Minister's plans for Mullaghmore rejected

The way is clear for the dismantling of the partially completed interpretative centre at Mullaghmore in the Burren National Park and the reinstatement of the site to its previous condition.

This follows the decision by An Bord Pleanala to uphold Clare County Council's refusal of planning permission to the controversial plan of the Minister for the Arts and Heritage, Ms de Valera, to develop visitor facilities at Mullaghmore.

Work stopped on the construction of the development in February 1993 following proceedings taken by the Burren Action Group. An application brought by the group has been before the High Court since 1996 to clarify the future of the development, which yesterday's decision confirmed as unauthorised.

The proceedings are to be referred back to the High Court following the adjudication on the Minister's application by the appeals board.

The Minister has two months in which to initiate a judicial review of the board's decision, if she wishes to challenge a point of law or procedure. But the Minister said yesterday she would contact Clare County Council with a view to identifying other potential sites that may be available for development.

Speaking on RTE radio, the Minister said: "It is important to have such a centre for everybody within the Burren and Co Clare, but it is also important for educational purposes that such a centre is there to link in with such areas as Corofin and Kilfenora, [and] also, of course, from a tourism point of view, that a sensitive approach be taken in terms of promoting the Burren."

Responding to the Minister's proposal to identify an alternative site, a spokesman for the Burren Action Group said that all proposals on access to the Burren "have been on the table for many years but have been delayed by the ill-advised persistence with the development, which has been today refused".

In a statement, the Burren Action Group welcomed the board's decision and the principle upon which it is based: "It is the first time that the evidence was tested and the development has proved to be flawed. The group has always promoted access to the Burren, but access based on dispersal and on existing and potential community-based facilities."

Welcoming the decision, An Taisce said it reinforced the principles of sustainable development and the imperative of conserving important habitats.

In its decision upholding Clare County Council's refusal of planning permission, the appeals board ruled that the development would lead to an unacceptable degradation of the physical environment in this area of outstanding landscape beauty.

The board ruled that the proposed development would seriously injure the amenities of the area because of its impact on the fragile ecology of the habitats within the "core area" of the national park. The proposal was not suited to the natural character of an undeveloped part of the Burren where such facilities and their associated traffic problems would be obtrusive on the landscape.

The board said the proposal would seriously injure the area by reason of the necessary road works associated with access from Kilnaboy to the site, which would seriously detract from the scenic amenity and rural character of the landscape.

In these circumstances, it was considered that the proposed development would not be in accordance with the principles set out in Sustainable Development - A Strategy for Ireland, published by the Government in April 1997. The proposal would therefore be contrary to the proper planning and development of the area.

In its decision, the board noted that the Burren was of international botanical importance and that the management plan for the Burren National Park indicated that nature conservation took precedence when conflicts arose between different objectives for the management of the Burren National Park.

Mr Seamus Kelly, chairman of the Burren National Park Support Association, which supported the Minister's application, said he was deeply saddened by the result.

He said: "I can't believe the board's decision. They don't seem to have accepted any of the arguments put forward in defence of the plan. I would have expected a more balanced decision. They seemed to have dismissed the State's case out of hand. It is very one-sided."

However, Mr Patrick McCormack, one of the seven plaintiffs who brought the original High Court proceedings that stopped work at the Mullaghmore site, said: "Today is a great day. We have broken new ground and brought the environmental agenda to a new platform."