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

95054

Commenting on behalf of

City of London

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The City of London is an active member of the Municipal Engineers Association’s (MEA) Excess Soil Working Group. The working group has met with the Ministry to discuss the proposed changes and has prepared a separate detailed submission, of which the City is supportive. Read more

Comment ID

95058

Commenting on behalf of

Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corporation (Waterfront Toronto)

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Waterfront Toronto is supportive of the proposed amendments to the On-Site and Excess Soil Regulation. In particular, the following proposals are beneficial to Waterfront Toronto's revitalization efforts: Read more

Comment ID

95119

Commenting on behalf of

Township of Puslinch

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The Township of Puslinch Council submits the following comments: That Council receive Correspondence item 10.5 regarding ERO 019-7636 Proposed regulatory amendments to encourage greater reuse of excess soil; and Read more

Comment ID

95120

Commenting on behalf of

TAPMO (Top Aggregate Producing Municipalities of Ontario)

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
TAPMO (Top Aggregate Producing Municipalities of Ontario) formally objects to the Province's approval of ERO #019-7636 in order to provide additional time for a comprehensive review by municipalities and stakeholders. Read more

Comment ID

95123

Commenting on behalf of

Brookfield Properties Development

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The proposed amendment requires a landscape or site plan be prepared and certified by an expert such as a Landscape Architect. This could add undue delay in approving a source for re-use, depending on the stage of the project. Read more

Comment ID

95134

Commenting on behalf of

Dillon Consulting Limited

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The proposed exemption for Aggregate Reuse Depots indicates that 'the aggregate must be known to be of a quality that it can be reused in an infrastructure project', but does not clarify the standards that would apply. Read more

Comment ID

95135

Commenting on behalf of

Dillon Consulting Limited

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
For small liquid soil sites, the proposed amendment excludes material from cleaning out sewage works; however, allows for sediment from stormwater management ponds and hydrovac. Please clarify if sediment from drain and ditch clean out would be included for small liquid soil sites.

Comment ID

95136

Commenting on behalf of

Dillon Consulting Limited

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
Many aggregate recyclers will accept both granular product (like road base) but also asphalt and concrete. Suggest that the proposed amendments do not limit the type of materials aggregate recyclers can receive, but require segregation of the excess soil portion from the concrete/asphalt materials.