Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9 251231_WrittenStatement_MayaTO: Kris Peck, Seward City Clerk FROM: Maya Moriarty, Wellness Advocate 400 Fourth Avenue, Seward, AK 99664 Mica VanBuskirk, Education Advocate 1904 Forget Me Knot Circle, Seward, AK 99664 Katie Cornwell, Prevention Specialist 106 Ash Street, Seward, AK 99664 DATE: December 21, 2025 SUBJECT: Written Statement - Appeal and Request for Reversal of Resolution 2025-035, CUP Approval of Tufted PuƯin drive-thru Maya, Mica, and Katie have been advocates for prevention, wellness, and education for a combined total of over 60 years. We are actively involved in programs and services that improve the mental, behavioral, and physical health of the community; projects like the Seward Community Playground, the Bike Park, The Children’s Museum, and Youth 360 promote health and wellness. Because we are strong advocates for prevention and wellness, we needed to take this stand and ask for a reversal of Resolution 2025-035. Allowing drive-thru sales of a controlled substance sets up a precedence that the community doesn’t want (2025 Comprehensive Plan survey) in a location deemed to be the most dangerous intersection in Seward not only by the public (2025 Comprehensive Plan survey) but also by KPB’s Safe Streets and Roads For All. The December 2, 2025, P&Z Agenda Statement provided a narrowed scope of the 2030 Comprehensive and Strategic Plan which rationalized its support of Resolution 2025-035. Please review our appeal packet which contained Commissioner Rhonda Hubbard’s “Alternative Findings et al” and I’m also attaching a copy of Maya’s citizen’s comments. One of the arguments is that the proposed use is in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan only citing support for business and growth. The 2030 plan was adopted on May 2017 and the community surveys did not question the community about marijuana establishments. It did ask about values, goals and objectives and 2.2.10 Land Development outlines that priority, “We are to ensure all adopted codes reflect community values” and the highlight states, “We value orderly growth and balanced development that is driven by community consensus in conformance with the land use plan.” (Same Written Statement received by the City Clerk December 31, 2025 at 13:45 value listed under 3.2.1 Promote residential and commercial development within the city of Seward and its vicinity in accordance with community values) The 2025 Comprehensive and Strategic Plan survey results show that the current land use codes are ineƯective for several reasons including “being antiquated.” When asked, “What types of development do you oppose in Seward regardless of location?” the top answers included tourism focused development and marijuana establishments. These are related queries because P&Z updated the land use codes related to marijuana in 2024 with a draft resolution for Council dated March 2025. No action was taken. In the December 2, 2025 meeting that frustration was verbalized by Commissioners Rhonda Hubbard and Nathaniel Charbonneau because the updated codes do not allow drive-thru cannabis sales. Commissioner Hubbard made this point in “Alternative Findings et al” and in her presentation of Tufted PuƯin marketing material. That material shows the promotion and anticipated growth of marijuana tourism which is a direct conflict of the community’s values of “opposed developments regardless of location.” The proposed use is in conflict with community values that specifically cite marijuana tourism and is also in conflict with SCC 15.10.115.8 Provide for orderly and stable public, residential, commercial and industrial development. The December 2nd P&Z Agenda Statement also provided a narrow scope of whether the proposed use would not be harmful to the public safety, health, or welfare of the community and failed to include SCC 15.10.115.5 Prevent undue traƯic congestion. The rational for meeting the public safety purpose was a subjective determination of a low volume drive-thru and a one-way traƯic pattern from Port Avenue on to the Seward Highway. The applicant provided the number of cars he expected and yet his promotional material and own statements are of expected growth thereby changing expected drive-thru volume. Conditions for the drive-thru listed in the statement were discussed (right turn only) but not voted on by P&Z. A coƯee drive thru has a much higher traƯic volume industry wide than both restaurants and cannabis stores. The queue length for an “average” volume coƯee drive thru is 140-180 feet per industry standards, a “busy” drive thru is even longer. This average length is twice the 87 feet the applicant states they have available. The location doesn’t allow for double drive-thru lanes and does not have enough space for a longer queue line when entering from Port Avenue and exiting on to the Seward Highway. By submitting 107 signatures, the Tufted PuƯin anticipates and is marketing for growth. This CUP should have been evaluated at its busiest proposed use. P&Z also failed the community by limiting their evaluation on the actual property boundaries. It has been over 25 years since a restaurant operated at this location. The last use prior to the Tufted PuƯin was as an oƯice building. This corner has had a dramatic increase in road traƯic with much more to come when construction is completed on the cruise ship terminal and Hotel 360. At this time, there is no alternative route for buses and semi’s to take. This is a dangerous intersection! Safe Streets and the 2025 Comprehensive Plan survey support this fact. The other appeals speak in more detail on a vari ety of traƯic issues. P&Z, City Council and even AMCO all include in their mission statements a responsibility to protect the public. Drive-thru cannabis sales does not protect the public for many reasons. “Alternative Findings, et al” notes the fact that staƯ at the Tufted PuƯin will have diƯiculty assessing overuse or confirming identity of the buyer(s). A drive-thru creates additional diƯiculties with passenger customers including: identification, evaluating inebriation, providing education, verifying minor relation, ensuring security measures of backseat customers and many other issues. AMCO regulations are silent on passenger customers probably because allowing drive-thrus is new and not well thought out. Instead, the emphasis appears to be on verifying that each customer is over 21 years of age, with video verification securely stored for a specified duration. The Tufted PuƯin website also has a picture of THC infused brew. What is the drive-thru safeguard for this? A lid? AMCO regulations allow related children 7 and under with the buyer. What kind of norm is being supported by having children in the vehicle and what happens to a child when he/she accidentally ingests THC infused brew? Per SCC 8.25.025 A. Council may recommend approval, denial, or approval with conditions of any application for a marijuana establishment. AMCO regulations defer to local authority and encourage it. This regulation is very specific and is an acceptable argument by AMCO that selling marijuana through a drive-thru should be considered in order to satisfy SSC 8.25.025. The attorney advice was subjective and should have been discussed with AMCO. Council can apply conditions to ensure passenger sales include proper I.D. verification and videotaped, lighting is adequate, buyer inebriation can be evaluated, etc. We reiterate the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Land Development section 2.2.10: “We value orderly growth and balanced development that is driven by community consensus in conformance with the land use plan, “ and section 3.2.1 “Promote residential and commercial development within the city of Seward and its vicinity in accordance with community values.” In this case, drive-thru cannabis sales has been shown to be dangerous, unvetted, and not wanted per the community surveys. As with prohibited drive-thru alcohol sales, protecting the public should outweigh economic growth.  A recent study of dead drivers in a major Ohio county morgue found that 42% of them tested positive for THC. Pot apologists quickly jumped to their defense, noting that THC can be detected for up to a month after use. But the national past 30-day marijuana use rate is only 16%, yet these drivers had average THC levels 5 to 10 times the state legal limits. https://www.foxnews.com/health/fatal-crash-report-finds-nearly-half-deadly-wrecks-tied- illegal-drug  The drive-through format presents heightened risks to public safety. Allowing individuals to purchase cannabis without leaving their vehicles diminishes the opportunity for meaningful customer screening, responsible service, and proper education on usage and legal limits,” “This model could inadvertently encourage consumption in vehicles, increase the potential for impaired driving, and pose enforcement challenges for local law enforcement agencies. Drive- through dispensaries are likely to generate higher volumes of traƯic and congestion,” And …"We have an obligation to maintain a careful balance between economic opportunity and the well- being of our citizens. While we recognize the potential for revenue generation from cannabis- related businesses, we believe that such establishments must be held to high operational and locational standards..." https://www.thebatavian.com/jfbeck99272012/city-manager-opposes- drive-through-dispensary-citing-concerns-about-public-health Please consider strongly SCC 8.25.025 and the powers it gives to Council. Based on the content of this statement and that of the other three appellants, Council should vacate the drive-thru cannabis sales permit and reverse Resolution 2025-035. Att: 12.2.2025 Citizen Comments: Maya Moriarty 2030 Comprehensive Plan Vol. 1 (cited sections) 2025 Comprehensive Plan survey results My name is Maya Moriarty and I reside outside of city limits but have worked within the City for over 28 yrs. I do not support Resolution 2025-035. The packet allows for a low traƯic drive thru facility but a coƯee drive thru has a much higher traƯic volume industry wide than both restaurants and cannabis stores. The queue length for an “average” volume coƯee drive thru is 140-180 feet per industry standards, a “busy” drive thru is even longer. This average length is twice the 87 feet the applicant states they have available. Since the applicant has submitted 107 signatures from his customers, we can anticipate increased use further supporting a longer queue length. It has been over 25 years since a restaurant operated at this location. Since that time this corner has had a dramatic increase in road traƯic with much more to come when construction is completed on the cruise ship terminal and Hotel 360. At this time, there is no alternative route for buses and semi’s to take. The bike path also didn’t exist 25 yrs ago. It is often used by unsupervised youth. The drive thru traƯic flow exits across the bike path. We’ve all read the horror stories of youth being run over because the driver didn’t see them. How horrible would that be? In July 2025 the City Manager of Batavian, outside Rochester NY, wasn’t in favor of drive-thru cannabis sales. Rachel Tabelski said in an interview:  The drive-through format presents heightened risks to public safety. Allowing individuals to purchase cannabis without leaving their vehicles diminishes the opportunity for meaningful customer screening, responsible service, and proper education on usage and legal limits,” “This model could inadvertently encourage consumption in vehicles, increase the potential for impaired driving, and pose enforcement challenges for local law enforcement agencies.  Drive-through dispensaries are likely to generate higher volumes of traffic and congestion,”  And …"We have an obligation to maintain a careful balance between economic opportunity and the well-being of our citizens. While we recognize the potential for revenue generation from cannabis-related businesses, we believe that such establishments must be held to high operational and locational standards..." I agree with her and firmly believe that the Commissioners on P&Z were focused on these concerns, especially the last , when they presented code changes to City Council at the joint work session held a year ago. Had Council supported the unanimous recommendations from P&Z, drive-thru cannabis sales would not be allowed today and the bike path would fall under the definition of parks. The public and various health-focused organizations are still waiting for the follow-up meeting to be scheduled. Should P&Z approve this CUP, additional conditions should be considered like months of operation, no minors in the vehicle, and a longer queue length. HOWEVER, I ask that P&Z vote no on this resolution because the location is not safe for a drive-thru, regardless of what is being sold. https://www.thebatavian.com/jfbeck99272012/city-manager-opposes-drive-through-dispensary-citing-concerns-about-public- health