Tribunal denies site access and strikes several proposed witnesses for irrelevance, bias, and procedural non-compliance.
The Appellant brought a motion for site access to conduct additional environmental studies, and the Applicant brought a motion to strike several witnesses from the Appellant's witness list.
The Tribunal dismissed the motion for site access, finding it inappropriate and academic given the upcoming deadlines.
The Tribunal granted the motion to strike in part, striking an economic impact witness for lack of relevance, an environmental expert for reasonable apprehension of bias, and two lay witnesses who had already been granted participant status.
The Tribunal also ordered that multiple experts in the same disciplines (land use planning and wetland assessment) be called as panels to avoid duplication of evidence.