13TH DAY (Tues.) OF HUNDER PIT OMB HEARINGS

Last Wednesday afternoon I missed the Presentations by the two Participants namely Della Stroobosscher and Bob Weber. My apologies and I have now read Bob's and been verbally advised that they were both excellent. Yesterday Dan Kennally was back on the stand being cross-examined by Mr. Pickfield on behalf of Hunder Developments. Mr. Pickfield pointed out and it was agreed that there is no definition of "unacceptable impacts" in the Official Plan. Mr. Pickfield also pointed out that the Provincial Policy Statement expressly states that municipalities must protect and make available aggregate resources. Dan agreed but pointed out that that policy does not trump everything else and he believes that Woolwich Township's Official Plan and staff interpretations do not go too far or are overeaching.

Regarding the Crowsfoot Corner Dan stated that there are existing operational issues at that corner as agreed to by many experts. Dan feels that the intersection should be improved BEFORE the Hunder gravel pit is approved. Dan Kennally is in disagrrement with six of the 21 Viewsheds finding them unacceptable impacts. Mr. Pickfield pointed out that there was not provincial guidance relating to visual impacts to which Dan agreed. Therefore they are a matter of judgement and are very subjective.

With regard to recycling Mr. Pickfield explored Dan Kennally's assertion that recycling would extend the life of the pit and was thus unacceptable. Dan is relying on the Interim designation for gravel pits and feels that mixing of recycled asphalt and concrete with new gravel will slow and delay the extraction of the licensed amount.

Mr. Pickfield appeared to make headway in arguing that the lack of a known operator isn't an issue as the history of compliance deals with the licensee not the operator. After Mr. Pickfield's questions he was followed by the OMB Chair (Ms. Schiller) asking Dan questions agricultural land, visual impacts and recycling.

Mr. Paton on behalf of the Conestoga Winterbourne Residents Association (CWRA) advised that 225 families were members and contributers. Mr. Pickfield suggested that Mr. Paton's facts were not currently in evidence but did not formally object. Mr. Paton examined a Dr. Heck (sp.?) from the University of Guelph, a soil expert. He gave an interesting talk about topsoil, its structure and formation. He advised that moving or removing topsoil disconnects it from its' biological and chemical processes. Also the pore spaces collapse causing it to compact excessively. Both microbial activity and the biodiversity of the soil degrade when it is stockpiled.

Previously here in the Advocate I have questioned Woolwich Council's commitment to their residents and citizens. This hearing certainly is opening my eyes to the time and money being spent on this Hearing in opposition to another gravel pit. At the same time I see vast amounts of resources being funnelled from taxpayers and citizens on both sides of the issue into lawyers pockets. There is supposed to be changes to the Aggregate Resources Act (ARA) in the wings. I would hope that streamlining and reducing paperwork and costs for all parties is part of it.