FOUR separate appeals have been lodged with An Board Pleanála this week objecting to planning permission granted to a controversial application which proposes to service a seaplane operation out of Mountshannon.
Applicants Harbour Air Ireland Ltd were granted planning permission last month to install a floating pontoon, mooring anchors, access gangway, reinforced concrete slipway and inspection hardstanding, workstore, parking area and associated infrastructure for the berthing and inspection of a sea plane at Mountshannon/Dooros.
Following local objections and criticism of the proposed development, two local groups have lodged appeals against the county council’s decision to grant permission. Furthermore, two State bodies have also lodged appeals with An Bord Pleanála. 
In an appeal document submitted to the planning board by the Sandycove Residents’ Association, they cite health and safety issues, environmental issues and the negative impact on the daily lives of the Sandycove residents as the grounds for their appeal.
John O’Brien, chairman of the group, claimed that among the health and safety concerns were access and traffic issues, fire and safety issues, and dangers to those using the adjacent beach.
He outlined environmental concerns relating to noise pollution, the SPA and NHA designations that Lough Derg comes under, disturbance to species of wintering birds and other wildlife, a risk to water quality and the potential threat of transfer of invasive species.
The residents’ group also highlighted that such a development would be “a major disturbance” to the residential area of Sandycove.
“We are concerned about the safety of living adjacent to a site where aviation fuel will be stored and where refuelling of planes will take place. The safety of the beach area in front of our homes will be compromised by the landing and daily taxiing of the seaplane,” the appeal document states.
Meanwhile, Eddie McCarthy also lodged an appeal as chairman of Mountshannon Angling Club.
In this appeal, it is claimed that the proposed development is not in accordance with the policies of the current County Development Plan or the proposed East Clare Local Area Plan. Among the claim is that the local community was not properly consulted and that their legal objections were not properly taken into consideration. The appellant also claims that the Natura 2000 Impact Assessment of the potential effects of the proposed seaplane base on the Lough Derg SPA sNHA was not sufficiently objective in its conclusions.
The appellant states: “The lake is a dangerous lake. It is subject to cross winds and planes landing and taking off will constitute a danger to other users. There are a number of unsubstantiated claims in the application and further information documents that the development will cause no disturbance to habitats and other wildlife”.
The appeal document states that the appellant considers that the policy CDP 52 of the County Clare Development Plan 2005 to be the guiding policy and that “this policy was not adhered to in this case”.
They also claim that it is understood from locals that a flight path of local hen harriers is also the proposed flight path for the seaplane.
“It will be a matter of conjecture, which will control this flight path, seaplane or hen harrier,” it concludes.
The State body An Taisce has also lodged an appeal with the board. In it, they cite two preliminary legal grounds for the appeal. They outline that “the applicants have not demonstrated the required legal title to lodge a planning application for the development of a seaplane base and land area affecting the shoreline and surface of Lough Derg”.
On substantive planning and environmental grounds, the body claims that the applicant has “not provided an adequate sustainability justification for the proposed development”.
They claim the proposal would constitute a public-safety risk and that the ecological impact on the SPA and NHA designated area has not been addressed.
The body also claims that the applicants have not addressed the use of Lough Derg for fishing, the noise impact on the amenity of residents and lakeshore recreation and the full shoreline-based impact of developing a seaplane base at this site.
The fourth appeal currently on file with the board is that of The Inland Fisheries Ireland formerly the Shannon Regional Fisheries Board.
In their appeal, the board claim that points raised by them on the original planning file have not been adequately addressed.
They note, in particular, the potential impact on fish species in the lake and highlights that the fishing rights vested in the lake are property rights.
“Significant disruption will arise caused by the scheduled flights to and from this development. Essentially, an airport has been constructed on the lake. While in the current economic climate, the number of flights may be relatively small, it is most likely that the number of flights will continue to expand and more serious disruption to anglers and other users of the lake is likely to arise. This is an infringement of the property rights vested in the lake. These property rights have to be defended in a clear and constructive manner. Anglers must have unrestricted access to the fisheries so that they are able to enjoy fishing rights throughout the lake,” the board’s appeal states.
“This is a public lake and the use of the surface of the lake for a commercial venture such as this should require appropriate permissions from the statutory agencies and stakeholder groups that have an interest in the lake,” their appeal added.
The body also raises concern on grounds of health and safety in particular of anglers fisheries staff and other boat and water-users. They also claim that no protocol has been addressed or required in the planning permission requiring the operators to inspect their craft and make positive measures to minimise the risk that invasive species may cling to the floats or other parts of the aircraft. The body notes that such a protocol is imposed on boat owners.
They also ask that should the board grant planning permission for the development that the points outlined be incorporated in their decision.