The City of Oshawa is scheduled for a Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) Hearing, for 5 days starting Mon. Feb 22, 2021. The 1515 Thornton Rd. N. property owner, Evergreen is appealing Oshawa's Committee of Adjustment decision to indefinitely delay Evergreen's application to build an anaerobic digestion facility at its site on the east side of Thornton Rd. N., just north of Taunton.
On December 31, 2020 the LPAT issued a decision that the Evergreen had the right to appeal Oshawa’s Committee of Adjustment decision to “table indefinitely” Evergreen’s application for a site plan approval and minor variances.
Details in Report DS-20-66 The existing use of the property is a waste transfer facility and a compost facility (i.e. processing facility of yard waste and clean wood) located on the Site, although the compost facility has not been operational since April 2019).
It is owned by 1515 Northwood Transfer Inc. and operated by Evergreen which acquired it under receivership in 2019, and currently operates the solid non-hazardous waste transfer station located on the site
Ummah Foundation of Durham (“Ummah”), which operates a mosque and community centre immediately south of 1515 Thornton Rd. N, supports the Evergreen's anaerobic digestion facility application, and filed an appeal against Oshawa’s decision to delay Evergreen’s application.
1515 Thornton was previously owned and operated by Northwood Recycling & Energy Inc. (“Northwood”) for approximately 20 years during which time the City and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change received many complaints concerning odors.
In February 2020 the City passed an Interim Control By-law on the site, which is due to expire this spring.
With a long 5 day Hearing scheduled, due to the complexity of the matter, it will be interesting to find out whether the Tribunal will find in favour or against the City delaying the Evergreen application.
Below is the Issues List for the Hearing: (Many questions being asked, but ultimately the question to be answered by the Tribunal simply seems to be: are there grounds for the City to take a position unfavourable to an anaerobic digestion facility on this site, which is currently zoned General Industrial and Select Industrial?
Committee of Adjustment Applications Issues List
1. Is the proposed variance minor?
2. Are the proposed variances desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land?
3. Does the proposed variance maintain the general intent and purpose of Interim Control By-law 25-2020?
4. Does the proposed variance maintain the general intent and purpose of Oshawa Official Plan, specifically policies 2.4 and 7?
5. What was the use of the land, buildings and/or structures on the day Interim Control By-law 25- 2020 was passed (February 24, 2020)?
6. Does the application propose an enlargement or extension of existing buildings or structures?
7. Does Section 45(2)(a)(i) of the Planning Act that gives the permission to grant an extension of a building or structure include the ability to permit new buildings where there are currently existing buildings and structures and outdoor storage , processing and staging areas. What do the words enlargement or extension in section 45(2) a (i) mean?
8. Is the proposed use of the land, building(s) or structure(s) similar to the purpose for which it was used on the day Interim Control By-law 25-2020 was passed (February 24, 2020) or is the use proposed more compatible with the uses permitted by the by-law than the purpose for which it was used on the day the by-law was passed?
9. Does Interim Control By-law 25-2020 prohibit the development of land, buildings and structures on the subject site? Is “developing land” a use of land that may be prohibited under section 38 of the Planning Act?
10. Does Interim Control By-law 25-2020 permit only existing uses that are taking place within existing buildings and prohibit existing uses taking place outdoor uses?
11. Does the applicant’s proposal constitute “development” as defined in the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement & Oshawa Official Plan
12. Is the proposed anaerobic digestion facility an expansion of the existing recycling operation use?
13. Is a third party peer or regulatory authority review of the findings of the following reports prepared by the applicant’s consultants required prior to the approval of the variances sought by the LPAT?
- Emission Summary and Dispersion Model
- Acoustic Assessment Report
- Traffic Impact Brief
- Wildlife Hazard Assessment
- Environmental Impact Study
14. Are the Emission Summary and Dispersion Model report, Acoustic Assessment Report and Traffic Impact Brief sufficient for demonstrating suitability of the proposed anaerobic digestion facility within the Northwood Business Park?
15. Would the granting of the variances sufficiently frustrate the ability for the City to conclude an appropriate land use study for the appropriateness of the GI (General Industrial) Zone in the Northwood Business Park?
16. Does Policy 9.15 of the Oshawa Official Plan require expert studies submitted in evidence by the Appellants in support of their appeal to be peer reviewed by a qualified third party professional prior to a decision being made on the LPAT on the appeal?
Site Plan Agreement Amendment Application Issues List
17. Have the Wildlife Hazard Assessment recommendations been implemented in the site plan, landscape plans and other plans to ensure the development is compatible with the operation of the Oshawa Executive Airport?
18. How is vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress to Building B achieved?
19. Is it appropriate for the lighting from the proposed development to spill onto City owned open space lands to the north?
20. Does the landscape plan drawing L-L1 need to be updated to specify that new boundary fencing is to be installed entirely on the subject site, including footings?
21. Do the site plan drawing SP-1 and landscape plan drawing L-L1 need to be coordinated with respect to fencing details and signage details?
22. Are building elevation plans required to be submitted to the City for Building C?
23. Is a set of building elevation plans required to be submitted to the City for the waste transfer building that is to be retained?
24. Should elevations of the tanks be provided and is their colour suitable for the area.
25. Does the height of the 15 proposed tanks comply with the maximum height requirements of Zoning By-law 60-94?
NOTE: Where a single party alone raises a technical issue then that party must call technical evidence in support of that issue from a qualified independent expert.
The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing. It is acknowledged that the parties may refer to policies other than those set out above in providing a response to the Issues.
On December 31, 2020 the LPAT issued a decision that the Evergreen had the right to appeal Oshawa’s Committee of Adjustment decision to “table indefinitely” Evergreen’s application for a site plan approval and minor variances.
Details in Report DS-20-66 The existing use of the property is a waste transfer facility and a compost facility (i.e. processing facility of yard waste and clean wood) located on the Site, although the compost facility has not been operational since April 2019).
It is owned by 1515 Northwood Transfer Inc. and operated by Evergreen which acquired it under receivership in 2019, and currently operates the solid non-hazardous waste transfer station located on the site
Ummah Foundation of Durham (“Ummah”), which operates a mosque and community centre immediately south of 1515 Thornton Rd. N, supports the Evergreen's anaerobic digestion facility application, and filed an appeal against Oshawa’s decision to delay Evergreen’s application.
1515 Thornton was previously owned and operated by Northwood Recycling & Energy Inc. (“Northwood”) for approximately 20 years during which time the City and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change received many complaints concerning odors.
In February 2020 the City passed an Interim Control By-law on the site, which is due to expire this spring.
With a long 5 day Hearing scheduled, due to the complexity of the matter, it will be interesting to find out whether the Tribunal will find in favour or against the City delaying the Evergreen application.
Below is the Issues List for the Hearing: (Many questions being asked, but ultimately the question to be answered by the Tribunal simply seems to be: are there grounds for the City to take a position unfavourable to an anaerobic digestion facility on this site, which is currently zoned General Industrial and Select Industrial?
Committee of Adjustment Applications Issues List
1. Is the proposed variance minor?
2. Are the proposed variances desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land?
3. Does the proposed variance maintain the general intent and purpose of Interim Control By-law 25-2020?
4. Does the proposed variance maintain the general intent and purpose of Oshawa Official Plan, specifically policies 2.4 and 7?
5. What was the use of the land, buildings and/or structures on the day Interim Control By-law 25- 2020 was passed (February 24, 2020)?
6. Does the application propose an enlargement or extension of existing buildings or structures?
7. Does Section 45(2)(a)(i) of the Planning Act that gives the permission to grant an extension of a building or structure include the ability to permit new buildings where there are currently existing buildings and structures and outdoor storage , processing and staging areas. What do the words enlargement or extension in section 45(2) a (i) mean?
8. Is the proposed use of the land, building(s) or structure(s) similar to the purpose for which it was used on the day Interim Control By-law 25-2020 was passed (February 24, 2020) or is the use proposed more compatible with the uses permitted by the by-law than the purpose for which it was used on the day the by-law was passed?
9. Does Interim Control By-law 25-2020 prohibit the development of land, buildings and structures on the subject site? Is “developing land” a use of land that may be prohibited under section 38 of the Planning Act?
10. Does Interim Control By-law 25-2020 permit only existing uses that are taking place within existing buildings and prohibit existing uses taking place outdoor uses?
11. Does the applicant’s proposal constitute “development” as defined in the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement & Oshawa Official Plan
12. Is the proposed anaerobic digestion facility an expansion of the existing recycling operation use?
13. Is a third party peer or regulatory authority review of the findings of the following reports prepared by the applicant’s consultants required prior to the approval of the variances sought by the LPAT?
- Emission Summary and Dispersion Model
- Acoustic Assessment Report
- Traffic Impact Brief
- Wildlife Hazard Assessment
- Environmental Impact Study
14. Are the Emission Summary and Dispersion Model report, Acoustic Assessment Report and Traffic Impact Brief sufficient for demonstrating suitability of the proposed anaerobic digestion facility within the Northwood Business Park?
15. Would the granting of the variances sufficiently frustrate the ability for the City to conclude an appropriate land use study for the appropriateness of the GI (General Industrial) Zone in the Northwood Business Park?
16. Does Policy 9.15 of the Oshawa Official Plan require expert studies submitted in evidence by the Appellants in support of their appeal to be peer reviewed by a qualified third party professional prior to a decision being made on the LPAT on the appeal?
Site Plan Agreement Amendment Application Issues List
17. Have the Wildlife Hazard Assessment recommendations been implemented in the site plan, landscape plans and other plans to ensure the development is compatible with the operation of the Oshawa Executive Airport?
18. How is vehicular and pedestrian ingress and egress to Building B achieved?
19. Is it appropriate for the lighting from the proposed development to spill onto City owned open space lands to the north?
20. Does the landscape plan drawing L-L1 need to be updated to specify that new boundary fencing is to be installed entirely on the subject site, including footings?
21. Do the site plan drawing SP-1 and landscape plan drawing L-L1 need to be coordinated with respect to fencing details and signage details?
22. Are building elevation plans required to be submitted to the City for Building C?
23. Is a set of building elevation plans required to be submitted to the City for the waste transfer building that is to be retained?
24. Should elevations of the tanks be provided and is their colour suitable for the area.
25. Does the height of the 15 proposed tanks comply with the maximum height requirements of Zoning By-law 60-94?
NOTE: Where a single party alone raises a technical issue then that party must call technical evidence in support of that issue from a qualified independent expert.
The identification of an issue does not mean that all parties agree that such issue, or the manner in which the issue is expressed, is appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Tribunal at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing. It is acknowledged that the parties may refer to policies other than those set out above in providing a response to the Issues.