Food and Water First
Food Water FirstPaterak calls for aggregate recycling workshop
- Details
- Published on Friday, 14 February 2014 20:42
- Hits: 1667
Caledon group wants effects of aggregate recycling explored
Ward 1 Regional Councillor Richard Paterak is looking for an educational forum on aggregate recycling.
However, some council members wanted a more fulsome meeting covering the best practices.
“I understand what [councillor] Paterak wants from this motion, but I believe we should use this as a starting point to a bigger exercise,” said Ward 3 and 4 Area Councillor Nick deBoer. “As a community we have always looked to be at the front. I would like to have a commitment we aren’t going to start right there (with status quo). Maybe we look at new age recycling methods being done in Europe, who knows? But what a great opportunity to send that message up to the province this is what Caledon is looking at. Maybe it makes sense to have it in a gravel pit? We’re looking at two options, one is recycling in a pit, the other is recycling in a dedicated location.”
Ward 3 and 4 Regional Councillor Richard Whitehead agreed, but also wanted to ensure a full and complete examination could be done.
“This is a major undertaking, and one very necessary in Caledon,” Whitehead said. “I don’t want to raise expectations, have a council-like workshop and everyone goes away frustrated though.”
Whitehead said he wants to see a report from staff on the process of examination itself. He wants to know how the process would work, how much it would cost and how long it would take.
“One of the questions is, do you want recycling in pits anyway?”
Whitehead noted that a huge amount of material is being recycled in the Highway 50 James Dick pit already, and he will want to ask if it can be done near the water table, and if it needs to happen in pits that go below. He also wants to know about location, and whether it could be performed in a central location in Caledon, like the Tullamore Industrial area.
Paterak clarified that the intent of his motion was to ask for a meeting about responsibility when it comes to regulating the activity, and not so much in depth examination of the activity itself.
“[My motion] came out of a meeting on the Olympia [Sand and Gravel] application,” he explained. “One of the frustrating things for the public and others in that meeting was a lot of misunderstanding and not a lot of clarity on what was the provincial rules and responsibilities, and what was the municipal rules and responsibilities. I wanted to organize a workshop where we get clear and enunciated statements from the two ministries what the responsibilities are.”
However, groups like PitSense agreed with Paterak’s colleagues, and not the Ward 1 regional councillor that it is the effects of the activity itself they are concerned about.
The groups want to see a workshop put together that examines recycling activities, the hazards and products of them, and what the effects on the community and environment will be.
“We’re not just concerned with the industrial process, which fits the MOE’s (Ministry of Environment) definition of a class three industrial use, requiring setbacks from residential land uses,” said Bob Shapton, spokesperson for PitSense. “But also, in pits or quarries that is at or near the water table. There’s a risk of major contamination of the water. We want to look at all of it.”
Shapton said one of his major concerns also comes from the proposed rules in place not being further examined as well. He said one of the notes on the Olympia application states they will only recycle concrete.
“Even if it’s clean concrete, concrete itself is a chemical composition. I’ve got a list of various chemical materials which are not native to a pit or quarry that are in concrete. They’re importing foreign substances, and then they’re going to incorporate material into new construction projects in some manner. I contend that demolition, grinding, sorting, is not recycling.”
Shapton said his group has always wanted the process of aggregate recycling examined. The conversation has been manipulated he said, to make this out to be a discussion of whether recycling should be done or not, and he said that, is sadly political.
“Recycling is a good thing,” he said. “We aren’t against it. But aggregate recycling is an industrial process, and for municipal and provincial leaders to simply be supporting the activity because the word itself sounds green, and not be wanting to examine the activity and the effects it could have on the environment, that’s disappointing and a major concern.”
Paterak said the meeting he is asking for is a first step.
“As a first step, I want to know what the law says, who is doing what, who classifies this stuff. So we can have a vocabulary we can all agree on and move on."