The Miller proposal is an…

The Miller proposal is an attempt to legitimize the illegal contractor’s yard, convert the asphalt plant that is associated with the aggregate operations into a permanent industrial recycling depot and backfill/dump waste from Miller’s construction sites into part of the existing pit, relieving Miller of its reclamation obligations. There is significant economic gain to Miller and permanent on-going environmental damage to the Uxbridge community. The proposal should be rejected completely.
We all recognize that aggregate extraction and associated activities on the Oak Ridges Morraine are acceptable interim land uses, but the land should revert to its agricultural or natural state on completion of the extraction process. The environmental damage done over this interim period has long been an acceptable cost to support economic growth in the GTA. However, conversion of an aggregate site to a permanent industrial site was never part of the social contract and should not be permitted.

The proposed removal of the asphalt plant area from the ARA license would enable Miller to establish an industrial facility for recycling all sorts of waste products indefinitely. This is contrary to the ARA’s policy, which requires that any recycling activities discontinue once the mineral resource is depleted. Miller has been advised in 3 inspection reviews (2010, 2015 and 2020) to remove certain recycling materials that are not permitted under its license. These demands have been continually ignored by Miller.

The asphalt plant is located on an area of High Aquifer Vulnerability, as defined under the Oak Ridges Morraine Conservation Plan. The Durham Region Official Plan considers such an asphalt plant to be high risk to groundwater and would not be approved if applied for today. Acquiescing to removal of the asphalt plant as an associated activity under the aggregate extraction license and conversion to a permanent industrial site means the ARA is implicitly accepting something that is contrary to the Oak Ridges Morraine Conservation Plan and the Durham Region Official Plan. The ARA is charged with responsibility for mineral aggregate operations and their associated activities in Ontario and should not be able to defer such responsibility to other parties.

The 2010 site inspection report advised Miller that the contractor’s yard was not a permitted use under the license and emphasized that the limitations of the license supersede any zoning the property may have. Despite of this non-compliance report, Miller did not remove the contractor’s yard and expanded it considerably in 2014/15. This was again cited in the 2015 inspection report and Miller was told to remove such equipment by June 30, 2015. Miller did nothing but begin a process to remove the contractor’s yard area from the ARA license and convert it to land use that is regulated by the municipality, even though such use is illegal under the Oak Ridges Morraine Conservation Plan. The 2020 site inspection report identified the continued non-compliance of the contractor’s yard and other matters on site and advised Miller that all equipment and materials not related to the aggregate operations should immediately be removed if the proposed site plan amendment is denied.
To further improve the “usability” of the extracted land, Miller is proposing to backfill such land with 1 million cubic metres of construction waste to create more outdoor storage and to construct a 40,000 square foot building for indoor storage. Such backfilling would occur on an area of High Aquifer Vulnerability and therefore poses great risk to groundwater. Furthermore, although Miller states that such backfill will be “clean”, given its history of non-compliance, how can anyone believe that this will be controlled over the next 10 years. Backfilling of any part of the pit is not permitted under the ARA license.

The approval of a new aggregate extraction operation requires significant justification, both from an environmental and social perspective. Once in operation, the licensee is subject to a large list of rules and regulations designed to protect both the environment and the public. Non-compliance is a major issue and under ARA 58(1) can result in a fine of up to $1 million plus $100,000 per day for each day that the offence continues. Ultimately, the MNRF could revoke a license if there is no compliance. The MNRF should reject Miller’s proposal and invoke these penalties should Miller fail to comply.