For your consideration. In…

For your consideration.
In general I find these proposals reflect a general pattern of hasty, inadequately informed policy change on the part of this provincial government and unfortunately in this case, regarding an area that would benefit from change.
Due to the shortage of detail supplied on these proposals I will comment on only two areas that are presented with relatively clear detail.
The first is proposed changes to Site Plan Standards, 1.2.1. These proposals would allow for 'general' siting of many elements of the aggregate operation as part of the original site plan proposal. This is not logical, particularly given the elements concerned.. A site plan is not a game of musical chairs but a defined placement of critical elements that ensures an operation will fit into its community/environment. Operation viability should be able to accommodate the need to seek approval for subsequent site plan changes at this level.
The second is similar, regarding proposed changes to Self Filing, Site Plan Amendments, 3.3.4. These amendments would allow for unsupervised change once again to site plans for supposedly less than critical elements. A kind of double jeopardy; if it wasn't covered under 'general' siting in 1.2.1., we'll cover it under self-filing. I repeat once again, elements such as buildings, haul routes entrances and equipment siting are not musical chairs but critical elements that ensure operation compatibility with the community/ environment.
At no charge I'll throw in the suggestion that you don't eliminate the requirement for fences around 10-20 metre deep, water filled pits and straight drop quarries. Its a sure way to lose prospective voters.
Regards