The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) procedure was referred back to the Ministry of Environment and Transport “due to deficiencies in the official procedure and the disregard of nature conservation and species protection regulations”, the BVwG announced by mail on the decision published on Friday. The state of Lower Austria announced an appeal.
According to the BVwG, the ministry must carry out an alternative test. With this it should be clarified “whether no alternative routing is possible that leads to less impact, and whether compelling reasons of public interest outweigh the interest of nature conservation”.
The Ministry of Transport under the then Minister Norbert Hofer (FPÖ) had confirmed the environmental compatibility of the S8 Marchfeld expressway in the west section – junction S1 / S8 to the Gänserndorf / Obersiebenbrunn junction and thus approved the construction. Due to a total of 18 complaints from citizens’ groups, environmental organizations and neighbors against the positive EIA decision, it was the BVwG’s turn. According to the broadcast, the procedure showed that the “provisions of species protection both with regard to the Triel and the Ziesel are being violated by the construction and operation of the S8”.
Complex procedure
After several days of negotiations in the previous year, a senate made up of three professional judges decided. According to the broadcast, the process was complex in terms of content. Because the construction of the expressway would affect the breeding area of the endangered Triel bird, according to the expert, the Lower Austrian state government decided to adapt the protected area in April 2020. The judges’ senate came to the conclusion “that the construction and operation of the S8 is not in accordance with the protection goals of the relevant nature conservation regulations – in particular the achievement of a favorable conservation status for the Triel. The realization of the S8 would lead to a considerable impairment of the bird sanctuary” . An alternative test should therefore be carried out.
Neither in the strategic assessment of transport nor in the approval process of the authority had a sufficient assessment of alternatives taken place, the BVwG cited as a deficiency. Therefore, the procedure was referred back to the authority for amendment. According to the Fauna-Flora-Habitat Directive or the Lower Austrian Nature Conservation Act, this must make up for an alternative test for various possible transport solutions and (if the route applied for is the most environmentally friendly) based on this, carry out a weighing of interests. Then “the authority has to supplement the procedure or (if it comes to the conclusion that the requested route is not the most environmentally friendly) reject the application for approval,” said the court.
Relief from “traffic avalanche”
Lower Austria’s Mobility Councilor Ludwig Schleritzko (ÖVP) stated in a broadcast: “The Ministry of Transport and Asfinag could have carried out the now required alternative assessment right from the start. Instead, such a procedural error now costs the population in Marchfeld time again until relief. You can only use that Shake your head. ” The state of Lower Austria will take legal action against the BVwG decision at the highest courts: “We are taking action against what we believe to be illegal referral of the matter from the BVwG to the ministry.” Regardless of this, the ministry is called upon to “work quickly” and “keep an eye on the legitimate interests of the population”.
“The decision of the Federal Administrative Court confirms one thing – there are projects that were planned twenty or thirty years ago, but no longer provide suitable solutions for the current challenges. This applies in particular to the massive consumption of valuable soils or the protection of unique and strictly protected animals. It is precisely for this reason that we are currently evaluating the Asfinag construction program and this decision will of course be fully taken into account there, “said Environment Minister Leonore Gewessler (Greens).
The people in the region should “be relieved of the current traffic avalanche quickly and effectively”. For this reason, the Ministry of the Environment will now immediately begin examining and planning alternatives to the S8. “This is the only way to get one step further,” said Gewessler. The state of Lower Austria is invited to take part.
Neos: “Slap” for the government
Wolfgang Rehm, spokesman for the complaining environmental organization Virus and the Marchfeld citizens’ initiative, saw the decision of the BVwG as ambivalent. It is good that the EIA decision has now been canceled. However, “the end of the S8” is currently being delayed further. “The Federal Administrative Court should have decided for itself and rejected the application,” was recorded in a broadcast. An alternative transport solution for the Marchfeld and an offensive in spatial planning “including the rededication of building land reserves” were called for.
NEOS NÖ spoke in a broadcast of a “slap in the face” for the state government: “Instead of advocating a quick solution for the traffic-plagued population, the country preferred to hit the wall with its head.” Helga Krismer, state spokeswoman for the Lower Austrian Greens, criticized the ÖVP for years.
The S8 is one of those Asfinag new building projects that are currently being evaluated by the Environment and Transport Ministry for climate protection and resource consumption. The west section is around 14.4 kilometers long and bypasses Raasdorf, Deutsch Wagram, Markgrafneusiedl, Strasshof, Obersiebenbrunn and Gänserndorf. With the expressway, the through traffic on the B8 should be relieved.
