.735.010 Purpose
18.735.020 Applicability
18.735.030 Approval and Enforcement
18.735.040 Development Standards
18.735.010 Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to:
A. Protect the general health, safety,property, and welfare of the public;
B. Balance the right of individuals to produce and access marijuana and marijuana derivatives
consistent with state law,with the need to minimize adverse impacts to nearby properties that
may result from the production, storage, distribution, sale, and/or use of marijuana and
derivatives;
C. Prevent or reduce criminal activity that my result in harm to persons or property;
D. Prevent or reduce diversion of state-licensed marijuana and marijuana derivatives to minors; and
E. Minimize impacts to the City's public safety services by reducing calls for service.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAT T—JANUARY 12, 2015 7
Staff Commentary
Section 18.735.020 establishes where the provisions of this chapter would apply. As set forth in this
section, this chapter would apply to the whole chain of production and custody in both a medical
and recreational context. The threshold for application would be the requirement for a state license
or registration of the facility, and would not apply to personal exemptions.
Section 18.735.030 establishes a Type I review process to determine minimum compliance with the
development standards set forth elsewhere in this section. The purpose of this review process is to
capture all new businesses entering or establishing themselves within the city, even in situations
where no other land use or building permits are required. As a Type I process, no public
notification will be provided to nearby property owners,with the assumption that the development
standards set forth in 18.735.040 will prevent or sufficiently mitigate negative off-site impacts that
could occur to sensitive land uses within proximity of the facility
The documentation requirements set forth in 18.735.030.0 are similar to requirements set forth in
the Durham Facility Plan District (see 18.650.070.G), and are intended to facilitate a meaningful and
objective review of facilities that may create a significant and unpleasant odor impact upon the
neighborhood. The standard is written broadly to allow flexibility in how the applicant responds to
the standard, as well as flexibility to the city as new and unknown business models and building
types and activities are presented as this sector of the economy develops.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT—JANUARY 12, 2015 8
Proposed Text Amendments
18.735.020 Applicability
A. Relationshi to other standards. The regulations ithin this Chaster are in addition to base zone
standards. Sites with overlay zones, plan districts,inventoried hazards, and/or sensitive lands
are subject to additional regulations, Specific uses or development types may also be subject to
regulations set forth elsewhere in this tide.
B. When provisions apply. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all marijuana facilities
requiring a state license or registration.
18.735.030 Compliance and Enforcement
A. Procedure: All marijuana facilities requiring a state license or registration, and public places of
assembly where marijuana is consumed, shall demonstrate minimal compliance with these
standards through a Type I procedure as set forth in 18.390.030 of this Title,using approval
criteria set forth in Subsection B of this section.
B. Approval Criteria: Development subject to the provisions of this chapter shall demonstrate
compliance with all standards set forth in Section 18.735.040 of this Chapter.
C. Documentation: The following provisions shall apply at the time of minimum compliance
review or a request for enforcement:
1. When processing a minimum compliance review, the City may accept an evaluation and
explanation certified by a registered engineer or architect, as appropriate, that the proposed
development will meet the off-site odor impact standard. The evaluation and explanation
shall provide a description of the use or activity, equipment,processes and the mechanisms,
or equipment used to avoid or mitigate off-site impacts.
2. If the City does not have the equipment or expertise to measure and evaluate a specific
complaint regarding off-site impacts,it may request assistance from another agency or may
contract with an independent expert to perform the necessary measurements. The City may
accept measurements made by an independent expert hired by the controller or operator of
the off-site impact source.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAIil'-JANUARY 12, 2015 9
Staff Commentary
State statute authorizes local governments to establish reasonable time, place, and manner
restrictions on both medical and recreational marijuana facilities when tied to specific community
impacts. In determining what is "reasonable", staff recommends looking at existing precedents both
within Tigard and across the region.
• The Tigard Development Code already includes use and design regulations comparable to
those proposed in 18.735.050,including:
o Restrictions on hours of operation;
o Restriction on allowed zones;
o Distance buffers;
o Limits on size;
o Design and Security requirements; and
o Environmental performance standards for odor.
• Restrictions on hours of operation are proposed
o According to data published by the OLCC, proposed hours of operation in TDC
18.735.050.0 are more expansive than those posted by the existing liquor stores in
Tigard (11-9 Monday — Friday, 10-7 Saturday, closed on Sunday). Looking at
surrounding communities, the proposed hours of operation are identical to (or
slightly more expansive) than existing liquor store hours in King City,Beaverton, and
Tualatin.
o An exception to hours of operation for industrial uses has been included in the
proposal for industrial uses where the general public is not present.
• Exterior lighting requirements are comparable to those required during normal Site
Development Review (see TDC 18.360.090.I).
• There is existing precedent for the use of minimum distance buffers as a reasonable land use
control for marijuana related businesses, such as those proposed in 18.735.040.H:
o The states of Oregon has already set a precedent for the use of 1,000 foot distance
buffers as a reasonable method to avoid diversion of marijuana and minimizing
public nuisances that may affect minors attending a primary or secondary school.
o Washington State ballot measure I-502, prohibits the issuance of a licenses for the
sale of marijuana within 1,000 feet of playgrounds, public parks, recreational
facilities, child care centers, elementary or secondary schools, transit centers,libraries,
or game arcades not restricted to 21 and older.
o The city of Tigard adult entertainment standards (18.330.050.B.1) require a 500 ft.
separation between adult entertainment uses and specified land uses which may be
negatively impacted by adult entertainments.
o Other local governments within Oregon have adopted minimum distance
requirements from specified land uses, including: Washington County (1,500 —2,000
feet), City of Salem (100-500 feet), City of McMinnville (1,000 feet), and City of
Albany (300 feet). The City of Hillsboro is also considering 1,000 foot minimum
distance buffers from residential areas, but the public hearing process has not yet
concluded.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT—JANUARY 12, 2015 10
Proposed Text Amendments
18.735.040 Development Standards
Development subject to the provisions of this chapter shall demonstrate compliance with all of the
following standards:
A. The proposed development complies with all applicable State requirements.
B. The proposed use is allowed in the underlying zone and complies with all applicable
requirements of this title.
C. Hours of commercial operation shall be limited to the hours between 10:00 am and 8:00 pm.
General industrial uses with no on-site retail activity are exempt from this restriction.
D. Primary entrances shall be located on street-facing facades and clearly visible from a public or
private street.
E. The proposed development shall be located inside a permanent building and may not be located
ithin a trailer shi sin. container car.o container tent or motor ehicle. Outdoor stora'e of
merchandise,plants, or other materials is not allowed.
F. Parking lots,primary entrances, and exterior walkways shall be illuminated with downward
facing security lighting to provide after-dark visibility to employees and patrons. Fixtures shall
be located so that light patterns overlap at a height of seven feet.
G. Drive-through marijuana facilities are prohibited.
H. The proposed site is not be located within 500 feet of any parcel or tract of land within the City
of Tigard and containing one or more of the following characteristics, as measured at the closest
property lines:
a. Residential Zone
b. Parks and Recreation Zone
c. Public Library
I. The proposed site is not located within 1,000 feet of any parcel or tract of land within the City
of Tigard containing a public or private elementary school, or career school attended primarily
by minors, as measured at the closest property lines.
J. The proposed development shall confine all marijuana odors and other objectionable odors to
levels undetectable at the property line.
TIGARD MARIJUANA FACILITIES PROJECT
PLANNING COMMISSION DRAT T—JANUARY 12, 2015 11
Citizen Participation Organization 4B
AN AUTHORIZED WASHINGTON COUNTY CPO
BULL MOUNTAIN/TIGARD BOUNDARY AREA
RESOLUTION NO. 15-01
RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT AMENDMENTS TO THE TIGARD DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT(DCA)2014-00002,MARIJUANA FACILITES DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT.
Corollary Policies and Implementation Mechanisms:
The City of Tigard agrees to abide by and enforce all requirements that the OLCC creates.
WHEREAS, CPO-4B,meeting at its scheduled time/date,has authority by a simple majority vote to
adopt resolutions advising local governments of matters which affect persons and properties within the
boundaries of CPO-4B; and
WHEREAS, OAR 660-015-0000(1)Oregon's Statewide Planning Goals &Guidelines (Goal 1-Citizen
Involvement)encourages the involvement of citizen groups in the planning process; and
WHEREAS, CPO-4B is a recognized Citizen Participation Organization of Washington County and
includes residents in the Bull Mountain and Tigard areas; and
WHEREAS, CPO-4B has reviewed the Public Hearing Notice regarding the Development Code
Amendments(DCA)2014-00002,Marijuana Facilities Development Code Amendment; and
WHEREAS,the development code amendments will affect the family community,businesses,residents
and visitors to Tigard; and
WHEREAS, CPO-4B hopes to promote a safe and healthy community by reducing marijuana use among
youth within the community. The approved vote for Prop 91 brings concerns to the CPO-4B about
marijuana legalization and the impact it will have in Tigard and outside areas of our community
especially given the reports from Colorado since inception of legalization in this state; and
WHEREAS, CPO-4B proposes Tigard limit the number of licenses individual entities can hold, and limit
the number of dispensaries in Tigard to one. These rules will fulfill the public expectation of creating a
tightly-regulated and controlled system while providing reasonable access to participation in the market;
and
WHEREAS, some 30 percent of homeless people in one Denver shelter came to Colorado for pot.
Marijuana facilities are having an impact on all of the social services across the state of Colorado,
according to"state Rep. Ted Harvey, "an unintended consequence I never thought of'; and
WHEREAS, CPO-4B proposes the following changes to the 18.735.040 Development Standards, Sec H
proposes site is not be located within 1000 feet of any parcel or tract of land within the City of Tigard and
containing one or more of the following characteristics, as measured at the closest property lines:
a. Residential Zone
b. Parks and Recreation Zone
c. Public Library
d. Public or Private preschool/daycare, elementary or secondary school; and
Page 1 of 3 Resolution No. 09-01
WHEREAS,the proposed policy sets a dangerous precedent that may harm many residents,business
owners and visitors. To allow marijuana dispensaries to operate in commercial zones would inhibit the
city's ability to effectively implement its vision. "The most walkable community in the Pacific Northwest
where people of all ages and abilities enjoy healthy and interconnected lives." CPO-4B proposes the
marijuana dispensaries be confined to industrial zones. Bainbridge Island,WA restricted marijuana
facilities to operate within the confines of their industrial zone in 2014. Those in favor of restricted
zoning said"it would change the family-friendly outlook of the area and be a negative influence on teens
and children in the neighborhood."(http://www.bainbridgereview.com/news/262155291.html); and
WHEREAS, since Colorado legalized recreational use of marijuana,there have been at least 31
explosions related to butane and hash oil. Explosions have already harmed many individuals locally in
our community. CPO-4B proposes no hash oil production or storage within the city limits as it is
dangerous and explosive; and
WHEREAS, statistics for the High Intensity Drug-trafficking Area(HIDTA)2014 legalization of
marijuana impact report: Dr. Chris Colwell reported that Denver Health Medical center sees"about five
to ten people per week, complaining about how they're feeling after ingesting edibles. Children's
Hospital Colorado Emergency Room physician and toxicology expert Dr. Wang reports that his
emergency room is treating one to two children a month for accidental marijuana ingestion,mostly in the
form of edibles such as brownies or candies. CPO-4B proposes no production or sale of marijuana infused
edible products; and
WHEREAS,the glamorization and push to normalize marijuana increases the illegal use in youth, CPO-
4B proposes the following changes to discourage curiosity and protect youth and limit access to
merchandise. CPO-4B proposes the Development Standards 18.735.040,to include and require frosted
windows,no photos and word only signs; and
WHEREAS,youth and others may experience the dangers of second hand smoke, CPO-4B requests
Tigard implement policies that do not allow public consummation or smoking in any public place or
around children under 21 years of age; and
WHEREAS, CPO-4B residents and youth may be irrevocably harmed by the implementation of such a
policy; and
NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by CPO-4B that:
SECTION 1: CPO-4B does hereby propose the above standards and requests the planning commission,
and Tigard City Council to implement these proposals or requirements that are more restrictive.
SECTION 2: This writing of and presentation of this resolution passed by a vote of CPO-4B
Members on January 8,2015 at the CPO-4B General Meeting.
SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
PASSED: This 8th day of January 2015.
FINALIZED: Jan. 12,2015
SIGNED: Jan. 12,2015
Julie Russell Lisa.-lamilton
Julie Russell Lisa Hamilton
CPO-4B Chairperson CPO-4B Vice-Chairperson
Page 2 of 3 Resolution No. 09-01
Page 3 of 3 Resolution No. 09-01