Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 05, 2024
CASE NO(S).: OLT-22-002049 (Formerly MM210006)
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: Dylan Jackson and Ashley Barker
Objector: Rusty and Doris Jackson
Objector: Bill and Joanne Klingenberg
Objector: Joyce Martz; 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-22-002049
Legacy Case No.: MM210006
OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-22-002049
Legacy Lead Case No.: MM210006
OLT Case Name: Carey v. Natural Resources and Forestry (Ontario)
Heard: January 24 and 25, 2024 via video conference
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel*/Representative |
|---|---|
| Dylan and Ashley Jackson | Self represented |
| Rusty and Doris Jackson | Self represented |
| Bill and Joanne Klingenberg | Self represented |
| Gord Ottewell | Self represented |
| Rowena and Kimberley Moore | Self represented |
| Landstone Quarry | David White* |
DECISION DELIVERED BY SHARYN VINCENT AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
Link to Order
BACKGROUND
1On August 22, 2022, the Tribunal issued an interim decision on the appeal of an application for a new licence under s.11(5) of the Aggregates Resources Act which seeks to authorize the extraction of stone from below the water table in an existing pit, with dewatering activities outletting to municipal road-side ditches along the south side of North Diagonal, opposite the property of Dylan and Ashley Jackson, who are joined by the other objectors, Rusty and Doris Jackson, Bill and Joanne Klingenberg, Gord Ottewell, and Rowena and Kimberley Moore, who also oppose the new licence.
2As was set out in the interim decision, the Tribunal had determined that Exhibit 5, as revised, had captured and responded to the principle operational issues raised by the objectors based on the evidence at the original hearing. At paragraph 7 of that decision, the Tribunal however advised that it was:
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.
The interim decision deemed the application premature until such time as evidence is brought to the Tribunal that these aspects of the operation have been resolved and the necessary approvals secured.
NEW EVIDENCE
3Landstone Quarry, through their Counsel, filed with the Tribunal, and circulated to all of the objectors, copies of the following documents which became exhibits to the continuance:
- the Entrance Permit: By-law 35-2023 which authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to sign an aggregate Haul Route Agreement with 1621185 Ontario Inc (Landstone Quarry);
- Entrance Permit 81-2022, date October 27, 2022:
- correspondence dated April 27, 2023, from GSS Engineering, which is entitled “Assessment of Effects on Drainage from the Proposed Access Road Reconfiguration”; and
- a full size set of the Exhibit 5 package of 5 drawings dated July 17, 2023, which constitute a Site Plan, which, together with all notes contained thereon, is the licence, subject to any additional terms or conditions imposed by the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry ("Minister”).
4The Tribunal heard and considered all of the evidence of the witnesses on behalf of Landstone, together with the cross examination by, and submissions of, all of the Objectors. Despite the apprehensions of the owners of the neighbouring properties about the proposed resumption of extraction activities at the quarry, the Tribunal finds that Landstone has provided all of the information and associated approvals as directed by the Tribunal in the interim decision.
5During the course of the hearing however, the Tribunal was further advised that the proposed outlets for the dewatering were in fact watercourses falling under the jurisdiction of the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority and that any alteration of the watercourse would require a permit. While it was the opinion of the hydrology witness that discharge directed to those watercourses would not require the approval of the Conservation Authority, the proposed dewatering proposal does present a change to the current circumstances.
6It was undisputed that further approvals will be required from the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (“MOECP”) for a permit to regulate the “taking of water”. The Tribunal will address both of these considerations in the direction to the Minister.
7It was the summary evidence of Brad Benson, the hydrology witness retained by Landstone, that, in his opinion and based on his analysis, “there would be no significant impacts to off property drainage” arising from the dewatering as much of the flow, which was likened to the full volume of a garden hose, would infiltrate and evaporate, either in the on site retention basin or, once pumped, over the 400 metre run from the edge of the pit to the road-side ditch. In the opinion of the witness, the net effect would be a water balance matching the existing.
ORDER
8The Tribunal is therefore prepared to direct the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry to issue a Class A, Category 2 licence upon the satisfaction of the additional conditions, beyond those prescribed on the Site Plan package prepared by Cuesta Planning Consultants Inc, comprised of drawings 21517-01-EX; 21517-02-OP; 21517-03-TR ; 21517-04-XS and 21517-05-RH, and dated July 17, 2023, as follows:
- Prior to the commencement of any extraction activity on site, the Licensee/Operator shall demonstrate to the Minister, or delegate, that all necessary approvals and permits from the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks have been issued.
- Prior to the commencement of any extraction activity on site, the Licensee/Operator shall demonstrate to the Minister, or delegate, that the proposed dewatering plan has been reviewed and considered by the Grey Sauble Conservation Authority and that any necessary approvals or permits have issued.
- Prior to the commencement of any excavation activity on the site, the Licensee/Operator shall construct the realigned internal access route and the reconfigured site access, in accordance with Engineering Drawing 14-005-E5, attached to and forming part of Permit 81-2022. The removal of any roadside trees shall be determined necessary in the field on an individual basis prior to any other site alteration work being commenced.
“Sharyn Vincent”
SHARYN VINCENT
VICE-CHAIR
Ontario Land Tribunal
Website: www.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.