Skip to content

Residents disappointed as Hidden Quarry application approved by tribunal

James Dick Construction Ltd.'s application to operate a gravel pit has been granted
20190708 Hidden Quarry KA
Parking lot outside the Guelph/Eramosa Township offices near Brucedale during the Local Planning Appeals Tribunal (formerly Ontario Municipal Board) deciding on approval for the Hidden Quarry. Kenneth Armstrong/GuelphToday file photo

GUELPH/ERAMOSA - The proposed Hidden Quarry will be moving forward after the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) ruled in favour of applicant James Dick Construction Ltd. (JDCL).

The 61.5-acre site will open at Highway 7 and 6th Line just outside Rockwood with some requirements to fulfill. 

This comes as a big blow to the many opponents who had been fighting the opening of the quarry for years. 

"We're deeply disappointed, we're still reviewing the decision," said Doug Tripp, president of Concerned Residents Coalition (CRC). "Needless to say it's a very difficult blow for the community."

The CRC is a local group of residents who represented the opposition to the application along with the Region of Halton, Halton Hills and the County of Wellington. They raised issues about the site ranging from groundwater contamination, endangering local wildlife and flying debris from blasting. 

The tribunal lasted eight weeks ending in July of last year with a decision expected by the end of the year although an exact timeline wasn’t given. This past Monday marked seven months since the tribunal’s conclusion.

The Township of Guelph/Eramosa also opposed the site opening in their region. Mayor Chris White said the decision still has to be reviewed with township council and staff.

“We need to go and get our legal team to have a look at the details of what is in there and what is required,” said White. “The township opposed the application and we don’t feel there was any benefit for the community to have this here. Clearly we are disappointed.”

White said the decision is likely a final one.

“These LPAT rulings are final unless there is an error in law,” he said.

Tripp said he isn’t hopeful either for any further action or appeals.

"There are circumstances under which an appeal can be made but it has to be related to errors in law by the tribunal and that's just a very high bar,” Tripp said. “I can say almost with certainty there would be no appeal."

The LPAT set out the following requirements for JDCL:

  • The township confirm that a road agreement has been executed with JDCL, including compensation for the township’s associated costs;
  • The township confirm that a note is added to the site plan setting out a preliminary terms of reference for a community liaison committee, with the committee’s ongoing reasonable costs to be covered by JDCL.
  • The county confirm that trigger levels have been established on the site plan for the south sentry wells based on the relationship of on-site groundwater levels and discharge at the Brydson spring and that any breach will invoke the actions of the monitoring program. 
  • The GRCA confirm that any necessary approvals and permits have been issued.
  • Halton Hills confirm that the site plan requires JDCL to file with the municipality an annual haul route summary report showing proportionate haul route usage and rationale.
  • The region confirm that the site plan requires JDCL to share monitoring data relevant to the region on a timely basis as it becomes available. 
  • JDCL confirm that trigger levels have been established on the site plan to protect the level of the De Grandis pond, based on off-site monitoring at the feature subject to landowner permission and, in the event access is denied, suitable surrogate on-site monitoring. 
  • JDCL confirm that, with input from the region, quantity and quality monitoring and trigger levels have been established on the site plan to protect the fish habitat in Brydson Creek, based on off-site monitoring at the feature subject to landowner permission and, in the event access is denied, suitable surrogate on-site monitoring. 
  • JDCL confirm that the final site plan reflects the results of a further bat survey in accordance with the 2017 protocol to be conducted jointly by a consultant for JDCL and Dougan & Associates at JDCL’s expense in the southwest area of Phase 2, with any identified LBM habitat to be excluded from the extraction limit of the quarry and retained in its natural state. 
  • JDCL confirm that a note is added to the site plan setting out a procedure for notice of blasting to area property owners. 
  • JDCL confirm that a note is added to the site plan requiring final rehabilitation to account for the actual final pond level where necessary for the creation of functioning wetlands, shallows, or other features dependent on final water level. 
  • JDCL confirm that the site plan requires an amendment if the frequency of offsite monitoring is proposed to be changed based on a review of the data.