Urban Affairs Committee backs amended special permit to relocate Garden Remedies, asks solicitor to finalize edits

The Marlborough City Urban Affairs Committee recommended approval on Jan. 13 of an amended special permit allowing Garden Remedies to relocate its adult-use and medical marijuana establishment from 416 Boston Post Road East to 423 Lakeside Avenue, while attaching conditions covering site plan review, security, inspections and reporting.

The recommendation, made after a public hearing record and review of department comments, directs the city solicitor to prepare the decision in final form for a vote by the full City Council. Committee members also asked the applicant and staff to correct administrative details in the draft decision, including plan and sign submission dates and the record of written comments received during the public hearing.

The draft decision incorporated findings that the new site “is an appropriate use and in harmony with the general purpose and intent” of the city zoning ordinance when subject to the draft conditions. City staff notes included no objections from several departments: Kevin Green, Fire Chief (no comment); the police chief (few calls for service at the current location and no expected increase); Paul Dinwiddie, Board of Health (no comment); Thomas DiPercio, City Engineer (no additional concerns); the building commissioner and the conservation/sustainability officer each reported no comment because build-out work is interior to the tenant space. Attorney Brian Fock, representing the applicant, told the committee that city departments “didn’t have a whole lot to add, in terms of concerns or about impact.”

The decision would carry forward many standard conditions used in prior Garden Remedies permits: compliance with state and local law and building codes; site plan review under the city’s site plan review ordinance before building permits issue; incorporation of submitted plans and renderings as permit attachments; annual reports to the City Council that mirror reports filed with the Massachusetts Cannabis Control Commission (CCC); compliance with CCC licensure and operation statutes and regulations; and regular inspections by city officials.

Security and operations conditions in the draft include a secure lobby and screening area, opaque exterior windows, prepackaged product delivery, no on-site consumption unless the city code is changed, employee criminal background checks (including a separate check by the police chief with authority to disapprove hires), a requirement to employ a city police detail when the chief files a letter stating one is necessary (or otherwise to hire a private detail), and a prohibition on selling products unrelated to marijuana (for example, tobacco or e‑cigarettes). The draft also requires the applicant to provide contact information for management to the police chief, building commissioner and city council.

Committee members noted an inconsistency in the draft’s operating hours language and asked staff to confirm the correct permitted schedule. The prior permit language the committee referenced listed hours as Monday–Saturday, 9 a.m.–10 p.m., and Sunday, 10 a.m.–8 p.m.; the draft decision includes different hour figures. A committee member said the draft represents an increase in hours and asked that the record make that clear before the council acts.

Councilor Brown, the Ward 4 councilor, spoke in favor of the move and described community benefit testimony heard during the public hearing, including a patient who said access to the dispensary had helped him participate in family meals while undergoing cancer treatment. Other councilors pressed for administrative accuracy in the decision (correct street-name formatting, attachment dates and a tally of letters submitted during the public hearing) and for the solicitor to prepare the final legal language.

Committee member Councilor Descedez moved to approve the notice of decision (grant of amended special permit) with editorial corrections noted; the motion was seconded and carried in committee by recorded voice vote. The committee directed that the applicant’s requested small edits be forwarded to the solicitor so the council can consider the final drafted decision on an upcoming council agenda. The applicant asked the city to expedite the timeline, saying it hoped to open within weeks if legal form is finalized.

The draft decision also notes a local limit tied to the city’s earlier vote permitting marijuana retail: the number of special permits for marijuana establishments in Marlborough cannot exceed 20% of the number of off‑premise liquor licenses; with 19 liquor licenses in the city, that calculation results in a four‑permit cap, all of which the city reports have been issued.

Next steps: the committee asked the city solicitor to prepare the draft decision in final legal form and the item will be scheduled for a full City Council vote per the council’s calendar and the applicant’s requested timeline.