Biosolid storage facility wins tribunal decision despite opposition from township, neighbours

Residents of a rural area southwest of Strathroy, Ont., are concerned about an Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) decision that clears the way for the construction of a storage facility for fertilizer pellets that contain dried human waste. 

LaSalle Agri has since 2018 planned to build a facility at 25700 Kerwood Rd. for the storage of up to 110,000 cubic metres of slow-release biosolid pellets. The property, currently vacant land zoned for agricultural and industrial use, is in the municipality of Adelaide Metcalfe. 

The plan has drawn significant criticism from residents with concerns about odour, dust, increased truck traffic and worries the facility could contaminate groundwater. 

And while the township had no issues with the site being used for storing biosolids at that location, its staff did have concerns with the storage method. The company filed an appeal with the OLT in 2020, arguing the municipality failed to make a timely decision on LaSalle's application for site plan approval. 

In an Aug. 19 decision the OLT sided with LaSalle saying "the tribunal is satisfied that the township's concerns with respect to protection of groundwater, public health and safety have been adequately allayed by the appellant."

Adelaide Metcalfe has since directed staff to file a review of the OLT's decision. 

Mayor Sue Clarke declined a request for comment from CBC News, saying "this matter is still unfolding and legal in nature."

Regardless of the OLT's decision, Gail Cahil said her concerns about the biosolids storage operation have not at all been allayed. She and her husband co-own the Texas Longhorn Ranch, which sells camping and trail riding experiences for visitors on a property located less than two kilometres away.

Cahil said the area is increasingly becoming residential, and worries the storage facility will create an unpleasant odour and ruin the area's rural charm with added truck traffic. 

"This site is not a good site," she said. "It's so close to a public school, daycares and our campground and guest ranch. A lot of new families have built homes between us and the proposed site. There's too many people that will live around it."

Biosolids, which include human waste, are nutrient-rich organic material and a byproduct of municipal sewage treatment. The material is dried using heat to the point where it meets the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's definition of a fertilizer. 

An expert who testified at the tribunal said the pellets produce little odour once they're dried and kept in a state with less than 10 per cent moisture. 

In LaSalle's plans, the pellets would be stored in two 247 by 46 metre outdoor bunkers surrounded by a concrete wall less than a metre tall. The biosolid stack, about seven metres tall, would be covered by a plastic tarp weighed down with tires. 

The tribunal sided with LaSalle on other concerns raised by the township, including storm water runoff and the potential fire hazard created by the site, as biosolids have the potential to spontaneously combust.

The landowner still has other regulatory hurdles to clear, including satisfying Ontario's Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks, that the groundwater won't be affected. 

Residents opposed to the project were busy this week filing comments with the province, as the deadline for public input closed Thursday. Among them is Heather Horning, who lives about a kilometre away. 

Her main concern is the way the biosolids will be stored. 

"To me the solution is to design a facility that's fully enclosed, with a permanent roof and full walls so it's completely contained," said Horning. 

She pointed to recent extreme rainfall events, which she worries could flood and overwhelm the proposed containment methods.

"I can't imagine that tarp and tires would be sufficient to survive that kind of weather event," she said.

LaSalle general manager Michaela Tessemaker said she's confident the containment plan is safe. 

"We've done so much work and so much testing," said Tessemaker. "We are regulated we went through all the proper steps and that's why the tribunal decision was made in our favour.