GREENFIELD — The city’s Major Development Review regulation will remain unchanged after a proposal to reduce the expected traffic threshold needed to trigger a more comprehensive impact study failed to receive the necessary support on Wednesday.

City Council was evenly divided on the issue, voting 6-6. The amendment required a two-thirds majority to pass.

If approved, the amendment would have reduced the number of daily vehicle trips expected at a future development for it to be regulated as a “major development” from 3,000 vehicles a day to 2,000 vehicles a day. Developers whose proposed businesses do not meet the threshold need to submit a simple traffic statement to the Planning Board. Businesses that are considered “major developments,” on the other hand, can only be approved through a special permit after developers clear detailed studies — including a full traffic study — to determine their impact on the community.

“I don’t want to make it harder for business,” Precinct 3 Councilor Michael Mastrototaro said in opposition to the amendment. “Right now we need business. If we lowered the threshold to whatever number that might be, in this case 2,000, it’s going to cost whoever it is who comes to town to do the study. We have so many empty storefronts.”

The amendment received a positive recommendation from the Planning Board earlier this month and was later approved by the Economic Development Committee in response to a developer’s proposal to open a Starbucks coffee shop at the current site of Friendly’s on the Mohawk Trail.

The Planning Board voted in favor of the amendment amid concerns that the Starbucks development — expected to bring in slightly more than 2,000 vehicle trips a day, according to an initial site plan — would bring an overwhelming traffic volume to the Interstate 91 rotary.

Prior to City Council’s discussion on the amendment, Planning Director Eric Twarog addressed the council, speaking in favor of the 2,000 daily vehicle trip threshold, as it aligns with state regulations. Twarog added that he believes zoning regulations should stay relatively consistent, as their constant change can scare off potential developers.

“If you asked me the question of whether 2,000 is a reasonable number to go down to, I would say yes, that 2,000 is based on Massachusetts’ development policy,” Twarog said. “The most important thing in terms of development and economic development is consistency of zoning ordinances. Regulations that change consistently in the community or regulations that are not applied equally on a uniform basis over time can be a problem and scares developers away.”

Greenfield passed a Major Development Review ordinance requiring all developments that are expected to bring in more than 500 daily vehicle trips to submit impact studies in 1991. In 2016, the threshold was raised to 1,000 vehicle trips, and in 2019, the number of vehicles was again raised to 3,000 with a “vote swap,” in City Council, exchanging a more lenient Major Development Review ordinance for a vote to approve borrowing to construct a new Greenfield Public Library.

During discussion, some councilors said they planned to vote against the amendment to honor the promise that councilors made in 2019.

“If we second-guess what happened in 2019 with that council, and we pulled the 3,000 [vehicle threshold], in theory, we should pull the library off of Main Street, too,” commented Precinct 7 Councilor William “Wid” Perry.

Councilors who supported the amendment argued that it would ensure that larger developments moving into the city would not have a negative impact on the community.

“It certainly wouldn’t get in the way of certain businesses coming in now — in fact, it’s never gotten in the way of any business coming in,” said Precinct 2 Councilor Rachel Gordon. “I actually think it’s important to note that [Major Development Review] really can help us as a community and help businesses make sure that we’ve identified any potential problems and pitfalls before construction gets underway.”

Councilors John Bottomley, Penny Ricketts, Michael Mastrototaro, Michael Terounzo, Sheila Gilmour and William “Wid” Perry voted against the amendment, while councilors Katherine Golub, Rachel Gordon, Marianne Bullock, Wahab Minhas, John Garrett and Lora Wondolowski voted in favor. Derek Helie was absent.

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