That is exactly what I have been saying. Pasted verbatim from your link.
Municipalities are responsible for governing the use of land within the respective municipality’s jurisdiction. Zoning bylaws enacted by municipalities may set out restrictions on land use, including but not limited to the use of land for medical marihuana production. Where such restrictions may apply to land within the ALR, such restrictions with respect to the particular land use of lawfully sanctioned medical marihuana production would not in and of themselves be considered as inconsistent with the ALC Act.
Lakeshore will allow the growing on site #1 but only limit the processing done on that site. The company has applied for a zoning amendment to eliminate that processing restriction. That is a fact, not a soft bash or hard bash but reality. The town lawyer has stated no medical marijuana application in the town of Lakeshore has been approved, therefore there is no basis upon which to grandfather anyone in. That link information also flies in the face of those who believe that once HC licenses CEN, the town no longer has any aurthority. So if you firmly believe I am wrong, so be it, your opinion does not change the facts of the case. It is something the company will have to deal with, and have attempted to deal with by filing the zoning amendment application and the process for its review will begin once the town adopts their zoning amendments for medical mj. If site #1 has its Value Added designation revoked, the company is on its way when HC grants the license. The only hold up for building number 2 on site #1 will be the build out of the necessary utility infrastructure done by the town and Hydro One, and the completion of the incinerator to dispose of product that does not make the grade. Ask yourself if what I say is simply not true, why did Bill submit an application to have site #1 rezoned? Was it to simply make work for Joe Byrne, or because it must be done if the company wishes to process what they will be granted a license to grow?
Municipalities are responsible for governing the use of land within the respective municipality’s jurisdiction. Zoning bylaws enacted by municipalities may set out restrictions on land use, including but not limited to the use of land for medical marihuana production. Where such restrictions may apply to land within the ALR, such restrictions with respect to the particular land use of lawfully sanctioned medical marihuana production would not in and of themselves be considered as inconsistent with the ALC Act.
Lakeshore will allow the growing on site #1 but only limit the processing done on that site. The company has applied for a zoning amendment to eliminate that processing restriction. That is a fact, not a soft bash or hard bash but reality. The town lawyer has stated no medical marijuana application in the town of Lakeshore has been approved, therefore there is no basis upon which to grandfather anyone in. That link information also flies in the face of those who believe that once HC licenses CEN, the town no longer has any aurthority. So if you firmly believe I am wrong, so be it, your opinion does not change the facts of the case. It is something the company will have to deal with, and have attempted to deal with by filing the zoning amendment application and the process for its review will begin once the town adopts their zoning amendments for medical mj. If site #1 has its Value Added designation revoked, the company is on its way when HC grants the license. The only hold up for building number 2 on site #1 will be the build out of the necessary utility infrastructure done by the town and Hydro One, and the completion of the incinerator to dispose of product that does not make the grade. Ask yourself if what I say is simply not true, why did Bill submit an application to have site #1 rezoned? Was it to simply make work for Joe Byrne, or because it must be done if the company wishes to process what they will be granted a license to grow?
