Subject: New port terminal at the San Simón inlet
The Port of Vigo is seeking to convert a number of obsolete port facilities into a new port terminal, work that will involve infilling on a substantial scale.
The intention is to carry out this project at the San Simón inlet (Ensenada de San Simón), which, as well as being a maritime area belonging to the Natura 2000 network and lying in an estuary – making it a particularly sensitive site – is home to traditional maritime occupations, with more than 1 500 jobs in artisanal fishing, shellfish gathering, and mussel raft culture.
The Port of Vigo has been deprived of the key planning tool on which the designation of port spaces and uses is based, this document, the DEUP, having been declared void on 4 December 2017 by the National High Court. Another point to bear in mind is that the rate of use for some of the Vigo quays is less than 50%, and it therefore follows that the traffic to be shifted to the San Simón inlet could be handled in Vigo itself.
1) Does the Commission consider that the expansion of facilities being sought by the Port of Vigo is a sound objective?
2) Is it possible for the site of a new port terminal project to be located in the middle of the Natura 2000 network?
Answer given by Mr Vella on behalf of the European Commission
(27 May 2019)
It is for the authorities of the Member State to assess the soundness of their project developments. In this regard, the role of the Commission is limited to overseeing the respect of EC law when such projects are developed and/or implemented.
The Habitats (1) and Birds (2) Directives do not, a priori, preclude the possibility for project developments to take place in estuaries and coastal areas within or around Natura 2000 sites. However, they lay down a stepwise procedure to ensure that such developments only proceed under certain conditions.
In Article 6 (3), the Habitats Directive establishes that any plan or project likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 site shall be subject to an appropriate assessment of its implications for the site and only be authorised after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site concerned, and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general public.
In addition, Article 6 (4) of the Habitats Directive provides, inter alia, that if, in spite of a negative assessment of the implications for the site and in the absence of alternative solutions, a plan or project must be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of social or economic nature, the Member State shall take all compensatory measures necessary to ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 is protected.
The responsibility for applying these provisions correctly lies with the competent authorities of the Member States.
The Commission guidance document on the implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives in estuaries and coastal zones (3) provides guidance on the application of the abovementioned provisions.
⋅1∙ Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7‐50
⋅2∙ Directive 2009/147/EC on the conservation of wild birds — OJ L 20 of 26.01.2010. p. 7
⋅3∙ http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/docs/Estuaries-ES.pdf