Last Updated: August 24th, 2022

What should everyone know going into this study?

• Council has put a moratorium on greenhouses – prohibiting any applications from being reviewed – so that we can update our by-laws and official plan to include necessary regulations.
• Without this proactive moratorium, greenhouses would technically be permitted, and our current by-laws are silent on the regulations that Council wants to have in place.
• It is so important to understand how we are different from Kingsville and Leamington.
  • Both communities have been experiencing greenhouse development for the better part of 20 years, with a growth rate of about 5% per year.
  • Greenhouses, at the time that they were initially developed were not built in particularly designated zones that considered the residential, mixed-use or commercial land use needs that would come up in those same 20 years.
  • There were not appropriate bylaws in place to regulate light pollution or odour when the facilities were built.
  • Some greenhouses built for vegetable farming have been retrofitted to grow cannabis, and are not able to control the smell.

Resident questions from the consultation on August 23rd:

• What is the recommended light / shade coverage for greenhouses should they ever be allowed to build?
  • 100%
• What is happening in Kingsville and Leamington that is different than what is happening in Lakeshore?
  • Kingsville and Leamington are in a position where they are going after the greenhouses retroactively through nuisance bylaws and through the planning act.
  • Where Lakeshore’s standard for light coverage is 100%, Kingsville and Leamington are believed to have compromised around 90% for retroactive applications.
  • Also important to note that new greenhouses are built with these features to be compliant
• How did the study identify a no-build zone?
  • The no-build zone takes into consideration the growth patterns and primary settlement nodes identified in the Official Plan.
  • This will minimize any girdling (sprawl) that would prohibit any necessary residential growth planned for the foreseeable future (20+ years), as after the Wallace Woods subdivision is built out, there is a chance that development would move South between the CN line and County Rd 42.
• Instead of a no-build zone, can’t we just identify where we would want them?
  • Potentially, yes. It was recommended that Council bring this question to the consultants and administration for the October 11 meeting.
• Why was cannabis omitted?
  • While the summary likely doesn’t speak to it as frequently as most readers anticipated, the recommendations certainly contain multiple references to cannabis – and the inclusion of non-medical marijuana.
• What level of government determines that greenhouses should be taxed as agricultural properties – even though they seem commercial and require far more infrastructure than traditional farming?
  • The Province.
• What about smell?
  • The report recommends that any approved greenhouse be designed to mitigate the impact of any odours generated from the growing of or processing of cannabis.
  • It should be noted that retrofitting is one of the leading causes of odour concerns because the greenhouses weren’t originally constructed with cannabis in mind.
  • Retrofitting is not recommended for Lakeshore.
• What types of penalties would they be subject to if they didn’t follow the regulations?
  • If violating the Zoning By-Law or a Site Plan Agreement, it will be up to the municipality to set the fines.
• Can’t we just charge high development charges to deter the development?
  • Not legally. All DCs have to be justified by the costs incurred by the Municipality to support growth and development.
  • Note: With Site Plan Agreements, there are typically conditions that require developers to upgrade and maintain affected roads and other infrastructure.
• What about Greenhouse Gas Emissions?
  • Greenhouses will be required to follow any Ministry requirements set by the Province