The cold heart of Brabant

It was written in the stars. After the very dubious decision about the forest on the Dennenlaan (Pine Lane), the Permanent Deputation of the Province of Flemish Brabant has now also approved the allotment application on the Holleweg (Hollow Road).

The so-called ‘hearing’ took place on March 25, 2021. The duration was 15 minutes in total, with only a few minutes of speaking time for each participant.

The decision was made the same day. It is clear that the hearing was perfunctory and that the Permanent Deputation had already decided in advance that the permit would be granted.

As for the grounds for the decision, hardly any attention was paid to the rock-hard arguments of Semper Ferraris and Natuurpunt Oost-Brabant.

Ideally, the Permanent Deputation should consider all aspects of good spatial planning in its assessment and start from the principle that there is no absolute right to split up a property.

It is not enough just to check whether the minimum urban planning regulations have been met and to tick off the various items. These sections are often completed by the applicant himself. For example, it is stated that “no negative environmental effects are conceivable!” As a myopic without glasses, the Permanent Deputation only looked at the plot, without paying attention to the consequences for the environment. On the contrary, it is essential that a project  be managed in a harmonious and balanced way.

Heritage

The typical view of the Holleweg will be destroyed at the level of the allotment and the proposed widening of the road, coupled with the excavation of the verge, differs from the rest of the street, where the landscape features are preserved.

The Permanent Deputation ignores the fact that the centuries-old Holleweg as a small landscape element (KLE) meets at least seven criteria in order to be considered as immovable heritage. Rotselaar is on the list of recognized heritage municipalities and since 2020 it is mandatory to make an inventory of all immovable heritage. This means that Rotselaar has a special commitment to protect its heritage pending a definitive inventory.

The fact that this unique piece of landscape is in danger of being lost forever does not register with the municipality and the province at all. The decision of the CBS states laconically: "relief changes: not applicable.”

Nature and Forest

Under current legislation, the scope of the Flemish Agency for Nature and Forests (ANB) is very limited. A selective assessment is often made about the ecological value of a forest. The presence of exotics, such as acacias, according to the agency's view, means that the forest can be "compensated".

In their advice on the Holleweg, ANB first confirmed that the area had been mapped as a biologically valuable hardwood plant (code n) with American oak (code quer) and Robinia (code rob).

On the other hand, ANB stated that their employee could not confirm any characteristic species of habitat-worthy forests, but "that is not proof that they are not present in view of the winter season".

Natuurpunt Oost-Brabant, on the other hand, points to the presence of cherry species such as cow-weed, falconia and common hawkweed for a habitat-worthy forest of the Natura 2000 type.

The presence of fauna was not investigated at all by ANB. To the objection that various, sometimes protected, fauna species have been spotted in the forest on the plot, the answer is that the builder / owner himself must check that no nests of protected bird species or bats are damaged, removed or destroyed. This approach is totally unrealistic and even naive.

To prevent irreparable damage, a thorough study is required a priori before a subdivision permit is issued. The problem has become very acute due to the recent loss of habitats in the immediate vicinity (Holleweg, Bosbessenlaan and Regastraat).

According to the ANB, they cannot make any statements about municipal policy or spatial planning.

Finally, even a negative advice from ANB can be ignored without complaint by the municipal and provincial authorities.

Provincial Politics

According to the experiences of action groups in other provinces, this is a fixed pattern. There is a very good chance that the province will simply approve permits, even in cases where they have been refused by a municipality in the first instance. Citizens and nature associations are still regarded as nosy parkers, NIMBYs and the naive ‘open-toed sandal brigade’.

The province is often regarded as less important by citizens and politicians. On one hand, the major policy lines are determined at a higher level and on the other, people identify more with their municipality.

Nevertheless, the permanent deputation of a province decides on permits according to the degree of appeal. Instead of a kind of "council of wise men" that takes a decision after a thorough consideration of the pros and cons, one is dealing here with a bastion where party political games can be played without fear of being punished in the next elections. .

The Spatial Policy Plan of the province of Flemish Brabant literally states:

“We must stop the fragmentation of open space living. That is why taking up extra space for houses - for example through new allotments - outside the cities and residential centers must be avoided. ”

There is a wide gap between these fine statements and actual, day-to-day politics.

In that sense, the Province's Policy Plan is a pretty piece of propaganda. The packaging is new, but everything else remains the same. The land of the brick, isn't it?

We should take an example from Costa Rica, which is a pioneer in conservation. There is even included in the constitution (article 50) that everyone has the right to a healthy and ecologically balanced environment. This means that any citizen may press charges against violations of that right and claim appropriate compensation. Moreover, the state has a duty to protect that right through legislation and administrative procedures.

Costa Rica's policy is resolutely focused on sustainable development and climate neutrality. Environmental impact reports must be submitted to the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA), which has much more power than our Flemish Agency for Nature and Forests. Each project is thoroughly analyzed with regard to the possible consequences for the environment and SETENA can work preventively and make the necessary corrections to reduce the impact.

We must also dare to ask the question whether conflicts between allotment projects and the environment cannot be better resolved by an independent body instead of leaving it to local politicians.

It is not just a question of outdated legislation. It's much deeper than that. Even within the current legal framework, policymakers still have enough room for manoeuvre to pursue vigorous environmental and climate policies. Above all, there is a lack of goodwill and a genuine culture of debate. The application from developers is often copied indiscriminately, while the thorough arguments of local residents and nature associations are laughed at.

Because the Permanent Deputation has not done its homework, it is again up to us to appeal to the Ministry of Justice.

Talking Moose