Sarah Mainguy

The moving party, Friends of Ball’s Bridge & Little Lakes, brought a motion to admit new evidence in an ongoing hearing regarding a proposed gravel pit.

The new evidence included an MNR inspection report, a corrected property survey, wood turtle sighting documents, and videos of dust emissions.

The Tribunal applied the Palmer test for fresh evidence.

The Tribunal admitted the MNR report, the survey, and the wood turtle documents, finding them relevant and not obtainable before the filing deadlines.

However, the Tribunal refused to admit the dust videos, finding they could have been produced earlier and their late admission would prejudice the responding party, who had already closed its case.

The applicant appealed the City of Toronto's failure to adopt an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Site Plan Application to permit a 4-tower high-rise residential development on a portion of a former golf course, with the remainder dedicated as public open space.

The City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority opposed the development, arguing it was located in a hazardous area (erosion hazard) and would negatively impact the natural heritage system.

The Tribunal found that the development site, located on a stable paleo terrace, was safe from natural hazards and that the proposed mitigation and restoration measures would result in no net negative impact on the natural heritage system.

The Tribunal allowed the appeals in part, approving the OPA and ZBA in principle, while adjourning the Site Plan Application to allow the parties to resolve outstanding technical issues.

The appellant appealed the Township's refusal of a zoning by-law amendment application to remove a holding provision and permit an access dock in a Type 1 Fish Habitat zone to facilitate cottage development on a water-access island property.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the appellant failed to demonstrate that the proposed dock and associated boating activity would have no negative impact on the highly sensitive aquatic vegetation and potential species at risk habitat.

The Tribunal rejected the appellant's argument that detailed environmental impact studies could be deferred to the site plan approval stage, holding that such studies are required at the zoning stage to establish the feasibility of the development.

The defendants brought a Charter application under subsections 11(b) and 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, alleging that their right to be tried within a reasonable time had been infringed due to unreasonable delay in consolidated provincial offence proceedings involving 39 defendants and 812 charges under the Conservation Authorities Act.

The court applied the analytical framework established in Regina v. Jordan, 2016 SCC 27, distinguishing between individual defendants and corporate defendants.

The court found that the individual defendants' rights had been infringed and stayed their charges, while the corporate defendants' applications were dismissed based on the principle that prejudice to fair trial rights cannot be inferred for corporations and the application of the transitional exceptional circumstance.

The Appellants appealed the Director's decision to issue a Renewable Energy Approval for an eight-turbine wind facility.

The Appellants argued the project would cause serious harm to human health due to aviation risks at two nearby aerodromes, and serious and irreversible harm to endangered bat species.

The Tribunal found that the proximity of the turbines to the aerodromes created an inadequate margin for error, posing a serious risk to human health.

The Tribunal also found that the project would cause serious and irreversible harm to the local population of the endangered little brown myotis bat.

The appeals were allowed in part and the hearing was adjourned to determine the appropriate remedy.