GREENFIELD — Only a week before they will be put to a special City Council vote on Thursday, the Planning Board voted unanimously to not recommend four proposed zoning amendments that would regulate accessory dwelling units, or ADUs.

Residents, in a roughly 45-minute public comment period, expressed a range of opinions on the proposals, with some speaking strongly in opposition and others in support.

If approved by City Council this week, the proposed amendments — brought forth through a citizen’s petition from residents Al Norman, Joan Marie Jackson and Mitchell Speight — would mandate that the Greenfield Housing Authority provide deed-restrictive rental housing vouchers for ADUs, to the extent that they are available. The vouchers would be for low-income households to limit rental costs to 30% of the household’s income or less.

The amendments also would alter the city’s ordinance to consider units that exist within a principal dwelling as ADUs, limit the number of ADUs allowable on a single-family lot to only one and mandate that any ADU that requires a special permit be brought before the Planning Board for a site plan review.

“Presently, homeowners can subsidize their existing one-family [home] to up to three apartments by right. These are not ADUs. The provision has proved to be a sound policy over time and it shouldn’t get changed,” Susan Worgaftik, coordinator of the advocacy organization Housing Greenfield, said in opposition of the proposed amendment to redefine ADUs. “We should maintain our present definition of ADU as a structure in addition to the primary dwelling.”

Worgaftik also spoke against the proposed amendment to limit the number of ADUs allowable on a single-family lot to one, noting that under the city’s current law, a special permit is needed to build more than one ADU on a single-family property.

Some in the audience argued that the amendments would prevent developers from buying single-family lots and maximizing their profits by building and renting ADUs.

“Constituents that we talk to are concerned about the expansion of developer deregulation. The conflict is between investor profits versus affordable housing,” Jackson said. “The new state mandate has changed from in-law apartments to investor profits. The old model of ADUs has been turned upside down. ADUs no longer must be owner-occupied. They can be built by right without any notice to the neighbors or abutters. This opens the door for absentee landlords and real estate investors.”

After deliberations, the Planning Board voted unanimously to negatively recommend each of the four proposed zoning amendments. Board members agreed that the Greenfield Housing Authority’s spending is not under the Planning Board’s purview and that altering the definition of an ADU to include internal units would too heavily infringe on property owners’ rights to convert their single-family homes into duplexes.

“This [amendment] interferes with the buyer’s right for the residents to build inside their residences,” Planning Board member Victor Moschella said. “That’s not considered an ADU right now. This is the whole thing about if you have a primary home and you want to cut it down, make two homes inside of it, you have the right to do that.”

Moschella added that the proposed regulation limiting ADU construction to one unit per single-family lot is unreasonable, as construction of more than one unit is already restricted by the special permit process. He also argued against the claim that ADU provisions would attract housing developers who wish to turn a profit.

“The first [ADU] is protected but anything after that is required to go through the special permit process. This gets rid of it. People should be able to do what they want with their properties … and there’s a mechanism for the citizens to speak out against it [through the special permit process],” Moschella said. “The issue in town is housing. We need to make housing as easy to build as possible. Investors and outside people coming and buying and creating ADUs — I don’t buy that.”

The proposed amendments will be further discussed and put to a full City Council vote at the May 8 meeting.

Anthony Cammalleri can be reached at acammalleri@recorder.com or 413-930-4429.