Decision looms as Creeslough families rail against redevelopment of explosion site

Bereaved families and survivors of the Creeslough explosion have issued a series of objections against the proposed redevelopment of the complex.

With a decision on an application by Vivo Shell Limited to rebuild on the site due from Donegal County Council this week, the local authority recently received further submissions.

Ten people, including three children, lost their lives when a horrific explosion tore through the complex in October 2022.

The Council last year sought further information from the applicant and documents which reinforced the company’s plans to proceed were received by the Council just ten days before the second anniversary of the tragedy.

Solicitor Darragh Mackin on behalf of some of the bereaved families wrote a lengthy submission to the council saying that the application “has caused immeasurable hurt to our clients”.

“The site of the explosion is not just a plot of land or a development site, but a place marked by immense loss and emotional trauma,” Mr Mackin said. “It holds significant, painful memories and the sensitivity of any development here should be prioritised above commercial interests.”

Noting that both the Stardust Nightclub in Dublin and Grenfell Tower in London were not rebuilt after tragedies, Mr Mackin added: “This is a time for restoration and reassurance, not redevelopment.”

He was writing on behalf of Aine Flanagan, Shauna Gallagher, Derek Martin, Caroline Lauder and Marie Louise MacLeod.

Vivo Shell Limited has sought permission for the demolition of the existing building and the erection of a new building to incorporate a class 1 commercial building; shop; post office; off-licence; store; deli; toilets including accessible toilets; staff welfare facilities; forecourt; replacement of underground storage tanks and pumps; external canopy; associated signage; and all other associated site development works including a space for a memorial garden.

Impressions of what the proposed development would look like show an area with 10 light poles close to the road side to commemorate those who lost their lives.

However, this has been met with disquiet from those affected.

Christine Evans was working in the shop on the day of the blast.

“I am lucky to have survived but the mental damage caused will remain with me for life and therefore rebuilding this garage on the same site will be re-traumatising,” she wrote in a submission to the council. “I firmly believe it is inappropriate to establish a business on this site and out of respect for the families who lost loved ones in that explosion it should only be considered as a memorial garden.”

The family of 14-year-old Leona Harper, who lost her life in the explosion, also submitted objections.

“I lost my sister and best friend…I miss my sister so much,” Leona’s brother, Jamie wrote. “This needs to be stopped.” 

Another brother, Anthony, said the site should be made “into a memorialis where families, friends and public can go to sit down or have a walk around a garden with benches and flowers. 

He wrote: “If a petrol station/ shop is needed so badly there are other alternatives that can be sought out.”

Leona’s father, Hugh, contested that the the plans for the building lack escape routes and added: “The alleyway at the rear of the proposed shop offers no emergency escape if the alleyway would become blocked, potentially forcing people back into the shop in the event of an emergency/incident.

“It is my opinion that the irregular shape of this site is potentially too small to provide a safe environment. The layout is confined and restrictive in its own nature.”

Charlie Flood, lost his partner, Catherine O’Donnell and her son James, in the explosion and wrote: “The thought of another shopo being built on this site is deeply distressing for my family.

“The presence of another shop would serve as a constant, painful reminder of the devastating loss we have endured. For the well-being of my family and the community, I strongly believe that this site should be dedicated as a memorial garden.”

Liam Cannon, an award-winning psychotherapist who has worked closely with those affected, argued that the council is taking a “hugh risk” in “not acknowledging significant factors not currently considered under planning legislation”.

He wrote: “There is a growing body of evidence which reflects the re-traumatisation impact of such decisions. This current research ought to be considered in taking planning decisions as this is not a regular application.

“In addition the planning needs to consider the outcomes of the stardust disaster and others. It should be noted that as this has already been flagged that accountability by the deciding officers needs to be carefully considered in view of these facts.”

Some residents of the apartments at the complex have lodged objections with one couple saying: “As someone who lived in that building, we would want to be part of a process that consults widely to get the best, most appropriate, and most respectful memorial possible.”

Transport Infrastructure Ireland (TII) previously raised issues over the proposed redevelopment of the site, saying that the application is “at variance with official policy in relation to control of development on/affecting national roads.”

TII said that the granting of permission would “adversely affect the operation and safety of the national road network”