Appropriations & Oversight Committee — 2019-01-14

Transcript

▶ 1:34:22 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: called to order this is a committee of the whole for the Board of Aldermen I am chair Lipper Garabedian and I am joined tonight by committee members vice chair Boisselle alderman Mortimer alderman Tramontozzi alderman Medeiros alderman excuse me alderman Forbes alderman Zwirko alderman Bewtra alderman McMaster and president Lemmerman madam clerk of committees could you please call the roll for the planning board chairman Anna Ann D'Souza Ward here Greg Samson Michael Cassavoy Paul King Robert Mercado here Carla Morelli Sharon Petrillo John Sadowski Jack Welch yeah thank you pursuant to the open meeting law this meeting is being recorded and will be available on the City of Melrose website it is also being broadcast live on MMTV

▶ 1:35:22 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: and streamed live at mmtv3.org at this time it is appropriate to open the floor for public comment motion to open the floor for public comment madam chair we have a motion to open the floor for public comment made by Alderman sorry Mortimer second in by vice-chair Boisselle all in favor any opposed okay this is the portion of our meeting where any member of the public can come forward to speak to any agenda item we only have one agenda item tonight on this for this hearing it is a proposed ordinance related to marijuana please put your name and address on the piece of paper at the table when you sit down to speak also our rules limit each speaker to 10 minutes and please be mindful of that it

▶ 1:36:10 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: looks like we have a lot of people here tonight also because this meeting is different from our usual meetings i did want to let you know that after this session of public comment closes we will turn to the order at hand we will have a presentation from our planning department and after that presentation there will be an opportunity to provide comments so you may wish to wait until you hear the presentation because some of your questions could be answered so with that thank you for being here and we look forward to hearing from you Good evening. My name is Rick Gretzky. I'm a resident of 23 Brazil Street, lived there over 38 years. I'm down here tonight to say that I am against any type of medical marijuana, recreational marijuana,

▶ 1:36:57 or cannabis growing, or labs, or anything in the lower Washington Street area. The neighborhoods down there don't deserve this. We have new condominiums going in on old two-family homes that young families are buying and putting their hard-earned money into. They're bringing children into these neighborhoods, and now they want to dump something like this in our area, which I don't think would be appropriate to bringing up families, having young kids back and forth. There's a daycare down in the corner. second thing I want to talk about is women I'll talk about something else on that the traffic issue down there is horrendous as we all know our alderman has had many complaints about the traffic issues on Washington Street you could say what you want about the transit system that

▶ 1:37:49 this will be a transit type thing that people get off the train and by yes they will but they'll drive to these facilities they'll it'll be street traffic there'll be bike traffic there'll be pedestrian traffic people are trying to go back and forth to work kids are going down to the t to try to go into events into the public garden and things it's not a good thing to be exposed to the other thing i have a concern about is property values in the ward 5 area i would think that a marijuana business any type in our area would have a have a real declining effect on our property I don't think you're gonna have it you're gonna have an easy time selling your house if there's a recreational marijuana place

▶ 1:38:34 right across the street young families are gonna look at that they're gonna say no the city of Melrose right now as we all know has a big override question going through we're trying to help everybody in that issue but you know you're trying to jam something into our area that we really don't want you have one already down on 99 which I I oppose that also but it's down there you don't need this one you can cap it at one you're trying to get 3% more taxes you're gonna sell out the Ward 5 area for 3% which is going to come back to haunt you eventually because you're all elected officials here so we're asking you you know to really look at this my third my third point is now is that you call the low Washington Street an industrial area I tend to differ with

▶ 1:39:28 that now because if you look at the footprint it's 80-20 residential you have put up all these new apartment buildings jack-flat apartments going all in back of Marty's down the side in the backs there's at least six seven buildings down on Washington Street next to the little sprouts so if you want to make an amendment change and you want to change the laws why don't you change that to be a zoned residential area because if you look at it there's more residents there than there is industry you have the Marty building you have Greenwood building you have little sprouts and you're calling that industrial and you want to change amendments and everything to fit a recreational business what about all the people that just bought and leased these new places all

▶ 1:40:16 around that you fought for the plan would fought for to get them in now they're going to have to have something they really don't want in their backyard they're trying to raise families and things down there and they're going to have to look at this in the front of either marty's or just down to the malden border again i'm going to reiterate with you you don't need it you got one you don't you can cap it at one and everybody here goes away happy i think um my last thing is going to be is that i urge all of you as alderman the zoning board the planning board to please take a hard look at this would you want this in your backyards would you want this in your neighborhoods think about that you're raising a family would you want it would you want your

▶ 1:41:02 grandparents you know grandchildren down there exposed to this so i i really want you to take a hard look at this and really vote against this and i thank you very much for your time thank you and our last speaker did a great job of this but please do speak into the microphone if you come up just for the purposes of people watching at home hi everyone my name is jane allen i live at 179 east foster street and i want to say good evening to you all to the board of aldermen and the planning board and also to commissioner title who's with us tonight and chief lyle thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed zoning amendments for recreational marijuana many of you know me because of my interest in racial justice i think fewer of

▶ 1:41:56 you are aware that professionally i'm a public health analyst conducting research related to marijuana and marijuana policy my thoughts on the proposed zoning for recreational marijuana businesses are informed by both of these perspectives. The proposed zoning would allow marijuana retailers along the Newbury Turnpike and on Lower Washington Street by Oak Grove. This placement of retail shops would be consistent with decision-making from other parts of the country. In fact, research shows that medical dispensaries and recreational shops are typically placed in economically disadvantaged communities and communities of color. Why Why do cities and towns replicate this pattern over and over across the country?

▶ 1:42:42 Is it a coincidence? No. It's the result of privileged decision makers responding to a stigmatized product by placing it in neighborhoods they do not value or neighborhoods they value less, neighborhoods they don't want to live in. I believe there are two separate and related biases at play here, the bias against economically disadvantaged communities, often communities of color, and the bias against marijuana and marijuana users. I see this zoning proposal as compounding existing biases against certain neighborhoods by restricting marijuana businesses to those locations. Given that the people of Melrose voted to legalize marijuana for adult recreational use, my own perspective is that we should treat it and zone it as we do our other businesses.

▶ 1:43:34 As you may know, rates of marijuana use are essentially the same by race ethnicity. Nevertheless, black and brown people have paid a disproportionate price for marijuana use with substantially higher rates of arrest and incarceration. In fact, these disparities persist even in states that have legalized. As a result of this history, in part, the Cannabis Control Commission is required to ensure that people from communities that have been disproportionately harmed by marijuana law enforcement in the past are included in the new legal marijuana industry i'm proud of our state and the cannabis control commissioner the cannabis control commission and especially chalene title who drafted the state's equity provisions and is working every day in support of these goals

▶ 1:44:23 i recently became aware that melrose can support the goals of the state by putting similar policies in place at the local level. Specifically, I hope Melrose will follow the lead of the city of Somerville, which has decided that for the next two years, they'll only consider agreements with businesses that they consider priority applicants, who meet the state criteria for economic empowerment or are local owners. Going forward, every other business approved in Somerville will benefit individuals and communities that have been harmed by past marijuana policy. I'd like to see us do something similar here let's not miss this opportunity to be part of the solution to correct past harms good evening Joe Garino I live on

▶ 1:45:28 Crinton Road I've been a lifelong resident of Ward 5 I just want to begin by saying thank you for allowing me to speak this evening I'm here to oppose the marijuana zoning amendment for the Washington Street corridor this area is heavily congested there's four apartment buildings with 397 units we have commercial buildings with multiple tenants in there and we have a daycare in that immediate area the amendment mentions that in 2016 question 4 was passed just you know by approximately 3% that was no landslide I asked you if that was on the ballot today would it pass seeing what all the other towns have gone through where they've opened up the marijuana places this is a very congested area you have people coming in

▶ 1:46:19 they'll be parking on brazil street good year av converse lane mighty's furniture building is filled during the day at night time neighboring residents from the apartment buildings park in there because their lots are overfilled there is no room for their cars and i personally know that because we do the snow plowing in there and have to have the cars move so that's a fact over there with that i mean i only think the right area in melrose is on route 99 and i ask before you consider this is to do a traffic study and maybe visit the area a few times during the day to see the congestion during the morning during the afternoon and during the evening of all the vehicles that are in there um i know the the law states that there has to

▶ 1:47:07 be a 500 foot buffer excuse me buffer between schools for kindergarten through 12. we do have a daycare down there which is preschool there's not to me a preschool and a kindergarten there's not much difference so i think you should take that into consideration also but i really ask that you take this heavily congested area into consideration before you move it forward thank you thank you my name is mary ellen landino i'm a nurse manager at a hospital in boston i don't work with children i don't have to oh sorry i don't work with children i don't have children but i have twin nieces that live out of state and i would not want them to be exposed to a marijuana shop i just if we look at what's happening to our children today they're being

▶ 1:48:12 abducted they're sexual predators and i'm not saying people who visit a marijuana shop are those people but i'm just saying i think we're putting our children at risk and i think we need to look at it i did not measure the 500 feet thing because i'm not an architect but i just i have to speak up for these kids they are our future and we have to do what we can to protect them and if when they're adults they make decisions they want to smoke marijuana then that's their decision but at least let them grow up safe that's it thank you and please if you could sign in with your name and okay perfect thank you good evening i'm lee schlanger i live in in Ward 1 on our street have for 18 years I come in support of the zoning

▶ 1:49:35 regulation changes allowing retail stores and other types of businesses in the area and I frankly would support that in any part of the city not just the areas where they're proposed I see this is largely an economic issue I understand some people can pose this based on personal religious social beliefs or perceived safety issues and I'll comment on that as well but in my mind this this should be an economic decision economically we hear all the time that Melrose doesn't have enough commercial space to pull in revenue from businesses and hence the remaining expenses of the city are supported by residents here are businesses that want to sell or produce products that are legal we should welcome them with open arms any business that's legal to our

▶ 1:50:29 city even recruit them I think we the city could do a better job of recruiting businesses and we should invite them in on this basis alone even if there's more traffic businesses create traffic but with this industry at least the retail sales come with an additional 3% sales tax directly to the city with the city and economic shortfalls asking residents to approve over $5 million in increased property taxes annually. Additional income is key. The marijuana market in Massachusetts is forecasted to grow up to $1.8 billion over the next several years. If stores in Melrose could capture $150 million in revenue, about 10%, it would cover the total override amount. I'm not sure it's realistic for Melrose to cover 10% of the entire state, and the market

▶ 1:51:24 at first is going to be small as it grows, but everything will help. Frankly, I'm not sure how someone could be in favor of the override and oppose allowing sale of this legal product. I think it would be shameful for this body to turn down the zoning change or delay it until after the override. The residents deserve to know what the economics of the city are going to be going into the override. Personally, I think I'm in favor of the override, but likely would change that support if the city denies this source of additional revenue. I doubt I would be the only person to hold that view. To best capture this source of additional revenue, stores should be well-placed to capture business not only from our city, but from elsewhere as well.

▶ 1:52:10 And as I said, I would be supportive of placing the businesses wherever they made sense in the city. i don't think that placement has been done based on racial discussion but based on business i always hear people talk about you know in this body and elsewhere the revitalization of downtown with restaurants that bring in business to the city including for example a fish restaurant that's known throughout the north of boston region we should endeavor to have marijuana businesses in Melrose capture as much of the market as possible. The Route 99 location is extremely well placed to capture business from Malden and communities along Route 1. A location along Washington Street near Oak Grove would benefit for consumers again of this legal product who want to or need

▶ 1:52:58 to take the T to get there potentially even bringing in business to other businesses in the city as they come. Businesses that might establish manufacturing in the city are not under the current proposal are not limited to that area and could bring in employees to shop at local shops local restaurants at lunchtime and so on I understand the area down by Oak Grove is more of mixed use and there are neighborhoods they are residential areas but it's just that it's a mixed use area with businesses this is a legal product any illegal behavior public usage usage while driving anything else that's objectionable against the law that is to say should be enforced by the police additional traffic that might come up for a new business is always something

▶ 1:53:47 that might happen when a business starts out if you remember when Krispy Kreme started out in August and Medford they had big traffic it went away after a while Sonic on Route one and so on so reports from other cities I expect those to die down especially as more stores open up around the state additionally data from Colorado which has had legalization since 2012 does not show sources for concern if you read the data Melrose should approve these changes and I'll talk more about that in a bit Melrose should approve these changes as other cities are doing so. Last month, for example, Newton approved eight adult use retail locations. I would hate to see cities around our area that neighbor us approve such businesses and

▶ 1:54:40 take away the opportunity for Melrose as we're trying to always grow business in Melrose. Let me move on to talk about some of the concerns that people have had. Some people are opposed to this type of business, I understand, but that debate should have ended when the vote happened a few years ago when 54% of the state and people in Melrose supported legalization of this business. People can be opposed to all sorts of things, but we do not prevent them in our city. Some people are opposed to alcohol, but we have long had alcohol served at restaurants in the city and now retail sales as well. Some people are opposed to cigarette sales, we have those. Some people can be opposed to major corporations, especially major banks, but you can get a

▶ 1:55:28 Dunkin' Donut coffee on your way to Bank of America in Melrose. Some people can be opposed to gambling or even the objectionable behavior of former executives of casinos, but the city is working with Encore to take community impact money. Marijuana is illegal and will be used by people in and out of Melrose, why not get that community impact money, the 3% additional sales tax. Some people can point to concern about crime or safety, but the facts do not really bear out this concern. Just last October, the Public Safety Department in Colorado published a report with data comparing all sorts of pieces of data before and after the legalization there. I have a website for the report if you want.

▶ 1:56:18 The summary of that data says that crime enforcement has shifted to black market sales, illegal sales of marijuana, felony convictions. Cases are initially dropped and then have gone up with the focus on this black market organized crime aspect of selling marijuana versus reputable retail locations. Most more importantly, overall DUI cases of all types were down 15% in Colorado. State DUI cases where marijuana only was involved was steady at 7%, showed no increases. Cases where other drugs were involved but also marijuana did increase from 12 to 17 and then decreased back to 15%, and you can sort of look at that as not pointing to anything I think, because marijuana is legal there. These are people who had other drugs with them or in their system.

▶ 1:57:16 Importantly, drivers in fatal crashes who tested positive for Delta-9-THC, which is the psychoactive constituent of marijuana, dropped from 11.6% to 7.5% over the last few years. Drivers in crashes with any part of marijuana, any cannabinoid, THC, or other things that don't make you high did increase from 11 to 21 percent so some people point to look at all the increases in Colorado 21 percent versus 11 had marijuana but that doesn't bear out the facts it makes sense because people are using CBD oil and other types of marijuana parts that don't make you high and they're illegal there correlation doesn't prove causality as I just said the fatal crashes involving THC people who were high decreased in

▶ 1:58:10 Colorado since in the last few years with regard to schools with regard to schools expulsions are down graduation rates are up dropout rates are down the data shows that the concerns about marijuana is unfounded their concerns but the data doesn't bear them out again any criminal activity should be handled by law enforcement the city has an opportunity to grow revenue by the sale of a legal product the placement of these businesses should be approved for any commercial or mixed use area especially ones that would draw in businesses such as along route 1 or by the t thank you good evening members of the planning board members of the board of aldermen i appreciate the the opportunity to speak in front of you.

▶ 1:59:16 My name is Chalene Tidal, I'm a Malden resident, but my family and I spend a lot of time in Melrose. I'm here largely to support the recommendations. I read the letter from Chairwoman D'Souza Ward, and I feel that this is one of the most thoughtful memos or letters of its type that I have read. I think the recommendations are, they're well-founded. I especially appreciate the differentiation between retailers and their impact on the area versus other types of marijuana establishment and their impacts. The one comment I would have is I do feel the retail zoning is quite limited and a concern as a member of the Cannabis Control Commission, There's five of us. We're experts in public health, public safety, government regulation, business and finance,

▶ 2:00:16 and social justice, respectively. My seat is a social justice seat. And so we're attempting to make this a diverse industry with room for businesses of all sizes. So one concern I've seen from that perspective is that largely because of the applications that we are getting that have been approved at the local level, we're not seeing a lot of diversity. And so we've issued 99 licenses. We have not issued even one to a certified minority-owned business. We also developed license types that are meant for smaller, less well-capitalized businesses, craft cooperatives and micro-businesses in particular. We have only issued one or two licenses to micro-businesses and none to cooperatives. So the way that that relates to the zoning is that what we've often seen is that when

▶ 2:01:12 there's very limited zoning with very few properties available, those landlords are able to charge such a high rent that only very well financed corporations often coming from out of state are able to get through the process. So for that reason, I would encourage you to consider perhaps more expansive zoning the way that you might look at another similar retailer. The Cannabis Control Commission has issued guidance on how to make the process equitable That's available at masscannabiscontrol.com slash local equity guidance for the benefit of all of you as well as the public. Previous speakers have mentioned the impact on a city or town when such a business comes in. If you look at that report, you can see the studies as summarized by our research department

▶ 2:02:10 and vetted by our agency. So you can rely on those studies. Just as a person who spends a lot of time in Melrose and a citizen of Malden, I think it's wise to have the areas where you do, so that people who are coming from Revere, Malden, or Saugus will likely visit those locations. It seems smart to me, it seems thoughtful. And just as an individual citizen, I wish that the Malden process had been this thoughtful. If you have any questions for me, the Cannabis Control Commission is always available to advise you, to answer any questions. And then lastly, as the previous speaker, Jane Allen, had mentioned, there are several marijuana-forward municipalities that are considering implementing equity programs

▶ 2:03:08 such that applicants who have been certified at the state level as contributing to equity or economic empowerment in those communities previously harmed by prohibition East Hampton Boston Somerville several other cities are considering this and I hope that Melrose will as well thank you Good evening. Jim O'Loughlin, 39 Lincoln Street, Elrose. I sent some comments over last night, but it's a long night for everybody, so I'll just summarize very quickly here. The city's marijuana policy and related public discussions need to be broader and narrow conversations around taxation and zoning. They need to include discussion on public safety and welfare. During the July Board of Aldermen meeting, the proposed amendment to the city

▶ 2:04:26 ordinance on peace and good order was tabled in deference to parallel state regulations and I have not heard any discussion on public safety and welfare since I would ask that we reinvigorate those discussions silence on public safety and welfare may cause some to perceive then enforcing laws and regulations relevant to marijuana will not be a city priority I would add that our police department will need funding and resources to address the unlawful awful use of marijuana. I remind everybody that it is my understanding that there is not a quantitative standard for intoxication for marijuana at this point. One of the most relevant things that I heard at the July Board of Aldermen meeting on taxation was a comment by Alderman

▶ 2:05:16 Medeiros that there will be costs associated with enforcement and that we should try to recover those costs or words to that effect. I agree with the Cannabis Control Commission's December 2018 recommendation that marijuana tax revenue should fund police training. I believe that every cent raised by taxation of marijuana should be dedicated to public safety. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public wishing to speak at this time? Hello. Thanks for allowing me to come and talk. My name is Lloyd Graves. I live at 72 Washington Street in Melrose, directly across from the Marty's Furniture building as far as i can tell that would be the location for a marijuana store because anywhere

▶ 2:06:24 further down towards the t is either residences or a greenwood heavy construction building down there so i'd be directly across from the from the store i'm opposed to having it be there primarily because of the traffic increased in traffic it's already uh pretty tough down there to even get across the street there's a crosswalk in front of my house that you have to take your life in your hands to go across you just have to wait and wait and wait to get across i've been talking to our uh working with alderman mcmaster to try to get some relief down there we've got a temporary police speed limit sign down there that was lasted a few weeks but it's it's really tough to get down there i'm not really understanding where the store where the people would think the store could be

▶ 2:07:12 down there because there's really no other place for it to be than the marty's furniture building and it's sort of amazing to me that's even being considered also i just took out a home equity loan to improve my house and it's a sort of a leaf leap of faith and i feel like it would decrease the value of my home to have a building like that across the street from me there's a daycare a few hundred meters down the street it'd be pretty close to that and That's pretty much all I've got to say about it. I just feel like it's just the traffic is going to be a mess to come down there, and I feel like it's really not an appropriate location to put a store in. So thanks a lot. Thank you. I'm Janice Bissex, 40 Glen Street, lifelong Melrose resident, and I'm here in support

▶ 2:08:30 of zoning changes to make legal cannabis more accessible to our community. I may not have felt exactly this way three years ago. That was before my father turned to cannabis to relieve his severe pain that was not helped by anything else. And I was shocked and amazed because I didn't know this. I was from the just say no generation and I was so amazed that I actually changed my career and I am now a holistic cannabis practitioner. I'm interested, as I said, in seeing it accessible to people in our community. I also feel very strongly about this tax revenue opportunity. This is an opportunity, and if we wait too long, other communities are going to open their shops and people will get used to going there, so we might lose revenue.

▶ 2:09:27 A lot of people said to me they were not happy when we approved the medical marijuana facility garden remedies and they thought it would be terrible and the sky hasn't fallen, they're wonderful neighbors. I think that people would agree that that has not had a negative impact on our community AND I WOULD CERTAINLY SUPPORT GARDEN REMEDIES ADDING ADULT USE, CANNABIS, TO THEIR FACILITY AND, AGAIN, I THINK IT WOULD BE A MISSED OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO LET THIS GO BY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THIS TIME? MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. SECOND. MOTION TO CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT IS MADE BY PRESIDENT Lemmerman, SECONDED BY ELDERMAN MORTIMER. ALL IN FAVOR? all opposed opposed i think there were still members of the public madam chair who were

▶ 2:10:36 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: interested in speaking um i we did ask if anyone else was interested so um we're going to close public comment for now there will be an opportunity um to to engage again once we hear um on this order so our order before us now is ordered to the motion to reconsider um if there are are there any members of the public who want to speak still a motion motion to reconsider the motion to close public participation motion to reconsider the motion to second okay motion to reconsider has been made by uh alderman mortimer seconded by president Lemmerman all in favor any opposed good evening my name is alan brown some of you know me some of you don't know me i've been a 50-year resident of the the city of Melrose 25 year resident of Ward 5 I am opposed to this change the

▶ 2:11:46 residents of Ward 5 a lot of the residents of Ward 5 including myself have gone through a lot of changes in that ward all the changes have not been good for all the residents I'm a resident that believes some of the changes have not been good for my family they impact me on a daily basis the traffic down there is a problem it's more dangerous down there with the traffic situation my concerns are you know just because it's good for the city or maybe good for the city it's not necessarily good for the neighborhood I don't like the idea of mixing marijuana and childcare in the same neighborhood I'm totally against that I don't think that's that makes for a good story once again the residents that have gone that have lived through all the changes down

▶ 2:12:40 there with all the development a lot of our concerns weren't heard or maybe they were heard but they weren't addressed we still have issues down there there's a lot of people in this room that don't want to get up and speak because they're not comfortable doing it but there are neighbors of mine sitting behind me that don't want to speak that would like to have their voices heard traffic is an issue down there it's an issue every single day bringing more business in bringing strangers to the neighborhood more people that don't know the roads it's not gonna be better for us as far as far as you know where you're gonna put it like one of my other neighbors said as far as I know the only building

▶ 2:13:22 is Marty's furnitures building and if you live there that's not good for you if that's your neighborhood it's it's not a good mix no one wants it in their neighborhood the people that want it don't live there I can guarantee that if we were to ask everyone on this board if they want in their neighborhood I find it hard to believe that anyone would say they want it in their neighborhood you know we unfortunately we live in an area that was at one point more commercial and now it seems to be there's less commercial and more residential there's been a huge increase in the volume of cars down there with all that development there's approximately 500 more cars in the neighborhood not including all the people that travel through there traffic is a huge issue in

▶ 2:14:06 that neighborhood it's not getting better it's only getting worse the more people we bring in the more cars the more traffic the more safety issues as far as across the street from the daycare I think that's a bad choice I think it's a horrible choice horrible choice it delivers the wrong message everyone thinks Melrose is so special and Melrose is special I've lived here 50 years of my life and I've lived in more than one place in the city of Melrose Melrose is kind of a unique place for a lot of reasons but I think there's better places that this could go in the city of Melrose I'm not really I'm not really for it but if you're gonna put it somewhere I don't think this is the right the right fit this is not the right neighborhood for it and I

▶ 2:14:48 think that I'm speaking on behalf of myself my family and a lot of people that don't have that aren't willing to get up here and speak and express their concerns we have problems down that area with traffic every single day it is not better down there and this is going to bring in more traffic be whether it be car bicycle foot whatever it's it's not a good choice I think there's better options I think if we have to do it route 99 is the place to do it not down there thank you I'm also aware that there were a couple members of the public who are not able to be here tonight but who did provide written comments and our madam clerk is going to read them into the record sure this is a letter from Little Sprouts daycare dated January 14th 2019 dear Melrose Planning

▶ 2:15:40 Board and Melrose Board of Aldermen as a child care center in Melrose at 40 Washington Street the safety and well-being of our families and employees employees is of our utmost priority. We have worked closely with Alderman Sean McMaster and Melrose Police Chief Michael Lyle relative to traffic and pedestrian safety issues on Washington Street, which has allowed us to support a safe travel pattern for several of our visitors to our center. Today I am writing to share that we are again working with them as we are concerned about the proposal for a marijuana retailer in our zoning area that may be situated less than 500 feet away from our school. We have several concerns with this coming to fruition

▶ 2:16:21 with traffic, pedestrian, and business concerns. Currently, we have challenges with traffic on Washington Street and fear that with the proposed marijuana retailer moving in so close to our school, that not only will the traffic further back up with congestion, but we also may have visitors to the retailer try to park in our limited parking lot. As an educational establishment, we fear that the odor of marijuana could permeate the surrounding area and have adverse and compromising effects on our children, families, and employees. We are opposed to the approval of the marijuana retailer moving into our neighborhood and hope that you will take this letter into consideration when voting on a decision.

▶ 2:16:57 Sincerely, Jacqueline Kababian, Director of Operations. I have a second letter from Town Estates on Pleasant Street dated January 14th, 2019. To her honor and honorable members of the board, It has come to our attention that a zoning change is being considered to allow a recreational marijuana store on Washington Street in Melrose. Town Estates Apartments has been a mainstay of the Melrose community for over 50 years. We value our relationship with the city and our home-owning neighbors, and want to continue the safety and desirability of the city of Melrose. It is an understatement to say that the Town Estates management is concerned with the placement of this new retail store. We have already been facing issues with traffic,

▶ 2:17:42 illegal parking, and complaints of parking along Pleasant Street. We have been in contact with Alderman Sean McMaster and Chief Mike Lyle concerning this. However, the increase in the flow of visitors to the area will undoubtedly cause more problems for the neighborhood. Our proximity to the Oak Grove T Station has made parking an ongoing challenge. Unauthorized vehicles are constantly being parked on our property and on Pleasant Street and adjacent streets. We are sure to see an increase in drivers using our parking lots. We have heard complaints of speeding on Pleasant Street and just last week a town estates resident and her child were hit by a car near the Pleasant Street West Wyoming intersection while walking in a crosswalk.

▶ 2:18:25 Drivers are not paying attention and distracted more than ever. Another serious concern is that more accidents could occur due to impairment of recreational marijuana users while driving. With all the pedestrians along Pleasant the lincoln elementary school less than a mile away this is just a tragedy waiting to occur other massachusetts cities have had similar issues with parking traffic and increased criminal activity due to a recreational marijuana store being opened in their neighborhoods we too are concerned that the city of melrose and this neighborhood in particular could face the same problems please contact me if you have any questions we look forward to working with the city in any way we can sincerely kimberly kimberly joyce property manager hi my name is

▶ 2:19:17 Maria Hall I didn't come with anything prepared but I've been a resident of Melrose for about 10 years now and I live in the Hillcrest Avenue and I am opposed to opening a second marijuana store in the Oak Grove area I commute into Boston every day five days a week taking public transportation in that area is extremely congested as it is already I'm concerned for public safety I'm concerned for the neighborhoods. I have two small children. I would not you know want to be Having to deal with this if I lived in that neighborhood having two small children I Just you know, I'm just opposed to it and I'm concerned about Transportation not transportation public safety issues and the congestion along that street and also what this will do to

▶ 2:20:14 um you know police officers their jobs are going to be so much more difficult to have to patrol this on a daily on a daily basis so thank you for your time would anyone else like to come forward at this time i'm brian cummings i live down on pleasant street i've been there a few years and i'm just opposed to it with the traffic and everything else there shouldn't be any parking down on pleasant street anyway with all the traffic bus route everything else and if you wanted that badly why don't you put it on main street up here in the middle of town just oppose and a few other people will be thank you thank you anyone else at this time there will be an opportunity to comment after the presentation of the planning department as well

▶ 2:22:13 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: motion to close public participation madam chair public comment motion to close public participation made by alderman mortimer seconded by vice chair Boisselle all in favor opposed the next agenda item that we have is ordered 2019-31 amending melrose revised zoning ordinance chapter 235 article 11 to create a new section 235-73.4 and amend section 235-5 definitions section 235 dash 16.1 site plan review section 235 dash 17 table of use and parking regulations and section third section 235 dash 61 special permit granting authorities to regulate marijuana establishments motion to suspend the rules second a motion has been made to suspend the rules by alderman is work oh second and by alderman Mortimer all in favor any

▶ 2:23:12 Denise Gaffey: opposed we are now under suspension of rules and we would invite the planning department board to come forward good evening my name is Denise Gaffey I'm the director of planning and community development for the city of Melrose and on my right is I'm Greg Sampson he is the chairperson of the zoning subcommittee so the zoning subcommittee is a subcommittee of the planning board and they worked over the last several months to draft this zoning proposal so we have a slide presentation I'll try to be brief and just walk you through the nuts and bolts and then I'm happy to answer any question and respond to comments that were raised okay so I don't need to go through the background I mean we've heard in Melrose too much but in Melrose the the ballot question

▶ 2:24:19 Denise Gaffey: number four in 2016 did pass it passed by about 500 votes so it was not you know resounding approval but it did pass so that that means that we are in a position to to create regulation and to allow this use unless there were to be another vote so that's why we're here today and we've we've taken the action to start work on this after after waiting for the cannabis control Commission to issue their regulations prior to this we were here about a year ago if you recall a little over a year ago to request that the Board of Aldermen approve a moratorium on recreational marijuana establishments because the regulations had not yet been crafted and we wanted to wait to see how those regulations you know shook out before we could actually develop some

▶ 2:25:15 Denise Gaffey: zoning around this so so the more the moratorium expired officially on December 31st of this past year we so we're out we're now outside of that moratorium period and it was our goal to try to get this zoning at least get it sent down to the Board of Aldermen before that deadline so that we weren't to be exposed in a way, if you will, to a proposal that we did not properly create regulations around. So we did, you know, we were successful in meeting that goal, which is great, but I will say we did not have a lot of time because by the time the regulations were complete and we had an opportunity to look at it, you know, there was not a lot of time that elapsed, but um nonetheless we feel like we have a pretty pretty comprehensive proposal in front of the

▶ 2:26:09 Denise Gaffey: board um let's see just again brief history the um the alderman in august of 2017 did create regulations around medicinal marijuana what we call registered marijuana dispensaries and And subsequent to that time, the city has approved one RMD, one dispensary, through a special permit process granted by the planning board for garden remedies. And that establishment is on 232 Newburyport Turnpike, also known as Route 99, and it is now open for business as of about October of this past year. and I'm just quickly the RMD program has kind of a housekeeping thing the Rd program has moved from into the CCC the cannabis control Commission's purview out of the Department of Health so the reason we mentioned this is because

▶ 2:27:07 Denise Gaffey: there's some slight modifications to the zoning language that we needed to make to address this change this just references the regulations if you want read the specific state regs I got around adult use marijuana RMDs are no longer required to be nonprofit entities and so subsequently we were suggesting that we would change our definition the existing definition that was approved by the Board of Alderman a year or so ago to reflect that that's why you see that the nonprofit piece there is struck out and then we just added the regulations in under which RMDs are allowed so marijuana establishments so we were here tonight to primarily talk about what's referred to as recreational or adult use

▶ 2:27:59 Denise Gaffey: marijuana and so what we have done is you know we we've looked closely at this state regulations and we're trying to make our proposal in line with with the state regulations and and at the same time reflect you know the city's goals and vision we do suggest proposing a section in the ordinance just for marijuana establishments similar for similarly similarly as we did for the dispensaries it's just worth noting that all marijuana establishments require a license from the cannabis control Commission and we create a definition for marijuana establishments in the zoning which I won't bother to read now that's in your package so here is sort of some of the nuts and bolts around zoning right we have a zoning use table and what we're proposing is to add a new

▶ 2:29:04 Denise Gaffey: category in our use table for marijuana related uses and we've taken each one of the possible uses and those are listed by number on the column to the left and then across the top is our all the zoning districts in Melrose and so then you have a breakdown where you see a dashed line that means the uses is prohibited it's not allowed if you see an S in that column that means that use would be allowed by special permit and we're proposing that the planning board would be the special permit granting authority much just like with the medical dispensaries and so you can see I'm gonna forward the slides and get into it a little bit further but you can see just sort of generally where the planning board is is currently recommending the use be these different

▶ 2:29:57 Denise Gaffey: uses be allowed. So I may come back to that, but I want to just proceed with the slides real quickly. So one of the things we looked at in thinking about where to cite recreational marijuana establishments is based on a provision in the Cannabis Control Commission's regulations recommends citing them outside of this 500 foot radius of for schools that serve kindergarten through grade 12 it's kind of ironic that that that buffer zone if you will is less restrictive than the buffer zone that was established for medicinal marijuana you can see there that the buffer zone for medicinal marijuana was 500 feet from all places where from schools in addition all places where children commonly congregate like daycare centers and parks so consequently when

▶ 2:30:59 Denise Gaffey: we were looking at where appropriate locations for medical dispensaries would be this was the exercise that we did a year and a half ago when we applied that 500 foot buffer zone and to places where children commonly congregate it did pretty much wipe out most of the most of the city and pretty obviously direct us to the route 99 southeast corner of the city so that's not quite that's quite the same here in this case when we look at 500 feet buffer from a simply from from K to 12 schools there is there's sort of more white area there and I'll show you that I mean there's a little bit hard to see but in general what that is showing is it's showing you each circle represents a k-12 school whether public or private and then the outer line is that 500 foot

▶ 2:31:54 Denise Gaffey: buffer so so that was the buffer we were that was in as part of the planning board's exercise we were looking at that those buffers to think about where in the city you know it might make sense to recommend these different marijuana uses so ultimately what's what is recommended in the proposal in front of you is to allow for so this we basically make a distinction between retail use and everything else and when I talk about everything else I'm talking about things like marijuana product manufacturers marijuana cultivators marijuana research facilities marijuana testing facilities these are all of the uses or all of the types of establishments or in uses I guess is the right word that are contemplated by the legislation that was approved the ballot question so we

▶ 2:32:52 Denise Gaffey: create definitions for each of these uses in the zoning and then in this chart you can see where we were recommending allowing the uses by special permit in all cases there is a special permit requirement there's no as of right zoning per se but going back to that slide the retail use we were sort of looking at a little more narrowly and in recommending in the being very mindful of the issue of where schools of where the schools are we were we were recommending in the area to the if i can use my pointer here whoops there we go so on the southeast corner right there newbury port turnpike there's actually two zoning districts there the purple one is an is an industrial district and the yellowish color is a bb district extensive

▶ 2:33:56 Denise Gaffey: business and then the other area is on this lower Washington Street zone which is it still is zoned technically as an industrial district although we also more commonly refer to it as our smart growth overlay district so the recommendation for the retail use was in in those locations and then for the the other types of establishments we which we which the board felt would have less impact on the surrounding areas in terms of traffic and access issues that was viewed as being it may be appropriate in the other business districts throughout the city like the BA and b2 b1 BA 1 BA 2 and the BC and the BD districts so I have another slide that will show exactly where these locations are so again to the point with the retail those the recommendation was

▶ 2:34:54 Denise Gaffey: based on the view that those districts had had very good transit access and might minimize issues related to traffic into parking and so in this slide again it shows you those same 500 foot buffers it shows you in purple where all the non-retail marijuana establishments would be eligible to be located based on this proposal and then it shows you with a dotted black line which again is a little bit maybe a little bit hard to see here those three locations that I was that I talked about here and then sorry this location and then that location here and let's see further considerations so the general law permits municipalities to cap the number of marijuana retailers at 20% of the number of package stores in the community so technically because Melrose

▶ 2:36:01 Denise Gaffey: does not have any package stores we can cap it at one so the planning board gave some thought to this and really recognizing that at the time didn't have a lot of we're very interested in what the public what the public's view on this would be understanding that it was a very close vote for the approval but we really didn't know where the public was going to come down on it we thought well let's let's start out at maybe considering two in order to better serve the market and allow for some competition and also generate additional revenue for the city so that is how this is currently structured as a proposal and then the arm just point of fact the marijuana retailers are the only establishment type that can be capped in this way so more nuts and bolts we are

▶ 2:36:54 Denise Gaffey: creating regulations for these uses in through this proposal we would create a new section in the ordinance entitled section 235 73.4 for marijuana establishments we walk through what the purposes you know are to give the plenty board some guidance when they're reviewing these under a special permit provision and what you know how businesses need can get even get in front of the planning board so the applicability there's general requirements around location operation hours of operation things of that nature it is a special permit process we also talk about inspections and reporting abandonment and discontinuation of use so I don't know if you want me to go through all of these things but so some of the things that we that are that we

▶ 2:37:43 Denise Gaffey: talk about in the regulations or that the the establishments must be in enclosed permanent buildings no cultivation processing manufacturing display of marijuana can be visible from a public place without the use of binoculars no pesticides may be disposed of into outside atmosphere no odor may be detected no consumption is allowed on premises or surrounding areas and establishments may not permit any disordered disturbance or illegal or illegality under state or local law prohibited it from operating between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. that is a recommendation prohibiting drive-through windows delivery only retailers are prohibited in this proposal and then signage has to comply with the CCC regulations in our signage ordinance and we're you know

▶ 2:38:36 Denise Gaffey: rigorous about no graphics and marijuana paraphernalia and that kind of stuff so additional location requirements we talked about the 500 feet but obviously if if the board were to adopt these specific locations that is not that they're nowhere near any schools of k to 12 schools may not be located in a building that contains a pre-existing daycare center that was a provision that we recommended that we saw in another couple of ordinances um marijuana product manufacturing may not be done in any building containing assembly education health care ambulatory health care residential or detention or correctional facilities and then marijuana transportation OUR DISTRIBUTION FACILITY SHALL NOT OCCUPY STREET LEVEL SPACE SO SOME THESE ARE SOME OF THE MORE

▶ 2:39:36 Denise Gaffey: SPECIFIC PROVISIONS AROUND LOCATION THAT ARE PROPOSED IN THE DRAFT ORDINANCE SO THESE ARE ALL THERE'S A THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF PROVISIONS AROUND SECURITY AND A LOT OF THIS IS DICTATED BY THE THE STATE THE PROCESS WITH THE CCC but we you know go and above and beyond in terms of where you know these different security provisions and let's see so there's a special there's the special permit process which is required for each different marijuana establishment type again the planning board may not grant special permits that would allow for more than two marijuana retailers to be in operation at any one time so if this is a if this ordinance is approved by the alderman to allow for the two establishments that we would recommend a provision like that the goal

▶ 2:40:36 Denise Gaffey: is to create a process similar to site plan reviews that would allow specific that would address specific and unique concerns related to marijuana establishments so we wouldn't actually undergo a site plan review process because the special permit process would be very similar to that process and that's exactly how we treat medicinal marijuana dispensaries so there's a lot of application materials that are required so really you know this really just kind of the slide kind of walks through all the different requirements in terms of an operation and management plan a security plan evidence of the applicants right to use the site disclosure of all the owners and partners in the business letters from the police department and the Board of

▶ 2:41:25 Denise Gaffey: Health indicating that they've reviewed safety and security measures and that they're adequate and then this last provision there talks about co-location which is also something that is that the Cannabis Control Commission envisions given that the the dispensaries kind of came online first the expectation is a lot of the medical dispensaries are going to ultimately co-locate with or allow for the adult use as well so we have we've just included the requirements that are also in the state regs they have to comply with anyway but there has to be a physical separation um in the in the retail space between the medical and the retail use so that's that's outlined in the zoning so there's there's a series of findings that the planning board would have to make in order to

▶ 2:42:21 Denise Gaffey: allow for a use and they would be um you know thorough in their review as they typically are when it comes to new uses so requiring requiring traffic studies in making sure that the traffic any traffic impacts are mitigated requiring adequate parking and making sure the site circulation is is sufficient and adequate and many different other you know infrastructure review requirements in terms of you know water and drainage and that kind of thing and then obviously the goal is to make sure the goal is to minimize any adverse impacts on the surrounding area the planning board can apply conditions which they typically do on on projects when on a range of different areas reasonably appropriate to improve the site design the

▶ 2:43:18 Denise Gaffey: traffic flow public safety air quality and preservation of the character of the surrounding area all marijuana establishments must meet with the fire and police department to discuss emergency and contingency plans for the site that's a requirement and then prior to the issuance of your certificate of occupancy the building commissioner from the building commissioner an emergency management sorry emergency response plan must be filed with the fire and the police department as well and then there's inspection requirements um that are codified in the in the proposed zoning um they have to file an annual report by the end of january each year just demonstrating that they are current with all their state licenses

▶ 2:44:04 Denise Gaffey: and there can be unscheduled inspections at any time by enforcement officials in the city and then we talk about abandonment and discontinuance this special it's important to point out that the special permit that's granted is for the is limited to the applicant that applies at that time it's not transferable at all and then and then this just talks about any you know the sort discontinuance aspect so what has to happen if an establishment is to close down and that is pretty much the zoning sort of the nuts and bolts of the zoning thank you so I think under the procedure of our hearing we would now pause and see if anyone else would like to come forward to speak on this hi my name is Michael Farah. I live on Converse Lane right in Ward 5. After going through this

▶ 2:45:28 presentation and hearing about where exactly you're proposing this, either of these stores could be potentially located, you're showing on the map that you had up on this screen about where potential locations could be because it can only be you know outside in retail zones and with outside of the 500 foot buffer around schools there's plenty of retail space all throughout the city besides the lower Washington Street area in the Newburyport Parkway area to say that there's less traffic and more transit access in our area on lower Washington Street would be full would be false there's bus routes that run along Main Street there's still traffic issues on Main Street and oftentimes the traffic on Washington Street in the morning and at night is just as bad if

▶ 2:46:16 not worse than on Main Street in downtown Melrose at 5 o'clock it's the same thing so to say that that's a better option to be in our area is wrong it could be anywhere in the city the city is a traffic nightmare all the time so to specifically target our ward which seems like we get the brunt of everything in the city we get all the apartments we get more traffic that we didn't ask for we get now a pot store it doesn't seem to make any sense what Why we seem to be get we're getting targeted for this stuff. At least it feels that way sometimes Especially to the residents who live in our neighborhood some that aren't here with us right now I just you know, I personally am not against having marijuana in general that debate was you know

▶ 2:47:04 long since passed after it passed through the state of Massachusetts, but Where this goes and seems to be positioned right along the Malden line right where the trains are and where the at this you know as far away from the center of the city as we can possibly get bring it bring it bring it further in see what everyone else has to say because putting it just in our area well it's not what we asked for thank you hi my name is Paula Emma Locke I've been living in Melrose for 32 years I live at 32 Harrison Street in Ward 1. We all voted. It's illegal. It's a legal substance now, so we have to accept that. When we wanted to bring liquor into Melrose, we have Beacon Hill Wines, and right down the street is the Green Street.

▶ 2:48:13 The First Baptist Church has their daycare center. Was anybody thinking about that at that point? I don't know. I agree that the Oak Grove area is too congested. And I think to dump it more on them is just really unfair. I'm there on a regular basis picking my husband up and dropping him off, and it is a nightmare. And 500 feet, you have that little Sprouts, and I don't think there's any place near there in that area that you should do it. I agree with the woman that spoke that said we sometimes put these stores and places where it's economically advantageous for us because we don't want it on Main Street. Well, maybe we got to stop thinking about that because this is a legal substance. It helps people

▶ 2:49:00 It is it is out there and we have to consider that there are a lot of empty stores on Main Street Why can't we figure out someplace there and leave Oak Grove alone? That's my thought. Thank you. Quick comment if I can based on the presentation Again, Lee Schlanger, Ward 1 So any business is going to create traffic and and I think we should have more businesses in town as I said with regard to what was presented I think it might be politically difficult as we see to single out certain wards and why not have the proposal be everywhere in town it should be legal to have this type of legal business I think the 500-foot rule as we heard it's gonna dictate what parts of town are allowed to approve these have these permits approved and just pass the zoning change

▶ 2:50:08 saying it's legal in town and permits are only going to be granted for parts of town where the 500-foot rule allows them to go I think a lot of businesses will wind up choosing down by Oak Grove because of the access to the T and by route 1 because of the access to traffic there but if we looked at the map way up the north side of the city along the Wakefield line on Main Street not near any school not near any of those circles let's pull in some business from Wakefield too you know and the only other comment I'd have is the hours that were suggested limiting between 8 a.m. 8 p.m. I think you know if there's a concern about rush hour traffic and so on in the morning make it 9 to 9 you know everyone's gonna rush our traffic will be more gone by 9 a.m. and people

▶ 2:50:55 who want to shop at this establishment in the evening after they get home from from work 8 p.m. may be a little early so I would think maybe 9 to 9 addresses some of those concerns you know putting a little later rush hour and also with kids getting to school and so on but again I'm in favor of the proposal would be in favor anywhere in the in the city and I think it should be set that way and just let the rules set up by the cannabis cannabis Commission dictate where the permits are are allowed anyone else wishing to speak hi my name is chris machad a potential business owner in melrose but i wanted to address one point on the the eight to eight as well so understand the restriction potentially on retail but as far as manufacturing or cultivation

▶ 2:51:56 some of these facilities tend to run multiple shifts at different times a day and giving the opportunity for folks to work multiple shifts as well so should just possibly be considered there is no other member of the public question to come forward we could have our planning department come back motion to close the public comment portion of the public hearing second motion to close public comment period was made by uh president Lemmerman seconded by vice chair Boisselle all in favor aye aye opposed uh alderman mcmaster thank you madam chair thank you uh ms gaffney for being here thank you mr sampson um ms gaffney i first want to thank you for the time that you've taken to familiarize me with this proposal to answer my questions and to address

▶ 2:53:16 Shawn M. MacMaster: my concerns and i want to particularly thank you for taking time out of your saturday a couple weeks ago to meet me and to spend about an hour if not a little longer with me to go over the proposal thank you for that um in fairness to you you know that i'm opposed to uh to this uh proposal uh as is um and in fairness to you i've made an attempt to give you a sense of the types of questions that i intend to ask you uh tonight correct because we've had a chance to talk about them okay um and and i understand that you're not here uh before us advocating for this location i think that's important for me to state publicly that you're here simply because you have a job to do and that job is to ensure that we have some zoning regulations in place so that marijuana

▶ 2:54:03 Denise Gaffey: facilities just don't pop up anywhere right right and i think it's safe to say and the planning board members would support me on this that we were really interested in hearing what the public had to say because there hadn't it really hasn't been an opportunity to hear from the public in terms of you know where they think the use makes sense so this has been really you know really interesting and i appreciate that i know the the residents of ward 5 do as well miss gaffey when putting forth a zoning proposal what factors do you look at in determining if a particular area would be suitable so whether that be a new development a type of business or anything else for that matter so in a case like this i mean when we're looking at

▶ 2:54:47 Denise Gaffey: potential potential business developments i think we looked at our natural inclination was to look at the business districts or the commercial districts that allow for for this type of use and then I think we were further further interested in very specifically in this instance about the buffer in trying to to stay away from the school environment out of most concern about people's concern about exposure to children and and then also transit access and just the opportunity to accessibility in general how easy is it for people to to get to these uses in order for them to be viable we want to make sure if we're if we're recommending that a use be in a given district that it's going to be viable so is parking a consideration um yes parking you know

▶ 2:55:39 Shawn M. MacMaster: certainly do you consider social impact costs for instance the possibility that a particular business might attract crime to a neighborhood well i mean we wouldn't um i think if i think if we felt that we were concerned about that we would consider that yes before determining that lower washington street would be one of two locations proposed for a retail marijuana facility did the planning department or the zoning subcommittee conduct proactive outreach to any stakeholders in um we didn't we didn't reach out to the property owners in these districts so the um miss gaffey the letter that was provided to us that accompanies the proposal is dated november 27 2008. prior to last week did anyone from the planning department or the zoning

▶ 2:56:39 Shawn M. MacMaster: subcommittee consult with chief lyle about the proposed location in lower washington street um we talked about it in form it i think chief lyle was aware of the proposal based on discussions that we've had you know in group meetings but not like i didn't sit down and meet with him about it how about the fire chief no the traffic commission no so no review of any prior minute meetings from traffic commission meetings that might provide information about traffic issues uh in the ward and particularly the lower washington street area no little sprouts early education and child care are you asking if i reach out to them if any plan anybody from the planning department or not that i'm aware of anyone in the subcommittee uh the businesses

▶ 2:57:28 Denise Gaffey: and apartment complexes in the neighborhood no the mbta no the city of malden yes okay um i will point out like the distinction here is this the this if if this were a major zoning change like when we did the zoning for the lowell washington area for the smart growth zoning where we're radically modifying the zoning i mean that was a years-long process when we had public meetings throughout with the neighbors this was a little bit different than we were just allowing for a use or some you know a use category in the district so so i think you i think you answered this um with that answer but if i if i'm correct so you're saying it's not customary to reach out to obvious stakeholders before a proposal goes this far understanding that what you might hear

▶ 2:58:24 Shawn M. MacMaster: could be instructive you know that perhaps you might learn something that would cause you to reassess or abandon a proposal altogether i think it's just it depends on the proposal it depends on what it would depend on the proposal okay at the time the proposal was conceived were you aware that the police department and i had been working with little sprouts to address traffic and pedestrian safety issues on lower washington street and that those concerns resulted in the traffic commission establishing a traffic safety zone from the brazil street corner to the city line reducing the speed limit to 20 miles per hour i had read about that in the crosswalk i believe was also correct were you aware that chief lyle and i have also been working with residents on

▶ 2:59:11 Shawn M. MacMaster: pleasant street washington street and converse lane to address parking concerns that have been impacting the neighborhood no if i could um draw your attention to the second paragraph on page three of the cover ladder do you have that in front of you oh yeah the last sentence says while the regulations for rmds meaning medicinal marijuana facilities allowed a 500 foot buffer from all places that children commonly congregate like daycare centers and parks regulations for marijuana establishments are less restrictive and only allow the buffer from schools to offer some clarity on that when it says schools it specifically means elementary middle or high schools correct it's specifically it says K to 12 K through

▶ 3:00:07 Shawn M. MacMaster: 12 public or private okay so it doesn't include daycares or preschools correct but the guidelines from additional marijuana facilities do put in place a 500 foot buffer zone for daycares and proposals is there a reason that we wouldn't hold ourselves to the more restrictive guidelines promulgated by the massachusetts department of public health when it comes to zoning for the sale of retail marijuana so our understanding is that we can't because we can't be more restrictive based on the regulations so the cannabis control commission does allow for for a daycare or a preschool to be excluded unlike the prior guidelines that were set forth by the department of public health so you're saying basically where we're we're allowed to have a

▶ 3:01:02 Shawn M. MacMaster: marijuana facility where within 500 feet that's what the regulation state but is there anything that would prevent us as a community from putting forth a proposal that would hold ourselves as a city to a higher standard to to coincide with what the department of public health saw fit to set forth so um well department of public health only allowed for that for the medicinal right so it is a different it's a separate statute in separate regulations so our understanding is that we we could not be more restrictive and zone out the location based on the daycare proximity we could not use a 500 foot buffer from preschools as a siting tool for marijuana retail establishments was our understanding based upon the regulations that were recently issued could that be

▶ 3:01:58 Shawn M. MacMaster: addressed through a special permit process that we would we would only be looking to to well when i strike that i'll move on to the next question there are really three parcels on the lower washington street uh area where a facility could go is that fair to say um yes i think there are yeah that makes sense so that would be green wood little sprouts or marty's furniture yeah yeah so i suppose it's possible if the there's a retail there's a commercial establishment right now in to washington that could turn over So, Little Sprouts has 10 years remaining on its lease. Greenwood construction, as we know, is a staple in the community, and it's not going anywhere, so that leaves Marty's Furniture, as I know some residents raised concerns about tonight.

▶ 3:02:54 Denise Gaffey: How would this proposal account for the limited parking in that area? We heard Mr. Guarino talk about the plowing that his company does there, not just being the ward 5 alderman but living in the neighborhood i live on brazil street there's very limited parking there so how would the proposal account for that if at all so we um you know we can't really we we don't really have a crystal ball into like what building or how the buildings might even be configured in the future i think we didn't we didn't we did not anticipate it would happen right away if at all in that location it was just and i you know suggested as a possible location because of his because of some of the other virtues of that location i mean the other thing

▶ 3:03:36 Denise Gaffey: i want to point out and just so everyone is aware that the use is allowed is also allowed in malden right on the other side of our of the city line so you know we're mindful of the fact that this retail establishment could pretty pretty easily open right on the other side in which case we would have no opportunity to apply any regular regulations whatsoever so that was it's also just something to be mindful of sub one final question I'm drawing your attention to page four section D of the proposal it says all marijuana establishment shall be ventilated in such a manner that no pesticides and pesticides or other chemicals or products used in cultivation of processing are dispersed into the outside atmosphere and so that

▶ 3:04:29 Shawn M. MacMaster: no odor from marijuana or its processing can be detected by a person with an unimpaired and otherwise normal sense of smell at the exterior of the marijuana establishment or at any adjoining use or property does that also apply to retail facilities yes so all marijuana facilities okay I'm just wondering how can that be insured is there really any way to protect the residents who live in jack flats in the washingtons as well as those who live on washington street brazil street goodyear shadow road and pleasant street from the odor that would emanate from such a facility my understanding is that it can be controlled just based on the conversations i had when we went through the process of vetting dispensaries for this use and i believe they've got those kind of controls in

▶ 3:05:21 Shawn M. MacMaster: place at garden remedies we certainly refer to that pardon you want me to handle that question you can add to it that would be great so they would use the same kinds of hvac equipment that's used in a clean room application which has hepa various levels of hepa filtration and that would THE PROBLEM. THROUGH THE CHAIR TO MR. WELCH, IS THAT APPROPRIATE? DOES THAT TYPE OF EQUIPMENT CAUSE ANY TYPE OF NOISE THAT WOULD BE HEARD IN THE COMMUNITY WHEN THE APARTMENT BUILDINGS WENT UP THAT WAS A CONCERN THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAD ABOUT AIR CONDITIONERS AND OTHER LOUD NOISE COMING FROM THE BUILDING THAT MIGHT DISRUPT THE NEIGHBORHOOD? THE CITY CURRENTLY HAS A DECIBEL REQUIREMENT NOW ON ANY TYPE OF EQUIPMENT LIKE THAT THAT WOULD GIVE OFF ANY NOISE.

▶ 3:06:16 Shawn M. MacMaster: I BELIEVE IT'S 80 DECIBELS WITHIN 40 FEET. I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK IT UP. IT IS A RIGOROUS REQUIREMENT. AND IT'S SOMETHING THE PLANNING BOARD WOULD BE ABLE TO ENFORCE THROUGH THE SPECIAL PERMIT PROCESS. THANK YOU, MR. WALSH. JUST ONE FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. THE NEXT SECTION, SECTION E, READS AS FOLLOWS. There shall be no smoking, eating, or other forms of consumption of any product containing marijuana or marijuana-related products on the premises, including all buildings, accessory structures, parking lots or parking areas, walks, and or immediate surroundings located on the same lot parceled as a marijuana establishment. Now, putting aside that smoking marijuana in public could be a violation of the open

▶ 3:07:03 Shawn M. MacMaster: container law putting that aside nothing in the proposal would preclude a person from lighting up and standing on a public sidewalk for instance outside of little sprouts daycare or a house on brazil street um would it i mean there's there's in other words no no zoning regulation can affect the behavior of customers who shop at a retail marijuana facility i believe it's against the law what's against the law for open container but we can zone for certain things but there's certain things we can't zone for fair to say and neighborhood climate issues um i think that's all i have i just want to thank you both for the questions thank mr welch and again ms gaffey i've always appreciated your responsiveness and the professionalism with which you deal with me not

▶ 3:07:51 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: just on this issue and again you have a job to do i have a job to do and you're well aware of my concerns and i appreciate your candor and answering uh my questions and again your professionalism so thank you thank you madam chair uh president Lemmerman thank you very much um again thank you for the presentation and the uh the thorough information that you provided tonight on both of these orders um just a couple a couple of questions um for you the first one i think you know probably would not be dealt with through this process however i just wanted to point out I was intrigued by the mention of the Somerville program and the equity program that they have put in place in terms of the operators of these

▶ 3:08:38 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: establishments and we do see programs like that in various industries women owned businesses businesses owned by people of color and trying to bring those into communities through purposeful methods and unfortunately it does sound like from what we heard from the speaker that none of those that has not been designated yet by the state if I heard correctly and so restricting to that might mean that we would not have options for people to come in but I that's this is all new to me I just I'm intrigued by that I think it's something that I would encourage the board if you know the planning board is going to be the licensing entity to look into that going forward I rush our conversation as well there was a you know mention that maybe we should consider nine to nine

▶ 3:09:33 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: instead you know I definitely would encourage us to look at how we can mitigate that wherever this ends up where the busiest times are and I did have a question that did come up from another gentleman um about cultivation would that would that restriction apply to a cultivation um operation that's happening that's not a storefront um i think the way it's currently proposed as proposed it does right it's a good comment it is exactly it is a good comment yeah okay so it may make sense to be more specific i think that makes sense i mean if it's not an issue of having public going in and out i think that matters less it might be worth looking into that as well moving forward I do wonder you know I know we have chief Lyle here this evening thank you for being here

▶ 3:10:26 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: you know I'm not sure how much deep analysis has been done on this but would would wonder how how much could be expected if at all that I imagine they would the police department would need in terms of staffing to for enforcement I mean clearly some of these things that are listed here if there is an odor coming out if there isn't it you know the police are gonna be the people who are called in that instance and so you know has there been an analysis of staffing needs for the police should these move forward I think that would be important information to have do you want to do you want to join us just for public who are at home any concerns their operation is outstanding that was actually maybe my next question so thank you how think how things are going yeah

▶ 3:11:33 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: with garden great operation there they're a good member of the neighborhood great thank you I would just say you know I generally I I agree with the sentiment that has been stated here this evening that you know this is this is the law now in Massachusetts that we have a requirement to take the proper steps to prepare our community for it you know I think we have been careful along the way as you mentioned Miss Gaffey we did a moratorium when we felt that we didn't have enough information to do this properly and you know we are now in position that we have to deal with it I I would also say, though, that as a ward alderman, I very much defer to a ward alderman, other ward alderman, when the questions are up about their area.

▶ 3:12:23 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: I know that Alderman McMaster has done an incredible amount of work to look into this on his own, to work with the planning department, and to speak with as many members of the community in his area about it. and I know that he has some some concerns that I would hope that the Planning Board when you come come back to this take into serious consideration I know that you will finally I just want to too quick too quick I guess housekeeping things can we I would like to make a motion as I did before to attach this presentation to the order second the motion president Lemmerman has made a motion to attach this presentation to the order for the public record seconded by Alderman Mortimer all in favor opposed and finally just want to

▶ 3:13:12 Jennifer L. Lemmerman: say thank you to everyone who came forward to speak it's incredibly important that we hear from members of the public and wanted to point out that for anyone whether you're watching at home or whether you're here this evening and did not feel for whatever reason comfortable coming up I know it's difficult to come up and speak at that table I did it before before I was sitting here and it's not easy so if you have input you'd like to give please always feel free to email us at alderman at city of morose.org thank you thank you alderman Bewtra thank you um i wanted to know if you um uh ms gaffey and chief lyle if you could uh speak a little bit to the process that you went through um a couple years ago with registered marijuana

▶ 3:13:59 Manisha Bewtra: dispensaries in terms of I guess learning more about the that line of business and how you think recreational or adult use marijuana may differ in terms of the facilities from a public safety and security standpoint I recall a couple years ago I think you you did a podcast on your the things you learned on the road touring facilities and also you've spoke to your experience with garden remedies but if you could just speak to both what you learned from that process with medicinal marijuana but also how you think it may apply in terms of the security of these facilities my takeaway was that I felt there was quite a bit of control and quite a bit of oversight that exists in this industry certainly in the medicinal

▶ 3:15:01 Denise Gaffey: marijuana industry but I think in general even as we can see from the rate from how long the process has taken for for the regulations to come up you know the established and there's been a lot of thought put into it and I think there are a lot of controls that are that are placed so I felt more comfortable after going through that process both around the sort of the the benefits that are out there for particularly for the medicinal use you know and what's available and the controls that are in place and i think through um i feel pretty comfortable with the kind of zoning requirements that we're proposing and all the various reviews and security provisions that you know we will have We'll have not simply revenue generating businesses, which are really important in this community,

▶ 3:15:56 but really reputable, solid business partners at the end of the day. We toured about nine facilities and ultimately it was Garden Remedies. I would say that every single facility we went to was very similar, the security levels Those were outstanding, anyway, without an escort. From the first place, check your license, they went through everything, sign in, sign out. And then when I see Garden Remedies open up, it's the same process, it's the same level of security. When I first went in, I was certainly hesitant because of the field I'm in and I had reservations. And when I was done looking at all these facilities, I said, well, I was impressed with the levels of security. Do you anticipate that the adult use facilities, retail facilities, would have a similar process

▶ 3:16:51 Manisha Bewtra: in terms of security? I would think access would be the same. Have you heard from, say, other municipalities that already have opened up recreational facilities from their police officers and community staff in terms of, you know, traffic issues. What are the things you're hearing in terms of those concerns? Well, the initial opening is not soft. It's quite involved with traffic. Traffic is overwhelming. But as more of these facilities open up, they seem to be doing much better. I know Salem did an outstanding job when they opened. If you didn't get a ticket, you didn't get in. Yeah, I think I read it. I think they learned from some of the communities out in Western Mass where they were overwhelmed.

▶ 3:17:40 Manisha Bewtra: Right, so there's some advantages to maybe not being the first ones, but also maybe not losing out on the potential business opportunities. And I liked the approach, from what I heard. I didn't follow up to see how it went. But where they had kind of you get a timed ticket, so it's not going to create the same. think there are things like that that we can consider as a community it's like disney world fast pass at disney world right um if if um ms gaffey if you could could you speak to why um for example you didn't um select the bd district since that also isn't within one of those buffer zones um when we looked at the bd district we were we thought of the close proximity to the middle school high school campus that was really what discouraged us um i just wanted to read um

▶ 3:18:44 Manisha Bewtra: some documentation from the cannabis control commission um on their guidance from municipalities regarding buffer zones um this is not sort of me taking a position on on the buffer zones themselves but just because i think the questions come up um in their guidance they say under state law a marijuana established may not be located within 500 feet of a pre-existing public or private school providing education in kindergarten or any of grades 1 through 12 municipalities may adopt an ordinance or bylaw to reduce that distance requirement I don't know that we're going to be discussing reducing the buffer zone but I don't know that you know members of the public are necessarily aware that that is an option

▶ 3:19:32 Manisha Bewtra: I don't know if there have been communities that have elected to do that Additionally in their equity guidance There is a statement that the Commission suggests that in additional buffers that additional buffer zones or separation requirements speaking to some of the concerns around locating You know having zoning for marijuana establishments or retail facilities Next nearby little sprouts or other state daycares, etc that suggests that additional buffer zones or separation requirements may not be necessary and cautions communities against acting arbitrarily. My concerns tend to kind of fall within the equity considerations, whether we actually need caps and need to, I think I really heard loud and clear from Ward 5

▶ 3:20:28 Manisha Bewtra: regarding concerns about traffic and also having faced some more of the development impact of a lot of different things that have gone on in our community so i kind of between those local neighborhood concerns as well as equity concerns i would be i would like to think about additional areas maybe outside of those 500 foot buffer zones but in other business districts just to again create equitable opportunities for this new legal use and um as well as i think some of the other things i agree i concur with some of the other think comments that have come up like looking at the operating hours um etc um trying to think if i had any further questions um i think i just wanted to put out there that this is also an issue where i've kind of seen over time i think when question

▶ 3:21:33 Manisha Bewtra: four was out there i i was initially opposed to question four but i was very pleased with the process of establishing the cannabis control commission all the research that's been done at the state level i think the care and thought and concern that's gone into um creating this initial zoning uh recommendation and and going forward in this process i think engaging the neighborhood more um i think that's what those things are as well as the research behind both the disparate impact of marijuana related enforcement in the past but also the actual public health aspects and communities that have legalized i've really sort of come around to being very open to this use and ultimately it is a legal use and we did vote in favor as a community so we are

▶ 3:22:28 Scott M. Forbes: obligated um to consider this um yeah i think that concludes my comments for the moment thank you alderman forbes thank you um really just have one question here so in august of 2017 when we you came before us and we discussed the zoning for the medicinal facility which is garden remedies one of the selling points that you gave us was the fact that this was not in a residential area and i think people were able to buy into that fact knowing that it was more industrial that strip of roadway most people don't even consider to be even melrose so it's kind of like the you hit the jackpot where we're able to establish this facility in our community but it doesn't have any residential impact so now we're faced with a situation where you know it is going

▶ 3:23:20 Denise Gaffey: to affect communities it's going to affect neighborhoods so you know can you just explain are we deviating from that approach uh because that really was one of those selling points when you came before us and did your presentation i'd like to get your thoughts on that sure um so i think too if i just uh um reiterate what i said earlier the other the other selling point for that for the route 99 area was really the more expansive buffer zone restrictions that really led us to that location kind of exclusively is that was just it was a different different reality in terms of what we couldn't could not do in terms of the location so but you know I certainly certainly have heard a lot from the from the neighborhood in the lower Washington

▶ 3:24:10 Denise Gaffey: street area in terms of the concern about the compatibility of the use with the residential development around there and I think you know that I think I'm you know I find that to be pretty compelling so you know I think we the retail use in general is allowed in in that district as well as other business districts so you know that was one of the reasons why we thought it would make for that and the proximity to the transit area into you know the allowed the area that's allowed over the border in malden it made some sense but um but there were different considerations that we were looking at in additional use if we can also add too i mean we also had the benefit of seeing the garden remedies project come before us seeing you know some of the actual thoughts

▶ 3:25:00 that go into the design the the fact that it really operate looks more like a doctor's office than it does you know a retail marijuana dispensary so um after seeing some of those things and the recognition that there's you know some benefits associated with having these in the city we were looking for more opportunities to create more opportunity zones and again not necessarily saying that by creating the zoning that allow them potentially to go there it's not a given you know it's still a very rigorous and difficult process to get this permit so you know looking for more opportunities more locations to provide um you know some competitions some different um proposals that might work and so that that was a big part of the decision as well

▶ 3:25:56 Scott M. Forbes: okay i do thank you for the presentation um you know melrose is a bedroom community uh it's neighborhoods we're not over 90 percent residential and we don't have a route one that comes down and provides us with that either commercial tax base or property that may be more suitable for a facility like this i understand that it is legal i understand that uh you know i voted in favor of the medicinal facility on on route 99 i think people like the idea of the concept but nobody wants it in their neighborhoods and i think that's the give and take that we're facing right now so um i think that's all i have thank you sure alderman smirko thank you madam chair thanks again for being here this evening and for all the time dedicated to this

▶ 3:26:43 Michael P. Zwirko: this is certainly breaking new ground for melrose um and thanks also to the residents who came out tonight to voice their concerns and their comments so I am just I am a Ward 5 resident as well I've spoken at length with Alderman McMaster on this over the past couple of weeks and I tell this story a lot publicly but I'm kind of a child of Oak Grove Village so my first entrance to Melrose was through Oak Grove Village and then my wife and I were fortunate enough to end up purchasing a home not far from Oak Grove Village so I've seen the benefits that these developments bring to the community but you know it's an accurate statement to say that no other section of the city has gone through the

▶ 3:27:29 Michael P. Zwirko: transformation that low the section of Ward five lower Ward five has gone in over the past eight to ten years I mean yeah Melrose has changed over that time but between the developments of Jack Flats Washington Place Oak Grove Village and some of the other on the periphery of Ward 5 it's it's really just seems that Ward 5 is bearing the brunt for a lot of these real estate developments and now adding this to it I think is really exacerbating where residents kind of feel a large concerns specifically specifically with the traffic and then on the flip side of that I can understand why it's an advantageous spot because it is near the MBTA and to your point Miss Gaffey the don't necessarily want to call it a threat but the potential for Malden to site a facility

▶ 3:28:20 Michael P. Zwirko: just over the border near the Oak Grove T station I think that's something that's very important for us because we could have all of the burden and none of the benefit in that in that instance and so it's something to be mindful of but So getting back to the Lower Ward 5 section, and maybe I'm meeting this incorrectly, when you put up the graph of the types, or the table rather, of the types of zoning parcels, BB1 is one of them that could potentially have a retail facility. Is that correct? No. It's not. it's no it's not because um there's an there's an asterisk in a footnote to that table it's not shown on the table but there's a footnote in the zoning proposal similar to we ran into this with

▶ 3:29:10 Denise Gaffey: the dispensary as well the um the bb and the bb1 districts are show up together in the same they share a column in our zoning table and it's kind of hard to split them because of the different uses so what we have done here is just have we have an aster a footnote to the table that says the use would only be allowed in the bb not in the bb1 not in the bb1 and what about ba1 for the retail use right now no no so we recently over the past couple of years with the overlay districts we tried to enhance some of the commercial viability of those sectors specifically around the commuter rail in the tremont corridor would we not open those up excluding the buffer just for a moment those areas for a potential retail facility well we

▶ 3:30:03 Michael P. Zwirko: do recommend opening them up for all the other types of establishments correct but not a retail adult use facility that it's not currently proposed that way right certainly you you can decide to do that understood yeah we were looking again at the buffers and it felt like when you when you overlay the the buffer zones those bubbles it does seem like there are other locations that might be feasible to hold an adult use recreational facility and there certainly looked like you know the downtown was an area that was just outside of the buffer between East Foster and Upham it's a small sliver but that's also an area that's known for commercial uses so it's not really a neighborhood in terms of the pure

▶ 3:30:52 Michael P. Zwirko: definition we're not confined by this only we could create an overlay and just have specific parcels and this leads to my next question is we the royal we have decided to go forward with potentially two but we're only mandated under the law for one since we don't really have package stores and you had stated in your statement that part of that is for an economic competition reason and also potential increase of revenue and is that the kind of the leading argument for not holding to one versus two I'm sensitive to the competition component I mean I don't really like mandating a monopoly in the city of Melrose I think that that's an economic problem there but I'm just curious if you could kind

▶ 3:31:40 Denise Gaffey: speak as to why uh why two when we really only need may need mandated for one that that's really that was the primary reason revenue and competition competition and um tax revenue opportunities right um we also just thought it made a little more sense rather than starting out on the gate being really restrictive because it just made a little sense to maybe allow for it's a little easier to pull back after you advertise the zoning for two you know two possible locations than it is to go in the other direction just from a sort of um accountability standpoint okay you know notification standpoint right you know what i mean and also recognizing that there's no obligation to issue two yes it could be the order you could have it out there for a long time but the planning board

▶ 3:32:31 Michael P. Zwirko: could opt not to grant a second special permit well and you'd also need a willing landlord as well correct right so it's that component a lot of factors yeah and again this is just about the use change so um i'm mindful of that i know that i've witnessed a lot and sat through a lot of planning board meetings and i know that they do a very credible job when it comes to vetting these so the site plan review as well as permitting i know this would be a special permit process but it does seem very thorough um i came across something and i don't know if it's true or not it was just in my following of other municipalities but i believe that that 500 foot buffer line is property line to property line i don't think it's structure to structure so if you could just get a

▶ 3:33:09 Michael P. Zwirko: clarification on that because i think that that will impact those act those buffer zones i'm almost positive that it's property line to property line so um it's just again it could winnow the the actual zone itself and that's i just would like a clarification because i think somewhere in your letter you reference a structure and i think it's actually a property line so it's just a legal i'd like a legal clarification on that okay possible sure um and that would make it more restrictive correct it would yep um the i had one more question i think it's for chief lyle leniency here can you explain there was a question that came up from the member of the public earlier this evening about the zone designation for lower washington as being industrial yet

▶ 3:34:03 Denise Gaffey: it seems to be a highly residential uh could could you explain very good point um the underlying zoning there is is is industrial zone so when we when we were undergoing the major zoning um initiative back in the mid 2000s we were we were sort of mindful of the existing uses that were allowed under the industrial designation and we're adding another layer of possible uses through an overlay process and so if that's a common zoning tool to do an overlay which allows for a broader Group of uses but to keep the underlying zoning designation the same so that you're not you're not jeopardizing any existing uses So it so it is technically still an industrial zone I think we've designated as the as an ie it is because yeah, it's different than the Izone which is over on 99, right?

▶ 3:35:02 Denise Gaffey: But it is also more commonly known as the smart growth overlay district which you know and the idea behind the smart overlay district was to allow for a broader range of uses primarily mixed-use we certainly envisioned residential clearly and also a mix of uses not just it's not strictly residential but commercial and residential ideally in fact that was our hope was to see it be sort of a dynamic mixed-use yeah like across the tracks on at oak grove village or windsor oak grove and yep um and then i had another question on oh yes um i believe that when we talk about this being a revenue uh generator i i don't think that this this these monies this pro these monies are going to be far out from hitting our our budget

▶ 3:35:57 Denise Gaffey: i mean even if we were to approve these in the statutory requirements it's highly likely that they wouldn't impact uh or could even be budgeted for like fy20 for per se no i mean i don't that may not be true actually i mean for for garden remedies for example to co-locate for them to collate locate which i think is something they're interested in doing yep there's really not a lot that they have to do i mean they have to go through this zoning has to be approved and then they have to go through a special permitting process with the planning board that takes some time um but there's not a lot of structural changes they'll have to make to their to their business to so it couldn't it's possible it wouldn't take so in their instance it actually

▶ 3:36:38 Denise Gaffey: could be quick revenue you know fairly so can you then explain um not only for myself but for everybody that's anxiously watching at home just this process we stand i believe once we um seek the recommendations from the planning board after 21 days they come back for us and then we have is it 60 or 90 days to approve or amend you have 90 days from from tonight's tonight yep on the um on the zoning you're obligated to wait 21 days um to get a report from the planning board and um the timing being such that it is we have a meeting later this month so it hopefully will work out although we do have a lot we have we have a lot to digest unpack two different zoning ordinance so you know we we may be asking for a little clemency there but um uh yeah that's that is

▶ 3:37:28 Michael P. Zwirko: typical that's how it works so some sometime in february this will come back to us yeah yeah you should hear from us by the end of the month early february unless we were specifically specifically asked for a little more time yep understood and then the um the last question that i had well and i just want to reiterate to uh to folks because we're just talking about a use change there is a lot of vetting that occurs post this stage so i think and again sitting just through subdivision developments that have occurred at the planning board site plan review it's it's not only rigorous but there's other opportunities for the public themselves to lend their concerns and enhancements to that process as well as what the planning board does absolutely so this is just

▶ 3:38:21 Michael P. Zwirko: process is a public public hearing right that's a good point yeah yeah and uh thank you for your time and i just uh for chief lab before i finish up my question i i understand that um you know your chief concern here is public safety but i do have to ask do you have um it seems to me there's this old saying in the state of maine you can't get there from here and and the 99 section of melrose yeah it's melrose by border but you can't really get there right it's not easy to get there you actually have to leave melrose in some instances to to get there so you have said earlier that you've received zero calls for service and that the garden remedies are a good partner with the city and in the neighborhood do you have any of those same concerns with the

▶ 3:39:09 Michael P. Zwirko: lower washington area is it i mean it is on the periphery of melrose there is heavy traffic response times public safety concerns and and and a coda to that question is so the first question is lower Washington second is is where would you feel comfortable at least looking at this map knowing where it is where a potential retail facility could be cited I haven't seen the map so from where I was over there I'm certainly with my vision as far as the Washington Street area i look back when the registry is there and maybe not many people in the room remember the registry it's like 10 years ago because i lived it i was a traffic sergeant way back when and i went down there tonight actually and i counted about 25 parking spaces within those 25 parking

▶ 3:39:56 spaces there's an existing crosswalk there's a future crosswalk and there's a bus stop so we'll say there's 20 yard parking spaces depending on where this facility is and there's other businesses in there i don't think there's much room on the roadway for additional parking or anything little sprouts went down there i met with the owners a couple times down there they have a drop off in the morning so that takes up space so for a facility it opens at eight o'clock in the morning or nine o'clock there's going to be challenges for a lot of people those are my concerns crime um you know where the population has increased down there there's calls for service down there it was before with all those apartments here in stone place um there is considerable

▶ 3:40:43 Michael P. Zwirko: cost of service over there as well sector two is that that's our sector um the cost of service and sector two have gone up considerably because of it's our busiest sector because of the additional housing down there i hope that helps it does and i hope as this process moves forward um that you know chief lyle is at least uh advised as to as to how it's going forward i know again we're just talking about a change in use so that's typically not something where you would maybe reach out but given that this could have an impact on public safety it would be nice to hear where he would land on potential amendments to the proposal that's brought before us so to the extent that that could be solicited with him i'd appreciate it myself i appreciate your time and that's all

▶ 3:41:32 Monica C. Medeiros: the questions i had at this moment alderman medeiros thank you thank you and thanks to everyone for coming tonight and speaking up um now i feel like i have so many questions but some of them have been addressed and um i guess they have some comments too um first maybe i'll go into comments i think you know overall i think this uh this the zoning amendment is is good and well thought out we didn't talk a lot about the all the different parts here the definitions the you know a lot of the restrictions that are here for the establishments but I think they cover a lot of the bases I do have concerns in particular about you know about odors and how that can be addressed less so in the retail establishment but perhaps more in some

▶ 3:42:35 Monica C. Medeiros: of the other uses I mean we you know our neighbors in Malden they have the smell of the coffee facility I remember the smell of the jello factory in Woburn I you know here I haven't smelled it myself but I've heard of you know the dairy and when and you know this could be addressed through the special permit but really it's most likely going to be the police who, you know, we're gonna get the call and, you know, it's nine o'clock at night and I smell something, right? So how do we enforce that and handle that? Well, so our goal would be to combat that as a, you know, just address it before it, before the facility is established. Would this be through inspections in the special permit process?

▶ 3:43:37 Denise Gaffey: Requiring sort of like to the technology, the kind of technology that Jack was speaking about. Requiring those kind of technology solutions so that the odor doesn't make its way. And then obviously, yeah, there would be an enforcement involved if something that weren't working properly, you might have to address that, tweak that. I mean, it could be a condition of a decision. So if they were ever outside of that, you know, that threshold, we can call them in and make them fix it. And I do think it's, you know, conversely, I think it's actually kind of harder to pull back the number than it is to, you know, in the restrictions than it is to start out that way. You know, I see we have a pretty strict sign ordinance, but I can go around town right now and we could find, you know, neon signs in the windows that aren't supposed to be on right now.

▶ 3:44:36 Monica C. Medeiros: So I just, I do get a little bit concerned about some of those factors. And by and large, this is still, you know, this is a use that Massachusetts has deemed legal, which is still illegal federally. against the law and this is by and large a cash only business as a result you know I'm concerned about you know safety about robberies and there's a there's a lot of cash that can change hands especially in especially in a retail establishment we've started off I think on a good foot with good footing with the medical use and you know I yes this is passed in Melrose with 51% not you know not an overwhelming majority but this use has been in place up on route 99 you know for almost three months and i think there might be a lot of people who you know are

▶ 3:45:57 Monica C. Medeiros: looking for drama and there's been none you know i could say i've got no phone calls no complaints you know and i think i've been kind of vocal that i it's not my favorite use right uh i think they would reach out and complain and i think you know part of the success there is certainly the business owner and the steps that they're taking but it's also the location that i think alderman forbes pointed out is not there's not really a lot of residential use around that area to conflict and it doesn't seem to me that lower washington street or really at this point while this is still and new use is really the best fit with the residential districts right now so i i would like to see this is you know the process of this is it's been presented to us the board of alderman

▶ 3:46:54 Monica C. Medeiros: by the planning board is this proposal it's going to go back to the planning board for your input ultimately it will be the board of alderman who um decide upon the zoning amendment i'd like to see us cap this for now at one we could always lift that cap as the use i think there's likelihood that this at some point in the future may very well become a legal federal use but right now it's not some of those other concerns about cash might go away some of those other concerns about novelty and people trying this the first time in traffic you know might go away after something's been established for a while so i would suggest for now that we consider limiting this to the districts that the medical

▶ 3:47:48 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: marijuana is limited to and cap this at one uh alderman medeiros i'm terribly sorry just a point of privilege we've been told by mmtv that we need to take a quick recess because they need to change their tapes um so that we can continue to do uh have this meeting be in public so i would entertain a motion for recess second all right we have a motion for recess made by alderman warner second by alderman forbes all in favor aye aye okay all opposed okay we are in recess for about six to to eight minutes we're gonna get started again right we were ready to reconvene MMTV has switched the tapes and so thank you for being back and alderman Medeiros sits here for thank you thank you very much back from break here so I'll recap so we're left off is that this is this is a

▶ 3:49:07 Monica C. Medeiros: legal use zoned in mass but not legal considering not considered legal federally and that brings with it some challenges including that this is primarily a cash only business um this did pass in in melrose but by a small majority so far we have had success in my opinion with the zoning of the medical establishment on in the route 99 area and i think it's a little bit harder to go to pull back if we've already say zoned than it is to expand that a little bit so my suggestion now as this moves back to the planning board i would like to see this capped for now at one and kept to the route 99 zoning districts with in in that that area does not really have any residential abutters just to speak of it really is mostly a

▶ 3:50:19 Monica C. Medeiros: commercially zoned area I think that would be sort of easier to start we could consider looking at this in the future you know this question was sold on the ballot as let's regulate marijuana like we do alcohol and we've talked about some of the different buffers and some of the buffers for alcohol use are that things can't be too close to a church there's schools you know so some of that's a little bit different I think about being on this board and we made some changes a couple years back about lowering the threshold of the number of seats required to serve alcohol and before that process there was kind of a vigorous public input process and there was meetings that were held for the public to discuss the proposal that was before them and you

▶ 3:51:20 Monica C. Medeiros: know this is new again I think you've done a very good job with this this zoning amendment my suggestion is to in a lot of what I heard today is that what we wanted to see what the public had to say my suggestion is to go back cap this at one keep it in the area that's does not have residential butters right now if you want to consider expanding this in the future open this up have some public input see where people are comfortable with having this maybe you know get the get the public involved in general maybe they'll say at that time you know we think this would be a good fit near Oak Grove maybe they'll say there's this is a better use for downtown it maybe we'll think of some other area that is that is better but maybe it will say one's enough but I

▶ 3:52:15 Monica C. Medeiros: think it's it's early in this and I think we could benefit by going at that a little bit more slowly we do need to zone and I again I think that so far we've had success in that area I wanted to talk just a little bit about this been some talk about hours and I would also suggest not going much past you know 8 or 9 p.m. in the evening as most of these other most of these other areas where industrial uses could be and they were thinking about other other uses in the discussion we had just here tonight not necessarily just retail but some of the other uses many of these zones are in fact in residential districts and we've had you know in in past years I think some of the ultimate here will remember having you know the the auto auto mechanic who was working you know

▶ 3:53:17 Monica C. Medeiros: small shop the auto mechanic working in a shop past nine o'clock and inevitably the sounds of noise that came from that you know bothered the residents tremendously and you know we've we've seen different kinds of concerns like that i think if we i can't think of too many other businesses that are i don't know if we're thinking about 24 hours or anything like that i'm just putting it out there but the only businesses that i can think of that operate 24 hours at the hospital the police you know and the fire um there may be some call centers that are around that are in existence but i mean i think we need to to think about that i don't know if we would have i'm not sure what would be involved in all of what's proposed but

▶ 3:54:05 Shawn M. MacMaster: i think that you know we should probably look at not going later than nine o'clock at night so that i think we're bound to run into residential concerns so i think i hope that i've covered uh everything i wanted to leave in and i thank you thank you any alderman wishing to speak for the first time alderman mcmaster thank you madam chair i have a few comments that i wanted to make but i did want to reserve those to give my colleagues an opportunity to ask questions before i make those comments i did have one question for chief lyle chief Chief, can you talk a little bit about the parking enforcement efforts that have been undertaken by the police department this year, particularly beginning, I would say, in early

▶ 3:54:55 Shawn M. MacMaster: October after the Victorian Fair and not long after the Coffee with Cops event where you and I had an opportunity to speak with residents from Pleasant Street and Washington Street. Can you talk a little bit about the enforcement efforts and also talk about the increase in parking enforcement when you when you compare 2017 to 2018 there was a couple of residents had real concerns about Pleasant Street especially with the town of States where residents want to pay their fees for additional vehicles TREAT ON CONVERSE. ULTIMATELY WE MOVED SOME SIGNS AROUND AND STEPPED UP ENFORCEMENT IN THERE AND WE FINALLY GOT THAT UNDER CONTROL. NUMEROUS PEOPLE WERE ISSUED PARKING VIOLATIONS. IT TOOK SOME TIME TO GET UNDER

▶ 3:55:54 Shawn M. MacMaster: CONTROL, BUT WE DID. WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM THE YEAR BEFORE. I BELIEVE THE TOWN OF STATES CHANGED THEIR PROCESS FOR SECOND VEHICLES. SO BASED ON SOME OF THE WORK THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING together there, even though there's still concerns, there's somewhat of favorable views from residents on Pleasant Street and Washington Street compared to what we saw this summer and in the spring. Early fall is really when it started. And you were kind enough to provide me with some data based on the enforcement that the police department has undertaken both this year or i should say 2018 and 2017 uh in wood um if i if i told you that that data said that just on pleasant street and washington street that enforcement parking

▶ 3:56:49 Shawn M. MacMaster: enforcement has increased by 66 percent over the last year um would that number surprise you I would say 50%, 60-odd percent, yes, that doesn't surprise me. Traffic officers down there, that's part of his routine every day. Thank you, Chief. Madam Chair, just a few comments and then I'll conclude. The cover letter to the proposal that we received indicates that the Washington Street location was selected in part because of its proximity to transit. Oak Grove Station and presumably even Wyoming Hill and the proposal says quote it should mitigate issues related to traffic in parking end quote this however does nothing to address the limited amount of parking in the neighborhood it would result in trespass parking which is already a problem at

▶ 3:57:43 Shawn M. MacMaster: town estates Jack Flats and the Washington's with people parking and walking to the T and it would result in unauthorized parking in the surrounding neighborhoods which is already a significant problem with this location the residents of Ward five particularly those who live in precinct one would be disproportionately affected by a marijuana facility true equity in government does not burden some residents over others if the city wants a second marijuana facility beyond the Newberry Turnpike area then all residents not just those who live in Ward five should share in the risks in the burdens that it will impose. For lower Washington Street neighborhood, it would also result in an influx of motor

▶ 3:58:28 Shawn M. MacMaster: vehicle traffic and foot traffic, adding to an already congested area where we've seen the addition of 482 housing units over the last few years. More cars and more pedestrians present more safety risks on our roads. As it relates to public transit, what the planning board and the subcommittee see as a virtue I happen to see as a vice. My concern with a retail marijuana facility being so close to transit is that it will serve as a vehicle for the black market, an easy way to access the city from other communities, set up shop in the neighborhood, and allow someone with ill intentions to benefit from selling marijuana at a cheaper price than they would otherwise be able to pay at a retail store. In the midst of an opiate crisis where

▶ 3:59:21 Shawn M. MacMaster: Over 18 fatal overdoses have occurred in Melrose over the last six years. The last thing we need to do is cause more drug related problems, especially considering the risk of marijuana laced fentanyl being introduced by the black market. It also makes me extremely nervous that we'd consider putting an all cash business, a business by its very nature that is a prime target for an armed robbery, steps away from a daycare and in the middle of a residential neighborhood. In all, as it relates to the lower Washington Street location, to me, this is an ill-conceived idea that would unduly burden the residents and business owners of the lower Washington Street area, adversely affect the climate of the neighborhood, present significant safety

▶ 4:00:11 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: risks to residents and result in social impact costs that we as a city cannot afford for these reasons i would ask the planning department and the zoning board to remove the ia location from its proposal entirely thank you madam chair thank you and if my cogs will just indulge me i just wanted to ask maybe two quick questions and start out by just thanking the public for being here and for the really immense outpouring of public participation it really helps us with our role here tonight and in the months to come one very discreet question you mentioned that when you were looking for a place to locate or zone for a medical marijuana dispensary there was really you know there were very little options there were there in fact any other

▶ 4:01:00 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: options besides Newberry Turnpike not really no once you applied the 500 foot boundary from places where children congregate it kind of wiped out okay so unequivocally the answer is no yeah it left I mean there were certain areas that were permissible but there were no zoning districts themselves that weren't partially impacted by a boundary buffer okay that's thank you and then a comment that leads sort of to a question so when I looked at the proposed ordinance and some things we haven't talked about tonight are the roles that different departments are going to play once we determine where recreational marijuana facility might be zoned so where I really appreciate the police chief being here tonight I also reached out to the fire chief to the health director to the

▶ 4:01:54 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: city inspector because all of their departments will have roles to play in terms of any permitting that might occur in terms of reviewing an application or being involved in signing off on some level of compliance and so I'm just mindful of the level to which it will be important for these departments to coordinate with each other and ensure that everyone is kept apprised of developments. So I'm wondering, you know, I'm hopeful that the experience that was, that you had with medical marijuana sort of leads for, provides a roadmap for you in terms of how all of the different departments will interact. And I just wondered if you could speak briefly to sort of who is, who quarterbacks all of this and how do,

▶ 4:02:39 Denise Gaffey: what are some of the lessons learned in terms of making sure your colleagues and other city departments are involved so the the special permit process will kind of establishes that that process where the planning office kind of coordinates the communication with all the relevant department heads where they are all submitted copies of the application they're they're encouraged to attend a department head meeting where we with the applicant before it even comes to the planning board where we kind of um you know go through all the application requirements and all of the um various concerns that that we know the planning board's going to have as they go through the process so they're brought in very early on when

▶ 4:03:24 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: there's an application um and we sort of the planning office kind of shepherds that and that's not limited to the rmds it's just the general process that's practice for every any new development okay um and one thing that we talked about city planner was just um that one of the requirements for a marijuana establishment will be to provide an emergency response plan and i think that goes to maybe a couple of our city departments there's no approval requirement for that and and also there's a requirement that an entity provided you with a construction management plan if any renovations or new constructing needs to occur I'm not sure if the the ordinance has written is clear whether that would

▶ 4:04:14 Kate Lipper-Garabedian: also be required after a permit is granted whether if there was an envisioned type of expansion or anything of that nature if it would come back to you so maybe as you you're the Planning Board takes this back I'm just taking a look at all the different ways in which we're asking city departments to be involved and whether the involvement is simply that they receive something or that they actually have to affirmatively approve of something would be something I would defer to you all on and and also went with your conversations with the department heads but I I think that's would be appropriate to focus on as well thank you any further business I would entertain a motion to adjourn motion to

▶ 4:04:57 Peter D. Mortimer: place this order on hold thank you second okay we have a motion to place this order on hold by Alderman Mortimer seconded by President All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion to adjourn. Before that second, and just a point of procedure, can we just proceed with this meeting and reopen the public hearing, keep the appropriations meeting open, but resume the public hearing? The one that we— We recessed the public hearing on the zoning ordinance. For affordable housing? Yes. Yes. But we actually posted those as separate meetings. Very good. second the motion to adjourn okay we have a motion to adjourn made by president Lemmerman seconded by alderman mortimer all in favor aye any opposed this motion uh this motion carries

Original documents

• This meeting on the city portal