WATERLOO REGION RECORD PUBLISHES UPDATE ON PROPOSED SHANTZ STATION (Maryhill) GRAVEL PIT

First of all despite the title above let me advise readers that yesterday's Woolwich Observer also published an article about the proposed pit as well as their Editorial was titled "Pitting what's democratic against what get's approved". It too was excellent. .............................................................................................................................. Leah Gerber's article in the Record today was titled "Maryhill gravel pit decision deferred until early August". The sub -title is "Neighbours say mine too close to businesses, homes, could impact water, health". Woolwich Council decided to defer their decision until August 10/21. I was pleased to see in Leah's article (as well as the Observer's), the number of councillors who clearly are uncomfortable with the location of the proposed pit despite Woolwich staff advising that Capitol Paving have jumped through all the approriate hoops and loops (read technical reports) and are in compliance with all relevant legislation. There is the rub. The province are pro aggregate and the public be damned. Same thing with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. Hence the legislation merely gives the public the opportunity to disagree. In fact they have very little substantive legally upon which to hang their arguments. They are good arguments. In a nutshell the gravel pit will lessen the neighbour's enjoyment of their properties as well as damage roads and put traffic, both pedestrian and vehicular at greater risk. A nearby school will also be negatively affected. ...................................................................................................................................... Above and beyond the sloped versus level playing field in this disagreement is the fact that aggregate need isn't even on the table. In fact it is specifically legislated off the table. Opponents cannot demand that information and proponents do not have to even respond to those questions. So why are aggregate companies continuing to expand their supply of gravel pits, often within a mile or two of each other when their is no shortage of gravel? Some suggest it is to lower the costs of transporting their gravel to its' end use and hence each aggregate company can increase their market share by being able to provide their product closer to construction sites, cement and asphalt plants etc. ............................................................................................................................................. So will Woolwich Council stand up on their hind legs and say no to Capitol Paving who to this date have everybody else, including Woolwich planning staff, behind them? Or will Woolwich Council in order to avoid appeal costs that they would likely lose, roll over and capitulate? Or will some sort of semi face saving compromise be found? Could Capitol Paving toss Woolwich Council a bone that they could crow about to the citizens and businesses in Maryhill when Council approves the applications from Capitol Paving?