The City of Biddeford could implement a residential setback for cannabis grow facilities.

At the Aug. 21 meeting, the Planning Board considered a zoning amendment introduced by City Council President Liam LaFountain that would require marijuana facilities meet a minimum 500-foot setback from residential properties.

The current ordinance requires marijuana facilities to be at least 500 feet away from each other, but does not include a residential zoning requirement.

While the Planning Board did not discuss the reasoning behind the proposed amendment, one factor could be odor from marijuana facilities.

“I’ve driven around town and smelled marijuana facilities,” Planning Board member Alexa Plotkin said.

The amendment is essentially to err on the side of caution for the residents who live near marijuana facilities, City Planner David Galbraith said.

But the amendment could be too harsh, some said.

Patrick Donohue of Five Star Holdings LLC, which owns many properties in Biddeford, said the amendment would be “over regulating” something that already has regulations in place.

“Over regulating something isn’t always the key to making something better for everybody,” Donohue said. “Prohibition is a good example of that. People will seek things out.”

A residential zoning amendment could make it difficult for marijuana facilities to open, therefore driving up the product prices and potentially driving users to seek unregulated, less safe products, Donohue said.

Five Star Holdings is hoping to build a recreational marijuana facility in the future, and Donohue said the company would like to have the ability to develop.

There should be some buffers when it comes to residents, Donohue said, but it shouldn’t affect businesses.

“The rules that are in place are already working,” Donohue said.

Plotkin agreed, adding that 500 feet could be difficult to work around with differently shaped properties.

“We agreed to allow these businesses,” Plotkin said. “The extra restriction seems overly harsh.”

The Planning Board ultimately tabled the discussion until the next meeting on Sept. 4, hoping to receive more context from LaFountain.