It's been nearly a month since city council opted to put off voting on the zoning which would allow for a controversial concrete batch plant in the McLean Lake area.

Now, city staff are recommending council again move forward on it with a condition that the land be put back to a natural state once quarrying in areas near the site have ended.

The site would be rezoned from Future Development to Quarries restricted. Only concrete plants would be permitted as a principle use, and they could only be established and operating while quarrying is happening in the McLean Lake Resource Extraction Area.

The proposal comes after years of court battles between McLean Lake residents, who are opposed to the plant, and its proponent, Territorial Contracting's Ron Newsome.

The most recent court decision saw the land revert to future development when the B.C./Yukon Court of Appeal ruled the operation of the batch plant cannot operate on its own and must be related to quarrying in the area.

The latest zoning amendment, brought forward last month, would allow the plant to be built and operated only as long as there is quarrying in the area.

Council deferred its decision on the zoning last month after Skeeter Miller-Wright, a strong voice against the development, questioned whether the city could even force a private property owner to return the land to a natural state.

At Monday evening's city council meeting, planning manager Mike Gau noted the proposed condition for the development agreement in his report to council:

"City administration is also proposing that (the zoning bylaw) be conditional upon Mr. Newsome entering into a development agreement with the city that will address the terms and conditions of the subject land being returned to a natural state once the quarrying activities have ceased – as per OCP (Official Community Plan) Policy 8.2.5.

"The development agreement will serve as a contractual arrangement between the city and Mr. Newsome – and any future owner of Lot 1247 – that will be registered on the title of the land and ensure the city's future right to have the land reclaimed to as natural a state as possible through slope grading, landscaping and reforestation.”

Under questioning from council, Gau said the development agreement would be on title with any future owners of the land subject to the same condition.

Changing the development agreement would require approval by the city.

Last month, when it was brought forward, Miller-Wright argued the city was pre-empting the current review of the OCP by moving ahead with it now rather than waiting until the city adopts a new document, likely in September.

The bylaw will also address the requirement that the plant can only be in operation as long as there is quarrying, Gau said, pointing to the proposed zoning bylaw which states: "The subject land is hereby designated IQx with the restriction being that only concrete plants are permitted as a principle use and a further restriction that concrete plants may only be established and/or continued as a use on the land as long as there is resource extraction operation within the McLean Lake resource extraction area.”

If council passes first reading next week, a public hearing would then be held at its July 26 meeting before a report to council comes forward in August prior to second and third readings of the rezoning.

At the public hearing, anyone can address council on the issue, but Miller-Wright once again voiced his opposition to the plant at Monday night's meeting after council asked if anyone in the gallery of council chambers wanted to speak.

Recognizing all his previous arguments and those of other residents are a matter of public record, he said he wouldn't go into details on those.

Instead, he made note of a suggestion that the Stevens area between the Alaska Highway and Takhini River be used for quarrying instead of the McLean Lake area, pointing out the proposed contribution agreement with the Yukon government to be considered for quarrying there.

He also took issue with comments made by Mayor Bev Buckway, who, he argued, implied that he is a lone voice against the plant.

Making note of the petitions, packed council meetings full of residents against the concrete plant and letters opposing the plant and quarry activities, he "referred” mayor and council to the record.

Miller-Wright argued too that the city has never answered his question about why it continues to move forward on allowing the batch plant to be developed.

And once again, he also challenged a council member or city staffer to a public debate on the matter, this time upping the ante with an offer to supply the coffee, juice, tea and cookies for the event.

Buckway opted to sit quietly after Miller-Wright finished his presentation and quickly left the meeting. She noted he was not there to hear her when Coun. Doug Graham questioned whether she had anything to say about Miller-Wright's remarks.

Graham, however, opted to make his own comment. His only comment, he said, was that if Miller-Wright wants to debate the issue with staff and council, he should get elected to council and then he could do so.

Miller-Wright was unsuccessful when he ran for council last October.