Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: September 24, 2025
CASE NO(S).: OLT-23-000630
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 140(1) of the Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19, as amended and subsection 100(4) of the Ontario Water Resources Act, R.S.O. c. O.40
Appellant: Steve Charest
Appellant: King & Benton Canal Bank Regeneration Lands Inc.
Respondent: Director, Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
Subject: Order of the Director
Description: To perform work to prevent or reduce the discharge of contaminants of concern (COCs) into the natural environment and to prevent impairment to the water
Reference No.: 1-209410483
Property Address: 65 Canal Bank Street
Municipality/Upper Tier: Welland/Niagara
OLT Case No.: OLT-23-000630
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-23-000630
OLT Case Name: Charest v. Ontario (Environment, Conservation and Parks)
Heard: September 15, 2025 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
Parties
Counsel
King & Benton Canal Bank Regeneration Lands Inc. and Steve Charest
John Georgakopoulos Alessia Petricone-Westwood
Director, Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks
Nadine Harris Shane Sukerman
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY S. BOBKA ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This event was the fifth Case Management Conference (“CMC”) regarding an appeal filed by King & Benton Canal Bank Regeneration Lands Inc. and Steve Charest (together the “Appellants”) in response to Director’s Order No. 1-209410483 (“Order”) issued by the Director, Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (“Director”) on June 13, 2023, relating to sewage works on the property located at 65 Canal Bank Street (“Subject Property”), in the City of Welland. The Order was appealed on June 28, 2023, under s. 140 of the Environmental Protection Act and s. 100(4) of the Ontario Water Resources Act.
2There is a history of industrial uses on the Subject Property, and the risk of environmental harm due to the potential discharge of contaminants in the soil is increased by the extraction of these contaminants due to exposure to the elements. The Director has submitted that the existing sewage works on the Subject Property are inadequate to mitigate this risk. The Order directs the Appellants to resolve the inadequacy of the existing sewage works on the Subject Property and consists of 10 items.
BACKGROUND
3The detailed history of this matter is explained in the previous CMC Decisions, but a brief outline is provided below for the convenience of the reader.
| Date | Outcome |
|---|---|
| First CMC: August 17, 2023 | On consent of the Parties, the Tribunal granted an interim stay of Work Items 8-10, and Work Items 1-7 were not stayed, pending the hearing of a Stay Motion to follow. Tribunal Decision issued: November 9, 2023 |
| Motion Hearing: October 19, 2023 | The Tribunal converted the Motion Hearing to consider a settlement of the Stay Motion arrived at by the Parties. The Tribunal ordered that Work Items 8, 9, and 10 of the Director’s Order were stayed, pending disposition of the appeal on its merits; and that with respect to Work Item 7, the Appellants would provide 30 days notice to the Director before a third party acquires the Subject Property, pending disposition of the appeal on the merits Tribunal Decision issued: November 9, 2023 |
| Second CMC: January 15, 2024 | The Tribunal approved a Procedural Order (“PO”), including Issues List, and scheduled a five-day Merit Hearing for November 4, 2024. Tribunal Decision issued: January 26, 2024 |
| Third CMC: November 7, 2024 | In advance of this CMC, at the request of the Parties, the Merit Hearing dates scheduled for November 4, 2024 were vacated and November 7, 2024 was converted to a CMC. The Tribunal heard that the Parties’ experts had been having productive discussions and scheduled a subsequent CMC. Tribunal Decision issued: November 13, 2024 |
| Fourth CMC: January 29, 2025 | The Tribunal heard that discussions between experts continued and that the Parties had agreed that Tribunal-led mediation would be beneficial and was being sought. At the request of the Director, a ten-day Merit Hearing was scheduled to commence on September 15, 2025 (“September Hearing”). Tribunal Decision issued: February 12, 2025 |
4In an email dated June 24, 2025, the Parties advised the Tribunal that, as a result of mediation, they had agreed to adjourn the September Hearing and reschedule it to begin January 27, 2026 (“January Hearing”). They requested that September 15, 2025, be converted to a CMC. The Parties also advised that they would work together to provide revised timelines to the Tribunal in a revised PO.
5In advance of the current CMC, the Tribunal received a revised PO, drafted by the Director, which reflects the new timelines for the scheduled January Hearing. The Tribunal was advised that the Appellants had not provided their comments on the revised PO to the Director, but would provide them to the Tribunal at the current CMC.
UPDATE
6Counsel for the Appellants advised that there was the potential to resolve this matter as an amended Environmental Compliance Approval (“ECA”) had been completed by the Appellants and would be submitted to the Director within days. Mr. Georgakopoulos said that, on