February 11, 2015 · 0 Comments
Adjala-Tosorontio council has heard that there is growing opposition to a proposed gravel quarry at part of Lots 6 and 7 on Concession 4 in former Tosorontio.
Janet Budgell told council in a delegation Monday night that township residents are concerned about the short and long term implications of the pit proposed by the Nelson Aggregate Company.
Budgell said that the pit could be licensed to extract upwards of 1,000,000 tons of sand and gravel per year in a part of the township where are already some existing pits.
“From this pit alone, we could see as many as 42 twenty-two diesel trucks leave through the township, every house,” said Budgell.
Budgell said a number of township residents are already concerned about the impact of removing aggregate from below the water table and the washing of the aggregate before it leaves the site.
“Will there be problems with water availability? Will any of the silt end up in the Boyne River?” she said.
Budgell said that, in addition to problems from the removal of aggregate on site, that local residents would be faced with additional traffic which could cause problems with road safety and accelerate the wear on the road.
“We need time to study the environmental and cost issues associated with such an undertaking which may affect our lives in Adjala–Tosorontio forever,” she said.
Nelson has scheduled a public information session between 2 and 6 p.m. next Wednesday (February 18) while some citizens with concerns about the proposal plan meetings at 2 and 4 p.m. on Sunday, February 22. Both meetings are at the Adjala-Tosorontio township administration centre.
Letters of comment concerning the pit must be submitted to the Ministry of Natural Resources office in Midhurst by March 9 which decides whether the permit to remove the aggregate will be granted.
Township planner Jackie Tschekalin told council that the township’s primary objection is that the proposed pit is not permitted in that location. The township has also circulated the proposal to all agencies such as the Nottawasaga Valley Conservation Authority which have input on the issue.
Council was split over how detailed a response should be made to the Ministry of Natural Resources over the proposal.
“The process is primarily directed by the Ministry of Natural Resources in terms of approval. I definitely hear your concerns,” she said to Budgell.
Later in the meeting, Ward Three councillor Bob Meadows presented a motion which called for a detailed response listing the township and other agencies’ concerns about the proposal to the Ministry of Natural Resources.
Deputy mayor Doug Little said that he wondered if the township could ask for an extension on the time to submit a detailed letter of response.
“The fact that its appropriately zoned for that sort of activity is critical but will we have all the other responses back from the NVCA and Simcoe County on the proposal,” he said.
Council decided by a vote of three to three to reject Meadow’s motion for a more complex letter stating the township and other agencies’ opposition to the proposal. Instead, the township send a letter to the MNR that the property was not properly zoned for removal of aggregate and noted that it will elaborate on its problems with the proposal.
By Richard Blanchard