The Appellants are appealing the REA on the following grounds:
1. The significant truck traffic associated with the operation of the proposed facility will be travelling into the central traffic corridor of the Town of Elmira, and will cause serious harm to the health of residents living and working along that corridor.
2. The taking of 50,000 litres of water daily will require the rezoning of the affected parcels of land from dry to wet and the construction of public water mains. The rezoning will facilitate the development of ancillary industry with associated truck traffic, thereby exacerbating the harm to public health.
3. The provisions related to truck movements on the facility only relate to on-site noise control and do not adequately address off-site health concerns associated with the truck traffic.
4. The acoustic audit will be carried out on-site and does not take into account the higher off-site noise from the truck traffic.
5. Residents along the traffic corridor will be stressed by trucks travelling to and from the facility before and after the facility’s hours of operation.
6. No provisions in the REA ensure the sanitary condition of incoming truck traffic, and will over time lead to many instances of stress affecting health.
7. The facility is not required to monitor and record the number of on-site truck movements in its record of activities undertaken at the facility. This undermines the provision restricting the number of trucks entering and exiting the facility and harms the public.
8. Schedule B “Noise Control Measures” does not address noise from off-site truck traffic, which is the type of noise that poses the greatest harm to residents.
9. The conditions related to the facility’s requirement to gather accurate information on odour and noise do not adequately address the full compliance of the EPA, O. Reg. 359/09.
10. The facility is permitted to operate during all holidays, and the lack of respite from truck traffic is a significant health risk to nearby residents.
11. The condition related to nuisance impact control and housekeeping does not include most off-site impact controls, therefore serious health risks to the public are ignored.
12. The condition related to record keeping and retention lacks a provision to monitor truck movements, which is a serious flaw that will hamper residents from monitoring this activity and seeking redress for violations.
13. The approval was issued without taking into account concerns expressed about the health impacts to those in the traffic corridor. The additional heavy truck traffic is dangerous to health because of the increased risk of collisions, the types of vehicles that use this corridor, the narrowness and crowdedness of the corridor, high levels of diesel fumes and dust emissions emitted by the trucks, and the stress resulting from a deterioration of the quality of life due to added truck traffic.
The Appellants are requesting that the Environmental Review Tribunal postpone the construction of the facility until means are found to divert truck traffic associated with the facility away from the downtown and residential corridors. In the alternative the appellants would accept the relocation of the facility to a more appropriate location, or the revocation of the REA. The appellants are not seeking a stay of the decision.