The Planning Board requested more detailed information during its site plan review for Coil Brothers LLC, a marijuana processing company looking to locate in town. The review, held at the board’s Oct. 15 meeting, was continued until its next meeting on Oct. 29, and the board gave Coil Brothers a list of topics requiring more in-depth plans and descriptions.
Coil Brothers is a marijuana manufacturing company looking to locate at the Appleworks Building at 325 Ayer Road in suite 116A, in the front left corner as one faces the building. It will process approximately 6 to 12 pounds of raw cannabis per day, and sell the resulting oils wholesale to other marijuana businesses (retail, medical, and research). Coil’s representatives have repeatedly stated they expect the business to be nearly invisible once it is running, as no retail customers will be visiting the building, and deliveries will be handled by a single unmarked van arriving approximately once per day.
One topic of discussion was Coil Brothers’ request to be allowed to operate from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. when Harvard’s marijuana bylaw requires businesses to open no earlier than 10 a.m. According to Coil Brothers COO Matthew Brace, the extra operational hours are necessary for the business to be economically competitive. Brace said the machine they will use to process the marijuana runs in cycles of several hours, meaning that losing two hours of work time would cost more than two hours’ worth of productivity. Planning Board members were receptive to the requested change, based on the rationale that the starting time limit had been intended for retail businesses, but stated that such an exception would likely have to be approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Engineer Fred Hamway, a Planning Board consultant hired to review the plan, questioned the amount of parking at the Appleworks building. Coil Brothers intends to have three to five employees onsite at a time, but their plans reserve only two parking spaces for the business. Furthermore, according to Hamway, the 90 parking spaces at Appleworks, are already fewer than the building should have based on its size. Of those, four are less than regulation size, including the two allocated to Coil Brothers. Hamway suggested that the Planning Board take this opportunity to bring the building’s parking into compliance. Nicholas Deane, the landlord, explained that the building’s parking nonconformity is a result of its history: It was previously an apple warehouse and a truck stop. Deane stated that he expects Coil Brothers will not be parking-intensive and that its addition would not significantly disrupt the current parking situation.
New loading area
Coil Brothers also included plans to install a new, secure loading area adjacent to the company’s facility. Delivery vehicles would access this area from a pull-off directly from Ayer Road, separate from the main parking lot. The area would be too small to turn around in and too small for large trucks to enter at all. Coil Brothers plans to receive three main types of deliveries: Twice a week, raw cannabis will be delivered and waste product will be removed—for a total of four trips per week—and once a month canisters of CO2 will be delivered. Planning Board members expressed two major concerns regarding the pull-off: First, vehicles using it would have to either back onto or off of Ayer Road, which could be dangerous given the road’s high traffic. Engineer Patrick McCarty, representing Coil Brothers, explained that deliveries would be scheduled for off-peak times, to reduce traffic impact.
Room for turnaround?
The board’s other trafic concern was that large delivery vehicles would be unable to fit in the pull-off area at all, potentially causing traffic safety problems due to confusion. Brace stated that the vehicles used by the licenced cannabis transport company would fit in the small turnaround. For security purposes, transporters use regular-sized, nondescript vehicles. According to Planning Board member Justin Brown, even the smallest delivery trucks used by Ayer Gas, the company from which Coil Brothers plans to purchase CO2, are too large for the pull-off. Brace said they may be able to arrange to receive four canisters every two months rather than two each month, to cut down on disruption. Also, according to Brace, other businesses in the Appleworks building already use compressed CO2, which is brought to them using the building’s existing back entrance, so Coil Brothers plans to use that entrance for gas deliveries. Brown noted that this statement contradicts Coil Brothers’ previous presentations, which had suggested that gas would be brought in the new side entrance. Brown requested that the updated information be included in the updated site plan, which should also include a plan for what to do if an oversized vehicle attempts to deliver to the side entrance.
The final major issues were the security plans and standard operating procedures (SOPs), which Planning Board members felt were not detailed enough in the site plan. Brown said, “These are not SOPs; these are a description of what will be in the SOPs.” Board members also required clarification about how the security cameras would be monitored, and they were hesitant when Brace said that the monitoring would be done off-site. They requested more detailed security information in the next version of the site plan.
Coil Brothers will present its new site plan at the Planning Board’s Oct. 29 meeting. When interviewed, Planning Board Chair Erin McBee said that, while she hoped the next site plan would be acceptable, the board will continue asking for revisions until it feels sure the safety of the town is guaranteed. She said, “This is not unreasonable. We are asking for the same information that the Cannabis Commission will.”
Select Board ready to negotiate
A day later, at the Oct. 16 Select Board meeting, members discussed when they should begin negotiations with Coil Brothers for a host community agreement. Coil Brothers requires the approval of both boards in what is, in theory, two entirely separate processes. Board member Kara Minar suggested waiting until the Planning Board has finished its deliberations, as acting sooner might rush the site plan approval process, but other members supported beginning sooner to maximize time efficiency. In a compromise, they agreed to begin negotiations at their next meeting, but with the understanding that even if a complete agreement is reached, they will not sign until the Planning Board makes its decision.
