08/05/2026
Schrödinger's rail platform
This “temporary” platform at Adare Station is being constructed using a planning exemption provision. However, there are serious legal and ecological concerns regarding how this project has been progressed.
This development should not lawfully have qualified as exempted development under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive.
The platform is not an independent project - it is entirely dependent on the Limerick to Foynes railway line redevelopment. That wider project has involved extensive vegetation clearance, drainage alteration, major construction works, and habitat disturbance along the long abandoned 44km rail corridor. However, it was not assessed as a single integrated project under the Habitats Directive. Instead, elements were advanced separately through questionable exemption provisions and isolated applications for two of the new bridges. However, like the “temporary” platform at Adare, these bridges do not have "functional independence" from the overall project.
European case law is very clear that projects cannot be artificially divided into smaller parts (“project splitting”) in order to avoid environmental assessment obligations.
A project requiring Appropriate Assessment cannot lawfully proceed as exempted development. The project documentation for the Adare platform itself acknowledges a direct hydrological connection to the Lower River Shannon SAC, via drainage pathways leading towards the River Maigue and ultimately into the SAC. This alone triggers the requirement for Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats Directive. This is before you get to the issue of cumulative impacts from the wider railway redevelopment.
The ecological surveys completed for the station platform are also highly problematic. Surveys were undertaken after substantial railway clearance and disturbance had already occurred. In other words, the “baseline” conditions used to assess ecological impacts had already been altered by ongoing works. The bat survey confirmed the presence of multiple Annex IV bat species and moderate bat activity, yet survey effort was limited and constrained. Conclusions of “negligible impact” again rely heavily on assumptions regarding mitigation and construction controls rather than objective scientific exclusion of risk.
The reliance on mitigation measures at screening stage, the failure to assess cumulative impacts, clear project splitting, and the deficiencies in ecological baseline data all point towards the same conclusion: Appropriate Assessment was required, and the reliance on exempted development provisions is highly questionable.
This is also clearly not a genuinely “temporary” structure. The platform itself is a substantial development with an estimated cost of approximately €3 million, despite the Ryder Cup event lasting only one week.
Indeed, public statements by Iarnród Éireann and others already indicate that the infrastructure is viewed as part of potential future passenger rail development for Adare and the wider Foynes line. The project is being publicly presented as both “temporary” and as a long-term transport investment at the same time.
That significantly undermines the credibility of the claim that this is merely a short-duration temporary structure associated with a single event. If this is not genuinely a temporary structure, then the legal basis for treating it as exempted development is also highly questionable.
I want to be clear that I am not opposed to rail development. Providing sustainable public transport infrastructure and improved passenger rail connectivity is clearly beneficial. However, no matter how desirable a project may appear, that does not provide a legal entitlement to circumvent planning and environmental law or to bypass the protections required under the Habitats Directive.
A temporary train station is to be constructed in Adare, Co Limerick, as part of plans for hosting the Ryder Cup.