Clearview votes to appeal NEC refusal of 26/27 SR reconstruction

AWARE News Network UPDATED

The following resolution was moved by Deputy Mayor Barry Burton, seconded by Councillor Shawn Davidson and carried unanimously by Clearview Township Council on December 7 2015:

Be it resolved that Council direct the CAO and Municipal Solicitors being Barriston LLP to appeal the Niagara Escarpment Commission decision to refuse the issuance of a Development Permit for the reconstruction of the 26/27 Sideroad, from the 10th Concession westerly to the Grey County Road 31 in Application File No. S/T/2013- 2014/9152 in accordance with the recommendation of Barriston LLP in its letter to the Township dated December 2, 2015, and; Further that the letter prepared by Barriston LLP dated December 2, 2015 be made public.

Link to Clearview resolution and lawyer’s letter

UPDATE: Text of NEC decision November 19 2015:

DECISION of the NIAGARA ESCARPMENT COMMISSION:

That the Development Permit application S/T/2013-2014/9152 be refused for the following reasons:

1. The road project does not meet the test of “essential” as defined in the NEP (Appendix 2, Definitions), which requires consideration of all options in the Escarpment Natural Area. The Development Permit application did not provide adequate evidence that all options had been taken into consideration.

2. A tunnel under (former) County Road 91, that will be used to move aggregate from the new Duntroon Quarry to the processing plant on the floor of the existing Duntroon Quarry, was not in place, or taken into consideration, when the Development Permit application was made and is now operational, which further erodes the case for this road project to be deemed “essential.”

3. Development would offend the objectives of the NEP’s two most sensitive land use designations: Escarpment Natural Area and Escarpment Protection Area.

4. Development would cause environmental harm, in particular to cold water streams and would damage steep Escarpment slopes.