1995-06-19_Minutes
85-320
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
At a meeting of the Common Council, held at the City Hall in the City of
Saint John, on Monday, the nineteenth day of June, A.D. 1995, at 4:00 o'clock p.m.
present
Shirley McAlary, Mayor
Councillors Arthurs, Ball, Brown, Chase, Fitzpatrick, Knibb, Trites,
Vincent and Waldschutz
- and -
Messrs. 1. Totten, City Manager; F. Rodgers, City Solicitor; D.
Wilson, Commissioner of Finance; C. Robichaud, Commissioner
of Municipal Operations; J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of
Environment and Infrastructure Services; R. Pollock, Planner; G.
Tait, Fire Chief; A. Martin, Assistant Deputy Chief of Police; Mrs.
M. Munford, Common Clerk; and Ms. C. Joyce, Assistant
Common Clerk.
1. MeetinQ Called To Order - OpeninQ Prayer
Mayor McAlary called the meeting to order, and Reverend David Jamer
of Saint John Alliance Church offered the opening prayer.
2. Approval of Minutes
On motion of Councillor Knibb
Seconded by Councillor Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting
of Common Council, held on June 5, 1995, be approved.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Mayor McAlary, having commented on the procedure and decorum for
the public hearing at this meeting, advised the intent for Council to recess at 6:00
o'clock p.m. and reconvene the meeting at 6:45 o'clock p.m., with the possibility of the
need, depending on the anticipated length of the public hearing as it progresses, to
adjourn the meeting at around 10:30 o'clock at which time a date to reconvene the
meeting would be set depending on the availability of both Council members and
persons wishing to make presentations.
3. (a) Municipal Plan & (b)(c) Zoning By-Law
Amendments HiQhway 7 (Crane Mountain)
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was
completed with regard to !!.l a proposed Municipal Plan amendment to redesignate on
Schedule 2-A, the Future Land Use Plan, a parcel of land containing an area of
approximately 330 acres and fronting on Highway 7 (Crane Mountain) at the
intersection of Highway 177, also being NBGIC Numbers 55087001, 55087027,
55043301,55043293 and portions of NBGIC Numbers 55086987 and 55087019, from
Rural to Heavy Industrial classification; {Q..l the proposed re-zoning of the same parcel
of land from "RF" Rural and "P" Park to "1-2" Heavy Industrial classification; and {Q} a
proposed Zoning By-Law text amendment with respect to Section 630 to (i) delete the
words "subject to subsection (2)(e) & (f), municipal sanitary landfill" and insert the words
"subject to subsection (2)(e) & (h), a sanitary landfill", in subsection 630(1)(b); (ii) delete
the word "municipal" in subsection 630(2)(e); (iii) delete the words "a municipal sanitary
landfill" in subsection 630(2)(f); and (iv) add a new subsection 630(2)(h) to read as
follows: "(h) a sanitary landfill shall be enclosed by natural buffering and/or constructed
earth berms.", to (1) permit the development and use of the parcel of land for a sanitary
landfill facility, as well as possible recycling and composting facilities, for the Fundy
Region; (2) remove the reference to municipal ownership of a sanitary landfill in the "1-
2" Heavy Industrial zone; and (3) delete the requirement that a sanitary landfill in the "1-
2" Heavy Industrial zone be enclosed with a painted, solid fence, and replace it with a
requirement for natural buffering and/or constructed earth berms, as requested by
85-321
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
Fundy SWAT, and that 3{e) letters of objection have been received from Mrs. Mildred
Crawford, Julie Dingwell, Eric M. Smith, Melissa G. Carr, Jim & Beatty Stubbs, Norman
Ferguson, and the River Road Action Team; and that letters have also been received
from 3{f) PURE SJ - SWAP with respect to its initiation of a project to review and
promote a solid waste alternative plan (SWAP); the River Road Concerned Citizens
Committee submitting a copy of a letter recently sent by the Committee to The Evening
Times Globe newspaper concerning the Planning Advisory Committee's decision to
refuse the Crane Mountain re-zoning application; M. Marlene Ross of the River Road
Action Team requesting copies of each and all minutes recorded regarding Fundy
SWAT and the Committee of the Whole and that all Council members become privy to
all of the Team's letters, petitions, presentations and all such data regarding the
opposition to the proposed Crane Mountain regional sanitary landfill site; Mr. Everett J.
Calvin of Grand Bay asking Council to re-examine the inclusion of a maximum recycling
and composting facility as an integral part of the overall plan; Mr. Melvin A. Wilson
expressing the view that recycling should be involved in order to reduce the amount of
garbage to be taken to a smaller and more remote landfill site, but not Crane Mountain
or Paddy's Hill which has already taken its toll on the Spruce Lake drinking water
supply over the past 17 years; and C. A. Makepeace of the River Road Action Team
submitting transcripts of public hearings for Lorneville and Crane Mountain areas; as
well as from the Saint John Board of Trade expressing concern about the potential
financial implications to its members if they are forced to bear the cost of shipping
materials to other jurisdictions, and from Stilwell Services Ltd. on solid waste
management in New Brunswick and the development of environmental businesses
(copies of the latter two letters were distributed to Council members at this meeting);
M9.l the River Road Concerned Citizens Committee questioning the appropriateness of
Councillor Knibb remaining a part of this process in that, according to a report in the
May 3, 1995 edition of The Evening Times Globe newspaper in a Board of Trade
survey, he indicated that he would vote to re-zone Crane Mountain for heavy industrial
use, and expressing the opinion that Councillor Knibb cannot be permitted to be a
participant in this process.
3{d)
Consideration was also given to a report from the Planning Advisory
Committee submitting a copy of Planning staff's report considered at the Committee's
February 21 and March 29 meetings, as well as of presentations, briefs and a petition
submitted at the subject meetings and Fundy SWAT's letter in response to issues
raised at the February 21, 1995 meeting, and of additional letters and a petition
received by the Committee; advising of the details of its meetings with respect to the
subject application of Fundy SWAT; and recommending that the application be denied.
3{h)
Consideration was also given to a report from the City Manager
commenting on the two main components of the above application, being a Municipal
Plan amendment and re-zoning which applies to the Crane Mountain site only, and a
text amendment to Section 630 of the Zoning By-Law which applies to the "1-2" zone
generally, including Crane Mountain (if re-zoned) and Paddy's Hill (as it is already in an
"1-2" zone; and outlining four options available to Council in dealing with the Fundy
SWAT application.
At Mayor McAlary's request for Councillor Knibb to respond to item 3(g),
Councillor Knibb, having advised that he discussed this matter with the City Solicitor,
confirmed that what the letter reports is correct; advised that it is his belief that he is an
objective, not a stubborn, person and that he is not disqualified from voting on the
subject application as his mind is not entirely made up and he is still open to
persuasion, although he would defer to his colleagues in that, if the Councillors felt that
in some way his presence was putting the public hearing at risk, he would withdraw
from the Council table if it were their wish. Mr. Rodgers, referring to Councillor Knibb's
indication that his mind is still open to persuasion, advised that a 1990 Supreme Court
of Canada case in the Province of Manitoba used those words in ruling that, dealing
with issues of this nature, elected officials bring some pre-determination to these
matters, although they would be disqualified if, before the public hearing commences,
they cannot be persuaded, or if the representations being made would have no effect
or are futile, because a public hearing under those circumstances would certainly not
85-322
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
satisfy the
statute; however, if there is a possibility that, during the public hearing, a councillor is
still open to be persuaded, then the councillor is not disqualified according to the
Supreme Court of Canada.
Ms. Marlene Ross, Chairperson of the River Road Action Team,
appeared in opposition to the proposed re-zoning of Crane Mountain for a sanitary
landfill site, on the basis of the effect on the quality of life of placing a garbage industry
only one mile from homes, schools, churches and business due to the possibility of
water pollution, an air quality concern, and the possibility of attracting bears and
coyotes to the area. Ms. Ross referred to the above-mentioned correspondence from
the Action Team and photographs of the subject area showing the type of rock in the
watershed; suggested that a more remote site can be found other than the Crane
Mountain or Lorneville sites; and requested Council to reject the proposal.
During discussion Ms. Ross noted the close proximity of the proposed
site to the highway and its location in the area water supply and, in response to Deputy
Mayor Chase, advised that the River Road Action Team includes Grand Bay, and that
the Action Team's position would not change with the inclusion of a maximum recycling
and composting facility as part of the operation because of the location in the water
supply; and Deputy Mayor Chase referenced a letter from the Municipal Council of the
Town of Grand Bay indicating that Fundy SWAT's presentation to the Planning
Advisory Committee and Common Council is its presentation on the issue.
Master Eric Leonard introduced himself to Council as a ten-year old
Lorneville resident who, when having heard last year that the dump might be coming to
Lorneville, got very upset so that he and his friend collected 112 signatures of people
who do not want the dump in Lorneville; and presented the petition to Council with the
request that Council use it when deciding where to put the new landfill.
Mr. David Bowen, Chairman of the River Road Concerned Citizens
Committee, in addressing Council in opposition to the proposal, summarized the
Committee's concerns with respect to the weaknesses in the N.B. Department of the
Environment's EIA process and the siting process used by Fundy SWAT which reduced
the prospective sites to only two - the Crane Mountain site at Henderson Lake in
Martinon, and the Paddy's Hill site at Burchill Brook in Lorneville, such concerns
outlined in the Committee's presentations to the N.B. Department of the Environment
and the Planning Advisory Committee (copies of which were submitted to Council in the
above report from the Planning Advisory Committee). Mr. Bowen explained the
Committee's reasons for believing that the Crane Mountain and Paddy's Hill sites are
unacceptable for this land use, not only without but also with a recycling facility at each
of those sites; and, with regard to the proposed Municipal Plan and Zoning By-Law
amendments, expressed the view that, under a Section 39 re-zoning, any landfill or
proposal such as this can have sufficient conditions applied at the Council level alone
and must, following an EIA or other study, return to the Planning Advisory Committee
for sufficient conditions to be applied; and suggested that, as it appears that the
subsection 2( e) of Section 630 of the Zoning By-Law pertaining to a 150 meter set-back
would not apply when the adjacent re-zoning occurs to a property affected by a Section
39 Council resolution, the set-back would have to be added as a separate condition
because one seems to contradict the other. Mr. Bowen suggested that, rather than to
use the widesweeping terminology "sanitary landfill", more appropriate wording would
be municipal or regional sanitary landfill so as not to open it up to hazardous or
industrial wasteland fills and so on; and also that any landfill must be completely
enclosed by a fence in order to deter bears, coyotes and other animals which will be
attracted by garbage so as to prevent not only entrance of these creatures but also the
removal by them of garbage bags and waste to nearby lands and bodies of water, and
that a 15-foot chainlink fence might be more aesthetically appealing as well as practical
and also serve to control fugitive litter which will be prevalent at any landfill, especially if
baling of waste is not employed; and further that berms should be added to section (h)
as a complement to fencing rather than to replace it. Mr. Bowen explained why re-
zoning the lands in question for a sanitary landfill does not conform to the Municipal
Development Plan, as set out in his above-mentioned presentations; and, in utilizing
overhead-projected slides of the watershed area designated in the Municipal
Development Plan, the proposed landfill site on Highway #7, the 300-metre set-back
85-323
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
area required by the Province as a set-back from the City watershed area, the 500-
metre set-back area that Fundy SWAT has indicated it will adhere to, and the 150-
metre set-back from the "RF" zones in the area, demonstrated how the size of the
proposed landfill site quickly diminishes and that Fundy SWAT has obviously ignored
the Municipal Plan's designated watershed area. Mr. Bowen asked Council to consider
these arguments and refuse to allow the re-zoning of the properties for the purpose of
a landfill in that the Crane Mountain site has too many negative factors to allow it to be
considered for the siting of a landfill and, with regard to any other site within the City,
too much is unknown at this point regarding conditions to impose and, as it appears
that Fundy SWAT is premature in its request for re-zoning and this strategy would allow
it to escape concessions which should be applied to the proposal, there is no other
choice but to deny Fundy SWAT's application.
Mayor McAlary, noting that the main concern is in consideration of the
water supply, asked Mr. Bowen how he would respond should, if the re-zoning of the
Crane Mountain property were approved, Fundy SWAT guarantee the water supply in
all the homes for the next twenty years, to which Mr. Bowen replied that, from what he
has read, some of the problems do not arise until twenty years after the fact as liners
leak and it could take some time before leachate reaches the community, thus he does
not believe that this arrangement would be satisfactory. Responding to Deputy Mayor
Chase, Mr. Bowen suggested that, with respect to a concern about the lack of an
operating manual, the unfortunate thing is that what is being dealt with is more or less a
concept, which is unfair to everyone, and that perhaps one could judge the proposal
much better if there were something of a more concrete nature with which to deal, but
there are a lot of things missing and much of it is guesswork.
Mr. Roy Hobson of Ketepec appeared in opposition to the proposal as a
representative of River Road concerned citizens and, reading from a prepared brief
(which was subsequently filed with the Common Clerk), addressed the specific issue of
ground water and leachate control at Crane Mountain, noting that much of the
information presented applies equally to Lorneville and other sites in view of the fact
that about 900 Saint John residences draw their household supply of water from the
groundwater beneath the Crane Mountain site, with the River Road communities plus
the near end of Grand Bay probably drawing about one million litres a day of this
groundwater, which has to be a controlling factor in the groundwater flow due to the
volume, in that there is no conceivable way to avoid contaminants being drawn into
some residential water supplies, even if some of the groundwater does resurface. Mr.
Hobson provided justification for the concerns by relating conclusions from various
studies which indicate that serious potential risks do exist, even with the most modern
landfill technology; and suggested that the biggest risk now appears to be the lack of
knowledge of all the specific risks in a landfill, although Council has been asked to
apply its best judgement and wisdom in determining what risks can safely be ignored
and what degree of damage will be tolerated. Mr. Hobson suggested that, although
Fundy SWAT has advised that there is no time to undertake another EIA study of a
different site, it can be done if the Provincial Government has the political will to do so;
and proposed that the construction in an existing industrial zone of a total
recycling/waste transfer operation with baling would provide employment and operate
for the same price or less per tonne than the proposed landfill, and the cost of
transferring the remaining waste by rail to a better site would be reduced greatly, when
compared to the cost projected by Fundy SWAT, as well as provide time to reassess
other sites based on the reduced area needed and perhaps a little wider radius from
the centre of waste production.
Mr. Joseph Oliver of Grand Bay was present in opposition to the
proposal, and expressed the opinion that even consideration of a sanitary landfill site in
an expanding and viable part of the City and within the confines of the City boundary
does nothing for the City of Saint John in building its tax base or its future; and
suggested that there are other more viable sites for a landfill. Referring to a prepared
brief (a copy of which was subsequently filed with the Common Clerk), Mr. Oliver noted
concerns about the water supply, the tax base, property values, development and sale
of property in the area, wildlife, leachate in the St. John River and its effect on sea life
in the Bay of Fundy; commented on the water systems and drainage points in the
Crane Mountain and Grand Bay areas and his concern about the impact on the St.
John River system of the location of a landfill site to encompass a radius of an area of
St. Martins to Maces Bay and the Lepreau area in view of possible leachate into the
85-324
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
ground, streams, brooks and eventually the St. John River, adding to an existing
pollution problem for which attempts are being made to eventually clean up. Mr. Oliver
advised that, while he
is not against a landfill site, he is against a landfill site at Crane Mountain; asked
Council to forbid this use within the area in question; and made available for Council's
perusal photographs depicting leachate running out of the landfill at Lorneville.
Ms. Carol Makepeace of the River Road Action Team addressed Council
in opposition to the proposal as the voice of the children whose lives would be
endangered by illness from well contamination due to leachate coming from a regional
landfill site in the subject area, or by being attacked by a coyote or bear; and asked
Council not to re-zone this area for a landfill, with or without recycling. Ms. Makepeace
read a letter from the Ketepec-Morna Heights Home and School Association expressing
concern regarding the proposed sanitary landfill at Crane Mountain, near Henderson
Lake and noted the petitions of approximately 1157 signatures against the location of
the landfill at Crane Mountain. Ms. Makepeace expressed the understanding that
Grades 3 and 4 students of Morna Heights School, who forwarded letters to Council on
the landfill issue, have not received a response, and advised that they would like
Council to comment on their concerns at some point in time.
Miss Kelly Legere of Martinon spoke in opposition to a landfill site at
Crane Mountain as she and her friends go hiking, skiing, snowmobiling, driving and,
sometimes, fishing at Henderson Lake and a landfill would kill the wildlife and the
water, as well as the spirits of those who enjoy nature.
Miss Sarah Gilbert appeared in opposition to the proposed landfill site on
the basis that, if it goes through, it will not only destroy nature, and children go to
Henderson Lake to swim, canoe, camp and hike; and asked Council to remember the
children and not to put a landfill site in Martinon.
Miss Erin Arsenault, speaking in opposition to the proposed landfill site
at Crane Mountain, expressed the view that what is done to harm the earth, which is on
loan the children, in turn, hurts the children; and asked that this be taken into
consideration before anything is done to harm the environment.
In response to Ms. Makepeace's request for a reply to the letters from
students of Morna Heights School, Mayor McAlary advised that a response would
perhaps be forthcoming after this public hearing.
Ms. Julie Dingwell of South Bay addressed Council in opposition to the
proposal; asked why this public hearing is being held if there is not even a design
completed; and expressed the view that, if approval is given to construct a regional
landfill at Crane Mountain or Paddy's Hill, this would effectively cut off all further
residential expansion of the West Side which, along with the loss of people already
living there, as well cost the City in tax dollars and reduce once-wonderful
neighbourhoods to urban ghettos, surrounded by industry and garbage. Ms. Dingwell
suggested that people can be made more responsible for the garbage they produce by
insisting they pay their fair share, and that maximized recycling and a smaller, more
remote location, far from anybody's neighbourhood, is the only option if the
communities on the West Side are to flourish.
Mayor McAlary, at approximately 6:00 o'clock p.m., called for a recess
and advised that the meeting would reconvene at 6:45 o'clock p.m.
The meeting reconvened, and the Mayor asked if there were further
presentations in opposition to the above application.
Mr. Tom Simms of Belmont, a member of the River Road Concerned
Citizens Committee appearing in opposition to the proposal, advised his intention, while
he has reservations to both proposed sites, to direct his remarks to the proposal to
have Crane Mountain re-zoned from Rural and Park to Heavy Industrial; and expressed
the view that the Crane Mountain setting, in itself, should be ruled out as a landfill site
because it is too close to Routes 7 and 177 which are designated Provincial Tourist
85-325
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
Routes, being part of the highway system to the famous, scenic St. John River Valley
drive, and that both the EIA study done on the site, as well as the Planning
Department's report, acknowledged the visibility of the site from Route 7. Mr. Simms
made the observation that the proposed landfill would be an eyesore, destroying the
panoramic view from the scenic lookout just before the Grand Bay Exit on leaving the
City, and the proposed berms and planting of tall trees would not hide this scar on the
landscape; and expressed concern about the possibility of a landfill being expanded
and be in place for 50 years or more, and the prospect of debris along the Route 7
highway caused by wind-blown garbage. Mr. Simms expressed the opinion that, as
Saint John has been transformed since the early 1980s and has lost its old drab image
with a serious of progressive development, it would be a retrogressive step to re-zone
Crane Mountain for a landfill in close proximity to a primary artery. Mr. Simms noted
the letter of concern about the Crane Mountain site from Enterprise Saint John to the
Planning Advisory Committee in this regard; and commented on the inadequacy of
access to the site with the present interchange at Route 7 and Route 177 and the
addition to the project costs of an improved access. Mr. Simms questioned the process
gone through by Fundy SWAT relevant to site selection, site ranking, degree of
involvement of local entrepreneurs if recycling and composting became an integral
component of the future waste management approach, as well as residents'
involvement, and Fundy SWAT's committee of the whole rejection of the
recommendation of its own technical committee on the matter of the best firm to do the
technical design. Mr. Simms also commented on the location of the proposed site on a
slope in the heart of the watershed in comparison to a preferred landfill site on level
ground as far downstream as possible from the hydrologic flow; as well as on the
negative impact on tax revenue due to a detrimental effect of a landfill on land values in
the area and the preclusion of new residential development; and suggested that the
private sector should be involved right away with a modern recycling and composting
facility in an area already zoned as heavy industrial and, with this, the present collection
system might not have to be radically changed, and as well user pay could be
considered to encourage more recycling and re-use activity thereby reducing the
amount of garbage going to a landfill and, with less garbage going into a landfill, other
sites could be revisited, with this lesser amount of garbage temporarily sent elsewhere
until there is a more appropriate site in the region, possibly in Kings County which has a
site on which an EIA has already been done. Mr. Simms suggested that Common
Council should not feel pressured to take the Fundy SWAT recommendation as there
are other options which could go further in benefitting the local economy and creating
jobs, be more socially-acceptable, and move the City into more modern waste
management approaches sooner, and that there is no way that Council could
responsibly make a decision to re-zone Crane Mountain in the light of the
circumstances.
Ms. Betty Rose of 36 Ashgrove Crescent in Belmont addressed Council
in opposition to the proposed landfill site at Crane Mountain on behalf of the River
Road Action Team on the basis of a concern about contamination of not only the
watershed and wildlife but possibly the water for everyone using Spruce Lake water, as
well as the St. John River.
Ms. Mary Milander appeared in opposition to the proposal as a resident
of the apartment building which is the closest residence to the proposed landfill site at
Crane Mountain; advised that she moved to the area because of the clean air and good
drinking water and is afraid that, with a landfill in the area, there will be problems with
wild animals trying to get into her garbage if the landfill is not as good or accessible
thus making the area unsafe for everybody, as well as a danger of pets getting sick
from waste at the landfill or not returning from the landfill. Ms. Milander noted the
outdoor recreational activities in the area which would be unsafe if the proposed landfill
were placed in the area; and suggested that the City should consider getting rid of
garbage some place other than in people's back yards where it will pollute the water,
and possibly the air and ruin so much of the surrounding area.
Ms. Lynn Matheson of 31 Henderson Road in Martinon spoke in
opposition to the proposal because of the possible contamination of the water supply
and the devaluation of her property as a result of being located in an area near a dump
with a potentially-bad water supply, smells bad when the wind is in the wrong direction,
and has rat, bear and seagull problem. Ms. Matheson advised that she does not want
the dump in the subject area, with or without recycling, nor does she want the rats, the
85-326
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
smell, the increased traffic, or the zone changes which would let in more industries like
Brookville's rock quarry, but most of all she wants to keep the water supply clean.
Mr. Michael Bonga of 78 Acamac Backland Road, appearing in
opposition to the proposal, distributed information and circulated a photo album
depicting photographs of the area concerned to Council members; and explained that
he is opposed to the re-zoning of the land for either site, not only because the
proposed Crane Mountain site is near his community but rather because he sees a
significant risk of locating a landfill near the City's water supply. Mr. Bonga addressed
the issues of recharge areas, recharge protection in other communities, liner failure,
and the Crane Mountain site recharge area in an attempt to make the point that, as
recharge areas are extremely sensitive to contamination, landfills, lined or unlined, are
considered a primary source of contamination; and asked clarification by Fundy SWAT
on his understanding, if it is incorrect, of an indication at the Grand Bay meeting that
the results of a modelling for groundwater flow of the area around the proposed landfill
showed that, if groundwater is contaminated, then water would come to surface well
above the downgrade in the Martinon or Grand Bay communities and would drain to the
St. John River through local streams. With respect to the latter, Mr. Bonga asked (1) if
the area beyond the point where water comes out of the ground is developed and wells
are drilled for homes, will their water become contaminated; (2) does the contaminated
groundwater have any relation or union with the City's watershed lakes, in other words,
does it all flow toward the St. John River or is there a possibility of it flowing in the other
direction; and (3) how extensive was the ground water modelling in that, having spoken
to the groundwater expert from the Environmental Protection Agency for the State of
Illinois to whom he explained the situation of trying to site a landfill on a recharge area
and while he obviously does not know the situation in this community, he pointed out
that, if there is fractured rock, such as limestone, it is very difficult to predict water flow
in a model. Mr. Bonga read from the distributed information with respect to action
taken in Pekin, Illinois to protect its community groundwater supply wells; and
referenced studies which pertain to a lined landfill in St. Catherines, Ontario, which did
leak and, while different from the proposed landfill in that it was designed with a clay
liner but no impermeable synthetic, shows what can happen when a landfill does not
perform according to design; and expressed the opinion that the re-zoning of the land
in question would be detrimental to the City and there is no purpose in risking water
supplies for a landfill, even if the land area does appear to be the perfect site, and that
the City should take the lead of Lunenburg, Nova Scotia, and establish a cost effective
composting operation which removes eighty per cent of the waste stream and, having
accomplished the extent of waste reduction, ships garbage to a landfill well away from
the water supply as might be possible.
Mr. Frank Hogan, a lawyer representing the Lorneville Community and
Recreation Association, was present in opposition to the proposal and, having noted
the presence in the Council Chamber of Mr. Armand Bannister of the Westmorland-
Albert area to whom an invitation could be extended to address Council in the interest
of having all of the information before Council at this meeting, explained that
representatives from the Lorneville community are participating in this public hearing for
the following reasons:- (1) the Fundy SWAT application makes three requests: (a) to
redesignate and re-zone the area known as the Crane Mountain site to a heavy
industrial designation and zone; (b) to remove the reference to municipal ownership in
the "1-2" Heavy Industrial zone; and (c) delete the requirement that a sanitary landfill in
the "1-2" Heavy Industrial zone be enclosed with a painted solid fence and replace it
with a requirement for a natural buffering and/or constructed earth berms, the latter two
which specifically relate to Lorneville. Mr. Hogan expressed the view that there has
been inadequate public notice of the Zoning By-Law amendment as it relates to
Lorneville in that, while Fundy SWAT has two proposed sites and the subject
application affects both sites, the public advertises never mentions the Lorneville site
and the map with the public advertising only shows the Crane Mountain site, and Fundy
SWAT's application and staff's report to the Planning Advisory Committee address
almost exclusively the Crane Mountain site, not the issue specific to Lorneville, leading
to the question of how Common Council could make a decision affecting the Lorneville
site without full input from all sources. Mr. Hogan commented on the proposed removal
of the word "municipal" from "municipal sanitary landfill" is not just a technicality in that
the word "municipal" connotes several things, including ownership and direct control by
the City of Saint John which is the ultimate planning body in the community, the size of
the facility; i.e. a landfill handling the City's garbage, not the whole region's garbage;
85-327
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
and the type of waste; i.e. municipal waste, not industrial waste, and asked the impact
of the removal of the word "municipal" for all "1-2" zones in the City and if any type of
sanitary landfill could be located in any of these locations without first coming to both
the Planning Advisory Committee and Common Council, and if a private sector ash
disposal landfill could be located in an 1-2 zone without any further amendment to the
Zoning By-Law; and suggested that the City would be giving up control if it makes the
blanket, non-site specific amendment. In relation to the request to remove the need for
fencing, Mr. Hogan noted that berms and trees will not keep out scavengers; and made
the observation that all of these points lead to the conclusion that the request to amend
the Zoning By-Law directly affects Lorneville, and no decisions should be made by
Common Council that impact on Lorneville without a full and fair hearing for the
Lorneville community. Mr. Hogan also explained that the other main reason for the
Lorneville community's participation is simple as the last thing anybody wants to see
happen at this meeting is that Common Council, after listening to the valid concerns of
the community, turns down the re-zoning only to have Fundy SWAT mis-read the will of
Common Council and try to locate the landfill in Lorneville as it is his belief that most
will agree that Lorneville is even more unsuitable as a location. Mr. Hogan summarized
the following key points relating to the Lorneville site:- (1) the basic requirements of the
Province's siting guidelines for sanitary landfills have not been met; (2) Fundy SWAT's
current organization and anticipated legislation to change the voting procedures such
that the City of Saint John will have an effective veto over any future decisions, with the
voting change to take effect only after the landfill site is chosen, raises the question of
the fairness of the City having a lot of control over the landfill's operation but very little
control over the sites promoted by Fundy SWAT; (3) the inadequacies of the current
Provincial environmental impact assessment and how it impacts on the City's planning
process in view of the most recent landfill decision in Canada, made by the Ontario
Joint Board rejecting an application to locate a landfill site near the town of
Flamborough, Ontario, with the EIA conducted for the sites in question; (4) flaws in the
site selection process; (5) a community concern about all three water quality issues in
Lorneville - municipal drinking water, groundwater and surface water, in view of a letter,
dated March 7, 1995, from Environment Minister The Honourable Marcelle Mersereau
to the then Mayor of Saint John acknowledging that there are concerns about the
current dump impacting on Spruce Lake; (6) concerns about the Lorneville site raised
by the Department of Economic Development and Tourism, the owner of the lands in
question, that the landfill not negatively impact on its industrial park development in
Lorneville and the fact that the Department has not accepted Fundy SWAT's request to
purchase or lease more than 100 hectares of land but rather is prepared to allow only
30 hectares of land at this site for this purpose, necessitating the procurement of a
baling machine for the Lorneville site at an additional expense estimated by Fundy
SWAT at $4 million which, along with other site specific costs associated with locating a
landfill near a host community, brings into question the true economic cost of this
proposal; and (7) the deterioration of property values in Lorneville with the current
dump located there and continuance of this if a landfill is also located there. Mr. Hogan
suggested that there are many other issues involving the Lorneville site, including
whether what is being proposed is truly a state-of-the-art landfill, the lack of a track
record for liner failures in municipal landfills, the permeability of the particular type liner
to substances such as waste oils that definitely end up in the landfill even with the best
diversion program, the lack of a true user-pay system which would not have to be part
of the basic tax rate, the lack of written legally-binding water supply guarantees, and
the lack of a compensation package for the host community; and asked, on behalf of
the Association, that Common Council not accept the requested amendments proposed
by the applicant, and to specifically state its concerns on the record about the
possibility of another landfill in Lorneville as the proposed site is not acceptable, so that
Fundy SWAT will not waste any more time focusing on either of these unacceptable
sites and will get on with the process of finding the real solution to the solid waste
problems.
In response to Councillor Fitzpatrick, Mr. Hogan advised that comments
have been made by Fundy SWAT, through Bill Artiss, that it may be possible, if the
proposed re-zoning is turned down, to attempt to make another application to the City,
possibly to the Planning Advisory Committee and not Common Council, concerning the
use of the Lorneville site for a landfill and/or maximum recycling facility and, in his
opinion, this would be a mis-reading of Council's position if Council were to reject the
proposed re-zoning, thus the request for some indication on the record to clearly
indicate Common Council's wishes that, if the re-zoning is turned down, it is turning it
85-328
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
down legally for the Crane Mountain site and, through political will, for the Lorneville
site.
Ms. Shirley Shewbridge of Lorneville spoke in opposition to the proposal
and, in reviewing some of the hardships the Lorneville area has endured over the past
24 years, referenced newspaper excerpts (copies of which were subsequently filed with
the Common Clerk) relevant to the 1971 re-zoning of 8,000 acres of Lorneville land to a
heavy industrial classification and plans for a thermal plant. Ms. Shewbridge advised
that Councillor Arthur Gould indicated at a March 23 Fundy SWAT executive meeting
that he was convinced that a promise was made by the former Mayor that Lorneville
would not have another dump or landfill; expressed the opinion that seagulls in Spruce
Lake are slowly affecting the water supply with both their droppings and garbage they
bring to the Lake; and presented a petition of 680 signatures opposing Fundy SWAT's
regional sanitary landfill at Paddy's Hill in the Lorneville area under any terms or
conditions.
Mr. Edmund Wilson of Lorneville, appearing in opposition to the
proposal, referenced a letter, signed by him and two other persons, to the Minister of
the Environment, dated February 13, 1995 on the subject of "A Community of Fear" or
"The Ghettoizing of Lorneville, N.B. (copies of which were submitted to Council with the
Planning Advisory Committee report), to outline concerns, including the visibility of the
Paddy's Hill site from the Lorneville Road, decrease in property values and a promise
by former-Mayor Elsie Wayne that there would be no further worries about a landfill in
Lorneville; and asked Council to support the Planning Advisory Committee's
recommendation to disallow any re-zoning that would affect the establishment of
another landfill in Lorneville and to act on the promise given Lorneville by the
immediate removal of Lorneville from further consideration for any future landfills.
Following a brief recess, the Council meeting reconvened whereupon
Mayor McAlary asked if there were any other persons who wished to speak in
opposition to the Fundy SWAT application.
Mr. Gerry Poole of Lorneville addressed Council in opposition to the
proposed landfill site at both Paddy's Hill and Crane Mountain; advised that, although
not opposed to Fundy SWAT's original proposal, he is in strong opposition to site
selection process and the "watered-down" version presented to Council as the people
were led to believe that a MAX RF would be operational upon the opening of a new
site, not the old site made over, but a new site; and expressed concern about future
domestic wells at Lorneville and Martinon and the water supply of West Saint John; the
greatly increased potential for vehicular accidents with the introduction of 388 to 558
more vehicles per day, with only one access to Lorneville through the Industrial Park;
the lack of enforcement of regulations requiring vehicles with open boxes to be covered
with a tarp to prevent flying debris; the creation of dust and fumes; and the adverse
effect on air quality of emissions from a decaying process of organic material and from
the operation of a landfill, most notably from the required trucks and other mobile
sources. Mr. Poole, in asking for a fair chance to enjoy what is left of the community
and to enjoy a quality of life denied to the residents since the introduction of the dump
in 1978, asked Council not to add insult to injury by allowing the proposal.
Mr. Garry Prosser of Red Head, appearing in opposition to either site,
spoke on behalf of PURE - Proper Urban and Rural Environment, and expressed
concern that, as industry is imposing itself on residential areas in the City, people are
moving away and the City's tax base is going down, as is the enjoyment of property
and quality of life. Mr. Prosser noted the presentation to the Planning Advisory
Committee by SWAP - the Solid Waste Alternate Plan Committee, at which time
Charlotte County and Westmorland County were mentioned as alternates; expressed
the view that it is not quite proper that Fundy SWAT looked only inside the immediate
area for a landfill site and that, while recycling must be a part of any proper landfill, the
mandate of the facility is more important, such mandate being that the end product
going into a landfill has to be totally inert because only then can one feel safer about
the water supply; and proposed that, because with recycling the landfill size could be a
fraction of what is proposed in the application, that, in turn, would open up the site
selection all over again, including the Charlotte and Westmorland Counties. Mr.
Prosser commented on problems with trucking to landfills and predicting groundwater
flow; and asked Council to honour the pledge made in 1967 by then-Mayor Arthur
85-329
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
Gould, as reported in a newspaper article on January 6, 1967 at the first Council
meeting of the new amalgamated City of Saint John, that each of the individual
communities could and did have the right of forming and structuring their own
communities, by denying the application for Crane Mountain, and to send a signal that
Lorneville will not be acceptable.
Mr. David Thompson of the New Brunswick Conservation Council, in
addressing Council in opposition to the proposal, advised that both the Crane Mountain
and Paddy's Hill sites are considered unacceptable, being both located between the
wells of residents on groundwater and City water supply, and that the Conservation
Council would like to go on record as opposing the re-zoning of the Crane Mountain
site for the intended purpose, as well as to any amendments to the wording in City
legislation which would allow any kind of a landfill to continue, or an amended type of
landfill, other than a municipal landfill, to occur in the Lorneville area. Mr. Thompson
expressed concern about the deletion of recycling and waste reduction from Fundy
SWAT's plan as this is the premise of good environmental and garbage management;
suggested that the process has failed, in that there should now be in operation a dump
site which is environmentally-sound, largely because of the unwillingness to involve the
host communities, being those which would have the potential of being affected from
the environmental effluent and activities of the waste site, as Fundy SWAT, in referring
to the larger community of Saint John, has refused to acknowledge the River
Road/Martinon or Lorneville as being the host communities. Mr. Thompson commented
on the unpredictability of groundwater flow in the subject area; beaver activity and the
presence of birds, wildlife and Atlantic salmon, the latter being a species very quickly
being eradicated from brooks and streams in this part of Eastern Canada; and the year-
round use of the area for recreation and berry picking; and expressed the opinion that
this green area should not be lost as people need a place available to get to nature,
and that such green spaces need to be protected and enhanced.
Mr. Steve Anderson of Lorneville spoke in opposition to the proposal
based on his concerns regarding land zoning in the Lorneville peninsula and its relation
to Fundy SWAT's application to secure part of it as a possible site for a regional landfill;
expressed agreement with Minister of Economic Development and Tourism The
Honourable Leo McAdam in a letter copied to former Mayor Thomas Higgins that, while
land in the Lorneville peninsula was assembled more than 20 years ago when the
possibility of heavy industries and a deep water terminal existed, these reasons may
not be realistic today, and added his opinion that at no time would they be acceptable
ways of exploiting the Lorneville Peninsula. Referring to comments attributed to
Premier Frank McKenna in the print media that the types of industry disappearing from
Saint John are likely never to be seen again, Mr. Anderson suggested that this signals
that it is time for the City of Saint John to concede that plans which would make the
Lorneville Peninsula a heavy industrial complex, including a regional sanitary landfill as
a heavy industrial use of the land, are indeed unrealistic. Mr. Anderson, in noting the
problems associated with a landfill, such as vermin and increased traffic, expressed the
opinion that the City must consider the long-term effects of air, water and soil pollution
and on the quality of life caused by the full development of the Lorneville Peninsula;
and asked that, as Mr. McAdam has indicated that his Department is commissioning a
study which will address a recommendation on zoning changes for future development
as well as concerns about having a landfill on the Lorneville Peninsula, Council
postpone its decision with respect to changing the wording from municipal to regional
sanitary landfill until the Province's land use strategy for the Lorneville Peninsula has
been redefined, and also that consideration be given to a review of the entire City's
land use strategy to reflect today's economy, its future direction, the health and
property rights of citizens and the environmental sensitivities as a Fundy coastal region.
Mr. Norman Ferguson of Lorneville spoke in opposition to the proposal
due to a concern about a problem with animals, such as coyotes, which get
accustomed to feeding at garbage dumps losing their fear of mankind, as illustrated by
a bear attack on youngsters in Lorneville last year; and also a concern about seagulls
in an area of a landfill in close proximity to the City's water supply; and asked Council,
in view of an anticipated expensive-looking, glitzy-type presentation by Fundy SWAT,
to consider that money and glitz does not always denote expertise and that the people
who have spoken so eloquently at this meeting are, in their own right, experts about
how their community should be treated.
85-330
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
Mr. W. Artiss, Chairman of Fundy SWAT, appearing in support of the
proposal and through a slide presentation, noted the composition of Fundy SWAT
representing each of the municipalities and local service districts in the Fundy Region,
including the City of Saint John, the six Kennebecasis Valley communities, Hampton,
St. Martins, Grand Bay, Westfield, and the local service districts in that area; and, in
explaining the purpose of the application before Council, advised that this is required in
order to complete the EIA process in that, before Cabinet will give a final decision, it
requires that issues with respect to availability and re-zoning of the land are cleared.
Mr. Artiss, having noted Fundy SWAT's mandate to develop and implement a solid
waste management plan to service the needs of the Fundy Region for at least twenty-
five years and be socially, environmentally and economically acceptable, provided
information on Fundy SWAT's activities to date, including (1) a waste audit which
concluded that the Region produced 115,000 tonnes of garbage a year, one-quarter of
the New Brunswick total, of which 70% comes from the City of Saint John, comprised of
approximately 65,000 tonnes from the ICI sector and about 19,000 tonnes a year
residential; (2) an assessment of the alternatives with the decision being that a solid
waste system for the Fundy Region would be comprised of waste reduction education
on an ongoing basis, a maximized recycling facility and a companion landfill, the City of
Saint John's vote being conditional on siting a landfill that would accommodate 100% of
the waste stream on the assumption that that would be necessary; and (3) the site
selection process, during which time the Department of the Environment indicated that
the 50% funding was for the landfill only and there would be no funding for recycling
and composting and the City of Saint John indicated that it could not afford recycling at
that point in time due to a concern about a substantial increase in taxes from the capital
cost of a facility and the increased cost of collection and transportation, with the
decision to have full environmental impact analysis done on two sites - Crane Mountain
and Paddy's Hill, neither of which have a dwelling within 2.2 kilometres with the single
exception of a small apartment building about one kilometre from the Crane Mountain
site. Mr. Artiss, addressing the Crane Mountain site, explained that, while this site is
within a groundwater recharge area, Fundy SWAT was told that 90% of the Province of
New Brunswick is in a groundwater recharge area which, if the decision were made not
to site a landfill in a recharge area, would eliminate 90% of the land mass in the
Province; requires a highway interchange redevelopment which has a budget item of
$2.7 million to upgrade to adequately handle the traffic that would be required; has a
visibility problem in that it is visible from about 2 kilometres on leaving Saint John and
that Fundy SWAT is working its utmost in an attempt to resolve that problem and has
$800,000 in capital for berms and trees, with the intent being to first build up the lower
part of the site and plant trees on that and subsequently work behind that so visibility
will be much less of a concern; and requires Municipal Plan and Zoning By-Law
amendments. Concerning the Paddy's Hill site, Mr. Artiss advised that this is Crown
land under the control of the Minister of Economic Development and Tourism; is a small
site which would require, in order to reach the 25-year mandate, baling at a capital cost
of $4 million; is remote from houses by 2.2 kilometres; is in a groundwater discharge
area insofar as the landfill would be located, with the scales and maintenance building
and such to be in a groundwater recharge area; has pool soil conditions, particularly the
lower part in which there is rock outcrops and bogs and would be difficult on which to
locate a landfill, but engineering firms indicate that it can be done; is located beside the
present Lorneville facility which is a concern because that site does not have a liner
and, if houses that have wells contaminated, it could be difficult to demonstrate that it
did not come from a new facility; requires the Zoning By-Law text amendments to
delete to reference to municipal and the requirement for a fence; and its use for a
sanitary landfill is conditional on a recycling facility being in place. Mr. Artiss made the
observation that the EIA that was done concluded that an engineered containment
landfill can be located at either of the Crane Mountain or Paddy's Hill sites, with the
Technical Review Committee's having generally agreed that, in the light of current
regulations and from experience with other containment landfill facilities, the project
could be constructed and operated in an environmentally-acceptable manner at either
site; that the Planning Department recommended the proposed Municipal Plan
amendment, re-zoning and text amendment subject to Section 39 conditions requiring
approval of the Province of the EIA, interchange improvements or reconstruction in
accordance with Department of Transportation requirements, and City approval of a
detailed site development plan; and that the Planning Advisory Committee could not
support the Fundy SWAT application and denied it. Mr. Artiss commented on the
original maximum recycling facility proposed by IPS, now a division of Wheelabrator, a
preferred developer selected by Fundy SWAT; as well as on a proposal which the
85-331
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
private sector has now put together which would include detailed design, construction
and operation of a maximized recycling and landfill facility; and advised that the
collection and transportation requirements are being reviewed as there is now more
information available and, depending on the level of service to be provided, it is
believed that a system can be put in place without significant changes to the cost of
collection and transportation, although this could no doubt mean that in at least the
rural areas there would be no front-door pick up of recyclables but rather depots could
be used for placing recyclable material, and that, even in the built-up areas, there could
be bi-weekly or even monthly pick-up.
With respect to alternatives, Mr. Artiss advised that Fundy SWAT, in order to address
the concerns expressed with respect to the EIA and the suggestion that with maximum
recycling and composting a large landfill would not be needed, has reviewed some of
the options that had previously been rejected, plus a few new ones, keeping in mind
that the Minister of the Environment has indicated that the present Spruce Lake facility
must be closed in the fall of 1996 and it is his understanding that she is going to place
similar deadlines on the other landfills in the area and is proposing to do the same thing
to the open dumps operated by the Department of Transportation, and considered the
easterly sites that were previously set aside on the basis of their size, as well as sites
just over the Charlotte County line and the idea of going to Gagetown and the Minto-
Chipman area. Mr. Artiss explained that the easterly sites are not better as those that
rank lower technically have access concerns and those that ranked higher technically
have social concerns; the smaller sites north of St. Martins are not viable on the basis
of size being unable to support a 25-year site, and distance from the centre of waste
generation resulting in transportation concerns and the environmental impact of
approximately 300 trucks a day travelling Route 111 to St. Martins, and, if viable, would
cost an extra $1 to $2 million a year, as well as the cost of reducing the amount of
waste to an amount small enough for it to be a 25-year site; sites just across the
Charlotte County line, while they would not be unopposed as people live there, have
generally poor soil conditions, would cost an additional $1 to $2 million a year and
would take 2 to 3 years to develop, if they could be developed; the Lawrence Station
site near McAdam, which is currently going through an EIA by the Charlotte County
Wastewatchers, is not yet approved, the capacity of it is a question, and the EIA would
have to be at least partially re-done as it is based on a waste loading of 40,000 tonnes
a year and the Fundy Region would be adding 115,000 tonnes to that, would require a
transfer station at a cost of $5 million and an operating cost of $1 million a year, the
line-haul cost would be about $1.5 million a year extra on top of what they would be
somewhere else, with transportation by road being more cost effective than
transportation by rail by about half a million dollars a year, there would have to be an
incentive attractive enough for the Charlotte County people to take waste from the
Fundy Region, the total cost of development is not yet known and the site would not be
unopposed; and Westmorland-Albert Solid Waste Commission indicated that it would
listen to Fundy SWAT and there would be costs involved for studies, including at least
a partial EIA because there would be a doubling of the waste loading on that facility,
would require public hearings and the approval of the municipalities, the Solid Waste
Commission, the private sector operator of the facility and the public, as well as benefit
the Westmorland-Albert, would require a transfer station, with similar line-haul costs as
for Lawrence Station, with the bottom line again being about $2 million more per year,
with no recycling or composting, representing a cost of $50 million over 25 years and
$17.50 a tonne on a tipping fee. Mr. Artiss also explained that a landfill only, based on
a preliminary design, for Crane Mountain, assuming a $2.7 million cost for highway
interchange upgrades and $800,000 for trees and berms, predicts a tipping fee of $48
per tonne, with the cost to the Region for disposal being $48 by 115,000 tonnes for
$5.5 million per year or, more correctly by dividing the $5.5 million cost per year by
115,000 tonnes per year; and that the tipping fee at Paddy's Hill would be $56 per
tonne, the difference reflected in the $4.5 million required in order to have the baling
facility to get a 25 year life there. Mr. Artiss made the observation that the residential
cost to the City of about $900,000 a year represents about 3 cents on the tax rate,
while the ICI sector, looking at the waste loading there, would cost about $2.5 million a
year, and that this would represent a new cost to the City, as the City has not been
charging itself for tipping at Spruce Lake and has also been obtaining revenue from the
operation and, considering the additional new cost and the loss of revenue, the swing
would be about 6 cents, if nothing else changes; while, if an alternative cost of $2
million a year, which is approximately the cost identified of the alternatives, of which
70% would come from the City of Saint John as 70% of the waste comes from the City,
this would represent an additional $300,000 residential cost and $1 million on the ICI
85-332
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
sector, or $1.4 million per year to the City of Saint John, which, although working it out
over 25 years for $50 million with 41,000 private households in the region and 52
weeks in the year represents $1 a week per household, represents the cost of Harbour
Station, the Imperial Theatre and a few other projects. Mr. Artiss reviewed Fundy
SWAT's concerns about the loss to the Region of the failure to solve the Region's
waste problem; and the five basic options of (1) a landfill only at Crane Mountain or
Paddy's Hill; (2) a landfill with recycling and composting at Crane Mountain or Paddy's
Hill; (3) going to Westmorland-Albert Counties or to Charlotte County; (4) a private-
public sector operation; and (5) a private sector operation. With respect to public
sector operation, Mr. Artiss noted the lowest cost of operation, based on a preliminary
estimate, of $48 per tonne, as well as a concern based on discussions over the past
couple of months about the possibility of 115,000 tonnes not being a certainty which
would have an effect on the tipping fee; and commented on concerns relevant to
private sector design, construction and operation of a landfill, plus recycling and
composting of yard waste with a capacity to expand that to compost the entire organic
stream for the cost of public sector operation of a landfill only, assuming a value of
$100 a tonne for recyclables, such concerns related to the uncertainty about how much
the organic fraction is as monitoring has not been done at the landfills. Mr. Artiss, in
summarizing, suggested that, should Council deny the application, Fundy SWAT needs
clear direction on where to go next.
During discussion Mr. Artiss responded to Council queries on matters,
including the availability of capital funding from the Province for a landfill only and
through the infrastructure program for a recycling and composting facility; Fundy
SWAT's expansion of the scope of the understanding it had with the private developer
selected for a recycling and composting facility, IPS Wheelabrator, with the landfill
portion to still involve the parent company, Waste Management Inc., with a question still
about ownership in that it is doubtful that the $1 million in infrastructure funding would
flow to a private company whereas it would flow to the commission that comes out of
Fundy SWAT, as well as a question of whether or not it would be less expensive for the
commission to raise the capital financing for the project; discussion with local
companies as to interest in the project to which he indicated that, while people in
Westmorland-Albert indicated a desire to talk with Fundy SWAT, they chose not to bid
on the proposal for recycling and composting and that, if the project is re-tendered,
there would have to be a site; the issues of garbage pick-up and separation; the
conclusion of the hydrogeologist who did the drilling for Fundy SWAT, the EIA and the
Technical Review Committee concluded that concern with respect to permeability and
leakage of seams and pinholes of liners is not a significant concern and that the down-
gradient wells are not at risk; a question of whether or not Fundy SWAT has an
objection to installing a chainlink fence at Crane Mountain to exclude animals and keep
in fugitive garbage, to which Mr. Artiss responded in the negative, with respect to either
site; the reference to $48 tipping fee based on 115,000 tonnes for landfill only and to
Wheelabrator's reference to 100,000 tonnes, in that the latter would change the tipping
fee to $55, and the diversion percentage relevant to recycling and composting, as well
as the issue of the value per tonne of recycled material, in view of an observation that it
appeared that the information presented is dated. In response to a query about
payment of taxes on a new landfill site; whether or not the City would pay taxes on a
landfill; a question about the accuracy of diagrams referenced during Mr. Bowen's
above presentation showing the proximity of the Crane Mountain site to the Spruce
Lake watershed while Fundy SWAT has indicated that it is not close to the watershed
tow which Mr. Artiss replied that the diagrams were accurate twenty some years ago
when they were generated for the first Municipal Plan in the early 1970s at which time
the definition of watershed was rather broad and the definition now used is contained in
legislation introduced about 7 or 8 years ago and it is in that time frame that the Spruce
Lake watershed has been defined, and also that the City of Saint John and the EIA
study concluded that, and the Province agrees, this site is not within the watershed;
and the matter of public involvement in the process.
On motion of Councillor Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Ball
RESOLVED that as recommended by the
Planning Advisory Committee, the application of Fundy SWAT for a Municipal Plan
amendment and re-zoning of property on Highway 7 (Crane Mountain), and a Zoning
By-Law text amendment with respect to Section 630, be denied.
85-333
COMMON COUNCIL
JUNE 19, 1995
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Chase,
Knibb and Waldschutz voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Vincent
Seconded by Deputy Mayor Chase
RESOLVED that Fundy SWAT be
requested to discontinue any further effort to establish a landfill site in Lorneville.
(Rescinded August 28, 1995 Bk. 85 Pg. 429 )
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Ball
RESOLVED that the Mayor be requested to
arrange a meeting with Fundy SWAT and the appropriate Provincial Government
officials to discuss and re-examine the landfill site for Saint John, with the site to remain
inside the City of Saint John on a permanent basis.
Councillor Trites expressed the understanding that the above-proposed
meeting is for Council, Fundy SWAT and Provincial officials. With respect to Councillor
Brown's indication of his difficulty with the motion if it proposes that the landfill would be
sited in Saint John County as this could cut off the City's options, Councillor Vincent
clarified that it was not his intention to eliminate options, but rather to look at Saint John
first to establish economic spin-offs and other benefits such as job creation, and that
the region could be looked at as well. Councillor Knibb expressed opposition to the
motion if it was proposing to eliminate Fundy SWAT and suggesting that the City
proceed along, whereupon Mayor McAlary clarified that the motion was for the Mayor to
arrange a meeting for Council, Fundy SWAT and Provincial Government
representatives to discuss options for the establishment of a landfill site, and Councillor
Vincent confirmed that it was not his intent to by-pass Fundy SWAT.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Adjournment
On motion of Councillor Trites
Seconded by Councillor Fitzpatrick
RESOLVED that this meeting be
adjourned.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Common Clerk