This article is from page 30 of the 2012-11-27 edition of The Clare People. OCR mistakes are to be expected so download the original SWF or the rendered page 30 JPG
PUTTING car park facilities in place at Mullaghmore is a case of the National Parks and Wildlife Service putting the cart before the horse, the Burren Action Group’s 15-page document against the controversial development proposal has claimed.
BAG, which campaigned successfully against the Office of Public Works proposal to build an interpretative centre at Mullaghmore, has blasted the planning application as it comes ahead of a commitment to deliver the Burren Management Plan.
This management plan is now in its third draft, but the feeling on the ground locally in North Clare is that it will never see the light of day, with the NPWS instead pressing ahead with its car park proposal adjacent to the original Mullaghmore Interpretative Centre location.
In its submission, BAG says it shares the NPWS objective of “alleviating the problems associated with random car parking on the Crag Road and at the crossroads between the Crag Road and the Green Road”, but that the application is premature as it comes in advance of an agreed National Park Management Plan.
“Three draft versions of a Plan (Burren Management Plan 2011 – 2018) have been produced but none have been published and none have benefitted from the input of the public, tourism operators or adjoining landowners,” says BAG.
“There is no indication when this Plan will seek the views of the public nor is there any proposed deadline for its completion. The application, therefore, is not in a position to avail of any agreed or finalised management proposals,” the submission adds.
In a further indictment of the NPWS proposal, the BAG submission says that the application, which was lodged with Clare County Council on October 22 is “incoherent”, “uncoordinated” and “missing significant data”.
“The application lacks the coherence that might be provided by a Management Plan and, in the single instance where its impacts in combination with other practices are acknowledged, no data is offered, even in relation to the applicant’s own services and facilties,” the BAG submission says.
“There is considerable potential for successful dialogue that can result in a Management Plan that respects and promotes the needs of the host people, local environment and those wishing to engage in sustainable low impact tourism in and around the National Park.
“There are alternative sites that can accommodate parking in the ownership of the applicant. There are also options for more multifaceted management practices available that can contribute to better visitor management in the park.
“A process to explore these options should precede a grant of permission to return to a site that has already failed the test of one of the longest and most comprehensive planning processes in the history of the state,” the submission adds.