CITY of NORMAN, OKLAHOMA CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY PLANNING and TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA Municipal Building Conference Room

CITY OF NORMAN, OKLAHOMA

CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA

Municipal Building Conference Room 201 West Gray

Friday, December 13, 2019

4:00 P.M.

1. PUBLIC TRANSIT RIDERSHIP REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER TRANSIT RIDERSHIP FARES.

2. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE NORMAN TRANSIT SYSTEM LONG RANGE PLAN.

3. DISCUSSION REGARDING POST OAK ROAD (INDIAN SPRINGS ESTATES) RAILROAD CROSSING BLOCKAGES.

4. REVIEW OF DRAFT ORDINANCE REGARDING MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROCESSOR ZONING AND LICENSING.

5. MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS.

It is the policy of the City of Norman that no person or groups of persons shall on the grounds of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, place of birth, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, familial status, marital status, including marriage to a person of the same sex, disability, retaliation, or genetic information, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination in employment activities or in all programs, services, or activities administered by the City, its recipients, sub-recipients, and contractors. In the event of any comments, complaints, modifications, accommodations, alternative formats, and auxiliary aids and services regarding accessibility or inclusion, please contact the ADA Technician at 405-366-5424, Relay Service: 711. To better serve you, five (5) business days’ advance notice is preferred.

ITEM 1

RIDERSHIP REPORT Community Planning & Transportation Committee Meeting – December 13th, 2019 Public Transportation Monthly Report for November 2019

Fixed-Route Ridership • Fixed-routes transported 25,666 passengers in November – a 7% decrease compared to November 2018. The daily average ridership was 1,285, an increase of 6% or 74. • Fiscal year 20 to date ridership (July – November) is 128,310 – a decrease of 9% over the same period last year.

Paratransit Ridership • Paratransit transported 1,791 passengers in November – a decrease of 35% compared to November 2018. Average daily ridership was 90, a decrease of 25% or 31. Zone 1 ridership decreased by 35% or 824 and Zone 2 ridership decreased by 35% or 149 compared to November 2018. • Fiscal year 20 year to date (July – November), paratransit ridership is 9,510 – a decrease of 35% or 5,077. Zone 1 ridership has decreased by 36% or 4,473 FYTD; Zone 2 ridership has decreased by 28% or 604 FYTD.

Transit Activities • Continued meetings regarding the joint transit and public safety maintenance facility to be constructed near current City fleet maintenance operations on Da Vinci Street. • City staff gained access to FTA grant/reporting systems. Continued work on documentation to gain access to program grant funds. • On November 12, 2019 voters approved the proposed sales tax of 1/8% for public transportation with 70.4% in favor. The tax will become effective April 1, 2020 (after the County jail tax expires). NORMAN TRANSIT RIDERSHIP TOTALS Month: November 2019 FY20: July 1, 2019 ‐ June 30, 2020 (FY19: July 1, 2018 ‐ June 30, 2019)

Average Daily Fixed‐Route Passengers Days of Service ROUTE Nov‐18 Nov‐19 % Change # Change FYTD19 FYTD20 % Change # Change Month Mon‐Fri Sat Total 10 Main Street 294 273 ‐7% ‐21 290 283 ‐2% ‐7 Nov‐19 20 NA 20 11 Lindsey East 539 587 9% 48 484 512 6% 28 Nov‐18 21 2 23 12 Lindsey West 77 151 96% 74 90 132 47% 42 FYTD20 108 NA 108 20 West Norman Link 26 13 ‐51% ‐13 24 14 ‐43% ‐10 FYTD19 107 14 121 21 Alameda/E. Norman 210 192 ‐9% ‐18 225 186 ‐17% ‐39 24 Sooner Express 60 66 9% 6 58 60 3% 2 44 Social Security (Tues. & Fri.) 44 Social Security 5 3 ‐42% ‐275‐26% ‐2 Month Days FYTD TOTAL 1,211 1,285 6% 74 1,177 1,191 1% 14 Nov‐19 9 44 Nov‐18 9 43 Total Fixed‐Route Passengers ROUTE Nov‐18 Nov‐19 % Change # Change FYTD19 FYTD20 % Change # Change *Saturday service discontinued 10 Main Street 6,761 5,464 ‐19% ‐1,297 35,130 30,582 ‐13% ‐4,548 January 1, 2019. All routes operate 11 Lindsey East 12,401 11,738 ‐5% ‐663 58,554 55,278 ‐6% ‐3,276 Monday‐Friday except Route 44, 12 Lindsey West 1,773 3,028 71% 1,255 10,835 14,220 31% 3,385 which operates on Tuesday and 20 West Norman Link 600 256 ‐57% ‐344 2,847 1,460 ‐49% ‐1,387 Friday. 21 Alameda/E. Norman 4,832 3,844 ‐20% ‐988 27,210 20,101 ‐26% ‐7,109 24 Sooner Express 1,261 1,311 4% 50 6,222 6,454 4% 232 44 Social Security 43 25 ‐42% ‐18 284 215 ‐24% ‐69 TOTAL 27,671 25,666 ‐7% ‐2,005 141,082 128,310 ‐9% ‐12,772

CARTaccess Passenger Information ZONE Nov‐18 Nov‐19 % Change # Change FYTD19 FYTD20 % Change # Change Zone 1 2,342 1,518 ‐35% ‐824 12,409 7,936 ‐36% ‐4,473 Zone 2 422 273 ‐35% ‐149 2,178 1,574 ‐28% ‐604 TOTAL 2,764 1,791 ‐35% ‐973 14,587 9,510 ‐35% ‐5,077 ITEM 2

TRANSIT SYSTEM LONG RANGE PLAN Norman Transit System Long-Range Plan

Council Community Planning and Transportation Committee December 13, 2019 4:00pm Background • 2008 CART Long-Range Public Transportation Plan – Based on a needs assessment undertaken in 2003 – Produced improvement recommendations in phases – Most implementation not realized due to lack of funding

• 2014 City Comprehensive Transportation Plan – Transit Subcommittee recommended enhancements to update the 2008 CART Plan – Discussed local and regional needs – Developed immediate, ongoing, short range, medium range, and long range action items for transit – Transit updates incorporated into the City of Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan adopted May 2014 2008 CART Long-Range Public Transportation Plan • Phase I Improvement Recommendations – Address requests for longer service hours: • Extended service hours on high-ridership core routes • Initiation of Sunday service. • Downtown/Campus Corner Circulator operating at 20-minute headways.

• Phase II Improvement Recommendations – Address requests for higher frequency more effective and understandable routes: • Creation of a grid of corridor routes • Operate the key grid routes at 30-minute headways

• Phase III Improvement Recommendations – Add routes along new service corridors, including: • State Highway 9 Circulator • West Norman Circulator • East Norman Circulator • Berry Road Corridor (expand existing) • Main Street Corridor extension west to Sooner Mall 2008 CART Long-Range Public Transportation Plan 2014 Comprehensive Transportation Plan Transit Related Action Items Action Items to be Implemented as Soon as Possible Short Range (first 5 years of the plan, 5th year = 2019) • Action S1c: Adopt the Updated CART Long Range Transportation Plan – COMPLETED • Action M4a: Extend the CART Transit System Service Hours on Five Key Routes – EXTENDED TO 10pm, NOT EXTENDED AS LONG AS RECOMMENDED Action Items to be Conducted on an Ongoing or Annual Basis • Action M4b: Add Sunday CART Transit System Service • Action S2b: Coordinate the Norman Thoroughfare Plan with the Norman Land Use Plan • Action M4c: Enhance the CARTaccess Service Hours to Match Fixed Route Service – AS • Action S2c: Allocate a Portion of the Available Local Funds to All Modes NEEDED • Action M4j: Provide Bus Pull-over Bays at Bus Stops on Upgrades to Urban Arterial Streets – • Action M4d: Maintain CART Service Frequency on Lindsey East & West Routes Year Round – LINDSEY STREET COMPLETED • Action M5b: Actively Engage in Agency and Public Planning and Promoting of Intercity • Action M4e: Add a New Downtown/Campus Corner Circulator Route Transit Services – REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF CENTRAL OKLAHOMA • Action M4f: Pilot Project to Reconfigure Main Street Route and Supporting Routes to Create • Action P1d: Monitor Transit Facilities and Rolling Stock Conditions and Implement Needed Initial Grid Network Maintenance • Action M4k: Enhance the CART Transit Accessibility, Safety and Amenities – • Action P2b: Assess Annually the Transit LOS and Ridership on Major Streets in Norman COMPLETED/ONGOING • Action P3a: Accommodate Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Access and Mobility During Public • Action M5a: Encourage the use of Intercity Transit Services and Private Construction in Public ROW • Action M5c: Develop Site Planning and Property Development Concepts for Commuter Rail • Action P4b: Monitor Transit Usage Barriers and Implement Mitigation Measures Station Areas • Action F1c: Seek FTA Funding for Transit Operations in Norman • Action F1h: Study the Needs, Methods and Implications of Establishing a Dedicated Source • Action E3a: Coordinate the Planned Commuter Rail Station with Future Land Use Planning, of Funding for CART – COMPLETED Development Controls and Incentives Medium Range (by the year 2025) • Action M4g: Reconfigure and Add Routes to Create Grid Network • Action M4i: Update the CART Long Range Public Transportation Plan • Action M4j: Create Hub Facilities for Coordinated Areawide Transit Services

Long Range (by the year 2035) • Action M4h: Add New Bus Routes to Target Key Corridors and to Expand the Serviced Area • Action F4a: Identify and Enter into Agreements to Secure the Property and Rights of Way for the Proposed Commuter Rail Stations 2014 City Comprehensive Transportation Plan

2013-2014 CART Long-Range Public Transportation Plan Update Current Challenges • Stabilization of Current Operation and Budget • General Fund and Capital Fund Budgets • Program of FTA Grant Funds • Bus Maintenance Facility • Fleet Replacements/Upgrades • Technology Upgrades – Updates to vehicles that do not have proper equipment (GPS, Automatic Passenger Counters, etc.) • Implementation of Fare Structure and Modern Fareboxes Council Priorities?

• Service Adjustments – Restore Saturday Service – Extend Routes/Stops • Norman Library East, Moore Norman Technology Center, Veteran’s Center, Improved Healthplex Service, Expanded Commuter Route – New Transfer Station • Fare Structure • Ridership • Technology Next Steps • 6 months (to June 30, 2020; 2nd half of FYE 2020) – Finish FTA Documentation and Program Grant Funds – Discussion and Direction from Council on Fare Structure – January 2020 CP&T Meeting • Set Fare Policy by June 30, 2020 or Earlier – Begin and Complete Construction of Bus Maintenance Facility – Analyze FYE 2020 Budget and Complete FYE 2021 Budget • Fleet Replacements - ~$1 million annually – Update Long Range Transit Plan – Analyze and Adopt Policies as Needed, either from EMBARK or City Specific • Rider Conduct, Safety, Title VI, DBE, EEO, Public Participation Plan, ADA Transition Plan, etc. – Branding Process Next Steps cont. • 6 to 12 months (July 1 to December 31, 2020; 1st half of FYE 2021) – Occupy New Maintenance Facility – Procure Fleet Replacements (~6 months for paratransit, ~18 months for fixed route) – Update Long Range Plan

• 12 to 18 months (January 1 to June 30, 2021; 2nd half of FYE 2021) – Adopt FYE 2021 Budget and Prepare FYE 2022 Budget • Fleet Replacements - ~$1 million annually – Adopt Long-Range Plan Update Attachments

Excerpts from 2014 City Comprehensive Transportation Plan

• Cover Page • Chapter 2 – Transportation System Needs – Pages 5-6: Regional Transit – Pages 11-14: Local Transit – Pages 24-25: Identified Transit Short Range Needs • Chapter 3 – Transportation System Plan – Pages 14-15: Transit Master Plan DISCUSSION

2014 City of Norman

COMPREHENSIVE Moving Forward http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/59/NormanFla g250.jpg TRANSPORTATION PLAN

In Association with: Alliance Transportation Group Final Report: May 13, 2014 Garver Adopted by Resolution No. R-1314-112

the CBD, and then follows a path parallel to Porter Avenue/Classen Boulevard south to the Cleveland County border. No spurs, short line railroads, switching yards, or intermodal facilities are associated with the Mid-Con through Norman (though a secondary bypass track is provided from north of Rock Creek Road to south of Robinson Street). Due to the national significance of the line, approximately 24 trains per day pass through the city, with train activity expected to increase in the future. This high train frequency can have an impact on local traffic operations as the line features 17 at-grade crossings and only two grade-separated crossings within the city limits, at SH 9 and at Robinson Street.

Truck Operations Within Oklahoma, truck movement data from the FHWA Freight Analysis Framework (FAF) indicate an average of 8,500 trucks daily along IH-35 carrying 546 ton-miles of freight in 2007. Forecasts from the FAF of total freight flows are projecting an increase of nearly 200% to 1,417 ton-miles by 2035. Truck

traffic volumes within Norman are generally handled by I-35 and SH-9. Truck estimates, gathered from

ACOG data and previous studies, indicate that I-35 traffic is composed of 15% trucks while SH-9 features approximately 6% trucks within the overall traffic stream.

In 2007, ODOT prepared a study to evaluate truck traffic along the I-35 corridor within Garvin County. The purpose of the study was to examine alternative by-pass routes from I-35 between Davis and Pauls Valley to I-40 east of Oklahoma City. While no definitive action resulted from the study, future study should be considered as trucking demands continue to rise within the Norman and OKC metropolitan area.

The city does not restrict trucks to specific routes, but 12 load-posted bridges are located in Cleveland County that could potentially influence truck traffic. Though most of these locations are located in rural parts of the county on routes with low traffic volumes, four of these locations are located within the city limits. One city location (E. Post Oak Road) carries relatively minor traffic volumes in a less developed area, but the other three posted crossings (Porter Avenue, Franklin Road, and 60th Avenue E.) are located near industrial areas with opportunities for heavy vehicle traffic. General Aviation Airport The Max Westheimer Airport, operated by the University of Oklahoma, is a reliever airport to the Will

Rogers World Airport in Oklahoma City and provides small aircraft access directly to Norman from the Regional Mobility and Connection Mobility Regional region and beyond. It’s ground transportation is well served by I-35 on the west, US 77/Flood Avenue on the east, Robinson Street on the south, and Tecumseh Road on the north. Of concern to the airport is the advancement of nearby residential development north of the airport that may be sensitive to the noise associated with the operations of the airport and its growth over time. Regional Transit The following regional transit needs assessment is based on a detailed evaluation of the currently provided public transportation services, anticipated future needs, as well as concerns and issues raised by the Transit Subcommittee.

Transit Subcommittee Concerns and Suggestions The members of the Transit Subcommittee, which serves in an advisory capacity to the CVC for the Norman CTP development, discussed multiple issues concerning public transportation needs within the City of Norman during their five subcommittee meetings. Issues raised by the committee members affecting regional transit needs are mentioned in this subsection, whereas those issues raised in regard

Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs 5 Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

to local transit services are discussed in the Local Mobility and Safety subsection of this Transportation Needs Assessment chapter.

The Transit Subcommittee suggested supporting a Regional Transportation Authority, and is in favor of developing a regional commuter rail system. To increase transit efficiencies, the Transit Subcommittee recognized the need for higher density development around transit stations and encouraged appropriate modification to the city’s land use plan. The committee also recommended that value capture mechanisms, such as tax increment financing (TIF), be considered for potential commuter rail stations to enhance and advance funding for transit supportive station area development.

Express Bus The Cleveland Area Rapid Transit, CART, operates a week-day only commuter express bus route, the

Sooner Express (Route 24), between Downtown Norman and Downtown Oklahoma City. The Sooner

Express connects the OU Campus with METRO Transit’s Downtown Oklahoma City transit center. This commuter express bus service is jointly operated in coordination with METRO Transit operated by Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority , COTPA, and offers six daily round-trips during peak travel times.

The express bus service provides an alternative to private automobile travel between the cities of Norman and Oklahoma City. However, since the bus operates in mixed traffic, and for a large portion of its route travels on I-35, it is subject to the same congestion delays experienced by commuters traveling by car. The congestion delays are reflected in the daily traffic volume of 136,800 vehicles per day that have been recorded along sections of I-35.

An increase in the number of daily round-trips should be considered to provide more convenient transportation options for commuters, along with a realignment of the current bus route or the implementation of a high-occupancy vehicle lane on I-35 between Norman and Oklahoma City to minimize existing congestion delays for the Sooner Express bus.

Connection to METRO Transit Service METRO Transit bus service (Route 40) extends into Moore as far south as S 104th Street between

Regional Mobility and Connection RegionalMobility Western Avenue and Santa Fe Avenue. CART bus service (West Norman Link – N20) extends as far north as Tecumseh Road at 36th Avenue W, which serves the Norman Regional HealthPlex facility.

METRO Transit’s Route 40 connects directly to the transit center in Downtown Oklahoma City, whereas the West Norman Link (N20) provides a connection to Downtown Norman and the OU Campus via transfer to the Main Street route (N10).

A north-south distance of seven miles, plus an east-west distance of one mile, separates the two routes. A connector service between the two routes may prove beneficial to patrons of both transit systems.

Potential Impacts of Proposed Regional Projects The City of Norman and the nearby metropolitan areas are presently served by Amtrak. Although no other local rail-based transit currently exists, interest in streetcar and commuter rail service has picked up with the recent adoption of the third round of Metropolitan Area Projects (MAPS 3) program in Oklahoma City. The MAPS 3 program includes the building of a downtown streetcar system, the conceptual design of an intermodal transportation hub, and the study of regional commuter corridors. The recently completed Intermodal Transportation Hub Master Plan for Central Oklahoma and the

6 Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

ongoing Central Oklahoma Commuter Corridors Study are briefly discussed in the following paragraphs, along with proposed enhancements to Amtrak service and current high speed rail planning efforts. Current information can be found at www.acogok.org and www.CentralOKGo.org .

Central Oklahoma Intermodal Transportation Hub In 2010, the Association of Central Oklahoma Governments (ACOG), in partnership with COTPA and the City of Oklahoma City, commissioned a study to assess the best location and conceptual lay-out for an intermodal transportation hub facility that would integrate all existing and planned transit modes within the vicinity of Downtown Oklahoma City. The central focus of the study was to determine how this intermodal hub would accommodate COTPA’s existing fixed-route bus service; the anticipated streetcar implementation; possible future bus transit improvements; potential commuter rail lines to the cities of Edmond, Midwest City, and Norman; as well as potential future high speed rail.

The Intermodal Transportation Hub Master Plan was completed in June 2011. The plan’s impact on public transit within the City of Norman will be determined by its ability to accommodate commuter rail and high speed rail connections. These additional transportation options would ultimately offer Norman residents more transit choices to reach other parts of the Oklahoma City metropolitan area or other metropolitan areas such as Tulsa, OK; Newton, KS; Kansas City, MO; and Dallas/Fort Worth, TX.

Central Oklahoma Commuter Corridors Study In Spring 2013, ACOG initiated the Central Oklahoma Commuter Corridors Study for regional transit service to lay the foundation for an integrated, high-capacity, commuter system that would connect communities to employment, entertainment, and housing opportunities throughout Central Oklahoma. The purpose of the Commuter Corridors Study (CCS) is to analyze the most suitable transit technology and route alignment to determine which will best meet the corridor’s purpose and needs. The alternatives to be studied will reflect a range of high and low cost capital improvements, including non- fixed guideway (no build) options, which will serve as a baseline for measuring the merits of higher level investments. The final product of the CCS will be the selection of the transit best mode (i.e. bus, bus rapid transit, commuter rail, etc.), and the location of the associated alignment to meet the corridor’s purpose and needs.

One of the three commuter corridors studied would serve the Cities of Moore and Norman. This corridor and Connection Mobility Regional would extend from Downtown Oklahoma City to Downtown Norman near the intersection of E Lindsey Street and Classen Boulevard. It would run roughly parallel to I-35 and is envisioned to have three or more station locations in Norman: one near Tecumseh Road, a second stop co-located with the Amtrak station, and the third stop north of SH 9, plus a potential special events platform near the OU Campus.

The Norman CTP can assist the Central Oklahoma Commuter Corridors Study by helping identify the preferred location of the proposed stations within the City of Norman and any design options that may be further identified during the ensuing preliminary engineering and design development phases.

Amtrak Enhancements At this time, the Oklahoma (ODOT), Kansas (KDOT), and Texas (TxDOT) Departments of Transportation are actively considering the extension of the current Amtrak Heartland Flyer service beyond the once daily roundtrip from Oklahoma City, OK to Fort Worth, TX. ODOT and KDOT have just completed a Service Development Plan for the expansion of service from Oklahoma City to Newton, KS. A stand-alone daytime service from Kansas City, KS to Fort Worth, TX via Oklahoma City was also considered as part of that plan.

Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs 7 Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

TxDOT, in coordination with ODOT and KDOT, has also begun assessing the expansion of the Heartland Flyer with a second daily roundtrip, which would double the currently available passenger rail capacity along the route, directly benefitting Norman residents.

High Speed Rail (HSR) The U.S. Department of Transportation has been actively working with ODOT and TxDOT regarding the HSR South Central Corridor, which extends from Tulsa, OK to Dallas/Fort Worth, TX and beyond. TxDOT has retained the services of a consultant team to develop a Corridor Investment Plan for the 850- mile corridor, which encompasses the metropolitan areas of Oklahoma City, Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin, and San Antonio, TX. The estimated completion date for this study is January 2015. Study progress should be monitored by City of Norman staff for any findings relevant to the City of Norman.

Regional Bicycling

Connections to Oklahoma City Facilities Oklahoma City has developed and is planning expansion of a large network of interconnected trails and on-street bikeways. One of the proposed loop network of trails with on-street connections would extend around Lake Stanley Draper, where signed on-street bike routes are currently designated around all but the very northern end of the lake along E. Stanley Draper Drive. The Draper Lake loop bike route and future trail network is just over three miles (along 72nd Avenue NE/S. Westminster Road) from the Little River Wildlife Management Figure 2.3 from OKC Trails Plan Area on Franklin Road, where the Norman Spine/Loop Trail is proposed in the Norman Parks and Recreation Master Plan (see Appendix B). A coordinated effort is needed to join these two planned trail systems as well as enhance the on-street bicycling along 72nd/Westminster for Norman bicyclists to access the Draper Lake loop bike route.

Long Distance Bicycling and Touring

Regional Mobility and Connection RegionalMobility Bicycle touring and long distance riding for exercise and enjoyment typically use the areas roadway network to accomplish their goals: an enjoyable ride without too much traffic interference that takes them past interesting countryside or to interesting sites or places. In some parts of the country, multiday bicycle touring is attractive for commercial tourism. Such corridors for long distance riding and tourism in the vicinity of Norman include:  US 77 heading south from Norman, through the small towns of Noble, Purcell and beyond, even as far as the Arbuckle Mountains;  SH 9 heading east from the center of Norman to Lake Thunderbird and beyond; Provision of a minimum of 8 foot wide shoulder lanes along these highways would help to facilitate bicycling in the corridors.

Even with no particular destination in mind, bicyclists enjoy riding on rural roadways in good condition with very little traffic to ride with very little interruption for distances of 20 miles or more on one excursion. These area excursion routes, when formally identified for group rides by local bicycling groups, should be targeted for signage indicating the potential presence of bicyclist on the roadway.

8 Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

Avenue, which should be improved as well to enhance capacity, add bike lanes and sidewalks, and improve safety conditions for all modes.

At-grade intersections between east-west arterials and the railroad (BNSF and Amtrak operations) can cause delay and detriment to the response times as services provided by emergency responders. A grade separated crossing over the railroad is provided for SH 9, and a grade separated intersection has been recently constructed for Robinson Street to cross under the railroad. Potential railroad grade- separated crossings at Tecumseh Road and Lindsey Street would create two-mile intervals of grade separations in Norman, enhancing emergency access across Norman.

North-South Circulation

Between I-35 and US 77, the one-mile grid of north-south section line roadways is also disrupted by the railroad and the airport, creating significant vehicular movement on the minor arterial and collector roadways. Due to the alignment of the railroad, no north-south streets cross the tracks. The 2025 plan does not specifically call out any routes as collector facilities, though north-south corridors such as Peters Avenue and Pickard Avenue serve collector purposes. One issue that has occurred with collectors and local streets is that they have experienced more use (and higher speeds) than intended by traffic diverting from congested arterials. Providing for added capacity, as feasible, on adjacent arterials is the most direct solution to address this issue.

Rural Norman The east region of rural Norman around Lake Thunderbird has seen steady growth in recent years, even though development is limited to one household per 10 acres. The city should continue to plan for investments to key east-west routes connecting this area to core Norman such as Alameda Street, SH-9, 60th Avenue E, Franklin Road and other routes to support additional residential and recreational growth in this area of the city. A network of rural collector roadways would serve to minimize the need to widen the rural arterials beyond the two lane roadways befitting the rural environment. Local Transit The following local transit needs assessment is again based on a detailed evaluation of the currently provided public transportation services, anticipated future needs, as well as concerns and issues raised by the Transit Subcommittee. Conditions ForecastTransportation

Transit Subcommittee Concerns and Suggestions The Transit Subcommittee identified the following three items as the major deficiencies of the existing system: the limited Saturday and evening bus service, the absence of night-time and Sunday service, and the need for an overall increase in bus frequencies. However, the committee also indicated that it was well aware of the fact that transit funding would be the most limiting factor constraining transit service expansion.

The Transit Subcommittee, therefore, suggested multiple potential new funding strategies, including time-limited sales tax, property tax, development fees, increased student fees, a possible fare increase, or value capture-based financing. Alternately, the committee suggested that a fare-free transit system be considered for the City of Norman to attract additional ridership.

The Transit Subcommittee also recommended policies be adopted by the City of Norman to encourage increased residential and employment densities near transit hubs and along transit lines to support

Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs 11 Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

transit efficiency, particularly in Downtown Norman, and, as previously discussed, to support the proposed commuter rail stations. A desire for a more grid-like transit system was also stated.

2008 CART Plan Based on the findings of a needs assessment undertaken in 2003 by the City of Norman, the University of Oklahoma and CART, the 2008 CART Long-Range Public Transportation Plan identified several transit improvement initiatives for phased implementation, including the following:

Phase I Improvement Recommendations Address requests for longer service hours:  Extended service hours on high-ridership core routes  Initiation of Sunday service.

 Downtown/Campus Corner Circulator operating at 20-minute headways.

Phase II Improvement Recommendations Address requests for higher frequency more effective and understandable routes:  Creation of a grid of corridor routes  Operate the key grid routes at 30-minute headways

Phase III Improvement Recommendations Add routes along new service corridors, including:  State Highway 9 Circulator,  West Norman Circulator,  East Norman Circulator, and  Berry Road Corridor (expand existing).  Main Street Corridor extension west to Sooner Mall

Major Destinations and Activity Centers The current fixed-route service in the study area was compared to the location of major activity centers and destinations, including: intermodal transit connections, shopping centers and malls, hospitals and medical complexes, large educational institutions, high-concentration employment centers, as well as densely populated areas (i.e. large apartment complexes). Through this comparison, it was determined

Forecast Transportation Conditions ForecastTransportation that geographic coverage of these activity centers and major destinations was adequate with the following exceptions:  At this time, the Norman Oklahoma Veterans Center is located more than 0.5 miles from the nearest existing transit route. The additional transit routes envisioned as part of Phase III of CART’s 2008 Long-Range Public Transportation Plan could provide a direct connection to the Veterans Affairs Center, which is located southwest of 24th Avenue NE and Robinson Street.  The only other major activity center or destination not currently tied into the existing or planned transit network is the Moore Norman Technology Center, located southeast of Franklin Road and 12th Avenue NW. The Franklin Road campus of the technology center has an approximate enrollment of 1,000, consisting of both high school and adult students. At this time, the Moore Norman Technology Center provides a shuttle bus service from Norman High School to the technology center campus, which is open to all attending high school students.  Several of the anticipated future population and employment growth areas are currently not well served by fixed-route transit. The addition of the new routes identified in CART’s 2008 Long-Range Public Transportation Plan would be able to reach most high-growth areas.

12 Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

Figure 2.5 shows the expanded service proposed in the 2008 Long-Range Public Transportation Plan in relationship to anticipated high-growth areas. (Note that the Sooner Express transit route continues north to Downtown Oklahoma City and was not depicted in its entirety.)

Special Transit Services for Limited Mobility Populations Households with an income at or below poverty level, households with persons aged 65+, households without vehicles, and persons with disabilities often have a higher degree of difficulty in securing the transportation services they need to get to work, medical appointments, educational institutions, or simply to a grocery store. Assessment of the current transit service in regard to limited mobility populations was undertaken in two steps.

Households with Low Income, with Persons 65 Years and Older, or No Available Vehicle

Currently, there are no special transit services provided for these limited mobility populations, unless transit patrons have a documented disability. However, to assess how well CART’s current transit system provides access to limited mobility households, the fixed bus routes were compared to the latest available U.S. Census information on median household income, age, and car ownership.

A preliminary analysis of this information indicated that CART’s current fixed-route bus service provides mobility options to most persons and households influenced by these mobility limiting factors. However, weekday night-time and weekend services are very limited and should be expanded to enhance transportation options for these segments of the population.

Persons with Disabilities Many persons with mobility disabilities are able to utilize the fixed route transit services provided by CART. Specialized transit services for persons with disabilities are provided by CARTaccess throughout the entire City of Norman area, during the service hours provided for fixed route transit. The provision of weekday night-time and expanded weekend services would also greatly enhance transportation options for this segment of the population.

City-Wide Transit Concerns After review of the existing conditions and the anticipated improvements of the transportation system, the following concerns remain, and should be considered in future decision-making relative to the transit system within the City of Norman. Conditions ForecastTransportation  The implementation of all of CART's 2008 Long-Range Public Transportation Plan recommendations would provide significant enhancements to service hours and service frequency, as well as geographic coverage. However, most identified long-range transit projects have not yet been realized as implementation of all Phase I through III improvements largely hinges upon the availability of funding.  As almost all transit trips begin and end with pedestrian travel, connections between pedestrian facilities and transit stops are important to transit riders. These connections are currently limited in many areas, therefore making it difficult for transit passengers to travel from home to transit stops and from transit stops to their final destination.  Congestion bottlenecks affect the travel times experienced on many transit routes. These travel delays impact service reliability, and the willingness of travelers to rely on transit connections.  In addition, the Federal Transit Administration is changing the way it quantifies limited mobility and assesses transit dependency to include households with persons under the age of 18. This represents a new approach to the evaluation of transit services.

Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs 13 Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

Figure 2.5 Figure Forecast Transportation Conditions ForecastTransportation

14 Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

Transportation System Needs As seen in the modeling analysis, while the currently committed projects listed above address some of the roadway needs, there are many current and short range needs for roadway, transit, bicycle and pedestrian modes of transportation that are yet unmet, as discussed earlier in this chapter. The following paragraphs discuss specific facility needs for each of the modes. Some of these improvement projects address the specific deficiencies noted in the modeling results described above. Identified Short Range Needs Short range needs address currently identified capacity, safety and network gap issues and those anticipated to arise within the next 5 to 10 years. Many of these short range needs were identified during meetings with the CVC Subcommittees.

Identified Roadway Short Range Needs The CVC subcommittee on automobile capacity and quality of service and parking identified the following current and pending needs:

 Improve Main Street operations for all modes and enhance its appearance between Flood Avenue and I-35. Create a sense of arrival and of place and improve mobility for all modes in the core of downtown from Flood Avenue to Porter Avenue.

 Improve Lindsey Street operations between OU and Berry Road to facilitate movement between Needs OU and I-35 as well as through traffic on Lindsey Street.  Improve traffic operations on Boyd Street, between 24th Avenue W and 12th Avenue E, to facilitate local access and circulation for all modes  Improve traffic operations along SH 9 (through more adaptive signal control and access management) to facilitate movement in and out of the southern sector of Norman and points south of SH 9, improve and create a preferred access route to OU from I-35, and accommodate future growth in this corridor.  Improve and enhance Robinson Street and Tecumseh Road as the arterial roadways of choice for traffic movements between I-35 and the northern and eastern sectors of Norman and US 77.  Improve the US 77 connections into the core of Norman by enhancing the operations of Flood Avenue south of Robinson Street to Lindsey Street and creating a direct connection from US 77 into Downtown.

Transportation System Transportation  Improve Chautauqua Avenue and Jenkins Avenue, between SH 9 and Lindsey Street, to facilitate access to and egress from campus parking areas and accentuate the preferred access route to and from the OU campus.  Improve Acres Street, between Berry Road and Porter Avenue, as a crossing circulation roadway for all modes. As noted, many of these needs are apparent in the results of the E+C modeling.

Identified Transit Short Range Needs The CVC subcommittee on transit capacity and quality of service identified the following current and pending needs:  Expanded service hours,  Increased service frequency on key routes,  Realigned routes to create a grid-like system with more efficient transfers,  Dedicated local funding source,  Enhanced bus stop amenities, and  Improved pedestrian access and safety near bus stops.

24 Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

Many of these needs were identified in CART’s 2008 Norman Long-Range Public Transportation Plan (2008 CART Plan), such as the expanded service hours and increased frequencies, as well as a restructured route system. As noted above, some additional needs were identified in discussions among the subcommittee members.

Identified Bicycling Short Range Needs The CVC subcommittee on pedestrians, bicyclists and streetscape identified the following current and pending bicyclist needs:  Create bike lanes and other designated facilities for the mobility of basic (average) bicyclists within the core of Norman. Target specific destinations of OU students for off-campus origins and destinations.  Accentuate the connection between the OU Campus and Downtown Norman.  Expand the network of multi-use paths (hike & bike trails) throughout Norman to provide increased opportunities for utilitarian as well as recreational riding. Some of the lack of useful roadway network for bicycling and the call for bike lanes on arterial streets comes from the lack of an adequate number of and/or sufficiently wide collector streets within in the urban street network. Addressing this need will be a long term effort.

Identified Pedestrian Mobility and Accessibility Short Range Needs The CVC subcommittee on pedestrians, bicyclists and streetscape also identified the following current Needs and pending pedestrian needs:  The Sidewalk Gap analysis conducted by City staff presents the big picture view of the sidewalk needs for pedestrians in Norman. The short range needs are prioritized using the following criteria: o Main Street corridor, from 24th Avenue W to 12th Avenue E, o Core Norman neighborhoods, o School access routes within one mile of Elementary and Middle Schools, and o ADA compliance for all ramps in these areas. Current roadway design standards call for 5-foot wide sidewalks on all principal and minor arterial roadways and 4-foot wide sidewalks on all collector, commercial/industrial and local streets.

A concept has been proposed to allow developers to pay into a Sidewalk Bank, upon approval from City Transportation System System Transportation staff, rather that install a short segment of discontinuous sidewalk along an arterial roadway adjacent to their development. This bank could be used to fund the construction of higher priority sidewalks. Non-Committed Planned Projects for Consideration Table 2.1 presents a list of those Encompass 2035 projects affecting the City of Norman that are included in the Encompass 2035 model network, but were not included in the E+C network described above. These projects, and their proposed timing, were assessed for their ability to meet the foreseen transportation needs in Norman by 2035.

Chapter 2 - Transportation System Needs 25 Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

Transit Master Plan

Summary of Key Transit Plan Features The 2008 CART Plan incorporates many of the recommended transit improvements, such as the often requested extended service hours and increased frequencies of service. Based on the feedback received from the Transit Subcommittee, OU students and citizens of Norman, the general consensus was to expeditiously advance the implementation schedule of the phased improvements recommended in the 2008 CART Plan. Various enhancements to the 2008 CART Plan recommendations were added during development of the CTP. The transit plan recommended improvements include:  Of highest importance is increasing the frequency of service and expanding hours of operations for all fixed bus routes. Sunday transit service is also desired. These improvements would not only enhance mobility for Norman citizens that rely on transit, but would also provide an attractive alternative for choice riders.  Better on-bus accommodations for transit patrons with wheelchairs, to include a more user-

friendly tie-down system and an improved, on-bus circulation pattern. This improvement would provide enhanced service to transit patrons with disabilities, and could relieve some of the need currently placed on the complimentary paratransit service, CARTaccess, which is generally more expensive to operate than regular fixed route bus transit.  Make all bus stops accessible according to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the 2008 ADA Amendments Act (ADA AA) requirements and providing overall enhanced pedestrian access. This improvement particularly recognizes ongoing mobility concerns for the mobility challenged community. ADA compliant improvements to bus stops should, whenever possible, be combined with general improvements to pedestrian access, enhancements to bus stop amenities, and elimination of safety concerns, such as uncontrolled pedestrian crossings or lighting issues. The number of mobility challenged citizens is projected to grow rapidly over the next twenty years as the baby boom generation ages.  Enhance the safety for transit riders crossing major roadways to reach bus stops, re-positioning bus stops as needed. Add crosswalks, signage, beacons and pedestrian crossing signals as appropriate.  Provide a corridor-based, grid network of transit routes to serve Norman, thus creating a more Transportation SystemPlan Transportation rider-intuitive system that can be served efficiently and migrates from the initially OU-centric route structure to better serve the needs of all of Norman.  Provide public transportation service to areas not considered in the 2008 CART Plan, such as along the Porter Avenue/Classen Boulevard corridor, to the Cleveland County Jail, the Moore Norman Technology Center-Franklin Road Campus, and to the growing University North Park development. These improvements would provide connectivity to currently unserved activity centers, as well as offer an additional mobility choice to growing residential areas.  Support regional public transportation connectivity through active encouragement of the implementation of a high-capacity transit connection, such as regional commuter rail, between the City of Norman and Downtown Oklahoma City and beyond. This improvement would greatly enhance mobility options available to City of Norman commuters and visitors alike, and has the potential to alleviate congestion on I-35.

The current 2008 CART Plan recommended route changes, in concert with the conceptual routes proposed by stakeholders, are shown in Figure 3.9.

14 Chapter 3 - Transportation System Plan Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan

Plan

CART Fixed Route Service Route CART Fixed

Transportation System Plan System Transportation Figure 3. Figure

Chapter 3 - Transportation System Master Plan 15 Norman Comprehensive Transportation Plan ITEM 3

POST OAK RR CROSSING Council Community Planning and Transportation Committee December 13, 2019 4:00 pm Post Oak Road (Indian Springs Estates) - RR Crossing Blockages £ •Ceder.wine Rd ...... _.

11,111 1'1y0.o IW

0.•• ·e..-..• '. l Possible Future , Connectton t~: Ceder'-- Addldon l •...... rC• .------......

•-co••·.. ••

c lty or Noble I MUJflX.. CC OC,h Cl)Of ..Cfl'llll'I Possible Connection , ,.. .,...,, ... , •.r. .-. :1po1.. .. to Post Oak Road j I ltt C't) !ll!HWUfl:Kl- <'IO Mop ~.. :;'...... tar<"""otfll'Wlll~ Location • . ... . -.:11J;1 1.-illa1 121D61%1119 "'' \ I s....a.b~"HIPl.Oo• ·• .. •'~ ~...,_,c~~~ ..., .a,,.,...... 11.. eu.. c..-....o., Location Map Citizens Concerns • Indian Springs Estates Citizens currently have only one route out of subdivision to Classen Blvd. (Hwy 77) which is often blocked by BNSF trains stopped at the Post Oak RR Crossing • Citizens are concerned that emergency vehicles cannot access their development when RR crossing is blocked. Citizens also frustrated due to the frequency of the RR crossing being blocked causing disruption to their daily schedules • Indian Springs Estates Citizens desire 2nd egress point Possible Connection to Cobblestone Creek Golf Club

Indian Springs Estates Plat Currently 23 Buildable Lots 19 Residences

Indian Springs Estates Indian Springs Estates History • February 2, 1971. City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2369 placing this property in the RE, Residential Estates district and removing it from A-2, Rural Agricultural District. • May 20, 1971. Planning Commission recommended to City Council that the final plat for Indian Springs Estates be approved. • June 29, 1971. City Council approved the final plat for Indian Springs Estates. • July 16, 1971. The final plat for Indian Springs Estates was filed of record with the Cleveland County Clerk. • During this period of time, property zoned as RE, Residential Estates could be developed with private streets. The responsibility for maintenance of the private streets is with the property owners. It should be noted that not all of the streets have been fully developed within this subdivision which was not uncommon at this time. • No documented incidents in 48 years by NPD, NFD, or EMSTT of inability to access neighborhood on Post Oak Road ~'l\.\1, ~IA. c~ CDHHl.~:s· ON~ Cl·U:t ... :;01.F c .UH A Molil :.. u CIJ U ..1.

Possible Connection to Indian Springs Estates -..... ,..,

Ol;':t":'JIL!. -, - , ...,,.., .Jl"~-1...••••>' ...... ~~.. - - \.::;.'!:... ',:!.ff..:,.:.-=::- ...!::...

Cobblestone Creek Golf Club Plat r--·····~

,, ,,...... 12106/2011 ·~ Cobblestone Creek Cobblestone Creek Golf Club History • May 8, 2001. City Council adopted Ordinance No. O-0001-50 placing this property in the RE, Residential Estates District and removing it from A-2, Rural Agricultural District. • May 8, 2001. Planning Commission recommended to City council that the final plat for Cobblestone Creek Golf Club be approved. • December 14, 2001. City Council approved the final plat for Cobblestone Creek Golf Club. • December 19, 2001. The final plat for Cobblestone Creek Golf Club was filed of record with the Cleveland County Clerk. • When City Council adopted Ordinance No. O-7273-105 on June 19, 1973 any new developments in RE, Residential Estates District after August 10, 1973 were required to be constructed as public streets to City paving standards. Cobblestone Creek Golf Club was constructed with public streets that are maintained by the City. Staff Analysis

• The existing roads in Indian Springs Estates are private and were constructed within 50 ft. private road easements • There is a platted 50 ft. private road easement available to construct a paved road from the west end of the current Shadybrook Drive to Pebble Beach Drive • The paved road would be private, built to City standards and paid for by the property owners in Indian Springs Estates Possible ConnectionRoad to Post Oak 1%/08/2019

Possible Secondary Egress from Indian Springs Estates Possible Secondary Egress from Indian Springs Estates Next Steps • Coordinate with property owners in Indian Springs Estates and Cobblestone Creek • Provide technical assistance to property owners in Indian Springs Estates in obtaining a design for the private egress road • Provide technical assistance to property owners in Indian Springs Estates with the construction of the private egress road Council Direction? • Direct staff to coordinate with property owners in Indian Springs and Cobblestone Creek on the construction of the private egress road Questions? ITEM 4

MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROCESSOR ZONING & LICENSING Medical Marijuana Processor Sub-Categorization December 6, 2019 Page | 1

DATE: December 6, 2019

TO: City Council Community Planning & Transportation Committee

THROUGH: Kathryn L. Walker, City Attorney

BY: Beth Muckala, Assistant City Attorney

RE: Medical Marijuana Processor Zoning and Licensing

BACKGROUND

In response to public comment and request, City Council has expressed interest in evaluating the various types of Medical Marijuana Processors in terms of their licensing and zoning treatment in the City of Norman. Namely, there has been concern that the state definition of “processing” is very broad and that seemingly low-impact processing activities, such as pre-rolling “joints” or adding pre-made concentrates to items such as baking edibles, is currently only allowed by right in industrial areas in Norman. This subject was discussed at the September 26, 2019 meeting of the City Council Community Planning & Transportation Committee, where the committee expressed a wish for input from the entire City Council before proceeding further in discussions of this topic. City Council considered the draft ordinance and gave direction at its December 3, 2019 Special Session. This memorandum briefly addresses potential amendments to Norman’s Zoning Ordinance and Licensing provisions in this regard for a final review before proceeding to formal City Council consideration.

DISCUSSION

“Non-Extraction” Processing Activities

The Oklahoma Medical Marijuana Authority (“OMMA”) has confirmed that grinding marijuana and pre-rolling joints, as well as “infusion” (this term generally refers to the addition of medical marijuana concentrates to other substances to create a derivative product) both constitute “processing” under Oklahoma state law. Thus, this categorization under state law creates an application of Norman’s Zoning Ordinance that would allow Medical Marijuana Processing as a permitted use in industrial areas only, with a requirement for Special Use in commercial zones.

A draft ordinance (attached) demonstrates a potential tiered structure that could be used for both zoning and licensing purposes. Tier I and Tier II Medical Marijuana Processors would relate to those businesses which plan to engage in only the pre-rolling of “joints” or the infusion of concentrates (that were created off-site) to create a derivative product. Tier I and II Processors are defined to specifically include “on-site sales,” which sets it apart from industrial zoning treatment in Norman (where customer patronage is not typical) and likens them more to retail businesses, such as bakeries and Medical Marijuana Dispensaries. Tier III processors would include Tier I and II activities, as well as any other activity, and this category would essentially replace the “catch-all” category previously in place. To make sure we are treating all types of Medical Marijuana Processor Sub-Categorization December 6, 2019 Page | 2 processors the same in the Tier III category, we must specify that “on-site sales” are not allowed if one wants to be a Tier III licensee.

City staff has been unable to locate any municipality that has created sub-categories of processors for the purpose of placing them in commercial areas (some sub-categorization has been found, but processors were simply distributed amongst differing “levels” of industrial areas, rather than within commercial areas). Thus, the chief challenge in this approach is creating a category that complies with state law and anticipates future application of the language in a way that avoids inconsistencies or confusion. Once the definitions and categories are determined, the application to licensing and zoning provisions is fairly straight-forward.

The attached draft treats Tier I and Tier II Medical Marijuana Processors the same as Medical Marijuana Dispensaries, and specifies that where a Tier I and Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor license is obtained for a location that already has a Medical Marijuana Dispensary license, duplicative fees need not be paid. For zoning purposes, Tier I and II Medical Marijuana Processors are allowed in the same places, and under the same circumstances, as Medical Marijuana Dispensaries. Tier III Medical Marijuana Processors are treated the same as the “catch-all” category before, and where necessary, the amendments note that “on-site sales” are not permitted without a special use.

The Challenges of Potentially Differing Treatment of Manufacturing Activities

Additionally, City Council relayed a question to staff regarding the potential sub-categorization of extraction processes (solvent extraction versus non-solvent extraction). In particular, City Council requested an evaluation as to whether processors that extract (without using volatile chemicals in the process) could be compatibly located in any commercial areas in Norman, and under what circumstances that could occur.

In order to vet this question, City Staff has reached out to several municipalities in both Colorado and California that have regulated this industry locally for many years. However, City staff was unable to find a city with a comparable zoning structure that allowed processors1 in commercially-zoned areas. On the whole, it was determined that nearly all municipalities with zoning regulations placed processors in industrial areas only. Some municipalities defined subcategories of processors for licensing purposes, but nonetheless only placed such activities as permitted uses amongst the industrially-zoned districts. A good example of this is Los Angeles, where uses are defined and organized in a categorical manner. Additionally, a small number of municipalities engage in an “open zoning” structure, which categorically allows all uses in all areas with additional regulations or restrictions “backed in” based on the type of use and the location of the use.2 A good example of this type of zoning treatment structure is Denver.

The City of Norman Zoning Ordinance is not structured similarly to the zoning codes of Los Angeles or Denver. The City of Norman has historically not engaged in “open zoning” such as Denver for any industry and has instead treated all businesses similarly by specifying the uses allowed (by right or

1 In some states, “processors” are referred to as “manufacturers,” but the definitions are substantially similar to Oklahoma’s “processor” definition. 2 Some these additional restrictions include setbacks from residential areas, as well as the size and the type of extraction processes involved. Medical Marijuana Processor Sub-Categorization December 6, 2019 Page | 3 special use) in each zoning district. While some special uses implement additional setback requirements, no uses appear to be based on the area or size of the space being utilized for the use. Additionally, in some instances, the Norman Zoning Ordinance does provide a particular definition for a use in order to fully explain, broaden or narrow it. However, this is not the case for most uses. Thus, this structure is also unlike Los Angeles, in that the City of Norman’s zoning uses are presented in “lists,” rather than in defined categories.

Another important consideration is that the Norman Zoning Ordinance listed uses have been compiled over the years to specifically list those types of manufacturing- or assembly-type activities that are allowed in commercial areas (such as “Baking goods store” and “Delicatessan store” and “Flower shop”) as distinguished from those allowed in industrial areas (such as the “Manufacture of beer, wine and sprits” and “Assembly of electrical appliances” and “The manufacture of bakery goods, candy cosmetics, dairy products, drugs, perfumes….”). Thus, the “line” that exists between these types of uses is demonstrated within these lists, rather than defined specifically within the Zoning Ordinance.

Thus, in order to identify different “types” of processors for different treatment in the attached draft, sub-categories were necessarily created within listed zoning uses. This is a challenge because the Norman Zoning Ordinance is not organized in a manner which easily accommodates sub-categorization, which risks the creation and ripple effect of internal code inconsistencies. This risk explains why subcategorization is not generally employed for other use types and is why the attached draft ordinance seeks to avoid alteration to more parts of the City Code than are strictly necessary.

City Staff has suggested a manner in which Norman may consider implementation of limited “tiers” of processors, where processing activities clearly fall more on the “commercial” side of that “line,” such as grinding marijuana for making pre-rolled joints and infusing products with concentrates created at manufacturing facilities. However, the Norman Zoning Ordinance does not provide clear guidance for differing treatment of extraction or concentrate-manufacturing processors, which can involve specific and scientific processes and specialized equipment.

Some guidance may be gleaned, however, from the City of Norman’s previous treatment of a similar “manufacturing” process that, due to industry and public demand, may occasionally seek to locate in more commercial areas: breweries. While the brewing of alcoholic beverages involves processes and equipment clearly different from the commercial manufacturing activities typically located in Norman’s commercially-zoned areas, such establishments may be permitted to locate, under the current Zoning Ordinance, in only C-3 areas when a specific list of conditions are met.3 Medical Marijuana Processors have, since inception of Norman’s Medical Marijuana regulation, been allowed to seek Special Use in not only C-3, but also C-1 and C-2 zoning districts.

State law allows municipalities to create special uses (called “specific use permits” in state statute, see 11 O.S. § 43-113) where “because of the size of the land they require or the specialized nature of the use, may more intensely dominate the area in which they are located and their effects on the general public are broader in scope than other uses permitted in the district.” In granting special uses, municipalities have wide discretion in requiring “conditions and safeguards” that are “indicated to be

3 The special uses drafted for Medical Marijuana businesses similarly employed additional conditions that were not included in the amendments ultimately passed by City Council, but which may merit future consideration if the City Council wishes to consider aligning the treatment of these businesses with other businesses, such as breweries and light industrial operations. Medical Marijuana Processor Sub-Categorization December 6, 2019 Page | 4 important to the welfare and protection of adjacent property and community as a whole.” Id. A public hearing on a special use request permits inquiry into matters allowing for such specialized determinations. By contrast, permitted uses are allowed only as set forth specifically in a municipal code, and applied as written, and as based on state law standards for municipal zoning.

The flexible avenues for considering and granting special uses created opportunities to breweries to locate in certain commercial areas by special use, a process that has been smoothly implemented in recent years. These avenues appear well suited to consideration of the various types of Medical Marijuana processing, particularly in light of the fact that processes are evolving with the industry, and any categories identified now are likely to be undermined by advances in the industry and processing technology.

CONCLUSION

Feedback from the full City Council on December 3, 2019 was that City Staff should proceed in finalizing the attached ordinance, based upon the currently-proposed 3-tier structure. City Staff was also advised that considerations for additional tiers (based on distinction between types of extraction activities) would wait for further consideration at a later date. Attached please find a final draft of the ordinance for your consideration.

cc: Darrel Pyle, City Manager Jane Hudson, Planning and Community Development Director Brenda Hall, City Clerk

[Attachment]

Ordinance No. O-1920-__

AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORMAN, OKLAHOMA, AMENDING SECTION 13-108, IN ARTICLE I OF CHAPTER 13 (LICENSES AND OCCUPATIONS); AMENDING ARTICLE XXXIV, SECTION 13-3401, IN CHAPTER 13 (LICENSES AND OCCUPATIONS); 422.7 (RO, RESIDENCE-OFFICE DISTRICT), 422.9 (O-1, OFFICE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT); 423.2 (C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT), 424.1 (C-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT), 424.2 (TC, TOURIST COMMERCIAL DISTRICT), 424.3 (CR, RURAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT), 425.1 (C-3, INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL DISTRICT), 426.1 (I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT), 428.1 (M-1, RESTRICTED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT), 429 (MUD, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT), ALL IN ARTICLE XI OF CHAPTER 22 (ZONING ORDINANCE); AND AMENDING SECTION 450 (DEFINITIONS), IN ARTICLE XIV OF CHAPTER 22 (ZONING ORDINANCE); ALL IN ORDER TO UPDATE CITY CODE LICENSING PROVISIONS AND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW FOR THREE TIERS OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA PROCESSORS AS ALLOWED BY STATE LAW, AND TO ADD DEFINITIONS AND OTHER RELATED PROVISIONS; AND PROVIDING FOR THE SEVERABILITY THEREOF.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORMAN, OKLAHOMA:

§ 1. That Section 13-108 of Chapter 13 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 13-108 – Fee schedules for licenses and permits and occupational taxes.

(s) Manufactured fertilizer ….. 25.00

(t) Marijuana Establishment

(1) Medical Marijuana Dispensary …. 600.00 initial/450.00 renewal

(2) Medical Marijuana Processor …. 900.00 (initial and renewal) (A Tier I or II Medical Marijuana Processor that also obtains a Medical Marijuana Dispensary license for the location shall be issued a separate Processor license, but shall not be required to pay duplicative initial or renewal fees)

(i) Tier 1 and/or II Medical Marijuana Processor …. 600 initial/450 renewal

(ii) Tier III Processor …. 900.00 initial and renewal)

(3) Medical Marijuana Commercial Grower …. 900.00 (initial and renewal)

(4) Medical Marijuana Testing Laboratory …. 900.00 (initial and renewal) Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 2

(5) Medical Marijuana Research Facility …. 500.00 (initial and renewal)

(6) Medical Marijuana Education Facility …. 500.00 (initial and renewal)

(7) Medical Marijuana Storage Facility (only required for locations where no other Marijuana Establishment license is obtained) ….600.00 initial/450.00 renewal

****

§ 2. That Article XXXIV – MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENT LICENSES within Chapter 13 (“Licenses and Occupations”) shall be amended as follows:

ARTICLE XXXIV. MARIJUANA ESTABLISHMENT LICENSES

SEC. 13-3401 – Definitions.

Those definitions set forth in the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana and Patient Protection Act, and found at 63 Okla. Stat. §§ 420 et seq., shall be incorporated and applicable within this Article. Additionally, the following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:

Marijuana Concentrate: subject to state law definitions, also generally means a product created by the extraction of constituent parts, including cannabinoids, terpenes and other biomolecules, from marijuana plant(s), and may include but is not limited to kief, hash, rosin, tinctures, oils, shatter, pull and snap, wax, budder/badder, crumble, distillate, and crystalline, and may result from extraction processes.

Marijuana Establishment: means those establishments listed in Section 13-108(t) herein, and including Medical Marijuana Businesses, as defined by applicable state law and regulation.

Medical Marijuana Storage Facility: means a facility where medical marijuana is being stored only, as permitted by applicable state law and regulation, and which facility is at a location for which any other Marijuana Establishment license has not already been obtained, and is not open to the general public.

Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor: means a facility defined and regulated by Oklahoma state law as a Medical Marijuana Processor, and which engages in only the following activity(ies): the preparation (from medical marijuana grown off-site), including necessary grinding, of “pre-rolled” marijuana cigarettes, “joints” or “blunts” for sale on-site. Nothing in this code affects state law license categories for Medical Marijuana Establishments. Local zoning and licensing applicants may be required to seek multiple state licenses in order to comply with state law.

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 3

Medical Marijuana Processing are the cooking, baking or preparation of Medical Marijuana edible products, or the addition of Marijuana Concentrate to products pre-manufactured off-site, such as lotions or soaps. Nothing in this code affects state law license categories for Medical Marijuana Establishments. Local zoning and licensing applicants may be required to seek multiple state licenses in order to comply with state law.

Tier III Medical Marijuana Processor: means a facility defined and regulated by Oklahoma state law as a Medical Marijuana Processor, and which engages in any type(s) of Medical Marijuana Processing, including all allowed extraction processes, except that on-site sales are not permitted. Nothing in this code affects state law license categories for Medical Marijuana Establishments.

****

§ 3. That Section 422.7 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 422.7 – RO, RESIDENCE-OFFICE DISTRICT

* 3. Special Use. The following uses may be permitted, after review, in accordance with Section 434.1:

(m) Pre-packaged food store and toiletries within apartment buildings or complexes wherein there are a minimum of 150 dwelling units, provided that:

(1) Such store is limited to the main floor or below of the building in which it is located; (2) There is no direct entrance thereto from any public street, sidewalk or other public way; (3) No part of such store, or its entrance is visible from any public way, street or sidewalk; (4) That such store shall not be advertised in any manner; (5) In reviewing any application for permission to establish and operate any such store in any apartment building or complex, the following matters shall be considered: [a] The proximity of other business or commercial districts, and whether or not the proposed store would constitute an independent commercial enterprise, as opposed to any “accessory” use to the tenants of the apartment complex; [b] Service entrances for delivery vehicles and adequate space for the parking of customers; [c] The size and character of the apartment building or complex, since the tenants thereof will be expected to furnish substantially all of the financial support of such store. (6) Any ordinance hereafter enacted granting permission for the establishment and operation of any pre-packaged food store after review, may set forth restrictions as to the space to be occupied, provisions for the automatic

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 4

termination of permission for violations, and any other reasonable conditions which the Commission may seem proper. (n) Medical Marijuana Dispensary, Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor, or Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law (only when in conjunction with residential uses in a mixed building).

****

§ 4. That Section 423.2 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 423.2 – C-1, LOCAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT

2. Uses Permitted. Property and buildings in a C-1, Local Commercial District, shall be used only for the following purposes:

* Leathergoods shop. Medical Marijuana Dispensary, as allowed by state law. Messenger or telegraph service.

* Theatre (excluding drive-in theaters), including one that sells alcoholic beverages in compliance with state law (O-1718-51) Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. Toy store. * 3. Special Use. The following uses may be permitted, after review, in accordance with Section 434.1:

* (g) Municipal use, public buildings and public utility. (h) Medical Marijuana Education Facility, as allowed by state law. (i) Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. (ji) Medical Marijuana Research Facility, as allowed by state law. (kj) Medical Marijuana Testing Laboratory, as allowed by state law. (k) Tier III Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law.

****

§ 5. That Section 424.1 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 424.1 – C-2, GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 5

2. Uses Permitted. Property and buildings in a C-2, General Commercial District, shall be used only for the following purposes:

* (e) Automobile, farm implement and machinery repair, sales and service, but not automobile wrecking yards or junk yards.

* Lumber and building materials sales yard. Medical Marijuana Dispensary, as allowed by state law. Music, radio or television shop.

* Storage Warehouse. Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. Trailer camp.

* 3. Special Use. The following uses may be permitted, after review, in accordance with Section 434.1:

(m) Municipal use, public buildings and public utility. (n) Medical Marijuana Education Facility, as allowed by state law. (o) Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. (po) Medical Marijuana Research Facility, as allowed by state law. (qp) Medical Marijuana Testing Laboratory, as allowed by state law. (q) Tier III Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law.

****

§ 6. That Section 424.2 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 424.2 – TC, TOURIST COMMERCIAL DISTRICT

2. Uses Permitted.

(a) Any of the following uses:

* (8) Ice dispensing machine (and other outdoor-type automatic vending machines). (9) Medical Marijuana Dispensary, as allowed by state law. (O-1920-4) (10) Miniature golf course. (11) Offices accessory to main use. (12) Parks or playgrounds.

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 6

(13) Parking lot or structure, non-commercial accessory to and within 200 feet. (14) Pre-packaged food store. (15) Service station. (16) Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor. (17) Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor. (168) Travel trailer store. (179) Sporting goods store, including sale of live bait. (O-9596-19) (1820) Child Care Center, as specified in Section 438.3. (O-9596-19)

****

§ 7. That Section 424.3 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 424.3 – CR, RURAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT

2. Uses Permitted. Property and buildings in CR, Rural Commercial District, shall be used only for the following purposes:

(a) No individual use shall exceed a Gross Floor Area of 35,000 square feet:

* (12) Key shop. (13) Medical Marijuana Dispensary, as allowed by state law. (O-1920-4) (14) Office building and offices for such professional services as accountant, architect, attorney, business or management consultant, court reporter, dentist or dental surgeon, engineer, geologies or geophysicist, linguist, landscape architect, optometrist, optician, osteopathic physician, planning consultant, psychologist, physician or surgeon, or registered nurse. Funeral homes and mortuaries shall not be considered professional services permitted in this district. (15) Package liquor store. (16) Pharmacy. (17) Plant nursery. (18) News stand and tobacco store. (19) Restaurant. (20) Shoe store or repair shop. (21) Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. (22) Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law.

§ 8. That Section 425.1 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 425.1 – C-3, Intensive Commercial District

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 7

3. Special Use. The following uses may be permitted, after review, in accordance with Section 434.1: (O-9596-19; O-0304-29; O-1213-17; O-1314-13)

(j) Municipal use, public buildings and public utility. (O-1617-31) (k) Medical Marijuana Education Facility, as allowed by state law. (l) Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. (ml) Medical Marijuana Research Facility, as allowed by state law. (nm) Medical Marijuana Testing Laboratory, as allowed by state law. (n) Tier III Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law.

****

§ 9. That Section 426.1 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 426.1 – I-1, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT

1. Uses Permitted. Property and buildings in an I-1, Light Industrial District, shall be used only for the following purposes:

(b) The Following uses when conducted within a complete enclosed building:

(9) Laboratories: Experimental, phot or motion picture, film or testing. For the purposes of this section, “Laboratories” includes Medical Marijuana Testing Laboratories, as allowed by state law, that fully comply with this provision. (10) Poultry or rabbit killing incidental to a retail business on the same premises. (11) Foundry casting light weight non-ferrous metals. (12) Tire retreading and recapping when incidental to a retail business. (13) Pipe storage yard. (14) Machinery or equipment storage yard. (15) Medical Marijuana Commercial Grower, as allowed by state law. (16) Medical Marijuana Education Facility, as allowed by state law. (17) Medical Marijuana Processor, (any Tier, except that on-site sales are only permitted as a Special Use), as allowed by state law. (18) Medical Marijuana Storage Facility. *

2. Special Use. The following uses may be permitted, after review, in accordance with Section 434.1: (O-9596-19)

(e) Municipal use, public buildings and public utility.

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 8

(f) Medical Marijuana Dispensary, as allowed by state law. (g) Medical Marijuana Research Facility, as allowed by state law. (h) Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. (i) Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law.

****

§ 10. That Section 427.1 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 428.1 – M-1, RESTRICTED INDUSTRIAL USE

2. Uses Permitted. The uses listed below shall be permitted subject to Use Conditions referenced in this section and as they may be regulated by other sections of the Norman City Ordinances.

(c) Laboratories: experimental, photo or motion picture, film, or testing. For the purposes of this section, “Laboratories” includes Medical Marijuana Testing Laboratories, as allowed by state law, that fully comply with this provision. (d) Mail order house (e) Medical Marijuana Commercial Grower, as allowed by state law (f) Medical Marijuana Education Facility, as allowed by state law. (g) Medical Marijuana Processor (any Tier, except that on-site sales are only permitted as a Special Use), as allowed by state law. (h) Medical Marijuana Storage Facility. (i) Market research (j) Office buildings (k) Systems development (l) Trade Schools and schools for vocational training.

4. Special Use. The following uses may be permitted, after review, in accordance with Section 434.1: (O-9596-19)

(g) Municipal use, public buildings and public utility. (h) Medical Marijuana Dispensary, as allowed by state law. (i) Medical Marijuana Research Facility, as allowed by state law. (j) Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. (k) Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law.

****

§ 11. That Section 429 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 9

SEC. 429 – MUD, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

2. Uses Permitted.

* (16) Key shop (17) Medical Marijuana Dispensary, as allowed by state law (18) Office use (including medical offices) (19) Personal services (20) Pet store (21) Repair shop (22) Shoe shop (including repair) (23) Small electric equipment (including sales and repair) (24) Tier I Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law (25) Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law (246) Toy store

* 4. Special Use. City Council may approve the following Special Uses after review and in accordance with Section 434.1:

* (g) Municipal use, public buildings and public utility. (O-1617-31) (h) Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law. (ih) Medical Marijuana Education Facility, as allowed by state law. (i) Tier III Medical Marijuana Processor, as allowed by state law.

****

§ 12. That Section 450 of Chapter 22 shall be amended to read as follows:

SEC. 450 – DEFINITIONS

(80.4) LUMINOUS TUBE. A glass tube filled with a gas or gas mixture (including neon, argon, mercury or other gasses), usually of small diameter (10-15 millimeter), caused to emit light by the passage of an electric current, and commonly bend into various forms for use as a decoration or signs. A luminous tub does not include common fluorescent tubes or compact fluorescent lamps.

(80.5) MARIJUANA DEFINITIONS.

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 10

Those definitions set forth in the Oklahoma Medical Marijuana and Patient Protection Act, and found at 63 Okla. Stat. §§ 420 et seq., shall be incorporated and applicable within the Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, the following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:

Marijuana Establishment: means those establishments listed in Section 13-108(t) herein, and including Medical Marijuana Businesses, as defined by applicable state law and regulation.

Tier II Medical Marijuana Processor: means a facility defined and regulated by Oklahoma state law as a Medical Marijuana Processor, and which engages in Tier Medical Marijuana Processor activities and/or the following activities: the use of Marijuana Concentrate(s) (created off-site in compliance with state law), to make derivative infused products for sale on-site. Tier II Medical Marijuana Processing does not include extraction processes of any kind. Examples of Tier II Medical Marijuana Processing are the cooking, baking or preparation of Medical Marijuana edible products, or the addition of Marijuana Concentrate to products pre-manufactured off-site, such as lotions or soaps. Nothing in this code affects state law license categories for Medical Marijuana Establishments. Local zoning and licensing applicants may be required to seek multiple state licenses in order to comply with state law.

(80.6) MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE. Under the circumstances, reasonable efforts have been undertaken to comply with the regulations or requirement, the costs of compliance clearly outweigh the potential benefits to the public or would unreasonably burden the prosed project or development, and reasonable steps have been undertaken to minimize any potential harm or adverse impact resulting from noncompliance.

****

Ordinance No. O-1920-4 Page 11

§ 13. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is, for any reason, held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.

ADOPTED this ______day NOT ADOPTED this ______day

of , 2019. of , 2019.

(Mayor) (Mayor)

ATTEST:

(City Clerk)