Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland: Guidance for Planning Authorities

1. Page 1

   Cite this pagePDF p. 1 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland Guidance for Planning Authorities

2. Page 2

   Cite this pagePDF p. 2 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Acknowledgements The Department wishes to acknowledge (in alphabetical order) the valuable input and assistance provided by representatives of the following organisations on both the Working Group and Steering Group in preparing these draft guidelines, and the contribution of all those who commented on various drafts of the document:  EPA  Fingal County Council  Heritage Council  Kildare County Council  NPWS, DEHLG  Planning Inspectorate, DEHLG  Sligo County Council 10 December 2009 REVISION NOTES 11 February 2010: “Statement for Appropriate Assessment” replaced by “Natura Impact Statement” or NIS.

3. Page 3

   Cite this pagePDF p. 3 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Executive summary With the introduction of the Birds Directive in 1979 and the Habitats Directive in 1992 came the obligation to establish the Natura 2000 network of sites of highest biodiversity importance for rare and threatened habitats and species across the EU. In Ireland, the Natura 2000 network of European sites comprises Special Areas of Conservation (SACs, including candidate SACs), and Special Protection Areas (SPAs, including proposed SPAs). SACs are selected for the conservation of Annex I habitats (including priority types which are in danger of disappearance) and Annex II species (other than birds). SPAs are selected for the conservation of Annex I birds and other regularly occurring migratory birds and their habitats. The annexed habitats and species for which each site is selected correspond to the qualifying interests of the sites; from these the conservation objectives of the site are derived. The Birds and Habitats Directives set out various procedures and obligations in relation to nature conservation management in Member States in general, and of the Natura 2000 sites and their habitats and species in particular. A key protection mechanism, and the subject of this guidance, is the requirement to consider the possible nature conservation implications of any plan or project on the Natura 2000 site network before any decision is made to allow that plan or project to proceed. Not only is every new plan or project captured by this requirement but each plan or project, when being considered for approval at any stage, must take into consideration the possible effects it may have in combination with other plans and projects when going through the process known as appropriate assessment (abbreviated in this document to AA). The concept of plan and project is extremely broad and is not limited to development planning and development management, covered by the Planning and Development Acts 2000-2006, and given specific attention in this document. The obligation to undertake appropriate assessment derives from Article 6(3) and 6(4) of the Habitats Directive, and both involve a number of steps and tests that need to be applied in sequential order. Article 6(3) is concerned with the strict protection of sites, while Article 6(4) is the procedure for allowing derogation from this strict protection in certain restricted circumstances. Each step in the assessment process precedes and

4. Page 4

   Cite this pagePDF p. 4 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   provides a basis for other steps. The results at each step must be documented and recorded carefully so there is full traceability and transparency of the decisions made. They also determine the decisions that ultimately may be made in relation to approval or refusal of a plan or project. AA is not a prohibition on new development or activities but involves a case-by-case examination of the implications for the Natura 2000 site and its conservation objectives. In general terms, implicit in Article 6(3) is an obligation to put concern for potential effects on Natura 2000 sites at the forefront of every decision made in relation to plans and projects at all stages, including decisions to provide funding or other support. The first test is to establish whether, in relation to a particular plan or project, appropriate assessment is required1. This is termed AA screening. Its purpose is to determine, on the basis of a preliminary assessment and objective criteria, whether a plan or project, alone and in combination with other plans or projects, could have significant effects on a Natura 2000 site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. The need to apply the precautionary principle in making any key decisions in relation to the tests of AA has been confirmed by European Court of Justice case law. Therefore, where significant effects are likely, uncertain or unknown at screening stage, AA will be required. AA is a focused and detailed impact assessment of the implications of the plan or project, alone and in combination with other plans and projects, on the integrity of a Natura 2000 site in view of its conservation objectives. There is no prescribed method for undertaking AA, or form or content for reporting. Case law has established that assessments should be undertaken on the basis of the best scientific evidence and methods. Accordingly, data and information on the project and on the site and an analysis of potential effects on the site must be obtained and presented in a Natura Impact Statement (NIS). Ecological specialists will be required to undertake the surveys, research and analysis, with input from other experts (e.g. hydrologists or engineers) as necessary to prepare the NIS. It is the responsibility of the proponent of the plan or project to have the NIS prepared for submission to the competent authority, i.e. the consent authority. Having satisfied itself 1 Plans or projects that are directly connected with or necessary to the nature conservation management of a Natura 2000 site are essentially exempt from further consideration. Such exceptions will be comparatively rare and it is recommended that the reasons and justifications, and any possible wider effects and mitigation measures, are assessed and recorded in advance of the decision to proceed in each case, together with evidence of consultation with the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) of the Department.

5. Page 5

   Cite this pagePDF p. 5 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   that the Statement is complete and objective, the competent authority carries out the AA on the basis of the Statement and any other necessary information. If it can be concluded on the basis of AA that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of a Natura 2000 site, the plan or project can proceed to authorisation, where the normal planning or other requirements will apply in reaching a decision to approve or refuse. If adverse effects are likely, or in cases of doubt, the derogation steps of Article 6(4) will apply, but only in a case in which there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest (IROPI) requiring a project to proceed, there are no less damaging alternative solutions, and compensatory measures have been identified that can be put in place. The IROPI test is more rigorous and restrictive in relation to adverse effects on Annex I priority habitats and species. The Habitats Directive requires Member States to inform the Commission of the compensatory measures; this enables the Commission to review whether the compensatory measures are sufficient to ensure that the coherence of the network is maintained. If the Commission is not satisfied it may take steps against the Member State up to and including litigation in the European Court of Justice. Recourse to derogation to allow a plan or project to proceed should be pursued in exceptional circumstances only, and the Minister must be informed at an early stage of any possible IROPI case. The duty to undertake AA, having considered the NIS, and to ensure that the stringent evaluation and decision-making procedure is applied correctly, lies with the competent authority, i.e. the national, regional or local authority charged with decision-making. This guidance is presented in five chapters followed by various appendices. Chapter 1 is the introduction, and provides background information about the nature conservation directives, the Natura 2000 sites in Ireland and their protection through the application of Articles 6(3) and 6(4) of the Habitats Directive, and the role of the European Commission. Chapter 2 gives the full text of Article 6(3) and 6(4) followed by an explanation of the terminology, concepts and tests that these provisions of the Directive introduce, based on current understanding and case law. Chapters 4 and 5 illustrate how Article 6(3) and 6(4) should be applied by planning authorities in the case of development planning (plans) and

6. Page 6

   Cite this pagePDF p. 6 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   development management (projects) covered by the Planning and Development Acts 2000-2006. This guidance is not a legal interpretation. Experience is defining and clarifying boundaries, procedures and concepts, and consequently law and policy in this area will undoubtedly evolve and change over time. This guidance represents the current situation and understanding, and should be regarded as a work in progress. Comments, feedback, suggestions and relevant case studies are invited from users of this guidance and these may be sent to the address below. Ultimately it is envisaged that this guidance will form the basis for statutory guidelines for planning authorities under the Planning Acts. Legislation Unit National Parks and Wildlife Service Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government 7 Ely Place Dublin 2 This guidance is available on the Department’s website at: www.npws.ie

7. Page 7

   Cite this pagePDF p. 7 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 1 - Introduction 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................3 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 10 1.1. GENERAL .............................................................................................................................. 10 1.2. EU DIRECTIVES...................................................................................................................... 11 1.3. NATURA 2000 NETWORK.......................................................................................................... 13 1.4. THE ROLE OF THE EU COMMISSION ............................................................................................. 16 2. ARTICLES 6(3) AND 6(4) – CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY .................................................................................................. 18 2.1. DEFINITION OF PLAN AND PROJECT.............................................................................................. 19 2.2. DIRECTLY CONNECTED WITH OR NECESSARY TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE NATURA 2000 SITE ................... 21 2.3. LIKELY TO HAVE SIGNIFICANT EFFECT THEREON.............................................................................. 22 2.4. APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT........................................................................................................ 23 2.5. CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................... 24 2.6. COMPETENT NATIONAL AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................... 25 2.7. IMPERATIVE REASONS OF OVERRIDING PUBLIC INTEREST – IROPI....................................................... 26 3. THE AA PROCESS......................................................................................... 27 3.1. STAGES IN THE PROCESS........................................................................................................... 27 3.2. STAGE 1 - APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT SCREENING ........................................................................... 30 3.3. STAGE 2 – APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT (AA) .................................................................................. 36 3.4. STAGE 3 - ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS ............................................................................................ 41 3.5. STAGE 4 - IMPERATIVE REASONS OF OVERRIDING PUBLIC INTEREST (“IROPI”)....................................... 43 4. PLANS - AA AND DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ............................................... 47 4.1. OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 47 4.2. TYPES OF PLANS..................................................................................................................... 47 4.3. HIERARCHY OF PLANS .............................................................................................................. 48 4.4. PLAN POLICIES....................................................................................................................... 49 4.5. AA AND SEA ......................................................................................................................... 50 4.6. APPROACHES TO UNDERTAKING THE AA OF PLANS ........................................................................... 51 4.7. MAINTAINING THE AA FILE........................................................................................................ 52

8. Page 8

   Cite this pagePDF p. 8 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 1 - Introduction 8 4.8. SCREENING OF PLANS .............................................................................................................. 53 4.9. SCOPING .............................................................................................................................. 54 4.10. AA OF THE PLAN..................................................................................................................... 54 4.11. CONSULTATIONS WITH THE DEHLG............................................................................................. 55 4.12. TRANSBOUNDARY REQUIREMENTS................................................................................................ 56 4.13. ADOPTION OF PLAN ................................................................................................................. 56 4.14. AA CONCLUSION STATEMENT ..................................................................................................... 57 4.15. MONITORING THROUGH THE AA PROCESS ..................................................................................... 57 4.16. ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE ............................................................................................................ 58 5. PROJECTS - AA AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT ................................... 59 5.1. OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 59 5.2. THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, NATURA 2000 SITES AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT ................................... 59 5.3. TYPES OF PROJECTS ................................................................................................................ 60 5.4. EXEMPTED DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................................... 60 5.5. THE AA PROCESS AND DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT ........................................................................ 61 5.6. AA AND EIA.......................................................................................................................... 65 5.7. REFERRAL OF THE APPLICATION .................................................................................................. 66 5.8. THE DECISION ....................................................................................................................... 68 5.9. CONDITIONS ON PERMISSIONS ................................................................................................... 69 5.10. MATERIAL CONTRAVENTIONS ..................................................................................................... 70 5.11. WORKS CARRIED OUT BY THE LOCAL AUTHORITY ............................................................................. 70 5.12. AN BORD PLEANÁLA ................................................................................................................ 70 5.13. TRANSBOUNDARY ISSUES .......................................................................................................... 71 5.14. ENFORCEMENT ....................................................................................................................... 71 6. REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING ....................................................... 72 RELEVANT DEPARTMENTAL CIRCULARS (AVAILABLE FROM WWW.NPWS.IE) .......................................................... 72 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................... 72 APPENDIX 1: ANNEX I HABITATS IN IRELAND ............................................................................................. 75 APPENDIX 2: ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................... 78 APPENDIX 3: GLOSSARY ....................................................................................................................... 79 APPENDIX 5: CHECKLISTS ..................................................................................................................... 82

9. Page 9

   Cite this pagePDF p. 9 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
   Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 1 - Introduction 9 TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: Legislation timeline ..................................................................................... 12 Figure 2 : Indicative SAC map (2009) ......................................................................... 15 Figure 3: Indicative SPA map .................................................................................... 15 Figure 4: Examples of significance indicators (from EC (2002), Box 4)........................... 33 Figure 5: Examples of impact prediction methods (from EC (2002), Box 8) .................... 38

10. Page 10

    Cite this pagePDF p. 10 (opens the publisher’s copy in a new tab)
    Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland - Guidance for Planning Authorities Section 1 - Introduction 10 1. Introduction 1.1. General This guidance is intended to assist and guide local and planning authorities in the application of Article 6(3) and 6(4) of the Habitats Directive2 as it relates to their roles, functions and responsibilities in undertaking Appropriate Assessment (AA) of plans and projects. It explains the concepts, tests and steps involved in the assessment procedure, the provisions of which are the primary mechanism for ensuring the protection of Natura 2000 sites and their conservation objectives when considering whether to authorise or adopt a plan or project. Natura 2000 sites in Ireland are European sites, including Special Protection Areas (SPAs), and Special Areas of Conservation (SACs). AA has been a legal requirement in Ireland since the Habitats Regulations3 were made in 1997. On 15 February 2008, and in response to the judgement of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in case C-418/04, the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (DEHLG) issued Circular Letter SEA 1/08 and NPWS 1/084, to all County and City Managers, Directors of Services for Planning, Town Clerks and Engineers. It informed them of the necessity to undertake AA of land use plans in accordance with the obligations of Article 6 of the Habitats Directive. The ECJ ruling had, among other things, clarified that Ireland has not correctly transposed Article 6(3) by not providing explicitly for AA of land use plans, as opposed to projects. Article 6(3) requires that any plan or project that is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the Natura 2000 site concerned but is likely to have a 2 Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, as amended by Council Directive 97/62/EC. See http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/habitatsdirective/index_en.htm 3 European Communities (Natural Habitats) Regulations, 1997 4 Circular Letter SEA 1/08 and NPWS 1/08: Appropriate Assessment of Land Use Plans

Source Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (National Parks and Wildlife Service): Appropriate Assessment of Plans and Projects in Ireland: Guidance for Planning Authorities (December 2009, revised February 2010) · Licence the publisher's termsText read from the publisher’s PDF; tables, maps and drawings do not survive as text, and page numbers are the PDF’s (its first page is 1). Check the original before relying on a passage.