Planning commission recommends denial of proposed marijuana retailer at 492 Southwest Capitol Avenue

The City of Battle Creek Planning Commission voted Dec. 18, 2024, to recommend denial of Special Use Permit PSUP-24-4, a petition from MCI JB Investment LLC to operate an adult-use marijuana retail establishment at 492 Southwest Capitol Avenue.

Planning staff recommended approval, telling the commission the application met buffering requirements in the marijuana ordinance and the zoning ordinance and noting a previous approval had lapsed. "The application meets all of the buffering requirements in the marijuana ordinance," staff said during the presentation and listed the standard conditions recommended in the staff report.

Marshall Isso, identified in the public hearing as the owner and applicant, told the commission his company is a three-partner operation with construction and operations experience and that the proposal would place a roughly 3,000-square-foot dispensary within a 10,700-square-foot building, with the remaining space proposed as flex office space for lease. "We're gonna try to make the dispensary up to 3,000 square feet," Isso said, and added the company hires local employees and has operated other locations without problems according to his remarks.

Several commissioners raised neighborhood concerns, including the site's proximity to a church and a school and questions about whether the 1,000-foot distance often cited for K–12 schools applied. Staff said the city attorney and planning staff had previously interpreted the ordinance to apply to operational public K–12 school properties and that the application is believed to satisfy the ordinance's buffering as documented in the staff report.

Commissioners debated a motion to postpone the item to allow additional neighborhood outreach and review by the advisory MPC-3 body; that motion failed for lack of support. A subsequent motion to deny the special use permit was made and seconded. The commission conducted a roll-call vote and the chair announced the application was denied by the Planning Commission.

Because the planning commission acts in a recommendatory role, the commission's denial will be forwarded to the City Commission in accordance with normal procedures. The planning commissioners did not amend the staff conditions; the denial was based on the majority vote recorded at the meeting.