About 100 people braved stormy weather Tuesday night as Rockwood council heard strong opposition to two Heidelberg Materials quarry-related applications near Stonewall, with residents and town officials warning of impacts on homes, traffic, health and future growth.
Scott Wozny, area manager for Heidelberg Materials, speaks during a public hearing in Rockwood regarding proposed quarry expansion near Stonewall
The RM of Rockwood hosted back-to-back public hearings on zoning bylaw amendment 38-25 and conditional use application RWC 10/25, both tied to proposed quarry expansion in the area.
Reeve Wes Taplin opened the meeting by acknowledging the strong emotions surrounding the issue and urging respectful dialogue.
“We are here to discuss matters that are important to our community and our municipality,” Taplin said. “It’s essential that we approach this evening with respect for one another and our shared goal of finding the best outcomes for everyone.”
The rezoning application would change land from industrial extractive holding to industrial extractive zoning to allow Heidelberg Materials to expand quarry development north of Stonewall.
A separate conditional use application would allow extraction activities to extend westward onto additional lands near PR 236, approximately half a mile from the town.
Jessie Russell-Edmonds, acting regional manager with Manitoba’s Municipal and Northern Relations Community Planning Services Branch in Selkirk, said the rezoning lands are identified in the South Interlake Planning District (SIPD) development plan as having high aggregate potential.
However, she noted both applications fall within a one-mile buffer surrounding Stonewall, where planning policy aims to limit land uses that could affect the town’s long-term expansion.
For the conditional use application, Russell-Edmonds added the land is designated restricted agricultural area and identified as having low to no aggregate potential, raising additional questions about compatibility with surrounding uses.
Provincial departments raised no major objections, but Manitoba Transportation and Infrastructure indicated traffic impacts on PR 236 and PTH 67 may require further study.
Scott Wozny, area manager for Heidelberg Materials, said the proposals are part of a long-term plan to continue existing operations, not create a new quarry.
“This application does not create a new quarry, and it does not introduce newer different types of activities,” he said. “Rather, it allows existing quarry operations to progress in an orderly and planned manner as current permitted areas are completed.”
Wozny said operations would continue to include drilling, blasting and hauling, with processing remaining at the existing Glacier plant site for the foreseeable future. He said truck traffic would not pass through Stonewall and the company would work with regulators to determine safe haul routes if operations expand west of PR 236 in the future.
He also emphasized that quarrying is a temporary land use and said Heidelberg conducts progressive reclamation, contributing to a provincial rehabilitation fund and restoring land as operations advance.
Supporters of the industry pointed to its economic importance in the region.
Chris Lorenc, president and CEO of the Manitoba Heavy Construction Association, said aggregates are essential to infrastructure and development across the province.
“Without this industry, building and maintaining the amount of infrastructure we rely on every day would be far more difficult and significantly more expensive,” he said.
The Town of Stonewall spoke against both applications.
CAO Wally Melnyk told council the proposals are premature, noting the SIPD is currently reviewing its development plan, including policies around quarry buffering near urban areas.
“The town cannot support this rezoning,” Melnyk said.
He added the applications fall within the one-mile buffer zone intended to protect future urban growth and argued council does not yet have sufficient information on traffic, water and other impacts to make an informed decision.
Mike Palmer, acting chairperson of the SIPD board, also recommended against approving new quarry developments within the one-mile buffer, citing the need to reduce land-use conflicts and allow the planning review process to be completed.
Dozens of residents spoke at both hearings, raising concerns about blasting, dust, truck traffic, groundwater impacts, property values and the long-term expansion of quarry operations toward the community.
Pam Palcat, who lives near the quarry area, said residents already experience impacts from existing operations.
“Our property in Rockwood is not only our home but an investment in our future,” she said. “If these changes are made, it’s extremely likely that our property value will decrease.”
Town of Stonewall resident Maggie Fitzpatrick said the conditional use proposal is particularly concerning because of its proximity to homes and community amenities.
“This one is directly north of my house and in my view from my kitchen window,” she said.
She also questioned the long-term growth of quarry operations near the town and urged council to reject the application.
“We really have this one chance for council to make the right decision and deny this application,” Fitzpatrick said.
Larry Neufeld said he has experienced years of blasting impacts and worries the situation will worsen if extraction moves closer.
“I do not have one seal in my windows that is not broken,” he said.
Other residents raised concerns about potential truck traffic crossing PR 236, the lack of visible reclamation on existing quarry lands and the timing of the applications while broader planning policies are still under review.
Heidi Fingas, a Stonewall resident and educator, said the proposal raises broader concerns about health, safety and quality of life.
“To ensure residents’ health and safety is a priority … ignoring these concerns will force people to move to preserve their health,” she said.
Council heard multiple written submissions in addition to oral presentations before adjourning both hearings.
No decisions have been made, and council is expected to consider the applications at a April 8 meeting.
