CPG recommends cannabis cultivation parcel constraints

Joe Naiman

Village News Reporter

The Fallbrook Community Planning Group and its Ad Hoc Cannabis Ordinance Committee are reviewing various elements of the proposed revision of the county's cannabis ordinance, and on Oct. 18 the planning group voted to support limitations on parcels used for cannabis cultivation.

Tom Harrington was not able to participate in the Oct. 18 meeting, but the other 14 planning group members supported the motion which would require cultivation to occur on property with A70 agricultural zoning, require parcels to be at least five acres, limit cultivation to no more than 20% of the parcel, require a 100-foot separation between a cultivation facility and the property line, limit lighting height to 25 feet and prohibit light emission onto other properties, limit signage to address and directional signs with no advertising allowed, require roads leading to the facility to be surfaced, require either that parcels are accessed by a public road or that a written recorded road maintenance agreement have the approval of all owners of a private road, require building and grading permits for structures, and require that the operations meet all federal, state, and local regulations.

"I think it's a very well done list. I think it was well thought through," said planning group member Roy Moosa.

"It's a compromise," said planning group chair Eileen Delaney. "We want to do what is best for the community."

A 4-1 Board of Supervisors vote Jan. 27, with Jim Desmond opposed, directed the development of Zoning Ordinance and Regulatory Code amendments which would repeal the existing ordinance restricting medical and recreational marijuana dispensaries and cultivation, allow the sale of edible and drinkable as well as smokable cannabis products, allow cannabis retail sales in areas with commercial and industrial zoning, allow cannabis cultivation in agriculturally-zoned areas, allow cannabis product manufacturing, distribution, and testing in industrial-zoned areas, allow for a cannabis microbusiness license in areas with agricultural, commercial, or industrial zoning, create a "social equity" program which gives individuals with past cannabis arrests and those in "disproportionately impacted areas" greater opportunities to secure an operating permit, allow for on-site consumption of cannabis products at specified cannabis facilities and permitted events, reduce the separation requirements for a dispensary, require a "labor peace agreement" with a labor union for every tenth employee at a cannabis facility, seek grant funding to implement the social equity program, and exclude cannabis from the medical pre-screening process for county employees.

The planning group's Ad Hoc Cannabis Ordinance Committee was created at the Feb. 15 planning group meeting. The committee reviews various elements of the proposed revised ordinance. The Aug. 16 planning group meeting included a recommendation of a 1,000-foot separation between dispensaries and sensitive sites (defined as public and private schools, child care centers, parks, playgrounds, sports activity venues, libraries, and churches) and also recommended that dispensaries not be allowed in the Fallbrook Village zones. On Sept. 20, the planning group recommended a restriction that cultivation be indoors in facilities which are locked when not in use.

"All of our committee recommendations to date have been a compromise position," said ad hoc committee chair Kim Murphy.

"The committee has really worked together," Murphy said. "I wish the supervisors were able to do that."

The county's A70 Limited Agriculture and A72 General Agriculture zones are both intended for crop or animal agriculture. The county's RR Rural Residential zoning permits family residential uses and allows group residential and limited packing and processing uses with a use permit. S92 General Rural zoning is intended to provide controls for land which has rugged terrain, dependency on groundwater, desert, fire or erosion susceptibility, or other environmental constraints.

The decision to limit cannabis cultivation to agricultural zoning was intended to prevent cultivation on properties with rural residential zoning. Although the planning group's recommendations would apply for the entire unincorporated county if accepted by the Board of Supervisors, Fallbrook has no land with S92 zoning and the ad hoc committee does not desire to address conditions for other communities.

Some concern was expressed about the scope of a cannabis operation on properties larger than five acres, but the 20% limitation for cannabis facilities and the 100-foot setback from property lines will protect neighbors and others from larger cultivators. "It really doesn't matter how many acres the property is as long as the appropriate setbacks are there," said planning group member Lee DeMeo.

The county's tiered winery ordinance addressed boutique wineries only when it was adopted in 2008 and then rescinded due to a California Environmental Quality Act challenge of an environmental Negative Declaration rather than an Environmental Impact Report, and the current ordinance was adopted in 2010.

The issue of private roads was debated during the discussion on the ordinance which allows wineries on A70 and A72 land, and the county's wireless communications facility ordinance adopted in 2003 has also led to concerns about excessive private road use by one user and subsequent conditioning of permits to address road maintenance.

The ad hoc committee had recommended that all cultivation facilities be accessed by county-maintained roads and not allowed if access requires using a private road, but the proposal for a written recorded agreement with unanimous consent addressed the concerns. The focus on Fallbrook caused the ad hoc committee to avoid discussion of access from a state highway rather than a county road, but the planning group recommendation eliminated any county road designation for public road access.