Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 3/15/2023
GRANBY — The Planning Board continued discussions on potentially expanding the current zoning bylaw on cannabis grow facilities during their March 6 meeting.
In their last discussion on the topic during their Feb. 13 meeting, the board came away from discussions looking to learn more about potential outdoor growing facilities and if they should consider allowing for them in different zones in town so that farmers could use their property to grow.
The current bylaw on the books allows cannabis retail/commercial only in the General Business zone. It also states that all cannabis retail/commercial operations are subject to special permit and site plan approval by the Planning Board. According to the bylaw, commercial growth operations shall be indoor facilities only and allowed in industrial and Business Park Overlay Districts with special permit and site plan approval by the Planning Board.
Review of the bylaw started after the Selectboard had a resident approach them with a petition to have an outdoor facility outside of the listed zone in the bylaw. The petition failed to get the required number of signatures, but the Selectboard still wanted the Planning Board to look at the bylaw overall and look at potential benefits of allowing the zoning to stretch into residential and or other business zoned areas. As currently stated in the bylaw, grow facilities are only allowed in industrial zoning.
Pioneer Valley Planning Commission Deputy Director of Land Use and Environment Ken Comia said he found two examples of municipalities for how a community has collected cannabis revenues to date. Comia works alongside the Granby Planning Board through his role with PVPC.
Comia referenced Easthampton and Provincetown as two communities with specific guidelines on the number of dispensaries allowed and amount of grow facilities. While these communities differ from Granby in ways, Comia noted the communities collected almost $2 million combined between the two, showcasing the potential revenue streams Granby could add with some expansion to their bylaw.
Comia also noted that through his research he discovered greenhouse growing facilities as a growing alternative to big corporation growers and outdoor growers.
“The greenhouse idea is relatively novel and to my knowledge in the Pioneer Valley there’s two communities who have approved outdoor grow, but they have not been constructed,” Comia shared with the board. “I think as I mentioned to the board its whether or not you want to adopt or look at any additional zoning regulations.”
Planning Board Chair James Trompke said something he had picked up on in researching since the last discussion was that some indoor grow facilities are in areas where there is a low cost or lower cost of electricity. He cited Holyoke and Chicopee as two communities building on cultivation facilities as they have their own city -run electric group, which leads to lower prices for the businesses coming in and growing.
Trompke did add he could see some growers look to smaller communities like Granby if they offered more space for them to come in and if prices on electricity were reasonable, as grow facilities tend to run up the electric bill.
“I can see facilities or growers wanting to move to the suburbs and say let’s farm it and use natural sunlight to grow,” Trompke said. “Right now, we allow it in our industrial zone/business park but again that will be a big hit on our electrical if its only allowed there versus elsewhere in town.”
Board member Melissa St. Germain was in favor of exploring the town’s options as she said she would look to add revenue to the town if it was possible, especially if it meant letting people use their land for these types of facilities.
“I think my biggest thing, too, is we should allow farmers to use their land to have these greenhouses and its not only helping them but giving us revenue,” St. Germain said. “This is pretty significant [the money referenced by Comia that communities collected], those are pretty significant revenue numbers that I would like coming into our town.”
Trompke agreed the revenue sounded like a good idea but said he was beginning to think greenhouse facilities being expanded out in town was the real discussion due to the odors and security issues of only outdoor growing facilities. He added he was thinking more of a greenhouse line than an open field grow out.
With the town’s smaller population, they already will not have more than two dispensaries in town so the option for greenhouse growing facilities on farmers land who would be interested seemed worth continuing to look into for the board.
“I think the fact of the matter is people being allowed to use their land for this with revenue coming back into the town,” St. Germain said.
The board, by the end of the discussion, decided on waiting to continue these conversations as they would look further into other communities experiences with greenhouse growing facilities and the type of contingencies they would want to put into a bylaw if they chose to expand zones for grow facilities.
Board member Robert Sheehan Jr. suggested the police and fire departments be looped in on discussions and researching for their take on security. Comia noted that a special permit would be required under a proposed facility under their current bylaw. He also added the Cannabis Control Commission (CCC) is very hands on with their own permitting and security set up in assistance with the owner of the company and town it is in.
Comia also noted other communities have utilized additional scrutiny in any bylaw changes they would pursue such as 500-foot buffers between schools, parks or a home. He added owners of property under the type of changes the board were discussing could also lease portions of their lands to cannabis companies strictly for growing space.
Trompke compared that situation to how solar fields are typically installed where a property owner leases the land to a solar company.
“Quite frankly I probably feel better about somebody that’s got a track record of doing these things than just a pop-up mom and pop doing it and trying to feel their way through the process,” Trompke said. “I wouldn’t be opposed to [mom and pop’s trying if they wanted to either].”
Sheehan Jr. said he didn’t think there was “any need to jump yet.”
“Nobody’s jumped at the industrial area, there’s been one person that approached the Board of Selectmen to petition the town, that individual did not gain enough signatures on their petition to bring it to town meeting,” Sheehan said.
He added if the town takes a wait and see approach to see how other communities’ situations age, they will be able to get their own establishments going much smoother.
St. Germain felt differently adding that she saw this as another revenue source that could come into Granby.
“While there’s been no one knocking on our door, we’ve all spent a significant time looking over bylaws and talking about making those changes that I think instead of tabling it, I think we should further the conversation so if someone does come to us, we have those new bylaws in place,” St. Germain said. “I’m pro revenue and I want people to use their land the way that they want to use it, especially for making money.”
Sheehan Jr. said he agreed with the agricultural point being made and felt farmers should be able to have this choice with their property. He still felt waiting some time and letting other communities serve as “stepping stones” was a safe bet for the town.
Board member Jason Smigiel suggested the board begin looking into a workshop to discuss further the town’s options as well as learn more about the best way to approach any bylaw changes. Trompke agreed more information was needed and while Sheehan Jr.’s point was valid, he felt Granby usually plays catch up in these situations.
“I understand what Bob’s saying, let someone else go through the trials and tribulations of working through that piece of it, but by the time that happens, and we decide to adopt it, we usually miss the bus,” Trompke said. “In other words, they’re already out there doing it and by the time we get our arms around the bylaw and present it, there already going up elsewhere. I think we’ve been asked to look at smaller or micro grow facilities, I think that would be a good place to start.”
Trompke also noted some growers in other communities could look at a potential change in Granby bylaws on growing facilities as a more cost-efficient option for certain operations if farmers leased portions of fields out.
Comia noted to the board he would continue researching other communities so the board could learn more about their options as well as the potential impacts to things like water and electric it would have on Granby.