THE DEVELOPERS of the proposed national children’s hospital have rejected suggestions that the 16-storey development could scupper Dublin’s chances of securing Unesco World Heritage Site designation.
Architects representing the hospital development board have told a Bord Pleanála hearing on the proposed facility that such claims were “scare stories” and the site of the development on the grounds of the Mater hospital, Dublin may not even be included in the application for world heritage status.
Shane O’Toole, an architect and architectural critic, told the hearing that having a tall building affecting views in the city did not preclude Dublin having world heritage status.
Mary Gallagher, representing a number of local residents who have concerns about loss of daylight if the 16-storey building goes ahead, said the development was so hemmed in by other structures that its “iconic landmark” aspect would be lost. “It’s like trying to put a two-pint bottle into a pint bottle,” she said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Showing posts with label Oral hearing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Oral hearing. Show all posts
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
Tuesday, 25 October 2011
Scale of hospital a key issue for planning board
THE ENORMOUS scale of the proposed Children’s Hospital of Ireland on the Mater site on Dublin’s Eccles Street has emerged as the key issue in the first week of An Bord Pleanála’s oral hearing on this €650 million Government-approved project.
The focus by objectors on the height and bulk of the multilayered scheme is inevitable as it is one of the biggest structures ever planned for Dublin, as well as being significantly taller than the stadiums at Croke Park and Lansdowne Road.
Rising above a four-level basement car park, the hospital is “stacked” – five storeys of major diagnostic, topped by a “therapy park” with a rooftop terrace on the next four floors, and a curvaceous seven-storey block of inpatient wards floating above.
This element is evocative of a multideck ocean liner, permanently “moored” on top of a nine-storey building and highly visible on the city’s skyline as an “anomalous” feature, in the words of one supporter, or simply “wrong”, according to objectors.
As a linear block, the proposed children’s hospital would have an impact quite different to a tower – not just because of its overall height which, at 73.89m (243.8ft), would be 14.5m (47.8ft) taller than Liberty Hall, but also because of its length and breadth.
The oversailing ward block would extend to 150m (495ft) in length and about 30m (99ft) in width, narrowing in the middle and tapering at each end. In other words, the most visible part of the project would be equivalent to eight Liberty Halls side by side, and twice as deep.
According to critic Shane O’Toole, who appeared for the hospital promoters, the “sculptural” ward block “literally elevates the position of sick children . . . above all else”, giving them “wonderful views . . . which will be better than from any penthouse apartment in the city”.
He rejected concerns that the intrusion of such an enormous edifice into the northside Georgian core would jeopardise Dublin achieving Unesco world heritage site status, citing examples of buildings that had “dramatically changed the unique character” of other cities.
But neither Cook Fournier’s “biomorphic” Spacelab in Graz nor Renzo Piano’s Nemo science museum in Amsterdam, like a half-sunk ship in the harbour, are seriously out of scale. And Robbrecht en Daem’s concert hall in Bruges, while bulky, is not anything like as tall.
Hospital architects O’Connell Mahon and NBBJ insist that the undulating form of the Eccles Street ward block, with its “thoughtfully engineered glass skin”, would “sit favourably” on Dublin’s skyline, catching and “subtly reflecting the ever- changing light and sky”.
They have made repeated references to Dublin City Council’s 2008 Phibsborough/ Mountjoy local area plan, which supported the development of a “world-class” children’s hospital on the Mater site and recognised that this would entail a “cluster of taller buildings”.
However, the plan also said: “Every effort must be made to ensure that increases in height will not have any negative overshadowing effects on adjoining properties or impact negatively on the settings of the protected structures both on the site and its periphery.”
The plan envisaged that significantly taller buildings might be located on the Eccles Street frontage than what O’Connell Mahon/NBBJ have proposed. Indeed, they have made a virtue of the fact that their scheme would be only four storeys high on the street.
“The Eccles Street block fills the existing void which resulted from significant demolitions of existing buildings during the 1980s and will complete the street in a manner that is consistent with good urban design objectives, appropriate to the character and urban grain . . . ”
The vast bulk of the hospital is set back from the street, partly hidden by a high canopied entrance forecourt, on a site that is already elevated at least 20m above sea level. As planning consultant Eamonn Kelly conceded, its scale would be “dramatically different”.
City council management’s view, in a submission to An Bord Pleanála, is that “while it is clear that a building of this scale will impact significantly on the character of the city, this is an inevitable part of the compromise necessary to achieve development in inner urban areas”.
Yet the height-and-bulk issue was barely considered in the decisions made by the Health Service Executive, former minister for health Mary Harney and her successor, James Reilly – and two governments – to proceed with this scheme, at a direct cost to taxpayers of €540 million.
The independent review commissioned by Dr Reilly last May only refers obliquely to this central issue, noting that “generic” eight-storey buildings on greenfield sites in Blanchardstown, Newlands Cross and Tallaght would be “significantly lower than the current proposals”.
Yet although it would be cheaper to develop the children’s hospital on any one of the three alternative sites, the review recommended that the present scheme should go ahead on the basis that writing off €24 million in planning and design costs “may be politically sensitive”.
Nobody considered that the objective of “co-locating” paediatric and adult hospitals might be achieved if the site occupied by Mountjoy Prison – directly across the North Circular Road from the Mater and due to be replaced – was developed for the Children’s Hospital of Ireland.
Neither has any consideration been given to what will become of the existing children’s hospitals in Temple Street and Crumlin after they are vacated. Will new uses be found for these buildings or will they become playgrounds for vandals like the empty Army barracks in Naas?
The only lateral thinking that has been applied to the project is evident in the form of the proposed development – the decision by its architects that a huge and highly visible horizontal slab, however well tricked out, is the most appropriate response to their almost impossible brief.
An Bord Pleanála’s oral hearing is expected to continue for a further two weeks, but it would not be surprising if the board eventually gives its approval for the scheme; after all, it represents the realisation of Government policy, which the board would be loathe to ignore.
Irish Times
www.bpsplanningconsultants.ie
The focus by objectors on the height and bulk of the multilayered scheme is inevitable as it is one of the biggest structures ever planned for Dublin, as well as being significantly taller than the stadiums at Croke Park and Lansdowne Road.
Rising above a four-level basement car park, the hospital is “stacked” – five storeys of major diagnostic, topped by a “therapy park” with a rooftop terrace on the next four floors, and a curvaceous seven-storey block of inpatient wards floating above.
This element is evocative of a multideck ocean liner, permanently “moored” on top of a nine-storey building and highly visible on the city’s skyline as an “anomalous” feature, in the words of one supporter, or simply “wrong”, according to objectors.
As a linear block, the proposed children’s hospital would have an impact quite different to a tower – not just because of its overall height which, at 73.89m (243.8ft), would be 14.5m (47.8ft) taller than Liberty Hall, but also because of its length and breadth.
The oversailing ward block would extend to 150m (495ft) in length and about 30m (99ft) in width, narrowing in the middle and tapering at each end. In other words, the most visible part of the project would be equivalent to eight Liberty Halls side by side, and twice as deep.
According to critic Shane O’Toole, who appeared for the hospital promoters, the “sculptural” ward block “literally elevates the position of sick children . . . above all else”, giving them “wonderful views . . . which will be better than from any penthouse apartment in the city”.
He rejected concerns that the intrusion of such an enormous edifice into the northside Georgian core would jeopardise Dublin achieving Unesco world heritage site status, citing examples of buildings that had “dramatically changed the unique character” of other cities.
But neither Cook Fournier’s “biomorphic” Spacelab in Graz nor Renzo Piano’s Nemo science museum in Amsterdam, like a half-sunk ship in the harbour, are seriously out of scale. And Robbrecht en Daem’s concert hall in Bruges, while bulky, is not anything like as tall.
Hospital architects O’Connell Mahon and NBBJ insist that the undulating form of the Eccles Street ward block, with its “thoughtfully engineered glass skin”, would “sit favourably” on Dublin’s skyline, catching and “subtly reflecting the ever- changing light and sky”.
They have made repeated references to Dublin City Council’s 2008 Phibsborough/ Mountjoy local area plan, which supported the development of a “world-class” children’s hospital on the Mater site and recognised that this would entail a “cluster of taller buildings”.
However, the plan also said: “Every effort must be made to ensure that increases in height will not have any negative overshadowing effects on adjoining properties or impact negatively on the settings of the protected structures both on the site and its periphery.”
The plan envisaged that significantly taller buildings might be located on the Eccles Street frontage than what O’Connell Mahon/NBBJ have proposed. Indeed, they have made a virtue of the fact that their scheme would be only four storeys high on the street.
“The Eccles Street block fills the existing void which resulted from significant demolitions of existing buildings during the 1980s and will complete the street in a manner that is consistent with good urban design objectives, appropriate to the character and urban grain . . . ”
The vast bulk of the hospital is set back from the street, partly hidden by a high canopied entrance forecourt, on a site that is already elevated at least 20m above sea level. As planning consultant Eamonn Kelly conceded, its scale would be “dramatically different”.
City council management’s view, in a submission to An Bord Pleanála, is that “while it is clear that a building of this scale will impact significantly on the character of the city, this is an inevitable part of the compromise necessary to achieve development in inner urban areas”.
Yet the height-and-bulk issue was barely considered in the decisions made by the Health Service Executive, former minister for health Mary Harney and her successor, James Reilly – and two governments – to proceed with this scheme, at a direct cost to taxpayers of €540 million.
The independent review commissioned by Dr Reilly last May only refers obliquely to this central issue, noting that “generic” eight-storey buildings on greenfield sites in Blanchardstown, Newlands Cross and Tallaght would be “significantly lower than the current proposals”.
Yet although it would be cheaper to develop the children’s hospital on any one of the three alternative sites, the review recommended that the present scheme should go ahead on the basis that writing off €24 million in planning and design costs “may be politically sensitive”.
Nobody considered that the objective of “co-locating” paediatric and adult hospitals might be achieved if the site occupied by Mountjoy Prison – directly across the North Circular Road from the Mater and due to be replaced – was developed for the Children’s Hospital of Ireland.
Neither has any consideration been given to what will become of the existing children’s hospitals in Temple Street and Crumlin after they are vacated. Will new uses be found for these buildings or will they become playgrounds for vandals like the empty Army barracks in Naas?
The only lateral thinking that has been applied to the project is evident in the form of the proposed development – the decision by its architects that a huge and highly visible horizontal slab, however well tricked out, is the most appropriate response to their almost impossible brief.
An Bord Pleanála’s oral hearing is expected to continue for a further two weeks, but it would not be surprising if the board eventually gives its approval for the scheme; after all, it represents the realisation of Government policy, which the board would be loathe to ignore.
Irish Times
www.bpsplanningconsultants.ie
Thursday, 20 October 2011
Children's hospital hearing begins
A public hearing on plans for the proposed National Children’s Hospital on the grounds of the Mater Hospital Dublin began this morning.
An Bord Pleanála expects the hearing, which will hear evidence from more than 30 parties, will take three weeks to complete.
The hospital, which is expected to cost €650 million, would be able to accommodate clinical facilities for the provision of paediatric care, including 392 beds, 53 day care beds, 13 operating theatres, overnight beds for parents and a family resource centre.
The application also seeks to develop play areas, a school, external gardens and courtyards. The development, which is intended to be up to 16 storeys in height, is due for completion in late 2016.
Architects representing the National Children’s Hospital Development Board told the hearing that the site offered an opportunity to provide “world class” facilities in co-location with an adult hospital and eventually a maternity hospital.
Architect Clare White acknowledged that many submissions had raised concerns about the effect on the historic Georgian area, particularly protected structures.
“Almost every building on Eccles Street is a protected structure and we considered this context from the very outset,” she said.
Plans to locate a 16 storey “landmark” building on the site were consistent with Dublin City Council’s Local Area Plan, Ms White said.
The heights proposed for Eccles Street had been limited to four storeys rather than the six to 12 which would have been permitted by the council’s plan she said.
An eight storey block, set back from Eccles Street was planned but this would have “minimal impact on existing vistas or protected structures” and would be similar in height to the Mater Adult Hospital currently under construction.
The development would cause some overshadowing of Leo Street, off the North Circular Road, but this was “generally not considered to be significant”, she said.
The construction of the hospital at the Mater site is being opposed by a number of parties including local residents, An Taisce, the Irish Georgian Society, Tallaght Hospital Action Group, and the New Children’s Hospital Alliance.
The alliance, which involves health professionals and parents of sick children, in its submission to the hearing said it would not be possible to maintain proper standards of care at the chosen site, and that alternative sites were not adequately considered.
An Taisce, the Georgian Society and local residents have said the facility’s height and scale would have an unacceptable impact on the historic core of the city. In its submission An Taisce said the proposed development was in “fundamental conflict” with the Dublin City Plan because it was “seriously over-scaled” and “damaging to the setting and integrity of protected structures”.
The site was inherently unsuitable for a new National Children’s Hospital because of its constricted nature an Taisce said. The scale, bulk and height of the proposed development, which would dominate the northside Georgian city and “should be rejected out of hand,” it said.
Dublin City Council supports the development but said it must be compensated for the resulting loss of on-street parking revenues.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
An Bord Pleanála expects the hearing, which will hear evidence from more than 30 parties, will take three weeks to complete.
The hospital, which is expected to cost €650 million, would be able to accommodate clinical facilities for the provision of paediatric care, including 392 beds, 53 day care beds, 13 operating theatres, overnight beds for parents and a family resource centre.
The application also seeks to develop play areas, a school, external gardens and courtyards. The development, which is intended to be up to 16 storeys in height, is due for completion in late 2016.
Architects representing the National Children’s Hospital Development Board told the hearing that the site offered an opportunity to provide “world class” facilities in co-location with an adult hospital and eventually a maternity hospital.
Architect Clare White acknowledged that many submissions had raised concerns about the effect on the historic Georgian area, particularly protected structures.
“Almost every building on Eccles Street is a protected structure and we considered this context from the very outset,” she said.
Plans to locate a 16 storey “landmark” building on the site were consistent with Dublin City Council’s Local Area Plan, Ms White said.
The heights proposed for Eccles Street had been limited to four storeys rather than the six to 12 which would have been permitted by the council’s plan she said.
An eight storey block, set back from Eccles Street was planned but this would have “minimal impact on existing vistas or protected structures” and would be similar in height to the Mater Adult Hospital currently under construction.
The development would cause some overshadowing of Leo Street, off the North Circular Road, but this was “generally not considered to be significant”, she said.
The construction of the hospital at the Mater site is being opposed by a number of parties including local residents, An Taisce, the Irish Georgian Society, Tallaght Hospital Action Group, and the New Children’s Hospital Alliance.
The alliance, which involves health professionals and parents of sick children, in its submission to the hearing said it would not be possible to maintain proper standards of care at the chosen site, and that alternative sites were not adequately considered.
An Taisce, the Georgian Society and local residents have said the facility’s height and scale would have an unacceptable impact on the historic core of the city. In its submission An Taisce said the proposed development was in “fundamental conflict” with the Dublin City Plan because it was “seriously over-scaled” and “damaging to the setting and integrity of protected structures”.
The site was inherently unsuitable for a new National Children’s Hospital because of its constricted nature an Taisce said. The scale, bulk and height of the proposed development, which would dominate the northside Georgian city and “should be rejected out of hand,” it said.
Dublin City Council supports the development but said it must be compensated for the resulting loss of on-street parking revenues.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Thursday, 10 March 2011
Casino venue could attract Breeders' Cup, says O'Brien
THE MULTIMILLION dollar Breeders’ Cup horse racing fixture could leave the United States and come to Ireland if a planned sporting and leisure complex goes ahead, said racehorse trainer Aidan O’Brien.
Mr O’Brien and his wife Anne-Marie yesterday expressed support for the €460 million “Tipperary Venue”, which would include a hotel and casino, racetrack and 15,000-person capacity indoor entertainment venue.
The couple made a submission to the second day of an oral hearing by An Bord Pleanála into plans by businessman Richard Quirke to develop the multifaceted project on an 800-acre site at Two-Mile Borris near Thurles. Mr O’Brien trains horses at Ballydoyle stables near Cashel in Co Tipperary.
The O’Briens said the organisers of the Breeders’ Cup – the self-styled world championship of flat racing, which has been held each November since 1984 – had expressed interest in staging the two-day fixture in Europe.
No European venue currently has the necessary grass and artificial surfaces to stage what is the world’s most valuable race meeting but, said Ms O’Brien, “The Tipperary Venue will be the first European track capable of hosting a Breeders’ Cup meeting.”
She said the development would be a sustainable and environmentally friendly addition to Irish horse racing.
“The proposed development is not dependent on grants. This is a wonderful opportunity for racing to create something unique and unrivalled and serve as a flagship racecourse for the industry,” she said.
Coolmore Stud in Fethard, Co Tipperary, has also thrown its weight behind the proposed development, as has the Irish Greyhound Board. Horse Sport Ireland chief executive Damian McDonald told the hearing the venue could also host the World Equestrian Games.
Mr Quirke, a former garda whose business interests include Dr Quirkey’s Good Time Emporium amusement arcade in Dublin, wants to build a 500-bed hotel and casino, golf course, greyhound racing circuit and equestrian centre as well as turf and all-weather horse racing tracks on the site.
The project, which includes a replica of the White House in memory of its Kilkenny-born designer, James Hoban, secured planning permission from North Tipperary County Council last October. However, following appeals by local residents and An Taisce, An Bord Pleanála announced a public hearing.
Concerns include the volume of traffic that would be generated by the venue, as well as helicopter activity, noise and other emissions. An Taisce questioned the viability of elements of the scheme and said under current legislation a casino would not be permitted.
Local resident Pat Blake told the hearing he was opposed to the project because of the casino element. “My concern would be the gambling one. I think there would be untold damage done,” he said.
The hearing continues today.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Mr O’Brien and his wife Anne-Marie yesterday expressed support for the €460 million “Tipperary Venue”, which would include a hotel and casino, racetrack and 15,000-person capacity indoor entertainment venue.
The couple made a submission to the second day of an oral hearing by An Bord Pleanála into plans by businessman Richard Quirke to develop the multifaceted project on an 800-acre site at Two-Mile Borris near Thurles. Mr O’Brien trains horses at Ballydoyle stables near Cashel in Co Tipperary.
The O’Briens said the organisers of the Breeders’ Cup – the self-styled world championship of flat racing, which has been held each November since 1984 – had expressed interest in staging the two-day fixture in Europe.
No European venue currently has the necessary grass and artificial surfaces to stage what is the world’s most valuable race meeting but, said Ms O’Brien, “The Tipperary Venue will be the first European track capable of hosting a Breeders’ Cup meeting.”
She said the development would be a sustainable and environmentally friendly addition to Irish horse racing.
“The proposed development is not dependent on grants. This is a wonderful opportunity for racing to create something unique and unrivalled and serve as a flagship racecourse for the industry,” she said.
Coolmore Stud in Fethard, Co Tipperary, has also thrown its weight behind the proposed development, as has the Irish Greyhound Board. Horse Sport Ireland chief executive Damian McDonald told the hearing the venue could also host the World Equestrian Games.
Mr Quirke, a former garda whose business interests include Dr Quirkey’s Good Time Emporium amusement arcade in Dublin, wants to build a 500-bed hotel and casino, golf course, greyhound racing circuit and equestrian centre as well as turf and all-weather horse racing tracks on the site.
The project, which includes a replica of the White House in memory of its Kilkenny-born designer, James Hoban, secured planning permission from North Tipperary County Council last October. However, following appeals by local residents and An Taisce, An Bord Pleanála announced a public hearing.
Concerns include the volume of traffic that would be generated by the venue, as well as helicopter activity, noise and other emissions. An Taisce questioned the viability of elements of the scheme and said under current legislation a casino would not be permitted.
Local resident Pat Blake told the hearing he was opposed to the project because of the casino element. “My concern would be the gambling one. I think there would be untold damage done,” he said.
The hearing continues today.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Tuesday, 23 November 2010
Developer challenges Dart Underground plan
A BORD Pleanála hearing into plans for the €2 billion Dart Underground project opened in Tallaght yesterday – and was challenged by a legal team acting for companies belonging to Dublin hotelier and property developer Owen O’Callaghan.
Iarnród Éireann is seeking permission from the planning board for a 7.6km tunnel travelling in an southerly arc from Docklands Station through Spencer Dock, to Pearse Station and on to St Stephen’s Green. From there it travels west to Christ Church, Heuston Station and to a new surface Dart station at Inchicore. Along the route the line is designed to connect with Iarnród Éireann’s northern, Kildare and Wexford rail lines. Iarnród Éireann claims the tunnel would increase capacity in the capital’s suburban services from 33 million passenger journeys per year to more than 100 million.
However, as the oral hearing got under way, senior counsel for Mr O’Callaghan’s companies, Colm Allen, said there was a significant legal question about the “jurisdiction of the board to do what it is about to do”.
Mr Allen said the Dart Underground project had the potential to “sterilise” his client’s property for as long as 10 years. He also said “if necessary” he would be prepared to “go elsewhere” to establish his point about the jurisdiction of the board.
Mr Allen said he was attempting to be helpful to the inquiry by flagging this matter now, offering written submissions on the point for consideration by the board. This could, he said, avoid the possibility of a more difficult decision at a later date.
However, Tom Rabbitte, senior inspector with the planning board, said he intended to go ahead with the hearing in the standard format for such oral hearings, but would make a note of Mr Allen’s comments.
Joe Costello TD, Senator Pascal Donohoe, Councillor Kevin Humphreys and East Wall resident Angela Broderick also asked to be heard at the opening of the inquiry as they objected to the venue for the hearing. Ms Broderick said the Tallaght venue represented a difficult and expensive destination for many residents who wished to attend the hearing.
Mr Rabbitte said the board had been unable to secure a suitable venue in the city centre for the expected duration of the hearing, possibly due to the time of year.
In his submission to the hearing, Iarnród Éireann chief executive Dick Fearn said that despite government efforts to achieve sustainable transport in Dublin, the reality was that “trip making has continued to be by private cars”.
Congestion was an “inevitable consequence”, he said.
Michael Reidy, manager of strategic and business planning with Iarnród Éireann, said a number of people had suggested using the existing Phoenix Park tunnel linking Heuston and Connolly stations across the north city, instead of the new project.
But he said a report by consultants Ove Arup had found in 2000 that this was “the least optimal solution” to provide additional capacity into and through the city centre. He said it would add to capacity constraints on the Maynooth line and would isolate Heuston as diverted Kildare services would effectively bypass Heuston to get to the tunnel. The hearing continues today.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Iarnród Éireann is seeking permission from the planning board for a 7.6km tunnel travelling in an southerly arc from Docklands Station through Spencer Dock, to Pearse Station and on to St Stephen’s Green. From there it travels west to Christ Church, Heuston Station and to a new surface Dart station at Inchicore. Along the route the line is designed to connect with Iarnród Éireann’s northern, Kildare and Wexford rail lines. Iarnród Éireann claims the tunnel would increase capacity in the capital’s suburban services from 33 million passenger journeys per year to more than 100 million.
However, as the oral hearing got under way, senior counsel for Mr O’Callaghan’s companies, Colm Allen, said there was a significant legal question about the “jurisdiction of the board to do what it is about to do”.
Mr Allen said the Dart Underground project had the potential to “sterilise” his client’s property for as long as 10 years. He also said “if necessary” he would be prepared to “go elsewhere” to establish his point about the jurisdiction of the board.
Mr Allen said he was attempting to be helpful to the inquiry by flagging this matter now, offering written submissions on the point for consideration by the board. This could, he said, avoid the possibility of a more difficult decision at a later date.
However, Tom Rabbitte, senior inspector with the planning board, said he intended to go ahead with the hearing in the standard format for such oral hearings, but would make a note of Mr Allen’s comments.
Joe Costello TD, Senator Pascal Donohoe, Councillor Kevin Humphreys and East Wall resident Angela Broderick also asked to be heard at the opening of the inquiry as they objected to the venue for the hearing. Ms Broderick said the Tallaght venue represented a difficult and expensive destination for many residents who wished to attend the hearing.
Mr Rabbitte said the board had been unable to secure a suitable venue in the city centre for the expected duration of the hearing, possibly due to the time of year.
In his submission to the hearing, Iarnród Éireann chief executive Dick Fearn said that despite government efforts to achieve sustainable transport in Dublin, the reality was that “trip making has continued to be by private cars”.
Congestion was an “inevitable consequence”, he said.
Michael Reidy, manager of strategic and business planning with Iarnród Éireann, said a number of people had suggested using the existing Phoenix Park tunnel linking Heuston and Connolly stations across the north city, instead of the new project.
But he said a report by consultants Ove Arup had found in 2000 that this was “the least optimal solution” to provide additional capacity into and through the city centre. He said it would add to capacity constraints on the Maynooth line and would isolate Heuston as diverted Kildare services would effectively bypass Heuston to get to the tunnel. The hearing continues today.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Wednesday, 25 August 2010
Legality of Shell pipe disputed
A DISPUTE over the legality of a section of Shell’s Corrib gas pipeline which has already been laid dominated a resumed Bord Pleanála oral hearing in north Mayo yesterday.
Bord Pleanála inspector Martin Nolan said he would respond today to this and other issues raised by objectors during heated exchanges at yesterday’s opening of the hearing in Belmullet.
Held under the Strategic Infrastructure Act, the hearing is considering Shell’s third proposed route for the final section of the Corrib gas pipeline, linking the offshore pipe landfall at Glengad to the gas terminal at Ballinaboy.
It is also considering compulsory acquisition orders to land applied for by Shell on behalf of Corrib gas partners Statoil and Vermilion Energy.
A previous route approval sought by the developers was rejected by the board late last year, as half of the 9km route was deemed “unacceptable” on safety grounds due to proximity to housing. The appeals board indicated it could give approval in principle if certain changes were made, and suggested an alternative, third route up Sruwaddacon estuary, which is a special area of conservation.
Almost 40 oral submissions are due to be heard on this revised plan – a number of which either support or oppose the methodology. Two priests with opposing views, Fr Michael Nallen of Kilcommon parish who lives in the affected area, and Fr Kevin Hegarty of Kilmore, will also give submissions, as will the board of Pollathomas National School, which overlooks the estuary. Fr Hegarty is a member of Shell’s third-level scholarship board.
Several of the objectors sought clarification yesterday on the legality of a section of pipeline already laid between the high water mark at Glengad and the cliff-face.
When Bord Pleanála turned down Shell’s plan late last year, it ruled that this section should have been submitted for planning approval. However, Mayo County Council maintains officially that it is exempt from planning permission.
The controversial section, which Eoin Ó Leidhín, an electronic engineer and member of Rossport Solidarity Camp, described yesterday as “probably the most dangerous part” of the high-pressure link, led to a walkout at last year’s hearing and subsequent clashes between protesters, gardaí and Shell security.
Shell E&P Ireland’s senior counsel Esmonde Keane told the hearing that this section was deemed exempt from planning permission, and was laid under consents awarded by the Government in 2002 under the Gas Act.
Fr Nallen, along with Belmullet resident and retired teacher Ed Moran and Mr Ó Leidhín, pointed out that questions relating to this section had been raised when Bord Pleanála first opened its hearing in May 2009.
“In justice, people living locally need this information,” Fr Nallen told the inspector, Mr Nolan.
“At the last oral hearing, you asked us to bear with you,” Fr Nallen continued. “We are still bearing with you . . . and people are suffering in the meantime. We need absolute clarity.” People had been “badly treated by the agents of the State”, Fr Nallen added.
In a presentation on behalf of Shell, Ciarán Butler, technical director of RPS Consulting Engineers, said a major objective in the revised environmental impact statement was “to identify a construction method for Sruwaddacon Bay which would not have a significant impact on this designated conservation site whilst at the same time balancing community and project considerations”.
He said: “The route is at least 234m from existing dwellings. There is a significantly greater separation distance between existing dwellings and the route now proposed than was in the case with the previously approved route (70m) and the pipeline route proposed in 2009 (140m),” he said.
The new route involves boring a tunnel under the estuary, with an external diameter of 4.2m for a 508mm (20 inch) pipe. The new route will avoid lands at Rossport, Mr Butler said.
CORRIB GAS CONSENT TIMELINE
1996: Corrib gas field discovery 83km off Mayo coast confirmed by Enterprise Energy Ireland.
April and May 2002: Development plan for Corrib gas field approved by minister, including construction of gas export pipeline, then exempted from planning, and signs 34 compulsory orders for access to land on the pipeline route. Shell takes over Enterprise Energy Ireland.
April 2003: An Bord Pleanála turns down application for onshore terminal at Ballinaboy, Co Mayo, due to health and safety concerns.
October 2004: New planning application for Corrib onshore terminal given final approval by planning board.
June 29th, 2005: Residents’ concerns over first proposed onshore pipeline route, exempt from planning, lead to jailing of Rossport Five for 94 days.
July 30th, 2005: Shell directed to dismantle an illegally constructed 3km section of onshore pipeline.
July 2006: Mediation fails to resolve dispute but subsequent report recommends pipeline route be modified to take it away from houses at Rossport.
November 2007: Restoration of special area of conservation ordered at Glengad following unauthorised drilling there during investigative work for revised pipeline route. Environmental Protection Agency issues licence for Ballinaboy terminal.
February 2009: Shell seeks permission for revised pipeline route avoiding houses in Rossport.
May 2009: Bord Pleanála hearing opens.
November 2009: Bord Pleanála deems half of modified route unacceptable due to proximity to housing, but gives approval in principle if alterations made.
May 31st, 2010: Third route under Sruwaddacon estuary applied for by Corrib gas partners.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Bord Pleanála inspector Martin Nolan said he would respond today to this and other issues raised by objectors during heated exchanges at yesterday’s opening of the hearing in Belmullet.
Held under the Strategic Infrastructure Act, the hearing is considering Shell’s third proposed route for the final section of the Corrib gas pipeline, linking the offshore pipe landfall at Glengad to the gas terminal at Ballinaboy.
It is also considering compulsory acquisition orders to land applied for by Shell on behalf of Corrib gas partners Statoil and Vermilion Energy.
A previous route approval sought by the developers was rejected by the board late last year, as half of the 9km route was deemed “unacceptable” on safety grounds due to proximity to housing. The appeals board indicated it could give approval in principle if certain changes were made, and suggested an alternative, third route up Sruwaddacon estuary, which is a special area of conservation.
Almost 40 oral submissions are due to be heard on this revised plan – a number of which either support or oppose the methodology. Two priests with opposing views, Fr Michael Nallen of Kilcommon parish who lives in the affected area, and Fr Kevin Hegarty of Kilmore, will also give submissions, as will the board of Pollathomas National School, which overlooks the estuary. Fr Hegarty is a member of Shell’s third-level scholarship board.
Several of the objectors sought clarification yesterday on the legality of a section of pipeline already laid between the high water mark at Glengad and the cliff-face.
When Bord Pleanála turned down Shell’s plan late last year, it ruled that this section should have been submitted for planning approval. However, Mayo County Council maintains officially that it is exempt from planning permission.
The controversial section, which Eoin Ó Leidhín, an electronic engineer and member of Rossport Solidarity Camp, described yesterday as “probably the most dangerous part” of the high-pressure link, led to a walkout at last year’s hearing and subsequent clashes between protesters, gardaí and Shell security.
Shell E&P Ireland’s senior counsel Esmonde Keane told the hearing that this section was deemed exempt from planning permission, and was laid under consents awarded by the Government in 2002 under the Gas Act.
Fr Nallen, along with Belmullet resident and retired teacher Ed Moran and Mr Ó Leidhín, pointed out that questions relating to this section had been raised when Bord Pleanála first opened its hearing in May 2009.
“In justice, people living locally need this information,” Fr Nallen told the inspector, Mr Nolan.
“At the last oral hearing, you asked us to bear with you,” Fr Nallen continued. “We are still bearing with you . . . and people are suffering in the meantime. We need absolute clarity.” People had been “badly treated by the agents of the State”, Fr Nallen added.
In a presentation on behalf of Shell, Ciarán Butler, technical director of RPS Consulting Engineers, said a major objective in the revised environmental impact statement was “to identify a construction method for Sruwaddacon Bay which would not have a significant impact on this designated conservation site whilst at the same time balancing community and project considerations”.
He said: “The route is at least 234m from existing dwellings. There is a significantly greater separation distance between existing dwellings and the route now proposed than was in the case with the previously approved route (70m) and the pipeline route proposed in 2009 (140m),” he said.
The new route involves boring a tunnel under the estuary, with an external diameter of 4.2m for a 508mm (20 inch) pipe. The new route will avoid lands at Rossport, Mr Butler said.
CORRIB GAS CONSENT TIMELINE
1996: Corrib gas field discovery 83km off Mayo coast confirmed by Enterprise Energy Ireland.
April and May 2002: Development plan for Corrib gas field approved by minister, including construction of gas export pipeline, then exempted from planning, and signs 34 compulsory orders for access to land on the pipeline route. Shell takes over Enterprise Energy Ireland.
April 2003: An Bord Pleanála turns down application for onshore terminal at Ballinaboy, Co Mayo, due to health and safety concerns.
October 2004: New planning application for Corrib onshore terminal given final approval by planning board.
June 29th, 2005: Residents’ concerns over first proposed onshore pipeline route, exempt from planning, lead to jailing of Rossport Five for 94 days.
July 30th, 2005: Shell directed to dismantle an illegally constructed 3km section of onshore pipeline.
July 2006: Mediation fails to resolve dispute but subsequent report recommends pipeline route be modified to take it away from houses at Rossport.
November 2007: Restoration of special area of conservation ordered at Glengad following unauthorised drilling there during investigative work for revised pipeline route. Environmental Protection Agency issues licence for Ballinaboy terminal.
February 2009: Shell seeks permission for revised pipeline route avoiding houses in Rossport.
May 2009: Bord Pleanála hearing opens.
November 2009: Bord Pleanála deems half of modified route unacceptable due to proximity to housing, but gives approval in principle if alterations made.
May 31st, 2010: Third route under Sruwaddacon estuary applied for by Corrib gas partners.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Tuesday, 24 August 2010
Corrib pipeline hearing to resume
An Bord Pleanála’s resumed oral hearing into State approval for the proposed new Corrib gas pipeline route opens in Belmullet, Co Mayo, this morning.
It comes almost 10 months after An Bord Pleanála turned down permission for a previous route option, as up to half of it was “unacceptable” on safety grounds due to proximity to housing.
The Department of the Environment is sending a senior engineer to north Mayo to investigate a complaint about Shell EP Ireland’s preliminary survey work on its proposed new Corrib gas pipeline route. The department’s investigation into aspects of Shell’s geological testing work in Sruwaddacon estuary was confirmed on the eve of the resumed oral hearing.
The Department of the Environment told The Irish Times yesterday it was investigating a complaint received from community group Pobal Chill Chomáin.
Earlier this year, Minister for the Environment John Gormley approved a foreshore licence for the investigative work by Shell in the Sruwaddacon estuary special area of conservation.
Pobal Chill Chomáin told the department the number of water-borne craft used by Shell contractors for investigative work “regularly” exceeds the number cited in the company’s foreshore licence application – as do the numbers on board the vessels, it says. It cites an incident on August 14th when a group of dolphins swam into Broadhaven bay, which Sruwaddacon estuary enters, and was “subjected to a barrage of Shell boats that constantly travelled between Rossport and Ballyglass”.
The resumed oral hearing is due to hear a revised application for the Sruwaddacon estuary route for the pipeline, which would avoid Rossport village and involve tunnelling through the waterway from the Glengad landfall.
Shell says the pipeline will be 508mm or 20 inches in diameter, running through a bored tunnel of 4.2 metres in external diameter.
The company has been reported as stating the tunnel option could delay the project by another year and cost an additional €100 million.
Some 49 submissions will be heard, including one lodged on behalf of 320 residents. Submissions have also been lodged by two priests – Fr Michael Nallen of Aughoose and Fr Kevin Hegarty of Kilmore-Erris – with bodies including Pobal Chill Chomáin, Pro-Gas Mayo, Rossport Solidarity Camp, Chambers Ireland, the Irish Offshore Operators Association and the board of management of Pollathomas National School.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
It comes almost 10 months after An Bord Pleanála turned down permission for a previous route option, as up to half of it was “unacceptable” on safety grounds due to proximity to housing.
The Department of the Environment is sending a senior engineer to north Mayo to investigate a complaint about Shell EP Ireland’s preliminary survey work on its proposed new Corrib gas pipeline route. The department’s investigation into aspects of Shell’s geological testing work in Sruwaddacon estuary was confirmed on the eve of the resumed oral hearing.
The Department of the Environment told The Irish Times yesterday it was investigating a complaint received from community group Pobal Chill Chomáin.
Earlier this year, Minister for the Environment John Gormley approved a foreshore licence for the investigative work by Shell in the Sruwaddacon estuary special area of conservation.
Pobal Chill Chomáin told the department the number of water-borne craft used by Shell contractors for investigative work “regularly” exceeds the number cited in the company’s foreshore licence application – as do the numbers on board the vessels, it says. It cites an incident on August 14th when a group of dolphins swam into Broadhaven bay, which Sruwaddacon estuary enters, and was “subjected to a barrage of Shell boats that constantly travelled between Rossport and Ballyglass”.
The resumed oral hearing is due to hear a revised application for the Sruwaddacon estuary route for the pipeline, which would avoid Rossport village and involve tunnelling through the waterway from the Glengad landfall.
Shell says the pipeline will be 508mm or 20 inches in diameter, running through a bored tunnel of 4.2 metres in external diameter.
The company has been reported as stating the tunnel option could delay the project by another year and cost an additional €100 million.
Some 49 submissions will be heard, including one lodged on behalf of 320 residents. Submissions have also been lodged by two priests – Fr Michael Nallen of Aughoose and Fr Kevin Hegarty of Kilmore-Erris – with bodies including Pobal Chill Chomáin, Pro-Gas Mayo, Rossport Solidarity Camp, Chambers Ireland, the Irish Offshore Operators Association and the board of management of Pollathomas National School.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Tuesday, 16 March 2010
Planning board told of NRA's 'extraordinary position'
A PROMINENT Irish developer has expressed concern over the influence which the National Roads Authority (NRA) has had on the State’s planning appeals board in a number of strategic decisions.
Cork developer Michael O’Flynn said: “It seems to me that the NRA believes that it is in some extraordinary position of power and influence, far above all other agencies as regards its contribution to the appeals process.”
Mr O’Flynn was speaking on the sixth day of a Bord Pleanála oral hearing concerning a €400 million development of 1,200 houses at Dunkettle outside Cork city which his company, O’Flynn Construction, proposes to build.
The NRA told the hearing last week that planning permission should be refused for the project as it would lead to even further traffic congestion at the Jack Lynch/Dunkettle interchange.
Mr O’Flynn said this was one of the rare occasions on which he had given evidence in an oral hearing. But he had felt compelled to do so on this occasion.
He pointed to a continuing failure on behalf of “certain Government agencies” to invest in Cork and in particular to ensure that the infrastructure of the region was adequate to support economic development.
“And now, not only is the NRA not investing in Cork but it is objecting to and frustrating the ongoing development of Cork and the implementation of the CASP (Cork Area Strategic Plan) strategy, our development and the Dunkettle Park and Ride being the most recent examples.”
Mr O’Flynn said he found it amazing that, not only had the NRA appointed three sets of consultants to overturn a decision taken by another public authority, but they had also flagged in a recent public prequalification tender document the possibility of objecting to no less than 18 planning applications which might affect the Dunkettle interchange.
“The logic of their position suggests that the NRA proposes to object to developments of any scale north and east of the Dunkettle Interchange . . . The board must consider if it will permit one agency to prevent the implementation of the vital policies underpinning the social and economic development of Cork.”
Earlier, the secretary of Glounthaune Community Association, Louise Oppermann, told the hearing of their concerns about the negative impact the development would have on the area in terms of traffic, residential amenity and on the character and setting of Dunkettle House, a protected structure.“We believe that, in the context of current economic and market realities, a fundamental reconsideration of approach is required in relation to the development of major housing schemes, particularly those of the ‘Celtic Tiger hangover’ type currently under appeal.”
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Cork developer Michael O’Flynn said: “It seems to me that the NRA believes that it is in some extraordinary position of power and influence, far above all other agencies as regards its contribution to the appeals process.”
Mr O’Flynn was speaking on the sixth day of a Bord Pleanála oral hearing concerning a €400 million development of 1,200 houses at Dunkettle outside Cork city which his company, O’Flynn Construction, proposes to build.
The NRA told the hearing last week that planning permission should be refused for the project as it would lead to even further traffic congestion at the Jack Lynch/Dunkettle interchange.
Mr O’Flynn said this was one of the rare occasions on which he had given evidence in an oral hearing. But he had felt compelled to do so on this occasion.
He pointed to a continuing failure on behalf of “certain Government agencies” to invest in Cork and in particular to ensure that the infrastructure of the region was adequate to support economic development.
“And now, not only is the NRA not investing in Cork but it is objecting to and frustrating the ongoing development of Cork and the implementation of the CASP (Cork Area Strategic Plan) strategy, our development and the Dunkettle Park and Ride being the most recent examples.”
Mr O’Flynn said he found it amazing that, not only had the NRA appointed three sets of consultants to overturn a decision taken by another public authority, but they had also flagged in a recent public prequalification tender document the possibility of objecting to no less than 18 planning applications which might affect the Dunkettle interchange.
“The logic of their position suggests that the NRA proposes to object to developments of any scale north and east of the Dunkettle Interchange . . . The board must consider if it will permit one agency to prevent the implementation of the vital policies underpinning the social and economic development of Cork.”
Earlier, the secretary of Glounthaune Community Association, Louise Oppermann, told the hearing of their concerns about the negative impact the development would have on the area in terms of traffic, residential amenity and on the character and setting of Dunkettle House, a protected structure.“We believe that, in the context of current economic and market realities, a fundamental reconsideration of approach is required in relation to the development of major housing schemes, particularly those of the ‘Celtic Tiger hangover’ type currently under appeal.”
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Friday, 11 September 2009
Dublin Bay infill hearing adjourned over bias issue
AN ORAL hearing into plans to infill 52 acres of Dublin Bay was adjourned indefinitely yesterday after concern was expressed about the involvement of flooding specialists HR Wallingford.
Counsel for Dublin Port Paul Gardiner SC raised the possibility of an objective bias in the firm’s retention by An Bord Pleanála, as HR Wallingford had previously been retained by the promoters of a new port at Bremore in north Co Dublin.
Mr Gardiner said Bremore had been put forward as an alternative to Dublin Port’s infill plans, and described Bremore as “the only other game in town”.
After an adjournment during which An Bord Pleanála senior planning inspector Brendan Wyse asked all parties to consider their positions, Jarlath Fitzsimons for Dublin Port suggested that the hearing may be irrevocably compromised. However, the assertion was opposed by Donall O’Laoire for Dublin Bay Watch, and Clontarf Residents’ Association. He said he believed the hearing should continue. It was possible, he said, in cases where a potential conflict of interest occurred, to simply discount the evidence of the party concerned.
Ian Lumley for An Taisce – which is also opposing the infill plans – said it was surprised by the development, and had put a lot of work into the planning hearing. If the hearing were to start over, he said, An Taisce would be subject to considerable costs and he would like to apply for those to be covered. Mr Lumley proposed a compromise in that the board might hire new consultants and continue with the hearings.
Having heard from the parties, Mr Wyse said he had used the adjournment to consult with his board, and the decision had been taken to adjourn “indefinitely” to allow the board to consider the issues raised.
A number of parties sought clarity on the issue of costs and whether the planning application for the infill could still be considered live, but Mr Wyse said he was not in a position to go into those issues. He declared the hearing adjourned, and parties would be advised in writing of what would happen next.
The hearing, under An Bord Pleanála’s fast-track strategic infrastructure rules, was in its second week of hearing the application by the port company for planning permission for the controversial infill.
The port company had earlier told the inquiry that the infill was of strategic national importance, while opponents had argued it was to be sited within a Special Protected Area – an EU designated area for the protection of birds.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Counsel for Dublin Port Paul Gardiner SC raised the possibility of an objective bias in the firm’s retention by An Bord Pleanála, as HR Wallingford had previously been retained by the promoters of a new port at Bremore in north Co Dublin.
Mr Gardiner said Bremore had been put forward as an alternative to Dublin Port’s infill plans, and described Bremore as “the only other game in town”.
After an adjournment during which An Bord Pleanála senior planning inspector Brendan Wyse asked all parties to consider their positions, Jarlath Fitzsimons for Dublin Port suggested that the hearing may be irrevocably compromised. However, the assertion was opposed by Donall O’Laoire for Dublin Bay Watch, and Clontarf Residents’ Association. He said he believed the hearing should continue. It was possible, he said, in cases where a potential conflict of interest occurred, to simply discount the evidence of the party concerned.
Ian Lumley for An Taisce – which is also opposing the infill plans – said it was surprised by the development, and had put a lot of work into the planning hearing. If the hearing were to start over, he said, An Taisce would be subject to considerable costs and he would like to apply for those to be covered. Mr Lumley proposed a compromise in that the board might hire new consultants and continue with the hearings.
Having heard from the parties, Mr Wyse said he had used the adjournment to consult with his board, and the decision had been taken to adjourn “indefinitely” to allow the board to consider the issues raised.
A number of parties sought clarity on the issue of costs and whether the planning application for the infill could still be considered live, but Mr Wyse said he was not in a position to go into those issues. He declared the hearing adjourned, and parties would be advised in writing of what would happen next.
The hearing, under An Bord Pleanála’s fast-track strategic infrastructure rules, was in its second week of hearing the application by the port company for planning permission for the controversial infill.
The port company had earlier told the inquiry that the infill was of strategic national importance, while opponents had argued it was to be sited within a Special Protected Area – an EU designated area for the protection of birds.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Thursday, 18 June 2009
College speaks out against proposed Cork incinerator
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT at the National Maritime College of Ireland (NMCI) in Cork could be severely hindered by a proposed toxic waste incinerator on a neighbouring site, according to a senior college official.
Jody Power, Staff Engineering lecturer, at the NMCI, gave evidence at yesterday’s An Bord Pleanála oral hearing into the proposed incinerator, to be located at Ringaskiddy.
Mr Power is the first NMCI staff member to speak out against Indaver Ireland’s planned facility, but concern is deepening among the student population at the college, according to the college’s Student Union representative Gearóid Buckley, who addressed the oral hearing last week.
Mr Power said the proposed incinerator would severely impact the development of the NMCI and adversely affect the international reputation of the college.
An engineering consultant to campaign group Zero Waste Alliance Ireland (ZWAI), Mr Power referenced his findings from a number of visits to operating incinerators in Denmark.
“The proposed incinerators will, in my opinion, adversely affect the international reputation at the college, and hinder its ability to attract and retain staff and make student enrolment a nightmare,” he said.
Increased levels of incinerated waste have caused recycling rates in Denmark to drop, according to Mr Power, who predicts a similar fall off in Ireland with the introduction of incineration.
“With increased levels of incineration in Denmark, recycling rates have plummeted to become one of the lowest in the EU according to Eurostat 2007 figures. About 84 per cent of Copenhagen’s landmass is polluted with heavy metals and coastline pollution is one of the worst examples, with fish consumption restricted from the Baltic area. What is proposed by the incineration application has very serious implications for Cork harbour and our national reputation as a green, clean country,” he said.
In the morning session of the oral hearing, Department of the Environment official Jarvis Good told the hearing that the planned incinerator would not have “significant” adverse effects on the proposed Special Protection Area (pSPA) of Cork harbour.
Outlining the potential effects of the incinerator emissions on bird life and wider ecology in the harbour area, Mr Good, who is attached to the National Parks and Wildlife Service, said emissions from the incinerator stacks were likely to be localised.
Mr Good said that the proposed combined municipal waste and hazardous waste incinerators were not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the integrity of Cork Harbour pSPA.
However, under questioning from engineer Alan Watson on behalf of Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase), Mr Good admitted that there was a lack of baseline monitoring data available for bird species.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Jody Power, Staff Engineering lecturer, at the NMCI, gave evidence at yesterday’s An Bord Pleanála oral hearing into the proposed incinerator, to be located at Ringaskiddy.
Mr Power is the first NMCI staff member to speak out against Indaver Ireland’s planned facility, but concern is deepening among the student population at the college, according to the college’s Student Union representative Gearóid Buckley, who addressed the oral hearing last week.
Mr Power said the proposed incinerator would severely impact the development of the NMCI and adversely affect the international reputation of the college.
An engineering consultant to campaign group Zero Waste Alliance Ireland (ZWAI), Mr Power referenced his findings from a number of visits to operating incinerators in Denmark.
“The proposed incinerators will, in my opinion, adversely affect the international reputation at the college, and hinder its ability to attract and retain staff and make student enrolment a nightmare,” he said.
Increased levels of incinerated waste have caused recycling rates in Denmark to drop, according to Mr Power, who predicts a similar fall off in Ireland with the introduction of incineration.
“With increased levels of incineration in Denmark, recycling rates have plummeted to become one of the lowest in the EU according to Eurostat 2007 figures. About 84 per cent of Copenhagen’s landmass is polluted with heavy metals and coastline pollution is one of the worst examples, with fish consumption restricted from the Baltic area. What is proposed by the incineration application has very serious implications for Cork harbour and our national reputation as a green, clean country,” he said.
In the morning session of the oral hearing, Department of the Environment official Jarvis Good told the hearing that the planned incinerator would not have “significant” adverse effects on the proposed Special Protection Area (pSPA) of Cork harbour.
Outlining the potential effects of the incinerator emissions on bird life and wider ecology in the harbour area, Mr Good, who is attached to the National Parks and Wildlife Service, said emissions from the incinerator stacks were likely to be localised.
Mr Good said that the proposed combined municipal waste and hazardous waste incinerators were not expected to have a significant adverse effect on the integrity of Cork Harbour pSPA.
However, under questioning from engineer Alan Watson on behalf of Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase), Mr Good admitted that there was a lack of baseline monitoring data available for bird species.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Safe distances at issue at the Ringiskiddy incinerator oral hearing
Evidence was presented at this morning's Ringiskiddy, Indaver, Oral Hearing by Mr Peter Daly, Chief Emergency Management Officer for the HSE (Health Services Executive), South, whose function in that role is to prepare emergency plans for the HSE for all type of Major Emergencies. Mr Daly said that distances claimed to be safe by Indaver would be regarded as well inside the danger zones by Public Response Agencies in the event of an accident or emergency.
Mr Daly said that should an accident occur, response plans prepared by Principle Response Agencies would define a 'Warm Zone' that "in this instance will at least include the public road" and "will carefully consider the risk of allowing even their own staff into that Warm Zone". The Warm Zone is described as being inside the 'Inner Cordon' where "airborne concentrations above which the general population could experience irreversible or other serious effects occur". Mr Daly also said:
- credible scenarios MUST include the possibility of a Vapour Cloud Explosion, which is currently omitted.
- in the event of an emergency there is insufficient infrastructure with only one entry and the same exit point to and from the same area.
- the occupants of the NMCI (Maritime College) should not be required to evacuate in the direction of the incident, indeed to within a few meters of the proposed plant.
Mr Daly is a former Defense Forces Engineering Officer and served as a Chemical Weapons Inspector to UNSCOM in Iraq. He holds a postgraduate qualification in Mechanical Engineering, and has made a study of the Seveso Legislation and related matters. He stressed that he made his submission as a private individual, but that the detailed knowledge he has in relation to Seveso issues is a result of his education, training, experience and derived from his current HSE responsibilities.
Outlining the process by which Principle Response Agencies prepare emergency plans at Seveso sites, which use the Public Safety Zone as a basis for emergency response, Mr Daly said "The Public Safety Zone (PSZ) addresses low probability scenarios. These incidents may however be of high consequence. In the unlikely event of an incident occurring there will be casualties with varying degrees of injury. The Public Safety Zone consists essentially of three zones i.e. Hot, Warm and Cold (Zones). Distances claimed as safe in the application would be regarded by the Public Response Agencies in emergency response as well inside a PSZ Warm circle. The area that they would regard as being in a 'warm zone' would be significantly greater than the perimeter of the plant."
Mr Daly also highlighted that in planning an emergency response, the Public Response Agencies must provide for primary and secondary access as a basic tenet. He said "This principle is not achievable in the proposed site. The area is effectively a cul-de-sac with only one entry point and if that entry point along the Ringaskiddy road is compromised then the Public Response Agencies will be significantly affected with the potential of very serious consequences.
The same principles dictate that "the concept of persons being evacuated from the Maritime College being compelled to move towards the facility, before being able to flee to the left or to the right will be of significant and on-going concern."
Source: Cork Harbour Alliance For a Safe Environment www.chaseireland.org
www.buckplanning.ie
Mr Daly said that should an accident occur, response plans prepared by Principle Response Agencies would define a 'Warm Zone' that "in this instance will at least include the public road" and "will carefully consider the risk of allowing even their own staff into that Warm Zone". The Warm Zone is described as being inside the 'Inner Cordon' where "airborne concentrations above which the general population could experience irreversible or other serious effects occur". Mr Daly also said:
- credible scenarios MUST include the possibility of a Vapour Cloud Explosion, which is currently omitted.
- in the event of an emergency there is insufficient infrastructure with only one entry and the same exit point to and from the same area.
- the occupants of the NMCI (Maritime College) should not be required to evacuate in the direction of the incident, indeed to within a few meters of the proposed plant.
Mr Daly is a former Defense Forces Engineering Officer and served as a Chemical Weapons Inspector to UNSCOM in Iraq. He holds a postgraduate qualification in Mechanical Engineering, and has made a study of the Seveso Legislation and related matters. He stressed that he made his submission as a private individual, but that the detailed knowledge he has in relation to Seveso issues is a result of his education, training, experience and derived from his current HSE responsibilities.
Outlining the process by which Principle Response Agencies prepare emergency plans at Seveso sites, which use the Public Safety Zone as a basis for emergency response, Mr Daly said "The Public Safety Zone (PSZ) addresses low probability scenarios. These incidents may however be of high consequence. In the unlikely event of an incident occurring there will be casualties with varying degrees of injury. The Public Safety Zone consists essentially of three zones i.e. Hot, Warm and Cold (Zones). Distances claimed as safe in the application would be regarded by the Public Response Agencies in emergency response as well inside a PSZ Warm circle. The area that they would regard as being in a 'warm zone' would be significantly greater than the perimeter of the plant."
Mr Daly also highlighted that in planning an emergency response, the Public Response Agencies must provide for primary and secondary access as a basic tenet. He said "This principle is not achievable in the proposed site. The area is effectively a cul-de-sac with only one entry point and if that entry point along the Ringaskiddy road is compromised then the Public Response Agencies will be significantly affected with the potential of very serious consequences.
The same principles dictate that "the concept of persons being evacuated from the Maritime College being compelled to move towards the facility, before being able to flee to the left or to the right will be of significant and on-going concern."
Source: Cork Harbour Alliance For a Safe Environment www.chaseireland.org
www.buckplanning.ie
Tuesday, 9 June 2009
No need for plant to burn waste, says TD
A SHIFT in Government policy toward waste reduction and recycling has bolstered the case against a proposed toxic waste incinerator to be built at Ringaskiddy, Cork, it was claimed by a Fine Gael TD at the public hearing yesterday.
An Bord Pleanála’s oral hearing into the proposed incinerator reconvened in Cork yesterday following a three-week break.
Fine Gael east Cork TD David Stanton said that following the recent polls he was addressing the hearing as a member of the “country’s largest political party” which is committed to “waste management on the prevention and minimisation of waste and the provision of recycling facilities”.
Mr Stanton said there has been a change in national government policy since the incinerator planning process began in 2001, with focus on recycling taking precedence over the need for an incinerator to be built.
As part of a Dáil discussion, in reply to questions, Green Party leader John Gormley said that Government policy supports the principles of internationally recognised waste hierarchy that places emphasis on “prevention, reuse and recycling of waste while minimising reliance on landfill and incineration”.
“Meeting this obligation will entail doubling the existing level of diversion from landfill by 2010 and further increases in diversion in subsequent years. The programme also signalled a move away from mass-burn incineration towards alternative technologies.
“Undue emphasis on incineration as the cornerstone of waste management policy is detrimental to the development of alternative solutions,” Mr Gormley said.
Mr Stanton referred to the recent circular issued by Mr Gormley reiterating a policy move away from incineration toward alternative waste management solutions including “mechanical and biological treatment”.
Chairwoman of Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase) Mary O’Leary presented a 16-page submission against the proposed Indaver incinerator.
“To have this monster in our harbour would always be a constant reminder that it is there 24/7 damaging our environment and health,” Ms O’Leary said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
An Bord Pleanála’s oral hearing into the proposed incinerator reconvened in Cork yesterday following a three-week break.
Fine Gael east Cork TD David Stanton said that following the recent polls he was addressing the hearing as a member of the “country’s largest political party” which is committed to “waste management on the prevention and minimisation of waste and the provision of recycling facilities”.
Mr Stanton said there has been a change in national government policy since the incinerator planning process began in 2001, with focus on recycling taking precedence over the need for an incinerator to be built.
As part of a Dáil discussion, in reply to questions, Green Party leader John Gormley said that Government policy supports the principles of internationally recognised waste hierarchy that places emphasis on “prevention, reuse and recycling of waste while minimising reliance on landfill and incineration”.
“Meeting this obligation will entail doubling the existing level of diversion from landfill by 2010 and further increases in diversion in subsequent years. The programme also signalled a move away from mass-burn incineration towards alternative technologies.
“Undue emphasis on incineration as the cornerstone of waste management policy is detrimental to the development of alternative solutions,” Mr Gormley said.
Mr Stanton referred to the recent circular issued by Mr Gormley reiterating a policy move away from incineration toward alternative waste management solutions including “mechanical and biological treatment”.
Chairwoman of Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase) Mary O’Leary presented a 16-page submission against the proposed Indaver incinerator.
“To have this monster in our harbour would always be a constant reminder that it is there 24/7 damaging our environment and health,” Ms O’Leary said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Wednesday, 20 May 2009
Revised Corrib route is 'safe'
Corrib gas consultants have said that a re-routed onshore pipeline is “safe” and meets all “relevant” codes and standards.
RPS Consultants for Shell E&P Ireland have told Bord Pleanála that the proposed new onshore pipeline route achieves “the optimum balance of community, environmental and technical criteria” developed by the consultants.
The consultants are among 17 witnesses for Shell E&P Ireland and partners Statoil and Marathon, listed to speak at an oral hearing which opened today in Belmullet, Co Mayo.
Some 78 submissions are to be heard for and against the application, which has been made under the Strategic
Infrastructure Act. The revised route for the 9.2 km onshore pipeline was selected as a result of a recommendation by Government mediator Peter Cassells in 2006.
Health and safety concerns about the original high pressure onshore pumping gas from the Corrib field off the Mayo coast into a refinery at Bellanaboy route led to the jailing of the five men known as the Rossport five for 94 days in 2005.
Opening the hearing, Mr Nolan expressed condolences to the families of the Belmullet-based Achill garda Terence Dever and Inver resident Stephen Conway, who both lost their lives in a car collision outside Belmullet ten days ago
Mr Nolan also appealed to parties at the hearing to engage in “reasoned point by point arguments” and making “heated contributions” would be less effective.
The hearing is expected to last three to four weeks with target decision take by mid-August.
Retired schoolteacher and Shell to Sea activist Maura Harrington was jailed for 14 days last night for
non-payment of fines related to her imprisonment for 30 days earlier this year. Ms Harrington has made a submission to the oral hearing.
Shell to Sea said it condemned “the continued persecution through political policing of protesters seeking to oppose the giveaway of Ireland’s natural resources through the Corrib Gas Project, and to protect the safety of the local area and its people.”
Erris fishermen who have not secured an agreement with Shell on laying the offshore pipeline in Broadhaven Bay have accused the company of breach of promise. Some of the fishermen staged a protest tie-up at Ballyglass pier this evening.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
RPS Consultants for Shell E&P Ireland have told Bord Pleanála that the proposed new onshore pipeline route achieves “the optimum balance of community, environmental and technical criteria” developed by the consultants.
The consultants are among 17 witnesses for Shell E&P Ireland and partners Statoil and Marathon, listed to speak at an oral hearing which opened today in Belmullet, Co Mayo.
Some 78 submissions are to be heard for and against the application, which has been made under the Strategic
Infrastructure Act. The revised route for the 9.2 km onshore pipeline was selected as a result of a recommendation by Government mediator Peter Cassells in 2006.
Health and safety concerns about the original high pressure onshore pumping gas from the Corrib field off the Mayo coast into a refinery at Bellanaboy route led to the jailing of the five men known as the Rossport five for 94 days in 2005.
Opening the hearing, Mr Nolan expressed condolences to the families of the Belmullet-based Achill garda Terence Dever and Inver resident Stephen Conway, who both lost their lives in a car collision outside Belmullet ten days ago
Mr Nolan also appealed to parties at the hearing to engage in “reasoned point by point arguments” and making “heated contributions” would be less effective.
The hearing is expected to last three to four weeks with target decision take by mid-August.
Retired schoolteacher and Shell to Sea activist Maura Harrington was jailed for 14 days last night for
non-payment of fines related to her imprisonment for 30 days earlier this year. Ms Harrington has made a submission to the oral hearing.
Shell to Sea said it condemned “the continued persecution through political policing of protesters seeking to oppose the giveaway of Ireland’s natural resources through the Corrib Gas Project, and to protect the safety of the local area and its people.”
Erris fishermen who have not secured an agreement with Shell on laying the offshore pipeline in Broadhaven Bay have accused the company of breach of promise. Some of the fishermen staged a protest tie-up at Ballyglass pier this evening.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Tuesday, 12 May 2009
Hearing highlights success of Cork recycling
THE SUCCESS of Cork City Council’s recycling programme was highlighted yesterday at an oral hearing on a proposed incinerator to be located at Ringaskiddy in Cork.
Levels of waste generated in the region have risen by just 1 per cent in the past six years, up from 115,000 tonnes since 2003, the hearing was told.
Entering its third week, the An Bord Pleanála hearing heard that the focus for waste-management in the Cork region – which takes in Cork city and county – was primarily waste-reduction methods such as recycling and composting.
At present 417,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste are produced in the Cork region every year, approximately half of which is recycled.
While Cork city and county councils collect 30 per cent of this waste, the bulk of the remainder is dealt with by private contractors, who could opt to utilise the services of the proposed incinerator.
In response to questioning, Cork City Council senior engineer Michael O’Brien said: “We can’t control what a private operator does.”
The hearing was told yesterday that once the city’s largest dump, the Kinsale Road landfill, closes this summer, the Cork region will be reliant on landfill sites in Cork county, primarily a landfill site located in Youghal, to deal with its landfill waste.
The council will begin disposing of waste at a new landfill facility at Bottlehill, 13 miles north of Cork city, when that facility opens in January 2010. This landfill will only accept pre-treated and baled waste, though no baling facility exists at present.
Mr O’Brien conceded that no site had been agreed for a baling facility, but council sources indicated that such a facility could be put in place in just 14 weeks.
Private operators deal with 52 per cent of domestic waste generated by the Cork region, and Cork City Council has advertised seeking private operators to deal with that waste during the latter part of 2009 and into the future, according to Mr O’Brien.
Cork city and county council’s long-term plan for waste management was focused on education, recycling and waste reduction at source, Mr O’Brien said.
“We must concentrate on the reduction of waste at source.”
The managing director of Indaver for the UK and Ireland, John Ahern, said Cork City Council would need to reach a recycling rate of 70 per cent in order to deal with its waste-management responsibilities into the future, where current recycling rates stand at 50 per cent.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Levels of waste generated in the region have risen by just 1 per cent in the past six years, up from 115,000 tonnes since 2003, the hearing was told.
Entering its third week, the An Bord Pleanála hearing heard that the focus for waste-management in the Cork region – which takes in Cork city and county – was primarily waste-reduction methods such as recycling and composting.
At present 417,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste are produced in the Cork region every year, approximately half of which is recycled.
While Cork city and county councils collect 30 per cent of this waste, the bulk of the remainder is dealt with by private contractors, who could opt to utilise the services of the proposed incinerator.
In response to questioning, Cork City Council senior engineer Michael O’Brien said: “We can’t control what a private operator does.”
The hearing was told yesterday that once the city’s largest dump, the Kinsale Road landfill, closes this summer, the Cork region will be reliant on landfill sites in Cork county, primarily a landfill site located in Youghal, to deal with its landfill waste.
The council will begin disposing of waste at a new landfill facility at Bottlehill, 13 miles north of Cork city, when that facility opens in January 2010. This landfill will only accept pre-treated and baled waste, though no baling facility exists at present.
Mr O’Brien conceded that no site had been agreed for a baling facility, but council sources indicated that such a facility could be put in place in just 14 weeks.
Private operators deal with 52 per cent of domestic waste generated by the Cork region, and Cork City Council has advertised seeking private operators to deal with that waste during the latter part of 2009 and into the future, according to Mr O’Brien.
Cork city and county council’s long-term plan for waste management was focused on education, recycling and waste reduction at source, Mr O’Brien said.
“We must concentrate on the reduction of waste at source.”
The managing director of Indaver for the UK and Ireland, John Ahern, said Cork City Council would need to reach a recycling rate of 70 per cent in order to deal with its waste-management responsibilities into the future, where current recycling rates stand at 50 per cent.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Thursday, 7 May 2009
Cork incinerator would contravene county plan
THE PROPOSAL by Indaver Ireland to build a €150 million incinerator at Ringaskiddy in Cork Harbour would require a material contravention of the Cork County Development Plan, the oral hearing into the proposed facility was told yesterday.
Cork County Council senior planner Paul Murphy told the sixth day of An Bord Pleanála’s hearing that the proposal materially contravenes specific zoning objectives of both the 2003 and 2009 development plans.
Mr Murphy said that the county council had previously refused planning permission for an earlier proposal by Indaver in 2003 but that it was granted permission by the planning board following a lengthy oral hearing.
The board’s inspector at that hearing recommended against granting planning on 14 grounds, but An Bord Pleanála’s board disagreed and granted planning, citing as its primary reason that the incinerator constituted “a necessary national public utility”.
Mr Murphy said the county council questioned the need for the facility, in particular a municipal waste incinerator element, as the Waste Management Plan for Cork County 2004 does not include incineration as an option for dealing with waste.
“The initial targets outlined in the landfill directive for 2010 and 2013 can be met without incineration. The development of such a facility could divert waste away from prevention, material recovery/reuse and recycling,” Mr Murphy said.
The county council was also concerned that the proposed building, with a maximum height of 48.27 metres and stack with a maximum height of 90.77 metres on such a prominent position on Ringaskiddy peninsula, could have a significant visual impact on the harbour area.
“It will impact not only upon the established areas around Ringaskiddy but also upon those areas regularly frequented by the public, especially for walking, such as Monkstown, Currabinny and Camden and areas of relatively high population such as Cobh,” he said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Cork County Council senior planner Paul Murphy told the sixth day of An Bord Pleanála’s hearing that the proposal materially contravenes specific zoning objectives of both the 2003 and 2009 development plans.
Mr Murphy said that the county council had previously refused planning permission for an earlier proposal by Indaver in 2003 but that it was granted permission by the planning board following a lengthy oral hearing.
The board’s inspector at that hearing recommended against granting planning on 14 grounds, but An Bord Pleanála’s board disagreed and granted planning, citing as its primary reason that the incinerator constituted “a necessary national public utility”.
Mr Murphy said the county council questioned the need for the facility, in particular a municipal waste incinerator element, as the Waste Management Plan for Cork County 2004 does not include incineration as an option for dealing with waste.
“The initial targets outlined in the landfill directive for 2010 and 2013 can be met without incineration. The development of such a facility could divert waste away from prevention, material recovery/reuse and recycling,” Mr Murphy said.
The county council was also concerned that the proposed building, with a maximum height of 48.27 metres and stack with a maximum height of 90.77 metres on such a prominent position on Ringaskiddy peninsula, could have a significant visual impact on the harbour area.
“It will impact not only upon the established areas around Ringaskiddy but also upon those areas regularly frequented by the public, especially for walking, such as Monkstown, Currabinny and Camden and areas of relatively high population such as Cobh,” he said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Tuesday, 5 May 2009
Incinerator oral hearing to resume
AN ORAL hearing by An Bord Pleanála into a proposed €150 million incinerator planned for Ringaskiddy in Cork Harbour will resume today when objectors to the proposal will get an opportunity to question the developers on their submissions.
Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase) and other opponents of the plan will start their questioning of experts called by Indaver Ireland who last week made submissions on various aspects of the proposal including air quality, traffic impact and safety risks.
Among those likely to be questioned at length by Chase and others this week is Indaver’s medical expert, Dr Martin Hogan, who presented a submission based on a review of a number of studies of the impact of incinerators on public health.
Dr Hogan said most of the published studies looked at incinerators whose emissions of dioxins, dust and heavy metal were far greater than would be emitted by a modern waste resource recovery facility such as that proposed by Indaver for Ringaskiddy.
He quoted from a report published in 2004 by the UK department of the environment, food and rural affairs which did not find a link between the current generation of municipal solid-waste incinerators and health effects.
“We looked in detail at studies of incineration facilities and found no consistent or convincing evidence of a link between cancer and incineration. There is little evidence that emissions from incinerators make respiratory problems worse.
“In most cases, the incinerator contributes only a small proportion to local levels of pollutants,” Dr Hogan claimed, before going on to refer to the Health Research Board’s 2003 report, Health and Environmental Effects of Landfilling and Incineration of Waste.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase) and other opponents of the plan will start their questioning of experts called by Indaver Ireland who last week made submissions on various aspects of the proposal including air quality, traffic impact and safety risks.
Among those likely to be questioned at length by Chase and others this week is Indaver’s medical expert, Dr Martin Hogan, who presented a submission based on a review of a number of studies of the impact of incinerators on public health.
Dr Hogan said most of the published studies looked at incinerators whose emissions of dioxins, dust and heavy metal were far greater than would be emitted by a modern waste resource recovery facility such as that proposed by Indaver for Ringaskiddy.
He quoted from a report published in 2004 by the UK department of the environment, food and rural affairs which did not find a link between the current generation of municipal solid-waste incinerators and health effects.
“We looked in detail at studies of incineration facilities and found no consistent or convincing evidence of a link between cancer and incineration. There is little evidence that emissions from incinerators make respiratory problems worse.
“In most cases, the incinerator contributes only a small proportion to local levels of pollutants,” Dr Hogan claimed, before going on to refer to the Health Research Board’s 2003 report, Health and Environmental Effects of Landfilling and Incineration of Waste.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Monday, 27 April 2009
Department to raise fresh incinerator concerns
THE Department of the Environment is set to raise several new concerns about the impact of two controversial incinerators on legally protected wildlife zones in Cork Harbour.
In a hard-hitting submission to a Bord Pleanála oral hearing, which gets under way today, the department will say it is not satisfied with the assessment of the impact of emissions and effluent discharges from Indaver’s proposed developments on the protected areas.
And it has also asked for further information on potential emissions in the event of an accident or a catastrophic failure of the incinerator’s combustion and air pollution control systems.
The submission, which has been seen by the Irish Examiner, says a more comprehensive assessment of the project is recommended.
It should take into account European Commission guidance on the protection of certain habitats, as well as the specific effects of effluent discharges and emissions from the proposed development on Cork Harbour and its protected areas, the department said.
These concerns were not raised during the 2003 oral hearing into a previous application by Indaver to build a single toxic waste incinerator on the same site.
The new departmental submission could prove hugely significant.
Indaver Ireland has applied to Bord Pleanála, under the Strategic Infrastructure Act, for 10-year planning permission for two incinerators — one for hazardous waste and one for municipal waste — on a 12-hectare site in Ringaskiddy.
The €150m project includes two waste-to-energy facilities, plus a waste transfer station.
The industrial WTE facility will burn a maximum of 100,000 tonnes of solid and liquid, hazardous and non-hazardous wastes such as contaminated packaging, products, and solvents or liquids from the pharmaceutical and chemical industry every year.
The municipal WTE facility will treat a maximum of 140,000 tonnes of residual household and commercial waste every year.
Hundreds of submissions have been made by members of the public opposed to the project.
The submission from the Department of the Environment points out that the proposed incinerators will be located within 1km of legally-protected zones of Cork Harbour, and within 10km of dozens of designated and proposed protected sites, which could be affected by emissions.
Cllr Dominick Donnelly said local campaigners have been raising these concerns for years.
"We are fairly confident of winning our case this time," the Green Party councillor said. "The last time, the only reason we lost was because of Government policy. The thinking now is very, very different."
However, Indaver Ireland said it believes incineration is part of the solution to key environmental, energy and economic challenges faced in the Cork region. "Facts, not hearsay should determine the outcome of its application," managing director John Ahern said.
"We believe that the facts we will present demonstrate a compelling case in favour of granting approval for our application."
A decision is expected in early June.
Irish Examiner
www.buckplanning.ie
In a hard-hitting submission to a Bord Pleanála oral hearing, which gets under way today, the department will say it is not satisfied with the assessment of the impact of emissions and effluent discharges from Indaver’s proposed developments on the protected areas.
And it has also asked for further information on potential emissions in the event of an accident or a catastrophic failure of the incinerator’s combustion and air pollution control systems.
The submission, which has been seen by the Irish Examiner, says a more comprehensive assessment of the project is recommended.
It should take into account European Commission guidance on the protection of certain habitats, as well as the specific effects of effluent discharges and emissions from the proposed development on Cork Harbour and its protected areas, the department said.
These concerns were not raised during the 2003 oral hearing into a previous application by Indaver to build a single toxic waste incinerator on the same site.
The new departmental submission could prove hugely significant.
Indaver Ireland has applied to Bord Pleanála, under the Strategic Infrastructure Act, for 10-year planning permission for two incinerators — one for hazardous waste and one for municipal waste — on a 12-hectare site in Ringaskiddy.
The €150m project includes two waste-to-energy facilities, plus a waste transfer station.
The industrial WTE facility will burn a maximum of 100,000 tonnes of solid and liquid, hazardous and non-hazardous wastes such as contaminated packaging, products, and solvents or liquids from the pharmaceutical and chemical industry every year.
The municipal WTE facility will treat a maximum of 140,000 tonnes of residual household and commercial waste every year.
Hundreds of submissions have been made by members of the public opposed to the project.
The submission from the Department of the Environment points out that the proposed incinerators will be located within 1km of legally-protected zones of Cork Harbour, and within 10km of dozens of designated and proposed protected sites, which could be affected by emissions.
Cllr Dominick Donnelly said local campaigners have been raising these concerns for years.
"We are fairly confident of winning our case this time," the Green Party councillor said. "The last time, the only reason we lost was because of Government policy. The thinking now is very, very different."
However, Indaver Ireland said it believes incineration is part of the solution to key environmental, energy and economic challenges faced in the Cork region. "Facts, not hearsay should determine the outcome of its application," managing director John Ahern said.
"We believe that the facts we will present demonstrate a compelling case in favour of granting approval for our application."
A decision is expected in early June.
Irish Examiner
www.buckplanning.ie
An Bord Pleanála hearing into Cork incinerators opens today
AN ORAL hearing by An Bord Pleanála into an application by Indaver Ireland to build a €150 million twin incinerator at Ringaskiddy in Cork harbour is due to open in Cork today.
The hearing is expected to run for a number of weeks.
The application for both a hazardous industrial waste incinerator and a municipal waste incinerator, each capable of taking 100,000 tonnes per annum, at the Ringaskiddy site was made by Indaver under the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006.
The Indaver proposal, first mooted eight years ago, has generated much controversy in the Cork harbour area, and a number of groups have come together under the banner of Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment to oppose the plan.
Indaver Ireland had already applied in November 2001 to Cork County Council for planning permission for a 100,000 tonnes hazardous industrial waste incinerator for the Ringaskiddy site only for the council to refuse planning permission in May 2003.
Indaver Ireland appealed the council’s refusal to An Bord Pleanála and following an oral hearing in October 2003, the planning body went against the recommendation of its inspector and granted planning permission for the facility in January 2004.
Meanwhile, Indaver Ireland applied to the Environmental Protection Agency for licences for both a 100,000 tonnes hazardous industrial waste incinerator and a 100,000 tonnes municipal waste incinerator at the 12-hectare Ringaskiddy site.
Following an oral hearing in February 2005, the EPA decided in November 2005 to grant licences to Indaver Ireland for both incinerators even though Indaver had only at that stage applied for and obtained planning permission for the hazardous industrial waste incinerator.
However, that original five-year permission expired last January, and Indaver Ireland was obliged to resubmit for planning permission. This time the company availed of the strategic infrastructure legislation to make its application.
An Bord Pleanála has received 284 submissions on the Indaver proposal. These include submissions from the Department of the Environment, Cork Cork County Council and Cork City Council as well as from the surrounding communities.
The hearing is being held at Cork International Airport Hotel.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
The hearing is expected to run for a number of weeks.
The application for both a hazardous industrial waste incinerator and a municipal waste incinerator, each capable of taking 100,000 tonnes per annum, at the Ringaskiddy site was made by Indaver under the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006.
The Indaver proposal, first mooted eight years ago, has generated much controversy in the Cork harbour area, and a number of groups have come together under the banner of Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment to oppose the plan.
Indaver Ireland had already applied in November 2001 to Cork County Council for planning permission for a 100,000 tonnes hazardous industrial waste incinerator for the Ringaskiddy site only for the council to refuse planning permission in May 2003.
Indaver Ireland appealed the council’s refusal to An Bord Pleanála and following an oral hearing in October 2003, the planning body went against the recommendation of its inspector and granted planning permission for the facility in January 2004.
Meanwhile, Indaver Ireland applied to the Environmental Protection Agency for licences for both a 100,000 tonnes hazardous industrial waste incinerator and a 100,000 tonnes municipal waste incinerator at the 12-hectare Ringaskiddy site.
Following an oral hearing in February 2005, the EPA decided in November 2005 to grant licences to Indaver Ireland for both incinerators even though Indaver had only at that stage applied for and obtained planning permission for the hazardous industrial waste incinerator.
However, that original five-year permission expired last January, and Indaver Ireland was obliged to resubmit for planning permission. This time the company availed of the strategic infrastructure legislation to make its application.
An Bord Pleanála has received 284 submissions on the Indaver proposal. These include submissions from the Department of the Environment, Cork Cork County Council and Cork City Council as well as from the surrounding communities.
The hearing is being held at Cork International Airport Hotel.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Friday, 27 March 2009
Oral hearing set for planned €54m Cork incinerators
AN oral hearing is to be held by An Bord Pleanála next month into the controversial €54m incinerators planned for Cork Harbour.
It will be the second oral hearing into the planned incineration scheme at Ringaskiddy with local residents, opposed to the development, faced with forking out about e80,000.
The first An Bord Pleanála hearing took place in 2003. However, the board disregarded the recommendations of their senior inspector and, instead, granted planning permission to developers, Indaver.
Cork Harbour for a Safe Environment (CHASE), in the meantime, sought a judicial review of the decision. By the time the court action was finished, the initial planning had expired.
This time, however, Indaver lodged planning permission with the board under the Strategic Infrastructure Act. Amendments to the planning act were aimed at fast-tracking vital national infrastructure and sidestepping local authorities.
It is reported An Bord Pleanála received 284 submissions in relation to the proposed new incinerators. The hearing will take place from April 27.
The Department of the Environment is among the objectors, on the grounds of potential risks to human, plant and animal life.
Objections were also received from the IFA, the Irish Midwives Association, Cobh Doctors Association, East Cork Tourism, local primary and secondary schools and their boards of management.
CHASE spokeswoman Linda Fitzpatrick yesterday said the new hearing will cost the local community e80,000 to outline their case as they will have to bring in experts from all over the world. However, locals are delighted, she said, that health issues will be discussed, this time, unlike the previous hearing.
"We’re glad that we can state our case again but the financial cost is quite high. Last time, the inspector was not allowed to hear, and had to ignore, any health-based evidence. New EU planning rules means that these issues will be under the microscope," she said.
A spokeswoman for Indaver said the company was looking forward to dealing with arguments raised in submissions at the oral hearing. "We have always placed a high value on engaging with the people of the localities in which we operate. ... We are confident that the facts, not hearsay, will determine the merits of the proposal," she said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
It will be the second oral hearing into the planned incineration scheme at Ringaskiddy with local residents, opposed to the development, faced with forking out about e80,000.
The first An Bord Pleanála hearing took place in 2003. However, the board disregarded the recommendations of their senior inspector and, instead, granted planning permission to developers, Indaver.
Cork Harbour for a Safe Environment (CHASE), in the meantime, sought a judicial review of the decision. By the time the court action was finished, the initial planning had expired.
This time, however, Indaver lodged planning permission with the board under the Strategic Infrastructure Act. Amendments to the planning act were aimed at fast-tracking vital national infrastructure and sidestepping local authorities.
It is reported An Bord Pleanála received 284 submissions in relation to the proposed new incinerators. The hearing will take place from April 27.
The Department of the Environment is among the objectors, on the grounds of potential risks to human, plant and animal life.
Objections were also received from the IFA, the Irish Midwives Association, Cobh Doctors Association, East Cork Tourism, local primary and secondary schools and their boards of management.
CHASE spokeswoman Linda Fitzpatrick yesterday said the new hearing will cost the local community e80,000 to outline their case as they will have to bring in experts from all over the world. However, locals are delighted, she said, that health issues will be discussed, this time, unlike the previous hearing.
"We’re glad that we can state our case again but the financial cost is quite high. Last time, the inspector was not allowed to hear, and had to ignore, any health-based evidence. New EU planning rules means that these issues will be under the microscope," she said.
A spokeswoman for Indaver said the company was looking forward to dealing with arguments raised in submissions at the oral hearing. "We have always placed a high value on engaging with the people of the localities in which we operate. ... We are confident that the facts, not hearsay, will determine the merits of the proposal," she said.
Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Thursday, 4 December 2008
Pipeline risk to residents ‘insignificant’
THE promoters of a €500 million gas terminal on the Shannon estuary have given assurances about the safety of a 26km pipeline which will run across country from Tarbert, in Co Kerry, to Foynes, Co Limerick.
Leon Bowdoin, engineering vice-president of Shannon LNG (liquefied natural gas), told an An Bord Pleanála hearing the pipeline was designed to the same standard as Bord Gáis pipelines.
Replying to concerns of people in north Kerry about the safety of pipeline, he described risks to people as “insignificant’.
Mr Bowdoin told the hearing in Listowel, pipelines were regarded as the safest and most reliable means of onshore, cross-country transport of large quantities of hazard product.
He also said the pipeline had been routed to avoid centres of population, minimise road and river crossings and to avoid areas liable to landslides.
The €58m pipeline will connect the country’s first LNG terminal, in Tarbert, to the national grid, near Foynes.
In relation to safety concerns raised by the group, Safety Before LNG, Mr Bowdoin said the risk of accident was extremely low, due to the design and operation of the pipeline. Shannon LNG has agreed to make manuals available to communities along the pipeline route so they can monitor the situation and see that best practice is followed.
However, Dr Catherine McMullin of An Taisce said the pipeline would run through a section of rich fen in the townland of Doonard Upper.
This habitat had links with the highly-protected Annex 1 habitat of alkaline fens. She said the mitigation measures proposed by Shannon LNG seemed inadequate.
Johnny McElligott, of Safety Before LNG, said no provision had been made to link the pipeline with the Tarbert or Moneypoint power stations and he called on the hearing’s chairperson, Anne Marie O’Connor, to address that situation.
Other local residents said the project would bring life back to Tarbert and Ballylongford, pointing out that upwards of 100 jobs would created.
A decision is due by February 18.
Irish Examiner
www.buckplanning.ie
Leon Bowdoin, engineering vice-president of Shannon LNG (liquefied natural gas), told an An Bord Pleanála hearing the pipeline was designed to the same standard as Bord Gáis pipelines.
Replying to concerns of people in north Kerry about the safety of pipeline, he described risks to people as “insignificant’.
Mr Bowdoin told the hearing in Listowel, pipelines were regarded as the safest and most reliable means of onshore, cross-country transport of large quantities of hazard product.
He also said the pipeline had been routed to avoid centres of population, minimise road and river crossings and to avoid areas liable to landslides.
The €58m pipeline will connect the country’s first LNG terminal, in Tarbert, to the national grid, near Foynes.
In relation to safety concerns raised by the group, Safety Before LNG, Mr Bowdoin said the risk of accident was extremely low, due to the design and operation of the pipeline. Shannon LNG has agreed to make manuals available to communities along the pipeline route so they can monitor the situation and see that best practice is followed.
However, Dr Catherine McMullin of An Taisce said the pipeline would run through a section of rich fen in the townland of Doonard Upper.
This habitat had links with the highly-protected Annex 1 habitat of alkaline fens. She said the mitigation measures proposed by Shannon LNG seemed inadequate.
Johnny McElligott, of Safety Before LNG, said no provision had been made to link the pipeline with the Tarbert or Moneypoint power stations and he called on the hearing’s chairperson, Anne Marie O’Connor, to address that situation.
Other local residents said the project would bring life back to Tarbert and Ballylongford, pointing out that upwards of 100 jobs would created.
A decision is due by February 18.
Irish Examiner
www.buckplanning.ie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)