Methadone Clinic Decision Postponed

After over five hours of deliberation, a vote on a controversial methadone clinic located just a few feet from the Chelmsford border on Old Canal Drive in Lowell was delayed in its request for a special permit from the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals on Thursday evening.

The evening began with almost two hours of testimony from representatives of the Habit OpCo Inc., the for-profit company that has run the facility in its previous location since 1987, the majority of which came from attorney George Eliades, who was interrupted twice by members of the audience during his initial testimony and said his client wanted a vote tonight due to not having members of the crowd from Chelmsford return to Lowell, citing two and a half years of planning in the site.

While most of Eilades’ testimony to the board was focused on the value of the proposed methadone clinic to its patients, the professionalism of its staff and ownership, that only five police calls were associated with the clinic at its old location during the past year, and that the Lowell Planning Board and City Council unanimously approved the project after hearing no opposition from residents.

Eliades also stated that no more than 28 of the 64 parking spaces would be used at any time by the 16 staff members, two security agents, two traffic controllers on the site and 500 likely patients per day using the facility when it would be expected to be open between 6 and 10 a.m.

While also noting that 16 of the current patients of the facility come from Chelmsford, he indicated that his clients only studied zoning uses north of the facility in Lowell, citing that they were under no obligation to extend any traffic or neighborhood studies to Chelmsford, also claiming that there were no residential units in Chelmsford north of Route 3.

After a short break and support from one nearby resident in Lowell, the board heard a wide array of opposition from individuals and groups ranging from the Chelmsford Board of Selectmen and School Committee to local churches such as Calvary Church stating the clinic would violate Lowell bylaws due to schools it operates only a few hundred feet from the facility to other nearby business owners.

Although those speaking in opposition recognized the need for a methadone clinic in the area and the help it can provide for those in need, reasons for opposition were various ranging from concerns of lack of a sign on the facility to a lack of notices from earlier board hearings to what might happen to parking impacts when the other half of the building is leased out to the volume of vehicles entering and leaving the facility.

Staff members told the board that an additional driveway would address the matter of vehicles entering and leaving the facility, but there were also concerns of safety, despite the figures provided from Eliades.

In particular, the facility’s immediate neighbor to the north, Brian Ewing of 218 Stedman Street, provided his fears over how the facility would impact his family and his property values, particularly after an incident several years ago where a heroin addict attacked him in his home three years ago.

“He held a two foot long screwdriver to my head, police apprehended him in my yard while my daughter watched. I looked in his car and saw stolen children’s piggybanks to feed his habit and a heroin cooking spoon on his dashboard,” said Ewing. “I am scared to have a bunch of people who made bad choices coming into my neighborhood daily 365 days a year.”

The reasons for not approving the special permit also included concerns over transportation access comparisons with the other facility, neighbors indicating that they saw the proposed clinic’s owners already doing work on Old Canal Drive, safety fears over possible increased foot traffic and even fears that the owners may attempt to add a medical marijuana dispensary in the future at the location.

Additionally, advocates of the proposed facility briefly interrupted School Committee chairman Michael Rigney during his testimony.

In response, Eliades challenged individuals opposing the facility, saying that he followed the law in regard to providing notice to neighbors, that no illegal building is occurring at the site, noting the seemingly contradictory contrast between claims that car and foot traffic would simultaneously increase and the fact that no notice was required for other nearby projects such as daycare centers and distribution centers, which was interrupted by a person yelling “we’re not worried about those projects!,” leaving the room a few seconds later.

Eliades continued to reiterate his points, facing another interruption from the audience when Chairman William Bailey asked him if anyone would be waiting outside for treatment in proximity to children, which he denied.

“I wonder sometimes how a deliberative body like the Chelmsford Board of Selectmen can vote on something when they don’t know the facts,” said Eliades. “They just chose to listen to a bunch of people hollering about druggies and things like that.”

Chelmsford Board of Selectmen chairman Matt Hanson took umbrage with that assessment on behalf of his board.

“The Board of Selectmen takes offense to the presenters attack on the integrity of the Board by stating that we ‘did not get the facts before voting in opposition.’ The application, including the traffic study, is a matter of public record,” said Hanson.  “Our Board reviewed these materials before drafting and voting on a letter in opposition. The presenter also stated that we listened to people in Chelmsford call these people ‘druggies’, (but) I did not hear any residents of the Town of Chelmsford call the patients of the methadone clinic ‘druggies.’”

Members of the Zoning Board also echoed a variety questions from opposition relating to whether the home schooling and Sunday school at the Calvary Chapel qualified as a school under Lowell’s zoning bylaws, how patients close to the current location would be impacted, and whether any informational meetings were held with the neighborhood.

While Zoning Board chairman William Bailey was informed by staff members that notices had not been given to Chelmsford residents or businesses in the past for Lowell projects abutting Chelmsford, but he also believed additional information to neighbors would have been helpful, despite claims from Eliades that

“There could have been some meetings that could have alleviated some concerns from Chelmsford or the Highlands or Stedman Street itself in this instance, it may have helped,” said Bailey.

Vice Chairman Corey Belanger called the most difficult decision he has made on his time on the board. said the facility was in a location more residential than what was being proposed, but he also urged Chelmsford and other towns to pick up the burden of aiding those who are homelessness and battling drug addiction in the area.

“When it comes to drug addicition services, Lowell serves greater Lowell. We have the Chelmsford Board of Selectmen and School Board and I welcome you, but I direct toward Chelmsford and Dracut and Tyngsboro officials to ask what are we doing on the issue of homelessness? Not much that I know of,” said Belanger. “That’s not an attack, it’s a message I’m trying to make and send to the suburbs that we’re all in this together."

The next hearing on the issue will be on June 10.