Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning board forwards Chapter 285 zoning changes, including reduced threshold and revised approach to cannabis dispensaries

Troy Planning Board · May 20, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Troy Planning Board voted to forward subcommittee recommendations to city council to amend Chapter 285: reduce a numerical threshold from 10,000 to 7,000 square feet and remove a special‑use designation for cannabis dispensaries, citing state oversight and to reduce redundant permitting.

The Troy Planning Board voted to forward subcommittee recommendations to the City Council that would amend Chapter 285 of the city charter to lower a numerical threshold in one section from 10,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet and to remove the 'P' special‑use designation for cannabis dispensaries.

Tony, the planning board subcommittee member who presented the revisions, said the changes aim to align local zoning with state rules and reduce permitting burden. "We recommend that the numerical threshold in section H be amended by striking 10,000 square feet and replacing it with 7,000 square ft," he told the board, and explained the subcommittee had reviewed Office of Cannabis Management rules about signage and other operational limits.

The subcommittee argued in its report that cannabis dispensaries are subject to distinct state requirements that do not apply to other retail uses and asked whether codifying those state limits would make a separate special‑use permit redundant. During public comment, Steven Maples of South Troy praised the subcommittee’s work and urged that the city produce a GIS map of buffer zones before final action; he also suggested codifying living fences as an acceptable fencing option.

The board moved to forward the recommendations to the City Council for further public discussion; the motion was seconded and passed on a roll call vote. The board’s referral starts the next phase of review; any further substantive changes would be made by council during its public hearing process.