Editor’s Note: It may seem that all issues with the Carp Road landfill have been quiet, but West Carleton resident Harold Moore tells us that … ‘we will see work on the new landfill in the future’. Harold has been a formidable voice in the fight against the landfill expansion.
As long-term residents know, the Carp Road landfill at the Queensway which opened in 1971 reached capacity and closed in 2011. Since the closure, the waste transfer facility has continued to accept waste for shipping off-site. This summer a new contaminated soil processing facility started operations to process soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons and other compounds associated with petroleum hydrocarbons.
Waste Management of Canada, the operator of the landfill started the approval process for expansion in 2006 and received provincial approval in 2013. Since then they have received rezoning approval from the city and in 2015 received conditional approval of the Site Plan by the city. Some of the 38 conditions that must be addressed before Site Plan approval relate to:
- odour monitoring,
- groundwater monitoring,
- roadwork on Carp road at a new landfill entrance,
- waste diversion, and
- agreement on a Host Municipality Responsibility Agreement (HMRA).
Since 2015 Waste Management of Canada and the city have been working on addressing the conditions and negotiating the HMRA. The HMRA is important, because it will define the relationship between the city and the landfill operator during the life of the landfill expansion and what responsibilities the operator has to the city and the residents of the local
community. Such things as:
- community compensation,
- property value protection, and
- environmental reporting among other issues will be part of the HMRA.
Unfortunately, the public will have little opportunity to review the HMRA and provide comment. The document is being negotiated behind closed doors and even our city councillors have little knowledge of the content.
It is understood that once a HMRA is finalized it will be presented to the Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee as an information item — meaning it will not be up for discussion and a vote.
Thus, it will basically be a done deal similar to the 2001 disastrous secret deal negotiated between the city and Waste Management. All the public can do is hope the city negotiators learned from the 2001 exercise and come up with a deal we all can live with.
SUPPORT LOCAL STITTSVILLE