By Galen Simmons, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
Part of an effort to clean up the town’s west quarry, also known as the fishing quarry, with the goal of opening up recreational opportunities similar to those at the town’s swimming quarry, council recently endorsed a plan that includes the removal of the large concrete structures left behind by limestone-mining at the site.
At the Feb. 25 council meeting, councillors approved a recommendation by the town’s strategic priorities committee to have the removal of the concrete structures be presented during the town’s 2026 capital budget deliberations as part of an overall plan for revitalizing the west quarry.
“The issues (at the west quarry) all revolve around the historical-industrial use and the site not being properly cleaned up before it was handed over to the town,” St. Marys infrastructure services manager Jeff Wolfe said at the Feb. 18 strategic priorities committee meeting. “So, there’s a bunch of concrete and steel and then there’s these concrete structures that stick up out of the ground that were not addressed before the previous (owner) handed it over.
“In the early 2000s, the town lifted the proverbial rug and swept this underneath by putting a fence all the way around (the property). They said this site isn’t safe, let’s fence it off to prevent people from going in there. Obviously, that didn’t address any of the reasons for the issues, but since that time, we’ve regularly had problems with people cutting the fence to access these particular structures, so it’s constantly a maintenance item for us. Our insurer calls them “an attractive nuisance” where we as the property owner don’t really want people interacting with them, but they look kind of neat so people will go out of their way to climb the fence or cut the fence to go in and interact with them along the edge of the water.”
There are six tall concrete structures approximately 20 feet in height and several shorter structures, roughly four feet high, along the west embankment of the quarry. These supports were originally built as mining infrastructure used by the Thames Quarry Company to support bins that would top load crushed stone into railway cars. Wolfe said people climb the structures and jump off of them into the water.
A visual review of the concrete pillars on the west side of the quarry was conducted by structural engineers at B.M. Ross and Associates Ltd. last spring. They found the structures to be cracked and spalled, with openings now housing wildlife. The columns do not appear to be at risk of falling over, however continued deterioration could increase the risk of large sections falling away from the structures – a liability for the town should the quarry be opened up to the public.
Staff recommended four options for what to do with the concrete structures ranging from the complete removal of the structures at a cost of as much as $68,000 to patch-repairing the six tall pillars at an estimated cost of more than $330,000 to prevent pieces from falling off.
St. Marys cultural services manager Amy Cubberley noted that while the concrete structures are not designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, they do have some heritage value and there would likely be some public backlash should council choose to remove them entirely. While Cubberley said the purpose of the taller structures is known, there is much less historical information on the purpose of the smaller structures other than they could have housed machinery of some kind.
“Could (the shorter structures) be used in some way to enhance the park like backing benches onto them or something that would still remain as part of the history but be something that’s not so onerous to maintain?” Coun. Fern Pridham asked during the committee meeting.
While Wolfe estimated the removal of just the taller pillars would cost between $20,000 and $25,000, and said the shorter structures are in better shape without as much risk for falling debris, Mayor Al Strathdee and other members of council spoke strongly in favour removing all the concrete structures.
“This area hasn’t been designated as a historical structure. … To me, it’s garbage,” Strathdee said. “Respectfully, it’s remnants from our industrial past and its stone is deteriorating. If we keep them, we have to maintain them and I don’t see what they would add to the new vision of redeveloping the quarry. They’re stones; there’s stones all over town in different places.
“This is garbage, this is junk, this is stuff that was left behind, abandoned, and respectfully, I think if there was historical value, if there was something special there – and I know people are going to disagree with me – something would have been done in the past, but the reality is, if you have a good look at these things, if we don’t do something, they’re going to fall down.”
Strathdee also pointed out the cost to have masons repoint and maintain structures like those at the west quarry would not be worth the value they would add to the site or the town as a whole.
Ultimately, the committee and later council agreed with the staff recommendation to remove the structures entirely as part of the plan for cleaning up the west quarry. This year, that plan includes water sampling and a depth scan at the west quarry, a parking study, the development of a landscape design and the preparation of a site-restoration budget. In 2026, landscaping and site-restoration work would begin in earnest, which will include the removal of the concrete structures.
“This isn’t happening immediately,” Coun. Rob Edney said at the committee meeting. “We approved this is the direction we’re going. … If someone can come forward with a case in that period of time to say the significance of these (structures) is so great that we have to find a way to maintain them, I am all ears.”
Pridham, who had to leave the committee meeting Feb. 18 before members voted on the removal of the structures, made it known at the Feb. 25 council meeting she was disappointed council wouldn’t consider maintaining the smaller structures as a tie-in to the quarry’s industrial past and voted against the committee recommendation.
Comments