If an organics and recycling processing facility is built in the middle of a Simcoe County Forest, does it make a sound?
Will we ever know?
Progress on the County of Simcoe’s Environmental Resource Recovery Centre project (ERRC) is churning slowly.
A Local Planning Appeals Tribunal (LPAT) case management conference between all parties involved was held today at the Township of Springwater Administration Centre in Midhurst.
While lawyers for the County of Simcoe, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, three different appellants and the Township of Springwater argued about the details of the project and whether there are opportunities for settlement, the taxpayer is on the hook for some of the bill.
“The county has spent now over $1 million of taxpayer money getting this far,” Marshall Green, lawyer for the county, said during proceedings on Wednesday afternoon.
According to Rob McCullough, the county's director of solid waste management, the money to date has gone toward consultants and studies. The impacts of the delays the project has experienced are tangible.
“The most obvious impact I can point out is economic,” said McCullough. “We’re quite concerned. We’re happy everyone in the province is moving toward organics, but these organics processing facilities are not being built as quickly as the demand.”
The ERRC project was first proposed by the County of Simcoe in 2010 as part of its waste management strategy. The facility would receive the county’s organics and recycling to be broken down into compost, fertilizer, or fuel for use in the county.
After the county said it considered more than 100 sites for the facility, they applied to the province for permission to build the compost and recycling facility in the middle of the Freele Tract of the Simcoe County Forest after receiving approval on the location from Simcoe County council.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing approved the county’s request earlier this year and granted an official plan amendment to allow the facility in the forest, which is north of Barrie in Springwater Township.
“Garbage is going to keep coming. We have to keep planning to manage it effectively,” said McCullough.
Currently, county landfills are filling up so fast it's costing the county, and therefore taxpayers, $1.65 million a year to transfer some of its waste to Hamilton, and the cost is only going up. Landfill space in Simcoe County is expected to be fully at capacity within seven years.
“The longer each one of these processes drags out, means the longer we have to rely on private transfer, haulage and processing of those materials we could be dealing with ourselves and doing a better job,” said McCullough.
“It’s the county position that this is key infrastructure in order for the county to be able to meet their own waste management goals and also the province’s waste management and climate change goals,” said Green during the conference on Wednesday.
Green added that the county has money lined up for the project that is only available if the project is completed within a certain time frame.
The three appellants are the owners of Nicholyn Farms, which is adjacent to the Freele Tract, Edward Kracjir and local environmental advocacy group Friends of Simcoe Forests.
All three appellants have stated publicly they don’t oppose the ERRC project as a whole; they only oppose the site chosen by the county in the middle of Simcoe County Forest.
“Right now, everything is very hypothetical,” said Mary Wagner, president of Friends of Simcoe Forests. “What I would like to see is the ability for our own professionals to be cross examined. They found the county’s professionals were lacking in their justification process for choosing the site.”
“In my opinion, (the county is) cherry-picking pieces of regulation to make this happen,” she added.
When speaking during the case management conference, Jacqueline Wilson, a lawyer for Friends of Simcoe Forests, said she didn’t see the need to try mediation.
“We don’t really see a lot of room for mediation here. We fundamentally object to putting a waste processing complex in the middle of a significant woodland and wildlife habitat,” said Lawrence. “It really is about the principle of the land use, for us.”
“If the (county) is keen on going forward with this site, we don’t see a lot of room,” she added.
During Wednesday’s proceedings, lawyers on all sides discussed the difficulty of arguing the case in light of Bill 108 expected to become law shortly. That legislation would change the way Local Planning Act Tribunal hearings are conducted moving forward.
In 2017, the Liberal provincial government of the time proposed Bill 139 as a way to expedite the LPAT process, as appeals across the province at that time were lengthy, and many times irrelevant to the issues at hand.
“(Kathleen Wynne) narrowed down the reasons you could appeal in the first place to a strict set of circumstances,” said Green.
The current Progressive Conservative government put forward Bill 108 last year, which proposes changes to 15 pieces of legislation including some that directly affect local government.
Included in the legislation is changes proposed to the way in which members of the public and/or applicants can appeal decisions made (or not made) on development applications – known as the LPAT.
If Bill 108 is passed, there will be a whole new set of rules in place for how planning matters must be argued at the appeals level. Bill 108 (the More Homes, More Choice Act) passed third reading at Queen’s Park and received Royal Assent in June.
“They’ve passed Royal Assent, but they haven’t been proclaimed yet. The word is, they’re going to be proclaimed the first or second week in September,” said Green.
The Bill 108 rules are very similar to the rules in place prior to Bill 139, with a “few minor tweaks here and there,” said Green.
Hearing dates determine whether hearings will run under Bill 139 or Bill 108 rules. Since hearing dates haven’t been set yet in this case, it is likely they will fall under Bill 108 rules.
Arguments from all sides will be heard in full at the hearing. Dates for the hearing will be determined after the next case management conference date.
The case management conference was postponed until Nov. 6.
