Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 13, 2025
CASE NO(S).: OLT-24-000888 OLT-24-000953
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Walker Aggregates Inc Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit the establishment of a mineral aggregate extraction operation on the Lands through OPA and ZBA Reference Number: D.13.04. ROPA-21-0003 Property Address: Part of Lots 119, 120, 136 & 137 in the former Township of Stamford Municipality/UT: Niagara Falls OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000888 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000888 OLT Case Name: Walker Aggregates Inc v. Niagara (Region)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Walker Aggregates Inc Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Failure to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit the establishment of a mineral aggregate extraction operation on the Lands through OPA and ZBA Reference Number: AM-2021-025 Property Address: Part of Lots 119, 120, 136 & 137 in the former Township of Stamford Municipality/UT: Niagara Falls OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000953 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000953 OLT Case Name: Walker Aggregates Inc v. Niagara (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant and Appellant: Walker Aggregates Inc Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal or neglect to make a decision To permit the establishment of a mineral aggregate extraction operation on the Lands through OPA and ZBA Reference Number: AM-2021-025 Property Address: Part of Lots 119, 120, 136 & 137 in the former Township of Stamford Municipality/UT: Niagara Falls OLT Case No.: OLT-24-000954 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-24-000953 OLT Case Name:
Heard: February 25, 2025, by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel |
|---|---|
| Walker Aggregates Inc. | Jonathan Kahn Ryan McNamara |
| Niagara Region | David Germain |
| City of Niagara Falls | Paul DeMelo |
| Parkbridge Lifestyle Communities Inc. & 1000352619 Ontario Inc. (c/o QuadReal Property Group) | Jonathan Cheng Calvin Lantz (in absentia) |
| Rudanco Hospitality Corporation and Zeljko Holdings Limited | Jonathan Cheng Calvin Lantz (in absentia) |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY BITA M. RAJAEE ON FEBRUARY 25, 2025 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1This event was the first Case Management Conference (“CMC”) before the Tribunal for two matters, as follows:
a. OLT-24-000888: Appeal pursuant to section 22(7) of the Planning Act (“Act”) by Walker Aggregates Inc. (“Applicant”) resulting from the failure of the Niagara Region (“Region”) to make a decision within the statutory timeframes of the Act on an amendment to the Regional Official Plan; and
b. OLT-24-000953 and OLT-24-000954: Appeals pursuant to sections 22(7) and 34(11) of the Act by the Application resulting from the failure of the City of Niagara Falls (“City”) to make a decision within the statutory timeframes of the Act on amendments to the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law.
2The purpose of the application is to allow for the establishment of a mineral aggregate extraction operation (“Quarry”) on lands known as Part of Lots 119, 120, 136 & 137 in the former Township of Stamford, now the City.
3At the CMC, the Tribunal canvassed Counsel, who confirmed that there were no issues with the service of the Notice of CMC. The Tribunal is in receipt of the following, which were marked as exhibits, and confirm that Notice was adequately served and no further notice is required:
a. Exhibit 1: Affidavit of Service sworn on January 27, 2025 by Roberta Brown regarding OLT-24-000888; and
b. Exhibit 2: Affidavit of Service sworn on January 27, 2025 by Roberta Brown regarding OLT-24-000953 and OLT-24-000954.
CONSOLIDATION OF APPEALS
4At the CMC, the Parties indicated that there was significant overlap between the two appeals, with the same Parties and the same issues to be addressed by the Tribunal. The Parties requested that these appeals be consolidated in accordance with Rule 16.1 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”).
5The Tribunal agreed that this would result in an efficient and cost-effective Hearing of these appeals. In the interest of a fair and expeditious proceeding, Tribunal files OLT-24-000888, OLT-24-000953, and OLT-24-000954 are now consolidated in accordance with Rule 16 of the Rules.
STATUS REQUESTS
6The Tribunal was tasked with adjudicating a number of requests for status.
7The Tribunal received Party Status requests from the following:
a. Parkbridge Lifestyle Communities Inc. & 1000352619 Ontario Inc. (c/o QuadReal Property Group) (“QuadReal”) is a landowner of lands located about 300 metres west of the proposed Quarry. QuadReal has received approval for a Draft Plan of Subdivision on some of its property and has recently submitted a development application for the balance of its property. It would like Party status as it has concerns regarding the land use compatibility between the proposed Quarry and the residential development advanced for the QuadReal lands.
b. Rudanco Hospitality Corporation and Zeljko Holdings Limited (“Rudanco”) is a landowner in the vicinity of the proposed Quarry. Rudanco has submitted a development proposal to introduce approximately 1,770 new residential units on its lands. Similar to QuadReal, Rudanco has concerns regarding the land use compatibility between the proposed Quarry and the residential development advanced for the Rudanco lands.
8Upon hearing submissions of Counsel to QuadReal and Rudanco, and receiving no objections from the other Parties, the Tribunal determined that both can provide a perspective, as neighbouring landowners, on the impact that the proposed Quarry may have on the immediate and surrounding area and landowners and both can assist the Tribunal in resolving the matters at issue. The Tribunal granted Party Status to QuadReal and Rudanco.
9The Tribunal received a Participant status request and accompanying statement signed by “Fernwood Estates residents,” and listing the following names: David J. Rupay, Dr. Frances Chandler, Helene Cayer, and Julie Lantos. At the CMC, the Tribunal sought clarity on exactly who was seeking Participant status, and was advised that each individual listed wished to be granted status, rather than the group as a whole. However, they submitted one unified statement, which was agreeable to the Tribunal and the Parties. These individuals raised objections to the proposal, including issues with the process that has taken place in addressing this application. The other Parties did not object to these requests. The Tribunal determined that these individuals had an interest in the matter and will assist the Tribunal in understanding the potential impacts of the application on the local community. The Tribunal granted Participant status to David J. Rupay, Dr. Frances Chandler, Helene Cayer, and Julie Lantos.
PROCEDURAL ORDER AND ISSUES LIST
10The Parties did not provide a draft Procedural Order (“PO”) prior to the CMC, explaining that there were a number of uncertainties preventing them from doing so. Those uncertainties included the status requests as well as the consolidation of the appeals.
11Additionally, the Applicant’s Counsel advised that the Applicant has submitted an Aggregate Resources Act license application (“ARA Matter”) and, since the scheduling of the CMC, has been told that it is being referred to the Tribunal imminently. Once the ARA Matter is received by the Tribunal, the Applicant will request that it also be consolidated with these subject appeals. As a result, the Applicant requested that a second CMC be scheduled in anticipation of the ARA Matter being received and to allow the Parties to address the PO then. The other Parties agreed that a second CMC would be helpful, and so did the Tribunal. If the ARA Matter is received, then this next CMC will be a first CMC for the ARA Matter, and any Notice issues, status request, or other procedural matters (such as its potential consolidation with the present appeals) can also be dealt with.
12A second CMC has now been scheduled with details discussed below. The Parties were directed to provide a draft PO, or a status update, to the Tribunal, by May 1, 2025. The Applicant’s Counsel undertook the responsibility to submit them to the Case Coordinator by that date. The Parties were directed to ensure that their issues on the IL are specific and allow for a fulsome discussion of the particular issues at play.
MEDIATION AND SETTLEMENT
13As it is quite early in this proceeding, the Parties have yet to engage in formal discussions. The Parties were directed to advise the Tribunal in writing should they reach a settlement with respect to some or all of the issues prior to the Hearing and, should they wish to pursue Tribunal-assisted mediation, they may make a written request to the Tribunal through the Case Coordinator for those services.
SECOND CMC
14As discussed above, a second CMC has been scheduled to take place by video conference on Thursday, May 8, 2025 at 10 a.m.
15The Parties and Participants are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins, to test their video and audio connections:
GoToMeeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/687587165
Access Code: 687-587-165
Audio-Only Telephone Line: +1 (647) 497-9373 or (Toll Free) 1-888-299-1889
Audio-Only Access Code: 687-587-165
16The Parties 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 GoTo Meeting or a web application is available: https://app.gotomeeting.com/home.html
17Persons who experience technical difficulties accessing the GoTo Meeting application or who only wish to listen to the event can connect to it by calling in to an audio-only telephone line at the number indicated above.
18Individuals 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 event to ensure that they are properly connected at the correct time. Questions prior to the event may be directed to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.
ORDER
19THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS as follows:
a. Tribunal file numbers OLT-24-000888, OLT-24-000953, and OLT-24-000954 are consolidated in accordance with Rule 16 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.
b. The following are now Parties in this proceeding: Parkbridge Lifestyle Communities Inc. & 1000352619 Ontario Inc. (c/o QuadReal Property Group), and Rudanco Hospitality Corporation and Zeljko Holdings Limited.
c. The following are now Participants in this proceeding: David J. Rupay, Dr. Frances Chandler, Helene Cayer, and Julie Lantos.
a. A second Case Management Conference is scheduled as described above in this Decision in paragraphs [14] to [18].
b. The Procedural Order, or a status update, is to be provided to the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator by May 1, 2025.
20There will be no further notice.
21This Member is not seized but may be contacted through the Case Coordinator should procedural issues arise.
“Bita M. Rajaee”
BITA M. RAJAEE
MEMBER
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.