Bord Pleanála concedes in court challenge to approval of €40m Offaly meat plant

An Bord Pleanála has decided not to contest a High Court action challenging its permission for a €40 million meat factory in Co Offaly.
The planning authority said it learned, sometime after approving the project near Banagher, of the “moderate” status that had been assigned to the nearby Rapemills River.
In correspondence before the High Court, it said it would consent to an order to reconsider Banagher Chilling Limited’s planning application, this time taking into account the status of the river.
On Monday, Ms Justice Emily Farrell was told the legal challenge to the permission, brought by two Banagher residents, should be adjourned for three weeks so the project developer can consider how to respond to the board’s stance. The judge agreed to this approach.
The proposed facility would have the capacity to slaughter 36,000 animals a year and would provide meat largely for export, particularly aimed at the Chinese market. The developer said the plant would employ up to 110 people.
Locals Desmond Kampff and Gwen Wordingham, represented by James Devlin SC and John Kenny, instructed by FP Logue solicitors, said they brought their case due to “critical” concerns about the proposed processing plant’s impact on the environment.
In particular, they point to the plan that the facility would discharge its domestic and wastewater into the nearby Feeghroe stream, which they say does not have capacity to accommodate this.
An Bord Pleanála’s inspector found the proposed development would “not be likely to have a significant negative environmental impact in terms of climate”.
The application had some two years earlier secured a grant of permission from Offaly County Council. It came before the board due to an appeal by Ms Wordingham and Mr Kampff, who describes himself as being active in local environmental protection.
Among their domestic and European law grounds of challenge, the pair allege the board did not sufficiently ensure the development would not cause a water body to deteriorate.
They say the board is precluded from granting consent for a development that may jeopardise the attainment of good water status and/or where no assessment was possible.