PUSLINCH – Council here has decided to address an aggregate noise complaint through a request for a meeting between two aggregate operators and township officials, instead of going straight the ministry with a complaint.
On July 15 council discussed councillor John Sepulis’ motion stating there is noticeable noise coming from the CBM Aggregates Aberfoyle Pit on Sundays and late at night over the last “several months.”
The motion says the noise has led a resident in Aberfoyle Mills to make a complaint to the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF).
However, the motion also states the MNRF has “advised the township that the licences associated with this pit do not have any restrictions on hours of operation.”
Sepulis’ motion asks that “staff be requested to obtain the hours of operation and noise level restrictions for the nearby gravel pits including those south of the 401; and that the MNRF be requested to add hours of operations and noise levels restrictions, to the Aberfoyle Pit site plans similar to those of the other gravel pits.”
The noise, Sepulis said, sounds like a roller coaster climbing a hill at the amusement park and the concern is “the actual operation of the conveyor belt that moves the aggregate from a lower level to the top of the pile.”
However the rest of council was not completely on board.
Mayor James Seeley called the motion “heavy handed.”
“I’m pretty critical of the aggregate industry, but I do believe that we are having constructive dialogue with them within the community,” Seeley said
“I would prefer that myself and the CAO reach out to CBM and Dufferin [Aggregates] and try to identify the source and if there are some opportunities to mitigate the noise, whether it be a larger berm or maybe CBM would voluntarily do some acoustical investigation … but to go directly to the MNRF I believe that’s a little bit harsh at this stage.”
Both CBM and Dufferin have operations in the same area.
COUNCILLOR MATTHEW BULMER
Councillor Matthew Bulmer acknowledged noise and aggregate operations can be a complicated issues to address.
However, he was not in favour of bypassing a conversation with the operator to go directly to the ministry.
“When I look back at the approval of this residential subdivision everybody concerned was fully aware of the hours of operation – the municipality, the applicant for both of these pits that are in Aberfoyle – and despite all that the subdivision was approved without a hearing,” Bulmer said.
“I think if the operators of those pits might have got a sense that after approving the subdivision we would then be going and speaking to the MNR to have their hours of operation amended after approving the subdivision, they might have wanted to appeal that plan of subdivision or that development, which would have led us into an expensive and lengthy hearing.”
Bulmer also pointed out that going directly to the ministry isn’t how other business complaints are addressed. He likened it to a noise complaint about a licensed patio.
“I believe our first response would likely be to approach the operator of that restaurant rather than to go to the AGCO and ask them to amend the liquor license for that restaurant,” he said.
He added it comes down to respecting the businesses and the system.
Bulmer also added that if the municipality does make a complaint to the MNRF a consultant would need to look at the problem.
“In this case we may have what appears to be the right solution in terms of changing the hours of operation, but we have nothing to indicate exactly what the problem is or if the noise exceeds what would be considered acceptable noise levels in an industrial area,” he said.
Councillor Sara Bailey said she would like to try to mitigate the issue with a conversation.
“I think we do need confirmation about what the actual noise is coming from and it’s not just something like equipment malfunction sound,” she said.
“Maybe there’s a reason behind it that we’re not clear about, I’m not sure.”
As the notice of motion was announced at the June 17 council meeting, CBM land manager Stephen May submitted a letter as a written delegation about the pit.
He said the Aberfoyle North Pit has been in operation since 2001 and before that was operated by various aggregates companies.
“It is appropriately zoned as an extractive industrial site and operates within Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) noise and air quality limits,” May said.
“CBM has continually operated the site in compliance with the noise levels set by the MECP for this type of setting.”
He also noted that the processing plant is over 1.1km away from where the complaint was made.
“For context, our Certificate of Approval (C of A) for the site, as issued by the MECP, requires a separation distance of 700m from the plant to the nearest sensitive receptor for Class 2 noise levels to be achieved, with full operations at night,” he said.
“It should be noted that CBM does not have any records of noise complaints related to Aberfoyle North Pit prior to this individual contacting the MNRF earlier this year.”
Stockpiled material also serves as a bern around the perimeter of the site, May wrote, which it helps address noise generation and the maintenance of acceptable noise levels.
COUNCILLOR JOHN SEPULIS
However, Sepulis said he thinks noise is coming from above the berm.
“This activity is higher than the noise berm, so in other words the noise is emanating higher than where the berm is located,” Sepulis said.
“So that to me is one red flag.”
May wrote that CBM staff met with an MNRF inspector in February and March.
“Through this process it was also identified that some of the noise complaint times did not correspond with our site operating, but did correspond with overnight construction activities on the 401,” May said.
“This discussion and inspection revealed that the site was operating in compliance and is not providing any undue hardship to local residents.”
May also indicated that at the time of the complaint there were other industries also creating noise and a new round about was under construction.
Council unanimously decided to table Sepulis’ motion and pass a different motion for the mayor and CAO to meet with representatives from both CBM and Dufferin Aggregates (another pit in the area) to see what could be done to mitigate noise levels on Sundays and in the evenings.
If the meetings offer a solution, council can then vote to remove Sepulis’ original motion because the issue is resolved.
However, if there is no solution, then council can implement the original motion.
By talking to both aggregate operators in the area, Seeley said it will help address Sepulis’ observations of CBM as well as May’s statements in his written delegation submission.
“Going forward if we have any further complaints, ensure that this is the process that’s followed – bring it to council, we’ll discuss it, we’ll choose a route or resolution to that,” Seeley said.
“We don’t want to get heavy handed and go to the ministries right away.
“We don’t want to jeopardize relationships and things like that.”
