Omagh man behind pet crematorium plan criticises planning process

AN Omagh man whose proposal for a pet crematorium several miles outside the town has been refused permission says he won’t be able to appeal.

Paul Kelly had planned to build the pet incinerator at a site on Tattykeel Road, near the scenic Pigeon Top.

The application has generated controversy both within the council and in the local community. It was initially granted approval, but that was overturned at the council planning committee’s December monthly meeting.

Mr Kelly was hoping to operate the facility on his own ground near the beauty spot. Councillors subsequently went against the views of planning officers by voting to overturn the approval.

Now Mr Kelly has written to the council expressing concerns about the planning process. He has told the Ulster Herald that an appeal is currently not feasible due to the potential costs involved.

“I’ve no money left, so that’s the end of that,” Mr Kelly said.

“It is what it is and there’s no point in getting upset. This is what happens when councillors are making decisions which I believe they know nothing about.”

In the letter which he has sent to the council, he has expressed ‘serious concerns’ about what he describes as ‘recent planning decisions’ made by Fermanagh and Omagh Council.

He has urged the council to review its decision-making procedures to ensure ‘fairness and transparency’.

“It is crucial that all planning applications are evaluated based on their merits and adherence to established regulations.

“I believe a thorough investigation into these matters is necessary to maintain public confidence in local government,” he says.

The committee felt that the need for the proposed facility on Tattykeel Road had not been demonstrated, and, as a result, the recommendation by planning officers for approval was overturned

More than 300 objections were received against the facility.

Councillors had previously held a site meeting at the location after a decision on the application was deferred and it was legally ‘called-in’ for review by the council.