An Bord Pleanála
Natural heritage 26/04/2007
Download 0.92 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Third party submissions
Natural heritage 26/04/2007This hearing was also attended, at the invitation of the inspector, by Dr. Morris Eaken of NPWS (DoEH&LG) Evidence by the first partyRichard Nairn, (managing director of Natura Environment Consultants ltd) was the author of chapter 10 on flora and fauna in the EIS for the proposed development. Reading from a written evidence (AL 26/04/07) he outlined the methods employed in the methodology used ingathering information, which included desk top study, consultations with NPWS, Bat Conservation Ireland, Eastern Regional Fisheries Board. They had also reviewed the EIS for the Northern Parallel Runway, and unpublished reports on water quality (2005 and 2006). Field surveys were carried out for flora and fauna during April-May 2006, and birds during April-June 2006. A special survey of bats was carried out on two dates in May, by a licensed bat specialist to determine whether bats were roosting in mature trees or in any of the buildings, and whether the site was used by foraging bats. He described the environment as being entirely artificial consisting of roads, car parks buildings, with landscape planting. None of the habitats created by landscaping (trees, amenity grasslands, ponds were of significant value. The nearest designated site was 2.5km from the site boundary. After going through the findings of the surveys, he concluded that the site had no significant value for flora and fauna, and significant value for nature conservation. Therefore direct ecological impact of the proposed development on the site was considered not significant. The indirect impact would not be significant except in relation to possible discharge to surface water, which would be subject to stringent mitigation measures. Sluice River located some four kilometres east of the development site was known to be used by otter (protected species listed under Annex II of the Habitats Directive). Subject to attenuation of all surface water from the site prior to release to the local drainage, there would be no direct or indirect impact fish populations and other food for otters in the sluice river. The only mitigation measures required during construction phase would be installation of pollution control measures on all surface water drainage from the construction site (including silt and soil), as outlined in chapter 12 of the EIS, carrying out site clearance during September to avoid nesting period. During operational phase they would recommend tree planting to replace lost habitats for common birds. He stated that they were withdrawing the first party appeal against condition number 30 attached by the planning authority. Mr. Flanagan for the planning authority stated that in the context of drainage measurements proposed (to be discussed in drainage section) and subject to condition number 30 which was not being appealed, they were satisfied that ecological issues were satisfactorily addressed. Third party submissionsMs. Lawton said she was onto EPA and the only development subject of IPC licence from the EPA was SR Technics. Ms. O’Brien, (a number of degrees in environmental science) had a power point presentation(AM 26/04/07) which she had prepared for the surface water module. She indicated where the streams were located and said they were actually running in ditches. She stated that over the years expansion of airport involved a number developments including paving of the land between old airport road (R132) and the M1, cargo bridge buildings, hotels and a number of car parks. She noted FCC had imposed stringent conditions for the disposal of surface water, requiring storage on site and slow release of water to minimise run-off. She referred to Kealy’s and Wad Streams, and Cuckoo stream, and said all the surface water is discharged into these streams. She had got involved in the issues following drowning of a 4 years old child, when the streams overflowed their banks. With the help of slides she indicated that the water from the airport drained onto other peoples lands and onto the roads. She showed pictures of flooded roads, running along the streams, all of which drained by the Sluice Stream and into Baldoyle Bay through Sluice marsh, a cSAC and NHA. Baldoyle Estuary was NHA, SPA and SAC, and it was a Ramsar site. 45% of the world population of wintering Goose (Branta bernicla hrota) used the site. Referring to pollution rating of ‘moderate’ to ‘serious’ (EIS), of Cuckoo Stream, she said this river receives the discharge from the airport (including leaks from toilet tanks of planes while being emptied, from car parks). She said DAA tended to treat only the water from sewerage pipes. She submitted the estuary received all of the waters from the airport. She referred to section 3.6.1.2 of the Terminal and Piers Study which stated ‘the existing paved area of the airport drained by a separate sewer system’, and maintained these flow directly into the surrounding streams. She noted the statement ‘the new development would replace the existing paved area, and therefore storage and attenuation is not considered to be required’. She also referred to EIS 12.6.2.2 which stated ‘attenuation would be provided in the development including all areas where development of brownfield surfaces will occur’ concluded that the two suggested different scenarios. The Master plan (page 128) objectives SW1, SW2, SW3 referred to ‘incorporate the requirement to implement such measures for all new development resulting from the implementation of the Master Plan’, while S. 6.9.3 of the SEA for the Master Plan ‘there is currently no treatment or attenuation of surface drainage from the Airport, thus any chemicals used in de-icing of planes and runways are discharged to the surface water network’. She noted the Northern Parallel Runway attenuation plan detailed direction of any polluted runoff into a special storage tank to be discharged into foul sewer, but there was no such plan for T2 proposal. She asked if this was because apron areas were not considered new development. De-icing took place at the apron. Fuelling of airplanes and servicing of toilets also took place at the apron areas. She referred to a number of pollutants including hydrocarbons that were generated by these activities. Reading from objective SW2 ’to intercept and collect, for separate treatment and disposal, runoff contaminated with de-icing chemicals in a manner compatible with achieving and maintaining ‘salmonid water quality’ in the receiving waters, she asked which it was going to be. Would the old part of the airport including major polluting parts of the aprons, taxiways and the runway continue to discharge directly into the local streams, while the new sections area attenuated. Alternatively would all of the runway at the airport be collected and the polluted portion be directed into a separate storage for discharge into the foul sewer while the rest is attenuated to ‘greenfield ‘rates. She noted this would fulfil the requirements of SW2. Referring to chapter 12 map 4 of the EIS which indicated several petrol interceptors and attenuation tanks around T2, one petrol interceptor and one attenuation tank at pier E, she asked if there were any others around the existing airport. She submitted that the cumulative effects of water discharges of the new development was being addressed piecemeal, as they took place. The effect of the existing airport was not. Mr. O’Donnell for the first party said the questions raised were more appropriate for the surface water module which would be discussed the following day. Mr. Harley thought there was admirable concern for the fellow creatures while there was very little for the homo-sapiens. Mr. Sweetman said the condition number 30 requiring assessment after the event was not acceptable. He referred to his complaint to European commission and the circular by NPWS. He noted the planning authority had ignored the submission from the fisheries Board. There should have been a condition regarding otters. He had looked at the Cuckoo stream, which looked like it was filthy, full of soap. He noted Mr. Nairns evidence and through the airport area cuckoo stream moved from being poor to awful. He said there must be toxicity testing of these rivers. This was not in the EIS. He asked the position of the pond in Kinsealy, attenuation pond for Sluice River, which discharged to Baldoyle SAC. There were some works going on where the compound going to be. It was quite near to cuckoo stream and he asked what the measures was to prevent surface water runoff from the compound. There was no mention of eels. They were threatened and had to be looked at in the interest of biodiversity. In relation to conditions he said
He submitted that information had to be in the EIS, to assess impacts on the habitats. Referring to other conditions as well he maintained the planning authority clearly indicated they did not know what the applicant was going to do. He submitted planning authority decision ultra vires European Court judgements in granting permission for this development because there was not adequate information available to the planning authority to indicate there would not be adverse impacts on annex IV species otters and salmonids. There were bats in the runway section. They were quite likely to come to the site. Condition number 30 required removal at precisely the time the bats were hibernating. Mr. Flanagan (Counse for FCC) left it to the inspector to read the letter from Eastern Fisheries Board. He submitted the mitigation measures contained in the EIS were interlinked. Mr. Sweetman agreed they did interlinked but maintained they were inadequate. Mr. O’Donnell said the evidence given by Mr. Nairn did indicate that it was unlikely that Bats existed in the area. Single sighting of a bat did not mean colonies, but obviously they would ensure somebody would be there to monitor. He would disagree that the conditions were not precise. The conditions imposed by the Board could require prior to commencement of development. He was aware of a court decision imposing such a condition. His understanding that there would be no impact on Kinsealy pond from this application. The approach in regard to surface water disposal would be that the entirety of the surface water would be attenuated and treated, so that existing waters would not be greater than they are. Mr. Flanagan said the reason the condition was like that was because there was on going work with Dublin Airport and difficulties were being resolved as applications came on stream with up to date knowledge. Obviously the Board might take a slightly different view. Mr. Sweetman asked how the agreements were being made as required by the conditions. Ms. O’Brien said conditions were imposed to achieve ‘greenfield’ attenuation in every new application, but the answers given by Mr. O’Donnell indicated that they did not apply to existing areas. At the invitation of the inspector regarding his views, Dr. Morris Eaken from NPWS, said surface water runoff seemed to be the main issue. Mr. Sweetman referred to indirect effects on the SAC. He said there was possibility of likely effects on the otter. Mr. O’Donnell said their expert had said there were going to be no effects on the otter. Dr. Eaken agreed and said the assessment established that there was no implications for the otter. He was happy with the EIS and the methodology used. Mr. Sweetman insisted condition number 21 showed that effects on otters were not assessed. The onus was on the applicant to prove there was none. In response to question by Ms. O’Brien if noise would effect the geese in Baldoyle SPA, Dr. Eaken said if he is required he would attend the noise module. The inspector said the noise arising from aircraft activities was a matter for the other appeal. The noise arising from terminal related activities and land traffic were not likely to have significant effect on the geese in Baldoyle SPA. Directory: news news -> Nonprofit grant application news -> Bulletin 4 Monday July 8, 2002 Backgammon news -> Last year four of the best Afrikaans Christian singers joined forces to tour Down Under with the production ‘Manne wat Glo’ news -> Management and Marketing news -> World Computer-Chess Championship news -> World Computer-Chess Championship news -> World Computer-Chess Championship Download 0.92 Mb. Share with your friends:
|