An overflow crowd packed the Guelph Eramosa Township council chambers on Monday for the first day of final arguments in the years-long license application and rezoning for the Hidden Quarry site.
The final arguments are expected to conclude as early as Tuesday during the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal (LPAT), formerly Ontario Municipal Board, being conducted at the Council Offices of Guelph Eramosa Township, near Brucedale.
James Dick Construction Ltd. (JDCL) purchased the Hidden Quarry site in the 1980s, but only applied for the license to extract the aggregates in 2013, said David White, counsel for the company.
The tribunal is being heard before hearing chair Scott Tousaw.
White said sand and gravel will be taken from the proposed quarry, but the main objective is to extract dolomite, an important ingredient in high-grade construction concrete.
The problem for some is that the dolomite sits below the water table and must be blasted for extraction. The Concerned Residents Coalition, a local group opposed to the proposed quarry, is one of the groups represented at the tribunal.
White said the company has made a number of changes to the official site plan in an effort to get final approval for the license and rezoning, including agreeing to on-site monitoring of possible water contamination.
Evidence presented earlier in the six-week tribunal showed the water at the site is connected underground to nearby Brydson Creek.
On Monday, White noted some groups have raised funds to wage what he called ‘an unreasonable opposition’ against the proposed quarry, using confirmation bias in an effort to block out any other outcome than rejection of the application.
About 50 people crammed into the gallery at the council offices, with speakers and chairs set up outside to handle the overflow of people.
A number of outstanding concerns were brought up during the closing arguments by David Germain, counsel for the Regional Municipality of Halton and Halton Hills. These included the potential safety and environmental impacts of undetonated explosives to be used at the proposed site, off-site monitoring of water quality and possible effects on nearby fish population and spawning, among others.
Although a relationship between the water at the site and nearby Brydson Creek was established, Germain said experts were not sure exactly how the water travels between the two and what effect rising and lowering of water levels at the site will affect the creek and spring.
Germain said work on the site would effect nearby wetlands.
White said the company will attempt to conduct off-site monitoring at the creek, but Germain stated that they have not yet secured permission to do so.
A number of concerns were also presented by Germain about the proposed haul route for trucking the aggregates east of the site through Acton. He said proper studies were not conducted to ensure the route was safe and appropriate.
Germain said there is so much flawed or missing information, and that as hearing chair, Tousaw must be satisfied the application is on solid ground. There are so many uncertainties, suggested Germain, that the application should not be granted.
On Tuesday the tribunal will hear closing arguments from Chris Barnett, counsel for the Concerned Residents Coalition, and the completion of the summary by Germain.
