Mr Justice McKechnie in the high court on Friday 4th June 2010 quashed the decision by Sligo Co Co to grant planning permission to Sligo Airport to extend the runway onto Dorrins Strand.

In August 2009 Sligo Co Co granted Sligo Airport planning permission to build an extended runway onto Dorrins Strand in Sligo Bay. This permission was granted despite wide scale objections from local residents and other national bodies such as Dept of Environment, Heritage & Local Government, An Taisce and Birdwatch Ireland. It was opposed by the residents of Coney Island who were concerned at damage that would be done to the access road to the island. Finally it was opposed by fish farming interests because of the very real threat to critical operations in the immediate vicinity of the proposed extension.

Dorrins Strand is a fabulous amenity for local people and visitors; it is an area of outstanding natural beauty and it is protected under EU and national law as an important wildlife habitat. It is an SAC, an SPA and it is a listed Ramsar Site

Two local residents applied to the high court for a judicial review of Sligo Co Co’s decision to grant permission. After months of delay, multiple adjournments and a number of hearings, Justice McKechnie quashed the County Council decision in full in his decision on Friday.

The scheduled Bord Pleanala appeal which had been delayed under high court injunction, pending the outcome of the high court process will not now take place.

It leaves Sligo Airport back to square one with their development plans – three and half years after they first applied for planning permission to build a runway on Dorrins Strand.

Dorrins & Cummeen Strand Conservation Group (DCCG) welcome the decision of the court and we applaud and congratulate the two local people that took the high court action. It was a strong and courageous decision by them.

This result is a triumph for local activists who stood up for the protection of their local environment and the preservation of the rights of local people. This proposed development is totally unnecessary, is very damaging to the environment and hugely wasteful of much needed public funds.

The environmental group have criticized The National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS). They group state that they would not have had to go to the high court if the NPWS would do their job properly.

The NPWS is a section within the Department of The Environment, Heritage and Local Government who have responsibility for ensuring that Ireland’s protected areas are correctly managed and developed. This is their obligation under Irish and European Law.

A link to the article on Ocean FM here

Also link here to Friends of Irish Environment Site

Our group Dorrins & Cummeen Strand Conservation Group (DCCG) are also very unhappy with the role NPWS is playing in Sligo Airport’s proposal to build an extension to their runway and other related developments  on Dorrins Strand – a location which has the protection of multiple designations (SPA, SPA and Ramsar).

http://www.sbpost.ie/news/ireland/ireland-high-among-eu-environmental-offenders-47083.html#mon

The location in which Sligo Airport would build a runway extension on Dorrins Strand is an area designated under EU and Irish Law. The area is protected by the following designations:

Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

Special Protection area (SPA)

Candidate National Heritage Area (cNHA)

Shellfish Water Directive

It is quite astonishing that Sligo County Council have backed this plan because if it ever did get built, Sligo County Council and The Irish Government  could face huge fines from EU Commission for non-compliance with EU Environmental law.  Of course it is not really the Co Co or the Government who would pay such fines. That would be for you the taxpayer.

http://www.sligochampion.ie/temp/difficult-to-maintain-that-sligo-airport-is-vital-to-the-region-2039587.html

The text of John’s letter is published below :

Sir,

It is not correct to say as suggested in a recent article by Paul Deering that Sligo Airport will be able to cater for larger planes if the proposed extension is built. The runway will remain the same length so bigger planes will not be able to land. The extension is to cater for safety margins on both ends.

It is not correct to say that suggestions to move the airport to a green field site was to satisfy objectors. Moving to a green field site should stand on its own merits or otherwise. If the issue was seriously looked at 10 or 15 years ago then maybe the airport would be in a much stronger position to-day. It is now unlikely to be a viable solution for many years to come if ever.

It is not correct to imply that the only thing preventing the airport building an extension onto Dorrins strand is the existence of a few objectors. The problem for the airport is that Dorrins Strand belongs to the people, is a beautiful tranquil place, has a viable shell fish business and its environment is protected by stringent Irish and European laws. The airport has to overcome the law not the objectors. What does the airport mean to Sligo?

On the positive side it clearly provides a useful function. It is handy for Sligo people to fly to and from Dublin without having the bother of going to Knock. On top of that every time you fly you receive a minimum of 80 euro subsidy from the taxpayer. Understandably this is something people would not like to lose. It also gives some status to Sligo. Finally even though it is not its function it does provide important local jobs.

Clearly then it is a good thing for Sligo. If it is economically viable and does not destroy the environment or public beaches then most reasonable people would support it.

However, as it is getting taxpayers money and is proposing to rob people of their beach and their rights to avail of its amenities then it is reasonable that the issues be looked at in a more hard nosed way. Is it a vital asset to Sligo as is claimed?

This can only be said with any credibility if figures are put forward to back it up. No research has been done or figures published indicating the economic contribution the airport is making to the economy of the region.

In the absence of figures it is more logical to assume that it makes a very small contribution to the economy of the region and also because of good bus and rail links and the proximity of Knock airport it is difficult to maintain that it is vital to the region.

The first hard fact to be faced is that to provide Sligo Airport’s one air service route cost the taxpayer €25 million over the period 1998 to 2007.

With present plans it will cost the taxpayer another €10 million to build the runway extension and ongoing yearly costs of 2.5 to 3 million.

The question must be answered is this good value to the taxpayer?

Subsidising air travel to the region for business people or tourists who are bringing economic wealth to the region makes sense. If these people could use Knock or the rail service just as easily does it make sense to subsidise Sligo airport?

Is it fair to subsidise these people when the vast majority of people in Sligo could not afford to fly even at the subsidised prices.

This issue of whether subsidies are justifiable has to be faced. There is no way it should be avoided at any time but in these difficult economic times it has to be part of the equation when discussing cut backs in other areas.

It is therefore not correct for Mr. Deering and others to assert that it is in every ones interest that the airport would continue in its present subsidised form.

Unless we can get to the stage that the airport makes a substantial economic benefit to the region, and so benefits everyone, then we are using taxpayers money to benefit a very small number of people in Sligo.

Those who have an interest in the development of Sligo Airport should call for a business plan that will make the Airport viable and sustainable into the future. If this was done 10 years ago the airport would not be in the difficult position it is in to-day.

There is no point in having pie in the sky flights of fancy that we might have flights to London some day. If it did not happen in ten years of the Celtic Tiger it will not happen now or in the future without a realistic plan to achieve it.

The other issue that I feel was not correct in Mr. Deering’s article is that the airport needs this extension to survive or to continue to land planes safely. It is a self evident fact that the airport is landing planes safely at the moment. It has only a small restriction in order to do so. It cannot land planes with a full load of 70 passengers but must reduce the numbers to a maximum of 64 per flight.

If Sligo Airport could have an average load of say 60 passengers per flight to and from Dublin (as they are now allowed) then the business would be on the road to being financially viable.

Safety can be maintained without the extension and the lack of the extension is not the factor preventing the airport flying with an economic number of passengers per flight.

The viability of Sligo Airport is determined by factors other than an extension to the runway.

- John Mac Dermott, Chairman of Dorrins and Cummeen Strand Conservation Group

The group is dedicated to the conservation of Light-bellied Brent Geese in Ireland, through a programme of research and monitoring, education and outreach activities.

It is well worth a read through if you are looking for information on the Brent Goose and there are lots of other good links to bird / wildlife / wildlife habitat sites.

At around 1.00pm the crowd moved down the old airport road to Dorrins Strand.  A cheerful troupe; cheerful and apprehensive in equal measure.  Across Dorrins strand they went and there was only one thing for it.  Dive straight into the chilly waters of the channel.  No place here for the faint hearted!

There was much laughter, screeching and gasping for breath as the cold water shocked the system.  Some of us loitered around and took photographs or chatted while we admired the spirit of those in the water.  They were wonderful.

Later in the warmth of Brees pub Maire served hot punch – alcohol, or alcohol free – depending on your choice.  The warmth of the atmosphere and the punch worked wonders.  The pub was soon filled with the hum of happy conversation and the feeling of satisfaction.

Satisfaction derived from the feeling that we advanced the cause and that our cause will prevail.

For pictures visit our Flickr Page www.flickr.com/photos/dorrinsstrand

We are one of six appeals to An Bord Pleanala.  Other persons / bodies who have submitted an appeal against Sligo Airport’s plan include:

1) Department of Environment,  Heritage and Local Government, 2) Birdwatch Ireland, 3) An Taisce , 4) Coney Island Shellfish Ltd and 5) Mr Nicholas Prins.

A number of “observations” have also been submitted to Bord Pleanala

We have asked for an oral hearing.  An oral hearing can be granted at the discretion of An Bord Pleanala.

Your help at any of the fundraising efforts would be greatly appreciated.  Funds are important in this case as we want to employ the best experts we can to present our case.

The new landing system together with other safety improvements were installed at a cost of €3.6 million.

“Scheduled flights from Ireland West (Knock Airport) now serve Dublin and Cork, as well as nine destinations in the UK, including London Gatwick, Stansted and Luton. A scheduled service also serves Alicante in Spain.

Charter services on the airport website include 10 locations from Portugal to eastern Europe.”

Clearly Knock has firmly established itself as The Regional Airport for the West, Northwest as well as part of the midlands and seems to be doing an excellent job.

Do we still think there is a need for two regional airports side by side? Is there a need for Sligo Airport to destroy Dorrins Strand? Is there a need to spend €10.0 million of taxpayer’s money on an airport that by virtue of its location will never become a sustainable piece of infrastructure?

We have to take care of our environment. It is long past time that the people in charge of our public finances took stock of the infrastructural needs in this region and began to target public spending more effectively and stop the profligate waste we saw during the Celtic Tiger years.

Contrary to some of the allegations made against our organisation, Dorrins and Cummeen Strand Group are very much in favour of economic development and we recognise the need for good infrastructure and its role in society. But it has to be sustainable development and infrastructure. Unlike some of the madness we have seen by unscrupulous developers in the last few years

Link to today’s Irish Times Article

The people in attendance unanimously condemned the decision by Sligo Co Co to grant planning permission to the Airport to build a runway on Dorrins Strand. In particular people feel badly let down by the politicians and the county manager who make up the majority of the Board of Directors at Sligo Airport. People also believe that Sligo planning department are acting unlawfully in granting planning permission on a Special Area of Conservation and Special Protection Area when the county council are legally responsible for protecting these designated areas instead of destroying them.

It was formally confirmed by the meeting that we will take our case to Bord Pleanala to have the decision by Sligo Co Co reversed.

It is a very unequal battle since the Airport have access to virtually unlimited funds to hire experts to fight their case whilst our group are reliant on private donations and collections from hard pressed members of the public.

If you can help with your time or if you would consider making a money donation to our case it would help enormously.

NEXT MEETING MONDAY 24 AUGUST @ 8PM ALSO IN KELLY’S, STRANDHILL

Up to 300 objections have been made against this project including objections from Dept of Environment, Birdwatch Ireland, Birdwatch Sligo, An Taisce as well as detailed carefully researched objections from local residents and visitors to the area.

The environmental law and advice on this matter is very clear. This project can not go ahead and contravenes Irish and EU law.

The common sense of the case says that it cannot be correct to build an airport runway on a public beach and trample over the rights of local people and inflict irreparable damage to a magnificent wildlife habitat and the natural heritage.

Lastly in a time when every person in our society is experiencing severe cuts in income and extortionate increases in taxation how can the Board of Directors of the Airport justify this spending of public monies?

We really expected more from the six politicians and the County Manager; all of whom are on the Board of the Airport and clearly support this project, when the millions being spent could have been used to improve schools, hospitals, roads etc. What world do these people live in?

We will vigorously object to this planning decision with Bord Pleanala.