Cumulative effects are extremely hard to manage in any approval
process. By definition, the person or project seeking an individual
approval does not usually control the other sources of cumulative
impact. Nor is the necessary information about the other actual or
potential impacts usually before the decision-maker. Occasionally,
however, both of these obstacles can be overcome.
In Vasarinsh v. Niagara Escarpment
Commission, the Niagara Escarpment Hearing Office declined
to approve a proposed recreational development, because of the
absence of sufficient evidence as to the cumulative impact of the
proposed development and other phases that were predicted to
follow. "In this case, ... the future development of the park
is relevant to the issue of cumulative impact, given that
Burlington has decided to segment the submission of development
permit applications. Generally speaking, it is preferable for
applicants to submit comprehensive applications for an
