Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de ( Ontario

RECEIVED AUG 2 0 2015 Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de ( Ontario Ontario ISSUE DATE: August 18,2015 CASE NO(S).: PL141047 PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: Subject: Existing Designation: Proposed Designation: Purpose: Property Address/Description: Municipality: Approval Authority File No.: OMB Case No.: OMB File No.: OMB Case Name: Shire Corporation Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of Town of Lincoln to adopt the requested amendment Good General Agriculture and Natural Environment Site specific (to be determined) To permit an agriculturally related Non- Agricultural Source Material (NASM) Storage and Distribution Facility to the list of permitted uses within the Agricultural Designation 3289 Frost Road Town of Lincoln PLOPA20130113 PL141047 PL141047 Shire Corporation v. Lincoln (Town) PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: Subject: Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning: Purpose: Shire Corporation Application to amend Zoning By-law No. 93.14.Z1 - Neglect of application by Town of Lincoln Agricultural (A) Zone, Agricultural (A-4) Zone, and Environnemental Conservation (EC) Zone Agricultural (A-xx) Zone To permit the reuse of the existing lagoons for a Non-Agricultural Source Material (NASM) storage and distribution facility

2 PL141047 Property Address/Description: Municipality: Municipal File No.: OMB Case No.: OMB File No.: 3289 Frost Road Town of Lincoln PLZBA20130114 PL141047 PL141048 Heard: August 6, 2015 in Beamsville, Ontario APPEARANCES: Parties Town of Lincoln Shire Corporation Regional Municipality of Niagara Mountain View Niagara Escarpment Community Association Ralph Izzo Sharon MacDonald CounselVRepresentative Tom Halinski* (absent) Josephine Matera* Nancy Smith* Shelley Kaufman* Stephen Chisholm* John Christie Harald Thiel (absent) Self-represented Self-represented MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. HEFFERON ON AUGUST 6, 2015 AND ORDER OF THE BOARD BACKGROUND [1] This was the second prehearing conference ( PHC ) into this matter. [2] Shire Corporation ( Shire ) has appealed the failure or neglect of Council of the Town of Lincoln to make a decision within the statutory time limits on its applications for amendments to both the Town of Lincoln Official Plan and the Town of Lincoln comprehensive Zoning By-law 93.14.Z1 ( By-law ) to permit the use of a portion of the 14.3 hectare property, more particularly three existing clay-lined storage lagoons

3 PL141047 previously used to store and treat sewage and process water from the former Grand River Poultry processing plant at 3249 Frost Road ( subject lands ), to store and treat non-agriculture source materials ( NASM ). [3] Subsequently on November 17, 2014, Council passed a resolution refusing the applications. MATTER BEFORE THE BOARD [4] Shire has appealed the non-decision of the Council of the Town of Lincoln for an amendment to the Official Plan from Good General Agriculture and Natural Environment to a designation to be determined in order to add an NASM facility to the list of permitted uses on lands within an Agriculture designation. [5] Shire has also appealed the non-decision of Council to amend the By-law from the current Agriculture ( A ) and Environment Conservation ( EC ) zones to a site- specific zone to be determined. DISPOSITION [6] The Board granted the requests of John Venn and the Wine Council of Ontario and Lincoln Wineries, which had previously been granted party status, to withdraw their requests for party status. The Board then recognized them as participants. [7] Richard Johnson, whose name was inadvertently omitted in the list of participants issued with a previous decision, was confirmed as a participant. [8] Shire Corporation has separately appealed the approval with modifications of the new Official Plan for the Town of Lincoln ( OPA 2014-47 ). The appeal of OPA 2014-47 has been assigned Board File No. PL150475 but no Prehearing has been set to date. The Province of Ontario has also appealed OPA 2014-47. Shire, the Town of Lincoln and the Regional Municipality of Niagara, all parties in both matters, have agreed to

4 PL141047 request at the first OPA 2014-47 Prehearing Conference that the site-specific Shire appeal be carved out. The intention will be that the outcome in this appeal (PL141047) can be determinative of and implemented in the broader Official Plan through the OPA 2014-47 appeal (PL150475). This request will be put before the Board Member presiding at the first PL150475 proceeding for determination. [9] Stephen Chisholm, counsel for the Regional Municipality of Niagara is directed to inform the Parties in a timely manner of the issues (if any) the Region requests be added to the final Issues List. [10] Sharon MacDonald is directed to inform the other parties of the matters on her Issues List on which she does not intend to call evidence. Ms. MacDonald indicated that she will withdraw those matters as issues. The parties agreed that the matters raised and the concerns expressed in the form of issues that were subsequently withdrawn can remain as concerns that Ms. MacDonald may, if she chooses, question during the hearing. [11] Ms. Mattera, counsel for the Town of Lincoln submitted a revised Procedural Order with a clean copy of the revised Issues List as determined in this second PHC. A copy of the revised Procedural Order is attached to this decision as Attachment 1. [12] A 20-day hearing into this matter will commence at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, February 2, 2016 (NOTE: this date has been changed) at: [13] No further notice is required. Municipal Building (Lincoln) Town of Lincoln 4800 South Service Road Beamsville, Lincoln, Ontario

5 PL141047 [14] This Member is not seized. C. Hefferon C. HEFFERON MEMBER If there is an attachment referred to in this document, please visit www.elto.gov.on.ca to view the attachment in PDF format. Ontario Municipal Board A constituent tribunal of Environment and Land Tribunals Ontario Website: www.elto.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248

ATTACHMENT 1 <991 'W ' ^QJ2 Q] Ontario Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de I Ontario PL141047 PROCEEDING COMMENDED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: Subject: Existing Designation: Proposed Designation: Purpose: Property Address/Description: Municipality: Approval Authority File No.: OMB Case No.: OMB File No.: Shire Corporation Request to amend the Official Plan - Failure of Town of Lincoln to adopt the requested amendment Good General Agriculture and Natural Environment. Site specific (to be determined) To permit an agriculturally related Non-Agricultural Source Material (NASM) Storage and Distribution Facility to the list of permitted uses within the Agricultural Designation 3289 Frost Road Town of Lincoln PLOPA20130113 PL141047 PL141047 PROCEEDING COMMENDED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended Applicant and Appellant: Subject: Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning: Purpose: Property Address/Description: Municipality: Municipal File No.: OMB Case No.: OMB File No.: Shire Corporation Request to amend Zoning By-law No. 93.14.Z1 - Neglect of application by Town of Lincoln Agricultural (A) Zone, Agricultural (A-4) Zone, and Environmental Conservation (EC) Zone Agricultural (A-xx) Zone To permit the reuse of the existing lagoons for a Non-Agricultural Source Material (NASM) storage and distribution facility 3289 Frost Road Town of Lincoln PLZBA20130114 PL141047 PL141048

-2- The Board orders that: PROCEDURAL ORDER [1] The Board may vary or add to this Order at any time either on request or as it sees fit. It may amend this Order by an oral ruling or by another written Order. Organization of the Hearing [2] The hearing will begin on February 1, 2016, at 11:00 a.m. in the Council Chamber, 4800 South Service Road, Town of Lincoln. [3] The length of the hearing will be 20 days. The length of the hearing may be shortened as issues are resolved or settlement is achieved. [4] The parties and participants identified at the prehearing conference are listed in Attachment 1 to this Order. [5] The Issues are set out in the issues List attached as Attachment 2. There will be no changes to this list unless the Board permits it. A party who asks for changes may have costs awarded against it. [6] The order of evidence shall be as set out in Attachment 3 to this Order. The Board may limit the amount of time allocated for opening statements, evidence in chief (including the qualification of witnesses), cross-examination, evidence in reply and final argument. The length of written argument, if any, may be limited either on consent or by Order of the Board. Reguirements Before the Hearing [7] All parties and participants (or their representatives) shall provide a mailing address, email address, and telephone number to the Board. Any such person who retains a representative (legal counsel or agent) subsequent to the prehearing conference must advise the other parties and the Board of the representative s name, mailing address, email address and phone number. [8] A party who intends to call witnesses, whether by summons or not, shall provide to the Board, the other parties and to the Clerk of the Town a list of the witnesses and the order in which they will be called. This list must be delivered on or before September 25, 2015, For expert witnesses, a party is to include a copy of the curriculum vitae and the area of expertise in which the witness is proposed to be qualified. [9] Expert witnesses in the same field shall have at least one meeting, without counsel, before the hearing to try to resolve or reduce the issues for the hearing. The experts must prepare, without involvement by counsel, a list of agreed facts and the remaining issues to be addressed at the hearing, and provide this list to all of the parties and the municipal Clerk. The agreed statement of facts and issues must be provided by the following deadlines:

- 3- Description Planning Odour/Dust Transportation Hydrogeology Agreed Statement by November 27, 2015 November 27, 2015 November 27, 2015 November 27, 2015 [10] An expert witness shall prepare an expert witness statement, that shall include: an acknowledgement of expert s duty form, the area(s) of expertise, any reports prepared by the expert, and any other reports or documents to be relied on at the hearing. Copies of this must be provided as in section 13. Instead of a witness statement, the expert may file his or her entire report if it contains the required information. If this is not done, the Board may refuse to hear the expert s testimony. [11] Each participant must provide to the Board, the parties and the Town Clerk a participant statement on or before November 2, 2015 or the witness or participant may not give oral evidence at the hearing., [12] Expert witnesses who are under summons but not paid to produce a report do not have to file an expert witness statement; but the party calling them must file a brief outline of the expert s evidence and his or her area of expertise, as in section 13. [13] On or before November 2, 2015, the parties shall provide copies of their witness statements to the other parties and the Clerk of the Town. Copies may be provided in any manner set out in section 18, but a party will be entitled to request a hard copy if one is not provided. [14] The parties shall prepare a Joint Document Book to be filed with the Board on the first day of the hearing. A paper copy of any document proposed to be entered into evidence or relied upon shall be provided at the hearing unless ordered otherwise by the presiding Member. [15] On or before January 15, 2016, the parties shall provide copies of their visual evidence to all of the other parties. If a model is proposed to be used the Board must be notified before the hearing. All parties must have a reasonable opportunity to view it before the hearing. [16] On or before December 11, 2015, parties may provide to all other parties and to the Clerk of the Town a written response to any written evidence. [17] A person wishing to change written evidence, including witness statements, must make a written motion to the Board in accordance with the Board s Rules [34 to 38], [18] A party who provides the written evidence of a witness to the other parties must have that witness attend the hearing to give oral evidence, unless the Board and the parties are notified at least seven days before the hearing that the written evidence is not part of their record. [19] Documents may be delivered in person, by courier, by facsimile, by email, or registered or certified mail, or otherwise as the Board may direct. The delivery of documents by fax and

-4- email shall be governed by the Board s Rules [26-31] on this subject. Material delivered by mail shall be deemed to have been received five business days after the date of registration or certification. Summary of Key Dates September 25, 2015 November 27, 2015 November 2, 2015 November 2, 2015 January 15, 2106 December 11, 2015 February 1, 2016 Witness Lists, CVs and Area of Expertise Expert Witness Agreed Statement of Facts Participant Statements Expert Witness Statements and Acknowledgement of Expert s Duty Visual Evidence Witness Statement Reply Hearing [20] No adjournments or delays will be granted before or during the hearing except for serious hardship or illness. The Board s Rules 61 to 65 apply to such requests. [21] The Town, in consultation with the parties and the Board, will prepare a hearing communication strategy that may include website posting and a witness workplan posting at the hearing. Strategy elements will include the best information available to further public engagement but will caution all on the unpredictability of the hearing process and anticipated scheduling. This Member is [not] seized. So orders the Board.

Purpose of the Procedural Order and Meaning of Terms Prehearing conferences usually take place only where the hearing is expected to be long and complicated. If you are not familiar with the hearing process you should prepare by obtaining the Guide to the Ontario Municipal Board, and the Board s Rules, from the Board Information Office, 15th Floor, 655 Bay Street, Toronto, M5G 1E5, 416-212-6349, or from the Board website at www. omb. gov, on.ca. The parties should discuss the draft Procedural Order before the prehearing conference and identify the issues and the process they propose the Board order following the prehearing. The Board will hear submissions about the content of the Procedural Order at the prehearing. Meaning of terms used in the Procedural Order: Party is an individual or corporation permitted by the Board to participate fully in the hearing by receiving copies of written evidence, presenting witnesses, cross-examining the witnesses of the other parties, and making submissions on all of the evidence. If an unincorporated group wishes to become a party, it must appoint one person to speak for it, and that person will become the party and assume the responsibilities of a party as set out in the Procedural Order. Parties do not have to be represented by a lawyer, and may have an agent speak for them. The agent must have written authorisation from the party. Participant is an individual, group or corporation, whether represented by a lawyer or not, who may attend only part of the proceeding but who makes a statement to the Board on all or some of the issues in the hearing. At the hearing, a participant may be asked questions by the parties about their statements. Participants do not normally receive notice of a mediation or conference calls on procedural issues and cannot ask for costs, or review of a decision as parties can. Written and Visual Evidence: Written evidence includes all written material, reports, studies, documents, letters and witness statements which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. These must have pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire document, even if there are tabs or dividers in the material. Visual evidence includes photographs, maps, videos, models, and overlays which a party or participant intends to present as evidence at the hearing. If a model forms part of the evidence, photographs of the model shall also be filed. Witness Statements: A witness statement or a participant statement is a short written outline of the person s or group s background, experience and interest in the matter; a list of the issues which he or she will discuss and the witness or participant s position on those issues; and a list of reports that the witness or participant will rely on at the hearing. An expert witness statement should include his or her (1) name and address, (2) qualifications, acknowledgement of the expert s duty, and specific area(s) of expertise, (3) a list of the issues to be addressed, (4) the witness opinions on those issues and the complete reasons for the opinions and (5) a list of reports that the witness will rely on at the hearing. The Procedural Order will set out when and how witness statements are to be exchanged.

Additional Information Summons: A party may ask the Board to issue a summons. This request must be made before the time that the list of witnesses is provided to the Board and the parties. (See Rules 45 and 46 on the summons procedure.) An affidavit may be requested indicating how the witness evidence is relevant to the hearing. If the Board is not satisfied from the affidavit, it will require that a motion be heard to decide whether the witness should be summoned. The order of examination of witnesses: is usually direct examination, crossexamination and re-examination in the following way: direct examination by the party presenting the witness; direct examination by any party of similar interest, in the manner determined by the Board; cross-examination by parties of opposite interest; re-examination by the party presenting the witness; or another order of examination mutually agreed among the parties or directed by the Board. Role of Participants: Participants are identified at the start of a prehearing or at the start of a hearing. Participant statements should be filed with the Board and the parties in accordance with the direction set out in the Board s Procedural Order. If a participant does not attend the hearing and only files a written statement, the Board may not give it the same attention or weight as submissions made orally. The reason is that parties cannot ask further questions of a person if they merely file the material and do not attend.

- 7- ATTACHMENT 1 PARTIES AND PARTICIPANTS Parties 1. Shire Corporation Turkstra Mazza Associates 15 Bold Street Hamilton, Ontario L8P 1T3 Nancy Smith Tel; (905) 529-3476 Fax: (905) 529-3663 Email: nsmith@tmalaw.ca Shelley Kaufman Tel: 519.434.3684 Fax: 519.434.6663 Email: skaufman@tmalaw.ca 2. Town of Lincoln Aird & Berlis LLP Brookfield Place, 181 Bay Street Suite 1800, Box 754 Toronto ON M5J 2T9 Josephine Matera Tel: 416.865.3061 Fax: 416.863.1515 Email: jmatera@airdberlis.com Tom Halinski Tel: 416.865.7767 Fax: 416.863.1515 Email: thalinski@airdberlis.com 3. Region of Niagara Niagara, Regional Municipality of Legal Services, 2201 St. David's Rd. PO Box 1042, Stn. Thorold Thorold, Ontario L2V 4T7 Stephen Chisholm Legal Counsel

-8- Tel: 905.685.4225 Ext: 3415 Fax: 905.685.7931 Email: Stephen.chisholm@niagararegion.ca 4. Mountainview Niagara Escarpment Community Association (MNECA) c/o Harald Thiel 4152 Locust Lane Beamsville, Ontario LOR 1 BO Tel: 905.563.8700, ext. 23 Fax: 905.563.8705 Email: hthiel@hiddenbench.com 5. Ralph Izzo 3743 Frost Road Beamsville, Ontario L0R1B2 Tel: 905.563.4109 Email: izzo.ralph57@qmail.com 6. Sharon MacDonald 4195 Ninth Street St. Catharines, Ontario L2R 6P9 Email: hinterlandlearners@gmail.com

- 9- Participants NAME ADDRESS EMAIL Ray A. Konkle 316521st Street, RR#1, rav(3>konkle.ca Jordan Station, ON LOR 1 SO Paul L. Labate Murray Cluff Lourdes Bosch Laura Johnson Richard Johnson Athina Leontis Sandra Kandracs Gordon Gerrie John Varsakis Curtis Fielding Marcia Christie Stella Halkias Oleg Kozyniak Evelina Zielnik 4556 Ontario Street Beamsville, ON L0R1B5 5149 Rose Ave. Beamsville, ON LOR 1B8 4607 Fly Road 3377 Frost Road 3377 Frost Road 5330 Philp Road 6351 Clare Cres. Niagara Falls, ON L2G 2C9 3623 Glen Elgin Drive Jordan, ON LOR 1S0 3203 Frost Road 4020 Locust Lane 5380 McLeod 4821 Hillside Drive Beamsville, ON LOR 1B6 3240 Dutch Lane 3381 Frost Road piabate(@.coqeco.ca mcluir@bell.net laisb(s>live.ca laiira(a>fmte.ca richi@canadianleak.ca zourntos(a>niaqara.com skandracs(o)qmail.com qrnq1(u)bell.net Johnnv varsakis(a)vahoo.corn ciirtisfd)fieldinqwines.com Christie.marcia(cZ)svmpatico.ca stellah(o>sypatico.ca oko.zvniak(o>hotmail.com fzinteriors@hotmail.corn

- 10- NAME ADDRESS EMAIL Jim Rowan 5011 Spring Creek Road RR #3 Smithville, ON LOR 2A0 Andrew Condos Representing: Bill Dermetsikas Jeff Robinson Gary Van Iperen Anthony Easton Gus Kamerelas 3360 Frost Road 4976 Fly Road 3380 Frost Road 3353 Cosby Road 5031 Philp Road 5416 Cosby Road Vineland, ON LOR 1B2 a kontos@hotmail.com John Venn 3015 Dutch Lane, RR#1 ikvenn@hotmail.com Vineland, Ontario LOR 2C0

-11 - ATTACHMENT 2 ISSUES LIST Town of Lincoln 1. Is the proposed use consistent with the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement? 2. Does the proposed use conform with the Regional Official Plan? 3. Does the proposed use conform with the in-force Town Official Plan? 4. Does the proposed use conform with the new Town Official Plan, as approved by the Region? 5. Is the proposal consistent with the Town s December 2010 Corporate Plan? 6. Is the proposed use compatible with neighbouring land uses as well as the surrounding agricultural community? 7. Should compatibility be assessed on the cumulative basis of the proposed use and the uses permitted as-of-right? 8. Would the proposal lead to the fragmentation of the agricultural area? 9. Should the proposal be approved in light of subsection 2.1 of the Planning Act? 10. Is the proposed consistent with the Town s Economic Development Strategy? 11. Will the proposal result in unacceptable adverse impacts on the transportation infrastructure in the Town? 12. Would the haul routes have a negative impact on the existing approved tourism and winery infrastructure along the haul routes within the town of Lincoln? 13. What haul routes are proposed to be used by the trucks travelling to and from the proposed facility and are those routes appropriate in light of the volume and type of vehicles, the classification, condition and grade of the roadways, and the land uses along the routes? 14. Does the proposal comply with the MOECC D-Series Guidelines for land use compatibility? 15. Does the proposal comply with MOECC Guideline NPC-300? 16. Does the proposal require approval under section 9 of the Environmental Protection Act? 17. Has the applicant identified and appropriately assessed the anticipated noise impact on all off-site points of reception? 18. Has the noise impact of anticipated truck traffic been appropriately assessed? 19. What types of odour emissions will the proposed facility and truck traffic generate?

- 12-20. Will the odour generated from the proposed lagoons, the transfer of material, and the vehicles create an adverse impact? 21. Will the proposal result in adverse stormwater management and site runoff impacts, in terms of both quantity and quality? 22. Will the proposal result in unacceptable hydrogeological impacts? 23. What is the potential for spills of materials and what are the potential resultant impacts and required mitigation measures? 24. Can the dust generated by the activities at the proposed facility be adequately mitigated and, if so, what measures are appropriate? 25. Will the natural heritage features be adequately protected? Region of Niagara 26. Does the proposed use require an amendment to the Regional Official Plan? Sharon MacDonald 27. How does the applicant interpret the proposed use as a feature of normal farm practice? 28. What will be the exact sources for the collection of non-agricultural municipal biosolids planned for storage at the proposed site? ' 29. At present, what surface and sub-surface drainage, man-made and/or naturally occurring, exists at the site? 30. What plans does the applicant have for applying its de-watering process to the stored municipal biosolids? 31. What odour classification system does the applicant apply? Mountainview Niagara Escarpment Residents Association 32. What are the precise scope and breadth of activities proposed for the site. The stated Purpose limited to the activities to storage and distribution of NASM. Besides the unloading and reloading of the NASM will any other activities take place at the facility? Applicant should provide complete and exhaustive description of scope and volume of proposed and potential activities at sight. 33. Will the proposed haul route(s) cross the Niagara Escarpment, a UNESCO World Biosphere site and if so how many loads per day would be going to and from the proposed facility? Size of trucks? ' 34. How does the applicant intend to enforce usage of the designated haul routes?

- 13- Shire Corporation 35. Is the proposed use required to conform with the new town Official Plan, as approved by the Region and appeal by Shire Corporation? If so, does it? If not, what role should this Plan play in the Board s decision? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 4) 36. Does the proposal give appropriate consideration to the Town s December 2010 Corporate Plan? (corresponds with the Town of Lincoln Issue 4) 37. Is it appropriate that the Board hear opinion evidence regarding Section 2.1 of the Planning Act or is this a legal determination to be made based on factual evidence and submissions? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 9) 38. Does the proposal give appropriate consideration to the Town s Economic Development Strategy? (corresponds with the Town of Lincoln Issue 10) 39. Will the proposal result in unacceptable adverse impacts on the transportation infrastructure in the Town? If so, can they be adequately mitigated and, if so, what measures are appropriate? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 11) 40. Would the haul routes have an unacceptable adverse impact on the existing approved tourism and winery infrastructure along the haul routes within the Town of Lincoln? If so, can it be adequately mitigated and, if so, what measure are appropriate? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 12) 41. Will the odour generated from the proposed lagoons, the transfer of material, and the vehicles create an unacceptable adverse impact? If so, can it be adequately mitigated and, if so, what measures are appropriate? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 20) 42. Will the proposal result in unacceptable adverse stormwater management and site runoff impacts, in terms of both quantity and quality? If so, can they be adequately mitigated and, if so, what measures are appropriate? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 21) 43. Will the proposal result in unacceptable adverse hydrogeological impacts? If so, can they be adequately mitigated and, if so, what measure are appropriate? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 22) 44. Will the proposal result in unacceptable dust impacts? If so, can they be adequately mitigated and, if so, what measure are appropriate? (corresponds with Town of Lincoln Issue 24) NOTE: 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 Board at the hearing. The extent to which these issues are appropriate or relevant to the determination of the Board at the hearing will be a matter of evidence and argument at the hearing.

- 14- ATTACHMENT 3 ORDER OF EVIDENCE 1. Shire Corporation 2. Parties in support of Shire Corporation 3. Town of Lincoln 4. Region of Niagara 5. Parties in opposition to Shire Corporation 6. Participants 7. Reply by Shire Corporation 23592378.3