Ontario Land Tribunal
Tribunal ontarien de l’aménagement du territoire
ISSUE DATE: March 2, 2026
CASE NO(S).: OLT-25-000372 OLT-25-000565
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Thomas Cavanagh Construction Ltd. Subject: Request to amend the Official Plan – Refusal to adopt the requested amendment Description: To permit a proposed extension to the existing West Carleton Quarry Reference Number: D01-01-21-0019 Property Address: 4200 March Road Municipality/Upper Tier: City of Ottawa OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000372 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000372 OLT Case Name: Thomas Cavanagh Construction Ltd. v. Ottawa (City)
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended
Applicant/Appellant: Thomas Cavanagh Construction Ltd. Subject: Application to amend the Zoning By-law – Refusal Description: To permit a proposed extension to the existing West Carleton Quarry Reference Number: D02-02-21-0105 Property Address: 4200 March Road Municipality/Upper Tier: City of Ottawa OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000374 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000372
PROCEEDING COMMENCED UNDER subsection 11(5) of the Aggregate Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.10.
Applicant: Thomas Cavanagh Construction Ltd. Objector: Ashley & Richard Miceli Objector: Grant & Gabrielle Edgar Objector: Robynne Eagan Objector: John & Beverly Blais Subject: Application for a Class ‘A’ License to operate a quarry below the water table (West Carleton Quarry Extension) Reference Number: License Application #626555 Property Address: Lot 15, Concession 11 Municipality/Upper Tier: Geographic Township of Huntley/City of Ottawa OLT Case No.: OLT-25-000565 OLT Lead Case No.: OLT-25-000565 OLT Case Name: Thomas Cavanagh Construction Ltd. v. Ontario (Ministry of Natural Resources)
Heard: February 24, 2026 by Video Hearing
APPEARANCES:
| Parties | Counsel/Representative* |
|---|---|
| Thomas Cavanagh Construction Ltd. | G. Meeds |
| City of Ottawa | T. Marc |
| Friends of the Burnt Lands Inc., John & Beverly Blais, Robynne Eagan and Ashley Struthers (Miceli) | D. Donnelly A. Nemy, student-at-law |
| Ken McRae | Self-Represented* |
MEMORANDUM OF ORAL DECISION DELIVERED BY C. HARDY ON FEBRUARY 24, 2026 AND ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL
INTRODUCTION
1The Tribunal held a second Case Management Conference (“CMC”) concerning appeals brought by Thomas Cavanagh Construction Ltd. (“Appellant”) relating to a proposed quarry expansion at 4200 March Road (“subject property”). The Appellant appealed the City of Ottawa’s (“City”) refusal of its applications for an Official Plan Amendment (“OPA”) and Zoning By-law Amendment (“ZBA”) pursuant to s. 22(7) and s. 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended (“Planning Act”). The proceedings also relate to the referral by the Ministry of Natural Resources (“MNR”) pursuant to s. 11(5) of the Aggregate Resources Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. A.8, as amended (“ARA”) of an application and objections concerning a Class A Licence to operate a quarry below the water table (“ARA Licence”).
2At the first CMC held on December 1, 2025, the Tribunal granted Party status in the Planning Act appeals to Friends of the Burnt Lands Inc. (“FBLI”), John & Beverly Blais, Robynne Eagan and Ken McRae and Participant status to Ashley Struthers. The Tribunal also granted Party status in the ARA matter to FBLI and Ken McRae.
3The Tribunal received a letter from MNR dated July 25, 2025, referring to the following Objectors to the ARA Licence to the Tribunal: John & Beverly Blais, Robynne Eagan, Ashley & Richard Miceli, Grant Edgar and Gabrielle Brune. In that same letter, the MNR confirmed that it does not intend to take part in the proceedings. In proceedings before the Tribunal pursuant to s.11(5) of the ARA, an Objector is an automatic Party. At the first CMC, the Tribunal confirmed that two of the Objectors, namely Grant Edgar and Gabrielle Brune, wished to take part in the proceedings as Participants as opposed to Parties.
CONSOLIDATION OR HEARING TOGETHER
4At the first CMC, the Tribunal addressed the consolidation or hearing together of the OPA appeal (Tribunal File No. OLT-25-000372), ZBA appeal (Tribunal File No. OLT-25-000374) and ARA referral (Tribunal File No. OLT-25-000565). Unfortunately, the Tribunal’s ruling at the first CMC was not sufficiently clear to enable implementation. Further, there was no Order made by the Tribunal with respect to consolidation or hearing together as required pursuant to Rule 16 of the Tribunal’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (“Rules”). As such, the Tribunal re-visited the matter with the Parties at this CMC.
5Gregory Meeds, Counsel for the Appellant, and David Donnelly, Counsel for FBLI et al., jointly advised the Tribunal that the Parties understood the matters would be consolidated. Mr. Donnelly further submitted that consolidation would be more efficient and avoid confusion during the hearing process. Timothy Marc, Counsel for the City, and Mr. McRae had no objection to the matters being consolidated.
6After hearing submissions from the Parties, the Tribunal determined that consolidating the matters would provide the most efficient and orderly way to proceed. When proceedings are consolidated, the Parties in one matter become Parties to all matters within the consolidated hearing. This was effectively accomplished through the granting of Party status at the first CMC making consolidation more appropriate. The Tribunal ordered that the three matters be consolidated pursuant to Rule 16 of the Rules.
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SETTLEMENT / MEDIATION
7The Tribunal was advised that some limited discussions around settlement had been raised, however, the Parties appeared in agreement that it was premature at this point. The Tribunal reminded the Parties that if Tribunal-led mediation could be of assistance, a mediation assessment could be requested through the Tribunal’s Case Coordinator.
PROCEDURAL ORDER
8In accordance with the Tribunal’s direction at the first CMC, Mr. Meeds filed a draft Procedural Order with the Tribunal in advance of the CMC. The Parties jointly advised that they were in agreement with the timelines and details set out in the draft Procedural Order.
9The Tribunal was also in receipt of Issues Lists from Mr. McRae and Mr. Donnelly. Mr. McRae confirmed that the Tribunal could disregard his original Issues List given that the issues raised by Mr. Donnelly incorporated his concerns, providing that s. 12(1)(j) of the ARA was added to the final Issues List.
10Mr. Marc had no objection to the Issues List filed by Mr. Donnelly. Mr. Meeds and Mr. Donnelly agreed to continue discussions to complete the Issues List ensuring that any repetition would be removed from the final draft filed with the Tribunal.
11In response to submissions made to the Tribunal, the Tribunal reminded the Parties that none of the appeals before the Tribunal engaged Rule 8.3 of the Rules requiring added Parties to shelter under issues raised by statutory Parties.
12Following this discussion, the Tribunal set the following timeline for the Parties:
- the Appellant will circulate a revised draft Procedural Order and Issues List to all Parties on or before Tuesday, March 3, 2026;
- the Appellant will file a revised Procedural Order and Issues List with the Tribunal for review and approval on or before Tuesday, March 10, 2026.
13The Tribunal Member will remain available, schedule permitting, to assist if any issues arise in finalizing the draft Procedural Order and Issues List.
HEARING DATES
14The Tribunal declined to schedule a further CMC noting that if the Parties determine a further appearance is necessary in advance of the Merit Hearing, they can arrange same through the Tribunal Case Coordinator.
15Following a discussion of the length of hearing required based upon the anticipated witnesses that each Party would be calling, the Tribunal scheduled a 27-day Merit Hearing to commence on Thursday, October 22, 2026 at 10 a.m. The Tribunal will not be sitting on Wednesday November 11, 2026 and Monday November 16, 2026.
16The hearing is scheduled to proceed by video as follows:
17Parties and/or Participants and/or Observers are asked to log in to the event at least 15 minutes before it begins to test their video and audio connections:
GoTo Meeting: https://meet.goto.com/996288525
Access code: 996-288-525
18Parties and/or 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
19Persons 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: +1 (647) 497-9391 or (Toll Free) 1 888 455 1389. The access code is: 996-288-525.
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 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.
21As of March 30, 2026, all hearing events are governed by the Tribunal’s Artificial Intelligence Practice Direction. This Practice Direction requires a party, participant, or witness to include a declaration within each submitted document if generative AI was used to create or generate content.
ORDER
22THE TRIBUNAL ORDERS THAT Tribunal File No. OLT-25-000372, OLT-25-000374 and OLT-25-000565 are hereby consolidated and will proceed under Tribunal File No. OLT-25-000372.
23The case management directives above are so ordered.
24There will be no further notice and this Member is not seized.
“C. Hardy”
c. hardy
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.