Even though applicants Marc and Andrea Reid followed the steps requested, in a 4-1 vote on May 14, Puslinch councillors voted against a proposed site alteration agreement that would have brought several thousand loads of soil from the GTA to a property on Wellington Road 36.
Council’s decision came at a special meeting at the Optimist Recreation Centre, where dozens of nearby residents awaited the outcome.
Part of the issue with the application is divided approval authority on the property at 7827 Wellington Road 36. Part of the Reid property falls under the jurisdiction of Conservation Halton and that part of the application has already been approved.
The township only has jurisdiction or authority over several acres included in the site alteration application.
Resident and former councillor Gerald Schmidt sent the township correspondence in which he estimated the proposed fill application would cover the seven acres to an average depth of 10.7 feet.
Schmidt also had various questions about the condition of fill, trucking routes, potential water runoff and township liability.
He said “unless solid rationale can be documented” the application should be denied, or else the township would be flooded with similar applications and become a “regional dump site for fill.”
Carmela Marshall of the Ontario Soil Regulation Task Force and Lakeridge Citizens for Clean Water, shared her experiences over the past five years with regards to large scale fill sites. She provided concerns and recommendations to council going forward regarding requirements, enforcement and compliance for large fill projects.
Marshall said the task force represents numerous community groups across southern Ontario working towards a sustainable future for excess soil management.
“We’ve proposed a Clean Soil Act and currently working on Project Clean Dirt, geared to municipalities to help when they are approached with large fill applications.”
The group created draft model agreements, management plans, and site alteration bylaws Marshall said. She added a review of the township’s existing bylaw and agreement need to be strengthened – such as testing and a contingency plan.
Marshall also did not believe the tipping fees were adequate to cover the cost of enforcement of compliance audits. She added there did not appear to be a clear plan how the township would enforce bylaw requirements.
Margaret Walton of Planscape opposed the site alteration from a planning perspective. She questioned whether a large scale fill operation actually could be defined under “normal farm practices.”
Walton said that in her line of work she is seeing an increasing number of site alteration applications with respect to agricultural lands.
She agreed that provincial regulation do allow some fill for normal operations, “But this seems to be a large amount of fill for a seven-acre property.”
Walton said she would have expected the matter to have been pursued with the Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs.
She encouraged council to look into the matter under the Farm Practices Act.
She said she had no issue with applications where the provincial criteria was met, but, “I urge you to proceed with caution.”
Lawyer Johanna Shapira of Wood Bull, speaking on behalf of resident John Myers, requested the refusal of the permit application and agreement.
In a letter to township CAO Karen Landry, Myers stated, “The goal is to participate constructively in the process of cooperating with the township and Conservation Halton to improve the legal framework within which the line between good and bad large scale fill operations, by whatever label, can be improved and in the meantime exercised, from the broadest perspective of the community interests, including those of Reid and future applicants.”
In the letter he suggested community diligence extends beyond the township’s vote “to deal with the challenges associated with Conservation Halton’s decision to issue a permit before the township and, as it now appears, without advance notice to the township.”
Shapira expressed concern over the true nature of the site alteration.
She said that while representations were made that “this fill operation is intended to increase farming efficiencies – the amount of the fill and resulting slopes suggest it might be a commercial fill operation.”
She said putting 65,900 cubic metres over seven acres should be considered a commercial fill operation.
Shapira suggested that would give rise to additional concerns for the township, including the need for this operation, its compatibility with the neighbours, and the possibility that an approval might lead to a negative precedent for commercial fill operations in the township.
“Irrespective of the nature of the use, the amount of fill being proposed is significant, and has the potential to negatively impact the neighbours,” said Shapira.
“What council does here for this site matters for the entire community … and future operations as well.”
She noted this is one of the first applications made to the township under its current site alteration bylaw.
“It is critical that the township does the technical and legal work required before any granting is approved – until you are 100% satisfied.”
She said the site alteration bylaw requires any soil brought in have the same composition as native soils. She suggested there have been issues regarding the fill brought onto the property under Halton Conservation jurisdiction.
She said it is in the township’s interest to find a way to tighten up the regulations.
Shapira had issue with the proposed agreement because “of a fundamental issue on the question as to whether the control plan can be incorporated into the agreement for the conservation side.”
She acknowledged the proponent had volunteered to agree to this, but “there are issues enforcing a voluntary agreement versus a legal agreement.”
Council opinion
As councillors began discussing the matter, it became clear many still harboured reservations about the proposal.
Councillor Susan Fielding said, “I’ve had a lot of concerns right from the beginning,” adding there are still a lot of unanswered questions.
Fielding was concerned with the impact to the neighbours and the traffic in Morriston.
Of the concerns raised by citizens she said, “Some have been addressed by the consultants, but I feel many issues still need to be addressed.”
She contended the province needs to come up with proper legislation and guidelines to address the issues, then, “Everyone would know where they stand and be treated the same way.”
Councillor Wayne Stokley said this was one of the hardest issues he has had to deal with as a member of council.
“I have some major concerns with respect to the bylaw.”
When the bylaw was first drafted, Stokley was quite pleased and thought the township had a handle on the matter “… but I never really thought the township would be dealing with such large scale operations.”
Stokley shared Fielding’s concern with the amount of heavy truck traffic and the potential bottleneck in Morriston.
He acknowledged traffic would be on a county road and that the bulk of the fill is going to an area controlled by the conservation authority, but, “I’m having difficulty with this. I’m fearful of what could happen to our township with large scale fill operations coming in.”
He believed the bylaw is limited and needs more work.
“I don’t want to be known as part of the group that indicated the township has become a dump site for massive fill operations.”
He too believed the province needs to take a stronger role, but also agreed places are needed for fill.
“It’s gotta go somewhere, but there needs to be more control.”
Councillor Ken Roth said he also struggled with the issue.
“I have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that this is a farm improvement.”
He too felt the problem is a provincial concern, noting, “It’s very unfortunate that municipalities face this situation.”
Yet at the same time Roth said the applicant did follow through on the process the township required.
He too suggested this is one of the toughest decisions as a councillor, but, “I think it is time we made a decision.”
Councillor Matthew Bulmer said the issue continues to be quite a struggle, complicated by the division in the areas of jurisdiction.
“As a farmer, I understand the desire to improve one’s land,” but Bulmer also saw the need for soil tests to ensure the quality of life.
Bulmer said that while the current bylaw and proposed agreement may collect enough fees to ensure the work is completed, he doubts the amount would cover correcting potential problems. He said he believed those types of security should be collected separately within the agreement.
Bulmer said he could support the bylaw if there was a guarantee the operation would be shut down upon the first truck coming without clean soil.
Mayor Dennis Lever agreed “this is one of the most difficult decisions this council has faced.”
He said on the one hand, the applicant has done everything requested by the municipality.
He added the township currently has a bylaw on which considerable time was spent and numerous experts consulted in its creation.
“A lot of time and thought went into this bylaw … that was three years ago.”
Lever said, “I still believe this is one of the best bylaws around … but that doesn’t necessarily mean it is the best it could be.”
However he did not want to see the problems encountered in other municipalities where there is no oversight.
“This fill is going to end up somewhere … and provincial legislation is needed.”
Having said that, Lever then commented briefly of his fear it could end up with the same situation as wind farms.
“When the province got involved in wind farms it became a nightmare for rural municipalities.”
He said there is a large group of local residents who have numerous concerns.
Lever commented that many of the concerns raised in Puslinch are similar to concerns raised about gravel pit applications.
“The big difference … is that with gravel pits there are provincial policy statements, the official plan and the Planning Act.
“Here municipalities are asked to act on their own.”
In a recorded 4-1 vote, council turned down the application.
Councillors Bulmer, Fielding, Roth and Stokley voted to turn down the application while the mayor voted in favour of it.
