Fingal County Council has hit back at the operator of Dublin Airport in a planning row over the proposed extension to the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) facility for US-bound passengers at the airport.
In July, Fingal County Council refused planning permission to airport operator DAA for an expansion of the CBP area.
The council refused permission after finding that the proposal would be premature pending the determination by it of the detailed road network to serve the area.
‘Totally unreasonable’
In its appeal against the decision to An Bord Pleanála, a DAA consultant described the decision as “totally unreasonable and unjustified”.
Wills without residuary clauses can see people inherit even if you didn’t want them to
An Irish businessman in Singapore: ‘You’ll get a year in jail if you are in a drunken brawl, so people don’t step out of line’
Balmoral shows ‘small’ investors the door
A helping hand with the cost of caring: what supports are available?
Planning consultant Coakley O’Neill described the refusal as “surprising”, saying the application aims to eliminate the “chronic congestion” faced by travellers to the United States at the existing CBP facility at the airport.
The cost of climate change: ‘almost like driving another budget through public finances’
Now, in a rebuttal to the DAA appeal, a Fingal planner has told the appeals board that DAA could resolve overcrowding issues at the Customs and Border Protection point without seeking planning permission for a terminal expansion.
In a report, senior planner with Fingal County Council Malachy Bradley said the application is for an increase in the floor area of a building that was previously capped by An Bord Pleanála for the purpose of limiting its capacity. This was aimed at mitigating impacts on national transport infrastructure of critical national importance.
Mr Bradley said the council planning refusal “is entirely consistent with that precedent”.
Terminal 2 designer
He said that by way of justification for the Customs and Border Protection expansion, DAA presents a case that CBP-related queuing occurs at peak times as a result of the design and configuration of Terminal 2.
The planner noted that Terminal 2 was designed by DAA. He said that by virtue of the floor spaces allocated by the airport operator to various uses at Terminal 2, these Customs and Border Protection queues have been directed to stairwells and other unsuitable areas.
Mr Bradley said DAA “has within its gift alternative solutions without recourse to terminal expansion”.
He has asked the appeals board to uphold the council’s decision to refuse planning permission.
