Opposition swells after town approval of gravel pit remediation plan

ERIN – Three months after Erin council approved  a remediation plan for a Hillsburgh gravel pit, a coalition of Erin residents wants the decision reversed, alleging it was based on false information and made without adequate notice to the community. 

Formally known as the Concerned Citizens of Erin (CCE), the group argues the process lacked transparency and failed to give residents a fair opportunity to respond.

Council approved the remediation plan in January for the property, which is located at 9516 Sideroad 27. The site operated as a sand and gravel pit for Strada Aggregates from 1999 to 2021.

The remediation plan will allow pit owner Jay Fieger to bring in 5.36 million cubic metres of fill to the site over 20 years. It will see approximately 150 trucks per day arriving and leaving the site. 

“We’re looking to put a new park ... just down the road from where 150 trucks per day for 15 to 17 years will pass. That’s a truck every three minutes,” said councillor Bridget Ryan during a Jan. 22 council meeting.

“I’m not sure that’s sustainable. I don’t think it demonstrates environmental stewardship or community vitality.”

Both Ryan and councillor Cathy Aylard have voiced opposition to the project.

Ryan voted against both the remediation plan and the follow-up bylaw amendment to allow the work. Aylard was absent from the initial Jan. 22 meeting and voted against the bylaw amendment to allow the work. 

Council ultimately approved the work.

Fieger will pay a $2 tipping fee for each load of fill that is dumped at the site. That will result in $10.72 million paid to the town, with an additional security deposit of $250,000 to remedy any breach of the agreement, including any required road repairs.

The CCE opposes the plan and has been working to petition council with the hope of changing its decision.

“I received a personal email from Michael Dehn saying it’s a done deal. It cannot be changed,” said Karen DeRooy, CCE member and Sideroad 27 resident.

“And I don’t accept that. I don’t think we should accept that.”

‘Misleading’

The group alleges council’s decision was based on false information and has accused Fieger of “misleading council” and of “several infractions with the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR),” though members were unable to specify them.

Fieger said he is “not aware of any issues that would be outside the normal course of regulatory oversight” by the ministry.

“As with any project of this nature, there is ongoing engagement with the relevant authorities to ensure full compliance,” he said.

“Overall, the goal is straightforward: to restore a site that has been in industrial use for decades into a safe and stable end state.”

The CCE has also alleged that Fieger “misled” council by not providing documentation of the original remediation plan for the property. 

Strada Aggregates presented a different remediation plan for the site to council of the day in 2014. At that time plans indicated that “following rehabilitation, portions of the site could be considered as a potential donation to [Credit Valley Conservation] or the town for conservation/community use.”

Other possible uses mentioned at the time included parkland (ball diamonds and or soccer fields) and retaining a pond on the property as part of a natural area at the headwaters of the West Credit River.

The MNR did not respond to an Advertiser request for comment.

“I was gobsmacked that no one asked the gravel pit owner for proof that the MNR had mandated him to do what he’s doing,” said DeRooy.

Fieger maintains the intent of the project “is to complete a responsible remediation of a long-standing gravel pit using clean fill hat meets all applicable environmental standards.” 

‘Bare minimum?’

The CCE also claims town officials did the “bare minimum to include the public in discussions.” 

David Watters, the town’s manager of planning and development, disagrees.

“The public meeting notice dated June 24, 2024 was held on July 18, 2024,” said Watters.

“Notice was published in the Wellington Advertiser, posted on the town’s website and mailed to property owners with 120 metres of the pit in accordance with the town’s site alteration bylaw.”

Watters said the reason for the large gap between the 2024 meeting and council’s approval of the plan in January “was due to the comments received by the town from the circulation of the submission materials and the time it took for the applicant to address the comments in a subsequent submission to the town, followed by another round of peer reviews.” 

He added “an agreement was being drafted during this time that required several reviews ... It’s typical for large scale site alteration applications to take multiple years to complete the process before a permit is ready to be issued.”

DeRooy acknowledges the town adhered to the site alteration bylaw, but asked, “Why is our council not held to a higher standard beyond the bare minimum?”

“It’s all about generating income,” suggested CCE member Mary Ellen Koroscil.

Group members say they’re also frustrated that if they want to sell their homes they need to disclose the gravel pit remediation plan to prospective buyers as per Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) requirements.

“I cannot sell my property because I have a fiduciary duty to disclose that before I could ever list my personal property for sale,” said DeRooy.

Earth Healing Foundation

Near the road on the Sideroad 27 property is a sign that reads, “The Earth Healing Foundation, a land restoration project coming soon, funded by the Metis people of Canada.”

According to Fieger, the foundation “was involved at an earlier stage in exploring potential rehabilitation concepts for the property. They are not involved in the current plans.”

Yet the sign remains at the entrance of the property, which the CCE calls “misleading.”

DeRooy says the sign “bamboozles everybody into a level of comfort that the Indigenous community is involved in the restoration of this pit.”

The Earth Healing Foundation did not respond to a request for comment. 

End goal 

CCE members says their end goal is to have council reverse its decision and instead transform the pit into a tourism destination featuring trails and parks.

“I mean I pay for a membership at the James Dick Quarry (in Caledon) every year and I love it,” said DeRooy. “I’d love to be able to go up the road and do that here.” 

CCE member and Erin business owner Paul Violo said if the decision cannot be reversed, he hopes the town will ensure no other agreements like this are approved and that residents are better informed and notified.  

“I’m coming at it from the perspective of, ‘Oh, this is a done deal. The town screwed up. This shouldn’t happen again,’” said Violo.

He added the municipality has “written these bylaws and entered these contracts.

“Well how about amending them so this doesn’t happen again, putting in place things that ... owners are going to get notified, not just by some ad in the paper that’s long forgotten.” 

The CCE has enlisted the help of Ian Sinclair, president of Gravel Watch Ontario, to assist them.