Amendments to Chapter 9 to add Medical Cannabis Uses (Transporation Distribution Testing)

At issue is whether the City desires to require that testing labs, transporters and distributors be subject to the same CUP process as other medical cannabis uses, or to consider an alternative process such as allowing the businesses as... Read more
At issue is whether the City desires to require that testing labs, transporters and distributors be subject to the same CUP process as other medical cannabis uses, or to consider an alternative process such as allowing the businesses as a use by right, with appropriate conditions, in areas where similar uses are allowed. Other localities, such as Oakland and Santa Rosa, have taken, or are considering taking, this approach. Since the potential impact to these businesses is likely less than the other license types, and these license types are not pre-existing in the City, allowing them as permitted uses may be appropriate and efficient to administer. Testing laboratories, for example, could be allowed in zones where medical offices or laboratories are currently permitted (PPO, PLC, MXC, NBP), and distribution/transportation facilities could be permitted uses where storage facilities and/or warehouses uses are currently permitted (CPB-2, I-1). These license types could also be permitted as conditional uses in zones where similar uses are only allowed as conditional uses (PCC). Read less
Cathedral City, CA ( Global)
November 16, 2019

Recent activity

Matt Harrison
edited the project details
16 months ago

User
edited the project details
16 months ago
John Aguilar
suggested a solution
16 months ago
Charlie McClendon
suggested a solution
16 months ago
Shawn Hauser
suggested a solution
16 months ago
User
edited the project details
16 months ago
User
started a project
16 months ago

Suggested solution

5.1

John Aguilar

Mayor Pro Tem
8th/ 20 in Cannabis Regulations

Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cathedral City amending the Cathedral City Municipal Code Chapters 9.108, 9.26, 9.28, 9.30, 9.36, 9.40 and 9.42 related to Medical Cannabis (ZOA 16-003), and approve the associated exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15601 (b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.

No comments
Reply

2 other solutions

Shawn Hauser for Vicente Sederberg LLP

August 11, 2016

Declining to subject these businesses to the CUP process would remove the public hearing requirement for these applications and streamline staff review. The businesses would still be subject to the comprehensive business licensing requirements set forth in in Title 5. Build-out could also be made subject to appropriate special... Read more

August 11, 2016

Declining to subject these businesses to the CUP process would remove the public hearing requirement for these applications and streamline staff review. The businesses would still be subject to the comprehensive business licensing requirements set forth in in Title 5. Build-out could also be made subject to appropriate special conditions imposed through the design review process in Section 9.78. Special conditions may include, as necessary, integration of odor control and security standards required for other medical cannabis license types. 

Alternatively, the City may wish to have a uniform process for all medical cannabis business license types and retain the CUP process for all license types. 

We look forward to your thoughts on the best approach in regulating these businesses. 

Read less
No comments
Reply
Reply
5.1

Charlie McClendon

Cathedral City City Manager
7th/ 20 in Cannabis Regulations
August 24, 2016

As they began working on the Chapter 9 Land Use revisions, Vicente Sederberg asked if the City might want to consider allowing the transportation, distribution and testing businesses as allowed uses in certain zoning districts.  Arguably the effect of those businesses on surrounding uses would be less significant than either... Read more

August 24, 2016

As they began working on the Chapter 9 Land Use revisions, Vicente Sederberg asked if the City might want to consider allowing the transportation, distribution and testing businesses as allowed uses in certain zoning districts.  Arguably the effect of those businesses on surrounding uses would be less significant than either the retail or manufacturing uses.  The result would be potentially a less onerous review and approval process and a reduced work load for the planning commission.

Alternatively, the City may wish to have a uniform process for all medical cannabis business license types and retain the CUP process for all license types.

Staff is seeking direction from the Council on how to proceed so we can advise Vicente Sederberg as they work on the code amendments. 

Read less
No comments
Reply
Reply

 

Your solution

Supporting info

Government & Policy

- Vicente Sederberg LLP