Sligo Co Co fail to follow advice of their own experts

Posted on August 20, 2009 | Filed Under Uncategorized 

We have had the opportunity to review the internal reports of the Sligo Co Co staff in relation to the airport runway planning application. It is both reassuring and shocking to read.

It is reassuring that a number of the staff in the Co Co are trying to follow the guidelines laid down in the Habitats Directive. It is shocking that as specialists in their respective fields, that their advice appears to be ignored by their more senior colleagues.

For example the Environmental Services Officer in a report on 6th August ’09 about the Airport Planning Application said the following:

“The environmental issues in relation to this proposal have not been adequately addressed and I have concerns in relation to the proposed development and the enforcement of planning conditions if the application is granted”

The Heritage Officer’s report was even more specific and recommended that the planning application be rejected.

Copyright issues prevent us from reproducing the report in its entirety but we quote from it as follows from the Heritage Officer’s report:

“Art 6(3) of the Habitats Directivehas not been applied correctly in the EIS submitted by the applicant”

“Art 6(4) if applied to the cSAC and SPA affected by the proposed development must have regard to priority species and habitats. The alternative solutions proposed are site specific only and do not examine the zero, re-location to another airport such as Knock Airport, or greenfield options. Economic criteria cannot be seen to overrule ecological criteria at this point of an Art 6(4) assessment and it is proposed that the project proposal does not address these issues.”

Art 6(4) Invoking IROPI [Imperative Reasons of Overriding Public Interest]
In invoking IROPI, stringent criteria must be met. The Planning Authority must consider that the project will allow for public interest, is overriding and is of long term interest. It is proposed that the project proposed does not deliver the scale of benefit required to invoke IROPI under the Habitats Directive and the issues of human health and public safety would be addressed by relocating the airport and/or airport services within the region.

Compensation
…… there is no clarity re the compensatory measures proposed, what the extent of the designation at Trabane Bay would be and how that would ensure the continued integrity of the cSAC and SPA…..

…. given the lack of information the Planning Authority would not be in a position to condition appropriate compensatory measures, or enforce them.

And the final conclusion is:

In the light of the above and particularly as the project proposal has failed to meet the requirements of Art 6(3) and Art 6(4) of the Habitats Directive it is recommended that the proposal be rejected.

You can read these reports in their entirety if you log on to Sligo Co Co website.
We salute the staff in the Co Co who are not afraid to stand up and say the truth. Such people are good public servants in the true meaning of the word.

About this Post
Permalink | Trackback | | Print This Article | Leave a Comment


Comments

Leave a Reply