Puslinch aggregate producers are willing to cover the rehabilitation costs necessary to construct the “Big Lake,” but many details need to be worked out before they will make an exact financial commitment to the project.
“The flexibility at this stage is tremendous,” said John Moroz, general manager of CBM Aggregates, alluding to the possibility of several different designs.
But for the first time on public record, Moroz and representatives from other gravel companies operating along Concession 2, south of Highway 401 – also including Lafarge Canada and Dufferin Aggregates – told council on Jan. 19 they are willing to cover the cost of rehabilitating eight small lakes created by their pits into one large lake measuring about 700 acres in size.
“It’s a unique opportunity for Puslinch,” said Melanie Horton, CBM’s director of land and resources. She said the result would be “enhanced value for the community,” given the lake would be open to the public for recreational use.
Horton said there is about 15 to 20 years worth of extraction left at the pits, but there could be an opportunity to open at least a portion of the Big Lake before extraction is completed, as was done with a similar project in Australia.
Other aggregate company spokespersons agreed with her assertion that there is interest in the project but more details on roles, responsibilities and costs need to be finalized before the project can move forward.
But councillor Susan Fielding said council has heard that before from the gravel companies. For her, the lack of a concrete financial commitment to date speaks volumes.
“I had a lot of concerns from the beginning,” Fielding said, citing the need for public input and more financial details.
She told the gravel companies the Big Lake project is still “a rehabilitation project,” which the producers are all required to complete anyway on their own properties.
Kevin Mitchell, resource development manager with Dufferin Aggregates, told council there are a number of processes involved, with both the Ministry of Natural Resources and the township, and both involving public consultation.
Other factors to be considered, he said, include hydrogeological, geological and planning costs, as well as the value of the land and costs to close Concession 2. Yet those factors did not change his company’s stance on the overall idea.
“We are committed to the project and would commit financially to paying for some of these things,” Mitchell said.
Land manager Chris Galway also pledged the support of his company, Lafarge Canada.
“We see it as an opportunity to create something for the community,” he said. However, Galway said he would not be comfortable providing an exact financial figure, given the project is in the very preliminary stages.
Even the University of Guelph, which owns a large portion of the land in the area, seems in favour of the concept.
“We are warmly supporting the project and will work with council towards that goal – if that is the goal,” said Philip Wong, the university’s director of real estate.
Councillor Jerry Schmidt said he is “excited” about the project, which has “an awful lot of opportunity,” though he, too, is worried about how costs will be shared.
Councillors Wayne Stokley and Ken Roth, along with mayor Dennis Lever, echoed the concern about money.
Horton acknowledged an agreement on costs is a critical, “front-end” piece to the puzzle. But Mitchell said he doesn’t want decisions made hastily just to capitalize on the $200,000 grant the township received from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM).
Several councillors had previously stated they are opposed to the township contributing anything towards the Big Lake study, but Stan Denhoed, the township’s hydrogeological consultant, said the study could “definitely” be completed for less than the total originally provided to council.
“We were reaching very high with the $400,000,” Denhoed said of the combined total from the FCM grant application and another for $193,000 from the province, the latter which was subsequently rejected.
The study, he explained, was not to determine if the Big Lake is possible – it has already been determined it is feasible.
Denhoed said items to be covered by the study include: hiring a planner, obtaining public feedback, negotiations with the gravel companies, an environmental impact study and filling “information gaps” that exist in the companies’ own monitoring.
At its completion, after about 18 months, the study would produce a plan, which the aggregate companies would carry out, without further impact to the township, Denhoed said.
“There isn’t a cost – there’s a benefit to making the Big Lake for the gravel companies,” he said, noting they will gain more gravel than they would by doing their own individual rehabilitation plans.
Lever said a process needs to be put in place, including “rough costs” and timeframes, how much aggregate is in between the eight smaller lakes and how environmental concerns with nearby Mill Creek will be addressed.
“We need to build trust with one another,” Lever told the aggregate officials.
The mayor said council will discuss the matter in the near future and the township could possibly start the public process on its own to get preliminary feedback.
