ORDER-2017-129 : Amend the Revised Zoning Ordinances, Chapter 235 for Registered Marijuana Dispensary Regulations as set forth herein

Transcript (~13 min @ 0:54)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 0:41 Peter D. Mortimer: Tonight we have Alderman Peter Mortimer as your chair, that is aye. Alderman Gail Inferno as the vice chair. We're also joined by Alderman Zwirko, Alderman Tramontozzi, Alderman Medeiros, Alderman Boycelle, Alderman Wright, Alderman McAteer-Margolis, Alderman Lemmerman, Alderman Forbes, and President Kahn. The first order we have before us is order 2017-129. It is to amend the revised zoning ordinances chapter 235 for registered marijuana dispensary regulations as set forth herein. We have a motion to suspend the rules from Alderman Forbes, duly seconded by Alderman Inferna. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? We would ask our city planner, Denise Gaffey, to come before us. There was a 35 day period since our last appropriations meeting where the planning board discussed this. And you ought to report back to us, please proceed.

▶ 1:48 Denise Gaffey: Good evening. Good evening. So the planning board did meet following the public hearing on June 1st, the joint public hearing. They met back on June 26th. discussed the comments that were raised at the joint public hearing and issued a report that's dated June 27th so that's been uploaded for a couple of weeks now and so just to briefly summarize there were there were no public comment at the joint public hearing but there was sort of a lively discussion amongst the alderman and the planning board members so there were four or five primary items that were were discussed which we outline in this report probably the most significant was the issue around sighting there sort of was consensus that there was a little bit of confusion with the way that the initial draft was written in and we wanted to make it very clear that the zoning districts that we were identifying for medical marijuana dispensaries is the the BB and the I districts those are the two districts that are located on route 99 so we that was very much part of our discussion but I think there was a little bit of confusion just because of the way that the zoning table is structured so what we have done and recommended is a modification to the proposed amendment and to the table of uses and parking regulations which makes it very clear with a footnote that we're only talking about the BB district and not the BB one district so so that was that was one recommended changes change that is that

▶ 3:34 Denise Gaffey: is presented in the draft revision which is dated June 26 2017 so we also discussed cultivation there was a question about whether the proposed zoning amendment allowed for cultivation and we responded at a time that the the definition which is the same you know definition that is used by the Department of Public Health in the regulations is um does allow for cultivation but we we just make it clear that we as we talked about at the meeting and we wanted to reinforce in this report that the cultivation would have to be an enclosed permanent building structure and it could be no greater than 5,000 square feet and we also point out in the report that in most in most instances that I'm aware of the cultivation is usually operates off-site so we we think would be unlikely that there would be this would be a cultivation an area for cultivation so we did not recommend any modifications to the zoning pursuant to that discussion there was some question about security so we went back and looked into the regulations a little more closely and discovered that the the regulation that the state actually goes through a very rigorous security check for these entities we outlined in this report the many different types of security measures that they have in place including the quarry check so consequently we didn't think it was necessary to augment the zoning regulation our zoning regulations around that issue because we felt like the Department of Public Health does a pretty rigorous job in this area there was some question about signage and with some discussion at the public joint public hearing about signage in a request that we make it very clear that flashing signage neon signage specifically flashing signage is not allowed so we did think that was a good idea and we did make a modification to the zoning amendment to specifically exclude flashing signage even though that it's already covered in our signage zoning but it's just kind of belts and suspenders makes it very clear and there was a question about taxes following the public hearing I did reach out to the the chief assessor and ask the question about whether taxes could be could be applied and he explained that as a medical office use that he would he would classify the the any medical marijuana establishment as a medical office use and it would and he would apply property taxes similarly and then we just mentioned in the report how typically there are host negotiations that are negotiated between the city officials and these entities to manage any potential impacts given that they are nonprofits and finally there was a request that the Board of Aldermen are notified on the any applications that the planning board should receive for site plan review so we did we thought that was a great idea and we added the board of alden and alderman as an entity to get that notification so all of those modifications are represented in the revised um regulations or the revised zoning amendment

▶ 7:00 Denise Gaffey: dated june 26 2017 and um otherwise we the planning board um requests that um the the

▶ 7:09 Denise Gaffey: board of aldermen approved the zoning as as revised so thank you very much city planner gaffey

▶ 7:14 Peter D. Mortimer: um as you aptly stated thank you very much for that synopsis as you aptly stated this has been been on our website for a few weeks, available for us to read, and available for members of the public to read. And thank you very much for the presentation. I think we're all well versed in it, and it's a very thorough job by you. President Kahn, please.

▶ 7:39 Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm going to support this order. These medical marijuana facilities are now obviously lawful businesses in the commonwealth. My concern is if we don't have a zoning district where they're permitted, that somebody could argue that they're permitted everywhere. I think that this is a good location for such a business. This is a zoning issue. We've roamed pretty far afield the last time from zoning, from where I sit. But I'm going to support this. We need to have a district where this legal business can operate. A lot of the other stuff we discussed before, and I hope we don't discuss it again, is covered by other zoning ordinances, state laws, state regulations that really have little or nothing to do with this. So I'd like to see this pass and get this on the books so that we have a zone where if somebody wants to come in here and conduct this business, they can. And we do not have the fear that this use could be permitted anywhere in the city without

▶ 8:47 Peter D. Mortimer: as to where it would be located Thank You president Kahn Alderman Wright

▶ 8:51 Francis X. Wright Jr.: please Thank You mr. chairman initially Denise thank you for your presentation I just want to make sure it's clear to anyone who heard you say the BB district you were talking about the letters B and not the BB school district

▶ 9:08 Francis X. Wright Jr.: sorry it's a business so to all my constituents at the levi gould and the fuller house um we will not be having a medical marijuana facility in the bb district um just to kind of piggyback on alderman khan's comments uh it is legal uh and i think Thorp an opportunity here for a community like melrose that has very little commercial real estate and um yet has this kind of odd corner of the city that really is not generally deemed to be part of the the melrose neighborhood area um where the city could could see some revenue as a result of this and i think it's you know we had our opportunity at the ballot to voice our position one way or the other it's passed it's uh it's gonna happen so um i think this This is an opportunity for the city to zone it in a place where it won't impact our neighborhoods and yet may be a revenue producing source of revenue for the city going forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

▶ 10:20 Peter D. Mortimer: Thank you, Alderman Wright. Would there be a motion to amend to include the revisions made by the planning board? Who was that? Alderman Medeiros has made a motion to amend this order to include the revisions made since the public hearing. second to include the revisions made by the planning board since our last public hearing it was duly seconded by alderman inferna any discussion on the motion to amend please

▶ 10:48 Monica C. Medeiros: alderman medeiros thank you i just want to thank ms gaffey and the planning board for a lively discussion but for also following up and clarifying this definitely yes i think it was a little bit confusing the last especially the the math is is great and i think it was just the gradations of color were a little bit difficult so i definitely appreciate the clarifications and looking into cultivation the cultivation questions as well and um you know as president khan said that this is certainly something that has been deemed illegal use and you know i i share those concerns that if we don't do something here tonight that of course it is possible that somebody could come in and move in any given place and I just want to so also clarify thank you for the clarification regarding taxation so that would be real estate taxes that we could possibly see some property taxes but for right now this is only for medical use this is not recreational and there is no local option tax. I just want to make sure that that's clear to the public. But you know, we're not going to see a boatload of local option sales taxes on this medical use. Thank you.

▶ 12:05 Peter D. Mortimer: Thank you. Alderman Medeiros, seeing no...

▶ 12:09 Mary Beth McAteer-Margolis: Just to follow up with both Alderman Connolly and Alderman Medeiros in terms of the citing. It does indicate BBN1, or I, and I, and if anyone were at home to look at the map, as Alderman President Kahn has mentioned, there are state regulations that would prohibit this use in those other I areas throughout the city because they are within 500 feet of areas where children would congregate on a regular basis.

▶ 12:42 Denise Gaffey: Well, in the case of the I district, the industrial district, we only have one.

▶ 12:46 Mary Beth McAteer-Margolis: we only have one the one down in one on Route 99 and the other one the one in

▶ 12:49 Denise Gaffey: lower Washington Street was modified to be an I a I a years ago when we created the Smart Growth District so that now has its own has its own designation

▶ 13:00 Peter D. Mortimer: don't yeah designation on the table and if I understand your presentation you changed that that was one of the revisions that you made well the BB BB

▶ 13:04 Denise Gaffey: one is now yeah we have an asterisk or a footnote in the table right just single of the bb um the business district versus the bb1 that you made that abundantly clear correct right

▶ 13:18 Peter D. Mortimer: yeah thank you mr shimmy thank you alderman makatia margolis seeing no further alderman wishing to be heard on the motion to amend to include the revisions made since june 26th they have posted on june 26th all in favor of the motion to amend please say aye aye any opposed Opposed, hearing none, the order is amended in accordance with the revisions made by the Planning Board since the public hearing on this matter. Is there a further motion?

▶ 13:45 Speaker 2: Motion to recommend.

▶ 13:46 Peter D. Mortimer: We have Alderman Medeiros with a motion to recommend this order for passage. Second. To the full board at our next full board meeting, duly seconded by Alderman Boycelle. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed, hearing none, this order as amended will be recommended to the full board for passage at our next full board meeting. And the next order we have delves into something Alderman Medeiros mentioned, that this is now talking about the moratorium on recreational marijuana, which we're going to have now. That other one was medical, this is recreational, and we're looking towards, we have a view towards a moratorium on that. And it's order 2017-130 to amend revised zoning ordinances, Chapter 235, Sections 235-5 and 235-16.2, to enact a temporary moratorium on recreational marijuana establishments as set forth herein. Please proceed, Ms. Gaffey.