Representation by Rebecca Rhind-Tutt
- Date submitted
- 11 January 2019
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Having reviewed the application documents on line I am unable to find any appropriate assessment under the Habitats Directive. Inote that appendix 8.25 to the ES is entitled ‘Habitats Regulations Assessment: Statement to Inform Appropriate Assessment’ and that it relies upon both mitigation and compensation in order to ensure that there is no adverse effect on the integrity of European Sites. In particular paragraph 9.1.1 of the conclusions states that there must be delivery of a replacement breeding plot for stone curlew at Parsonage Down and a new breeding plot at Winterbourne Down. These are compensatory measures.
According to recent decisions of the European Court of Justice in People Over Wind (C-323/17) and Grace and Sweetman v An Bord Plenala (C-164/17) this scheme ought to: (a) be subject to an appropriate assessment and (b) be tested against article 6(4) of the Habitats Directive in that it must be shown that: (i) there is an absence of alternatives (ii) there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest and (iii) all compensatory measures have been taken. It is clear that these tests cannot be met in this case. In particular, there are alternatives which have not been properly explored/consulted upon by the applicant, there are no imperative reasons of overriding public interest and it is unclear whether all compensatory measures have been taken.
I also object to the proposal based upon a flawed consultation, I witnessed public being misinformed at the meetings and we were given no alternative consideration other than a tunnel.