The community’s dialogue on how it wants to proceed with regulated cannabis continued on April 14, with a public workshop held before the monthly Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
While members of the public were invited to attend and provide input, the commissioners themselves were encouraged to start deciding what they want to see from the nascent industry.
Adopted by ballot initiative during the 2014 elections, Alaska’s marijuana legalization process began taking effect in February. Licenses to sell, cultivate, test and manufacture cannabis are acquired through the state Alcohol & Marijuana Control Office and its Marijuana Control Board. Applications must also be approved by applicants’ municipalities and follow local zoning guidelines.
Already one Wrangell resident who has applied for three permits with the state, but has run into conflict with current ordinances. Kelsey Martinsen wants to open a grow and retail business near Front Street, located in the hotel just behind his Diamond C Restaurant. Called Happy Cannabis, the shop would feature a storefront for his pending retail license, with 15 grow bays, drying and packaging rooms, and an extraction area to suit his pending licenses for cultivation and concentrate manufacturing.
As the city zoning administrator, Carol Rushmore determined the cultivation and manufacturing aspect of Martinsen’s proposed marijuana business does not meet either the allowed or the conditional uses of commercial district zoning.
Rushmore advised him to appeal the ruling, which was put before the zoning commission at the meeting. Martinsen explained to the commissioners that the growing, drying and extraction would be considered accessory uses to his retail business.
“Right now I feel the growing of marijuana falls within the agricultural definition,” Rushmore explained.
Going through different zones outlined in Chapter 20 of the Wrangell Municipal Code, she found most marijuana-related activities would only be permissible with conditional use under a “cottage industry” designation. But she admitted the nuances of cannabis as a controlled business are relatively new, something which the code does not specifically deal with.
“It’s not as up-to-date as it should be, but it’s what we have,” Rushmore said.
She prepared a table comparing current zones on the books to different types of marijuana-related activities available to obtain licenses for, noting which activities would be permissible in each zone and how.
“It was kind of surprising to me as I was going through it,” she said.
For example, the retail of marijuana and its testing would both be permissible at commercially zoned properties, as manufacturing would be in either light or regular industrial zones. Cultivation would be allowable in remote residential mixed use zones.
All activities could be permissible in single- and multi-family residential zones as cottage industries, as well as in both rural residential designations. Under current code, agricultural uses such as cultivation are not allowable in either commercial or light industrial zones. All forms of licensed operations would be permissible with a conditional use permit in waterfront development zones, but only if no upland alternative is available.
Over the next few months, Planning and Zoning will be examining the code more closely and will begin the process of making adjustments.
“We need to decide where we would feel is a good fit,” said commission chair Terri Henson.
“As a starting point that I would like to put on the table, we start with commercial, and you’ve got your industrial, light-industrial and waterfront development,” offered commissioner Jim Shoemaker. As for even cottage industry applications in single- and multi-family residential zones, the commission seemed in agreement that neighborhoods would not be appropriate.
“I have some heartburn over single-family residential or even multi-family residential,” Henson said.
In addition to determining compatible uses, commissioners will also need to look at how it defines parks and recreational centers – such as public trails, open lawns with benches and the Nolan Center – with regards to state law establishing a 500-foot buffer between marijuana-related establishments and such public amenities. The boundary also applies to school property, religious assemblies, correctional facilities and youth centers.
The commission invited Wrangell Police Chief Doug McCloskey to give his input, and he recommended clarity in how it defined things.
“The one thing you want to be very careful of is how you word everything,” he said. “Being able to interpret it in different ways is going to make a mess of how we will proceed.”
For example, though McCloskey might interpret the Nolan Center as a “recreation center” because it shows films and hosts occasional events, Rushmore disagreed. Without a definitive answer, he said it made things unduly difficult both for law enforcement and those getting into the business to know where they stood.
“As long as they follow the law it’s just another thing to monitor,” said McCloskey.
A number of areas surrounding the regulation of pot are beyond the commission’s purview, such as the levying of local taxes on top of the state’s but another consideration Planning and Zoning can consider is whether to limit which licenses will be permissible within the community. As an example, there are two available licenses for cultivation, one for cultivation 500 square feet or less in scale and another for any amount greater.
For Martinsen’s appeal, commissioners decided to table the item until it had time to sort through its definitions. Martinsen had hoped for a quicker decision, as the first release date for cultivation licenses is set for June 9.
“We don’t want to apply until you guys know what you’re doing or not,” he said.
“We are just now looking at this as a whole,” explained Henson. “It’s going to take more than one meeting to get this ironed out.”
The next Planning and Zoning meeting has been set for May 12.
Reader Comments(0)