Wellington County council has approved an official plan amendment to allow the Tri City Lands Ltd. aggregate extraction pit in Guelph-Eramosa.
On April 27 the county endorsed a planning committee recommendation to approve the amendment to facilitate the development.
Last month Guelph-Eramosa council approved a zoning bylaw amendment to allow the pit in the southwest corner of the township.
The township originally approved the project last year, but because the approval was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, when the township’s new comprehensive zoning bylaw came into effect Tri City Lands submitted a “housekeeping amendment” under the new bylaw.
The new application was to rezone agricultural land to extractive industrial. However, under the new bylaw Tri City Lands also had to apply to Wellington County for an official plan amendment.
Glenn Harrington of Harrington McAvan Ltd., speaking on behalf of the Tri City Materials, told county council the company resubmitted the application due to a “technical glitch” in the process. He noted the applicant is a locally-owned company and the aggregate from the pit will largely be used locally.
Harrington said the above-the-water-table sand and gravel pit, which will be rehabilitated to agricultural after closure, is “a well-established use in this area.”
He said the actual operation will create seven new jobs and generate about $4 million in local economic activity. He also noted the company has spent about $1 million to this point, adding, “We’re obviously hoping the official plan is approved.”
Councillor Shawn Watters was not in favour of approving the pit.
“This is not a good thing right now for our council. It’s not a good thing for our community. It’s not good for the township,” said Watters.
He noted a recent change in the way gravel pits are assessed by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) makes hosting a gravel pit a financial burden for a municipality.
“I think it speaks to a much bigger picture of where the county is in terms of subsidizing these programs,” Watters stated.
“I can appreciate that they’ve been through all the hoops but we’ve got to think harder on this one,” he added.
“However I feel about what MPAC has done and what impact that has on the county budget … I have to take each one on an individual basis and make a decision based on its merits,” said councillor Doug Breen.
He noted the project is being proposed by a local owner, will operate above the water table, has good road access and will be extracting aggregate on farmland he described as “not the best by any stretch.”
He also pointed out the project “is short term because it’s a relatively small operation – so it’s not something people are going to have to deal with for 100 years.”
Breen continued, “So if you were going to pick a gravel pit site from the moon, this is a pretty good site.
“To take our frustration with MPAC out on a local company that has done everything we’ve asked them to do for years is patently unfair … They’ve jumped through every hoop we’ve asked them to jump through and the staff recommendation is that it be approved at the county level.”
Councillor Andy Lennox pointed out objections to the project at the committee level “centred on the revenue side from assessments.
“I’m not sure this is the side to fight this one,” he stated.
Lennox said he doubts the county could make much of an argument to support turning down the application if it went to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).
“I find it very difficult to turn down this application and give false hope to the neighbours who are objecting to it because I don’t believe we have a reasonable chance to win at the OMB,” said Lennox.
Councillor Don McKay said, “If they follow all the rules and regulations then I may not like it, but I’ll support it. If you don’t like the rules and regulations you go after the people that set those rules and regulations and that’s MPAC.”
A resolution to approve the official plan amendment passed with just Watters opposed.
Councillor George Bridge was absent.
