GREENFIELD — After a back and forth on how to best move forward, and taking into consideration residents’ concerns, the City Council agreed to reschedule a joint meeting between the Planning Board and the Economic Development Committee so it can consider a zoning amendment that seeks to reduce the size limit on outdoor marijuana cultivation sites.
The amendment proposes returning the limit on outdoor cultivation sites to Tier 1, or 5,000 square feet, from its current limit of 100,000 square feet; limiting the number of licenses of one type that a person can hold for one parcel to three; and limiting the maximum outdoor canopy under all licenses for a single parcel to 15,000 square feet.
“It seems to me like … we need to scale back this proposed marijuana farm,” said Precinct 7 Councilor Jasper Lapienski, referencing a proposed outdoor grow facility at 446 Country Club Road. “And there’s a proposal on the table to do it.”
At-Large Councilor Philip Elmer relayed to councilors that despite the Approval Not Required (ANR) having been endorsed by the Planning Board last month for 446 Country Club Road, City Council is “well within its rights” to make zoning changes, such as the number of square feet of canopy allowed, that would ultimately apply to the Country Club Road property.
“You can’t stop the use of that (property), but we can make reasonable limits on what’s done on that property,” Elmer said, referring to the limits of the ANR.
The conversation among councilors Wednesday night followed multiple remarks from members of the public, urging councilors to reexamine the zoning bylaws in an effort to address the proposed cultivation operation on Country Club Road.
The property became the subject of controversy following abutter notification from three limited liability companies eyeing the site for Tier 11 outdoor cultivation licenses from the state Cannabis Control Commission. Tier 11 allows for grow sites with up to 100,000 square feet of canopy, which is the largest size possible for a cultivation site in Massachusetts, according to the CCC.
“The 300,000-square-foot grow would destroy our quality of life here,” commented resident Al Collins. “The neighbors feel like they’ve been thrown under the bus. … We weren’t warned they were doing any of this.”
Collins urged councilors to pursue the reinstatement of a Tier 1 limit before initiating a moratorium that had previously been discussed.
“The moratorium will give us plenty of time to address the other issues,” he said.
Some councilors said the public hearing last month regarding a moratorium on outdoor cultivation sites should suffice to move the process forward, but others were hesitant that would open the city up to liability.
“It really needs to have the eye of the Planning Department to be written correctly,” said Mayor Roxann Wedegartner, who spoke earlier in the meeting in favor of the zoning amendment. “I think the citizens would be better served by a fully written zoning bylaw. All this does is open up yet another avenue for all the other people who want a marijuana growth to sue us, and we don’t need any more lawsuits.”
After the joint public hearing, both the Economic Development Committee and Planning Board will be expected to make a recommendation to City Council, according to City Clerk Kathy Scott. At that point, City Council will deliberate and vote on the amendment.
The proposed zoning changes for outdoor marijuana cultivation were among a handful of topics taken up by the City Council Wednesday night. In addition to a discussion on the use of social media by police in the wake of Police Department budget cuts, councilors unanimously supported a resolution that called on the mayor to hire a new licensed site professional (LSP) for the environmental cleanup at the former Lunt Silversmiths property on Federal Street.
The property — which the Springfield-based 401 Liberty St. LLC subleases to the Behavioral Health Network and Clinical & Support Options — has been the subject of controversy among residents and city officials who are concerned about the status of the environmental cleanup. In particular, there is concern for contamination levels of trichloroethylene (TCE).
“I understand the mayor’s point of view that … some things need to be done in 60 days,” said Precinct 3 Councilor Virginia “Ginny” DeSorgher, referencing the Notice of Noncompliance the city received following an audit of the cleanup by the Department of Environmental Protection. “But there’s actually another LSP that came to some of the (Public Involvement Plan) meetings. It’s not difficult to read through the materials. I think we would be safer … with a new LSP.”
The city has 60 days from receipt of the Notice of Noncompliance to submit a conceptual Phase II scope of work for the DEP to review. The city must also submit a Post-Audit Completion Statement within those 60 days.
DeSorgher also expressed concern for the appearance of a conflict of interest, given that the LSP is employed by the prospective owner of the property.
Although Elmer ultimately voted in support of the resolution, he did speak on behalf of the LSP company, O’Reilly, Talbot & Okun Associates (OTO).
“OTO is a reputable organization,” he said. “I do believe they’ve failed to adequately clean up the property and I hear the conflict of interest issues. I guess it bothers me that an organization that’s done good work is being thrown under the bus.”
The resolution calling for the mayor to hire a new LSP passed, with Precinct 9 Councilor Derek Helie abstaining from the vote.
Reporter Mary Byrne can be reached at mbyrne@recorder.com or 413-930-4429. Twitter: @MaryEByrne.