Comments

View the comments this notice received through the registry. You can either download them all or search and sort below.

Some comments will not be posted online. Learn more about the comment status and our comment and privacy policies.

Download comments

Search comments

Comment ID

41267

Commenting on behalf of

Citizens for Safe Ground Water

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
-Concerned with the permit application to draw water. -Concerned with the application to install wash ponds onsite, risk of contamination to neighboring wetland that is the immediate vicinity. Also concerned of contamination of Source Water Protection Area, Waterloo moraine, and private wells. Read more

Comment ID

41309

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
There are only two words FRESH WATER. Don't let anyone propose to endanger their water OUR water. We Canadians are so fortunate to have fresh water. Why would you put that in jeopardy? Why would you expose the people that live here to that? Read more

Comment ID

41314

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Hello, There is just NO benefit to the citizens living in the surrounding areas to the proposed gravel pit and asphalt business. Why put a gravel and asphalt business adjacent to a village, where so many people live? Read more

Comment ID

41316

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Clearly the only experts in this scenario are those representing the applicant. The kangaroo court nature of this application are becoming more obvious. While I may just be a working stiff it seems pretty clear that the applicant will condone anything which suits their agenda. Read more

Comment ID

41329

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The consideration of the carbon emissions from the extraction of aggregate - in total as a process including the transportation, and its use in making cement - one of the primary producers of carbon dioxide, is very much overdue. Read more

Comment ID

41332

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I oppose this application. The application does not take into account the community in regard to hours of operation. The hours of operation must reduce the impact on the community. Read more

Comment ID

41342

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This license must not be issued; this project poses far too great of a risk to groundwater in the region. More “red tape” is required in all permits of this kind, our current government is moving in the completely wrong direction.

Comment ID

41366

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The following are significant factors against allowing this project : -hydrogeological report not sufficient according to experts -wash ponds -permit to draw water -recycling (asphalt and concrete) Read more

Comment ID

41418

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I have concerns when our water can be negatively affected by industrial uses: wash ponds and the impact to surface water flow to provincially significant wetland. I have heard that the hydrogeological report not sufficient according to experts. Read more

Comment ID

41530

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
There are many concerns about this venture. My biggest is the fact it will be dug on top of our water source. Not only is this dangerous to our communities it is irresponsible.

Comment ID

41560

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
In my humble opinion there are already water by laws in effect in this region to protect our groundwater and this pit jeopardizes that even further this region has a commitment to protecting groundwater yet allowing 20000 tons of aggregate to be removed from the table per year is not only irresponsi Read more

Comment ID

41562

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Because this proposed quarry is located in an aquifer recharge area for Waterloo Region I'm very much opposed to it. A significant portion of the region's water supply originates in this area. Read more

Comment ID

41564

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I object to the proposed gravel pit. I have grave concerns around the effects this project will have on our ground water and overall environmental footprint.. Read more

Comment ID

41743

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
As an informed citizen (professional engineer & Ph.D. in healthcare governance), who is impacted by a possible decision to allow an aggregate facility in the proposed location, I have the following concerns: Read more

Comment ID

41746

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Environmental Registry of Ontario Reference: Proposed Gravel Pit 1894-1922 Witmer Road, Petersburg Jackson Harvest Farms Ltd. Comments on reports submitted with application at public meeting January 13 2020. Water 1. Issue: removal of natural capital (filtration) Read more