Guelph-Eramosa sets Sept. 10 as date for “˜hidden quarry”™ planning report presentation

Guelph-Eramosa will have a special meeting of council on Sept. 10 to receive a planning report on the “hidden quarry.”

Also, there will be a meeting on Sept. 15 for the public to offer input and recommendations on the report.

Both meetings will take place at the Rockmosa Community Centre at 7pm. The report will be available at www.get.on.ca/hiddenquarry on Sept. 3, in advance of both meetings.

The township was informed in May that James Dick Construction Ltd. (JDCL) was referring its zoning bylaw amendment application for the quarry on Highway 7 near the 6th Line to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) because the township exceeded the two-year limit to make a decision.

Now that the application is before the OMB, council doesn’t have the authority to approve or reject the application.

However, council will make a decision, based on the planning report, on the township’s position in the OMB proceedings.

In anticipation of the OMB process, the Concerned Residents Coalition (CRC) has been making presentations to Guelph-Eramosa council opposing the rezoning.

On Aug. 10 there were two CRC delegations at the council meeting.

The first presentation was by Stephanie De Grandis and Peter Kauss of the CRC scientific review committee.

Kauss spoke first about the 2012 natural environment report prepared by JWS Ecological and Forestry Services for JDCL, a report that Kauss said seems to be outdated.

He said there were a number of significant wetlands both on and off the quarry site and under the aggregate resources act and provincial policies, “There’s no development allowed within habitat of endangered and threatened species, significant wetlands and significant coastal wetlands.

“No development and site alteration is allowed on lands adjacent to such features or within or adjacent to significant woodlands, significant valley lands, significant wildlife features or affecting their ecological functions.”

Kauss added the quarry site and surrounding wetlands are a habitat for species of concern that have been identified since 2012.

“Four of these, the monarch butterfly, snapping turtle, eastern wood pewee and the little brown bat were found on-site,” he said. “The first three …  are considered to be of special concern both provincially and federally.”

The little brown bat is listed as endangered, he said.

“That is in danger of imminent extinction federally,” he said. “As such, the species and its habitat is protected by law.”

De Grandis then picked up the presentation to discuss the agricultural impact assessment, which she said does not discuss cumulative impacts.

“The first criticism we have of the survey is the terms of reference really were not disclosed to the residents,” she said. “We came late into the game and we could have suggested quite a few items that could have been listed on the terms of reference.”

She indicated the survey didn’t discuss with farmers their farm businesses or the best practices necessary for their operations.     

“For example, in my case I was listed as a livestock owner,” she said. “My livestock includes beef basically and I have a thoroughbred racing establishment, broodmares, I have a poultry business, I have a bed and breakfast business, I have a lot more businesses than were listed in the report.”

Another area of concern was the impact of dust on plants and animals.

“It was basically, ‘Well there’s mitigation, there’s barriers, there’ll be no problem,’” she said. “There’s multi-million dollar businesses here, including a very successful mushroom farm that was really just lightly touched with respect to issues related to that farm.”

She asked that baseline dust  levels be determined now so air pollution levels can be measured.

She asked that baseline dust  levels be determined now so air pollution levels can be measured.

“The mitigation measures are not specific to the needs of each of the businesses,” said De Grandis.

“The complaint protocol offered, well, we can call and complain but it’s too late if the dust is already contaminating the spores in the mushroom factory or on the fields, so (from) an agricultural perspective complaint protocols are way too late.”

De Grandis also pointed out there was discrepancy in the report’s findings regarding the soil class and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) findings.

In 1997 OMAFRA said that half the site was prime agricultural land, whereas the report showed that just 39% of the land was prime agricultural.

She also said the Ontario Federation of Agriculture is currently working to make more soil classes part of prime agriculture, which would mean approximately 77% of the proposed quarry property could be considered prime agriculture land.

She requested that the township revise the natural environment report and have the agricultural assessment undergo extensive review by farmers.

The second delegation on behalf of the CRC was Dan Kennaley, who discussed the cultural heritage impact report of the quarry put together by George Robb for JDCL.

Kennaley said the 6th Line rural roadscape is a cultural heritage landscape based on its tree-lined rural profile and three 19th century farmsteads that are located north of the quarry property.

In the cultural heritage impact report it’s pointed out that “significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be preserved,” Kennaley said.

He indicated that JDCL knows the cultural heritage landscape needs to be conserved because it outlined  mitigation strategies.

“Mr.  Robb adds that, in his view, the retention of the treed road verge and the landscaped berm beyond will be sufficient to achieve this mitigation,” he said.

Kennaley said the CRC doesn’t think this is significant and the only sure way to provide preservation is not to permit the hidden quarry – or at the very least prohibit the 6th Line from being a stacking lane for gravel trucks.  

Kennaley concluded by outlining sections of the Wellington County official plan that would need to be met if council or the OMB wished to approve the quarry.

He noted the official plan aims to keep the county a good place to live, maintain the small town and rural character feel, protect the agricultural base for farming, protect and (where reasonable) enhance features and functions within natural heritage areas, maintain clean water, clean air and healthy plant, fish and wildlife and more.

He said the sections of the official plan he discussed were similar to those other municipalities used to impact the  decisions to deny the Rockfort Quarry in the Town of Caledon and the Hunsberger Gravel Pit in Woolwich Township.

 

Comments