An Bord Pleanála
Download 0.92 Mb.
|
Questions by An TaisceIan Lumley for An Taisce had a few questions to the planning authority. He asked for a hard copy of the SEA for the LAP to verify that a section on climate was missing. He had downloaded it from the web site, and wanted to make sure they contained the same information. The inspector gave her own hard copy. Sean O' Faircheallaigh senior planer for FCC stated they did not accept that climate was not covered in the SEA of the LAP. Both the scooping report and air quality sections required green house gases and emissions to be … the environmental objectives, backbone of the entire LAP had two specific objectives EO14 (to promote minimisation of green house gas emissions) and EO15 (to support action on climate change). The entire LAP would have been tested against environment objectives. Had they done the environmental report now, having regard to the current prominence of the issue, they would have included a separate section under climate change. Mr. Lumley stated that air quality monitoring did not cover climatic change effects. Annex 1 of the SEA Directive indicated that climate change must be included in the environmental report. Sean O' Faircheallaigh stated that the LAP was on public display and this issue could have been raised during that time, to which Ian Lumley responded as before stating that An Taisce were not a consultee in the LAP process and simply was not aware. He asked if a map could be provided to indicate all the areas within and outside the red and blue line where works would need to be carried out as a result of the planning authority conditions (roads, sewer etc including way leaves). Dermot Flanagan for the planning authority stated that the Board could choose to impose different conditions. Mr. Sweetman stated that they were in the first instance appealing against the decision of the planning authority and the planning authority must provided such a map. Inspector ruled that the exact implications of the conditions and specific locations would become clear during discussions on each module. Ian Lumley also asked ARUP to provide details of consultations in relation to road projects whether on behalf of the planning authority or for DAA. Mr.Sweetman stated that work was already under way and would be lodging a complaint. The inspector stated that enforcement was outside the scope of the hearing. Mr. Sweetman stated that the Board could not grant permission for extension to an unauthorised development and there was a court case. Mr. Lumley requested specific sections of the SEA where climate change was referred to. Mr. Sean O' Faircheallaigh referred to Appendix A ‘scoping’ report and revised scooping report, environmental objectives referred to earlier and pages 90-94. Mr. Lumley went through sections maintaining there was no specific reference to climate change and air quality was local air quality. He requested the baseline data and monitoring data. Mr. Flanagan (FCC) stated that the subject of this hearing was a planning application and its EIS under Irish Law. Information required by Mr. Lumley was for another forum. The inspector ruled that indeed the adequacy of the SEA was a matter for another forum, but the questions regarding the same would be brought to the attention of the Board. Mr. Sweetman stated that the Counsel for the planning authority had not understood his points. This was not an assessment of an EIS but assessment of a project. Whether the Council considered the adequacy of the EIS under Irish Law was irrelevant. He was appealing the ‘non-assessment’ of the development by the planning authority and they would be challenging the Board on this issue all the way to the European Courts, demanding their costs. The decision of the planning authority was ultra vires of the European Law. Responding the Mr. Flanagan’s points Mr. Lumley stated that petition was taken by An Taisce to challenge the SEA and was taken very seriously at the European level. DAA was relying on this LAP to justify this development, which in turn relying on an SEA legality of which was impuned. There was a requirement under SEA Directive for ongoing monitoring. EIA Directive only applied to parts of the whole development. The serious deficiencies of the EIA was already highlighted and accepted by the planning authority through their conditions. Questions by Mr. Harley (for Uproar) Mr. Harley provided a single sheet on the sensitivity tests carried out by DAA on the master plan. (exhibit E-18/04/07) He argued any number of headings could be used in addition to the three categories such as heritage, and the figures obtained were very close to each other (4.6 v 4.7). Mr. Moran (DAA) stated that the three categories contained a number of sub categories. Heritage was included in the deliverability as a constraint to constructibility. The three categories were devised Merril Lynch architects with world wide expertise (in JFK where TWA terminal was such a heritage issue), and accepted by American Institute of Architects . They had also carried out consultations with stakeholders, no body had suggested another category. Mr. Harley concluded that scheme was arbitrary and could produce any result required. Only a single numeraire method would avoid the problem. Following discussions, Mr. Harley requested that Ms. Coveney produced the actual forecasting projections for the 30 year period. Discussing options of a second airport in Dublin, he confirmed with Mr. Evans that there was no specific economic evaluation. Mr. O’ Donnell stated that it would be part of an overall cost evaluation including environmental cost. Mr. Harley stated that dismissal on cost basis was only a personal opinion. He asked Mr. Wheelan why duplication of services at a second airport was a problem, as that was the basis of competition, and why increase in land prices as a result of a second airport was a problem. Mr. Wheelan could not locate the documents referred to and would come back later. Questions by Ms. Lawton, (She was advised that a translation service was no longer available) Referring to introduction of internal environmental taxes in other jurisdictions such as Norway a Britain she asked Ms. Coveney if her forecasting include a scenario where such taxes were imposed. The answer was no as there were no such taxes and no plans to introduce them. If they were introduced low growth scenario would happen. The main consideration in growth scenarios was GDP while secondary drivers included taxes, fuel prices, population, demographic factors, market fragmentation. The central line assumption was that the fuel prices would remain constant as a result of the increased (12%) efficiency in aircrafts. In response to question by Ms. Lawton that as a result of the continuous developments such as area 14, and Pier D, T1 would be able to accommodate future expansion, Mr. Foley stated that these were extraordinary measures to respond to unprecedented growth in an attempt to alleviate congestion. In response to question he stated that the design capacity of T1 was 10-15mppa, but was presently operating at 22mppa. Yes the LOS was low and at level F in some sections. Following its completion, the headroom in T2 would allow them to refurbish T1 to bring it to same service level as T2. In response to question for the application for a new commercial section at T1 he stated that the passengers using Pier D would not be going through the existing duty free area, and they needed commercial facilities to capture them and generate revenue which the DAA dependent upon. Ms. Coveney responded that yes they had taken into consideration of the constraints introduced in Heathrow and Standstead in their forecast. Mr. Wheelan agreed that yes, a national aviation policy would be helpful to the planners, as well as other strategies such as NSS. Mark Foley stated that for the first time there was AAP which required break up of DAA into three authorities. Mr. O Donnell disagreed there was a project splitting in this case as both the runway and T2 had separate EISs. Project splitting was a legal concept where there was avoidance of EIS. 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:
|