Sacramento Planning & Design Commission Meeting - August 25, 2022: Cannabis CUPs and Land Use Policy Workshop
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Sacramento Planning & Design Commission Meeting - August 25, 2022
The Planning and Design Commission met on Thursday, August 25, 2022, at 5:30 p.m. via teleconference due to COVID-19. The meeting experienced technical difficulties, recessing at 5:32 p.m. and resuming at 6:10 p.m., and adjourned at 10:00 p.m. The agenda included a public hearing on a cannabis delivery and manufacturing conditional use permit (CUP) at 1717 Kathleen Avenue and a workshop on the citywide Cannabis Land Use Policy.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of Minutes: The minutes from the August 11, 2022 meeting were approved by a motion (Pluckebaum/Lenzi) with Commissioners Macias Reed and Wallace abstaining.
- Director's Report: Received and filed; noted City Council approval of the Dutch Brothers project on Florin Road on August 16, previously recommended by the commission on June 23.
Public Comments & Testimony
Item 3: 1717 Kathleen Avenue CUPs
- June (property owner): Expressed support, stating the building has been vacant due to tenant damage and she trusts applicant Scott Lockwood. Noted her family has owned the property since 1986 and that the area is zoned industrial.
- Hali Retterer (District 6 resident, urban planner/biologist): Opposed the project, citing over-concentration in Districts 2 and 6, lack of public health consideration in the study, and potential for political corruption. Urged a moratorium.
- D8 Neighborhood Vine: Opposed, arguing that cannabis businesses oversaturate disadvantaged districts while grocery stores and other essential services are lacking. Asked for equitable distribution across all districts.
- Tara Kirse (Hagenwood community member): Supported the project, praising Lockwood’s community engagement and business model. Noted the area has vacant lots and poor sidewalks, and a responsible business would benefit the neighborhood.
Item 4: Cannabis Land Use Policy Workshop
- Hali Retterer: Criticized the EPS study as potentially biased, called for peer review, and emphasized the need to consider transit routes, public health, and social impacts in buffer zones.
- D8 Neighborhood Vine: Argued that cannabis uses are prioritized over food access, water and energy consumption are high, and businesses do not hire locally. Urged the commission to evaluate best use for communities and require hiring ratios.
- Deanna Garcia (cannabis advocate): Supported the study and the legal industry, noting its contributions to jobs, tax revenue, and elimination of the gray market. Urged continued safe access.
- Rachel Brown (Executive Director, Power and Alliance): Thanked city staff and Sergeant Young for their work. Stated her organization is focused on maintaining traditional industrial space for repurposing and is open to removing distribution caps.
Discussion Items
Item 3: 1717 Kathleen Avenue - Cannabis Delivery & Manufacturing CUPs (P21-039)
Staff recommended denial based on inconsistency with the M-T (Industrial and Transit-Area) zone, citing auto-oriented nature (delivery) and insufficient buffer from residential uses. The applicant, Scott Lockwood (High Top Company LLC), disputed the auto-oriented characterization and presented a micro-business model (delivery-only, non-volatile manufacturing) with community support (28 residents within 600 feet, 17 Hagenwood businesses, 26 District 2 businesses, and 7 signatures from the Hagenwood Community Association – totaling 78). He argued the EPS study shows no negative impact on nearby homes, crime (average 0.5 crimes per cannabis business), or industrial rents. Commissioner questions focused on hours (9am-9pm), number of vehicles (1-2), and routing. Discussion emphasized the building’s industrial use and the area’s need for occupied space over vacancy. A motion (Covill/Wallace) to deny staff’s recommendation (i.e., approve the project) was amended (Yee) to require a revised plan ensuring secure product transfer and to continue the item without a date certain, necessitating re-notification of the community.
Item 4: Workshop on Cannabis Land Use Policy
Staff (Kevin Colin) and EPS consultants (David Zender, Tom Martins) presented findings from the Comprehensive Cannabis Study. Key findings: cannabis businesses have not negatively impacted home values, retail/industrial rents, or crime beyond levels of other businesses. Concentrations in Districts 2 and 6 are a function of zoning. Council had directed the commission to evaluate seven points: (1) review sensitive use buffers; (2) consider additional zones for storefront/delivery-only dispensaries and non-volatile manufacturing; (3) allow dispensaries in RMX and C3 zones; (4) revise the list of sensitive uses and buffer distances (e.g., remove child care, tobacco retailers); (5) review mixed-light cultivation building type for repurposing; (6) consider permitting cannabis research and development; and (7) remove distribution from the district cap. Commissioners provided general support for expanding zones, reducing buffers, and removing distribution caps, while requesting further analysis on crime at perimeters, community engagement, and equity (including navigator services for core applicants). No vote was taken; direction was provided to staff to develop a scope and schedule for further work, including robust public outreach.
Key Outcomes
- Item 3 (1717 Kathleen Avenue): The commission voted 9-3 (Hernandez, Pluckebaum, Yee dissenting) to deny staff’s recommended denial and to continue the item to a future hearing. Staff was directed to prepare findings for approval (CEQA exemption, CUPs for delivery-only dispensary and non-volatile manufacturing), re-notice the project due to the absence of a set date, and require the applicant to amend the floor plan for secure product transfer.
- Item 4 (Cannabis Land Use Policy Workshop): The commission conducted the workshop and provided staff with preliminary direction on the approach and scope for evaluating council’s recommendations. No formal action or vote was taken. Next steps include further analysis, community engagement, and subsequent commission meetings to refine policy changes.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening, everybody. This is Nico Dina, the chair of the planning commission and um checking in with staff uh about the troubleshooting. It looks like that the issue's not been resolved. Um we will provide another five more minutes until 6 15, at which time if the if the technical issues have not been resolved, we will um turn to the um city attorney to confirm that we can adjourn the meeting and continue the items until the the next meeting. Really appreciate everyone's patience on this and understanding, uh, but it's really important that we continue uh in um in this format and ensuring that we can have the the streaming um platform available to the public and folks. Um so just a quick announcement again at 615. We'll check in um and hope that the technical issues can be resolved. If not, um we will have to um adjourn the meeting and continue the items. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Um this is Hong, your clerk for the evening. It appears we may have gotten net fixed. We're just um confirming the stream as back up and running, and I will get back to you and we can restart the meeting. Thank you. Chair, the stream is up and running. I do apologize for that delay. We are ready when you are. Thank you very much. Can we would you advise where you would like us to begin? Should we pick up where we left off, which was um uh consent calendar, or do we need to do we need to start before that? Um this is city attorney Jeff Heron again. Uh I'm I'm not sure when it stopped. Maybe the clerk can confirm that it was uh uh early on. One possible solution would just be to confirm openly that a quorum was established, say who was absent, and then we did the land acknowledgement and the pledge, and then now we are actually moving on to an item of business. But I'm not sure where it stopped. Thank you. Madam Madam Clerk, um, does that help? Yes. Um I can confirm we got through um the roll call, but it appears we did have our absent members rejoin us um out of an abundance of consciousness. I I would recommend taking roll again. Okay, excellent. So commissioners, please then move your mics um and we'll call the role more time to establish a quorum. Okay, thank you. Commissioner Boyd. Here commissioner Buckley. Here, Commissioner Chase. Here, Commissioner Cobble. Here, Commissioner Lindsay. Here, Commissioner Mrs. Reed. Here, Commissioner Bucky Ball. Here, Commissioner Wonconnally. Here, Commissioner Eat. Here, Commissioner Young. Here, Vice Chair Wallace. Here. And Chair Hernetz. Here again, thanks everybody for your patience. Um, with as we deal with our technical issues, the quorum has been established. Um, I will reread the um housekeeping items and confirm that we read the and uh read the land acknowledgement and pledge of allegiance.
openpublica.com