Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: April 17, 2023
CASE NO(S).: OLT-21-001690 (Formerly PL180383)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Applicant/Appellant: Coco Properties Corporation Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: to permit expansion of a quarry Reference Number: D14-104-2014 Property Address: 2357-2363 and 2489-2505 Unity Road Municipality/UT: Kingston/Frontenac OLT Case No: OLT-21-001690 Legacy Case No: PL180383 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-21-001690 Legacy Lead Case No: PL180383 OLT Case Name: Coco Properties Corporation v. Kingston (City.)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision Description: to permit expansion of a quarry Reference Number: D-09-025-2014 Property Address: 2357-2363 and 2489-2505 Unity Road Municipality/UT: Kingston/Frontenac OLT Case No: OLT-22-004036 Legacy Case No: PL180384 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-21-001690 Legacy Lead Case No: PL180383
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER section 11(5) of the Aggregate Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.10.
Subject: Aggregate License Description: to permit a Category 2, Class A licence to excavate aggregate from a 73.8 hectare quarry Reference Number: 626239 Property Address: Part of Lots 12-13, Concession 5 Municipality/UT: Kingston/Frontenac OLT Case No: OLT-21-001519 OLT Lead Case No: OLT-21-001690 Legacy Lead Case No: PL180383 OLT Case Name: Lattimore et al v. Ontario (MNRF)
Heard: November 30, 2022 by video hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Coco Properties Corporation | Kim Mullin and Eugenia Bashura |
| City of Kingston | Tony Fleming and Spencer Putman |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY M.A. SILLS ON NOVEMBER 30, 2022 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This was the third Case Management Conference (“CMC”) in the matter of appeals brought by Coco Properties Corporation (“Applicant/Appellant”) regarding Applications for amendments to the City of Kingston (“City”) Official Plan (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law No. 76-26 (“ZBA”) pertaining to the properties municipally known as 2357-2363 and 2489-2505 Unity Road (“subject properties”).
2The Applicant submitted an application to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forests (“MNRF”) to obtain approval for an expansion of the existing Elginburg Quarry. The Elginburg Quarry is located in Part of Lots 14 and 15, Concession 5 in the geographic Township of Kingston, now part of the City of Kingston, and operates under a Class A Licence approved under the Aggregate Resources Act (“ARA”).
3The Minister of the MNRF referred the licence application and a list of Objectors to the Tribunal, pursuant to s. 11(5) of the ARA. On the referral of an ARA application to the Tribunal, the Objectors to the ARA application are parties in the Tribunal proceeding(s).
4At the first CMC on February 14, 2020, the Tribunal consolidated the ARA licence application referral matter with the OPA and ZBA appeals, and as requested, conferred Participant status to all of the Objectors in attendance.
5A second CMC was held on August 26, 2022. Following from discussions at that CMC, the Tribunal granted requests by Dave Munroe, Mark Taylor, Michael and Lisa Drewniak, Ronald and Sandra Murphy, Mary Rahmel, Jack Walker, and Angela Allison to change their status back to party. Mr. Munroe agreed to act as the lead spokesperson on behalf of the Objector parties.
6On November 3, 2022, the City and the Appellant reached a settlement in regard to the OPA and ZBA appeals. The settlement is intended to be brought before the Tribunal at the hearing.
7A 10-day hearing was scheduled and the Procedural Order to govern the conduct of the hearing was approved by the Tribunal and issued together with the Decision from the second CMC on November 21, 2022.
8At the current CMC, the Tribunal responded to questions from the unrepresented parties and further clarified the hearing processes and procedural matters. Specifically, the Tribunal explained the expectations and responsibilities of a party in a hearing before the Tribunal, including that a party is required to attend on each day of the hearing, and that a party is expected to tender evidence to support the issues it intends to raise at the hearing. This is particularly necessary in this case because the City and the Appellant have reached a settlement. Mr. Munroe indicated that consideration would possibly be given to retaining an expert witness(es), but no final decision had been made on that to this point.
9In that regard, the Tribunal cautioned Mr. Munroe not to delay as a hearing date has been established and an expert witness will necessarily need time to complete the work in preparation for the hearing.
10In the same vein, there was an obvious misconception about the extent of the Tribunal’s jurisdiction in the ARA referral matter, in that many of the comments and concerns were directly related to the ongoing operations of the licenced Elginburg Quarry, which is not before the Tribunal and/or over which the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction.
11The Tribunal urged Mr. Munroe and other unrepresented parties to consider making further inquiries to better understand the hearing processes and the role and expectations of a party to a hearing. The Tribunal suggested that helpful information may be obtained from the Ontario Land Tribunal website.
12Subsequently, in early March 2023, the Tribunal received separate email correspondence from Mr. Munroe and each of the named Objector parties, all requesting to revert back to Participant status. The Tribunal has granted these requests.
13At about that same time, the Tribunal received correspondence from a Participant seeking to make a motion to dismiss the appeal(s). However, as was indicated by the Case Coordinator a non-party to a matter before the Tribunal does not have standing to bring a motion.
14For those individuals that have converted their status from party to Participant, the Tribunal extends the date for the submission of a Participant Statement to Friday, April 28, 2023.
15Participant Statements Forms can be obtained from the Ontario Land Tribunal website or by contacting the Case Co-ordinator having carriage of this file for further information. Please submit the completed form to the Tribunal and copy counsel to the Appellant and the City for the established date.
16The Tribunal has scheduled a 1-day hearing on Wednesday, May 31, 2023 at 10 a.m.
17Parties and participants are asked to log into the video hearing at least 15 minutes before the start of the event to test their video and audio connections:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/344779885
Access code: 344-779-885
18Parties and participants are asked to access and set up the application well in advance of the event to avoid unnecessary delay. The desktop application can be downloaded at GoToMeeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
19Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoToMeeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to the event by calling into an audio-only telephone line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or Toll Free 1-888-299-1889. The access code is 344-779-885.
20Individuals are directed to connect to the event on the assigned date at the correct time. It is the responsibility of the persons participating in the hearing by video to ensure that they are properly connected to the event at the correct time. Questions prior to the hearing event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator having carriage of this case.
21No further notice will be provided.
22This Member is not seized.
“M.A. Sills”
M.A. SILLS
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.