Ontario Land Tribunal

Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire

ISSUE DATE: August 26, 2022

CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002049 (Formerly MM2100006)

PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 11(5) of the Aggregate Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.8, as amended

Referred by: Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

Objector: Peter Carey

Objector: Dylan Jackson and Ashley Barker

Objector: Rusty and Doris Jackson

Objector: Bill and Joanne Klingenberg; and others

Applicant: 1621185 Ontario Inc.

Subject: Application for a Class A licence for the removal of aggregate

Property Address/Description: Part of Lot 41, Concession 2

Municipality: South Bruce Peninsula

OLT Case No.: OLT-22-002334

Legacy Case No.: MM210006

OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002334

Legacy Lead Case No.: MM210006

OLT Case Name: Carey v. Natural Resources and Forestry (Ontario)

Heard: February 14-19, 2022 by video hearing

APPEARANCES:

Parties

Counsel/Representative*

1621185 Ontario Inc. (“Landstone Quarry”)

David White*

Dylan and Ashley Jackson

Self-represented

Rusty and Doris Jackson

Self-represented

Gord Ottewell

Self-represented

Bill and Joanne Klingenberg

Self-represented

DECISION DELIVERED BY SHARYN VINCENT AND INTERIM ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL

INTRODUCTION

1The Jackson, Ottewell, and Klingenberg households (“Objectors”) raised objections to the Application by Landstone Quarry for a Class A, Category 2 License to operate a quarry within the footprint of a former sand and gravel pit operation. The quarry, although licensed, has been dormant for a number of years and is characterized as being exhausted. The new licensing application seeks permissions which would authorize extractions of stone from below the level of the water table, with dewatering activities outletting to municipal lands and infrastructure adjacent to the property of Dylan and Ashley Jackson. While no land use permissions under the Planning Act are required for the proposed use, the approvals of the haul route, again dependent upon municipal infrastructure bordering the Jackson lands, have not yet been fully investigated or secured.

2The principle issues relate to the concerns arising from the potential impacts of the renewed quarrying activities include blasting, dewatering and haulage, on nearby livestock farming and rural activities including four new residences and a horse boarding and training facility, and also the potential exacerbation or recurrence of drainage issues which have resulted in flooding on the Jackson property located immediately to the north of North Diagonal, the road separating the Jackson holdings from the quarry.

3Landstone Quarry proffered witnesses to speak to the following disciplines: planning; surface water; hydrogeology; environmental assessment; noise; blasting and traffic. The Objectors each made submissions and presented an engineering drainage specialist in support of that aspect of their contentions. All of the witnesses were qualified by the Tribunal to assist with opinion evidence in their respective areas of expertise to assist the Tribunal in its deliberations.

4As is the norm with these types of licensing applications to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, any final approvals take the form of a heavily annotated set of site plans and details and in this instance, that document is what literally evolved through corrections, updates and additions of proposed monitoring, mitigation measures and operational details throughout the hearing process, to be Exhibit 5.

5The Tribunal commends the unrepresented Objectors, who through their diligent preparation and critique of the evidence, and cross examination of the witnesses brought in support of the application have effectively required revisions and additions where necessary to the five page package which constitute the Site Plan, and ultimately the License.

6The Tribunal, having heard and considered all of the evidence, shares the frustration of the Objectors, but has determined that Exhibit 5 as revised and in final form has captured the principle operational issues raised by the Objectors.

7The Tribunal however is not fully satisfied in the absence of the final details of the haul route, and the proposed reconfiguration of the on site access road and in turn, its access to North Diagonal, and details with respect to how any related grading will affect estimated overland flows and discharge, and, therefore finds that approving the license in principle, is premature.

8The Tribunal will therefore reserve until such time as evidence is brought to the Tribunal that these aspects of the operation have been resolved and the implementation thereof, properly secured.

“Sharyn Vincent”

SHARYN VINCENT

VICE-CHAIR

Ontario Land Tribunal

Website: olt.gov.on.ca Telephone: 416-212-6349 Toll Free: 1-866-448-2248

The Conservation Review Board, the Environmental Review Tribunal, the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal and the Mining and Lands Tribunal are amalgamated and continued as the Ontario Land Tribunal (“Tribunal”). Any reference to the preceding tribunals or the former Ontario Municipal Board is deemed to be a reference to the Tribunal.