The appellant cement manufacturer proposed substituting alternative fuel derived from post-recycling and post-composting materials for conventional fossil fuel.
The respondent municipality argued this constituted a new land use as a 'waste disposal area' under its zoning by-law, requiring an amendment.
The application judge agreed with the municipality.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the productive use of these materials as fuel in an existing cement manufacturing process does not constitute dumping, destroying, or storing waste, and therefore does not create a new land use.
