The applicant, represented by Ed Minardi, sought approval for additional use and site plan to establish the licensed cannabis store. The proposed changes to the site were minimal, primarily adding a van-accessible parking space and a handicap ramp. However, substantial improvements were discussed regarding security and operational protocols. Witnesses, including Shauna Ebanks and Jacqueline Durman, provided testimony on the development plans and the applicant’s history.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to addressing security concerns. The applicant outlined a robust security system, including locked cases for product display, carbon filters for odor mitigation, controlled access points, and a state-of-the-art surveillance system with ample video storage and remote law enforcement access. Additionally, the presence of licensed security guards was assured.

Furthermore, the applicant detailed the facility’s operational structure, noting customer access control, the prohibition of on-site consumption, and the implementation of renewable energy practices. Emphasis was placed on a queueing system for online orders to manage customer flow and prevent long queues outside the establishment. The facility’s location, described as a summer destination area, was expected to help in managing customer traffic, which was estimated at around 24 customers per day.

Board inquiries touched on various operational concerns, such as product packaging, trash pickup frequency, designated parking for curbside pickup, and the capability of the facility to maintain security during power outages. Clarification was also sought on whether the facility would permit consumption areas in the future, which was denied by the applicant.

Environmental impact was another point of scrutiny. The applicant conveyed a commitment to environmental stewardship by explaining their waste management plan, which involved separating and securely storing cannabis waste and employing recyclable containers. The board also probed into the backup power system for security features, which the applicant described as a UPS battery system.

The discussion also highlighted the potential impact on the neighborhood, including nearby businesses such as a law firm and an ice cream shop, as well as a school bus stop, raising questions about the store’s compatibility with the vicinity. A resident voiced concerns over the proposed business’s impact on neighborhood safety and the adequacy of the security plan.

The board and the public also debated the proposed site’s layout and aesthetic, which included updates to driveways, parking, lighting, and sidewalks.

Traffic and parking were central to the debate. The board challenged the traffic study’s assumptions and sought further analysis on parking space turnover, traffic patterns, and potential congestion. Public comments echoed these concerns, focusing on pedestrian and cyclist safety. A comprehensive traffic analysis was requested to assess the real impact of the proposed dispensary on local traffic and parking.

The applicant’s professional engineer presented an aerial map and existing conditions exhibit, detailing the current state of the site and its planned improvements. The board expressed concerns about the impact of the proposed business on traffic and the surrounding area, seeking clarification on the loading and unloading process, and security measures to prevent criminal activity.

Concerns were raised about the visual impact of the ventilation system and HVAC units on the building’s appearance. The proximity of the building to the property line and non-conforming use were also discussed. Questions about parking spot numbers, overflow parking, snow plowing, and traffic flow were posed during the public comments segment.