Signed

Council reaches road use deal with Chuckery Hill developer

Last week, County council approved a Road Use Agreement with Canadian Solar, the developer of largescale solar installation (about 50,000 panels) on Chuckery Hill. The project is well-advanced. The land has been cleared, heavy equipment is on site, and many truckloads of crushed rock have been delivered.

Earlier this month, the municipality complained to the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and the Ontario Ombudsman that the developer had begun work before it had a Road Use Agreement (RUA) in place with the County. So far the MOE has not responded.

As it turns out, the developer is not required to reach an RUA with the municipality, only that it make reasonable efforts to do so. (See Correction sidebar).

Nevertheless, Canadian Solar officials came to Shire Hall last week with an RUA ready for council’s approval last week.

Several councillors used the occasion to vent their irritation with the developer.

Councillor Robert Quaiff says the developer has acted with disrespect, both to the County and to the taxpayers who fund its roads and bridges. He accused the developer of hiding their activities on the site and moving heavy equipment under the cover of darkness.

Nevertheless, Quaiff said he would hold his nose and support the signing of the RUA, as it provides for a financial guarantee to the municipality and the mechanism to recover costs to repair damage that may arise to County roads and bridges from the project.

Without this agreement, the municipality would have little recourse to recover these costs. Particularly since the enforcing body—the MOE—isn’t returning the County’s phone calls or emails on this matter.

This is not the first time the County has had to wait until Canadian Solar was well along in the development of a large solar project before it had an RUA in hand. On Black Road in Sophiasburgh, the project was nearly complete before the RUA was reached between the County and Canadian Solar.

Councillor Kevin Gale complained that the reconstruction of the Demorestville bridge was made necessary now because of the heavy truck traffic required to service the Black Road project.

“What mechanism can we put in place to ensure they come [to the County] as respectful partners?” asked Gale.

Councillor Quaiff recommends that any future applications require an enforceable commitment from the developer to sign an RUA before work begins. Renewable energy developers do not need municipal approval for their projects, but since the spring of 2012 support from local council counts as two points in favour of its application in the province’s rating system. Quaiff wants to bind future applicants to a road use agreement before council awards them these two points.

Not all councillors were displeased by the developer’s actions.

Hallowell councillor Keith MacDonald says the roads around Chuckery Hill weren’t good to begin with and that opponents were seeking to hinder development.

“This is an ideal location for that installation,” said MacDonald.

He wanted to know how much the municipality would be receiving in property taxes from the multi-million dollar project. It turns out the municipality will earn about $5,600 per year in property taxes from the 50,000-panel solar installation covering 70 acres on Chuckery Hill.

Three representatives of the developer sat silently in the gallery. None addressed council.

CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS

 The developer of a large scale solar energy installation on Chuckery Hill, is not required to reach an agreement with the municipality to use County roads. In the Times July 16 issue, it was reported that Canadian Solar had contravened the terms of its Renewable Energy Approval (REA) permit, granted to it under the Green Energy Act, by moving heavy equipment and material onto the Chuckery Hill site before it had an agreement with the municipality to do so.

According to the REA, the developer is required to prepare a traffic management plan to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Environment (MOE) but is only required to make reasonable efforts to enter into a Road Use Agreement with the municipality. If it fails to do so within three months of the delivery of its Traffic Management Plan, it must provide an explanation to the Ministry.

his company has met its requirements and that his company is not required to obtain formal permission to use County roads. (See Marner’s letter to the Times here).

The developer contends it is not required to seek an entrance permit from the municipality because they are using an existing entrance to the property. Marner further contends that the developer does not need an oversized load permit from the County, as the developer’s carrying weights are within allowable limits.

Last week, County council approved a Road Use Agreement with Canadian Solar. That agreement provides for a financial guarantee and the mechanism for the municipality to recover the cost of damage that may be caused to County roads and bridges by this development.

The project is located on 70 acres according to Marner, not 150 acres as was reported in the Times July 16 story, which relied on the Consultation Report prepared for a previous owner of the project presented in August 2012.

The project comprises fewer than 50,000 panels according to Marner.

Marner says Canadian Solar has no other plans for solar installations in the County.

He adds that his firm cannot speak to, nor does it have knowledge of, events that happened in relation to this project before Canadian Solar acquired it.

The Times attempted to contact officials from Canadian Solar for comment prior to publication of the July 16 story. Company officials responded five days later, three days after publication.