Maryhill pit latest example of a broken planning process

Whether you view Woolwich’s decision to reach a deal on a gravel pit near Maryhill as a sellout or a pragmatic move, the decision underscores longstanding problems with aggregate extraction in the province. Add in the undemocratic elements of development, exacerbated by the Ford government, and you’ve got a recipe for public dissatisfaction. (This despite earlier comments from the Premier that municipalities, not the province, should have the right to choose about gravel pit applications.)

Certainly, gravel pit debates are nothing new in Woolwich. There have been a few exceptions – most notably in West Montrose and Conestogo – but mining operations are generally approved, if not by the township then by unaccountable provincial tribunals.

The threat of such costly legal action has been a factor in past choices, as it is with the latest Capital Paving application.

Left to make the decision, Woolwich councillors would reject Capital Paving’s bid to mine gravel from a 230-acre site centered on 1195 Foerster Rd., south of Maryhill. As local representatives, they would be doing the will of most residents by voting ‘no.’ Moreover, gravel operations provide little in the way of economic benefit to the township, while at the same time damaging roads as heavy trucks travel back and forth to the mining location, all the while increasing traffic and the resultant safety risks.

In this instance, it was the company that took the issue out of local hands by making an appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT), arguing the township had taken too long to make a decision.

By reaching a settlement, Woolwich has taken itself out of the game. Residents could continue with the OLT hearing scheduled for later this year, but would essentially be left on their own – the township, region and province will not come to their aid.

With this pit application, council didn’t get to make a firsthand decision. Now, it’s chosen to opt out. Of course, it never really had a say, beyond voting ‘no’ to set off the company’s legal appeal to the tribunal. Under the current circumstances, practicality trumped backing the residents: appeals to the public good have historically fallen on deaf ears at the provincial level. The quasi-judicial tribunals have a track record of ignoring local decisions in favour of developers.

The poor provincial record of respecting local wishes is magnified in the case of gravel pits, where the Aggregate Resources Act is practically a cudgel, and the Ministry of Natural Resources seen as a defender of operators, not Ontarians.

Of course, we do need gravel, and it does have to come from somewhere. Because of its geography, this stretch of the province is rife with aggregate, as witnessed by the numerous pits already in operation. If every application for an extraction licence was turned down, we’d have to find alternative sources for an essential material. Or at least that’s how the argument goes, though there is research to show we have decades and decades worth of gravel in already licenced pits.

Currently, provincial policies favour developers, putting far too much power in the hands of the OLT. Opponents such as Gravel Watch Ontario say the same is true of the aggregate policies. They also lament the actions of the MNR in enforcing what feeble rules do exist. Fixing those inadequacies would go a long way in reducing the disputes over gravel pit applications.

High on the priority list is the enacting of sunset clauses on gravel licences: hard and intractable timelines for the decommissioning of pits. As it stands today, operators can continue to work an “active” site for years, a favourite tactic for avoiding the remediation now required of pit owners. Such a move would assure nearby residents that the health and safety risks would exist for a fixed time only, an important step.

As it stands right now, even where municipalities have tried to impose sunset clauses, the MNR has simply stepped in and voided them. Local residents are limited to grumbling ... and living with the consequences.