New legislation exempts the area from the Environmental Assessment Act
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismissed an application by a grassroots organization opposing the West Island redevelopment at Ontario Place.
The organization, Ontario Place for All, represents over 30,000 supporters. It argued that the redevelopment required an environmental assessment due to plans for a large spa facility, which would involve cutting down trees, altering a cultural heritage landscape, and filling parts of the lakefront. The government had completed an environmental assessment for other parts of Ontario Place but excluded the West Island, asserting it was a private project not subject to the Environmental Assessment Act (EAA).
However, after the application for judicial review was filed, the government passed the Rebuilding Ontario Place Act, 2023 (ROPA), exempting the West Island redevelopment from the EAA. The court's decision centred on whether it was clear that the application could not succeed under ROPA.
The Superior Court concluded it was plain and obvious the application could not succeed, as the new legislation exempts the West Island from the EAA. The organization had sought a court order for a comprehensive environmental assessment, including the West Island, and a declaration that excluding the West Island from the initial assessment was unlawful.
The court noted that while the organization argued the West Island was part of the overall Ontario Place redevelopment, its application did not sufficiently plead this connection. Furthermore, interpreting the legislation as suggested by the organization would render parts of it meaningless.
The court also found the issue moot, as the new legislation nullified the need for an environmental assessment of the West Island. The court determined there was no ongoing live dispute and no principle likely to recur, thus opting not to exercise its discretion to hear the moot issue.
Regarding costs, the court recognized the organization's public interest role and declined to order it to pay costs. The organization's approach in inviting a motion to quash the application after the passage of ROPA was deemed reasonable by the court, as it allowed for an efficient judicial ruling on the impact of the new legislation. Ultimately, the motion was allowed, and the application was quashed with no costs ordered.
