- Fri. Jun. 7, 2013
FORCE recipient of Environmentalist of the Year award
- Wed., Apr. 24, 2013
Mahoney: Quarry foes set to celebrate holding their ground
- Mon., Apr. 8, 2013
Quarry battle over opponents say
- Wed.,Mar. 27, 2013
FORCE ready to celebrate quarry victory
- Thurs., Mar. 14, 2013
My View: The community that could
2006 Annual Report
||Message from Chair - Environmental Defence - The Proponent - The Application - The Case - Natural Environment - Transportation - Community - Hydrogeology - Financials - Public Activity Report - References - Volunteer Committee||
Aggregate trucking in our rural residential Communities is incompatible with school buses, pedestrians and cyclists. As recently as November 2006, the Balaclava School Council received numerous complaints from parents concerned about the speed and volume of trucks on the 11th Concession. Their children were jumping into, and walking along, the roadside ditches just to feel safe. There were even instances where truckers did not respect the stop sign at the intersection of 11th Concession East and Centre Road.4 If these complaints are any indication of St Marys Cement CBM's best hauling practices, we are justified in being anxious about the impact of 1140 planned truck trips per day.
In April 2006 the municipalities of Hamilton, Halton, Burlington and Milton requested that the potential haul routes to service the proposed quarry be evaluated consistent with the requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act. The Terms of Reference that have been developed for St Marys are rigorous and the scope of the study is comprehensive. Since then we have learned that St Marys has had meetings challenging the scope of the transportation study. Fortunately, the city and surrounding municipalities have refused to reduce the scope. We commend the staff members and politicians for their integrity and professionalism.
Unfortunately, it would appear that in order to obtain the information required, St Marys contracted with a firm who did not follow proper procedures before carrying out destructive tests of our local roadways. Local municipalities are still investigating, but it would appear that numerous boreholes have been drilled into area roads without the appropriate permits. Is this an example of the kinds of behaviour we might be faced with should the quarry application be approved? We certainly feel it is in contrast to what we would expect from an organization claiming to be a "good neighbour".