A CHALLENGE to Bord Pleanala's planning permission for a major development of the Dun Laoghaire harbour terminal to accommodate the new high speed "superferry" was rejected by the Supreme Court yesterday.
The three judges dismissed an appeal by pensioner Mr Raymond Boland, of Dundela Park, Sandycove, against a High Court judgment of December, 1994.
Mr Boland sought to quash Bord Pleanala's planning permission, granted subject to a number of conditions in July, 1994, claiming that it had failed in its responsibility to make decisions on the traffic consequences of the development.
The development consists of the extension and refurbishment of the existing ferry terminal at St Michael's Wharf to accommodate the new high speed ferry service as well as existing ferry services.
It includes the reclamation from the sea of one area renewal and extension of traffic marshalling areas construction of a two storey terminal building and refurbishment of the existing two storey St Michael's terminal building.
Counsel for Mr Boland had submitted that the central issue for resolution by An Bord Pleanala was the significant increase in traffic, including the greatly increased volume of heavy goods traffic, which would be generated by the development.
It was claimed that Bord Pleanala could not dispose of what was regarded as a crucial issue by leaving so many of the relevant problems to be resolved between the Minister for the Marine and the planning authority without interested parties being given an opportunity to be heard.
The Chief Justice Mr Justice Hamilton, said that while the regulation of traffic was of crucial importance to Mr Boland and was the subject of the conditions relevant to the issues in the High Court, it would be incorrect to describe it as the central issue in the appeal to the board.
The Chief Justice said that he was satisfied that Bord Pleanala had complied with the criteria relating to matters which might properly be left to the developer and the planning authority to agree upon. The trial judge had been correct in holding that the imposition of the conditions did not constitute an abdication by the board of its statutory duties.
Mr Justice Blayney, also dismissing the appeal, said that he was satisfied that the conditions imposed by the board were not ultra vires (outside its powers). Mr Justice Barrington also dismissed the appeal.
The Chief Justice said that the Supreme Court had been called on to decide a question of public importance and it would not make any order in relation to the costs of the appeal. In the High Court, costs were awarded against Mr Boland.